Technology Status Report: In Situ Flushing - CLU-IN

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In Situ Flushing Project Summaries GWRTAC Case Study Database GWRTAC ID: FLSH0023 Project Name: Hooker Chemical/Ruco Polymer, NY City: Hicksville State/Province: NY Primary GWRTAC Personal Communication Source (Name/Organization): Project Summary: Linda Ross U.S. EPA Report(s)/Publication(s) (GWRTAC Source): U.S. EPA, Nov. 1996: Innovative Treatment Technologies: Annual Status Report (Eighth Edition), EPA 542-R-96-010, Number 8, U.S. EPA OSWER (5102G) TIO, Washington, DC. The following text is from notes from a July 1998 conversation with the EPA RPM: It is planned that groundwater will be pumped, treated above ground, and re-injected via one or two sumps (sumps 1 and 2) located in existing and constructed recharge basins. It is estimated that 100 gpm must be pumped to achieve hydraulic control, although the number and depths of wells are still to be determined. The geologic material targeted with in situ flushing at the site is sand and gravel of the Upper Glacial Formation. The water table at the site is approximately 35 feet below the ground surface (bgs). There is no shallow confining layer at the site; containment of the flushing operation would be strictly hydraulic control. The maximum depth of the target contaminants (VOCs (PCE, TCE, 1,2-DCE, vinyl chloride), phenol, and TICs (tentatively identified compounds)) is between 25 and 50 feet bgs. Report(s)/Publication(s) (Additional Information Sources): U.S. EPA, Nov. 1996: Innovative Treatment Technologies: Annual Status Report (Eighth Edition), EPA 542-R-96-010, Number 8, U.S. EPA OSWER (5102G) TIO, Washington, DC. Ground-Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center Operated by Concurrent Technologies Corporation Appendix - Page 52 of 164 Copyright GWRTAC 1998 Revision 1 Tuesday, November 17, 1998
In Situ Flushing Project Summaries GWRTAC Case Study Database GWRTAC ID: FLSH0024 Project Name: Howard University, Washington, DC - Treatment of PCBs with City: Washington State/Province: DC Primary GWRTAC Personal Communication Source (Name/Organization): Project Summary: None None Report(s)/Publication(s) (GWRTAC Source): U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), April 1995: Status Report: Surfactant Enhancements, EPA 542-K-94-003, U.S. EPA OSWER (5102W), TIO, Washington, DC, avail. at www.gwrtac.org The following is excerpted from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), April 1995: Status Report: Surfactant Enhancements, EPA 542-K-94-003, U.S. EPA OSWER (5102W), TIO, Washington, DC, avail. at www.gwrtac.org: Researchers currently are conducting tests on treatment of PCBs with surfactants with the support of the Great Lakes/Mid-Atlantic Hazardous Substance Research Center Report(s)/Publication(s) (Additional Information Sources): Chawla, R.C.; Cannon, J.N.; Johnson, J.H.; and Porzucek, C. "Importance of Soil-Contaminant- Surfactant Interactions in In-Situ Soil Washing." ACS Symposium on Emerging Technologies for Hazardous WasteTreatment. Atlantic City, New Jersey, June 4-7, 1990, p 23. Porzucek, C. Surfactant Flooding Technology for In Situ Cleanup of Contaminated Soils and Aquifers -A Feasibility Study. Los Alamos National Laboratory, UD-702.LA-11541-MS, November 1989. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), April 1995: Status Report: Surfactant Enhancements, EPA 542-K-94-003, U.S. EPA OSWER (5102W), TIO, Washington, DC, avail. at www.gwrtac.org Ground-Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center Operated by Concurrent Technologies Corporation Appendix - Page 53 of 164 Copyright GWRTAC 1998 Revision 1 Tuesday, November 17, 1998
Page 1 and 2:
Technology Status Report Technology
Page 3 and 4:
ABSTRACT This technology status rep
Page 5 and 6:
LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 1 I
Page 7 and 8:
1.0 INTRODUCTION / PURPOSE OF STATU
Page 9 and 10:
a laboratory-scale project. As illu
Page 11 and 12:
3.1 Flushing Solutions 3.0 ANALYSIS
Page 13 and 14:
(approximately eight) full-scale pr
Page 15 and 16:
Table 1. In Situ Flushing - Summary
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Table 3 In Situ Flushing - Geology
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Table 4 In Situ Flushing - Recovere
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Full-Scale/Commercial 26% Figure 2.
Page 35 and 36:
Site Remediation 25% Figure 4. In S
Page 37 and 38:
NAPL Removal 34% Figure 6. In Situ
Page 39 and 40:
Figure 8. In Situ Flushing - Distri
Page 41 and 42:
Number of Projects 35 30 25 20 15 1
Page 43 and 44:
Number of Case Studies 45 40 35 30
Page 45 and 46:
25 ft and 50 ft and 10 ft and 100 f
Page 47 and 48:
Unconfined Aquifer 65% Figure 16. I
Page 49 and 50: In Situ Flushing Project Summaries
Page 99: In Situ Flushing Project Summaries
Page 151 and 152:
In Situ Flushing Project Summaries
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
show all

Technology Status Report: In Situ Flushing - CLU-IN

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?