Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation SITE

Corrective Action Application This technology is currently being evaluated under the Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program. 

Reauthorization Act (SARA), 10 514, 21 588-589, 14 581 Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE), 25 837 Superfund legislation, 21 588 Superfund Reauthorization Act, 21 589 Super glue, 1 539 Super Grubbs catalyst, 26 933 Superheated aqueous solution processing, 14 80... 

Table 1 gives cost and maintenance information for the frozen barrier installed as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). Table 2 gives physical design data for the ORNL project. 

Based on data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration, the total cost for PF extraction was estimated to be 307/kg of trichloroethene (TCE) removed. This demonstration was conducted over a 4-week period in August and September of 1992 at an industrial site in Somerville, New Jersey. The cost estimate includes expenses associated with both PF and soil vapor extraction. Major cost factors were labor (29%), capital equipment (22%), VOC emission control (19%), site preparation (11%), and residuals management (10%) (D10589F, p. v). 

According to a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) report, treatment costs for the BioGenesis soil washing technology are affected by the following factors ... 

Based on data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ERA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration program, the cost for using this technology to treat liquid wastes was calculated. Treatment costs vary with the system utilization rates. These cost estimates were 2000 per ton (1994 U.S. dollars) for a utilization rate of 60% 1850 per ton for a rate of 70% and 1670 per ton for a rate of 80%. The site preparation cost was 127,400. The feed rates used for this analysis were assumed to be 2.2 kg/min of wastewater and 0.485 kg/min of waste oil. The waste streams were simultaneously injected into the reactor. Labor proved to be the most important element affecting cost (52%), followed by site preparation (15%), supplies (12%), and startup/mobilization (12%) (D187160, p. 19). 

Based on data from the Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program demonstration, total demonstration project costs were calculated to be 813,505 (1992 dollars). The vendor calculated costs to prepare for and execute the treatability study at their pilot-scale... 

Based on the Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA s) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration at the Domtar Wood Preserving Facility in Trenton, Ontario, Canada, the vendor estimated the costs associated with a full-scale application of the technology... 

In 1991, the SERF was demonstrated at the Rainbow Disposal site in Huntington Beach, California, under the Environmental Frotection Agency s (EFA s) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program. Total costs for the remediation at the site was approximately 4,400,000. This cost does not include legal fees. The total amount of soil that was considered to have undergone treatment was 95,000 yd, which includes the volume of soil within the treatment perimeter between the depths of 20 and 40 ft. This yields a treatment cost of 43/yd (D15382M, p. 7). 

In 2000, cost estimates for the NoVOCs system were calculated based on a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration at North Island Naval Air Station in California. One-time capital costs for the NoVOCs system were estimated to be 190,000. Operational costs were an additional 160,000 for the first year and 150,000 for each additional year. Factoring in a 4% annual inflation rate, total costs are as follows 350,000 for 1 year, 670,000 for 3 years, 1,000,000 for 5 years, and 2,000,000 for 10 years of operation. At the North Island site, a Thermatrix flameless oxidation system (T0795) was also used as part of the treatment train. The Thermatrix system cost an additional 989,000 (D21594L, pp. ES-8, ES-9). 

Cost estimates were prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration in June 1992 based on data from the vendor and data gathered during the evaluation. Costs were presented on a cost-per-ton basis. Estimates were given for different feed rates of the tested PACT-6 pilot-scale system, as well as for the PACT-8 full-scale system. Cost estimates were prepared for treatment rates of the PACT-6 of 500 Ib/hr and 1000 Ib/hr. The estimated treatment rate of the PACT-8 was 2200 Ib/hr. Eor each treatment rate, estimates were included for online factors of 50 and 70%. Eor a feed rate of 500 Ib/hr and an online factor of 70%, the cost is estimated at 1816. Eor a feed rate of 2200 Ib/hr, with the same 70% online factor, the cost is 757 (D104585, p. 1). These costs are summarized in Table 1. 

In 1991, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration program evaluated the AquaDetox/SVE system. The demonstration took place at the San Fernando Valley Groundwater Basin Superfund site in Burbank, California. Based on this demonstration, cost estimates for a full-scale deployment of the system were prepared. Three treatment flow rates were evaluated, based on the 1200-gallon-per-minute (gpm) system used at the Lockheed site 500, 1000, and 3000 gpm. Capital costs and annual operational and maintenance (O M) costs were estimated in 1991 dollars and are shown in Table 1. 

---