Superfund site remediation by landfilling—overview of landfill design,operation, closure,and postclosure issues

This article discusses the appropriateness of using landfills as part of remediating hazardous chemical and Superfund sites, with particular emphasis on providing for true long‐term public health and environmental protection from the wastes and contaminated soils that are placed in the landfills. On‐site landfilling or capping of existing wastes is typically the least expensive approach for gaining some remediation of existing hazardous chemical/Superfund sites. The issues of the deficiencies in US EPA and state landfilling approaches discussed herein are also applicable to the landfilling of municipal and industrial solid “nonhazardous” wastes. These deficiencies were presented in part as “Problems with Landfills for Superfund Site Remediation” at the US EPA National Superfund Technical Assistance Grant Workshop held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in February 2003. They are based on the author's experience in investigating the properties of landfill liners and the characteristics of today's landfills, relative to their ability to prevent groundwater pollution and to cause other environmental impacts. Discussed are issues related to both solid and hazardous waste landfills and approaches for improving the ability of landfills to contain wastes and monitor for leachate escape from the landfill for as long as the wastes in the landfill will be a threat. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Low intervention soil remediation approaches

Traditional bioremediation approaches have been used to treat petroleum source contamination in readily accessible soils and sludges. Contamination under existing structures is a greater challenge. Options to deal with this problem have usually been in the extreme (i.e., to dismantle the facility and excavate to an acceptable regulated residual, or to pump and treat for an inordinately long period of time). The excavated material must be further remediated and cleanfill must be added to close the excavation. If site assessments were too conservative or incomplete, new contamination adulterating fill soils may result in additional excavation at some later date. Innovative, cost-efficient technologies must be developed to remove preexisting wastes under structures and to reduce future remediation episodes. An innovative soil bioremediation treatment method was developed and evaluated in petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated (PHC) soils at compressor stations of a natural gas pipeline running through Louisiana. The in-situ protocol was developed for remediating significant acreage subjected to contamination by petroleum-based lubricants and other PHC products resulting from a chronic leakage of lubricating oil used to maintain the pipeline itself. Initial total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) measurements revealed values of up to 12,000 mg/kg soil dry weight. The aim of the remediation project was to reduce TPH concentration in the contaminated soils to a level of <200 mg/kg soil dry weight, a level negotiated to be acceptable to state and federal regulators. After monitoring the system for 122 days, all sites showed greater than 99-percent reduction in TPH concentration.     

Thermal treatment and non-thermal technologies for remediation of manufactured gas plant sites

More than 1500 manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites exist throughout the U.S. Many are contaminated with coal tar from coal-fueled gas works which produced ‘town gas’ from the mid-1800s through the 1950s.^1,2 Virtually all old U.S. cities have such sites. Most are in downtown areas as they were installed for central distribution of manufactured gas. While a few sites are CERCLA/Superfund, most are not. However, the contaminants and methods used for remediation are similar to those used for Superfund clean-ups of coal tar contamination from wood-treating and coke oven facilities. Clean-up of sites is triggered by regulatory pressure, property transfers and re-development as well as releases to the environment — in particular, via groundwater migration. Due to utility de-regulation, site clean-ups may also be triggered by sale of a utility or of a specific utility site to other utilities. Utilities have used two approaches in dealing with their MGP sites. The first is ‘do nothing and hope for the best’. History suggests that, sooner or later, these sites become a bigger problem via a release, citizen lawsuit or regulatory/public service commission intervention. The second, far better approach is to define the problem now and make plans for waste treatment or immobilization. This paper describes recent experience with a high capacity/low cost thermal desorption process for this waste and reviews non-thermal technology, such as bio-treatment, capping, recycling, and dig and haul. Cost data is provided for all technologies, and a case study for thermal treatment is also presented.     

Sustainable Remediation and Decision Analysis Practices at an Onshore Gas Well Site

Strategies for remediation of drilling mud wastes at a typical deep sour gas well site in the foothills of Alberta were assessed in terms of financial and social costs and benefits, in alignment with established sustainable remediation and decision analysis principles. Managers of contaminated sites containing historical drilling wastes are challenged with managing liability through several regulatory changes over time. Excavation and disposal of the contaminated soil from the site was the only means of securing regulatory release, with the nearest landfill located 150 km away. A perception exists that in many cases excavation and disposal inflicts unnecessary levels of site intrusiveness and public disturbance when other options achieving a similar risk end point may do so for lower social cost. The study tested this hypothesis to ascertain whether the currently accepted solution is the best option when the wider costs and benefits to society and the environment are included. Eight remedial strategies were assessed using cost–benefit analysis, including using environmental economics techniques to quantify social and environmental impacts. The economic model showed that methods such as capping in‐place or engineered encapsulation were superior to full excavation and disposal from financial and sustainability perspectives. Quantified external costs and benefits such as road damage, greenhouse gas emissions, public nuisance and safety, and community amenity value were influential in identifying superior options. It was demonstrated that $0.2 million of societal costs could be avoided by choosing capping over landfill disposal. This represents substantial implications when viewed in the context of this and other operators’ portfolios of hundreds of abandoned wells in the area. ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Application of source removal and natural attenuation remediation strategies at MGP sites in Wisconsin

This article presents site closure strategies of source material removal and dissolved‐phase groundwater natural attenuation that were applied at two manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites in Wisconsin. The source removal actions were implemented in 1999 and 2000 with groundwater monitoring activities preceding and following those actions. Both of these sites have unique geological and hydrogeological conditions. The article briefly presents site background information and source removal activities at both of these sites and focuses on groundwater analytical testing data that demonstrate remediation of dissolved‐phase MGP‐related groundwater impacts by natural attenuation. A statistical evaluation of the data supports a stable or declining MGP parameter concentration trend at each of the sites. A comparison of the site natural attenuation evaluation is made to compare with the requirements for site closure under the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources regulations and guidance. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

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.     

In Situ solidification—A case study at a former manufactured gas plant in Macon,Georgia

In situ solidification (ISS) is a reliable, EPA‐recognized technology for the treatment of industrial and waste sites. ISS was employed at a former manufactured gas plant (MGP) site in Macon, Georgia, for the treatment of approximately 33,000 cubic yards of coal tar residues in the saturated zone soil. The site is regulated by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) under the Hazardous Site Rehabilitation Act (HSRA) and is located approximately four blocks from downtown Macon. This article will review the technical and regulatory basis for the successful use of this technology, provide an overview of the treatability and pilot testing used to develop the design and implementation of the treatment process, and present the results of the application of ISS to an MGP site. The results of groundwater monitoring, pre and postremediation, will also be discussed. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Estimating Remediation and Contaminant Respiration Emissions for Alternatives Comparisons at Petroleum Spill Sites

Greenhouse gas emissions assessments for site cleanups typically quantify emissions associated with remediation and not those from contaminant biodegradation. Yet, at petroleum spill sites, these emissions can be significant, and some remedial actions can decrease this additional component of the environmental footprint. This article demonstrates an emissions assessment for a hypothetical site, using the following technologies as examples: excavation with disposal to a landfill, light nonaqueous‐phase liquid (LNAPL) recovery with and without recovered product recycling, passive bioventing, and monitored natural attenuation (MNA). While the emissions associated with remediation for LNAPL recovery are greater than the other considered alternatives, this technology is comparable to excavation when a credit associated with product recycling is counted. Passive bioventing, a green remedial alternative, has greater remedial emissions than MNA, but unlike MNA can decrease contaminant‐related emissions by converting subsurface methane to carbon dioxide. For the presented example, passive bioventing has the lowest total emissions of all technologies considered. This illustrates the value in estimating both remediation and contaminant respiration emissions for petroleum spill sites, so that the benefit of green remedial approaches can be quantified at the remedial alternatives selection stage rather than simply as best management practices. ©2015 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.     

Sustainable soil remediation by refrigerated condensation at sites with “high‐concentration” recalcitrant compounds and NAPL: Two case studies

Remediation of recalcitrant compounds at sites with high concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or nonaqueous‐phase liquids (NAPLs) can present significant technical and financial (long‐term) risk for stakeholders. Until recently, however, sustainability has not been included as a significant factor to be considered in the feasibility and risk evaluation for remediation technologies. The authors present a framework for which sustainability can be incorporated into the remediation selection criteria focusing specifically on off‐gas treatment selection for soil vapor extraction (SVE) remediation technology. SVE is generally considered an old and standard approach to in situ remediation of soils at a contaminated site. The focus on off‐gas treatment technology selection in this article allows for more in‐depth analysis of the feasibility evaluation process and how sustainable practices might influence the process. SVE is more commonly employed for recovery of VOCs from soils than other technologies and generally employs granular activated carbon (GAC), catalytic, or thermal oxidation, or an emerging alternative technology known as cryogenic‐compression and condensation combined with regenerative adsorption (C3–Technology). Of particular challenge to the off‐gas treatment selection process is the potential variety of chemical constituents and concentrations changing over time. Guidance is available regarding selection of off‐gas treatment technology (Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, 1996; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006). However, there are common shortcomings of off‐gas treatment technology guidance and applications; practitioners have rarely considered sustainability and environmental impact of off‐gas treatment technology selection. This evaluation includes consideration of environmental sustainability in the selection of off‐gas treatment technologies and a region‐specific (Los Angeles, California) cost per pound and time of remediation comparisons between GAC, thermal oxidation, and C3–Technology. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

DNAPL Source Depletion: 2. Attainable Goals and Cost–Benefit Analyses

It is difficult to quantify the range in source strength reduction (MdR) that may be attainable from in situ remediation of a dense nonaqueous‐phase liquid (DNAPL) site given that available studies typically report only the median MdR without providing insights into site complexity, which is often a governing factor. An empirical study of the performance of in situ remediation at a wide range of DNAPL‐contaminated sites determined MdRs for in situ bioremediation (EISB), in situ chemical oxidation (ISCO), and thermal treatment remedies. Median MdR, geometric mean MdR, and lower/upper 95 percent confidence interval for the mean were: 49x, 105x, 20x/556x, respectively, for EISB; 9x, 21x, and 4x/110x for ISCO; and 19x, 31x, and 6x/150x for thermal treatment. Lower MdR values were determined for large, complex sites and for sites with DNAPL pool‐dominated source zones. A feasibility analysis of partial DNAPL depletion is described for a pool‐dominated source zone. Back‐diffusion from low‐hydraulic conductivity units within a pool‐dominated source zone is shown to potentially sustain a secondary source for more than 1,000 years, indicating that aggressive source treatment may not reduce the remediation timeframe. Estimated plume response demonstrates there may be no reduction in cost associated with aggressive treatment, and little difference in risk reduction associated with the various alternatives. Monitored natural attenuation (MNA) for the source zone is shown to be a reasonable alternative for the pool‐dominated source zone considered in this example. It is demonstrated that pool‐dominated source zones with a large range in initial DNAPL mass (250 to 1,500 kg) may correspond to a narrow range in source strength (20 to 30 kg/year). This demonstrates that measured source strength is nonunique with respect to DNAPL mass in the subsurface and, thus, source strength should not be used as the sole basis for predicting how much DNAPL mass remains or must be removed to achieve a target goal. If aggressive source zone treatment is to be implemented due to regulatory requirements, strategic pump‐and‐treat is shown to be most cost effective. These remedial decisions are shown to be insensitive to a range of possible DNAPL pool conditions. At sites with an existing pump‐and‐treat system, a significant increase in mass removal and source strength reduction may be achieved for a low incremental cost by strategic placement of extraction wells and pumping rate selection. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Hazardous chemical site remediation through capping: Problems with long-term protection

The capping of waste management units and contaminated soils is receiving increasing attention as a low-cost method for hazardous chemical site remediation. Capping is used to prevent further groundwater pollution by existing waste management units and contaminated soils through limiting the moisture that enters the wastes. In principle, for wastes located above the water table, the construction of an impermeable cap can prevent leaching of the wastes (leachate generation) and groundwater pollution. In practice, appropriately designed and constructed RCRA caps can provide for only short-term prevention of groundwater pollution. Alternative approaches are available for capping of wastes that can be effective in preventing moisture from entering the wastes and concomitant groundwater pollution. These approaches recognize the inability of the typical RCRA cap to keep wastes dry for as long as waste constituents will be a threat and, most importantly, provide the necessary funds to effectively address all plausible worst-case scenario failures that could occur at a capped waste management unit or contaminated soil area.     

Best Available Treatment Technologies Applied to Groundwater Circulation Wells

Groundwater circulation wells (GCWs) are a quasi‐in‐situ method for remediating groundwater in areas where remediation techniques that limit the water available for municipal, domestic, industrial, or agricultural purposes are inappropriate. The inherently resource‐conservative nature of groundwater circulation wells is also philosophically appealing in today's culture, which is supportive of green technologies. Groundwater circulation wells involve the circulation of groundwater through a dual‐screen well, with treatment occurring between the screens. The wells are specifically designed so that one well screen draws in groundwater and the second returns the groundwater after it has been treated within the well. Historically, the treatment has been performed with specialized equipment proprietary to GCW vendors. Two full‐scale pilot systems at a formerly used Defense Superfund site in Nebraska used best available technologies for treatment components. A multiple‐tray, low‐profile air stripper typically used for pump‐and‐treat remediation systems was successfully adapted for the GCW pilot system located in a trichloroethylene (TCE) hot spot. An ultraviolet water disinfection system was successfully adapted for the GCW pilot system located in a hot spot contaminated with the explosive compound hexhydro‐1,3,5‐trinitro‐1,3,5‐triazine (RDX). The pilot systems showed that GCW technology is competitive with a previously considered pump‐and‐treat alternative for focused extraction, and the regulatory community was supportive of additional GCW applications. A remedial design for the site includes 12 more GCW systems to complete focused remediation requirements. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Injecting remediation compounds—How you inject is equally as important as what you inject

The injection of remediation compounds has rapidly become a widely accepted approach for addressing contaminated sites. One of the most fundamental questions surrounding the use of in situ remediation has been “What compound are you injecting at your site?” With the advances in the industry's understanding and acceptance of the in situ remediation process remediation professionals are now asking a follow‐up question that has become equally important to the success of a project: “How are you injecting a compound at your site?” This article discusses advances in field applications for in situ remediation and injecting remediation compounds. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Managing contaminated sites and the role of domestic and international forums

Domestic and international cooperation in the field of contaminated‐site management has increased dramatically in the past decade. The expected benefits of this cooperation include the reduction of duplication in remediation efforts, the coordination of contaminated‐site research, improved synergy between various stakeholders, enhanced policy development, and better information dissemination and technology transfer. This article identifies and briefly discusses key domestic and international collaborations, partnerships, and networks relating to contaminated‐site management and remediation. Also provided is information on how the forums can be accessed. Common themes identified across the forums discussed in this article include (1) the development and demonstration of innovative technologies, (2) the use of risk assessment, (3) the use of toxicology, bioavailability, and ecotoxicity testing, and (4) the increasing need to find holistic approaches for managing contaminated sites, such as guaranteed remediation programs and transfer of environment liability, and the need for understanding implications of remediation financing mechanisms. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

Automated continuous monitoring and response to toxic subsurface vapors entering overlying buildings—Selected observations,implications and considerations

Vapor intrusion characterization and response efforts must consider four key interactive factors: background indoor air constituents, preferential vapor migration pathways, complex patterns of vapor distribution within buildings, and temporal concentration variability caused by pressure differentials within and exterior to structures. An additional challenge is found at sites contaminated by trichloroethylene (TCE), which in the United States has very low indoor air screening levels due to acute risk over short exposure durations for sensitive populations. Timely and accurate characterization of vapor intrusion has been constrained by traditional passive time‐averaging sampling methods. This article presents three case studies of a robust new methodology for vapor intrusion characterization particularly suited for sites where there is a critical need for rapid response to exposure exceedances to minimize health risks and liabilities. The new methodology comprises low‐detection‐level field analytical instrumentation with grab sample and continuous monitoring capabilities for key volatile constituents integrated with pressure differential measurements and web‐based reporting. The system also provides automated triggered alerts to project teams and capability for integration with engineered systems for vapor intrusion control. The three case studies illustrate key findings and lessons learned during system deployment at two sites undergoing characterization studies and one site undergoing thermal remediation of volatile contaminants.     

Triad case study: Rattlesnake Creek

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (US ACE) is responsible for conducting the cleanup of radiological contaminated properties as part of the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program. One property is the Rattlesnake Creek (RSC) portion of the Ashland sites. The RSC stream sediments are contaminated with thorium‐230, radium‐226, and uranium. The US ACE is closing RSC using protocols contained within the Multi‐Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM). At RSC, the US ACE developed site‐specific derived concentration guideline level (DCGL) cleanup requirements consistent with the MARSSIM guidance. Because of uncertainty about the distribution of contamination within the creek, the US ACE used the Triad approach to collect data and design remedial actions. Systematic planning helped target the areas of concern, develop a conceptual site model, and identify data gaps to be addressed before remediation plans were finalized. Preremediation sampling and analysis plans were designed to be explicitly consistent with final status survey requirements, allowing data sets to support both excavation planning needs and closure requirements in areas where contamination was not encountered above DCGL standards. Judicious use of real‐ time technologies such as X‐ray fluorescence and gamma walkover surveys minimized expensive off‐ site alpha spectrometry analyses, and at the same time provided the ability to respond to unexpected field conditions. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Biogeochemical gradients as a framework for understanding waste‐site evolution

The migration of biogeochemical gradients is a useful framework for understanding the evolution of biogeochemical conditions in groundwater at waste sites contaminated with metals and radionuclides. This understanding is critical to selecting sustainable remedies and evaluating sites for monitored natural attenuation, because most attenuation mechanisms are sensitive to geochemical conditions, such as pH and redox potential. Knowledge of how gradients in these parameters evolve provides insights into the behavior of contaminants with time and guides characterization, remedy selection, and monitoring efforts. An example is a seepage basin site at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina where low‐level acidic waste has seeped into groundwater. The remediation of this site relies, in part, on restoring the natural pH of the aquifer by injecting alkaline solutions. The remediation will continue until the pH upflow of the treatment zone increases to an acceptable value. The time required to achieve this objective depends on the time it takes the trailing pH gradient, the gradient separating the plume from influxing natural groundwater, to reach the treatment zone. Predictions of this length of time will strongly influence long‐term remedial decisions. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.