road map to understanding innovative technology … roadmap4.pdfthe law modified epa’s existing...

PDHonline Course C283 (8 PDH)

Characterizing Brownfields

2012

Instructor: Jim Newton, P.E., DEE

PDH Online | PDH Center5272 Meadow Estates Drive

Fairfax, VA 22030-6658Phone & Fax: 703-988-0088

www.PDHonline.orgwww.PDHcenter.com

An Approved Continuing Education Provider

http://www.PDHonline.org

http://www.PDHcenter.com

ROAD MAP TO UNDERSTANDING INNOVATIVETECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR BROWNFIELDS

INVESTIGATION AND CLEANUP, FOURTH EDITION

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

Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology InnovationWashington, DC 20460

September 2005EPA-542-B-05-001

ROAD MAP TO UNDERSTANDING INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR BROWNFIELDS INVESTIGATION AND CLEANUP

NOTICE

Preparation of this document has been funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) underContract 68-W-02-034. The document was subjected to the Agency’s administrative and expert review andwas approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does notconstitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

i


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation acknowledges and thanks theindividuals who reviewed and provided comments on draft documents. The reviewers includedrepresentatives of business, community and grassroots organizations, EPA Headquarters and regional offices,local government and city planning offices, and public interest groups.

ii


CONTENTS

NOTICE ........................................................................................................................................................................ iACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................................................. iiBACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................................................................1INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................4

How to Use The Road Map .................................................................................................................................7BEFORE YOU BEGIN ............................................................................................................................................. 10ROAD MAP OUTLINE ............................................................................................................................................. 18SITE ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................................ 20SITE INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................................................................ 39ASSESSMENT OF CLEANUP OPTIONS ............................................................................................................... 58CLEANUP DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION ....................................................................................................... 82

SPOTLIGHTSS1 OTHER REDEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES:

Reducing Barriers to Redevelopment of Brownfields Sites .............................................................. 30

S2 SUPERFUND REDEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................... 32

S3 ALL APPROPRIATE INQUIRY:Standards and Practices to Provide CERCLA Liability Protections .................................................. 34

S4 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS AT BROWNFIELDS SITES ................................................ 36

S5 SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT APPROACHES AND REVITALIZATION TOOLS – ELECTRONIC(SMARTe) ........................................................................................................................................... 38

S6 KEYS TO TECHNOLOGY SELECTION AND ACCEPTANCE ........................................................ 51

S7 THE TRIAD APPROACH:Streamlining Site Investigations and Cleanup Decisions .................................................................... 52

S8 DATA QUALITY AND REPRESENTATIVENESS:Keys to Cost-Effective Site Investigation ............................................................................................ 53

S9 SUPPORTING TRIBAL REVITALIZATION EFFORTS ..................................................................... 54

S10 INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO ASSESSMENT AND CLEANUP OF MINING SITES ................. 56

S11 STATE DRYCLEANER REMEDIATION PROGRAMS:An Innovative Approach to Cleanup .................................................................................................. 77

S12 REMEDIATING MANUFACTURED GAS PLANT SITES:Emerging Remediation Technologies ............................................................................................... 78

S13 PHYTOREMEDIATION TECHNOLOGY:A Growing Field ................................................................................................................................. 79

S14 CLEANUP OF DENSE NONAQUEOUS PHASE LIQUIDS:A Widespread Challenge ................................................................................................................... 81

S15 VAPOR INTRUSIONAn Emerging Concern at Brownfields Sites ....................................................................................... 90

iii


S16 UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS AT BROWNFIELDS SITES:Major Concepts and Issues ................................................................................................................ 91

APPENDICESA GUIDE TO CONTAMINANTS AND TECHNOLOGIES .................................................................... A-1

B LIST OF ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS ............................................................. B-1

C LIST OF BROWNFIELDS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT CONTACTS ......................................... C-1

D HOW TO ORDER DOCUMENTS..................................................................................................... D-1

INDEX OF RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................ I-1

iv


1• Background • Introduction • Before You Begin • Site Assessment • Site Investigation • Cleanup Options • Cleanup Design and Implementation

BACKGROUND Section 101 of the Comprehensive EnvironmentalResponse, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)defines brownfields sites as “real property, theexpansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may becomplicated by the presence or potential presence of ahazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)established its Brownfields Economic RevitalizationInitiative to empower states, communities, and otherstakeholders in economic revitalization to worktogether to accomplish the redevelopment of

brownfields sites. With the enactment ofthe Small Business Liability Relief andBrownfields Revitalization Act in 2002,EPA assistance was expanded to providegreater support for brownfields cleanupand reuse (see the inset box on page 2).Many states and local jurisdictions alsohelp businesses and communities adaptenvironmental cleanup programs to thespecial needs of brownfields sites.

Preparing brownfields sites for productivereuse requires integration of manyelements—financial issues, communityinvolvement, liability considerations,environmental assessment and cleanup,regulatory requirements, and more—as wellas coordination among many groups ofstakeholders. The assessment and cleanupof a site must be carried out in a way thatintegrates all these factors into the overallredevelopment process. In addition, thecleanup strategy will vary from site to site.At some sites, cleanup will be completedbefore the properties are transferred to newowners. At other sites, cleanup may takeplace simultaneously with constructionand redevelopment activities.

Regardless of when and how cleanups areaccomplished, the challenge to any brownfieldsprogram is to clean up sites in accordance withredevelopment goals. Such goals may include cost-effectiveness, timeliness, avoidance of adverse effectsto site structures and neighboring communities, andredevelopment of land in a way that benefitscommunities and local economies.

Regulators and site managers are increasinglyrecognizing the value of implementing a moredynamic approach to streamline assessment andcleanup activities at brownfields sites. Thisapproach, referred to as the Triad, is flexible andrecognizes site-specific decisions and data needs.


2

Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act

Since its inception in 1995, EPA’s Brownfields Programhas grown into a proven, result-oriented initiative that haschanged the way contaminated property is perceived,addressed, and managed. Through passage of the SmallBusiness Liability Relief and Brownfields RevitalizationAct (Public Law 107-118; H.R. 2869) in January 2002,effective policies that EPA had developed over the yearswere passed into law. The Brownfields Law expandedEPA’s assistance by providing new tools that the publicand private sectors could use to promote sustainablebrownfields cleanup and reuse.

The law modified EPA’s existing brownfields grants andtechnical assistance program by:

• Increasing the funding authority up to $200 million peryear

• Providing grants for assessments, revolving loanfunds, direct cleanups, and job training

• Expanding the entities, properties, and activitieseligible for brownfields grants

• Expanding the Brownfields Program’s applicability tosites with petroleum contamination such asabandoned gasoline stations

• Providing authority for brownfields training, research,and technical assistance

• Allowing up to 10 percent of the grant funds to be usedto monitor the health of exposed populations andenforce any instutional controls

Brownfields grants continue to serve as the foundation ofEPA’s Brownfields Program by funding environmentalassessment, cleanup, and job training activities.Brownfields Assessment Grants provide funding forbrownfields inventories, planning, environmentalassessments, and community outreach. BrownfieldsRevolving Loan Fund Grants provide funding to capitalize

The Triad approach focuses on management of decisionuncertainty by incorporating (1) systematic projectplanning; (2) dynamic work planning strategies; and (3)use of real-time measurement technologies, includinginnovative technologies, to accelerate and improve thecleanup process. The Triad approach can reduce costs,improve decision certainty, expedite site closeout, andpositively affect regulatory and community acceptance.This approach is well aligned with brownfields sitepriorities, which are affected by the economics ofredevelopment, community involvement, and liabilityconsiderations.

Numerous technology options are available to assistthose involved in brownfields cleanup. EPA’s Office ofSuperfund Remediation and Technology Innovation(OSRTI) encourages use of smarter solutions forcharacterizing and cleaning up contaminated sites byadvocating more effective, less costly technologicalapproaches. Use of innovative technologies tocharacterize and clean up brownfields sites providesopportunities for stakeholders to reduce cleanup costsand accelerate cleanup schedules. Often, innovativeapproaches are also more acceptable to communities.

loans that are used to clean up brownfields sites.Brownfields Job Training Grants provide environmentaltraining for residents of brownfields communities.Brownfields Cleanup Grants provide direct funding forcleanup activities at certain properties with plannedgreen space, recreational, or other nonprofit uses.

The law changed and clarified Superfund liability:

• Clarified Superfund liability for prospectivepurchasers, innocent landowners, and contiguousproperty owners

• Provided liability protection for certain small-volumewaste contributors and contributors of municipal solidwaste

The law created a strong, balanced relationship betweenthe federal government and state and tribal programs:

• Authorized up to $50 million per year for building andenhancing state and tribal response programs andexpanded the activities eligible for funding

• Provided protection from Superfund liability at sitescleaned up under a state program

• Preserved the federal safety net by detailing thecircumstances in which EPA can revisit a cleanup

• Clarified the state role in adding sites to the SuperfundNational Priorities List (NPL)

EPA’s investment in the Brownfields Program hasresulted in many accomplishments, and the momentumgenerated by the program is leaving an enduring legacy.EPA’s Brownfields Program continues to look to thefuture by expanding the types of properties it addresses,forming new partnerships, and undertaking newinitiatives to help revitalize communities across thenation. Additional information on the Brownfields Law isavailable at www.epa.gov/brownfields/sblrbra.htm.

Access resources at www.brownfieldstsc.org



EPA defines an innovative technology as one that hasbeen used in the field but that does not yet have along history of full-scale use. In addition, data aboutthe cost and performance of innovative technologiesmay not be sufficient to encourage decision-makers toselect those technologies over establishedtechnologies. A primary area of interest to EPA isdocumenting and disseminating information aboutthe cost and performance of innovative technologies.EPA, through its work with the Federal RemediationTechnologies Roundtable (FRTR), has seen significantprogress in this area. Innovative technologies arebeing used in many cleanup programs to assesscontamination and to clean up sites.

Comprehensive information about the range ofinnovative technologies and their use as well astechnical expertise pertinent to them, is available fromEPA’s Brownfields and Land RevitalizationTechnology Support Center (BTSC). The BTSC iscoordinated through OSRTI and is supported byEPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD).The center works closely with EPA’s Office ofBrownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment and inpartnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(USACE) and Argonne National Laboratory (ANL).Established in 1999 as a pilot program, the BTSCassists brownfields decision-makers by presentingstrategies for streamlining site assessment andcleanup, identifying information about technologyoptions, evaluating plans and documents, describingcomplex technologies for communities, and providingdemonstration support (see page 14 for moreinformation about the BTSC).

An emerging technology is an innovative technology thatis currently undergoing bench-scale testing in which asmall version of the technology is tested in a laboratory.

An innovative technology is a technology that has beenfield-tested and applied to a hazardous waste problem ata site but that lacks a long history of full-scale use.Information about its cost and how well it works may beinsufficient to support prediction of its performanceunder a wide variety of operating conditions.

An established technology is a technology for whichcost and performance information is readily available.Only after a technology has been used at many differentsites and the results have been fully documented is thattechnology considered to be established.


4

INTRODUCTION The “Road Map to Understanding InnovativeTechnology Options for Brownfields Investigation andCleanup,” Fourth Edition, includes new and updatedresources to assist in identification and selection ofinnovative site characterization and cleanuptechnologies for brownfields redevelopment. TheRoad Map provides a general outline of the steps inthe investigation and cleanup of a site slated forredevelopment and introduces brownfieldsstakeholders to the range of innovative technologyoptions and resources available to them. The RoadMap provides valuable information for a wide rangeof stakeholders involved in or affected byredevelopment of brownfields sites, whether through

public projects, private developments, orpublic-private partnerships. The FourthEdition has been expanded significantly toinclude new and updated resources andsupplemental information.

The First Edition of the Road Map, which waspublished in 1997, provided a broad overviewof EPA’s Brownfields Program and an outlineof the steps involved in the cleanup of abrownfields site. Designed primarily forstakeholders who were unfamiliar with theelements of cleaning up a brownfields site, theRoad Map built awareness of the advantagesoffered by innovative technologies. As theBrownfields Program matured, the Second andThird Editions were published in 1999 and2001, respectively, to update information andresources associated with the program andinnovative technologies. Those editions wereaccompanied by a CD-ROM to provide easieraccess to the wide range of information andresources included in the Road Map.

The new Fourth Edition has been developed tocontinue to serve audiences who are new to theBrownfields Program as well as provide new andupdated technical information to audiences withmore experience and technical qualifications.Updated with 71 new resources and one-pagedescriptions of technologies, processes, andinitiatives that affect the consideration and use ofinnovative technologies, the newest edition of theRoad Map will help:

• New and less experienced stakeholders learn aboutEPA’s Brownfields Program and site cleanup ingeneral.

• Decision-makers who are familiar with theBrownfields Program but are also interested inobtaining more detailed information about




technologies. The Road Map provides these userswith up-to-date information about theapplicability of innovative technologies and readyaccess to the latest resources that can assist themin making their technology decisions.

• Stakeholders who hire or oversee site cleanupprofessionals (such as environmental consultants,cleanup contractors, technology vendors, oranalytical laboratories). The Road Map providesthese stakeholders with a detailed understandingof the different phases of cleanup of a brownfieldssite and presents information about the role thatcleanup professionals play in the process andabout how to encourage consideration of use ofinnovative technologies.

• Regulators by increasing their understanding ofthe advantages that innovative technologies andapproaches may provide throughout the cleanupprocess. The Road Map also serves as a resourcethat regulators can use to provide site owners,service providers, and other stakeholders withuseful information about the BrownfieldsProgram.

• Community members by providing informationabout the general site cleanup process as well asguidelines and mechanisms that ensure that theyare involved in the decision-making process.

• Other stakeholders, such as financial institutionsand insurance agencies, by providing informationfor their use in assessing and minimizing the riskassociated with brownfields redevelopment.

It is important to understand that the sitecharacterization and cleanup process may not occur inthe sequence outlined in the following sections. Atmany sites, several activities may be undertakenconcurrently, and some steps may recur throughoutthe process. For example, many technologies that areused for characterizing sites during the preliminaryphases of a brownfields project may be appropriate foruse in later stages of a site cleanup. Understanding thelogical progression of the process is crucial to ensuringthat the proper groundwork is laid for future phasesand in determining whether activities can be combinedor implemented concurrently.

The Road Map is not an official guidance document.Rather, it draws upon EPA’s experiences withbrownfields and Superfund sites, corrective actionsites under the Resource Conservation and RecoveryAct (RCRA), and underground storage tank (UST)sites. Specific conditions—such as the kinds andamounts of contamination, the proposed reuses of the

property, the financial resources available, and thelevel of support from neighboring communities—varyfrom site to site.

New in the Fourth Edition

• Addition of 71 new resources identified with a “newresource” icon

• Updates of 18 resources identified with an “updatedresource” icon

• Removal of approximately 40 resources that have beendiscontinued or are no longer available

• Updates and additions to the one-page spotlights on specifictopics that identify and describe key technologies,processes, and initiatives that affect the use andconsideration of innovative technologies at brownfields sites

• Updates to programmatic information and organizationalchanges resulting from the passage of the Small BusinessLiability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act

• Revision of Appendix A to provide additional informationabout typical contaminants found at brownfields sitesand the technologies used to investigate and remediatethese sites

• Expansion of Appendix B, List of Acronyms and Glossaryof Key Terms

• Updates to brownfields and technical support contactsidentified in Appendix C

• Updates to document ordering information included inAppendix D

• Elimination of the Road Map CD-Rom. With improvedInternet access and the opportunity to provide morefrequent updates, all publications and links are availableonline at www.brownfieldstsc.org

How to Submit Comments

EPA invites comments from the members of thebrownfields community to help ensure that any futureversions of the Road Map meet their needs. Pleasesubmit comments to:

Dan PowellU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyOffice of Superfund Remediation andTechnology InnovationAriel Rios Building1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. (5102G)Washington, DC 20460E-mail: [email protected]: (703) 603-7196


6

How to Obtain Additional Copies

Portable document format (pdf) and HTML versionsof the Road Map are available for viewing ordownloading at the Brownfields and LandRevitalization Technology Support Center Web site atwww.brownfieldstsc.org. A printed or hard copyversion can also be ordered directly from that site.

If you do not have access to the Internet, a printed orhard copy version of this document can be obtainedfrom the following source:

National Service Center forEnvironmental Publications

U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyP.O. Box 42419Cincinnati, OH 45242-0419Telephone: (800) 490-9198 or (513) 489-8190Fax: (513) 489-8695

When ordering the Road Map, refer to documentnumber EPA 542-B-05-001.




How to Use the Road Map

• Before You Begin • Site Assessment • Site Investigation • Cleanup Options • Cleanup Design and Implementation

The remaining four sections of the Road Map summarize the general phases of thecharacterization and cleanup of potentially contaminated sites: Site Assessment, SiteInvestigation, Assessment of Cleanup Options, and Cleanup Design and Implementation.Each section:

• Describes the objectives to be accomplished

• Outlines the key questions to be answered

• Summarizes the activities to be undertaken

• Lists information resources available toassist in selecting technologies. Withineach section, the resources are listed inalphabetical order in three categories:

A. Technology resources relevant to the phase provide general information abouttechnologies and their application in the four phases delineated in the Road Map.

B. Site-specific resources provide information about the application of innovativetechnologies to specific contaminants and site types.

C. Technology-specific resources present detailed information about specifictechnologies and their application to specific contaminants and media.

• Indicates specific actions to be taken atthe completion of the phase

The graphic on page 18 provides an overview of the general phases of the sitecharacterization and cleanup process, identifies some of the factors and questionspotentially affecting the course of the process, and directs users to relevant sections of theRoad Map.

The Road Map and the resources described in it have been organized into sections corresponding to thegeneral phases of site characterization and cleanup, from early planning through implementation of theremedy.

The first section, Before You Begin, discusses important factors that set the stage for the characterization andcleanup of brownfields sites and lists applicable resources. Regulatory guidelines for the process areintroduced, and innovative technologies are discussed within the overall framework of the selection of sitecharacterization and cleanup technologies.

��


8

The Road Map is intended to identify and answer questions related to selection of technologies rather thanquestions related to other brownfields issues. Please note that the key questions and discussions of activitiesto be conducted are intended to guide the reader in identifying issues that should be addressed. To serve asguideposts in the cleanup process, the questions take the point of view of the various groups involved in theprocess. The questions ask what stakeholders as a group working together—the”we” of each question—mustdo as assessment and cleanup progress.

Spotlights

Like the previous edition, this edition of the Road Mapincludes brief descriptions that “spotlight” key technologies,processes, and initiatives that affect the use and considerationof innovative technologies for the characterization andcleanup of brownfields sites. The spotlights are included inthe sections of the Road Map that are most relevant. Eachspotlight also includes information about additional

resources, as appropriate. The following spotlights have been updated for the Fourth Edition:• “Other Redevelopment Initiatives”• “Keys to Technology Selection and Acceptance”• “The Triad Approach”• “Data Quality and Representativeness”• “State Dry Cleaner Remediation Programs”• “Remediating Manufactured Gas Plant Sites”

• “Underground Storage Tanks at Brownfields Sites”• “Phytoremediation Technology”• “Cleanup of Dense Nonaqueous-Phase Liquids”• “Understanding the Role of Institutional Controls

at Brownfields Sites”

Six new spotlights have been added to the Fourth Edition of the Road Map:

• “Superfund Redevelopment Initiative”• “All Appropriate Inquiry”• “Sustainable Management Approaches and

Revitalization Tools - electronic (SMARTe)”

• “Vapor Intrusion”• “Innovative Approaches to Assessment and

Cleanup of Mining Sites”• “Supporting Tribal Revitalization Efforts”

Resources: Components of Each Entry

** Please note that in the Fourth Edition, the information about where to download the resource is no longerincluded with the entry. All resources may be accessed through www.brownfieldstsc.org

Clarifying DQO Terminology Usage toSupport Modernization of Site CleanupPractices (EPA 542-R-01-014)

This report, which was developed by EPA, addressesthe need to clarify DQO terminology use in order tosupport modernization of environmental restorationactivities. The document presents a basic conceptualunderstanding of DQO-related terms in a way thatfacilitates systematic project planning in the contextof site cleanups. A list of descriptions of DQO-related terms and concepts appears first in the report,followed by a more detailed discussion of theinterrelationships among the concepts.

Title of resource

This icon denotes resources newlyincluded in the Fourth Edition.

Publication number

ASTM Standard Guide for EnvironmentalSite Assessments: Phase IIEnvironmental Site Assessment Process(E1903-97(2002))

Developed by ASTM, the guide discusses aframework for employing good commercial andcustomary practices in the United States duringPhase II environmental site assessments ofcommercial property with respect to the potentialpresence of a range of contaminants within thescope of CERCLA as well as petroleum products.The guide, which is available at a cost, can beordered online at www.astm.org.

This icon denotes resourcesupdated in the Fourth Edition.

Title of resource

Description of the resource




Appendices

Four appendices are included in the Road Map to help stakeholders understand technical issues and termsrelated to site cleanup.

Appendix A, Guide to Contaminants and Technologies, identifies the types of contaminants found atbrownfields sites and the range of technologies that may be appropriate for investigating and remediatingthose contaminants at brownfields sites.

Appendix B, List of Acronyms and Glossary of Key Terms, defines acronyms and specialized terms used indiscussing and describing brownfields cleanup efforts. Because of the technical nature of the resourcescontained in this publication, acronyms are used throughout the Road Map. Consult Appendix B as necessaryto identify acronyms and obtain definitions of unfamiliar terms.

Appendix C, List of Brownfields and Technical Support Contacts, provides information about state and EPAregional and technical points of contact.

Appendix D, How to Order Documents, provides information about ordering the documents identified in theRoad Map.

Index of Resources

The Index of Resources located at the back of the document provides a complete list of the resources in theRoad Map sorted alphabetically by title. The Index is a useful tool for screening the list of resource titles andidentifying new and updated resources.


10

BEFORE YOU BEGIN What is the Planned End Use? A Word AboutRedevelopment

It is important to consider potential redevelopmentplans from the outset of any brownfields project. Theredevelopment plan (or lack thereof) will govern mostbrownfields projects, from the identification of siteinvestigation and cleanup standards and the abilityto obtain financing to the ultimate affordability orprofitability of the project.

Defining and understanding the long-term goals ofthe brownfields project and the decisions to be

made throughout the project is a crucialelement in identifying appropriatetechnologies for site investigation andcleanup. Technology tools, when carefullyselected, will assist those responsible for thebrownfields project in collecting the datanecessary to support such decisions andaccomplish the established goals. Duringthe many phases of a brownfields project, itis important to keep in mind that

technology options are an effective means ofachieving the desired result at a site, rather than anend in themselves.

Brownfields projects may be initiated for a number ofreasons. A landowner may want to sell a property to aprospective purchaser for development. A municipalitymay want to clean up a parcel or area that has becomean eyesore, create space for business development, orcreate a park in a disadvantaged area. A localcomprehensive plan may call for infill development of acertain type in a brownfields area. The brownfieldsprocess will be tailored to the specific end use, if that useis known. For example, if the redevelopment plan callsfor the construction of a light industrial facility, it maybe appropriate, depending on state and localregulatory requirements, to apply industrialinvestigation and cleanup standards that are lessstringent than those applicable to property that is to beredeveloped for residential use. The standards requiredwill affect every aspect of the project, from its overall cost(which is generally greater as the standards becomemore conservative) to the applicability of innovativecharacterization and cleanup technologies. Keep inmind, however, that new information aboutcontamination or cleanup may require that reuse plansbe altered; develop flexible plans so that revised cleanupneeds can be incorporated into them.

If the end use is not known at the beginning of theproject, the individuals involved should make every



attempt at least to identify the general type of desireddevelopment, whether industrial, commercial, orresidential or a mixed-use development of some sort.Absent that information, the most conservativeassumptions will be made at every stage of thebrownfields project, a circumstance that couldincrease significantly the time and expense of theproject and may even make it infeasible.

Understanding Regulations and RegulatoryGuidelines and Standard Industry Practices

The redevelopment of brownfields sites may be subjectto a variety of federal, state, and local laws, regulations,policies, and guidelines with respect to thecharacterization and cleanup of the site. Such sites alsomay be governed by the standard practices of othergovernment, nongovernment, and private institutions.

The applicable laws, regulations, policies, andguidelines will vary by site, depending on theregulatory authority that manages the cleanup.Therefore, it is important to research this information atthe outset and to work closely with the regulatoryauthority throughout the cleanup process. Forexample, state or local regulatory authorities maymanage the cleanup of brownfields sites. Theseagencies should be consulted to determine what, if any,site-specific requirements or permits are applicable.

Many of the standard practices are designed to helpthe brownfields redevelopment project obtainfinancing from public programs and private banksand institutions. Guidance and standards are issuedby government and nongovernment organizations,such as the American Society for Testing andMaterials (ASTM), the Federal Deposit InsuranceCorporation (FDIC), and state and local economicdevelopment authorities, and even private lenders.

EPA also can be a valuable resource for brownfieldsstakeholders by providing regulatory and policysupport to facilitate selection of technologies (seeAppendix C, List of Brownfields and TechnicalSupport Contacts, for information about EPA regionaland technical points of contact).

Although compliance with regulations and officialpolicy directives issued under other federalregulatory and cleanup programs such as Superfundmay not be required, some of the information gatheredunder such programs may be useful in theinvestigation and cleanup of brownfields sites. Forsome sites, existing information provides a basis ofunderstanding of site activities and conditions.

Additionally, lessons learned about sitecharacterization strategies help to refine the process. Forexample, in the past, a number of sampling events andfield mobilizations have been required at many RCRAand Superfund sites to gather sufficient information tocharacterize the sites adequately. Additional samplingwas necessary to assess all potential contaminants, toadequately analyze all pathways of exposure, to obtainrepresentative samples of wastes and environmentalmedia, and to obtain analytical results of theappropriate accuracy to enable regulatory authorities tomake cleanup decisions with confidence. Streamliningthe process may decrease costs and reduce the decision-making period for selecting options for site cleanups.

EPA has shown its support for the adoption ofstreamlined approaches to sampling, analysis, datareview, and data evaluation during site assessment,characterization, and cleanup in a number of technicaland guidance documents. Brownfields sites are wellsuited for use of the Triad approach (see Spotlight 7 onpage 52), as limited funding and plans for reusestrongly influence decisions about cleanup. Inherent inthe Triad approach is the need for cooperation andcollaboration among the many stakeholders in theprocess. The Triad approach and the BrownfieldsInitiative reinforce each other in their emphasis on acommon-sense approach in which barriers are removedand dollars are leveraged to provide the most cost-effective and streamlined strategy for monitoring andmeasurement activities. Use of real-time measurementtechnologies as well as a rigorous planning process tounderstand and control sources of uncertainty isinherent to the Triad approach and helps stakeholdersimprove the reliability of risk-related decisions.

Recognizing that rigorous planning is important, theapproach should remain flexible and dynamic andshould allow for adjustments in the field in light ofactual site conditions observed and sample analyticalresults. Such a dynamic approach usually requires awell-rounded technical team that has a broad range oftechnical expertise and use of field analyticaltechnologies, including an on-site mobile laboratory,to provide quick-turnaround analyses.

Seeking and Procuring External ProfessionalSupport

Most decision-makers for brownfields sites willrequire technical and legal assistance to fullyunderstand the complexities of investigating andcleaning up contaminated sites. Depending upon thecomplexity of a particular site, decision-makers may


12

request the assistance of environmental consultants,cleanup contractors, technology vendors, oranalytical laboratories in performing the manyactivities required to investigate and clean up the site.The inclusion of these professionals and other expertsas members of the brownfields team is recommended.

Some states may require the participation of certifiedor licensed professionals to help guide the siteinvestigation and cleanup process. To obtain theservices of such professionals (individuals or a firm),a request for proposal (RFP) is often used as theprocurement mechanism. The RFP addresses theapproach, qualifications, and cost estimate for theservices requested and includes specifications thatencourage prospective bidders to think “outside thebox” and consider nontraditional approaches.Selection criteria outlined in the RFP should includethe demonstrated experience of the individuals orfirm in developing valid options for usingstreamlined strategies and innovative technologies atbrownfields sites and in successfully implementingthe selected options.

To ensure that those individuals or firms respondingto an RFP propose approaches that are valid for thesite, the RFP also should include, or make readilyavailable, all studies and reports that provide site-specific information that can be used as the basis formaking technology decisions. Individuals preparingRFPs may wish to be proactive and providesuggestions for the use of specific strategies andtechnologies that appear to be valid for the particularsite. When reviewing proposals and interviewingfirms, the evaluation team must be prepared to askpointed, detailed questions about the selection anduse of technologies to be assured that the individualor firm chosen to perform the work is qualified tocomplete the project successfully. Described in thisRoad Map are many excellent resources that willassist brownfields decision-makers in preparingspecifications to be included in RFPs, selecting thecriteria for evaluating proposals, and developingquestions for interviews of those responding to theRFP. For example, see EPA’s Brownfields TechnologyPrimer: Requesting and Evaluating Proposals ThatEncourage Innovative Technologies for Investigationand Cleanup on page 42 for more information.

Community Involvement

It is important that brownfields decision-makersencourage acceptance of redevelopment plans andcleanup alternatives by involving members of the

community early in the decision-making processthrough community meetings, newsletters, or otheroutreach activities. For an individual site, thecommunity should be informed about how the use ofa proposed technology might affect redevelopmentplans or the adjacent neighborhood. For example, theplanting of trees for the use of phytoremediation maycreate aesthetic or visual improvements; on the otherhand, the use of phytoremediation may bring aboutissues related to site security or long-termmaintenance that could affect access to the site.

EPA can assist members of the brownfieldscommunity by directing its members to appropriateresources and providing opportunities to networkand participate in the sharing of information. Anumber of Internet sites, databases, newsletters, andreports provide opportunities for brownfieldsstakeholders to network with other stakeholders toidentify information about cleanup and technologyoptions. As noted in the preceding section, EPA’sBrownfields and Land Revitalization TechnologySupport Center is a valuable resource for brownfieldsdecision-makers (see page 14 for more information).

Comparing Innovative Technologies to OtherCharacterization and Cleanup Options

In addition to innovative site characterization andcleanup technologies, the use of established treatmentand containment technologies also should beconsidered. Examples of established treatmenttechnologies include solidification/stabilization, soilvapor extraction, thermal desorption, incineration, andpump-and-treat. (For a complete list and description ofthe technologies, see the Treatment Technologies forSite Cleanup: Annual Status Report (Eleventh Edition).The document is available online at http://clu-in.org/asr/.) Examples of containment include containingcontaminated soil on site using a cap and limitingmigration of contaminants using a vertical engineeringbarrier such as a slurry wall. In either case,containment does not involve actively treating thewaste to recover or degrade contaminants. Whendeciding between innovative and establishedtechnologies or between treatment and containmenttechnologies, or other options, brownfields decision-makers should consider the specific needs of theindividual site and stakeholders. It also is importantthat brownfields decision-makers consider both thecurrent effects of the selected technology approach andits future effects on potential development of the site.


http://clu-in.org/



Selecting and Accepting Technologies

The successful cleanup of abrownfields site dependson the selection andacceptance of a specifictechnology or technologyapproach. Identified in thebox below are the keyelements to ensure that aproposed technology willbe accepted by all stakeholders, whether site owners,potential buyers, financial service providers,investors, regulators, or affected citizens. Spotlight 6,Keys to Technology Selection and Acceptance, onpage 51, describes in detail these key elements.

A Quick Look

• Focus on the decisionsthat support site goals

• Build consensus• Understand the technology• Allow flexibility

Information Centers, Training, and OtherResources

Described on the next four pages are some of theresources available to brownfields projects fromgovernment and nongovernment institutions,including the various EPA hotlines for statutory andregulatory programs that may affect brownfieldsprojects. The resources provide more generalinformation than the technology resources identifiedin the chapters that follow. Training courses andprograms provided by EPA, as well as otherorganizations, also are identified. Information aboutstate and local resources can be obtained from thecontact for each state listed in Appendix C, List ofBrownfields and Technical Support Contacts.

Analysis of State Superfund Programs: 50-State Study, 2001 UpdateThe report, which was prepared by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) in association with EPA, provides an analyticaloverview of state Superfund programs and includes information about statutes, program staffing and organization, sites,cleanup activities, cleanup policies and standards, requirements for public participation, funding and expenditures, andenforcement tools. The report also discusses the voluntary remediation and Brownfields Programs established by thestates and presents detailed program information arranged in tables that facilitate comparisons among the states. A copy ofthe report can be downloaded from ELI’s Web site at www.eli.org; the report can be found under the topic “ContaminatedSites” under “Research Reports” in the ELI Store section of the site.

Brownfields: A Comprehensive Guide to Redeveloping Contaminated Property, Second EditionThe book, which was published by the American Bar Association (ABA), is aimed at an audience of real estate and environmentalattorneys, property owners and developers, environmental regulators and consultants, and state and local government leaders. Thebook provides an overview of and background information about brownfields issues as well as explanations of the federal and statelaws governing brownfields. Legal, business, financial, and political issues associated with redeveloping contaminated property alsoare addressed. The book presents the scientific concepts used to clean up contaminated property, describing risk assessment andremediation strategies. Comprehensive information about state voluntary cleanup programs also is provided. Originally published in1997, the Second Edition of this book was released in 2002. The book can be purchased through ABA’s Web site at www.abanet.org

or at bookstores across the country. The International Standard Book Number (ISBN) for the book is 1-57073-961-7.

Brownfields and Land Revitalization Technology Support CenterEPA established BTSC to ensure that brownfields decision-makers are aware of the full range of technologies available forconducting site assessments and cleanup actions and can make informed decisions for their sites. The center helps governmentdecision-makers evaluate strategies to streamline the site assessment and cleanup process, identify and review information aboutcomplex technology options, evaluate contractor capabilities and recommendations, explain complex technologies tocommunities, and plan technology demonstrations. BTSC is coordinated through EPA’s OSRTI and works through EPA’s ORDlaboratories. The center works closely with EPA’s Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment and in partnership with theU.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). Localities can submit requests for assistance:

– Through their EPA Regional Brownfields Coordinator– Online at www.brownfieldstsc.org– By calling 1 (877) 838-7220 (toll free)

For more information about BTSC, contact Dan Powell of EPA’s OSRTI at (703) 603-7196 or [email protected].

INFORMATION CENTERS, TRAINING, AND OTHER RESOURCES


14


Brownfields Handbook: How to Manage Federal Environmental Liability Risks (EPA 330-B-01-001)In November 1998, EPA issued “The Handbook of Tools for Managing Federal Superfund Liability Risks at Brownfields andOther Sites.” The handbook provided a compilation of tools and a discussion of how to use them for evaluating the benefitsof reusing a brownfields property. The updated edition of the handbook published in November 2002 summarizes the toolsavailable to clarify and address barriers to site cleanup and reuse posed by RCRA. In addition, the handbook summarizesthe tools and initiatives that have been implemented since 1995. These include the Superfund Redevelopment Initiative(SRI), the UST-related initiatives, RCRA reforms, and improvements in the prospective purchaser agreement process. Thehandbook also provides updated lists of brownfields policies and guidance documents and EPA contacts. An electronic copyof the handbook is available at www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/cleanup/brownfields/handbook. Inaddition, this site contains policies and guidance documents issued since the publication of the 2002

CLU-IN StudioCLU-IN Studio, which is coordinated by EPA’s OSRTI, ITRC, and other partners, provides free and unlimited access to Internettechnical seminars, live conference Webcasts, and videotapes. The three types of media provide information about and resourcesrelevant to innovative site characterization and cleanup technologies. The 2-hour Internet seminars are live, Web-based slidepresentations, each of which has a companion audio portion available by telephone line or RealAudio simulcast. The conferenceWebcasts are live events that combine Web-based presentation materials with a companion live audio stream. The videotapes,whose viewing time ranges from 6 to 28 minutes, may be viewed or ordered online. Descriptions and registration information forupcoming events as well as links to archived seminars and Webcasts are provided at www.clu-in.org/studio.

EPA Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment Internet SiteThis Internet site coordinated by EPA’s Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment provides extensive informationabout EPA’s Brownfields Program, including the Brownfields Law, EPA brownfields grants, and technical tools and resourcesas well as information about brownfields projects across the country. Descriptions of EPA’s brownfields pilot projects andpoints of contact in each of the EPA regional offices are provided, as are descriptions of publications, regulations, and otherdocuments. Brownfields stakeholders involved in selection and use of technologies for environmental cleanup may haveparticular interest in learning more about EPA’s brownfields grant programs, which offer assessment grants, revolving loanfund grants, cleanup grants, and job training grants. Information is also provided on EPA’s Targeted BrownfieldsAssessments (TBA) Program as well as state and tribal response programs. The site also contains routinely updatedannouncements related to grants and information on pilot projects and success stories. The site provides links to the Websites of different cleanup programs managed by offices within the EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response(OSWER). For additional information, visit the Web site at www.epa.gov/brownfields.

EPA DocketsDockets, electronic dockets, and information centers serve as the repositories for information related to particular EPAactions. When a rulemaking or nonrulemaking action is announced, a docket is established in EPA Dockets (EDOCKET)with an assigned tracking number to accumulate materials throughout the process. Dockets may contain Federal

Register documents, a variety of supporting documentation, and public comments. Publicly available docket materialsare available either electronically in EDOCKET or on hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West Building, Room B102,1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC. This facility is open from 8:30 am to 4:30 pm, Monday through Friday,excluding federal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephonenumber for the OSWER Docket is (202) 566-0276. All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index atwww.epa.gov/edocket.





Guidance for Preparing Standard Operating Procedures (EPA 240-B-01-004)The document provides guidance on the preparation and use of a standard operating procedure (SOP) within a qualitysystem. An SOP is a set of written instructions that document a routine or repetitive activity that an organization carries out.The development and use of SOPs are an integral part of a successful quality system because SOPs provide individuals withthe information needed to perform a job properly and facilitate consistency in the quality and integrity of a product or endresult. SOPs describe both technical and administrative operational elements of an organization that would be managedunder a work plan, a quality assurance project plan, or a quality management plan. A copy of the guidance document can beviewed at the online version of the Road Map at www.brownfieldstsc.org.

Hazardous Substance Research CentersThe Hazardous Substance Research Centers (HSRC) provide a national program of basic and applied research, technology transfer,and outreach. Five multi-university centers focus on different aspects of hazardous substance management and serve differentregions of the country. The HSRCs receive financial support from EPA and additional funding from academia, industry, and otherfederal and state agencies. Research projects involve laboratory and field experiments as well as mathematical and physicalmodeling. Technology transfer and training activities facilitate information exchange with government agencies, industry, and otheracademic participants. The HSRCs operate three outreach programs that provide free, nonadvocacy technical assistance tocommunities. Technical Outreach Services for Communities (TOSC) uses university educational and technical resources to helpcommunity groups understand the technical issues associated with the hazardous waste sites in their midst. TOSC aims to empowercommunities to participate substantively in the decision-making process regarding their hazardous substance problems. An affiliate ofTOSC is Technical Outreach Services for Native American Communities (TOSNAC), which provides technical assistance to NativeAmericans dealing with hazardous substance issues. Technical Assistance to Brownfields Communities (TAB) helps communities toclean up and redevelop properties that have been damaged or undervalued because of environmental contamination. The mainaudiences for TAB assistance are community groups, municipal officials, developers, and community leaders, with lending institutionsconstituting a secondary audience. More information on the HSRCs and their brownfields initiatives is available at www.hsrc.org.

Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste Center of ExpertiseCoordinated through USACE, the Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste Center of Expertise (HTRW-CX) provides technicalassistance and information regarding use of innovative technologies for cleanup of contaminated properties. Detailedinformation about a variety of innovative technology resources, points of contact at the HTRW-CX, and upcoming trainingcourses and workshops is provided on the center’s Web site. More than 50 case studies of successful applications ofinnovative technologies also are described on the site. Visit the HTRW-CX Web site at www.environmental.usace.army.mil/

info/technical/it/it.html for more information on the center’s innovative technology programs.

Interstate Technology and Regulatory CouncilITRC is a state-led coalition working with industry and other stakeholders to achieve regulatory acceptance of environmentaltechnologies. ITRC consists of 43 states, the District of Columbia, multiple federal partners, industry participants, and otherstakeholders, cooperating to break down barriers and reduce compliance costs, making it easier to use new technologies, and helpingstates to maximize resources. ITRC brings together a diverse group of environmental experts and stakeholders from both the publicand private sectors to broaden and deepen technical knowledge and to streamline the regulation of new environmental technologies.ITRC has established a team of experts specifically focused on redevelopment issues. ITRC accomplishes its mission in two ways:it develops guidance documents and training courses to meet the needs of both regulators and environmental consultants, and it workswith state representatives to ensure that ITRC products and services have maximum impact among state environmental agencies andtechnology users. ITRC was originated in 1995 based on a previous initiative conducted by the Western Governors’ Association(WGA). In January 1999, ITRC became affiliated with the Environmental Research Institute of the States (ERIS). ERIS is a 501(c)3nonprofit educational subsidiary of the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS). ITRC receives regional support from WGA and theSouthern States Energy Board (SSEB) and receives financial support from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Department ofDefense (DoD), and EPA. Brownfields decision-makers will find success stories, guidance documents, training materials, and otherinformation related to the use of innovative technologies developed by ITRC on its Web site at www.ITRCweb.org.


16


RCRA OnlineRCRA Online is an online database that provides users access to thousands of letters, memoranda, and questions andanswers issued by EPA’s Office of Solid Waste (OSW). The documents indexed in the database represent past EPAHeadquarters interpretations of the RCRA regulations governing management of solid, hazardous, and medical wastes.Users can retrieve documents through topical, full text, and advanced search functions and can view the actual text ofdocuments identified in a search. Detailed instructions on how to use the database are provided, as are tips for conductingsearches. RCRA Online is available online at www.epa.gov/rcraonline. An updated pdf version of the RCRA Onlinebrochure (EPA 530-F-03-011) is provided on the Road Map at www.brownfieldstsc.org.

Superfund and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act Call CenterThe Superfund and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) Call Center is a publicly accessibleservice that provides up-to-date information on several EPA programs. The Call Center responds to factual questions aboutfederal regulations related to the following program areas:

– EPCRA– Risk Management Program regulations under the Clean Air Act (CAA)– CERCLA or Superfund– Spill prevention, control, and countermeasure (SPCC) plans and oil pollution prevention regulations under the Clean WaterAct (CWA)

The Call Center operates Monday through Friday, 9:00 am to 5:00 pm Eastern Standard Time (EST). The center can bereached by telephone at (800) 424-9346 from all nongovernment locations outside the Washington, DC, metropolitan localcalling area or at (703) 412-9810 from all locations in the Washington, DC, metropolitan local calling area.

Tax Credits and Deductions for Expensing Environmental Remediation Costs (Section 198)Section 198 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. §198 (A)(1)(B)(VI)) describes the expensing of costs related toenvironmental remediation of qualified contaminated sites. As the code specifies, taxpayers are permitted to treat anyqualified environmental remediation expense as an expense that is not chargeable to a capital account; such an expenditurecan be treated as a deduction for the taxable year in which it is paid or incurred. In general, a qualified remediationexpenditure is an expenditure paid or incurred in connection with abatement or control of hazardous substances at a qualifiedcontaminated site. The specific terms and qualifications are described in Section 198 of the Internal Revenue Code.

TechDirectTechDirect, which is hosted by EPA’s OSRTI, is a free e-mail service that highlights new publications and events of interestfor site assessment and remediation professionals. At the beginning of every month, the service e-mails a messagedescribing the availability of publications and announcing events. For publications, the message explains how to obtain ahard copy or how to download an electronic version. Interested persons may subscribe online at www.clu-in.org/techdrct.

Toxic Substances Control Act Assistance Information ServiceThe information service provides technical assistance and information regarding programs implemented under the ToxicSubstances Control Act (TSCA), the Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Act (ASHAA), the Asbestos Hazard EmergencyResponse Act (AHERA), the Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act (ASHARA), the Residential Lead-BasedPaint Hazard Reduction Act (Title X of TSCA), and EPA’s 33/50 program. The information service operates Monday throughFriday, 8:30 am to 5:00 pm EST. The information service can be reached by telephone at (202)554-1404, by fax at (202) 554-5603, or by e-mail at [email protected].





Training InformationTraining courses and programs that can be useful for brownfields stakeholders, particularly those involved in technologyselection, are identified below.

• EPA’s Training-Exchange (TRAINEX), an Internet site that provides a range of training information for representatives offederal, state, local, and tribal agencies, is intended primarily for individuals involved in hazardous waste managementand remediation. The site provides information about more than 65 classroom and Internet-based classes as well asschedules for their delivery. Visit the TRAINEX Web site at www.trainex.org for additional information.

• EPA’s “Streamlined Investigation and Cleanups Using the Triad Approach” training course is a moderate to advanced-level training program that provides participants an introduction to a wide array of innovative technologies andapproaches that can be used to characterize hazardous waste sites. The class stresses the importance of the planningprocess and the use of field-based measurement technologies and on-site data assessment techniques. Participantswill be introduced to the Triad approach and methods for better understanding, planning, and implementing monitoringstrategies to improve cleanup at lower costs. In addition, participants will be provided an overview of several of the fieldanalytical and rapid sampling technologies that can support streamlined measurement approaches. For informationabout the program and the schedule for its delivery, visit the TRAINEX Web site at www.trainex.org; select “CERCLAEducation Center (CEC).”

• Information about upcoming courses provided by a variety of federal and nonfederal organizations is provided onOSRTI’s CLU-IN Web site at www.clu-in.org; select “Courses and Conferences” under “What’s Hot? What’s New?”

• The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) also offers many technical and professional trainingopportunities, such as training on environmental site assessment processes, that may be of interest to brownfieldsdecision-makers. For more information, visit ASTM’s Web site at www.astm.org/TRAIN.

Triad Resource CenterThe Triad is an innovative approach to decision-making for hazardous waste site characterization andremediation. The Triad approach employs new characterization and treatment tools, using work strategiesdeveloped by innovative and successful site professionals. The Triad Resource Center provides theinformation that hazardous waste site managers and cleanup practitioners need to implement the Triad

approach effectively. The Triad Web site provides an overview of Triad; information on its management, regulatory, andtechnical components; user experiences; and references and resources for additional information. For additionalinformation on Triad, visit the Web site at www.triadcentral.org.


1818


20

The purpose of this step is to evaluate the potentialfor contamination at a particular site by collectingand reviewing existing information. The siteassessment, typically referred to as an ASTM Phase Ienvironmental site assessment, is an initialinvestigation usually limited to a search of historicalrecords. The data collected also includesinformation about past and current environmentalconditions and historical uses of the site. The siteassessment is the most crucial step in thebrownfields process, because any furtherenvironmental investigation and cleanup will hingeon whether potential environmental concerns areidentified during that phase.

During the site assessment phase, it is important toconsider the activities and requirements described inthe subsequent chapters and determine how theywill be affected by the initial site assessment.Because the information obtained in this phase willdetermine whether any future work must be done atthe site, the site assessment must be thorough andtailored to meet specific data objectives. Asdiscussed in the section Before You Begin, decisionsmade about the end use of a site and the long-termgoals of the brownfields project will determine thetypes and quantity of data that must be collected, aswell as the level of quality the data must attain. Thedata quality objectives (DQO), in turn, will serve asthe basis upon which the best decisions will bemade about the most appropriate technologies andtechniques to be used in collecting and analyzingthe data at a particular site (see Appendix B, List ofAcronyms and Glossary of Key Terms, for adefinition of DQO).

The Triad approach is applicable to many elementsof monitoring and measurement activities that occuron site - from early investigations aimed at riskestimation, through designing, implementing, andmonitoring the implementation of a remedy. The keyto the Triad approach, and the benefit to brownfieldssites, is that decisions are made with the fullconsideration of existing information developedduring past site use and cleanup activities, and witha thorough understanding of how the site might bereused. Using this approach, activities areperformed that target the principal sources ofuncertainty that can affect the confidence of sitedecisions. Use of the Triad approach for site

SITE ASSESSMENT Collect and Assess InformationAbout the Brownfields Site



assessments at brownfields sites allows decision-makers to economically collect the volume andquality of data necessary to reassure regulators andcommunities that a property is safe for reuse.

The data collected during this initial step of thecleanup process is extremely important for use inidentifying and evaluating the applicability of siteassessment and cleanup technologies, as well as indetermining whether the property can be cleaned upto the level necessary for its intended reuse. If it iscarefully planned, some of the follow-on work, suchas limited sampling, may also be accomplishedduring this phase. The site assessment also canprovide a preliminary indication of what types ofcleanup technologies might be available. It also isessential to assess and address the needs andconcerns of the community (for example, thedevelopment of social and economic profiles and theidentification of acceptable environmental risk).

Technologies that detect possible contamination inthe air may be applicable at this stage as well assome analytical sampling technologies useful forassessing contamination in soil or groundwater.Examples of sampling and analysis technologiesthat may be applicable during this phase arepresented in Appendix A, Table A-2, Technologiesfor Analyzing Contaminants at Brownfields Sites.However, the use of technologies may be somewhatlimited, since much of the work at this stageinvolves a search of paper and electronic records.

The following section is intended as a general planningguide and is not a comprehensive listing of assessmentactivities required under state and federal regulations.For a better understanding of these requirements, usersshould consult the references identified and work withtheir appropriate regulatory authority.

Factors that should be considered during this phaseinclude:

1. Has a redevelopment plan been prepared or aproposed end use identified? Is the site located inan area targeted for redevelopment? Is the sitelocated in an industrial area? Will it remainindustrial or be rezoned for commercial use? Is aresidential development planned? Will

community members who use the property beexposed directly to the soil or sediment?

2. What data are needed to support the long-termgoals of the project, address concerns related to it,and ensure its acceptability? What decisionsneed to be made, and what data should becollected to support those decisions? What levelof quality is necessary and what level ofuncertainty is acceptable to meet those goals?

3. What is known about the site? What recordsexist that indicate potential contamination andpast use of the property? Have otherenvironmental actions occurred (such as noticesof violation)? Has an environmental audit beenconducted? What information is needed toidentify the types and extent or the absence ofcontamination?

4. If the site is located in an area targeted forredevelopment, is the site being considered forcleanup under a federal or state Superfundcleanup initiative?

5. Will the site be entered into a Voluntary CleanupProgram (VCP)? If not, what agency (federal, state,local, or tribal) would be responsible for managingoversight of cleanup? Are there other federal,state, local, or tribal regulatory requirements forsite assessment? (See the definition of a VCP inAppendix B, List of Acronyms and Glossary ofKey Terms)

6. What are the special needs and concerns of thecommunity? How can community involvement beencouraged and meaningful? How willcommunity views be solicited?

7. What environmental conditions will thecommunity find acceptable? What environmentalstandards should be considered to ensure thatcommunity stakeholders are satisfied with theoutcome of the cleanup, in light of the identifiedand proposed reuse?

8. If the site shows evidence of contamination, whoand what will be affected? Who will pay for thecleanup? Who will be responsible for long-termmonitoring and oversight, particularly if residualcontamination is left in place?

The following figure depicts the linkages among thedecisions to be made, the data to be collected, and theselection of technologies to expedite the collection ofdata.

What Do We Need to Know?


22

Activities to be conducted during the initial survey ofa site include:

• Establish the technical team and take advantage ofthe team’s expertise to determine the adequacy ofexisting site information and identify potentialdata gaps

• Ensure that the brownfields decision-makers (suchas regulators; citizens; property owners; andtechnical staff, such as chemists and toxicologists)are involved in the decision-making process

• Develop the conceptual site model (CSM). TheCSM is the planning tool that organizes existingsite information, provides a framework to identifyproject goals and data gaps, and directs siteactivities and team communications.

• Identify future plans for reuse and redevelopmentand goals of the site

• Identify data that must be collected to support thegoals of the site

• Determine whether contamination is likelythrough the conduct of an ASTM Phase Ienvironmental site assessment or its equivalent. Arecords search is performed and the site is visited,but no sampling of soil or groundwater occurs.The effort includes the following activities:

– Identify past owners and the uses they made of theproperty by conducting a title search and reviewingtax documents, sewer maps, aerial photographs, andfire, policy, and health department documentationrelated to the property

– Review and analyze city government and otherhistorical records to identify past use or disposal ofhazardous or other waste materials at the site

– Review federal and state lists that identify sites that mayhave environmental contamination; such lists include,but are not limited to: (1) EPA’s ComprehensiveEnvironmental Response, Compensation, and LiabilityInformation System (CERCLIS) of potentiallycontaminated sites, (2) the National Pollutant DischargeElimination System (NPDES) of permits issued fordischarges into surface water, and (3) state records of“emergency removal” actions (for example, the removalof leaking drums or the excavation of explosive waste)

– Interview property owners, occupants, and othersassociated with the site, such as previous employees,residents, and local planners

Linking the Decision, Data, and Technologies

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE?

Determine:What you are trying to accomplish at the site –redevelopment, cleanup, etc.

NO

WHAT INFORMATION DO I NEED TO MAKETHE DECISION?

Identify:Data or information necessary to make the decision(s)or answer the question(s)

Consider:Level of data quality required (detection limits andaccuracy)

HOW SHOULD I COLLECT THE DATA?

Evaluate & Select:Various sampling and analysis designs to achieverequired data and data quality

Consider:Technologies available to provide more data quickly andcost-effectively at a level of quality required by decisions

WHAT DOES THE DATA TELL ME?

Evaluate/Interpret Data:Can decision(s) be made?Can question(s) be answered?

TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION

Based on the decision made or question answered.

YES

WHAT DECISIONS ARE NEEDED TO SUPPORTSITE GOALS?

Determine:Are contaminant levels above or below acceptablelimits to a specified degree of certainty?

How Do We Find the Answers?




– Perform a physical or visual examination of the site,including examination of existing structures forstructural integrity and asbestos-containing material

– Test for the presence of various contaminants; forexample, lead-based paint, asbestos, and radon instructures

The practice of conducting site assessments, or allappropriate inquiries, is intended to satisfy onerequirement for obtaining protection from CERCLAliability. To obtain protection from CERCLA liabilityas a bona fide prospective purchaser, an innocentlandowner, or a contiguous property owner;prospective property owners must conduct allappropriate inquiries, or a phase I site assessment,prior to acquiring a property. The Brownfields Lawrequires EPA to promulgate federal standards andpractices governing the conduct of all appropriateinquiries. The Law also established interimstandards for conducting “all appropriate inquiry”to determine the environmental condition of aproperty prior to its acquisition. The interimstandard for properties purchased after May 31,1997, which remains in place until EPA promulgatesa final rule establishing federal standards for allappropriate inquiries, is the ASTM E1527-97 orASTM E1527-00, entitled “Standard Practice forEnvironmental Site Assessments: Phase IEnvironmental Site Assessment Process.” Spotlight3 on page 34 provides additional information on therequirements for all appropriate inquiries.

• Review the applicability of government oversightprograms:

– Determine whether there is a state VCP and consultwith the appropriate federal, state, local, and tribalregulatory agencies to include them in the decision-making process as early as possible

– Determine the approach (such as redevelopmentprograms, the Superfund program, property transferlaws, or a state Brownfields Program) that is requiredor available to facilitate the cleanup of sites (see thesection, Before You Begin, for an overview ofapplicable regulations and regulatory guidelines)

– Identify whether economic incentives, such as benefitsfrom state Brownfields Programs, or federalbrownfields tax credits, can be obtained

– Contact the EPA regional brownfields coordinator toidentify and determine the availability of EPA supportprograms and federal financial incentives (see AppendixC, List of Brownfields and Technical Support Contacts)

• Determine how to incorporate and encouragecommunity participation:

– Identify regulatory requirements for publicinvolvement (see page 15 in the section, Before YouBegin, for a description of community servicesprovided by HSRCs)

– Assess community interest in the project

– Identify community-based organizations

– Review any community plans for redevelopment

• Identify factors that may impede redevelopmentand reuse

• Begin identifying potential sources for funding siteinvestigation and cleanup activities at the site, ifnecessary

• Examine unacceptable environmental conditions interms of initial costs for site improvement and long-term costs for operation and maintenance —includepotential cleanup options and constraints that mayaffect redevelopment, such as project schedules,cost, and potential for achieving the desired reuse

• Conduct work at the site and collect data asnecessary to define site conditions or to resolveuncertainties related to the site

Examples of technology resources that are available toassist in assessing a site are listed below. Theresources are listed alphabetically under thefollowing categories

A. Resources for Site Assessment

B. Site-Specific Resources for Site Assessment

C. Technology-Specific Resources for Site Assessment

Although many of the resources are more applicable inlater stages, it may be useful to begin thinking nowabout options and tools for investigation and cleanup.

Access the Road Map online atwww.brownfieldstsc.org to view or download thefollowing resources electronically or to obtain a linkthat provides complete ordering information.

A. Resources for Site AssessmentThe documents listed below are resources thatprovide general information about the availability oftechnology resources in the form of bibliographies,status reports, and user guidelines.

Where Do We Find Answers to OurTechnology Questions?


24

Archived Internet SeminarsThrough the CLU-IN Web site, EPA haspresented numerous Internet Seminarscovering a wide variety of technical topicsrelated to hazardous waste characterization,

monitoring, and remediation. For each seminar topic,EPA has selected the highest-quality offerings andplaced them in archives that are accessible on the site.The seminars are Web-based slide presentations withan accompanying audio portion. Examples of archivedseminars include the following:

– Application of Transport Optimization Codes toGroundwater Pump-and-Treat Systems;

– Biosensors for Environmental Monitoring - Parts 1and 2;

– Dynamic Data Collection Strategy Using SystematicPlanning and Innovative Field-Based MeasurementTechnologies;

– In Situ Treatment of Groundwater Contaminated withNonaqueous-Phase Liquid (NAPL) Contamination:Fundamentals and Case Studies (In Situ ChemicalOxidation);

– In Situ Treatment of Groundwater Contaminated withNAPL Contamination: Fundamentals and Case Studies(NAPL Characterization and Related Cleanup Issues).

Assessing Contractor Capabilities for StreamlinedSite Investigations (EPA 542-R-00-001)Developed by EPA’s BTSC, the resource will assistdecision-makers on brownfields projects in evaluatingthe capabilities of contractors who are beingconsidered to perform work in support of siteinvestigations. The resource also identifies potentialactivities that contractors can perform to enhance thesite investigation process through innovativeapproaches. A comprehensive series of questions thatdecision-makers can use in interviewing contractorsand evaluating those contractors’ qualifications ispresented, followed by information about the relevanceof the questions and potential answers to them.

ASTM Standard Guide for Process ofSustainable Brownfields Development(E1984-03(2003))The guide, which was developed by ASTM,discusses redevelopment of a brownfields

property and is intended for all stakeholders. Itidentifies impediments to such redevelopment andsuggests solutions that can facilitate completion of asuccessful project. It describes a flexible process ofsustainable brownfields redevelopment that actively

engages property owners, developers, governmentagencies, and the community in conducting correctiveaction, economic evaluation, and other efforts thatpromote the long-term productive reuse of a brownfieldsproperty. The guide, which is available at a cost, can beordered online at www.astm.org.

ASTM Standard Practice forEnvironmental Site Assessments: PhaseI Environmental Site Assessment Process(E1527-00(2003))The purpose of the practice, which was

developed by ASTM, is to define commercial andcustomary practices in the United States for conductingPhase I environmental site assessments of commercialreal estate with respect to the range of contaminantswithin the scope of CERCLA, as well as petroleumproducts. Research and reporting requirements alsoare identified. The practice, which is available at acost, can be ordered online at www.astm.org.

Brownfields Technology Primer: Using the TriadApproach to Streamline Brownfields SiteAssessment and Cleanup (EPA 542-B-03-002)This document, which was prepared by EPA’s BTSC,provides an educational tool for site owners, projectmanagers, and regulators to help streamlineassessment and cleanup activities at brownfieldssites. The primer also discusses strategies to reducecosts, decrease time frames, positively affectregulatory and community acceptance, and improvethe economics of redevelopment at brownfields sites.The primer is organized in three sections: anintroduction; a description of the three elements of theTriad approach, with examples describing the use ofeach element; and a discussion of the role of thetechnical team in managing a project, procurementconsiderations when a project is being planned, anddecision-support software and other tools that areavailable to help brownfields site managers.

Clarifying DQO Terminology Usage toSupport Modernization of Site CleanupPractices (EPA 542-R-01-014)This report, which was developed byEPA, addresses the need to clarify DQO

terminology use in order to support modernization ofenvironmental restoration activities. The documentpresents a basic conceptual understanding of DQO-related terms in a way that facilitates systematicproject planning in the context of site cleanups. A listof descriptions of DQO-related terms and conceptsappears first in the report, followed by a more




detailed discussion of the interrelationships amongthe concepts.

Clean-Up Information Home Page on the WorldWide Web (CLU-IN)The Internet site, which was developed by EPA, providesinformation about innovative treatment technologies andsite characterization technologies to the hazardous wasteremediation community. CLU-IN describes programs,organizations, publications, and other tools for EPA andother federal and state personnel, consulting engineers,technology developers and vendors, remediationcontractors, researchers, community groups, andindividual citizens. Information about issues related toremediation and site characterization also is provided:technology verification and evaluation; technologyselection tools; contaminant-specific information,guidance and application support; case studies;regulatory development; and publications.

Data Quality Objective Process for HazardousWaste Site Investigations (EPA 600-R-00-007)The document focuses on the DQO process as theappropriate systematic planning process to supportdecision-making. The DQO process is an importanttool for project managers and planners to use indefining the types, quality, and quantity of dataneeded to make defensible decisions. The documentis based on the principles and steps developed inGuidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process, butis specific to investigations of hazardous waste sites.The guidance is also consistent with Data QualityObjectives Process for Superfund: Interim FinalGuidance (EPA 1993) and Soil Screening Guidance:User’s Guide (EPA 1996). Although the documentfocuses on EPA applications, the guidance also isapplicable to programs at the state and local levels.

Data Quality Objectives Web SiteThe DQO Web site, which is sponsored by DOE, is ahelpful resource for those responsible for preparing adata collection design. The Web site defines the DQOprocess and explains its role in ensuring that a datacollection activity produces results of sufficient qualityto support decisions based on those results. The Website provides step-by-step procedures for the DQOprocess. It also provides a decision process flow chart,describes purposes and goals related to the use of theDQO process, and reviews relevant DOE and contractordirectives. It also provides information on data qualityassessment (QA); describes a number of availabletraining courses; lists contacts; and provides glossariesof relevant terms, as well as links to related sites.

Directory of Technical Assistance for LandRevitalization (BTSC) (EPA 542-B-03-001)EPA’s BTSC has prepared the directory toprovide information about technicalassistance that is available from federal

agencies to assist regional, state, and local governmentpersonnel in assessment and cleanup decision-makingfor brownfields reuse and revitalization. This directoryincludes information about 37 organizations within 10federal agencies that provide different types of supportto help with site assessment and cleanup, includingtechnical support and funding sources. Profiles areincluded for the agencies and organizations andcontain the following types of information: backgroundand location information, relevancy to revitalization,description of the areas of expertise available,discussion of the types of services available, types offunding available and eligibility, contact informationand the process for requesting assistance, and examplesof specific instances where the organization haspreviously provided support for site revitalization.Information in the profiles is believed to be current as ofMarch 2003. To help maintain current information, thedirectory is available as an online searchable databaseat www.brownfieldstsc.org/directory.

Engineering and Design: Requirements for thePreparation of Sampling and Analysis Plans (EM200-1-3)Developed by USACE, the manual provides guidancefor the preparation of project-specific sampling andanalysis plans (SAP) for the collection ofenvironmental data. In addition, the manual presentsdefault sampling and analytical protocols that may beused verbatim or modified based in light of the DQOsfor a specific project. The goal of the manual is topromote consistency in the generation and executionof sampling and analysis plans and therefore to helpinvestigators generate chemical data of known qualityfor the purpose to which those data are to be used.

EPA REmediation And CHaracterization InnovativeTechnologies (REACH IT) Online SearchableDatabaseThe EPA REmediation And CHaracterizationInnovative Technologies (EPA REACH IT) onlinesearchable databases sponsored by EPA’s OSRTI is aservice provided free of charge to both users andtechnology vendors. EPA REACH IT is accessibleonly through the Internet. This database providesusers comprehensive, up-to-date information aboutmore than 256 characterization technologies and 481remediation technologies and their applications. It


26

combines information submitted by technologyservice providers about remediation andcharacterization technologies with information fromEPA, DoD, DOE, and state project managers aboutsites at which innovative technologies are beingdeployed. During the preliminary phase of abrownfields project, EPA REACH IT will assistbrownfields stakeholders to learn about and becomefamiliar with the range of available technologyoptions that can be employed during the investigationand the cleanup phases that follow, as well as dataabout various types of sites. Information aboutanalytical screening technologies that may be usefulfor initial sampling of a site also is provided. EPAupdates all of the information available in the systemabout every six months. Technology vendors mayalso add or update information in EPA REACH IT atany time through the Data Entry System, or bysubmitting information by mail. You can search theEPA REACH IT system in several ways. Varioussearch options are available for a user on the homepage, including Custom Search; Spotlight; MostCommon Searches; Saved Searches; Guided Search;and Vendor, Technology, and Site Index. Forquestions about whether a technology is eligible forlisting in EPA REACH IT, the user may contact theEPA REACH IT help line at (800) 245-4505 or (703)390-0713 or send an e-mail to [email protected].

Expedited Site Characterization (ESC) Method(Ames Laboratory Environmental TechnologiesDevelopment Program)This Web site, which was developed by DOE, providesinformation about demonstrations of the ESC methodconducted by the Ames Laboratory EnvironmentalTechnology Development Program. The ESCdemonstrations employ several technologies such ashydrological technologies to better understand theproperties and physical characteristics of groundwatermovement; geophysical and geotechnical technologiesto improve understanding of the subsurface geologyand predict “fate and transport” of the targetcontaminants; analytical technologies designed todetect and quantify the target contaminants; and datafusion technologies to integrate site information into aconceptual site model. The ESC demonstrationsinclude characterization work performed bycommercial contractors at existing contaminated sites.Public sessions provide a forum for citizens, media,state and local government officials, EPA and stateregulators, technology providers, environmentalscientists, engineers and educators to offer input onthis new approach and its role within theenvironmental cleanup process.

Improving Decision Quality: Making the Case forAdopting Next-Generation Site CharacterizationPracticesThis paper, which was published in Remediation inspring 2003 as a joint effort of EPA OSRTI and theNortheast Waste Management Officials’ Association(NEWMOA), addresses developments in sitecharacterization and the barriers that hinderimproved decision-making. The paper discusses theneed for the site cleanup industry to continue itstechnical advancement by using next-generationmodels based on current scientific understanding. Itaddresses data quality assessments and the impactsof matrix heterogeneity on analytical results. Thepaper also discusses the use of the Triad approach –systematic project planning, dynamic work planningstrategies, and real-time data generation – as a meansof moving beyond existing data paradigms.

Improving Sampling, Analysis, and DataManagement for Site Investigation andCleanup (EPA 542-F-04-001a)The document, which was published byEPA, describes the three-pronged Triad

approach that forms the basis of EPA’s nationalstrategy for site characterization and assessment.This streamlined approach to site assessment focuseson systematic planning to ensure the effective use ofresources; preparation of a dynamic work plan tosupport decision-making in the field; and use of on-site analytical tools, rapid sampling platforms, andon-site data interpretation. Following the discussionof the Triad approach to site investigation, thedocument briefly reviews a number of recentdevelopments that promise marked benefits forcleanup efforts and sets forth the EPA’s vision ofdefensible decisions at an affordable cost that is thegoal of the national strategy. The document can bedownloaded from CLU-IN under “Publications.” SeeSpotlight 7, “The Triad Approach,” for a moredetailed description of the approach.

In Search of Representativeness:Evolving the Environmental Data QualityModelThis paper, which was published by EPAOSRTI, discusses the need to update the

environmental data quality model to recognize andmanage the uncertainties involved in generatingrepresentative data from heterogeneous environmentalmatrices. It discusses issues associated with dataquality despite improvements in environmentalanalytical capabilities. The paper also discusses the




gradually increasing acceptance of new technologiesand dynamic work plan strategies by regulators andcleanup practitioners. The complete reference for thepaper is as follows: Quality Assurance, Volume 9(2001/2002), Pages 179 through 190.

OnSite OnLine Tools for Site AssessmentDeveloped by EPA’s ORD and EPA Region 9, the Website offers a set of online tools for site assessment,including calculators for formulas, models, unitconversion factors, and scientific demonstrations for usein assessing the effects of contaminants in groundwater.

Quality Assurance Guidance for ConductingBrownfields Site Assessments (EPA 540-R-98-038)The document informs brownfields site managers aboutconcepts and issues related to QA and provides step-by-step instructions for identifying the type and qualityof environmental data needed to present a clear pictureof the environmental conditions at a given site.

Sensor Technology Information Exchange (SenTIX)SenTIX serves as a forum to exchange informationabout sensor technologies and needs. The purpose ofthe Web site is to serve as a tool to assist those workingin the environmental field in cleaning up hazardouswaste. The submit and search functions of SenTIX canassist users who are looking for a sensor technology tomeet a specific need. The discussion forum alsomatches developers, vendors, and users. Users canprovide sensor-related information online. The sitewas developed by WPI, a nonprofit organization,under a cooperative agreement with EPA.

Superfund Representative SamplingGuidanceIn this December 1995 EPA Superfundguidance, readers learn about the variablesthat relate to site-specific conditions,

sampling design approaches, and techniques forcollection and preparation of representative samples.The guidance also discusses the importance of theconceptual site model (CSM). Accuracy of samplingdata is critical for project managers and field personnelto accurately characterize actual site conditions whenidentifying threats, delineating the sources and extentof contamination, and confirming the achievement ofcleanup standards. The guidance is available in fivevolumes covering soil (EPA 540-R-95-141), water(publication number not available), waste (EPA 540-R-95-141), air (EPA 540-R-95-140), and biologicalmaterials (EPA 540-R-97-028).

Sustainable Management Approachesand Revitalization Tools - electronic(SMARTe)The SMARTe web-based decision supporttool is a cooperative effort of EPA, ITRC,

and the German Federal Ministry for Education andResearch. It is designed to aid stakeholders inidentifying, applying, and integrating tools andtechnologies to facilitate the revitalization ofpotentially contaminated sites in the United States.Currently, SMARTe contains information anddatabases that allow project stakeholders to assessboth market and non-market costs and benefits ofredevelopment options, clarify private and publicfinancing options, evaluate and communicateenvironmental risks and opportunities, and accessrelevant state-specific information. By October 2007,SMARTe will use expert system technology tointegrate environmental, social and economic issuesin a multi-criteria decision analysis so thatstakeholders can evaluate alternative reuse scenarios.

Technical and Regulatory Guidance forthe Triad Approach: A New Paradigm forEnvironmental Project ManagementThis document, which was prepared byITRC’s Sampling, Characterization and

Monitoring (SCM) Team, introduces the Triadapproach as an integrated package of conceptsleading to modernized practices for conductingcontaminated site work. It explains the relationshipof the Triad to existing approaches such as the DQOprocess, lists the advantages and disadvantages ofthe Triad, and notes regulatory and organizationalbarriers that may present obstacles to its use.

B. Site-Specific Resources for Site AssessmentListed below are survey reports and online toolspertaining to the application of innovativetechnologies to specific contaminants and site types.

EPA Office of Enforcement andCompliance Assurance Industry SectorNotebooksDeveloped by EPA’s Office of Enforcementand Compliance Assurance (OECA), the

sector notebooks provide extensive profiles of selectedmajor industries. Each profile includes informationabout an industrial process, information aboutpollution prevention techniques, pollutant releasedata, pertinent federal statutes and regulations,compliance and enforcement data, information ongovernment and industry partnerships, descriptions


28

of innovative programs, and bibliographic references.Profiles are available online and on hard copy for thefollowing industry sectors:

– Aerospace (EPA 310-R-98-001)– NEW! Agricultural chemical, pesticide and fertilizer

(EPA 310-R-00-003)– NEW! Agricultural crop production

(EPA 310-R-00-001)– NEW! Agricultural livestock production

(EPA 310-R-01-002)– Air transportation (EPA 310-R-97-001)– Dry cleaning (EPA 310-R-95-001)– Electronics and computer (EPA 310-R-95-002)– Fossil fuel electronic power generation

(EPA 310-R-97-007)– Ground transportation (EPA 310-R-97-002)– Inorganic chemical (EPA 310-R-95-004)– Iron and steel (EPA 310-R-95-005)– Lumber and wood products (EPA 310-R-95-006)– Metal casting (EPA 310-R-97-004)– Metal fabrication (EPA 310-R-95-007)– Metal mining (EPA 310-R-95-008)– Motor vehicle assembly (EPA 310-R-95-009)– Nonferrous metals (EPA 310-R-95-010)– Nonfuel, nonmetal mining (EPA 310-R-95-011)– Oil and gas extractions (EPA 310-R-99-006)– UPDATED! Organic chemical (EPA 310-R-95-012)– Petroleum refining (EPA 310-R-95-013)– Pharmaceutical (EPA 310-R-97-005)– Plastic resins and manmade fibers (EPA 310-R-97-006)– UPDATED! Printing (EPA 310-R-95-014)– Pulp and paper (EPA 310-R-95-015)– Rubber and plastic (EPA 310-R-95-016)– Shipbuilding and repair (EPA 310-R-97-008)– Stone, clay, glass, and concrete (EPA 310-R-95-017)– Textiles (EPA 310-R-97-009)– Transportation equipment cleaning (EPA 310-R-95-018)– Water transportation (EPA 310-R-97-003)– Wood furniture and fixtures (EPA 310-R-95-003)

EPA Region 3 Industry Profile Fact SheetsDeveloped by EPA Region 3, the fact sheets aredesigned to assist in the initial planning andevaluation of sites that are under consideration forremediation, redevelopment, or reuse. The fact sheetsprovide general descriptions of site conditions andcontaminants commonly found at selected industrial

sites. Each fact sheet provides information about theprocesses conducted in the industry, raw materialscharacteristic of the industry, environmental mediathat could be affected, sampling strategies, andsuggested parameters for analysis. Fact sheets on thefollowing subjects are available online:

– Abandoned chemical facilities– Abandoned laboratories– Abandoned oil facilities– Asbestos piles– Automobile body facilities– Battery reclamation facilities– Bethlehem asbestos and tailing mine– Drum recycling facilities– Dye facilities– Electroplating– Glass manufacturing facilities– Gasoline stations– Infectious wastes– Manufactured gas plants and coal tar sites– Municipal landfill– Ordnance– Paint industry– Pesticide facilities– Petroleum recycling facilities– Plastics– Print shops– Quarry sites– Radiation– Railroad yard facilities– Salvage yards– Scrap metal– Steel manufacturing - electric arc/coke– Tanning facilities– Tire fires– Wood treating facilities

Frequently Asked Questions about Dry Cleaning(EPA 744-K-98-002)The EPA fact sheet addresses a number of issues relatedto dry cleaning, including EPA’s interest in dry cleaning,the process of dry cleaning, the human health andenvironmental risks associated with chemical solventsused in the dry cleaning process, what dry cleaners andthe government are doing to reduce those risks, and othermethods of cleaning clothes. The document listsadditional sources of information about dry cleaningand EPA’s Design for the Environment Program.




Ordnance and Explosives Mandatory Center ofExpertise (MCX) and Design CenterThe mission of the Ordnance and Explosives MCXand Design Center, which is hosted by the U.S.Army Engineering and Support Center inHuntsville, Alabama, is to safely eliminate orreduce risks posed by ordnance, explosives, andrecovered chemical warfare materials at current orformerly used defense sites. The Internet siteprovides links to information about technicalrequirements for contracting; fact sheets onordnance and explosives programs; frequentlyasked questions related to ordnance responseactions; innovative technologies, presentations,and technical papers; and technical guidance andprocedures related to ordnance and explosives.Points of contact also are identified.

C. Technology-Specific Resources for SiteAssessment

The documents listed below provide detailedinformation about specific innovative technologiesand the application of those processes to specificcontaminants and media in the form of engineeringanalyses, application reports, technologyverification and evaluation reports, and technologyreviews.

Dry Cleaner Site Assessment &Remediation - A Technology SnapshotIn this report, the State Coalition forRemediation of Drycleaners (SCRD)evaluates trends in the use of technologies

to address dry cleaner sites across the country overthe last 3 years. The analysis is based on theresponses of 28 states to a 2002 SCRD survey andcomparison of these responses to those from asimilar survey conducted in 1999. SCRD gatheredinformation on technologies that states have used orevaluated for assessment and remediation ofsolvent-contaminated dry cleaning sites as well asprogram- and project-specific informationconcerning contaminant types, general costs,technologies, cleanup standards, guidancedocuments, and lessons learned.

Study of Assessment and RemediationTechnologies for Dry Cleaner SitesPrepared by SCRD with the support of EPA’s OSRTI,the report presents the results of the coalition’sevaluation of assessment and remediationtechnologies commonly used in cleaning up drycleaner sites. The evaluation was based on the results

of responses to questionnaires sent to entities involvedin such cleanups in 1999. The report presents thoseresults in detail. An appendix in the report providesdescriptions and brief evaluations of assessmenttechnologies frequently used at dry cleaner sites.

Underground Storage Tanks and Brownfields Sites(EPA 510-F-00-004)The fact sheet focuses on EPA’s “USTfields” Initiativefor addressing brownfields properties at whichredevelopment is complicated by real or perceivedenvironmental contamination originating fromfederally regulated USTs. The fact sheet describes the50 pilot projects implemented or to be implementedunder the two phases of the initiative.

��

Course of ActionResult of Site Assessment

➡

➡

➡

➡

➡ Discuss results withappropriate regulatory officialsbefore proceeding withredevelopment activities.

Contact the appropriate federal,state, local, or tribalgovernment agenciesresponsible for hazardouswaste. Based on feedback ofgovernment agency, determinewhat cleanup levels arerequired for redevelopment,and proceed to the SITEINVESTIGATION phase.

Proceed to the SITEINVESTIGATION phase.

Proceed to the SITEINVESTIGATION phase.

Proceed to the SITEINVESTIGATION phase ifadditional investigation isneeded; otherwise, proceed tothe CLEANUP OPTIONSphase.

No evidence ofcontamination is foundand there is no reason tosuspect other media arecontaminated. Concernsof stakeholders havebeen addressedadequately.

Contamination is foundthat poses a significantrisk to human health orthe environment.

Contamination possiblyexists.

Contamination definitelyexists, BUT no siteinvestigation has beenconducted.

Contaminationdefinitely exists,AND a siteinvestigation has beenperformed.

Where Do We Go from Here?


30

In partnership with states, tribes, territories, and a broadrange of stakeholders, EPA is undertaking the LandRevitalization Initiative to restore land to productiveeconomic and green space uses. In April 2003, EPAannounced an action agenda to serve as a blueprint forincorporating land reuse into its Superfund, RCRA,brownfields, and UST hazardous waste cleanupprograms. Land Reuse Coordinators and Land ReuseTeams have been established in each of EPA’s 10regional offices to ensurecoordination among the cleanupprograms in implementing theLand Revitalization Agenda.Additional information isavailable at www.epa.gov/oswer/landrevitalization. EPAhas published the Directory ofTechnical Assistance for LandRevitalization (EPA542-B-03-001) to provide information abouttechnical assistance that isavailable from EPA and otherfederal agency programs. Thedocument is available atwww.brownfieldstsc.org.

At the same time that EPA beganits Land Revitalization Initiative,the Agency also announced theOne Cleanup Program, a long-term initiative designed to supportthe ongoing planning and qualityimprovement efforts of EPA’scleanup programs. The goal ofthe program is to improve thecoordination, speed, andeffectiveness of cleanups at RCRA and Superfund,brownfields, leaking UST, federal facility, and othercontaminated sites. By encouraging improvedcoordination among EPA programs and with governmentat all levels, the One Cleanup Program supports thetransfer of ideas, experiences, and innovations across allprograms as well as effective coordination andcommunication with the public. More information aboutEPA’s Once Cleanup Program is available atwww.epa.gov/swerrims/onecleanupprogram.

The SuperfundRedevelopmentInitiative (SRI) reflectsEPA’s commitment toconsider reasonablyanticipated future land useswhen making remedy decisions forSuperfund sites so that these sites can be cleaned up to beprotective for future users of the land. Because Superfund

and brownfields sites are often co-located, there are manyopportunities to share information,experiences, and lessons learnedat the site level in addition toopportunities for transfer of ideasbetween programs at other levels.Spotlight 2 provides more detailedinformation about SuperfundRedevelopment.

Under EPA’s RCRA BrownfieldsPrevention Initiative, pilot projectsare designed to test approaches thatbetter integrate reuse considerationsinto the corrective action cleanupprocess. The initiative alsoaddresses concerns that applicationof RCRA to cleanup activities atbrownfields sites may be slowingthe progress of cleanup efforts.Although no grant money isassociated with the pilot projects,EPA has engaged contractors tohelp find ways to expedite cleanupat the pilot sites. Additionalinformation about the RCRA

Brownfields Prevention Initiative is provided online atwww.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/rcrabf.htm.

The RCRA Brownfields Prevention Targeted Site Efforts(TSE) Initiative is intended to focus short-term attention andsupport on sites at which cleanup has been delayed orslowed and to serve as a catalyst to initiate cleanup at suchsites in order to prevent them from becoming brownfieldssites. Implemented at the regional level, the TSE programwill apply to sites that have significant potential for

OTHER REDEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES:Reducing Barriers to Redevelopment of Brownfields Sites

A Quick Look

• EPA’s Land Revitalization Initiative wasestablished to incorporate land reuse intothe Agency’s cleanup programs.

• The One Cleanup Program establishesactivities to improve the pace, efficiency,and effectiveness of EPA’s cleanupprograms through improvedcommunication and coordination.

• EPA is addressing redevelopment ofSuperfund sites through SRI.

• The purpose of the RCRA BrownfieldsPrevention Initiative is to prevent creationof future brownfields and ensuresuccessful cleanup and long-term,sustainable reuse of RCRA facilities.

• Under the RCRA Brownfields PreventionTSE Initiative, selected sites will receiveconcentrated, short-term support to preventthem from becoming brownfields sites.

• EPA’s OUST supports the cleanup andredevelopment of petroleum-contaminatedsites.

• Sharing of lessons learned can benefit theBRAC and Brownfields Programs.

Continued on next page



Continued ... OTHER REDEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES:Reducing Barriers to Redevelopment of Brownfields Sites

redevelopment and reuse and that require a limited amountof EPA support to achieve the next level of cleanup,consensus, or site closure. EPA will offer a small amountof funding to support TSE efforts in each region. For moreinformation about the program, visit www.epa.gov/swerosps/rcrabf/tse.htm.

EPA’s Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST),focuses on how to improve the cleanup of sites affectedby petroleum contamination, thereby fostering theredevelopment of those sites (see Spotlight 4,Underground Storage Tanks at Brownfields Sites, formore information about the USTFields Initiative).Additional details about the initiative also are availableonline at www.epa.gov/oust/rags/ustfield.htm.

Many aspects of DoD’s Base Realignment and Closure(BRAC) Program and EPA’s Brownfields Program aresimilar. Significant issues common to both programsinclude eliminating disincentives and providingassurances to developers and financiers, consideringfuture land use in cleanup decisions, and implementinginstitutional controls. Because federal facility andbrownfields cleanups can have similar effects oncommunities, EPA and DoD are exploring methods ofcoordinating BRAC and brownfields activities. Visit theBRAC Internet site at www.dtic.mil/envirodod/brac/ foronline access to relevant policies and initiatives,publications, and points of contact.


32

EPA’s Superfund Redevelopment Initiative (SRI)reflects its commitment to consider reasonablyanticipated future land uses when making remedydecisions at Superfund hazardous waste sites so thatthese sites can be cleaned up to be protective of humanhealth and the environment under future uses. Throughcase studies, fact sheets, an online database of sites, andan Internet site, SRI is providing information about reuseoptions and the lessons learned through these projects.It is forming partnerships withstates, local government agencies,citizen groups, and other federalagencies to restore previouslycontaminated properties asvaluable assets for communities.Some of SRI’s most valuablepartnerships are with privategroups with nationalmemberships. For example, theU.S. Soccer Foundation providesfree design and engineeringservices and sports equipment tocommunities that want to buildsoccer fields on Superfund landthat has been cleaned up, andwhere EPA has determined thatrecreational use is appropriate.The Academy of ModelAeronautics also has anagreement with SRI to provideservices, such as mowing andfence maintenance, on cleaned-up land in return forSRI’s help in identifying suitable Superfund land that canused by their membership for flying model airplanes.SRI is exploring similar arrangements with partners thatwant to make agreements with local communities forappropriate use of cleaned-up properties. These partnerscontribute their services and expertise to communities inexchange for use of the land. SRI contributesinformation about suitable sites and contacts withRegional staff and local stakeholders. EPA also iscommitted to the ongoing evaluation of its policies andpractices to determine whether changes are needed tofurther the effort to reuse sites.

Passage of the Brownfields Law in January 2002 clarifiedCERCLA liability provisions for landowners and potentialproperty owners including the requirement to conduct all

appropriate inquiries intothe previous ownership,uses, and environmentalconditions of a property.Spotlight 3 providesadditional information onAll Appropriate Inquiry.

On November 10, 2004, EPAannounced a newphase of SRI, the “Return toUse” initiative. The Initiativefocuses on National Priorities Listsites that were cleaned up beforeEPA’s current emphasis onconsidering reuse duringresponse activities. Many of thesesites have remained vacant.Returning these sites to beneficialuse will provide localcommunities with valuable greenspace, recreational amenities, orcommercial property. Removingthe stigma associated with fencedand vacant Superfund sites mayalso increase local property valuesand the tax base. As part of theInitiative, EPA is committed toreviewing remedies in place todetermine whether there arerelatively modest ways to removebarriers to reuse that are not

necessary for the protection of human health and theenvironment or the remedy. Such actions might includemodifying fences that are no longer necessary, issuingReady for Reuse (RfR) Determinations that identify how asite can be used while maintaining protection of peopleand the environment, eliminating misleading signs andunnecessary obstacles when conditions at the site nolonger merit them, and ensuring that institutional controlsare appropriate and effective.

As a starting point for the Initiative, EPA is establishingdemonstration projects through partnerships withcommunities to overcome obstacles to reuse. For its part, EPAwill:

• Perform appropriate risk and remedy analyses tosupport decisions that consider reuse of sites.

• Issue RfR Determinations.

SUPERFUND REDEVELOPMENT


A Quick Look

• For several years EPA has supportedcommunity efforts to return Superfundsites to use through the SRI.

• The “Return to Use” initiative focuses onNational Priorities List sites that werecleaned up before EPA’s currentemphasis on considering reuse duringresponse activities.

• EPA will review remedies in place toidentify alterations to the remedy toencourage reuse.

• EPA’s new Ready for ReuseDetermination is a tool that is used toindicate to the marketplace a property’ssuitability for reuse.

• EPA will establish demonstration projectsthrough partnerships with communities toovercome obstacles to reuse.




Continued ... SUPERFUND REDEVELOPMENTReady for Reuse Determinations

On February 18, 2004, EPA issued its new Guidance forPreparing Superfund Ready for Reuse Determinations atSuperfund sites). A RfR determination is a new type ofdocument developed by the Agency to provide potentialusers of Superfund sites with an environmental statusreport that documents a technical determination by EPA, inconsultation with states, tribes, and local governments, thatall or a portion of a real estate property at a site can supportspecified types of uses and remain protective of humanhealth and the environment. With this new guidance, EPAprovides its staff with the information needed to make anddocument these determinations, and thus takes a majorstep forward in its effort to facilitate the reuse of Superfundsites. With the creation of the RfR determination, potentialusers and the real estate marketplace will have anaffirmative statement written in plain English andaccompanied by supporting decision documentation, that asite identified as ready for reuse will remain protective aslong as all required response conditions and use limitationsidentified in the site’s response decision documents andland title documents continue to be met.A copy of this guidance is available at www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle/rfrguidance.pdf.

Key Resources

Visit EPA’s SRI Web site at www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle for additional information onSuperfund Redevelopment and the Return to UseInitiative. Related publications available on the siteinclude:• Land Use in the CERCLA Remedy Selection Process:

OSWER 9355.7-04. May 25, 1995.• Reusing Superfund Sites: OSWER 9230.0-85.

March, 2001• Reusing Cleaned Up Superfund Sites: Recreational

Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste ContainmentAreas: OSWER 9230.0-93: April 12, 2001.

• Reuse Assessments: A Tool To Implement theSuperfund Land Use Directive: OSWER 9355.7-06P.June 4, 2001.

• Reusing Superfund Sites: Commercial Use WhereWaste is Left on Site: OSWER 9230.0-100, February26, 2002.

• Reusing Cleaned Up Superfund Sites: Golf FacilitiesWhere Waste is Left on Site: OSWER 9230.0-109.November 20, 2003.

• Guidance for Preparing Superfund Ready for ReuseDeterminations: OSWER 9365.0-33. February 12,2004. (Joint OSRTI/OSRE guidance).

• Guidance for Documenting and Reporting theSuperfund Revitalization Performance Measures:OSWER 9202.1-26. November 5, 2004.

• Superfund Redevelopment: Realizing Possibilities:Video

• Frequently Asked Questions: SuperfundRedevelopment Program

• Frequently Asked Questions: Return to UseProgram

• Direct communities to tools and resources, such ascomfort letters and involuntary acquisition factsheets, which relate to liability issues.

• Connect communities with EPA’s national reusepartners, such as the U.S. Soccer Foundation.

• Work with communities that are creating site reuseplans to ensure that the remedies will support theplanned activities.

The expectation for local communities is a commitmentto the reuse of the Superfund site. Additionalcontributions will depend on the site’s needs and thecommunity’s resources.

The Superfund Redevelopment Help Desk at(434) 817-0470 provides Regional SuperfundRedevelopment coordinators, RPMs, site attorneys,

OSCs, CICs and other staff with information andassistance in carrying out Superfund reuse-relatedactivities. It operates from 8 am to 5 pm, Mondaythrough Friday, with voice mail service after hours.

For more information see the resources numbered75, 77, 93, 121, 123, 124, 125, 127, 128, 129, 130,131, 141, 147, 152, 153, 154, and 173 in theIndex of Resources beginning on page I-1.


34

On January 11, 2002, President Bush signed the SmallBusiness Liability Relief and Revitalization Act (“theBrownfields Law”). The Brownfields Law clarifiesCERCLA liability provisions for landowners andpotential property owners. It provides liabilityprotections for certain propertyowners, if the property ownerscomply with specific provisions,including conducting allappropriate inquiry into presentand past uses of the property andthe potential presence ofenvironmental contamination onthe property. The all appropriateinquiry standards and practicesare relevant to:

• The innocent landownerdefense to CERCLA liability(§101 (35))

• The contiguous propertyexemption to CERCLA liability (§107 (q))

• The bona fide prospective purchaser exemption toCERCLA liability (§107 (r)(1) and (§101 (40))

• The brownfields site characterization and assessmentgrant programs (§104 (k)(2))

The Brownfields Law amends Section 101(35)(B) ofCERCLA to include an interim standard for conductingall appropriate inquiry and requires EPA to promulgateregulations that establish federal standards andpractices for conducting all appropriate inquiries.Congress directed EPA to include, within thestandards for all appropriate inquiry, the ten criteriashown below:

• The results of an inquiry by an environmentalprofessional

• Interviews with past and present owners, operators,and occupants of the facility for the purpose ofgathering information regarding the potential forcontamination at the facility

• Reviews of historical sources, such as chain of titledocuments, aerial photographs, building

department records,and land-userecords, todetermine previoususes and occupancies

of the realproperty since the property wasfirst developed

• Searches for recordedenvironmental cleanup liensagainst the facility that are filedunder federal, state, or local law

• Reviews of federal, state, and localgovernment records; wastedisposal records; undergroundstorage tank records; andhazardous waste handling,generation, treatment, disposal,and spill records concerningcontamination at or near the facility

• Visual inspections of the facility and adjoiningproperties

• Specialized knowledge or experience on the part of thedefendant

• The relationship of the purchase price to the value ofthe property if the property was not contaminated

• Commonly known or reasonably ascertainableinformation about the property

• The degree of obviousness of the presence or likelypresence of contamination at the property and theability to detect the contamination by appropriateinvestigation

EPA’s Proposed Rule: Standards and Practices for AllAppropriate Inquiries was signed by the EPA Administratorand published in the Federal Register on August 26, 2004(69 FR 52542). The proposed rule would establishspecific regulatory requirements for conducting allappropriate inquiries into the previous ownership, uses,and environmental conditions of a property for thepurposes of qualifying for certain landowner liabilityprotections under CERCLA. EPA developed the proposed

A Quick Look• All appropriate inquiry refers to the

requirements for assessing theenvironmental conditions of a propertyprior to its acquisition.

• All appropriate inquiry provides CERCLAliability protections for certain landownersand potential property owners.

• The Brownfields Law amends Section101(35)(B) of CERCLA to include aninterim standard for conducting allappropriate inquiry.

• EPA proposed regulations for standardsand practices for all appropriateinquiries on August 26, 2004.

ALL APPROPRIATE INQUIRY:Standards and Practices to Provide CERCLA LiabilityProtections





Continued ... ALL APPROPRIATE INQUIRY:Standards and Practices to Provide CERCLA Liability Protections

Key ResourcesVisit the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/regneg.htm for copies of the proposed rule, a fact sheet,and supplemental information on all appropriate inquiry.For detailed information on specific aspects of the proposed rule, contact Patricia Overmeyer of EPA’s Office ofBrownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment at (202) 566-2774 or at [email protected].

rule using a Negotiated Rulemaking process. Theproposed rule retains the regulatory language developedby the Negotiated Rulemaking Committee. The publiccomment period for the proposed rule closed onNovember 30, 2004. Currently, EPA is reviewing thecomments received in response to the proposed ruleand considering the issues raised by commenters. Afterconsidering all issues raised within the publiccomments, EPA will respond to the comments and

develop a final rulemaking.

The interim standard for properties purchased after May 31,1997, which remains in place until EPA promulgates a finalrule establishing federal standards for all appropriateinquiries, is the ASTM E1527-97 or ASTM E1527-00,entitled “Standard Practice for Environmental SiteAssessments: Phase I Environmental Site AssessmentProcess.

http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/regneg.htm


36

Of the estimated 450,000 brownfields sites in the UnitedStates, approximately 100,000 to 200,000 containabandoned USTs or are affected by leaks of petroleumfrom such tanks. EPA and many state and local leadersare committed to achieving sustainable development andpreserving green space by cleaning up and reusing thesepetroleum brownfields, which are often located on cornerlots and in other prime locations. Reusing abandonedgasoline stations helps to preserve green space, reduceurban sprawl, and reduce thedistance that people have totravel, thus decreasing airpollution. Such sites as the WestOgden Pocket Park, a formerservice station, had been used forillegal dumping and wereeyesores to the Chicagocommunity. Cooperationbetween the Chicago Departmentof Buildings, Department of theEnvironment, and Department ofTransportation led to tankremoval, site remediation, andsite restoration. In summer 2001,the West Ogden Pocket Parkopened, adding much neededgreen space to its neighborhood.

With so many UST sites requiringremediation, EPA is promotingfaster, more effective, and lesscostly alternatives to established cleanup methods. EPAand states are continuing their legacy of developing anddisseminating innovative tools to address petroleumbrownfields. A Ready-for-Reuse Determination is onesuch tool. It is being used in Sayre, Oklahoma and otherplaces to acknowledge that the site has been cleaned upand is ready and available for a particular type of reuse.Site inventories are helping bring property ownerstogether with end users who may want to use theproperties.

Although established technologies such as P&T systemsor excavation and disposal in a landfill, have proveneffective and are frequently used, innovative technologiesmay be applicable for cleanup of USTs. EPA’s OUST hasworked with EPA’s ORD to foster development of

USTs AT BROWNFIELDS SITES:Technology Options for Tank Remediation

A Quick Look

• USTs are present at many brownfieldssites because the owners have closedtheir businesses and do not have thefunds necessary to remove the tanks orproperly clean up the tanks.

• Contaminants likely to be found at USTsites include petroleum hydrocarbons,gasoline, diesel fuel, MtBE, BTEX, JP-4 jetfuels, and solvents.

• The USTFields Initiative focuses attentionon abandoned or underused industrial andcommercial properties at whichredevelopment is complicated byenvironmental contamination originatingfrom USTs.

• The Brownfields Law allocates fundingeach year to assess and clean uppetroleum-contaminated brownfields sites.


innovative siteassessment andcleanup technologies,such as fieldmeasurement techniques,soil vapor surveying,vacuum-enhanced free productrecovery, active and passive bioremediation, and MNA.OUST continues to encourage scientifically sound, rapid,

and cost-effective corrective actionat UST sites. It also encourages theuse of expedited site assessmentsas a means of streamlining thecorrective action process,improving data collection, andreducing the overall cost ofremediation. The May 2004publication Technologies forTreating MtBE and Other FuelOxygenates, (available atwww.epa.gov/tio/download/remed/542r04009/542r04009.pdf) is an example ofnew informational materials that arerelevant to UST remediation.

Prior to the enactment of the SmallBusiness Liability Relief andBrownfields Revitalization Act orBrownfields Law, petroleum-contaminated sites were not eligible

for traditional brownfields funding. Therefore, in 2000, toencourage the reuse of abandoned properties contaminatedwith petroleum from USTs, OUST created the USTFieldsInitiative. A total of 50 projects were awarded up to$100,000 each to assess, clean up, and restore high-prioritypetroleum-impacted sites. Although no additional USTFieldspilot projects will be awarded funds, opportunities toaddress relatively low-risk petroleum sites are now availablethrough the brownfields assessment, cleanup, and revolvingloan fund grants. In addition, high-priority and high-risksites can be addressed by states through the LeakingUnderground Storage Tank (LUST) Trust Fund.

The Brownfields Law expanded the original EPABrownfields Program by making relatively low-risk




Continued ... USTs AT BROWNFIELDS SITES:Technology Options for Tank Remediation


petroleum sites eligible for brownfields assessment andcleanup grant funding and by allotting 25 percent of thefunding strictly for petroleum brownfields assessmentand cleanup. Previously, petroleum sites were ineligiblefor brownfields grants funding. In 2004, EPA awardedclose to $23 million in brownfields grants to assess andclean up petroleum-contaminated sites. Recipientsincluded abandoned sites such as gasoline stations,industrial properties, and retail properties that contain orare perceived to contain petroleum contamination.

For more information, see the resources numbered14, 17, 27, 56, 80, 102, 103, 162, 171, and 173 inthe Index of Resources beginning on page I-1.

Key Resource

EPA’s Office of Underground Storage Tanks Internet Site

View online at www.epa.gov/oust.

Hosted by EPA’s OUST, the Internet site provides resourcesand tools to help owners and operators of UST sites andbrownfields stakeholders better assess their options foroperation, maintenance, and cleanup of USTs. Informationand guidance about technologies suitable for cleaning upreleases from UST systems are provided, as are detailsabout current federal UST regulations and UST programpriorities, including specific details about the USTFieldsInitiative. Points of contact in each of the EPA regionaloffices also are identified. An extensive number of USTpublications can be viewed online or downloaded at nocharge. In addition, information about state-sponsored USTprograms, including links to state Internet sites, is providedon OUST’s site at www.epa.gov/oust/states/index.htm.Some of the more recent publications available atwww.epa.gov/oust/pubs/index.htm include:• How to Evaluate Alternative Cleanup Technologies for

Underground Storage Tank Sites: A Guide for CorrectiveAction Plan Reviewers (EPA 510-R-04-002), May 2004

• Underground Storage Tanks: Building on the Past toProtect the Future (EPA 510-R-04-001), March 2004

• Reuse of Abandoned Gas Station Sites (EPA-510-F-04-001), February 2004


38

Revitalization of contaminated sites is a global concernthat requires an integrated approach to mitigate the risksto human health and the environment. Many countrieshave committed extensive resources to addressingenvironmental, social, and economic issues related to thecleanup and revitalization of brownfields sites. Thechallenge is to determine how to capitalize on theavailable resources, expertise, and knowledge andeffectively share and transfer that information to theorganizations and individuals responsible for makingdecisions and implementing revitalization efforts.

EPA and the German Federal Ministry for Education andResearch Bundesministerium Für Bildung undForschung (BMBF) have initiated a cooperative effort toshare such information and evaluate new solutions forthe revitalization of potentially contaminated sites.

Sustainable Management Approaches and RevitalizationTools - electronic (SMARTe) is a Web-based informationsource and decision support tool. The purpose ofSMARTe is to aid stakeholders in identifying, applying,and integrating tools and technologies to facilitate therevitalization of potentially contaminated sites in theUnited States. SMARTe is intended to be a living Web-based system that can be updated as new tools,technologies, and approaches become available forrevitalization.

SMARTe will provide a decision support tool fordeveloping and evaluating plans for land revitalization.Its decision analysis capabilities are intended to be usedby brownfields project stakeholders for:

• Assessing both market and non-market costs andbenefits of revitalization options

• Comparing alternative reuse scenarios

• Clarifying both private and public financing options

• Evaluating and communicating environmental risks

• Easing access to pertinent state specific informationrelated to specific projects

SMARTe is the umbrellaproviding entry points fortools and information atthe level of detail desired bythe user. SMARTe containsfour components:

• An electronic document that provides information onthe revitalization process

• A screening tool that leads the user through therevitalization process

• A tool box to analyze and solve revitalization issues

• A search engine for information tools, and bestpractices

SMARTe will provide the analytical tools needed toimplement and integrate each component of the decisionprocess. In the future, SMARTe will use expert systemtechnology to integrate environmental, social andeconomic issues in a multi-criteria decision analysis sothat stakeholders can evaluate alternative reuse scenarios.The goal of SMARTe is to not only provide the tools andinformation needed by a user to solve a revitalizationissue, but also to integrate these tools and informationinto an assessment that facilitates sustainablerevitalization.

SMARTe is accessible at www.smarte.org.

SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT APPROACHESAND REVITALIZATION TOOLS - ELECTRONIC(SMARTe)




SITE INVESTIGATION

The site investigation phase focuses on confirmingwhether any contamination exists at a site, locatingany contamination, and characterizing the natureand extent of that contamination. It is essential thatan appropriately detailed study of the site beperformed to identify the cause, nature, and extent ofcontamination and the possible threats to theenvironment or to any people living or workingnearby. For brownfields sites, the results of such astudy can be used in determining goals for cleanup,quantifying risks, determining acceptable andunacceptable risk, and developing effective cleanupplans that minimize delays or costs in theredevelopment and reuse of property. To ensure thatsufficient information is obtained to support futuredecisions, the proposed cleanup measures and theproposed end use of the site should be consideredwhen identifying data needs during the siteinvestigation.

A site investigation, also referred to as an ASTMPhase II environmental site assessment, is based onthe results of the site assessment, which is discussedin the preceding section of the Road Map. The siteinvestigation phase may include the analysis ofsamples of soil and soil gas, groundwater, surfacewater, and sediment. The migration pathways ofcontaminants also are examined during this phase,and a baseline risk assessment may be needed tocalculate risk to human health and the environment.Examples of sampling and analysis technologies thatmay be useful during this phase are presented inAppendix A, Table A-2, Technologies for AnalyzingContaminants at Brownfields Sites.

During site investigation, use of the Triadapproach allows decision-makers to implement astrategy that is flexible and meets the needs of thesite. Use of systematic planning can result in loweroverall project costs. Use of dynamic workingstrategies can reduce or eliminate the need formultiple mobilizations on a site to reach closeout.For brownfields sites, where decision-making isclosely tied to economic constraints and publicacceptance, increased information value obtainedusing real-time measurement technologiescollaboratively with definitive fixed laboratorymethods for data collection will providestakeholders with the confidence they need at areduced cost. Reducing project costs and schedules

Identify the Source, Nature, andExtent of Contamination


40

to obtain closure means that more dormant orabandoned sites may become economically viablefor redevelopment.

Factors that should be considered during the siteinvestigation, if there is evidence of potential or actualcontamination include:

1. Will the site be entered into a state voluntarycleanup program (VCP)? If so, will theinvestigation plan be reviewed through the VCP? Ifnot, are there federal, state, local, and tribalregulatory requirements applicable to the siteinvestigation? What agency will be responsible formanaging oversight of this phase? What is to bedone if the appropriate agency has not developedstandards or guidelines that are suitable for theproposed redevelopment?

2. What technologies are available to facilitate siteinvestigation and to support data collectionrelevant to the goals of the project? Has thetechnical team explored the full range oftechnologies that can produce data of the qualitynecessary? Can the technologies selected limit thenumber of mobilizations at the site?

3. Can the need for cleanup be assessed fully andaccurately from the information gathered during thesite assessment or from a previous site investigation?

4. What issues has the community raised that mayaffect the site investigation?

5. What are the potential exposure pathways? Whoor what could be affected by the contamination orthe efforts to clean up the contamination?

6. What happens if significant contamination isfound? What happens if contamination poses a“significant threat” to local residents?

7. What happens if the contamination is originatingfrom an adjacent or other off-site source? Whathappens if background sampling indicates thatcontamination is originating from a naturallyoccurring source?

8. Are the infrastructure systems (roads, buildings,sewers, and other facilities) contaminated? Couldthey be affected by efforts to clean upcontamination?


The following table describes field analyticaltechnologies and mobile laboratories.

Highlights of Field Analytical Technologies and Mobile Laboratories

Field Analytical Technologies: Field analytical technologies, oftenreferred to as “field analytics,” can be used on site without theabsolute need for a mobile laboratory. Some field analyticaltechnologies are very sophisticated and can yield quantitative resultsthat are comparable to those obtained by analysis in mobile or off-sitelaboratories. Some field analytical measurements can be madequickly, allowing a high rate of sampling. Under certain conditions,data can be collected in a short period of time. Field analyticaltechnologies are implemented through the use of hand-heldinstruments, such as the portable gas chromatography and massspectrometry and the x-ray fluorescence analyzer, as well as the useof bench procedures, such as colorimetric and immunoassay tests.

Mobile Laboratories: A variety of technologies can be used in amobile laboratory. Such technologies differ from field analyticaltechnologies because they may require more controlledconditions (such as temperature, humidity, and source ofelectricity) or complex sample preparation that uses solvents orreagents that require special handling or protective equipment thatrequire the handling and storage of chemical standards.Technologies adaptable to mobile laboratories include those usedto analyze soil and water samples for inorganic analytes (such asanodic stripping voltammetry) and organic compounds (such asgas chromatography with a variety of detectors). When operatedproperly and with adequate quality assurance (QA) and qualitycontrol (QC), the technologies can achieve quantitative resultsequal to those achieved by off-site analytical laboratories.

Typical activities that may be conducted during thesite investigation phase include:

• Identify the proper mix of technologies (such asfield measurement technologies that characterizethe physical and chemical aspects of the site andfixed laboratory sampling methods) that canfacilitate site investigations and meet the requiredlevel of data quality:

– Ensure that the laboratory has appropriate detectionlimits for analytes

• Determine the environmental conditions at the site(for example, by performing an ASTM Phase IIenvironmental site assessment or equivalentinvestigation that includes tests to confirm thelocations and identities of environmental hazards):

– Conduct sampling and analysis to determine thenature, extent, source, and significance of thecontamination that may be present at the site





– Conduct sampling and analysis to fully assess thephysical, geophysical, and ecological conditions andcharacteristics of the site

– Interpret the results of the analysis to characterize siteconditions

– Determine whether and how (if applicable) theinfrastructure systems (including existing structures)are affected by contamination

• Assess the risk the site may pose to human healthand the environment. Consider the exposurepathways of direct contact, ingestion, orinhalation of soil and dust, water, and air.

• Depending on state regulatory requirements,consider the use of a site-specific risk assessmentto identify cleanup levels when that approachmay result in more reasonable cleanup standardsor when cleanup standards have not beendeveloped

• Examine unacceptable environmental conditionsin terms of initial costs for site improvement andlong-term costs for annual operation andmaintenance — include potential cleanup optionsand constraints that may affect redevelopmentrequirements, such as project schedules, costs, andpotential for achieving the desired reuse

• Revise assumptions about the site based on datacollected at the site

• Begin consideration of sources of funding for siteinvestigation and cleanup activities such as stateBrownfields Programs and federal tax credits:

– Contact the EPA regional brownfields coordinator toidentify and determine the availability of EPAsupport programs and federal financial incentives

• Continue to work with appropriate regulatoryagencies to ensure that regulatory requirementsare being properly addressed:

– Identify and consult with the appropriate federal,state, local, and tribal agencies to include them asearly as possible in the decision-making process

• Educate members of the community about the siteinvestigation process and actively involve them indecision-making; consider risk communicationtechniques to facilitate those activities

Listed below are examples of resources that assist inidentifying the environmental condition of a site. Theresources are listed alphabetically under thefollowing categories:

A. Resources for Site Investigation

B. Site-Specific Resources for Site Investigation

C. Technology-Specific Resources for Site Investigation


A. Resources for Site Investigation

ASTM Standard Guide for Accelerated SiteCharacterization for Confirmed or SuspectedPetroleum Releases (E1912-98(2004))Developed by ASTM, the guide describes acceleratedsite characterization (ASC), a process used to rapidlyand accurately characterize confirmed or suspectedreleases of petroleum. The guide provides aframework that responsible parties, contractors,consultants, and regulators can use to streamline andaccelerate site characterization. The guide isavailable at a cost and can be ordered online atwww.astm.org.

ASTM Standard Guide forEnvironmental Site Assessments: PhaseII Environmental Site AssessmentProcess (E1903-97(2002))Developed by ASTM, the guide discusses

a framework for employing good commercial andcustomary practices in the United States during PhaseII environmental site assessments of commercialproperty with respect to the potential presence of arange of contaminants within the scope of CERCLAas well as petroleum products. The guide, which isavailable at a cost, can ordered online atwww.astm.org.



42

Brownfields and Land RevitalizationTechnology Support CenterEPA established BTSC to ensure thatbrownfields decision-makers are aware ofthe full range of technologies available for

conducting site assessments and cleanup and canmake informed decisions for their sites. The centerhelps government decision-makers evaluate strategiesto streamline the site assessment and cleanupprocess, identify and review information aboutcomplex technology options, evaluate contractorcapabilities and recommendations, explain complextechnologies to communities, and plan technologydemonstrations. The center is coordinated throughEPA’s OSRTI and works through EPA’s ORDlaboratories. BTSC works closely with EPA’s Office ofBrownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment and inpartnership with USACE and ANL. Localities cansubmit requests for assistance through their EPARegional Brownfields Coordinator, online atwww.brownfieldstsc.org, or by calling (877) 838-7220(toll free). For more information about BTSC, contactDan Powell of EPA’s OSRTI at (703) 603-7196 [email protected].

Brownfields Technology Primer:Requesting and Evaluating Proposalsthat Encourage Innovative Technologiesfor Investigation and Cleanup (EPA 542-R-01-005)BTSC prepared this primer to assist site

owners, project managers, and others preparing RFPsto solicit support in conducting activities toinvestigate and clean up contaminated sites. It isspecifically intended to assist those individuals inwriting specifications that encourage contractors andtechnology vendors to propose options for usinginnovative characterization and remediationtechnologies at brownfields sites. The primer alsoprovides information, from a technology perspective,to guide review teams in their evaluations ofproposals and the selection of qualified contractors.

Brownfields Technology Primer: Using the TriadApproach to Streamline Brownfields SiteAssessment and Cleanup (EPA 542-B-03-002)BTSC prepared this document to provide aneducational tool for site owners, project managers,and regulators in order to help streamline assessmentand cleanup activities at brownfields sites. Strategiesthat reduce costs, decrease time frames, and positivelyaffect regulatory and community acceptance also canimprove the economics of redevelopment at

brownfields sites. Increased attention to brownfieldssites and the manner in which they are redevelopedplaces greater importance on the approach to sitecleanup. This primer is one in a series that willaddress specific cleanup issues.

Cost Estimating Tools and Resources for Addressingthe Brownfields Initiatives (EPA 625-R-99-001)The guide is one in a series of publications designed toassist communities, states, municipalities, and theprivate sector to address brownfields sites moreeffectively. The guide, which is designed to be usedwith the three guides for specific types of sites –Technical Approaches to Characterizing and CleaningUp Automotive Repair Sites Under the BrownfieldsInitiative, Technical Approaches to Characterizing andCleaning Up Iron and Steel Mill Sites Under theBrownfields Initiative, and Technical Approaches toCharacterizing and Cleaning Up Metal Finishing SitesUnder the Brownfields Initiative – providesinformation about cost estimating tools and resourcesfor addressing cleanup costs at brownfields sites.Many decision-makers at brownfields sites may chooseto assign the preparation of cost estimates toconsultants who are experienced in the cleanup ofhazardous waste sites; however, it benefits thosedecision-makers to be able to provide guidance to theirconsultants and to understand the process sufficientlywell to provide an informed review of the estimatesprepared. The guide provides general informationabout the cost estimation process and includessummaries of various types of estimates. The guidealso outlines the process of developing “order ofmagnitude” cost estimates. Information aboutresources, databases, and models also is provided.

Data Quality Objective Process for HazardousWaste Site Investigations (EPA 600-R-00-007)The document focuses on the DQO process as theappropriate systematic planning process to supportdecision-making. The DQO process is an importanttool for project managers and planners to use indefining the types, quality, and quantity of dataneeded to make defensible decisions. The documentis based on the principles and steps developed inGuidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process butis specific to investigations of hazardous waste sites.The guidance is also consistent with Data QualityObjectives Process for Superfund: Interim FinalGuidance (EPA 1993) and Soil Screening Guidance:User’s Guide (EPA 1996). Although the documentfocuses on EPA applications, the guidance also isapplicable to programs at the state and local levels.




Directory of Technical Assistance for LandRevitalization (BTSC) (EPA 542-B-03-001)BTSC prepared this directory to provideinformation about technical assistance thatis available from federal agencies to assist

regional, state, and local government personnel inmaking assessment and cleanup decisions forbrownfields, reuse, and revitalization sites. Thisdirectory includes information about 37organizations within 10 federal agencies that providedifferent types of support to help with site assessmentand cleanup, including technical support andfunding sources. Profiles are included for theseagencies and organizations and contain the followingtypes of information: background and locationinformation, relevancy to revitalization, description ofthe areas of expertise available, discussion of thetypes of services available, types of funding availableand eligibility, contact information and the processfor requesting assistance, and examples of specificinstances in which the organization has previouslyprovided support relevant to site revitalization.Information in the profiles is believed to be current asof March 2003. To help maintain current information,the directory is available as an online database atwww.brownfieldstsc.org/directory/directory.cfm.

Engineering and Design: Requirements for thePreparation of Sampling and Analysis Plans (EM200-1-3)Developed by USACE, this manual provides guidancefor the preparation of project-specific SAPs for thecollection of environmental data. In addition, themanual presents default sampling and analyticalprotocols that may be used verbatim or modifiedbased in light of the DQOs for a specific project. Thegoal of the manual is to promote consistency in thegeneration and execution of sampling and analysisplans and therefore to help investigators generatechemical data of known quality for the purpose towhich those data are to be used.

EPA Office of Solid Waste SW-846 Online:Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes,Physical/Chemical MethodsDeveloped by EPA’s OSW, the Web siteprovides test procedures and guidance that

EPA recommends for use in conducting theevaluations and measurements needed to complywith requirements established under RCRA. Theonline manual presents state-of-the-art methods ofroutine analytical testing that have been adapted foruse under the RCRA Program. All the documents

found in the Third Edition of SW-846, as updated byupdates I, II, IIA, IIB, III, and IIIA, are located at theWeb site. It presents procedures for field andlaboratory QC, sampling, identification of hazardousconstituents in wastes, determination of thehazardous characteristics of wastes (toxicity,ignitability, reactivity, or corrosivity), anddetermination of the physical properties of wastes. Italso provides guidance on selecting appropriatemethods. The methods can be downloaded from theSW-846 Web site at no cost.

EPA REmediation And CHaracterization InnovativeTechnologies (REACH IT) Online SearchableDatabaseThe EPA REACH IT online searchable databasessponsored by EPA’s OSRTI is a service provided freeof charge to both users and technology vendors.This database provides users comprehensive, up-to-date information about more than 256characterization technologies and 481 remediationtechnologies and their applications. It combinesinformation submitted by technology serviceproviders about remediation and characterizationtechnologies with information from EPA, DoD, DOE,and state project managers about sites at whichinnovative technologies are being deployed. Duringthe preliminary phase of a brownfields project, EPAREACH IT will assist brownfields stakeholders tolearn about and become familiar with the range ofavailable technology options that can be employedduring the investigation and the cleanup phasesthat follow, as well as data about various types ofsites. Information about analytical screeningtechnologies that may be useful for initial samplingof a site also is provided. EPA REACH IT isaccessible only through the Internet.

Evaluation of Selected Environmental DecisionSupport Software (DSS)Developed by DOE’s Office of EnvironmentalManagement, the report evaluates DSS, computer-based systems that facilitate the use of data,models, and structured decision processes inmaking decisions related to environmentalmanagement. The report evaluates 19 such systemsthrough the application of a rating system thatfavors software that simulates a wide range ofenvironmental problems. It includes a glossary ofterms and a statement of the rationale for theselection of various aspects of the performance ofthe DSS for evaluation.


44

Field Analytic Technologies Encyclopedia (FATE)The online encyclopedia provides information abouttechnologies that investigators can use in the field tocharacterize contaminated soil and groundwater;monitor the progress of remedial efforts; and, insome cases, perform confirmation sampling andanalysis to support closeout of a site. Theencyclopedia emphasizes the systematic planningcomponent of the Triad as a necessary step toidentify factors and issues that contribute todecision uncertainty. The site also provides asearchable function to enable the user to find anappropriate technology based on the contaminantsat a site and the media to be treated, and providessite summaries, links to relevant resources, andtraining modules. The encyclopedia serves a widerange of users, from engineering students to fieldtechnicians and site managers.

Field Sampling and Analysis Technologies Matrix,Version 1.0The matrix, an online tool, will assist brownfieldsstakeholders to obtain information about and screentechnologies applicable for site investigation. Eachsite characterization technology is rated in a numberof performance categories, such as detection limits,applicable media, selectivity, and turnaround time.Other useful information provided includestechnology descriptions; data on commercial status,cost, and certification; and evaluation reports. Thematrix is extremely helpful to users who are notfamiliar with specific characterization technologies,but who know baseline information about a site, suchas contaminants and media; for such users, the matrixcan identify and screen technologies for potential useat a site.

Guideline for Dynamic Workplans and FieldAnalytics: The Keys to Cost-Effective SiteCharacterization and CleanupDeveloped by Tufts University in cooperation withEPA, the document provides users with informationabout the many factors that are to be considered inincorporating field analytical instruments andmethods into an adaptive sampling and analysisprogram for expediting the site investigationprocess. The guidance is intended to assist federaland state regulators, site owners, consultingengineers, and remediation companies understandhow to develop, maintain, and update a dynamicworkplan.

Improving the Cost-Effectiveness of HazardousWaste Site Characterization and MonitoringThe report introduces a new standard promoted byEPA’s OSWER and OSRTI that encourages moreeffective and less costly strategies for characterizingand monitoring hazardous waste sites. The newapproach uses an integrated triad of systematicplanning, dynamic work plans, and on-site analysisfor data collection and technical decision-making athazardous waste sites. Individually, none of theconcepts in the Triad approach is new, but it has beendemonstrated that the integrated approach completesprojects faster, cheaper, and with greater regulatoryand client satisfaction than the traditional phasedapproach. The report includes a list of additionalresources regarding innovative technologies and sitecharacterization.

Innovations in Site Characterization Case Study SeriesThe case studies provide cost and performanceinformation about the innovative technologies thatsupport less costly and more representative sitecharacterization. The purpose of the case studies is toanalyze and document the effectiveness of newtechnologies proposed for site cleanup. They presentinformation about the capability of the technologiesin analyzing and monitoring cleanup, as well asinformation about costs associated with the use of thetechnologies. The following case studies areavailable:

– Dexsil L2000 PCB/Chloride Analyzer for DrumSurfaces (EPA 542-R-99-003)

– Geophysical Investigation at Hazardous Waste Sites(EPA 542-R-00-003)

– Hanscom Air Force Base, Operable Unit 1(EPA 542-R-98-006)

– Site Cleanup of the Wenatchee Tree Fruit Test PlotSite Using a Dynamic Work Plan (2000)(EPA 542-R-00-009)

– NEW! Technology Evaluation: Real-time VOCAnalysis Using a Field Portable GC/MS(EPA 542-R-01-011)

Innovative Remediation and SiteCharacterization Technologies Resources(EPA 542-C-04-002)Produced by EPA’s OSRTI, this CD-ROMcontains resources that provide information

to help federal, state, and private sector site managersevaluate site assessment and cleanup alternatives. Theability to gain access to resources that provide




information about innovative site characterization andremediation technologies will increase theunderstanding of those technologies and of the cost andperformance factors related to them. Suchunderstanding is essential to the consideration of thosetechnologies for use in addressing contamination athazardous waste sites. The information on the CD-ROM is broken down into seven categories: bulletins,fact sheets, journals, and newsletters; communityinvolvement support; electronic resources;organizations, programs and partnerships; publicationclearinghouses; publications; and regulatory resources.Several resources included on the CD-ROM also areavailable at the Road Map online. Copies of the CD-ROM can be ordered through the NSCEP at P.O. Box42419, Cincinnati, Ohio 45242-2419 or by calling (800)490-9198 (toll free).

Managing Uncertainty in EnvironmentalDecisionsThis paper was published in EnvironmentalScience and Technology, a publication of theAmerican Chemical Society, in October

2001. The preparation of this paper was coordinatedthrough EPA OSRTI and included input from USACE.The paper discusses the relationship between dataquality concepts and improved decision-making forenvironmental site investigation and cleanup projects.It addresses the context and use of site investigation-related terminology, conventional data qualityapproaches, and the use of the Triad approach.

Relationship Between SW-846, PBMS,and Innovative Analytical Technologies(EPA 542-R-01-015)This paper, which was developed by EPAOSRTI in collaboration with EPA OSW,

explains and documents EPA’s position regardingtesting methods (such as SW-846) used in wasteprograms and the relationship between regulatoryflexibility regarding analytical methods and the useof on-site measurements to improve the cost-effectiveness of contaminated site cleanups. Thepaper also explains the advantages of a performance-based approach to analytical methods and the use ofperformance-based measurement systems (PBMS)within EPA programs. The Triad approach to siteinvestigation and characterization, which is based onPBMS principles, also is briefly discussed. Thispaper will assist brownfields stakeholders byproviding information and references that addressflexibility and more affordable approaches toperforming analyses at contaminated sites.

Resources for Strategic Site Investigation andMonitoring (EPA 542-F-01-030B)The document is a concise guide to resources, bothexisting and planned, that support new, streamlinedapproaches to site investigation and monitoring. Itdescribes training courses available, including somethat are downloadable; lists sources of informationabout available technologies and guidancedocuments available through EPA programs; andprovides sources of information about technologyverification and demonstration efforts. The guidealso lists a number of Web sites from which relatedpublications and software can be downloaded. Thedocument can be downloaded from CLU-IN under“Publications.”

Sensor Technology Information Exchange (SenTIX)SenTIX serves as a forum to exchange informationabout sensor technologies and needs. The purpose ofthe Web site is to serve as a tool to assist those workingin the environmental field in cleaning up hazardouswaste. The submit and search functions of SenTIX canhelp match users looking for a sensor technology tomeet a specific need. The discussion forum alsomatches developers, vendors, and users. Users canprovide sensor-related information online. The sitewas developed by (WPI), a nonprofit organization,under a cooperative agreement with EPA.

Site Characterization Library, Version 3.0(EPA 600/C/05/001)The Site Characterization Library (Library),which was created by EPA’s ORD,National Exposure Research Laboratory

(NERL), Environmental Sciences Division (ESD) in LasVegas, Nevada, provides a centralized, field-portablesource for site characterization information. EPA hascompiled this compendium in electronic form on bothCD-ROM and DVD. The resources contained in theLibrary were recommended by experts in the field ofsite characterization and are classified into thefollowing four types: Web sites, audiovisual resources,documents, and software. Version 3.0 of the Librarycontains over 36,000 pages of guidance in the form ofpdf files, software programs, video files, and Web links.It includes 400 documents, 80 Web links, 54 softwareprograms, and 11 audiovisual files. The audio andvideo files are new to Version 3.0 and contain Internettraining seminars relating to site characterization andmonitoring technologies and approaches. Analphabetical index of all the resources in this Library isincluded to enable users to locate resources by title. Asection on the Triad approach provides easy access to


46

information on this innovative site characterizationmethodology. A limited number of copies of Version3.0 of the Library are available free of charge by mailfrom either of the following locations: EPA NSCEP,P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati, Ohio 45242-2419,telephone: (513) 489-8190 or (800) 490-9198, fax: (513)489-8695; or EPA NERL, ERD/ORD, P.O. Box 93478,Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-3478, telephone: (702) 798-2365 or (702)798-2207, e-mail: [email protected].

Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)Program Demonstration ReportsAn extensive inventory of reports of the evaluation ofmeasurement and monitoring technologies in theSITE Program is available to assist decision-makers inreviewing technology options and assessing atechnology’s applicability to a particular site. Thereports evaluate all information about a technology;provide an analysis of its overall applicability to sitecharacteristics, waste types, and waste matrices; andpresent testing procedures, performance and costdata, and QA/QC standards. The DemonstrationBulletins provide summarized descriptions oftechnologies and announcements of demonstrations.The Innovative Technology Evaluation Reportsprovide full reports of the demonstration results,including technical data useful to decision-makers.The Emerging Technology Program Reports describeemerging innovative technologies and are developedunder the terms of a cooperative agreement betweenthe technology developer and EPA.

Sustainable Management Approachesand Revitalization Tools - electronic(SMARTe)The SMARTe Web-based decision supporttool is a cooperative effort of EPA, ITRC, and

the German Federal Ministry for Education andResearch. It is designed to aid stakeholders inidentifying, applying, and integrating tools andtechnologies to facilitate revitalization of potentiallycontaminated sites in the United States. Currently,SMARTe contains information and databases thatallow project stakeholders to assess both market andnonmarket costs and benefits of redevelopmentoptions, clarify private and public financing options,evaluate and communicate environmental risks andopportunities, and access relevant state-specificinformation. By October 2007, SMARTe will use expertsystem technology to integrate environmental, socialand economic issues in a multi-criteria decisionanalysis so that stakeholders can evaluate alternativereuse scenarios.

Triad Resource CenterThe Triad Resource Center, a multiagencycollaboration of EPA, USACE, ITRC, DOE,the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Air Force, and theState of New Jersey, is maintained by

ANL. The center provides information abouteffective implementation of the Triad approach indecision-making during hazardous waste sitecharacterization and remediation. It also providesan overview of the Triad principles and describeschanges in regulatory functions that are requiredwhen the Triad approach is used at hazardouswaste sites. Also available are descriptions ofprojects in which Triad principles have beensuccessfully implemented. A reference and resourcesection includes general reference material, trainingresources, and information about upcomingconferences and workshops.

Using Dynamic Field Activities for On-Site Decision-Making: A Guide forProject Managers (EPA 540-R-03-002)This document, which was developed byEPA, provides environmental cleanup

professionals with guidance on how to use an on-sitedecision-making process to streamline field work atcontaminated sites. This guidance focuses on howproject managers can use dynamic work planningand field-based analytical methods to meet projectgoals and streamline site activities. Also included areexamples of sites where this process has beensuccessfully implemented.

B. Site-Specific Resources for Site InvestigationListed below are survey reports on the application ofinnovative technologies to specific contaminants andsite types.

Application of Field-Based Characterization Tools inthe Waterfront Voluntary SettingThis report investigates the reasons voluntary actionto redevelop potentially contaminated property issubject to market constraints and other pressures thatdiffer vastly from those that affect corrective actionprograms. It sets forth in detail the current level ofapplication of field-based characterization tools at115 waterfront brownfields sites and sites beingaddressed under VCP programs.




Characterization of Mine Leachates and theDevelopment of a Ground-Water MonitoringStrategy for Mine Sites (EPA 600-R-99-007)The objective of the research project was to develop abetter understanding of the composition of minewaste leachates and to identify cost-effectivegroundwater monitoring parameters that could beincorporated into a monitoring strategy to reliablydetect the migration of contaminants from hard-rockmining operations.

Resource for MGP Site Characterization andRemediation: Expedited Site Characterization andSource Remediation at Former Manufactured GasPlant Sites (EPA 542-R-00-005)The document provides current information aboutuseful approaches and tools being applied at formermanufactured gas plant (MGP) sites to the regulatorsand utilities that are engaged in characterizing andremediating these sites. The document outlines sitemanagement strategies and field tools for expeditingsite characterization at MGP sites; presents asummary of existing technologies for remediatingMGP wastes in soils; provides sufficient informationabout the benefits, limitations, and costs of eachtechnology, tool, or strategy for comparison andevaluation; and provides, through case studies,examples of the ways in which those tools andstrategies can be implemented at MGP sites.

Risk-Management Strategy for PCB-ContaminatedSedimentsThe report, prepared by the National ResearchCouncil’s Committee on the Remediation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments under an EPA grant,reviews the nature of the challenge involved in themanagement of sediments contaminated with PCBs;provides an overview of current knowledge about theinputs, fates, and effects of PCBs; recommends a risk-based framework for use in assessing remediationtechnologies and risk-management strategies; andelaborates on the framework as it is applicablespecifically to sediments contaminated with PCBs.

C. Technology-Specific Resources for SiteInvestigation

The documents listed below provide detailedinformation about specific innovative technologiesand the application of those processes to specificcontaminants and media in the form of engineeringanalyses, application reports, technology verificationand evaluation reports, and technology reviews.

A User’s Guide to Environmental ImmunochemicalAnalysisDeveloped by EPA’s ORD, the document facilitatestransfer of immunochemical methods for the analysisof environmental contaminants to the environmentalanalytical chemistry laboratory. Field personnel whomay have a need to employ a measurementtechnology at a monitoring site also may find thismanual helpful. The document instructs the reader inthe use and application of immunochemical methodsof analysis for environmental contaminants. Itincludes a general troubleshooting guide, along withspecific instructions for certain analytes. The guide iswritten in a manner that allows the user to apply theinformation presented to immunoassays that are notdiscussed in the manual.

Adaptive Sampling and AnalysisProgram (ASAP), ANLDeveloped by the EnvironmentalAssessment Division (EAD) of ANL, anadaptive sampling and analysis program

(ASAP) is an expedited approach to collecting datain support of hazardous waste site characterizationand remediation. ASAPs rely on “real-time” datacollection techniques and in-field decision-makingto keep data collection as inexpensive, focused, andefficient as possible. The Web site provides links torelated fact sheets and identifies sites where theASAP approach has been successfully used.

Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquids(DNAPLs): Review of EmergingCharacterization and RemediationTechnologiesThis document, which was developed byITRC, is an educational tool for regulators

and project managers who work with DNAPL-contaminated sites. The emerging characterizationtechnologies discussed in the document includegeophysical and direct-push technologies, and in situtracers. Emerging remediation technologies describedin the document include in situ flushing, dynamicunderground stripping, six-phase heating, and in situchemical oxidation. The document also presentsstakeholder concerns about application of theseemerging technologies.


48

Environmental Security TechnologyCertification Program (ESTCP)DoD’s ESTCP Program promotesinnovative, cost-effective environmentalcharacterization and remediation

technologies through their demonstration andvalidation at DoD sites. Successful demonstrationleads to acceptance of innovative technologies byDoD end-users and the regulatory community. TheWeb site provides access to detailed reports aboutcompleted demonstration projects that have verifiedcost and performance of a technology, and fact sheetsabout ongoing projects where innovative technologiesare being tested. Some of the areas under which thesedemonstrations are being conducted includechlorinated solvents, heavy metals, perchlorate,petroleum hydrocarbons and related compounds andcontaminated sediments. Reports about sitecharacterization, monitoring and processoptimization are also available. The user can also usethe online library to search for reports and fact sheetsbased on keywords.

Environmental Technology VerificationReportsProduced by EPA’s ORD, theEnvironmental Technology Verification(ETV) Program reports provide extensive

information about the performance of commercial-ready, private sector technologies. The reports areintended for buyers of technologies, developers oftechnologies, consulting engineers, and state andfederal agencies. The documents verify theenvironmental performance characteristics of thesetechnologies based on pilot project results. Thereports as well as other information about the ETVProgram are available on the ETV Web site.Approximately 100 ETV reports and verificationstatements about the performance of varioustechnologies are available. Examples of thesetechnologies include ambient ammonia sensors,mercury continuous emission monitors, arsenic testkits, rapid polymerase chain reaction (PCR)technologies, laser-induced fluorescence sensors,cone penetrometer-deployed sensors, environmentalDSS, explosives detection, field-portable gaschromatograph/mass spectrometer, field-portable X-ray fluorescence analyzer, groundwater sampling,PCB field analysis technologies, portable gaschromatograph/mass spectrometer, soil and soil gassampling, wellhead monitoring for volatile organiccompounds (VOC), and soil sampling technologies.

EPA Dynamic Field Activities Internet SiteHosted by EPA’s OSRTI, the Internet site providesresources to assist decision-makers to streamlineactivities conducted at hazardous waste sites usingreal-time data and real-time decisions. Descriptionsof the specific elements of dynamic field activitiesare provided, as well as related guidance documentsand publications, including links to relevant Internetsites. Information about on-site analytical toolssuitable for use during dynamic field activities alsois provided.

EPA Technical Support ProjectEPA’s OSWER, regional wastemanagement offices, and ORD establishedthe Technical Support Project (TSP) in1987 to provide technical assistance to

regional remedial project managers (RPM), correctiveaction staff, and on-scene coordinators (OSC). TheTSP consists of a network of Regional Forums andspecialized Technical Support Centers in ORD, Officeof Radiation Programs (ORP) laboratories, andOSWER’s Environmental Response Team. The threetechnical forums within the TSP include theEngineering Forum, the Ground Water Forum, andthe Federal Facilities Forum. Members of these forumswork to improve communication and assist intechnical transfer between the regions and thecenters. The Forums also act as technical resourcesand disseminate TSP information to their regionalcolleagues. TSP issue papers and fact sheets, whichare available online, provide information onremediation technologies or technical issues ofconcern. Technical assistance requests may bedirected to any of the Technical Support Centercontacts or to the regional forum representative.Contact information can be found on the TSP Web siteat www.epa.gov/tio/tsp.

Federal Facilities Forum Issue: FieldSampling and Selecting On-SiteAnalytical Methods for Explosives inWater (EPA 600-S-99-002)This paper was prepared by members of

the Federal Facilities Forum, a group of EPA scientistsand engineers representing EPA regional offices whoare committed to identification and resolution ofissues affecting federal facility Superfund and RCRAsites. The purpose of the paper is to provide guidanceto RPMs about field sampling and on-site analyticalmethods for detecting and quantifying secondaryexplosive contaminants in water. The paper isdivided into the following sections: (1) purpose and




scope, (2) background information, (3) overview ofsampling and analysis of explosives, (4) DQOs, (5)sampling and analysis for explosives in water, (6) asummary of on-site analytical methods and (7)summary of EPA reference analytical methods forexplosives in water.

National Environmental Technology TestSitesThe National Environmental TechnologyTest Sites (NETTS) Program wasestablished by the Strategic

Environmental Research and Development Program(SERDP) in 1993 to facilitate the transition ofenvironmental remediation technologies to full-scaleuse by overcoming the barriers that presently inhibitcommercialization of such technologies. SERDPprojects focus on five key areas: cleanup, compliance,conservation, pollution prevention, and UXO. Theprogram provides sites for applied research andcomparative demonstration and evaluation ofinnovative and potentially cost-effective cleanup,characterization, and monitoring technologies. Thesetest sites are located at Naval Construction BattalionCenter, Port Hueneme, California; Dover Air ForceBase, Delaware; and McClellan Air Force Base,Sacramento, California. The NETTS locations offerunique environmental settings, media, andcontaminants for field demonstrations at well-characterized test sites as well as the infrastructureand site support required for technologydemonstrations. The program provides infrastructure(site preparation, access roads, test pads, offices,laboratories, analytical equipment, drill rigs, fieldvehicles, utilities, lighting, fencing, and security) andsite support (site characterization, demonstrationoversight, permitting assistance, and technologytransfer assistance). Information about fundingopportunities is available at www.serdp.org/funding/funding.html.

New England Waste ManagementOfficials (NEWMOA)NEWMOA is a nonprofit, nonpartisaninterstate association that has amembership composed of the hazardous

waste, solid waste, waste site cleanup, and pollutionprevention program directors for the environmentalagencies in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, NewHampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island,and Vermont. The Web site includes information onpollution prevention, solid and hazardous wastemanagement, waste site cleanup, and brownfields.

NEWMOA’s waste site cleanup program focuses onissues of interest to state programs that haveresponsibility for investigation and remediation ofcontaminated sites. The waste site cleanup programis working on issues surrounding the redevelopmentand reuse of contaminated property and the use ofinnovative site characterization and remediationtechnologies. The waste site cleanup program area ofthe Web site contains NEWMOA waste site cleanuptechnology advisory opinions, conferencepresentations and surveys, research briefs,workgroup information, and links to other sites. Thisresource assists states in developing effectivestrategies for improving the effectiveness of voluntarysite cleanups and the redevelopment of brownfieldssites and increases understanding of methods to meetthe state program requirements of the newbrownfields legislation.

Remedial Technology DevelopmentForum (RTDF)RTDF, which was established in 1992, is apublic-private partnership that undertakesresearch, development, demonstration,

and evaluation efforts focused on finding innovativetechnologies to remediate and to characterizecontaminated sites. RTDF includes partners fromindustry, several federal and state governmentagencies, and academia who voluntarily share theirknowledge, experience, equipment, facilities, andeven proprietary technology to achieve commoncleanup goals. The RTDF includes eight action teams:Bioremediation of Chlorinated Solvents Consortium,In-Place Inactivation and Natural EcologicalRestoration Technologies (IINERT) Soil Metals ActionTeam, NAPL Cleanup Alliance, Phytoremediation ofOrganics Action Team, Permeable Reactive Barriers(PRB) Action Team, Sediments Remediation ActionTeam, Lasagna™ Partnership (inactive), and In SituFlushing Action Team (inactive). RTDF providesupdated information on the technologies addressedby these teams and other innovative approaches tosite characterization and treatment.

Site Characterization Technologies forDNAPL Investigations (EPA 542-R-04-017)Compiled by EPA’s OSRTI, this resourceprovides a summary of information aboutthe current state of technologies available

for locating and characterizing DNAPL contaminatedsites. This report may be used by remediation sitemanagers to identify suitable characterizationtechnologies for potential or confirmed DNAPL


50

��

Course of Action

Consult withappropriate regulatoryofficials beforeproceeding withredevelopmentactivities.

Consult withappropriate regulatoryofficials beforeproceeding withredevelopmentactivities.

Proceed to theCLEANUP OPTIONSphase.

Determine whetherredevelopmentcontinues to bepracticable as planned,or whether theredevelopment plancan be altered to fit thecircumstances; if so,proceed to theCLEANUP OPTIONSphase.

Contact theappropriate federal,state, local, or tribalgovernment agenciesresponsible forhazardous waste. Ifcontamination exists atconsiderable levels,compliance with otherprograms, such asRCRA and Superfund,may be required.

Results of the SiteInvestigation

No contamination isfound.

Contamination isfound BUT does notpose a significantrisk to stakeholders’human health or theenvironment.

Cleanup of thecontaminationfound probably willrequire a smallexpenditure of fundsand time.

Cleanup of thecontaminationfound probably willrequire a significantexpenditure of fundsand time. However,contaminationdoes not pose asignificant threatto local residents.

Contamination isfound that poses asignificant threatto local residents.

➡

➡

➡

➡

➡

contamination, screen the technologies for potentialapplication, learn about technology applications atsimilar sites, and locate additional information onthese technologies. The report describes bothgeophysical and non-geophysical characterizationtechnologies as well as characterization technologiesunder evaluation.

Tri-Service Site Characterization and AnalysisPenetrometer System-SCAPS: InnovativeEnvironmental Technology from Concept toCommercializationThe report, which was published by the U.S. ArmyEnvironmental Center, summarizes the development,field demonstration, and regulatory acceptanceactivities associated with the SCAPS technologies thatare used to detect, identify, and quantify subsurfacecontamination in soil and groundwater.

U.S. Department of Defense: StrategicEnvironmental Research andDevelopment Program (SERDP)SERDP is an environmental research anddevelopment program planned and

executed and in full partnership with DOE and EPAwith the participation of numerous other federal andnonfederal organizations. Within its broad areas ofinterest, the program focuses on cleanup, compliance,conservation, pollution prevention, and UXOtechnologies. SERDP provides demonstrationopportunities through the NETTS Program andencourages technology transfer through an annualtechnical symposium and workshop. SERDP fundsenvironmental research and development by bothgovernment and private sector parties. Additionalinformation about SERDP funding may be obtained atwww.serdp.org/funding/funding.html. Users canaccess detailed performance and cost information forcompleted demonstrations at the SERDP Web site.Users may also subscribe to a mailing list forquarterly SERDP updates.

After you have completed your investigation of theenvironmental conditions at the site, you may takeone of the following courses of action:





KEYS TO TECHNOLOGY SELECTIONAND ACCEPTANCE

Managing uncertainty is the unifyingtheme of the Triad approach, and it is

a crucial aspect of the effective use of field analytical methods (seeSpotlight 7, The Triad Approach, on the next page). Although notall field analytical technologies employ screening methodologies (forexample, field-portable gas chromatography/mass spectrometry [GC/MS] is a definitive analytical methodology), many such technologies(for example, immunoassays) do. In general, data produced byscreening analytical methods will present more analytical uncertaintythan data produced by definitive methods. However, that fact initself does not make definitive methods necessarily “better” thanscreening methods. Definitive methods are not fool-proof –interferences or other problems can cause a marked increase in theiranalytical uncertainty. On the other hand, a number of strategies canbe used to minimize the analytical uncertainty inherent in screeningmethods. Such strategies include the selection of appropriate QA/QC procedures to ensure that the data are of known anddocumented quality. Most important, field analytical technologiesoffer the unique ability to cost-effectively manage the largest singlesource of decision error—sampling representativeness—an abilitythat is not available when requirements to use fixed laboratorymethods discourage proactive management of sampling uncertainty.

Managing Uncertainty

As described throughout the Road Map, innovativetechnologies and technology approaches offer manyadvantages in the cleanup of brownfields sites. Stakeholdersin such sites, however, first must accept the technology.Brownfields decision-makers should consider the followingelements to increase the likelihood that the technology will beaccepted, thereby facilitating the cleanup of the site.

1 Focus on the Decisions that Support Site Goals

As discussed in Spotlight 7, The Triad approach (see next page),systematic planning is an important element of all cleanupactivities. Clear and specific planning to meet explicit decisionobjectives is essential in managing the process of cleaning upcontaminated sites: site assessment, site investigation, sitemonitoring, and remedy selection. With good planning,brownfields decision-makers can establish the cleanup goals forthe site, identify the decisions necessary to achieve those goals,and develop and implement a strategy for addressing thedecision needs. Technology decisions are made in the context ofthe requirements for such decisions. All cleanup activities aredriven by the project goals. An explicit statement of the decisionsto be made and the way in which the planned approach supportsthe decisions should be included in the work plan.

2 Build Consensus

Investing time, before the site work begins, in developingdecisions that are acceptable to all decision-makers will fostermore efficient site activities and make successful cleanup morelikely. Conversely, allowing work to begin at a site before a

common understanding andacceptance of the decisionshave been establishedincreases the likelihood thatthe cleanup process will beinefficient, resulting in delaysand inefficient use of time andmoney. Further, decision-makers mustunderstand that there is uncertainty in all scientific and technicaldecisions (see below for more information about uncertainty).Clearly defining and accepting uncertainty thresholds beforemaking decisions about the site remedy will build consensus.Decisions also should be made in the context of applicableregulatory requirements, political considerations, budgetavailable for the project, and time constraints.

3 Understand the Technology

A thorough knowledge of a technology’s capabilities andlimitations is necessary to secure its acceptance. Alltechnologies are subject to limitations in performance. Planningfor the strengths and weaknesses of a technology maximizesunderstanding of its benefits and its acceptance. “Technologyapprovers,” typically regulators, community groups, and financialservice providers are likely to be more receptive of a newapproach if the proposer provides a clear explanation of therationale for its use and demonstrates confidence in itsapplicability to specific site conditions and needs. This latter pointunderscores the importance of carefully selecting an experienced,multidimensional team of professionals who have the expertisenecessary to plan, present, and implement the chosen approach.

4 Allow Flexibility

Streamlining site activities, whether site assessment, siteinvestigation, removal, treatment, or monitoring, requires aflexible approach. Site-specific conditions, including variousphysical conditions, contamination issues, stakeholder needs,uses of the site, and supporting decisions, require that alldecision-makers understand the need for flexibility. Althoughpresumptive remedies, standard methods, applications at othersites, and program guidance can serve as the basis fordesigning a site-specific cleanup plan and can help decision-makers avoid “starting from scratch” at each site, decision-makers should be wary of depending too heavily on “boilerplatelanguage” and prescriptive methodologies, as well as standardoperating procedures and “accepted” methods. While suchtools provide excellent starting points, they lack the flexibility tomeet site-specific goals. To ensure an efficient and effectivecleanup, the actual technology approach, whether establishedor innovative, must focus on decisions specific to the site.


52

The modernization of the collection, analysis, interpretation,and management of data to support decisions about hazardouswaste sites rests on a three-pronged or “triad” approach. Theintroduction of new technologies in a dynamic frameworkallows project managers to meet clearly defined objectives.Such an approach incorporates the elements described below.

Systematic planning is a common-sense approach to assuringthat the level of detail in project planning matches the intendeduse of the data being collected. Once cleanup goals have beendefined, systematic planning is undertaken to chart a course forthe project that is resource effective, as well as technicallysound and defensible to reach these project-critical goals. Ateam of multidisciplinary, experienced technical staff works totranslate the project’s goals intorealistic technical objectives. TheCSM is the planning tool thatorganizes the information that alreadyis known about the site; the CSMhelps the team identify the additionalinformation that must be obtained.The systematic planning process tiesproject goals to individual activitiesnecessary to reach these goals byidentifying data gaps in the CSM. Theteam then uses the CSM to direct thegathering of needed information,allowing the CSM to evolve andmature as work progresses at the site.

A dynamic working strategyapproach relies on real-time data toreach decision points. The logic for decision-making isidentified and responsibilities, authority, and lines ofcommunication are established. Dynamic work strategyimplementation relies on and is driven by critical projectdecisions needed to reach closure. It uses a decision-tree andreal-time uncertainty management practices to reach criticaldecision points in as few mobilizations as possible. Success ofa dynamic approach depends on the presence of experiencedstaff in the field empowered to make decisions based on thedecision logic and their capability to deal with new data and anyunexpected issues, as they arise. Field staff maintain closecommunication with regulators or others overseeing the projectduring implementation of dynamic work plans.

The use of on-site analytical tools, rapid sampling platforms, andon-site interpretation and management of data makes dynamicwork strategies possible. Such real-time measurement tools areamong the key streamlined site investigation tools because theyprovide the data that are used for on-site decision-making. The

tools are a broad categoryof analytical methods andequipment that can beapplied at the samplecollection site. They includemethods that can be usedoutdoors with hand-held, portableequipment, as well as more rigorousmethods that require the controlled environments of a mobilelaboratory (transportable). During the planning process, the teamidentifies the type, rigor, and quantity of data needed to answer thequestions raised by the CSM. Those decisions then guide thedesign sampling modifications and the selection of analytical tools.

The Triad approach enables projectmanagers to minimize uncertainty whileexpediting site cleanup and reducingproject costs. For example, EPAcollaborated with the Town ofGreenwich, Connecticut to implementthe Triad approach to characterize aformer power plant site scheduled forredevelopment as a waterfront park.The Triad approach yielded anestimated cost savings of 50 to 60percent when compared with atraditional approach involving twomobilizations and comprehensiveanalytical methods at a fixed laboratory.The City of Trenton, New Jersey beganimplementing the Triad approach in

2001 as part of its program to redevelop a large number ofabandoned industrial sites. Overall, the Triad approacheliminated costs associated with follow-on investigation activitieswhile accelerating the redevelopment schedule and reducingdecision uncertainty. Additional details about these and otherexamples are available in the July 2004 edition of EPA’sTechnology News and Trends newsletter atwww.epa.gov/tio/download/newsltrs/tnandt0704.pdf.

EPA published Using the Triad Approach to Streamline BrownfieldsSite Assessment and Cleanup in June 2003. This document canbe obtained from EPA’s Brownfields and Land RevitalizationTechnology Support Center at www.brownfieldstsc.org.

The Triad Resource Center Web site at www.triadcentral.orgprovides information on the Triad approach.

For more information, see the resources numbered 9,24, 48, 63, 79, 140, 159, 167, and 174 in the Index ofResources beginning on page I-1.

THE TRIAD APPROACH:Streamlining Site Investigations and Cleanup Decisions

A Quick Look• Integrates systematic planning, dynamic work

strategies, and real-time measurementtechnologies to meet project and program goals.

• Takes advantage of real-time results and dataassessment to guide additional sampling and tominimize mobilization to reach decision points.

• Focuses site activities on project goals, ratherthan on analytical methods, thereby saving timeand money and fostering better decisions.

• Demonstrated to complete projects faster,cheaper, and with greater regulatorysatisfaction than the traditional phasedapproach to data collection.




The information value of data depends heavily upon theinteraction among sampling and analytical designs inrelation to the intended use of the data, the site-specificcontext surrounding that intended use, and the associatedquality control. When this concept is understood, on-siteanalytical tools can play a major role in makingenvironmental decision-making more efficient, defensible,and cost-effective. In today’s industrial and regulatoryclimate, practitioners are often required to make immediatedecisions that are based ondependable, representative data.The term “representative data”means that there is some stability inthe samples and assurance of datadensity. On-site analyticaltechniques offer that type ofdecision-making assurance to theuser of the data.

Brownfields investigations requireinnovative approaches that arefaster, cheaper, and better thancommon practices. The fasterapproach reduces sampleturnaround times, facilitates in-fielddecision-making, and minimizes deployment time of crewand equipment. The more cost-effective approach is usedto reduce analytical costs, field-labor costs, and completiontimes. The better approach results in data quality that is asaccurate as that attained by fixed off-site laboratories andrefined data analysis based on the results of on-sitescreening. Brownfields sites are essentially industrial sitesat which people will want to take measurements, determinethe extent of contamination, and institute a plan. Thesampling designs for such sites will be dynamic in nature;therefore, the real-time analytical capability offered by field-portable instruments will be essential in successfulsampling. Data representativeness will becomeincreasingly important in site characterization andremediation projects in the near future because it supportsthe dynamic approach by providing real-time feedback.With liability an important consideration at brownfieldssites, managing uncertainties and having representativedata that reflect the true site conditions is critical to propertytransactions. Data representativeness can be usedsuccessfully to generate scientifically sound data that areable to support defensible project decisions at substantial

DATA QUALITY AND REPRESENTATIVENESS:Keys to Cost-Effective Site Investigation

A Quick Look

• Data quality is the function of the data’sinformation content and its ability torepresent the true state of a site.

• Data representativeness is the measureof the degree to which samples can beused to estimate the characteristics ofthe true state of a hazardous waste site.

• Brownfields are considered an “up-and-coming” application in which dataquality and representativness will playan important role.

cost savings over thecost of current practices.

Increased samplingefficiencies, fostered bythe use of innovativetechnologies, allow moretargeted sample collection effortsthat minimize the handling of samples that provide little valuein meeting site-specific data quality objectives. Increased

field analytical productivity isobtained when the type of analysisperformed is targeted so that moresamples can be analyzed each day,thereby bringing about more rapidsite characterizations and verificationof cleanup. When data needs arearticulated clearly, and when anumber of modern sampling andanalytical options are available, it ispossible to optimize data collectionso that the information produced isaccurate for its intended purposewhile still being less costly thanpreviously possible. When applied

carefully, on-site analytical methods offer representative anddecision-quality data with the added benefits of increasedsampling density and real-time availability of results.

Although traditional approaches have tended to focusheavily on the capabilities of definitive analytical methods,the effect of sampling error on the representativeness ofmonitoring and measurement activities also should beconsidered. It is important to determine how data obtainedfrom quality assessment samples can be used to identifyand control in the measurement process sources ofsampling error and uncertainties.

By increasing sampling density, made possible and cost-effective with the use of new sampling and analytical tools,decision-makers can reduce uncertainty and increaseunderstanding of the true conditions of a site. This shouldincrease comfort among site owners, buyers, regulators, andsurrounding communities, as well as reduce the likelihood oferrors and omissions that could negatively affect the site later.

For more information, see the resources numbered30, 35, 36, 79, 86, and 154 in the Index ofResources beginning on page I-1.


54

State and tribal response programs oversee assessmentand cleanup activities at most of the brownfields sitesacross the country. EPA provides technical assistanceand other support to states and tribes in order to helpthem implement more effective approaches to attainingproductive reuse of sites. Two examples of tribalrevitalization efforts in partnership with EPA that arebased on the use of the Triad approach involve theTohono O’odham Nation in Arizona and the Crow CreekSioux Nation in South Dakota.

In October 2002, the Tohono O’odham Nation requestedthat EPA’s BTSC provide support for planning anenvironmental investigation for the former MinerecMining Chemical facility. TheMinerec facility was constructedin 1990 on native desert in theSan Xavier Business Park onland leased from the TohonoO’odham Nation. In 1991,Minerec began limitedproduction of sulfur-containingchemicals that are used in themining industry to separate oreand a pesticide for agriculturaluse. Although known locationsof chemical releases to facilitysoil have been investigated,studies have concluded thatfurther investigation is needed.Investigations would beconducted to address uncertainties regardingundocumented, undiscovered releases that may haveimpacted the facility and to further define areas of knownreleases to support site cleanup planning.

Systematic planning involved developing a CSM toincorporate existing information and to help design anddirect data collection activities supporting reuse plans.The three main tasks identified by BTSC for theinvestigation included:

• Conducting a soil gas survey using direct-pushdrilling methodology for sample collection and an on-site laboratory for analysis

• Collecting and analyzing subsurface soil samples to adepth of 20 feet using direct-push drillingmethodology and an on-site laboratory

• Further assessingvertical migration ofcontamination andpotentialgroundwater impacts(if the joint two tasksindicated a potential threatto groundwater).

The soil gas and soil boring investigations were to beconducted in a single mobilization.

The use of a CSM enabled the Tohono O’odham Nation toestablish a course for the project that is resource-effective,

technically sound, and defensible.The systematic planning processmade use of a decision tree andreal-time uncertainty managementpractices to reach critical decisionpoints in a single mobilization.

At the Ft. Thompson landfill, theCrow Creek Sioux Nation workedwith EPA Region 8 to apply theTriad approach in order to developa model for landfill closure. Tribalconcerns about the landfill siteinvolved impacts on residencesand recreational areas, surfacewater impacts, the ability to reuseland for grazing and other habitatpurposes, and official site closure.

The Ft. Thompson landfill, a 12.5-acre community dumpused from the 1960s through 2000 for waste burning anddisposal, was used primarily by homeowners and smallbusinesses. The potential existed for disposal ofpesticides, petroleum products, batteries, and metals. Asoil cover had been placed over the dump; some pits andburn areas remained visible.

BTSC assisted EPA Region 8 in formulating an initial CSM that:

• Focused data needs on surface soil and surface water(runoff) pathways instead of the landfill

• Improved data density through use of field-basedmethods and a dynamic work strategy

• Helped Region 8 develop a model for landfillinvestigations

SUPPORTING TRIBAL REVITALIZATIONEFFORTS

A Quick Look

• EPA provides technical assistance andother support to states and tribes that areinterested in implementing more effectiveapproaches to attaining productive reuseof sites.

• The use of a CSM enabled the TohonoO’odham Nation to establish a course forits project that is resource-effective,technically sound, and defensible.

• Careful planning and the use of creativefield-based technologies helped EPARegion 8 and the Crow Creek Sioux Nationto produce a higher density of data andaffordably manage uncertainty.





Based on BTSC recommendations, the project team:

• Eliminated the need to drill into and beneath thelandfill (potentially creating new pathways)

• Selected field-based methods to characterize soil andsediment for metals (X-ray fluorescence), totalpetroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) (colorimetric test kits),and chlordane and other chlorinated pesticides(immunoassay test kits)

Careful planning helped to ensure that the datacollected would meet the intended use. Creative field-

Continued ... SUPPORTING TRIBAL REVITALIZATIONEFFORTS

based technologies were used to affordably manageuncertainty, producing a higher density of data andmore defensible decisions. The end result is thatdecisions made about the site were supported by betterinformation, thus providing a model for futureinvestigations of this type.

The two examples summarized above demonstrate thebenefits of improved decision-making through systematicplanning. For more information, visitwww.brownfieldstsc.org.


56

BackgroundThe enactment of the Small Business Liability Relief andBrownfields Revitalization Act expanded the definition ofbrownfields to include mine-scarred lands (MSL),making these properties eligible for the benefits of theBrownfields Program. MSLs are defined as lands,associated waters, and surrounding watersheds whereextraction, beneficiation, or processing of ores andminerals (including coal) has occurred. It is estimatedthat there are more than 500,000abandoned mining sitescomposed of hard rock and coalmines located on both public andprivate land across the UnitedStates that involve complexeconomic, social, andenvironmental issues. MSLs havebecome a persistent problem inmany communities because of theeconomic and environmentalchallenges of cleaning up andreusing the lands.

The inclusion of MSLs in theBrownfields Programstrengthens existing minereclamation programsadministered by the U.S. Department of Interior’s (DOI)Office of Surface Mining. The Surface Mining Controland Reclamation Act governs surface coal miningactivities and established the abandoned mine landreclamation fund. The MSL Working Group, which iscomposed of six federal agencies, is co-chaired byEPA’s Office of Brownfields Cleanup andRedevelopment and DOI’s Office of Surface Mining.The MSL Working Group was established tocollaboratively address the challenges of MSL cleanupand revitalization.

Hard Rock Mining – Remediation Through Addition ofResidualsSeveral EPA Superfund sites were contaminated by hardrock mining. At some of these sites, contaminated soilsare being addressed through use of residuals. Examplesof processes that generate potentially useful residualsinclude dairy, swine, and chicken farming; wastewatertreatment; drinking water treatment; phosphorus

INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO ASSESSMENTAND CLEANUP OF MINING SITES

A Quick Look

• The inclusion of MSLs in theBrownfields Program strengthensexisting mine reclamation programs.

• The addition of residuals to soils atabandoned mine sites can help torebuild the soils in support of furtherrevitalization.

• The Triad approach has proven useful inaddressing various types ofcontamination present on abandonedmine lands.

• Other innovative approaches are beingdemonstrated to support remediation ofabandoned mine lands.

production; pulp andpaper production; sugarbeet processing; andenergy production fromcoal or wood. Theresiduals can readilycontribute to rebuilding soilthrough their ability to re-establishstructure and function by adding organic matter and

nutrients to the disturbed soils. Asa result of recreating a fertile soilhorizon, the soil microbialcommunity, invertebrates, andplants will be re-established and itwill be possible to attain a self-sustaining system. Moreimportantly, in the properamendment ratios, residuals can beused to address problems of metaltoxicity and acidity. In addition toresidual use at upland sites,materials such as wood ash, logyard debris, and biosolids composthave been used to correct toxicity ina tailings pond in order to re-establish wetland functions.

Use of Triad ApproachVarious types of contamination associated with coalmining may be addressed using the Triad approach,including contamination related to waste and ash disposalareas, on-site industrial facilities, chemical and solventstorage equipment, buildings and electrical transformers,petroleum storage and usage equipment, and acid minedrainage. Systematic planning, dynamic work strategies,and real-time measurement were applied to severalaspects of the investigation.

BTSC provided technical assistance for a pilot project atthe Dark Shade Brownfields Site in Somerset County,Pennsylvania. The project focused on applying the Triadapproach to investigation activities. The planning wasbased on a reuse scenario that includes reclamation of thebuildings located on site as office space or for otherindustrial applications. The objectives for the Phase IIinvestigation are as follows:





• Identify whether contaminants are present atconcentrations above Act 2 industrial reuse levels insoil and surface water inside and outside the existingstructures

• Identify whether disposal or recycling restrictionsmust be considered prior to removal of existingequipment from the buildings

• Identify whether the configuration of the groundwaterflow regime in the area suggests that basementflooding has resulted from groundwater infiltration oran influx of surface water

• Identify options for removal and disposal of the watercurrently present in the flooded basements of theexisting structures

• Identify whether groundwater sampling and analysisactivities need to be performed and, if so, for whatconstituents

• Determine what remediation, if any, should be considered

The following areas were identified for application of theTriad approach:

• Collecting wipe, surface water, soil, and groundwatersamples to evaluate the potential presence of PCB-containing oil in or on the existing transformers andother machinery

• Evaluating whether the water in flooded basements iscontaminated with PCBs, solvents, polynucleararomatics, or petroleum hydrocarbons (concentrationscontaminants of potential concern) at concentrationsthat would require special handling of water during itsdisposal or could indicate the presence of a source

• Establishing the lateral and vertical extent ofcontaminants of potential concern in unsaturated soil

• Estimating the direction of groundwater flow and depthto groundwater beneath the site

Other Innovative Approaches

EPA and other organizations continue to demonstrate andevaluate innovative technologies for the reclamation ofmining sites. EPA is developing a primer on mining thatwill include an overview of innovative approaches that aresuitable for consideration for mining sites.

Additional information is available at www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/aml.

Continued ... INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO ASSESSMENTAND CLEANUP OF MINING SITES


58

ASSESSMENT OFCLEANUP OPTIONS

The review and analysis of cleanup alternatives relieson the data collected during the site assessment andinvestigation phases, which are discussed in thepreceding sections of the Road Map. The purpose ofevaluating various technologies is to identify thosetechnologies with the capability to meet specificcleanup and redevelopment objectives. Forbrownfields sites, it also is important to considerbudget requirements and to maintain a work scheduleso that the project remains financially viable.

Institutional controls also are an importantconsideration during this phase. Examples of suchlegal and administrative requirements includeeasements, covenants, zoning restrictions, and theposting of advisories to increase community awarenessof the environmental conditions and cleanup activitiesat the site. See Spotlight 16, Understanding the Role ofInstitutional Controls at Brownfields Sites, for moreinformation about institutional controls.

Factors that should be considered during theevaluation of cleanup options include:

1. How do we determine the appropriate and feasiblelevel of cleanup? Are there federal, state, local, andtribal requirements for cleanup? Should risk-basedapproaches be considered as an option forassessing exposure (see the definition of risk-basedcorrective action [RBCA] in Appendix B, List ofAcronyms and Glossary of Key Terms)? Are thereprescribed standards for cleanup? Are thereprovisions for using presumptive remedies?

2. What factors are associated with the implementationof cleanup options? Will the cleanup facilitate orhinder the planned redevelopment? How long willcleanup take? What will cleanup cost? What are theshort-term and long-term effects of the cleanuptechnologies under consideration?

3. Are the cleanup options compatible with regionalor local planning and development goals andrequirements? Can redevelopment activities (suchas construction or renovation of buildings) beconducted concurrently with cleanup?

Evaluate Applicable CleanupAlternatives for the Site

What Do We Know?



4. How can the community participate in the reviewand selection of cleanup options? Are the optionsacceptable in light of community concerns aboutprotection during cleanup and reuse of the site?What environmental standards should beconsidered to ensure that community stakeholdersare satisfied with the outcome and process ofcleanup, given the intended reuse?

5. Is there a need for institutional controls aftercleanup? Are proposed institutional controlsappropriate in light of community concerns andaccess to and use of the property? Willinstitutional controls facilitate or hinderdevelopment? What plans, including financialassurances, are being made to ensure thatinstitutional controls remain in place as long ascontamination is present?

6. What options are available to monitor theperformance of cleanup technologies?

The process of reviewing and analyzing cleanupoptions and technology alternatives usually followsthese steps:

• Establish goals for cleanup that consider the enduse and use applicable standards, published stateor federal guidelines, RBCAs, or site-specific riskassessment results

• Educate members of the community about the sitecleanup selection process and actively involvethem in decision-making

• Review general information about cleanuptechnologies to become familiar with those thatmay be applicable to a particular site:

– Use the resources in this publication

– See Appendix A, Table A-3, Technologies forTreating Contaminants Found at Brownfields Sites,for examples of technologies that are appropriate forspecific types of contaminants

– Conduct searches of existing literature that furtherdescribes the technology alternatives

– Analyze detailed technical information about theapplicability of technology alternatives


• Narrow the list of potential technologies that aremost appropriate for addressing thecontamination identified at the site and that arecompatible with the specific conditions of the siteand the proposed reuse of the property:

– Network with other brownfields stakeholders andenvironmental professionals to learn about theirexperiences and to tap their expertise

– Determine whether sufficient data are available tosupport identification and evaluation of cleanupalternatives

– Evaluate the options against a number of factors,including toxicity levels, exposure pathways,associated risks, future land use, and economicconsiderations

– Analyze the applicability of a particular technologyto the contamination identified at a site

– Determine the effects of various technologyalternatives on redevelopment objectives

• Continue to work with appropriate regulatoryagencies to ensure that regulatory requirementsare addressed properly:

– Consult with the appropriate federal, state, local, andtribal regulatory agencies to include them in thedecision-making process as early as possible

– Contact the EPA regional brownfields coordinator toidentify and determine the availability of EPAsupport programs

• Integrate cleanup alternatives with reusealternatives to identify potential constraints onreuse and time schedules and to assess cost andrisk factors

• To provide a measure of certainty and stability tothe project, investigate environmental insurancepolicies, such as protection against cost overruns,undiscovered contamination, and third-partylitigation, and integrate their cost into the projectfinancial package

• Select an acceptable remedy that not only achievescleanup goals and addresses the risk ofcontamination, but also best meets the objectivesfor redevelopment and reuse of the property and iscompatible with the needs of the community

• Communicate information about the proposedcleanup option to brownfields stakeholders,including the affected community


60

Examples of resources that will assist in reviewingand analyzing cleanup options are listed on thefollowing pages. Resources are listed alphabeticallyunder the following categories:

A. Resources for Cleanup Options

B. Site-Specific Resources for Cleanup Options

C. Technology-Specific Resources for Cleanup Options


A. Resources for Cleanup OptionsThe documents listed below are resources thatprovide general information about the availability oftechnology resources in the form of bibliographies,status reports, and user guides.

ASTM Standard Guide for Risk-Based CorrectiveAction Applied at Petroleum Release Sites (E1739-95e1(2003))The purpose of the guide is to define RBCA as aprocess for assessing and responding to a petroleumrelease in a manner that ensures the protection ofhuman health and the environment. The guide willassist brownfields decision-makers who wish tobecome familiar with another approach that can beused to assess environmental risk at a site, inconformity with applicable federal, state, local, andtribal regulations. The diversity and flexibility of aRBCA approach is defined and discussed, and thetiered approach of the process is summarized.Although the RBCA process is not limited to aparticular site, the guide emphasizes the use of RBCAin response to releases of petroleum. Examples ofRBCA applications also are provided. The guide,which is available at a cost, can be ordered online atwww.astm.org.

Breaking Barriers to the Use of InnovativeTechnologies: State Regulatory Role in UnexplodedOrdnance Detection and CharacterizationTechnology SelectionThe report, which was published in 2000 by the ITRC,contains an analysis of case studies from states

having experience in remediating UXO-contaminatedsites. The report supports early and meaningful stateregulatory involvement in the selection of innovativeUXO characterization and remediation technologies.The report also offers recommendations to ensure theappropriate participation of states in the selection oftechnologies for characterizing and remediatingUXO-contaminated sites.

Brownfields Technology Primer: Requesting andEvaluating Proposals That Encourage InnovativeTechnologies for Investigation and Cleanup (EPA542-R-01-005)BTSC prepared this primer to assist site owners,project managers, and others preparing RFPs tosolicit support in conducting activities toinvestigate and clean up contaminated sites. It isspecifically intended to assist those individuals inwriting specifications that encourage contractorsand technology vendors to propose options forusing innovative characterization and remediationtechnologies at brownfields sites. The primer alsoprovides information, from a technologyperspective, to guide review teams in theirevaluations of proposals and the selection ofqualified contractors.

Citizen’s Guides to UnderstandingInnovative Treatment TechnologiesThe guides are prepared by EPA to providesite managers with nontechnical outreachmaterials that they can share with

communities in the vicinity of sites. The guidespresent information on innovative technologies thathave been selected or applied at some cleanup sites,provide overviews of the technologies, and presentsuccess stories about sites at which innovativetechnologies have been applied. Both English andSpanish versions of the guides are available. Theguides contain information on the following subjects:

– NEW! Activated carbon treatment (EPA 542-F-01-020)

– NEW! Air stripping (EPA 542-F-01-016)

– NEW! Bioremediation (EPA 542-F-01-001)

– Capping (EPA 542-F-01-022)

– NEW! Chemical dehalogenation (EPA 542-F-01-010)

– Chemical oxidation (EPA 542-F-01-013)

– Fracturing (EPA 542-F-01-015)





– In situ flushing (EPA 542-F-01-011)

– NEW! In situ thermal treatment methods(EPA 542-F-01-012)

– Incineration (EPA 542-F-01-018)

– Monitored natural attenuation (EPA 542-F-01-004)

– NEW! Permeable reactive barriers (EPA 542-F-01-005)

– NEW! Phytoremediation (EPA 542-F-01-002)

– Pump and treat (EPA 542-F-01-025)

– NEW! Soil excavation (EPA 542-F-01-023)

– NEW! Soil washing (EPA 542-F-01-008)

– Solidification/stabilization (EPA 542-F-01-024)

– Solvent extraction (EPA 542-F-01-009)

– NEW! Soil vapor extraction (SVE) and air sparging(EPA 542-F-01-006)

– Thermal desorption (EPA 542-F-01-003)

– Vitrification (EPA 542-F-01-017)

Clean-Up Information Home Page on the WorldWide Web (CLU-IN)The Internet site, which was developed by EPA,provides information about innovative treatmenttechnologies and site characterization technologiesto the hazardous waste remediation community.CLU-IN describes programs, organizations,publications, and other tools for EPA and otherfederal and state personnel, consulting engineers,technology developers and vendors, remediationcontractors, researchers, community groups, andindividual citizens. Information about issuesrelated to remediation and site characterizationalso is provided: technology verification andevaluation; technology selection tools;contaminant-specific information, guidance andapplication support; case studies; regulatorydevelopment; and publications.

Cost Estimating Tools and Resources for Addressingthe Brownfields Initiatives (EPA 625-R-99-001)The guide is one in a series of publicationsdesigned to assist communities, states,municipalities, and the private sector to addressbrownfields sites more effectively. The guide,

which is designed to be used with the three guidesfor specific types of sites – Technical Approaches toCharacterizing and Cleaning Up AutomotiveRepair Sites Under the Brownfields Initiative,Technical Approaches to Characterizing andCleaning Up Iron and Steel Mill Sites Under theBrownfields Initiative, and Technical Approachesto Characterizing and Cleaning Up Metal FinishingSites Under the Brownfields Initiative – providesinformation about cost estimating tools andresources for addressing cleanup costs atbrownfields sites. Many decision-makers atbrownfields sites may choose to assign thepreparation of cost estimates to consultants whoare experienced in the cleanup of hazardous wastesites; however, it benefits those decision-makers tobe able to provide guidance to their consultantsand to understand the process sufficiently well toprovide an informed review of the estimatesprepared. The guide provides general informationabout the cost estimation process and includessummaries of various types of estimates. The guidealso outlines the process of developing “order ofmagnitude” cost estimates. Information aboutresources, databases, and models also is provided.

Directory of Technical Assistance forLand Revitalization (BTSC) (EPA 542-B-03-001)BTSC has prepared this directory toprovide information about technical

assistance that is available from federal agencies toassist regional, state, and local government personnelin making assessment and cleanup decisions forbrownfields, reuse, and revitalization sites. Thisdirectory includes information about 37organizations within 10 federal agencies that providedifferent types of support to help with site assessmentand cleanup, including technical support andfunding sources. Profiles are included for theseagencies and organizations and contain the followingtypes of information: background and locationinformation, relevancy to revitalization, description ofthe areas of expertise available, discussion of thetypes of services available, types of funding availableand eligibility, contact information and the processfor requesting assistance, and examples of specificinstances in which the organization has previouslyprovided support relevant to site revitalization.Information in the profiles is believed to be current asof March 2003. To help maintain current information,the directory is available as an online searchabledatabase at www.brownfieldstsc.org/directory.


62

EPA REmediation And CHaracterization InnovativeTechnologies (REACH IT) Online SearchableDatabaseThe EPA REACH IT online searchable databasessponsored by EPA’s OSRTI, is a service provided free ofcharge to both users and technology vendors. EPAREACH IT is accessible only through the Internet. Thisdatabase provides users with comprehensive, up-to-date information about more than 254 characterizationtechnologies and 484 remediation technologies andtheir applications. It combines information submittedby technology service providers about remediation andcharacterization technologies with information fromEPA, DoD, DOE, and state project managers about sitesat which innovative technologies are being deployed.During the preliminary phase of a brownfields project,EPA REACH IT will assist brownfields stakeholders tolearn about and become familiar with the range ofavailable cleanup technology options that can beemployed during the investigation and the cleanupphases that follow, as well as data about various typesof sites. EPA updates all of the information available inthe system about every six months. Technologyvendors may also add or update information in EPAREACH IT at any time through the Data Entry Systemor by submitting information by mail. You can searchthe EPA REACH IT system in several ways. Varioussearch options are available for a user on the homepage, including Custom Search; Spotlight; MostCommon Searches; Saved Searches; Guided Search; andVendor, Technology, and Site Index. For questionsabout whether a technology is eligible for listing in EPAREACH IT, the user may contact the EPA REACH IThelp line at (800) 245-4505 or (703) 390-0713 or send ane-mail to [email protected].

Evaluation of Selected Environmental DecisionSupport Software (DSS)Developed by DOE’s Office of EnvironmentalManagement, the report evaluates DSS, computer-based systems that facilitate the use of data, models,and structured decision processes in makingdecisions related to environmental management. Thereport evaluates 19 such systems through theapplication of a rating system that favors softwarethat simulates a wide range of environmentalproblems. It includes a glossary of terms and astatement of the rationale for the selection of variousaspects of the performance of the DSS for evaluation.

Evaluation of Subsurface Engineered Barriers atWaste Sites (EPA 542-R-98-005)The report provides a national retrospective analysis ofthe field performance of barrier systems, as well as

information that could be useful in developing guidanceon the use and evaluation of such systems. The reportcontains information about the design, application, andperformance of subsurface engineered barriers.

Federal Remediation TechnologiesRoundtable Case StudiesThe case studies provide the user withinformation about specific characterizationand remediation technology optimization

applications. Four focus areas have been established byFRTR for providing performance and cost information ontechnology applications: remediation case study reports,characterization and monitoring case study reports,technology assessment reports, and long-termmonitoring/optimization case study reports. FRTR casestudies are developed by DoD, USACE, the U.S. Navy, theU.S. Air Force, DOE, DOI, and EPA. The case studiesfocus on full-scale and large field demonstration projectsand include site background information, technologydescriptions, cost and performance information, andlessons learned. The technologies include innovativeand conventional treatment technologies forcontaminated soil, groundwater, and solid media. Userscan search the case studies by groups of contaminants,media, waste management practices that contribute tocontamination, and treatment systems.

Guide to Documenting and Managing Cost andPerformance Information for Remediation Projects(EPA 542-B-98-007)The document recommends the types of data thatshould be collected to document the performance andcost of future cleanups. The guide specifies dataelements for 13 conventional and innovative cleanuptechnologies: soil bioventing, soil flushing, soil vaporextraction, groundwater sparging, in situ groundwaterremediation, pump-and-treat technologies,composting, incineration, land treatment, slurry-phasesoil bioremediation, soil washing, stabilization, andthermal desorption. The document provides sitemanagers with a standard set of parameters fordocumenting completed remediation projects. Anumber of federal agencies have made commitments tousing the guidance to collect data for full-scalecleanups, demonstrations, and treatability studies.

Innovative Remediation and SiteCharacterization Technologies Resources(EPA 542-C-04-002)Produced by EPA’s OSRTI, this CD-ROMcontains resources that provide information

to help federal, state, and private sector site managers




evaluate site assessment and cleanup alternatives. Theability to gain access to resources that provideinformation about innovative site characterization andremediation technologies will increase theunderstanding of those technologies and of the cost andperformance factors related to them. Suchunderstanding is essential to consideration of thosetechnologies for use in addressing contamination athazardous waste sites. The information on the CD-ROMis broken down into seven categories: bulletins, factsheets, journals, and newsletters; communityinvolvement support; electronic resources; organizations,programs, and partnerships; publication clearinghouses;publications; and regulatory resources. Severalresources included on the CD-ROM also are available atthe Road Map online. Copies of the CD-ROM can beordered through NSCEP at P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati,Ohio 45242-2419 or by calling (800) 490-9198 toll free.

Innovative Remediation Technologies: Field-ScaleDemonstration Projects in North America, 2ndEdition (EPA 542-B-00-004)EPA’s publication, Completed North American InnovativeTechnology Demonstration Projects, is available in anonline, searchable database of ongoing and completedfield demonstrations of innovative remediationtechnologies sponsored by government agenciesworking in partnership with private technologydevelopers to bring new technologies into thehazardous waste remediation marketplace.

Rapid Commercialization Initiative Final Report foran Integrated In Situ Remediation Technology(Lasagna™) (DOE/OR/22459-1)This report describes demonstration results for theLasagna™ process, a process which uses establishedgeotechnical methods to install degradation zones incontaminated soil and electrosmosis to move thecontaminants back and forth through these zonesuntil treatment is completed.

Remediation Technologies ScreeningMatrix and Reference Guide, Version 4.0The document, which was developed byFRTR, is intended to help site remediationproject managers to narrow the field of

remediation alternatives and identify potentiallyapplicable technologies for more detailed assessmentand evaluation before remedy selection. The documentis divided into five sections: Introduction,Contaminant Perspectives, Treatment Perspectives,Treatment Technology Profiles, and References. Thedocument summarizes the strengths and weaknesses

of innovative and conventional technologies forremediation of soils, sediments, sludges, groundwater,surface water, and air emissions and off-gases; itfocuses primarily on demonstrated technologies.Treatment, containment, separation of wastes, andenhanced recovery technologies are covered.Additional information resources also are included.

Reuse Assessments: A Tool to Implement theSuperfund Land Use Directive (OSWER Directive9355.7-06P)This memorandum, which was signed on June 4, 2001,by EPA’s OERR, presents information that supportsthe development of assumptions related to future landuse when making remedy selection decisions forresponse actions conducted at Superfund sites. TheReuse Assessment guide, which provides informationabout the collection and evaluation of information fordeveloping assumptions, and the Superfund Land UseDirective, which provides basic information aboutdeveloping and using future land use assumptions tosupport Superfund remedial actions, are included asattachments to the directive.

Site Remediation Technology InfoBase: A Guide toFederal Programs, Information Resources, andPublications on Contaminated Site CleanupTechnologies, Second Edition (EPA 542-B-00-005)Prepared by the member agencies of FRTR, the guideidentifies programs, resources, and publications ofthe federal government related to technologies for thecleanup of contaminated sites.

Superfund Innovative TechnologyEvaluation Program: Technology Profiles,Eleventh EditionDeveloped by EPA’s SITE Program, thesedocuments (contained in three volumes)

provide profiles of more than 150 demonstration,emerging, and monitoring and measurementtechnologies currently being evaluated. Eachtechnology profile identifies the developer andprocess name of the technology, describes thetechnology, discusses its applicability to waste, andprovides a project status report and contactinformation. The profiles also include summaries ofdemonstration results, if available. The followingvolumes are available: Demonstration Program,Volume 1 (EPA 540-R-03-501); Emerging TechnologyProgram, Volume 2 (EPA 540-R-03-501A); andMonitoring and Measurement Program, Volume 3(EPA 540-R-03-501B).


64

TechKnow™ DatabaseDeveloped by the Global Network of Environmentand Technology (GNET), TechKnow is an online,interactive database that allows users to gain accessto and provide information about innovative andsustainable technologies. For each technologyprofiled, a summary, development information,status, and cost is provided. The Internet site alsoprovides contact information for the technologies.Users may access the TechKnow database atwww.techknow.org. There is no cost to useTechKnow, but users are required to register onGNET.

Treatment Technologies for Site Cleanup:Annual Status Report (Eleventh Edition)(EPA 542-R-03-009)This report, which was developed by EPA,documents the status and achievements

(as of March 2003) of treatment technologyapplications for soil, other solid wastes, andgroundwater at Superfund sites. The data in thisreport were gathered from Superfund records ofdecision (ROD) from fiscal years (FY) 1982 through2002, close-out reports (COR) from FYs 1983 through2002, and project managers at Superfund remedialaction sites. The report examines in situ and ex situtreatment technologies for soil, sludge, sediment,other solid matrix wastes, and NAPLs; in situ and exsitu P&T groundwater treatment technologies;vertical engineered barriers (VEB); and the selectionof MNA remedies for groundwater. This edition ofthe annual status report summarizes 1,811technology applications identified for Superfundremedial actions. EPA created a searchable, onlinesystem to allow access to the data that form the basisfor this report. This searchable system is available athttp://cfpub.epa.gov/asr/.

B. Site-Specific Resources for Cleanup OptionsListed below are survey reports on the application ofinnovative technologies to specific contaminants andsite types.

Air Sparging: Technology Transfer andMulti-Site Evaluation (CU-9808)Developed by ESTCP, this documentpresents an evaluation of the Air SpargingDesign Paradigm implemented at 10 field

sites. The goal of the study was to determine theeffectiveness of the paradigm and to modify it asnecessary based on the results of the evaluation. The

document explains the technology and demonstrationdesign and provides an assessment of theperformance and cost of the technology in fieldapplications.

Arsenic Treatment Technologies for Soil,Waste, and Water (EPA 542-R-02-042)This report, which was prepared by EPA,contains current information on treatmenttechnologies for wastes and

environmental media containing arsenic. Theintended audience for the report includes hazardouswaste site managers, generators and treaters ofarsenic-contaminated waste and wastewater, ownersand operators of drinking water treatment plants,regulators, and the interested public. The reportsummarizes information on 13 technologies used totreat arsenic, identifies sites and facilities wherearsenic treatment has been used, and providesreferences to more detailed arsenic treatmentinformation.

Assessment of Phytoremediation as an In-SituTechnique for Cleaning Oil-Contaminated SitesThe document, which is based on a review of therelevant literature, provides examples of thephytoremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons anddiscusses the key mechanisms of that process, as wellas the special considerations involved inphytoremediation of petrochemicals. The documentalso discusses the benefits, limitations, and costs ofphytoremediation, compared with alternativeapproaches, including natural attenuation,engineering, and bioremediation.

Catalog of EPA Materials on USTs (EPA 510-B-00-001)The booklet provides an annotated list of USTmaterials and includes ordering information. Manyof the informational leaflets, booklets, videos, andsoftware items listed are designed to provide USTowners and operators with information to help themcomply with the federal UST requirements.

DNAPL Remediation: Selected ProjectsApproaching Regulatory Closure - StatusUpdate (EPA 542-R-04-016)This paper, which was prepared by EPA’sOSRTI, is a status update on the use of

DNAPL source reduction remedial technologies. Thedocument provides information about recent projectsin which regulatory closure has been reached andprojects that are approaching regulatory closure


http://cfpub.epa.gov/asr/



following source reduction. Information is presentedabout the challenges associated with DNAPLremediation and the types of in situ technologiesused, and data and findings are included concerningthe relative effectiveness of field applications of thesetechnologies. Project profiles for eight fieldapplications are provided that illustrate some of thefindings presented in the paper.

EPA ORD Brownfields Guides - TechnicalApproaches to Characterizing andCleaning Up Iron and Steel Mill SitesUnder the Brownfields Initiative (EPA625-R-98-007)

The Brownfields Guides, which were developed byEPA ORD, are designed to help communities, states,municipalities, and the private sector addressbrownfields sites more effectively. EPA hasdeveloped this “Iron and Steel” guide to providedecision-makers such as city planners, private sectordevelopers, and others involved in redevelopingbrownfields with a better understanding of thetechnical issues involved in assessing and cleaningup iron and steel mill sites so they can make the mostinformed decisions possible. This guide provides theuser with an understanding of common industrialprocesses at iron and steel mills and the relationshipbetween these processes and potential releases ofcontaminants to the environment. The guide alsoincludes a discussion of site assessment, screeningand cleanup levels, and technologies that can be usedto assess and clean up the types of contaminantslikely to be present at iron and steel mill sites. A listof relevant acronyms, a glossary of key terms, and anextensive bibliography are also provided.

EPA ORD Brownfields Guides -Technical Approaches to Characterizingand Cleaning Up Metal Finishing SitesUnder the Brownfields Initiative (EPA625-R-98-006)

The Brownfields Guides, which were developed byEPA ORD, are designed to help communities, states,municipalities, and the private sector addressbrownfields sites more effectively. EPA hasdeveloped this “Metal Finishing” guide to providethose involved in redeveloping brownfields with abetter understanding of the technical issues involvedin assessing and cleaning up metal finishing sites sothey can make the most informed decisions possible.This guide provides the user with an understandingof common industrial processes at metal finishingfacilities and the relationship between these

processes and potential releases of contaminants tothe environment. It also provides information on thetypes of contaminants likely to be present at thesesites. The guide includes a discussion of aconceptual framework for pathways by whichcontaminants may migrate off site and environmentaland human health concerns to be considered whencleanup options for these sites are evaluated. Inaddition, a list of relevant acronyms, a glossary of keyterms, and an extensive bibliography are provided.

Groundwater Cleanup: Overview of OperatingExperience at 28 Sites (EPA 542-R-99-006)The report summarizes information about thegroundwater remediation systems at 28 sitesthroughout the United States at which completed orongoing groundwater cleanup programs are in place.It includes details about design, operation, andperformance of the systems; capital, operating, andunit costs of the systems; and factors that potentiallyaffect the cost and performance of the systems. Thereport compares and contrasts data from the casestudies to assist those involved in evaluating andselecting remedies for groundwater contamination athazardous waste sites. Of the 28 projects presentedin the case studies, 24 are Superfund remedialactions, one is a Superfund removal action, one is acleanup conducted by state authorities, and two arecorrective actions taken under RCRA. The sitesrepresent a range of site types and hydrogeologicalconditions.

How to Evaluate Alternative CleanupTechnologies for Underground StorageTank Sites: A Guide for Corrective ActionPlan Reviewers (EPA 510-R-04-002)The guide was developed by EPA to assist

state regulators in efficiently and confidentlyevaluating corrective action plans (CAP) thatincorporate alternative technologies. The guide,which was written in nontechnical language, takesthe reader through the steps involved in reviewing aCAP. Earlier versions of the guide (1994 and 1995)covered technologies such as SVE, air sparging,biosparging, landfarming, biopiles, bioventing, low-temperature thermal desorption, natural attenuation,dual-phase extraction, and in situ groundwaterbioremediation. The revised version (2004) has twonew chapters on enhanced aerobic bioremediationand chemical oxidation and two revised chapters: theintroduction and a chapter on MNA. Eachtechnology chapter presents a comprehensivedescription of a technology, an explanation of how it


66

works, and a flow chart that illustrates the decisionpoints in the process; information that will help theregulator evaluate whether a given technology willclean up a given site successfully; a discussion andinstructions to help the regulator evaluate whether aCAP is technically sound; a checklist to assist theregulator in determining whether a CAP includes allthe steps necessary; and a list of references.

Impact of Landfill Closure Designs onLong-Term Natural Attenuation ofChlorinated HydrocarbonsDeveloped by ESTCP, this landfill closureevaluation document is intended to help

users develop alternative landfill closure designs andmanagement strategies that can enhance the long-term natural attenuation of chlorinated solvents inlandfills and landfill leachate-contaminatedgroundwater. The design approach proposed in thisdocument maximizes the use of natural remediationand management techniques for landfill closures.

Innovations in Site Characterization Case StudySeriesThe case studies, which were developed by EPA,provide cost and performance information about theinnovative technologies that support less costly andmore representative site characterization. Thepurpose of the case studies is to analyze anddocument the effectiveness of new technologiesproposed for site cleanup. They present informationabout the capability of the technologies in analyzingand monitoring cleanup, as well as information aboutcosts associated with the use of the technologies. Thefollowing case studies are available:

– Dexsil L2000 PCB/Chloride Analyzer for DrumSurfaces (EPA 542-R-99-003)

– Geophysical Investigation at Hazardous Waste Sites(EPA 542-R-00-003)

– Hanscom Air Force Base, Operable Unit 1(EPA 542-R-98-006)

– Site Cleanup of the Wenatchee Tree Fruit Test PlotSite Using a Dynamic Work Plan (2000) (EPA 542-R-00-009)

– NEW! Technology Evaluation: Real-time VOCAnalysis Using a Field Portable GC/MS(EPA 542-R-01-011)

InterAgency DNAPL Consortium Home PageThe Web site is sponsored by the Interagency DNAPLConsortium (IDC). IDC is an alliance of five federalagencies, including the National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA), EPA, DOE, the U.S.Navy, and the U.S. Air Force. It reports on the IDC’seffort to evaluate and compare the cost andperformance of three innovative remediationtechnologies for the treatment of DNAPLS. The threetechnologies are being applied for the treatment oftrichloroethene (TCE) at Launch Complex 34 at CapeCanaveral Air Force Station, Florida. The threetechnologies being demonstrated in side-by-side plotsat the launch area are chemical oxidation with the useof potassium permanganate, six-phase heating, anddynamic underground stripping.

MtBE Fact Sheet #2: Remediation of MtBE-Contaminated Soil and Groundwater(EPA 510-F-98-002)Developed by EPA’s OUST, the fact sheet describesthe physical and chemical characteristics of methyltertiary butyl ether (MtBE) and identifies alternativetechnologies for remediating it.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization/Committee on the Challenges of ModernSociety (NATO/CCMS) Pilot StudyEvaluation of Demonstrated andEmerging Technologies for the

Treatment of Contaminated Land and Groundwater(Phase III) 2002 Annual Report (EPA 542-R-02-010)This document reports on the fourth meeting for thePhase III Pilot Study on the Evaluation of Demonstratedand Emerging Technologies for the Treatment andClean Up of Contaminated Land and Groundwater.The Phase III study, which concluded in 2002, focusedon technologies for treating contaminated land andgroundwater. The study addressed issues ofsustainability, environmental merit, and cost-effectiveness with continued emphasis on emergingremediation technologies. The objectives of the studywere to critically evaluate technologies, promoteappropriate use of technologies, use informationtechnology systems to disseminate study products, andfoster innovative thinking about contaminated land.




Resource for MGP Site Characterization andRemediation: Expedited Site Characterization andSource Remediation at Former Manufactured GasPlant Sites (EPA 542-R-00-005)The document provides current information aboutuseful approaches and tools being applied at formerMGP sites to the regulators and utilities that areengaged in characterizing and remediating thesesites. The document outlines site managementstrategies and field tools for expediting sitecharacterization at MGP sites; presents a summary ofexisting technologies for remediating MGP wastes insoils; provides sufficient information about thebenefits, limitations, and costs of each technology,tool, or strategy for comparison and evaluation; andprovides, through case studies, examples of the waysin which those tools and strategies can beimplemented at MGP sites.

State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners(SCRD) Internet SiteThe SCRD Internet site, which is supported by EPA’sOSRTI, provides extensive information about stateremediation programs and resources related to theremediation of dry cleaner sites. Descriptions of stateprograms and points of contact in each of the memberstates are provided. Publications, regulations, andother documents are identified as well. Brownfieldsstakeholders involved in the assessment and cleanupof dry cleaner sites in Alabama, Connecticut, Florida,Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, NorthCarolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas,and Wisconsin may be particularly interested in thedetailed information provided about programs inthose states. Profiles of the remediation of specificsites throughout the United States are intended toassist users, particularly state officials, in makingmore informed decisions related to the remediation ofsites in their states, and, when possible, to provideadditional resources. Publications developed by theSCRD, as well as state and federal resources pertinentto issues associated with dry cleaner sites, can beviewed online or downloaded at no charge.

The Bioremediation and Phytoremediation ofPesticide-Contaminated SitesThe technology assessment report discusses the use ofbioremediation and phytoremediation for the cleanupof sites contaminated with pesticides. It providesinformation about the current status of the twotechnologies to federal and state agencies, consultingengineering firms, private industries, and technologydevelopers.

Treatment Experiences at RCRA Corrective Actions(EPA 542-F-00-020)The fact sheet summarizes information about the useof treatment technologies at 30 RCRA correctiveaction sites. It focuses on ongoing or completedcleanups of contaminated soil or groundwater atRCRA sites for which key information, such as thetype of technology used and the point of contact, wasavailable. The sites illustrate the types of cleanupsconducted at RCRA corrective action sites; they arenot intended to be representative of all cleanupsconducted under RCRA.

Use of Monitored Natural Attenuation at Superfund,RCRA Corrective Action, and Underground StorageTank SitesThe policy directive, which was issued on April 21,1999, provides guidance to the staff of EPA, thepublic, and the regulated community on how EPAintends to exercise its discretion in implementingnational policy on the use of monitored naturalattenuation for the remediation of contaminated soiland groundwater at sites regulated under theprograms of EPA’s OSWER.

C. Technology-Specific Resources for CleanupOptions

The documents listed below provide detailedinformation about specific innovative technologiesand the application of those processes to specificcontaminants and media in the form of engineeringanalyses, application reports, technology verificationand evaluation reports, and technology reviews.

Air Sparging Design ParadigmThis design guidance resulted fromresearch and development effortssponsored by the U.S. Air ForceArmstrong Laboratory and the U.S. Naval

Facilities Engineering Research Center and from fieldresearch and data analysis conducted by BattelleMemorial Institute, Arizona State University, OregonGraduate Institute, Parsons Engineering-Science, andColorado State University. The guidance providesdetails on air sparging principles; sitecharacterization; pilot testing; system design,installation, and operation; and system monitoring.Use of the design paradigm is illustrated indescriptions of field studies and by using the resultsof controlled physical model studies. The guidance isorganized in sections that provide an overview of airsparging in general and the specific design paradigm


68

followed by a discussion of site characterization, airsparging application, pilot testing, and system designand monitoring.

Analysis of Selected Enhancements for Soil VaporExtraction (EPA 542-R-97-007)The report provides an engineering analysis of andstatus report on, selected enhancements for SVEtreatment technologies. The report is intended toassist project managers who are considering an SVEtreatment system by providing them with an up-to-date report on the status of enhancement technologiesin an evaluation of each technology’s applicability tovarious site conditions, a presentation of cost andperformance information, a list of vendors thatspecialize in the technologies, a discussion of therelative strengths and limitations of the technologies,recommendations of factors to be kept in mind whenconsidering the enhancements, and a compilation ofreferences. The five enhancement technologiesdiscussed in the report are air sparging, dual-phaseextraction, directional drilling, pneumatic andhydraulic fracturing, and thermal enhancement.

Application Guide for Bioslurping -Volume IThis application guide, which wasdeveloped by Battelle for NFESC, ispresented in two volumes. Volume I

provides principles and practices of bioslurping toassist project managers in preliminary decision-making. Based on Volume I, a site manager maydetermine whether this technology is feasible for asite contaminated with light nonaqueous phaseliquid (LNAPL).

Application Guide for Bioslurping -Volume 2This application guide, which wasdeveloped by Battelle for the NavalFacilities Engineering Service Center

(NFESC), is presented in two volumes. Volume Iprovides principles and practices of bioslurping toassist project managers in preliminary decision-making, and Volume II contains a detaileddescription of the bioslurper system; testingprocedures; system design, installation, operation,and monitoring; and an approach for site closure.

Bioremediation of Chlorinated SolventContaminated GroundwaterThe report is intended to provide a basic summary ofin situ treatment technologies for groundwatercontaminated with chlorinated solvents. It includesinformation gathered from a range of currentlyavailable sources, including project documents,reports, periodicals, Internet searches, and personalcommunication with parties involved in the use of thetechnologies.

Brownfields Technology Primer: Requesting andEvaluating Proposals That Encourage InnovativeTechnologies for Investigation and Cleanup (EPA542-R-01-005)BTSC prepared this primer to assist site owners,project managers, and others preparing RFPs to solicitsupport in conducting activities to investigate andclean up contaminated sites. It is specificallyintended to assist those individuals in writingspecifications that encourage contractors andtechnology vendors to propose options for usinginnovative characterization and remediationtechnologies at brownfields sites. The primer alsoprovides information, from a technology perspective,to guide review teams in their evaluations ofproposals and the selection of qualified contractors.

Brownfields Technology Primer: Selecting andUsing Phytoremediation for Site Cleanup (EPA 542-R-01-006)BTSC developed this document to provide aneducational tool for site owners, project managers,and regulators to help evaluate the applicability ofthe phytoremediation process at brownfields sites.The primer explains the types of biological processesinvolved in phytoremediation; provides examples ofthe sites and contaminants where phytoremediationhas been applied; and discusses technicalconsiderations in selecting and designingphytoremediation systems, activities necessary tooperate and maintain phytoremediation systems, andexamples of estimated potential cost savings fromusing phytoremediation versus more conventionaltreatment processes. The primer also provides acomprehensive list of other resources that areavailable to assist decision-makers in evaluatingphytoremediation as an option for cleaning upcontaminated sites.




Capstone Report on the Application,Monitoring, and Performance ofPermeable Reactive Barriers for Ground-Water Remediation: Volume 1 (EPA 600-R-03-045a)

This report, which was developed by EPA, discussesgeochemical and microbiological processes withinzero-valent iron PRBs that may contribute to changesin iron reactivity over time and decreases in reactionzone permeability. Two full-scale PRBs are evaluatedin this report. Detailed water sampling and analysis,core sampling, and solid-phase characterizationstudies were carried out to: (1) evaluate spatial andtemporal trends in contaminant concentrations andkey geochemical parameters, (2) characterize the typeand nature of surface precipitates forming over timein the reactive barriers, and (3) identify the type andextent of microbiological activity within and aroundthe reactive barriers.

Capstone Report on the Application,Monitoring, and Performance ofPermeable Reactive Barriers forGround-Water Remediation: Volume 2(EPA 600-R-03-045b)

This report, which was developed by EPA, discussessoil and groundwater sampling methods andprocedures used to evaluate the long-termperformance of PRBs at two sites: one in ElizabethCity, North Carolina, and the other one in DenverFederal Center near Lakewood, Colorado. Both PRBswere installed in 1996 and have been monitored andstudied since their installation to determine theircontinued effectiveness in removing contaminantsfrom groundwater. The report points out that aneffective monitoring program requires appropriatesoil and groundwater sampling techniques.

CLU-IN Technology FocusThe Technology Focus, a section of EPAOSRTI’s CLU-IN site, provides acompilation of the most relevantinformation sources for a range of

remediation technologies. Grouped by specifictechnologies, the resources provide technologydescriptions, information about applications and useof technologies, relevant engineering and regulatoryguidance, and links to training sources andadditional references. Information about thefollowing technologies is available: air sparging,bioreactor landfills, bioremediation of chlorinatedsolvents, bioventing and biosparging, electrokinetics,

fracturing, groundwater circulating wells, in situflushing, in situ oxidation, multiphase extraction,natural attenuation, PRBs, phytoremediation, solventextraction, SVE, soil washing, thermal desorption,and thermal enhancements.

Cost Analyses for Selected Groundwater CleanupProjects: Pump-and-Treat Systems and PermeableReactive Barriers (EPA 542-R-00-013)Developed on the basis of case studies prepared byEPA, other members of FRTR, and the RemediationTechnologies Development Forum, the report presentsthe results of an analysis of groundwater cleanupcosts for P&T systems and PRBs at 48 sites. Targetedfor site managers, technology developers, and users,as well as others involved in groundwaterremediation efforts, the report provides detailedinformation about the costs of groundwater cleanuptechnologies and factors that affect those costs. Of the48 sites, 32 had P&T systems and 16 had PRBs.

Engineered Approaches to In Situ Bioremediation ofChlorinated Solvents: Fundamentals and FieldApplications (EPA 542-R-00-008)The report provides an overview of in situbioremediation for the remediation of chlorinatedsolvents in contaminated soil and groundwater. Itdescribes mechanisms for the degradation ofchlorinated solvents, enhancements of suchmechanisms by the addition of various materials andchemicals, design approaches, and factors to considerwhen selecting and using the technology. The reportalso presents a list of vendors of the technology andnine case studies of field applications.

Engineering and Design: Adsorption Design Guide(DG 1110-1-2)The guide, published by USACE, provides practicalguidance for the design of liquid- and vapor-phasedevices for the adsorption of organic chemicals. Theadsorptive media addressed include granularactivated carbon (GAC) and other alternativeadsorption media, such as powdered activatedcarbon (PAC) and non-carbon adsorbents. Itaddresses various types of adsorption media,applicability, use of various adsorption processtechnologies, design of equipment and ancillarycomponents, availability, advantages, disadvantages,regeneration methods, costs, and safetyconsiderations.


70

Engineering and Design: Soil VaporExtraction and Bioventing (EM 1110-1-4001)This guide, which was published byUSACE to provide practical guidance for

design and operation of SVE and bioventing (BV)systems. It discusses all aspects of the engineering ofSVE and BV systems, including site characterization,technology selection; bench- and pilot-scale testing,design, installation, operation, and closure.

EPA’s Office of Underground Storage TanksInternet SiteHosted by EPA’s OUST, the Internet site providesresources and tools to assist owners and operators ofUSTs and brownfields stakeholders to better assesstheir options for the operation, maintenance, andcleanup of USTs. Information and guidance abouttechnologies suitable for cleaning up releases fromUST systems are provided, as well as details aboutcurrent federal UST regulations and UST programpriorities, including specific details about theUSTFields Initiative. Points of contact in each of theEPA regional offices also are identified. An extensivenumber of UST publications can be viewed online ordownloaded at no charge. In addition, informationabout state-sponsored UST programs, including linksto state Internet sites, is provided on OUST’s site atwww.epa.gov/swerust1/states/index.htm.

Evaluation of Performance and Longevityat Permeable Reactive Barrier Sites (CU-9907)Developed by ESTCP, this report presentsan evaluation of short- and long-term

performance issues associated with PRBs installed atseveral DoD sites. The report assesses the longevityof PRBs made from iron and the hydraulicperformance of various PRBs in terms of their abilityto meet groundwater capture zone and residence timerequirements. The report describes PRB technologyand provides an assessment of the performance andcost of the technology when implemented in the field.It also addresses implementation issues such as scale-up, regulatory constraints, and monitoring.

Evaluation of Permeable Reactive BarrierPerformance - Revised ReportThis document, which was prepared forFRTR by DoD, DOE, and EPA, summarizesfield performance evaluations of several

PRBs installed at sites under the purview of DoD,DOE, and EPA. The evaluations focus on thelongevity and hydraulic performance of the PRBs invarious geologic settings. The results of these studiesare being provided to RPMs at government-ownedsites to aid in decision-making. The document alsodiscusses compliance and monitoring issues relatedto PRBs.

Evaluation of Phytoremediation forManagement of Chlorinated Solvents inSoil and Groundwater (EPA 542-R-05-001)This document, prepared by the RTDF, isdesigned to briefly introduce various

phytotechnologies; identify potential applications ofphytoremediation to control, transform, or managechlorinated solvents in soil and groundwater; showhow to conduct a preliminary assessment todetermine if a particular site is a good candidate forphytoremediation; and describe monitoring optionsand show how to assess the effectiveness ofphytoremediation at full-scale field implementation.It is intended to aid regulators, site owners,consultants, and other stakeholders in understandingthe proper application of phytotechnology toremediate groundwater contaminated withhalogenated solvents.

Evapotranspiration Landfill CoverSystems Fact Sheet (EPA 542-F-03-015)This fact sheet, which was prepared byEPA, provides a summary of aninnovative landfill final cover design

called evapotranspiration (ET) covers. Theinformation in this fact sheet was obtained fromcurrently available technical literature and fromdiscussions with site managers. The general ETcover concept involves use of one or more vegetatedsoil layers to retain water until it is eithertranspired through vegetation or evaporated fromthe soil surface. The fact sheet discusses generalconsiderations of ET cover design, performance,monitoring, cost, status, and limitations andprovides project-specific examples. Final coversystems are used as part of the remediation andfinal closure for landfills, contaminated areas at ornear the ground surface, and other waste disposalsites. As of September 2003, ET covers have beenproposed, tested, or installed at 64 sites throughoutthe United States, generally from Georgia toOregon.




Field Applications of In Situ RemediationTechnologies: Chemical Oxidation (EPA 542-R-98-008)The document describes recent pilot demonstrationsand full-scale applications of chemical oxidationprocesses that treat soil and groundwater in place orincrease the solubility and mobility of contaminantsto improve their removal by other remediationtechnologies.

Field Applications of In Situ RemediationTechnologies: Ground-Water Circulation Wells(EPA 542-R-98-009)The report is one in a series of reports that documentrecent pilot demonstrations and full-scaleapplications that treat soil and groundwater in situ orincrease the solubility and mobility of contaminantsto improve their removal by other remediationtechnologies. It is hoped that the informationprovided will facilitate more frequent consideration ofnew, less costly, and more effective technologies toaddress the problems associated with hazardouswaste sites and petroleum contamination.

Field Applications of In Situ RemediationTechnologies: Permeable Reactive Barriers(EPA 542-R-99-002)One of a series of reports that summarize pilotdemonstrations and full-scale applications oftechnologies that treat soil and groundwater, thedocument presents profiles of a number ofapplications of PRBs. Each profile identifies, to theextent the information is available, the name of thesite, its location, its characteristics, the principalcontaminants present, the installation date of thePRB, the type of construction, the costs of design andconstruction, the reactive materials used, and theresults achieved. The profiles also discuss lessonslearned and lists a point of contact for obtainingfurther information. A bibliography of articles anddocuments related to PRBs also is included.

Geophysical Techniques to Locate DNAPLs: Profilesof Federally Funded Projects (EPA 542-R-98-020)The document provides to researchers andpractitioners a status report on federal projects thatare using noninvasive geophysical techniques tolocate DNAPLs in the subsurface.

Groundwater Pump and Treat Systems:Summary of Selected Cost andPerformance Information at Superfund-Financed Sites (EPA 542-R-01-021a andEPA 542-R-01-021b)

This report, which was published by EPA, summarizesPhase 1 (the data collection phase) of the NationwideFund-lead Pump and Treat Optimization Project. Thefirst phase of this project identified a total of 88 Fund-lead (EPA-lead and state-lead with Fund money) P&Tsystems within the Superfund Program. Systemidentification was accomplished through use of onlinedatabases and discussions with project liaisons in eachregion. The number of Fund-lead P&T systems in EPAregions ranged from zero in Region 8 to 22 in Region 2.The report identifies the 88 Fund-lead P&T systems,summarizes the information submitted by RPMs, andpresents the screening and selection of those systems toreceive remediation system evaluations (RSE). The EPA542-R-01-021a report does not contain data appendices.The “b” version of the report includes all appendices.

Ground-Water Remediation TechnologiesAnalysis Center Technology ReportsDeveloped by the Ground-WaterRemediation Technologies Analysis Center(GWRTAC), various reports about

groundwater technologies and how they work areavailable to assist decision-makers in reviewingtechnology options and assessing a technology’sapplicability to a particular site. The TechnicalOverview Reports are intended to provide generaloverviews of and introductions to selected groundwatertechnologies. More detailed information and technicalanalyses are provided in the Technical EvaluationReports. Each of these reports provides a comprehensivedescription of a specific technology, performanceinformation, information about its applicability and cost,a discussion of regulatory and policy requirements andissues, and a summary of lessons learned. TheTechnology Status Reports are summary documents thatprovide information about the status of and currentdevelopment efforts for specific emerging groundwatertechnologies or address related topics. Examples of someof the topics covered include air sparging, chlorinatedsolvents, DNAPL remediation, electrokinetics, hydraulicand pneumatic fracturing, in situ bioremediation, in situchemical treatment, in situ soil flushing, permeablereactive wells, phytoremediation, groundwatercirculation wells, in situ S/S, in situ vitrification, LNAPLremediation, perchlorate remediation, remediation ofmetals, SVE and dual -phase extraction, thermalenhancements, and treatment trains.


72

Groundwater Remedies Selected atSuperfund Sites (EPA 542-R-01-022)EPA prepared this report to document theselection of groundwater treatment andMNA remedies for Superfund remedial

action sites. The report presents data on groundwatertreatment and MNA remedy decisions and analyzestrends in these decisions over time. The focus of thisreport is on groundwater treatment and MNAremedies that result in reduction of contaminantconcentrations or mobility. Groundwatercontainment and other remedies are not addressed inthis report.

Hydraulic Optimization Demonstration forGroundwater Pump-and-Treat SystemsThe report, contained in two separate volumes,presents a screening analysis that users can use todetermine whether they can achieve significant costsavings by altering key aspects of an existing orplanned P&T system. The first volume, intended for abroad audience, describes the screening analysis,which uses spreadsheets to allow quick andinexpensive cost comparison of alternatives underconsideration for use at a site, in terms of net presentvalue (NPV). The second volume, intended for a moretechnical audience, provides case study examples ofthe application of hydraulic optimization at threesites. Site-specific factors, as well as the stepsinvolved to conduct the analysis, are described indetail. The following volumes are available:

– Volume I: Pre-Optimization Screening Method andDemonstration (EPA 542-R-99-011A)

– Volume II: Application of Hydraulic Optimization(EPA 542-R-99-011B)

In Situ Electrokinetic Remediation of MetalContaminated Soils Technology Status Report(SFIM-AEC-ET-CR-99022)The report, which was published by the U.S. ArmyEnvironmental Center for ESTCP, provides anoverview of the current developmental status ofelectrokinetic remediation for metals-contaminatedsoils. The report identifies concerns about the in situapplication of the technology and issues that requirefurther investigation. It also presents the results of afield demonstration conducted at Naval Air WeaponsStation at Point Mugu to illustrate concerns about thein situ application of the technology at its currentstage of development.

In Situ Treatment of ChlorinatedSolvents: Fundamentals and FieldApplications (EPA 542-R-04-010)This report, which was prepared by EPA,contains information about the use of in

situ thermal treatment technologies to treatchlorinated solvents in source zones containing free-phase contamination or high concentrations ofcontaminants that are either sorbed to soil ordissolved in groundwater in the saturated orunsaturated zone. The information in this report maybe helpful to site managers, site owners, treatmenttechnology vendors, regulators, consulting firms, andothers involved in the cleanup of sites contaminatedwith chlorinated solvents. The report describes threein situ thermal technologies: steam-enhancedextraction, electrical resistive heating, and electricalconductive heating. The report also discusses overallapplicability issues and engineering considerationsfor the use of these technologies in the field.

In Situ Treatment of Contaminated SedimentsThe document provides a technology assessmentabout in situ treatment technologies applicable forcleanup of contaminated sediments. It is intended toprovide federal agencies, states, consultingengineering firms, private industries, and technologydevelopers with information on the current status ofthis technology.

Introduction to Phytoremediation (EPA 600-R-99-107)The document provides a tool for regulators, owners,neighbors, and managers to use in evaluating theapplicability of phytoremediation to a site. Thedocument defines terms and provides a framework foruse in developing an understanding ofphytoremediation applications. It is a compilation ofinformation obtained through research andremediation work that has been done to date.

ITRC Phytoremediation Decision TreeThe document, which was produced by the ITRCworkgroup, provides a tool that can be used todetermine whether phytoremediation can be effectiveat a given site. It is designed to complement existingphytoremediation documents. It allows the user touse basic information about a specific site, through aflow chart layout, to decide whetherphytoremediation is feasible at that site.




Leak Detection for Landfill Liners: Overview of Toolsfor Vadose Zone Monitoring (EPA 542-R-98-019)The report provides a basic summary of tools incurrent use for detection of leaks in landfill liners. Itincludes information gathered from a range ofcurrently available sources, including projectdocuments, reports, periodicals, Internet searches,and personal communication with parties involved insuch efforts.

Long-Term Performance of PermeableReactive Barriers Using Zero-ValentIron: An Evaluation at Two Sites(Environmental Research Brief) (EPA600-S-02-001)

This environmental research brief, which wasdeveloped by EPA ORD, presents findings over thepast 4 years at two sites where detailed EPAinvestigations have focused on the long-termperformance of PRBs. The document also examinesthe field performance of multiple PRBs across theUnited States.

Monitored Natural Attenuation of ChlorinatedSolvents (EPA 600-F-98-022)The fact sheet, which was written for a nonscientificaudience and intended to assist federal, state, andlocal regulators in educating the public aboutcomplex environmental issues, explains what theterm “monitored natural attenuation” means when itis used to describe a potential strategy for remediatinga contaminated site. It also describes the variousphysical, chemical, and biological processes ofnatural attenuation that may take place at a sitecontaminated with chlorinated solvents and explainshow decision-makers evaluate the role of MNA at acontaminated site.

Monitored Natural Attenuation of PetroleumHydrocarbons (EPA 600-F-98-021)The fact sheet, which was written for a nonscientificaudience and intended to assist federal, state, andlocal regulators in educating the public aboutcomplex environmental issues, explains what theterm “monitored natural attenuation” (MNA) meanswhen it is used to describe a potential strategy forremediating a contaminated site. It also describes thevarious physical, chemical, and biological processesof natural attenuation that may take place at a sitecontaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons andexplains how decision-makers evaluate the role ofMNA at a contaminated site.

MtBE Treatment ProfilesThis Web site is sponsored jointly byEPA’s OSRTI and OUST. The searchableWeb site contains data on almost 400completed and ongoing applications of

MtBE treatment for drinking water and contaminatedmedia. The treatment profiles describe sites at whichtechnologies (both in situ and ex situ/aboveground)have been used to treat MtBE in groundwater, soil,and drinking water. The technologies include airstripping and sparging, carbon adsorption,bioremediation (in situ and ex situ), in situ chemicaloxidation, SVE and dual-phase extraction, and P&T.The profiles include active links to 18 case studiesthat present more in-depth information about thetreatment sites. EPA encourages project managers,site owners, and technology vendors to add newMtBE treatment profiles to the Web site. Onceinformation is provided, it may be updated to addmore recent data, add data for more fields, or correcterrors in existing data.

Multi-Phase Extraction: State of the Practice (EPA542-R-99-004)The report describes the use of multi-phase extraction(MPE) for the remediation of contaminated soil andgroundwater, focusing primarily on the application ofMPE at sites at which contamination withhalogenated VOCs is present. The report describesMPE technology and the various configurations usedfor it, indicates the types of site conditions to whichMPE is applicable, and discusses the advantages andpotential limitations of the use of MPE at such sites.In addition, the report provides information aboutvendors of MPE and case studies that summarize costand performance data on applications of thetechnology at three sites.

Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents inGroundwater: Principles and PracticesThe industrial members of the Bioremediation ofChlorinated Solvents Consortium (bioconsortium) ofthe RTDF prepared the document to disseminate up-to-date scientific information about naturalattenuation of chlorinated solvents. The mission ofthe RTDF bioconsortium is to accelerate thedevelopment of cost-effective bioremediationprocesses for degrading chlorinated solvents and toachieve public and regulatory acceptance of thoseprocesses as safe and effective. The documentprovides a framework to be used in evaluatingnatural attenuation of chlorinated VOCs.


74

Natural Attenuation of MtBE in the Subsurfaceunder Methanogenic Conditions (EPA 600-R-00-006)The document presents a case study conducted at theformer Fuel Farm Site at the U.S. Coast Guard SupportCenter at Elizabeth City, North Carolina. The casestudy is intended to answer several questions: CanMtBE be biodegraded under methanogenic conditionsin groundwater that was contaminated by a fuelspill? Will biodegradation produce lowerconcentrations of MtBE than those required underregulatory standards? Is the rate of degradation inthe laboratory adequate to explain the distribution ofMtBE in the groundwater at the field site? What is therelationship between the degradation of MtBE and thedegradation of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, andxylene (BTEX) compounds? What is the rate ofnatural attenuation at the source area?

Overview of the Phytoremediation of Lead andMercuryThe report assesses the current state ofphytoremediation as an innovative technology anddiscusses its usefulness and potential in theremediation of lead- and mercury-contaminated soilsfound at hazardous waste sites. The advantages anddisadvantages, limitations, current status, projectedmarket, and environmental concerns associated withthis new and innovative technology are discussed.Case studies involving the phytoremediation of leadand mercury detailing bench and full-scale projectsare also provided.

Permeable Reactive Barrier Technologies forContaminant Remediation (EPA 600-R-98-125)The document provides information about PRBs interms of treatable contaminants, designs, feasibilitystudies, and construction options. Summaries ofseveral current installations also are provided.

Permeable Reactive Barriers for InorganicsThe report provides a summary of information aboutPRBs for inorganics and a discussion of the currentstatus of such barriers. It contains informationgathered from a range of currently available sources,including project documents, reports, periodicals, theInternet, and personal communication with partiesinvolved in projects that use the barriers.

Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soil and GroundWater at Hazardous Waste Sites (EPA 540-S-01-005)The issue paper was developed for the EPA RegionalGround Water Forum. The paper provides a concise

discussion of the processes associated with the use ofphytoremediation as a cleanup or containmenttechnique for remediation of hazardous waste sites,sediment, groundwater, surface water, andwastewater.

Phytoremediation Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-99-003)The document aids decision-makers in reviewing theapplicability of phytoremediation extractiontreatment technologies. The document also providesaccess information on electronic resources andhotlines; cites relevant federal regulations; andprovides abstracts of more than 100 pertinentresources, such as bibliographies, guidancedocuments, workshop proceedings, overviewdocuments, study and test results, and test designsand protocols. Included is a phytoremediationtreatment technology resource matrix that comparesthe documents by technology type, affected media,and contaminants. The guide also provides detailedinformation on how to obtain the publications listed.

Phytotechnology Technical and RegulatoryGuidance (Phyto-2)The document, which was published by ITRC,provides technical and regulatory guidance to helpregulators understand, evaluate, and make informeddecisions about phytotechnology proposals. Thedocument includes a description ofphytotechnologies and discussions of regulatory andpolicy issues, technical requirements forphytotechnologies, and concerns on the part ofstakeholders. It also provides case studies andtechnical references.

Proven Alternatives for AbovegroundTreatment of Arsenic in Groundwater(EPA 542-S-02-002)This issue paper, which was developedfor EPA’s Engineering Forum, identifies

and summarizes experiences with provenaboveground treatment alternatives for arsenic ingroundwater and provides information on theirrelative effectiveness and cost. The four technologiesincluded in the report are precipitation/coprecipitation, adsorption, ion exchange, andmembrane filtration. The report describes the theoryand operation of each technology, provides availableproject-specific performance and cost data, anddiscusses limitations. The report also discussesspecial considerations for retrofitting systems to meetthe lower arsenic maximum contaminant level (MCL)of 10 micrograms per liter (µg/L).




Remediation Technology Cost Compendium- Year 2000 (EPA 542-R-01-009)This cost compendium, which wasprepared by EPA’s OSRTI, captures currentinformation about the costs of the following

six remediation technologies: (1) bioremediation, (2)thermal desorption, (3) SVE, (4) on-site incineration, (5)groundwater P&T systems, and (6) PRBs. Cost datawere obtained from federal agency sources, includingcase studies and reports prepared by the FRTR; DOE’sLos Alamos National Laboratory; the USACEHazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Center forExpertise; and the U.S. Air Force Center forEnvironmental Excellence (AFCEE). The reportincludes six sections, each of which describes the costanalysis for one of the six technologies. Each of thesections includes a brief description of the technology,a discussion of the methodology used in the costanalysis, and the results of the cost analysis.

Solidification/Stabilization Use at Superfund Sites(EPA 542-R-00-010)The report provides to interested stakeholders, suchas project managers, technology service providers,consulting engineers, site owners, and the generalpublic, the most recent information about S/Sapplications at Superfund sites as well as informationabout trends in the use of the technology, specifictypes of applications, and costs.

Study of Assessment and RemediationTechnologies for Dry Cleaner SitesPrepared by SCRD, with the support ofEPA’s OSRTI, the report presents theresults of the Coalition’s evaluation of

assessment and remediation technologies commonlyused in cleaning up dry cleaner sites. The evaluationwas based on the results of responses toquestionnaires sent to entities involved in suchcleanups in 1999. The report presents those results indetail. An appendix in the report providesdescriptions and brief evaluations of assessmenttechnologies frequently used at dry cleaner sites.

Subsurface Containment and Monitoring Systems:Barriers and Beyond (Overview Report)The document provides a summary of informationabout subsurface barriers – vertical and horizontal –with an emphasis on emerging and innovativevertical barrier technologies. It also presents adiscussion of the current status of such barriers. Thereport is not intended to be inclusive; it merelyprovides an overview of the current work in the field

on subsurface barrier technologies drawn frominformation gathered from a range of sources,including project documents, reports, periodicals, theInternet, and personal communication with partiesinvolved in projects that use such barriers.

Subsurface Remediation: Improving Long-TermMonitoring and Remedial Systems PerformanceConference Proceedings, June 1999 (EPA 540-B-00-002)The document, which was compiled by EPA’s OSRTI,summarizes the presentations made and workshopsconducted during a conference on improving long-termmonitoring (LTM) and the performance of remedialsystems. The conference, sponsored and developed byFRTR, took place in St. Louis, Missouri, from June 8through 11, 1999. The conference provided up-to-dateinformation about LTM and system optimizationthrough presentations and topical workshops.

Surfactant-Enhanced AquiferRemediation (SEAR) ImplementationManual (TR-2219-ENV)This implementation manual, which wasprepared by Intera Inc. and NFESC, is

designed to familiarize RPMs, engineers, and scientistsworking on environmental remediation projects withthe major tasks and planning parameters involved inimplementing an in situ surfactant flood or SEARproject to remove DNAPLs. The manual is intended tohelp users understand basic design andimplementation issues, attain remedial objectives, andfollow risk management methodologies andapproaches in order to avoid misapplication ofsurfactant flooding for DNAPL removal.

A Systematic Approach to In SituBioremediation in Groundwater,Including Decision Trees for In SituBioremediation of Nitrates, CarbonTetrachloride, and Perchlorate

This document, which was prepared by ITRC, providesguidance for the systematic characterization, evaluation,design, and testing efforts associated with implementingin situ bioremediation (ISB) for a biotreatablecontaminant. It serves as guidance for regulators,consultants, responsible parties, and stakeholders whenan ISB technology is being considered. This documentpresents decision trees for reviewing, planning,evaluating, and approving ISB systems for the saturatedsubsurface and defines site parameters and appropriateranges of criteria for characterization, testing, design,and monitoring efforts. The information provided inthis document will support ISB evaluation.


76

Technical and Regulatory Guidance forSurfactant/Cosolvent Flushing of DNAPLSource ZonesThis guidance, which was prepared byITRC, provides technical and regulatory

information for those involved in selecting andimplementing surfactant and cosolvent flushing as aremedial action for DNAPLs. The guidance describesthe technology and discusses the major factors thatneed to be considered in evaluating design andimplementation work plans for surfactant andcosolvent flushing of DNAPLs.

Technical and Regulatory Requirements forEnhanced In Situ Bioremediation of ChlorinatedSolvents in GroundwaterThe report, which was published by ITRC, describesenhanced in situ bioremediation (EISB) and examinesthe circumstances under which its application isappropriate. It also discusses related regulatory andpolicy issues, such as the ban under RCRA on landdisposal and technical requirements forimplementation of EISB.

Technologies for Treating MtBE and OtherFuel Oxygenates (EPA 542-R-04-009)This report, which was developed by EPA’sOSRTI, provides an overview of thetreatment technologies used to remediate

groundwater, soil, and drinking water contaminatedwith MtBE and other fuel oxygenates. The treatmentmethods discussed include air sparging, SVE, MPE, insitu and ex situ bioremediation, in situ chemicaloxidation, P&T, and drinking water treatment.Information in the report can be used to help evaluatethese technologies based on their effectiveness atspecific sites. The report summarizes availableperformance and cost information for thesetechnologies, provides examples of where each has beenused, and identifies additional sources of information.

Technology Status Review: In SituOxidationThis report, which was published byESTCP, provides a survey of sites where insitu oxidation (ISO) has been used. The

overall objective of the project summarized in the reportwas to assess the current status of ISO and determinewhat additional information is needed to understandthe site conditions for which ISO is appropriate.

Underground Injection Control (UIC) ProgramThe federal UIC Program works with state and localgovernments to prevent contamination of drinkingwater resources caused by the underground injectionof waste. Among the wastes the UIC programregulates are more than nine billion gallons ofhazardous waste every year; more than two billiongallons of brine from oil and gas operations everyday; and automotive, industrial, sanitary and otherwastes that are injected into shallow aquifers.

Use of Field-Scale Phytotechnology forChlorinated Solvents, Metals, Explosives/Propellants and Pesticides - StatusUpdate (EPA 542-R-05- 002)This status report, which was published

by EPA OSRTI, provides information about 79phytotechnology projects conducted at sites in theUnited States and Canada, including Superfund sitesand federal and military sites that are beingaddressed under state, local, or voluntary cleanupprograms. These projects involved treatment of soil orgroundwater contaminated with chlorinated solvents,metals, explosives and propellants, and pesticides.The document is meant to be a networking tool forfederal, state, and industrial employees to sharelessons learned from and practical experiences withfield-scale applications of phytotechnology.

��

Course of ActionResult of the Review ofCleanup Options

➡

➡ Proceed to the CLEANUPDESIGN ANDIMPLEMENTATION phase.

Determine whether revisingthe redevelopment planremains a practicable option;if so, proceed to theCLEANUP DESIGN ANDIMPLEMENTATION phase.If contamination exists atconsiderable levels,compliance with otherprograms, such as RCRA andSuperfund, may be required.

The proposed cleanupoption appears feasible.

No cleanup optionappears feasible in lightof the proposedredevelopment andland reuse needs (suchas project milestonesand cost and intendedreuse).


After you have reviewed options for cleanup, you maytake any of the following courses of action:




State-mandated programs have had a major impact in turningformer dry cleaner sites into marketable properties. Soil andgroundwater contaminated by dry cleaning solvent areassociated with many of these sites. Resource and budgetconstraints pose challenges to states as they undertakeassessment and pursue remediation of these properties. Withsupport from EPA’s OSRTI, the State Coalition forRemediation of Drycleaners (SCRD) was established in1998 to (1) provide a forum for exchange of information anddiscussion of implementation issues related to establishedstate dry cleaner programs, (2) share information and lessonslearned, and (3) encourage the useof innovative technologies in theremediation of dry cleaner sites. Thecoalition is made up ofrepresentatives of states that haveestablished dry cleaner remediationprograms, including Alabama,Connecticut, Florida, Illinois,Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, NorthCarolina, Oregon, South Carolina,Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin.A subgroup of the coalition hasfocused its efforts on conductingresearch about state programs anduse of innovative technologies toassess and remediate sitescontaminated with dry cleaning solvents. In its 2004 report,Drycleaner Site Assessment and Remediation – A TechnologySnapshot (2003) the coalition reports the results of a 2002survey performed to evaluate changes in use of innovativetechnologies. Surveys such as these provide information in

the search for cost-efficient and technicallyeffective assessment andremediation technologies.Such studies as the oneperformed at the ArmenCleaners site in Ann Arbor,Michigan, will continue to generate new information aboutinnovative analytical approaches. That study was successful inbuilding a collaborative data set to confirm the completeness ofvapor intrusion and ambient air pathways. The study also

better defined the extent of indoor aircontamination and identified potentialresidential receptors of concern.Overall, although EPA’s investigationbuilt upon previous data to delineatesignificant sources of PCE at the site, italso found that vapor and ambient airconcentrations of tetrachloroethene(PCE) were fairly localized, droppingquickly with distance from the site.The project was unique in itsapplication of a number of innovative,real-time analytical approaches as wellas its use of the Triad approach tostress systematic planning anddynamic work strategies in order to

expedite and improve site characterization and cleanup.

For more information, see the resources numbered41, 72, 148, and 149 in the Index of Resourcesbeginning on page I-1.

STATE DRYCLEANER REMEDIATION PROGRAMS:An Innovative Approach to Cleanup

A Quick Look

• Dry cleaners use chlorinated solvents,particularly PCE, in their operations andhave contributed to contamination of soiland groundwater at many brownfields sites.

• SCRD provides a forum for exchange ofinformation and lessons learnedregarding the use of innovativetechnologies in the assessment andremediation of dry cleaner sites.

• Innovative technologies are of particularbenefit at small dry cleaner sites becauselimited funding for cleanup of such sitesis often an issue.

KEY RESOURCE

State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners (SCRD) Internet SiteView on line at www.drycleancoalition.orgThe SCRD Internet site, which is supported by EPA’s OSRTI, provides extensive information aboutstate remediation programs and resources related to remediation of dry cleaner sites. Descriptions ofstate programs and points of contact in member states are provided. Relevant publications,regulations, and other documents are identified as well. Brownfields stakeholders involved in theassessment and cleanup of dry cleaner sites in Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas,Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin maybe particularly interested in the detailed information provided about programs in those states.Profiles of the remediation of specific sites throughout the United States are intended to assist users,particularly state officials, in making more informed decisions regarding remediation of sites in theirstates. Publications developed by SCRD, as well as state and federal resources that are pertinent toissues associated with dry cleaner sites can be viewed online or downloaded at no charge.


78

From the early 1800s through the mid-1900s,manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites were operatednationwide to produce gas from coal or oil for lighting,heating, and cooking. The gas manufacturing andpurification processes conducted at the plants yieldedgas plant residues that included tars, sludges, lampblack,light oils, spent oxide wastes, and other hydrocarbonproducts. Although many of the by-products wererecycled, excess residues remained at MGP sites. Theresidues contain polycyclicaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH),petroleum hydrocarbons,benzene, cyanide, metals, andphenols. The basecontaminant, coal tar, iscomposed of a complex mixtureof PAHs that generally exhibitlow volatility, low solubility, andlow biodegradability.Consequently, thosecomponents are difficult to treat.

There are an estimated 3,000 to5,000 former MGP sites acrossthe country; some of those sitesstill are owned by thesuccessors to the utilities thatfounded them. MGPs typicallywere built on the outskirts ofcities that since have grown.Today, therefore, the under-used sites often are located in inner city areas, many ofwhich are being considered for redevelopment under theBrownfields Program. The redevelopment of MGP sitesfor reuse can help the utility industry turn potentialliabilities into assets. For example, in the city of FortMyers, Florida, a former MGP site was redeveloped into aprivate, nonprofit museum and aquarium called theImaginarium.

As the business environment has spurred companies toreassess land holdings and better manage environmentalconcerns, the MGP sites have become a central focus.Many companies are investigating and remediating suchsites. The similarities in the configuration of the sites andin the contaminants found at them provide opportunities

to apply innovativeapproaches that benefitfrom economies ofscale. Former MGP sitesoffer an ideal opportunityto apply tools andtechnologies that expedite sitecharacterization and source remediation.

Thermal desorption has been used successfully toremediate soils that contain MGPwastes (for example, lampblack andcoal tar), achieving reductions ofmore than 98 percent inconcentrations of PAHs; totalpetroleum hydrocarbons (TPH);benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, andxylene (BTEX) compounds; andcyanide. Performance data havedemonstrated that less than 10 partsper billion (ppb) of residual PAHsand cyanides can be achievedthrough the application of thermaldesorption. Other technologies thathave proven successful inremediating MGP wastes include co-burning in utility boilers, recycling inroad beds, in situ bioremediation,landfarming, and soil washing.

Because former MGP sites areprevalent and represent a large area of unused land withcomplex remedy needs, new technologies are beingencouraged and field-tested to demonstrate their technicalfeasibility. Opportunities exist to demonstrate and refinenew assessment and remediation technologies that canassist in expediting cleanup processes that can placethese contaminated sites back into productive use.

For more information, see the resource numbered139 in the Index of Resources beginning on page I-1.

REMEDIATING MANUFACTURED GAS PLANT SITES:Emerging Remediation Technologies

A Quick Look

• Although MGPs have closed and mosthave been demolished, such facilitieshave left a legacy of environmentalcontamination.

• Releases of coal tars, oils, andcondensates produced in MGP plantscontributed to a wide range ofcontamination with PAHs, phenols,benzene, and cyanide.

• As utilities discover more MGP sites,they are faced with the need to identifycost-effective, environmentally safe, andinnovative approaches for thecharacterization and remediation ofthose sites.



Phytoremediation includes the use of plants and naturalprocesses to remediate or stabilize hazardous wastes insoil, sediments, surface water, or groundwater. By actingas filters or traps, plants can degrade organic pollutants,extract metal contaminants, or contain and stabilize themovement of contaminants. Phytoremediation first wastested actively at waste sites in the early 1990s, and use ofthe approach has been increasing. Phytoremediation hasbeen implemented on a full or demonstration scale atmore than 200 sites nationwide. As the number ofprojects grows, new information about the cost andperformance of phytoremediationwill become available.

Phytoremediation provides manyadvantages because it has thepotential to work at a broad varietyof sites and on myriadcontaminants involving potentiallyless costs than other options.Types of sites at whichphytoremediation has beenapplied with some degree ofsuccess in cleaning up the sitesinclude pipelines, industrial andmunicipal landfills, agriculturalfields, wood treatment sites,military installations, fuel storagetank farms, army ammunition plants, sewage treatmentplants, and mining sites.

Phytoremediation is being tested and evaluated for itseffectiveness in treating a wide array of contaminantsfound at brownfields sites. Current results indicate thatplants have the potential to enhance remediation ofpetroleum hydrocarbons, BTEX, polycyclic aromatichydrocarbons (PAH), PCBs, chlorinated solvents, heavymetals, and pesticide waste. In addition to providing along-term solution, phytoremediation is an excellentoption for providing an interim solution for containing thespread of contaminants and beginning the treatmentprocess. Phytoremediation does not require theexcavation of soil, and its application may require onlyminimal material handling. Further, phytoremediation canhave a positive effect on the aesthetic character of a site,may be an attractive alternative for use at large sites atwhich other methods of remediation are not cost-effective

or practical, and canbe used inconjunction withother technologieswhen theredevelopment and landuse plans for the site includethe use of vegetation.

Decision-makers at brownfields sites at which there arerelatively low concentrations of contaminants (that is,

organics, nutrients, or metals) over alarge cleanup area and in shallowsoils, streams, and groundwatershould consider the use ofphytoremediation. Phytoremediationalso may be considered for use inconjunction with other technologieswhen redevelopment and land useplans for a site include the use ofvegetation. Among the types ofplants used for phytoremediation arehybrid poplar, willow, andcottonwood trees; rye, Bermuda,sorghum, and fescue grasses;legumes (clover, alfalfa, andcowpeas); aquatic and wetlandplants (water hyacinth and bullrush);

and hyperaccumulators for metals (such as alpinepennycress for zinc or alyssum for nickel). If levels ofcontamination are so high that the concentrations ofcontaminants are toxic to plants (phytotoxic),phytoremediation may not be an effective treatment option.

Because phytoremediation has been used more frequentlyon a demonstration-scale basis, site owners may find itnecessary to show its potential applicability and efficacyon a site-specific basis. Doing so may require an up-frontcommitment of time and resources to demonstrate that theperformance of phytoremediation is comparable to theperformance of traditionally accepted technology options.However, such an investment ultimately could save siteowners significant amounts of money when they clean uptheir properties for redevelopment. In recent years, EPAhas compiled new information to assist site decision-makers who may be reluctant to use phytotechnology

PHYTOREMEDIATION TECHNOLOGY:A Growing Field

A Quick Look

• An aesthetically pleasing, passivecleanup technology powered by solarenergy.

• A technology that is most useful at sitesat which shallow, low levels ofcontamination are present.

• A cost-effective technology that has thepotential to clean up a wide variety ofbrownfields sites.

• Can also be used for other functionsrelated to site cleanup, such as erosioncontrol and runoff control.



80

Continued ... PHYTOREMEDIATION TECHNOLOGY:A Growing Field

because of the limited amount of information about its useat actual field-scale projects. In a recent paper, Use ofField-Scale Phytotechnology for Chlorinated Solvents,Metals, Explosives and Propellants, and PesticidesSTATUS UPDATE (April 2005), EPA provides informationon phytotechnology applications and identifies suchexamples as the Edward Sears property that was used fromthe mid-1960s to the early 1990s for the repackaging andsale of paints, adhesives, paint thinners, and variousmilitary surplus materials. Groundwater at the site wascontaminated with a variety of solvents, includingmethylene chloride, trimethylbenzene, TCE, and xylenes.A field demonstration of phytotechnology using hybridpoplars to clean up shallow groundwater at the site wasperformed beginning in 1996. Substantial reductions incontaminant concentrations have been reported. Forexample, data covering the period from 1995 to 2004shows that concentrations of methylene chloride was

reduced from as high as 6,700 ìg/L to below detection;trimethylbenze from as high as 1,890 to 730 ìg/L; and TCEfrom as high as 510 to 46 ìg/L. Groundwater monitoring isongoing at the site.

In addition to the document discussed above, otherresources are available at www.epa.gov/tio/pubitech.htm including:

Brownfields Technology Primer: Selecting and UsingPhytoremediation for Site Cleanup (EPA 542-R-01-006),July 2001

Phytoremediation Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-99-003),June 1999

For more information, see the resources numbered13, 23, 29, 32, 59, 95, 96, 115, 118, 119, 120, and164 in the Index of Resources beginning on page I-1.




It is estimated that billions of dollars will be spent bythe private and public sector to clean up sitescontaminated with DNAPL. Denser than water,DNAPLs tend to sink through the water table and forma product pool on top of such impermeable soil layersas clay. DNAPLs also can sink and migrate laterallythrough fractures in bedrock. Numerous variablesinfluence fate and transport of DNAPLs in thesubsurface, and it can be difficult to predict the pathDNAPLs will take.

Because of these properties,DNAPLs act as a continuingsource of contamination.DNAPLs may cause serious,long-term contamination ofgroundwater and pose asignificant challenge to cleanupof the site, especially forestablished technologies suchas pump-and-treat. At siteswith significant DNAPLcontamination, pump-and-treatsystems may require severalhundreds of years to clean upthe groundwater.

Sites likely contaminated withDNAPLs include dry cleaningfacilities, wood preservationsites, MGP sites, and solvent sites (industrialoperations using large quantities of solvents as well assolvent disposal and recovery sites).

To accelerate the development and implementation ofinnovative technologies for remediating DNAPLs ingroundwater, the Interagency DNAPL consortium(IDC) was formed. The consortium has developed anational action plan that proposes collaborativeefforts among federal agencies, private sectorentities, and responsible parties in research anddevelopment, technology demonstrations, and full-scale technology deployment to reduce the perceived

risk associated withinnovativetechnologies. Theinteragencyagreement supportsthe testing of new andexisting technologies in side-by-side demonstrations to compare cost andperformance data that will be used to expediteregulatory acceptance and use of innovative remedialtechnologies at other sites.

EPA continues to support theevaluation and application oftechnologies for the assessmentand remediation of sitescontaminated with DNAPLs. InDNAPL Remediation: SelectedProjects Approaching RegulatoryClosure STATUS UPDATE (EPA542-R-04-016) (November2004), EPA provides informationon the challenges of DNAPLcharacterization and remediation,and overview of DNAPLremediation technologies, adescription of DNAPLremediation projects, and asummary of findings.

For more information, see the resources numbered30, 40, 73, 90 (specifically the case study titled“Geophysical Investigation at Hazardous WasteSites”), 94, and 158 in the Index of Resourcesbeginning on page I-1.

CLEANUP OF DNAPLS:A Widespread Challenge

A Quick Look

• Most commonly occurring DNAPLstypically are industrial chlorinated solventssuch as TCE, PCE, and carbon tetrachloride(CCl4). Other prevalent DNAPLs includecreosote, pentachlorophenol (PCP), andPAH coal tars.

• DNAPLs are present at 60 to 70 percent ofthe Superfund NPL sites.

• Among the number of innovativetechnologies that are demonstratingsuccess and providing promising resultsin reducing DNAPL contamination are insitu thermal treatment, in situ chemicaloxidation, and ISB.


82

CLEANUP DESIGN ANDIMPLEMENTATION

The cleanup design and implementation phasefocuses on developing and carrying out a cleanupplan to prepare the property for redevelopment andreuse. The design of the cleanup plan andimplementation of the technology options selected inthe previous phase involves close coordination withall other redevelopment efforts in the immediatevicinity of the site.

Factors that should be considered during the designand implementation of cleanup activities include:

1. Are there federal, state, local, and tribalrequirements for the design, installation, andmonitoring of cleanup activities?

2. How will cleanup be monitored so that work canbe stopped when cleanup goals are reached?

3. How best can the community participate in thedesign and implementation of the cleanup plan?

4. What can be done to protect the community andother property during cleanup?

5. What are the tradeoffs between cost and meetingredevelopment project deadlines? Canredevelopment activities (such as renovation ofexisting buildings and construction of roads andsewage systems) be performed concurrently withcleanup activities?

6. What are the long-term effects of the selectedtechnology on the liability or on the future use ofthe site? What are the effects of a catastrophicchange to the environment (for example, ahurricane or changes to the subsurface)?

7. Will long-term monitoring be required? If so, howwill it be managed?

8. Will institutional controls facilitate or hinderredevelopment? Now? In the future?

Develop and Carry Out DetailedCleanup Plans for the Site






Typical activities that may be conducted during thisphase include:

• Review all applicable federal, state, local, andtribal regulatory guidelines and regulations todetermine all specific requirements, includingguidelines for state VCPs

• Continue to work with the appropriate regulatoryagencies to ensure that regulatory requirementsare being properly addressed:

– Consult with the appropriate federal, state, local, andtribal regulatory agencies to include them in thedecision-making process as early as possible

– Contact the EPA regional brownfields coordinator toidentify and determine the availability of EPAsupport programs

• Develop conceptual plans for cleanup andsubsequent monitoring that incorporatetechnology options and consider the effect of anycleanup activities on the proposed reuse of theproperty and the schedule for project design orconstruction:

– Develop or review the schedule for completion of theproject

– Obtain a final amount for the funds available forproject development

– Coordinate the renovation and construction ofinfrastructure with cleanup activities

– Coordinate activities with developers, financiers,construction firms, and members of the localcommunity

• Establish contingency plans to address thediscovery of additional contamination duringcleanup, including tools such as environmentalinsurance policies

• Develop procedures for community participation,for example, by working with community advisoryboards or local redevelopment authorities

• Implement and monitor the cleanup plan andperformance of the technology selected

• Work with the state VCP, if applicable, and/orcounty or local officials to facilitate the placementand implementation of institutional controls

Listed below are examples of technology resourcesthat provide information about cleanup designs andimplementations including regulatory guidelines andcommunity outreach materials. In addition,technologies identified during the site investigationphase may be appropriate to monitor cleanupperformance and close-out. The Resources are listedalphabetically for the following categories:

A. Resources for Cleanup Design and Implementation

B. Site-Specific Resources for Cleanup Design andImplementation

C. Technology-Specific Resources for Cleanup Designand Implementation


A. Resources for Cleanup Design andImplementation

The documents listed below are resources thatprovide general information about the availability oftechnology resources in the form of bibliographiesand status reports. Online searchable databases alsoare included.

Characterization of Mine Leachates and theDevelopment of a Ground-Water MonitoringStrategy for Mine Sites (EPA 600-R-99-007)The objective of the research project was to develop abetter understanding of the composition of minewaste leachates and to identify cost-effectivegroundwater monitoring parameters that could beincorporated into a monitoring strategy to reliablydetect the migration of contaminants from hard rockmining operations.

Citizen’s Guides to UnderstandingInnovative Treatment TechnologiesThe guides are prepared by EPA to providesite managers with nontechnical outreachmaterials that they can share with

communities in the vicinity of sites. The guidespresent information on innovative technologies thathave been selected or applied at some cleanup sites,



84

provide overviews of the technologies, and presentsuccess stories about sites at which innovativetechnologies have been applied. Both English andSpanish versions of the guides are available. Theguides contain information on the following subjects:

– NEW! Activated carbon treatment (EPA 542-F-01-020)

– NEW! Air stripping (EPA 542-F-01-016)

– Bioremediation (EPA 542-F-01-001)

– NEW! Capping (EPA 542-F-01-022)

– NEW! Chemical dehalogenation (EPA 542-F-01-010)

– Chemical oxidation (EPA 542-F-01-013)

– Fracturing (EPA 542-F-01-015)

– In situ flushing (EPA 542-F-01-011)

– In situ thermal treatment methods (EPA 542-F-01-012)

– NEW! Incineration (EPA 542-F-01-018)

– Monitored natural attenuation (EPA 542-F-01-004)

– Permeable reactive barriers (EPA 542-F-01-005)

– Phytoremediation (EPA 542-F-01-002)

– NEW! Pump and treat (EPA 542-F-01-025)

– NEW! Soil excavation (EPA 542-F-01-023)

– Soil washing (EPA 542-F-01-008)

– NEW! Solidification/Stabilization (EPA 542-F-01-024)

– NEW! Solvent extraction (EPA 542-F-01-009)

– Soil vapor extraction and air sparging(EPA 542-F-01-006)

– Thermal desorption (EPA 542-F-01-003)

– NEW! Vitrification (EPA 542-F-01-017)

Design Solutions for Vapor Intrusion andIndoor Air Quality (EPA 500-F-04-004)This fact sheet, compiled by EPA OSWER,provides an overview of technical andhealth issues regarding vapor intrusion

into indoor air and its effect on land redevelopment.The fact sheet discusses how to anticipate thepotential for vapor intrusion; evaluate the extent ofthe problem; and prevent or correct the problem.

Directory of Technical Assistance for LandRevitalization (BTSC) (EPA 542-B-03-001)BTSC has prepared this directory toprovide information about technicalassistance that is available from federal

agencies to assist regional, state, and localgovernment personnel in making assessment andcleanup decisions for brownfields, reuse, andrevitalization sites. This directory includesinformation about 37 organizations within 10 federalagencies that provide different types of support tohelp with site assessment and cleanup, includingtechnical support and funding sources. Profiles areincluded for these agencies and organizations andcontain the following types of information:background and location information, relevancy torevitalization, description of the areas of expertiseavailable, discussion of the types of servicesavailable, types of funding available and eligibility,contact information and the process for requestingassistance, and examples of specific instances inwhich the organization has previously providedsupport relevant to site revitalization. Information inthe profiles is believed to be current as of March 2003.To help maintain current information, the directory isavailable as an online searchable database atwww.brownfieldstsc.org/directory.

EPA REmediation And CHaracterization InnovativeTechnologies (REACH IT) Online SearchableDatabaseThe EPA REACH IT online searchable databasessponsored by EPA’s OSRTI is a service provided freeof charge to both users and technology vendors. EPAREACH IT is accessible only through the Internet.This database provides users with comprehensive,up-to-date information about more than 254characterization technologies and 484 remediationtechnologies and their applications. It combinesinformation submitted by technology serviceproviders about remediation and characterizationtechnologies with information from EPA, DoD, DOE,and state project managers about sites at whichinnovative technologies are being deployed. Duringthe preliminary phase of a brownfields project, EPAREACH IT will assist brownfields stakeholders tolearn about and become familiar with the range ofavailable technology options that can be employedduring the investigation and the cleanup phases thatfollow, as well as data about various types of sites.Information about analytical screening technologiesthat may be useful for initial sampling of a site also isprovided. EPA updates all of the information




available in the system about every six months.Technology vendors may also add or updateinformation in EPA REACH IT at any time throughthe Data Entry System or by submitting informationby mail. You can search the EPA REACH IT systemin several ways. Various search options are availablefor a user on the home page, including CustomSearch; Spotlight; Most Common Searches; SavedSearches; Guided Search; and Vendor, Technology,and Site Index. For questions about whether atechnology is eligible for listing in EPA REACH IT,the user may contact the EPA REACH IT help line at(800) 245-4505 or (703) 390-0713 or send an e-mail [email protected].

Federal Remediation TechnologiesRoundtable Case StudiesThe case studies provide the user withinformation about specific characterizationand remediation, technology optimization

applications. Four focus areas have been establishedby FRTR for providing performance and costinformation on technology applications: remediationcase study reports, characterization and monitoringcase study reports, technology assessment reports,and LTM/optimization case study reports. FRTRcase studies are developed by DoD, USACE, the U.S.Navy, the U.S. Air Force, DOE, DOI, and EPA. Thecase studies focus on full-scale and large fielddemonstration projects and include site backgroundinformation, technology description, cost andperformance information, and lessons learned. Thetechnologies include innovative and conventionaltreatment technologies for contaminated soil,groundwater, and solid media. Users can search thecase studies by groups of contaminants, media, wastemanagement practices that contribute tocontamination, and treatment systems.

Federal Remediation TechnologiesRoundtable Remediation OptimizationWeb SiteRemediation process optimization (RPO)involves systematic monitoring and

evaluation to detect and respond to changes inremedial system performance. System optimizationoffers benefits that include enhanced protectiveness,reduced cost, shortened cleanup times, and theincreased likelihood of site close-out. The Web siteincludes a searchable database of optimization casestudies, meeting and conference materials from eventsrelated to remediation system optimization, general

optimization tools and processes, descriptions ofbroad-based optimization projects, definitions ofoptimization acronyms, and a list of RPO points ofcontact. Monitoring optimization includesapproaches for increasing efficiency, reducing cost,identifying uncertainty, and increasing reliability oflong-term monitoring. Simulation optimizationinvolves the use of mathematical optimizationtechniques coupled with groundwater simulationmodels to determine optimal pumping locations andrates for plume containment and/or cleanup.Treatment technology optimization includesinformation on specific in situ and ex situ remedialtechnologies.

Improving the Cost-Effectiveness of HazardousWaste Site Characterization and MonitoringThe report introduces a new standard promoted byEPA’s OSWER and OSRTI that encourages moreeffective and less costly strategies for characterizingand monitoring hazardous waste sites. The newapproach uses an integrated triad of systematicplanning, dynamic work plans, and on-site analysisfor data collection and technical decision-making athazardous waste sites. Individually, none of theconcepts in the Triad approach is new, but it has beendemonstrated that the integrated approach completesprojects faster, cheaper, and with greater regulatoryand client satisfaction than the traditional phasedapproach. The report includes a list of additionalresources regarding innovative technologies and sitecharacterization.

Institutional Controls: A Site Manager’s Guide toIdentifying, Evaluating, and Selecting InstitutionalControls at Superfund and RCRA Corrective ActionCleanups (EPA 540-F-00-005)The fact sheet provides site managers and decision-makers at Superfund and RCRA corrective actionsites with an overview of the types of institutionalcontrols that commonly are used or implemented andoutlines the factors that generally should beconsidered when evaluating and selectinginstitutional controls as part of the remedy. The factsheet also provides guidance to the public and theregulated community in the matter of how EPAintends to evaluate and implement institutionalcontrols as part of cleanup decisions. Detaileddescriptions of the different types of institutionalcontrols are provided, as are a glossary and achecklist for implementing institutional controls.


86

OSWER Draft Guidance for Evaluatingthe Vapor Intrusion to Indoor AirPathway from Groundwater and Soils(Subsurface Vapor Intrusion Guidance)This draft guidance, issued by EPA

OSWER, provides current technical and policyrecommendations on determining if the vaporintrusion pathway poses an unacceptable risk tohuman health at cleanup sites. At the time of issuingthis draft guidance, OSWER has recommended its useat RCRA Corrective Action sites, Superfund sites andbrownfields sites, but not for UST sites. The draftdocument is intended to serve as an aid in evaluatingthe potential for human exposure from the vaporintrusion pathway given the state-of-the-science atthis time. EPA believes that the document providesrelevant information and guidance currentlyavailable on the issue of vapor intrusion.

Vapor Intrusion Issues at BrownfieldsSitesThis background document, prepared bythe ITRC, is designed to help stakeholdersinvolved with redevelopment projects to

develop a consistent approach to vapor intrusionevaluation, regulatory approval, and deployment ofspecific technologies at specific sites. The documentprovides an overview of vapor intrusion, the type ofcontaminants that may have vapor intrusion potential,the possibility of brownfields sites to have indoor airexposure from vapor intrusion, and the steps that canbe taken to limit such exposure. The documentprovides an international perspective on the problemby including information about vapor intrusionproblems and case studies of affected sites in Germany.

B. Site-Specific Resources for Cleanup Designand Implementation

Listed below are case studies and other resources thatprovide information and lessons learned from theapplication of innovative technologies to specificcontaminants and site types.

Naval Air Station Pensacola,Optimization of RAO to TreatChlorinated Hydrocarbons inGroundwaterThis summary report, which was

prepared by NFESC, describes LTM cost reductionsassociated with reducing sampling frequency and the

number of constituents being analyzed for. The U.S.Navy, in conjunction with regulators, optimizedremedial action operation (RAO) at a former sludgedrying bed and surge pond site at Naval Air Station(NAS) Pensacola in Florida. The RAO resulted inimprovements in the monitoring program, amodification to the remedial strategy, accelerated sitecleanup, and significant cost savings.

Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay (InSitu Chemical Oxidation)During the early 1990s, a plume ofchlorinated solvents was discovered ingroundwater moving toward a residential

area located near Site 11, Old Camden CountyLandfill, Naval Submarine Base (NSB), Kings Bay,Georgia. To prevent further off-site contamination, aP&T system was designed and installed tohydraulically contain the plume at the perimeter ofthe landfill and adjacent to the residential area. AnRAO modification reduced long-term P&T forhydraulic containment to a period of less than 2months after chemical oxidation treatments.Additionally, this modification resulted in savings ofmore than several million dollars over the life of theremedy. NFESC compiled the summary report todescribe system optimization, such as implementingin situ chemical oxidation in addition to P&T in orderto reduce contaminant concentrations in source areas.MNA was implemented to address residualconcentrations.

Pilot Project to Optimize Superfund-Financed Pump and Treat Systems:Summary Report and Lessons Learned(EPA 542-R-02-008 a-u)This report, which was compiled by

EPA, summarizes Phase II (site optimization) of theNationwide Fund-lead Pump and TreatOptimization Project. This phase includedconducting RSEs at the 20 sites selected in Phase Iwith the purpose of providing recommendations toimprove remedy effectiveness, reduce remedy costs,improve technical operations, and gain site close-out. RSEs at 4 of the 20 P&T systems (two inRegion 4 and two in Region 5) were previouslyconducted as part of a demonstration projectcompleted in 2000. The RSE process wasdeveloped by USACE.




Pump and Treat and Air Sparging ofContaminated Groundwater at the GoldCoast Superfund Site, Miami, Florida,September 1998Gold Coast Oil Corporation operated as a

spent oil and solvent recovery facility from 1970 to1982 near Miami, Florida, and discharged chlorinatedsolvents directly onto the soil. DNAPL was alsoobserved in groundwater at this site. The case studyreport prepared by EPA describes modifications to theP&T extraction system, including enlarging twoextraction wells, shutting down the system for 4months, conducting air sparging in source areas, andadding peroxide to wells for a certain period of time.The report describes the results and cost ofimplementing these modifications at the site.Cleanup standards were met at this site withinapproximately 4 years after the system modifications.

Pump and Treat and In SituBioremediation of ContaminatedGroundwater at French LimitedSuperfund Site, Crosby, Texas,September 1998

The French Limited site was used as a disposal sitefor industrial waste material that includedchlorinated solvents and organic contaminants suchas benzene and chloroform. Active remediation wasconducted at the site from January 1992 throughDecember 1995 using groundwater extraction andabove-ground treatment; enhanced aquifer flushingthrough pressure injection of clean water; andaccelerated ISB through the addition of oxygen,phosphorus, and nitrate. Source control wasachieved through installation of sheet-pile wallsaround lagoon and DNAPL source areas. The casestudy report prepared by EPA describes modificationsto the treatment system, including adding a secondsheet-pile wall around DNAPL. The report alsodescribes the results and cost of implementing thesemodifications at the site.

Pump and Treat and In SituBioremediation of ContaminatedGroundwater at the Libby GroundwaterSuperfund Site, Libby, Montana,September 1998

The Libby site is a former wood-treating facility wherewidespread creosote and PCP contamination wasobserved. The remedial strategy at this site was to

address the source area by removing the NAPL and tostimulate bioremediation in the downgradient upper-aquifer plume. The three components of the aquiferremedial system included a source area extractionsystem, an intermediate injection system, and aboundary injection system. The case study reportprepared by EPA describes modifications to theextraction and treatment system, including convertingto low-shear pumps, abandoning four extractionwells and constructing a new one, and replacing aperoxide aeration system for ISB of source water witha bubbleless system. The report also describes theresults and cost of implementing these modificationsat the site.

Pump and Treat and PermeableReactive Barrier to Treat ContaminatedGroundwater at the Former Intersil,Inc. Site, Sunnyvale, California,September 1998

The Former Intersil, Inc., site housed a semiconductormanufacturer that caused groundwater in the area tobe contaminated with chlorinated solvents. A P&Tsystem was operated at this site from 1987 until 1995.After the mass removal by the P&T system hadasymptotically declined, a PRB was selected as analternative technology. The case study reportprepared by EPA describes modifications to the P&Tsystem, including upgrading the system andswitching to a PRB in 1995. The report also describesthe results and cost of implementing these twotechnologies at the site.

Pump and Treat of ContaminatedGroundwater at the Mid-South WoodProducts Superfund Site, Mena,Arkansas, September 1998The Mid-South Wood Products site was

contaminated with PCP, PAHs, and heavy metals.DNAPL and LNAPL were observed in groundwaterat the site. The case study report developed by EPAdescribes modifications to the site extraction andtreatment system, including removing five extractionwells, continuously adjusting the pumping schedulefor the extraction wells, and adding a carbontreatment system for 1 year. The system optimizationwas performed after 8 years of systems operation, andgroundwater contamination was reduced to onelocalized area of concern. The report also describesthe results and cost of implementing P&T at the site.


88

Pump and Treat of ContaminatedGroundwater at the SCRDI DixianaSuperfund Site, Cayce, South Carolina,September 1998The SCRDI Dixiana site, a former

industrial waste storage facility contaminated withchlorinated solvents, provided a cleanup challengebecause of its complex hydrogeology. The case studyreport compiled by EPA describes modifications to thesite extraction and treatment system, includingadding a collection trench, reducing the number ofextraction wells by five, and replacing the tower air-stripper with a shallow air stripper. The report alsodescribes the results and cost of implementing P&T atthe site.

Pump and Treat of ContaminatedGroundwater at the Solid State CircuitsSuperfund Site, Republic, Missouri,September 1998The Solid State Circuits site is a former

manufacturing facility contaminated with chlorinatedsolvents. The groundwater, which was characterizedas a leaky artesian system occurring in karstformations with shallow and deep bedrock zones,posed a cleanup challenge. A P&T system wasoperated at the site for several years, but cleanupgoals were not achieved. Hence, the system had to bemodified in order to enhance its performance. Thecase study report prepared by EPA describesmodifications to the extraction and treatment system,including adding three extraction wells off site tocontain the plume and electronically linking the airstripper blower to transfer pumps so that the blowerwould shut off when the pumps were not operating.The report also describes the results and cost ofimplementing P&T at the site.

Pump and Treat of ContaminatedGroundwater at the United ChromeSuperfund Site, Corvallis, Oregon,September 1998The United Chrome Superfund site is a

former industrial hard chrome plating facility wherechromium contamination was widespread. The casestudy report prepared by EPA describes modificationsto the site extraction and treatment system, includingturning off some extraction wells, flushing someareas, sending untreated water to a Publicly OwnedTreatment Works (POTW), and injecting deep aquiferwater into the upper aquifer. The report alsodescribes the results and cost of implementing P&T atthe site.

Pump and Treat of ContaminatedGroundwater at the Western ProcessingSuperfund Site, Kent, Washington,September 1998The Western Processing site was operated

as a waste processing facility from 1961 to 1983. Over400 businesses transported industrial wastes to thesite to be stored, reclaimed, or buried. The originalapproach to groundwater treatment at this site wasan aggressive effort to fully restore the site to itsoriginal condition within 7 years. Restoration was apriority, and high costs were incurred to achieve thisgoal, including high P&T system operating costs.After 8 years of P&T, the goal of restoration waschanged to containment based on the technicalimpracticability of achieving full restoration. Thiscase study report prepared by EPA describesmodifications to extraction and treatment system,including discontinuing operation of 210 shallowwell points, installing deep wells, and adding metalprecipitation to the treatment system. The report alsodescribes the results and cost of implementing P&T atthe site.

Remedial Action Operation OptimizationCase Study: Eastern GroundwaterPlume, New Brunswick, MaineThis case study report, which wasprepared by NFESC, includes an

effectiveness evaluation for the Eastern GroundwaterPlume P&T system at NAS Brunswick in Maine. Theprimary purpose of the evaluation is to assess theongoing RAO program for this system and to providerecommendations for attainment of site remedialaction objectives and site closure.

Technical Protocol for Evaluating NaturalAttenuation of Chlorinated Solvents inGround Water (EPA 600-R-98-128)The report provides guidance forenvironmental managers about the steps

that must be taken to understand the rate and extentto which natural processes are reducing contaminantconcentrations at sites that are contaminated bychlorinated solvents. Data collected with thisprotocol can be used to evaluate natural attenuationthrough biological processes as part of a protectiveoverall site remedy. The protocol is the result of acollaborative field and laboratory research effortinvolving researchers from EPA ORD, the U.S. AirForce, and the U.S. Geological Survey.




Course of Action

Consult with theappropriate regulatoryofficials before proceedingwith redevelopmentactivities.

Continue cleanupactivities. However, youmay have to return to theSITE INVESTIGATIONphase to determine theextent and nature ofthe contamination.

Return to the SITEINVESTIGATION phaseto collect after-performancesamples for monitoringcleanup.

Result of Cleanup

Contamination hasbeen removed,contained,or controlled.

Additionalcontamination hasbeen discovered.

Long-termmonitoring ofcleanup andperformance of thetechnology isrequired.

➡

➡

➡

��


After you have completed cleanup, you may take oneof the following courses of action:


90

Vapor intrusion is the migration of volatile chemicals fromthe subsurface into overlying buildings. Vapor intrusionis typically associated with releases of volatile organiccompounds (VOCs) such as petroleum products andchlorinated solvents to soil and groundwater from formergas stations, dry cleaners, automobile repair shops, andindustrial facilities. VOCs inburied wastes and contaminatedgroundwater can emit vapors thatmay migrate through thesubsurface into air spaces ofoverlying buildings throughfoundation cracks, holes inconcrete floors, and small gapsaround pipes and utility lines.Certain site characteristics such asthe presence of a high water tableor fractured bedrock can increasethe likelihood of vapor intrusion.

Vapor intrusion is an emergingconcern at brownfields sites. Theunderground contaminant vaporscan act as hidden sources of contamination that may not bedetected during the due diligence process for propertytransfers. Redevelopment of older buildings with damagedfoundations can increase the potential for vapor intrusion. Inextreme cases, the vapors may accumulate in dwellings oroccupied buildings to levels that may pose near-term safetyhazards, acute health effects or aesthetic problems. In most

VAPOR INTRUSIONSubsurface Vapor Intrusion Guidance

A Quick Look

• Vapor intrusion is the migration of volatilechemicals from the subsurface intooverlying buildings.

• Vapor intrusion is an emerging concern atbrownfields sites.

• Several strategies have been developed toreduce or eliminate indoor air contaminantconcentrations using source control of thecontaminant of concern, improvingventilation in buildings, air treatmentmethods, and land use controls.

• Savings can be realized when controls areaddressed prior to redevelopment.

cases, however, thechemical concentrationsare low, or depending onsite-specific conditions,vapors may not be present atdetectable concentrations.

Some states along with EPA havedeveloped methods to screen forsites with potential vaporintrusion concerns. Severalstrategies have been developed toreduce or eliminate indoor aircontaminant concentrationsincluding source remediation, aswell as building-specificengineering (e.g., improvedventilation) and land use controls.While all exposure controls mayneed ongoing operation,maintenance and monitoring,considerable savings can berealized when controls such as

vapor barriers, or active and passive venting systems, areincluded prior to redevelopment.

For additional information, visit: www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/eis/vapor.htm,www.itrcweb.org/Documents/BRNFLD-1.pdf,and http://iavi.rti.org.

EPA Subsurface Vapor Intrusion Guidance

On November 29, 2002 (67 FR 71169), EPA published the Draft Guidance For Evaluating The Vapor Intrusion to IndoorAir Pathway From Groundwater And Soils (Subsurface Vapor Intrusion Guidance). The draft guidance is intended toprovide a tool to conduct a screening evaluation as to whether or not the vapor intrusion exposure pathway is completeand to determine whether it poses an unacceptable risk to human health. It is not intended to providerecommendations for delineating extent of risk or eliminating risk. The draft guidance provides a three-tiered approachto evaluating the vapor intrusion pathway: Primary Screening, Secondary Screening, and Site-Specific PathwayAssessment. Each tier contains a set of questions that aid in the determination of whether a vapor intrusion pathway iscomplete. A complete pathway means that humans are exposed to vapors originating from site contamination. Forthose sites determined to have a complete pathway, the draft guidance provides ways to evaluate whether the pathwayposes a potential significant risk to human health. If a site is determined to have an incomplete vapor intrusionpathway, further consideration of the current site situation generally should not be needed. In addition to brownfieldssites, this draft guidance is suitable for use at RCRA Corrective Action and Superfund sites.A copy of the draft guidance, a fact sheet, and other background information is available at: www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/eis/vapor.htm.

http://iavi.rti.org



Institutional controls (ICs) are administrative and legalrestrictions or limitations placed on the use of a site tominimize potential exposure to chemicals of concern or toprevent activities that might interfere with the effectiveness ofa response action. Institutional controls are vital elements ofresponse alternatives because they influence andsupplement the physical component of the remedy to beimplemented. On one hand, the right combination of ICs isnecessary to ensure the protectiveness of the remedy andmay be critical for obtaining the liability protections under theBrownfields Law; on the other hand, the wrong combinationof institutional controls can be a real or perceivedimpediment to reuse of a site. ICsprovide an added measure ofprotectiveness at contaminated sitesand are not a substitute forthorough investigation and cleanup.The use of ICs must be carefullyconsidered when weighingremedial options as their use mayentail a long-term financial andadministrative burden to ensureeffectiveness and may be adisincentive to prospectivepurchasers and developers.

The Small Business Liability Reliefand Brownfields Revitalization Act addresses ICs atbrownfields sites in two sections. First, in Section 104,Subtitle A, local governments are permitted to use up to 10percent of a grant to enforce institutional controls or monitorpopulation health effects. Thus, local governments can nowuse EPA funds to enforce ICs. The Act also makescompliance with ICs and land use restrictions a prerequisitefor landowner liability protection. Subtitle B of the Actestablishes three landowner liability defenses: the bona fideprospective purchaser defense, the contiguous landownerliability defense, and the innocent landowner defense. Toqualify for any of these defenses, the landowner mustdemonstrate its compliance with land use restrictions thatwere part of or connected with a response action. Alandowner must also show that it has not impeded theeffectiveness or integrity of ICs established in connectionwith a response action to qualify for liability protection.

The term “institutional control” can be applied to a widespectrum of legal and administrative measures. In general,

UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF INSTITUTIONALCONTROLS AT BROWNFIELDS SITES:

A Quick Look

• Institutional controls are administrative andlegal mechanisms that are intended to reduceexposure to residual contamination andprotect the integrity of a remedy at a formerindustrial facility or waste disposal sites.

• The role of institutional controls is animportant consideration during the cleanupof a brownfields site.

• Examples of institutional controls includecovenants, recorded deed notices,restrictions, and advisories.

mechanisms for creatingICs can be divided intofour categories:

• Proprietary controls• Governmental controls• Enforcement and permit mechanisms

with IC components• Informational tools

Proprietary controls are unique because they are based onreal property law. Examples of proprietary controls includecovenants, which are written contracts that can prohibit

specific types of development orconstruction on the land, andeasements, which can grantproperty access or restrict theowner to land uses that arecompatible with the intended use.

Governmental controls involverestrictions that generally fall withinthe traditional police powers ofstate and local governments.Examples of governmental controlsinclude zoning, by whichrestrictions can be imposedthrough the local zoning or land

use planning authority that limit property access and prohibitdisturbance of the response action; well drillingprohibitions; and ordinances for building permit processesand master planning activities.

Another common type of IC is enforcement mechanisms.Such ICs include administrative orders, consent decrees, andRCRA permits that require a landowner, usually a potentiallyresponsible party (PRP), to limit certain activities at a site. TheseICs are used most frequently for CERCLA and RCRA cleanups.

The final category of ICs is informational tools.Informational tools provide information about residual orcapped contamination or provide notification that suchcontamination may remain on site or that a remedy hasbeen undertaken. Typical examples of these tools includestate registries of contaminated properties, deed notices,and advisories. Informational tools are used mostfrequently as a secondary measure to help ensure theoverall reliability of other institutional controls.

Major Concepts and Issues



92

UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF INSTITUTIONALCONTROLS AT BROWNFIELDS SITES:

Major Concepts and Issues

ICs are designed to ensure that the postremediation use of aproperty is compatible with the level of cleanup. ICs,however, have several limitations. For example, deed noticesare informational, not enforceable. An easement cannot beestablished unless a party is willing to hold the easement.Some state governments cannot hold easements, and otherparties may be unwilling to do so. Zoning laws may not befully effective unless they are monitored and enforced over thelong term, and local governments may not have the resourcesfor such oversight. Furthermore, zoning ordinances are notnecessarily permanent; they can be repealed, or localgovernments can grant exceptions after public hearings.Concern has been expressed about the long-term viability ofICs as a remediation tool. For example, they may beforgotten, enforcement agencies may not effectively reviewproperties or land users’ actions, or land users simply mayignore the controls and take their chances. To ensuresuccessful implementation, monitoring, and enforcement ofICs, EPA is developing and issuing policies and guidance.In February 2003, EPA issued the draft guidanceInstitutional Controls: A Guide to Implementing,Monitoring, and Enforcing Institutional Controls atSuperfund, Brownfields, Federal Facility, UST and RCRACorrective Action Cleanups. The purpose of this guidanceis to (1) provide Superfund, brownfields, federal facility,UST, and RCRA corrective action site managers and siteattorneys with an overview of their responsibilities forimplementation, monitoring, and enforcement ofinstitutional controls at their sites and (2) discuss some ofthe common issues that site managers and site attorneysmay encounter when carrying out these responsibilities.This guidance is the second in a series of guidancedocuments on the use of ICs. The first guidance,Institutional Controls: A Site Manager’s Guide toIdentifying, Evaluating and Selecting Institutional Controlsat Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action Cleanups(OSWER 9355.0-74FS-P, EPA 540-F-00-005) (September2000), provides direction for identifying, evaluating, andselecting ICs. This guidance is available on the Internet atwww.epa.gov/superfund/action/ic/index.htm.In September 2004, EPA issued OSWER Directive 9355.0-106 to set forth its Strategy to Ensure Institutional ControlImplementation at Superfund Sites. The strategy will assistEPA regional and Headquarters personnel in preparingregion-specific action plans and in conducting the work

necessary to ensure the proper implementation of ICs atSuperfund sites. This work includes gathering informationand entering it in the Institutional Controls Tracking System(ICTS), evaluating the data generated by the ICTS, prioritizingand conducting site-specific follow-up activities, buildingthe capacity to better manage and review institutional controlinformation, and coordinating with other interested parties.Because land use remains the principal domain of localgovernments, those governments play a significant role inthe management and oversight of ICs. However, it is notalways clear what that role will be. Many local governmentsdo not yet have the capacity and resources necessary to meetthe challenges of long-term stewardship. With an improvedunderstanding of the terms and issues related to ICs, localgovernments and brownfields stakeholders will be in a betterposition to respond effectively to the long-term challenges ofusing ICs to promote site reuse while ensuring that publichealth and the environment are protected.An indication of the significance of IC issues to localgovernments is the establishment of LUCs.org(www.lucs.org) through cooperative agreements betweenthe International City/County Management Association(ICMA) and EPA. LUCs.org is part of ICMA’s continuingeffort to enhance the effectiveness of local governmentthrough professional management practices. ICMA and itspartner agencies and organizations have come to understandthe importance of providing a clearinghouse of informationon the subject for the use of all stakeholder groups.In addition to their designated implementing role inregulatory programs, states may also have broaderauthorities affecting their ability to implement ICs. Anumber of states are establishing specific requirements aspart of VCPs that address the use of ICs.ICs are a mechanism for providing a certain degree of safety inthe absence of technology that could clean up contaminatedsites thoroughly. Decision-makers should weigh the full costsof such options, including capital costs, costs of long-termsampling and analysis, and costs of replacing equipment, aswell as concerns about potential long-term risks associatedwith contaminants left in place against the costs of options thatwould remove the contaminants permanently.

For more information, see the resource numbered93 in the Index of Resources beginning on page I-1.

Continued ...



��

��

� ��

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

• APPENDIX A: GUIDE TO CONTAMINANTS AND TECHNOLOGIES


Appendix A

GUIDE TO CONTAMINANTS AND TECHNOLOGIES

The tables provided in this appendix are intended to help brownfields stakeholders better understand the typesof contaminants typically found at brownfields sites and the range of technologies that may be appropriate forassessing and remediating those contaminants during the various phases of a site cleanup.

What Are the Causes of Contamination at Brownfields Sites?

Section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) definesbrownfields sites as “real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by thepresence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.” Almost any formerproperty, industrial or nonindustrial, where chemicals were used, produced, or reclaimed is a potentialbrownfields site. Over the operational history of the site or through its current use, contamination may haveresulted from use, storage, or disposal of various products or chemicals. Some of the products commonly usedor generated at the sites that may have resulted in contamination of structures, soils, or groundwater include thefollowing:

• Acids and bases • Insulation

• Batteries • Motor oil

• Cleaning products • Oil sludge and waste oil

• Coal tar • Paints

• Degreasing agents • Pesticides, herbicides, and insecticides

• Diesel fuel • Plastics

• Dyes, pigments, and inks • Polymers and epoxy compounds

• Electrical equipment • Refrigerants and coolants

• Explosives and ordnance • Soaps

• Fertilizers • Solvents

• Gasoline • Surfactants

• Hydraulic fluids and lubricants • Waxes

A wide variety of chemical contaminants may be present at brownfields sites. The following tables presentinformation on the sites, typical contaminants, and investigative and remedial technologies:

• Table A-1 lists common site types, activities that may have lead to contamination, and contaminant groupstypically associated with the site types

• Table A-2 lists technologies used to analyze contaminants commonly found at brownfields sites

• Table A-3 lists technologies used to treat contaminants commonly found at brownfields sites

Seven general contaminant groups are included in Tables A-1, A-2, and A-3. Descriptions of the sevencontaminant groups have been included at the end of this appendix to provide supplemental information aboutthem. In addition, supplemental information about treatment technologies described in Table A-3 also has beenincluded at the end of this appendix.

The information in this appendix was obtained from various U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)sources. The appendix is intended to provide general information on brownfields sites, contaminants, andtechnologies and is not intended to be all-inclusive. Contaminants and activities associated with commonbrownfields site types may not be relevant to every site. Additionally, investigation and remediationtechnologies may not be appropriate for the listed contaminants in all situations. Stakeholders should consultEPA or state officials, qualified professionals, and other sources of information when proceeding withredevelopment activities.

A-1


Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives


A-2

What Types of Contaminants Are Found at Brownfields Sites?

Various contaminants potentially may be present at brownfields sites. Table A-1 lists common brownfields sitetypes, activities that may have lead to contamination over the operational history of these sites, and thecontaminant groups typically associated with these activities. In this appendix, contaminant groups arepresented rather than the specific contaminants. Information about the contaminant groups is includedbeginning on page A-11. Please note that if a contaminant group is listed, it does not imply that all thecontaminants within a particular group are associated with each site type.

Table A-1. Typical Contaminants Found at Brownfields Sites

Site Type Site Activities

Agricultural Feed supply and other agricultural chemical distribution X X X X Xpoints may be contaminated with fertilizers, pesticides,and herbicides. Groundwater, drainage area sediments,soils, and nearby surface waters may be contaminatedwith pesticides and herbicides and could exhibit elevatedlevels of nitrate from fertilizer runoff. Contamination atagricultural sites may also arise from chemicals used tooperate, clean, and maintain farm equipment such as fuel,oil, grease, and solvents.

Battery recycling and Battery recycling and disposal facilities regenerate, Xdisposal reclaim, and dispose of used batteries. Many batteries

contain toxic constituents such as lead, mercury, andcadmium. The metal in used batteries is separated fromother battery constituents and processed for reuse.Lead-acid automobile batteries must be “broken” toreclaim the lead within. In battery breaking, the top ofthe battery casing is removed, the sulfuric acid solutioninside is drained, and the lead components are separatedfrom the casing. The remaining battery casing may berinsed prior to disposal in order to remove residual leadoxide. Discarded acid and rinse water may be stored inlagoons or tanks. Chemicals may be released to soil andgroundwater by leaking tanks or through spillage duringthe breaking process. Discarded casings may be buried.Any metal remaining on buried, discarded casings mayleach into soil and groundwater. The extracted metalmust be smelted prior to reuse. Particulate matter emittedby the smelter may contaminate nearby surface soil.

Chemical and dye A wide range of chemicals are used and generated in X X X Xmanufacturing facilities that manufacture, reformulate, and package

various chemicals and dyes for commercial and industrialuse. The types of contaminants released depend on theraw materials, processes, equipment and maintenancepractices used. Environmental contamination resultingfrom chemical and dye manufacturing may persist innearby or downstream surface waters or sediments longafter operations have ceased. Moreover, chemicaloperations can change over time or involve multipleprocesses; therefore, the sites may be overlaid with severalgenerations of wastes from a variety of products orprocesses. Many chemical facilities also have qualityassurance and research laboratories that use smallquantities of toxic chemicals that could contaminateisolated locations.



Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives

Chlor-alkali Chlor-alkali plants produce a variety of chemicals, including X X Xmanufacturing chlorine, caustic soda, hydrochloric acid, sodium hypochlorite,

sodium hydrosulfite, salt, hydrogen, sulfur dioxide, and spentsulfuric acid. Three basic processes are used for themanufacture of chlorine and caustic soda from brine: themercury cell, diaphragm cell, and membrane cell processes.The mercury cell process uses elemental mercury as thecathode and produces mercury-contaminated wastewater,solid waste, and gaseous emissions. The process and wastestreams must be carefully controlled to prevent the release ofmercury to the environment. The diaphragm cell process mayuse lead or graphite anodes and asbestos diaphragms andmay generate chlorinated hydrocarbons as a by-product. Themembrane cell process is the most modern and has economicand environmental advantages. The primary by-product of themembrane cell process is dilute hydrochloric acid, which mustbe neutralized before it is discharged into the environment.

Cosmetics Cosmetics are mixtures of surfactants, oils, and other X X Xmanufacturing ingredients. Cosmetics may contain mineral or metallic and

nonmetallic additives. In sunscreen, for example, titanium andzinc are used as sun blockers. The color of makeup is determinedby the concentrations and ratio of black or red iron oxide,titanium dioxide, and/or zinc oxide. Metal dyes are used infingernail polish. The uses and concentrations of heavy metalsplay an important role in cosmetics production and a primaryenvironmental concern at these site types.

Drum recycling Drum recycling facilities clean used drums for reuse. Soil X X X X X Xand groundwater contamination at these facilities mayresult from leaking and spilling of residual chemicals andoils. The variety of chemicals stored in drums makescharacterizing potential contaminants difficult. Contaminantscould include acids, bases, corrosives, reactive chemicals,flammable materials, and oils. Spillage of paint, paint thinners,and solvents can also contaminate drum recycling facilities.

Dry cleaning The dry cleaning industry provides garment cleaning and X Xrelated services such as clothes pressing and finishing. The drycleaning process is physically very similar to the home laundryprocess except that clothes are washed in dry cleaning solventinstead of water. Dry cleaning sites may become contaminatedbecause of leaks, spills, and improper disposal of solvents.

Gasoline stations Gasoline stations consist of pump islands, underground X X X Xstorage tanks (UST) for fuel, small storage areas, and serviceareas (which typically contain either hydraulic lifts or pits) forchanging automobile engine oil and other maintenanceactivities. Gasoline and diesel fuel are transferred from bulktank trucks to large USTs. Spills at the transfer areas andpumps along with overfilling of and leakage from the USTsare likely sources of contamination at gasoline stations. Theprimary contaminants of concern at gasoline stations includepetroleum hydrocarbons; Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, andXylenes (BTEX); and fuel oxygenates such as methyl tertiarybutyl ether. Service areas typically have small containers ofethylene glycol (coolant), hydraulic oils, lubricants, automotivebatteries (lead and acid), and compressed gas especiallyacetylene and oxygen cylinders for welding operations.Surface soils may be contaminated because of historical spillsor dumping of used lubricants, coolants, and cleaningsolvents generated during service activities. Subsurface soilsand groundwater, especially in the vicinity of USTs, may alsobe contaminated because of spills, overfilling, and leaks.



Continued

A-3


Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives


Glass manufacturing The glass industry consists of firms engaged in primary Xglass manufacturing and of others that create productsusing purchased glass. The primary contaminants associatedwith glass manufacturing are metals such as lead, arsenic,chromium, and others. Other chemicals used in the glassmanufacturing process include hydrofluoric acid, sulfuricacid, and various organic and inorganic solvents.Contaminants may be released to the environment throughspills and leaks of raw materials and plant maintenancewaste as well as insufficiently treated air emissions.

Hospitals Hospitals use a variety of toxic chemicals for diagnostic and X X Xtherapeutic procedures as well as for cleaning and sterilization.Hazardous materials used include chemotherapy andantineoplastic chemicals, formaldehyde, photographicchemicals, radionuclides, solvents, mercury, anesthetic gases,and other toxic or corrosive chemicals. These substances maybe released to the environment through leaks and spills,improper disposal of wastes, and insufficient treatment ofwasterwater. In addition, medical waste incinerators mayrelease mercury into the air.

Incinerators An incinerator is an enclosed device that uses controlled X X Xflame combustion to thermally break down waste to an ashresidue that contains little or no combustible material.Incinerators may accept specific wastes such as municipalsolid waste, sewage sludge, or medical waste. Contaminationfrom incinerators may be associated with storage andhandling of waste materials prior to incineration as well asdisposal of ash and other by-products of the combustionprocess.

Landfills, municipal and Landfills are now restricted to household garbage, yard X X X X X Xindustrial wastes, construction debris, and office wastes. Prior to 1970,

however, landfills could accept industrial wastes. Therefore,older landfills are more likely to be contaminated withhazardous chemicals. Even modern landfills can contain ahost of chemicals from household wastes such as oils, paints,solvents, corrosive cleaners, batteries, and gardening products.Illegal dumping at landfills can also cause seriouscontamination. Improperly designed landfills have a higherlikelihood of surface soil and groundwater contaminationand may trap explosive levels of methane gas and hydrogensulfide in the soil.

Leather manufacturing Leather tanning is the process of converting raw hides or skins X Xinto leather. Hides and skins absorb tannic acid and otherchemical substances that prevent them from decaying,make them resistant to wetting, and keep them supple anddurable. Tanning is essentially the reaction of collagen fibersin the hide with tannins, chromium, alum, or other chemicalagents. The most common tanning agents used in theUnited States are trivalent chromium and vegetabletannins extracted from certain tree barks. Alum, syntans(manmade chemicals), formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde,and heavy oils are also used as tanning agents.


Continued

A-4



Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives


Machine shops and The fabricated metal product industry has facilities that X X X Xmetal fabrication generally perform two functions: forming metal shapes and

performing metal finishing operations, including surfacepreparation. Metal fabricators produce ferrous andnonferrous metal products. Machining and other metalworking may generate waste metals, lubricants, cleaners,and other materials. These substances may impact soil,groundwater, and surface water if they are spilled, leaked,or improperly disposed.

Manufactured gas plants Manufactured gas has been produced as a fuel source from X X X Xand coal gasification coal and oil since the early 1800s. Typically, coal or oil is

heated and the resulting volatilized gases are distilled toproduce natural gas. Depending on the process design,various by-products can be recovered, including anthracene,benzene, cresol, naphthalene, paraffin, phenol, toluene, andxylenes. Waste products from manufactured gas operationsinclude coal fines, coal tar, cyanide salts, hydrogen sulfidegas, ammonia, and wastewater. Leakage and spillage fromstorage drums or tanks may contaminate surface andsubsurface soils, sediments, surface water, and groundwater.

Marine maintenance Marine maintenance industry establishments engage in X X Xgeneral painting and repair of ship or boat structures andengines or power plants. Activities may include painting,servicing engines, structural repairs, engine or power plantmaintenance, electroplating, air conditioning and refrigerationservice, electrical repair, and other cleaning and repair services.A number of chemicals may be used at marine maintenancefacilities, including chemical paint strippers, blast media,antifouling paints, solvents, carburetor cleaner, cuttingfluids, acids and alkalis, cyanide, heavy metal baths,fiberglass and reinforcement, resins, and mold release agents.

Metal plating and finishing Metal plating operations improve a product’s performance X X X X X(for example its durability or corrosion resistance) orappearance. Metal components are first cleaned (usingsolvents and/or water-based detergents) to remove dirt andoils from manufacturing operations. The metal componentsare subsequently etched, plated, and finished in a series ofvats or baths. Common plating metals include cadmium,chromium, copper, gold, nickel, silver, and their alloys.Spillage during plating and cleaning operations andleakage or overflows from storage tanks and process vatsmay contaminate concrete floors and underlying soils.Groundwater may also be contaminated by heavy metals,cyanide, and solvents.

Metal recycling and Automobile salvage yards recover usable parts, scrap metal, X X Xautomobile salvage and other recyclable materials from old or wrecked

automobiles. Nonrecyclable materials are stored on site or sentto a municipal landfill. Metal recyclers purchase metal from avariety of sources and sort and process the scrap metal forresale. Metals commonly salvaged by these facilities includeiron, steel, copper, brass, and aluminum. Sites may containnon-recyclable wastes and contaminated materials.Contaminated “auto fluff”, a fibrous residue containingplastics, fabrics, and other materials, may be present atsites that perform shredding. Depending on the type ofrecycling operation conducted at a site, the surrounding soilsmay be contaminated with heavy metals, asbestos,polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) oils, hydraulic fluids,lubricating oils, fuels, and solvents.


Continued

A-5


Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives


Munitions manufacturing Ordnance sites typically include facilities that manufacture, X Xand ordnance sites assemble, store, or dispose of a variety of military munitions

such as bombs, shells, grenades, mines, small armsammunition, and specialty explosives. Potentialcontaminants in structures and surrounding property includedi- and tri-nitro substituted phenols and benzenes,nitroglycerin, metals, ethers, formaldehyde, and ammoniatedcompounds. Unexploded ordnance (UXO) may be buriedalong with other waste materials. Groundwater may becontaminated with solvents such as formaldehyde andtoluene. Furthermore, because of the age of some facilities,asbestos-containing materials may be found in abandonedbuildings and demolition debris.

Mining There are three general steps in the mining process: extraction, X X Xbeneficiation, and processing. Extraction of the mineral valuefrom the rock or matrix is the initial step in the operation.Beneficiation is the processing of extracted materials to cleanor concentrate the product either for use as a final product or inpreparation for further processing. Beneficiation may involvephysical (such as milling) or chemical (such as leaching)separation processes or both. Processing is conductedfollowing beneficiation to further extract or refine the materialand prepare it for specific uses. Processing may include avariety of operations such as smelting, refining, roasting anddigesting. Chemical contamination at mining sites may resultfrom acidic, metal-laden mine drainage. Spilled, leaked, orimproperly disposed of petroleum, lubricants, and otherindustrial chemicals may also result in site contamination.

Painting and automobile Paint shops and automobile body repair shops paint various X X X Xbody repair plastic and metal products and fix truck and automobile

body parts. Damaged automobile body parts are replacedor repaired with fillers and are then sanded, primed, andpainted. The shops may use cutting torches, weldingequipment, solvents and cleaners, fiberglass, various polymersand epoxy compounds, and sand or grit blasting. Gasolineand diesel from vehicle fuel tanks, solvents, cleaners, acids,and paints may be leaked or spilled, contaminating soilsand groundwater. Typical contaminants include toluene,acetone, perchloroethylene, xylene, gasoline and diesel fuel,carbon tetrachloride, and hydrochloric and phosphoric acids.

Pesticide manufacturing A pesticide is any substance or mixture of substances X X X X X Xand use intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating

any pest. The term pesticide also applies to herbicides,fungicides, and various other substances used to control pests.Spillage, leakage, and improper storage or disposal ofpesticides may result in their release to the environment. Sitesmay also be contaminated with properly applied butpersistent pesticides. Because of the wide variety of pesticidesand applications, facilities manufacturing or using pesticidesmay be contaminated with a broad range of chemicals.

Petroleum refining Oil production facilities consist of oil drilling, refining, storage, X Xand reuse transfer, transport, and recycling facilities. Typical materials

present at these facilities include crude, fuel, and motor oils aswell as waste oils. Production processes at these facilities maycontaminate soils with sludges, acids, and waste oil additivesas well as co-contaminants such as PCBs when spills, leaks orimproper disposal practices occur. In some cases,disposalpits may contain thick tarry sludges with very high pH values.Groundwater and deeper soil may be contaminated withmetals and lighter oil fractions such as BTEX.


Continued

A-6



Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives


Pharmaceutical The pharmaceutical industry manufactures bulk X X Xmanufacturing pharmaceutical intermediates and active ingredients, that

are further processed into finished products. Chemicals usedin the manufacturing process vary according to the desiredproduct and the process type. Equipment must be thoroughlycleaned between processing operations for different products.VOCs are used as solvents at various stages of themanufacturing process. Because of the purity required forproducts, spent solvent is not usually reused inpharmaceutical manufacturing. It may be sold fornonpharmaceutical use or destroyed via incineration. Theten contaminants most commonly discharged inpharmaceutical wastewater are methanol; ethanol; acetone;isopropanol; acetic acid; methylene chloride; formic acid;ammonium hydroxide; N,N-dimethylacetamide and toluene.

Photographic film Photographic film is coated with an emulsion containing X X X Xmanufacturing and light-sensitive silver halide crystals. Once film has beendevelopment exposed, it must go through a series of chemical processes

to bring out the images. Various chemicals are used asdevelopers and fixing solutions, including hydroquinone,catechols, aminophenols, acetic acid, muriatic (hydrochloric)acid, and sodium or ammonium thiosulfate. Silver solutionsare often generated during the photographic developmentprocesses.

Plastic manufacturing Almost all plastics are made from petroleum. Plastics are X X X Xpolymers, which are very long chains of molecules thatconsist of subunits (monomers) linked together by chemicalbonds. Monomers of petrochemical plastics are not typicallybiodegradable. Wastes generated by the industry includepolymers, phthalates, cadmium, solvents, resins, chemicaladditives, and VOCs.

Printing and ink The printing industry consists of firms engaged in printing X X X Xmanufacturing using one or more common processes such as lithography,

letterpress, flexography, gravure, and screen printing.Contamination may result from spills, leaks, and improperdisposal of excess chemicals and wastes, including inkconstituents such as metals, cleaners, and solvents usedduring printing and production processes.

Railroad yards Railroad yards may consist of any combination of track and X X X X X Xswitching areas, engine maintenance buildings, engine fuelingareas, bulk and container storage and transfer stations, andstorage areas for materials used in track and enginemaintenance. Materials used at railroad yards includediesel fuel, paint, solvents and degreasing agents, PCB oils,and creosote. Spills, leaks, or dumping of these compoundsmay contaminate soil and groundwater. Chemical spillsand leaks during loading and unloading of tanker andfreight cars can also contaminate a railroads yard.Because of the variety of chemicals used at and transportedthrough railroad yards, virtually any type of chemicalcontamination could be present.


Continued

A-7


Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives


Research and educational Academic institutions are often similar to small cities, as X X X Xinstitutions they may have research laboratories, automobile repair

facilities, power plants, wastewater treatment plants,hazardous waste management and trash disposal activities,asbestos management activities, drinking water supplyfacilities, grounds maintenance activities and incinerationfacilities. Educational institutions typically generate smallquantities of a variety of wastes, including inorganic acids,organic solvents, metals and metal dust, photographicwaste, waste oil, paint, heavy metals, and pesticides.

Semiconductor The semiconductor manufacturing industry is a subset of X X Xmanufacturing the electronics manufacturing industry and produces

integrated circuits or “chips.” Contamination onsemiconductor chips is one of the primary reasons that theyfail; therefore, chips are cleaned before and after many of themanufacturing steps. Chemicals used in the manufacturingprocess include various acids, ethylene glycol, hydroxidesolutions, halogen gases, fluorocarbons, chlorine, andvarious organic solvents.

Smelter operations The primary use of smelting is to produce iron and steel Xfrom iron ore. Smelting is also used to extract copper andother base metals from raw ores. Contamination fromsmelting operations often takes the form of deposition ofairborne metals, asbestos, and sulfur compounds in areassurrounding smelters. Contamination may also result fromimproper storage and disposal of raw ores or by-product slag.

Underground storage tanks A UST is a tank and any underground piping connected to X X X Xa tank where at least 10 percent of the combined volume isunder the ground. USTs often contain petroleum products,gasoline, or other chemicals. Faulty installation or inadequateoperating and maintenance procedures can cause USTs torelease their contents into the environment. The greatestpotential hazard from leaking USTs is that petroleum fuels,fuel additives, or other hazardous substances can seepinto soil and contaminate groundwater.

Vehicle maintenance Vehicle maintenance involves handling and managing a wide X X X Xvariety of materials and wastes, including oils, batteries,refrigerants, antifreeze, solvents, asbestos, and fuels.Improper management and disposal of wastes as well asleaks from fuel and waste storage containers may result incontamination of vehicle maintenance facilities.

Wood preservation Wood preservation sites typically consist of wood preparation X X X X Xfacilities, chemical storage tanks, chemical treatment areas(including high-pressure vessels in many cases), drip ordrying areas, and wood storage areas. Wood is treated withpreservative chemicals either by dipping the wood into achemical bath or by injecting chemicals into the wood underpressure. Storage tanks at wood preservation sites couldcontain creosote, pentachlorophenol, or chrome-copper-arsenate (CCA) solutions for wood treatment. These chemicalscould enter the environment if the tanks were overfilled orleaked. Contaminated water squeezed from wood duringprocessing and retort sludge may have spilled on the ground,causing soil and ground water contamination. As treatedwood is transferred from the treatment area to the dryingarea, chemicals may drip onto soil and contaminate the soiland groundwater. Likewise, drippage in drying areas,especially in older operations where pressure treatment maynot have been used, could result in soil contamination. Runofffrom site could also contaminate nearby surface waters.


Continued

A-8



Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives


Wood pulp and paper The pulp and paper industry produces commodity grades X Xmanufacturing of wood pulp, printing and writing paper, sanitary tissue,

industrial-type paper, containerboard, and boxboard usingcellulose fiber from timber or purchased or recycled fibers.The two steps involved are pulping and paper or paperboardmanufacturing. Pulping is the process of dissolving woodchips into individual fibers using chemical, semichemical,or mechanical methods. Pulping is the major source ofenvironmental impacts in the industry. Chlorinatedorganic compounds in pulp plant wastewater sludge areof particular concern because of their tendency to partitionfrom effluent to solids. Improper treatment or disposal ofwastes may result in contamination being released to theenvironment. Spills and leaks of process and wastechemicals are other common sources of contamination atpulp mills. Air emissions are also problematic at pulp mills,which are typically noted for their unpleasant odors.

Notes:SVOC = Semivolatile organic compoundVOC = Volatile organic compound

What Technologies May Be Used to Investigate Contamination at Brownfields Sites?

Various analytical technologies may be used to investigate contamination at brownfields sites. Table A-2contains information on analytical technologies that are available for investigating the contaminant groupspresented in Table A-1.

Table A-2. Technologies for Analyzing Contaminants at Brownfields Sites

Amperometric and Galvanic Cell Sensor X X X

Anodic Stripping Voltammetry X

Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy X

Catalytic Surface Oxidation X X

Chemical Colorimetric Kits X X X X X X X

Chemical Reaction-Based Test Papers X X X X X

Detector Tubes X X

Electrochemical Detector Kits X X X

Electromagnetic X X X X X X X

Explosimeter X X

Fiber Optic Chemical Sensors X X X

Field Bioassessment X X X X X X

Flame-Ionization Detector X X X X

Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives


Continued

A-9


Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Nonha

loge

nate

d SVO

Cs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives

Fluorescence Spectrophotometry X

Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy X X X

Free Product Sensors X X X

Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry X X X X X X

Ground Penetration Radar X X X X

Immunoassay Colorimetric Kits X X X X X X X

Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy X

Infrared Spectroscopy X X X X X

Ion Chromatography X

Ion Mobility Spectrometer X X X X X X

Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry X X X X

Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy X

Laser-Induced Fluorescence/Cone Penetrometer X X X X X

Magnetometry X

Near Infrared Reflectance/Transmittance Spectroscopy X X

Particle-Induced X-Ray Emissions X

Photo Ionization Detector X X X X X

Piezoelectric Sensors X X

Raman Spectroscopy/Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering (SERS) X X X X X

Resistivity/Conductivity X X

Room-Temperature Phosphorimetry X X

Scattering/Absorption LIDAR X X

Semiconductor Sensors X X

Soil-Gas Analyzer Systems X X X X X X

Solid/Porous Fiber Optic X X X X

Synchronous Luminescence/Fluorescence X X X X X

Thin-Layer Chromatography X

Toxicity Tests X X X X X X

Titrimetry Kits X

Ultraviolet Fluorescence X X X

Ultraviolet Visible Spectrophotometry X X X X

X-Ray Fluorescence X X X X

What Technologies May Be Used to Remediate at Brownfields Sites?

Various treatment technologies may be used to remediate contamination at brownfields sites. Table A-3contains information on treatment technologies that are available for remediating the contaminants presented inTable A-1. Descriptions of the remedial technologies are included at the end of this appendix beginning onpage A-15.

Continued

A-10



Haloge

nated

VOCs

Nonha

loge

nate

d VOCs

Haloge

nate

d SVO

CsNon

halo

gena

ted S

VOCs

Fuels

Metals

and M

etall

oids

Explo

sives

Air Sparging G G G

Bioremediation S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G

Chemical Treatment S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G

Electrokinetics S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G

Flushing S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G

Incineration S S S S S S

In-Well Air Stripping G G

Mechanical Soil Aeration S

Multi Phase Extraction S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G

Open Burn/Open Detonation S

Permeable Reactive Barrier G G G G G G G

Physical Separation S S S

Phytoremediation S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G

Pump and Treat G G G G G G G

Soil Vapor Extraction S S S

Soil Washing S S S S S S S

Solidification/Stabilization S S S S S S S

Solvent Extraction S S S S S S S

Thermal Desorption S S S S S S

Thermal Treatment (in situ) S/G S/G S/G S/G S/G

Vitrification S S S S S S

Notes:S and G indicate the media that can be treated using each technology typeS = Soils, sediments, and sludgesG = Groundwater, leachate, and surface water

What Are the Contaminant Groups Presented in Tables A-1, A-2, and A-3?

The following general contaminant groups are included in Tables A-1, A-2, and A-3:

• Halogenated VOCs

• Nonhalogenated VOCs

• Halogenated SVOCs

• Nonhalogenated SVOCs

• Fuels

• Metals and metalloids

• Explosives

Descriptions of the seven contaminant groups are included below to provide supplemental information aboutthe characteristics and specific constituents of the groups.

A-11

Table A-3. Technologies for Treating Contaminants Found at Brownfields Sites


Halogenated VOCs

VOCs are hydrocarbon compounds that evaporate readily at room temperature A halogenated VOC is a VOCthat has a halogen (fluorine, chlorine, bromine, or iodine) attached to it. Locations where halogenated VOCsmay be found include burn pits, chemical manufacturing plants and disposal areas, contaminated marinesediments, disposal wells and leach fields, electroplating and metal finishing shops, firefighting training areas,hangars and aircraft maintenance areas, landfills and burial pits, leaking storage tanks, radioactive and mixedwaste disposal areas, oxidation ponds and lagoons, dry cleaning shops, grain storage sites, paint stripping andspray booth areas, pesticide and herbicide mixing areas, solvent degreasing areas, surface impoundments, andvehicle maintenance areas. Typical halogenated VOCs encountered at many sites include those listed below.

1-Chloro-2-propene Carbon tetrachloride Hexachlorobutadiene

1,1-Dichloroethane Chlorodibromomethane Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

1,1-Dichloroethylene (Vinylidene chloride) Chloroethane Hexachloroethane

1,1,1-Trichloroethane Chloroform Monochlorobenzene

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane Chloromethane Neoprene

1,1,2-Trichloroethane (Vinyl trichloride) Chloropropane Pentachloroethane

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (Acetylene tetrachloride) Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Tetrachloroethylene(Perchloroethylene)

1,2-Dichloroethane Cis-1,3-dichloropropene Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene

1,2-Dichloropropane (Propylene dichloride) Dibromochloropropane Trans-1,3-dichloropropene

1,2,2-Trifluoroethane (Freon 113) Dibromomethane Trichloroethylene

2-Butylene dichloride Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride) Trichlorotrifluoroethane

Bromodichloromethane Ethylene dibromide Vinyl chloride

Bromoform Fluorotrichloromethane (Freon 11)

Bromomethane Glycerol trichlorohydrin

Nonhalogenated VOCs

A nonhalogenated VOC is a VOC that does not have a halogen (fluorine, chlorine, bromine, or iodine) attachedto it. Locations where nonhalogenated VOCs may be found include burn pits, chemical manufacturing plantsand disposal areas, contaminated marine sediments, disposal wells and leach fields, electroplating and metalfinishing shops, firefighting training areas, hangars and aircraft maintenance areas, landfills and burial pits,leaking storage tanks, radioactive and mixed waste disposal areas, oxidation ponds and lagoons, paintstripping and spray booth areas, pesticide and herbicide mixing areas, solvent degreasing areas, surfaceimpoundments, and vehicle maintenance areas. Typical nonhalogenated VOCs (excluding fuels, BTEX, andgas-phase contaminants) encountered at many sites include those listed below:

1-Butanol (n-Butyl alcohol) Carbon disulfide Methanol

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (Methyl isobutyl ketone) Cyclohexanone Methyl ethyl ketone

Acetone Ethanol Styrene

Acrolein Ethyl acetate Tetrahydrofuran

Acrylonitrile Ethyl ether Vinyl acetate

Aminobenzene Isobutanol

Halogenated SVOCs

SVOCs are hydrocarbon compounds with boiling points greater than 200ºC. A halogenated SVOC is an SVOC that hasa halogen (fluorine, chlorine, bromine, or iodine) attached to it. Locations where halogenated SVOCs may be found

A-12



include burn pits and other combustion sources, chemical manufacturing plants and disposal areas, contaminatedmarine sediments, disposal wells and leach fields, electroplating and metal finishing shops, firefighting training areas,hangars and aircraft maintenance areas, landfills and burial pits, leaking storage tanks, radioactive and mixed wastedisposal areas, oxidation ponds and lagoons, dry cleaning shops, grain storage sites, pesticide and herbicide mixingareas, solvent degreasing areas, surface impoundments, vehicle maintenance areas and wood preservation sites.Typical halogenated SVOCs (excluding fuels and explosives) encountered at many sites include those listed below:

1,2-Bis(2-chloroethoxy) ethane 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine Chlorobenzilate

1,2-Dichlorobenzene (o-Dichlorobenzene) 4-Bromophenyl phenylether Chlorphenothane

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 4-Chloroaniline Hexachlorobenzene

1,3-Dichlorobenzene (m-Dichlorobenzene) 4-Chlorophenyl phenylether Hexachlorobutadiene

1,4-Dichlorobenzene (p-dichlorobenzene) Bis(2-chloroethoxy)ether Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

2-Chloronaphthalene Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane p-Chloro-m-cresol

2-Chlorophenol Bis(2-chloroethoxy)phthalate Pentachlorobenzene

2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether Pentachlorophenol

2,4-Dichlorophenol Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether Polychlorinated biphenyls

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol Chlordane Quintozene

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol Chlorobenzene Tetrachlorophenol

Pesticides are a subgroup of halogenated SVOCs. Typical pesticides encountered at many sites include thoselisted below.

Aldrin 4,4’-DDD Endosulfan sulfate Heptachlor epoxide

BHC-alpha 4,4’-DDE Endrin Malathion

BHC-beta 4,4’-DDT Endrin aldehyde Methylparathion

BHC-delta Dieldrin Ethion Parathion

BHC-gamma Endosulfan I Ethyl parathion Toxaphene

Chlordane Endosulfan II Heptachlor

Nonhalogenated SVOCs

A nonhalogenated SVOC is an SVOC that does not have a halogen (fluorine, chlorine, bromine, or iodine)attached to it. Locations where nonhalogenated SVOCs may be found include burn pits, chemicalmanufacturing plants and disposal areas, contaminated marine sediments, disposal wells and leach fields,electroplating and metal finishing shops, firefighting training areas, hangars and aircraft maintenance areas,landfills and burial pits, leaking storage tanks, radioactive and mixed waste disposal areas, oxidation pondsand lagoons, pesticide and herbicide mixing areas, solvent degreasing areas, surface impoundments, andvehicle maintenance areas and wood preservation sites. Typical nonhalogenated SVOCs (excluding fuels andexplosives) encountered at many sites include those listed below:

1-Aminonaphathalene Anthracene Diphenylenemethane (Fluorene)

1,2-Benzacenaphthene Benzidine Ethion

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine Benzo(a)anthracene (Tetraphene) Ethyl parathion

2-Aminonaphthalene Benzo(a)pyrene Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene

2-Methylnaphthalene Benzo(b)fluoranthene Isophorone

2-Nitroaniline Benzo(k)fluoranthene Malathion

2-Nitrophenol Benzoic acid Methylparathion


A-13


2,3-Phenylenepyrene Benzyl alcohol Naphthalene

2,4-Dinitrophenol Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate n-Nitrosodimethylamine

3-Nitroaniline Butyl benzyl phthalate n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine

4-Nitroaniline Chrysene n-Nitrosodiphenylamine

4-Nitrophenol Dibenzofuran Parathion

4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol Diethyl phthalate Phenanthrene

Acenaphthene Dimethyl phthalate Phenyl naphthalene

Acenaphthylene Di-n-butyl phthalate Pyrene

Allyldioxybenzene methylene ether Di-n-octyl phthalate

Fuels

Fuels are a general class of chemicals created by refining and manufacturing petroleum or natural gas for use incombustion processes to generate heat or other energy. Fuels include nonhalogenated VOCs, nonhalogenatedSVOCs, or both. Sites where fuel contamination may be found include aircraft, storage and service areas, burnpits, chemical disposal areas, contaminated marine sediments, disposal wells and leach fields, firefightingtraining areas, hangars and aircraft maintenance areas, landfills and burial pits, leaking storage tanks, solventdegreasing areas, surface impoundments, and vehicle maintenance areas. Typical fuel contaminantsencountered at many sites include those listed below:

1-Pentene 2,3,4-Trimethylhexane Benzo(k)fluoranthene n-Decane

1,2,3,4-Tetramethylbenzene 2,3,4-Trimethylpentane Chrysene n-Dodecane

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 2,4-Dimethylphenol Cis-2-butene n-Heptane

1,2,4-Trimethyl-5-ethylbenzene 2,4,4-Trimethylhexane Creosols n-Hexane

1,2,4,5-Tetramethylbenzene 3-Ethylpentane Cyclohexane n-Hexylbenzene

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 3-Methyl-1-butene Cyclopentane n-Nonane

2-Methyl-1,3-butadiene 3-Methyl-1-pentene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene n-Octane

2-Methyl-2-butene 3-Methyl-1,2-butadiene Dimethylethylbenzene n-Pentane

2-Methyl-butene 3-Methylheptane Ethylbenzene n-Propylbenzene

2-Methylheptane 3-Methylhexane Fluoranthene n-Undecane

2-Methylnaphthalene 3-Methylpentane Fluorene o-Xylene

2-Methylpentane 3,3-Dimethyl-1-butene Ideno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene Phenanthrene

2-Methylphenol 3,3,5-Trimethylheptane Isobutane Phenol

2,2-Dimethylheptane 4-Methylphenol Isopentane Propane

2,2-Dimethylhexane Acenaphthene Methylcyclohexane p-Xylene

2,2-Dimethylpentane Anthracene Methylcyclopentane Pyrene

2,2,4-Trimethylheptane Benzene Methylnaphthalene Pyridine

2,2,4-Trimethylpentane Benzo(a)anthracene Methylpropylbenzene Toluene

2,3-Dimethylbutane Benzo(a)pyrene m-Xylene Trans-2-butene

2,3-Dimethylpentane Benzo(b)fluoranthene Naphthalene Trans-2-pentene

2,3,4-Trimethylheptane Benzo(g,h,i)perylene n-Butane Vinyl benzene

Continued

A-14



Metals and Metalloids

Metals are one of the three groups of elements distinguished by their ionization and bonding properties, alongwith metalloids and nonmetals. Metals have certain characteristic physical properties: they are usually shiny,have a high density, are ductile and malleable, usually have a high melting point, are usually hard, andconduct electricity and heat well. Metalloids have properties that are intermediate between those of metals andnonmetals. There is no unique way of distinguishing a metalloid from a true metal, but the most common wayis that metalloids are usually semiconductors rather than conductors. Locations where metals and metalloidsmay be found include artillery and small arms impact areas, battery disposal areas, burn pits, chemical disposalareas, contaminated marine sediments, disposal wells and leach fields, electroplating and metal finishingshops, firefighting training areas, landfills and burial pits, leaking storage tanks, radioactive and mixed wastedisposal areas, oxidation ponds and lagoons, paint stripping and spray booth areas, sand blasting areas,surface impoundments, and vehicle maintenance areas. Typical metals and metalloids encountered at manysites include those listed below.

Aluminum Calcium Mercury Tin

Antimony Chromium Molybdenum Titanium

Arsenic Cobalt Nickel Vanadium

Barium Copper Potassium Zinc

Beryllium Iron Selenium Zirconium

Bismuth Lead Silver

Boron Magnesium Sodium

Cadmium Manganese Thallium

Explosives

Most commonly, artificial explosives are chemical explosives manufactured for use as explosives andpropellants. Sites where explosive contaminants may be found include artillery impact areas, contaminatedmarine sediments, disposal wells, leach fields, landfills, burial pits, and TNT washout lagoons. Typicalexplosive contaminants encountered at many sites include those listed below.

2,4-DNT (2,4-Dinitrotoluene) Nitroglycerine

2,6-DNT (2,6-Dinitrotoluene) Nitroguanidine

AP (Ammonium perchlorate) Picrates

DNB (Dinitrobenzenes) RDX (Cyclo-1,3,5-trimethylene-2,4,6-trinitramine)

HMX (1,3,5,7-Tetranitro-1,3,5,7-tetraazocyclooctane) Tetryl (N-Methyl-N,2,4,6-tetranitrobenzeneamine)

Nitroaromatics TNB (Trinitrobenzenes)

Nitrocellulose TNT (2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene)

What Are the Treatment Technologies Identified in Table A-3?

Table A-3 contains information on treatment technologies for remediating brownfields sites. Descriptions ofthese remedial technologies are presented below.

Air Sparging involves injection of air or oxygen into a contaminated aquifer. Injected air traverses horizontallyand vertically in channels through the soil column, creating an underground stripper that removes volatile andsemivolatile organic contaminants by volatilization. The injected air helps to flush the contaminants into theunsaturated zone. Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) usually is implemented in conjunction with air sparging to removethe generated vapor-phase contamination from the vadose zone. Oxygen added to the contaminated groundwaterand vadose zone soils also can enhance biodegradation of contaminants below and above the water table.

A-15


Bioremediation involves use of microorganisms to degrade organic contaminants in soil, sludge, solids, andgroundwater either in situ or ex situ. It can also be used to make metals or metalloids less toxic or mobile. Whenorganic contaminants are being treated, the microorganisms break down contaminants by using them as a food sourceby cometabolizing them with a food source. Aerobic processes require an oxygen source, and the end productstypically are carbon dioxide and water. Anaerobic processes are conducted in the absence of oxygen, and the endproducts can include methane, hydrogen gas, sulfide, elemental sulfur, and nitrogen gas. Ex situ bioremediationtechnologies for groundwater typically involve treating extracted groundwater in a bioreactor or constructed wetland.In situ techniques stimulate and create a favorable environment for microorganisms to grow and use contaminants asa food and energy source or to cometabolize them. Generally this process involves providing some combination ofoxygen, nutrients, and moisture and controlling the temperature and pH. Microorganisms that have been adapted fordegradation of specific contaminants are sometimes applied to enhance the process. For treatment of metals andmetalloids, the process involves biological activity that promotes formation of less toxic or mobile species by creatingambient conditions that will cause such species to form or by acting directly on the contaminant. The treatment mayresult in oxidation, reduction, precipitation, coprecipitation, or another transformation of the contaminant.

Chemical treatment, also known as chemical reduction/oxidation (redox), typically involves redox reactionsthat chemically convert hazardous contaminants into compounds that are nonhazardous, less toxic, morestable, less mobile, or inert. Redox reactions involve the transfer of electrons from one compound to another.Specifically, one reactant is oxidized (loses electrons) and one reactant is reduced (gains electrons). Theoxidizing agents used for treatment of hazardous contaminants in soil include ozone, hydrogen peroxide,hypochlorites, potassium permanganate, Fenton’s reagent (hydrogen peroxide and iron), chlorine, and chlorinedioxide. This method may be applied in situ or ex situ to soils, sludges, sediments, and other solids and mayalso be applied to groundwater in situ or ex situ chemical treatment using pump and treat technology.Chemical treatment may also include use of ultraviolet (UV) light in a process known as UV oxidation.

Electrokinetics is based on the theory that a low-density current will mobilize contaminants in the form ofcharged species. A current passed between electrodes is intended to cause aqueous media, ions, andparticulates to move through soil, waste, and water. Contaminants arriving at the electrodes can be removed bymeans of electroplating or electrodeposition, precipitation or coprecipitation, adsorption, complexing with ionexchange resins, or pumping of water (or other fluid) near the electrodes.

For Flushing, a solution of water, surfactants, or cosolvents is applied to soil or injected into the subsurface to treatcontaminated soil or groundwater. When soil is being treated, injection is often designed to raise the water table intothe contaminated soil zone. Injected water and treatment agents are recovered together with flushed contaminants.

Both on-site and off-site Incineration involves use of high temperatures (870 to 1,200°C or 1,600 to 2,200°F) tovolatilize and combust (in the presence of oxygen) organics in hazardous wastes. Auxiliary fuels are often usedto initiate and sustain combustion. The destruction and removal efficiency of properly operated incineratorsexceeds the 99.99 percent requirement for hazardous waste and can meet the 99.9999 percent requirement forPCBs and dioxins. Off-gases and combustion residuals generally require treatment. On-site incineration istypically a transportable unit; for off-site incineration, waste is transported to a central facility.

For In-well air stripping, air is injected into a double-screened well, causing the VOCs in the contaminatedgroundwater to be transferred from the dissolved phase to the vapor phase in air bubbles. As the air bubblesrise to the surface of the water, the vapors are drawn off and treated by a SVE system.

Mechanical soil aeration involves agitation of contaminated soil by using tilling or other means to volatilizecontaminants.

Multi-phase extraction involves use of a vacuum system to remove various combinations of contaminatedgroundwater, separate-phase petroleum product, and vapors from the subsurface. The system typically lowersthe water table around a well, exposing more of the formation. Contaminants in the newly exposed vadose zoneare then accessible for vapor extraction. Once above ground, the extracted vapors or liquid-phase organics andgroundwater are separated and treated.

Open burn (OB) and Open detonation (OD) operations are conducted to destroy excess, obsolete, or unserviceable(EOU) munitions and other items containing explosives, propellants, and other energetic materials. In OB

A-16



operations, materials are destroyed by self-sustained combustion, which is ignited by an external source, such as aflame, heat, or a detonation wave. In OD operations, materials are destroyed by detonation, which generally isinitiated by an energetic charge.

Permeable reactive barriers, also known as passive treatment walls, are installed across the flow path of acontaminated groundwater plume, allowing the water portion of the plume to flow through the wall. Thesebarriers allow passage of water while prohibiting movement of contaminants by means of treatment agentswithin the wall such as zero-valent metals (usually zero-valent iron), chelators, sorbents, compost, andmicrobes. The contaminants are either degraded or retained in a concentrated form by the barrier material,which may need to be replaced periodically.

Physical separation processes use physical properties to separate contaminated and uncontaminated media orto separate different types of media. For example, different-sized sieves and screens can be used to separatecontaminated soil from relatively uncontaminated debris. Another application of physical separation isdewatering of sediments or sludge.

Phytoremediation is a process in which plants are used to remove, transfer, stabilize, or destroy contaminants insoil, sediment, or groundwater. The mechanisms of phytoremediation include enhanced rhizospherebiodegradation (which takes place in soil or groundwater immediately around plant roots), phytoextraction (alsoknown as phytoaccumulation, the uptake of contaminants by plant roots and the translocation and accumulationof contaminants into plant shoots and leaves), phytodegradation (metabolism of contaminants within planttissues), and phytostabilization (production of chemical compounds by plants to immobilize contaminants at theinterface of roots and soil). The term phytoremediation applies to all biological, chemical, and physical processesthat are influenced by plants (including the rhizosphere) and that aid in the cleanup of contaminated substances.Phytoremediation may be applied in situ or ex situ to soils, sludges, sediments, other solids, or groundwater.

Pump and treat involves extraction of groundwater from an aquifer and treatment of the water above theground. The extraction step is usually conducted by pumping groundwater from a well or trench. Thetreatment step can involve a variety of technologies such as adsorption, air stripping, bioremediation, chemicaltreatment, filtration, ion exchange, metal precipitation, and membrane filtration.

Soil vapor extraction (SVE) is used to remediate unsaturated (vadose) zone soil. A vacuum is applied to the soilin order to induce a controlled flow of air and remove volatile and some semivolatile organic contaminants fromthe soil. SVE usually is performed in situ; however, in some cases, it can be used as an ex situ technology.

For Soil washing, contaminants sorbed onto fine soil particles are separated from bulk soil in a water-based systembased on particle size. The wash water may be augmented with a basic leaching agent, surfactant, or chelatingagent or by adjustment of pH to help remove contaminants. Soils and wash water are mixed ex situ in a tank orother treatment unit. The wash water and various soil fractions are usually separated by means of gravity settling.

Solidification/stabilization (S/S) reduces the mobility of hazardous substances and contaminants in theenvironment through both physical and chemical means. The S/S process physically binds or enclosescontaminants within a stabilized mass. S/S can be performed both ex situ and in situ. Ex situ S/S requiresexcavation of the material to be treated, and the treated material must be disposed of. In situ S/S involves use ofauger or caisson systems and injector head systems to add binders to contaminated soil or waste withoutexcavation, and the treated material is left in place.

Solvent extraction involves use of an organic solvent as an extractant to separate contaminants from soil. Theorganic solvent is mixed with contaminated soil in an extraction unit. The extracted solution is then passedthrough a separator, where the contaminants and extractant are separated from the soil.

For Thermal desorption, wastes are heated so that organic contaminants and water volatilize. Typically acarrier gas or vacuum system transports the volatilized organics and water to a gas treatment system, usually athermal oxidation or recovery system. Based on the operating temperature of the desorber, thermal desorptionprocesses can be categorized in two groups: high-temperature thermal desorption (320 to 560°C or 600 to1,000°F) and low-temperature thermal desorption (90 to 320°C or 200 to 600°F). Thermal desorption is an ex situtreatment process. In situ thermal treatment is discussed below.

A-17


In situ thermal treatment is an in situ treatment process that uses heat to facilitate contaminant extractionthrough volatilization and other mechanisms or to destroy contaminants in situ. Volatilized contaminants aretypically removed from the vadose zone using SVE. Specific types of in situ thermal treatment includeconductive heating, electrical resistive heating, radio frequency heating, hot air injection, hot water injection,and steam-enhanced extraction. In situ thermal treatment is usually applied to a contaminated source area butmay also be applied to a groundwater plume.

Vitrification involves use of an electric current to melt contaminated soil at elevated temperatures (1,600 to2,000°C or 2,900 to 3,650°F). Upon cooling, the vitrification product is a chemically stable, leach-resistant, glassand crystalline material similar to obsidian or basalt rock. The high-temperature component of the processdestroys or removes organic materials. Radionuclides and heavy metals are retained within the vitrifiedproduct. Vitrification may be conducted in situ or ex situ.

A-18

APPENDIX B

• APPENDIX B: LIST OF ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS


Appendix B

LIST OF ACRONYMS and GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS

µg/L Microgram per LiterABA American Bar AssociationAFCEE Air Force Center for Environmental

ExcellenceAHERA Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response ActANL Argonne National LaboratoryASAP Adaptive Sampling and Analysis ProgramASC Accelerated Site CharacterizationASHAA Asbestos School Hazard Abatement ActASHARA Asbestos School Hazard Abatement

Reauthorization ActASTM American Society for Testing and MaterialsBRAC Base Realignment and ClosureBTEX Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and

XyleneBTSC Brownfields and Land Revitalization

Technology Support CenterBV BioventingCAA Clean Air ActCAP Corrective Action PlanCCl4 Carbon TetrachlorideCEC CERCLA Education CenterCERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability ActCERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and LiabilityInformation System

CLU-IN EPA Hazardous Waste Clean-upInformation Web Site

COR Close-Out ReportCSM Conceptual Site ModelCWA Clean Water ActDNAPL Dense Nonaqueous-Phase LiquidDoD Department of DefenseDOE Department of EnergyDOI Department of InteriorDQO Data Quality ObjectiveDSS Decision Support SoftwareEAD Environmental Assessment DivisionECOS Environmental Council of the StatesEDOCKET EPA’s Online Public Access and Comment

SystemEISB Enhanced In Situ BioremediationELI Environmental Law InstituteEPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyEPA REACH IT EPA REmediation And CHaracterization

Innovative Technologies OnlineSearchable Database

EPCRA Emergency Planning and CommunityRight-to-Know Act

ERIS Environmental Research Institute of theStates

ESC Expedited Site CharacterizationESD Environmental Sciences DivisionEST Eastern Standard TimeESTCP Environmental Security Technology

Certification ProgramET EvapotranspirationETV Environmental Technology VerificationFATE EPA Field Analytic Technologies

EncyclopediaFDIC Federal Deposit Insurance CorporationFRTR Federal Remediation Technologies

RoundtableFY Fiscal YearGAC Granular Activated CarbonGC/MS Gas Chromatography/Mass SpectrometryGNET Global Network of Environment and

TechnologyGWRTAC Ground-Water Remediation Technologies

Analysis CenterHRS Hazard Ranking SystemHSRC Hazardous Substance Research CenterHTRW-CX Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste

Center of ExpertiseICMA International City/County Management

AssociationICTS Institutional Controls Tracking SystemIDC Interagency DNAPL ConsortiumIINERT In-Place Inactivation and Natural

Ecological Restoration TechnologiesISB In Situ BioremediationISBN International Standard Book NumberISO In Situ OxidationITRC Interstate Technology and Regulatory

CouncilLNAPL Light Nonaqueous-Phase LiquidLTM Long-Term MonitoringLUST Leaking Underground Storage TankMCL Maximum Contaminant LevelMCX Mandatory Center of ExpertiseMGP Manufactured Gas PlantMNA Monitored Natural AttenuationMPE Multi-Phase ExtractionMSL Mine-Scarred LandMtBE Methyl tertiary Butyl EtherNAPL Nonaqueous-Phase LiquidNAS Naval Air StationNASA National Aeronautics and Space

Administration

B-1


B-2

NATO/CCMS North Atlantic Treaty Organization/Committee on the Challenges of ModernSociety

NERL National Exposure Research LaboratoryNETTS National Environmental Technology Test

SitesNEWMOA Northeast Waste Management Officials’

AssociationNFESC Naval Facilities Engineering Service CenterNPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination

SystemNPL National Priorities ListNPV Net Present ValueNSB Naval Submarine BaseNSCEP National Service Center for

Environmental PublicationsOB Open BurnOD Open DetonationOECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance

AssuranceOERR Office of Emergency and Remedial

ResponseORD Office of Research and DevelopmentORP Office of Radiation ProgramsOSRTI Office of Superfund Remediation and

Technology InnovationOSW Office of Solid WasteOSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency

ResponseOUST Office of Underground Storage TanksP&T Pump and TreatPAC Powdered Activated CarbonPAH Polycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonPBMS Performance-Based Measurement SystemPCB Polychlorinated BiphenylPCE TetrachloroethenePCP PentachlorophenolPCR Polymerase Chain ReactionPDF Portable Document FormatPOTW Publicly Owned Treatment WorksPRB Permeable Reactive BarrierPRP Potentially Responsible PartyQA Quality AssuranceQC Quality ControlRAO Remedial Action OptimizationRBCA Risk-Based Corrective ActionRCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Actredox Reduction/OxidationRFP Request for ProposalRfR Ready for ReuseROD Record of DecisionRPM Remedial Project ManagerRPO Remedial Process OptimizationRSE Remedial System Evaluation

RTDF Remedial Technology DevelopmentForum

SAP Sampling and Analysis PlanSCAPS Site Characterization and Analysis

Penetrometer SystemSCM Sampling, Characterization and

MonitoringSCRD State Coalition for Remediation of

DrycleanersSEAR Surfactant-Enhanced Aquifer RemediationSenTIX Sensor Technology Information ExchangeSERDP Strategic Environmental Research and

Development ProgramSITE Superfund Innovative Technology

EvaluationSMARTe Sustainable Management Approaches

and Revitalization Tools electronicSOP Standard Operating ProcedureSPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and

CountermeasuresSRI Superfund Redevelopment InitiativeS/S Solidification/StabilizationSSEB Southern States Energy BoardSVE Soil Vapor ExtractionSVOC Semivolatile Organic CompoundTAB Technical Assistance to Brownfields

CommunitiesTBA Targeted Brownfields AssessmentsTCE Trichloroethene or TrichloroethyleneTOSC Technical Outreach Services for

CommunitiesTOSNAC Technical Outreach Services for Native

American CommunitiesTPH Total Petroleum HydrocarbonsTRAINEX Training ExchangeTSCA Toxic Substances Control ActTSE Targeted Site EffortsTSP Technical Support ProjectUIC Underground Injection ControlUSACE U.S. Army Corps of EngineersUST Underground Storage TankUV UltravioletUXO Unexploded OrdnanceVCP Voluntary Cleanup ProgramVEB Vertical Engineered BarrierVOC Volatile Organic CompoundWGA Western Governors’ Association



B-3

AdsorptionAdsorption is the adhesion of molecules of gas, liquid,or dissolved solids to a surface. The term also refers toa method of treating wastes in which activated carbonis used to remove organic compounds fromwastewater. See also Carbon Adsorption.

Air SpargingIn air sparging, air is injected into the ground below acontaminated area, forming bubbles that rise andcarry trapped and dissolved contaminants to thesurface. Air sparging is often used in conjunctionwith soil vapor extraction systems. See also Soil VaporExtraction.

Air StrippingAir stripping is a treatment technology that removes or“strips” volatile organic compounds (VOC) fromcontaminated groundwater or surface water. As air isforced through the water, VOCs are volatilized. Seealso Volatile Organic Compound.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)ASTM sets standards for many services, includingmethods of sampling and testing of hazardous wasteand media contaminated with hazardous waste.

AquiferAn aquifer is an underground rock formationcomposed of such materials as sand, soil, or gravelthat can store groundwater and supply it to wells andsprings.

AromaticsAromatics are organic compounds that contain 6-carbon ring structures, such as creosote, toluene, andphenol, that often are found at dry cleaning andelectronic assembly sites.

Baseline Risk AssessmentA baseline risk assessment is an assessmentconducted before cleanup activities begin at a site toidentify and evaluate the threat to human health andthe environment. After remediation has beencompleted, the information obtained during a baselinerisk assessment can be used to determine whether thecleanup levels were reached.

BedrockBedrock is the rock that underlies the soil; it can bepermeable or non-permeable. See also Creosote.

BiopileBiopile is an aerated static pile composting process inwhich soil is mixed with amendments on a treatmentarea that includes leachate collection systems andaeration with blowers or vacuum pumps. It is used toreduce concentrations of petroleum constituentsthrough the use of biodegradation. Moisture, heat,nutrients, oxygen, and pH can be controlled toenhance biodegradation.

BioreactorBioreactors use microorganisms in attached orsuspended biological systems to degrade contaminantsin water. In suspended biological systems, such asactivated sludge, fluidized beds, or sequencing batchreactors, contaminated water is circulated in an aerationbasin where microbes aerobically degrade organic matterand produce carbon dioxide, water, and biomass. Inattached systems, such as rotating biological contactorsand trickling filters, a microbial population isestablished on an inert support matrix. The cells form asludge, which is settled out in a clarifier and is recycledto the aeration basin and disposed of.

BioremediationBioremediation refers to treatment processes that usemicroorganisms such as bacteria, yeast, or fungi to breakdown hazardous substances into less toxic or nontoxicsubstances. Bioremediation can be used to clean upcontaminated soil and water. In situ bioremediation treatscontaminated soil or groundwater in the location inwhich it is found. For ex situ bioremediation processes,contaminated soil is excavated or groundwater is pumpedto the surface before they can be treated.

BiosensorA biosensor is a portable device that uses livingorganisms, such as microbes, or parts and products ofliving organisms, such as enzymes, tissues, andanitbodies, to produce reactions to specific chemicalcontaminants.

BioslurpingBioslurping is the adaptation of vacuum-enhanceddewatering technologies to remediate hydrocarbon-contaminated sites. Bioslurping combines elements ofboth bioventing and free-product recovery tosimultaneously recover free product and bioremediatesoils in the vadose zone. Bioventing stimulates the aerobicbioremediation of hydrocarbon-contaminated soils andvacuum-enhanced free-product recovery extracts lightnonaqueous phase liquids (LNAPL) from the capillaryfringe and the water table. See also Vadose Zone.

Following is a list of specialized terms that pertain to the cleanup of brownfields sites.


B-4

BioventingBioventing is an in situ remediation technology thatstimulates the natural biodegradation of aerobicallydegradable compounds in soil by the injection ofoxygen into the subsurface. Bioventing has been usedto remediate releases of petroleum products, such asgasoline, jet fuels, kerosene, and diesel fuel. See alsoBioremediation and Soil Vapor Extraction.

BrownfieldsBrownfields sites are abandoned, idled, or under-usedindustrial and commercial facilities where expansionor redevelopment is complicated by real or perceivedenvironmental contamination.

Brownfields Cleanup GrantsBrownfields Cleanup Grants provide direct fundingfor cleanup activities at certain properties withplanned green space, recreational, or other nonprofituses.

Brownfields Job Training GrantsBrownfields Job Training Grants provide funding forenvironmental training for residents of brownfieldscommunities.

Brownfields Revolving Loan Fund GrantsBrownfields Revolving Loan Fund Grants providefunding to capitalize loans that are used to clean upbrownfields sites.

BTEXBTEX is the term used for benzene, toluene,ethylbenzene, and xylene, which are volatile aromaticcompounds typically found in petroleum productssuch as gasoline and diesel fuel.

Carbon AdsorptionCarbon adsorption is a remediation technology thatremoves contaminants from air or water throughphysical adsorption into the carbon grain. Carbon is“activated” to improve adsorption through a processthat creates porous particles that have large internalsurface areas. A number of commercial grades ofactivated carbon are available to meet therequirements of specific applications.

Carbon TetrachlorideCarbon tetrachloride is a colorless, highly volatileliquid that has a strong ethereal odor similar to that ofchloroform. It mixes sparingly with water and, whenheated to decomposition, emits highly toxic fumes ofphosgene. Carbon tetrachloride is used primarily as achemical intermediate in the production of therefrigerants Freon 11 and 12. It also has been used as

a general solvent in industrial degreasing operationsand as an industrial solvent in the manufacture ofcables and semiconductors.

Chemical DehalogenationChemical dehalogenation is a chemical process thatremoves halogens (usually chlorine) from a chemicalcontaminant, rendering the contaminant lesshazardous. The chemical dehalogenation process canbe applied to common halogenated contaminants suchas PCBs and dioxins, which may be present in soil andoils. Dehalogenation can be effective in removinghalogens from hazardous organic compounds, such asdioxins, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB), and certainchlorinated pesticides. The treatment time is short,energy requirements are moderate, and operation andmaintenance costs are relatively low. This technologycan be brought to the site, eliminating the need totransport hazardous wastes. See also PolychlorinatedBiphenyl and Dioxin.

Chemical Reduction/OxidationChemical treatments typically involve chemicalreduction/oxidation (redox) reactions that chemicallyconvert hazardous contaminants to nonhazardous orless toxic compounds that are more stable, less mobile,or inert. Redox reactions involve the transfer ofelectrons from one compound to another. Specifically,one reactant is oxidized (loses electrons) and one isreduced (gains electrons). The oxidizing agents mostcommonly used for treatment of hazardouscontaminants are ozone, hydrogen peroxide,hypochlorites, chlorine, and chlorine dioxide. Incyanide oxidation, organic cyanides are oxidized toless hazardous compounds through chemicalreactions. This method can be applied in situ or ex situto soils, sludges, sediments, and other solids and alsocan be applied for the in situ treatment of groundwater.

Clean Air Act (CAA)The CAA is a federal law passed in 1970 that requiresthe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) toestablish regulations to control the release ofcontaminants to the air to protect human health andenvironment.

Clean Water Act (CWA)The CWA is a 1977 amendment to the Federal WaterPollution Control Act of 1972, which set the basicstructure for regulating discharges of pollutants toU.S. waters. This law gave EPA the authority to setwastewater discharge standards on an industry-by-industry basis and to set water quality standards forall contaminants in surface waters.



B-5

CleanupCleanup is the term used for actions taken to deal witha release or threat of release of a hazardous substancethat could affect humans and or the environment. Theterm sometimes is used interchangeably with theterms remedial action, removal action, responseaction, or corrective action.

ColorimetricColorimetric refers to chemical reaction-based indicatorsthat are used to produce reactions to individual, orclasses of compounds. The reactions, such as visiblecolor changes or other easily noted indications, are usedto detect and quantify contaminants.

Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)CERCLA is a federal law passed in 1980 that createda special tax that funds a trust fund, commonlyknown as Superfund, to be used to investigate andclean up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardouswaste sites. CERCLA required for the first time thatEPA step beyond its traditional regulatory role andprovide response authority to clean up hazardouswaste sites. EPA has primary responsibility formanaging cleanup and enforcement activitiesauthorized under CERCLA. Under the program, EPAcan pay for cleanup when parties responsible for thecontamination cannot be located or are unwilling orunable to perform the work, or take legal action toforce parties responsible for contamination to cleanup the site or reimburse the federal government forthe cost of the cleanup. See also Superfund.

Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, and Liability Information System(CERCLIS)CERCLIS is a database that serves as the officialinventory of Superfund hazardous waste sites. CERCLISalso contains information about all aspects of hazardouswaste sites, from initial discovery to deletion from theNPL. The database also maintains information aboutplanned and actual site activities and financialinformation entered by EPA regional offices. CERCLISrecords the targets and accomplishments of theSuperfund program and is used to report thatinformation to the EPA Administrator, Congress, and thepublic. See also National Priorities List and Superfund.

Conceptual Site Model (CSM)A CSM, a key element used in facilitating cleanupdecisions during a site investigation, is a planning toolthat organizes information that already is known abouta site and identifies the additional information necessaryto support decisions that will achieve the goals of the

project. The project team then uses the CSM to directfield work that focuses on the information needed toremove significant unknowns from the model. The CSMserves several purposes - as a planning instrument; as amodeling and data interpretation tool; and as a means ofcommunication among members of a project team,decision-makers, stakeholders, and field personnel.

Cone PenetrometerThe cone penetrometer is a truck-mounted device thatrapidly penetrates the ground to collect samples. Ithas been used for approximately the last 50 years forgeotechnical applications, but its use for sitecharacterization is relatively new.

ContaminantA contaminant is any physical, chemical, biological,or radiological substance or matter present in anymedia at concentrations that may pose a threat tohuman health or the environment.

CorrosivityCorrosive wastes include those that are extremelyacidic or alkaline and capable of corroding metal suchas tanks, containers, drums, and barrels.

CreosoteCreosote is an oily liquid obtained by the distillation ofwood that is used as a wood preservative anddisinfectant and often is found at wood preserving sites.See also Aromatics and Light Nonaqueous Phase Liquid.

Data QualityThe term data quality refers to all features andcharacteristics of data that bear on its ability to meet thestated or implied needs and expectations of the user.

Data Quality Objective (DQO)DQOs are qualitative and quantitative statementsspecified to ensure that data of known and appropriatequality are obtained. The DQO process is a series ofplanning steps, typically conducted during siteassessment and investigation, that is designed to ensurethat the type, quantity, and quality of environmental dataused in decision making are appropriate. The DQOprocess involves a logical, step-by-step procedure fordetermining which of the complex issues affecting a siteare the most relevant to planning a site investigationbefore any data are collected.

Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid (DNAPL)A DNAPL is one of a group of organic substances thatare relatively insoluble in water and more dense thanwater. DNAPLs tend to sink vertically through sandand gravel aquifers to the underlying layer.


B-6

Detection LimitThe lowest concentration of a chemical that can bedistinguished reliably from a zero concentration.

DioxinA dioxin is any of a family of compounds knownchemically as dibenzo-p-dioxins. They are chemicalsreleased during combustion. Concern about themarises from their potential toxicity and the risk posedby contamination in commercial products. Boilersand industrial furnaces are among the sources ofdioxins.

DisposalDisposal is the final placement or destruction of toxic,radioactive or other wastes; surplus or bannedpesticides or other chemicals; polluted soils; anddrums containing hazardous materials from removalactions or accidental release. Disposal may beaccomplished through the use of approved securelandfills, surface impoundments, land farming, deepwell injection, or ocean dumping.

Dual-Phase ExtractionDual-phase extraction, also known as multi-phaseextraction, is a technology that uses a vacuum systemto remove various combinations of contaminatedgroundwater, separate-phase petroleum product, andvapors from the subsurface. The system lowers thewater table around a well, exposing more of theformation. Contaminants in the newly exposedvadose zone then are accessible to soil vaporextraction. Once above ground, the extracted vaporsor liquid-phase organics and groundwater areseparated and treated. See also Soil Vapor Extraction.

Dynamic Underground StrippingDynamic underground stripping is a process thatemploys vapor extraction during undergroundsteaming and electrical heating. The heat, supplied bysteam and electricity, vaporizes contaminants trappedin the soil. Once vaporized, the contaminants areremoved by vacuum extraction. The process ismonitored and guided by underground imaging.

Dynamic Work PlanA dynamic work plan is a work plan that allowsproject teams to make decisions in the field about howsite activities will progress. Dynamic work plansprovide the strategy for the way in which dynamicfield activities will take place. As such, they documenta flexible, adaptive sampling and analytical strategy.Dynamic work plans are supported by the rapidturnaround of data collected, analyzed, andinterpreted in the field.

EasementAn easement is a right to use the land of another for aspecific purpose, such as a right-of-way or a utility.

Emergency RemovalAn emergency removal is an action initiated inresponse to a release of a hazardous substance thatrequires on-site activity within hours of adetermination that action is appropriate.

Emerging TechnologyAn emerging technology is an innovative technologythat currently is undergoing bench-scale testing.During bench-scale testing, a small version of thetechnology is built and tested in a laboratory. If thetechnology is successful during bench-scale testing,it is demonstrated on a small scale at field sites. Ifthe technology is successful at the fielddemonstrations, it often will be used full scale atcontaminated waste sites. As the technology is usedand evaluated at different sites, it is improvedcontinually. See also Established Technology andInnovative Technology.

Environmental AuditAn environmental audit usually refers to a review orinvestigation that determines whether an operatingfacility is in compliance with relevant environmentalregulations. The audit may include checks forpossession of required permits, operation withinpermit limits, proper reporting, and record keeping.The typical result is a corrective action or complianceplan for the facility.

Environmental RiskEnvironmental risk is the chance that human health orthe environment will suffer harm as the result of thepresence of environmental hazards.

Established TechnologyAn established technology is a technology for whichcost and performance information is readily available.Only after a technology has been used at manydifferent sites and the results fully documented is thattechnology considered established. The mostfrequently used established technologies areincineration, solidification and stabilization, andpump-and-treat technologies for groundwater. See alsoEmerging Technology and Innovative Technology.

Ex SituThe term ex situ, or “moved from its original place,”means excavated or removed.



B-7

Ex Situ BioremediationEx situ bioremediation uses microorganisms todegrade organic contaminants in excavated soil,sludge, and solids. The microorganisms break downcontaminants by using them as a food source. Theend products typically are carbon dioxide and water.Ex situ bioremediation includes slurry-phasebioremediation, in which the soils are mixed withwater to form a slurry to keep solids suspended andmicroorganisms in contact with the soil contaminants;and solid-phase bioremediation, in which the soils areplaced in a cell or building and tilled with addedwater and nutrients. Land farming and compostingare types of solid-phase bioremediation.

Exposure PathwayAn exposure pathway is the route of contaminantsfrom the source of contamination to potential contactwith a medium (air, soil, surface water, orgroundwater) that represents a potential threat tohuman health or the environment. Determiningwhether exposure pathways exist is an essential stepin conducting a baseline risk assessment. See alsoBaseline Risk Assessment.

FiltrationFiltration is a treatment process that removes solidmatter from water by passing the water through aporous medium, such as sand or a manufactured filter.

Gas ChromatographyGas chromatography is a technology used forinvestigating and assessing soil, water, and soil gascontamination at a site. It is used for analysis forVOCs and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC).The technique identifies and quantifies organiccompounds on the basis of molecular weight,characteristic fragmentation patterns, and retentiontime. Recent advances in gas chromatography that areconsidered innovative are portable, weather-proofunits that have self-contained power supplies.

GroundwaterGroundwater is the water found beneath the earth’ssurface that fills pores between such materials assand, soil, or gravel and that often supplies wells andsprings. See also Aquifer.

Halogenated Organic CompoundA halogenated organic compound is a compoundcontaining molecules of chlorine, bromine iodine, andfluorine. Halogenated organic compounds were usedin high-voltage electrical transformers because theyconduct heat well, are fire resistant, and are goodelectrical insulators. Many herbicides, pesticides, and

degreasing agents are made from halogenated organiccompounds.

Hazard Ranking System (HRS)The HRS is the primary screening tool used by EPA toassess the risks posed to human health or theenvironment by abandoned or uncontrolledhazardous waste sites. Under the HRS, sites areassigned scores on the basis of the toxicity ofhazardous substances that are present and thepotential that those substances will spread throughthe air, surface, water, or groundwater, taking intoaccount such factors as the proximity of the substanceto nearby populations. Scores are used in determiningwhich sites should be placed on the NPL. See alsoNational Priorities List.

Hazardous SubstanceAs defined under CERCLA, a hazardous substance isany material that poses a threat to public health or theenvironment. The term also refers to hazardouswastes as defined under Resource Conservation andRecovery Act (RCRA). Typical hazardous substancesare materials that are toxic, corrosive, ignitable,explosive, or chemically reactive. If a certain quantityof a hazardous substance, as established by EPA, isspilled into the water or otherwise emitted into theenvironment, the release must be reported. Under thelegislation cited above, the term excludes petroleum,crude oil, natural gas, natural gas liquids, or syntheticgas usable for fuel.

Heavy MetalThe term heavy metal refers to a group of toxic metalsincluding arsenic, chromium, copper, lead, mercury,silver, and zinc. Heavy metals often are present atindustrial sites at which operations have includedbattery recycling and metal plating.

HydrocarbonA hydrocarbon is an organic compound containingonly hydrogen and carbon, often occurring inpetroleum, natural gas, and coal.

HydrogeologyHydrogeology is the study of groundwater, includingits origin, occurrence, movement, and quality.

HyperaccumulatorA hyperaccumulator is a metallophyte thataccumulates an exceptionally high level of a metal to aspecified concentration or to a specified multiple of theconcentration found in nonaccumulators. The term isused in reference to plants used in Phytoremediation.See also Phytoremediation.


B-8

IgnitabilityIgnitable wastes can create fires under certainconditions. Examples include liquids, such as solventsthat readily catch fire, and friction-sensitive substances.

ImmunoassayImmunoassay is an innovative technology used tomeasure compound-specific reactions (generallycolorimetric) to individual compounds or classes ofcompounds. The reactions are used to detect andquantify contaminants. The technology is available infield-portable test kits.

In SituThe term in situ, “in its original place” or “on site,”means unexcavated and unmoved. In situ soilflushing and natural attenuation are examples of insitu treatment methods by which contaminated sitesare treated without digging up or removing thecontaminants.

In Situ BioremediationIn situ bioremediation techniques stimulate and createa favorable environment for microorganisms to growand use contaminants as a food and energy source.Generally, this means providing some combination ofoxygen, nutrients, and moisture, and controlling thetemperature and pH. Sometimes, microorganismsadapted for degradation of the specific contaminantsare applied to enhance the process. Bioventing is acommon form of in situ bioremediation. Bioventinguses extraction wells to circulate air with or withoutpumping air into the ground.

In Situ OxidationIn situ oxidation is an innovative treatmenttechnology that oxidizes contaminants that aredissolved in groundwater and converts them intoinsoluble compounds.

In Situ Soil FlushingIn situ soil flushing is an innovative treatmenttechnology that floods contaminated soils beneath theground surface with a solution that moves thecontaminants to an area from which they can beremoved. The technology requires the drilling ofinjection and extraction wells on site and reduces theneed for excavation, handling, or transportation ofhazardous substances. Contaminants considered fortreatment by in situ soil flushing include heavy metals(such as lead, copper, and zinc), halogenated organiccompounds, aromatics, and PCBs. See also Aromatics,Halogenated Organic Compound, Heavy Metal, andPolychlorinated Biphenyl.

In Situ Thermal TreatmentIn situ thermal treatment is a treatment process thatinvolves heating contaminated soil in place tovaporize organic contaminants in the soil. Thesurface area to be treated is usually covered withsilicone rubber mats to provide insulation and to forma vapor barrier.

In Situ VitrificationIn situ vitrification is a soil treatment technology thatstabilizes metal and other inorganic contaminants inplace at temperatures of approximately 3,000°F. Soilsand sludges are fused to form a stable glass andcrystalline structure with very low leachingcharacteristics.

IncinerationIncineration is a treatment technology that involvesthe burning of certain types of solid, liquid, or gaseousmaterials under controlled conditions to destroyhazardous waste.

Infill DevelopmentInfill development is new construction on previouslydeveloped land in cities or developed suburbs. Theterm often refers to redevelopment of small residential,commercial, or industrial properties. An importantaspect of many infill development projects is theenhancement of the built environment with openspace and parks.

Innovative TechnologyAn innovative technology is a process that has beentested and used as a treatment for hazardous waste orother contaminated materials, but lacks a long historyof full-scale use and information about its cost and howwell it works sufficient to support prediction of itsperformance under a variety of operating conditions.An innovative technology is one that is undergoingpilot-scale treatability studies that usually areconducted in the field or the laboratory and requireinstallation of the technology, and provideperformance, cost, and design objectives for thetechnology. Innovative technologies are being usedunder many federal and state cleanup programs to treathazardous wastes that have been improperly released.See also Emerging Technology and Established Technology.

Inorganic CompoundAn inorganic compound is a compound that generallydoes not contain carbon atoms (although carbonateand bicarbonate compounds are notable exceptions)and tends to be more soluble in water. Examples ofinorganic compounds include various acids,potassium hydroxide, and metals.



B-9

Institutional ControlsAn institutional control is a legal or institutionalmeasure which subjects a property owner to limitactivities at or access to a particular property. Theyare used to ensure protection of human health and theenvironment, and to expedite property reuse. Zoningand deed restrictions are examples of institutionalcontrols.

Ion ExchangeIon exchange, a common method of softening water,depends on the ability of certain materials to removeand exchange ions from water. These ion exchangematerials, generally composed of unsoluble organicpolymers, are placed in a filtering device. Watersoftening exchange materials remove calcium andmagnesium ions, replacing them with sodium ions.

LampblackLampblack is a finely divided, bulky, black soot, at onetime the most important black pigment used in themanufacture of printing inks. It is one of several gasplant residues found at manufactured gas plant(MGP) sites. See also Manufactured Gas Plant.

LandfarmingLandfarming is the spreading and incorporation ofwastes into the soil to initiate biological treatment.

LandfillA sanitary landfill is a land disposal site fornonhazardous solid wastes at which the waste is spreadin layers compacted to the smallest practical volume.

Laser-Induced Fluorescence/Cone PenetrometerLaser-induced fluorescence/cone penetrometer is a fieldscreening method that couples a fiber optic-basedchemical sensor system to a cone penetrometer mountedon a truck. The technology can be used for investigatingand assessing soil and water contamination.

Land Revitalization InitiativeThe Land Revitalization Initiative was undertaken byEPA in partnership with states, tribes, territories, anda broad range of stakeholders to restore land toproductive economic and green space uses. In April2003, EPA announced the Land RevitalizationAgenda to incorporate land reuse into the RCRA,brownfields, and underground storage tank (UST)hazardous waste cleanup programs.

LeachateA leachate is a contaminated liquid that results whenwater collects contaminants as it trickles through

wastes, agricultural pesticides, or fertilizers. Leachingmay occur in farming areas and landfills and may be ameans of the entry of hazardous substances into soil,surface water, or groundwater.

LeadLead is a heavy metal that has been used in themanufacture of gasoline, paints, and other substances.See also Heavy Metal.

Light Nonaqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL)An LNAPL is one of a group of organic substancesthat are relatively insoluble in water and are lessdense than water. LNAPLs, such as oil, tend tospread across the surface of the water table and form alayer on top of the water table.

Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)LTM typically is performed to verify thatcontaminants at a site pose no risk to human healthor the environment and that natural processes arereducing contaminant levels and risk as predicted.

Manufactured Gas Plant (MGP)MGPs were operated nationwide from the early 1880sthrough the mid-1900s. MGPs produced gas from coalor oil for lighting, heating, and cooking. The gasmanufacturing and purification processes conductedat the plants yielded residues that included tars,sludges, lampblack, light oils, spent oxide wastes, andother hydrocarbon products. Although many of thebyproducts were recycled, excess residues containingpolycyclic acromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), petroleumhydrocarbons, benzene, cyanide, metals, and phenolsremained at MGP sites.

Mass SpectrometryMass spectrometry is a method of chemical analysisin which the substance to be analyzed is heated andplaced in a vacuum. The resulting vapor is exposedto a beam of electrons that causes ionization to occur,either of the molecules or their fragments. Theionized atoms are separated according to their massand can be identified on that basis.

MediumA medium is a specific environment – air, water, or soil– that is the subject of regulatory concern and activities.

MercuryMercury is a heavy metal that can accumulate in theenvironment and is found in thermometers, measuringdevices, pharmaceutical and agricultural chemicals,chemical manufacturing, and electrical equipment.See also Heavy Metal.


B-10

MethanogenicThe term methanogenic refers to anaerobic oxidationof petroleum hydrocarbons, as well as fermentation ofhydrocarbons to methane.

Methyl tertiary Butyl Ether (MtBE)MtBE, a synthetic chemical, is a volatile, flammable,colorless liquid. MtBE has a relatively high vaporpressure and is water soluble to a significant degree.MtBE usually is produced in a refinery by mixing afeedstock of isobutylene with methanol. Theisobutylene is derived by steam-cracking duringproduction of olefin and fluid-cracking duringproduction of gasoline. Concern about them arisesfrom its potential contamination of groundwater as aresult of releases from underground storage tanks ofgasoline that contains oxygenates. See also Oxygenates.

Mine-Scarred Lands (MSL)MSLs are lands, associated waters, and surroundingwatersheds where extraction, beneficiation, orprocessing of ores and minerals, including coal, hasoccurred. MSLs have become a persistent problem inmany communities because of the economic, social,and environmental challenges of cleaning up andreusing such lands. The Brownfields Law expandedthe definition of brownfields to include MSLs, makingthese properties eligible for benefits under theBrownfields Program.

Mobile LaboratoryA mobile laboratory refers to a collection of analyticalinstruments contained in a vehicle that can bedeployed to a project site. A mobile laboratory offersmany of the advantages of a fixed laboratory, such asprotection from the elements, a power supply, andclimate control, while still providing the advantages ofanalyzing samples on site while the project is inprogress. A mobile laboratory may even allow the useof laboratory-grade instruments which otherwisecould not be taken into the field. Configurations canvary in sophistication from a single instrumentmounted in a sampling van, to large truck trailers andrecreational vehicles equipped with multipleinstruments and laboratory-grade support equipment.

Monitored Natural AttenuationThe term MNA refers to the remedial approach thatallows natural processes to reduce concentrations ofcontaminants to acceptable levels. MNA involvesphysical, chemical, and biological processes that act toreduce the mass, toxicity, and mobility of subsurfacecontamination. Physical, chemical, and biologicalprocesses involved in MNA include biodegradation,chemical stabilization, dispersion, sorption, andvolatilization.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)NPDES is the primary permitting program under theClean Water Act, which regulates all discharges tosurface water. It prohibits discharge of pollutants intowaters of the United States unless EPA, a state, or atribal government issues a special permit to do so.

National Priorities List (NPL)The NPL is EPA’s list of the most serious uncontrolledor abandoned hazardous waste sites identified forpossible long-term remedial response under Superfund.Inclusion of a site on the list is based primarily on thescore the site receives under the Hazard RankingSystem (HRS). Money from Superfund can be used forcleanup only at sites that are on the NPL. EPA isrequired to update the NPL at least once a year. See alsoHazard Ranking System and Superfund.

Nonaqueous Phase Liquid (NAPL)NAPLs are organic substances that are relativelyinsoluble in water. See also Dense Nonaqueous PhaseLiquid and Light Nonaqueous Phase Liquid.

Organic Chemical or CompoundAn organic chemical or compound is a substanceproduced by animals or plants that contains mainlycarbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.

OxygenateOxygenates are chemicals derived from hydrocarbonsthat are added to fuels to increase the oxygen contentof those fuels to improve combustion, thereby reducingemissions, such as carbon monoxide and otherpollutants. Examples of oxygenates include methyltertiary butyl ether (MtBE), ethyl tertiary butyl ether,tertiary amyl methyl ether, ethanol, and other ethersand alcohols. See also Methyl tertiary Butyl Ether.

OzoneOzone is a form of oxygen found naturally whichprovides a protective layer in the stratosphereshielding the earth from the harmful health effects onhuman health and the environment from ultravioletradiation. Ozone also is a chemical oxidant and amajor component of smog in the troposphere, theearth’s atmospheric layer below the stratosphereextending 7 to 10 miles from the earth’s surface.

Pentachlorophenol (PCP)PCP, a chemical compound containing carbon,chlorine, oxygen, and hydrogen, is a chemical nowused primarily as a wood preservative but which waspreviously used as a herbicide, defoliant, algicide,fungicide, and disinfectant.



B-11

Performance-Based Measurement System (PBMS)EPA defines a PBMS as a set of processes throughwhich the data needs or limitations of a program orproject are specified and serve as criteria for selectingappropriate methods to meet those needs in a cost-effective manner. EPA uses the term to convey whatmust be accomplished, but not prescriptively how todo it. The PBMS initiative places regulatory emphasison obtaining analytical results that provide adequateinformation to support the regulatory decision, butleaves the choice of analytical procedures up to theuser. The PBMS approach gives regulators andmembers of the regulated community increasedflexibility in selecting technologies, while still meetingmandated monitoring requirements. The use of PBMSis intended to reduce barriers to the use of newmonitoring technologies.

PermeabilityPermeability is a characteristic that represents aqualitative description of the relative ease withwhich rock, soil, or sediment will transmit a fluid(liquid or gas).

Permeable Reactive Barriers (PRB)PRBs, also known as passive treatment walls, areinstalled across the flow path of a contaminatedplume. As groundwater flows through the PRB,contaminants are either degraded or retained in aconcentrated form by the reactive material. Examplesof reactive media include zero-valent metals, chelators,sorbents, and microbes.

PesticideA pesticide is a substance or mixture of substancesintended to prevent or mitigate infestation by, ordestroy or repel, any pest. Pesticides can accumulatein the food chain and or contaminate the environmentif misused.

Phase I Environmental Site AssessmentEnvironmental site assessments, or all appropriateinquiries, are conducted to evaluate existingenvironmental problems from past operations andpotential environmental problems from current orproposed operations at a site. The practice ofconducting site assessments is intended to satisfy onerequirement for obtaining protection from CERCLAliability for potential property owners. Mostenvironmental site assessments are called Phase Iassessments because they are conducted inconformance with ASTM E1527-00 Standard Practicefor Environmental Site Assessments: Phase 1Environmental Site Assessment Process. Phase I siteassessments include:

• An inspection of the property

• A review of pertinent records for evidence ofcurrent and past use of the property and adjacentproperties

• Interviews with current owners and occupants aswell as local government officials

• Evaluation of information gathered anddevelopment of a report

• In some cases, samples are collected of buildingmaterials to determine if PCBs, asbestos, or lead arepresent

The need for additional sampling to confirmcontamination or to determine the nature and extent ofcontamination leads into a “Phase II” assessment.

Phase II Environmental Site AssessmentEnvironmental site assessments are conducted toevaluate existing environmental problems from pastoperations and potential environmental problemsfrom current or proposed operations at a site. Theprimary objective of conducting a Phase II assessmentis to confirm and evaluate the environmentalconditions identified in the Phase I environmental siteassessment or transaction screening process. Duringthe Phase II, additional investigation and sampling isneeded to determine the nature and extent, source, andsignificance of contamination following a Phase Ienvironmental assessment for the purpose ofsupporting subsequent cleanup and reuse decisions.

PhenolA phenol is one of a group of organic compounds thatare byproducts of petroleum refining, tanning, andtextile, dye, gas, and resin manufacturing.

PhytoremediationPhytoremediation is an innovative treatmenttechnology that uses plants and trees to clean upcontaminated soil and water. Plants can breakdown, or degrade, organic pollutants or stabilizemetal contaminants by acting as filters or traps.Phytoremediation can be used to clean up metals,pesticides, solvents, explosives, crude oil,polyaromatic carbons, and landfill leachates. Its usegenerally is limited to sites at which concentrationsof contaminants are relatively low andcontamination is found in shallow soils, streams,and groundwater.

PhytotechnologyThe term phytotechnology refers to technologies thatuse living plants. See also Phytoremediation.


B-12

PhytotoxicThe term phytotoxic is used to describe a substancethat is harmful to plants.

PlumeA plume is a visible or measurable emission ordischarge of a contaminant from a given point oforigin into any medium. The term also is used to referto measurable and potentially harmful radiationleaking from a damaged reactor.

Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB)PCBs are a group of toxic, persistent chemicalsproduced by chlorination of biphenyl that once wereused in high-voltage electrical transformers becausethey conducted heat well while being fire-resistantand good electrical insulators.

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH)A PAH is a chemical compound that contains morethan one fused benzene ring. They are commonlyfound in petroleum fuels, coal products, and tar.

Potassium PermanganatePotassium permanganate is a crystalline compoundthat is soluble in water, acetone, and methanol, but isdecomposed by ethanol. It is used widely as apowerful oxidizing agent, as a disinfectant in a varietyof applications, and as an analytical oxidant reagentin redox titrations.

Potentially Responsible Party (PRP)A PRP is an individual or company (such as owners,operators, transporters, or generators of hazardouswaste) that is potentially responsible for, orcontributing to, the contamination problems at aSuperfund site. Whenever possible, EPA requiresPRPs, through administrative and legal actions, toclean up hazardous waste sites they havecontaminated. See also Comprehensive EnvironmentalResponse, Compensation, and Liability Act and Superfund.

Presumptive RemediesPresumptive remedies are preferred technologies forcommon categories of CERCLA sites that have beenidentified through historical patterns of remedy selectionand EPA’s scientific and engineering evaluation ofperformance data on technology implementation.

Pump and Treat (P&T)P&T is a general term used to describe remediationmethods that involve the pumping of groundwater tothe surface for treatment. P&T is one of the mostcommon methods of treating polluted aquifers andgroundwater.

Quality Assurance (QA)QA is a system of management activities that ensurethat a process, item, or service is of the type andquality needed by the user. QA deals with settingpolicy and implementing an administrative system ofmanagement controls that cover planning,implementation, and review of data collectionactivities. QA is an important element of a qualitysystem that ensures that all research design andperformance, environmental monitoring andsampling, and other technical and reporting activitiesconducted by EPA are of the highest possible quality.

Quality Control (QC)QC refers to scientific precautions, such ascalibrations and duplications, that are necessary ifdata of known and adequate quality are to beacquired. QC is technical in nature and isimplemented at the project level. Like QA, QC is animportant element of a quality system that ensuresthat all research design and performance,environmental monitoring and sampling, and othertechnical and reporting activities conducted by EPAare of the highest possible quality.

Radioactive WasteRadioactive waste is any waste that emits energy asrays, waves, or streams of energetic particles. Sourcesof such wastes include nuclear reactors, researchinstitutions, and hospitals.

RadionuclideA radionuclide is a radioactive element characterizedaccording to its atomic mass and atomic number,which can be artificial or naturally occurring.Radionuclides have a long life as soil or waterpollutants. Radionuclides cannot be destroyed ordegraded; therefore, applicable technologies involveseparation, concentration and volume reduction,immobilization, or vitrification. See also Solidificationand Stabilization.

RadonRadon is a colorless, naturally occurring, radioactive,inert gaseous element formed by radioactive decay ofradium atoms. See also Radioactive Waste andRadionuclide.

ReactivityReactive wastes are unstable under normalconditions. They can create explosions and or toxicfumes, gases, and vapors when mixed with water.



B-13

Ready for Reuse (RfR) DeterminationAn RfR is a new type of document developed by EPAto provide potential users of Superfund sites with anenvironmental status report that documents atechnical determination made by EPA in consultationwith states, tribes, and local governments. Theenvironmental status report indicates whether all or aportion of a property can support specific types ofuses and remain protective of human health and theenvironment. The RfR guidance was issued by EPA inFebruary 2004.

Record of Decision (ROD)A ROD is a legal, technical, and public document thatexplains which cleanup alternative will be used at aSuperfund NPL site. The ROD is based oninformation and technical analysis generated duringthe remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS) and consideration of public comments andcommunity concerns.

ReleaseA release is any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring,emitting, emptying, discharging, injecting, leaching,dumping, or disposing into the environment of ahazardous or toxic chemical or extremely hazardoussubstance, as defined under RCRA. See also ResourceConservation and Recovery Act.

Removal ActionA removal action usually is a short-term effortdesigned to stabilize or clean up a hazardous wastesite that poses an immediate threat to human health orthe environment. Removal actions include removingtanks or drums of hazardous substances that werefound on the surface and installing drainage controlsor security measures, such as a fence at the site.Removal actions also may be conducted to respond toaccidental releases of hazardous substances.CERCLA places time and money constraints on theduration of removal actions. See also ComprehensiveEnvironmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act.

Representative SamplingThe term representative sampling refers to a portion ofmaterial or water that is as nearly identical in contentand consistency as possible to that in a larger body ofmaterial or water being sampled. To preventsegregation and to provide a level of accuracy, thesample is representative of the volume and nature ofthe material being sampled.

ResinResins are solids or semi-solids, originally of plantorigin, used principally in lacquers, varnishes, inks,adhesives, synthetic plastics, and pharmaceuticals.Man-made resins, also called synthetic plastics, havea wide range of applications from manufacturing ofhousehold goods to architectural and industrial uses.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)RCRA is a federal law enacted in 1976 that establisheda regulatory system to track hazardous substances fromtheir generation to their disposal. The law requires theuse of safe and secure procedures in treating,transporting, storing, and disposing of hazardoussubstances. RCRA is designed to prevent the creationof new, uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.

RCRA Brownfields Prevention InitiativeThe RCRA Brownfields Prevention Initiative supportsthe design of pilot projects to test approaches thatbetter integrate reuse considerations into the correctiveaction cleanup process. The initiative also addressesconcerns that application of RCRA to cleanupactivities may slow the progress of cleanup efforts.

RCRA Brownfields Prevention Targeted Site Efforts(TSE) InitiativeThe RCRA Brownfields Prevention TSE Initiative isintended to focus short-term attention and support onsites where cleanup has been delayed or slowed andto serve as a catalyst for completing the cleanup atsuch sites in order to prevent them from becomingbrownfields sites. The initiative applies to sites wheresignificant potential for redevelopment and reuseexists and where limited EPA support would berequired to bring the Sites to the next level of cleanup.

Response ActionA response action is a short-term removal action or along-term remedial response, authorized underCERCLA that is taken at a site to address releases ofhazardous substances.

Return to Reuse InitiativeThe Return to Reuse Initiative was announced by EPAon November 10, 2004. This initiative focuses on NPLsites that were cleaned up before EPA’s currentemphasis on considering reuse during responseactivities, many of which remain vacant. Under thisinitiative, EPA is committed to reviewing remedies inplace to determine whether there are relatively modestways to alter the remedy, without triggering changesto the ROD, to encourage reuse of these sites.


B-14

Reuse AssessmentA reuse assessment involves the collection andevaluation of information to develop assumptionsabout reasonably anticipated future land uses atSuperfund sites. It provides a tool for implementingthe Superfund land use directive and can involve areview of available records, visual inspections of thesite, and discussions with local government officials,property owners, and community members aboutpotential future land uses.

Risk CommunicationRisk communication, the exchange of informationabout health or environmental risks among riskassessors, risk managers, the local community, newsmedia and interest groups, is the process of informingmembers of the local community about environmentalrisks associated with a site and the steps that arebeing taken to manage those risks.

Risk-Based Corrective Action (RBCA)As defined by EPA, RBCA is a streamlined approachthrough which exposure and risk assessmentpractices are integrated with traditional componentsof the corrective action process to ensure thatappropriate and cost-effective remedies are selectedand that limited resources are allocated properly.RBCA refers specifically to Standard Guide E 1739 forRisk-Based Corrective Action Applied At PetroleumRelease Sites, published by ASTM. The RBCA processcan be tailored to applicable state and local laws andregulatory practices. See also American Society forTesting and Materials.

Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)A SAP documents the procedural and analyticalrequirements for a one-time or time-limited project thatinvolves the collection of samples of water, soil,sediment, or other media to characterize areas ofpotential environmental contamination. A SAP containsall the elements of a quality assurance project plan and afield sampling plan that must be provided to meet therequirements for any project funded by the EPA underwhich environmental measurements are to be taken.

Saturated ZoneThe saturated zone is the area beneath the surface ofthe land in which all openings are filled with water.

Seismic Reflection and RefractionSeismic reflection and refraction is a technology used toexamine the geophysical features of soil and bedrock,such as debris, buried channels, and other features.

Semivolatile Organic Compound (SVOC)SVOCs, composed primarily of carbon and hydrogenatoms, have boiling points greater than 200ºC.Common SVOCs include PCBs, PAHs, and phenols.See also Phenol and Polychlorinated Biphenyl.

Significant ThreatThe term refers to the level of contamination that astate would consider significant enough to warrant anaction. The thresholds vary from state to state.

Site Characterization and Analysis PenetrometerSystem (SCAPS)SCAPS was developed by the Division of the NavalCommand, Control, and Ocean Surveillance Center, incollaboration with the U.S. Army and the U. S. AirForce. SCAPS, a cone penetrometer testing system,coupled with laser-induced fluorescence, measuresfluorescence with optical fibers. The measurement ismade through a sapphire window on a probe that ispushed into the ground with a truck-mounted conepenetrometer testing platform. See also ConePenetrometer and Laser-Induced Fluorescence/ConePenetrometer.

Six-Phase Soil HeatingSix-phase soil heating is an in situ thermaltechnology for the remediation of contamination ofsoil and groundwater. The process splitsconventional electricity into six electrical phases forthe electrical resistive heating of soil andgroundwater. Each electrical phase is delivered toone of six electrodes placed in a hexagonal array.The voltage gradient between phases causes anelectrical current to flow through the soil andgroundwater. Resistivity causes the temperature torise. As the soil and groundwater are heateduniformly to the boiling point of water, the waterbecomes steam, stripping volatile and semivolatilecontaminants from the pore spaces. In addition,removal of the soil moisture increases the airpermeability of the soils, which can further increasethe rate at which contaminants are removed.

SludgeSludge is a semisolid residue from air or watertreatment processes. Residues from treatment of metalwastes and the mixture of waste and soil at the bottomof a waste lagoon are examples of sludge, which canbe a hazardous waste.



B-15

Small Business Liability Relief and BrownfieldsRevitalization ActThe Small Business Liability Relief and BrownfieldsRevitalization Act – also known as the BrownfieldsLaw - was passed in January 2002. With the passageof this act, EPA assistance was expanded to providegreater support for brownfields cleanup and reuse.The law modified EPA’s brownfields grants andtechnical assistance program by increasing EPAfunding authority up to $200 million per year;providing grants for assessments, revolving loanfunds, direct cleanups, and job training; expandingthe entities, properties, and activities eligible forbrownfields grants; expanding the BrownfieldsProgram’s applicability to sites with petroleumcontamination such as abandoned gas stations; andproviding authority for brownfields training, research,and technical assistance. In addition, the BrownfieldsLaw changed and clarified Superfund liability forprospective purchasers, innocent landowners, andcontiguous property owners. The law also providedliability protection for certain small-volume wastecontributors and municipal solid waste contributors.

Soil BoringSoil boring is a process by which a soil sample isextracted from the ground for chemical, biological, andanalytical testing to determine the level ofcontamination present.

Soil FlushingIn soil flushing, large volumes of water, at timessupplemented with treatment compounds, are appliedto the soil or injected into the groundwater to raise thewater table into the zone of contaminated soil.Contaminants are leached into the groundwater, andthe extraction fluids are recovered from the underlyingaquifer. When possible, the fluids are recycled.

Soil GasSoil gas consists of gaseous elements and compoundsthat occur in the small spaces between particles of theearth and soil. Such gases can move through or leavethe soil or rock, depending on changes in pressure.

Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)SVE is a process that physically separatescontaminants from soil in a vapor form by exerting avacuum through the soil formation. SVE removesVOCs and some SVOCs from soil beneath the groundsurface.

Soil WashingSoil washing is an innovative treatment technology thatuses liquids (usually water, sometimes combined with

chemical additives) and a mechanical process to scrubsoils, removes hazardous contaminants, andconcentrates the contaminants into a smaller volume.The technology is used to treat a wide range ofcontaminants, such as metals, gasoline, fuel oils, andpesticides. Soil washing is a relatively low-costalternative for separating waste and minimizing volumeas necessary to facilitate subsequent treatment. It is oftenused in combination with other treatment technologies.The technology can be brought to the site, therebyeliminating the need to transport hazardous wastes.

Solidification and StabilizationSolidification and stabilization are the processes ofremoving wastewater from a waste or changing itchemically to make the waste less permeable andsusceptible to transport by water. Solidification andstabilization technologies can immobilize many heavymetals, certain radionuclides, and selected organiccompounds, while decreasing the surface area andpermeability of many types of sludge, contaminatedsoils, and solid wastes.

SolubilitySolubility is a measure of the amount of solute that willdissolve in a solution. It is the ability or tendency of onesubstance to dissolve into another at a given temperatureand pressure and is generally expressed in terms of theamount of solute that will dissolve in a given amount ofsolvent to produce a saturated solution.

SolventA solvent is a substance, usually liquid, that iscapable of dissolving or dispersing one or more othersubstances.

Solvent ExtractionSolvent extraction is an innovative treatmenttechnology that uses a solvent to separate or removehazardous organic contaminants from oily-typewastes, soils, sludges, and sediments. The technologydoes not destroy contaminants, but concentrates themso they can be recycled or destroyed more easily byanother technology. Solvent extraction has beenshown to be effective in treating sediments, sludges,and soils that contain primarily organiccontaminants, such as PCBs, VOCs, halogenatedorganic compounds, and petroleum wastes. Suchcontaminants typically are generated from metaldegreasing, printed circuit board cleaning, gasoline,and wood preserving processes. Solvent extraction isa transportable technology that can be brought to thesite. See also Halogenated Organic Compound,Polychlorinated Biphenyl, and Volatile OrganicCompound.


B-16

Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)An SOP is a step-by-step procedure that promotesuniformity in operations to help clarify and augmentsuch operations. SOPs document the way activitiesare to be performed to facilitate consistentconformance to technical and quality systemrequirements and to support data quality. The use ofSOPs is an integral part of a successful quality systembecause SOPs provide individuals with theinformation needed to perform a job properly andfacilitate consistency in the quality and integrity of aproduct or end result. SOPs also provide guidance inareas in which the exercise of professional judgment isnecessary and specify procedures that are unique toeach task.

Steam InjectionSteam injection is a remediation technology that usesthe addition of steam to the subsurface to heat the soiland groundwater and drive off contaminants. Thetechnology was developed by the petroleum industryto enhance recovery of oils from reservoirs, and hasbeen adapted by the remediation industry for use inthe recovery of organic contaminants from thesubsurface.

Strategic Environmental Research and DevelopmentProgram (SERDP)SERDP is an environmental research anddevelopment program headed by the U.S. Departmentof Defense in partnership with the U.S. Department ofEnergy and EPA. The program focuses on cleanup,compliance, conservation, pollution prevention, andunexploded ordnance technologies. SERDP alsoprovides demonstration opportunities at national testsites and conducts annual symposia and workshopsto encourage technology transfer.

SubsurfaceUnderground, beneath the surface.

SuperfundSuperfund is the trust fund that provides for thecleanup of hazardous substances released into theenvironment, regardless of fault. The Superfund wasestablished under the Comprehensive EnvironmentalResponse Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)and subsequent amendments to CERCLA. The termSuperfund also is used to refer to cleanup programsdesigned and conducted under CERCLA and itssubsequent amendments. See also ComprehensiveEnvironmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act.

Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)ProgramThe SITE Program is an effort established by EPA in1986 to advance the development, evaluation, andcommercialization of innovative treatment technologiesfor assessing and cleaning up hazardous waste sites.The program provides an opportunity for technologydevelopers to demonstrate their technologies’ ability tosuccessfully process and remediate hazardous waste.The SITE Program has four components: the EmergingTechnology Program, the Demonstration Program, theMeasurement and Monitoring Program, and theTechnology Transfer Program.

Superfund Redevelopment Initiative (SRI)The SRI reflects EPA’s commitment to considerreasonably anticipated future land uses when makingremedy decisions for Superfund hazardous wastesites so that sites can be cleaned up to be protective ofhuman health and the environment under the futureuses of the land.

Surface WaterSurface water is all water naturally open to theatmosphere, such as rivers, lakes, reservoirs, streams,and seas.

Surfactant FlushingSurfactant flushing is a technology used to treatcontaminated groundwater. Surfactant flushing ofNAPL increases the solubility and mobility of thecontaminants in water so that the NAPLs can bebiodegraded more easily in an aquifer or recovered fortreatment aboveground. See also Nonaqueous PhaseLiquid.

Systematic PlanningSystematic planning is a planning process that isbased on the scientific method. It is a common-senseapproach designed to ensure that the level of detailin planning is commensurate with the importanceand intended use of the data, as well as the availableresources. Systematic planning is important to thesuccessful execution of all activities at hazardouswaste sites, but it is particularly important todynamic field activities because those activities relyon rapid decision-making. The data quality objective(DQO) process is one formalized process ofsystematic planning. All dynamic field activitiesmust be designed through the use of systematicplanning, whether using DQO steps or some othersystem. See also Data Quality Objective.



B-17

“Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods” (SW-846)SW-846 refers to an EPA guidance and referencedocument, “Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,Physical/Chemical Methods,” which is intended toassist analytical chemists and other users in theRCRA and Superfund programs by suggestingprocedures that analysts have found to be successfulwhen applied to typical samples. The SW-846methods are analytical and sampling methods thathave been evaluated and approved for use incomplying with RCRA regulations. The methods arenot intended to be prescriptive, nor are alltechnologies or methods that may be used identified.

TetrachloroetheneTetrachloroethene is a nonflammable manufacturedchemical widely used for dry cleaning fabrics and inmetal degreasing operations. It also is used as astarting material (building block) for the production ofother manufactured chemicals. Other names fortetrachloroethene include PERC, tetrachloroethylene,perchloroethylene, and PCE.

Thermal DesorptionThermal desorption is an innovative treatmenttechnology that heats soils contaminated withhazardous wastes to temperatures from 200 to 1,000ºFso that contaminants that have low boiling points willvaporize and separate from the soil. The vaporizedcontaminants then are collected for further treatmentor destruction, typically by an air emission treatmentsystem. The technology is most effective for treatingVOCs; SVOCs; and other organic contaminants suchas PCBs, PAHs, and pesticides. It is effective inseparating organics from refining wastes, coal tarwastes, waste from wood treatment, and paint wastes.It also can separate solvents, pesticides, PCBs, dioxins,and fuel oils from contaminated soil. See alsoPolycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon, PolychlorinatedBiphenyl, Semivolatile Organic Compound, and VolatileOrganic Compound.

TolueneToluene is a colorless liquid chemical with a sweet,strong odor. It is used as a solvent in aviationgasoline and in making other chemicals, perfumes,medicines, dyes, explosives, and detergents.

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)TPH refers to a measure of concentration or mass ofpetroleum hydrocarbon constituents present in agiven amount of air, soil, or water.

Toxic SubstanceA toxic substance is a chemical or mixture that maypresent an unreasonable risk of injury to health or theenvironment.

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)TSCA was enacted in 1976 to test, regulate, and screenall chemicals produced or imported into the UnitedStates. TSCA requires that any chemical that reachesthe consumer marketplace be tested for possible toxiceffects prior to commercial manufacture. Any existingchemical that poses health and environmentalhazards is tracked and reported under TSCA.

ToxicityToxicity is a quantification of the degree of dangerposed by a substance to animal or plant life.

Triad ApproachThe Triad approach is a three-pronged approachdesigned to encourage modernization of datacollection, analysis, interpretation, and management inorder to support cleanup decisions for hazardouswaste sites. The three parts of the Triad approachinclude systematic planning, a dynamic work strategy,and use of real-time measurement tools to allow on-siteanalysis of samples. The Triad approach enablesproject managers to minimize uncertainty whileexpediting site cleanup and reducing project costs.Systematic planning is a common-sense approach usedto ensure that the level of detail of project planningmatches the intended use of the data being collected.The dynamic work strategy relies on real-time data toreach decision points. The logic for decision-making isidentified, and responsibilities, authority, and lines ofcommunication are established. Real-timemeasurement is made possible by use of on-siteanalytical tools and rapid sampling platforms, on-siteinterpretation and management of data, and supportson-site decision-making.

Trichloroethene (TCE)TCE is a stable, low-boiling point, colorless liquid thatis used as a solvent, as a metal degreasing agent, andin other industrial applications. TCE is also known astrichloroethylene.

UncertaintyThe term uncertainty refers to the inherent unknownquantities present in all scientific and technicaldecisions. Uncertainties can arise from incompleteknowledge of the nature and extent of contamination,an inability to predict a technology’s performanceunder site-specific conditions, or new or changingregulatory requirements.


B-18

Underground Injection Control (UIC)UIC is the prevention of contamination from fluidsdisposed through underground injection. Regulatedunder the Safe Drinking Act, the UIC program wasestablished to prevent contamination of undergroundsources of drinking water. In addition to banningcertain types of injection, the program establishesminimum requirements for the siting of injection wellsand the construction, operation, maintenance,monitoring, testing, and closure of wells.

Underground Storage Tank (UST)An UST is a tank and any underground pipingconnected to a tank that is used to contain gasoline orother petroleum products or chemical solutions andthat is placed in such a manner that at least 10 percentof its combined volume is underground.

USTFields InitiativeThe USTFields Initiative undertaken by EPA’s Officeof Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) focuses onimproving cleanups at sites affected by petroleumcontamination and encouraging redevelopment ofthese sites.

Unexploded Ordnance (UXO)The term exploded ordnance refers to any munition,weapon delivery system, or ordnance item thatcontains explosives, propellants, and chemical agents.UXO consists of the same items after they: (1) havebeen armed or otherwise prepared for action; (2) havebeen launched, placed, fired, or released in such amanner as to constitute a hazard to operations,installations, personnel, or material; and (3) remainunexploded by design, by malfunction, or for anyother reason.

Unsaturated ZoneThe unsaturated zone is the area between the landsurface and the uppermost aquifer (or saturated zone).The soils in an unsaturated zone may contain air andwater.

Vadose ZoneThe vadose zone is the area between the surface of theland and the surface of the water table in which themoisture content is less than the saturation point andthe pressure is less than atmospheric. The openings(pore spaces) also typically contain air or other gases.

VaporVapor is the gaseous phase of any substance that isliquid or solid at atmospheric temperatures andpressures. Steam is an example of a vapor.

Volatile Organic Compound (VOC)A VOC is one of a group of carbon-containingcompounds that evaporate readily at room temperature.Examples of VOCs include trichloroethane;trichloroethene; and benzene toluene ethylbenzene andxylene (BTEX). These contaminants typically aregenerated from metal degreasing, printed circuit boardcleaning, gasoline, and wood preserving processes.

VolatilizationVolatilization is the process of transfer of a chemicalfrom the aqueous or liquid phase to the gas phase.Solubility, molecular weight, and vapor pressure ofthe liquid and the nature of the gas-liquid affect therate of volatilization.

Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP)A VCP is a formal means established by many states tofacilitate assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment ofbrownfields sites. VCPs typically address theidentification and cleanup of potentiallycontaminated sites that are not on the NationalPriorities List (NPL). Under a VCP, owners ordevelopers of a site are encouraged to approach thestate voluntarily to work out a process by which thesite can be readied for development. Many state VCPsprovide technical assistance, liability assurances, andfunding support for such efforts. See also NationalPriorities List.

WastewaterWastewater is spent or used water from an individualhome, a community, a farm, or an industry thatcontains dissolved or suspended matter.

Water TableA water table is the boundary between the saturatedand unsaturated zones beneath the surface of theearth, the level of groundwater, and generally is thelevel to which water will rise in a well. See also Aquiferand Groundwater.

ZoningZoning is the exercise of the civil authority of amunicipality to regulate and control the character anduse of property.

APPENDIX C

• APPENDIX C: LIST OF BROWNFIELDS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT CONTACTS


C-1

Appendix C

LIST OF BROWNFIELDSAND TECHNICAL SUPPORT CONTACTS

The lists included in this appendix identify contacts at the state and EPA regional levels, as well as EPAtechnical support staff in the Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation and the Office ofResearch and Development. The individuals are available to assist cleanup and redevelopment efforts atbrownfields sites.

The points of contact listed are current, according to information available at the time of publication.

State Brownfields Contacts ................................................................................ C-2

EPA Regional Brownfields Coordinators ........................................................ C-7An online list of regional contacts is available atwww.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/regcntct.htm

EPA Technical Support Contacts ...................................................................... C-8


ALABAMAwww.adem.state.al.us/Dan CooperLand DivisionAL Department of Environmental

Management1751 Congressman WL DickinsonDriveMontgomery, AL 36109Phone: (334) 271-7711Fax: (334) 279-3050

ALASKAwww.dec.state.ak.us/Jill TaylorSpill Prevention and ResponseAK Department of Environmental

Conservation410 Willoughby AvenueJuneau, AK 99801Phone: (907) 465-5209Fax: (907) 465-5262E-mail: [email protected]

ARIZONAwww2.ev.state.az.us/index.htmlAl RoeslerVoluntary Sites UnitAZ Department of Environmental

Quality3033 North Central AvenuePhoenix, AZ 85012Phone: (602) 207-4166Fax: (602) 207-4236E-mail: [email protected]

ARKANSASwww.adeq.state.ar.us/hazwaste/Mike BatesHazardous Waste DivisionAR Department of Environmental

Quality8001 National DriveP.O. Box 8913Little Rock, AR 72219-8913Phone: (501) 682-0831Fax: (501) 682-0565E-mail: [email protected]

Daniel ClantonHazardous Waste Division, Active Sites

BranchDepartment of Environmental Quality8001 National DriveP.O. Box 8913Little Rock, AR 72219-8913Phone: (501) 682-0834Fax: (501) 682-0565E-mail: [email protected]

CALIFORNIAwww.calepa.ca.gov/Steven BeckerSacramento Regional OfficeDepartment of Toxic Substances Control8800 Cal Center DriveSacramento, CA 95826Phone: (916) 255-3845Email: [email protected]

Megan CambridgeStatewide Brownfields CoordinatorDepartment of Toxic Substances Control8800 Cal Center DriveSacramento, CA 95826Phone: (916) 255-3727Email: [email protected]

Tina DiazGlendale Regional OfficeDepartment of Toxic Substances Control1011 North Grandview AvenueGlendale, CA 91201Phone: (818) 551-2862Fax: (818) 551-2832Email: [email protected]

Janet NaitoBerkeley Regional OfficeDepartment of Toxic Substances Control700 Heinz AvenueSuite 200CBerkeley, CA 94710Phone: (510) 540-3833Fax: (510) 540-3819Email: [email protected]

Lynn NakashimaBerkeley Regional OfficeDepartment of Toxic Substances Control700 Heinz AvenueSuite 200CBerkeley, CA 94710Phone: (510) 540-3839Fax: (510) 540-3819Email: [email protected]

Kevin ShaddyClovis Field OfficeDepartment of Toxic Substances Control1515 Tollhouse RoadClovis, CA 93611Phone: (559) 297-3929Email: [email protected]

Rania ZabanehCypress Regional OfficeDepartment of Toxic Substances Control5796 Corporate AvenueCypress, CA 90630Phone: (714) 484-5479Email: [email protected]

C-2

COLORADOwww.state.co.us/gov_dir/cdphe_dir/hmDaniel ScheppersHazardous Waste Materials and Waste

Management DivisionCO Department of Public Health and

Environment4300 Cherry Creek Drive SouthDenver, CO 80246-1530Phone: (303) 692-3398Fax: (303) 759-5355E-mail: [email protected]

CONNECTICUThttp://dep.state.ct.us/Doug ZimmermanCT Department of Environmental

Protection79 Elm StreetHartford, CT 06106-5127Phone: (860) 424-3800Fax: (860) 424-4057E-mail:[email protected]

DELAWAREhttp://sirb.awm.dnrec.state.de.us/Steve SeidelDepartment of Revenue820 North French StreetWilmington, DE 19801Phone: (302) 577-8455Fax: (302) 577-8656E-mail: [email protected]

FLORIDAwww.dep.state.fl.us/Joe McGarrityBureau of Waste CleanupFL Department of Environmental

ProtectionTallahassee, FLPhone: (904) 488-3935E-mail: [email protected]

Roger RegisterBrownfields LiaisonFL Department of Environmental

ProtectionMS 45052600 Blair Stone RoadTallahassee, FL 32399-2400Phone: (850) 488-0190Fax: (850) 922-4368E-mail: [email protected]

http://dep.state.ct.us/

http://sirb.awm.dnrec.state.de.us/



GEORGIAwww.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/environDarren MeadowsEnvironmental Protection DivisionGA Department of Natural ResourcesSuite 1462205 Butler Street, SEAtlanta, GA 30334Phone: (404) 657-8600Fax: (404) 657-0307E-mail:[email protected]

HAWAIIwww.hawaii.gov/healthBryce HatoakaEnvironmental Management DivisionHI Department of Health, HazardEvaluation and Emergency Response919 Ala Moana Boulevard, Suite 206Honolulu, HI 96814Phone: (808) 586-4248Fax: (808) 586-7537E-mail: [email protected]

IDAHOwww2.state.id.us/deqDean NygardDivision of Environmental QualityID Department of Health and Welfare1410 North Hilton StreetBoise, ID 83706Phone: (208) 373-0276Fax: (208) 373-0576

ILLINOISwww.epa.state.il.us/Rick LucasDivision of Land Pollution ControlIL Environmental Protection Agency1021 North Grand Avenue EastP.O. Box 19276Springfield, IL 62794-9276Phone: (217) 782-6761Fax: (217) 782-3258E-mail: [email protected]

INDIANAwww.ai.org/idem/oer/index.htmlPeggy DorseyVoluntary Remediation ProgramIN Department of EnvironmentalManagementP.O. Box 6015100 North Senate AvenueIndianapolis, IN 46206-6015Phone: (317) 234-0428E-mail: [email protected]

IOWAwww.state.ia.us/epdStuart C. SchmitzContaminated Sites SectionIA Department of Natural ResourcesWallace State Office BuildingDes Moines, IA 50319Phone: (515) 242-5241Fax: (515) 281-8895E-mail: [email protected]

KANSASwww.kdhe.state.ks.us/ber/Frank Arnwine1000 SW Jackson, Suite 410Topeka, Kansas 66612-1367Phone: (785) 296-1665Fax (785) 296-7030E-mail [email protected]

KENTUCKYwww.kyeqc.net/Jeffrey PrattDivision of Waste ManagementKY Department of Environmental

Protection14 Reilly RoadFrankfurt, KY 40601Phone: (502) 564-6716Fax: (502) 564-4049E-mail: [email protected]

LOUISIANAwww.deq.state.la.us/John HalkDepartment of Environmental QualityInactive & Abandoned Sites DivisionP.O. Box 82178Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2178Phone: (504) 765-0487Fax: (504) 765-0484

MAINEwww.state.me.us/dep/rwm/home.htmNicholas HodgkinsBureau of Hazardous Materials & Solid

Waste ControlME Department of Environmental

ProtectionState House Station 17Augusta , ME 04333-0017Phone: (207) 287-2651Fax: (207) 287-7826E-mail: [email protected]

STATE BROWNFIELDS CONTACTS (continued)

C-3

MARYLANDwww.mde.state.md.us/Karl KalbacherMD Department of the Environment2500 Broening HighwayBaltimore, MD 21224Phone: (410) 631-3437Fax: (410) 631-3472E-mail: [email protected]

Jim MetzMD Department of the Environment2500 Broening HighwayBaltimore, MD 21224Phone: (410) 631-3437Fax: (410) 631-3472E-mail: [email protected]

MASSACHUSETTSwww.state.ma.us/dep/bwsc/bwschome.htmBetsy HarperOffice of the Attorney GeneralMA Environmental Protection Division200 Portland StreetBoston, MA 02114Phone: (617) 727-2200Fax: (617) 727-9665

Catherine FinneranBrownfields CoordinatorWaste Site CleanupMA Department of Environmental

ProtectionOne Winter Street Floor # 7Boston, MA 02108Phone: (617) 556-1138Fax: (617) 556-1049

MICHIGANwww.deq.state.mi.us/James LintonSite Reclamation UnitMI Department of Environmental

QualityP.O. Box 30426Lansing, MI 48909Phone: (517) 373-8450Fax: (517) 373-9657E-mail: [email protected]


MINNESOTAwww.pca.state.mn.us/cleanup/index.htmlGreg RuffGroundwater & Solid Waste UnitMN Pollution Control Agency520 Lafayette RoadSt. Paul, MN 55155-4194Phone: (651) 296-0892Fax: (651) 296-9707E-mail: [email protected]

Meredith UdoibokDepartment of Trade and Economic

DevelopmentSt. Paul, MNPhone: (651) 297-4132

MISSISSIPPIwww.deq.state.ms.us/Tony RussellMS Department of Environmental

QualityHazardous Waste DivisionP.O. Box 10385Jackson, MS 39289-0385Phone: (601) 961-5171Fax: (601) 961-5300E-mail: [email protected]

MISSOURIwww.dnr.state.mo.us/deq/homedeq.htmJim BelcherVoluntary Cleanup SectionMO Department of Natural ResourcesP.O. Box 176Jefferson City, MO 65102Phone: (573) 526-8913Fax: (573) 526-8922

MONTANAwww.deq.state.mt.us/index.aspCarol FoxSite Remediation DivisionMT Department of Environmental

QualityP.O. Box 200901Helena, MT 59620-0901Phone: (406) 444-0478Fax: (406) 444-1901E-mail: [email protected]

NEBRASKAwww.deq.state.ne.us/Ted HuscherNE Department of Environmental

Quality1200 N StreetThe Atrium Building, Suite 400Lincoln, NE 68509-8922Phone: (402) 471-2214Fax: (402) 471-2909E-mail: [email protected]

NEVADAwww.state.nv.us/Robert KelsoBureau of Corrective ActionsNV Division of Environmental

Protection333 West Nye LaneCarson City, NV 89706Phone: (702) 687-5872Fax: (702) 687-6396E-mail: [email protected]

NEW HAMPSHIREwww.state.nh.us/des/hwrb/Gary LynnWaste Management DivisionNH Department of Environmental

Services6 Hazen DriveConcord, NH 03304Phone: (603) 271-6778Fax: (603) 271-2456

NEW JERSEYwww.state.nj.us/dep/srp/index.htmGary GreulichBureau of Field OperationsNJ Department of Environmental

Protection2 Babcock PlaceWest Orange, NJ 07052Phone: (973) 669-3960

George NicholasBureau of Ground Water Pollution

AbatementNJ Department of Environmental

ProtectionP.O. Box 413Trenton, NJ 08625-0413Phone: (609) 984-6565

Mark PedersonCase Assignment SectionNew Jersey Department of

Environmental ProtectionP.O. Box 028Trenton, NJ 08625-0434Phone: (609) 292-1928Fax: (609) 292-2117

NEW MEXICOwww.nmenv.state.nm.us/Christine BynumVoluntary Remediation Program,Ground Water Quality BureauNM Environmental DepartmentP.O. Box 26110Santa Fe, NM 87502Phone: (505) 827-2754Fax: (505) 827-2965E-mail:[email protected]


C-4

NEW YORKwww.dec.state.ny.us/Christine CostopoulosDivision of Remedial ResponseNY Department of Environmental

Conservation50 Wolf RoadAlbany, NY 12233-7010Phone: (518) 457-5861Fax: (518) 457-9639E-mail: [email protected]

NORTH CAROLINAhttp://wastenot.ehnr.state.nc.us/Charlotte JesneckDivision of Waste Management, Site

Cleanup BureauNC Department of Environment,

Health, and Natural Resources401 Oberlin RoadP.O. Box 29603Raleigh, NC 27611-7687Phone: (919) 733-2801Fax: (919) 733-4811E-mail:[email protected]

NORTH DAKOTAwww.ehs.health.state.nd.us/ndhd/environ/wm/index.htmKurt EricksonDivision of Waste ManagementND Department of Health and

Consolidated LabsP.O. Box 5520Bismark, ND 58506-5520Phone: (701) 328-5166Fax: (701) 328-5200E-mail:ccmail.cerickso@ranch. state.nd.us

OHIOwww.epa.state.oh.us/derr/Jennifer KwasniewskiOhio Environmental Protection

Agency1800 Watermark DriveP.O. Box 1049Columbus, OH 43266-0419Phone: (614) 644-2279Fax: (614) 644-3146

http://wastenot.ehnr.state.nc.us/



OKLAHOMAwww.deq.state.ok.us/waste.htmlRita KottkeWaste Management DivisionOK Department of Environmental

QualityP.O. Box 1677707 N. RobinsonOklahoma City, OK 73101-1677Phone: (405) 702-5127Fax: (405) 702-5101E-mail: [email protected]. ok.us

Amil LyonDepartment of Environmental QualityWaste Management Division707 North RobinsonOklahoma City, OK 73102Phone: (405) 702-5140Fax: (405) 70205101E-mail: [email protected]

OREGONwww.deq.state.or.us/wmc/cleanup/clean.htmAlan KiphutWaste Management and Cleanup

DivisionOR Department of Environmental

Quality811 S.W. Sixth AvenuePortland, OR 97204Phone: (503) 229-6834Fax: (503) 229-6977E-mail: [email protected]

PENNSYLVANIAwww.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/wm/default.htmScott DunkelbergerGrants OfficeDepartment of Community and

Economic Development494 Forum BuildingHarrisburg, PA 17120Phone: (717) 787-7120Fax: (717) 772-2890E-mail: [email protected]

David HessDepartment of Environmental

ProtectionPhiladelphia, PAPhone: (717) 783-7509E-mail: [email protected]

James ShawBureau of Land Recycling & Waste

ManagementDepartment of Environmental

Protection400 Market StreetP.O. Box 8471Harrisburg, PA 17105Phone: (717) 787-7120Fax: (717) 787-1904E-mail: [email protected]

PUERTO RICOEnid VillegasChief Superfund CorePuerto Rico Environmental Quality

BoardP.O. Box 11488Santure, PR 00910(787) 767-8181Fax: (787) 766-0150

RHODE ISLANDwww.state.ri.us/demGreg FineOffice of Waste ManagementRI Department of Environmental

Management235 Promenade StreetProvidence, RI 02908Phone: (401) 222-2797Fax: (401) 222-3812

SOUTH CAROLINAwww.state.sc.us/dhecGail JeterBureau of Land and Waste

ManagementSC Department of Health and

Environmental Control2600 Bull StreetColumbia, SC 29201Phone: (803) 896-4069Fax: (803) 896-4001E-mail:[email protected]

SOUTH DAKOTAwww.state.sd.us/state/executive/denr/denr.htmlMark LawrensonDivision of Environmental RegulationSD Department of Water and Natural

Resources523 East Capitol, Foss BuildingPierre, SD 57501Phone: (605) 773-5868Fax: (605) 773-6035

TENNESSEEwww.state.tn.us/environment/dsf/home.htmAndrew ShivasDivision of SuperfundTN Department of Environment and

Conservation401 Church Street14th Floor, L&C AnnexNashville, TN 37214Phone: (615) 532-0912Fax: (615) 532-0938E-mail: [email protected]

C-5


TEXASwww.tnrcc.state.tx.us/homepgs/oprr.htmlChuck EppersonVoluntary Cleanup SectionTX Natural Resource Conservation

CommissionP.O. Box 13087 - MC221Austin, TX 78711-3087Phone: (512) 239-2498Fax: (512) 239-1212E-mail: [email protected]

UTAHwww.eq.state.ut.us/EQERR/errhmpg.htmBrent EverettDivision of Environmental Response

and Remediation168 North 1950 West1st FloorSalt Lake City, UT 84116Phone: (801) 536-4100Fax: (801) 536-4242E-mail: [email protected]

VERMONTwww.anr.state.vt.us/George DeschDepartment of Environmental

ConservationVT Agency of Natural Resources103 South Main StreetWaterbury, VT 05671-0404Phone: (802) 241-3491Fax: (802) 244-3296E-mail: [email protected]

VIRGINIAwww.deq.state.va.us/Erica DameronVA Department of Environmental

Quality629 E. Main StreetRichmond, VA 23219Phone: (804) 698-4201Fax: 804 698-4234E-mail: [email protected]

WASHINGTONwww.ecy.wa.gov/Curtis DahlgrenWA Department of EcologyP.O. Box 47600Olympia, WA 98504-7600Phone: (360) 407-7187Fax: (360) 407-7154E-mail: [email protected]


WASHINGTON, D.C.Angelo TomprosDepartment of Consumer and

Regulatory AffairsEnvironmental Regulation

Administration2100 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, SERoom 203Washington, DC 20020Phone: (202) 645-6080Fax: (202) 645-6622

WEST VIRGINIAwww.dep.state.wv.us/Ken EllisonOffice of Waste ManagementWV Division of Environmental

Protection1356 Hansford StreetCharleston, WV 25301Phone: (304) 558-5929Fax: (304) 558-0256E-mail: [email protected]

WISCONSINwww.dnr.state.wi.us/org/aw/rrDarsi FossDivision of Environmental QualityWI Department of Natural Resources101 South Webster StreetP.O. Box 7921Madison, WI 53707-7921Phone: (608) 267-6713Fax: (608) 267-2768E-mail: [email protected]

WYOMINGhttp://deq.state.wy.us/Carl AndersonSolid and Hazardous Waste DivisionWY Department of Environmental

Quality122 West, 25th StreetCheyenne, WY 82002Phone: (307) 777-7752Fax: (307) 777-5973E-mail: [email protected]

C-6

http://deq.state.wy.us/



An online list of regional contacts isavailable at www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/regcntct.htm.

REGION 1

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,New Hampshire, Rhode Island,Vermontwww.epa.gov/region01/Brownfields/U.S. EPA Region 1 Brownfields OfficeOne Congress Street (HBT)Boston, MA 02114-2023Phone: (617) 918-1221Fax: (617) 918-1291

REGION 2

New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico,Virgin Islandswww.epa.gov/r02earth/superfnd/brownfld/bfmainpg.htmU.S. EPA Region 2 Brownfields Office290 Broadway18th FloorNew York, NY 10007-1866Phone: (212) 637-3000Fax: (212) 637-4360

REGION 3

Delaware, Washington, D.C.,Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia,West Virginiawww.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/brownfld/hmpage1.htmU.S. EPA Region 3 Brownfields Office1650 Arch StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19103Phone: (215) 814-3129 or (800) 814-5000Fax: (215) 814-3254

REGION 4

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,Mississippi, North Carolina, SouthCarolina, Tennesseewww.epa.gov/region4/index.htmlU.S. EPA Region 4 Brownfields OfficeAtlanta Federal Center61 Forsyth StreetAtlanta, GA 30303(404) 562-8684Fax: (404) 562-8566

REGION 5

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota,Ohio, Wisconsinwww.epa.gov/R5Brownfields/U.S. EPA Region 5 Brownfields Office77 West Jackson Boulevard (SE-4J)Chicago, IL 60604-3507Phone: (312) 886-7576 or (800) 621-8431Fax: (312) 886-7190

REGION 6

Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico,Oklahoma, Texaswww.epa.gov/earth1r6/6sf/bfpages/sfbfhome.htmU.S. EPA Region 6 Brownfields Office1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200Dallas, TX 75202-2733Phone: (214) 665-6736Fax: (214) 665-6660

REGION 7

Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraskahttp://www.epa.gov/region07/Brownfields/index.htmlU.S. EPA Region 7 Brownfields Office901 North 5th StreetKansas City, KS 66101Phone: (913) 551-7066 or (800) 223-0425Fax: (913) 9646

REGION 8

Colorado, Montana, North Dakota,South Dakota, Utah, Wyomingwww.epa.gov/region08/land_waste/bfhome/bfhome.htmlU.S. EPA Region 8 Brownfields Office999 18th Street, Suite 300Denver, CO 80202-2406Phone: (800)-227-8917Fax: (303) 312-6067

REGION 9

Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada,American Samoa, Guamwww.epa.gov/region09/waste/brown/index.htmlU.S. EPA Region 9 Brownfields Office75 Hawthorne StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105Phone: (415) 972-3188Fax: (415) 947-3528

REGION 10

Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washingtonwww.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/index.html#otherU.S. EPA Region 10 Brownfields Office1200 Sixth AvenueSeattle, WA 98011Phone: (800)424-4372Fax: (206) 553-0124

EPA - HEADQUARTERS

www.epa.gov/brownfieldsOffice of Solid Waste and Emergency

Response1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20460Phone: (202) 260-6837Fax: (202) 260-6066

C-7

http://www.epa.gov/region07/


CLEANUP TECHNOLOGIES

John KingscottU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyOffice of Superfund Remediation and Technology

InnovationAriel Rios Building1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. (5102G)Washington, DC 20460Phone: (703) 603-7189E-mail: [email protected]

GROUNDWATER INFORMATION

Richard SteimleU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyOffice of Superfund Remediation and Technology


REGULATORY INFORMATION

See page C-6 for information about EPA regionalpoints of contact.

SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND MONITORING

Deana CrumblingU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyOffice of Superfund Remediation and Technology


CLEANUP TECHNOLOGIES

Ed BarthNational Risk Management Research LaboratoryOffice of Research and DevelopmentU.S. EPA26 Martin Luther King DriveCincinnati, OH 45268Phone: (513) 569-7669Fax: (513) 569-7676E-mail: [email protected]

Joan ColsonNational Risk Management Research LaboratoryOffice of Research and DevelopmentU.S. EPA26 Martin Luther King DriveCincinnati, OH 45268Phone: (513) 569-7501Fax: (513) 569-7676

GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES

David BurdenRobert S. Kerr Environmental Research CenterOffice of Research and DevelopmentU.S. EPAP.O. Box 1198Ada, OK 74821-1198Phone: (580) 436-8606E-mail: [email protected]

GENERAL INFORMATION:OFFICE OF SUPERFUND REMEDIATION ANDTECHNOLOGY INNOVATION

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL SUPPORT:OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Online: www.brownfieldstsc.orgPhone: (877) 838-7220 (Toll Free)

EPA Contact: Dan PowellU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyOffice of Superfund Remediation and

Technology InnovationPhone: (703) 603-7196E-mail: [email protected]

BROWNFIELDS AND LAND REVITALIZATIONTECHNOLOGY SUPPORT CENTER

C-8

APPENDIX D

• APPENDIX D: HOW TO ORDER DOCUMENTS


Each resource described in this document can either be viewed or downloaded online atwww.brownfieldstsc.org. Many of the documents are provided in portable document format (pdf). Printed orhard copy versions of the publications are available from a variety of EPA sources. Visit the EPAInformation Sources Web site for publications at www.epa.gov/epahome/publications.htm to obtain additionalinformation on sources of publications. Some of the information contained on the Web site is includedbelow.

EPA’s National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) is a central repository for all EPAdocuments, with more than 7,000 titles in paper and electronic format. The documents are available free ofcharge, but supplies may be limited. You may order one copy each of as many as five documents within anytwo-week period. Documents may be ordered on line, by telephone, by facsimile, or by using the order formon the following page. Please include the EPA document numbers of all publications ordered.

NSCEP publications may be ordered:

Online: www.epa.gov/ncepihom/index.htm

By mail: U.S. EPA/NSCEPP.O. Box 42419Cincinnati, Ohio 45242-0419

By fax: Send your order via FAX, 24-hours a day, 7-days a week.(513) 489-8695

By e-mail: [email protected]

By phone: Call 1-800-490-9198 or (513) 489-8190 (Speak to an operator Monday through Friday,7:30 AM - 5:30 PM, E.S.T.). Leave an order 24-hours a day.

Some EPA publications also may be available on EPA’s National Environmental Publications Internet Site(NEPIS), EPA’s online repository of more than 10,000 documents. Visit the NEPIS Web site at www.epa.gov/nepis/ to search for, view, and print documents. The collection may include documents that no longer areavailable in print.

Since some EPA offices make selected documents available through their own Web sites, you may wish tovisit the EPA Web site at www.epa.gov/epahome/publications2.htm for more information about obtainingdocuments from specific EPA offices.

Publications that have numbers beginning with PB, or publications that are out of stock at NSCEP, may bepurchased from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). NTIS publications may be orderedonline at www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.asp. NTIS also provides ordering by mail, fax, and e-mail. Visit theWeb site to obtain additional information regarding document availability and cost before ordering by thosemethods. For additional information or telephone orders call the Sales Desk at 1-800-553-6847 or (703) 605-6000 8 a.m. - 6 p.m.; EST, Mon-Fri.

Appendix D

HOW TO ORDER DOCUMENTS

D-1


This page intentionally left blank.

D-2

NATIONAL SERVICE CENTERFOR ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLICATIONS

ORDER FORM

EPA publications may be available through the National Service Center for EnvironmentalPublications (NSCEP). Single copies are available free of charge while supplies last.

Mail to: U.S. EPA/NSCEPP.O. Box 42419Cincinnati, OH 45242-0419

Fax to: (513) 489-8695

Document No. Document Title

Customer Information

Name

Company

Street Address

City State Zip Code

Daytime Telephone Number

FOLD HERE

Return Address:

U.S. EPA/NSCEPP.O. Box 42419Cincinnati, OH 45242-0419

FOLD HERE

PlaceStampHere

INDEX OF RESOURCES

• INDEX OF RESOURCES


NEW 1 A Systematic Approach to In Situ Bioremediation in Groundwater, IncludingDecision Trees for In Situ Bioremediation of Nitrates, Carbon Tetrachloride, andPerchlorate .............................................................................................................................. 75

2 A User’s Guide to Environmental Immunochemical Analysis ........................................ 47

NEW 3 Adaptive Sampling and Analysis Program (ASAP), ANL ............................................... 47

NEW 4 Air Sparging Design Paradigm ............................................................................................ 67

NEW 5 Air Sparging: Technology Transfer and Multi-Site Evaluation (CU-9808) .................... 64

6 Analysis of Selected Enhancements for Soil Vapor Extraction (EPA 542-R-97-007) ..... 68

NEW 7 Application Guide for Bioslurping - Volume 2 .................................................................. 68

NEW 8 Application Guide for Bioslurping - Volume I ................................................................... 68

9 Application of Field-Based Characterization Tools in the Waterfront VoluntarySetting ...................................................................................................................................... 46

NEW 10 Archived Internet Seminars .................................................................................................. 24

NEW 11 Arsenic Treatment Technologies for Soil, Waste, and Water (EPA 542-R-02-042) ......... 64

12 Assessing Contractor Capabilities for Streamlined Site Investigations(EPA 542-R-00-001) ................................................................................................................ 24

13 Assessment of Phytoremediation as an In-Situ Technique for CleaningOil-Contaminated Sites ......................................................................................................... 64

14 ASTM Standard Guide for Accelerated Site Characterization for Confirmed orSuspected Petroleum Releases (E1912-98(2004)) ............................................................... 41

UPDATED 15 ASTM Standard Guide for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase IIEnvironmental Site Assessment Process (E1903-97(2002)) .............................................. 41

UPDATED 16 ASTM Standard Guide for Process of Sustainable Brownfields Development(E1984-03(2003)) .................................................................................................................... 24

17 ASTM Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action Applied at PetroleumRelease Sites (E1739-95e1(2003)) ......................................................................................... 60

NEW 18 ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase IEnvironmental Site Assessment Process (E1527-00(2003)) .............................................. 24

19 Bioremediation of Chlorinated Solvent Contaminated Groundwater ............................. 68

20 Breaking Barriers to the Use of Innovative Technologies: State Regulatory Role inUnexploded Ordnance Detection and Characterization Technology Selection ............. 60

UPDATED 21 Brownfields and Land Revitalization Technology Support Center ................................ 42

22 Brownfields Technology Primer: Requesting and Evaluating Proposals thatEncourage Innovative Technologies for Investigation and Cleanup(EPA 542-R-01-005) .................................................................................................... 42, 60, 68

23 Brownfields Technology Primer: Selecting and Using Phytoremediation for SiteCleanup (EPA 542-R-01-006) ................................................................................................ 68

24 Brownfields Technology Primer: Using the Triad Approach to StreamlineBrownfields Site Assessment and Cleanup (EPA 542-B-03-002) ............................... 24, 42

NEW 25 Capstone Report on the Application, Monitoring, and Performance of PermeableReactive Barriers for Ground-Water Remediation: Volume 1 (EPA 600-R-03-045a) ..... 69

I-1

Index No. Title of Resource Page


NEW 26 Capstone Report on the Application, Monitoring, and Performance of PermeableReactive Barriers for Ground-Water Remediation: Volume 2 (EPA 600-R-03-045b) ..... 69

27 Catalog of EPA Materials on USTs (EPA 510-B-00-001) .................................................... 64

28 Characterization of Mine Leachates and the Development of a Ground-WaterMonitoring Strategy for Mine Sites (EPA 600-R-99-007) ............................................. 47, 83

UPDATED 29 Citizen’s Guides to Understanding Innovative Treatment Technologies ................. 60, 83

NEW 30 Clarifying DQO Terminology Usage to Support Modernization of Site CleanupPractices (EPA 542-R-01-014) ............................................................................................... 24

31 Clean-Up Information Home Page on the World Wide Web ...................................... 25, 61

UPDATED 32 CLU-IN Technology Focus .................................................................................................... 69

33 Cost Analyses for Selected Groundwater Cleanup Projects: Pump-and-TreatSystems and Permeable Reactive Barriers (EPA 542-R-00-013) ........................................ 69

34 Cost Estimating Tools and Resources for Addressing the Brownfields Initiatives(EPA 625-R-99-001) .......................................................................................................... 42, 61

35 Data Quality Objective Process for Hazardous Waste Site Investigations(EPA 600-R-00-007) .......................................................................................................... 25, 42

36 Data Quality Objectives Web Site ......................................................................................... 25

NEW 37 Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLs): Review of EmergingCharacterization and Remediation Technologies ............................................................. 47

NEW 38 Design Solutions for Vapor Intrusion and Indoor Air Quality (EPA 500-F-04-004) ...... 84

NEW 39 Directory of Technical Assistance for Land Revitalization (BTSC)(EPA 542-B-03-001) .............................................................................................. 25, 43, 61, 84

NEW 40 DNAPL Remediation: Selected Projects Approaching Regulatory Closure -Status Update (EPA 542-R-04-016) ...................................................................................... 64

NEW 41 Dry Cleaner Site Assessment & Remediation - A Technology Snapshot ........................ 29

42 Engineered Approaches to In Situ Bioremediation of Chlorinated Solvents:Fundamentals and Field Applications (EPA 542-R-00-008) ............................................ 69

43 Engineering and Design: Adsorption Design Guide (DG 1110-1-2) ............................... 69

44 Engineering and Design: Requirements for the Preparation of Sampling andAnalysis Plans (EM 200-1-3) .......................................................................................... 25, 43

NEW 45 Engineering and Design: Soil Vapor Extraction and Bioventing (EM 1110-1-4001) .... 70

NEW 46 Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) .............................. 48

UPDATED 47 Environmental Technology Verification Reports ............................................................... 48

48 EPA Dynamic Field Activities Internet Site ......................................................................... 48

UPDATED 49 EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Industry Sector Notebooks .... 27

UPDATED 50 EPA Office of Solid Waste SW-846 Online: Test Methods for Evaluating SolidWastes, Physical/Chemical Methods ................................................................................. 43

NEW 51 EPA ORD Brownfields Guides - Technical Approaches to Characterizing andCleaning Up Iron and Steel Mill Sites Under the Brownfields Initiative(EPA 625-R-98-007) ................................................................................................................ 65

I-2




NEW 52 EPA ORD Brownfields Guides - Technical Approaches to Characterizing andCleaning Up Metal Finishing Sites Under the Brownfields Initiative(EPA 625-R-98-006) ................................................................................................................ 65

53 EPA Region 3 Industry Profile Fact Sheets ......................................................................... 28

54 EPA REmediation And CHaracterization Innovative Technologies(REACH IT) Online Searchable Database ......................................................... 25, 43, 62, 84

NEW 55 EPA Technical Support Project ............................................................................................ 48

56 EPA’s Office of Underground Storage Tanks Internet Site ................................................ 70

NEW 57 Evaluation of Performance and Longevity at Permeable Reactive Barrier Sites(CU-9907) ................................................................................................................................ 70

NEW 58 Evaluation of Permeable Reactive Barrier Performance - Revised Report ....................... 70

NEW 59 Evaluation of Phytoremediation for Management of Chlorinated Solvents inSoil and Groundwater (EPA 542-R-05-001) ........................................................................ 70

60 Evaluation of Selected Environmental Decision Support Software (DSS) ................ 43, 62

61 Evaluation of Subsurface Engineered Barriers at Waste Sites (EPA 542-R-98-005) ....... 62

NEW 62 Evapotranspiration Landfill Cover Systems Fact Sheet (EPA 542-F-03-015) .................. 70

63 Expedited Site Characterization (ESC) Method (Ames Laboratory EnvironmentalTechnologies Development Program) .................................................................................. 26

NEW 64 Federal Facilities Forum Issue: Field Sampling and Selecting On-Site AnalyticalMethods for Explosives in Water (EPA 600-S-99-002) ....................................................... 48

UPDATED 65 Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable Case Studies ................................... 62, 85

NEW 66 Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable Remediation OptimizationWeb Site ................................................................................................................................... 85

67 Field Analytic Technologies Encyclopedia (FATE) ........................................................... 44

68 Field Applications of In Situ Remediation Technologies: Chemical Oxidation(EPA 542-R-98-008) ................................................................................................................ 71

69 Field Applications of In Situ Remediation Technologies: Ground-WaterCirculation Wells (EPA 542-R-98-009) ................................................................................ 71

70 Field Applications of In Situ Remediation Technologies: Permeable ReactiveBarriers (EPA 542-R-99-002) ................................................................................................. 71

71 Field Sampling and Analysis Technologies Matrix, Version 1.0 ..................................... 44

72 Frequently Asked Questions about Dry Cleaning (EPA 744-K-98-002) .......................... 28

73 Geophysical Techniques to Locate DNAPLs: Profiles of Federally Funded Projects(EPA 542-R-98-020) ................................................................................................................ 71

74 Groundwater Cleanup: Overview of Operating Experience at 28 Sites(EPA 542-R-99-006) ................................................................................................................ 65

NEW 75 Groundwater Pump and Treat Systems: Summary of Selected Cost andPerformance Information at Superfund-Financed Sites (EPA 542-R-01-021a andEPA 542-R-01-021b) ............................................................................................................... 71

UPDATED 76 Ground-Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center Technology Reports ......... 71

NEW 77 Groundwater Remedies Selected at Superfund Sites (EPA 542-R-01-022) ...................... 72

I-3



78 Guide to Documenting and Managing Cost and Performance Information forRemediation Projects (EPA 542-B-98-007) .......................................................................... 62

79 Guideline for Dynamic Workplans and Field Analytics: The Keys to Cost-EffectiveSite Characterization and Cleanup ..................................................................................... 44

UPDATED 80 How to Evaluate Alternative Cleanup Technologies for Underground StorageTank Sites: A Guide for Corrective Action Plan Reviewers (EPA 510-R-04-002) .......... 65

81 Hydraulic Optimization Demonstration for Groundwater Pump-and-Treat Systems .... 72

NEW 82 Impact of Landfill Closure Designs on Long-Term Natural Attenuation ofChlorinated Hydrocarbons ................................................................................................... 66

NEW 83 Improving Decision Quality: Making the Case for Adopting Next-Generation SiteCharacterization Practices .................................................................................................... 26

UPDATED 84 Improving Sampling, Analysis, and Data Management for Site Investigation andCleanup (EPA 542-F-04-001a) .............................................................................................. 26

85 Improving the Cost-Effectiveness of Hazardous Waste Site Characterization andMonitoring ........................................................................................................................ 44, 85

NEW 86 In Search of Representativeness: Evolving the Environmental Data Quality Model .... 26

87 In Situ Electrokinetic Remediation of Metal Contaminated Soils Technology StatusReport (SFIM-AEC-ET-CR-99022) ........................................................................................ 72

NEW 88 In Situ Treatment of Chlorinated Solvents: Fundamentals and Field Applications(EPA 542-R-04-010) ................................................................................................................ 72

89 In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments ................................................................... 72

90 Innovations in Site Characterization Case Study Series ............................................. 44, 66

UPDATED 91 Innovative Remediation and Site Characterization Technologies Resources(EPA 542-C-04-002) .......................................................................................................... 44, 62

92 Innovative Remediation Technologies: Field-Scale Demonstration Projects inNorth America, 2nd Edition (EPA 542-B-00-004) .............................................................. 63

93 Institutional Controls: A Site Manager’s Guide to Identifying, Evaluating, andSelecting Institutional Controls at Superfund and RCRA Corrective ActionCleanups (EPA 540-F-00-005) .............................................................................................. 85

94 InterAgency DNAPL Consortium Home Page ................................................................... 66

95 Introduction to Phytoremediation (EPA 600-R-99-107) .................................................... 72

96 ITRC Phytoremediation Decision Tree ................................................................................ 72

97 Leak Detection for Landfill Liners: Overview of Tools for Vadose Zone Monitoring(EPA 542-R-98-019) ................................................................................................................ 73

NEW 98 Long-Term Performance of Permeable Reactive Barriers Using Zero-Valent Iron:An Evaluation at Two Sites (Environmental Research Brief) (EPA 600-S-02-001) ......... 73

NEW 99 Managing Uncertainty in Environmental Decisions ......................................................... 45

100 Monitored Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents (EPA 600-F-98-022) ............... 73

101 Monitored Natural Attenuation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPA 600-F-98-021) ....... 73

102 MtBE Fact Sheet #2: Remediation of MtBE-Contaminated Soil and Groundwater(EPA 510-F-98-002) ................................................................................................................ 66

I-4




I-5

NEW 103 MtBE Treatment Profiles ....................................................................................................... 73

104 Multi-Phase Extraction: State of the Practice (EPA 542-R-99-004) .................................. 73

NEW 105 National Environmental Technology Test Sites ................................................................. 49

106 Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater: Principles andPractices .................................................................................................................................. 73

107 Natural Attenuation of MtBE in the Subsurface under Methanogenic Conditions(EPA 600-R-00-006) ................................................................................................................ 74

NEW 108 Naval Air Station Pensacola, Optimization of RAO to Treat Chlorinated Hydrocarbonsin Groundwater ...................................................................................................................... 86

NEW 109 Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay (In Situ Chemical Oxidation) .................................... 86

NEW 110 New England Waste Management Officials (NEWMOA) ................................................ 49

UPDATED 111 North Atlantic Treaty Organization/Committee on the Challenges of ModernSociety (NATO/CCMS) Pilot Study Evaluation of Demonstrated and EmergingTechnologies for the Treatment of Contaminated Land and Groundwater(Phase III) 2002 Annual Report (EPA 542-R-02-010) ......................................................... 66

112 OnSite OnLine Tools for Site Assessment ........................................................................... 27

113 Ordnance and Explosives Mandatory Center of Expertise (MCX) and Design Center .... 29

NEW 114 OSWER Draft Guidance for Evaluating the Vapor Intrusion to Indoor Air Pathwayfrom Groundwater and Soils (Subsurface Vapor Intrusion Guidance) ........................... 86

115 Overview of the Phytoremediation of Lead and Mercury ................................................. 74

116 Permeable Reactive Barrier Technologies for Contaminant Remediation(EPA 600-R-98-125) ................................................................................................................ 74

117 Permeable Reactive Barriers for Inorganics ........................................................................ 74

118 Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soil and Ground Water at Hazardous WasteSites (EPA 540-S-01-005) ....................................................................................................... 74

119 Phytoremediation Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-99-003) ................................................... 74

120 Phytotechnology Technical and Regulatory Guidance (Phyto-2) .................................... 74

NEW 121 Pilot Project to Optimize Superfund-Financed Pump and Treat Systems: SummaryReport and Lessons Learned (EPA 542-R-02-008 a-u) ...................................................... 86

NEW 122 Proven Alternatives for Aboveground Treatment of Arsenic in Groundwater(EPA 542-S-02-002) ................................................................................................................ 74

NEW 123 Pump and Treat and Air Sparging of Contaminated Groundwater at the GoldCoast Superfund Site, Miami, Florida, September 1998 .................................................... 87

NEW 124 Pump and Treat and In Situ Bioremediation of Contaminated Groundwater atFrench Limited Superfund Site, Crosby, Texas, September 1998 ..................................... 87

NEW 125 Pump and Treat and In Situ Bioremediation of Contaminated Groundwater atthe Libby Groundwater Superfund Site, Libby, Montana, September 1998 .................... 87

NEW 126 Pump and Treat and Permeable Reactive Barrier to Treat ContaminatedGroundwater at the Former Intersil, Inc. Site, Sunnyvale, California, September 1998 .... 87

NEW 127 Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at the Mid-South Wood ProductsSuperfund Site, Mena, Arkansas, September 1998 ............................................................. 87



NEW 128 Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at the SCRDI DixianaSuperfund Site, Cayce, South Carolina, September 1998 .................................................. 88

NEW 129 Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at the Solid State CircuitsSuperfund Site, Republic, Missouri, September 1998 ........................................................ 88

NEW 130 Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at the United ChromeSuperfund Site, Corvallis, Oregon, September 1998 .......................................................... 88

NEW 131 Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at the Western ProcessingSuperfund Site, Kent, Washington, September 1998 .......................................................... 88

132 Quality Assurance Guidance for Conducting Brownfields Site Assessments(EPA 540-R-98-038) ................................................................................................................ 27

133 Rapid Commercialization Initiative Final Report for an Integrated In SituRemediation Technology (Lasagna™) (DOE/OR/22459-1) ............................................ 63

NEW 134 Relationship Between SW-846, PBMS, and Innovative Analytical Technologies(EPA 542-R-01-015) ................................................................................................................ 45

NEW 135 Remedial Action Operation Optimization Case Study: Eastern GroundwaterPlume, New Brunswick, Maine ............................................................................................ 88

NEW 136 Remedial Technology Development Forum (RTDF) .......................................................... 49

UPDATED 137 Remediation Technologies Screening Matrix and Reference Guide, Version 4.0 .......... 63

NEW 138 Remediation Technology Cost Compendium - Year 2000 (EPA 542-R-01-009) ............. 75

139 Resource for MGP Site Characterization and Remediation: Expedited SiteCharacterization and Source Remediation at Former Manufactured Gas PlantSites (EPA 542-R-00-005) ................................................................................................. 47, 67

140 Resources for Strategic Site Investigation and Monitoring (EPA 542-F-01-030B) .......... 45

141 Reuse Assessments: A Tool to Implement the Superfund Land Use Directive(OSWER Directive 9355.7-06P) ............................................................................................. 63

142 Risk-Management Strategy for PCB-Contaminated Sediments ........................................ 47

143 Sensor Technology Information Exchange (SenTIX) ................................................... 27, 45

UPDATED 144 Site Characterization Library, Version 3.0 (EPA 600/C/05/001) ................................... 45

NEW 145 Site Characterization Technologies for DNAPL Investigations (EPA 542-R-04-017) .... 49

146 Site Remediation Technology InfoBase: A Guide to Federal Programs, InformationResources, and Publications on Contaminated Site Cleanup Technologies, SecondEdition (EPA 542-B-00-005) .................................................................................................. 63

147 Solidification/Stabilization Use at Superfund Sites (EPA 542-R-00-010) ...................... 75

148 State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners (SCRD) Internet Site ........................ 67, 77

149 Study of Assessment and Remediation Technologies for Dry Cleaner Sites ............ 29, 75

150 Subsurface Containment and Monitoring Systems: Barriers and Beyond(Overview Report) .................................................................................................................. 75

151 Subsurface Remediation: Improving Long-Term Monitoring and RemedialSystems Performance Conference Proceedings, June 1999 (EPA 540-B-00-002) ............. 75

152 Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program DemonstrationReports .................................................................................................................................... 46

I-6




UPDATED 153 Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program: Technology Profiles,Eleventh Edition ..................................................................................................................... 63

NEW 154 Superfund Representative Sampling Guidance ................................................................. 27

NEW 155 Surfactant-Enhanced Aquifer Remediation (SEAR) Implementation Manual(TR-2219-ENV) ....................................................................................................................... 75

NEW 156 Sustainable Management Approaches and Revitalization Tools - electronic(SMARTe) .......................................................................................................................... 27, 46

157 TechKnow™ Database .......................................................................................................... 64

NEW 158 Technical and Regulatory Guidance for Surfactant/Cosolvent Flushing ofDNAPL Source Zones ........................................................................................................... 76

NEW 159 Technical and Regulatory Guidance for the Triad Approach: A New Paradigm forEnvironmental Project Management ................................................................................... 27

160 Technical and Regulatory Requirements for Enhanced In Situ Bioremediation ofChlorinated Solvents in Groundwater ................................................................................ 76

NEW 161 Technical Protocol for Evaluating Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents inGround Water (EPA 600-R-98-128) ..................................................................................... 88

NEW 162 Technologies for Treating MtBE and Other Fuel Oxygenates (EPA 542-R-04-009) ....... 76

NEW 163 Technology Status Review: In Situ Oxidation ................................................................... 76

164 The Bioremediation and Phytoremediation of Pesticide-Contaminated Sites ................ 67

165 Treatment Experiences at RCRA Corrective Actions (EPA 542-F-00-020) ...................... 67

UPDATED 166 Treatment Technologies for Site Cleanup: Annual Status Report (Eleventh Edition)(EPA 542-R-03-009) ................................................................................................................ 64

NEW 167 Triad Resource Center ........................................................................................................... 46

168 Tri-Service Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System-SCAPS:Innovative Environmental Technology from Concept to Commercialization ................ 50

NEW 169 U.S. Department of Defense: Strategic Environmental Research and DevelopmentProgram (SERDP) ................................................................................................................... 50

170 Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program .................................................................. 76

171 Underground Storage Tanks and Brownfields Sites (EPA 510-F-00-004) ....................... 29

NEW 172 Use of Field-Scale Phytotechnology for Chlorinated Solvents, Metals, Explosives/Propellants and Pesticides - Status Update (EPA 542-R-05- 002) .................................... 76

173 Use of Monitored Natural Attenuation at Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, andUnderground Storage Tank Sites ......................................................................................... 67

NEW 174 Using Dynamic Field Activities for On-Site Decision-Making: A Guide for ProjectManagers (EPA 540-R-03-002) ............................................................................................. 46

NEW 175 Vapor Intrusion Issues at Brownfields Sites ....................................................................... 86

I-7
