Remediation Technologies Screening Matrix, Version 4.0 4.13 Land Treatment
(Ex Situ Soil Remediation Technology)
  Description Synonyms Applicability Limitations Site Information Points of Contact
Data Needs Performance Cost References Vendor Info. Health & Safety
Table of Contents
Technology>>Soil, Sediment, Bedrock and Sludge

>>3.4 Ex Situ Biological Treatment (assuming excavation)

      >>4.13 Land Treatment
Introduction>> Contaminated surface soil is treated in place by tilling to achieve aeration, and if necessary, by addition of amendments. Periodically tilling, to aerate the waste, enhances the biological activity.


Figure 4-13:
Typical Land Treatment Unit
Land Treatment is a full-scale bioremediation technology in which contaminated soils, sediments, or sludges are turned over (i.e., tilled) and allowed to interact with the soil and climate at the site. The waste, soil, climate, and biological activity interact dynamically as a system to degrade, transform, and immobilize waste constitutes. Wastes are periodically tilled to aerate the waste.

Soil conditions are often controlled to optimize the rate of contaminant degradation. Conditions normally controlled include:

  • Moisture content (usually by irrigation or spraying).
  • Aeration (by tilling the soil with a predetermined frequency, the soil is mixed and aerated).
  • pH (buffered near neutral pH by adding crushed limestone or agricultural lime).
  • Other amendments (e.g., Soil bulking agents, nutrients, etc.).

A Land Treatment site must be managed properly to prevent both on-site and off-site problems with ground water, surface water, air, or food chain contamination. Adequate monitoring and environmental safeguards are required.

Land Treatment is a medium- to long-term technology.

back to top


Solid phase treatment; Landfarming; Land application, Land tilling.
DSERTS Code: H15 (Land Treatment).

back to top


Soil bioremediation has been proven most successful in treating petroleum hydrocarbons and other less volatile, biodegradable contaminants. Because lighter, more volatile hydrocarbons such as gasoline are treated very successfully by processes that use their volatility [i.e., soil vapor (vacuum) extraction and bioventing], the use of aboveground bioremediation is usually limited to heavier hydrocarbons. As a rule of thumb, the higher the molecular weight (and the more rings with a PAH), the slower the degradation rate. Also, the more chlorinated or nitrated the compound, the more difficult it is to degrade. (Note: Many mixed products and wastes include some volatile components that transfer to the atmosphere before they can be degraded.)

Contaminants that have been successfully treated include diesel fuel, No. 2 and No. 6 fuel oils, JP-5, oily sludge, wood-preserving wastes (PCP, PAHs, and creosote), coke wastes, and certain pesticides.

back to top


Factors that may limit the applicability and effectiveness of the process include:
  • A large amount of space is required.
  • Conditions affecting biological degradation of contaminants (e.g., temperature, rain fall) are largely uncontrolled, which increases the length of time to complete remediation.
  • Inorganic contaminants will not be biodegraded.
  • Volatile contaminants, such as solvents, must be pretreated because they would evaporate into the atmosphere, causing air pollution.
  • Dust control is an important consideration, especially during tilling and other material handling operations.
  • Presence of metal ions may be toxic to the microbes and possibly leach from the contaminated soil into the ground.
  • Runoff collection facilities must be constructed and monitored.
  • Topography, erosion, climate, soil stratigraphy, and permeability of the soil at the site must be evaluated to determine the optimum design of facility.
  • Waste constitutes may be subject to "Land-ban" regulation and thus may not be applied to soil for treatment by land treatment (e.g., some petroleum sludges).
  • The depth of treatment is limited to the depth of achievable tilling (normally 18 inches).

back to top

Data Needs:

A detailed discussion of these data elements is provided in Subsection 2.2.1 (Data Requirements for Soil, Sediment, and Sludge). The following contaminant considerations should be addressed prior to implementation: types and concentrations of contaminants, depth profile and distribution of contaminants, presence of toxic contaminants, presence of VOCs, and presence of inorganic contaminants (e.g., metals).

The following site and soil considerations should be addressed prior to implementation: surface geological features (e.g., topography and vegetative cover), subsurface geological and hydrogeological features, climate, precipitation, wind velocity and direction, water availability, soil type and texture, soil moisture content, soil organic matter content, cation exchange capacity, water-holding capacity, nutrient content, pH, permeability, and microorganisms (degradative populations present at site).

In some cases, the presence of co-contaminants, that is contaminants which are not the primary contaminants of concern, may have appreciable effects on land treatment. Ecotoxicity tests may also be helpful in characterizing the performance of land treatment operations.

back to top

Performance Data:

Numerous full-scale operations have been used, particularly for sludges produced by the petroleum industry. As with other biological treatments, under proper conditions, land treatment can transform contaminants into nonhazardous substances. Removal efficiencies, however, are a function of contaminant type and concentrations, soil type, temperature, moisture, waste loading rates, application frequency, aeration, volatilization, and other factors.

back to top


Ranges of costs likely to be encountered are:
  • Costs prior to treatment (assumed to be independent of volume to be treated): $25,000 to $50,000 for laboratory studies; about $100,000 for pilot tests or field demonstrations.
  • Cost of land treatment: $30 to $70 per cubic meter ($25 to $50 per cubic yard).

back to top


California Base Closure Environmental Committee (CBCEC), 1994. Treatment Technologies Applications Matrix for Base Closure Activities, Revision 1, Technology Matching Process Action Team, November, 1994.

EPA, 1990. Bioremediation in the Field, EPA/540/2-90-004.

Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable, 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation, EPA/542/R-95/002.

Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable, 1997. Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation and Vitrification, EPA/542/R-97/008.

Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable, 1998. Remediation Case Studies: Ex Situ Soil Treatment Technologies (Bioremediation and Vitrification), EPA/542/R-98/011.

Norris, et al., 1994. Handbook of Bioremediation, EPA, RSKERL, Lewis Publishers, CRC Press, 200 Corporate Boulevard, Boca Raton, FL 33431.

Pope, D.F. and J.E. Matthews, 1993. Bioremediation Using the Land Treatment Concept, EPA Report EPA/600/R-93/164.

Sims, J.L., et al., 1989. Bioremediation of Contaminated Surface Soils, EPA, RSKERL, EPA Report EPA/600/9-89/073.

USACE, 1996. Champion International Superfund Site, Libby, Montana: Bioremediation Field Performance Evaluation of the Prepared Bed Land Treatment Systems, EPA/600/R-95/156.

USACE, 1996. Bioremediation Using Landfarming Systems, Engineering Technical Letter (ETL), ETL 1110-1-176.

USACE, 1996. Bioremediation Using Landfarming Systems, USACE Guide Specification, CEGS 02287.

back to top

Site Information:

back to top

Points of Contact:

General FRTR Agency Contacts

Technology Specific Web Sites:

Government Web Sites

back to top

Vendor Information:

A list of vendors offering In Situ Biological Treatment is available from the Vendor Information System for Innovative Treatment Technologies (VISITT) developed by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Government Disclaimer

back to top

Health and Safety:

Hazard Analysis

back to top

Introduction Contaminants Treatments/Profiles References Appendices Navigation