Pump and Treat Permeable Reactive Barrier Former Intersil, Inc. Site Sunnyvale, California Presented by Daniel Cheung.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Young-Rainey STAR Centre
Advertisements

Groundwater Remediation Thanks to Phil deBlanc, Groundwater Services, Inc.
Greenwich Peninsula.
AHMET UCANOK JOHN E. ELVIS Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at the United Chrome Superfund Site Corvallis, Oregon.
Environmental Geotechnology Presentation Site OT-16B, Shaw Air Force Base, South Carolina, USA By Oliver Edwards And Alaric Shenton.
Biodegradation and Natural Attenuation
The Need For A New Conceptual Site Model Peter Strauss December 11, 2013 CPEO’s Moffett-MEW Community Advisory Board Mountain View, California.
Remediation of Tetrachloroethylene DNAPL Contaminated Soils on Parris Island, South Carolina Randall Martin SWS 6262: Soil Contamination and Remediation.
Water Contaminants Soluble Contaminants - dissolve in water Particulates/Colloids - carried by the water column Insoluble Contaminants - very low solubility.
Treatment of Arsenic in Groundwater EAST HELENA D.W.A.S.W.Daladawatta Dawoud.
Dale T Littlejohn Senior Geologist. What is fate and transport in the vadose zone? Vadose Zone Hydrocarbon release from buried pipeline Aquifer Surface.
Air Force Plant 4 Superfund Site Evaluation of SVE Combined with ERH for the Remediation of TCE Source Material Jeffrey Ragucci SWS 6262 – Soil Contamination.
1 Thermal Remediation Services, Inc. Electrical Resistance Heating for In-Situ Remediation of Soil & Groundwater December 10, 2002 Greg Beyke (770)
Environmental Geotechnology Presentation Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida.
Contaminated Groundwater in the San Gabriel Valley, California Stephen Hinds and James Mackcracken.
DNAPL Remediation at Camp Lejeune Using ZVI-Clay Soil Mixing
Distribution of Nitrate in Ground Water Under Three Unsewered Subdivisions Erin P. Eid Mike Trojan Jim Stockinger Jennifer Maloney Minnesota Pollution.
A Semi-Passive Permeable Reactive Barrier (PRB) Remediation Technology Using Membrane-Attached Biofilms Lee Clapp Bala Veerasekaran Vipin Sumani February.
Background Site of a former Industrial Waste Treatment Plant Contaminants accumulated in sludge drying beds and surge pond, they subsequently leaked into.
“GAS MART” petroleum facility in Florida By: Ernest Twum-Barimah Zhengzhong Fang (John) Zhengzhong Fang (John)
Clean-up at BP Paulsboro New Jersey (USA) Roxane Fisher and Mark Ferguson.
Manatee Power Plant: Chlorinated Solvent Leak Presentation Tom Miles Oliver Read.
1 Soil Vapor Extraction Limitations and Enhancements LeeAnn Racz AgE 558 Semester Project April 2001.
R SRP Research Webinar Session II February 9, 2015 Dual-Biofilm Reactive Barrier for Treatment of Chlorinated Benzenes at Anaerobic- Aerobic Interfaces.
Fate and Transport of Chemicals A Presentation by Terrie Boguski Technical Outreach Services for Communities (TOSC) Great Plains/Rocky Mountain Hazardous.
Sand clay Hydraulic Capture clay piezometric surface.
Solution Provider bij bodemsanering Leading in soil and groundwater remediation Solution Provider for soil & groundwater remediation Leading in soil and.
Remedy Analysis for Sierra Army Depot, Building 210 Area
Model Simulation Uniform Recharge – 60 cm/yr 10 x.

FSA Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport Model Presentation to Scottsdale Citizens Group March 19, 1999.
1 Case Summary: Electrical Resistance Heating ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Portland, Oregon Jennifer Sutter, Project Manager Oregon DEQ EPA Technology Innovation.
DTSC VAPOR INTRUSION GUIDANCE California Industrial Hygiene Council 16 th Annual Conference Dan Gallagher Department of Toxic Substances Control California.
Site Activities Update Park – Euclid RP Group Community Advisory Board Meeting January 16, 2013.
Introduction to NAPLs Review of general concepts
Typical Design of a Production or Monitoring Well.
Field-Scale Application of in situ Reductive Dechlorination for High Concentrations of Mixed Solvents in Complicated.
The world’s leading sustainability consultancy In Situ Chemical Oxidation of Pesticides Using Shallow Soil Mixing The world’s leading sustainability consultancy.
Ministry of Environment and Energy Danish EPA Ad Hoc International Working Group on Contaminated Land ”Natural attenuation in Denmark” by Kim Dahlstrøm,
History and Cleanup at Chemical Commodities, Inc. Jeff Field US EPA Region 7 1.
Pump & Treat Experience at the NECCO Park Landfill Niagara Falls, New York Paul F. Mazierski, PG Senior Project Leader.
1 LOCKFORMER ELECTRIC RESISTIVE HEATING CASE STUDY U.S. EPA Emergency Response Branch Steve Faryan, On-Scene Coordinator ,
Chlorinated Solvent Contamination. Backyard Burning of Trash is now the #1 Dioxin Source!
Two Union Square Union Street, Suite 601 Seattle, WA (206) Field testing and modeling of in situ groundwater.
Geochemical Heterogeneity of Groundwater in Uncontaminated and Contaminated Aquifers Jean M. Bahr University of Wisconsin - Madison.
TCE and 1,2-DCE Biotransformation Inside a Biologically Active Zone Anthony W. Holder, Philip B. Bedient, and Joseph B. Hughes Environmental Science and.
DNAPLs Drew Lonigro. Remediation In order to have a successful remediation, it is necessary to first isolate or remove the source of the contamination.
Donald Pope| IPEC 2015 Conference
A Tree-Based Remediation System for Treatment and Hydraulic Control of a Hydrocarbon Plume in a 20 Foot Deep Aquifer at a Former Refinery in Central Oklahoma.
Bioremediation and Bionanotechnology Part 2 Dr Russell Thomas, Parsons Brinckerhoff 19 th May 2010.
Biological Treatment of Residual DNAPL
Hydrogeologic Analysis of the Delphi Corporation Site, Wyoming Michigan Mark Bryson, Emily Daniels, Sara Nagorsen, Kirk Perschbacher, Joe Root, Jason Stewart,
Case Study of Groundwater Contamination at the Delphi Corporation, Wyoming, Michigan Dr. Peter E. Riemersma Department of Geology Grand Valley State University.
Groundwater Water Table Recharge Groundwater Hydraulic Gradient
Feasibility Study Workplan Park – Euclid RP Group Community Advisory Board Meeting May 23, 2013.
Protection of ground water meeting UPUS Determining ground water zones – Ground water definition – Determining how many zones Examples POGWMUPUS and GW.
By Alex Walton Josh Bush Alex Walton, Josh Bush1.
Results of 2001 Barksdale Site Investigation April 2, 2002 Presented by: DuPont Corporate Remediation Group.
Green Remediation through Optimization Douglas Sutton, PhD, PE Tetra Tech GEO April 4, 2011.
Melissa Boggs California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Office of Spill Prevention and Response.
The Woodlawn Landfill Site A Case Study in the Values and Methods of Ecological Revitalization.
BUILDING STRONG ® TNT Source Area Ground Water Remediation Former Nansemond Ordnance Depot Formerly Used Defense Site June 2, 2016.
Unity Ground Water Investigation Steve Faryan, USEPA.
Sustainable Remediation Case Studies
Cover Slide TCEQ logo.
ASSESSMENT OF CORRECTIVE MEASURES PUBLIC MEETING
East Hennepin Avenue Site
Using the HAPSITE® as a Vapor Intrusion Investigation Tool
Rapid Closure of Lingering Off-Site Plume Remediation Program in Residential Neighborhood using Horizontal Air Sparge and Soil Vapor Extraction Wells Narayanan.
Web-based Class Project on Geoenvironmental Remediation
Presentation transcript:

Pump and Treat Permeable Reactive Barrier Former Intersil, Inc. Site Sunnyvale, California Presented by Daniel Cheung

Outline of Presentation  Site Background  Geotechnology Alternatives  Science/Principles Involved (PRB)  Evaluation on Remediation  Conclusion

Site Background  Historical Activities Former Intersil, Inc. (Sunnyvale, California) Former Intersil, Inc. (Sunnyvale, California) 1970s–1983 Semiconductor manufacturing 1970s–1983 Semiconductor manufacturing 1972 Concrete, epoxy-lined, in-ground neutralization system installed 1972 Concrete, epoxy-lined, in-ground neutralization system installed 1986 Identified as potential contaminant source 1986 Identified as potential contaminant source 1987-Present Remediation 1987-Present Remediation

Site Background

 Hydrogeology of the Site (2.4 acres) Semi-confined aquifer Semi-confined aquifer Upper silty clay (9-12 feet)Upper silty clay (9-12 feet) Lower clay and silty clay (~65 feet)Lower clay and silty clay (~65 feet) Interfingering zones of (~1-8 feet, porosity = 0.3) Interfingering zones of (~1-8 feet, porosity = 0.3) Silty fine grained sandSilty fine grained sand Fine to medium grained sandFine to medium grained sand Gravelly sandGravelly sand Average flow rate = 0.8 ft/dayAverage flow rate = 0.8 ft/day Not usable for consumption (high TDS) Not usable for consumption (high TDS)

Site Background  Contamination Halogenated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) Halogenated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) Maximum concentrations in 1986 Maximum concentrations in 1986 Halogenated VOCs μg/L Halogenated VOCs μg/L Trichlorethene (TCE) 13,000Trichlorethene (TCE) 13,000 cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE) 19,000cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE) 19,000 Vinyl chloride (VC) 1,800Vinyl chloride (VC) 1,800 Freon-13316,000Freon-13316,000 Only detected in the upper aquifer Only detected in the upper aquifer

Geotechnology Alternatives  Pump and Treat, P&T (11/87 – 02/95) 4 extraction wells (pump) 4 extraction wells (pump) 13 monitoring wells 13 monitoring wells 1 Air stripper (treat) → Storm sewer (discharge) 1 Air stripper (treat) → Storm sewer (discharge) 2 Carbon adsorption (unused) 2 Carbon adsorption (unused)  Permeable Reactive Barrier, PRB (02/95 – Ongoing) Granular iron treatment zone Granular iron treatment zone Flow control zone Flow control zone Hydraulic barrier system (2 slurry walls) Hydraulic barrier system (2 slurry walls)

Science/Principles Involved (PRB)

Abiotic Reductive Dehalogenation

Evaluation on Remediation  Pump and Treat HVOCs < MCLs (NPDES) HVOCs < MCLs (NPDES) Inward hydraulic gradient contained the plume Inward hydraulic gradient contained the plume Removal rate declined exponentially Removal rate declined exponentially $1,343,800 (24% capital cost, 76% O/M cost) $1,343,800 (24% capital cost, 76% O/M cost) $24,000/kg of total contaminant $24,000/kg of total contaminant  1993 evaluation Minimise cost & Increase effectiveness Minimise cost & Increase effectiveness Return the site to leasable conditions Return the site to leasable conditions

Evaluation on Remediation  Permeable Reactive Barrier TCE & Freon-133 < MCLs (California & EPA) TCE & Freon-133 < MCLs (California & EPA) Cis-1,2-DCE & VC >> MCLs (California & EPA) Cis-1,2-DCE & VC >> MCLs (California & EPA) Natural attenuation & Non-migrated Natural attenuation & Non-migrated Plume has been contained Plume has been contained $762,000 (78% capital cost, 22% O/M cost) $762,000 (78% capital cost, 22% O/M cost) $108,900/kg of total contaminant $108,900/kg of total contaminant The site was released in 1995 The site was released in 1995

Evaluation on Remediation PRB 2M gallons 7kg in 1.5yrs P&T 36M gallons 56kg in 7.25yrs 98% Total Removal

Conclusion  Both P&T and PRB were used  Satisfactory overall clean up performance  Appropriate methods were adopted Hydrogeology Hydrogeology Seriousness of contamination Seriousness of contamination Cost effectiveness Cost effectiveness Legal requirement Legal requirement

Q&A