Solidification/stabilization for remediation of wood preserving sites: Treatment for dioxins,PCP, creosote,and metals

This article discusses the use of solidification/stabilization (S/S) to treat soils contaminated with organic and inorganic chemicals at wood preserving sites. Solidification is defined for this article as making a material into a freestanding solid. Stabilization is defined as making the contaminants of concern nonmobile as determined from a leaching test. S/S then combines both properties. For more information on S/S in general the reader should refer to other publications (Connors, J.R. [1990]). Chemical fixation and solidification of hazardous wastes. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; US Environmental Protection Agency. [1993a]. Engineering bulletin solidification/stabilization of organics and inorganics (EPA/540/S‐92/015); Wiles, C.C. [1989]. Solidification and stabilization technology. In H.M. Freeman [Ed.], Standard handbook of hazardous waste treatment and disposal. New York: McGraw Hill) as this article addresses only wood preserving sites and assumes basic knowledge of S/S processes. For a more general discussion of wood preserving sites and some other remedial options, the reader may wish to refer to a previous EPA publication (US Environmental Protection Agency. [1992a]. Contaminants and remedial options at wood preserving sites [EPA/600/R‐92/182]). This article includes data from the successful remediation of a site with mixed organic/inorganic contaminants, remediation of a site with organic contaminants, and detailed treatability study results from four sites for which successful formulations were developed. Included are pre‐ and post‐treatment soil characterization data, site vaines. ileizdot‐ names (in some cases), treatment formulas used (generic aridproprietary), costs, recommendations, and citatioiis to inore detailed refer‐ en ces. The data presen ted iiidica te that dioxins, pentachlorophepi 01 (PCP), creosote, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbom (PAHsI, and metals can be treated at moderate cost by the use of S/S techuologp.     

Treatment technologies for 1,4‐Dioxane: Fundamentals and field applications

1,4‐Dioxane is a synthetic industrial chemical frequently found at contaminated sites where 1,1,1‐trichloroethane was used for degreasing. It is a probable human carcinogen and has been found in groundwater at sites throughout the United States. The physical and chemical properties and behavior of 1,4‐dioxane create challenges for its characterization and treatment. It is highly mobile and has not been shown to readily biodegrade in the environment. In December 2006, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) prepared a report titled “Treatment Technologies for 1,4‐Dioxane: Fundamentals and Field Applications.” The report provides information about the chemistry of dioxane, cleanup goals, analytical methods, available treatment technologies, and site‐specific treatment performance data. The information may be useful to project managers, technology providers, consulting engineers, and members of academia faced with addressing dioxane at cleanup sites or in drinking water supplies. This article provides a synopsis of the US EPA report, which is available at http://cluin.org/542R06009 . © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Treatment technology for remediation of wood preserving sites: Overview

This is the first in a series of five articles describing the applicability, performance, and cost of technologies for the remediation of contaminated soil and water at wood preserving sites. Site‐specific treatability studies conducted under the supervision of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL), from 1995 through 1997 constitute much of the basis for the evaluations presented, although data from other treatability studies, literature sources, and actual site remediations have also been included to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of remediation technologies. This article provides an overview of the wood preserving sites studied, including contaminant levels, and a summary of the performance of the technologies evaluated. The subsequent articles discuss the performance of each technology in more detail. Three articles discuss technologies for the treatment of soils, including solidification/stabilization, biological treatment, solvent extraction and soil washing. One article discusses technologies for the treatment of liquids, water and nonaqueous phase liquids (NAPLS), including biological treatment, carbon adsorption, photolytic oxidation, and hydraulic containment. The reader should be aware that other technologies including, but not limited to, incineration, thermal desorption, and base catalyzed dehalogenation, also have application for treating contaminants on wood preserving sites. They are not discussed in these five articles since the focus was to evaluate lesser known and hopefully lower cost approaches. However, the reader should include consideration of these other technologies as part of any evaluation or screening of technologies applicable to remediation of wood preserving sites.     

A Slice of Guidance Provides Some Insight to Addressing Contaminated Sediments

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued guidance to improve cleanup risk management decisions at sites involving contaminated sediments. The guidance is titled Principles for Managing Contaminated Sediment Risks at Hazardous Waste Sites and is important because sediment cleanup decisions are often very technical and complex. While the guidance is not a step‐by‐step “how to” document, it does provide the framework for risk‐based decision making and national consistency. Although it does not answer the more technical questions associated with remediation, it will likely provide site managers with greater certainty related to their decisions and help determine what questions need to be asked for many complex issues. Additional and forthcoming EPA reports, seminars, and products will be useful in building upon this framework. This article provides an overview of the risk management principles presented in the guidance. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Development of a site‐specific cleanup goal for PAHs in soil based on anthropogenic background levels

During removal of an industrial landfill in Folsom, California, fill material was excavated and processed through a mechanical screening plant to segregate soil from construction and demolition debris. The segregated soil was stockpiled and analyzed for a wide range of chemical groups to determine if the soil could be backfilled on‐site. The analytical results indicated many of the stockpiles had concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) that exceeded US EPA Regional Screening Levels, and a large quantity of soil was initially classified as requiring off‐site disposal at considerable cost. Because PAHs are ubiquitous in urban settings and the landfill did not contain a significant source of PAHs, development of a site‐specific PAH cleanup goal was proposed to regulators. Cal/EPA guidance for using on‐site data to develop a background threshold for metals was applied to the development of the PAH cleanup goal. The Cal/EPA approach involves demonstrating whether the data belong to a single population or multiple populations based on data distribution tests and probability plots. This article explains the statistical and graphical methods that were used to demonstrate that the Cal/EPA approach was valid for PAHs and that the calculated cleanup level was consistent with published anthropogenic background levels of PAHs in California and across the United States. The site‐specific PAH cleanup goal enabled most of the soil to be backfilled on‐site, saving about $227,000 in transportation and disposal costs, and regulators subsequently approved unrestricted future use of the property. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Cleanup levels for dioxin-contaminated soils

EPA's use of a 1 part per billion (ppb) level for dioxin contamination in residential soils is shown to be too high and not protective of public health. It was derived in a 1984 cancer risk assessment by another federal agency, but it is inconsistent with risk-based levels of 2 to 4 parts per trillion (ppt) obtained by using EPA's standard risk assessment methods. EPA has called the 1 ppb level a policy-based level, which correctly distinguishes it from a risk or health-based cleanup standard. The 1984 assessment is shown in this article to have considerable shortcomings. For over a decade, dioxins have been left in soils at levels posing health risks and sometimes at levels that EPA is legally required to address. Moreover, noncancer effects have been ignored, but recent work has shown them to support action at low ppt levels. To protect public health, be consistent with current scientific knowledge and other EPA policies, reduce confusion in the environmental management community, and be responsive to public demands for stringent dioxin cleanups, new EPA policy guidance for dioxin soil cleanups is needed, and key elements are presented in this article. In an ad hoc fashion, EPA Region 4 has recently used a 200 ppt dioxin cleanup level for residential soil, acknowledged to correspond to a one-in-ten-thousand cancer risk, at two Superfund sites, which environmental professionals should be aware of. This suggests a shift in EPA policy.     

Assessing cleanup levels for industrial sites under state risk reduction programs

Many states are promoting the cleanup and reuse of industrial sites. The reasons stem from the need to implement cost-effective risk reduction programs that show reasonable progress in the cleanup of contaminated sites and from the need to make effective use of industrial sites instead of abandoning them and making use of greenfield sites for new industrial facilities. The industrial land-use cleanup criteria developed by states are primarily risk-based. Several EPA regional offices also have developed similar risk-based cleanup criteria. This article addresses methodologies employed for assessing and evaluating the level of cleanup at several industrial sites in Texas, Michigan, and Ohio. This includes defining the regulatory framework, estimating the level and extent of contamination of soil and groundwater, assessing migration pathways, performing health risk assessments, and estimating cleanup requirements and associated costs. The implications associated with the various types of risk reduction options available for these states also are addressed.     

Triad case study: Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton

The U.S. Navy Public Works Center (PWC) Environmental Department, San Diego, California, is home to the Navy West Coast Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System (SCAPS). SCAPS has been extensively used at several Navy sites since 1995 to provide real‐time, high‐density data sets. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Triad approach provided an ideal framework for optimizing the use of the Navy SCAPS during a volatile organic compound (VOC) source investigation at Installation Restoration Site 1114 at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. All three elements of Triad—systematic planning, dynamic work strategy, and use of real‐time measurement tools—were implemented to manage decision uncertainty and expedite the site management process. The investigation was conducted using the Navy SCAPS, outfitted with a cone penetrometer, membrane interface probe, and a direct sampling ion trap mass spectrometry detector, which allowed for real‐ time collection of over 690 feet of continuous lithologic information and VOC concentration data. These data were used collaboratively with 24‐hour turnaround US EPA 8260B VOC groundwater results from temporary direct‐ push wells to support the conclusion of a limited source area. Implementation of the Triad approach for this investigation provided an expedited high‐density data set and a refined conceptual site model (CSM) in real time that resulted in cost savings estimated at $2.5M and reduction of the site characterization and cleanup schedule by approximately three years. This project demonstrates how the US EPA's Triad approach can be applied to streamline the site characterization and cleanup process while appropriately managing decision uncertainty in support of defensible site decisions. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The active role of state laws in superfund cleanups

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) did not ignore the fifty individual states when establishing responsibility, authority, and liability for cleaning up hazardous waste sites. Although CERCLA gives EPA the ultimate authority to select a remedy for a contaminated site, the law was drafted not only to allow for state activity without EPA, but also for significant state input when EPA is involved. The relationship between a state (and its environmental laws) and EPA can help decide the remedial and financial interests of any potentially responsible party (PRP). This article discusses the relevant CERCLA provisions, recent court decisions, and resolved and unresolved issues in federal-state Superfund involvement, and recommends several common-sense strategies for PRPs when working with a state in a Superfund cleanup.     

Rocky Flats,plutonium, and controversy: Citizen activists provide institutional memory

The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) selected Rocky Flats, east of the Rocky Mountains, as the site to fabricate “plutonium pits,” triggers for H‐bombs, and operations began in 1952. Press reports revealed the plant's connection to atomic weapons in 1956. Denver is downwind and “downslope” by about 16 miles. As western suburbs moved closer to Rocky Flats over time, plant accidents sent plutonium and other contaminants offsite. In 1989, armed agents of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation raided the facility, and the plant operator, Rockwell International, subsequently pleaded guilty to criminal environmental violations. By this time, the U.S. Department of Energy had inherited responsibility for Rocky Flats and atomic weapons production. In 1993, the primary mission at Rocky Flats became cleanup of contamination from plutonium and other hazardous substances. Under Energy's “Accelerated Cleanup” plan, remediation was certified complete in 2005 by the Department's cleanup regulators, EPA, and the Colorado Department of Public Health. But planned uses for the “buffer zone” around the facility's central industrial area, and for off‐site areas continued to generate public controversy. This article examines the controversy and reports on general “stewardship” concepts for long‐term waste management.     

Modeling natural attenuation of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination using alternate electron acceptors: Case study comparing bioplume iii with BIOSCREEN

Natural attenuation holds great promise as a cost‐effective means of remedying groundwater contamination at petroleum spill sites: this is particularly true at sites with sufficient background concentrations of alternate electron acceptors (nitrate and/or sulfate). The study reported in this article compared the results of a new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) numerical model (BIOPLUME III) with an updated EPA analytical model (BIOSCREEN Version 1.4) used to predict natural attenuation at an underground fuel spill site in Oklahoma. High background sulfate concentrations were shown to result in unrealistic predictions from both BIOSCREEN and BIOPLUME III. BIOSCREEN could be easily used with a data set not significantly enlarged from that used in a routine leaking fuel tank investigation. BIOPLUME III was much more difficult to use and did not yield reliable results. Results of this study indicate that the additional complexity of the BIOPLUME III model is not justified for simple sites.     

A dynamic methodology for estimating cleanup efforts for mercury in soil at gas utility gate stations

This article provides an overview of a dynamic methodology leading to the estimation of the level of mercury concentration in soil and soil cleanup volumes associated with a large number of gate stations suspected of having mercury in their soil. The methodology uses a unique screening approach that has been developed for relating measurements of volatile mercury near the surface to mercury concentration in the upper soil subsurface (about twelve inches deep). The screening approach was used in an effort to reduce the number of sites that are subject to extensive multimedia environmental sampling and analysis. The approach helps to focus on a small number of sites that are suspected of having the highest mercury concentration in soil, perform multimedia environmental sampling at these sites, use the field data to perform risk assessment, and determine the cleanup action levels and the volume of hot spots soil to be cleaned at these sites. The information obtained for the most contaminated sites is used to determine, if required, the level of cleanup for less contaminated sites.     

A risk-based approach to how clean is clean

Clearly defined remedial action objectives are a key factor in successful remediation programs. Chemical-specific cleanup criteria are critical components of remedial action objectives. A common risk-based approach can be applied for developing cleanup criteria for remediations under CERCLA, RCRA, and TSCA. This approach involves four steps: identify regulatory requirements; identify chemical-specific cleanup guidelines from previous cleanups; evaluate site-specific risk considering mitigating factors for a given site; select the final cleanup criteria based on information from the first three steps. To describe this approach, this paper presents a case study on a PCB cleanup conducted under TSCA. An objective risk-based approach was used to capitalize on the flexibility built into EPA's PCB cleanup guidelines. EPA granted an exemption to the stated policy on the basis of competing risk factors using a comparative risk-assessment approach. Similarly, risk assessment can be used to take advantage of regulatory flexibility in the selection of applicable or appropriate and relevant requirements (ARARs) under CERCLA, or in the selection of media protection standards under RCRA.     

Estimating Remediation Costs at Contaminated Sites With Varying Amounts of Available Information

Environmental professionals are often tasked with projecting the cost to bring a contaminated site or portfolio of sites to regulatory closure. Fortunately, there are a number of useful guidance documents and industry publications available to assist in such cost projections. However, the usefulness of such tools is limited when adequate costing information is lacking, such as (a) the nature and extent of contamination; (b) regulatory requirements; (c) the remedial approach to be implemented; and/or (d) the duration of operation, maintenance, and monitoring activities. Despite the lack of such information, cost‐to‐closure estimates are nevertheless routinely needed and generated for internal assessments or audits, regulatory disclosures, property acquisitions, insurance claims, litigation, and other business transactions. Cost estimates are also often needed in bankruptcy proceedings where the trier of fact must estimate the total future costs associated with an environmental legacy portfolio to determine the overall value (or solvency in the case of evaluating the potential bankruptcy) of a company. This article presents a solution for developing cleanup costs for single sites or a portfolio of sites using a comprehensive, three‐tiered method that is effective over a wide range of site information. Real‐world examples of the successful application of this method are then provided, based on detailed environmental analyses that were completed for a recent bankruptcy proceeding and a case in which an estimated cleanup cost was needed in a legal proceeding. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Case study: Conducting an accelerated cleanup at a superfund site in a mixed residential and industrial area

This article presents a case study of an accelerated cleanup conducted by EPA at the Adams Plating Company (APC) Superfund site near Lansing, Michigan. The APC site remediation was a Superfund EPA-lead project under the remedial program in Region 5. An accelerated cleanup was possible at the APC site by consistently identifying, evaluating, and implementing opportunities to streamline the remedial investigation (RI) and remedial design (RD) process. Streamlining opportunities were discovered and implemented in both the technical and administrative aspects of the project. Streamlining components used to accelerate the remedial process included: (1) extensive use of field screening techniques during the Phase II RI; (2) a focused feasibility study (FS) that evaluated only practical alternatives; (3) maintaining project momentum by initiating the RD concurrent with the issuance of the Record of Decision (ROD); (4) a highly accelerated RD with limited predesign work; (5) elimination of the transition period between RD and remedial action (RA) project phases; (6) frequent and effective communication, coordination, and cooperation between all parties involved (EPA, Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), technical contractor, PRC Environmental Management, Inc. (PRC), and the public); (7) maintaining a consistent project team throughout project duration; and (8) the setting of aggressive project goals.     

Sensitivity analysis for setting soil cleanup standards

In recent years, many states have sought to set soil standards for hazardous waste sites. For example, Michigan and Oregon have had soil standards for several years, and within the last three years Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Texas have derived soil standards; while Illinois and several other states are in the process of developing soil standards. In general, soil cleanup standards are set to protect against leaching to groundwater and direct contact with soil. This article reviews several agencies' protocols and presents a sensitivity analysis of parameters used to establish these soil cleanup standards. Major issues examined in this article include land use (residential versus commercial/industrial) and exposure parameters used for deriving soil cleanup standards for direct contact. Soil cleanup standards are developed considering exposure routes such as ingestion, dermal contact, inhalation of vapors, and fugitive dust. Other factors such as chemical/physical properties are also considered. For example, many states use Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) or EPA Method 1312 Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) to derive soil standards protective of leaching to groundwater. The results indicate that factors such as leaching and certain exposure assumptions play a key role in determining soil cleanup standards. Exposure pathways were examined by performing a sensitivity analysis using a generic equation to consider exposure from ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation of soil in deriving soil cleanup standards. The sensitivity analysis indicates that selection of exposure parameters such as toxicity values and soil-to-skin adherence factors contribute more substantially than others. These two factors are also among those values with the greatest uncertainty. Selection of exposure pathways is also important for the derivation of soil cleanup standards. For example, inhalation is the most significant exposure pathway for volatile organic compounds such as toluene, yet many states do not evaluate this exposure route. These findings are based on the mathematical models used by the agencies, and no judgments are made on the validity of the models. The results of this analysis can help focus attention on the most sensitive parameters as federal government reforms environment policies (i.e., CERCLA and RCRA) and the development of national soil cleanup standards is debated.     

Superfund cleanup: Designing containment remedies for recreational reuse

In July, 1999, EPA announced its Superfund Redevelopment Initiative, the Agency's effort to help communities bring Superfund sites back into productive use in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment. As part of the Superfund Redevelopment Initiative, the Agency is developing reuse design guides that provide technical information related to the design of remedies that safely support reuse. The design guides focus on the reuse of containment sites, and address such topics as settlement, gas control, irrigation, drainage, and operation and maintenance. Case studies of redeveloped sites are also presented in the guides. EPA is currently developing design guides that address the reuse of Superfund sites for commercial purposes, wildlife areas, parking lots, recreational sports fields, and golf courses. This article provides information on the first guide in the series‐the reuse of Superfund sites for recreational purposes.     

Treatment technologies for mercury in soil,waste, and water

Mercury occurs naturally in the environment and can be found in elemental (metallic), inorganic, and organic forms. Modern uses for mercury include chemical manufacturing, thermometers, and lighting (mercury vapor and fluorescent lamps). The chemical and allied products industry group is responsible for the largest quantity of mercury used in the United States. Mercury, particularly the organic methylmercury form, is a potent neurotoxin capable of impairing neurological development in fetuses and young children and of damaging the central nervous system of adults. Mercury regulations span multiple federal and state environmental statutes, as well as multiple agency jurisdictions. In August 2007, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (US EPA's) Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) published a report titled “Treatment Technologies for Mercury in Soil, Waste, and Water.“ The report identifies eight treatment technologies and 57 projects, 50 of which provide performance data. This information can help managers at sites with mercury‐contaminated media and generators of mercury‐contaminated waste and wastewater to identify proven and effective mercury treatment technologies; screen technologies based on application‐specific goals, characteristics, and costs; and apply experiences from sites with similar treatment challenges. This article provides a synopsis of the US EPA report, which is available at http://clu‐in.org/542R07003 . © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. *

1 This article is a U.S. Government work and, as such, is in the public domain of the United States of America.

     

Natural attenuation of chlorinated solvent plumes at Texas dry cleaners

Dry cleaners are the largest users of perchloroethene (PCE) solvents in the United States. Releases from dry cleaners to soil and groundwater, however, remain largely unstudied. This article presents a database of 137 chlorinated solvent plumes at dry cleaners in Texas. The data indicate that PCE plumes are generally shorter in extent than those from industrial sites. Degradation products were observed at more than 80 percent of the sites with groundwater contamination. Calculated attenuation rates are on the order of one‐to‐three‐year half‐lives for PCE and its degradation products. The estimated cleanup timeframe for calculated attenuation rates is < 50 years. More research is needed to understand the presence of organic carbon sources at dry cleaners and its implications for natural attenuation. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Iowa's land recycling program: A case study

Voluntary cleanup programs for contaminated sites have been developed in several states over the last few years. Some of the advantages of these programs include developing a collaboration between site owners and regulators, implementing cleanup standards based upon site‐specific current and future risks, and enhancing the market conditions that can lead to development of properties to their highest productive use. This article offers a case study of the first site in Iowa to proceed through the state's voluntary cleanup program, the Land Recycling Program. It offers the step‐by‐step progress toward the client's goal of a site classification requiring no further action. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.