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

Overview Guidance Application Training Additional Resources

Guidance

Design Guidance for Application of Permeable Barriers to Remediate Dissolved Chlorinated Solvents
1997. A. Gavaskar, et al., USACE/USAF. DG 1110-345-117, AL/EQ-TR-1997-0014, 192 pp.

Design Guidance for Application of Permeable Reactive Barriers for Groundwater Remediation
2000. A. Gavaskar, et al.,U.S. DoD/ESTCP, 247 pp.

Economic Analysis of the Implementation of Permeable Reactive Barriers for Remediation of Contaminated Ground Water
Published: 2002. R.M. Powell, P.D. Powell, R.W. Puls. EPA 600-R-02-034, 42 pp.

Evaluating the Longevity and Hydraulic Performance of Permeable Reactive Barriers at Department of Defense Sites. ESTCP Cost and Performance Report
2003. U.S. DoD, Environmental Security Technology Certification Program, Project CU-9907, 69 pp.

Evaluation and Design of Permeable Reactive Barriers Amidst Heterogeneity
2000

This 384-page paper is a PhD Dissertation reporting a study that investigated the impact of aquifer and PRB heterogeneity on influent and effluent from three types of PRB, a horizontal flow PRB, a funnel and gate PRB, and a caisson PRB. This work has been published by Elder et al in the journal Water Resources Research, Vol. 38, No. 8.

Innovative Measures for Subsurface Chromium Remediation: Source Zone, Concentrated Plume, and Dilute Plume
EPA 600-S-97-005, 1997. D.A. Sabatini, et al. 16 pp.

Long-Term Performance of Permeable Reactive Barriers
2004. K.E. Roehl; T. Meggyes; F.-G. Simon; D.I. Stewart (eds.). Elsevier, New York. Trace Metals and Other Contaminants in the Environment, Vol 7. ISBN: 0-444-51536-4, 272 pp.

NATO/CCMS Pilot Study on Evaluation of Demonstrated and Emerging Technologies for the Treatment of Contaminated Land and Groundwater (Phase III) 1998 Special Session: Treatment Walls and Permeable Reactive Barriers
EPA 542-R-98-003 , 1998

This volume contains the proceedings of a special session on the construction, reactive materials, and international case studies held February 22-23, 1998.

Permeable Reactive Barriers: Lessons Learned/New Directions
2005. Interstate Technology and Regulatory Cooperation Work Group (ITRC). 202 pp.

Lessons Learned/New Directions was prepared by the ITRC Permeable Reactive Barriers Team to update previous guidance written by the team. The goal for this document was to compile the information and data on permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) that have been generated over the last 10 years of technology development and research, as well as to provide information on noniron-based reactive media that can be used in PRBs. This document also provides an update on a developing technology somewhat related to PRBs in which source zone contamination is treated with iron-based reactive media.

Prediction of Groundwater Quality Down-Gradient of In Situ Permeable Treatment Barriers and Fully-Remediated Source Zones
P.C. Johnson, P. Dahlen, and P.M. Carlson
Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), Project ER-0320, 127 pp, 2008

In situ permeable treatment barriers (more commonly referred to as a permeable reactive barriers, or PRBs) are designed such that contaminated ground water flows through an engineered treatment zone within which contaminants are eliminated or the concentrations are reduced significantly. This project developed a practicable approach to project reasonable order-of-magnitude estimates of ground-water quality improvements with time downgradient of a PRB and used the approach while conducting detailed monitoring and characterization downgradient of a well-understood PRB site, a full-scale biobarrier to address MTBE at the Naval Base Ventura County.

Regulatory Guidance for Permeable Barrier Walls Designed to Remediate Chlorinated Solvents
1997. Interstate Technology and Regulatory Cooperation Work Group (ITRC). 37 pp.

Technical Protocol for Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation Using Permeable Mulch Biowalls and Bioreactors
AFCEE, 302 pp, 2008

Biowall substrates are typically low-cost materials (mulch, compost). The substrates are mixed with common construction materials (sand, gravel) to prevent compaction and maintain permeability. Amendments can be added to stimulate both biotic and abiotic degradation processes, based on the type of contaminant(s) present and the desired degradation pathway(s) to be stimulated. The technology can be applied in source areas or use groundwater recirculation to capture deeper plumes in an in situ bioreactor configuration .

Technology Evaluation Report: Treatment Walls
1996

This report prepared by the Ground Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center (GWRTAC) provides a state of the art review of treatment walls. Information used to prepare this report was gathered primarily from peer-reviewed papers and publications. Report contains a description of the technology and information on performance, cost, applicability, regulatory/policy requirements, lessons learned, and general references.

Zero-Valent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers: A Review of Performance
2001. Korte, N.E., Oak Ridge National Lab., Oak Ridge, TN. Report No: ORNL/TM-2000/345, 36 pp.

Disclaimer
http://www.clu-in.org/techfocus/default.focus/sec/Permeable%5FReactive%5FBarriers%2C%5FPermeable%5FTreatment%5FZones%2C%5Fand%5FApplication%5Fof%5FZero%2DValent%5FIron/cat/Guidance/
Last updated on Thursday, December 18, 2008