Abstracts of Remediation 

Case Studies

Volume 1

Prepared by Member Agencies of the 

Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

Environmental Protection Agency

Department of Defense

U.S. Air Force

U.S. Army

U.S. Navy

Department of Energy

Department of Interior

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Tennessee Valley Authority

Coast Guard

March 1995
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj i

NOTICE

This document has been subjected to administrative review by Agencies participating in

the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable, and has been approved for

publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute

endorsement or recommendation for use. Further information on the Roundtable may

be obtained from the Chairman at EPA's Technology Innovation Office at (703) 308-

8800.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj ii

FOREWORD

This report is a collection of abstracts summarizing 37 case studies of site

remediation projects prepared by Federal agencies. The case studies were undertaken to

document the results and lessons learned from early technology applications. They will

help establish benchmark data on cost and performance which should lead to greater

confidence in the selection and use of cleanup technologies. The case studies were collected

under the auspices of the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable as part of a larger

effort to improve future project documentation and information transfer.

The Roundtable was created to exchange information on site remediation

technologies, and to consider cooperative efforts that could lead to a greater application of

innovative technologies. Roundtable member agencies, including the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Defense, and U.S. Department of Energy, expect to

complete many site remediation projects in the near future. These agencies recognize the

importance of documenting the results of these efforts, and the benefits to be realized from

greater coordination.

The case study reports themselves are organized by technology in a fourvolume set listed below. In the future, the set will grow through periodic supplements

tracking additional progress with site remediation. 

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation (PB95-182911);

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment (PB95-182929);

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction (PB95-182937); and

Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and In Situ

 Vitrification (PB95-182945).

Four Volume Set: Remediation Case Studies (PB95-182903).

To order, call the National Technical Information Service at (703) 487-4650 or write them

at the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,

Virginia 22161.

Walter W. Kovalick, Jr., Ph.D.

Chairman

Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj iii

This page intentionally left blank.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1

2.0 REMEDIATION CASE STUDIES: BIOREMEDIATION . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3.0 REMEDIATION CASE STUDIES: GROUNDWATER

TREATMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

4.0 REMEDIATION CASE STUDIES: SOIL VAPOR

EXTRACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

5.0 REMEDIATION CASE STUDIES: THERMAL

DESORPTION, SOIL WASHING, AND IN SITU

VITRIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj v

This page intentionally left blank.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to provide summary information for site

remediation projects, and to serve as a reference for identifying case study reports,

available under separate cover (see Foreword). The case studies are the first in a series of

studies being prepared by Federal agencies to improve future remedy selection at

contaminated sites and to allow a comparison of technologies in support of broader

analyses, such as the consideration of presumptive remedies.

Case Studies

The case studies were developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), and the U.S. Department of Energy

(DOE). The studies present cost and performance information for full-scale remediation

efforts and several large-scale demonstration projects and were prepared retrospectively,

based on available information and interviews with project personnel. The case studies are

meant to serve as primary reference sources, and contain information on the site,

contaminants and media treated, technology, technology vendor, a summary of cost and

performance data, and points of contact for the technology application. The case studies

contain varying levels of detail, reflecting the differences in the availability of data and

information on cost and performance. Also, full-scale cleanup efforts are not conducted

primarily for the purpose of technology evaluation; therefore, data collection is usually

limited to establishing compliance with contractual requirements or regulatory levels.

EPA has documented 17 completed full-scale remediation efforts using

innovative technologies. DoD and DOE have prepared 20 case studies of both innovative

technologies and conventional groundwater pump-and-treat technologies. Twenty-two

projects are completed. For projects that are ongoing, interim findings will be updated in

future publications, when the final data are available. 

Guide to Documenting Cost and Performance for Remediation Projects

During the preparation of the case studies, a work group of the Federal

Remediation Technologies Roundtable met to coordinate documentation of future site

remediation efforts. The resulting Guide to Documenting Cost and Performance for

Remediation Projects presents recommended procedures for documenting site matrix

characteristics and technology operation, performance, and cost. Recommendations

include specific parameters to measure and report for 13 conventional and innovative

cleanup technologies.

Abstracts Contained in This Report

The abstracts summarize key project information in a consistent format, to

allow the reader to easily assess potential interest in specific case studies. If the reader
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 2

desires more information, the complete copies of the case studies may be obtained under

separate cover. The abstracts are based on recommended terminology and procedures

from the Guide to Documenting Cost and Performance for Remediation Projects. 

Roundtable agencies are investigating strategies for future electronic search and

distribution.

The 37 case studies in this series are grouped by technology, and summarized

in Tables 1 through 4, listed below:

 Table 1. Summary of Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation;

 Table 2. Summary of Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater

Treatment;

 Table 3. Summary of Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor

Extraction; and

 Table 4. Summary of Remediation Case Studies: Thermal

Desorption, Soil Washing, and In Situ Vitrification.

These tables include information on technology used, contaminants and media treated, and

project duration. The tables also note highlights of the technology applications. 

The bioremediation volume contains reports on nine projects that include

bioventing and land treatment technologies, as well as a unique, large-scale slurry-phase

project. In these projects, petroleum hydrocarbons are the most frequent contaminants of

concern. Two land treatment projects in this volume are completed cleanups at creosote

sites.

The groundwater treatment volume describes 11 groundwater treatment

projects, eight of which are still ongoing. Most of the projects address petroleum

hydrocarbons and chlorinated aliphatics, such as trichloroethylene (TCE). The eight

ongoing projects are using pump-and-treat technologies, while two of the three completed

efforts utilized air sparging. One report in this volume describes a project that used in situ

steam injection/electrical heating of subsurface soils (referred to as dynamic underground

stripping).

The soil vapor extraction report describes 10 projects. Various chlorinated

aliphatic contaminants were treated at eight of the locations. One report in this volume

describes a project that used soil vapor extraction (SVE) followed by bioventing. (Note: 

this one project, completed at Hill Air Force Base, Site 914, is described in both the SVE

and Bioremediation case study volumes.) One of the projects described in the SVE volume

used horizontal wells with remote monitoring of equipment.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 3

The last volume primarily describes projects using thermal desorption,

including six completed applications at sites contaminated with PCBs, pesticides, or

chlorinated aliphatics. Two projects in this volume used soil washing and in situ

vitrification technologies, respectively.

Cost Analysis

Table 5 summarizes cost data for 35 of the 37 case studies, including

information on quantity of media treated and contaminant removed. In addition, Table 5

shows a calculated unit cost for some projects, and identifies key factors potentially

affecting project cost. While a summary of project costs is useful, it is difficult to compare

costs for different projects because of site-specific factors and differences in level of detail. 

Cost data are shown on Table 5 as reported in the case studies, and have not

been adjusted for inflation to a common year basis. The dollar values shown in Table 5

should be assumed to be dollars for the time period that the project was in progress (shown

on Tables 1 through 4 as project duration).

The project costs shown in the second column of the table were compiled

consistently. However, the case studies themselves vary in terms of the level of detail and

format of the available cost data. Where possible, project costs were categorized according

to an interagency Work Breakdown Structure (WBS). The WBS specifies costs as 1)

before-treatment costs, 2) after-treatment costs, or 3) treatment costs. (Table 5 provides

information on which activities fall under each category.) In many cases, however, the

available information was not sufficiently detailed to be broken down in this way.

The column for the calculated cost for treatment provides a dollar value per

unit of soil or groundwater treated and, if possible, per pound of contaminant removed. 

Note that comparisons using the information in this column are complicated by the fact

that calculated costs may only be available on a per cubic yard or per ton basis, and cannot

be converted back-and-forth due to limited availability of soil bulk density data.

Key factors that potentially affect project costs include economies of scale,

concentration levels in contaminated media, required cleanup levels, completion schedules,

and hydrogeological conditions. It is important to note that several projects in the case

study series represent early applications, and that the costs of these technologies are likely

to decrease in the future as firms gain experience with design and operation.

On-Line Access

The case study abstracts contained in this report are available on-line

through EPA's Cleanup Information Bulletin Board System (CLU-IN). To access CLU-IN

by modem, call (301) 589-8366, or to contact the CLU-IN help desk, call (301) 589-8368. 

CLU-IN is available on the Internet; the telnet address is clu-in.epa.gov or 134.67.99.13.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 4

This page intentionally left blank.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 5

Table 1. Summary of Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

Site Name, State (Technology) TPH Aliphatics Explosives Hydrocarbons Contaminants) Media (Quantity) Duration 

Contaminants Treated

and/or Chlorinated Aromatic (Principal Project

BTEX Polynuclear Contamination

Source of

Brown Wood Preserving Superfund Site, FL  Lagoon (creosote) Soil (8,100 yd ) 12/89 - 7/90 

(Land Treatment) 

3

Eielson Air Force Base, AK (Bioventing)  Spills and leaks (JP-4 Soil (not Operational 

fuel) available) since 7/91 

French Ltd. Superfund Site, TX (Slurry-   Disposal pit, spills and Soil and sludge 1/92 - 11/93 Phase Bioremediation) leaks (benzene, vinyl (300,000 tons) 

chloride, benzo(a)- pyrene) 

Hill Air Force Base, Site 280, UT (Bioventing)  Spills and releases Soil (not Operational 

(JP-4 fuel) available) since 12/90 

Hill Air Force Base, Site 914, UT (Bioventing  Spill (JP-4 fuel) Soil (5,000 yd ) 10/88 - 12/90 

Preceded by SVE) 

3

Lowry Air Force Base, CO (Bioventing)  UST (heating oil) Soil (not Operational 

available) since 8/92 

Lowry Air Force Base, CO (Land Treatment)  UST (heating oil) Soil (not Operational 

available) since 7/92 

Scott Lumber Company Superfund Site, MO  Lagoon and spills Soil (15,916 tons) 12/89 - 9/91 (Land Treatment) (creosote) 

Umatilla Army Depot Activity, OR  Lagoon Soil (224 yd ) 5/92 - 11/92 (Composting) (TNT/RDX/HMX) 

3

Key:SVE - Soil Vapor ExtractionBTEX - Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and XyleneTPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 6

Table 2. Summary of Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatmen

Site Name, State (Technology) TPH Aliphatics Aliphatics Biphenyls Contaminants) Media (Quantity) Duration 

Contaminants Treated

and/or Chlorinated chlorinated nated (Principal Project

BTEX Non- Polychlori- Contamination

Source of

Amcor Precast, UT (Density Driven Sparging)  UST (diesel and Soil (not available) 3/92 - 9/93 Trea

gasoline) Groundwater (not biod

available)

Amoco Petroleum Pipeline, MI (Extraction   Petroleum pipeline Groundwater (775 Operational Lar

followed by GAC) (BTEX and MTBE) million gallons in 5 since 10/88 grou

years) gallo

clea

Ft. Drum, Fuel Dispensing Area 1595, NY  UST (gasoline and Groundwater (not Operational Free 

(Extraction followed by air stripping and No. 2 fuel) available) since 2/92 of coGAC)Langley Air Force Base, IRP Site 4, VA  UST (JP-4 fuel) Groundwater (not Operational Vac

(Extraction followed by air stripping) available) since 7/92 syst

prod

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,  UST (leaded gasoline) Soil and groundwater 11/92 - 12/93 Fiel

GSA, CA (Dynamic underground stripping) (not available) elecMcClellan Air Force Base, Operable Unit B/C,  UST, landfill (TCE) Groundwater (660 Operational LarCA (Extraction followed by air stripping) million gallons in 7 since 1988 was

years) disp

McClellan Air Force Base, Operable Unit D,  Disposal pit, open Groundwater (not Operational Lar

CA (Extraction followed by air stripping) burning (TCE) available) since 1987 was

pits

Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant, MN  Discharges to sewer, Groundwater (1.4 Operational Lar

(Extraction followed by air stripping) dumping and burning billion gallons 10/91 - since 10/87 hyd

(TCE) 9/92) rem

U.S. Department of Energy Kansas City    Manufacturing (TCE) Groundwater (11.2 Operational ExtrPlant, MO (Extraction followed by advanced million gallons in since 1983 and oxidation processes) 1993) peroU.S. Department of Energy Savannah River  Surface impoundment Groundwater (198 Operational Gro

Site, A/M Area, SC (Extraction followed by (TCE) million gallons per since 9/85 acreair stripping) year) of DU.S. Department of Energy Savannah River  Surface impoundment Groundwater (not Operational Fiel

Site, A/M Area, SC (In situ air stripping) (TCE) available) since 7/90 hori

Soil (not available) with 

Key:GAC - Granular Activated Carbon BTEX - Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and XyleneSVE - Soil Vapor Extraction TPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 7

Table 3. Summary of Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

Site Name, State (Technology) TPH Aliphatics Aliphatics Contaminants) Media (Quantity) Project Duration 

Contaminants Treated

BTEX Non- Contamination

and/or Chlorinated chlorinated (Principal

Source of

Commencement Bay, South Tacoma Channel Well  Storage drums (PCA) Soil (98,203 yd ) Operational since Demonst12A Superfund Site, WA (SVE w/product recovery) 8/92 with on-

3

Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation Superfund   UST (TCA, xylenes) Soil (42,000 yd ) 1/89 - 4/90 Early ap

Site, CA (SVE) hydrogeo

3

slurry w

Hastings Groundwater Contamination Superfund  Spill of grain Soil (185,000 yd ) 6/92 - 7/93 RelativelSite, Well Number 3 Subsite, NE (SVE w/GAC) fumigants (CCl4) SVE

3

Hill Air Force Base, Site 914, UT (SVE with catalytic  Spill (JP-4 fuel) Soil (5,000 yd ) 10/88 - 12/90 SVE use

oxidation followed by bioventing) hydrocar

3

bioventin

Luke Air Force Base, North Fire Training Area, AZ   Fire training area Soil (not 10/90 - 12/92 Estimate(SVE w/thermal oxidizer) (petroleum, oil, available) removed 

lubricant wastes) oxidation

operatio

McClellan Air Force Base, Operable Unit D, Site S,  Disposal pit (PCE, Soil (not Operational since Demonst

CA (SVE w/catalytic oxidizer & scrubber) TCE, 1,1-DCA, Freon- available) 1993 oxidation 

113)

Rocky Mountain Arsenal Superfund Site (Motor  Motor vehicle Soil (34,000 yd ) 7/91 - 12/91 ApplicatPool Area-Operable Unit #18), CA (SVE w/product maintenance (TCE) system rrecovery and GAC) from the 

3

system b

Sacramento Army Depot Superfund Site, Tank 2   UST (PCE, ethyl- Soil (650 yd ) 8/92 - 1/93 Small qu

(Operable Unit #3), CA (SVE w/GAC) benzene, xylenes) unexpect

3

way thro

SMS Instruments Superfund Site, NY (SVE   UST (chlorobenzene, Soil (1,250 yd ) 5/92 - 10/93 SVE usinw/catalytic incineration and scrubbing) 1,2-dichlorobenzene, monitori

xylenes) small qu

3

Verona Well Field Superfund Site (Thomas Solvent   UST (PCE, TCA, Soil (26,700 yd ) 3/88 - 5/92 First Sup

Raymond Road - Operable Unit #1), MI (SVE acetone, toluene) oxidation w/catalytic oxidation and GAC) higher th

3

Key:GAC - Granular Activated Carbon BTEX - Benzene, toluene, Ethylbenzene, and XyleneSVE - Soil Vapor Extraction TPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 8

Table 4. Summary of Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and In 

Site Name, State (Technology) Duration 

Contaminants Treated Media

(Quantity)

Project

BTEX and/or TPH

Chlorinated Aliphatics

Pesticides

Polynuclear Aromatic

Polychlorinated

Metals

Source of Contamination

(Principal

Contaminants)

Anderson Development Company Superfund   Manufacturing Soil (5,100 tons) 1/92 - 6/93 Tr

Site, MI (Thermal desorption) process (MBOCA, sy

phenol, phthalates)

King of Prussia Technical Corporation  Surface impoundment Soil and sludge 6/93 - 10/93 InSuperfund Site, NJ (Soil washing) (Cr, Cu, Ni) (19,200 tons) te

fluwsit

McKin Superfund Site, ME (Thermal    Disposal Pit (TCE) Soil (11,500 yd ) 7/86 - 4/87 Ea

desorption) de

3

Outboard Marine Corporation Superfund  Surface water & sewer Soil and sediment 1/92 - 6/92 A

Site, OH (Thermal desorption) discharges (12,755 tons) ef

th

Parsons Chemical/ETM Enterprises    Surface water & sewer Soil (3,000 yd ) 5/93 - 5/94 FiSuperfund Site, MI (In situ vitrification) discharges (DDT, m

mercury, dioxins) fin

3

Pristine, Inc. Superfund Site (Thermal    Spills and on-site Soil (12,800 tons) 11/93 - 3/94 C

desorption) disposal (aldrin, DDT, ra

dieldrin, dioxin) an

el

T H Agriculture & Nutrition Company  Spills and leaks (DDT, Soil (4,300 tons) 7/93 - 10/93 SoSuperfund Site, GA (Thermal desorption) toxaphene, BHC) or

prpr

Wide Beach Development Superfund Site, NY  Road oiling (PCB Soil (42,000 tons) 10/90 - 9/91 Th

(Thermal desorption w/dehalogenation) 1254) A

Key:BTEX - Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and XyleneTPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Project Cost* Calculated Cost for Treatment**

T = Costs for treatment activities, including preprocessing, capital equipment, operation, **Calculated based on costs for treatment activities (T): exclude

and maintenance and after- (A)treatment activities. Calculated costs shown as "NB = Costs for before-treatment activities, including site preparation, excavation, and estimate of treatment costs unavailable.sampling and analysisA = Costs for after-treatment activities, including disposal of residuals and siterestorationC = Capital costsO = Annual operating costs

NRJ-0800227-02.nrj 9

Table 5. Remediation Case Studies - Summary of Cost Data

Site Name, State (Technology) Project Cost ($)* Quantity Treated Removed Treatment** 

Quantity of

Contaminant Calculated Cost for K

Bioremediation

Brown Wood Preserving T - 565,406 8,100 cubic yards -- $70/cubic yard of soil TreaSuperfund Site, FL (Land B - 58,000 of soil treated consTreatment) A - 9,800 und

6 mo

Eielson Air Force Base, AK C - 758,077 (includes Not available -- Ongoing field Incl(Bioventing) design and engr.) demonstration colle

O - 177,160 not 

French Ltd. Superfund Site, TX T - 26,900,000 300,000 tons of soil -- $90/ton of soil and sludge Exca(Slurry-Phase Bioremediation) B - 16,500,000 and sludge treated rela

A - 5,600,000 resu

Hill Air Force Base, Site 280, UT C - 115,000 Not available -- Ongoing full-scale cleanup One (Bioventing) O - 24,000 projHill Air Force Base, Site 914, UT T - 599,000 5,000 cubic yards -- $120/cubic yard of soil Fou(Bioventing) of soil treated concLowry Air Force Base, CO C - 28,650 (includes design Not available -- Ongoing full-scale cleanup Rela

(Bioventing) and engr.)

O - 32,875

Lowry Air Force Base, CO (Land C - 104,257 (includes Not available -- $19/ton estimated cost; TreaTreatment) design and engr.) assumes 3.5 years to liner

O - 18,460 (estimated complete treatment

operating costs)
Table 5. Remediation Case Studies - Summary of Cost Data

(Continued)

Site Name, State (Technology) Project Cost ($)* Quantity Treated Removed Treatment** 

Quantity of

Contaminant Calculated Cost for K

Project Cost* Calculated Cost for Treatment**T = Costs for treatment activities, including preprocessing, capital equipment, operation, **Calculated based on costs for treatment activities (T): exclude

and maintenance and after- (A)treatment activities. Calculated costs shown as "NB = Costs for before-treatment activities, including site preparation, excavation, and estimate of treatment costs unavailable.sampling and analysisA = Costs for after-treatment activities, including disposal of residuals and siterestorationC = Capital costsO = Annual operating costs

NRJ-0800227-02.nrj 10

Bioremediation (Continued)

Scott Lumber Company T - 1,292,000 (1989-1991) 15,961 tons of soil -- $81/ton of soil treated TreaSuperfund Site, MO (Land 254,000 for laboratory consTreatment) analyses undUmatilla Army Depot Activity, T - 1,840,000 Projected costs -- $92/ton projected based on CostOR (Composting) B - 2,000,000 (projected based on treatment 5 years treatment, and 40-d

for full-scale operation) of 20,000 tons of compliance with RCRA

soil Waste Pile Facility

Standards

Groundwater Treatment

Amcor Precast, UT (Density- C - 156,950 Not available Not available -- CleaDriven Sparging) O - 62,750 18 mAmoco Petroleum Pipeline, MI C - 297,000 (for 775 million gallons 118,000 gallons Ongoing full-scale cleanup; (Extraction followed by GAC) groundwater recovery and of groundwater in free product O&M to date

treatment system) 5 years recovered approximately $0.003 per

(includes design and engr.) 1,000 gallons of

C - 375,000 (for air groundwater treated

sparging system)

O - 475,000

Ft. Drum, Fuel Dispensing Area C - 958,780 (includes Not available Not available Ongoing full-scale cleanup 1595, NY (Extraction followed by design and engr.)air stripping and GAC) O - 129,440 (estimated)
Table 5. Remediation Case Studies - Summary of Cost Data

(Continued)

Site Name, State (Technology) Project Cost ($)* Quantity Treated Removed Treatment** 

Quantity of

Contaminant Calculated Cost for K

Project Cost* Calculated Cost for Treatment**T = Costs for treatment activities, including preprocessing, capital equipment, operation, **Calculated based on costs for treatment activities (T): exclude

and maintenance and after- (A)treatment activities. Calculated costs shown as "NB = Costs for before-treatment activities, including site preparation, excavation, and estimate of treatment costs unavailable.sampling and analysisA = Costs for after-treatment activities, including disposal of residuals and siterestorationC = Capital costsO = Annual operating costs

NRJ-0800227-02.nrj 11

Groundwater Treatment (Continued)

Langley Air Force Base, IRP Site C - 569,739 Not available Not available Ongoing full-scale cleanup 16 e4, VA (Extraction followed by air O - 216,561 (1993) condstripping) O - 143,047 (1994)Lawrence Livermore National T - 5,400,000 (includes Not available 7,600 gallons of Field demonstration ComLaboratory, CA (Dynamic design and engr.) gasoline project of hunderground stripping) B - 1,700,000 dem

appr

McClellan Air Force Base, C - 4,000,000 660 million gallons Approximately Ongoing full-scale cleanup; 10 eOperable Unit B/C, CA O - 1,240,000 of groundwater in 44,000 pounds $80 in operating costs per(Extraction followed by air 7 years VOCs removed in lb of VOC removed (firststripping) 7 years year of operation data

only)

McClellan Air Force Base, C - 4,000,000 660 million gallons Approximately Ongoing full-scale cleanup; 10 eOperable Unit D, CA (Extraction O - 1,240,000 of groundwater in 44,000 pounds $80 in operating costs per extrfollowed by air stripping) 7 years VOCs removed in lb of VOC removed (first

7 years year of operation data

only)

Twin Cities Army Ammunition C - 8,034,454 (includes Not available Not available Ongoing full-scale cleanup; ComPlant, MN (Extraction followed design and engr.) O&M to date calculated as of hby air stripping) O - 588,599 $0.12 per 1,000 gallons

treated
Table 5. Remediation Case Studies - Summary of Cost Data

(Continued)

Site Name, State (Technology) Project Cost ($)* Quantity Treated Removed Treatment** 

Quantity of

Contaminant Calculated Cost for K

Project Cost* Calculated Cost for Treatment**T = Costs for treatment activities, including preprocessing, capital equipment, operation, **Calculated based on costs for treatment activities (T): exclude

and maintenance and after- (A)treatment activities. Calculated costs shown as "NB = Costs for before-treatment activities, including site preparation, excavation, and estimate of treatment costs unavailable.sampling and analysisA = Costs for after-treatment activities, including disposal of residuals and siterestorationC = Capital costsO = Annual operating costs

NRJ-0800227-02.nrj 12

U.S. Department of Energy C - 1,383,400 11.2 million gallons Not available Ongoing full-scale cleanup; Pres

Kansas City Plant, MO O - 355,200 groundwater AOP operating costs for AOP (Extraction followed by advanced (actual costs for FY 1987 treated (1993) second generation systemoxidation processes) to 1994) projected as $13.80/1,000

gallons

Groundwater Treatment (Continued)

U.S. Department of Energy C - 4,103,000 198 million gallons 273,300 pounds Ongoing full-scale cleanup; ComSavannah River Site, SC O - 149,200 of groundwater VOC removed O&M to date disc(Extraction followed by air (1985 to 1990) per year (1985-1993) approximately $0.75 per reevstripping) 1,000 gallons treatedU.S. Department of Energy Projected costs - Not available 16,000 pounds Field demonstration; This Savannah River Site, A/M Area, equipment 253,525 VOCs removed in projected costs of $15.60/lb cost SC (In situ air stripping) (includes system design demonstration of VOC removed pum

and engr.); hori

site work - 5,000; vert

labor - 62,620; and

consumables - 157,761

Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)

Commencement Bay, South C - 5,313,973 98,203 cubic yards Not available Ongoing full-scale cleanup 22 e

Tacoma Channel Well 12A O - 100,000 of soil recoSuperfund Site, WA (SVE demw/product recovery) avai

capi
Table 5. Remediation Case Studies - Summary of Cost Data

(Continued)

Site Name, State (Technology) Project Cost ($)* Quantity Treated Removed Treatment** 

Quantity of

Contaminant Calculated Cost for K

Project Cost* Calculated Cost for Treatment**T = Costs for treatment activities, including preprocessing, capital equipment, operation, **Calculated based on costs for treatment activities (T): exclude

and maintenance and after- (A)treatment activities. Calculated costs shown as "NB = Costs for before-treatment activities, including site preparation, excavation, and estimate of treatment costs unavailable.sampling and analysisA = Costs for after-treatment activities, including disposal of residuals and siterestorationC = Capital costsO = Annual operating costs

NRJ-0800227-02.nrj 13

Fairchild Semiconductor C - 2,100,000 42,000 cubic yards 16,000 pounds $93/cubic yard of soil 39 e

Corporation Superfund Site, CA Total Operating Costs - of soil contaminants treated hydr(SVE) 1,800,000 (16 months) removed $240/pound of contaminant mon

(16 months) removed

Hastings Groundwater T - 370,000 185,000 cubic 600 pounds carbon $2/cubic yard of soil 10 eContamination Superfund Site, yards of soil tetrachloride treated beneWell Number 3 Subsite, NE (SVE removed $620/pound of carbon levew/GAC) tetrachloride removed

Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) (Continued)

Hill Air Force Base, Site 914, UT T - 599,000 5,000 cubic yards 211,000 pounds $120/cubic yard of soil Two 

(SVE) of soil TPH removed treated inclu

$2.80/pound of TPH

removed

Luke Air Force Base, North Fire C - 297,017 (includes Not available 12,000 pounds $42/lb of contaminant 2 exTraining Area, AZ (SVE design and engr.) contaminants removed cleaw/thermal oxidizer) O - 210,168 removedMcClellan Air Force Base, 3,800,000 (budget for Not available 113,000 pounds Ongoing field 17 eOperable Unit D, Site S, CA 1993-1994) (includes VOC removed (15 demonstration cont(SVE w/catalytic oxidizer and design and engr.) weeks operation) charscrubber)
Table 5. Remediation Case Studies - Summary of Cost Data

(Continued)

Site Name, State (Technology) Project Cost ($)* Quantity Treated Removed Treatment** 

Quantity of

Contaminant Calculated Cost for K

Project Cost* Calculated Cost for Treatment**T = Costs for treatment activities, including preprocessing, capital equipment, operation, **Calculated based on costs for treatment activities (T): exclude

and maintenance and after- (A)treatment activities. Calculated costs shown as "NB = Costs for before-treatment activities, including site preparation, excavation, and estimate of treatment costs unavailable.sampling and analysisA = Costs for after-treatment activities, including disposal of residuals and siterestorationC = Capital costsO = Annual operating costs

NRJ-0800227-02.nrj 14

Rocky Mountain Arsenal T - 74,600 34,000 cubic yards 70 pounds $2.20/cubic yard of soil 2 ex

Superfund Site (Motor Pool Area B - 88,490 of soil contaminants treated trea- Operable Unit #18), CO (SVE A - 19,650 removed $1,100/pound of of cow/product recovery and GAC) contaminant removed not 

Sacramento Army Depot T - 290,000 (cost estimate 650 cubic yards of 500 pounds VOC $450/cubic yard of soil 8 ex

Superfund Site, Tank 2 (Operable adjusted to account for soil removed (non- treated limiUnit #3), CA (SVE w/GAC) Freon; assumed operation Freon) $580/lb of non-Freon pres

costs equivalent for Freon contaminant removed incr

and non-Freon hydr

contaminants)

SMS Instruments Superfund Site, T - 450,521 1,250 cubic yards Not available $360/cubic yard of soil 2 ex

NY (SVE w/catalytic incineration of soil treated limiand scrubbing) com

Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) (Continued)

Verona Well Field Superfund T - 1,600,000 26,700 cubic yards 45,000 pounds $60/cubic yard of soil 23 eSite, (Thomas Solvent Raymond B - 480,000 of soil VOCs removed treated and Road - Operable Unit #1), IL A - 5,000 $36/pound of VOC com(SVE w/catalytic oxidation and removedGAC)

Thermal Desorption, In Situ Vitrification, and Soil Washing
Table 5. Remediation Case Studies - Summary of Cost Data

(Continued)

Site Name, State (Technology) Project Cost ($)* Quantity Treated Removed Treatment** 

Quantity of

Contaminant Calculated Cost for K

Project Cost* Calculated Cost for Treatment**T = Costs for treatment activities, including preprocessing, capital equipment, operation, **Calculated based on costs for treatment activities (T): exclude

and maintenance and after- (A)treatment activities. Calculated costs shown as "NB = Costs for before-treatment activities, including site preparation, excavation, and estimate of treatment costs unavailable.sampling and analysisA = Costs for after-treatment activities, including disposal of residuals and siterestorationC = Capital costsO = Annual operating costs

NRJ-0800227-02.nrj 15

Anderson Development Company Not available 5,100 tons of soil -- Projected costs range from Proj

Superfund Site, MI (Thermal $230 to $340/ton of soil mois

desorption) treated (SITE program

cost estimates based ondemonstration project)

King of Prussia Technical 7,700,000 19,200 tons of soil -- Not Calculated No iCorporation Superfund Site, NJ and sludge com(Soil washing)McKin Superfund Site, ME 2,900,000 11,500 cubic yards -- Not Calculated Lim(Thermal desorption) of soil comOutboard Marine Corporation T - 2,474,000 12,755 tons of soil -- $190/ton of soil and Superfund Site, OH (Thermal B - 900,000 and sediment sediment treateddesorption)Parsons Chemical/ETM T - 800,000 3,000 cubic yards -- $270/cubic yard of soil AppEnterprises Superfund Site, MI B - 800,000 of soil treated stag(In situ vitrification) A - 90,000
Table 5. Remediation Case Studies - Summary of Cost Data

(Continued)

Site Name, State (Technology) Project Cost ($)* Quantity Treated Removed Treatment** 

Quantity of

Contaminant Calculated Cost for K

Project Cost* Calculated Cost for Treatment**T = Costs for treatment activities, including preprocessing, capital equipment, operation, **Calculated based on costs for treatment activities (T): exclude

and maintenance and after- (A)treatment activities. Calculated costs shown as "NB = Costs for before-treatment activities, including site preparation, excavation, and estimate of treatment costs unavailable.sampling and analysisA = Costs for after-treatment activities, including disposal of residuals and siterestorationC = Capital costsO = Annual operating costs

NRJ-0800227-02.nrj 16

Thermal Desorption, In Situ Vitrification, and Soil Washing (Continued)

Pristine, Inc. Superfund Site, OH Not available 12,800 tons of soil -- -- (Thermal desorption)T H Agriculture & Nutrition T - 849,996 4,300 tons of soil -- $200/ton of soil treated SmaCompany Superfund Site, GA B - 252,582 (2,500 cubic yards) $340/cubic yard of soil scale(Thermal desorption) treatedWide Beach Development T - 11,600,000 42,000 tons of soil -- $280/ton of soil treated Lack Superfund Site, NY (Thermal B - 908,000 soil 

desorption/dehalogenation) A - 3,400,000
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 17

This page intentionally left blank.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 18

2.0 REMEDIATION CASE STUDIES: BIOREMEDIATION

Land Treatment at the Brown Wood Preserving

Superfund Site Live Oak, Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Refueling Loop E-7, Source Area ST20 Bioventing

Treatment at Eielson Air Force Base Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Slurry-Phase Bioremediation at the French Limited

Superfund Site Crosby, Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Low-Intensity Bioventing for Remediation of a JP-4

Fuel Spill at Site 280 Hill Air Force Base Ogden, Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Soil Vapor Extraction and Bioventing for Remediation

of a JP-4 Fuel Spill at Site 914, Hill Air Force Base,

Ogden, Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) Bioventing

Treatment at Lowry Air Force Base (AFB) Denver,

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) Land Treatment at

Lowry Air Force Base (AFB) Denver, Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Land Treatment at the Scott Lumber Company

Superfund Site, Alton, Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Windrow Composting of Explosives Contaminated Soil

at Umatilla Army Depot Activity Hermiston, Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 19

Land Treatment at the

Brown Wood Preserving Superfund Site

Live Oak, Florida

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Brown Wood Preserving Superfund Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) January 1989 to July 1990

Site - Primary constituents in creosote

- Total PAH concentrations in stockpiled soil

ranged from 100 to 208 mg/kg Location: Cleanup Type:

Live Oak, Florida Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

John Ryan Land Treatment CERCLA

Remediation Technologies, Inc. - Construction of the land treatment area - ROD Date: 4/8/88

(ReTeC) (LTA) included installation of a clay liner, - PRP Lead

1011 Southwest Klickitat Way, berm, run-on swales, and a subsurface

Suite 207 drainage system

Seattle, WA 98134 - Retention pond for run-off control;

(206) 624-9349 portable irrigation system

- Treatment performed using three lifts of

soil; first lift inoculated with PAH -

degrading microorganisms

- Lifts cultivated once every two weeks; soil

moisture content maintained at 10%

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

2491B (Wood Preserving using Martha Berry

Creosote) Remedial Project Manager

U.S. EPA Region 4

345 Courtland Street, N.E.

Atlanta, GA 30365

(404) 347-3016

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Manufacturing Process; Lagoon Soil

- 8,100 cubic yards of soil treated in three lifts

- Mixture of lagoon contents; lagoon had a clay bottom and sandy contents,

which ranged from silty clay to fine sand

Purpose/Significance of Application:

This was one of the early

applications of land treatment of

creosote-contaminated soil at a

Superfund site.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- ROD specified cleanup goals for PAHs in terms of Total Carcinogenic Indicator Chemicals (TCICs)

- TCICs defined as the sum of the concentrations of six constituents: benzo(a)anthracene; benzo(a)pyrene;

benzo(b)fluoranthene; chrysene; dibenzo(a,h)anthracene; and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

- ROD required reduction of TCIC concentration to 100 mg/kg within two years of initial seeding

Results:

- The cleanup goal was achieved within 18 months

- TCIC concentrations at 18 months ranged from 23 to 92 mg/kg
Land Treatment at the

Brown Wood Preserving Superfund Site

Live Oak, Florida (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 20

Cost Factors:

- Total costs for treatment activities at this site were approximately $565,400 (including solids preparation and handling;

mobilization/setup; and short-term (up to 3 years) and long-term (over 3 years) operation costs)

- Over half of total costs (about $312,000) were for short-term operation

- Before treatment costs were approximately $58,000 (including mobilization and preparatory work, site work, and solids

collection and containment)

- After treatment costs were approximately $9,800 for demobilization

Description:

From 1948 to 1978, the Brown Wood Preserving site was used to pressure treat lumber products with creosote. While

pentachlorophenol was occasionally used, creosote was the primary wood preservative. Lumber was pressure treated in

two cylinders and wastewaters from these cylinders were discharged to a lagoon. The lagoon and soils at the site were

determined to be contaminated with high levels of organics (primarily polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) found

in creosote) and the site was placed on the NPL in December 1982. In April 1988, following the completion of several

interim removal activities, a Record of Decision (ROD) was signed specifying land treatment for contaminated soils

stockpiled during the interim removal activities. 

Land treatment of the PAH-contaminated soils was performed from January 1989 to July 1990. Approximately 8,100

cubic yards of stockpiled soil were treated in three lifts. The cleanup goal specified in the ROD was 100 mg/kg for Total

Carcinogenic Indicator Chemicals (TCICs - the sum of the concentrations of six PAHs selected by EPA based on the

results of a risk assessment) to be achieved within two years of operation. The cleanup goal was achieved within 18

months using land treatment, 6 months ahead of the 2-year timeframe specified in the ROD. The concentrations of TCICs

measured during verification sampling (July 1990) ranged from 23 to 92 mg/kg. The LTA was revegetated in October

1991 and approximately 90% of the former LTA was covered with native grasses by March 1992.

The total treatment cost for this application at the Brown Wood site was approximately $565,400. The treatment costs

included solids preparation and handling, mobilization and setup, and operation costs. In addition, there were beforetreatment costs (mobilization and preparatory work, site work, and solids collection and containment) of approximately

$58,000 and after-treatment costs (demobilization) of approximately $9,800. This application is notable for being one of

the early applications of land treatment of creosote-contaminated soil at a Superfund site.
Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 21

Refueling Loop E-7, Source Area ST20

Bioventing Treatment at

Eielson Air Force Base

Alaska

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Eielson Air Force Base Source Area Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) and Status - Ongoing

ST20 Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes Report covers - 7/91 to 7/94

(BTEX)

- Soil TPH levels averaged 1,500 mg/kg

- Contamination is concentrated in areas

greater than 5.25 feet below ground surface

Location: Cleanup Type:

Fairbanks, Alaska Field Demonstration

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Ronald M. Smith Bioventing CERCLA and State: Alaska

Battelle-Pacific Northwest Labs - Bioventing conducted in conjunction with - Federal Facilities Agreement

Richland, WA several soil warming techniques - ROD Date: 9/92

- Four experimental plots tested: passive

warming, active warming, surface

warming, and control

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Capt. Timothy Merrymon

354 CES/CEVR

2258 Central Ave., Suite 1

Eielson AFB, Alaska 99702

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Spills and Leaks of JP-4 Jet Fuel Soil

- Thickness of contamination in saturated zone - 6.1 meters 

- Soil consists of interbedded layers of loose to medium dense gravel and sands

with varying amounts of silt to 6-9 feet

- Underlain by 600 feet of medium dense to dense sandy gravel

- No permafrost encountered at site

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Bioventing with various soil

warming techniques to demonstrate

technology effectiveness in a

subarctic environment.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- TPH - 200 mg/kg in soil

- Benzene - 2 lbs/day in extracted soil gas

- Remedial activities to be conducted in accordance with a Federal Facilities Agreement between U.S. Air Force, U.S.

EPA, and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation

Results:

- Bioventing project not complete at time of this report

- Preliminary results indicate that bioventing with soil warming stimulates in situ biodegradation year round in a

subarctic environment

- Active warming achieved higher biodegradation rates than passive or surface warming

- Ambient air samples showed no detectable concentrations of benzene 4 feet and 6 feet above ground level
Refueling Loop E-7, Source Area ST20

Bioventing Treatment at

Eielson Air Force Base

Alaska (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 22

Cost Factors:

- Estimated Capital Costs - $758,077 (including floating fuel collection devices, soil bioventing equipment, composting site

development, mobilization, groundwater remediation and engineering design)

- Estimated Annual Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Costs - $177,160 (O&M of three components - floating fuel (5

year duration), soil bioventing (10 year duration), groundwater monitoring (30 year duration), including sample

analysis and monitoring of each component)

Description:

As a result of spills and leaks of JP-4 jet fuel at a refueling complex at Eielson Air Force Base (AFB) in Fairbanks, Alaska,

soil was contaminated with total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes

(BTEX). In November 1989, Eielson AFB was added to the National Priorities List (NPL) with the fuel-saturated area

within the Refueling Loop E-7, Source Area ST20 designated as CERCLA Operable Unit 1. A field demonstration of

bioventing and three soil warming techniques began in July 1991 including active warming, passive warming, and surface

warming. Specific cleanup goals include TPH (200 mg/kg in soil), and benzene (2 lbs/day in extracted soil gas). 

The field demonstration of the bioventing system was on-going as of July 1994. Available respiration test data for oxygen

consumption rates confirmed the occurrence of biological degradation processes. Preliminary results indicate that

bioventing with soil warming achieves biodegradation year round in a subarctic environment. Active warming was found

to achieve a higher biodegradation rate than passive or surface warming. It was noted that biodegradation is enhanced

by adequate soil oxygen, moisture, and nutrient levels; that injection wells are impractical at source areas with a

naturally high concentration of iron in the groundwater; and that high soil moisture content interferes with soil gas

monitoring and reduces the number of soil gas monitoring points that can be sampled.

The estimated capital cost of this application was approximately $758,000 and the estimated annual operations and

maintenance costs are $177,160. Full-scale remedial activities at the site will be conducted in accordance with a Federal

Facilities Agreement between the U.S. Air Force, U.S. EPA, and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.
Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 23

Slurry-Phase Bioremediation at the

French Limited Superfund Site

Crosby, Texas

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

French Limited Superfund Site Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) January 1992 to November

and Chlorinated Aliphatics; 1993

- Primary constituents included benzene,

vinyl chloride, and benzo(a)pyrene

- Site contaminants included volatile organics

(up to 400 mg/kg); pentachlorophenol (up

to 750 mg/kg); semivolatiles (up to 5,000

mg/kg); metals (up to 5,000 mg/kg); PCBs

(up to 616 mg/kg) and arsenic

Location: Cleanup Type:

Crosby, Texas Full-scale cleanup

Vendors: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Jonathan Greene Slurry-Phase Bioremediation CERCLA

ENSR - Two treatment cells designed to hold 17 - ROD Date: 3/24/88

3000 Richmond Avenue million gallons each - PRP Lead

Houston, TX 77098 - Mixflo aeration system used to maintain

(713) 520-9900 dissolved oxygen concentration at 2.0 mg/L

Gary Storms - Tarry sludge dredged and treated

Praxair, Inc. separately from subsoil in lagoon

39 Old Ridgebury Road

Danbury, CT 06810

(203) 837-2174

TM

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

4953E (Waste management-refuse Judith Black

systems; sand and gravel pit Remedial Project Manager

disposal) U.S. EPA Region 6

1445 Ross Avenue

Dallas, TX 75202

(214) 665-6739

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Disposal pit Soil and Sludge

- Approximately 300,000 tons

- Soils varied from fine grained silts to coarse sand

- Sludges - tar-like consisting of a mixture of petrochemical sludges, kiln dust,

and tars (styrene and oils)

Purpose/Significance of Application:

A large full-scale application of

slurry-phase bioremediation of a

lagoon at a Superfund site. An

innovative system was used to

minimize air emissions during the

remediation.
Slurry-Phase Bioremediation at the

French Limited Superfund Site

Crosby, Texas (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 24

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- The ROD specified maximum allowable concentrations in the lagoon subsoils and sludges for 5 contaminants: 

benzo(a)pyrene (9 mg/kg), total PCBs (23 mg/kg), vinyl chloride (43 mg/kg), arsenic (7 mg/kg), and benzene (14 mg/kg)

- The ROD specified an action level for total VOCs of 11 ppm for 5 minutes at the site boundary at any time during

treatment

Results:

- The specified cleanup criteria were met within 10 months treatment for Cell E and 11 months treatment for Cell F

- There were no exceedances of the established criteria for VOC air emissions

Cost Factors:

- Total costs were approximately $49,000,000 (including project management, pilot studies, technology development,

EPA oversight, and backfill of the lagoon)

- $26,900,000 of total costs were for activities directly attributed to treatment (including solids, liquid, and vapor/gas

preparation and handling, pads/foundations/spill control, mobilization/setup, startup/testing/permits, training, and

operation)

- $16,500,000 were for before-treatment activities (including mobilization and preparatory work, monitoring sampling,

testing, and analysis, site work, surface water, groundwater, and air pollution/gas collection and control, solids and

liquids/sediments/sludges collection and containment, and drums/tanks/structures/miscellaneous demolition and

removal)

- $5,600,000 were for after-treatment activities (including decontamination and decommissioning, commercial and noncommercial disposal, site restoration, non-treatment unit demobilization, topsoil, and revegetation)

Description:

The French Ltd. Superfund site in Crosby, Texas, is a former industrial waste disposal facility where an estimated 70

million gallons of petrochemical wastes were disposed in an unlined lagoon at the site between 1966 and 1971. The

primary contaminants at the site included benzo(a)pyrene, vinyl chloride, and benzene, as well as arsenic and PCBs.

In 1983, the Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) formed the French Limited Task Group (FLTG) to lead the

remediation at the site. The ROD, signed in March 1988, specified bioremediation of the lagoon. In addition, the ROD

specified soil cleanup goals for five target contaminants (benzo(a)pyrene, total PCBs, vinyl chloride, arsenic, and

benzene). Slurry-phase bioremediation of the lagoon was performed from January 1992 through November 1993. An

innovative system (the MixFlo system) was used for aeration in this application that minimized air emissions while

supplying oxygen to the biomass. This system used pure oxygen and a series of eductors to oxygenate the mixed liquor

while minimizing air emissions. During this time, approximately 300,000 tons of contaminated sludge and soil in the

lagoon were treated to levels below those specified in the ROD. In addition, air emission limits specified in the ROD were

not exceeded during treatment. Total costs for the system were approximately $49,000,000, including approximately

$26,000,000 for activities directly attributed to treatment.

This application is notable as being the first application of slurry-phase bioremediation at a Superfund site, and included

approximately $12,000,000 in technology development and pilot-scale testing work. According to FLTG, the costs for

future applications of slurry-phase bioremediation depend on site-specific chemical and physical conditions with oxygen

and nutrient supply being key factors affecting the cost of bioremediation systems.
Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 25

Low-Intensity Bioventing for

Remediation of a JP-4 Fuel Spill at Site 280

Hill Air Force Base

Ogden, Utah

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Hill Air Force Base, Site 280 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) and Status - Ongoing

Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes Report covers - 12/90 to 6/94

(BTEX)

- Soil TPH concentrations measured as high

as 5,040 mg/kg

- Soil gas TPH concentrations measured as

high as 11,200 ppm

Location: Cleanup Type:

Ogden, Utah Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Not Available Bioventing State: Utah

- System consists of 1 injection well and 10

monitoring wells

- Air flow rate on blower discharge ranged

from 20 to 117 acfm; operated since 11/93

at 20 acfm

- Blower discharge pressure of 2 in. of Hg

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) William James

Remedial Project Manager

Hill Air Force Base

Ogden, Utah

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated: 

Spills and other releases of JP-4 jet Soil

fuel - Soil-gas permeability value - 0.057 darcy

- Porosity 30 to 50%; moisture content 1.4 to 18%; air conductivity 4.7 to 7.8

darcies; particle density 0.3 to 0.5 gm/cm and particle diameter 0.8 to 10 mm; 3

soil bulk density 0.37 to 0.48 gm/cm ; soil organic content 0.08 to 0.86% 3

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Bioventing to remediate soils

contaminated with JP-4 jet fuel.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- No specific cleanup goals established at this time

- Cleanup assessment will be conducted subject to "Guidelines for Estimating Numeric Cleanup Levels for Petroleum

Contaminated Soils at Underground Storage Tank Release Sites," which are established by Utah Department of Health

Results:

- Bioventing project was not complete at time of this report

- Respiration rate tests from 4/91 to 11/93 indicate hydrocarbon degradation is occurring

- As of 11/92, soil gas TPH concentration reduced to less than or equal to 2,600 ppm

- Estimates of the mass of contaminants removed have not yet been reported

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Cost (estimated) - $115,000 (including construction of piping system, buildings, process equipment, and

startup)

- Total Annual Operating Cost (estimated over 4 years) - $24,000 (including labor, electricity, lab charges, maintenance,

and monitoring)
Low-Intensity Bioventing for

Remediation of a JP-4 Fuel Spill at Site 280

Hill Air Force Base

Ogden, Utah (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 26

Description:

As a result of spills and other releases of JP-4 jet fuel at the 280 Fuel Storage Lot at Hill Air Force Base in Ogden, Utah,

soil was contaminated with total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX). 

TPH concentrations were reported as high as 5,000 mg/kg in the soil and 11,200 ppm in the soil gas. A low-intensity

bioventing system was installed at the site and has been in operation since December 1990. No specific cleanup goals have

been established at this time. The final cleanup assessment will be conducted subject to "Guidelines for Estimating

Numeric Cleanup Levels for Petroleum Contaminated Soils at Underground Storage Tank Release Sites", which are

established by the Utah Department of Health. 

The bioventing system includes one injection well (100 ft. depth) and 10 monitoring wells (varying depths). During the

operation of this system, the air flow rate of the blower discharge had been varied between 20 and 117 acfm (at a discharge

pressure of 2 in. of Hg) in order to optimize air flow rates while eliminating volatilization. Available data from respiration

rate tests (4/91 to 11/93) indicate that hydrocarbon degradation is occurring. As of November, 1992, soil gas TPH

concentrations had been reduced from 11,200 mg/kg to below 2,600 mg/kg. Estimates of the mass of contaminants removed

have not yet been reported.

The estimated total capital cost for this application is $115,000. The total annual operating cost, estimated over 4 years, is

$24,000 exclusive of final site characterization. During this application, it was noted that biodegradation is enhanced by

maintaining adequate soil oxygen, moisture, and nutrient levels and that estimates of biodegradation are more accurate if

oxygen depletion is used instead of carbon dioxide formation. In addition, it was noted that air flow rates can be optimized

to low levels ranging from 40 to 67 acfm. 
Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 27

Soil Vapor Extraction and Bioventing

for Remediation of a JP-4 Fuel Spill

at Site 914, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Hill Air Force Base, Site 914 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) October 1988 - December 1990

- TPH concentrations in untreated soil

ranged from <20 to 10,200 mg/kg with

average soil TPH concentration of 411

mg/kg

Location: Cleanup Type:

Ogden, Utah Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Bioventing Preceded by SVE Cleanup Authority:

Not Available Bioventing State: Utah

- 4 vent wells (Numbers 12-15) located on the

southern perimeter of the spill area; 31

monitoring wells; 3 neutron access probes

(for soil moisture monitoring)

- Vent wells approximately 50 feet deep with

4-inch diameter PVC casings, screened

from 10 to 50 feet below ground surface

- Monitoring wells - ranged in depth from 6

to 55 feet with 1-inch diameter PVC

casings, screened from 10 to 50 feet below

ground surface

- No treatment of extracted vapors required

(hydrocarbon concentrations <50 mg/L; use

of catalytic incinerator not required)

- Air flow - 250 acfm

- Soil moisture - 6 to 12%

- Nutrients added - C:N:P ratio of 100:10:10

SVE

- 7 vent wells (Numbers 5-11 located in areas

of highest contamination), 31 monitoring

wells, 3 neutron access probes (soil moisture

monitoring)

- Vent wells approximately 50 feet deep with

4-inch diameter PVC casings, screened

from 10 to 50 feet below ground surface

- Plastic liner installed over part of spill area

surface to prevent local air infiltration and

bypassing of air flow to the vent well

directly from the surface

- Monitoring wells - range in depth from 6 to

55 feet with 1-inch diameter PVC casing

and a 2-foot screened interval to the bottom

of the well

- Catalytic incinerator for extracted vapor

- Air flow - 1,500 acfm (maximum), 700 acfm

(typical)

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Robert Elliot

OO-ACC/EMR

7274 Wardleigh Road

Hill AFB, Utah 84055

Waste Source:

Spill of JP-4 Jet Fuel

Purpose/Significance of Application:

One of the early applications

involving sequential use of SVE and

bioventing technology.
Soil Vapor Extraction and Bioventing

for Remediation of a JP-4 Fuel Spill

at Site 914, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 28

Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Soil

- 5,000 yds contaminated by spill (surface area of 13,500 ft ) 3 2

- Approximate extent of 10,000 mg/kg JP-4 contour covered area 100 by 150 feet 

- Formation consists of mixed sands and gravels with occasional clay lenses

- Air permeability ranged from 4.7 to 7.8 darcies

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- 38.1 mg/kg TPH

- Cleanup conducted under Utah Department of Health's "Guidelines for Estimating Numeric Cleanup Levels for

Petroleum-Contaminated Soil at Underground Storage Tank Release Sites" 

Results:

- Achieved specified TPH levels

- Average TPH soil concentrations in treated soil reduced to less than 6 mg/kg;

- 211,000 lbs of TPH removed in approximately 2 years of operation;

- Removal rate ranged from 20 to 400 lbs/day

Cost Factors:

- Total costs of $599,000, including capital and 2 years of operating costs

- Capital costs - $335,000 (including construction of piping and wells, other equipment, and startup costs) 

- Annual operating costs - $132,000 (including electricity, fuel, labor, laboratory charges, and lease of equipment for 2

year operation)

Description:

In January 1985, an estimated 27,000 gallons of JP-4 jet fuel were spilled at the Hill Air Force Base Site 914 when an

automatic overflow device failed. Concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) in the soil ranged from <20

mg/kg to over 10,000 mg/kg, with an average concentration of about 400 mg/kg. The spill area covered approximately

13,500 ft .2

The remediation of this spill area was conducted from October 1988 to December 1990 in two phases: the soil vapor

extraction (SVE) phase followed by the bioventing phase. The SVE system included 7 vent wells (Numbers 5-11) located

in the areas of highest contamination, 31 monitoring wells, and a catalytic incinerator. The typical air flow rate through

the vent wells was 700 acfm, with a maximum of 1,500 acfm. In addition, a plastic liner was installed over part of the spill

area surface to prevent local air infiltration and bypassing of air flow to the vent well directly from the surface. Within a

year, the SVE system removed hydrocarbons from the soil to levels ranging from 33 to 101 mg/kg. Further reduction of

the hydrocarbon concentration in the soil, to levels below the specified TPH limit, was achieved by using bioventing for 15

months. The bioventing system included 4 vent wells (Numbers 12-15), located on the southern perimeter of the spill

area, and the monitoring wells used for SVE system. Because hydrocarbon concentrations were <50 mg/L in the

extracted vapors, the catalytic incinerator was not required for this phase. Biodegradation was enhanced by injecting

oxygen, moisture, and nutrients to the soil. Average TPH concentrations in the treated soil were less than 6 mg/kg.

The total capital cost for this application was $335,000 and the total annual operating costs were $132,000. In monitoring

biodegradation rates, oxygen depletion was found to be a more accurate estimator of biodegradation rate than carbon

dioxide formation. Carbon dioxide sinks, such as biomass, solubility in water, and reaction with the soil, limited the

usefulness of carbon dioxide formation as a process control parameter.
Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 29

Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)

Bioventing Treatment at

Lowry Air Force Base (AFB)

Denver, Colorado

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Lowry Air Force Base Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) Status - Ongoing

- Total Recoverable Petroleum Report covers - 8/92 to 4/94

Hydrocarbons (TRPH) concentrations of

15 to 14,000 mg/kg were measured in soil

samples below the area excavated for

landfarming

- BTEX concentrations in soil samples were

lower than cleanup criteria

Location: Cleanup Type:

Denver, Colorado Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Engineering Science, Inc. Bioventing State: Colorado

1700 Broadway, Suite 900 - 6 piping manifolds (each consisting of two

Denver, CO 80290 10 ft, 2 in diameter screens)

- Placed in excavation at right angles (in a

horizontal plane), surrounded with 1 to 2

ft layer of pea gravel

- Aerated to maintain an oxygen

concentration greater than 14%

- Carbon dioxide concentration maintained

at less than 4%

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Lt. Tom Williams

3415 CES/DEV

Lowry AFB, CO 80230

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Underground Storage Tank Soil

- No estimates have been made of the quantity of soil treated or hydrocarbon

product degraded at the time of this report

- Moist, firm sandy clay in top 10-15 ft

- Medium to coarse-grained sand in next 15-80 ft

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Bioventing to remediate soils

contaminated with heating oil which

contained relatively high

concentrations of TPH and relatively

low concentrations of soluble

contaminants (e.g., benzene).

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Treated soil - TPH < 500 mg/kg; TRPH < 500 mg/kg; and BTEX < 100 mg/kg

- Cleanup conducted under EPA and State of Colorado Underground Storage Tank Regulations and the Colorado

Department of Health's Remedial Action Category III (RAC III) action levels

Results:

- Bioventing project was not complete at time of this report

- No TRPH, BTEX, or TPH data are available at this time

- Bioventing system maintained adequate O levels in the contaminated soil and removed CO from the soil 2 2
Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)

Bioventing Treatment at

Lowry Air Force Base (AFB)

Denver, Colorado (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 30

Cost Factors:

- Final cost data were not available

- Total Capital Cost - $28,650 (including equipment, site work, engineering, project management)

- Annual Operating Costs - $32,875 per year (including electricity, maintenance, laboratory charges)

Description:

As a result of a leak of heating oil from an underground storage tank (UST) at Lowry Air Force Base in Denver, Colorado,

soil was contaminated with total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX). 

Following excavation of contaminated soil to a depth of 35 to 40 feet below ground level, soil sampling from the bottom of

the excavation indicated that TRPH concentrations of 15 mg/kg to 14,000 mg/kg remained in the soils. A bioventing

system, consisting of six bioventing piping manifolds, was installed at the bottom of the excavation and began operating in

August 1992. The soil was aerated to maintain an oxygen concentration greater than 14% and a CO concentration less 2

than 4%.

The bioventing of the contaminated soil at this site was ongoing as of April 1994. The target cleanup levels for the soil were

TPH to less than 500 mg/kg; Total Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TRPH) to less than 500 mg/kg; and BTEX to

less than 100 mg/kg. The cleanup is being conducted under the authority of the Colorado Department of Health

Underground Storage Tank Program. While no TPH, TRPH, or BTEX data were available at the time of this report, the

bioventing system was found to have maintained adequate O and CO levels in the soil. 2 2

The total capital cost for this application is $28,650 and the estimated annual operating costs are $32,875. It was noted

during this application that key operating parameters for bioventing are soil moisture, oxygen content, and carbon dioxide

content; and that more frequent and better reported respiration test results would provide a more complete picture of the

progress of the bioventing process, and indicate when final soil samples should be collected. 
Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 31

Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)

Land Treatment at

Lowry Air Force Base (AFB)

Denver, Colorado

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Lowry Air Force Base Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes Status - Ongoing

(BTEX) and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Report covers - 7/92 to 9/93

(TPH)

- Contaminated soil - BTEX < 100 mg/kg;

Total Recoverable Petroleum

Hydrocarbons (TRPH) up to 11,000

mg/kg; 3,100 mg/kg average

- Stockpiled soil - average TRPH of 3,983

mg/kg

Location: Cleanup Type:

Denver, Colorado Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Engineering Science, Inc. Land Treatment State: Colorado

1700 Broadway, Suite 900 - Soil spread on plastic sheeting to thickness

Denver, CO 80290 of 14 to 18 inches

- One-time addition of ammonium nitrate

nutrients (C:N:P ratios of 200:10:1)

- Soil aerated twice a month (AprilNovember)

- Soil moisture content 10%-15%

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Lt. Tom Williams

3415 CES/DEV

Lowry AFB, CO 80230

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Underground Storage Tank Soil

- Soil type firm sandy clay and medium to coarse-grained sand

- Soil moisture content ranged from 6% to 11%

- 5,400 yd treated plus three additional truckloads of contaminated soil 3

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Land treatment to remediate soils

contaminated with heating oil which

contained relatively high

concentrations of TPH and relatively

low concentrations of soluble

contaminants (e.g., benzene).

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Treated soil - TPH < 500 mg/kg; TRPH < 500 mg/kg; and BTEX < 100 mg/kg

- Cleanup conducted under EPA and State of Colorado Underground Storage Tank Regulations and the Colorado

Department of Health's Remedial Action Category III (RAC III) action levels

Results:

- Land treatment project was not complete at time of this report

- No TRPH, BTEX, or TPH data are available at this time

- Total Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbon levels as of September 1993 ranged from 1,300-1,700 mg/kg
Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)

Land Treatment at

Lowry Air Force Base (AFB)

Denver, Colorado (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 32

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Cost - $104,257 (including site work, permitting, construction/mobilization/demobilization, pilot testing,

project management); pilot testing was $76,000 of the total capital costs

- Estimated Annual Operating Costs - $18,460 per year (including laboratory charges, maintenance, monitoring)

Description:

As a result of a leak of heating oil from an underground storage tank (UST) at Lowry Air Force Base in Denver, Colorado,

soil at the site was contaminated with total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and

xylenes (BTEX). An estimated 10,500 gallons of fuel oil were released. The USTs in the area were removed and the

contaminated soil was excavated. Land treatment was selected for the excavated soil; treatment of about 5,400 cubic yards

began in July 1992 and is ongoing at the time of this report. For this land treatment application, nutrients (ammonium

nitrate) were added in a one-time application, the soil is tilled twice a month, and soil moisture content is kept between 10

to 15% by weight. The target cleanup levels for the soil are TPH to less than 500 mg/kg; Total Recoverable Petroleum

Hydrocarbons (TRPH) to less than 500 mg/kg, and BTEX to less than 100 mg/kg. The cleanup is being conducted under

the authority of the Colorado Department of Health Underground Storage Tank Program.

The estimated completion time for the land treatment operation was two years. However, as of September 1993, the

treatment had not been completed. While no TPH, TRPH, or BTEX data were available at the time of this report, levels of

Total Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TEPH) sampled as of September 1993 showed levels in the range of 1,300 to

1,700 mg/kg. These data and the results of a pilot test, which showed a general decrease in TEPH over time, appear to

indicate that land treatment will be effective, though no projections for a completion date are available at this time.

The total capital cost for this project is $104,257 including $76,000 for pilot testing, and the estimated annual operating

costs are $18,640. Available information to date indicates that the credibility of the land treatment soil assessment would

have been improved if an adequate, random sampling program had been used for sample collection. In addition,

laboratory analysis should have been consistent throughout the pilot test or an explanation of inconsistencies provided. 
Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 33

Land Treatment at the

Scott Lumber Company Superfund Site

Alton, Missouri

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Scott Lumber Company Superfund Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) December 1989 to September

Site - PAH concentrations were measured as high 1991

as 0.326 mg/kg in lagoon water, 12,400

mg/kg in sludge, and 63,000 mg/kg in soils

- Benzo(a)pyrene ranged from 16 to 23

mg/kg at initiation of treatment

Location: Cleanup Type:

Alton, Missouri Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Christina Consentini Land Treatment CERCLA (removal action)

Remediation Technologies, Inc. - Construction of land treatment area - Action memorandum date:

(ReTeC) included a clay liner and berms, run-on 7/10/87

1001 S. 24th Street, W., Suite 105 swales, and subsurface drainage system - Fund Lead

Billings, MT 59102 - Retention pond and irrigation system

(406) 652-7481 - Treatment performed using two lifts of soil

- Indigenous microorganisms used to support

biodegradation

- Nutrients added to Lift No. 1; none added

to Lift No. 2

- Cultivated once every two weeks

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

2491B (Wood Preserving - using Bruce A. Morrison

Creosote) Remedial Project Manager

U.S. EPA - Region 7

Emergency Planning and

Response Branch

25 Funston Road

Kansas City, KS 66115

(913) 551-7755

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Surface Impoundment/Lagoon; Spill Soil

- 15,961 tons of soil treated in two lifts

- Classified as sand per USDA system

- Approximately 4% of soil passes a No. 200 sieve

Purpose/Significance of Application:

This was one of the early

applications of land treatment at a

Superfund site contaminated with

creosote compounds.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Action levels in soil were established for total PAHs at 500 mg/kg and for benzo(a)pyrene at 14 mg/kg

- Total PAHs was defined as the sum of 16 specific PAH constituents

Results:

- Land treatment achieved specified action levels for PAHs and benzo(a)pyrene

- Lift No. 1 - Total PAHs reduced from 560 to 130 mg/kg, and BAP from 16 to 8 mg/kg, in 6 months of treatment

- Lift No. 2 - Total PAHs reduced from 700 to 155 mg/kg and BAP from 23 to 10 mg/kg, in 3 months of treatment

Cost Factors:

- Total Costs for Removal Action - approximately $4,047,000 (including $1,292,000 for the land treatment contractor

(over 3 years), $254,000 for laboratory analyses, EPA contractors and EPA oversight)
Land Treatment at the

Scott Lumber Company Superfund Site

Alton, Missouri (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 34

Description:

From 1973 to 1985, the Scott Lumber Company, located near Alton, Missouri, operated a wood treating facility used to

preserve railroad ties with a creosote/diesel fuel mixture. As a result of these operations, soil at the site was found to have

been contaminated with polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) at concentrations as high as 63,000 mg/kg. An

Action Memorandum was signed in July 1987, which specified the construction and operation of a land treatment unit

(LTU) as a removal action for treatment of PAH-contaminated soils at the site. Cleanup activities were performed in

three phases. The first two phases involved decontamination and removal of surface debris and sludge at the site and

excavation and stockpiling of contaminated soil at the site. Phase III involved on-site land treatment of the contaminated

stockpiled soil.

Land treatment was performed from December 1989 through September 1991, and 15,961 tons of soil were treated

during this application. Stockpiled soil was placed in the LTU in two lifts. Approximately 200 lbs per acre of ammonium

phosphate fertilizer were added to the first lift to adjust the nutrients in the soil. No nutrient adjustments were made to

the second lift. Each lift was cultivated once or twice a week and irrigated, as necessary, to maintain a moisture content

between 1% and 4%.

Action levels for the soil at the site, established by EPA, were 14 mg/kg for benzo(a)pyrene (BAP) and 500 mg/kg for total

PAHs. Land treatment at the Scott Lumber site reduced levels of BAP and total PAHs to below action levels. In Lift 1,

BAP concentrations were reduced from 16 mg/kg to 8 mg/kg and total PAH concentrations were reduced from 560 mg/kg

to 130 mg/kg within 6 months. In Lift 2, concentrations were reduced from 23 mg/kg to 10 mg/kg for BAP and from 700

mg/kg to 155 mg/kg for total PAHs within 3 months. The total costs for this removal action were $4,047,000, including

$1,292,000 for the land treatment contractor and $254,000 for laboratory analyses. Site demobilization was completed in

September 1991.
Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 35

Windrow Composting of Explosives Contaminated Soil at

Umatilla Army Depot Activity

Hermiston, Oregon

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Umatilla Army Depot Activity Explosives May 1992 to November 1992

(UMDA), Explosives Washout - Primary soil contaminants include 2,4,6-

Lagoons, CERCLA Soils Operable trinitrotoluene (TNT); hexahydro-1,3,5-

Unit trinitro-1,3,5-triazine (RDX); and

octahydro-1,3,5,7-tetranitro-1,3,5,7-

tetrazocine (HMX)

- Contaminant levels >100 ppm limited to

soils in the first 2 to 4 feet below the surface

of the lagoons

Location: Cleanup Type:

Hermiston, Oregon Field Demonstration

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Roy F. Weston, Inc. Composting CERCLA

- Excavated soil screened and mixed with soil

amendments

- Nonaerated and aerated windrows

composted for 40 days

- Treated soil mixed with top soil and

revegetated, redeposited in excavated area,

or landfilled

- Windrows contained contaminated soil

(30%), cow manure (21%), alfalfa (18%),

sawdust (18%), potatoes (10%), and hen

manure (3%)

- Mixed 3 to 7 times per week, temperature

15 to 60C, oxygen up to 21%, moisture 30

to 40%, pH 5 to 9

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Remedial Project Manager

Umatilla Army Depot Activity

Hermiston, OR

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Surface Impoundment/Lagoon Soil

- 244 cubic yards (8 windrows, 28 cubic yards each)

- Predominantly Quincy fine sand and Quincy loamy fine sand Purpose/Significance of Application:

Field demonstration of windrow

composting to biodegrade

explosives-contaminated soils.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Concentrations of explosives in soil to be below 30 ppm; target compounds were TNT and RDX

- Top 5 feet of soil below the lagoons to be excavated, treated, and returned to the excavated area

Results:

- Windrow composting performance after 40-day treatment generally reduced the levels of target explosives to below the

cleanup goals

- TNT reduced from 1,600 to 4 ppm (aerated and nonaerated)

- RDX reduced from 1,000 to 7 ppm (aerated) and 2 ppm (nonaerated)

- HMX reduced from 200 to 47 ppm (aerated) and 5 ppm (nonaerated)
Windrow Composting of Explosives Contaminated Soil at

Umatilla Army Depot Activity

Hermiston, Oregon (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 36

Cost Factors:

- No costs were available for the field demonstration

Projected cost for full-scale windrow composting: 

- Capital cost for treatment activities - $1,840,000 (including equipment, buildings, structures, mechanical/piping, and

electrical)

- Five-year operating cost - $2,000,000 (including power, amendments, fuel, labor, and maintenance)

- Full-scale costs assume 20,000 tons of soil, 5-year project duration, nonaerated windrows, mixed daily, 30% soil

loading, 30-day treatment periods, and compliance with RCRA Waste Pile Facility Standards

Description:

From approximately 1955 to 1965, the Umatilla Army Depot Activity (UMDA) operated a munitions washout facility in

Hermiston, Oregon, where hot water and steam were used to remove explosives from munitions bodies. About 85 million

gallons of heavily-contaminated wash water were discharged to two settling lagoons at the site. The underlying soils and

groundwater were determined to be contaminated with explosive compounds, primarily TNT, RDX, and HMX, and the

site was placed on the NPL in 1987. 

Windrow composting was used in a field demonstration at UMDA from May to November 1992 to treat 244 cubic yards

of contaminated soil. Nonaerated and aerated windrows were treated for 40 days, using several soil amendments, and

tested for residual contamination. TNT was reduced from 1600 to 4 ppm (aerated and nonaerated), RDX reduced from

1000 to 7 ppm (nonaerated) and 2 ppm (aerated), and HMX reduced from 200 to 47 ppm (aerated) and 5 ppm

(nonaerated) in the 40 day treatment period. With the exception of HMX (aerated), these levels were below the targeted

soil cleanup levels of 30 ppm.

Costs were not available for the field demonstration. The costs for a full-scale application of windrow composting at

Umatilla were estimated assuming treatment of 20,000 tons of soil, 5-year project duration, nonaerated windrows, mixed

daily, 30% soil loading, 30-day treatment periods, and RCRA Waste Pile facility standards. The capital cost for the fullscale application was estimated as $2,118,000, and the annual operating cost as $527,000.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 37

This page intentionally left blank.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 38

3.0 REMEDIATION CASE STUDIES: GROUNDWATER TREATMENT

Density-Driven Groundwater Sparging at Amcor

Precast Ogden, Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Petroleum Product Recovery and Contaminated

Groundwater Remediation Amoco Petroleum Pipeline

Constantine, Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Recovery of Free Petroleum Product Fort Drum, Fuel

Dispensing Area 1595 Watertown, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at

Langley Air Force Base Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Dynamic Underground Stripping Demonstrated at

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Gasoline

Spill Site, Livermore, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at

Operable Unit B/C McClellan Air Force Base

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at

Operable Unit D McClellan Air Force Base California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at Twin

Cities Army Ammunition Plant, New Brighton,

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at U.S.

Department of Energy Kansas City Plant Kansas City,

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at U.S.

Department of Energy Savannah River Site, Aiken,

South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

In Situ Air Stripping of Contaminated Groundwater at

U.S. Department of Energy Savannah River Site Aiken,

South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 39

Density-Driven Groundwater Sparging at

Amcor Precast

Ogden, Utah

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Amcor Precast Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total Xylenes (BTEX), Naphthalene, March 1992 to

and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) September 1993

Groundwater

- Average groundwater concentrations (mg/L) in plume area/site

maximum - TPH (51/190), benzene (1.3/4.7), toluene (2.4/9.4),

ethylbenzene (0.78/2.7), total xylenes (2.5/8.0), naphthalene

(0.18/0.63)

Soil

- Average soil concentrations (mg/kg) in plume area/site maximum -

TPH (555/1,600), benzene (2.0/7.8), toluene (1.4/2.5), ethylbenzene

(5.7/19), total xylenes (37/110)

Location: Cleanup Type:

Ogden, Utah Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Todd Schrauf In situ Density-Driven Groundwater Sparging and Soil Vapor State: Utah

Wasatch Env., Inc. Extraction Department of

2251B West California - System consists of three main components - groundwater sparging Environmental

Ave. system; groundwater recirculation system; and soil vapor extraction Quality, Division of

Salt Lake City, UT system Response and

84104 - Groundwater sparging was principal method of remediation; SVE Remediation (DERR)

(801) 972-8400 was used locally

Sparging System

- Density-driven groundwater sparging - removed petroleum

hydrocarbons using (1) aerobic degradation and (2) in situ air

stripping; water inside the wellbore was aerated directly by injecting

air at the base of the wellbore

- 12 groundwater sparging wells installed to a depth of 18 feet

Groundwater Recirculation

- 3 downgradient extraction (pumping) wells installed to a depth of 20

feet and 1 upgradient injection galley (former tank excavation

backfilled with pea gravel)

SVE

- 3 vertical extraction wells located adjacent to the pumping wells

- Vapor discharged to atmosphere

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

Not Available Shelly Quick

Utah DERR

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Underground Storage Groundwater and Soil

Tanks - Site stratigraphy - interbedded silty sand and poorly graded fine gravel underlain by a silty

clay aquitard at a depth of approximately 18 feet below ground surface

- Depth to groundwater - 5 to 11 feet; aquifer thickness (7-13 feet)

- Porosity (20-35%), hydraulic conductivity (190 ft/day)

- Aerial extent of the plume - approximately 30,000 ft ; vertical extent of contamination - 2

contaminants concentrated in vertical zone from approximately 5 to 11 feet below ground

surface

- Estimated volume of contaminated soil - 7,000 yd3
Density-Driven Groundwater Sparging at

Amcor Precast

Ogden, Utah (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 40

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Full-scale remediation of groundwater contaminated with diesel and gasoline fuels using in situ density-driven

groundwater sparging and soil vapor extraction.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Soil - DEQ Recommended Cleanup Levels (RCLs) - TPH - 30 mg/kg; Benzene - 0.2 mg/kg; Toluene - 100 mg/kg;

Ethylbenzene - 70 mg/kg; Xylenes - 1,000 mg/kg; Naphthalene - 2.0 mg/kg

- Groundwater - BTEX and naphthalene to below MCLs; no cleanup goal for TPH in groundwater

- Air - no air discharge permit was required because air emissions were below de minimis standards of the Utah Division

of Air Quality

Results:

- The cleanup goals were achieved for all contaminants of concern in both soil and groundwater

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Cost: $156,950 (including drill/install wells and sparging system, start-up, project management)

- Total Annual Operating Cost: $62,750 (including electricity, maintenance, monitoring)

Description:

Amcor Precast in Ogden, Utah, stored gasoline and diesel fuel in three underground storage tanks. A release was

discovered in 1990. An investigation in 1991 indicated that the areal extent of groundwater contamination was

approximately 30,000 ft and that an estimated 6,700-7,000 yd of soil had been contaminated. The primary contaminants 2 3

of concern were benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX), naphthalene, and total petroleum hydrocarbons

(TPH). A density-driven groundwater sparging system and soil vapor extraction (SVE) system were installed in

January/February 1992 and operated from March 1992 to September 1993. The sparging system was used as the primary

remediation technology. SVE was used locally to treat volatilized hydrocarbons, created by the air stripping process, and

prevent contaminants from migrating to nearby office buildings.

With the density-driven groundwater sparging system at Amcor, water inside the wellbore was aerated by injecting air

into the base of the wellbore (rather than injected under pressure) with the resulting injection air bubbles stripping

contaminants from the water while increasing the dissolved oxygen content. In addition, the aeration process acted to

create groundwater circulation and transport. Therefore, with this system, petroleum hydrocarbons were removed from

the subsurface by (1) aerobic biodegradation resulting from the supply of oxygen to the saturated zone; and (2) in situ air

stripping. The air stripped vapors are transferred to the vadose zone and are biodegraded in place. The application of

density-driven groundwater sparging and SVE achieved the specified cleanup goals for both soil and groundwater. The

cleanup goals for soil and for all contaminants except naphthalene in groundwater were achieved within 11 months of

system operation. The cleanup goal for naphthalene in groundwater was achieved within 18 months.

The total capital cost for this application was about $157,000 and total annual operating costs were $62,750. Air sparging

is limited to contaminants that can be degraded by indigenous bacteria under aerobic conditions. Maximum sparging well

air flow and groundwater wellbore circulation rates are dependent on well diameter, depth to groundwater, and the

hydraulic conductivity of the formation. Therefore, longer remediation times or a greater number of sparging wells may

be required in lower permeability formations.
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 41

Petroleum Product Recovery and

Contaminated Groundwater Remediation

Amoco Petroleum Pipeline

Constantine, Michigan

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Amoco Petroleum Pipeline Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes Status: Ongoing

(BTEX), Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE) Report covers - 10/88 to 6/94

- An estimated 300,000 to 2 million gallons

of gasoline, fuel oil, and kerosene released

to subsurface

- Free product present in an approximate 6-

acre area at an average apparent

thickness of 2 feet

Location: Cleanup Type:

Constantine, Michigan Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Residuals Management Technology, Groundwater Extraction followed by Other: Voluntary cleanup

Inc. Granular Activated Carbon (GAC); In situ

Air Sparging of saturated zone

Groundwater Extraction With GAC

- 4 extraction wells installed in two phases

(1988 and 1992); depths up to 28 feet

below ground surface (bgs) with

extraction rates of 50 and 100 gpm

- Extracted water treated using two GAC

vessels in series; recovered free product

sent to storage in aboveground tanks

In-situ Air Sparging

- 30 two-inch diameter air sparging wells

with 3-foot screens

- Installed to depths of 25-30 feet

- Two 300 scfm blowers

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

4612 (crude petroleum piping) Paul Ressmeyer

Remedial Project Manager

Amoco Corporation

Waste Source:

Other: Petroleum pipeline leak

Purpose/Significance of Application: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Full-scale pump and treat of Groundwater

petroleum contaminated- - 775 million gallons of groundwater between 1988 and 1993

groundwater using granular - Sand and gravel

activated carbon to recover free - Porosity 30-40%

product and treat groundwater. In - Hydraulic conductivity 0.0002 - 0.0004 cm/sec

situ air sparging was subsequently

added to treat the saturated zone.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- The remediation is being performed as a voluntary action by Amoco; final cleanup criteria will be established in the

future with concurrence from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources

- Treated water required to meet SPDES permit requirements prior to discharge - benzene (5 g/L), total BTEX (20

g/L), MTBE (380 g/L), pH (6.5-9.0)
Petroleum Product Recovery and

Contaminated Groundwater Remediation

Amoco Petroleum Pipeline

Constantine, Michigan (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 42

Results:

Groundwater Extraction with GAC

- 118,000 gallons of free product recovered (10/87-12/93); rate of free product recovery has decreased to 20 to 25 gallons

per month as of late 1993

- Free product has been hydraulically contained and observed apparent thickness of free product has been reduced to

<0.01 feet

- Concentrations of BTEX in extracted groundwater have remained relatively constant; MTBE concentrations have

decreased

- Treated effluent from GAC have generally met SPDES discharge limits

In-situ Air Sparging

- Pilot testing indicated a radius of influence of 65-150 feet per single well

- No additional results were available at the time of this report

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Costs: about $297,000 for groundwater recovery and treatment system (including well construction,

pumps, system installation, engineering); $375,000 for the air sparging system (including 3 months of initial operations,

and testing)

- Annual Operating Costs (approximate): about $475,000 for groundwater recovery and treatment system; not yet

defined for air sparging system

- An estimated total cost for completing the cleanup is not available at this time

Description:

The Amoco Corporation owns and operates a liquid petroleum product pipeline that transverses the Constantine site. As a

result of a pipeline leak, discovered in June 1987, an estimated 350,000 to 2 million gallons of gasoline, fuel oil, and

kerosene were released to the subsurface. Free product was present at an average apparent thickness of 2 feet. Beginning

in October 1988, a groundwater pump and treat system, consisting of 4 extraction wells and granular activated carbon

(GAC) vessels, was used to recover free product and treat the contaminated groundwater. In situ air sparging of the

saturated zone was subsequently added and began operating in February 1994.

Through December 1993, groundwater extraction with GAC had recovered an estimated 118,000 lbs of free product and

reduced the observed apparent thickness of the free product layer to <0.01 feet. MTBE concentrations were reduced;

however, BTEX concentrations near the source of contamination remained relatively constant. No full-scale performance

data were available for the air sparging system at the time of this report.

The groundwater extraction with GAC system operated > 95% of the time through December 1993. Periodic shutdowns of

1 to 3 days were required for carbon changeout and extraction well rehabilitation. Leasing the activated carbon system

and carbon provided flexibility to modify the treatment system in response to changing operating conditions. However,

GAC proved to be inefficient in removing MTBE when compared to BTEX.
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 43

Recovery of Free Petroleum Product

Fort Drum, Fuel Dispensing Area 1595

Watertown, New York

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Fort Drum Fuel Dispensing Area 1595 Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Status: Ongoing

Xylenes (BTEX) Report covers - 2/92 to 4/94

- Gasoline and #2 fuel oil

- Free product measured in two wells in

1990 and 1994

- Full extent of contamination not yet

defined

Location: Cleanup Type:

Watertown, New York Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Not Available Groundwater Extraction followed by Air DoD

Stripping and Granular Activated Carbon

- 2 recovery wells - approximately 25 ft.

below ground surface; average rate of 5-6

gpm

- Oil/water separator - 575 gallon capacity

- Air stripper - 750 cfm

- GAC - 4 55-gallon steel drums; 200 lb

GAC per drum; operated 2 in series

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Remedial Project Manager

Fort Drum Environmental

Division

Watertown, NY

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Underground Storage Tank Groundwater and Free Product

- Hydraulic conductivity of aquifer 0.11 to 0.0012 cm/sec

- Transmissivity 11,787 to 32,518 using Jacob method Purpose/Significance of Application:

Full-scale remediation to recover freephase petroleum product using

groundwater extraction and air

stripping and granular activated

carbon (GAC).

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Final cleanup criteria have not been established at this time; the project is being conducted as a Rapid Response Interim

Remediation

- Treated water discharged to the POTW must meet the following criteria - benzene (3 g/L), toluene (35 g/L), xylenes

(190 g/L), ethylbenzene (8 g/L)

Results:

- Information on the total quantity of free product recovered is not available at this time

- The effluent from the treatment system met all discharge criteria

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Costs - $958,780 (including system design and construction including site work, equipment, and

mobilization/demobilization)

- Total Annual Operating Costs - $129,440 (including carbon changeout/regeneration, maintenance, laboratory analysis,

and project management)

- An estimated cost for completion of the cleanup is not available at this time
Recovery of Free Petroleum Product

Fort Drum, Fuel Dispensing Area 1595

Watertown, New York (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 44

Description:

Fort Drum in Watertown, New York, established in 1906, serves as a combat skills training area and operations

headquarters for light infantry troops. Motor vehicle and aircraft refueling activities are conducted in Area 1595 of the

facility. Area 1595 includes an underground storage tank (UST) and 10 dispensing units for gasoline, diesel fuel, and jet

fuel. In 1982, free petroleum product was observed in a spring near this area. Suspected contaminant sources include

leaking USTs and wastewaters from vehicle washing operations located adjacent to Area 1595. The primary contaminants

of concern are BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes) and free petroleum product. The full extent of the

contamination had not been defined at the time of this report. The site remediation is being performed as a Rapid

Response Interim Remediation and final cleanup criteria have not been established at this time.

A pump and treat recovery, consisting of two recovery wells, an oil/water separator, an air stripper, and granular

activated carbon vessels, was operated from March 1992 to mid-1993. The system was restarted in February 1994 and was

operational at the time of this report. The first year of operation focused on troubleshooting and little data were collected

during that time. As such, no information is available at this time on the total quantity of free product recovered or the

rate of recovery. Data from the air stripper/GAC system indicated that the concentrations of contaminants in the effluent

meet the POTW discharge criteria for BTEX. An air emissions certificate was issued by the State in October 1992;

however, information on specific emission limits was not available at the time of this report.

The total capital costs for this remediation are $958,780 and the estimated total annual operating costs are $129,440. 

Based on operations to date, it has been observed that free product recovery pumps require frequent maintenance and that

activated carbon efficiency was limited because of fouling by iron and biomass.
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 45

Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at

Langley Air Force Base

Virginia

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Langley Air Force Base, IRP Site 4 Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes Status: Ongoing

(BTEX) and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Report covers - 7/92 to 1/94

(TPH)

- Primary constituents of JP-4 fuel are

alkanes, cycloalkanes, alkylbenzenes,

indans/tetralins, naphthalenes

- Total Recoverable Petroleum

Hydrocarbons - 25 to 4,100 ppb in

groundwater; >100 ppm in soil

- Free product floating on groundwater has

exceeded 1 ft. in thickness

Location: Cleanup Type:

Langley, Virginia Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Not Available Groundwater Extraction using a Vacuum UST Corrective Action and

Assisted Well Point Extraction System and State: Virginia

Aboveground Air Stripping

- Extraction - 16 vacuum extraction wells

connected by a header pipe to a central

vacuum system; wells extend to

approximately 14 ft. below ground surface 

- Extraction network has an average flow

rate of 32 gpm (2 gpm per well); vacuum

pump provides 24-25 in of Hg

- Separation - initial oil/water separation

occurs in a vacuum decanter followed by a

high efficiency oil/water separator; oil

phase is sent to a storage tank

- Treatment of aqueous phase - 2 air

stripping columns - Column 1 - air/water

ratio of 180 and air flow of 1,440 cfm at 60

gpm; Column 2 - air/water ratio of 100

and air flow of 800 cfm at 60 gpm

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Vern Bartels

Remedial Project Manager

Langley AFB

Waste Source:

Underground Storage Tanks

Purpose/Significance of Application: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Full-scale remediation of Groundwater and Free Product

groundwater contaminated with fuel - Area of free product - about 600 ft. x 300 ft.; estimated volume of free product

oil using a vacuum assisted well point is 12,000 to 31,000 gallons

extraction system and aboveground - Area of groundwater contamination - about 1,000 ft. x 2,000 ft.

air stripping. - Properties of aquifer include pH (6.4 - 7.2), hydraulic conductivity (0.00099 -

0.002 ft/day), transmissivity (0.99 - 2.2 ft /day) 2
Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at

Langley Air Force Base

Virginia (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 46

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Groundwater: BTEX - Benzene (1.4 ppb), Toluene (2 ppb), Ethylbenzene (1 ppb), Total Xylenes (3 ppb)

- Air Stripper Criteria for discharge: BTEX - Benzene (7 ppb), Toluene (50 ppb), Ethylbenzene (4.3 ppb), Total Xylenes

(13 ppb), Lead (5.6 ppb) and TPH (1,000 ppb)

- Cleanup conducted under Virginia State Regulations and Federal Underground Storage Tank Regulations

Results:

As of 1/94:

- Floating product - appears to be largely unaffected at this time; no estimates of the amount of free product recovered are

available at this time

- Air Stripper - average concentrations from air stripper are below discharge criteria

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Costs - $569,739 (1992) (including demolition and excavation, system installation, startup, mobilization and

site preparation)

- Annual Operating Costs - $216,561 (1993), $143,047 (1994) (including labor, materials, and equipment)

- An estimated total cost for completing the cleanup is not available at this time

Description:

Langley AFB has operated since 1916 as an aviation research and development facility. JP-4 fuel was stored in

underground storage tanks and, in 1981, twenty-four 25,000-gallon underground fuel tanks and a fuel pipeline located at

IRP Site 4 were determined to be leaking. In 1987, the tanks were abandoned by cleaning and sand-cement backfilling. 

Subsequent remedial investigation activities detected fuel contamination in soil and groundwater, including free product

floating on the groundwater table at up to 1 foot in thickness. Primary contaminants of concern at the site are BTEX

(benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes) and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH).

A groundwater pump and treat system consisting of a vacuum assisted well point extraction system, oil/water separators,

and air strippers, began operating in July 1992 and was operational at the time of this report. Results to date indicate that,

on average, the effluent concentration of BTEX, TRPH, and lead from the air stripper are below the discharge criteria. 

However, the layer of free product floating on the groundwater appears to be largely unaffected at this time. In addition,

an estimate of free product recovered to date cannot be made since a sample port was not installed because of vacuum inlet

conditions. It was noted that such sampling points are necessary to allow quantification of system performance.

The total capital costs for this application were about $569,700 and the annual operating costs for years 1993 and 1994

were about $216,600 and $143,000, respectively. Operational difficulties including problems with scaling, oil/water

separator icing, and delays in acquiring spare parts have caused the system to be down about 51% of the time. In early

1994, adjustments to the system were made, including the use of chemical additives to prevent fouling of the system. It was

noted that a roof over the treatment plant would have prevented weather-related damage and downtime (i.e., icing of

oil/water separator).
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 47

Dynamic Underground Stripping

Demonstrated at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Gasoline Spill Site, Livermore, California

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Lawrence Livermore National Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total November 1992 - December

Laboratory, Gasoline Spill Site Xylenes (BTEX) 1993

- Concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons (FHC)

in gasoline as high as 5,100 ppm in

saturated sediments near center of vadose

zone (indicates likely presence of free-phase

gasoline)

- Benzene levels in groundwater greater than

1 ppb found within 300 feet of release point

- Benzene levels in soil greater than 50 ppm

Location: Cleanup Type:

Livermore, California Field demonstration

(commercial-scale)

Technical Information: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Roger Aines, Principal Investigator, Dynamic Underground Stripping (DUS) CERCLA and Other: Bay Area

LLNL (510) 423-7184 - Combination of three technologies: steam Air Quality Management

Robin Newmark, LLNL injection at periphery of contaminated area District

(510) 423-3644 to drive contaminants to centrally-located

Kent Udell, UC Berkeley vacuum extraction locations; electrical

(510) 642-2928 heating of less permeable soils; and

John Mathur, US DOE underground imaging to delineate heated

(301) 903-7922 areas

- Six steam injection/electrical heating wells

approximately 145 feet deep, 4-inch

diameter, screened in upper and lower

steam zones

- Three electrical heating wells

approximately 120 feet deep, 2-inch

diameter

- One groundwater and vapor extraction

well, approximately 155 feet deep, 8-inch

diameter

- Extracted water processed through an aircooled heat exchanger, oil/water separators,

filters, UV/H O treatment unit, air 2 2

stripping, and GAC

- Extracted vapors processed through heat

exchanger, demister, and internal

combustion (IC) engines

SIC Code: Licensing Information:

5541 (Gasoline service station) Kathy Willis

University of California Office

of Tech Transfer

1320 Harbor Bay Parkway,

Suite 150

Alameda, CA 94501

(510) 748-6595

Kathy Kaufman

Tech. Transfer Init. Program,

L-795

University of California

Lawrence Livermore Nat'l.

Laboratory

7000 East Avenue

P.O. Box 808

Livermore, CA 94550

(510) 422-2646

Waste Source:

Underground Storage Tanks

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Commercial-scale demonstration of dynamic underground stripping. Results compared to pump and treat, and pump

and treat with vacuum extraction technologies.
Dynamic Underground Stripping

Demonstrated at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Gasoline Spill Site, Livermore, California (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 48

Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Soil and Groundwater

- 100,000 cubic yards heated to at least 200F

- 4 hydrogeologic units and 7 hydrostratigraphic layers identified near gas pad

- Hydraulic conductivity ranged from <5 gpd/ft (low permeability) to 1,070 gpd/ft (very high to high permeability) 2 2

- Low groundwater velocities kept contamination confined to a relatively small area

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Groundwater cleanup levels established based on California MCLs: benzene 1 ppb; ethylbenzene 680 ppb; and xylenes

1,750 ppb

- Remediation was required until soil contaminant concentrations were identified as not adversely impacting

groundwater

- Air permits were issued by the BAAQMD for the air stripper, GAC, IC engine, and for site-wide benzene

Results:

- Over 7,600 gallons of gasoline removed during demonstration effort

- Most of the gasoline was recovered in the vapor stream and not from extracted groundwater

Cost Factors:

- Overall program costs for the field demonstration, including all research and development costs, were $1,700,000 for

before-treatment costs (project management, characterization and compliance monitoring), and $5,400,000 for

treatment activities (process monitoring, subsurface wells, steam generation and electrical heating surface equipment,

aboveground treatment systems, utilities, and labor and material costs)

Description:

The 800-acre Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) site was used as a flight training base and aircraft

assembly and repair facility by the Navy beginning in 1942. In 1951, the Atomic Energy Commission converted the site

into a weapons design and basic physics research laboratory. Initial releases of hazardous materials occurred in the midto late-1940s. Between 1952 and 1979, up to 17,000 gallons of leaded gasoline were released from underground storage

tanks beneath a gasoline filling station in an area now designated as the Gasoline Spill Area (GSA). Soil and groundwater

in the GSA were found to be contaminated with BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes) and fuel

hydrocarbons.

A commercial-scale field demonstration of Dynamic Underground Stripping (DUS) was completed at the GSA from

November 1992 to December 1993. DUS is a combination of three technologies: steam injection at the periphery of a

contaminated area to drive contaminants to a centrally-located vacuum extraction location; electrical heating of less

permeable soils; and underground imaging (primarily Electrical Resistance Tomography) to delineate heated areas. The

DUS system used at the GSA employed 6 steam injection/electrical heating wells, 3 electrical heating wells, and 1 vacuum

extraction well, as well as above ground water and vapor treatment equipment.

Over 7,600 gallons of gasoline were removed by the DUS system in the demonstration effort. Most of the gasoline was

recovered in the vapor stream and not from the extracted groundwater. Potential cost savings of $4,000,000 were

identified for applying DUS at the same site in the future (taking into account the benefits of the lessons learned and

without research-oriented activities).
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 49

Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater

at Operable Unit B/C

McClellan Air Force Base

California

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

McClellan Air Force Base, Operable Chlorinated Aliphatics Status: Ongoing

Unit (OU) B/C - Trichloroethene (TCE), cis-1,2- Report covers - 1988 to 1993

Dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE),

Tetrachloroethene (PCE), 1,2-

Dichloroethane (1,2-DCA)

- In an area of 7,800 million cubic feet,

there is an estimated 33,000 kg of VOCs;

percent of total mass for individual

constituents is TCE (82.7%), cis-1,2-DCE

(0.5%), PCE (16.7%), 1,2-DCA (0.1%)

Location: Cleanup Type:

Sacramento, California Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Not Available Groundwater Extraction followed by DoD

Aboveground Air Stripping

- 7 extraction wells pump to a main

treatment plant

- Air stripper - design capacity of 1,000

gpm; average flow rate of 250 gpm

- Supplemental Treatment - thermal

oxidizer and caustic scrubber for offgases;

two GAC units in series to polish liquid

phase prior to discharge

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Remedial Project Manager

McClellan AFB

Sacramento, CA

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Landfill; Underground Storage Groundwater

Tank; Disposal Pit; Open Burn Area - As of 1/94: Over 660 million gallons of groundwater treated since startup in

March 1987

- Groundwater subsurface consists of 5 distinct monitoring zones (A through

E); evidence points to hydraulic link among 5 zones

- Hydraulic conductivity ranges from 2.8 to 30.7 ft/day

- Transmissivity ranges from 100-2,000 ft /day 2

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Full-scale remediation of

groundwater contaminated with

VOCs using groundwater extraction

and aboveground air stripping.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

Final cleanup criteria have not been established at this time

- Current target is <0.55 g/L VOCs for groundwater

- NPDES permit - acetone, MEK, and MIK to <1 mg/L and VOCs to <0.5 g/L

Results:

- Influent VOC concentrations have decreased from about 60 ppm in 1987 to about 4 ppm in 1993

- The effluent from the treatment system has been below the permitted discharge levels since operation began

- As of 3/94, approximately 44,000 lbs of VOCs have been removed since startup
Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater

at Operable Unit B/C

McClellan Air Force Base

California (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 50

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Cost in 1987 - $4,000,000 (including over $1,700,000 for the incinerator, air stripper, scrubber, wells, and

GAC tanks, and about $1,000,000 for heat exchangers, blowers, pumps, and compressors; control center)

- Total Annual Operating Costs - $1,240,000 (including contractor operations, utilities, sampling and analysis, project

management)

- An estimated total cost for completing the cleanup is not available at this time

Description:

The McClellan Air Force Base in Sacramento, California was established in 1937. Operations at the 3,000-acre facility

include aircraft, electronics, and communications equipment maintenance and repair, and a wide variety of hazardous

materials have been used at the site. The site was added to the National Priorities List in 1987. Areas of contamination at

the site include Operable Unit B (OU B) and Operable Unit C (OU C). Releases from OU B resulted from disposal/release

of hazardous substances from landfills, underground storage tanks, storage lots, burial and burn pits. Releases from OU C

were attributed to waste disposal activities. Extensive VOC contamination has been identified at the facility. The primary

constituents of concern are TCE, cis-1,2-DCE, PCE, and 1,2-DCA.

A groundwater extraction and treatment system including air stripping was installed with operations beginning in 1988. 

Offgases from the air stripper are treated by thermal oxidation and caustic scrubbing. The effluent from the air stripper is

treated using GAC prior to a NPDES-permitted discharge. The 1993 data on the influent to the air stripper show that the

VOC concentrations have decreased to about 4 ppm from concentrations of 60 ppm (1987). An estimated 44,000 pounds of

VOCs have been removed as of March 1994. The remediation was ongoing at the time of this report and final performance

data are not yet available. In addition, the treatment system has been effective in treating groundwater to below the

NPDES discharge limits.

The total capital costs for this system are $4,000,000 and the total annual operating costs are $1,240,000. The system has

been on line 98% of the time. Problems of scaling and deposition in the air stripper from calcium and magnesium salt

precipitation were remedied by changing to 2-inch packing from 1-inch packing in the air stripper. Corrosion was

minimized through material changes to nickel-based commercial alloys and change in physical layout to improve flow.
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 51

Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater

at Operable Unit D

McClellan Air Force Base

California

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

McClellan Air Force Base Chlorinated Aliphatics Status: Ongoing

Superfund Site, Operable Unit D - Trichloroethene (TCE), cis-1,2- Report covers - 1987 to 1993

Dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE),

Tetrachloroethene (PCE), 1-2-

Dichloroethane (1,2-DCA)

- In an area of 7,800 million cubic feet, there

is an estimated 33,000 kg of VOCs; percent

of total mass for individual constituents -

TCE (82.7%), cis-1,2-DCE (0.5%), PCE

(16.7%), 1,2-DCA (0.1%)

Location: Cleanup Type:

Sacramento, California Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Not Available Groundwater Extraction followed by DoD

Aboveground Air Stripping

- 6 extraction wells pump to a main

treatment plant

- Air Stripper - design capacity of 1,000 gpm;

average flow rate of 250 gpm

- Supplemental Treatment - thermal oxidizer

and caustic scrubber for offgases; two GAC

units in series to polish liquid phase prior to

discharge

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Remedial Project Manager

McClellan AFB

Sacramento, CA

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Disposal Pit; Open Burn Pits Groundwater

- As of 1/94: Over 660 million gallons of groundwater treated since startup in

March 1987

- Groundwater subsurface consists of 5 distinct monitoring zones (A through E);

evidence points to hydraulic link among 5 zones

- Hydraulic conductivity ranges from 2.8 to 30.7 ft/day

- Transmissivity ranges from 100-2,000 ft /day 2

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Full-scale remediation of

groundwater contaminated with

VOCs using groundwater extraction

and aboveground air stripping.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

Final cleanup criteria have not been established at this time

- Current target is <0.55 g/L VOCs in groundwater

- NPDES permit limits on acetone, MEK, MIK of 1 mg/L and VOCs of 0.5 g/L

Results:

- Influent VOC concentrations have decreased from about 60 ppm in 1987 to about 4 ppm in 1993

- The effluent from the treatment system has been below the permitted discharge levels since operation began

- Approximately 44,000 lbs of VOCs have been removed since startup
Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater

at Operable Unit D

McClellan Air Force Base

California (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 52

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Costs - $4,000,000 (including over $1,700,000 for the incinerator, air stripper, scrubber, wells, and GAC

tanks, and about $1,000,000 for heat exchangers, blowers, pumps, and compressors; control center)

- Total Annual Operating Costs - $1,240,000 (including contractor operations, utilities, sampling and analysis, project

management)

- An estimated total cost for completing the cleanup is not available at this time

Description:

The McClellan Air Force Base in Sacramento, California was established in 1937. Operations at the 3,000-acre facility

include aircraft, electronics, and communications equipment maintenance and repair, and a wide variety of hazardous

materials have been used at the site. Operable Unit D (OU D) was primarily a waste disposal area at McClellan from

1956 until the last 1970s. Numerous burial and burn pits which had received solid waste, oil, various chemicals, and

industrial sludges were closed in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Extensive VOC contamination has been identified at the

facility with the primary constituents of concern at OU D being TCE, cis-1,2-DCE, PCE, and 1,2-DCA.

A groundwater extraction and treatment system including air stripping was installed with operations beginning in 1988. 

Offgases from the air stripper are treated by thermal oxidation and caustic scrubbing. The effluent from the air stripper

is treated using GAC prior to a NPDES-permitted discharge. The 1993 data on the influent to the air stripper show that

the VOC concentrations have decreased to about 4 ppm from concentrations of 60 ppm (1987). An estimated 44,000

pounds of VOCs have been removed as of March 1994. The remediation was ongoing at the time of this report and final

performance data are not yet available. In addition, the treatment system has been effective in treating groundwater to

below the NPDES discharge limits.

The total capital costs for this system are $4,000,000 and the total annual operating costs are $1,240,000. The system has

been on line 98% of the time. Problems of scaling and deposition in the air stripper from calcium and magnesium salt

precipitation were remedied by changing to 2-inch packing from 1-inch packing in the air stripper. Corrosion was

minimized through material changes to nickel-based commercial alloys and change in physical layout to improve flow.
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 53

Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at

Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant,

New Brighton, Minnesota

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Twin Cities Army Ammunition Chlorinated Aliphatics Status: Ongoing

Plant (TCAAP) - Contaminants of greatest concern in the Report covers - 10/87 to 9/92

groundwater are: 1,1-DCE, 1,1-DCA, 1,2-

DCE, chloroform, 1,1,1-TCA, TCE, and

PCE

- TCE is the most prevalent VOC on site,

with concentrations greater than 10,000

ppb in groundwater

Location: Cleanup Type:

New Brighton, Minnesota Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Not Available Groundwater Extraction followed by Air CERCLA

Stripping - ROD Date: 10/88

- 12 boundary recovery wells and 5 source

area recovery wells

- Air stripping plant designed to treat 2,900

gal/min; 4 towers - 2 @ 7 feet diameter and

2 @ 8 feet diameter; all 36 feet tall with

propylene packing

- Treated water discharged to a sand and

gravel pit, or, alternately to an elevated

tank

- Designed for an operating life of 30 years

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Remedial Project Manager

Twin Cities Army Ammunition

Plant

New Brighton, MN

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Other: Variety of Waste Disposal Groundwater

Practices, including Discharges to - Over 1.4 billion gallons of water pumped from 10/91 to 9/92

Sewer, Dumping, and Burning - Complex hydrogeology and heterogeneities in a multilayer aquifer system

- Fractured bedrock and discontinuous sand, clay, and till layers

- Hydraulic conductivity 0.001 to 137 ft/day; transmissivity 3,160 to 28,724

ft /day 2

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Pump and treat of large-volume of

groundwater contaminated with

VOCs.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Several RODs apply to overall TCAAP remedial program, including a ROD for groundwater remediation

- Target cleanup criteria focus on residual levels of contamination in groundwater and containment of existing plume

- Target cleanup levels in groundwater include: TCE - 5 ppb; PCE - 6.9 ppb; 1,2-DCE - 70 ppb; and 1,1,1-TCA - 200

ppb

Results:

- Boundary Groundwater Recovery System (BGRS) recovered an average of 23 pounds of VOCs per day

- TCAAP Groundwater Recovery System (TGRS) recovered 19,510 pounds of VOCs in one year of operation

- Historical total of 92,700 pounds of VOCs recovered in 6 years of operation (BGRS and TGRS)

- Plume containment successful at site

- VOC plumes changed little after several years of treatment; estimate of remediation time increased to achieve a

concentration of 17 ppb TCE in 50 to 70 years
Pump & Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at

Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant,

New Brighton, Minnesota (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 54

Cost Factors:

- Capital costs - $8,034,454 (including construction of treatment plant, wells, force main and pump houses, startup,

engineering, and project management)

- Annual operating costs - $588,599 (including power, labor, maintenance, laboratory charges, and replacement of tower

packing)

- Total Life Cycle Costing estimated as $0.30 per 1,000 gallons of water treated

- Total cost of operation and maintenance calculated as $0.12 per 1,000 gallons of water treated

Description:

The Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant, established in 1941, has been used for the production and storage of munitions. 

The site includes 7 major production buildings and over 300 auxiliary buildings. A series of hydrogeological

investigations beginning in 1981 revealed elevated levels of VOCs in groundwater; 14 separate source areas have been

identified at the site. Trichloroethene (TCE) has been measured at concentrations over 10,000 ppb in the groundwater. 

Target groundwater cleanup levels were established for four constituents - TCE, PCE, 1,2-DCE, and 1,1,1-TCA.

Groundwater extraction followed by air stripping has been used at this site since October 1987 to treat contaminated

groundwater. The groundwater extraction system includes 12 boundary recovery wells and 5 source area recovery wells. 

Extracted groundwater is treated using four 36-feet tall air stripping towers. An estimated 92,700 pounds of VOCs have

been recovered in 6 years of system operation. Although plume containment has been successful at the site, the plumes

have changed little after several years of treatment. 

An estimate of the time required for remediation has been revised from 30 years to 50 to 70 years, based on a review of

data collected to date. Capital costs for this application were $8,034,454, and annual operating costs are $588,599. 
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 55

Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at

U.S. Department of Energy

Kansas City Plant

Kansas City, Missouri

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Chlorinated Aliphatics; includes Status: Ongoing

Kansas City Plant Tetrachloroethene (PCE), Trichloroethene Report covers - 5/88 to 2/94

(TCE), 1,2-Dichloroethenes (1,2-DCEs), and

Vinyl Chloride 

PCBs, Petroleum Hydrocarbons, and Metals

- TCE concentrations of > 10,000 g/L in

groundwater

- Presence of DNAPLs suspected

Location: Cleanup Type:

Kansas City, Missouri Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Allied Signal, Inc. Groundwater Extraction with Advanced RCRA Corrective Action and

Oxidation Processes (AOPs) Other: Kansas City Water and

- 14 extraction wells and one trench; Pollution Control Department

screened intervals of wells ranged from 27

feet to approximately 47 feet below

ground surface; flow rates ranged from

0.9 to 5 gallons per minute (gpm) based on

a design flow rate of 2 gpm

- Interceptor trench of 250 ft. in length;

ranged in depth from about 22 ft. to 31 ft.

- Treatment system - acidification to

solubilize inorganic metals, bag filtration,

UV/peroxide oxidation, and neutralization

- Initial AOP - UV/Ozone/Peroxide system

replaced in May 1993 with a high intensity

UV/Peroxide system

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) G.P. Keary

3724 (aircraft-engine manufacturing) Environmental Restoration

Program Manager

DOE Kansas City Plant

Kansas City, MO

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Manufacturing Process Groundwater

- 11.2 million gallons treated (1993)

- Horizontal/Vertical distribution of VOCs in groundwater - up to 4,000 ft.

horizontal and over 40 ft. vertical

- Alluvial deposits underlain by bedrock consisting of sandstone and shale

- Shale is relatively impermeable

- Porosity of aquifer is 20%

- Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity of aquifer is 1.1 to 2.3 ft/day; sandstone is

0.04 to 0.005 ft/day; underlying shale is impermeable in water

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Full scale remediation of groundwater contaminated with VOCs using advanced oxidation processes (UV/peroxide).
Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at

U.S. Department of Energy

Kansas City Plant

Kansas City, Missouri (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 56

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Final cleanup goals for site have not been established at time of report; will be set subsequent to RFI/CMS activities

- Treated groundwater discharged to municipal sewer system must meet requirements of permit issued by the Kansas City

Water and Pollution Control Department; for organics - total organic halogen 0.16 mg/L; metals - 0.69 to 100 mg/L

Results:

As of February 1994:

- Influent VOC concentrations to UV/Peroxide treatment system were 10.6 mg/L with an average influent concentration of

25 mg/L; effluent concentrations were 0.01 mg/L

- The UV/peroxide system destroyed > 99.95% VOCs

- PCBs were detected at levels up to 0.3 g/L in influent to UV/peroxide unit; not detected in effluent

- VOC contaminant plume appears to be contained

- No significant change in VOC groundwater concentrations at this time

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Costs: $1,383,400 (including equipment, site preparation, construction/engineering, startup)

- Annual Operating Costs: $355,200 (including maintenance, project management, laboratory analysis, supplies)

- An estimated total cost for completing the cleanup is not available at this time.

Description:

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Kansas City Plant, constructed in 1942, has been used for aircraft engine

manufacturing, production of nuclear weapons components, and defense-related research and manufacturing operations. 

During the 1980s, hydrogeologic investigations identified soil and groundwater contamination at the site which had

resulted from releases from the research and manufacturing operations. The primary contaminants detected included

chlorinated VOCs, aromatic VOCs, PCBs, and metals. DNAPLs are suspected in the groundwater, but have not been

detected at this time. Final cleanup goals have not been established at this time. Treated water from the system is

discharged to the municipal sanitary sewer system under the provisions of a Kansas City Water and Pollution Control

Department wastewater discharge permit (2/88).

Operation of a groundwater pump and treat system, which includes an Advanced Oxidation Process (AOP), began in May

1988 under RCRA corrective action. The initial system included 14 extraction wells followed by a low intensity Ultraviolet

(UV)/Ozone/Peroxide treatment system. This system was replaced in May 1993 by a high intensity UV/Peroxide system to

provide additional 30 GPM treatment capacity for groundwater and to correct operational problems with the initial unit

(equipment malfunctions and downtime). While the cleanup is ongoing at this time and final performance data are not yet

available, interim results indicate that the extraction system appears to be containing the VOC contaminant plume. 

However, the concentrations of VOC in the groundwater have not changed significantly.

The total capital costs for this application were $1,383,400 and the annual operating costs were $355,200. With respect to

the AOP, the replacement of the low intensity UV/ozone/peroxide system with the high intensity UV/peroxide system

resulted in both increased treatment capacity and cost savings while meeting the discharge limits for the treated water. 

The high intensity UV/peroxide system eliminated the need for GAC polishing and treatment of air emissions and reduced

operation and maintenance costs. Although more expensive than alternatives such as air stripping, AOP was selected

because it destroys the contaminants rather than transferring contaminants to other media.
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 57

Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater

at U.S. Department of Energy Savannah River Site,

Aiken, South Carolina

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Chlorinated Aliphatics Status: Ongoing

Savannah River Site A/M Area - Trichloroethene (TCE), Tetrachloroethene Report covers - 9/85 to 12/93

(PCE), and 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA)

- Concentrations of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) in groundwater

reported as high as 500 ppm

- Groundwater TCE concentrations over 48

ppm

- Groundwater contains 260,000-450,000

pounds of dissolved organic solvents in

concentrations greater than 0.01 ppm,

estimated to be 75% TCE

- Soil TCE concentrations over 10 ppm

- Dense nonaqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs)

are present in groundwater

Location: Cleanup Type:

Aiken, South Carolina Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

C.L. Bergen Groundwater Extraction Wells followed by RCRA Corrective Action and

Westinghouse Savannah River Air Stripping State: South Carolina Bureau

Company - 11 recovery wells at depths to over 200 feet of Air Quality Control

Aiken, SC below ground surface

- Production air stripper has a design

capacity of 610 gpm; operated at 510 gpm

- 1993 average flow rate was 479 gpm;

average air flow rate was 2,489 cfm

- In 1993, 19,500 lbs of VOCs removed;

average air emission rate of 2 lbs/hr

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) G.E. Turner, DOE

3355 (Aluminum forming) Savannah River Oper. Office

3471 (Metal finishing) Environmental Restoration Div.

Aiken, SC

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Surface Impoundment Groundwater

- VOC contaminated groundwater has an approximate thickness of 150 ft and

covers about 1,200 acres

- Complex hydrogeology arising from heterogeneities in a multilayer aquifer

system with discontinuous sand and clay layers

- Hydraulic conductivity 9 - 73 ft/day

- Transmissivity 175 - 12,500 gpd/day

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Full-scale pump and treat

remediation of groundwater

contaminated with VOCs using

aboveground air stripping.
Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater

at U.S. Department of Energy Savannah River Site,

Aiken, South Carolina (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 58

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

Groundwater:

TCE - 5 ppb; PCE - 5 ppb; TCA - 200 ppb

- Adopted in 1990, based on EPA MCLs

- During initial remediation efforts in 1985, the cleanup goal was 99% removal of VOCs over a 30-year period

Air:

34 tons/yr VOCs or 7.9 lbs/hr

- Based on South Carolina Bureau of Air Quality Control permit

Results:

As of 1993:

- Influent concentrations to air stripper decreased for TCE (from 25,000 ppb to about 6,000 ppb) and PCE (from 12,000

ppb to 4,000 ppb)

- The total quantity of VOCs removed from 1985 to 1993 is 273,300 lbs

- Average VOC removal efficiency for air stripper >99.9%

Cost Factors:

- Total Capital Costs (1990 dollars) - $4,103,000 (including design, construction and installation, engineering, site

development)

- Total Annual Operating Costs (1990 dollars) - $149,200 (for years 1985 to 1990) (including electricity, maintenance,

operation, well sampling and analysis)

- Total cost of operation and maintenance is $0.75 per 1,000 gallons treated (198 million gallons per year treated)

- An estimated total cost for completing the cleanup is not available at this time

Description:

At the U.S. Department of Energy Savannah River Site, administrative buildings are located within the "A" area and

aluminum forming and metal finishing operations have been performed within the "M" area. An estimated 3.5 million

pounds of solvents were discharged from these operations between 1958 and 1985, with over 2 million pounds sent to an

unlined settling basin. Groundwater contamination beneath the settling basin was discovered in 1981. The primary

contaminants were volatile organic compounds (VOCs) at concentrations up to 500 ppm. A pilot groundwater

remediation system was operated in 1983, with the full-scale groundwater treatment begun on September 1985. The fullscale technology included groundwater extraction wells and a production air stripper. The design of the production air

stripper was based on pilot and prototype air strippers.

While the remediation was ongoing at the time of this report, reductions in concentrations of both TCE and PCE to the

air stripper have been noted and the estimated total historical (1985 to 1993) removal of VOCs is over 273,000 lbs. In

addition, the average VOC removal efficiency of the air stripper is greater than 99.9%. Contaminated groundwater in

the source areas and the areas of the highest VOC concentrations appears to be contained at this time. However, the

areas at the fringes of the plume are not as well contained, due to hydraulic factors.

The total capital cost for this application is $4,103,000 and the total annual operating costs are $149,200. DNAPLs were

discovered in the groundwater in 1991 and pose a significant limitation to the long-term use of pump and treat, since

pump and treat is effective for plume restoration only where DNAPL source areas have been contained or removed. A

need for supplemental site characterization to fully define the DNAPL contamination and to redirect ongoing remediation

activities has been identified.
Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 59

In Situ Air Stripping of Contaminated Groundwater at

U.S. Department of Energy

Savannah River Site

Aiken, South Carolina

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Chlorinated Aliphatics July 1990 to September 1993

Savannah River Site A/M Area - Trichloroethene (TCE), Tetrachloroethene

(PCE), 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA)

- Concentrations of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) in groundwater

reported as high as 500 ppm

- Groundwater TCE concentrations over

48 ppm 

- Groundwater contains 260,000-450,000

pounds of dissolved organic solvents in

concentrations greater than 0.01 ppm,

estimated to be 75% TCE

- Soil TCE concentrations over 10,000 g/L

(1991)

- Dense nonaqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs)

are present in groundwater

Location: Cleanup Type:

Aiken, South Carolina Field Demonstration

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

C.L. Bergen In Situ Air Stripping RCRA Corrective Action and

Westinghouse Savannah River Co. - 7 horizontal wells installed; only 2 wells State: South Carolina Dept. of

Aiken, SC used in field demonstration Health and Environmental

- Demonstration wells: 1 installed in Control, Air Quality Control,

saturated zone; 1 installed in vadose zone; and Underground Injection

targeted contaminated sands Control

- Air injected through lower horizontal well,

below the water table

- Demonstration focused on supplementing

pump and treat efforts

- Demonstration did not include offgas

treatment

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) G.E. Turner, DOE

3355 (Aluminum forming) Savannah River Oper. Office

3471 (Metal finishing) Environmental Restoration Div.

Aiken, SC

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Surface Impoundment Groundwater and Soil

- Area of VOC-contaminated groundwater has an approximate thickness of 150

feet and covers about 1,200 acres

- Aquifer units characterized to 180 feet below ground surface (9 separate units),

showing complex hydrogeology and discontinuous sand and clay layers

- Hydraulic conductivity 9 - 73 ft/day

- Transmissivity 175 - 12,500 gpd/day

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Field demonstration of in situ air stripping using horizontal wells to supplement groundwater pump and treat technology.
In Situ Air Stripping of Contaminated Groundwater at

U.S. Department of Energy

Savannah River Site

Aiken, South Carolina (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater Treatment

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 60

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- No specific cleanup goals identified for the field demonstration

- Demonstrations permitted by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) Air

Quality Control (AQC) and Underground Injection Control (UIC)

Results:

- Substantial changes in groundwater VOC concentrations measured during demonstration

- Increased microbial numbers and metabolic activity exhibited during air injection period

- 139 day demonstration (July-December 1990) removed nearly 16,000 pounds of VOCs

- Vacuum extraction removed an estimated 109 lbs VOC/day while air injection resulted in an additional 20 lbs/day VOC

removal

Cost Factors:

- Costs for conducting field demonstration not provided

Cost study for in situ air stripping provided the following projected costs:

- Total equipment costs - $253,525 (including design and engineering, well installation, air injection and extraction

system, piping, and electrical)

- Site costs - $5,000 (setup and level area)

- Total Annual Labor Costs - $62,620 (including mobilization/demobilization, monitoring, and maintenance)

- Total Annual Consumable Costs $157,761 (including carbon recharge, fuel, and chemical additives)

Description:

At the U.S. Department of Energy Savannah River Site, administrative buildings are located within the A area and

aluminum forming and metal finishing operations have been performed within the "M" area. An estimated 3.5 million

pounds of solvents were discharged from these operations between 1958 and 1985, with over 2 million pounds sent to an

unlined settling basin. Groundwater contamination beneath the settling basin was discovered in 1981. A pump and treat

program has been ongoing since 1985 for removal of VOCs from the groundwater.

A field demonstration using in situ air stripping with horizontal wells in the A/M Area was conducted from July 1990 to

September 1993. The demonstration was part of a program at Savannah River to investigate the use of several

technologies to enhance the pump and treat system. In the air stripping demonstration, air was injected into a lower

horizontal well in the saturated zone and extracted through the horizontal well in the vadose zone. The demonstration

did not include treatment of offgases. The in situ air stripping process increased VOC removal over conventional vacuum

extraction from 109 pounds per day to 129 pounds per day. Nearly 16,000 pounds of VOCs were removed during the 139

day demonstration period.

A cost analysis performed as part of this demonstration showed that in situ air stripping can remove VOCs for

approximately 69% of the cost for conventional methods. Installation costs for horizontal wells is greater than for

vertical wells. For deeper horizontal wells (over 40-50 feet), costs range from $360 to $700 per foot. Several

implementation concerns were identified for installing horizontal wells at Savannah River. 
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 61

This page intentionally left blank.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 62

4.0 REMEDIATION CASE STUDIES: SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION

Soil Vapor Extraction System at Commencement Bay,

South Tacoma Channel (Well 12A), Phase 2, Tacoma,

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Soil Vapor Extraction at the Fairchild Semiconductor

Corporation Superfund Site San Jose, California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Soil Vapor Extraction at the Hastings Groundwater

Contamination Superfund Site Well Number 3 Subsite,

Hastings, Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Soil Vapor Extraction and Bioventing for Remediation

of a JP-4 Fuel Spill at Site 914, Hill Air Force Base,

Ogden, Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Soil Vapor Extraction at North Fire Training Area

(NFTA) Luke AFB, Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction at McClellan Air Force

Base California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

Soil Vapor Extraction at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal

Superfund Site Motor Pool Area (OU-18) Commerce

City, Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Soil Vapor Extraction at the Sacramento Army Depot

Superfund Site, Tank 2 Operable Unit Sacramento,

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Soil Vapor Extraction at the SMS Instruments

Superfund Site Deer Park, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Soil Vapor Extraction at the Verona Well Field

Superfund Site, Thomas Solvent Raymond Road (OU-1)

Battle Creek, Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 63

Soil Vapor Extraction System at Commencement Bay,

South Tacoma Channel (Well 12A),

Phase 2, Tacoma, Washington

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Commencement Bay, South Tacoma Chlorinated Aliphatics Status: Ongoing

Channel (Well 12A) Superfund Site trans-1,2-Dichloroethene (DCE), Report covers - 8/92 to 2/94

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (PCA),

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethene (PCE),

Trichloroethene (TCE)

- Average VOC concentrations in top 25 feet

of soil ranged from 10 to 100 mg/kg 

- Average PCA concentrations in soil borings

ranged from 6,200 at 30 feet depth to over

19,000 mg/kg at 40 feet depth

- Approximately 571,000 lbs of VOCs present

in unsaturated zone

Location: Cleanup Type:

Tacoma, Washington Full-scale cleanup (Report

documents demonstration

phase)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Environmental Science & Soil Vapor Extraction CERCLA, Local Requirements

Engineering, Inc. - 22 wells used for vapor extraction, air inlet, - ROD Date: 3/85

and observation

- Vapor-phase carbon adsorption (GAC)

used for treatment of extracted VOCs

- GAC beds regenerated on site with low

pressure steam

- Design flow rate for extraction system of

3,000 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm)

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

2851 (Paints, Varnishes, Lacquers, Phil Stoa

Enamels, and Allied Products) Remedial Project Manager

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Seattle District

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Storage - Drums; Other: Pour off Soil

from Processing Tanks - Volume of contaminated soil reported as 98,203 cubic yards, based on an area

of 66,300 ft and a depth of 40 ft 2

- Upper aquifer (50 ft thickness) consists of unconfined sand and gravel

- Surface soil permeability ranges from 2.8 to 3.6 x 10 cm/sec -3

- Separate liquid phases of VOCs in soil and groundwater suspected

- Tar-like compounds in soil suspected

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Application of soil vapor extraction

with an on-site solvent recovery

system; relatively large volume of

contaminated soil; possible presence

of separate liquid phases of VOCs

and tar-like compounds in soil.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- No specific cleanup goals identified in Record of Decision

- Local permit required for air emissions

- Performance objective for air treatment system set at 99% removal

- Air discharge limits specified as follows:

PCA 0.149 lbs/hr

PCE 0.095 lbs/hr

TCE 0.344 lbs/hr
Soil Vapor Extraction System at Commencement Bay,

South Tacoma Channel (Well 12A),

Phase 2, Tacoma, Washington (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 64

Results:

- No results provided for quantity of contaminants removed during demonstration phase

- Computer modelling results show predicted removal rates for VOCs as a function of time

- Pilot-scale results indicated that 3 to 4 lbs/day/well of VOC could be removed from the upper 30 feet of soil

- No results provided for air emissions - treatment system removals or mass discharge rates

- Problems were experienced with the operation of the solvent recovery system

- Condensed mixed solvents formed an emulsion which did not readily separate from the water

Cost Factors:

Total Capital Cost - $5,313,973 (as of 5/94) (no breakdown of costs available)

Annual Operating Costs - $100,000 (estimated) (no breakdown of costs available)

Description:

The Commencement Bay site was used from 1927 to 1964 for waste oil recycling, paint and lacquer thinner

manufacturing, and solvent reclamation and hundreds of drums of material were stored at the site. Leaks from these

drums, as well as the dumping of wastes directly on the ground and overflows from the solvent and waste oil recycling

tanks, resulted in contamination of the soil and groundwater at the site. The primary contaminants of concern at the site

included DCE (trans-1,2-dichloroethylene), PCA (1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane), PCE (1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethylene), and TCE

(trichloroethylene). VOC soil concentrations range from 10 to 100 mg/L.

A full-scale SVE system was constructed in 1992. Operation testing of this system began in August 1992 and this report

covers the demonstration phase of the project. The SVE system includes 22 vapor extraction wells. Granular activated

carbon (GAC), used to treat extracted vapors, is regenerated on site using low pressure steam, which was subsequently

condensed. The on-site solvent recovery system is used to separate VOCs from the condensate.

As of May 1994, the total capital costs and annual operating costs for this application were $5,313,973 and $99,810,

respectively. While no performance data are available at this time, it was noted that the SVE system seems to be

performing adequately. Several problems were experienced in the operation of the solvent recovery system. Condensed

mixed solvents formed an emulsion which did not readily separate from the water. The report identifies a need to

perform pilot testing of the solvent recovery system to ensure that separation of VOCs and water can be performed.
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 65

Soil Vapor Extraction at the Fairchild

Semiconductor Corporation Superfund Site

San Jose, California

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Fairchild Semiconductor Chlorinated and Non-Chlorinated Aliphatics January 1989 to April 1990

Corporation Superfund Site - TCA (trichloroethane), DCE (1,1-

dichloroethene), IPA (isopropyl alcohol),

xylenes, acetone, Freon-113, and PCE

(tetrachloroethene)

- Maximum concentration of total solvents

in soil was 4,500 mg/kg

- TCA - measured as high as 3,530 mg/kg in

soil; xylenes as high as 141 mg/kg in soil

Location: Cleanup Type:

San Jose, California Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Dennis Curran Soil Vapor Extraction CERCLA and State: California

Canonie Environmental Services - 39 extraction wells, 2 vacuum pumps - ROD Date: 3/20/89

Corporation (capacity of 4,500 ft /min at 20 inches of - PRP Lead

441 N. Whisman Road, Building 23 Hg)

Mountain View, CA 94043 - Vapor treatment system -

(415) 960-1640 dehumidification unit and vapor phase

3

granular activated carbon SIC Code: Point of Contact:

3674 (Semiconductors and Related Belinda Wei

Devices) U.S. EPA Region 9

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

(415) 744-2280

Waste Source:

Underground Storage Tank

Purpose/Significance of Application: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

One of the early full-scale Soil

applications of SVE; used at a site - 42,000 yds

with a complex hydrogeology. - Sands, silts, and clays; air permeability 0.12-0.83 cm/sec; transmissivity -

3

69,000 to 810,000 gpd/ft

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

Operation of SVE system until total chemical removal rate was less than 10 lbs/day and the chemical removal rate from

individual wells decreased to 10% or less of the initial removal rate or until the chemical removal rate declined at a rate of

less than 1% per day for 10 consecutive days

Results:

- Achieved the cleanup goal for the 10 lbs/day total chemical removal rate in 8 months 

- After 16 months of operation, the removal rate for total chemicals was less than 4 lbs/day

Cost Factors:

- Actual capital costs - $2,100,000 (including installation of wells and vapor extraction system, and engineering services)

- Total operation and maintenance costs for 16 months - $1,800,000 (including water quality sampling and analysis, water

level monitoring, equipment maintenance, engineering services, and carbon regeneration)
Soil Vapor Extraction at the Fairchild

Semiconductor Corporation Superfund Site

San Jose, California (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 66

Description:

The Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation Superfund site (Fairchild) is a former semiconductor manufacturing facility

which operated from 1977 to 1983. In late 1981, an underground storage tank used to store organic solvent was

determined to be leaking. An estimated 60,000 gallons of solvents were released to the soil and groundwater. The primary

contaminants of concern in the soil were 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), 1,1-dichloroethene (DCE), tetrachloroethene (PCE),

xylene, acetone, Freon-113, and isopropyl alcohol (IPA). Reported concentrations of total solvents in the soil were as high

as 4,500 mg/kg, with maximum concentrations of TCA and xylenes in soil of 3,530 mg/kg and 941 mg/kg, respectively. As

part of a multi-site cooperative agreement between EPA, the State of California, and Fairchild, Fairchild conducted site

remediation activities at the San Jose site, including installing a soil vapor extraction (SVE) system. The California

Regional Water Quality Control Board established a soil cleanup goal for this remediation of a total chemical rate of less

than 10 lbs/day, along with specific performance goals for individual wells.

The SVE system, which consisted of 39 extraction wells, operated from January 1989 to April 1990. The most rapid

reductions in contaminant concentrations occurred during the first 2 months of operation. After 8 months of operation,

the SVE system achieved the cleanup goal of less than 10 lbs/day for total chemical removed. After 16 months of operation,

the system achieved a chemical removal rate of less than 4 lbs/day, at which time the system was shut off.

The total costs for the SVE treatment system at Fairchild were approximately $3,900,000. The actual costs were about 7%

less than the projected costs because the time required for the cleanup was less than originally estimated. This treatment

application was part of a multi-faceted cleanup program which included the installation of a slurry wall and dewatering of

the aquifer which accelerated contaminant removal from the soil.
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 67

Soil Vapor Extraction at the

Hastings Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site

Well Number 3 Subsite,

Hastings, Nebraska

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Hastings Groundwater Chlorinated Aliphatics June 1992 to July 1993

Contamination Superfund Site, Well - Carbon tetrachloride, chloroform,

Number 3 Subsite trichloroethylene (TCE), 1,1-

dichloroethane (DCA), 1,1,1-

trichloroethane (TCA), and

perchloroethylene (PCA)

- Highest carbon tetrachloride

concentration measured in soil gas was

1,234 ppmv at 112 ft below ground surface

Location: Cleanup Type:

Hastings, Nebraska Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Steve Roe Soil Vapor Extraction CERCLA

Morrison-Knudsen Corporation - 10 extraction wells (5 deep, 3 intermediate, - ROD Date: 9/26/89

7100 East Belleview Avenue 2 shallow) - Fund Lead

Suite 300 - 5 monitoring well probes

Englewood, CO 80111 - An air/water separator, vacuum pump,

(303) 793-5089 and vapor phase granular activated

carbon unit

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

0723A (Crop Preparation Services Diane Easley (RPM)

for Market, Except Cotton Ginning- U.S. EPA Region 7

Grain Fumigation) 726 Minnesota Avenue

Kansas City, KS 66101

(913) 551-7797

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Spill; Other: Contaminated Aquifer Soil

- 185,000 yd3

- Shallow zone: moisture content 26.3%, air permeability 1.9 x 10 cm , -10 2

TOC - 270 mg/kg

- Deep zone: moisture content 5%, air permeability 6.2 x 10 cm , -8 2

TOC - < 50 mg/kg

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Full-scale SVE application at a

Superfund site to treat a large

quantity of soil contaminated with

carbon tetrachloride.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

Extraction rate for carbon tetrachloride of 0.001 lb/hr

- Established in 1992 by EPA and Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality
Soil Vapor Extraction at the

Hastings Groundwater Contamination Superfund Site

Well Number 3 Subsite,

Hastings, Nebraska (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 68

Results:

- The SVE system achieved the cleanup goal of 0.001 lb/hr extraction rate for carbon tetrachloride within 9 months of

operation

- Approximately 600 pounds of carbon tetrachloride extracted, about 45 pounds extracted within the first 2 months of

operation

Cost Factors:

- Total cost of $369,628 (including project monitoring and control, procurement support, construction management

(drilling, construction, system dismantlement, and grouting of wells), operations, maintenance, and reporting)

Description:

Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) was used at the Hastings Groundwater Contamination Superfund site to treat approximately

185,000 cubic yards of soil contaminated with carbon tetrachloride (CCl ). The site had become contaminated through 4

accidental spills of carbon tetrachloride which was used in the 1960s and 1970s as a fumigant at a grain storage facility. 

Concentrations of CCl were measured in soil gas at the site at levels as high as 1,234 ppmv. A Record of Decision (ROD) 4

was signed in September 1989, specifying SVE as an interim source control measure. 

A pilot-scale treatability study (2 deep and 2 shallow extraction wells), conducted from April to May 1991, removed 45

pounds of CCl . The full-scale SVE system, based on the pilot-scale study, consisted of 10 extraction wells (5 deep, 3 4

intermediate, and 2 shallow) and was operated from June 1992 to July 1993. EPA and the Nebraska Department of

Environmental Quality established an extraction rate for CCl of 0.001 lb/hr as the cleanup goal with operation of the 4

system required until field analytical results were verified through laboratory analysis and confirmation of no rebounding

of CCl . The SVE system achieved the 0.001 lb/hr CCl extraction rate within 6 months (January 1993) with the results 4 4

verified and no rebounding confirmed by July 1993.

The total cost for this treatment application was approximately $370,000. Actual costs were 17% less than projected. Cost

savings were attributed to the effectiveness of the SVE system (the cleanup required only 9 months rather than the

estimated 2 years based on treatability study results), and use of local contractors.
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 69

Soil Vapor Extraction and Bioventing

for Remediation of a JP-4 Fuel Spill

at Site 914, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Hill Air Force Base, Site 914 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) October 1988 to December 1990

- TPH concentrations in untreated soil

ranged from <20 to 10,200 mg/kg with

average soil TPH concentration of 411

mg/kg

Location: Cleanup Type:

Ogden, Utah Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Soil Vapor Extraction followed Cleanup Authority:

Not Available by Bioventing State: Utah

SVE

- 7 vent wells (Numbers 5-11 located in areas

of highest contamination), 31 monitoring

wells, 3 neutron access probes (for soil

moisture monitoring)

- Vent wells approximately 50 feet deep with

4-inch diameter PVC casings, screened

from 10 to 50 feet below ground surface

- Plastic liner installed over part of spill area

surface to prevent local air infiltration and

bypassing of air flow to the vent well

directly from the surface

- Monitoring wells - ranged in depth from 6

to 55 feet with 1-inch diameter PVC casing

and a 2-foot screened interval to the bottom

of the well

- Catalytic incinerator for extracted vapor

- Air flow - 1,500 acfm (maximum), 700 acfm

(typical)

Bioventing

- 4 vent wells (Numbers 12-15) located on the

southern perimeter of the spill area; 31

monitoring wells; 3 neutron access probes

(soil moisture monitoring)

- Vent wells approximately 50 feet deep with

4-inch diameter PVC casings, screened

from 10 to 50 feet below ground surface

- Monitoring wells - range in depth from 6 to

55 feet with 1-inch diameter PVC casings,

screened from 10 to 50 feet below ground

surface

- No treatment of extracted vapors required

(hydrocarbon concentrations <50 mg/L; use

of catalytic incinerator not required)

- Air flow - 250 acfm

- Soil moisture - 6 to 12%

- Nutrients added - C:N:P ratio of 100:10:10

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Robert Elliot

OO-ACC/EMR

7274 Wardleigh Road

Hill AFB, UT 84055

Waste Source:

Spill of JP-4 Jet Fuel

Purpose/Significance of Application:

One of the early applications

involving sequential use of SVE and

bioventing technology.
Soil Vapor Extraction and Bioventing

for Remediation of a JP-4 Fuel Spill

at Site 914, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 70

Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Soil

- 5,000 yds contaminated by spill (surface area of 13,500 ft ) 3 2

- Approximate extent of 10,000 mg/kg JP-4 contour covered area 100 by 150 feet 

- Formation consists of mixed sands and gravels with occasional clay lenses

- Air permeability ranged from 4.7 to 7.8 darcies

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- 38.1 mg/kg TPH

- Cleanup conducted under Utah Department of Health's "Guidelines for Estimating Numeric Cleanup Levels for

Petroleum-Contaminated Soil at Underground Storage Tank Release Sites" 

Results:

- Achieved specified TPH levels

- Average TPH soil concentrations in treated soil reduced to less than 6 mg/kg

- 211,000 lbs of TPH removed in approximately 2 years of operation

- Removal rate ranged from 20 to 400 lbs/day

Cost Factors:

- Total costs of $599,000, including capital and 2 years of operating costs

- Capital costs - $335,000 (including construction of piping and wells, other equipment, and startup costs) 

- Annual operating costs - $132,000 (including electricity, fuel, labor, laboratory charges, and lease of equipment for 2

year operation)

Description:

In January 1985, an estimated 27,000 gallons of JP-4 jet fuel were spilled at the Hill Air Force Base Site 914 when an

automatic overflow device failed. Concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) in the soil ranged from <20

mg/kg to over 10,000 mg/kg, with an average concentration of about 400 mg/kg. The spill area covered approximately

13,500 ft .2

The remediation of this spill area was conducted from October 1988 to December 1990 in two phases: the soil vapor

extraction (SVE) phase followed by the bioventing phase. The SVE system included 7 vent wells (Numbers 5-11) located

in the areas of highest contamination, 31 monitoring wells, and a catalytic incinerator. The typical air flow rate through

the vent wells was 700 acfm, with a maximum of 1,500 acfm. In addition, a plastic liner was installed over part of the spill

area surface to prevent local air infiltration and bypassing of air flow to the vent well directly from the surface. Within a

year, the SVE system removed hydrocarbons from the soil to levels ranging from 33 to 101 mg/kg. Further reduction of

the hydrocarbon concentration in the soil, to levels below the specified TPH limit, was achieved by using bioventing for 15

months. The bioventing system included 4 vent wells (Numbers 12-15), located on the southern perimeter of the spill

area, and the monitoring wells used for SVE system. Because hydrocarbon concentrations were <50 mg/L in the

extracted vapors, the catalytic incinerator was not required for this phase. Biodegradation was enhanced by injecting

oxygen, moisture, and nutrients to the soil. Average TPH concentrations in the treated soil were less than 6 mg/kg.

The total capital cost for this application was $335,000 and the total annual operating costs were $132,000. In monitoring

biodegradation rates, oxygen depletion was found to be a more accurate estimator of biodegradation rate than carbon

dioxide formation. Carbon dioxide sinks, such as biomass, solubility in water, and reaction with the soil, limited the

usefulness of carbon dioxide formation as a process control parameter.
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 71

Soil Vapor Extraction at

North Fire Training Area (NFTA)

Luke AFB, Arizona

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Luke Air Force Base, North Fire Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) October 1991 to December 1992

Training Area Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes

(BTEX), and Methyl ethyl ketone (MEK)

- Initial soil contamination in two fire

training pits - Benzene - 0.2 to 16 mg/kg;

Toluene - 10 to 183 mg/kg; Ethylbenzene -

21 to 84 mg/kg; Xylenes - 69 to 336 mg/kg;

and Total Recoverable Petroleum

Hydrocarbons (TRPH) - 151 to 1,380

mg/kg

Location: Cleanup Type:

Arizona Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Dan McCaffery Soil Vapor Extraction State: Arizona

Envirocon, Inc. - 1 extraction well for each of 2 fire pits

James Ramm - Wells constructed with 35-foot screens to

Rust Environment depths up to 57 feet

- Thermal oxidizer used for destruction of

organics in extracted vapors SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Jerome Stolinksi

CERMO

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

Omaha District

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Fire Training Area Soil

- Permeable silty sands, very permeable, clean well graded to poorly graded

sands, and permeable to low permeability inorganic silts

- Moisture content 10%

- Permeability of top soils ranged from 1 x 10 to 3 x 10 cm/sec -4 -3

- Porosity ranged from 36 to 46%

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Full-scale cleanup of two fire training

pits using soil vapor extraction.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Arizona Action Levels for soil - TPH - 100 mg/kg; and BTEX - 412 mg/kg

- Applicable state air emissions standards

Results:

- Treated soil concentrations indicated TPH and BTEX were below the Arizona Action Levels

- 12,000 lbs of contaminants were removed during 30 weeks of operation

- Removal rate remained at 40 lbs/day after 30 weeks of operation

- Soil gas concentration reductions achieved in 6 months for 8 constituents ranged from 72 to 96% (benzene)
Soil Vapor Extraction at

North Fire Training Area (NFTA)

Luke AFB, Arizona (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 72

Cost Factors:

Total cost - $507,185

- Capital costs - $297,017 (including site preparation, site work, startup, engineering, pipes, buildings, permitting, and

regulatory)

- Annual operating costs - $210,168 (including labor, laboratory charges, monitoring, fuel, electricity, maintenance, and

disposal of residuals)

Description:

Routine fire training exercises were conducted at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona between 1963 and 1990, using

petroleum, oil, and lubricant wastes, and JP-4 fuel. Fire training pits number 3 and 4 were used since 1973. During site

investigations conducted between 1981 and 1989, soil at these two pits were determined to be contaminated with total

petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX). Cleanup goals were established

for TPH and BTEX in soil based on Arizona Action Levels (AALs) - TPH at 100 mg/kg, and BTEX at 412 mg/kg. 

A full-scale cleanup using Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) of the soil in the two pits was conducted from October 1991 until

December 1992. A thermal oxidizer was used for destruction of organic vapors extracted from the soil. The full-scale

system, which used the thermal oxidizer, removed 12,000 pounds of contaminants in 30 weeks of operation. TPH and

BTEX levels were below the AALs after five months of operation, with TPH and benzene reported as not detected in

March 1992. Results of sampling in November 1992 showed ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes as not detected. System

downtime was about 1% during this period. After a temporary shutdown period, an attempt to restart the system caused a

malfunction in the thermal oxidizer and the destruction of the burner. As of December 1992, future activities at the site

were pending.

The total cost of this treatment application was $507,185. It was noted that the site investigation underestimated the

amount of contamination at the site. A pilot-scale study was conducted at Luke prior to implementing the full-scale system. 

The pilot-scale system used vapor-phase granular activated carbon to treat extracted soil gas. Due to unexpectedly high

concentrations of volatile organic constituents, the carbon supply was exhausted after two days of operation and the study

was aborted. In discussing remediation of sites contaminated with JP-4 jet fuel, the report includes a discussion of the

relative benefits of using SVE and bioventing techniques.
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 73

In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction at

McClellan Air Force Base

California

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

McClellan Air Force Base Superfund Chlorinated Aliphatics Status - Ongoing

Site, Operable Unit D, Site S Tetrachloroethene (PCE), Trichloroethene Report covers - 1993 to 5/94

(TCE), 1,1-Dichloroethene (1,1-DCE), Vinyl

Chloride, 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA), 1,2-

Dichloroethene (1,2-DCA), Freon 113 

- PCE, TCE, 1,1-DCE, TCA, and Freon 113

account for over 99% of the speciated

VOC mass in the vadose zone

- Maximum borehole concentration of

VOCs in vadose zone reported up to

2,975,000 g/kg

Location: Cleanup Type:

Sacramento, California Field Demonstration

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

CH2M Hill Soil Vapor Extraction CERCLA and State: California

- 17 vapor extraction wells in three - ROD Date: pending

contamination zones (scheduled for issuance 

- 5 vacuum blowers, 2 vapor/liquid mid-1995)

separators

- Catalytic oxidizer and scrubber used to

control air emissions

- Total system average air flow rate was

2,500 scfm

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

9711 (National Security) Kendall Tanner

Remedial Project Manager

McClellan, AFB

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Disposal Pit (for fuel and solvents) Soil

- Three zones of contamination - waste pit (landfilled silty sands and sandy silt

with oily material, wire wood, debris, etc.); intermediate alluvium; and deep

alluvium

- Permeability ranged from 0.001 (for silty clay) to 1.7 (for sand) darcies

Purpose/Significance of Application:

A demonstration of soil vapor

extraction to remediate VOCs in

waste pit materials and vadose zone

soils, and to assess performance of

catalytic oxidation and scrubbing.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Cleanup criteria not yet established for this site at McClellan

- Air Emissions - 95% destruction of total VOCs, required by the Sacramento Air Quality Management District
In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction at

McClellan Air Force Base

California (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 74

Results:

- Demonstration not complete at time of report; no soil samples to characterize post-treatment vadose zone were collected

at time of report

- Approximately 46,000 lbs of speciated VOCs were extracted and treated during initial 6 weeks of operation; 113,000 lbs

during initial 15 weeks of operation

- TCE, 1,1-DCE, and TCA accounted for more than 90% of the mass of contaminants removed

- Up to 150,000 lbs of contaminants (hexane-equivalents) believed to have been biodegraded in situ during initial 6 weeks

of operation

- Overall DRE averaged 99% for total VOCs during second and third months of demonstration; lower DRE in first month

attributed to operational concerns

Cost Factors:

- Field demonstration budget - $1.8 million for 1993 and $2.0 million for 1994 (including site characterization; air

permeability testing; installation and operation of SVE wells; vapor probes and manifold; air/water separators; blowers;

scrubber; catalytic oxidizer (rented); resin adsorption (rented); electronic beam technology testing; laboratory analysis;

and engineering support)

Description:

The McClellan Air Force Base in Sacramento, California is an Air Force Command Logistics Center that has been in

operation since 1943. The base was placed on the National Priorities List in 1987 and Site S within Operable Unit D is one

of the areas of confirmed contamination at the base. Site S is the location of a former fuel and solvent disposal pit, used

from the early 1940s to mid-1970s. Soil at Site S has been contaminated with chlorinated and petroleum-based volatile

organic constituents (VOCs). No cleanup goals had been established for Site S at the time of this report. The report

indicates that a Record of Decision for Operable Unit D (which includes the disposal pit site) is scheduled to be issued in

mid-1995. A 95% destruction and removal efficiency (DRE) for total VOCs in the extracted vapors was required by the

Sacramento Air Quality Management District. 

A field demonstration of soil vapor extraction (SVE) at Site S began in mid-1993. This demonstration is being conducted

as part of a series of field programs designed to optimize remedial technologies to be used in a full-scale cleanup at

McClellan. This SVE system includes 17 vapor extraction wells, vapor/liquid separators, a catalytic oxidizer, and a

scrubber. Results from the field demonstration of SVE to date showed that approximately 113,000 pounds of VOCs were

extracted in 15 weeks of operation; mostly consisting of TCE, 1,1-DCE, and TCA. In addition, up to 150,000 pounds of

contaminants (hexane-equivalents) were believed to have been biodegraded in situ during the initial 6 weeks of the SVE

demonstration. The average DRE for total VOCs during the second and third months of the demonstration was 99

percent.

It was noted during this application that the heterogeneity of the soils at this site caused the radius of influence for the

extraction wells to vary from 15 to 60 feet for a single well. The calculated mass of contaminants was almost two orders of

magnitude less than the mass extracted in the first six weeks of system operation. It was also noted that SVE air pollution

control systems should be designed with sufficient capacity to provide for operational flexibility.
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 75

Soil Vapor Extraction at the

Rocky Mountain Arsenal Superfund Site

Motor Pool Area (OU-18)

Commerce City, Colorado

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Rocky Mountain Arsenal Superfund Chlorinated Aliphatics July 1991 to December 1991

Site (Motor Pool Area - Operable - Trichloroethylene (TCE)

Unit 18) - Levels of TCE in soil vapor of up to 65

ppm Location: Cleanup Type:

Commerce City, Colorado Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Rick Beyak Soil Vapor Extraction CERCLA 

Woodward-Clyde Federal Services - 1 shallow vapor extraction well and 1 deep - Federal Facilities Agreement

4582 S. Ulster St., Suite 1200 vapor extraction well - ROD Date: 2/26/90

Denver, CO 80237 - Shallow well screened between 13 and 28

(303) 740-2600 feet below ground surface (bgs); deep well

screened between 43 and 58 feet bgs

- Liquid/vapor separator tank, sediment

filter, and regenerative blower

- Exhaust air from blower treated using two

granular activated carbon systems in

series

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

7699 (Repair Shops and Related James D. Smith

Services, Not Elsewhere Classified) Program Manager

Rocky Mountain Arsenal

Attn: AMCPM-RME

Commerce City, CO 80022-

1749

(303) 289-0249

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Other: Motor Vehicle, Railcar, and Soil

Heavy Equipment Maintenance, - 34,000 yd (70 ft radius by 60 ft deep)

Repair, and Cleaning Activities - Unconsolidated deposits beneath Motor Pool Area consist of discontinuous

3

sand and gravel lenses

- 1-3 foot low-permeability clayey sand to clay layer 32 to 38 feet bgs

- Moisture content - 4.7 to 30.9%; permeability - 167 darcys at 38 ft bgs and

2,860 darcys at 55 ft bgs

Purpose/Significance of Application:

This application demonstrated that a

pilot-scale SVE system removed

sufficient vapor contaminants from

the vadose zone, and expansion of the

system beyond a pilot-scale was not

necessary.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- No specific cleanup goals were specified for Motor Pool Area OU-18

Results:

- TCE concentrations decreased to less than 1 ppm after 5 months of operation of the SVE system

- Rate of TCE extraction decreased from 35 pounds per month to less than 10 pounds per month

- Approximately 70 pounds of TCE removed during operation of the system
Soil Vapor Extraction at the

Rocky Mountain Arsenal Superfund Site

Motor Pool Area (OU-18)

Commerce City, Colorado (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 76

Cost Factors:

- Costs attributed to treatment activities: $75,600 (installation and operation)

- Costs attributed to before-treatment activities: $88,490 (including mobilization and preparatory work, monitoring, and

laboratory analytical)

- Costs attributed to after-treatment activities: $19,650 (including pilot study)

Description:

Soil vapor extraction (SVE) was performed at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal (RMA) Superfund site, Motor Pool Area, in

Commerce City, Colorado to remove halogenated volatile organic compounds (VOCs), primarily trichloroethylene, from

the vadose zone. The Motor Pool Area at RMA, referred to as Operable Unit 18, had been used for cleaning and servicing

equipment, vehicles, and railroad cars, and for storing diesel, gasoline, and oil products in aboveground and underground

storage tanks. VOCs, detected in the Motor Pool Area's soil and groundwater have been attributed to releases of

chlorinated solvents used during cleaning operations; these solvents were discharged through floor drains and pipes into

unlined ditches at the site.

This system was initially considered to be a pilot study because it was expected to provide performance data on SVE at this

site that could be used to expand the system to a full-scale operation. This application, operated from July to December

1991, demonstrated that a pilot-scale SVE system removed sufficient vapor contaminants from the vadose zone, and

expansion of the system beyond pilot-scale was not necessary. The SVE system used within the Motor Pool Area consisted

of one shallow vapor extraction well and one deep vapor extraction well. Four clusters of vapor monitoring wells were

installed to aid in the assessment of the performance of the SVE system. TCE levels in soil vapors collected from the vapor

monitoring wells were reduced to non-detect or to levels of less than 1 ppm from initial vapor monitoring well samples as

high as 65 ppm. Approximately 70 pounds of TCE were recovered during this cleanup action.

The operating parameters collected during the system's 1991 operation indicated that a clay lense located beneath the site

affected the SVE system's performance by limiting both the shallow and deep vapor extraction wells' vertical zones of

influence. The contract award cost for procuring, installing, and operating the SVE pilot system, as well as preparing a

pilot study report was $182,800. This cost was approximately 15% less than the preliminary cost estimate provided by the

remediation contractor for the project. Factors contributing to the lower cost included lower construction and system

operating costs.
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 77

Soil Vapor Extraction at the

Sacramento Army Depot Superfund Site,

Tank 2 Operable Unit

Sacramento, California

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Sacramento Army Depot Superfund Chlorinated and Non-Chlorinated Aliphatics August 1992 to January 1993

Site, Tank 2 (Operable Unit #3) - 2-Butanone (0.011 to 150 mg/kg);

Ethylbenzene (0.006 to 2,100 mg/kg),

Tetrachloroethene (0.006 to 390 mg/kg),

and Xylenes (0.005 to 11,000 mg/kg)

Location: Cleanup Type:

Sacramento, California Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

James Perkins Soil Vapor Extraction CERCLA and Other: Federal

Terra Vac, Inc. - 8 vacuum extraction wells, positive Facilities Agreement

14798 Wicks Boulevard displacement blower, vapor-liquid - ROD Date: 12/9/91

San Leandro, CA 94577 separator, and primary and secondary

(510) 351-8900 carbon filters

- Wells installed to depths of 15 to 28 feet

below ground surface SIC Code: Point of Contact:

3471 (Electroplating, Plating, Dan Obern

Polishing, Anodizing, and Coloring) Sacramento Army Depot

3479 (Coating, Engraving, and Allied 8350 Fruitridge Road

Services, Not Elsewhere Classified) Sacramento, CA 95813-5052

(916) 388-2489

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Underground Storage Tank Soil

- 650 yd (25 ft by 35 ft by 20 ft deep) 3

- Silt with clay content of <30%; moisture content - 25.6 to 26.5%; air

permeability 1.7 x 10 to 6.2 x 10 cm/sec; porosity - 44.3 to 45.8%; TOC -7 -5

0.011 to 0.44%

Purpose/Significance of Application:

This application of SVE was in a

relatively small volume of low

permeability, heterogenous,

contaminated soil.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- 1991 ROD specified soil cleanup levels for the Tank 2 Operable Unit of 2-Butanone (1.2 ppm); ethylbenzene (6 ppm);

tetrachloroethene (0.2 ppm); and total xylenes (23 ppm)

- Cleanup levels were to be achieved within 6 months of system operation

Results:

- The specified cleanup levels were achieved within six months of system operation

- Levels of 2-butanone, ethylbenzene, tetrachloroethene, and total xylenes were reduced to below detection limits

Cost Factors:

Total cost of $556,000 - costs directly associated with treatment (including mobilization/setup, startup, operation, sampling

and analysis, demobilization)

- $290,000 of total cost attributed to treatment of non-Freon contaminants (adjusted assuming operation costs equivalent

for Freon and non-Freon contaminants)
Soil Vapor Extraction at the

Sacramento Army Depot Superfund Site,

Tank 2 Operable Unit

Sacramento, California (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 78

Description:

The Sacramento Army Depot (SAAD) located in Sacramento, California is an Army support facility. Past and present

operations conducted at the site include equipment maintenance and repair, metal plating, parts manufacturing, and

painting. During investigations of the facility in 1981, soil contamination was identified in the area of an underground

storage tank and designated as Tank 2 Operable Unit. Tank 2 had been used to store solvents and the primary

contaminants of concern included ethylbenzene, 2-butanone, tetrachloroethene, and xylenes. These constituents were

detected in the soil at levels up to 11,000 mg/kg. A Record of Decision (ROD), signed in December 1991, specified soil

cleanup levels for the four primary constituents of concern and specified a six month timeframe for achieving these levels. 

SVE was selected for remediating the contaminated soil because it was determined to be the most cost effective alternative. 

The SVE system consisted of 8 vacuum extraction wells, a vapor-liquid separator, and primary and secondary carbon

adsorption units, and was operated from August 6, 1992 to January 25, 1993. The system achieved the specified soil

cleanup levels a month ahead of the specified timeframe. In addition, the SVE system removed approximately 2,300

pounds of VOCs. During system operation, Freon 113 was unexpectedly encountered. Extraction of Freon 113

significantly increased the quantity of carbon required to treat the extracted vapors.

The total treatment cost for this application was $556,000. This cost was greater than originally estimated primarily as a

result of the additional carbon required as a result of the presence of Freon 113. A computer model treatability study was

used for this application. The study predicted SVE using 4 extraction wells could reduce concentrations of volatile

organics to non-detectable levels within 6 months.
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 79

Soil Vapor Extraction at the

SMS Instruments Superfund Site

Deer Park, New York

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

SMS Instruments Superfund Site Chlorinated and Non-Chlorinated Aliphatics May 1992 to October 1993

and Semivolatile Organic Compounds

- Concentration of specific volatiles ranged

as high as 1,200 mg/kg in source area soils

- Concentration of specific semivolatiles

ranged as high as 1,800 mg/kg in source

area soils

Location: Cleanup Type:

Deer Park, New York Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Bill Ballance Soil Vapor Extraction CERCLA and State: New York

Four Seasons Environmental, Inc. - Two horizontal vapor extraction wells - ROD Date: 9/29/89

3107 South Elm - Eugene Street - Installed in trenches 15-feet deep, 2-feet - Fund Lead

P.O. Box 16590 wide, and 75-feet long

Greensboro, NC 27416-0590 - Extracted vapors treated using catalytic

(919) 273-2718 incineration and scrubbing

- Remote monitoring used for process

control SIC Code: Point of Contact:

3728 (Aircraft parts and auxiliary Abram Miko Fayon

equipment, not elsewhere classified) Remedial Project Manager

U.S. EPA Region 2

Jacob K. Javits Federal

Building

New York, NY 10278-0012

(212) 264-4706

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Underground Storage Tank; Other: Soil

Leaching Pool - 1,250 cubic yards of soil treated in this application

- Well-sorted sands to silty sands with fine gravel

- Permeability 0.00227 to 0.00333 cm/sec Purpose/Significance of Application:

Full-scale SVE system that used

horizontal vapor extraction wells and

a process control system which

allowed for remote system monitoring

and oversight.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Soil cleanup levels established for 9 volatiles and 9 semivolatiles; levels ranged from 0.5 to 5.5 mg/kg

- Additional criteria specified for soil cleanup effort based on percent reductions

- Air emissions required to meet New York State ambient air guidelines for toxic air contaminants

Results:

- Soil cleanup levels and criteria were achieved within approximately 400 days after system operation began
Soil Vapor Extraction at the

SMS Instruments Superfund Site

Deer Park, New York (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 80

Cost Factors:

- Total treatment system cost was $450,520 (including $182,700 for one year of monthly operation and maintenance,

mobilization, system design and construction, demobilization, drum relocation)

Description:

The SMS Instruments site in Deer Park, NY was used for overhauling military aircraft components. Past waste disposal

practices at the site included discharging untreated wastewater from degreasing and other refurbishing operations to an

underground leaching pool. In addition, jet fuel was stored at the site in an underground storage tank. The results of a

Remedial Investigation at the site indicated soil contamination in the areas of the leaching pool and the underground

storage tank. Contaminant concentrations in soil ranged as high as 1,200 mg/kg for volatiles and 1,800 mg/kg for

semivolatiles. The New York Department of Environmental Conservation developed soil cleanup levels for 9 volatile and 9

semivolatile constituents.

Soil vapor extraction (SVE) was used at SMS to treat the contaminated soil. The SVE system, operated from May 1992 to

October 1993, included two horizontal vapor extraction wells installed in trenches adjacent to the contaminated areas, a

catalytic oxidizer, and acid gas scrubber. Based on the results of soil boring data, collected in June 1993, SVE achieved the

cleanup levels and standards for 17 of the 18 specified organic constituents. For one constituent, BEHP, concentrations

were above the specified cleanup level. However, according to the EPA RPM, this result may be an anomaly since the

concentration of BEHP in the treated soil was greater than concentrations of BEHP identified during the remedial

investigation at the site. In addition, the state ambient air guidelines were met during the operation of this system. 

The total treatment cost for this application was $450,420. The treatment vendor indicated that the costs associated with

instrumentation were greater than anticipated and that there was a problem with corrosion of ductwork. The vendor

suggested several ideas for reducing costs of future similar applications including ways to reduce air monitoring costs.
Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 81

Soil Vapor Extraction at the Verona

Well Field Superfund Site, Thomas

Solvent Raymond Road (OU-1)

Battle Creek, Michigan

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Verona Well Field Superfund Site, Chlorinated and Non-Chlorinated Aliphatics March 1988 to May 1992

Thomas Solvent Raymond Road - Tetrachloroethene (PCE), 1,1,1-

(OU-1) trichloroethane, acetone, and toluene

- Light nonaqueous phase liquids (LNAPL)

in groundwater

- Volume of organic compounds estimated

to be 3,900 lbs in groundwater and 1,700

lbs in soil

Location: Cleanup Type:

Battle Creek, Michigan Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Robert Pinewski Soil Vapor Extraction CERCLA

Terra-Vac, Inc. - 23 extraction wells with 14 of 23 wells in - ROD Date: 8/12/85

9030 Secor Road operation at a given time - Fund Lead

Temperance, MI 48182 - Catalytic oxidation and activated carbon

(313) 847-4444 adsorption of offgases

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

7389 (Business Services, Not Margaret Guerriero (RPM)

Elsewhere Classified) U.S. EPA Region 5

77 W. Jackson Boulevard

Chicago, IL 60604

(312) 886-0399

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Other: Solvent Storage, Blending, Soil

Repackaging, Distribution, and - 26,700 yd of soil (based on capture zone of 36,000 ft and depth of 20 ft)

Disposal - Clay content < 5%

3 2

- Moisture content 5%

- Permeability 10 cm/sec Purpose/Significance of Application: -3

EPA's first application of SVE at a

Superfund site.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- 1991 ROD specified soil and groundwater cleanup standards for 19 constituents

- Standards in soil ranged from 0.014 mg/kg for carbon tetrachloride, 1,1-dichloroethane, 1,1-dichloroethene, and

tetrachloroethene to 16 mg/kg for toluene

- Standards in groundwater ranged from 0.001 mg/L for vinyl chloride, 1,1,2-trichloroethane, tetrachloroethene, and

benzene to 0.8 mg/kg for toluene

Results:

- SVE achieved the cleanup standards for all VOCs

- A total of 45,000 lbs of VOCs were removed
Soil Vapor Extraction at the Verona

Well Field Superfund Site, Thomas

Solvent Raymond Road (OU-1)

Battle Creek, Michigan (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor Extraction

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 82

Cost Factors:

- Cost attributed to treatment activities - approximately $1,600,000 (including solids preparation and handling,

mobilization/setup, startup/testing/permits, operation, cost of ownership, and demobilization)

- Cost attributed to before-treatment activities - approximately $480,000 (including monitoring, sampling, testing and

analysis, and drums/tanks/structures/miscellaneous demolition and removal)

- Cost attributed to after-treatment activities - approximately $5,000 (including well abandonment and disposal of drums)

Description:

The Verona Well Field Superfund site is the location of the former primary well field that supplied potable water for the

city of Battle Creek, Michigan. In early 1984, 27 of the 30 wells were determined to be contaminated. The Thomas Solvent

Raymond Road area was determined to be a source of contamination. Soil in this area was determined to be contaminated

with chlorinated solvents, primarily tetrachloroethene and 1,1,1-trichloroethane. The amount of volatile organic

compounds in the soil at this site was estimated to be 1,700 pounds.

Full-scale operation of an SVE system to treat the soil began in March 1988 and ran intermittently until May 1992. Over

the course of the SVE operation, both carbon adsorption and catalytic oxidation were utilized to treat the extracted vapors

prior to atmospheric discharge. Dual vacuum extraction and nitrogen sparging were implemented to enhance recovery

rates during the latter stages of the groundwater remediation effort. A total of 45,000 pounds of VOCs were removed from

the subsurface soil, and 10,000 pounds from the groundwater, during the remediation. Cleanup verification sampling of

the soil occurred in June 1992 and the analytical results indicated that SVE reduced the constituent concentrations in the

soil at this operable unit. The constituent-specific soil cleanup standards established in a 1991 ROD were met. 

The cost attributed to treatment activities for this SVE application was approximately $1,600,000. The SVE system used at

Verona accommodated both carbon adsorption and catalytic oxidation for the treatment of extracted vapors. Catalytic

oxidation was identified as preferable for treatment of extracted vapors instead of carbon adsorption for the period of the

application where the contaminant mass removed by SVE was much greater than 10 to 20 lb/day.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 83

This page intentionally left blank.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 84

5.0 REMEDIATION CASE STUDIES: THERMAL DESORPTION, SOIL

WASHING, AND IN SITU VITRIFICATION

Thermal Desorption at the Anderson Development Company

Superfund Site Adrian, Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Soil Washing at the King of Prussia Technical Corporation

Superfund Site Winslow Township, New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Thermal Desorption at the McKin Company Superfund Site

Gray, Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

Thermal Desorption at the Outboard Marine Corporation

Superfund Site Waukegan, Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

In Situ Vitrification at the Parsons Chemical/ETM Enterprises

Superfund Site Grand Ledge, Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

Thermal Desorption at the Pristine, Inc. Superfund Site

Reading, Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Thermal Desorption at the T H Agriculture & Nutrition

Company Superfund Site Albany, Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Thermal Desorption/Dehalogenation at the Wide Beach

Development Superfund Site Brant, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 85

Thermal Desorption at the

Anderson Development Company Superfund Site

Adrian, Michigan

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Anderson Development Company Chlorinated Aliphatics, PAHs, Other January 1992 to June 1993

Superfund Site Organics, and Metals

- MBOCA (4,4-methylene bis(2-

chloroaniline) primary contaminant

concentration in untreated soil

- Manganese at levels up to 10%

Location: Cleanup Type:

Adrian, Michigan Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Michael G. Cosmos Thermal Desorption CERCLA and State: Michigan 

Weston Services - Solids pretreated by shredding, screening, - ROD Date: 9/30/91

1 Weston Way and dewatering - PRP Lead

West Chester, PA 19380 - Thermal processor consisting of 2 jacketed

(610) 701-7423 troughs

- Hollow screw conveyors in the troughs

mix, transport, and heat the contaminated

soil

- Soil residence time 90 minutes,

temperature of soil/sludge 500-530F

- Treated soil was discharged into a

conditioner, where it was sprayed with

water

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

2869 (Industrial Organic Chemicals, Jim Hahnenburg (HSRW-6J)

Not Elsewhere Classified) Remedial Project Manager

U.S. EPA Region 5

77 West Jackson Boulevard

Chicago, IL 60604

(312) 353-4213

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Surface Impoundment/Lagoon Soil and Sludge

- 5,100 tons treated

- Moisture content: soil - not available, sludge - 65-70% (before dewatering),

41-44% (after dewatering)

- pH: <7 (before dewatering), 10.9-11.2 (after dewatering)

Purpose/Significance of Application:

Treatment using a thermal auger

system; main contaminant is a

hardener for plastics.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Soil - MBOCA: 1.684 mg/kg 

- Soils/sludges - VOCs and SVOCs: Michigan Environmental Response Act (MERA) Number 307, Regulation 299.5711,

compliance with Type B criteria for soil standards; off-site disposal required for treated soil due to elevated manganese

levels

Results:

- Analytical data for 6 piles of treated soil indicated that the cleanup goals for MBOCA and VOCs were met

- Seven of eight SVOCs met cleanup goals; analytical problems were identified for bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 

- Treated soil disposed off site due to elevated manganese levels

Cost Factors:

Information not available
Thermal Desorption at the

Anderson Development Company Superfund Site

Adrian, Michigan (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 86

Description:

Between 1970 and 1979, the Anderson Development Company (ADC) site located in Adrian, Lewanee County, Michigan,

was used for the manufacture of 4,4-methylene bis(2-chloroaniline) or MBOCA, a hardening agent used in plastics

manufacturing. Process wastewaters were discharged to an unlined lagoon. A remedial investigation determined that soil

and sludges in and around the lagoon were contaminated. Contaminated soils and sludges were excavated, dewatered, and

stockpiled. A Record of Decision (ROD), signed in September 1991, specified thermal desorption as the remediation

technology for the excavated soil. Soil cleanup goals were established for MBOCA and specific volatile and semivolatile

organic constituents.

Thermal desorption using the Roy F. Weston LT system was performed from January 1992 to June 1993. The LT 3 3

thermal processor consists of two jacketed troughs. Hollow-screw conveyors move soil across the troughs, and act to mix

and heat the contaminated soil. The thermal processor discharges treated soil to a conditioner where it is sprayed with

water. Thermal desorption achieved the soil cleanup goals specified for MBOCA and all volatile organic constituents. 

Seven of eight semivolatile organic constituents met cleanup goals; analytical problems were identified for bis(2-

ethylhexyl)phthalate.

Information on costs for this application were not available at the time of this report. Originally, the treated soils were to

be used as backfill for the lagoon. However, the state required off-site disposal of treated soils due to the presence of

elevated levels of manganese.
Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 87

Soil Washing at the

King of Prussia Technical Corporation Superfund Site

Winslow Township, New Jersey

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

King of Prussia Technical Corporation Metals June 1993 to October 1993

Superfund Site - Beryllium, chromium, copper, nickel, zinc,

lead, mercury

- Highest metals concentrations in sediments

- chromium (8,010 mg/kg), copper (9,070

mg/kg), mercury (100 mg/kg)

- Highest metals concentration in sludge -

chromium (11,300 mg/kg), copper (16,300

mg/kg), lead (389 mg/kg), nickel (11,100

mg/kg)

Location: Cleanup Type:

Winslow Township, New Jersey Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Mike Mann Soil Washing CERCLA

Alternative Remediation Technologies, Materials Handling - ROD Date: 9/28/90

Inc. - Selective excavation of metals-contaminated - PRP Lead

14497 Dale Mabry Highway soil using visual inspection, confirmed using

Tampa, FL 33618 on-site X-ray fluorescence

(813) 264-3506 Soil Washing System

- Four components - screening, separation,

froth flotation, sludge management; rated

feed capacity of 25 tons/hour

- Screening - multiple screens; coarse screen

(>8 inches) and process oversize (>2 inches);

wet screening of <2 inch materials

- Separation - hydroclones separate coarse

and fine-grained materials

- Froth flotation - air flotation treatment

units

- Sludge management - overflow from

hydroclones sent through clarifier, sludge

thickener, filter press; filter cake disposed

off site; water reused for wet screening

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

4953 (Sanitary Services-Refuse Systems) John Gorin

Remedial Project

Manager

U.S. EPA Region 2

26 Federal Plaza

New York, NY

(202) 264-7592

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Surface Impoundments/Lagoons Soil and Sludge

- 19,200 tons of soil and sludge

- Moisture content of approximately 15%

- pH of approximately 6.5

Purpose/Significance of Application:

EPA's first full-scale application of soil washing to remediate a Superfund site. Innovative on-site monitoring technique;

selective excavation techniques, including use of X-ray fluorescence, to screen soil for cleanup.
Soil Washing at the

King of Prussia Technical Corporation Superfund Site

Winslow Township, New Jersey (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 88

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

1990 ROD identified soil cleanup levels for 11 metals

- Arsenic (190 mg/kg), beryllium (485 mg/kg), cadmium (107 mg/kg), chromium (483 mg/kg), copper (3,571 mg/kg), lead

(500 mg/kg), mercury (1 mg/kg), nickel (1,935 mg/kg), selenium (4 mg/kg), silver (5 mg/kg), zinc (3,800 mg/kg)

Results:

- Cleanup goals were met for all 11 metals

- Cleanup goals were achieved in less than 4 months

Cost Factors:

- Total cost of $7,700,000 (including off-site disposal cost)

Description:

The King of Prussia (KOP) Technical Corporation Superfund site had been used as a waste recycling facility from 1971

to 1974. An estimated 15 million gallons of liquid industrial waste were processed in six lagoons. These activities resulted

in soil and sludge contamination at the site. The primary constituents of concern were chromium (at levels up to 11,300

mg/kg), copper (at levels up to 16,300 mg/kg), and nickel (at levels up to 11,100 mg/kg). The ROD, signed in September

1990, specified complete excavation of soils, sediments, and sludges from these lagoons and use of contaminant extraction

(soil washing) to achieve the specified soil cleanup levels for 11 metals. 

The soil washing system at KOP was selected based on the results of a treatability study and data from a demonstration

run using KOP soil at a full-scale unit in the Netherlands. The soil washing system was operated at KOP from June 1993

to October 1993. The system consisted of a series of hydroclones, conditioners, and froth flotation cells. Approximately

19,200 tons of contaminated soil and sludge were treated during this application. The soil washing system achieved the

specified soil cleanup levels for all 11 metals, and the treated soil was used as backfill at the site. Of note for this full-scale

cleanup was the use of selective excavation techniques to screen contaminated soil and sludge for treatment. Selective

excavation was performed through visual examination confirmed using on-site X-ray fluorescence, and resulted in fewer

tons of soil requiring treatment.

The total cost for this application was $7,700,000, including off-site disposal costs for the sludge cake. Selective

excavation reduced the overall costs for the application by reducing the amount of soil requiring treatment by a factor of

two. Further, the data from the demonstration run expedited the design schedule of the full-scale unit by more than a

year.
Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 89

Thermal Desorption at the

McKin Company Superfund Site

Gray, Maine

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

McKin Company Superfund Site Chlorinated Aliphatics; Benzene, Toluene, July 1986 to April 1987

Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes (BTEX);

Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

- Excavated soil contained up to 3,310

mg/kg TCE, 130 mg/kg Ethylbenzene, and

35 mg/kg Toluene

Location: Cleanup Type:

Gray, Maine Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Canonie Environmental Thermal Desorption CERCLA

800 Canonie Drive - Rotary kiln desorber 7 feet in diameter - ROD Date: 7/22/85

Porter, IN 46304 and 28 feet long - PRP Lead

(219) 926-8651 - Soil heated to 250-400F and a residence

time of 6 minutes

- Offgases treated using HEPA filter,

baghouse, scrubber, and carbon

adsorption

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

4953E (Refuse Systems - Sand and Sheila Eckman

Gravel Pit Disposal) Remedial Project Manager

U.S. EPA Region I

John F. Kennedy Federal Bldg.,

Room 2203

Boston, MA 02203

(617) 573-5784

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Disposal Pit Soil

- 11,500 cubic yards

- No information available on matrix characteristics Purpose/Significance of Application:

This treatment application is notable

for being one of the earliest full-scale

applications of thermal desorption to

remediate halogenated volatile

organic compounds at a Superfund

site.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Soil performance standard of 0.1 mg/kg for TCE, with retreatment as necessary

- Performance standards of 1 mg/kg for individual aromatic organic compounds, 1 mg/kg for individual PAHs, and 10

mg/kg for total PAHs

Results:

- All cleanup goals achieved

- 11,500 tons of soil treated within 10-month period

- Ambient air concentrations for VOCs were less than 2 ppm above background
Thermal Desorption at the

McKin Company Superfund Site

Gray, Maine (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 90

Cost Factors:

- Total Cost - $2,900,000 (including salaries and wages, rental, supplies, subcontracts, fuel, and other professional services)

Description:

The McKin Company (McKin), in Gray, Maine, was a former waste collection, transfer, storage, and disposal facility. Soil

at McKin was contaminated with halogenated VOCs and petroleum products, including polynuclear aromatic

hydrocarbons (PAHs) and aromatic compounds. During the remedial investigation at McKin, soil contamination levels

were measured as high as 1,500 mg/kg for trichloroethylene (TCE), 49 mg/kg for methylene chloride, and 21 mg/kg for

xylenes. The ROD identified several areas at McKin that required on-site thermal desorption treatment for contaminated

soil. These areas were grouped into a "VOC-Contaminated Area" and a "Petroleum-Contaminated Area." The treatment

performance standard, stipulated in the ROD, required treatment of TCE in the soil to a concentration of 0.1 mg/kg. In

addition to the TCE requirement, treatment performance standards for PAHs and aromatic organics were specified for the

petroleum-contaminated area. Ambient air monitoring was required during the application. 

The thermal desorption system included a rotary kiln desorber with offgases treated using a filter, baghouse, scrubber, and

carbon adsorption. Thermal desorption of approximately 11,000 cubic yards of soil was completed at McKin between July

1986 and April 1987. This treatment application is notable for being one of the earliest full-scale applications of thermal

desorption to remediate halogenated volatile organic compounds at a Superfund site. Treatment performance and air

monitoring data collected during this application indicated that all performance standards and monitoring requirements

were achieved through use of the thermal desorption technology.

The total cost for this application was $2,900,000. According to the vendor, this cost included rental supplies, labor,

subcontracts, fuel and other professional services, and estimated that over 80% of the cost was associated with the

treatment of the contaminated soil. A pilot-scale treatability study indicated that thermal desorption would be effective in

treating soils at the McKin site.
Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 91

Thermal Desorption at the

Outboard Marine Corporation Superfund Site

Waukegan, Illinois

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Outboard Marine Corporation Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) January 1992 to June 1992

Superfund Site - PCB concentrations in material feed to

thermal desorber ranged from 2,400 to

23,000 mg/kg PCBs Location: Cleanup Type:

Waukegan, Illinois Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Joseph Hutton Thermal Desorption CERCLA

SoilTech ATP System, Inc. - Rotary kiln desorber with proprietary - ROD Date: 3/31/89

800 Canonie Drive sand seals - PRP Lead

Porter, IN 46304 - Retort zone temperature 1,207F

(219) 926-8651 - Preheat and retort zone residence time 30-

40 minutes

- Air emissions controlled using cyclones,

baghouse, scrubbers, fractionator,

condenser, gas-oil-water separator, and

carbon adsorption

- Water treated on site using sand filtration,

Klensorb® filtration, ultraviolet oxidation,

cartridge filtration, and carbon

adsorption 

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

3363 (Aluminum Die-Casting) Bill Bolen - RPM

(Cindy Nolan - former RPM)

U.S. EPA, Region 5

77 West Jackson

Chicago, IL 60604

(312) 353-6316

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Other: Discharge to Sewer/Surface Soil and Sediment

Water; Surface Disposal Area - 12,755 tons treated

- 12.9% moisture; pH of 8.59 Purpose/Significance of Application:

This application was an early

application of SoilTech's ATP system

for treating soil and sediment at a

Superfund Site contaminated with

PCBs.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Soil and Sediment - PCBs: 97% removal by mass

- Air - PCBs: Destruction and Removal Efficiency (DRE) of 99.9999%, Dioxins/Furans: 30 ng/dscm

Results:

Soil and Sediment - Achieved PCB cleanup goal for soil and sediment; average PCB removal efficiency of 99.98%; PCB

concentrations in treated soil ranged from 0.4 mg/kg to 8.9 mg/kg; most samples less than 2 mg/kg

Air - Stack gas requirements met for PCBs; stack gas requirements met for dioxins/furans after system modifications
Thermal Desorption at the

Outboard Marine Corporation Superfund Site

Waukegan, Illinois (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 92

Cost Factors:

- $2,474,000 - Actual total costs for cost elements directly associated with treatment (including solids preparation and

handling, startup/testing/permits, operation, capital equipment, and demobilization)

- $900,000 for before-treatment costs (including mobilization and preparatory work, and monitoring, sampling, testing,

and analysis)

Description:

Outboard Marine Corporation (OMC), located on Lake Michigan, performed marine product manufacturing operations

at the site. Contamination of the soil and sediments at the site resulted from the discharge of hydraulic fluid containing

PCBs through floor drains which discharged to several areas at the site and into Waukegan Harbor. An estimated 700,000

pounds of PCBs were discharged to the OMC site and 300,000 pounds of PCBs were discharged to Waukegan Harbor. 

Based on a 1989 Consent Decree and Record of Decision, remedial activities selected for the site included excavation,

stockpiling, and treatment of soil and sediment contaminated with PCBs. A cleanup goal for PCBs in soil and sediment of

97% removal was specified in the 1989 ROD. 

SoilTech's mobile Anaerobic Thermal Processor (ATP) system was selected for treating the PCB-contaminated soil and

sediment at OMC. The ATP system was operated at the site from January 23, 1992 until June 23, 1992. During this time,

12,755 tons of PCB-contaminated soils and sediments were treated. The ATP system met the cleanup goal for PCBs in soil

and sediment by achieving an average removal efficiency of 99.98% for total PCB concentrations. PCBs in treated soil

ranged from 0.4 to 8.9 mg/kg. The PCB DRE of 99.9999% and total dioxin and furan stack emission requirements of 30

ng/dscm were met during the cleanup.

During the proof-of-process period (January 23 until March 5), the DRE for PCBs was not met, and EPA shut the system

down. From March 5 until May 30, SoilTech made modifications to the system, and the stack gas emissions requirements

were met during the remainder of the soil cleanup. An EPA SITE Demonstration was conducted at the OMC site in June

1992. During this demonstration, 255 tons of soil and sediment were treated. The total cost for the full-scale application of

thermal desorption at the OMC site was $2,474,000.
Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 93

In Situ Vitrification at the

Parsons Chemical/ETM Enterprises Superfund Site

Grand Ledge, Michigan

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Parsons Chemical/ETM Enterprises Pesticides, Heavy Metals, Phthalates, May 1993 to May 1994

Superfund Site Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs),

and Dioxins

- Pesticides - up to 340 mg/kg for DDT

- Heavy metals - up to 34 mg/kg for

mercury

- Dioxin - up to 1.13 g/kg

Location: Cleanup Type:

Grand Ledge, Michigan Full-scale cleanup (interim

results)

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

James E. Hanson In Situ Vitrification CERCLA (Removal Action)

Geosafe Corporation - 9 melt cells; each cell 26 feet by 26 feet and State: Michigan

2950 George Washington Way with cells installed in a 16-foot deep - Action Memo Date: 9/21/90

Richland, WA 99352 treatment trench - Fund Lead

(509) 375-0710 - Air emissions control system - offgas

collection, hood, water scrubber, and

thermal oxidizer SIC Code: Point of Contact:

2879 (Agricultural Chemicals, Not Len Zintak, OSC

Elsewhere Classified) U.S. EPA Region 5

77 West Jackson Boulevard

Chicago, IL 60604

(312) 886-4246

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Other: Discharge to sewer/surface Soil

water (floor drains, septic tank, leach - 3,000 cubic yards

field) - Silty clay with high moisture content

- Soil reported to be difficult to work with under very wet and very dry

conditions Purpose/Significance of Application:

First application of full-scale in situ

vitrification at a Superfund site to

treat soils and sediments

contaminated with pesticides, heavy

metals, and dioxins.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Soil cleanup standards and standards for offgases established for four constituents. Soil cleanup/offgas standards were -

chlordane (1 mg/kg / 25 lbs/hr); DDT (4 mg/kg / 0.01 lbs/hr); dieldrin (0.08 mg/kg / 0.00028 lbs/hr); mercury (12 mg/kg /

0.00059 lbs/hr)

- Offgas standards based on State ARARs
In Situ Vitrification at the

Parsons Chemical/ETM Enterprises Superfund Site

Grand Ledge, Michigan (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 94

Results:

- Specific performance data for soils were not available at the time of this report

- According to the vendor, near-surface vitrified materials had "acceptable" levels of pesticides and mercury

- Additional samples will not be taken until after the melt has cooled (estimated May 1995)

- Data on air emissions indicates offgases met the state air emissions standards

Cost Factors:

- Cost objectives were $800,000 for vitrification activities; approximately $800,000 for before-treatment activities

(mobilization, site administration and preparation, sampling and analysis, and site configuration); and $90,000 for aftertreatment activities (backfill and restoration, drainage structures, and demobilization)

Description:

A full-scale soil remediation system using in situ vitrification (ISV) was conducted at the Parsons Chemical/ETM

Enterprises Superfund site (Parsons). Soils and sediments at the site were contaminated with pesticides, heavy metals,

phthalates, PAHs, and dioxins as a result of former agricultural chemical manufacturing processes. Dioxin levels in soil at

the site were reported as high as 1.13 g/kg. Maximum levels of other contaminants in the soil range from 0.99 mg/kg for

phenanthrene to 340 mg/kg for DDT. Soil cleanup requirements were established for four constituents (chlordane, DDT,

dieldrin, and mercury). In addition, the offgases from the ISV unit were required to meet state air requirements for these

constituents during operation. 

The ISV system used at Parsons included 9 melt cells and an air emissions control system. Contaminated soil was

excavated and staged at the site due to the shallow nature of the contamination. The melt cells were installed in a

treatment trench. Eight melts were completed from June 1993 to May 1994. The melts ranged in duration from 10 to 19.5

days and consumed between 559,000 and 1,100,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity per melt. Several operational problems

were encountered during this period including fires and equipment problems. These problems were addressed through

modifications to equipment and operating practices.

Because the melt requires approximately one year to cool before samples of the subsurface can be collected, data on the

performance of the ISV will not be available until after May 1995. According to the vendor, initial results of samples taken

from the surface indicate that near-surface vitrified materials contained acceptable levels of pesticides and mercury. Data

on typical air emissions indicates that stack gas emissions were in compliance with state standards during operation. The

cost ceiling identified in the action memorandum for this application was $1,763,000.
Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 95

Thermal Desorption at the

Pristine, Inc. Superfund Site

Reading, Ohio

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Pristine, Inc. Superfund Site Chlorinated Aliphatics, Pesticides, November 1993 to March 1994

Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs),

and Metals

- VOCs up to 0.14 ppm

- SVOCs up to 130 ppm

- 4,4'-DDT ranging from 0.11 ppm to 8.2

ppm

- Lead ranging from 26 ppm to 1,100 ppm

Location: Cleanup Type:

Reading, Ohio Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Joseph Hutton Thermal Desorption CERCLA

SoilTech ATP System, Inc. - Rotary kiln desorber with proprietary - ROD Date: 3/30/90

800 Canonie Drive sand seals - PRP Lead

Porter, IN 46304 - Retort zone temperature 1,009.9-

(219) 926-8651 1,034.1F

- Air emissions controlled using cyclones,

baghouse, scrubbers, fractionator,

condenser, and gas-oil-water separator

- Water treated on site using oil/water

separation, hydrogen peroxide oxidation,

sand filtration, and carbon adsorption

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

4953W - Waste Management; Refuse Tom Alcamo

Systems (Waste Processing Facility, Remedial Project Manager

Miscellaneous) U.S. EPA - Region 5

230 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, IL 60604

(312) 886-7278

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Storage-Drums/Containers; Waste Soil

Treatment Plant - Approximately 12,800 tons treated

- 12-25% moisture; pH of 1-2 for some feed soils Purpose/Significance of Application:

This application is notable for

treating soils with a wide range of pH

and moisture conditions.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Soil - Numeric cleanup goals identified for 11 constituents, including PAHs, pesticides, dioxin, benzene, and chlorinated

aliphatics; cleanup goals ranged from 0.99 to 3,244 g/kg

- Air - Total Dioxins/Furans: <30 mg/dscm, particulates: 0.015 gr/dscf, and four other stack gas emission parameters

Results:

Soil - Cleanup goals for all constituents were met in all soil piles tested; 6 of 11 constituents removed to levels at or below

detection limit

Air - Stack gas requirements met for dioxin/furan emissions and particulates
Thermal Desorption at the

Pristine, Inc. Superfund Site

Reading, Ohio (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 96

Cost Factors:

No data available

Description:

Pristine, Inc. performed liquid waste disposal operations at the site from 1974 to 1981. Spills and on-site disposal of

treated wastes led to soil contamination. Soils at the Pristine site were contaminated with volatile and semivolatile

organics, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides, and metals. The soils also contained greater than 2% of

elemental sulfur. This application was notable for treating soil with a wide range of pH and moisture conditions.

SoilTech's 10 ton/hr mobile Anaerobic Thermal Processor (ATP) system was used for treating the contaminated soil at the

Pristine site. The SoilTech ATP system included a feed system, the ATP unit (rotary kiln thermal desorber), a vapor

recovery system, a flue gas treatment system, and a tailings handling system. Wastewater from the vapor recovery system

was treated in an on-site wastewater treatment system. The ATP system was operated at the Pristine site from November

1, 1993 until March 4, 1994 and was used to treat approximately 12,800 tons of contaminated soil. 

The ATP System treated contaminants in soil to levels below the cleanup goals. Levels of 6 of the 11 target constituents

were reduced to concentrations at or below the reported detection limits. All stack gas air emission performance standards

were met in this application, with occasional spikes of THC over the 20 ppm performance standard. Average throughput

was approximately 6.5 tons/hr, and average on-line availability was approximately 62 percent.
Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 97

Thermal Desorption at the

T H Agriculture & Nutrition Company Superfund Site

Albany, Georgia

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

T H Agriculture & Nutrition Halogenated Organic Pesticides July 1993 to October 1993

Company Superfund Site - Dieldrin, toxaphene, DDT, lindane

Location: Cleanup Type:

Albany, Georgia Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Mark Fleri Thermal Desorption CERCLA (Removal Action)

Williams Environmental Services, - Rotary dryer desorber and State: Georgia

Inc. - Temperature of soil exiting heating - Unilateral Administrative

2076 West Park Place chamber ranged from 833 to 1,080F Order - 3/92

Stone Mountain, GA 30087 - Soil residence time 15 minutes - PRP Lead

(404) 498-2020 - Offgases - routed through a baghouse, a

water quenching unit, a reheater, and a

vapor phase carbon adsorption bed SIC Code: Point of Contact:

2879 (Pesticides and Agricultural R. Donald Rigger

Chemicals, Not Elsewhere Classified) On-Scene Coordinator

U.S. EPA Region IV

345 Courtland Street, N.E.

Atlanta, GA 30365

(404) 347-3931

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Manufacturing Process Soil

- 4,300 tons

- Bulk density - 125.8 to 129.7 lbs/ft ; moisture content - 13 to 19%; pH - 5.7 to 3

6.2; particle size distribution - up to 2.38 mm; TOC - 0.2 to 0.23 mg/kg

Purpose/Significance of Application:

First full-scale application of thermal

desorption under the Superfund

program to remediate soil

contaminated with a mixture of

organochlorine pesticides.

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

Cleanup goals identified in March 1992 Unilateral Administrative Order and October 1992 Treatability Variance for

proof-of-process performance test and full-scale treatment

- Total OCL pesticides < 100 mg/kg and 4 constituents (DDT, toxaphene, BHC-alpha, BHC-beta) > 90% measured

reduction in concentration; air emissions - stack gas total hydrocarbons < 100 ppmv

- Additional air emissions limits during proof-of-process test - Georgia Guideline for Ambient Impact Assessment of Toxic

Air Pollutant Emissions
Thermal Desorption at the

T H Agriculture & Nutrition Company Superfund Site

Albany, Georgia (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 98

Results:

- The cleanup goals for soil were met for both total OCL pesticides and individual constituents

- Air emission standards were achieved during both the proof-of-process test and during the full-scale remediation

- Average OCL pesticides concentration in treated soil was 0.51 mg/kg

- Average removal efficiencies for individual constituents were greater than 98%

Cost Factors:

- Estimated Total Treatment Cost - $849,996 (including solids preparation and handling, mobilization, startup, system

operation, and demobilization)

- Estimated Before-Treatment Costs - $252,582 (including mobilization and preparatory work, monitoring, sampling,

testing, and analysis, including the treatability study)

Description:

The T H Agriculture & Nutrition (THAN) Company Superfund site in Albany, Georgia was used from the 1950s to 1982

for pesticide formulation and storage. As a result of these operations, soils at the site were contaminated with pesticides,

primarily organochlorine (OCL) pesticides and the site was placed on the National Priorities List (NPL) in 1989. In March

1992, EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order to THAN for removal of contaminated soil and debris. Contaminated

soil with concentrations of OCL pesticides greater than 1,000 mg/kg was excavated and stockpiled.

Thermal desorption was used at THAN to treat approximately 4,300 tons of stockpiled soil contaminated with OCL

pesticides. The thermal desorption unit consisted of a rotary kiln thermal desorber operated at 833 to 1,080F (soil exit

temperature) and a 15-minute residence time. An interlock (waste feed cutoff) process control system was used in this

application to maintain operation of the unit within allowable limits. The system was operated from July to October 1993. 

Thermal desorption achieved the specified cleanup levels for OCL pesticides and air emission rates. Total OCL pesticide

concentrations in the treated soil ranged from 0.009 to 4.2 mg/kg with an average concentration of 0.5 mg/kg. Average

removal efficiencies for the four target OCL pesticides were greater than 98%. 

The total estimated treatment cost for this application was approximately $850,000. The proof-of-process performance test

results provided information on operating conditions and air emissions that were used for the full-scale treatment

application. In addition, the bench-scale treatability study provided data to support a treatability variance request by

THAN, approved by EPA in October 1992, to place treated soils on site.
Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 99

Thermal Desorption/Dehalogenation at the

Wide Beach Development Superfund Site

Brant, New York

Site Name: Contaminants: Period of Operation:

Wide Beach Development Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) October 1990 to September

Superfund Site - Stockpiled soil contained 10 to 5,000 mg/kg 1991

PCBs

- Material feed to thermal desorber

contained 11 to 68 mg/kg PCBs

Location: Cleanup Type:

Brant, New York Full-scale cleanup

Vendor: Technology: Cleanup Authority:

Joseph Hutton Thermal Desorption/Dehalogenation CERCLA and State: New York

SoilTech ATP System, Inc. - Rotary kiln desorber with proprietary sand (per interagency agreement

800 Canonie Drive seals between EPA and USACE)

Porter, IN 46304 - Retort zone temperature 1,160F - ROD Date: 9/30/85

(219) 926-8651 - Preheat and retort zone residence time 30- - Fund Lead

40 minutes

- Alkaline polyethylene glycol (APEG)

sprayed onto contaminated soil to

dechlorinate PCBs

- Air emissions controlled using cyclones,

baghouse, scrubbers, fractionator,

condenser, gas-oil-water separator, and

carbon adsorption

- Water treated on site using filtration,

oxidation, settling, air stripping, and

carbon adsorption

SIC Code: Point of Contact:

Not applicable Herb King (RPM)

U.S. EPA Region 2

26 Federal Plaza

New York, NY 10278

(212) 264-1129

Joe Salvatore

USACE c/o 914 TAG, Bldg. 322

Niagara Falls Int'l. Airport

Niagara Falls, NY 14304

(716) 297-8531

Waste Source: Type/Quantity of Media Treated:

Road Oiling - Application of PCB- Soil

containing waste oils to the - 42,000 tons treated

roadways for dust control - 18.3% moisture; 12.8% clay; 30.3% silt; pH of 7.7

Purpose/Significance of Application:

The Wide Beach project is notable

for being the first full-scale treatment application using SoilTech's

ATP system in conjunction with

APEG dechlorination to treat soil at

a Superfund Site contaminated with

PCBs.
Thermal Desorption/Dehalogenation at the

Wide Beach Development Superfund Site

Brant, New York (Continued)

Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desorption, Soil Washing, and

In Situ Vitrification

NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 100

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:

- Soil - PCBs: 2 mg/kg

- Air - PCBs: 3.33 x 10 lbs/hr, PEG: 4.16 x 10 lbs/hr, particulates: 0.05 gr/dscf -5 -5

Results:

- Soil - PCB concentrations reduced from up to 68 to less than 2 mg/kg

- Air - Stack gas requirements met for PCBs, PEG, and particulates; dioxin/furan emissions equivalent to a 2,3,7,8-

TCDD concentration of 0.707 ng/dscm

Cost Factors:

- Actual total costs for cost elements directly associated with treatment - $11,600,000 (including solids preparation and

handling, startup, equipment, and operation)

- Before-treatment costs - $908,000 (including mobilization/preparatory work, monitoring)

- After-treatment costs - $3,400,000 (disposal)

Description:

Contamination of soil at the Wide Beach Development Superfund site (Wide Beach) resulted from the spraying of waste

oil containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) over the roadways in the community to control dust. In response to a

1985 Record of Decision and a 1988 interagency agreement between EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

(USACE), SoilTech's mobile anaerobic thermal processor (ATP) system was used in conjunction with alkaline

polyethylene glycol (APEG) dechlorination from October 1990 to September 1991 to treat contaminated soil at Wide

Beach. Approximately 42,000 tons of stockpiled soil contaminated with PCBs, mainly Arochlor 1254, at concentrations

ranging from 10 to 5,000 mg/kg, were treated at Wide Beach. The USACE specified that the concentration of PCBs in

soil treated at Wide Beach should not exceed 2 mg/kg. The Wide Beach project is notable for using full-scale treatment

application using SoilTech's ATP system in conjunction with APEG dechlorination to treat soil at a Superfund Site

contaminated with PCBs.

During the full-scale treatment of soils at Wide Beach, samples of untreated soil were occasionally collected from the feed

conveyor of the ATP system. The concentrations of PCBs measured in these samples ranged from 11 to 68 mg/kg, with an

average PCB concentration of 24 mg/kg. Samples of the treated soil were collected either from the treated solids staging

area or the tailings conveyor of the ATP system. The concentrations of PCBs measured in these samples were generally

less than or near the detection limit (approximately 0.5 mg/kg) and all samples were below the 2 mg/kg cleanup level

during the treatment application. A lack of structural integrity in the treated soils led to a need for off-site disposal.

The cost for this full-scale application was $11,600,000, for costs directly associated with treatment. The level of

dechlorination achieved by the ATP/APEG process was measured during a demonstration test conducted prior to fullscale operation of the system. The demonstration test results indicated that the ATP/APEG process dechlorinated 76

percent of the PCBs that entered the ATP system during the test. However, this figure does not account for

dechlorination from recycling residual oil through the system. In addition, an EPA SITE Demonstration was conducted

during the full-scale operation in May of 1991. The SITE Demonstration results indicated that 98 percent of the PCBs

that entered the ATP system were dechlorinated.
NRJ-080

0227-02.nrj 101