Index
A
Accessing Federal Data Bases for Contaminated Site Clean-Up Technologies , 85
Accounting profession. See also Environmental auditing
developing consistent standards for tabulating remediation liabilities , 67-68
training certified environmental accountants, 5
Acrimony, reducing, 9
Advanced Applied Technology Demonstration Facility (AATDF) project , 227, 234, 236
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), 184
Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE), 234
Air sparing, 37-38, 92, 96, 108, 117, 151, 213, 226
Alternatives for Ground Water Cleanup, 1
Alternative Treatment Technology Information Center (ATTIC) Network , 272
American Academy of Environmental Engineers, 16, 85, 258, 269
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, 68
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 19-20, 48
Aqueous-phase transport, 27
Aquifers
characterizing, 221
complexity of, 88
nonuniformity of, 24
Aroclors. See Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Arsenic, 51
Artificial wetlands. See Wetlands, constructed
Asphalt batching, 90
B
Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX), 21
Biodegradation, 102-103
Biological reaction processes, 89, 91-92, 98-99, 108-112, 125-128, 132-133
Biopiles, 91
Bioremediation, 36-38, 43, 60, 65-66, 81, 83-84, 149-150, 214-215.
See also Engineered in situ bioremediation
sulfate-reducing, 119
testing, 214-215
Bioremediation in the Field Search System (BFSS), 273
Bioventing, 81, 91, 109-111, 209
evolution of, 110-111
Brownfield sites, 30-31, 62-63, 196-197
C
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Technology Certification Program, 241, 243
Case Study Data System, 273
Center for Environmental Excellence, 209
Chemical reaction processes, 89, 92, 98-99, 132
testing, 210-212
Chlorinated solvents, 21, 65-66, 83, 92, 100-101, 113-120, 214
relative ease of cleanup, 87-88
relative solubilities of, 115
research needed, 120
Citizens Opposed to Polluting the Environment, 33
Clay, lenses of, 24
CleanUp Information Bulletin Board System (CLU-IN), 273
Clients. See Site owners
Coal tar. See Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
Complexation reaction, 27
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), 28, 42, 172.
See also Superfund program
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS), 273
Computer simulation models, 206
Congress, action needed by
authorizing long-term amortization of remediation liabilities, 5, 69, 76
evaluating issue of national cleanup standards, 6, 77
reviewing effectiveness of state cleanup standards, 71
Superfund reform, 47-48
Congressional Budget Office (CBO), 4, 18, 47, 49
Consensus building, 8
Consortia. See Partnerships in technology development
Consultants. See Remediation technology consultants
Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes (CROW™), 36
Containment processes, 89-91, 98-99, 130-131
research needed, 155-156
testing, 210-211
Contaminants.
See also Ground water contaminants;
Soil contaminants;
and specific contaminants
classes of compounds, 13-14
diffusion into micropores, 28, 32-33
entrapment into immobile zones, 28
exposure pathways, 22-24, 185-186
ion exchange bonding of, 28
measuring levels of exposure to, 9
mixtures of, 155-156
plume formations from, 7, 24-25, 90-91, 112, 116
relative treatability of, 13, 237-238
solvent- and surfactant-based, 156
sorption to subsurface materials, 28, 33, 123
sources of, 21-29, 97, 113, 120-121, 129-130, 134-136, 144-146, 219 -220
unreactive or immobile, 155
Contaminated sites. See Hazardous waste sites
Conventional remediation technologies.
See also specific technologies
Glossary of Remediation Technologies, 90-95
high costs of, 33-34
limitations of, 1-2, 7, 17-18, 30, 32-34
Cosolvent flushing, 86, 92-93, 218-220
Cost of Remedial Action Model (CORA), 274
Costs, comparing, 1, 8, 15-17, 252-270
cost effectiveness presently unrewarded, 4
estimates that include discount rates and tax benefits needed, 17, 262-267, 270
estimates that include one-time start-up costs needed, 17, 253, 268 -269
fixed-price remediation contracts needed, 5-6, 69, 76
pattern of stalling versus acting, 47
sharing of data on performance and costs needed, 8, 253, 265, 267-269
standardized estimating systems needed, 8, 192-193, 252-253, 259-265
standardized system of metrics needed, 253, 258-259, 268-269
"template sites" cost comparison system needed, 16, 254-258, 269
typical cost categories used, 261-262, 269-270
Cyanide oxidation, 36
D
Data bases presently available, 84-85, 272-277
Defense Environmental Network and Information Exchange (DENIX), 274
Dioxin, 52
Displacement, 105
Dissolution, 102-103
Dissolved-phase solvents, 115-116
"DOIT" committee. See Federal Advisory Committee to Develop On-Site Technologies
Down time, likelihood of, 190
Dual-phase extraction, 37-38, 87, 93, 107-108, 117
E
Electron acceptors, 91-92
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986, 74
Emulsification, 105
Engineered in situ bioremediation, 91, 119
Engineering friendliness, 189-191
Enhanced solubilization, 105
Environmental auditing, 5, 68, 76
Environmental companies. See Remediation technology providers
Environmental Leadership Program. See Naval Environmental Leadership Program
Environmental Management Science Program, 59
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 243-246
collects data on innovative technologies, 2, 81
developing a standard "template sites" cost comparison system, 16
See also Costs, comparing
ensuring consistency in remediation technology selection process, 6, 70-71, 76-77, 198
establishing a coordinated national testing program, 14, 248
establishing a national registry of contaminated sites, 6, 77
evaluating issue of national cleanup standards, 6, 71, 77
improving Superfund and RCRA enforcement, 5, 76
making comprehensive data bases available, 8, 73-74, 154, 267, 270
notifies SEC about compliance with environmental laws, 67
Online Library System (OLS), 274
reducing litigation by promptly identifying potentially responsible parties, 72
requiring early public involvement, 10, 197-198
reviewing effectiveness of state cleanup standards, 71, 76
Environmental regulators, See Regulatory authorities
Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), 234
Environmental Technologies Remedial Actions Data Exchange (EnviroTRADE) , 274
Environmental Technology Information System (TIS), 274
Equilibrium point, 109
Explosives, 100-101
Extraction processes, 92-96, 98-99
F
Facilitated transport, 27
Federal Accounting Standards Board, 68
Federal Advisory Committee to Develop On-Site Technologies, 39
Federal Facilities Compliance Act, 29
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable, 11, 85, 193
guidelines for data collection at federal facilities, 202, 241-242, 260
work-breakdown structure (WBS) for standardized cost reporting, 16 , 260, 262, 269-270
Fenton's reagent, 92, 117, 150
Fixed-price remediation contracts. See Costs, comparing
Forgiveness, 189-190
Fracturing technology, 93
Full-cost environmental accounting. See Environmental auditing
Fungal treatment, 91
Future land use, limits on, 196-197
G
Geological formations. See Verification of innovative remediation technology performance
Global Network for Environmental Technology (GNET), 275
Government agencies
initiating periodic peer review of technologies, 8, 154-155
sharing of data on performance and costs needed, 8, 154
wide variety of, with differing priorities, 45
Ground water contaminants, 80-81
fewer treatment technologies available than for soil, 7
flow rates of, 25-26
innovative technologies in use, 43-44
retention mechanisms of, 28
sources of, listed, 22
transformation mechanisms of, 29
transport mechanisms of, 27, 30
Ground Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center (GWRTAC), 19 , 85, 267, 275
Grout walls, 90
H
Hazardous Waste Collection Data Base, 273
Hazardous waste sites
full disclosure concerning, 73-74
no guidelines for data collection at, 202
owners of See Site owners
Hazardous Waste Superfund Collection Data Base, 275
Hazard Ranking System (HRS), 176
Health risks. See Human health risks; Wildlife health risks
Herbicides, carrier solvents of, 113
"Hockey-stick" plot effect, 126-127
Hot air injection, 36
Human health risks, 183-189, 204-205.
See also Risk-based corrective action (RBCA) standards
Hydrogen peroxide, 150
I
Implementation, ease of, 190
Incineration approaches, 33, 36-37, 52, 92, 148
Industry groups, 2.
See also individual groups
Injection approaches, 230.
See also Hot air injection
Innovative remediation technologies, 80-166.
See also Testing remediation technologies;
Transferring remediation technologies;
and specific technologies
assessing commercial potential of, 191-194
barriers to implementation, 38-39, 46-55
case histories of, 44, 58, 60, 64-65, 118, 209, 211, 214-219, 222-223, 226, 229
constant evolution of, 81-82
cost targets to beat needed, 5, 69
definitions, 81-97
Glossary of Remediation Technologies, 90-95
lacking information about, 7-8, 82, 84-86
more a legal product than a technological one, 53
present utilization of, 34-38
Innovative remediation technology consultants. See Remediation technology consultants
Innovative remediation technology providers. See Remediation technology providers Innovative technology users. See Site owners Innovative Treatment Technologies: Annual Status Report,81
Inorganic contaminants, 100-101, 134-144.
See also Metal contaminants;
Radioactive contaminants
relative mobility of, 137
research needed, 144
In situ
versus ex situ approaches, 36-38, 83
precipitation/coprecipitation, 90
Insurance companies, 174
Intellectual property restrictions, 193
International Standards Organization (ISO) ISO 14001, 69
standards for environmental management systems, 5, 68-69, 76
Internet listings needed
comprehensive data bases of remediation technology, 6, 154, 267
national registry of contaminated sites, 6
Interstate Regulatory Cooperation Project for Environmental Technologies , 242
Interstate Technology and Regulatory Cooperation (ITRC) Working Group , 242
Intrinsic bioremediation, 91, 109
research needed, 156
Intrinsic remediation (natural attenuation), 37-38
Investors, 174.
See also Venture capital sources predictions of high returns not borne out, 42
presently unable to project returns, 4
K
Kerr Laboratory. See Robert S. Kerr Environmental Laboratory Soil Transport and Fate Data Base
L
Laboratory tests. See Testing remediation technologies, determining level of testing required
Leaking underground storage tanks, 97
cleaning up, 36-38
regulations, 29-31
Legislative reform needed, dealing with likelihood of relaxing cleanup regulations , 3-4.
See also Congress, action needed by Lenders, reluctant. See Property values depressed
Level of testing. See Testing remediation technologies, determining level of testing required
Lime addition, 90
Long-term liability, difficult to calculate, 2
M
Maintenance requirements, 190
Manufacturers. See Remediation technology providers
Markets for innovative remediation technologies, 42-79
few incentives offered at present, 4, 15-16
inherently fragmented, 45
making data about remediation market available, 65, 77
stimulating by harnessing market forces, 3-7, 20, 42-43, 62-75
Massachusetts program for licensing site professionals, 6, 72-73, 77, 241
Massachusetts Strategic Envirotechnology Partnership (STEP), 243
Materials handling, research needed, 156
Metal contaminants, 21, 27, 136-141
nonvolatile, 90
precipitation of, 28-29
research needed, 156-157
sequestering See Precipitation
Methanotrophic bacteria, 116
Microbial degradation, 29, 36, 90, 102, 122-123, 147-148
Mixed-region vapor stripping (MRVS), 216-21
Mobilization processes, 92-96, 98-99
Modeling, 228
N
NAPL recovery, 93, 106, 218-220.
See also Nonaqueous-phase liquid (NAPL) transport;
Thermally enhanced NAPL recovery
NAPL source zone mapping, 229
National Advisory Council on Environmental Policy and Technology, 38
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), contaminated sites on land owned by, 1, 18
National Center for Integrated Bioremediation Research and Development (NCIBRD), 234
National Commission on Superfund, 39
National Environmental Technology Test Sites (NETTS), 234
National Priorities List (NPL) of sites. See Superfund program
National Research Council (NRC), 1, 18, 212
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, 243
Naval Environmental Leadership Program (NELP), 227, 235
Nonaqueous-phase liquid (NAPL) transport, 22, 24, 27, 92-96
complex flow paths, 120
direct mobilization, 125
DNAPLs, 27, 86, 93-94, 114, 155
entrapment, 28
O
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 18
Olefins, 92
Open detonation, 36
Organic biofilters, 92
P
Partnerships in technology development, 15, 245-246, 249
Passive-reactive barriers, 90, 92, 138, 185.
See also Zero-valent iron barriers testing, 222-223
Passive treatment walls, 37, 65, 86
Peer review panels, 5-6, 8, 154-155
Perchloroethylene (PCE), 21, 113 migration rate of, 25, 28, 30
Permeable treatment walls. See Passive-reactive barriers;
Zero-valent iron barriers
Peroxide combinations, 92
Pesticides, 51, 100-101, 144-153
carrier solvents of, 113
classes and uses table, 145
Petroleum hydrocarbons, 19-21, 36, 81-84, 97, 100-113
relative profitability of cleanup, 45, 60
relative treatability of, 7, 54, 87-88, 103
research needed, 112
Pharmaceutical industry, analogy to, 56-57, 201
pH-controlled solid phase formation, 90, 136, 149
Physical separation, 36
Phytoremediation, 92, 143, 157
Pilot tests. See Testing remediation technologies, determining level of testing required
Plasma high temperature metals recovery, 36
Point of maximum effect, 10, 198
Political pressure for reform, 47-48
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), 21, 52, 86, 100-101, 129-135
cost of cleaning up, 33-34
research needed, 133
verifying stabilization of, 211, 225
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), 21, 25, 53, 100-101, 120-129
relative rates of biodegradation, 122
research needed, 128-129
Potassium permanganate, 92, 150
Predictability under wide-ranging site conditions, 191
Professional organizations, initiating periodic peer review of technologies , 8, 154-155
Profitability, 193
Property values depressed, 2, 20, 30 fear of pre-sale environmental assessments, 63-64
Public involvement, 9-19, 170-172
avoiding community disruption, 194-195
case histories of, 178-180, 182-183
ensuring public safety, 195-196
Public sector environmental remediation, inadequate cost containment , 4
Pump-and-treat systems, 32-34, 37-38, 93-94, 117, 137-138
failures of, 202
R
Radioactive contaminants, 21, 27, 31-32, 90, 134-136
Radio frequency heating, 151-152
Rapid Commercialization Initiative (RCI), 234
Recommendations, 4-17, 75-77, 154-157, 197-198, 247-249, 269-270
Records of Decision Data Base, 276
Redox potential-controlled solid phase formation, 90, 92, 136, 149
Reducing treatment zones, generating, 139
Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances, 184
Regulatory authorities, 2, 172-173.
See also Environmental Protection Agency (EPA);
State regulatory authorities
approval protocols of, 242-243
averse to risk-taking, 153, 173
categorizing sites by treatment difficulty, 12-14, 34
initiating periodic peer review of technologies, 8, 154-155
wide latitude in decisionmaking, 8
Regulatory barriers to innovation, 46-54
approval difficult to obtain, 4, 39
inconsistent enforcement, 3, 54, 65, 70
lack of consistent standards, 4, 53-54, 65, 70-72
likelihood of relaxation by legislative reform, 3-4
limits on customers' freedom to choose and adapt technologies, 46, 72-73
option to arbitrate, 46
surmounting, 196
Remediation Information Management System (RIMS), 275
Remediation technologies. See Conventional remediation technologies;
Innovative remediation technologies
Remediation Technologies Development Forum (RTDF), 16, 19, 245-246, 258, 269
Remediation technology consultants
averse to risk-taking, 153
bias towards providing clients with "safe" technologies, 45
providing diverse range of environmental services, 44
sharing of data on performance and costs needed, 8, 154
Remediation technology providers, 173
compiling and releasing cost figures, 15
considering client and client's consultant in sales strategy, 45
considering concerns of all stakeholders, 10, 198
decline in stocks of, 42-44
offering proof their technology works to reduce risks, 11, 46, 198
start-up difficulties, 2-4, 44, 50, 52, 55, 59, 61-62
ReOpt Data Bases, 276
Residual-phase solvents, 114-115
Residuals production, 191
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 2-3, 29-31, 42, 172
cleanups under, 37-38
official corrective action plan required, 47, 175
regulatory structure, 46-54
Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS), 276
Risk-based corrective action (RBCA) standards, 19-20, 48
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory Treatability Data Base, 272
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Laboratory Soil Transport and Fate Data Base, 272, 276
Robustness, 189
S
Saturated zone, 24
Scale of testing. See Testing remediation
technologies, determining level of
testing required
SEC. See U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Secondary emissions, 191
Semiconductor industry, analogy to, 58-59
Semivolatile organic compounds, 100-101
Separation processes, 92-96, 98-99, 117, 151-152
Sheet pile walls, 90
Site cleanup, barriers to
lengthy implementation process, 3, 49-52
move to limit the number of cleanups, 42
option to engage in litigation to delay, 3-4, 47
slow action by site owners, 4
Site managers
of federally owned contaminated sites, 5
flexibility needed to consider alternative technologies, 6
averse to risk-taking, 153
categorizing sites by treatment difficulty, 12-14
conservatism of, 39
in economically distressed areas, 62
hesitant to share information about sites, 54-55
as potentially responsible parties (PRPs), 178
reluctant to account for remediation costs to stockholders, 48-49
sharing of data on performance and costs needed, 8, 154
testing at client's site, 217-225
Site workers, 168-169, 174-175 avoiding disruption to, 195
Six-State Partnership for Environmental Technology, 242
Slurry walls, 90
Soil aeration, 36
Soil contaminants, 80-81
innovative technologies in use, 43
more treatment technologies available than for ground water, 7
Soil flushing, 94, 104-105, 124-125, 131-132, 151
research needed, 156
Soil mixing, 131
Soil Transport and Fate Data Base. See Robert S. Kerr Environmental Laboratory Soil Transport and Fate Data Base
Soil vapor extraction (SVE), 35-37, 43, 80, 84, 94, 96, 103-104, 117, 151.
See also Thermally enhanced SVE
evolution of, 86-87, 110-111, 171, 226
Soil washing, 36-37, 94, 104-105, 124-125, 131-132, 143-144
Solidification processes, 33, 36, 89-91, 98-99, 130
research needed, 156
testing, 210-211
Sorption reactions, 27.
See also Enhanced sorption
Southern States Energy Board, 11, 242
Sparge barriers, 92
Stabilization processes, 89-91, 98-99, 130
research needed, 156
testing, 210-211
Stakeholders, 2-3.
See also Insurance companies;
Investors;
Public;
Regulatory authorities;
Remediation technology providers;
Site owners;
Site workers
concerns of, 168-169
levels of participation in Superfund process, 181
other interested groups See Congress;
Industry groups;
Professional organizations
roles in site cleanup process, 175-182
State regulatory authorities
requiring early public involvement, 10, 197-198
testing policies, 230
Steam extraction, 151
Steam sparging, 94
STEP program. See Massachusetts Strategic Envirotechnology Partnership
Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP), 46, 232-234
Substitution, 92
Success criteria
list of, 187-188
technology selection, expediting, 9-10
Superfund Innovative Technologies Evaluation (SITE) program, 11, 46, 192, 225, 227, 235, 241, 243-244
Superfund program, 2-3
cleanups under, 36-38
National Priorities List (NPL) of sites, 4, 30-31, 49, 73, 176
official record of decision (ROD) required, 47, 175
regulatory structure, 46-54
step in the process, 176-177
Superfund Reauthorization Act and Amendments (SARA) of 1986, 243
T
TechDirect, 277
Technologies for remediation. See Conventional remediation technologies;
Innovative remediation technologies
Technology Access Services, 277
Technology Assistance Directory, 272
Technology Certification Program, 241, 243
Technology consultants. See Remediation technology consultants
Technology development partnerships. See Partnerships in technology development
Technology implementation. See Transferring remediation technologies
Technology Innovation and Economics Committee, 38
Technology Innovation Office, 19, 39, 55, 85
Technology providers. See Remediation technology providers
Technology testing. See Testing remediation technologies
Technology users. See Site owners
''Template sites." See Costs, comparing
Testing remediation technologies, 9-15, 39, 74-75, 182-191, 201-251.
See also Verification of innovative remediation technology performance
categorizing sites by treatment difficulty, 12-14, 34, 230-240, 248
collecting data needed for, 7-8, 202-216, 245-248
details on prior cleanups often proprietary, 8
determining level of testing required, 213, 215-216, 221, 224
Glossary of Remediation Technologies, 90-95
including experimental controls, 12, 14, 208-209, 248
minimizing testing costs, 11
reporting point of maximum effect, 10, 198
reporting system effectiveness in standardized terms, 10
site-specific testing needed for, 239
testing at client's site, 217-225
using standardized testing protocols, 20, 242-243, 248,
Test sites, selecting, 216-227, 232-233
testing opportunities at federal facilities needed, 6-7, 65-66, 74 , 77, 225, 227, 232-233
Thermal desorption, 35-37, 43, 58, 86, 90, 94-95, 105-106, 123-124, 131
Thermally enhanced NAPL recovery, 95, 106-107
Thermally enhanced SVE, 95
TIS. See Environmental Technology Information System
Toxicity, determining, 204
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 6, 74, 77
Transferring remediation technologies, 227-240
site-specific technical expertise needed for, 46
Treatment fluids, pumping, 7
1,1,1-Trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA), 113
Trichloroethylene (TCE), 21, 113
U
Underground storage tank (UST) cleanup program. See Leaking underground storage tanks
U.S. Department of Agriculture, contaminated sites on land owned by, 1, 18
U.S. Department of Defense (DOD)
Air Force use of bioventing, 109, 209
conditionally implementing ISO 14001 standard, 69, 193
contaminated sites on land owned by, 1, 18, 29, 31
major component of remediation market, 45
using few new technologies, 38
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
contaminated sites on land owned by, 1, 18, 21, 29, 31, 134-136
funding research on remediation technologies, 142-14359
major component of remediation market, 45
using few new technologies, 38, 81
using "template sites" approach, 256
U.S. Department of the Interior, contaminated sites on land owned by, 1, 18
U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), 2, 4, 38, 47, 53-54
investigating Massachusetts program for licensing site professionals , 6, 77
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 212
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
enforcing reporting of environmental liabilities, 5, 66-67, 75-76
present requirements, 67
Users. See Site owners
V
Vacuum-assisted NAPL recovery, 95
"Valley of Death" phase of start-up companies, 59, 61
Vapor-phase transport, 27
Vapor stripping, 216-217
Vendor Information System for Innovative Treatment Technologies (VISITT) , 277
Venture capital sources
characteristics of industries attracting venture capital, 55-62
little funding of innovative remediation technologies, 3, 49-50
Verification of innovative remediation technology performance, 14-15, 202-216, 240-248
developing protocols for, 243
entering findings in national data base, 15, 249
establishing cause-and-effect relationship, 203, 206-207
specifying range of contaminant types and hydrogeological conditions , 15, 24, 219-223, 249
standardized summary sheet needed, 14-15, 248
Vitrification, 36, 64, 90-91, 131, 142-143
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 86, 90, 92, 94.
See also Semivolatile organic compounds
W
Water contamination. See Ground water contaminants
Western Governors Association, 11.
See also Interstate Technology and Regulatory Cooperation (ITRC) Working Group
Wetlands, constructed, 139-141, 156-157
Wildlife health risks, 186
Work-breakdown structure (WBS). See Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
Z
Zero-valent iron barriers, 92, 117-119
testing, 222-223
