CLU-IN.ORG | Technology Focus: PERMEABLE REACTIVE BARRIERS, PERMEABLE TREATMENT ZONES, AND APPLICATION OF ZERO-VALENT IRON, Application

Permeable Reactive Barriers, Permeable Treatment Zones, and Application of Zero-Valent Iron

Select a Topic | Technology Focus Home | Suggest Resource

◊ Air Sparging
◊ Bioreactor Landfills
◊ Bioremediation of Chlorinated Solvents
◊ Bioventing and Biosparging
◊ Electrokinetics: Electric Current Technologies
◊ Fracturing
◊ Ground-Water Circulating Wells
◊ In Situ Flushing
◊ In Situ Oxidation
◊ Multi-Phase Extraction
◊ Natural Attenuation
◊ Permeable Reactive Barriers
◊ Phytoremediation
◊ Remediation Optimization
◊ Soil Vapor Extraction
◊ Soil Washing
◊ Solvent Extraction
◊ Thermal Treatment: Ex Situ
◊ Thermal Treatment: In Situ

Application

Application of Zero-Valent Iron

Cost and Performance Report: Nanoscale Zero-Valent Iron Technologies for Source Remediation
A. Gavaskar, L. Tatar, and W. Condit
Environmental Security Technology Certification Program, CR-05-007-ENV, 54 pp, 2005.

Permeable Reactive Barriers

Cost and Performance Case Studies from the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

Alternatives for Mending a Permeable Reactive Barrier at a Former Uranium Milling Site: Monticello, Utah
U.S. DOE, Grand Junction, CO. ESL-RPT-2005-02, DOE-LM/GJ850-2005, 88 pp, 2005.

In 1999, DOE installed a ZVI PRB downgradient of a former uranium milling site near Monticello, UT. Some contaminated ground water is flowing around the south slurry wall, and methods are being considered that might be used to mend the gap. This report contains spreadsheet calculations of costs for seven mending alternatives.

An Assessment of Zero Valence Iron Permeable Reactive Barrier Projects in California
J. Muegge, California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Document 1219, 154 pp, 2008

A review of the performance of 10 PRBs installed primarily to address chlorinated contaminants indicates that a ZVI PRB should not be expected to provide near-term improvement of water quality very far below its installation. The same levels observed downgradient of a PRB before its installation can persist for extended periods (often decades) despite the presence of a PRB. The PRBs were installed at Alameda Naval Air Station, BP-Hitco, DuPont Oakley, Fairchild/Applied Materials, Intersil, Moffett Field, Mohawk Laboratory, Sierra Army Depot (2 separate PRBs), and Travis Air Force Base.

Attenuated Anaerobic Dechlorination of Groundwater Using HRC®. Mactec - Harding ESE: Demonstration Bulletin
U.S. EPA, Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.
EPA 540-R-08-003, 2 pp, 2008

An in situ PRB was designed that utilizes Hydrogen Release Compound (HRC®) to treat ground water contaminated with chlorinated compounds. A demonstration of this technology was conducted in 2000 near the Fisherville Mill brownfields site in South Grafton, MA, to determine its effectiveness in eliminating TCE and daughter products from the ground water. The cleanup criteria were not achieved at the downgradient monitoring wells over a period of 2 years despite extensive conversion of TCE to DCE.

Capstone Report on the Application, Monitoring, and Performance of Permeable Reactive Barriers for Ground-Water Remediation, Volume 1: Performance Evaluations at Two Sites
2003. R.T. Wilkin and R.W. Puls, U.S. EPA, National Risk Management Research Lab., Ada, OK. EPA 600-R-03-045a, 156 pp.

Capstone Report on the Application, Monitoring, and Performance of Permeable Reactive Barriers for Ground-Water Remediation, Volume 2: Long-Term Monitoring of PRBs Soil and Ground Water Sampling
2003. C.J. Paul; M.S. McNeil; F.P. Beck, Jr.; P.J. Clark; R.T. Wilkin; R.W. Puls. EPA 600-R-03-045b, 145 pp.

DNAPL Remediation: Selected Projects Approaching Regulatory Closure
EPA 542-R-04-016, 2004

This paper is a status update on the use of DNAPL source reduction remedial technologies, and provides information about recent projects where regulatory closure has been reached or projects that are approaching regulatory closure, following source reduction. Information is presented about the challenges associated with DNAPL remediation, the types of in situ technologies used, and data and findings concerning the relative effectiveness of field applications of these technologies. Appendix A contains project profiles for eight field applications that illustrate some of the findings presented in this paper.

DOE Permeable Reactive Barriers Projects Page

Design, Construction and Monitoring of a Permeable Reactive Barrier Technology for Use at Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS)
2000. Dwyer, Brian P., Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM, Report No: SAND2000-2702. NTIS: DE00767720. 65 pp.

Design, Construction, and Monitoring of the Permeable Reactive Barrier in Area 5 at Dover Air Force Base
2000. Gavaskar, Arun; Neeraj Gupta; Bruce Sass; Woong-Sang Yoon; Robert Janosy, Battelle, Columbus, OH. Report No: AFRL-ML-WP-TR-2000-4546. NTIS: ADA380005. 399 pp.

Enhancements to Natural Attenuation: Selected Case Studies
T.O. Early (ed.).
WSRC-STI-2007-00250, 132 pp, 2007

Presents case studies of engineered covers; biostimulation and bioaugmentation to address trichloroethene (TCE) contamination at Cape Canaveral, FL; a ZVI PRB for TCE and chromate at the U.S. Coast Guard Support Center, Elizabeth City, NC; a full-scale mulch biowall for TCE at Offutt Air Force Base, NE; and a wetland enhancement/reactive mat for TCE, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane at Aberdeen Proving Ground.

Evaluation of Permeable Reactive Barrier Performance
EPA 542-R-04-004, 2004

This report on the performance of permeable reactive barriers (PRB) for groundwater remediation was prepared under the auspices of the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable, a collaborative effort among federal agencies involved in hazardous waste site cleanup. Three United States (U.S.) government agencies, the Department of Defense (DoD), Department of Energy (DOE), and United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as the Interstate Technologies and Regulatory Council (ITRC) contributed to the report, which is a concise summary of the conclusions and recommendations of the three agencies' individual studies at different sites.

Field Applications of In Situ Remediation Technologies: Permeable Reactive Barriers
2002

RTDF Permeable Reactive Barrier Installation Profiles

This document summarizes technical data and lessons learned from profiles of more than 40 installations of permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) for ground-water remediation in the United States, Canada, and selected locations abroad. Included are data from ongoing and completed pilot- and full-scale PRB demonstrations and full-scale cleanups. More in-depth information about each of the sites included in this summary document is available on the RTDF web site.

Field Demonstration of Permeable Reactive Barriers to Remove Dissolved Uranium from Groundwater, Fry Canyon, Utah, September 1997 through September 1998: Interim Report
2000. David L. Naftz, et al. EPA 402-C-00-001, 98 pp.

Fry Canyon, UT, USGS Project Home Page

Groundwater Remediation Using In-Situ Treatment Walls
[Conference presentation slides] 1998. S. O'Hannesin, EnviroMetal Technologies, Inc. GWRTAC. 49 pp.

Handbook of Groundwater Remediation Using Permeable Reactive Barriers: Applications to Radionuclides, Trace Metals, and Nutrients
2002. David Naftz, et al. (eds.). Academic Press, San Diego, CA. ISBN: 0125135637, 550 pp.

This handbook offers numerous case studies to introduce the reader to current applications, innovations, and methods for using PRBs in the removal of inorganic contaminants from ground water.

In Situ Chemical Reduction (ISCR) Technologies: Significance of Low eH Reactions
J. Dolfing, M. Van Eekert, A. Seech, J. Vogan, and J. Muellers.
Soil & Sediment Contamination, Vol 17 No 1, p 63-74, Jan 2008

In March 2005, 22,000 kg of ISCR reagent was injected to form an 82-m PRB across a plume of dissolved-phase carbon tetrachloride (CT) about 150 m downgradient of the suspected source area. The ISCR reagent slurry was injected at 126 injection points advanced via direct push. By August 2006, CT concentrations had decreased from > 1,600 ppb to < 5 ppb, achieving > 99% removal.

An In Situ Permeable Reactive Barrier for the Treatment of Hexavalent Chromium and Trichloroethylene in Ground Water
D.W. Blowes, et al.
EPA 600-R-99-095a, EPA 600-R-99-095b, and EPA 600-R-99-095c, 1999.

Volume 1: Design and Installation

Volume 2: Performance Monitoring

Volume 3: Multicomponent Reactive Transport Modeling

In Situ Remediation Technology Status Report: Research and Application of Permeable Barriers
1998

This document is an attempt to compile worldwide research efforts and applications in the field of permeable reactive barriers (PRB). Research projects are organized by the type of contamination treated (organics or inorganics) and by the type of reaction process (sorption, precipitation, substitution, or degradation), and then by the specific material. Field projects are organized by state, province, or country.

In Situ Remediation Technology Status Report: Treatment Walls
EPA 542-K-94-004, 1994

Describes field demonstrations or full-scale applications of in situ abiotic technologies for nonaqueous phase liquids and ground water treatment.

Innovative Technology Evaluation Report: EnviroMetal Technologies, Inc., Metal-Enhanced Dechlorination of Volatile Organic Compounds Using an In-Situ Reactive Iron Wall
EPA 540-R-98-501, 1998. 110 pp.

Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Optimization, Clare Water Supply Superfund Site, Permeable Reactive Barrier and Soil Remedy Areas, Clare, Michigan
EPA 542-R-07-010, 2007

This report contains a review of the long-term groundwater monitoring network for the Permeable Reactive Barrier (PRB) and Soil Remedy Areas at the Clare Water Supply Superfund Site in Clare, Michigan. The current monitoring network in each area was evaluated using a formal qualitative approach and statistical tools found in the Monitoring and Remediation Optimization System software (MAROS). The report also contains recommendations for the groundwater monitoring networks based the results of these qualitative and quantitative evaluations.

Long-Term Performance Assessment of a Permeable Reactive Barrier at Former Naval Air Station Moffett Field
A. Gavaskar, W.S. Yoon, J. Sminchak, B. Sass, N. Gupta, J. Hicks, and V. Lal.
Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center, Port Hueneme, CA. CR-05-006-ENV, 37 pp, 2005.

A pilot-scale PRB filled with zero-valent iron was installed at former Naval Air Station Moffett Field in April 1996 to address chlorinated organics in the ground water. It was monitored periodically for the next 8 years. This report describes the results of the last round of monitoring conducted in July 2004, the relationship of the recent results to those of previous rounds, and implications for the longevity and hydraulic performance of the PRB.

Long-Term Performance of Permeable Reactive Barriers Using Zero-Valent Iron: An Evaluation at Two Sites. Environmental Research Brief
2002. R.T. Wilkin, R.W. Puls, G.W. Sewell, U.S. EPA, Ada, OK. EPA 600-S-02-001, 19 pp.

Mine Waste Technology Program: Permeable Treatment Wall Effectiveness Monitoring Project, Nevada Stewart Mine
A.L. McCloskey.
EPA 600-R-06-153, 100 pp (plus appendices A-F, 282 pp), 2007

This project demonstrates the effectiveness of Apatite II™ (cleaned fishbone) to remove metals (zinc, iron, manganese, lead, and cadmium) from water flowing from a mining site.

Nease Chemical Site, Columbiana County, Ohio - Technology Update #2: Nanotechnology
U.S. EPA Region 5, 2 pp, June 2007

A field study was conducted at the site in November 2006 to confirm the effectiveness of injecting nanoscale zero-valent iron (NZVI) to treat highly contaminated ground water in fractured sedimentary bedrock and to support the design of the full-scale treatment approach. One hundred kg of NZVI in 2,665 gallons of clean water were injected into a highly contaminated portion of the aquifer. The iron was injected in batches containing powdered soy as an organic dispersant, and most batches contained a small amount of palladium. Substantial reductions of PCE (38 to 88% of initial concentrations) and TCE (30 to 70%) were noted in all wells.

Passive Reactive Barrier. Innovative Technology Summary Report
2002. U.S. DOE, Office of Environmental Management. DOE/EM-0623, 37 pp.

This report describes the performance of two PRBs installed at DOE's Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee.

Performance Assessment and Recommendations for Rejuvenation of a Permeable Reactive Barrier: Cotter Corporation's Canon City, Colorado, Uranium Mill
U.S. DOE, Grand Junction, CO. ESL-RPT-2005-02, DOE-LM/GJ816-2005, 130 pp, 2005.

The Cotter Corporation PRB, which was installed to remediate high levels of molybdenum and uranium in the ground water, has not functioned as well as expected, and a study was conducted to determine possible causes for the early breakthrough of molybdenum. This report discusses the performance problems and identifies barrier rejuvenation options for further evaluation and development.

Permeable Reactive Barrier/Geosiphon Treatment System for Metals Contaminated Groundwater. Final Report
1999. Washburn, F.A.; M.E. Denham; W.E. Jones; M.A. Phifer; F.C. Sappington, Westinghouse Savannah River Co., Aiken, SC, Report No: WSRC-RP-99-01063. NTIS: DE00750656. 191 pp.

Permeable Reactive Barriers for Inorganic and Radionuclide Contamination
2005

This document was prepared by Kate Bronstein, a National Network of Environmental Management studies grantee, under a fellowship from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This paper is meant to be an updated reference for project managers, engineers, students, and others interested in a review of case studies of the instances where permeable reactive barriers have been used to remediate sites contaminated with inorganics and radionuclides. This paper mainly focuses on case studies, but a brief overview is given on topics such as: treatment media types, reactive processes, site characterization, configuration, and the nature of contamination.

Permeable Reactive Treatment (PeRT) Wall for Rads and Metals. Innovative Technology Summary Report
2000. U.S. DOE, Office of Environmental Management, Report No: DOE/EM-0557, 21 pp.

Permeable Reactive Wall Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons in Groundwater: ESTCP Cost and Performance Report (CU-9604)
1999, ESTCP

Report for Full-Scale Mulch Wall Treatment of Chlorinated Hydrocarbon-Impacted Groundwater
2004. Groundwater Services, Inc., Houston, TX. DTIC: ADA422621, 97 pp.

Treatment Walls: A Status Update
[Conference presentation slides] 1997. J.A. Sacre, GWRTAC. 24 pp.

The Trench and Gate Groundwater Remediation System
1997. Marc W. Bowles, Master's thesis, University of Calgary, 250 pp.

The trench-and-gate PRB is a modified funnel-and-gate system suitable for installation in tills. Modifications include the addition of high hydraulic conductivity trenches along the upgradient side of the funnel walls and a reinfiltration gallery down-gradient of the treatment gate. Preferential groundwater flow through the added high permeability infrastructure prevents mounding and induces a capture zone both horizontally, and vertically larger than the cross-sectional funnel area. Coupled with bioremediation catalyzed by biosparging, or other remediation technologies, the system constitutes an economical, long-term, in situ method for contaminant plume capture and treatment, suitable for low to moderate permeability sediments. A prototype trench and gate was successfully installed at the East Garrington Gas Plant, Alberta, Canada.

Permeable Treatment Zones

Cost and Performance Case Studies from the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

Demonstration of In Situ Dehalogenation of DNAPL Through Injection of Emulsified Zero-Valent Iron at Launch Complex 34 in Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida: Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
A. Gavaskar, W.-S. Yoon, M. Gaberell, E. Drescher, L. Cumming, J. Sminchak, J. Hicks, B. Buxton, M. Morara, T. Wilk, and L. Bahn.
EPA 540-R-07-006, 223 pp, 2004

The field demonstration of emulsified zero-valent iron (EZVI) technology for treatment of a TCE DNAPL source zone began at Launch Complex 34 in June 2002 and ended in January 2003. Long-term ground-water monitoring results collected in December 2003 and March 2004 indicate that the EZVI treatment had a long-lasting effect on the chlorinated contaminants in the subsurface. TCE, cis-1,2-DCE, and (eventually) VC levels declined sharply in the one year following EZVI injection, and ethene levels increased substantially.

Edible Oil Barriers for Treatment of Perchlorate Contaminated Groundwater
2005

This final technical report documents the demonstration of emulsified edible oil barriers for groundwater remediation at a confidential perchlorate site in Maryland. The general purpose of the demonstration was to evaluate the efficacy of emulsified oils for treating perchlorate contaminated groundwater. A second demonstration was performed as part of this project to evaluate the use of emulsified oils for remediation of chlorinated solvent impacted groundwater at the Charleston Naval Weapons Station (NWS) in South Carolina. The work at the Charleston NWS is still ongoing and will be reported separately. In addition, a technical protocol document is being written under this demonstration project which describes in detail the use of emulsified oils for enhanced anaerobic bioremediation of perchlorate and chlorinated solvents.

Electrically Induced Redox Barriers for Treatment of Groundwater
T. Sale, M. Petersen, and D. Gilbert.
Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), CU-0112, NTIS: ADA438421, 187 pp, 2005

Closely spaced permeable electrodes can be installed through a ground-water contaminant plume in the format of a permeable reactive barrier, called an e-barrier. An e-barrier was installed at F.E. Warren Air Force Base in August 2002 in the path of a shallow alluvial TCE plume. This report documents results from a three-year collaboration between ESTCP and Colorado State University on the development and testing of this innovative electrolytic approach for managing redox-sensitive contaminants in ground water.

FY2003 Annual Summary Report for the In Situ Redox Manipulation Operations
R.F. Raidl and G.G. Kelty.
DOE/RL-2004-06, OSTI: DE00825446, 85 pp, May 2004

This progress and performance report discusses the in situ redox manipulation (ISRM) interim remedial action at the Hanford 100-HR-3 Operable Unit to address the hexavalent chromium plume in the southwest portion of the 100-D Area. Implementation of the ISRM technology involves creating a permeable subsurface treatment zone by injecting sodium dithionite into the aquifer, which creates a chemically reduced environment. Hexavalent chromium passing through the treatment zone is reduced to less toxic and less mobile trivalent chromium.

Groundwater Monitoring Network Optimization, Frontier Hard Chrome Superfund Site, Vancouver, Washington
EPA 542-R-07-021, 2007

This report reviews and provides recommendations for instituting a long-term groundwater monitoring network for Frontier Hard Chrome (FHC) Superfund Site in Vancouver, Washington. The FHC Site is a former chrome plating facility in the floodplain of the Colombia River. The current FHC groundwater monitoring network has been evaluated using a formal qualitative approach as well as statistical tools found in the Monitoring and Remediation Optimization System software (MAROS). Recommendations are made for groundwater sampling frequency and location based on current hydrogeologic conditions and long-term monitoring goals for the system. The primary goal of developing an optimized groundwater monitoring strategy at the FHC Site is to create a dataset that fully supports site management decisions while minimizing time and expense associated with collecting and interpreting data.

In Situ Bioremediation of MTBE in Groundwater
P. Johnson, C. Bruce, and K. Miller.
TR-2222-ENV, 118 pp, 2003

A biologically reactive ground-water flow-through barrier (a 'biobarrier') was established at the Naval Base Ventura County, Port Hueneme, CA, to prevent further contamination of ground water by MTBE leaching from gasoline-contaminated soils. The biobarrier was installed downgradient of a gasoline-spill source zone. Ground water containing dissolved MTBE flowed to and through the biobarrier, and the microorganisms in the treatment zone converted MTBE to carbon dioxide and water. Gas injection wells were installed to introduce oxygen into the treatment zone.

In Situ Chemical Reduction of Cr(VI) in Groundwater Using a Combination of Ferrous Sulfate and Sodium Dithionite: A Field Investigation
R.D. Ludwig, C. Su, T.R. Lee, R.T. Wilkin, S.D. Acree, R.R. Ross, and A. Keeley.
Environmental Science & Technology, Vol 41 No 15, p 5299-5305, 2007

A field study was conducted to evaluate the performance of an in situ redox zone for the treatment of a dissolved-phase hexavalent chromium (Cr[VI]) plume at a former industrial site. The in situ redox zone was created by injecting a blend of 0.2M ferrous sulfate and 0.2M sodium dithionite into the path of the plume within a shallow, unconfined aquifer formation of medium-to-fine sand. Monitoring data collected over a period of 1,020 days after more than 100 m of linear ground-water flow through the treatment zone indicated sustained treatment of dissolved-phase Cr(VI) from initial concentrations between 4 and 8 mg/L to less than 0.015 mg/L.

In Situ Reactive Zones (IRZ) Data Sheet
U.S. Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Environmental Restoration Technology Transfer, Multimedia Training Tools website, 16 pp, 2005.

In Situ Redox Manipulation Permeable Reactive Barrier Emplacement: Final Report, Frontier Hard Chrome Superfund Site, Vancouver, WA
V.R. Vermeul, M.L. Rockhold, B.N. Bjornstad, J.E. Szecsody, C.J. Murray, M.D. Williams, D.R. Newcomer, and Y. Xie.
PNWD-3361, 107 pp + separate appendices, 2004

This report documents results from the emplacement of an in situ redox manipulation (ISRM) treatment zone for the remediation of chromate-contaminated ground water.