SUMMARY OF THE REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES DEVELOPMENT FORUM
PHYTOREMEDIATION ACTION TEAM
TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON IN SOIL SUBGROUP
CONFERENCE CALL

February 16, 1999
12:00 p.m.-1:00 p.m.

On February 16, 1999, the following members of the Phytoremediation Action Team, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) in Soil Subgroup, met in a conference call:

Lucinda Jackson, Chevron Corporation (RTDF Action Team Co-Chair and Subgroup Co-Chair)
Phil Sayre, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Subgroup Co-Chair)
Pam Davis, Exxon Product Research
Steve Geiger, RETEC, Inc.
Peter Kulakow, Kansas State University (KSU)
David McMillan, ARM Group
Cindy Smith, Phillips Petroleum Company
Steve Rock, EPA
David Tsao, Amoco Research Center

Also present was Christine Hartnett of Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG).

SITE UPDATES

Chevron's California Site

Lucinda Jackson provided a brief summary of activities at Chevron's California site. She noted that time zero (T₀) samples were collected prior to seeding the treatment plots. She said that the next sampling event, T₁, is scheduled in June 1999. Jackson noted that plant growth has been strong over the last month due to wet and warm weather conditions. She said that some consideration had been given to reseeding the area, but that this is no longer deemed necessary. She said that individual species have been planted in strips behind the treatment plots to help investigators identify plant species. In April, she explained, Peter Kulakow will visit the site and perform a plant assessment (e.g., analyze species composition and root growth).

Jackson talked briefly about weed control methods being used at the California site. She said that RoundUp was applied to the control plot at the start of the study and that a second application is planned in the near future. In addition, investigators plan to manually remove weeds around the individual seeded plots. By doing so, she explained, investigators will ensure that plants do not mix between the treatment plots.

The field study at Chevron's California site will be conducted under a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) between the Petroleum Environmental Research Forum (PERF) and EPA. Jackson said that Exxon's Evelyn Drake sent a working draft of the CRADA to participating PERF organizations. Jackson has reviewed this draft and plans to suggest some revisions. She asked David Tsao and Cindy Smith, other PERF participants, whether they had reviewed it. Tsao said that he had and he also had comments. Smith said that she would review it as soon as possible. Jackson and Tsao agreed to submit their comments to Drake.

Chevron's Ohio Site

Steve Rock provided a brief summary of activities at Chevron's Ohio site. A Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) has been compiled for the site and it is currently being reviewed by a statistician. In general, Rock said, the statistician has responded favorably, noting that the Subgroup has created a good experimental design. Rock said that the QAPP will provide information on data interpretation. He agreed to forward the QAPP to conference call participants after EPA's Quality Assurance Office completes its review.

Rock noted that the demonstration project at this site will be performed under an EPA-Chevron CRADA. Before finalizing the CRADA, Rock said, he needs a letter of insurance from Jackson. She agreed to send it. Rock said that all companies entering a CRADA must provide an insurance bond or a certificate of self-insurance.

Rock said that soil sampling activities will be conducted in the near future. He noted that his research team has been trying to determine the best way to collect and homogenize subsurface soil samples. He reminded participants that the protocol requires investigators to mix about 4-6 liters of soil when creating a composite sample. (Rock said that each core contains about 1 liter of soil and that 4-6 cores must be mixed together.) In an effort to identify the most efficient mixing methods, Rock's team conducted a time study in the laboratory. Rock said that his team dumped 1 core of soil into a mixing bowl and then sampled the contents in four different locations. After that was completed, the sample was mixed for 5 minutes (using an electronic mixer and rubber spatulas) and then resampled from four different locations. This activity was repeated multiple times, until the sample had been mixed for a total of 45 minutes. Rock said that results across locations differed tremendously in the premixed sample. The results were reasonably consistent, however, after just 5 minutes of mixing. Additional mixing, Rock said, did little to increase the consistency. Rock's team concluded that 5 minutes of mixing produces a well-homogenized sample. The team will use these results to set up their sampling plan.

Rock said that his team discussed the pros and cons associated with mixing in the field versus the laboratory. For Chevron's Ohio site, Rock said, samples will be mixed in the field because electricity will be available at the site. Rock asked conference call participants to comment on how they have handled mixing in the past. David McMillan said that his team has used undergraduate labor for the task. He noted that it was easiest for his team to do the mixing in the field rather than hauling the cores to the laboratory for mixing. When using student labor, he noted, it is important to ensure that all those contacting the soil have received OSHA training. He said that mixing in the field ensured that fewer students contacted the hazardous material. Kulakow noted that weather conditions often dictate where mixing occurs. At Chevron's California site, for example, he said it would have been impossible to do the mixing in the field. For this site, Kulakow said, cores were collected and then processed in the laboratory. (Kulakow mentioned that 8 cores were used to generate a composite sample.)

Rock said that four plots (i.e., control, grasses, grasses/willow trees, and grasses/hackberry trees) will be established at Chevron's Ohio site. He said that the University of Cincinnati plans to conduct bioavailability studies for all of plots. He said University members will perform sequential extractions so that researchers can determine whether water-soluble or acid-soluble fractions are degrading. Rock expressed strong enthusiasm regarding the University's bioavailability studies and he noted that they plan to perform greenhouse tests (e.g., treatability studies) concurrently with field testing. Jackson said that the University's study efforts are outlined in a proposal. She agreed to distribute the proposal to conference call participants.

Amoco's Sites

Tsao said that he plans to conduct field demonstration projects at sites in Texas and Rhode Island. Regulatory approval has been granted for the Texas site, Tsao said, and the fields are being prepared for a March 1999 seeding. Tsao said that regulatory approval is pending at the Rhode Island site. Assuming it is granted, he hopes to have treatment plots established in spring 1999. In addition to these projects, Amoco is involved with other phytoremediation projects. For example, Tsao said, the Illinois EPA recently gave approval for a vegetative cover demonstration project. Other Amoco projects, Tsao explained, involve ground-water remediation.

Site in Kansas

Kulakow said that KSU plans to conduct a phytoremediation study in sediments at a military site in Kansas. The sediments are scheduled to be moved from their current location in spring 1999, Kulakow said, and he hopes to seed the sediment plots soon after.

Sites in New York

Steve Geiger and McMillan provided an update on potential demonstration sites located in New York. McMillan noted that there had been two sites in Utica that were considered for demonstration projects. Plants were established at both sites, but plots were not established according to the Subgroup's protocol. At one of the sites, McMillan said, it is unclear whether studies will continue and he will no longer be participating as the principal investigator. At the other site, for which Geiger is the primary contact, a demonstration project is planned. Geiger said that his client has expressed strong interest in joining the TPH in Soil Subgroup's field demonstration program. He asked Rock to send a draft CRADA to the site contact (Ed Neuhauser). Rock agreed to send the CRADA. Geiger said that he would gather information about the site and forward it to Kulakow for inclusion in the Subgroup's database.

COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ANALYTICAL LABORATORIES

Arthur D. Little (ADL) and Battelle will analyze many of the samples that are generated by the TPH in Soil Subgroup. Kulakow said that ERG recently distributed a summary of his conversations with the laboratories. He asked conference call participants to contact him if they had any questions. In summary, he said, the laboratories have agreed to analyze for hydrocarbons using the TPH Criteria Working Group methodology; they will charge no more than they would have for using more standard methodologies. Kulakow did say, however, that additional fees will be charged if investigators want samples analyzed for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX). (He said that BTEX data are important for investigators who want to perform risk characterizations.) Similarly, Kulakow noted, the laboratories will not charge additional fees to analyze for the 16 priority polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), but additional charges will be incurred if investigators want data on extended PAHs.

UPDATING THE SUBGROUP'S PROTOCOL

In the past, the Subgroup generated a protocol for their field demonstration program. Kulakow said that the version posted on the RTDF Web page is outdated. Kulakow and Rock agreed to talk offline about updating the protocol. Conference call participants suggested making the following changes:

• Add information/clarification for soil analyses section. During a previous conference call, participants discussed adding information about the TPHCWG methodology.

• Add information about plant uptake analyses. Kulakow noted that he recently sent information on plant uptake analyses to conference call participants.

• Modify microbiology section. Rock said that he plans to modify the microbiology section after he receives information from Mike Reynolds. Rock agreed to contact Reynolds to discuss this matter further.

FACE-TO-FACE MEETING

Conference call participants talked about meeting twice during 1999:

• April 1999 meeting. Rock noted that several TPH in Soil Subgroup members are planning to attend the Battelle conference that is scheduled in San Diego, California, on April 19-22. He noted that some discussion had been given to having Subgroup members meet on the afternoon of the 21st, a time slot with no scheduled presentations. He said that ERG contacted Battelle's conference coordinators and learned that meeting space could be made available to the Subgroup. Rock said that he will not be able to attend, leaving the meeting planning up to Jackson and Phil Sayre. Sayre and Jackson agreed to generate a draft agenda and to send it to ERG for distribution to conference call participants. Sayre said that it is becoming difficult to find affordable sleeping rooms in San Diego. He recommended making hotel reservations soon. (He said that additional information about the Battelle conference is available through Battelle's Web page.)

• Late Summer/Early Fall Meeting. Jackson said that it would be useful to meet after some field data have been generated. Rock suggested holding a meeting in conjunction with a 2-day EPA phytoremediation conference that will take place in Cincinnati, Ohio. Rock said that the meeting is tentatively planned for August or September 1999 and that he will issue an announcement and a request for speakers in the near future. Rock said that the meeting will likely have a session dedicated to the RTDF Phytoremediation Action Team. Each of the Action Team's three Subgroups (i.e., TPH in Soil, TCE in Ground Water, and Alternative Covers) will be allotted a section. Rock said that the Subgroup could plan a field trip to Chevron's Ohio site.

OTHER MEETINGS

Conference call participants noted that there are several phytoremediation conferences planned over the next year, including:

• The Annual Alternative Covers Assessment Program (ACAP) meeting. Rock noted that this meeting will be held on March 22-23, 1999, in San Francisco, California. He said that the meting will be held in EPA's Region 9 offices, but that sleeping rooms will be available at the Argent hotel (415-974-6400). He said that ERG prepared an invitation and preliminary agenda for the meeting. ERG agreed to distribute these to conference call participants.

• Environment Canada's meetings. According to Rock and Jackson, Environment Canada plans to hold a meeting in March 1999 in Montreal and a meeting on May 31 and June 1 in Calgary. Jackson said that she will speak at the Calgary meeting and will update attendees on the RTDF Phytoremediation Action Team's progress.

• The IBC conference. Sayre and Tsao said they are both planning to attend and speak at this meeting. While Sayre plans to discuss the TPH in Soil Subgroup's protocol, Tsao will provide industry's perspective on phytoremediation. The two agreed to coordinate their talks to prevent any overlap.

NEXT CONFERENCE CALL

The next conference call is scheduled for March 18, 1999, from 12:00 p..m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST).

ACTION ITEMS

• Jackson and Tsao agreed to forward their comments on the PERF CRADA to Drake. Smith said she will review the CRADA as soon as possible.

• Rock agreed to forward the QAPP for Chevron's Ohio site to conference call participants after EPA's Quality Assurance Office completes its review.

• Jackson agreed to send Rock a letter of insurance.

• Jackson agreed to send the University of Cincinnati's proposal to conference call participants.

• Geiger said that his client has expressed strong interest in joining the TPH in Soil Subgroup's field demonstration program. Rock agreed to send a draft CRADA to the site contact (Ed Neuhauser). Geiger said he would forward additional contact information to Rock.

• Kulakow and Rock agreed to talk offline about updating the Subgroup's protocol.

• Conference call participants discussed meeting in conjunction with Battelle's April 1999 conference. Phil Sayre and Jackson agreed to generate a draft agenda and to send it to ERG for distribution to conference call participants.

• Rock noted that the Annual ACAP meeting will be held in March 1999. ERG agreed to distribute an invitation and preliminary agenda to conference call participants.

• Sayre and Tsao agreed to talk offline about their presentations for the IBC meeting.

• ERG agreed to set up the next conference call for March 18, 1999, from 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST).