SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Presented by LRST at the NETL Carbon Storage Project Review Meeting, 9/9
Poster presented at the AGU 2021 Fall Meeting, Virtual, December 13-17, 2021.
Conference on Innovations in Climate Resilience Conference, Virtual, March 29-30, 2022
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
A non-time critical (NTC) removal action (RA) was designed at the Savannah River Site (SRS) to inject an emulsified oil mixture with a bioaugmentation culture to prevent trichloroethylene (TCE) discharging to surface water above maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). The emulsified oil mixture is expected to sequester the TCE and then be broken down into harmless compounds through microbial biodegradation. At 15 locations 8,290 L (2,190 gal) of oil mixture, buffer and chase water were injected into the subsurface creating two bio-barriers. At each location half of the oil mixture was injected, then 2 L (0.528 gal) of an enriched bioaugmentation culture was injected, and then the second half of the oil mixture was injected into the subsurface. Finally, at each location 151 L (40 gal) of buffer mixed with 575 L (200 gal) of dilution water was then injected followed by 1,135 L (300 gal) of chase water. SRS estimates this created two emulsified oil barriers totaling 73 m (240 ft) long, approximately 3 m (10 ft) high and 4.9 m (16 ft) wide in the subsurface. Similar emulsified oil barriers have been effective for 3 to 5 years, and SRS anticipates a similar longevity for these barriers. (authors)
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) uses a customized, web-based mapping tool called TRAC (Tracking Restoration and Closure) to communicate information on plume sizes, remedial approaches, regulatory drivers, exit strategies, and long-term stewardship requirements at all sites within the DOE-EM complex. The web-based GIS story maps provide robust geospatial visualization of plumes at DOE sites using an intuitive interface that allows users to explore the plume maps, explanatory text, photographs, and video. This collection of story maps not only communicates information for each individual site, but also summarizes pertinent metrics on cleanup and remaining contaminants across all EM sites. This paper describes a new design within TRAC for communicating metrics on plume status, regulatory cleanup progress, and technology implementation. A principal benefit of TRAC is the ability to view individual pieces of data at a time, permitting targeted questions to be addressed, such as the status of regulatory decisions, site cleanup priorities, and site closure needs for each site within the DOE-EM complex. TRAC manages communication and supports decision-making through knowledge access, data and information transparency and traceability, and inclusive participation. It serves as a common resource that provides consistent information for DOE managers, site personnel, regulators and stakeholders. Because long-term stewardship of legacy waste sites requires ongoing coordination and communication among DOE, regulators, and stakeholders, TRAC can also be used to help transition EM sites to the Office of Legacy Management at site closure. (authors)
Technetium 99 (Tc) is among the most common environmental contaminants at DOE sites and one of the most common risk drivers in low- and high-level waste disposal sites. The majority of Tc is generated from anthropogenic sources, such as nuclear power plants, global weapons, nuclear storage facilities and medical applications. Through these sources, Tc contamination has been unintentionally introduced in to the environment. The most common chemical form of Tc is Tc(VII)O{sub 4}{sup -}. Due to its high solubility and mobility, Tc can enter the food chain and cause adverse health effects to humans. Currently, ion exchange resins and reduction processes are the most common approaches for Tc immobilization. Although these techniques have shown to be effective, they also possess major drawbacks, such as high cost, low adsorption capacity, and complex creation and maintenance. Therefore, development of more efficient and simple technologies for the remediation of Tc-contaminated systems are needed. Functionalized magnetic nanoparticles have been used to remove organic and inorganic contaminants from water resources. These nanoparticles have attracted extensive attention as an adsorbent material due to their large surface area, high efficiency, low-cost, easy functionalization and separation with a magnet. This study seek to develop functionalized magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for the efficient removal of Tc and other heavy metal contaminants from water resources under ambient conditions. Objectives: Synthesize magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles and functionalize their surface with Cetyltrimethylammonium Bromide (CTAB) and tetraethyl-orthosilicate (TEOS). Characterize the synthesized nanoparticles using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) coupled with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS), Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS) and Zeta PALS. Perform adsorption studies to evaluate their adsorption behavior and capacity for (a) Technetium using Rhenium (ReO{sub 4}{sup -}) as a surrogate and (b) heavy metals, e.g. Cu{sup 2+}. Conclusions: Magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles were successfully functionalized with CTAB and TEOS. The functionalization of the iron oxide nanoparticles affects their surface charge and their hydrodynamic diameter. The addition of CTAB or TEOS decreased the hydrodynamic diameter of the nanoparticles due to repulsive and steric forces. The SEM micrographs show spherical nanoparticles of different sizes. The EDX analysis shows the presence of iron and oxygen from the iron oxide crystalline structure, and the different constituents of the CTAB and TEOS molecules. Proof-of-concept shows the successful adsorption of rhenium (ReO{sub 4}{sup -}) and copper Cu{sup 2+}) onto CTAB-Fe{sub 2}O{sub 3} and TEOS-Fe{sub 2}O{sub 3} respectively.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
This repository of global hydrogeologic datasets contains aquifer properties on 0.5° scale, including depth to groundwater (Fan et al., 2013), aquifer thickness (de Graaf et al., 2015), WHYMap aquifer classes (Richts et al., 2011), recharge (Döll and Fiedler, 2008; Gleeson et al., 2016), lakes (Messager et al., 2016), porosity and permeability (Gleeson et al., 2014), digitized and geo-processed from their respective sources. Globally gridded aquifer properties could be used independently to estimate global groundwater availability or used as critical inputs to the superwell model to simulate groundwater extraction and provide estimates of pumped volumes and unit costs under user-specific scenarios. Key resources related to this data are: Niazi, H., Ferencz, S. B., Graham, N. T., Yoon, J., Wild, T. B., Hejazi, M., Watson, D. J., & Vernon, C. R. (2025). Long-term hydro-economic analysis tool for evaluating global groundwater cost and supply: Superwell v1.1. Geoscientific Model Development, 18(5), 1737-1767. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1737-2025 superwell model repository which uses this data to simulate groundwater extraction and provides estimates of the global extractable volumes and unit-costs ($/km3) of accessible groundwater production under user-specified extraction scenarios. Repository Overview Main output: aquifer_properties_rec.csv contains all processed outputs, including aquifer properties like porosity, permeability, recharge, lake areas, aquifer thickness, and depth to groundwater. shapefiles.zip: contains all digitized GIS databases and shapefile for all aquifer properties prep_inputs.R and prep_inputs_recharge_lakes.R: R scripts that process the shapefiles to produce the aquifer_properties_rec.csv file plot_inputs.R: R script for plotting the maps and conducting preliminary analysis on the available groundwater volume basin_to_country_mapping.csv, basin_country_region_mapping.csv and continent_county_mapping.csv provide the mapping between continents, 32 energy-economic macro regions, countries, and water basins for post-processing aquifer_properties_rec.csv Maps: Each map visualizes the spatial distribution of one of the aquifer properties across the globe map_in_Porosity.png map_in_Permeability.png map_in_Aquifer_thickness.png map_in_Depth_to_water.png map_in_Recharge.png map_in_Grid_area_km.png map_in_Lake_area_km.png map_in_WHYClass.png Sample inputs sample_inputs.py: this script samples inputs from the aquifer_properties_rec dataset, ensuring the sampled and original inputs maintain the same distributions sampled_data_100.csv contains 100 sampled data points and sampled_data_100.png compares their distributions Dataset Overview The main outputs are consolidated in a comprehensive aquifer_properties_rec.csv file and include the following fields: GridCellID: Unique identifier for each (roughly 0.5°) grid cell Continent: Continent name Country: Country name GCAM_basin_ID: Identifier for GCAM hydrologic basin Basin_long_name: Full name of the basin WHYClass: Hydrogeologic classification based on WHYMap aquifer classes (Richts et al., 2011) Porosity: Soil porosity (%) (Gleeson et al., 2014) Permeability: Soil permeability (in square meters; Gleeson et al., 2014) Aquifer_thickness: Thickness of the aquifer (in meters; de Graaf et al., 2015) Depth_to_water: Depth to groundwater (in meters; Fan et al., 2013) Recharge: long-term annual averaged recharge rates (in m/yr; Döll and Fiedler, 2008; Gleeson et al., 2016) Grid_area: Area of the grid cell (in square meters) Lakes_area: Area of inland lakes (in square meters; Messager et al., 2016) Key References The datasets are digitized versions of global hydrogeologic properties from the following key literature sources: Depth to Groundwater: Fan, Y., Li, H., & Miguez-Macho, G. (2013). Global Patterns of Groundwater Table Depth. Science, 339(6122), 940-943. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1229881 Aquifer Thickness: de Graaf, I. E. M., Sutanudjaja, E. H., van Beek, L. P. H., & Bierkens, M. F. P. (2015). A high-resolution global-scale groundwater model. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19(2), 823-837. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-823-2015 Porosity and Permeability: Gleeson, T., Moosdorf, N., Hartmann, J., & van Beek, L. P. H. (2014). A glimpse beneath earth's surface: GLobal HYdrogeology MaPS (GLHYMPS) of permeability and porosity. Geophysical Research Letters, 41(11), 3891-3898. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL059856 Aquifer classes: Richts, A., Struckmeier, W. F., & Zaepke, M. (2011). WHYMAP and the Groundwater Resources Map of the World 1:25,000,000. In J. A. A. Jones (Ed.), Sustaining Groundwater Resources: A Critical Element in the Global Water Crisis (pp. 159-173). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3426-7_10 Recharge: Döll, P., & Fiedler, K. (2008). Global-scale modeling of groundwater recharge. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 12(3), 863-885. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-12-863-2008; Gleeson, T., Befus, K. M., Jasechko, S., Luijendijk, E., & Cardenas, M. B. (2016). The global volume and distribution of modern groundwater. Nature Geoscience, 9(2), 161-167. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2590 Inland Lakes: Messager, M. L., Lehner, B., Grill, G., Nedeva, I., & Schmitt, O. (2016). Estimating the volume and age of water stored in global lakes using a geo-statistical approach. Nature Communications, 7(1), 13603. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13603 Cite as Niazi, H., Watson, D., Hejazi, M., Yonkofski, C., Ferencz, S., Vernon, C., Graham, N., Wild, T., & Yoon, J. (2024). Global Geo-processed Data of Aquifer Properties by 0.5° Grid, Country and Water Basins. MultiSector Dynamics-Living, Intuitive, Value-adding, Environment. https://doi.org/10.57931/2484226 Contact Reach out to Hassan Niazi or open an issue in the superwell repository for questions or suggestions.
This PFAS Site Assessment Progress Report (SAPR) presents the findings of the 2022 PFAS investigation conducted from November 2021 through August 2022 at Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 114 located within Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida. SWMU 114 includes area around Fire Station #2, Former Sewage Treatment Plant #17, the southern portion of the Shuttle Landing Facility Runway, Remote Launch Vehicle Hangar, and the Towway area. Fire Station #2 was constructed in 2008 and is currently active, housing fire station personnel and equipment, including aqueous film forming foam (AFFF). Releases of AFFF has occurred at SWMU 114. Previous environmental assessments have been performed at SWMU 114, including soil, groundwater, and surface water sampling for volatile organic compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, total petroleum hydrocarbons, and metals. No active remediation has been performed at the SWMU 114. PFAS site assessment field activities were conducted at SWMU 114 from November 2021 through August 2022. During the 2021-2022 Site Assessment, 124 direct-push samples were collected from 27 locations, 17 surface water samples were collected from 15 locations, 41 groundwater samples were collected from 37 newly installed monitoring wells, five concrete samples were collected from four locations, and one asphalt sample was collected. Additionally, two soil borings were advanced to 60 feet for lithologic descriptions, ten staff gauges were installed, and one round of water level measurements were collected from monitoring wells and staff gauges for groundwater flow determination. All groundwater and surface water samples were analyzed for 25 PFAS analytes by USEPA Method 537M. Concrete, and asphalt samples were analyzed by synthetic precipitation leaching procedure (SPLP) PFAS analysis by USEPA Modified Method 537M. Groundwater results were compared to the most recent Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) published by USEPA for residential tap water (USEPA, 2022a) to determine the extent of PFAS contamination at SWMU 114 for six PFAS analytes (PFOA, PFNA, PFBS, PFHxS, PFOS, and GenX). Surface water results were compared to the FDEP surface water screening levels (SW SLs) (FDEP, 2020) for PFOA and PFOS. The PFAS investigation concluded that groundwater exceeding RSLs extends east and south to Banana Creek and west to approximately the center of the SLF runway. The extent of PFAS is approximated to the north, to an area between Sharkey Road and Astronaut Road, where samples below the RSLs do not fully bound SWMU 114. At least two distinct PFAS source areas are located near Fire Station #2 and along Towway, at S114-MW0007S, within SWMU 114. Groundwater head measurements indicate that flow at SWMU 114 is generally similar across the shallow and intermediate water tables. A northeast to southwest trending groundwater divide is located near the middle of Towway where groundwater southeast of the divide flows to the south and groundwater northwest of the divide flows to the west. The groundwater divide generally separates the two areas of higher PFAS concentrations. Surface water samples indicated concentrations of PFOS above the SW SLs in surface water bodies across the site. Further assessment and sampling are required to better understand the interaction between groundwater and surface water at SWMU 114. Concrete and asphalt samples collected confirm that a significant release of AFFF occurred near the stormwater pond northwest of Fire Station #2. Additional concrete samples surrounding Fire Station #2 and at the northwest and southeast edges of the SLF tarmac indicate elevated PFOS concentrations. These results indicate that discharges of AFFF in these locations have infiltrated into asphalt and concrete and may act as a continuing source of PFAS to groundwater and surface water after rain events. Additional direct-push samples are required to delineate PFAS at SWMU 114. Samples may need to extend beyond the Former SLF Rescue Building and Morpheous Test Site to delineate PFAS in groundwater. Monitoring wells should be sampled and gauged quarterly to determine if seasonal impacts are observable, especially in shallow wells near surface water features. Furthermore, surface water samples should be collected from additional ditches to further define the extent of surface water impacts at SWMU 114 and extending along the SLF runway. Staff gauges should be gauged quarterly with groundwater gauging to determine surface water flow and interaction with groundwater. The PFAS sampling results and path forward for SWMU 114 were presented to the KSC Remediation Team in October 2022. Once the PFAS SAPR is approved, it will be submitted to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
This repository of global hydrogeologic datasets contains aquifer properties on 0.5° scale, including depth to groundwater (Fan et al., 2013), aquifer thickness (de Graaf et al., 2015), WHYMap aquifer classes (Richts et al., 2011), porosity and permeability (Gleeson et al., 2014), digitized and geo-processed from their respective sources. Globally gridded aquifer properties could be used independently to estimate global groundwater availability or used as critical inputs to the superwell model to simulate groundwater extraction and provide estimates of pumped volumes and unit costs under user-specific scenarios. Key resources related to this data are: Niazi, H., Ferencz, S., Graham, N., Yoon, J., Wild, T., Hejazi, M., Watson, D., & Vernon, C. (2024; In-prep). Long-term Hydro-economic Assessment Tool for Evaluating Global Groundwater Cost and Supply: Superwell v1. Geoscientific Model Development. superwell model repository which uses this data to simulate groundwater extraction and provides estimates of the global extractable volumes and unit-costs ($/km3) of accessible groundwater production under user-specified extraction scenarios. Repository Overview Main output: aquifer_properties.csv contains all processed outputs, including aquifer properties like porosity, permeability, aquifer thickness, and depth to groundwater. shapefiles.zip: contains all digitized GIS databases and shapefile for all aquifer properties prep_inputs.R: R script that processes the shapefiles to produce the aquifer_properties file plot_inputs.R: R script for plotting the maps and conducting preliminary analysis on the available groundwater volume basin_to_country_mapping.csv, basin_country_region_mapping.csv and continent_county_mapping.csv provide the mapping between continents, 32 energy-economic macro regions, countries, and water basins for post-processing aquifer_properties.csv Maps: Each map visualizes the spatial distribution of one of the aquifer properties across the globe map_in_Porosity.png map_in_Permeability.png map_in_Aquifer_thickness.png map_in_Depth_to_water.png map_in_Grid_area_km.png map_in_WHYClass.png Sample inputs sample_inputs.py: this script samples inputs from the aquifer_properties dataset, ensuring the sampled and original inputs maintain the same distributions sampled_data_100.csv contains 100 sampled data points and sampled_data_100.png compares their distributions Dataset Overview The main outputs are consolidated in a comprehensive aquifer_properties.csv file and include the following fields: GridCellID: Unique identifier for each (roughly 0.5°) grid cell Continent: Continent name Country: Country name GCAM_basin_ID: Identifier for GCAM hydrologic basin Basin_long_name: Full name of the basin WHYClass: Hydrogeologic classification based on WHYMap aquifer classes (Richts et al., 2011) Porosity: Soil porosity (%) (Gleeson et al., 2014) Permeability: Soil permeability (in square meters; Gleeson et al., 2014) Aquifer_thickness: Thickness of the aquifer (in meters; de Graaf et al., 2015) Depth_to_water: Depth to groundwater (in meters; Fan et al., 2013) Grid_area: Area of the grid cell (in square meters) Key References The datasets are digitized versions of global hydrogeologic properties from the following key literature sources: Depth to Groundwater: Fan, Y., Li, H., & Miguez-Macho, G. (2013). Global Patterns of Groundwater Table Depth. Science, 339(6122), 940-943. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1229881 Aquifer Thickness: de Graaf, I. E. M., Sutanudjaja, E. H., van Beek, L. P. H., & Bierkens, M. F. P. (2015). A high-resolution global-scale groundwater model. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19(2), 823-837. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-823-2015 Porosity and Permeability: Gleeson, T., Moosdorf, N., Hartmann, J., & van Beek, L. P. H. (2014). A glimpse beneath earth's surface: GLobal HYdrogeology MaPS (GLHYMPS) of permeability and porosity. Geophysical Research Letters, 41(11), 3891-3898. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL059856 Aquifer classes: Richts, A., Struckmeier, W. F., & Zaepke, M. (2011). WHYMAP and the Groundwater Resources Map of the World 1:25,000,000. In J. A. A. Jones (Ed.), Sustaining Groundwater Resources: A Critical Element in the Global Water Crisis (pp. 159-173). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3426-7_10 Cite as Niazi, H., Watson, D., Hejazi, M., Yonkofski, C., Ferencz, S., Vernon, C., Graham, N., Wild, T., & Yoon, J. (2024). Global Geo-processed Data of Aquifer Properties by 0.5° Grid, Country and Water Basins. MSD-LIVE Data Repository. https://doi.org/10.57931/2307831 Contact Reach out to Hassan Niazi or open an issue in superwell repository for questions or suggestions.
DOE contractor CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company is currently responsible for conducting groundwater contamination monitoring at several RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal units located on the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington State. The Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill treatment, storage, and disposal unit presents a distinct groundwater monitoring problem because of a large multi-contaminant soil vapor plume beneath it that is a likely source of low-level volatile organic compound groundwater contamination. Adjacent to Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill is the Solid Waste Landfill. Volatile organic compounds are inventory components of both the Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and the Solid Waste Landfill. Therefore, it is possible that both sites could be contributing to the soil vapor plume. For regulatory purposes, it is important to differentiate which site is the primary contributor of volatile organic compounds to the plume. An approach was developed to identify the primary volatile organic compound source of the soil vapor plume beneath Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill. The site conceptual model hypothesis of vapor-phase volatile organic compound transport to the dissolved phase in groundwater was tested by a simple mathematical model of vapor/liquid equilibrium concentrations at the groundwater/air interface. Once it was shown that vapor-phase volatile organic compound transport to groundwater was a valid conceptual model for Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill, spatial and statistical methods were used to determine the primary site contributing to the majority of volatile organic compounds to the soil vapor plume. Average groundwater chloroform, tetrachloroethene, and trichloroethene concentrations from Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill monitoring network wells were plotted on maps of the facilities and immediate vicinities and compared to soil vapor sampling probe locations. Principal component analysis and mixing ratios were used to identify source contributions of each treatment, storage, and disposal unit to the plume. Results of the vapor/liquid equilibrium concentrations mathematical model showed that transport phenomena outweigh steady-state equilibria. Estimated vapor/liquid equilibrium concentrations were considerably lower than soil vapor measurements. The results indicate that dynamic vadose zone and groundwater factors such as decreased vapor concentrations with depth, vapor dilution from dispersion in the vadose zone, and advective and diffusional volatile organic compound dilution in groundwater result in groundwater volatile organic compound concentrations much less than would be measured under steady-state equilibrium conditions. Site source contribution differentiation by principal component analysis and mixing ratios was inconclusive using actual soil gas data because of the similarity in concentration values in both datasets for Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill. Similar data populations suggest mixing of the vapor contributions from both sites by dispersion through the soil matrix pore spaces. However, when groundwater volatile organic compound data were compared between the Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill monitoring networks, Solid Waste Landfill mean concentrations were higher, suggesting more vapor-phase volatile organic compound transport to groundwater at those locations. Simulated volatile organic compound soil vapor and groundwater datasets created to test the methods developed for this study show that the method can be successful in source differentiation when significantly different datasets are compared. This paper will describe a method of testing a conceptual model for vapor-phase contaminant transport to groundwater and for differentiating site sources of contaminants comprising a mixed-constituent soil vapor plume. (authors)
This report presents a summary of the long-term monitoring (LTM) activities that occurred in 2021 at Wilson Corners, Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 001, at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida. The site is monitored under KSC’s Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action Program. Adaptive site management is being utilized through ongoing assessment, design, and interim measures (IM). Annual LTM of the groundwater is also being conducted at the site. This approach also meets the requirements of Chapter 62-780, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The goal of LTM at this site is threefold: to determine groundwater flow characteristics, monitor the downgradient concentration trends, and monitor select locations internal to the groundwater plume. Every 5 years, upgradient and side-gradient monitoring wells are sampled to verify delineation. The last time this was performed was in 2015. The sampling of these wells in 2020 was replaced with the direct push technology (DPT) investigations completed in October 2020 and April 2021. This DPT groundwater data was presented in an Advance Data Package (ADP) in September 2021 and discussed in the Implementation Work Plan (IWP) dated November 2021 for installation of an air sparge (AS) system. Based on results from groundwater sampling activities performed during the previous reporting period, including the 2020 and 2021 DPT groundwater sampling, it was determined that the LTM sampling plan was no longer meeting the goal of LTM because delineation was not verified. The 2021 LTM sampling plan was modified to include the sampling of monitoring wells located around the perimeter of the low concentration plume (LCP); the area with concentrations of contaminants of concern [COCs] greater than Groundwater Cleanup Target Levels [GCTLs]), and sampling of 10 monitoring wells proposed for installation (April 2021 KSC Remediation Team (KSCRT) Meeting, Decision 2104-D32). The modified LTM plan received team consensus at the September 2021 KSCRT Meeting (Decision Number 2109-D03), and sampling of the existing monitoring wells was completed in December 2021. The proposed monitoring wells are planned for installation in late 2022, concurrent with ongoing IM construction activities. December 2021 LTM data was presented at the May 2022 KSCRT Meeting, and activities are summarized in this report. The activities presented in this report include the December 2021 groundwater gauging of 42 monitoring wells and sampling of 44 monitoring wells. During the December 2021 event, the low flow sampling method was used, and samples were analyzed for a select list of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113). The following conclusions can be made based on the 2021 LTM results: - In December 2021, groundwater flow for the site was generally to the west at all intervals. This is generally consistent with historical observations at the site, with the exception of a southwest and southeast flow component observed at 34 to 48 feet below land surface (bls). - The vertical extent of VOCs was historically delineated by monitoring wells screened greater than 48 feet bls. The results from the two vertical extent monitoring wells, WILC-MW0078 (screened 65 to 70 feet bls) and WILC-MW0130 (screened 56 to 66 feet bls) that were sampled during the 2021 LTM indicate that groundwater vinyl chloride (VC) concentrations in both wells were greater than the GCTL. The Remediation Team has previously agreed to delay deeper DPT investigations in this area to prevent the creation of additional pathways for vertical migration. - The LCP continues to extend both horizontally, predominantly to the west, and vertically beyond the current monitoring well network, with some retraction observed to the southeast. Evaluation of this data combined with data from the 2020 and 2021 DPT sampling event indicate that the LCP encompasses an estimated 20.7 acres based on an expanded sampling area, as compared to the 2020 LCP footprint of 17.0 acres. - Freon 113 was not detected above GCTLs during the 2021 LTM event. Based on groundwater sampling activities performed in 2021, including April 2021 DPT groundwater sampling, the following recommendations are provided: - Perform the next LTM sampling event, targeted to occur in 2023, concurrently with the IM baseline sampling prior to AS system installation; - Include sampling from nine monitoring wells that are planned to be installed in late 2022, concurrent with upcoming IM construction activities. Installation of one deep vertical well, screened 70 to 80 feet bls, will be delayed to prevent the creation of an additional pathway for vertical migration; - Continue to sample under the modified annual LTM plan as presented in Table 4-1 concurrently with IM baseline sampling; and - Once the AS system install and start-up is complete, select monitoring wells from the LTM program will transition into the performance monitoring plan, and LTM will be temporarily discontinued. Performance monitoring will be performed quarterly, and the monitoring well network will be evaluated following the first performance monitoring sampling event.