Running head: BIOLOGICAL REMEDIATION PROJECT

Biological Remediation Project Dan Lockward, Kevin ODonnell The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey

BIOLOGICAL REMEDIATION PROJECT Abstract Two superfund sites were used to exemplify biological remediation technologies that could in theory work at those specific sites. Biological remediation is broken down into two subdivisions: bioremediation and phytoremediation. Bioremediation is the use of microorganisms to break down contaminants, and phytoremediation is the use of plant life to ingest contaminants or cap the land off. The criteria for choosing each site was that one had to have contaminants like TCE, PCBs, or VOCs so that bioremediation technologies could be applied and the other had to have inorganic pollutants so that phytoremediation technologies could be applied. The first site, Bog Creek Farm in Howell, NJ applies a specific bioremediation technique that could work and the second site, Denzer & Schafer X-Ray Company in Bayville, NJ applies a phytoremediation technique that could work.

BIOLOGICAL REMEDIATION PROJECT Site 1: Bog Creek Farm, Howell, NJ During the early 1970s, various contaminants were dumped into a trench on this property including VOCs such as benzene, TCE, chloroform, and toluene (EPA, 2011, p.1). All of these chemicals are known to either be harmful to human health, either by causing cancer, problems with the central nervous system, or various other problems (ADSTR, 2011, p.1). They leached into the groundwater and then into other water bodies nearby. The EPA rated the groundwater contaminant plume migration as more hazardous before remediation was done, but concluded that there was no threat to drinking water wells (EPA, 2011, p.1). Even though the site has already undergone remediation, there are several bioremediation techniques that could have been used. The most effective was deemed bioventing, which will be the focus of this analysis. This method involves microbial respiration which requires an electron donor and acceptor to yield waste products. These microorganisms would destroy the contaminants and the whole process is enhanced by the injection of oxygen through wells or nutrient injection. There are a couple operable units that would need to be established. The first would be a set of injection and monitoring wells in the area where the dumping occurred, at the 150 foot long trench on the eastern part of the property. These wells would penetrate into the vadose zone where the contaminated groundwater is. Bioventing does not work well with moist soils because it dehydrates them and reduces the availability of oxygen, so it is important to keep the wells away from the water table as well as introduce oxygen through the wells along with the microorganisms (EPA, 1994). A monitoring device for vapor at the soil surface will also be installed for extra assurance. In addition, high water tables would also impact the bioventing process negatively, which is why it would be important to ensure that the wells go down far enough to where they can be of use but at the same time not come in contact with the water table.

BIOLOGICAL REMEDIATION PROJECT According to the Township of Howell, the average water table depth in the Bog Creek region is greater than 5 feet (Township of Howell, 2008, p.27). This qualifies bioventing to work efficiently, since water tables less than 5 feet below the ground are considered too high. With bioventing, the process of reductive dechlorination takes place with the microorganisms, in this case native bacteria, serving as an electron donor and the oxygen and contaminants serving as electron acceptors, this creating a reaction that breaks down the VOCs. During reducing conditions, chlorine ions are replaced with hydrogen atoms. The whole process is controlled by methanogens and chlororespiration. The second operable unit of monitoring and injection wells would be established close to the other water bodies. Careful attention would be paid to follow the criteria for installing wells for bioventing that were discussed before, so that the wells are still out of contact with the water table, yet in an effective spot. The same process and bacteria would be used, with hopes that the VOCs disintegrate before more content leaches further into the water bodies including the Squankum Brook, which leads to a major river. The only slight adjustment would be to add more oxygen in the injection wells, simply due to the increased proximity to the water bodies. To remediate the water bodies themselves, other remediation technologies outside bioremediation need to be explored, such as pump-and-treat. Site 2: Denzer & Schafer X-Ray Company, Bayville, NJ The Denzer & Schafer X-Ray Company reclaimed silver from microfilm and x-ray negatives. The stripping solutions used had been disposed of in the septic system, as well as microfilm processing waste from 1974 to 1981. Prior to 1974 films were also stored shredded and incinerated on site. Contaminants on site included VOCs including chloroform and toluene, and heavy metals including arsenic, chromium, lead, and mercury, in the groundwater. The soil was

BIOLOGICAL REMEDIATION PROJECT contaminated with cadmium and immobile lead. Below the site is the Cohansey Aquifer, which is shallow to the surface. The VOCs were found to have dissipated or degraded by 1995, and the only contaminants above acceptable concentrations were cadmium in the soil, as well as three samples containing lead above the federal drinking water standard. The higher concentrations of lead are immobile and surrounding the immediate source area. No action was taken except for a restriction on wells in the immediate surroundings and the removal of hazardous stripping solution, 36 drums of hazardous substances, and the underground storage tank. Phytoremediation could have been used to clean up the contaminants on site. The site could have been broken up into 2 operable units, soil and groundwater. The soil operable unit (OU1) would be taking up the cadmium as well as the immobile lead with the help of a chelant and plant life. The groundwater operable unit (OU2) would also use plant life to take up lead from the ground water, as well as some of the other, low level, contaminants. In OU1, chelant would be used to mobilize the lead in the soil, which would be taken care of in OU2. Sunflowers would be used to take up the cadmium through phytoextraction, as they have a high tolerance for cadmium, as well as a high natural uptake (Smolders, 2001). The sunflower store the cadmium in the seeds, this would require the harvesting of the flower before the seeds dropped to prevent recontamination. Sunflower can also survive lead uptake up to 500 g/ml (Begonia, 2007), so shallow mobilized lead will also be taken into the roots of the sunflower. For OU2, trees will be planted as a means of taking up lead and other contaminants from the groundwater through phytoextraction. This would work well as the contaminated groundwater was found to be immobile. Thus, any water taken up by the trees would have potential to absorb the lead contaminant, with the more water taken up, the more lead would be

BIOLOGICAL REMEDIATION PROJECT drawn to and absorbed into the roots. The only possible issue would be disturbance of contaminants in the soil in the planting process, but as the underground storage tank was successfully removed, this should not be an issue. Appendix Site Description: Bog Creek Farm A 4-acre disposal area was located on the 12-acre Bog Creek Farm, which contained a pond, bog, and trench. Between 1973 and 1974, organic solvents and paint residues were dumped around a trench in the eastern part of the property. Waste sampling revealed a wide variety of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and heavy metals. Some chemicals moved into the ground water, which carried them to the pond and bog, as well as to the north branch of Squankum Brook. Contaminant levels in the north branch of Squankum Brook decreased markedly with distance from the site and did not appear to affect the Manasquan River. The site lies in a rural agricultural and recreational area. Farms which raise horses, nursery stock, vegetables, grain, sod, and flowers are situated nearby. The Allaire State Park is 1/2 mile east of the site and is used by golfers, fishermen, hunters, and equestrians. There are two homes on the site and several more about 500 feet to the northwest, on Squankum Park Road. Approximately 900 people live within 1 mile of the site. The town of Farmingdale, 3 miles north of the site, has approximately 1,400 residents. Groundwater is the sole drinking water source for residents near the site and is also used for irrigation. Nearby surface waters are used for recreation. Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through Federal actions (EPA, 2012, p.1).

BIOLOGICAL REMEDIATION PROJECT

Figure 1: Overview of Bog Creek Farm (Google Maps, 2011) Site Description: Denzer & Schafer X-Ray Company The Denzer & Schafer X-Ray Company is located on Block 858, Lot 46A on the northside Lane (number 186) approximately 4,700 feet west of Route 9 in the Bayville area of Berkeley Township. The size of the property is approximately 10 acres. Barnegat Bay is approximately two miles to the east of the site, and Toms River is two miles to the north. The Site is situated between two drainage systems. Potter Creek, which flows east to Barnegat Bay, is approximately 2,000 feet to the south. Wetlands associated with the headwaters of Mill Creek are 2,000 feet to the west' and north. Mill Creek is a northeast flowing tributary of Toms River. An unpaved access road runs across the north end of the Denzer & Schafer property roughly parallel to Hickory Lane. Single family residential neighborhoods are located to the north, northeast and east of the Site. Six commercial buildings and one residence are located to the west along Hickory Lane. Approximately 2,000 feet to the west are the Central Railroad of New Jersey

BIOLOGICAL REMEDIATION PROJECT tracks. A quarry and the Berkeley Township sewage treatment plant are tracks.(EPA, 2011, p.9)

References ATSDR. (2011). Trichloroethylene (TCE). Retrieved from http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/substances/toxsubstance.asp?toxid=30 ATSDR. (2011). Toluene. Retrieved from http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/substances/toxsubstance.asp?toxid=29 ATSDR. (2011). Benzene. Retrieved from http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/substances/toxsubstance.asp?toxid=14 ATSDR. (2011). Chloroform. Retrieved from http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/substances/toxsubstance.asp?toxid=16 Begonia, G. (7007). mscad.org. In Department of Biology, Jackson State University, Jackson, MS 39217 Retrieved from http://www.msacad.org/journal/ejour3.html EPA. (2012, February). Bog Creek Farm Superfund Site. (p. 1-2). Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/region02/superfund/npl/0200397c.pdf EPA. (1998). Npl fact sheet for denzer & schafer x-ray company. Retrieved from: www.epa.gov/Region2/superfund/npl/0200321c.pdf EPA. (2011). Third five year review for denzer and schafer x-ray company superfund site. Retrieved from www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/fiveyear/f2011020003831.pdf EPA. (2011). Superfund Site Report: Bog Creek Farm GoodGuide. Retrieved from http://scorecard.goodguide.com/env-releases/land/site.tcl?epa_id=NJD06315715 0#maps

BIOLOGICAL REMEDIATION PROJECT EPA. (1994). Bioventing. (p.1-46). Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/oust/pubs/tum_ch3.pdf Google Maps. (2011) Howell, NJ [Map]. Retrieved April 25, 2012, from: http://www.maps.google.com Smolders, E. (2001). Cadmium uptake by plants. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 14(2), 177-183. Retrieved from est.imp.lodz.pl/upload/oficyna/artykuly/pdf/full/Smol10-02-01.pdf Township of Howell. (2008, November). Environmental Resource Inventory. (p.1-27). Retrieved from http://www.twp.howell.nj.us/filestorage/8254/8269/6951/Howell_ERI_Main.pdf