ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0013013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CHAPTER 4 +- BIOREMEDIATION 'r As described in the work plan prepared by Aprotek (Attachment A) approximately 2,300 cubic yards of excavated soil was placed in a treatment cell and was to be treated using FryeZemeT"' enhance bioremediation, a proprietary process which utilizes accelerated enzyme catalyzed metabolic remediation. Based on the analytical results of soil samples from the treated soil, this process was not successful in destroying the petroleum hydrocarbons at this site. However, the bioremediation activities are summarized below for completeness. Approximately 2,300 cubic yards of soil were used by Aprotek in a pilot test for bioremediation of the soil. In June 1993, a 100 foot by 300 foot biocell was constructed on site. The biocell consisted of a layer of plastic sheeting on which 8 inches of sand was placed. The hydrocarbon affected soil was then placed on the sand in 18 to 24 inch lifts. Bails of straw were 6, placed around the soil for containment. Once a week for eight weeks, FryeZemeTm was mixed with water in a tanker truck and spread over the soil. The water was used both for inoculation of the soil with the bioremediation product and for dust control. Soil samples were collected by BC for analysis of total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel (TPHd) and motor oil (TPHmo) to determine the effectiveness of the bioremediation process. �. The samples were submitted to Western Environmental Science and Technology (WEST) laboratory in Davis, California. Analytical results indicated that the process did not reduce the hydrocarbon concentrations to below the criteria stated in the Aprotek work plan (Attachment A). s. Therefore, the process of inoculating the soil once a week for eight weeks was repeated. After the process was completed the second time, soil samples were collected, and results indicated that, again, the criteria were not met. The inoculation procedure was repeated one more time, �- and the results were the same (i.e., the criteria were not met). Therefore, the bioremediation treatment technology was deemed unsuccessful for the soils at this site, and no further attempts were made to treat the soil. Instead, efforts were concentrated on determining whether the soil was hazardous or the hydrocarbons were leachable, as described in the following chapter. The laboratory results of the soil samples collected following each of the three inoculation events are included in Attachment G. Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction specified at the beginning of this document. I 122Z93+L%7co3�REPORTSs KENT-OU-CLO QNMPS2200 L 1 r