PROCEEDINGS OF THE EXPERT PANEL WORKSHOP
TO EVALUATE THE PUBLIC HEALTH IMPLICATIONS
FOR THE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS-
CONTAMINATED WASTE


Chapter 4 - Expert Panel Report (Cont'd)

III. INTEGRATED TREATMENT

The possibility of using a series of technologies for a PCB-contamination site was raised many times during the panel discussions. Integrated treatment trains can be used to enhance the efficiency of the PCB-remediation process, or as an alternative to off-site disposal of residuals and byproducts. Examples given during the discussions included a dechlorination process paired with thermal desorption, and a composting process followed by either soil washing or solvent extraction. Many of the individual technologies discussed produce wastestreams or residuals or both that require further treatment or disposal. For example, the technologies that minimize the volume of PCB-contaminated material rather than destroy the PCBs may be paired with on-site dechlorination for the concentrated PCB byproduct.

As with individual technology selection, to determine whether a multiple technology approach would be an effective means of treatment, site-specific information and site-specific treatability studies are necessary.

IV. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE

Determination of the most likely or the possible routes of human exposure and health risks of any given remediation technology requires both site-specific and technology-specific information. Without this information, only general comments on exposure routes and possible health risks can be presented.

Necessary site-specific information should include the following:

Necessary technology-specific information should include the following:

The majority of the technologies discussed require excavation and sizing of the contaminated media. Depending on the matrix characteristics and contaminants present, fugitive air emissions of VOCs, semi-VOCs, and particulates can be generated during this phase. Air monitoring and sampling, engineering controls, and fugitive emission suppression methods are necessary to avoid off-site airborne migration of the contaminants. Transportation of the contaminated media should be conducted with minimal emissions and with contingencies in place to avoid a release and potential human exposure in the event of a vehicular accident.

V. CONCLUSIONS

Although consensus and conclusions were not a point of emphasis for the expert panel meeting, the following generally summarizes the findings of the sessions:

1. Tables 2-4 (located at the end of this section) provide a framework for evaluation of the applications of each technology category for PCB-contaminated material.

2. There is no single non-incineration technology that is ubiquitously applicable for all PCB-contaminated matrices.

3. Except for landfilling, there are very limited data suggesting that non-incineration technologies may be applicable to PCB-contaminated municipal solid waste.

4. Because of the significant effect of waste matrix and levels of contamination, site characterization must include a broad range of parameters, for example, soil type to determine applicability of certain technologies (e.g., clay, silt); distribution of material size to determine if pretreatment will permit use of the technology; other contaminants that may render a technology non-feasible; and other factors (e.g., water) that may interfere with a selected technology.

5. Site-specific information about the facility, the environment, and the community is required to assess possible public health implications of a specific waste treatment technology. A review from a public health perspective of design, operating, maintenance, and monitoring data of a proposed facility is critical to ensuring that the treatment process is protective of public health.

Table 2. NIRT Treatment Capabilities of Different PCB-Contaminated Waste Matrices
Technology Category Matrix
Oil Soil Sediment Municipal Solid Waste Sewage Treatment Sludge
Bioremediation U E E E E
Dechlorination P A/P E U U
Soil Washing N/A A E N N
Solvent Extraction P A E N A
Thermal Desorption N/A P E U U
Solidification/Stabilization N E U U U
Landfill N P P P P
N = Not generally feasible
N/A = Not applicable
U = Unproven
E = Emerging technology
A = Applied technology
P = Proven technology
Note: Refer to Section II.1. for definitions of emerging, applied, and proven technologies.


Table 3. NIRT PCB Residual Concentrations (ppm) of Matrix Post-Treatment
Technology Category PCB Residual Concentrations (ppm)
< 1 1-10 10-50 50-100 >100
Bioremediation U U U U U
Dechlorination A A A A A
Soil Washing E/A A A A A
Solvent Extraction E A A A A
Thermal Desorption A P P P P
Solidification/Stabilization N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Landfill P P P P P
U = Unknown
N/A = Not applicable
E = Emerging technology data
A = Applied technology data
P = Proven technology data
Notes: Refer to Section II.1. for definitions of emerging, applied, and proven technologies.
Refer to Table 2 for matrix applicability.


Table 4. NIRT PCB Treatment Requirements
Technology Category Treatment Requirement
In situ/Ex situ Material Sizing Other Pre- Treatment Post Treatment (PCBs) Post Treatment (Other)
Bioremediation I/E Y (Ex situ) M N N
Dechlorination E Y N N M
Soil Washing E Y N Y Y
Solvent Extraction E Y N Y Y
Thermal Desorption E Y M Y M
Solidification/Stabilization I/E Y M N N
Landfill I N N Y Y
I = In situ treatment
E = Ex situ treatment
Y = Yes
N = No
M = Depends on waste matrix and process

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS

During the panel sessions, the following recommendations were made to improve and to better understand the implications of a non-incineration remedial technology:

1. Conduct sampling and analyses of fugitive emissions, byproducts, and wastestreams to better address uncertainties about the feasibility and public health implications of technologies.

2. Evaluate the possible public health implications of available non-incineration and incineration treatment technologies on a site-specific basis.

3. Develop a more consistent comparative process of permitting, testing, and monitoring all technologies.

4. Identify the contaminants of public health concern so that a more complete evaluation of a technology and identification of engineering controls warranted to protect public health can be made.

5. Encourage continuing research and development of technologies to provide a broad selection of viable remedial technologies.

VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Note: This list of literature is included to provide the reader with more detailed information on specific technologies. The bibliography is arranged in the same order of technology category discussion in the panel report. In addition, the last grouping includes pubilications that cover more than one technology review, and other PCB-related literature.


Bioremediation:

Abramowicz DA. 1990. Aerobic and aerobic biodegradation of PCBs: A review. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology 10(3): 241-251.

Bedard DL and ML Haberl. 1990. Influence of chlorine substitution pattern on the degradation of polychlorinated biphenyls by 8 bacterial strains. Microbial Ecology 20:87-102.

Buisson RSK, PWW Kirk, and JN Lester. 1990. Fate of selected chlorinated organic compounds during semi-continuous anaerobic sludge digestion. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 19(3): 428-432.

Furukawa K, N Tomizuka, and A Kamibayashi. 1979. Effect of chlorine substitution on the bacterial metabolism of various polychlorinated biphenyls. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 38:301-310.

General Electric Company, Corporate Research and Development. 1992. 1991 In Situ Hudson River Research Study: A Field Study on Biodegradation of PCBs in Hudson River Sediments. February.

Harkness MR, JB McDermott, DA Abramowicz, JJ Salvo, WP Flanagan, ML Stephens, FJ Mondello, RJ May, JH Lobos, KM Carroll, MJ Brennan, AA Bracco, KM Fish, GL Warner, PR Wilson, DK Dietrich, DT Lin, CB Morgan, and WL Gately. 1993. In situ stimulation of aerobic PCB biodegradation in Hudson River Sediments. Science 259:503-507.

Katayama A and F Matsumura. 1991. Photochemically enhanced microbial degradation of environmental pollutants. Environmental Science Technology 25(7): 1329-33.

Levin M and MA Gealt. 1993. Biotreatment of Industrial and Hazardous Waste. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Nies L and TM Vogel. 1990. Effects of organic substrates on dechlorination of Aroclor 1242 in anaerobic sediments. Applied Environmental Microbiology 56(9): 2612-2617.

Quensen III JF, JM Tiedje, and SA Boyd. 1988. Reductive dechlorination of polychlorinated biphenyls by anaerobic microorganisms from sediments. Science 242:752-754.

Quensen III JF, SA Boyd, and JM Tiedje. 1990. Dechlorination of four commercial polychlorinated biphenyl mixtures (Aroclors) by anaerobic microorganisms from sediments. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 56(8): 2360-2369.

Quensen III JF, JM Tiedje, SA Boyd, C Enke, R Lopshire, J Giesy, M Mora, R Crawford, and D Tillet. 1992. Evaluation of the suitability of reductive dechlorination for the bioremediation of PCB-contaminated soils and sediments. Extended abstract for soil decontamination using biological processes, 6-9 December, 1992, Karlsruhe, Germany. DECHEMA, Frankfort, Germany.

Sugiua K. 1992. Microbial degradation of polychlorinated biphenyls in aquatic environments. Chemosphere 24(7): 881-890.

Thomas D and G Georgiou. 1990. Bioreactor development for the growth of the white rot fungus phaneorchaete chrysosporium and the degradation of organic pollutants. Journal of Hazardous Materials 24(2-3): 281-282.

Tiedje JM, JF Quensen III, J Chee-Sanford, JP Schimel, and SA Boyd. 1992. Microbial reductive dechlorination of PCBs. Extended abstract for Pacific Basin Conference on Hazardous Wastes. April 10, 1992. Bangkok, Thailand.

US EPA. 1992. Bioremediation of hazardous wastes. EPA/600/R-92/126, August.

US EPA. 1993. Bioremediation in the field. EPA/540/N-93/001, May.

Viney I and RJF Bewley. 1990. Preliminary studies on the development of a microbiological treatment for polychlorinated biphenyls. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 19: 789-796.


Dechlorination/Destruction

Miller BH, WJ Sheehan, and CG Swanberg. 1993. The Base Catalyzed Decomposition (BCD) Process for Treating Heavy Halocarbons in Soils and Sludges. 14th Annual HMCRI Superfund Conference, Washington, D.C., November 30 - December 2.


Soil Washing

Abdul AS and TL Gibson. 1991. Laboratory studies of surfactant-enhanced washing of polychlorinated biphenyl from sandy material. Environmental Science Technology 25(4): 665-671.

Abdul AS, TL Gibson, CC Ang, JC Smith and RE Sobczynski. 1992. In situ surfactant washing of polychlorinated biphenyls and oils from a contaminated site. Ground Water 30(2): 219-231.

Clarke AN, PD Plumb, TK Subramanyan, and DJ Wilson. 1991. Soil clean-up by surfactant washing. I. Laboratory results and mathematical modeling. Separation Science and Technology 26(3): 301-343.

US EPA. 1992. SITE demonstration bulletin - Soil/sediment washing system. EPA/540/MR-92/075, October.


Solvent Extraction

US EPA. 1989. SITE demonstration bulletin - Organic extraction utilizing solvents. EPA/540/M5-89/006, April.

US EPA. 1990. Technology Demonstration Summary - CF systems organics extraction system, New Bedford Harbor, Massachusetts. EPA/540/S5--90/002, August.

US EPA. 1990. Technology evaluation report: CF systems organics extraction system, New Bedford, Massachusetts. EPA/540/5-90/002, January.

US EPA. 1990. Applications analysis report - CF systems organics extraction process, New Bedford, Massachusetts. EPA/540/A5-90/002, August.

US EPA. 1992. Technology fact sheet - a citizen's guide to solvent extraction. EPA/542/F-92/004, March.

US EPA. 1992. SITE demonstration bulletin - The basic extractive sludge treatment (B.E.S.T.®). EPA/540/MR-92/079, December.

Valentinetti R. 1990. On-site testing of an organics extraction unit. Hazardous Materials Control 3(2): 34-41.


Thermal Desorption

Evans DH, M Pirbazari, SW Benson, TT Tsotsis, and JD Devinny. 1991. Pyrolytic destruction of polychlorinated biphenyls in a reductive atmosphere. Journal of Hazardous Materials 27(3): 253-272.

Kolaczkowski ST, BD Crittenden, and SP Perera. 1992. Catalytic combustion of polychlorinated biphenyls - catalyst screening trails. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 70(B1): 27-38.

de Percin PR. 1991. Thermal desorption attainable remediation levels. In: Remedial Action, Treatment, and Disposal of Hazardous Waste, Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual RREL Hazardous Waste Research Symposium. EPA/600/9-91/002, April: 436-444.

US EPA. 1991. SITE demonstration bulletin - The plasma centrifugal furnace. EPA/540/M5-91/007, October.

US EPA. 1992. SITE demonstration bulletin - AOSTRA-Soiltech anaerobic thermal processor: Wide Beach Development site. EPA/540/MR-92/008, March.

US EPA. 1992. Applications analysis report - Retech Inc., plasma centrifugal furnace. EPA/540/A5-91/007, June.

US EPA. 1992. SITE demonstration bulletin - Soiltech anaerobic thermal processor: Outboard Marine Corporation site. EPA/540/MR-92/078, November.

US EPA. 1993. SITE demonstration bulletin - X*TraxTM model 200 thermal desorption system. EPA/540/MR-93/502, February.

US EPA. 1993. SITE demonstration bulletin - Mobile volume reduction unit. EPA/540/MR-93/508, April.


Solidification/Stabilization

Timmons DM, V Fitzpatrick, and S Liikala. 1990. Vitrification tested on hazardous wastes. Pollution Engineering 22(6): 76-81.

US EPA. 1989. SITE demonstration bulletin - In-situ soil stabilization. EPA/540/M5-89/004, April.

US EPA. 1989. Applications analysis report - HAZCON Solidification Process, Douglassville, Pennsylvania. EPA/540/A5-89/001, May.

US EPA. 1989. SITE technology demonstration summary - International waste technologies in situ stabilization/solidification, Hialeah, Florida. EPA/540/s5-89/004, June.

US EPA. 1991. SITE technology demonstration summary - International waste technologies/geo-con in situ stabilization/solidification update report. EPA/540/s5-89/004a, January.

US EPA. 1991. Fate of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in soil following stabilization with quicklime. EPA/600/2-91/052, September.

US EPA. 1992. SITE demonstration bulletin - Cyclone furnace soil vitrification technology. EPA/540/MR-92/011, March.

US EPA. 1992. Vitrification technologies for treatment of hazardous and radioactive waste handbook. EPA/625/R-92/002, May.


Landfilling

Caldwell JA and CC Reith. 1993. Principles and Practice of Waste Encapsulation. Boca Raton: Lewis Publishers.

Grube Jr. WE. 1991. Soil barrier alternatives. In: Remedial Action, Treatment, and Disposal of Hazardous Waste, Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual RREL Hazardous Waste Research Symposium. EPA/600/9-91/002, April: 436-444.

US EPA. 1989. Seminar publication - Requirements for hazardous waste landfill design, construction, and closure. EPA/625/4-89/022, August.

US EPA. 1991. Seminar publication - Design and construction of RCRA/CERCLA final covers. EPA/625/4-91/025, May.


Other

Amend LJ and PB Lederman. 1992. Critical evaluation of PCB remediation technologies. Environmental Progress 11(3): 173-177.

Brannon JM, TE Myers, D Gunnison and CB Price. 1991. Nonconstant polychlorinated biphenyl partitioning in New Bedford Harbor (Massachusetts, USA) sediment during sequential batch leaching. Environmental Science & Technology 25(6): 1082-1087.

Brown Jr. JF, RW Lawton, MR Ross, and J Feingold. 1991. Assessing the human health effects of PCBs. Chemosphere 23(11-12): 1811-1815.

Darmiento FT. 1992. Understanding PCB cleanup guidelines. Hazmat World, November: 46-47.

Environment Canada. 1991. Environmental Protection Series Report - Options for the treatment/destruction of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and PCB-contaminated equipment. EPS 2/HA/1, November.

Freeman HM. 1989. Standard Handbook of Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hooper SW, CA Pettigrew, and GS Sayler. 1990. Ecological fate, effects and prospects for the elimination of environmental polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 9(5): 655-667.

Johnston LE. 1985. Decontamination and Disposal of PCB Wastes. Environmental Health Perspectives 60: 339-346.

McCoy and Associates Inc. 1992. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) - regulations and treatment technologies. The Hazardous Waste Consultant 10(3): 4.1-4.37.

McCoy DE. 1989. PCB wastes. In: H Freeman (ed.), Standard Handbook of Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Otis MJ. 1990. A pilot study of dredging and disposal alternatives for the New Bedford Harbor, Massachusetts, Superfund sites. Management of Bottom Sediments Containing Toxic Substances: Proceedings of U.S./Japan Experts Meeting (14th) held in Yokohama, Japan.

Piver WT and FT Lindstrom. 1985. Waste disposal technologies for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Health Perspectives 59: 163-177.

Scott MP, KF Najjar, and JL Mermelstein. 1993. Innovative PCB Remediation technologies - Dealing with the Options. Environmental Report 5(2): 2-5.

Sedlak DL and AW Andren. 1991. Aqueous-phase oxidation of polychlorinated biphenyls by hydroxyl radicals. Environmental Science Technology 25(8): 1419-27.

Stults RG. 1993. Hazardous waste identification: A guide to changing regulations. Hazmat World, March: 55-60.

Tchobanoglous G, Thiesen HM, and SA Vigil. 1993. Integrated Solid Waste Management. New York: McGraw-Hill.

US EPA. 1987. A compendium of technologies used in the treatment of hazardous waste. EPA/625/8-87/015, September.

US EPA. 1992. The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program: Technology Profiles, Fifth Edition. EPA/540/R-92/077, November.

Woodyard JP. 1990. PCB detoxification technologies: A critical assessment. Environmental Progress 9(2): 131-135.

VIII. APPENDICES

Appendix A. Panel Member Biosketches

The following persons were members of the Non-Incineration Remedial Technologies Panel. Although their participation included reviews of the draft reports, it does not necessarily imply their endorsement of the final written panel report or their support for the conclusions derived in the report.


CHAIR: Frederick G. Pohland, Ph.D., P.E., DEE
Edward R. Weidlein Chair of Environmental Engineering
and Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

B.S., Civil Engineering, Valparaiso University
M.S., Civil Engineering (Environmental Engineering), Purdue University
Ph.D., Environmental Engineering, Purdue University

Teaching and research in environmental engineering operations and processes; environmental chemistry and microbiology; solid and hazardous waste management; industrial waste minimization, treatment and disposal; environmental impact monitoring and assessment; and expert consultant to public and private sectors.


RAPPORTEUR: James J. Cudahy, M.S., M.B.A., P.E.
President
Focus Environmental, Inc.
Knoxville, Tennessee

B.S., Chemical Engineering, Newark College of Engineering
M.S., Chemical Engineering, University of Delaware
M.B.A., Michigan State University

Experience in the chemical industry and as an environmental engineering consultant; specialization for 22 years in thermal treatment and destruction and various other aspects of solid and hazardous waste management, permitting, and soil clean-up technologies; incinerator metals emissions; development of EPA incineration guidance documents; and energy recovery from waste incineration. Authored more than 40 publications in the areas of thermal treatment of wastes and contaminated soils.


Harry L. Allen, Ph.D.
Senior Environmental Scientist
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Response Team
Edison, New Jersey

A.B., Biology, Gettysburg College
M.S., Environmental Science, Rutgers University
Ph.D., Environmental Science, Rutgers University

Currently serves as a national technical expert in the area of hazardous waste treatment and emergency response; as a senior member of the ERT, he has served as on-scene science advisor at the Exxon Valdez (AK) Oil Spill, the Ashland (PA) Major Oil Spill, the Winchester (VA) Tire Fire, the Livingston (LA) Train Wreck, and several less spectacular emergency responses; field application of hazardous waste site cleanups; served on international teams to provide expertise on waste disposal.


John F. Brown, Jr., Ph.D.
Manager
Environmental Toxicology Branch
Environmental Laboratory
GE Corporate Research & Development
Schenectady, New York

Sc.B, Chemistry, Brown University
Ph.D., Chemistry, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Originally trained as an organic chemist, but retrained biologically (post-doctorate in clinical pathology, SUNY Upstate Medical Center, 1968-69) following a mid-career switch from organic chemical to biomedical and environmental research; personal research interests in recent years have included new medical diagnostic techniques, PCB decontamination, and PCB behavior in the environment; granted 19 U.S. patents and is the author of more than 60 scientific papers.


Co-Chair: Joseph C. Carpenter, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Atlanta, Georgia

B.S., Chemistry, Lenoir Rhyne College
M.S., Environmental Engineering, Clemson University
M.B.A., Georgia State University

Currently responsible for the preparation of public health assessments on hazardous waste sites; reviews environmental data and evaluates possible public health implications; experience in underground storage tank upgrading, removals, and remediation; provided environmental engineering services for hazardous waste management and municipal/industrial wastewater treatment.


Joseph G. Hailer, M.S.
Waste Policy Institute
Blacksburg, Virginia

B.S., Chemistry, George Washington University
M.S., Geochemistry, George Washington University

Currently works on alternative remediation technologies for DOE; remediation to minimize excavation, transport, and disposal of both hazardous and radioactive wastes; evaluation of containment, chemical fixation, biodegradation, and enhanced mobilization methods; site investigation manager for waste remediation projects; site investigation and remedial studies at hazardous substance spills; hydrogeologic transport and geochemical interactions of contaminants in soil and water.


Peter B. Lederman, Ph.D., P.E., DEE, P.P.
Director, Center for Environmental Engineering and Science, and Research Professor of Chemical Engineering
New Jersey Institute of Technology
Newark, New Jersey

B.S., Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan
M.S., Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan
Ph.D., Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan

Hazardous substance management with extensive RCRA, CERCLA, audit, remediation and pollution prevention experience; development of air pollution control devices; industrial waste treatment research and development; oil and hazardous material spill control and remediation; petrochemical, petroleum, polymer, chemical, and food industries; health and safety, construction, training, and quality assurance. Manager and/or technical consultant on several major PCB cleanups.


John F. Quensen, Ph.D.
Assistant Research Professor
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan

B.S., Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University
M.A., Marine Science, Virginia Institute of Marine Science
Ph.D., Ecology and Evolution, Purdue University

Biodegradation, ecology, marine science, and zoology, and experience in undergraduate teaching; current research interests include both aerobic and anaerobic microbial transformations of normally recalcitrant environmental contaminants including PCBs and dioxins; anaerobic microbial dehalogenation of aromatic compounds including PCBs, TCDD, chlorobenzenes, and PBBs; aerobic microbial degradation of TCDD, PCBs, and pesticides.


Charles J. Rogers, M.S.
Senior Research Scientist
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio

B.S., Chemistry, Ohio State University
M.S., Environmental Engineering, University of Cincinnati

Research activities have focused upon developing alternative technology to incineration for the destruction of toxic and hazardous compounds; research led to the development of a new chemical process for the destruction of PCBs, chlorinated dioxin/furans, and non-halogenated toxic and hazardous compounds; internationally recognized scientist whose expertise in detoxification technology has been applied to wastes in soil, sediment, sludges, and effluents.


Rengarajan Soundararajan, Ph.D.
Research Chemist
RMC Environmental and Analytical Laboratories, Inc.
West Plains, Missouri

M.S., Analytical Chemistry, University of Madras, 1975
Ph.D., Hydrazine Chemistry, Indian Institute of Science, 1979

Conducts research in stabilization/solidification processes; international experience in the areas of electrochemical detoxification of hazardous materials, soil washing, in situ vitrification and desensitization of ordnance materials (explosives and propellants); consultant to the U.S. EPA, Department of Justice, and DOE; an affiliate of Los Alamos National Laboratory.


Paul B. Trost, Ph.D.
Consultant
Director of Remediation Engineering and Consulting Services
Remediation and Field Services Group
Waste-Tech Services, Inc.
Golden, Colorado

B.S., Chemistry, Notre Dame University
Ph.D., Geochemistry, Colorado School of Mines

Experience in hazardous waste remediation, including field operations and development/field testing of innovative alternatives for remediation of hazardous waste sites; directed remediation projects with budgets up to $23 million; closures of ponds, pits, lagoons, wells, slurry wall installation, capping, solidification, groundwater remediation, and construction of hazardous waste landfills; development and field application of advanced technologies. Holder of patent on soil washing process.


Co-Chair: Lynn C. Wilder, M.S.Hyg.
Environmental Health Scientist
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Atlanta, Georgia

B.S., Chemistry, Chatham College
M.S., Industrial Hygiene, University of Pittsburgh

Member of ATSDR's Emergency Response and Consultation Branch since 1989. Responsibilities include public health interpretation of environmental data; providing technical assistance to requestors (primarily EPA) regarding sampling strategies that will enable ATSDR to assess public health impact; ensuring that site clean-up actions are protective of public health; and communication of ATSDR public health conclusions and follow-up actions to communities surrounding hazardous waste sites.


Appendix B. Glossary

APEG alkali metal polyethylene glycolate
B.E.S.TTM Basic Extractive Sludge Treatment (solvent extraction technology)
CaO calcium oxide, quick lime
DRE destruction and removal efficiencies
dscm dry standard cubic meter
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
gpd gallons per day
ISV In situ vitrification
kg kilogram
KPEG potassium polyethylene glycolate
lb/hr pound per hour
NaPEG sodium polyethylene glycolate
ng nanogram
NPL National Priorities List
PCB Polychlorinated biphenyls
POTW Public Owned Treatment Works
ppb parts per billion
ppm parts per million
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SITE EPA's Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation program
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (EPA Method)
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
UV Ultraviolet

Appendix C. Issues and Questions

The following issues and questions were generally discussed and evaluated for each of the seven technological categories listed previously. Processes under each of the broad categories were evaluated if information was available. Although several of the emerging technologies have limited supporting data, the panel identified and discussed processes that they believed show promise for future treatment of PCB-contaminated material. Where possible, any data gaps relevant to the application of each technology were identified.

  1. Waste Characterization Considerations

  2. Preliminary Treatment Considerations

  3. Technology Process Considerations

  4. Post Treatment/Ultimate Disposal Considerations

  5. Technology Summary

    Appendix D. Figures


    Figure 1: BCD Process


    Figure 2: APEG Process


    Figure 3: Soil Washing


    Figure 4: Solvent Extraction


    Figure 5: Thermal Desorption


    Figure 6: Landfill Operations and Processes


    Figure 7: Development and Completion
    of a Solid Waste Land Disposal Unit

    Next Section          Table of Contents