Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “GROUNDWATER”

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.

At least 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Zero-Valent Iron Permeable Reactive Barrier to Remediate Volatile Organic Compounds in Groundwater - 20209

The US DOE-SRS, the US EPA, and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control determined it was appropriate to perform a non-time critical removal action at the P-Area Groundwater Operable Unit at the SRS to reduce the mass and downgradient transport of trichloroethylene in the P-Area groundwater plume. Contaminated groundwater discharges to a nearby stream, Steel Creek, within the SRS boundaries, resulting in trichloroethylene concentrations above the maximum contaminant level. Impact to surface water is limited in areal extent and supported by recently collected characterization data. The P-Area Groundwater Operable Unit encompasses the groundwater beneath an industrial area within SRS, P Area, where the P-Reactor once operated. The boundaries of the P-Area Groundwater Operable Unit extend northwest to Steel Creek, northeast toward PAR Pond, and southeast to Meyers Branch. Groundwater in the Upper Three Runs Aquifer of the P-Area Groundwater Operable Unit has been impacted by reactor and facility operations between 1954 and 1991, including tritium and volatile organic compounds. The P-Area surface units contributing to groundwater contamination were remediated as part of the P-Area Operable Unit in 2011. The P-Reactor closure is one of the first of its kind in the DOE Complex and is one of only a few full-sized production reactors in the US to undergo completion of final closure activities. The nature and extent of groundwater contamination was determined using a variety of investigative approaches such as groundwater monitoring wells, direct-push technology, and surface water samples. Groundwater contamination associated with trichloroethylene is primarily exhibited in a narrow plume that extends from the source area at P-Reactor and west to Steel Creek. Maximum contaminant level exceedances in groundwater occur over an area of ∼6.9 hectares for trichloroethylene with concentrations as high as 7.7 milligrams per liter. To the west of the P-Area facility area, the trichloroethylene groundwater plume is controlled by a buried geologic feature, assumed to be an old stream bed, that further narrows the groundwater plume in what has been designated as the 'neck area.' This narrowing of the groundwater plume provides an ideal location for a treatment barrier. The non-time critical removal action alternative chosen is to install a zero-valent iron permeable reactive barrier within the neck area of the trichloroethylene groundwater plume, perpendicular to groundwater flow direction. This technology will provide a treatment barrier that will reduce trichloroethylene groundwater concentrations by 90% and has an anticipated useful life of at least 25 years. A pre-design investigation was performed in the neck area to confirm site lithology, hydrogeology, geochemistry, and extent of trichloroethylene contamination prior to a final design. A treatability study, conducted as part of the pre-design investigation, indicated that the subsurface and groundwater in the PArea Groundwater Operable Unit is compatible with the zero-valent iron and will not lead to excessive buildup from mineralization/precipitation or biofouling. Probabilistic modeling was conducted using field and laboratory data to determine the expected performance of the zero-valent iron permeable reactive barrier. The model simulations indicated that a 3.81-centimeter thick barrier would provide greater than 90% reduction of trichloroethylene groundwater concentration. The final design of the zero-valent iron permeable reactive barrier is a barrier that will extend 80.5 linear meters in a 'zigzag' orientation to best transect the trichloroethylene plume and account for varying groundwater flow. The barrier will be installed from 13.7 meters below ground surface to 41.1 meters below ground surface for 65.8 linear meters and from 13.7 meters below ground surface to 36.6 meters below ground surface for 14.6 linear meters, the base of which is 'keyed' into a low permeability zone. The barrier is designed to a thickness of 10.2 centimeters, which was determined to reduce the trichloroethylene groundwater concentrations by greater than 90% with a safety factor of 2.67. A total of approximately 689 metric tons of zero-valent iron will be injected through 22 injection wells spaced 3.66 meters apart, using guar to suspend the zero-valent iron. Zero-valent iron permeable reactive barrier construction will be monitored through 23 installed resistivity receivers offset 7.32 meters from the zerovalent iron permeable reactive barrier. The zero-valent iron will be energized with a low-voltage 100 Hertz signal during injection and will be monitored using the resistivity receivers to ensure complete coalescence of the zero-valent iron permeable reactive barrier. The zero-valent iron was sized to have a hydraulic conductivity greater than the natural subsurface, thus promoting groundwater flow through the barrier. As contaminated groundwater contacts the zero-valent iron, volatile organic compounds, including trichloroethylene, are immediately degraded to harmless compounds such as ethylene. The performance of the zero-valent iron permeable reactive barrier will be monitored using three upgradient monitoring well clusters, six downgradient monitoring well clusters, and four in-wall monitoring wells. The in-wall monitoring wells will indicate immediate reduction of trichloroethylene mass in the groundwater and allow analyses of the zero-valent iron permeable reactive barrier health. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Comparison of Groundwater Sampling Technologies, Including Passive Diffusion Sampling, for Radionuclide Contamination - 20205

Using traditional high-flow purge methods for long-term water quality monitoring of deep groundwater wells can be expensive, affect contaminant migration, and produce excessive volumes of discharge water that can be difficult to manage. The use of low-flow pumping methods and depth discrete bailers (DDBs) can reduce the cost of sampling deep groundwater wells. In general, using different pumping methods to obtain reproducible and representative groundwater can be challenging. Passive diffusion samplers (PDSs) have successfully been used in long-term monitoring for volatile organic compounds, major ions, and trace-elements, but application has been limited for stable and radioactive isotopes. Beginning in 2018, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) conducted three sampling events to test the ability of PDSs and DDBs to obtain reproducible and representative groundwater samples. The sampled well is completed in a regional, permeable carbonate aquifer and is one in a set of wells that have historically been used for tritium tracer testing. All samples were obtained at 180 m (590 ft) below land surface (bls) in a 13.97 cm (5.5 inch) uncased well that has a total depth of 202 m (662 ft) bls. The first sampling event deployed a regenerated cellulose dialysis membrane (RCDM) PDS for 14 days with deionized water as the blank. The second sampling event deployed a RCDM for 27 days also with deionized water as the blank. The third sampling event deployed a Dual Membrane (DM) PDS for 65 days using a blank of tritium-dead carbonate water. The DM PDS was used to assess the effect of longer term deployment on tritium concentrations and address whether or not the PDSs reached equilibrium with ambient groundwater. The day after each of the three passive samplers were retrieved a DDB was used to obtain discrete non-integrated groundwater samples. For each DDB sampling day, the bailer was lowered into the well 10 consecutive times to determine if the water chemistry changed from the first to the last bailed sample. Quality assurance samples including blanks and duplicates were obtained during all three sampling events. All blank waters had tritium concentrations less than 21±33 pCi/L. Major ion (e.g. calcium, chloride, sodium, and sulfate) results were compared between all samples obtained with RCDM and DDB. Major ion concentrations showed a coefficient of variation of less than 6% between all RCDM and DDB samples; however, the coefficient of variation between the different deployment times and the two different methods for trace-element concentrations was much larger, particularly for manganese (82%), lead (41%), and zinc (33%). Stable isotope values were compared between the RCDM and DDB samples. The DDB sample results all fell within analytical uncertainty and were considered representative of the formation groundwater. The stable isotope values from the RCDM samples indicated that a longer deployment time was necessary to gain equilibrium and to obtain representative groundwater samples. Tritium results from groundwater samples obtained from the RCDM, DM, and DDB indicate that groundwaters obtained with PDSs produced tritium concentrations 2 to 3 times higher (between 1,426 and 3,060±87 pCi/L) than groundwaters obtained with a DDB (479 to 1,219±51 pCi/L). The longer the passive diffusion samplers were deployed, the higher the tritium concentration, suggesting that equilibrium with tritium was not reached within a 27-day deployment. DDB samples showed tritium results declining from the first to the last bailed sample for all three sampling events. This research suggests that tritium results from groundwater samples obtained from PDSs are more reproducible than samples obtained from DDBs. Also, PDSs likely do not accumulate isotopes of water but rather equilibrate with the ambient groundwater. On the other hand, both PDSs and DDBs were able to provide representative groundwater samples for major ions and have the potential to produce representative groundwater samples for stable isotopes of water (δD and δ{sup 18}O). Utilizing the most effective method for sampling groundwater is important for long-term groundwater monitoring. Quantifying the ability of passive diffusion groundwater samplers to obtain representative radioactive chemistry samples will help determine if these methods can be a useful alternative to pumping and purging wells for long-term monitoring. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗