Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “REMEDIATION”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2018

The Role of Technical Guidance and Analysis Tools in Remedy Decisions, Implementation, and Closure - 18307

Selection, design, and implementation of environmental remedies are conducted under regulatory frameworks that define the activities, communication, and documentation requirements for the remediation process. However, there are site situations that are not well described in the basic regulatory frameworks, and technical guidance and analysis tools can help facilitate remedy decisions and actions. An example where technical guidance and analysis tools are helpful is in the transition from pump-and-treat (P and T) remediation to monitored natural attenuation (MNA). Standard MNA regulatory guidance does not account for a plume initially controlled by P and T hydraulic conditions rather than natural-gradient conditions. For instance, MNA guidance discusses demonstrating plume stability as a means to evaluate the suitability of MNA. However, plume stability under long-term natural gradient conditions cannot be directly demonstrated while the plume is being contained by a P and T system. Thus, additional guidance is needed to describe other measures that can be used to support transition from P and T to MNA. As an additional example, standard MNA regulatory guidance is not written to provide suitable information for application to vadose-zone contamination; discussion and examples in the regulatory guidance are predominantly for groundwater. Use of contaminant transport assessments is an important component of vadose-zone remedy decisions where technical guidance and analysis tools can facilitate these decisions. For volatile compounds, the assessment may need to also consider flux to the surface and constraints associated with vapor intrusion. Recent technical guidance and associated analysis tools provide sites with approaches to support remedy decisions for the above conditions. In particular, these recent approaches target developing and implementing P and T and soil vapor extraction remediation exit strategies and facilitating assessment and implementation of remedies for coupled vadose-zone/groundwater contamination. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Complex Sources and Impacts on Remediation and Monitoring Approaches - 19058

Remedy selection, implementation, and coordination with tank farm activities for adjacent waste sites need to be facilitated by a technically defensible description of sources and their relative strength and temporal contributions to groundwater contamination. Detailed data describing contaminant source releases are typically not available, so source locations are highly uncertain. Furthermore, data on sources and model parameters are not readily available through direct measurements. Instead, source data are often derived by extrapolation from a few direct and/or indirect measurements, while model parameters are commonly estimated using inverse modeling or calibration methods. Because the conceptual model of sources will influence the mass and timing of the flux of contaminants to groundwater, uncertainty in the source terms should be considered. Even though a best-fit model can often be identified, it may not be the best representation of the sources given the sparse, uncertain nature of the data used for estimating source terms. To support future feasibility studies, a systematic approach is needed for identifying remediation and monitoring activities appropriate under conditions of uncertainty. In this study, an integrated assessment of alternative conceptual model elements has been examined using the B-Complex site in the Hanford Central Plateau to demonstrate how multiple sources in a waste management complex can be described to identify their relative contributions to groundwater. The heterogeneous structure of the system is modeled based on available field information on the lithological data for both the vadose zone and aquifer. The approach includes a simulation assessment and linkages to site data, with an uncertainty analysis applied to evaluate the effects of source term uncertainty on contaminant mass flux to groundwater. An integrated assessment of alternative conceptual model elements was evaluated to identify how parameter uncertainty impacts both temporal and spatial uncertainties associated with vadose zone source terms. Modeling scenarios identify important characteristics of remediation target zones to provide context for how surface barriers, in situ remedies, and water-table treatment zones can be designed to account for source dynamics. Ramifications for remediation and monitoring are discussed within the context of the source term uncertainty. The described approach facilitates systematically addressing alternative conceptual model questions in relation to remediation and monitoring and supports the remedial investigation/ feasibility study process and the remediation strategy development for the Hanford Central Plateau. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2012

Remediation Guidance for Major Airports after a Bioterrorist Attack

This document provides general guidelines for airport managers, local officials, and other stakeholders for developing a response and recovery plan for a major airport following the release of a biological warfare agent, with specific guidance for remediation. San Francisco International Airport was selected as the example airport during development of the guidance to illustrate specific details. The spore-forming bacterium Bacillus anthracis was selected as the biological agent of primary concern because it is the most difficult of known bioterrorism agents to inactivate and is considered to be one of the agents most likely to be used as a biological weapon. The focus of the guidance is on cleanup and disposal activities associated with the Characterization, Decontamination, and Clearance Phases that are defined herein. Activities associated with the Notification and First-Response Phases are brieÀy discussed in Appendixes A and B, respectively. In addition to the main text of this Remediation Guidance document and associated appendixes, a data supplement was developed specifically for San Francisco International Airport. Requests for the data supplement must be made directly to the Emergency Planning Operations Division of San Francisco International Airport. This document does not describe public health responses to release of a biological warfare agent. If laboratory analytical results confirm the presence of a biological agent, the responsible public health agency involved in the response will commence appropriate public health actions, such as treatment (CDC 2004) and decontamination of potentially contaminated individuals, distribution of prophylaxis, and medical examinations. See the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention web site for more information on emergency public health responses (http://www.bt.cdc.gov/). Effective communication with the media and the public is an essential component of airport remediation and recovery. Whereas such communication is beyond the scope of this document, many helpful resources are available. (See Section 1.1 for more information.) The concept of operations described in this document for cleanup of a Bacillus anthracis release at a major airport conforms to the National Response Framework (NRF) (DHS 2008) and implementation of the National Incident Management System (NIMS 2004). In most cases, a Unified Command would be formed to direct the cleanup process jointly and to take ultimate responsibility for all cleanup decisions. The Unified Command would likely include the Airport Manager or Airport Emergency Operations Manager, representatives from state and local public health and emergency management agencies, and Federal agencies, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Unified Command and Incident Command Staff would ideally be co-located in an Incident Command Post in an uncontaminated area of the airport. If a release is large or complex, co-location of all key players may not be possible. If a major incident is declared, a Principal Federal Official may be appointed by the Department of Homeland Security to facilitate Federal support to the Unified Command. In some facilities and jurisdictions, additional response plans or procedures (such as BioWatch or other emergency response plans, procedures, or protocols) may govern notification and first response. Facility personnel, responders, and emergency management coordinators should be aware of all applicable plans and procedures and how to implement them. Cleanups following the anthrax attacks of 2001 in the U.S. pre-dated the NRF and NIMS and did not make use of a NIMS Incident Command System as we know it today. Most Incident Commanders for the larger of those cleanups chose to convene a Technical Working Group (TWG) of multi-agency, multi-disciplinary, outside experts to advise in developing sampling and decontamination plans. Most of the Incident Commanders also convened a separate Environmental Clearance Committee (ECC) to independently review pre- and post decontamination sampling data as well as data on decontamination parameters, to evaluate whether the decontamination was effective, and to add credibility regarding a decision that decontaminated areas may be reoccupied. Use of such specialized technical expertise is strongly recommended, although it would now operate within the construct of the NIMS Incident Command System. The TWG, if convened, would act in an advisory capacity to the Environmental Unit within the Planning Section. Likewise, the ECC, if convened, would provide independent peer review of products and recommendations by the Environmental Unit. For maximum impartiality, the ECC could also provide recommendations directly to the Unified Command. Cleanup activities commence with site characterization. The principal goal of characterization is to define the extent of contamination and to gather information needed to design the decontamination approach. Initial sampling data collected by first responders are assessed to approximate the location(s) of contamination. Confirmation of the agent type and viability is obtained from a Laboratory Response Network laboratory. Additional characterization data are collected to determine the extent of contamination and where decontamination actions are needed. Areas suspected of being contaminated are contained and isolated to the degree possible to prevent further movement of an agent to uncontaminated areas or the environment, and to reduce the potential for future exposure from the agent or fumigant, if fumigation is needed. Agent air monitoring in areas adjacent to the contained contamination zones is done to ensure the protection of remediation personnel and to monitor any release from the contained zones. Various sampling approaches are considered. For example, wipe samples can be used to sample hard, nonporous surfaces. Swab samples can be used to sample nooks, crannies, joints, and seams. Appendix I is a template for preparing an incident-specific, operational characterization plan. Upon completion of the characterization plan, an internal review is initiated. Upon approval of the plan by the Unified Command, characterization commences. The Site Safety Officer develops a Health and Safety Plan to ensure that coordinated health and safety measures are in place for all responding personnel. This plan describes physical, chemical, and biological hazards at the site, personal protective equipment, personal decontamination procedures, and emergency procedures to be used by sampling and remediation personnel. An incident-specific Remediation Action Plan is developed, which describes the decontamination methods to be used and other details, including waste disposal. Under NIMS, this overall plan, as well as other plans described below, are implemented through a series of standardized, shorter-term Incident Action Plans, which describe specific activities that will take place during a shift or a day. The template in Appendix J is designed to facilitate preparation of the Remediation Action Plan. If fumigation will be done, a Sampling and Analysis Plan will be needed, as well as an Ambient Air Monitoring Plan, which can be a component of the Remediation Action Plan. These three plans are needed to obtain a crisis exemption from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for authorized use of an unregistered sterilant or pesticide during cleanup. If pesticide products become registered for inactivation of B. anthracis in the future, the three plans will likely be required by the product’s labeling, but the plans would no longer be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for approval; rather, the Incident Commander would approve them. If fumigation is used, an Emergency Response Plan is also recommended, although such a plan is not required for a crisis exemption. For some nonpersistent biological warfare agents, natural attenuation may be an adequate decontamination option. In cases where contamination is not extensive or an agent is not persistent, application of surface decontaminants or other methods of medical infection control may be effective. For extensive contamination by persistent agents, such as Bacillus anthracis, fumigation may be necessary. In those cases, the Decontamination Phase commences with source reduction, such as pre-cleaning surfaces to reduce the contaminant load. To expedite cleanup and prevent costs from escalating unnecessarily, a cost–benefit analysis should be incorporated in the decision process related to retention versus disposal of facility items and materials. Certain materials and structural components can be decontaminated for reuse, but it may not be feasible or cost-effective to decontaminate other items. Those items must be pre-treated, packaged (with the package decontaminated externally), and removed for disposal as waste. Site preparation includes sealing openings to prevent leaks and setting up equipment. Decontamination reagents and delivery systems are selected, and pre-testing all systems is done before carrying out chemical treatment(s). The important choice of decontamination technologies depends on characteristics of the agent, the nature and extent of contamination, and other site parameters identified during characterization. Decontamination-related decisions can have a major impact on waste-disposal costs, and it is necessary to develop a disposal plan that identifies a means of disposal, necessary approvals, transportation, and other details. A clearance strategy is developed to ensure that after decontamination, the risk of exposure to residual contamination is negligible. A clearance sampling plan is developed, which sets clearance criteria, specifies how to determine whether the criteria have been met, and describes how and where to collect clearance samples after decontamination. In most cases, clearance sampling includes both surface and aggressive air samples. Appendix K is a clearance plan template that identifies the types of required information. To determine whether the decontaminated area may be reoccupied, the Environmental Unit (and the ECC separately, if one is convened) evaluates the results of clearance samples. For the anthrax incidents to date, and given methods that have been used, cleanup was considered successful only when there was no growth of B. anthracis cultured from any environmental samples taken after decontamination. Other factors that will be considered include the decontamination process parameters (e.g., temperature, relative humidity, decontaminant concentration, and contact time) and the results from post-decontamination culture of biological indicators that may have been used during fumigation or sterilization processes. From such an evaluation the Environmental Unit or ECC, or both, recommend whether the area may be reoccupied, or whether further decontamination is necessary. The UC makes the final decision that a facility is appropriately decontaminated for reoccupancy. The facility owner or responsible public health agency makes the final decision to reopen a decontaminated facility. A theme that is emphasized throughout this document is that many activities can greatly reduce the time required to restore airport operations if those activities are conducted prior to an actual release of biological warfare agent. A summary of specific resources (such as Federal, state, and local agency contacts; contractors; prospective team members; subject-matter experts; laboratory facilities; and other entities) that should be identified in advance by airport officials is provided in each pertinent section of this document, and summary contact lists of such resources are provided in Appendix L. A summary of overall pre-planning actions that should be completed by airport officials is presented at the end of this document.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2019

Complex Sources and Impacts on Remediation and Monitoring Approaches

Remedy selection, implementation, and coordination with tank farm activities for adjacent waste sites need to be facilitated by a technically defensible description of sources and their relative strength and temporal contributions to groundwater contamination. Detailed data describing contaminant source releases are typically not available, so source locations are highly uncertain. Furthermore, data on sources and model parameters are not readily available through direct measurements. Instead, source data are often derived by extrapolation from a few direct and/or indirect measurements, while model parameters are commonly estimated using inverse modeling or calibration methods. Because the conceptual model of sources will influence the mass and timing of the flux of contaminants to groundwater, uncertainty in the source terms should be considered. Even though a best-fit model can often be identified, it may not be the best representation of the sources given the sparse, uncertain nature of the data used for estimating source terms. To support future feasibility studies, a systematic approach is needed for identifying remediation and monitoring activities appropriate under conditions of uncertainty. In this study, an integrated assessment of alternative conceptual model elements has been examined using the B-Complex site in the Hanford Central Plateau to demonstrate how multiple sources in a waste management complex can be described to identify their relative contributions to groundwater. The heterogeneous structure of the system is modeled based on available field information on the lithological data for both the vadose zone and aquifer. The approach includes a simulation assessment and linkages to site data, with an uncertainty analysis applied to evaluate the effects of source term uncertainty on contaminant mass flux to groundwater. An integrated assessment of alternative conceptual model elements was evaluated to identify how parameter uncertainty impacts both temporal and spatial uncertainties associated with vadose zone source terms. Modeling scenarios identify important characteristics of remediation target zones to provide context for how surface barriers, in situ remedies, and water-table treatment zones can be designed to account for source dynamics. Ramifications for remediation and monitoring are discussed within the context of the source term uncertainty. The described approach facilitates systematically addressing alternative conceptual model questions in relation to remediation and monitoring and supports the remedial investigation/ feasibility study process and the remediation strategy development for the Hanford Central Plateau.

Rockhold, Mark L.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Oil and Natural Gas Development near and beneath Uranium Tailings Cells and Other Remediated Sites - 20358

DOE LM is responsible for maintaining remedies at more than 50 remediated sites that require active long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS and M). Institutional controls (ICs) were established to limit human and environmental exposures to residual contamination by controlling land use, restricting access to potential hazards, and making the public aware of potential dangers from the residual contamination. ICs for each site were developed based on current and foreseeable conditions; however, these controls should evolve to mitigate potential human health and other environmental risks from unanticipated changes in activities or site conditions. Activities conducted beyond the DOE long-term care boundaries by non-DOE parties may impact the effectiveness of ICs or even the long-term stability of disposal cells and groundwater remedies. Several sites that LM manages or that will transfer to LM for LTS and M are in active oil and gas production basins. The sites are associated with uranium ore milling or nuclear test sites and have been remediated or are in the process of remediation and have no ongoing DOE mission. Particularly since 2005, hydraulic fracturing ('fracking') combined with directional drilling has dramatically increased oil and natural gas (oil/gas) production in the United States, now making it the number one hydrocarbon-producing country. Fracking has allowed production from shale and other rocks of low natural permeability that were historically not considered viable oil/gas resources. Also, because wellbores can now be drilled as many as 5 kilometers or more horizontally, hydrocarbons can be recovered from zones without having access to the surface above them. Drilling activity near Rulison, Colorado, the location of an underground nuclear detonation managed by LM, has raised public concerns that remnant radioactivity in the detonation zone could migrate to producing wells and enter the natural gas distribution system. At sites like the Falls City, Texas, Disposal site, transitioned to LM with a split estate, increased production in the region has resulted in wellbores beneath the long-term care boundary of the site. While the DOE license for Falls City was approved by the NRC in 1997 without the acquisition of the subsurface rights, NRC has raised concerns on whether this activity impacts the integrity of the cell and/or groundwater remedies. In Wyoming, LM is anticipating receiving the license for the Bear Creek site and manages the Spook site, both locations of uranium mill tailings disposal cells. These Wyoming sites are in an active region of major oil and gas development. This change in surrounding land use will require LM to work collaboratively with NRC to address these concerns. At several DOE sites radioactive waste, and often intermixed nonradioactive constituents, is permanently isolated in engineered disposal cells. At other sites, residual contamination can be present in groundwater, blast cavities, and infinite amounts within soil. Areas targeted for oil and gas development at the Texas and Wyoming sites range from depths of 2440 to 3350 meters (8000-11000 feet) below ground surface. When most site remedies were designed, oil and gas development was not considered to be an issue within the site boundary. With the more recent uses of directional drilling, fracking, and associated wastewater injections, the evaluative criteria for incoming sites and ICs for managing long-term protectiveness and regulatory compliance are changing. Although DOE surface ownership was previously thought to be a robust IC to prevent surface and subsurface development, particularly at disposal sites, that may no longer be the case. Whereas the subsurface development at Texas and Wyoming sites is currently occurring at thousands of meters beneath the surface, shallower and direct onsite development would be more of a concern for LM. The energy introduced when a well is hydraulically fractured causes microseismic events (magnitude -2 to 1.0) as the fractures propagate but does not directly cause seismic events (earthquakes) of sufficient magnitude to damage surface structures. Additionally, the extent of the hydraulic fractures is limited to the targeted depths, which are far below the surface. However, earthquakes of sufficient magnitude to damage surface structures have been attributed to the injection of wastewater into disposal wells. States that have experienced these effects have enacted regulations that limit the rate and pressures that wastewater can be injected into disposal wells. Items LM may consider are the need for monitoring the volume of water injected into nearby disposal wells and possibly installing seismic stations at sites most susceptible to damage. While the need to demonstrate that no impact from oil and gas extraction activities on a site groundwater remedy or disposal cells will vary from site to site, LM is assessing risk criteria for this activity. Though LM has not experienced an issue yet at a uranium tailings disposal site, it cannot assume that there will be none, and must address NRC concerns. LM is building on past experiences at other sites and beginning to form new processes with the hope that these concepts can be applied for other future sites. (authors)

04 OIL SHALES AND TAR SANDS↗
DOE OSTI2015

Integrating remediation and resource recovery: On the economic conditions of landfill mining

Highlights: • We compare two remediation scenarios; one with resource recovery and one without. • Economic analysis includes relevant direct costs and revenues for the landfill owner. • High degrees of metal and/or combustible contents are important economic factors. • Landfill tax and the access to a CHP can have a large impact on the result. • Combining landfill mining and remediation may decrease the project cost. - Abstract: This article analyzes the economic potential of integrating material separation and resource recovery into a landfill remediation project, and discusses the result and the largest impact factors. The analysis is done using a direct costs/revenues approach and the stochastic uncertainties are handled using Monte Carlo simulation. Two remediation scenarios are applied to a hypothetical landfill. One scenario includes only remediation, while the second scenario adds resource recovery to the remediation project. Moreover, the second scenario is divided into two cases, case A and B. In case A, the landfill tax needs to be paid for re-deposited material and the landfill holder does not own a combined heat and power plant (CHP), which leads to disposal costs in the form of gate fees. In case B, the landfill tax is waived on the re-deposited material and the landfill holder owns its own CHP. Results show that the remediation project in the first scenario costs about €23/ton. Adding resource recovery as in case A worsens the result to −€36/ton, while for case B the result improves to −€14/ton. This shows the importance of landfill tax and the access to a CHP. Other important factors for the result are the material composition in the landfill, the efficiency of the separation technology used, and the price of the saleable material.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2012

Advanced Remedial Methods for Metals and Radionuclides in Vadose Zone Environments

Functionally, the methods for addressing contamination must remove and/or reduce transport or toxicity of contaminants. This problem is particularly challenging in arid environments where the vadose zone can be up to hundreds of feet thick, rendering transitional excavation methods exceedingly costly and ineffective. Delivery of remedial amendments is one of the most challenging and critical aspects for all remedy-based approaches. The conventional approach for delivery is through injection of aqueous remedial solutions. However, heterogeneous vadose zone environments present hydrologic and geochemical challenges that limit the effectiveness. Because the flow of solution infiltration is dominantly controlled by gravity and suction, injected liquid preferentially percolates through highly permeable pathways, bypassing low-permeability zones which frequently contain the majority of the contamination. Moreover, the wetting front can readily mobilize and enhance contaminant transport to underlying aquifers prior to stabilization. Development of innovative, in-situ technologies may be the only way to meet remedial action objectives and long-term stewardship goals. Shear-thinning fluids (i.e., surfactants) can be used to lower the liquid surface tension and create stabile foams, which readily penetrate low permeability zones. Although surfactant foams have been utilized for subsurface mobilization efforts in the oil and gas industry, so far, the concept of using foams as a delivery mechanism for transporting reactive remedial amendments into deep vadose zone environments to stabilize metal and long-lived radionuclide contaminants has not been explored. Foam flow can be directed by pressure gradients rather than being dominated by gravity, and, foam delivery mechanisms limit the volume of water (< 20% vol.) required for remedy delivery and emplacement, thus mitigating contaminant mobilization. We will present the results of an integrated laboratory- / intermediate-scale investigation to simulate, develop, demonstrate, and monitor (using advanced geophysical techniques and natural marker monitoring) foam-based delivery of remedial amendments to stabilize metals and radionuclides in vadose zone environments.

Foam Delivery↗
DOE OSTI2012

Overview of the U.S. Department of Energy Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program - 12189

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) was established in 1974 to address residual radiological contamination at sites where work was performed for the Manhattan Engineer District and U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. Initially, FUSRAP activities began with a records search for sites that had the potential to contain residual radiological contamination; 46 sites were identified that were eligible for and required remediation. Remedial action began in 1979. In 1997, Congress assigned responsibility for the remediation of FUSRAP sites to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). DOE retains responsibility for determining if sites are eligible for FUSRAP remediation and for providing long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS&M) of remediated FUSRAP sites. DOE LTS&M activities are designed to ensure that FUSRAP sites remain protective of human health and the environment and to preserve knowledge regarding FUSRAP sites. Additional elements include eligibility determinations, transition of remediated sites from USACE to DOE, LTS&M operations such as inspections and institutional controls management, stakeholder support, preservation of records, and real property and reuse. DOE maintains close coordination with USACE and regulators to ensure there is no loss of protectiveness when sites transition to DOE for LTS&M.

Radiological contamination, Grand Junction, Colora↗
DOE OSTI2013

Development of an Automated Remedy Performance Evaluation Program - 13622

Performance monitoring is a vital element of groundwater remediation. Unfortunately, the enormous efforts and costs that are expended procuring, managing, processing and storing monitoring data are often not subject to correspondingly rigorous evaluation. This is despite the fact that many steps in the process are predictable and are repeated many times over the remedy life cycle. At the Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site, a program is underway to automate many of these steps - processing, formatting any analyzing large volumes of heterogeneous data associated with the operation of several groundwater pump-and-treat (P and T) and in-situ remedies. The Automated Remedy Performance Evaluation Program (ARPEP) was developed from a work-flow process designed to deliver (a) monthly data summaries and preliminary analysis, (b) quarterly performance assessments, and (c) annual roll-up analyses that detect changes in long-term monitoring datasets and support remedy optimization. The intent of the ARPEP is to provide detailed, systematic and traceable data summaries, depictions and analyses that can be used by project scientists to complete their evaluation of remedy performance. The ARPEP work-flow was formalized following extensive review of applicable guidance, regulation and industry standards. The ARPEP incorporates disparate data types collected over different frequencies, such as water levels and pumping rates recorded every minute, and groundwater sample results obtained on quarterly, annual or irregular intervals. The data are processed, reduced to frequencies suitable for assessment, and combined in various ways leading to performance indicators such as (a) pumped well capacities and system downtime that reflect operational performance; (b) hydraulic gradients and areas of hydraulic containment that reflect hydraulic performance; and (c) time-series (longitudinal) and geo-statistical (spatial) trend analyses that reflect progress toward attainment of Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs). The entire sequence of data processing and analysis is undertaken within the R programming environment, an open-source environment for statistical computing and graphics, and is summarized in a comprehensive PDF project report. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2012

Remediation of Mercury Contaminated Soils at the Miramas Site - 12243

Beneficial 'new' use of the Miramas Site is the remediation objective for a former light isotope manufacturing facility. Remediation operations will remove contaminated soils and materials and deconstruct facilities. The remediation objective is faced with project challenges and regulatory requirements that dictate/influence the outcome. The operation consists of the remediation of approximately 100,000 cubic meters of soil and the decommissioning of facilities. The types and ranges of waste are the result of historical processing activities (chemical facilities, pyrotechnic components storage, mining component treatment and light isotope manufacturing activities). Mercury is the primary component of the waste, but metals and organic compounds are also possible waste components. A thermal desorption process is used to remove Mercury from the polluted soil while a biological treatment is considered to the organic nitrate compound removal. A focus is done on the technologies used to remediate the Mercury contaminated soil. After few months of operation, the first results confirm that the technology choices were relevant and the soil remediation project is a success. The first successful month of operation at an industrial scale demonstrate that the Thermal Desorption is an efficient and relevant process to remediate large quantity of mercury contaminated soils. The project is on cost and the mercury removal should be end by 2014. The scrubbing is a good way to limit the volume of material to be treated with the Thermal Desorption Unit. The biological treatment is a promising process for the organic nitrate compound removal and testing at a pilot scale will be done in 2012. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

FUSRAP Maywood Site - Remediation of a Residential Property at 61 Trudy Drive, Lodi, NJ - 17533

The Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) is the U.S. government program started in 1974 to identify, investigate and clean up or control sites that became contaminated as a result of the nation's early atomic programs. The FUSRAP Maywood (New Jersey) Superfund Site (FMSS) consists of 92 designated property parcels known as vicinity properties. 61 Trudy Drive in Lodi, New Jersey is one such vicinity property. Construction planning for a recently-completed remedial excavation at 61 Trudy Drive was predicated on a fundamental question: to remediate the property with the existing home remaining in place or to demolish the exiting home. Answering this question involved detailed engineering and cost analyses, programmatic considerations, and stakeholder input. 61 Trudy Drive was originally addressed under FUSRAP in 1985 by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). However, subsequent remediation on an adjacent property by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in 1998 suggested that residual contamination remained at depth at 61 Trudy. The property owner at that time declined to allow FUSRAP access to the property. However, a property transfer in 2012 presented USACE with an opportunity to address this property. Characterization of the property began in 2013; remedial activities were completed in 2015. The 61 Trudy Drive remediation required an intensive stakeholder communications program tailored for several audiences, including the affected property owner, local government officials and the neighboring community This paper will present the FUSRAP history at 61 Trudy Drive, to provide context for recent FUSRAP actions there. It will then focus on the challenges and complexities of performing environmental remediation in a suburban residential setting, focusing on both construction and communications. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Cost-effective Remediation of Legacy Uranium Mines in Canada - 19279

Canada's legacy uranium mines were developed and operated in the 1950's and the 1960's when environmental regulations applied to mining activities were not as stringent as they are today. Fortunately, the ore was very low grade and, most of these sites do not currently pose a significant risk. However, the mining practices used at the time would not be considered acceptable today and there is a need to ensure these sites are being managed properly, especially in the context of gaining public support for the development of new uranium mines. At the beginning of the Cold War nuclear arms race, uranium was in high demand. In 1948, bans on private uranium exploration and mining were lifted, resulting in extensive exploration activity across the country, with Canada's second uranium mine beginning production in 1953. By 1958, 19 uranium mills were operating and Canadian production peaked at 12,239 tonnes of uranium metal (tU). The uranium mining boom was short-lived as the United States, the major purchaser, soon had sufficient quantities of uranium to meet its needs and the Canadian contracts were not extended. Uranium mines began closing, and by 1965, only 4 remained in operation. Closure requirements were minimal at that time, and other than sealing shafts and other safety measures, the sites were abandoned by their owners and the wastes were not addressed. In many cases, the company that operated the mine, or its successor, still exists and is now addressing the wastes on its sites. However, sites for which a former operator cannot be found have become a government responsibility. It is not often practical or cost-effective to remediate legacy sites to the standards applied to modern uranium mines. Most of the sites pose a very low risk, due to the very low-grades of ore, their remote locations, and the fact that contamination has spread and dissipated over the last 50 years and the environment will continue to improve through natural attenuation. Owners of legacy uranium mine sites in Canada have developed and successfully carried out cost-effective remediation plans that meet regulatory requirements. Experience from the legacy sites that have been remediated to date in Canada has shown that costs for remediating legacy uranium mines need not be excessive, and should be similar to the cost of remediating other metal mines of comparable size. The main factor in the cost of remediating these sites is the amount of tailings that were generated. On a per unit cost basis (current U.S. dollars), costs of remediation, have ranged from US$0.83 to US$2.57 per tonne of tailings. (authors)

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

Panel Session 26: Risk-Based Approaches to Environmental Remediation and Adaptive Site Management

This panel discussed the needs and importance of developing risk-based approaches to environmental remediation that will enable complex sites to be adaptively managed by applying cost-effective remedies that are protective of human health and the environment. The discussion emphasized risk-based approaches within decision processes and subsequent incorporation into regulatory decision documents. Remedy approaches, remediation exit strategies, and long-term monitoring plans that support risk-based end-states for difficult-to-remediate sites were discussed Panelists with presentations: Risk-Informed Approaches to Environmental Remediation and Adaptive Site Management (Vicky Freedman); ITRC Adaptive Site Management Perspective (Michael Truex); Optimization During Operations and Maintenance Phase at the Hanford Site 200-ZP-1 Groundwater Operable Unit (Emerald Laija, Kate Amrhein, Michael Truex); Adaptive Management: EPA Overview (Benjamin Simes); Decommissioning and Environmental Remediation Section Division of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology (Horst Monken Fernandes)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Developing a remediation framework

When harmful contaminants are detected in soil, sediment, or groundwater (or suspected due to industrial activities), remediation efforts may be required to protect human health and the environment. This chapter will introduce and discuss the steps in the general site remediation process that are key when approaching any remediation strategy, regardless of the site complexity. While these steps are described in a linear fashion, in most cases, the approach is more fluid and iterative depending on the desired outcomes and success of each progressive clean-up effort along the way. This chapter will additionally articulate some key considerations which may be important to the overall remediation strategy depending on the particular needs and desired outcomes. From these more general discussions, the chapter will branch into a case-study of the remediation approach, or process steps, previously/currently/in the future taking place at the Hanford Site, as one example of a complex waste sites in the United States. As indicated earlier, while a remediation strategy can be more simply described by a progression of general process steps, it is far more likely to observe fluidity and strategy evolution over time from the first conceived strategy as remediation progress occurs. The chapter concludes with a brief discussion of how the strategy at the Hanford Site has evolved to provide a singular example of what this evolution might look like for other complex waste sites.

Muller, Katherine A.↗
DOE OSTI2012

Effects of remediation amendments on vadose zone microorganisms

Surfactant-based foam delivery technology has been studied to remediate Hanford 200 area deep vadose zone sediment. However, the surfactants and remediation amendments have an unknown effect on indigenous subsurface microorganisms. Microbial populations are important factors to consider in remediation efforts due to their potential to alter soil geochemistry. This project focuses on measuring microbial metabolic responses to remediation amendments in batch and column studies using Deep Vadose Zone Sediments. Initial studies of the microbes from Hanford 200 area deep vadose zone sediment showed surfactants sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) and remediation amendment calcium polysulfide (CPS) had no affect on microbial growth using BiologTM Ecoplates. To move towards a more realistic field analog, soil columns were packed with Hanford 200 Area sediment. Once microbial growth in the column was verified by observing growth of the effluent solution on tryptic soy agar plates, remedial surfactants were injected into the columns, and the resulting metabolic diversity was measured. Results suggest surfactant sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) stimulates microbial growth. The soil columns were also visualized using X-ray microtomography to inspect soil packing and possibly probe for evidence of biofilms. Overall, BiologTM Ecoplates provide a rapid assay to predict effects of remediation amendments on Hanford 200 area deep vadose zone microorganisms.

Miller, Hannah M.↗
DOE OSTI2018

Mercury Remediation Technology Development for Lower East Fort Poplar Creek - FY2018 Update

Mercury (Hg) remediation is a high priority for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management (OREM). Mercury contamination in the environment can be found at all three DOE facilities in Oak Ridge, but probably the greatest environmental risk concern relative to Hg on the Oak Ridge Reservation is associated with historical Hg losses at and near the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12). Water and fish from East Fork Poplar Creek (EFPC) downstream of Y-12 exceed regulatory thresholds. Because of the complexities of Hg transport and fate in the aquatic environment, conventional remedial options for EFPC are highly uncertain. DOE is using a phased, adaptive management approach to Hg remediation at Y-12, with a focus in the next few years on construction of the Mercury Treatment Facility (MTF) to treat the most contaminated Y-12 outfall entering EFPC (DOE 2017a; DOE 2017b). Once operational, the MTF will provide additional protection against inadvertent releases of Hg into the stream from decontamination and decommissioning of Y-12 Hg-use buildings. Although it is anticipated that the MTF will substantially decrease Hg water concentrations and flux in the upper part of EFPC, research and technology development is needed to develop appropriate and longer-term remedial solutions for the downstream environment. Since late 2014, OREM and UCOR/RSI (URS | CH2M Oak Ridge LLC/Restoration Services, Inc.) have supported Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Environmental Sciences Division staff in conducting field and laboratory studies to develop Hg remedial technology solutions for lower EFPC (LEFPC). A technology development strategy for lower EFPC was developed in 2014 that was consistent with the adaptive management paradigm and DOE’s Technology Readiness Level (TRL) guidelines (Peterson et al. 2015). Initially, a thorough review of the literature and site-specific information was conducted to develop a broad number of potential technologies that might be applied in lower EFPC. An adaptive management approach was then used to focus on technologies that might have the most promise and potential remediation benefit. Field and laboratory studies conducted during 2014–2018 have (1) identified the major drivers of Hg flux and bioaccumulation in EFPC and (2) narrowed the list of highmerit technologies that might be of use in remediating the downstream environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Mercury Remediation Technology Development for Lower East Fork Poplar Creek (FY2020 Update)

Mercury (Hg) remediation is a high priority for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management. Mercury contamination in the environment can be found at all three DOE facilities in Oak Ridge, but probably the greatest environmental risk concern relative to Hg on the Oak Ridge Reservation is associated with historical Hg losses at and near the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12). Water and fish from East Fork Poplar Creek (EFPC) downstream of Y-12 exceed regulatory thresholds. Because of the complexities of Hg transport and fate in the aquatic environment, conventional remedial options for EFPC are highly uncertain. DOE is using a phased adaptive management approach to Hg remediation at Y-12 with a focus in the next few years on construction of the Mercury Treatment Facility (MTF) to treat the most contaminated Y-12 outfall entering EFPC (DOE 2017a; DOE 2017b). Once operational, the MTF will provide additional protection against inadvertent releases of Hg into the stream from decontamination and decommissioning of Y-12 Hg-use buildings. Although the MTF is anticipated to substantially decrease Hg water concentrations and flux in the upper part of EFPC, research and technology development are needed to develop appropriate and long-term remedial solutions for the downstream environment. Since late 2014, the Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management and URS | CH2M Oak Ridge LLC/Restoration Services, Inc. have supported DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Environmental Sciences Division staff in conducting field and laboratory studies to develop Hg remedial technology solutions for lower EFPC (LEFPC). A technology development strategy for LEFPC was developed in 2014 that was consistent with the adaptive management paradigm and DOE’s technology readiness level (TRL) guidelines (Peterson et al. 2015). Initially, a thorough review of the literature was conducted and site-specific information was collected to develop a broad number of potential technologies that might be applied in LEFPC. An adaptive management approach was then used to focus on technologies that might have the most promise and potential remediation benefit. Field and laboratory studies conducted from 2014 to 2020 have identified the major drivers of Hg flux and bioaccumulation in EFPC and narrowed the list of high-merit technologies that might be of use in remediating the downstream environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Part IV: Remedial Action

This part of the book focuses on the remedial action where the remedy is selected and approved with associated regulatory documentation, detailed designs are prepared, and construction and/or implementation of the remedy is completed. The application may include remediation of environmental media (e.g., subsurface sediments or surface water sources), waste processing, and/or deactivation and decommissioning of historical facilities. Once a preferred remedy is implemented, the final steps include long-term stewardship and site closure (discussed in Part V). Refer to Section 3.2 of Chapter 1, Remediation Strategy for Complex Waste Sites, for context on how these steps fit into the broader remediation process.

Johnson, Christian D.↗