+++++..+++++__++ AIIM ++,.,, •++!++++++++,++,.,_ ,:_!++_+++++_.';++_+ \.'_. Association for Information and Image Management

+"ver+or'n°'?e:u'c"_nO_0" '+'_;+_°++++,,,.,+..,+•__ +o,]+++_++o?+'_°+'°°° + ,_++++. ,+++.++++++%+ +

.....I! ....... I II In II I II IIINI inn1Innun .... _'_'nl- II

I

P

UCRL-ID- 115789

, DOE In Situ Remediation Integrated ProgramIn Situ Manipulation Technologies

Subprogram Plan

Jesse L. Yow, Jr.

|

|

December 22, 1993

•

This is an informal report intended primarily for internal or limited externaldistribution. The opinions and conclusions stated are those of the author and

may or may not be those of the Laboratory.Work performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by theLawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract W-7405-Eng-48.

' ' ' i ,1 , , , i i

DISCLAIMER

This document was prepared us an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government.Neither the United States Government nor the University of California nor any of their employees,makes anywarranty, expressor implied, or assumesany legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness,or usefulnessof any information, apparatus, product, or processdisclosed,or represents that its use would notinfringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specificcommerdai products, process, or servicebytrade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarilyconstitute or imply its endorsement,

- recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or the University of Caiifornia. The views andopinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Governmentor the University of California, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.

8.

&

This report has beenreproduceddirectly from the best available copy.

Available to DOE and DOE contractors from theOffice or ScientiFic and Technical Information

P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, 'IN 37831Prices available from (615) 576-8401, FTS 626.8401

Available to the public from theNational Technical Information Service

U._. Department of Commerce$285 Port Royal Rd,

Springfield, VA 22161

DOE In Situ Remediation Integrated Program

In Situ Manipulation TechnologiesSubprogram Plan "

Prepared forMr. Jeffrey Walker

U.S. Department of Energy" Office of Teelmology Development

In Situ Remediation IntegratedProgramWashington, D.C. 20585

Jesse L. Yow, Jr.

." Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

December 22, 1993

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLF_ ii

"_° i_

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

PREFACE AND ACKNO_MENTS iv .

1.0 INTRODUCTION 11.1 Purpose andScope 21.2 Approach

2.0 ASSESSMENT OF DOE NEEDS 32.i Containment Technologies 332.2 Physical/Chemical Treatment Technologies 42.3 Bioremediation Technol0.gics2.4 General In SireManipulation TechnologyNeeds 52.5 Tuningof DOE Needs for ISM Technology 6

3.0 -" TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT STATUS 73.1 Features of In Sire Manipulation Technologies 73.2 Stares of Development and Commercialization 73.3 Related Domestic Research and Development Programs 13

4.0 R&D PROGRAM FOR IN $1TU MANIPULATION TECHNOLOGIES 14144.1 Linkage to Other ISRP Subprograms 144.2 Technical Gaps and Issues 154.3 Research and Development Opportunities 164.4 Subprogram Funding and Milestones 16

- 4.5 Expected Impact of Unresolved Issues 16 "4.6 Key Assumptions 174.7 Drivers and Regulations

5.0 REFERENCES 18

Appendix A: Timing of DOE Needs for Environmental Remcdiation Technology 20

, i

LIST OF TABLES

"f Table I Major Areas of InnovationinRemedial Technologies 2

'i Table2 RemediatiTypicalon$1tuManipulation Needs for FXr 1993 In $itu 5IntegratedProgramTechnical Task Plans "•-"

1 Table 3 Systems for In Sltu Dispersal of Treatment Agents 7

'1 Table 4 Drilling Methods for Vertical Boreholes 9

Table 5 Summary of Vertical Drilling Systems 11

Table 6 Held Methods for Remedial Process Monitoring/_trol 13

'_ Table 7 Related Federal Reaearch and Development Programs 13

u

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ANL - Argonne National LaboratoryBNL - Brookhaven National LaboratoryDNAPL - Dense Nonaqueous Phase LiquidsDOD - U.S. De_nt of DefenseDOE - U.S. _.ent of Energy . "'"EM - Office of Environmental Re_muion andWare ManagementEM-40 - Office of Environmental Restoration within EMEM-50 - Office of Technology Development within EMEPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyER • - Office of Energy ResearchESD - Environmental Sciences DivisionFMPC - Feed Materials Productions CenterFUSRAP - Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial ActionHSRC - Hazantous Substance Research Co--urnINEL - Idaho National Engineering Laboratory -.

IP - Integrate Pro.gr_. Ofthe Office of Technology DevelopmentISM - In Sire ManipulationISPC'T - In $1tu Physical/Chemical TreatmentISRP - In $1tu Remediation Integrated ProgramITEP - In_onal Technology Exchange Program

- Lawrence LivermoreNational LaboratoryLNAPL - Light Nonaqueous Phase LiquidsORNL - Oak Ridge National LaboratoryNAPL - Nonaqueous Phase LiquidsOSHA - Occupational Safety and Health AdministrationOTD - Office of Technology DevelopmentQA/QC - Quality Assurance/Quality ControlQAPP - Quality Assurance Project PlanR&D - Research and DevelopmentRCRA - Resource Conservation and Recovery AcSBIR - Small Business Innovated Research

SR - Savannah River LaboratoryUSAEC - U.S. Army Environmental CenterVOC - Volatile Organic Compound

iii

PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The first draft of the In Situ Manipulation CISM)Technologies Subprogram Plan wasprepared between March and July, 1993 in support of.the Strategic Program Plan for the DOEOffice of Technology Development's In Sltu Remediation IntegratedPmgrmn USRP). The draftwas _.v_ during the first quarter of FY 1994 to reflect review comments and to incorporatemore information about relevant areas of the ISRP. "IbisISM plan focuses the development of/ns/m manipulation _ enabling technologies for use in soil and ground water xein_n in theDOE complex. This revised version of the plan smnmarizes ISM technologies and technologyneeds for a major part of the ISRP. The plan is intended to be a livingdocument and will berevised further u more information becomes available, u the technical needs of the ISRP, DOEEM-50, and DOE EM-40 evolve, and as the program achieves its objectives.

Preparation of this draft ISM plan was.assistednumber ofpeople at _ and other orgamzations, bMarkhnical

and programmatic input froma Gerber and Mary Peterson at PNL,Richard .Thorpe and Dennis Kelsh at .SAIC, and Robert Si.egrist at ORNL were particularly.he!pful dunng the development of thts document. Technical and programmatic input _.agui.from for ISRP,the direction of this plan as well as m the success of the program. •

,m

.o

iv

1.0 INTRODUCTION

I.I Purpose and Scope

.The In Si.m Remediation Integrated Program ._..RP) supports and manages a balancedpm_olio of applied research and development activities in support of DOE environmental_on and was._ m_ge.men, t ne_ls. ISRP technologies are being developed in four areas:containment_ chemical and physical trentmeat,/n _u bioremediation,.and in $iru manipulation(including electrokinetics). The focus of containment is to provide mechanisms to stopcontaminant migration through the subsurface. In sire bioremediation and chemical and physicaltreatment both aim to destroy or eliminate contaminants i:a groundwater and mils. In siremanipulation (IS.M) provides mechanisms to access contamilmnts or introduce treatm.ent agentsmto the soil, and includes other tec.hnologies necessary to support the implementation of ISRmethods. Descnpfions of each major program area are.provided below _ set the technicalcontext of the ISM subprogram;Table I identifies typical ISM needs for major areas of in sireremediation research and development.

. o

Containment technology focuses on barriers (inclu_ng barriers which are perme_.ble orimpenneab_ to water) to prevent the subsurface mignmon of contaminants. Examples includevertical diffusion (hydraulic) b.a_i'ers:d_ic .soil c0mpactio_..and cry.oge.nic,barriVers..DOEhas also developed in $itu vitrification tecanotogy m unmoomze or limit, the mzgrauon ozcontaminants. Other innovative approaches, such as ...r.eactiveor gated bm'ri.ers,are cu_.. n.dYbeing developed. Data are still limited on the applicability of these u_chnologles to remediauonproblems under certain soil and groundwater conditions.

Phvsical.e_d Chemical Tw_tment methods have traditionally involved pumping ground water tothe surface for ex situ treatment. More innovative techniques involving vapor extraction forvolatiles, sometimes enhanced with air or steam injection, are being demonstrated in someapplications. Proposed mechanisms to achieve in situ treatment include thermal desu'ucfion,thermal enhancement of extraction processes, oxidation/reduction to immobilize (or mobilize)contaminants, permeable or gated st_bsurfacebarriers,and electrochemical processes.

Bioremediation focuses on cleanup of sites contaminated with hazardous organics and mixedwaste (hazardous organics with metals or radionuclides), including chlorinated hydrocarbons andnon-aqueous p_mse liquids (NAPLs). The ability of natural agents to destroy or altercontaminants has been demonstrated under certain conditions. However, understanding ofbioremedial processes in more general situations (such as in the vadose zone and in fight soils)and knowledge of explicit mechanisms that relate biological processes to the fate ofcontaminants arc still incomplete.

I_ situ manivulation provides technology for addition, dispersion, or recovery of materials in soilor ground water in the subsurface, as well as complementary enabling technologies to design an.dassm'e the performance of in situ processes. Thus, ISM technologies are instrumental to mesuccess of in situ remediation technologies in each of the program areas described above.Existing physical ISM technologies include special drilling techniques derived from theconstruction and mining industry, and electrokinetic techniques adapted from civil engineering.Electrokinetics (including electroosmosis and electrophoresis phenomena) provides a mechanismto achieve ionic migration in ground water and soil with potential use for contaminant removal orin situ chemical treatment techniques. Although drilling capabilities for environmentalapplications are becoming generally established, performance criteria needed to assess theefficacy of drilling, injection, and mixing technologies for subsurface manipulation andsubsequent remediation are not as mature.

TABLE 1. Major Areas of Innovation in RcmeAial Technologies

ProgramArea ExampleTechnol_ T_icalin situ l_nipulationNeedscom_t _._ __ ' sua_f_ _te__of__'w'

Succemfulemplacmnentof energym uemogeueoesin _ v!uification mediatoachievecomple_vitrificatk3a.

_ ekurk_tmeug •Sucum__of_ mu_mm_r

c_m_nene__ oa=mmpmemstoamu_o0_n_ot_.,rtoachievedmimidesmeof mixing.

• Smxmfulemptemmmtet mm_ TmbetmSemmeleclmkin_cs mesa toavoidleavinzcoldspotsuntreated. _ _

Biomuedia_on .... MkxobialFil/m" • Sua:essfulemplacanogof microbesor ufiuub_.... _nutrientsinheterogeneousmedia. ......

1.2 Approach

The ISM subpro_ plan is intended to identify DOE needs and research opportunitiesfor ISM technologies. Generic areas of need include:

• • Technologies for/n s/tu introduction, transfer, or mixing of mass ¢r energy. "

• Enabling technologies (incl.udin.gmeasurement and simulation tools) for perfmmancedesign,monitorini_,oroptimization.

• Reseaxch to address basic scientific challenges that impede the success or development ofISM technologies.

Appropriate research and development activities will be planned and conducted toprovide the technologies necessary to resolve the first two of these generic need c._gories. To ,that.end, this plan identifies and assesses the state of the practice for ISM technologtes; gapsare identified in available .technolo_'.".escan be addressed in aprogram call for 1_..posals or wt.thother technology acquisition a'ctivitxcs. The third generic need area, involving more basleresearch, can be compared against research in progress in DOE and other basic researchprograms to identify strategies for resolution.

2

' plW '

2.0 ASSESSMENT OF DOE NEEDS

2.1 Containment Technologies

Much of DOE's waste and/or contaminant plume "sourc,..,terms" _ associated with thevadose zone. _ is a need to de.velop texhnologie s that will be effective in containing the

oftheexmtingplumesand¢z_ntrollingsource.terms.Such a technologywould satisfyneedsfornulundancyin en_ co_t bame_,forwastedisposaland would altosatisfyneedsto containremdnalcontaminationremainingin the vadosezone followin,grestoration,.Contaminantsaretransferredthroughthevadosezoneby diffusiveand advectivemechanismsm themeteoricgroundwaterthatpercolatesdownwardthroughtheemplacedwaste

orcontaminantplumelocation..Containmentconceptsinvolveemplacingapermeablephysical,chemical,orbiologicalbarrierm thevadosezonebeloworadjacentto(surrounding)thesourcelocationtoattenuate,retard,orstopcontaminantmovementinsoilandgroundwater.

ISM technology needs in SUPtXn_of containment methodologies include the following:

• Technologies capable of introducing physical, chemical,.or biological agents into thesubsurfaceasbarrierssurroundingthe_ orplumelocation."thesetechnologiescouldincludedrilling,jetgrouting,oraugernnxmg.

• Nondestructive(e.g.,geophysical)techniquestoconfirmthesuitableemplacement,configuration,andimmediateperformanceofbarriermaterials.

• Performancemeasurestoestablishthelong-termeffectivenessofemplacedbarriers..,i"_ j

2.2 Physical/Chemical Treatment Technologies

Contamination of soil and ground water by organics, inorganic ions, and radionuclides isan almost ubiquitous problem at DOE sites. Due to advecfion of percolating water, contaminant

: migration poses a greater risk for site releases in humid regions. However, contamination ofdeepaquifers in arid regions has also occuned. Alternatively, contamination of unsaturated softwell above the water table is a problem particular to the arid sites. TCE, PCE, and CC14 are

j organic contaminants of particular concern at many DOE sites. Chromium (VI), uranium (VI),mercury, other heavy metals, and nitrate are inorganic species of widespread interest at the., various sites, along with radionuclides 137Cs, 90Sr, and 3H. These cohtaminants are found both

individually and in various combinations, depending on the site.

CMnent state of the practice for treating ground water contamination involves pumpingwater to the surface for ex situ treatment. Techniques such as vapor extraction have beendeveloped for coliecting volatile organic compounds from soils, and are being tested at over 70Federal and industrial sites across the U.S. However, both of these treatments _req_"c separationof the contaminant from the media and transportto the surface. Electrokinetic _ques may beable to provide in situ separation techniques in some situations, but these applications are stillunder development. Consequently, cleanup progress is limited by the ability of contaminants tobe separated from underground host media

In situ destruction and treatment techniques may be able to reduce or eliminate theamount of contaminated soil, ground water, andvapor that must be extracted and treated on site.As examples, destruction techniques could be used to eliminate organics from soil and groundwater', in situ treatment of inorganics could reduce their mobility in the soil and ground water.

Treatmentcould.be performedalone or in hybridcombinationswith other technologies such asvaporextraction,groundwaterextraction,or biologicaltreatment.

ISM technology nee_ in supper/of physical/chemical treatmentmethodologies include thefollowing:

• Technologies for.introducingphysical,chemical,or biological ageats into the subs_waste or contaminantplume locattion.Technologiesarealso needed for adding(e4.,thermalorelectrl_tl)tosubmrfa_systems.

• Technologies for more effectively extractingagentsor fluids,from subsurface waste orcontaminantplume locations (e.Z.,el.ec_kineti.cs of permeabilityenhancementsthroughultrasonic,hydrofracturing,or pneumaticfracumngprocesses).

• Nondestructive (e.g.: geophysical) techniques to confirm the emplacement andperformanceof agentsm the subsurface.

2.3 BioremediationTechnologies

Operationsat DOE research, production,and operationsfac_li."tiesover past decJukS generatedsignificant .volumesof or_'c, w.asW.sth_ were routinelydischargedto the ground in ponds,trenches,andotherdisposal faciliues. _.from. tanksand_ piping, leachs_ from burialgrounds.,or .storage.a.T_, and large-scaleliquiddischarges.mthemil have resu.l,ted in widespreadcon.mmmauonof soils and ground waterat many DOE rotes. These orgamc wastes includedchlonnatedsolvents such as TCE, PCE,CCI4,and CHCI3,andpetroleumhydrocmboos such asgasoline,,diesel fuel, kerosene, and lubricatingoils. Someof these organic contaminants leakedor were discharged to soils both as pure productand as aqueous-phase contaminants. Pureprod.uctor non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) in the subsurface have• the potential tostgnificantlydegradegroundwaterqualityby providinga long-term,continualso_ of aq..ueonscontaminationup to the contaminant'ssolubilitylimit. C!e_nupof NAPI.,-contaminatedsoil andgroundwateris a high priorityfor siteremediation,especiallyfor dense NAPLs (DNAPLs) fromchlorinatedsolvents. DNAPLs areparticularlyproblematicin aquifersbecause of their tendencyto sink below the water table, makingrecoveryvirtuallynnpossible by conventional pumpandtreatmethods.

• .

Biodegradation techniques are effective for ex situ treatmentof a wide range of organiccontaminantsdissolved in groundwaterand aqueouswastestreams. However, the potential forin situ remediation of NAPLs has not been fully evaluated. Some microorganisms have beenshown to toleratehigh concentrationsof (or free phase)organiccontaminants in certain cases,and may eventuallyprovide an effective means of destroyingNAPLs in sltu. Biof'dm formationaroundNAPLdeposits may provide a means of containingand slowly destroying these sourcesof long-termpollution.

ISMtechnologyneeds in supportof bioremediationmethodologiesincludethe following:

• Technologies for introducingbiological agentsor nutrientsinto the subsurface waste orcontaminantplume location.

• Technologies for adding energy (e.g., thermal or electrical) to sub.surfacesystems tothermally enhance biodegradation,or to move microbe populations to desired locationsbyelectrophoresis.

• Nondestructive (e.g., geophysical) techniques to confirm the emplacement orperfmmance of biological agents in the subsurface.

2.4 C.mmm'alISM Technology Needs

For most efficient and.effective cleanup of many DOE sites, radionuclides, metal, andorga eo..mmimmmto r.u.o m .nymedg=treatment widmut requmng large-scale rotedisturbance. In s._.adap..tatiom of available ex s/mprocesses.(e.g., soil flushing, chemical ueaunemt, bimemediation) have been shown to workabove ground for many.contaminants. However, the engineering problems of adding, dispersing(mixing), and recovermg treatment materials and residuals with minimal site disturbance_m ntly prevent the/n s/tu application of many treatment p_. ses. T_hnolo_ies .need..to

onstrated, developed, m..¢_ed, or tested for ..a_in.".g,dis..persmg,ana recovm'm..gnqmus amgases in mils: Means for adding and dispmling solids m soils may also be _ m suppo_, ofsome mnovatwe cleanup schemes. Table 2 lists current (FY 1993) ISRP activities and providesa t_Wesentctive indication of ISM needs associawA with each activity.

TABLE 2. Typical In Sire Manipulation Needs for FY 1993 In Sire Re--'on IntegratedProgram Technical Task Plans

TTP Technk_ ActivityT'_e ..... _ iA$//aManimdatioa_iAL-2310.08 Bvalmfionof TwoNewHowableCn,mitTechml_ forIn Barrieremp_ lind

suuemia.Ccmtruc_ parmmsmczdl_mos_.AL.23]009 _mrc_mi¢ _on ofHeavyMeudCoomdmtim Czeuolsystmforwat_addedat

in UnsaumuedSoil elecuede& ,.AL-9310XX Injectedim$/tuPmneableTteaunentSystems. Massemplacementtechnology.CH-331001" Regnlam_Ismosmd _ _ withBarden Agm'anceof comimityo/"_.

in theVadoseZoneSurroundmgBuriedWaste emplacementandperformance.OR-1011-08 Demcmstrationof Come_bolicTechniquesRL-331005 In $/tuRedoxManipulation:Eahancemmtof ContaminantPerformancediagnmtksthroughin

DestructionandImmobilization . situmonitoringOfredoxcoediuous.R1_330254 ModelingStrategiesforOptimizingln-SituBioremediationRL-331002 ChemicallyEnhancedBanie_ ChemicallyEnlumced Barrieremp_and

BarrierstoMinimizeContaminantMigration performancediagnostics.RL-33I006 In$ituComnaforln$ituT_t ofNonvolafilcOrganic_le ew.rgyemplacem_ in

Contaminants heterogeneousmedia.RL.431001 ln$itu_Treatment: Evaluafionofthelm$itu Massemp_t andmixing,md

ChemicalTrealmentApproachfor_fion of Soilsand perfommncediagnostics.Grotmdwater

SF-20114)1 In$itu MicrobialHirers Nfi_ emplacement_uesfor heterogeneousmalta.

SF-231001 [ OptimalRemediationDesign:M_.c_ andUser-

iFriendlySoftwareforContaminatedAquifersSR-1310-03 FieldDemoof ElectmkineticMigrationTechnologyatOld Engineexedemplacementin

TNXBasin heterogeneousmedia.

ISM technology needs in support of in sire remediafion can be general_ to include thefollowing:

• Delivery and recovery systems for treatment materials, nutrients, and flushing/extractionagents in unsaturatedsoils (vadose zones).

• Dispersal systems to mix materials or agents for uniform contact with soils.

• Systems to control the movementof liquidor gaseoustreatmentmaterials in unsaturatedsoils so as to avoid or minimize di_ fromthetreaunentarea.

• Separation of Reaction Products/Residuals: How can reaction products/residuals besopamtedfrom soil particles/11situ so thattheycan be removedfrom the soiL

•. Monitmingsystemsperfcnnanceasw,ssmeatandwoceucontroL

• orsun m forpms dmtgn,opamUumm,and

2.5 TimingofDOE Needsfor ISMTechnology

Re_nt DOE needs assessments(DOE, 1993) indicatein a general way how soon variousEM-40 programs need bettertechnologies for en"V_..nmentalremediation. Histograms thatillustratethese needs are includedin AppendixA of thisplan. These data arevery general,andindicatethatsomeofDOE's-needsfor.remedialteclmologyaretooimminenttobemetbythisp.ro_. However, in each technical category addrosl_ by the uses._.ent, them are asignificantnumbs_,of remedialneeds _g in futureyearsor thatare anticipatedbut not yetassigned to a pm_cular year. These are the needs I_, can be most pro.fitabl_t_g. e_. by the.ISRP .andby the ISM subprogramas it suplg_ DOE s development and application of gnsfturemediafionmethods.

¶

" ' '' , ' , ,l II ' |[ , , r

3.0 TECHNOIf)GY DEVELOPMENT STATUS

3.1 Features of ISM Technologies

. As implied by the general descriptions of needs in Section 2.0, ISM technologies embracea wi_.de.range of emp.lacement technologies _uch as bozeholes _" soil mixing and a !peccum ofenabling technologies such as electrokinedcs, geophysical tools, or .n.mn..e_ simulators.Emplacementtechnologiesindu_.,aamber ofmethodsfar.Inlmd___fluids(water,air,steam,etc.), reagents, or energy into soil or groundwater. Similar methods are used to recover fluids,contaminants, .or excess reagents from these zones. Enabling technologies includeelectroosmotic or electrophoretic methods for manipulating fluids or particles in the subsurface(particularly under saturated conditions); ultrasonic, hydrofracmring, and pneumatic fncmringmethods for permeability modification; point sensor, borehole logging, and underground imagingsystems for process monitoring and control; and numerical models for natural and engineeredremedial processes.

• •

. . Emplacemont methods of particular interest for ISM include borehole drilling .andsoilnnxm.g technol0gt,cs, which are described in the following subsections. Table 3 outlines the

can be accomplished with some of these technologies .rela_ve zone of ".influencethat when.applied in remedial systems. Other, relatively well-established emplacement technologiesinclude bulk excavation, French drain con.muction, and percolation_tration technologies, butthese are not reviewed in this plan.

TABLE 3. Systems for In Situ Dispersal of Treatment Agents (after Yow, 1992)

GeaeralTechnique TypicalRadiusof Influence TypicalDepthof Avplicafion

augermixing onemeter+ upto20 m±

ktmixing . . one_+ . .. upto20m+

mulliweHin_ctionsystems , tensofmeters meterstolOOsofmeters

multiplehydrofracturing lensofmeters lOstolOOsofmeters

3.2 Status of Development and Commercialization

While many of the technologies to be used for ISM applications come from the civilconstruction, mining, or petroleum fields, site cleanup investigations and operations pose specialchallenges thatrequire adaptation of conventional approaches. Hazards posed by contaminants,unusual characterization and operational requirements associated with innovative processes, andtheextraordinary visibility of work conducted under regulatory and public scrutiny all affect theperceived status, definitions of success, and considerations of risk of failure for ISMtechnologies. These factors often require modification or additional development ofconventional technologies already accepted in other industries before the methods can becommercialized for environmental use. The following figure portrays the status of severalinnovative technologies for enhanced recovery, most of which are being adapted from successfulcommercial application in other fields.

Well construction technology, for example, is used to emplace injection and extractionwells. These are proven technologies used for hydraulic control of groundwater, hydrologiccapture of contaminant plumes, or manipulation of groundwater regimes. Drilled boreholes arealso used for injecting reagents into the ground to construct subsurface barriers (permeation

Vl le n r 'rll I , , _ fr _ II _ I I

grouting) or to immobilize contaminants in soil. Extraction_njecdon well systems are versatileand can be used to contain, remove, divert, or minimize development of a plume under a varietyof site conditions. Wells are also u.sed,to provide access for equipment used to excavatesubsurface chambers or mzx reagents with mil./n _tu (e4., jet grouting). Boreholea also provideameans to introduce _on andmomt0ring equipmeat into the subsurface,

Adaptation of well construction _Jmology to hazardous waste remediation is currendyunderway. The mat_. issues tmpmed by this application are the need for aaemte p_ ofwells that are soe_. t/m.es separated from one another by only a few feet, the need to minimizecost, and the need to minimize the generation of ddIHngspoils that .co_t of contaminated soilor.sediment This latterissue is particularlyimportantif the contaminantsareradimedve. Acurrentfocus in adaptingwell emplacementtechnologyis in constructingrelativelyshallow(<100 ft deep) horizontal wells that can be located underneath a contaminant source term at asite. These wells may be particularly useful for the construction of containment floors and forenabling treatment te¢.hn.ologies such as vapm:ex.u'action,soft flushing, and even ground waterextraction from relatively _ strata of co.ntamma.tedsediment. Much of the technologyadaptation has focused on..drilling in unconsolidated soils for these applications.

........ i mill illl

Technique Concept and Controlled Largo _ale _edBenchStudies FieldExperiments SiteTrlatsor UseScientificReportsn i i

Electroklnetics _

Hotwateror stem •flushlrjg

Hydrofracturing

Surfactantmobilization - •:::.::.:.::,,::..::

Alteringohemloalconditions

Pneumaticfracturing _ .

Solvent mobilization

Status of Research and Development for Enhanced Recovery Technologies (after EPA, 1993)

Vcrdcal Borehole Drilline

Vertical drilling is the standard technique for installing groundwater extraction andinjection Wells, vapor extraction wells, and certain kinds of in situ vertical barriers. Many of thevertical drilling techniques can also be used to drill angled borehole whicfi are appficable to theinstallation of angled barriers. Table 4 lists common vertical drilling methods; most of these arediscussed briefly below.

Auger methods involve rotating an auger attached to a shaft to penetrate the subsurface.Hand auger and rotary auger bucket systems are periodically removed from the hole to emptydirt from the auger, the spiral auger continuously removes dirt from the hole as the auger rotates.

i

Hollow stem augers have the added capability of collecting samples or installing a well casinginside the hollow shaft (EPA, 1985).

. Impact driven methods include driven well points and cable tools. Hand and machinedriven po_ts are forced into the subsurface, displacing the surrounding soil with some.consequential compaction .of soft imme_._ly adjacent to the hole. The cable tool methodmvolves rais_g, and lowering a string of drilling tools suspended On a cable in the weUbore,followed pen0cli.'cally by the bailing the euttinp from the hole. The Califmaia stove pipemethod is a.variation of the conventional cable tool tTuem, inthat the easing is.forced into thebmv_le using jacks instead of using the impact tools; a mud scow is mud as both a drm bit anda bailer, and a thin pipe-within-a-pipe is used as casing as compared to standard casingapproaches (EPA, 1985). " "

TABLE 4. Drilling Methods for Vertical Boreholes

Type Variatloas " GeologicMat_'ial NominM Max. CasingPlaced CommentsDiam. Depth

A_ _.dep=md _ SoU,__ _n _2oft _drm_ .....crrunangund

_Xusa'Buctet SoU.mboeldm z31n _0ft DedngddmngUmany_41_diameter

SpimlAuger Soiknoboulden ..48in _90ft AfterddUing Usewithocherorrunningrand _ belowwata

tableI IIIII I III I

Driven HandDrivenPoint Soil, noboulders _3 in _30 ft Duringdrilling

_ _eter Sou -sin _5oft_'ingdmnngCableTool Anytype Dmin'gorafter Canmonitoror log

drilling whiledrgling

CableTool Anytype Duringdrilling Paster& lesscosily(C,alif.StovePipe) thancmventiooal

cabletoolJetting SelfJetting Soil ...8in ._50ft During0,tilling Oftenneedsless '"

development

Wellpeinl/Rlsex Soil -8 in _ ft Duringdrilling Needslargeamountof water

SeparateJettingPipe Soil -8 in 100ft AfterdrillingOemporary)SeparateJettingPipe Soil -8 in 100ft Duringdrilling(pemmen0RotaryHole_ Soil& friable -24 in 200ft Duringdrilling

sandstones .Rotary"Cony.Hydraulic Anytype _.3in 100sft After¢]rilling Use fordeepwells

ReverseHydraulic Lostcirculation _ in lOOsft Afterdrilling Canneedlargecanbeproblem amountof water

AkRotary Anytype -12 in 100sft Afterdrilling Veryfastmetlmd

PneumaticHammer. Anytyre -.8in 100ft Afterdrilling Vet3,fastmf_hod....Sonic Sonic Uninduratedsoil 9.5 in 200ft Duringdrilling

incLgravelsandcobbleS. ,..

9

TI , i , i i i , f f

Jet methods utilize the cutting action of a downward-direc_l streamof Waterto createbo_bole. The casing is lowered into thehole as it is consu_c_d and serves as a conduit for

removing water and cuttings from the welL Variationsof the jet method differ ._hnarily in.whetherthe [5"Ol}tu.beor jetting pipe is left in the boreholefollowingjetting. In ad_._fioa,thejetpipe may .havecutting teeth at the bottomand can be rotatedbackand forth to aid the jettingprocessin induratedsoil (EPA, 1985).

Rotmydrilling methods involve the use of a rotatingbit .wi._.a _g fluid to cool• thebit and transportthecuttings to the surface. Hydmulk rotarydrillinguses wa_ of a drilling

mud as the fluid. This conventional method transportsthe mud from the surface through therotatingdrillpipe andto the drillbit. The fluidand cuttingsarecarriedto the surfacethroughthe

flows lannulusbetween the boreholeand the drillingpipe. In the reversemethod the fluid fromthe surfaceto the drill bit via the annulusand returnswith the cuttingsthrough the drill pipe.However, this is susceptible to significant loss of fluid circulationm soil and rock containing

_, largevoids oran extremelyopen porousmatrix(e.8., gravelor rubblezones). The airrotaryI method uses compressedair to blow the cuttingsupwardfrom the botto.mof the .borehole;this

i method is good for consolidated rock drilling (EPA, 1985). The an"percussion rotary ori and hydraulicor air rotarydownhole hammeris combination of impact rotary_g using ai drillsystem.mida reci_g hamm_.co_.to the b|t.(F.,PA,1987). A casing hammercan.

be'usedto drive the casing throughdifficult to drill fonna_o.nssuch as unconsolidated surfacedeposits,thenusing the rotarydrillingmethodfor hole compleuon(F.PA,1985).

Sonic drillinguses a combinationof mechanicallygeneratedvibrations and rotarypowerto penetratethe soil. The drill headconsists of two counter-rotatingrollers that cause the drillpipe to vibrate. The rollers are synchronizedwith each other to ensure that the vertical force

componentis transmitteddownwardalong the d_/_._ Th.efrequencyof the vibrationis tunedto the resonant frequency of the drill pipe. p_pecan also be rotated to facilitatepenetration. Displaced soil enters the drill stringcasing throughan open faced drill bit and iscontainedin an innercore tube that rests on the inside shoulderof the bit. When the core barrelis filled it is retrievedto the surfaceusing a wirelineretrievalsystem; these samples can be usedforlogging the hole. Alternatively,a split-spoonsamplercanbe loweredinside the drillpipe.

HorizontalBoreholeDrilline

Horizontalborehole drilling encompasses a numberof drilling methods thatcan placehorizontalholes at depths rangingfrom nearthe surfaceto over 100 ft deep. Horizontaldrillingsystems use a varietyof methods to createhorizontalboreholes;installationof a horizontalwellrequiresthat thedesired depthbe accessed as partof thedrillingeffort. This is accomplishedbythreeprinciplemethods. The first method consists of startingthe boreholeat the surface, eithervertically or at an angle, and then using a specially designed jet or downhole rotary motorcapable of drilling straight or curved boreholes. Specially designed steering mechanisms areused to steer the motor along a selected pathto achieve a horizontalattitude at the appropriatedepth and laterallocation and to continue drilling horizontally in the desired direction. Thesecond method also begins with a vertical orientation and is drilled down to a p.redetermineddepth. The drillingpipe is thenreplacedwith a pipe bentto a desiredradiuswhich Is placed in adrillingguide housing and placed in the hole. The bent drillingpipe causes the drilling head,which includes a pressure jet drilling system, to progress along the desired curve radius as itprogressesfrom the guide housing, reaching horizontalat the desired depth. The thirdmethodinvolves drilling a large-diameter vertical hole from the surface to the desired depth for thehorizontalborehole. A horizontalhole is thendrilled into the side of the vertical borehole in thedesireddirection. .

10

i ' I I I ,, I ' ,I , Ill t i ,, i i , , ,

A recent workshop sponsored by OTD's Arid Site Integrated Demonstration provides agood overview of commercially available systems (Jemen et al., 1992). This workshop focusedon systems capable of _g horizontal hol_ at.depths greaterthan 100 ft. System co.mP0.nentsdiscussed inciode d drill ng and down hole drilling tools, casing and screen material, ".dir.ecd.oralm_ment.dovices, and fluid circulating systems. There are at least 64 U.S. Companies wzthhorimnml drillin_ capabilities (30 with capabilities functional at depths greater than I00 f0,Table 5 summarizes the basic methods discussed at the workshop, and also includes an

inf andselectionmteflaweresummarizedbyW'flsoaandKaback

... _I'ABLE5. Summary of Horizontal Drilling Systems

DevialioaMelhod DrillingTool StartingAngle Radiusof Ddll/ngFluid NominnlfromVerfi,c_ Curvature _

Xns insm wnholeRotary 0-5" l® ..... mud 12insured

Jet System Bentonitemud 4 to36incrwaler

,I

bratsub

Beatsub DownholeRotaryMotet" 0-75° 2_'240 ft " Drillingmud '3to12in

JetSystem 0-75° 200-240ft Drillingmud 3 to 12in

Deformedtubing JetSyslem 0.90° 1.0ft Wafer 3 in

Hodzoalalinsert RolarFDrill 90° NA ' Water 3 to 36inf_n ced._e_

Electrokinedcs

Clays and silts ("tight" soils) complicate site remediation schemes that involve fluidinjection, mixing, or extraction, since their low hydraulic permeabilities make flow through thesesoils extremely slow. Electrokinetic processes are an attractive approach for moving water .andionic materials through these fro..e-grained soils..t_use electroosmosis and electmly_, migrauontransportprocesses are largely independent of this range of pore sizes. Electroosmosls has beenapplied to dewater soils in civil construction for several decades (Winterkom and Fang, 1975),but electrokinefic technologies are now receiving new attention for environmental applications.

Electmkinetic processes are applied in the field by installing electrodes in the desiredsaturated soil horizons and applying a DC voltage (usually a few tens of volts at field scale) tothe system. Under the applied potential field, water tends to migrate towards the cathodes(negative electrodes) in the System, where it can be removed by vacuum extraction or other pumpsystems. Electrode designs, cathode and anode spacing, and system operation are engineered todeal with site-specific conditions.

Laboratory-scale research has shown that mercury in sand/kaolinite s0il mixtures can bemoved by application of'an electrical field and trapped for recovery in a specially-designedelectrode system. Bench-scale experiments have also demonstrated that electrode chemistryplays an important role in effective transport of contaminants to electrode wells for recovery_bstein and Hicks, 1993). However, propagation of pH changes thro.ugh the soils away fro.mthe electrodes can cause the accumulation of metals in certain regions of the soil. Designapproaches are being developed to deal with and. perhaps exploit this effect. Additional

11

experimental work indicates that these approaches may not be limite4 to saturated soils, but mayin fact be applicable in partially-saturated geologic.media. '

In Slru Soil Mixin_ or Processinf

• In $1tu soil mixing includes technologies that_physically mix the soil wldle a_lin_, fluidse¢ chemical reagents to the soil mass. The three prindple methods are generally classified asareamixing,shallowmixing,anddeepsoilmixing.

Area mixing is the simplest method for in sire mixing ofs__d and soil. mi_-gllds_involves delivery of the.reagents to the surface of the soil to be and then themwith the soil using a backhoe. The degree of mixing is subjective in nature and left to the best

• j.'udgmentof the backhoe operator (EPA, 1989).. While this method is relatively simple andinexpensive it is not gener_y considered to be an efficient method of mixing.

• Shallow soil mixing systems differ from area mix_g in that spe_ally designed soil.mi?_g systems are mounted on a backhoe or a bulldozer, and the reagents are added through themixingsystem. Oneem_. eraal systemincludesa rotaryaugermountedon thefrontendof abulldozer. The sys_ nuxesthe soil andreagentsin 8 to 12 inch lifts. Othercommer_al-sysumml_. ludea mixingu_..tmountedonabackhoe.Themixingunitin thisease consistsof.five inje_i.o.n,tu.bes, each wzth a separately controlled feed system, a dustcontml system, and asl.udg.e/additivedispersmnmixer. Impellersandaugen attheoutletof the unitaredemgnedto.m_ the reagentswith the soil. A thirdcommercialsystem includes a series of pneumaticrejectorsmoun.uulon .a backhoe. The soil is mixedby a combinationof the backandforthmotionof theinjectorm the soilandtheforceof thepneumaticdelivery(EPA,1989). Backhoesystemsareroutinelyusedto treatsludgeandsoilto adepthof aboutI0 feet,butgreater .depthsmaybe .aehievabledependingon thereachof thebackhoe.

Deepsou mixingis a technologyoriginallydevelopedfortheconstructionindustrythathas been adapted to site remediation. Remedial system applications include in $itu fixation ofcon.taminatedmaterialsand cut-offwall constructionforcontainment. A typicaldeep soilm_xmg sys)em consists of a guided assembly of two or more hollow stemmed auger and mixingpaddles. As the augers penetratethe soil, grout is injected through the tip of the auger blades.The augers lift the soil and grout to the mixing paddles, which homogenize the two components.The mixing process takes place both during penetration of the soil (during which about 30% ofthe intended grout is injected) and during withdrawal (during which the remainder of the grout isinjected). The entire assembly is guided by a crane-supported set of leads, similar to theequipment used for drilling foundation caissons in civil construction. The process minimizes theamount of soil that is actually exca_;ated from the ground. When constructing a cut-off wall,secondary columns are placed between primary columns so that the secondary columns overlapboth adjacent primary columns in a split-spacing scheme.

ISR Performance Monitorine and Process Control

In situ remediation performance monitoring includes measurement and characterizationtechniques that can be used to monitor the progress of a treatment or verify the integrity of sitecontainment measures. This technology area als0 includes sampling strategies that can be usedon site to provide a satisfactory level of confidence that adequate performance has beenobtained. Techniques can be classed as either invasive or noninvasive, and can provide eitherpoint or spatially integrated measurements of selected parameters. Examples of invasivetechniques include monitoring wells and soil coring for sample collection; noninvasivetechniques include electromagnetic, electric, and seismic tomography, or hydraulic testing ofbarriers. Table 6 summarizes many of the available field methods for remedial processmonitoring and control.

•12

3.3 Related Domestic Research and Development Programs

Several Federal agencies conduct programs of research, development, testing, andtechnology demonstration that relate either directly or indirectly to ISRP and ISM needs. Theseprograms and their sponsoring agencies include:

TABLE 7. Related Federal Research and Development Programs

, Sponsoring Agency ' ProgramOfficeU.S. Air Force • Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence

US Army • Army Environmental Center (Aberdeen l_ov_ng Grounds)• Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station

US Navy .. Civil Engineering Laboratory(Port Hueneme, CA)EPA • Several laboratories and office either administer contract

research; conduct R&D, or both.• Regional Hazardous Waste Research Consortia

DOE * OBES Office of Geosciences• OHER Subsurface Science Program• OTD Integrated Demonstrations• OTD CharacterizadonIntegrated Program

Relevant interagency research includes the Strategic Environmental Research and DevelopmentProgram (SERDP) which involves DOD, DOE, andEPA participants.

13

4.0 R&D PROGRAMFOR ISMTECHNOLOGIES

4.1 Linkageto other Subprograms

The ISM subvrogram exists to meet the needs of the other subprogramsof the In $ituRemediafionInteoated"Programfor bs z/tu sm_.pulafionandenables t_echnologies..T_hnic_.needs of the o.ther subprogramsandcommunicatedto the ISM s.uDpr0grmntomumy .un.nmpprogram_planningandreviewprocesses,.doveAopmeatandexecutionof._czlIsfor_opo4__-a_l

mparticipants..Table 2 Is a partialexam.pieof theresultstinscommun.lcauon.sjnocess, .meg ......ISM needs listed for ISRP activmes m Table 2 werecompiled duringa mm year revsew oz v x1993funded activities.

The ISMsubprogramwill alsodevelop plansto meettechnicalneeds communicatedfromother O71) Intesrated De.m.on.strationsand In_lFa.t_i Programs,from DOE EM-40, and fro.mDOE BM-30. Those acfivi,tiCS _ be included m I_rooam implementation and planningaccordingto their relative priorityand asresourcespermn.

4.2 TechnicalGaps and Issues

Technical gaps and issues to be addressedby.the ISM subL)rogn_" _ .be sort_..in,tothree major categories: mass or energy introduction and transter tccnnosogses, enaoungtechnologscs,and resemch issues. .The researchissues includeunderlyingscientific questions or_blcms thataffectthe successor fcasibdityof tcchmcalapproach_,to ISZ_ the tcchnoogyIssuesper se tendto be driven by questionsof feasibility,cost,or effectiveness.

at

Mass or Enerav Introduction and Transfer

• Emplacement technologies for in situ treatment agents such as chemical agents,surfactants, grout components, microbes, microbial nutrients, thermal energy, orelectricalenergy.

• Drilling or penetmmeter technologies for economic, safe, effective access to thesubsurface.

• In situ mixing or processing methods for use at depth,particularly with avoidance ofaquiferfouling or destruction.

• Permeabilityenhancement, reduction,or modificationto help control flow and wansponprocesses(including liquidand gas phases in porousmedia).

• Hydmfracturing or pneumatic fracturingin soils to create engineered permeabilitymodificationthroughorientedor multiplefractmcs.

• Ultrasonicmodificationof soil structureforpermeabilityenhancement.

• Elcctrokinetics (clectroosmosis and electrophorcsis), including system design andemplacement,contaminantrecoveryprocessesandcontrol(fundamentalunderstandingaswell as system engineering),and field tests for specific classes of contaminants.

14

Enabling Technologies

• Monitoring,and control technologies for in $1tuprocesses, including POint measurements(sensors), line scans (borehole logging), and 2D and 3D underground imaging, if notprovidedbytheOtaractefl__tionIntegratedProgram.

or• Modeling support for design, optimization, performance asse,_ment, including• telem andjfisdflcatimofkeyperfcanancelmUUmn anddtmtmiuqtam

• emperor,rm= andlife amyResearch Issues

• Effects of laminar flow on contaminant dispersal or reagent introduction. Some scientificevidence supPOrts the idea that saturated flow in .subsurface POrous media b lan_.inarunder most hydraulic gradients. Under what conditions do laminar flow regimesdominaw, and how mi_g.htgr.a_'..".entsor Utt_. 0ns be.manipulated to cw,ate.turbuleat flowandenhance/n $1t_mixing without destroying the soft @,ele_n of the aquifer7

• Hetemgeneities Otydrogeologic, geochemi.c_l, or biological) such asmineralogical.•la.y_.g of soil. anita..tropicpermeability, localized microbial emsystetm, relic ffacuaing,or desiccation cracking can affect the success of in situ treatments (e.g., unexcitedhydrologic short chcuits, interference with _ processes, or biological predation onagents of biodegradation). How can these factors be anticipated andidentified so thatsolutions can be devised to facilitate ISRprocesses?

• SL_cial problems associated with vadose zone or NAPL behavior, .including contaminant5uoyancy an.d sinking effects, migration and smearing through sinuous flow channels,and rate limiting factors affecting contaminant extraction or destruction.

4.3 Research and Development Opportunities

The gaps and issues identified in the preceding section each pose research questions intheir own right. The bullets listed below amplify some of the ideas to help frame R&Dopportunities. These opportunities will be prioritized as the ISM plan is revised to reflectevolving DOE needs and successes and failures in technology development.

• Hydrogeologic heterogeneities complicate remediation by causing variability insubsurface flow and transport phenomena; in situ hydraulic conductivities and flowvelocities at a site can vary by orders of magnitude. How can fingering and bypassing beavoided during injection or extraction operations7 Can mixins be induced amongcombinations of fluids in the subsurface7

• Geochemical heterogeneifies may degrade cleanup effectiveness; variabilities in soilchemistry can affect the performance of injected reagents. Can inadvertent in situbuffering or sequestering effects be nullified or turned to advantage?

• The sharpness of transitions from one property regime to another within heterogeneousmedia may influence the effect of the heterogeneities on the remediation scheme. Thetypes of gradients operative Within the heterogeneous system can also influence the effectand success of mass or energy emplacement or extraction. What discriminators or sitedata are necessary to assess the significance of this problem7

15

• Hydrologic short circuits such as desiccation cracks or r¢1i¢ fracture systems withinmaterials having otherwise predictable hy.draulic performance. Can these be used toadvantage or avoided in subsurface processing?

• Antic hydraulic behavior. How can we anticipa_ and account for variati0na in soilpermeability (as a function of orientation) in fluid injection andextraction schemes?

• Biolo_ het_rogeneities may involve spatial or t_mp0ral chang_ in subsurfacehy_emical oonditictts as the mlcg_tal ecosystem evolves adjacent m contsmtnant

. plumes, injected nutrients, or remedialchemistries.Howcanthis be anticipatedwithrobust bioremediafion approaches?

. • Sorption or capillary ©ff.ects can impede contaminant extraction; wetting phase effectsduring water table fluctuations can trap contaminants below the water table.

• Detection and anticipation of conditions such as underlying fractured or cavitosemat_mls that co.uld lead to piping or settlement failures of materials ©mplaced forcontainment (Drumm, et al., 1987),

.

4.4 Subprogram Funding andMilestones

OverallISRP fundingand milestonesaredescribedin theprogram strategyandimplementationplanfortheISRP,whichissupportedbythissubprogram.Additionaldetailsareprovide_incallsforTechnicalTaskPlans,AnnualReports,andotherdocumentspreparedbytheIgRPanditssubprograms.

4.5 Expected Impact of Unresolved Issues

In general, unresolved ISM issues may delay the successful field testing, demonstration,or application of in $/n_'remediation technologies leading to a loss of the benefits in cost savingsor cleanup effectiveness that are expected from these approaches. These impacts will bequantified, to the extent useful and feasible, on a case-by-case basis as ISM technologies areprioritized and matched up with specific DOE needs. Unresolved issues can have a moreinsidious impact, though, by causing unexpected and t/nexplained failures of innovativetechnologies, leading to a loss of credibility for the site owners or technology developmentprogram. Again, these scenarios will be anticipated to the extent possible during ISRPdevelopment and implementation.

• ..

,4.6 Key Assumptions

ISM research and technology development will be coordinated by the DOE_M-54 ISRPProgram Manage_with support from DOE and contractor staff. Activities of the subprogramwill be fully integrated with activities of the other ISRP subprograms to avoid unnecessaryredundancies and to ensure that DOE needs for ISM technologies are fulfilled. Funding for thissubprogram is expected to fluctuate from year to year according to the anticipated life cycle ofin._vidual projects that are initiated and conducted within this technical area. This subprogramvnll be motivated and defined by the n_ of DOE EM-40 and EM-50 for cost-effective andtimely ISM technologies.

16

4.7 Drivers and Regulations

The development and eventual application of ISM technologies by DOE and itscontractors must be done in a mann_ that comphes with regulatory requirements and winsapproval for application where needed in the DOE complex. Siskind and Heiscr (1993)sunun_ manyof thereguintotyissues(atanationallevel)anocia_ with in stm battlersforwaste containment; these issues apply to other ISRP technologies as well Regional- and state-level re_ consu'_ts can81soaffect,at_de_mca|t, _ testing,andeventualuseofISM t0c_log_. Examples of these constraints include the application of _water non-delwadaatonpolt_s tnCn_omtaandotherstaa_s,

TheISM subprogramwill idendf_vandaddressre_nlatoryandotherdrivec,definethetechnologydevelopmentprocessbyrevolvingrepres_nmiver©gulat_rysts_hold_ (fromnational and stateLevels) in proEramreviewsandotherforums for cooperativediscussmn, Thiswill allow technology development plans to be modified to reflect reE_atory nc__, andconstraints early in the development process in anticipation of eventual field application ofsuccessful technolo_es. In addition, The ISM subprogram will work with other cognizantDOFYEM pro.gift., elements to share lessons learned and to communicate evolving needs,constraints, and drivers that affect the work of the subwogtmn. -.

i

17

5.O REFERENCES

1986, "HorizontalDickinson, W., R. W. Dickinson, T. W. Cmsby, jtnd H. N. Head, Drillingbeneath Suw/ff_d. Sites," The 7th National Conference on _ _ --

• Silverl_!azanions Waste Sties, H_ Materials Control Reseaxch Institute, Spring, MD.

Dnanm, B. C., 1t. ELKetelle, W.B. Mamod, and J. Bea.Hasstt_ 1987,"Analyala of Pla=tic Softin Contact with Covitose Bedrock," in AmericanSociety of Civil Engineen, New York.

Gerber, M. A. and M. J. Fayer, 1993, In Sire Integrated Pmm'aql Containment Subn_om'amPlan• (draft), PacificNorthwest Laboratory, Richland, WA. •

Jensen, E. J., S. P. Airhart, C, L. Edison, and G. W. Mclellan, 1992, Horizontal Drilling_Vorkshoo Summary Reoort for the ,Arid lnteerated Demonstration Promltm, V_rHC-EJP.0596,Westinghouse Hanford c._mpany, Richland, WA.

Pankow, J. F., R. L. Johnson, and J. A. Cherry, 1993, "Air Sparging in Gate Wells in Cotoff-Walls and Trenches fig Control of Plumes of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)," _

Volume 31, pp. 654-663.

•Probstein, R. O. and R. E. Hicks, 1993, "Removal of Contaminants from Soil by Electric Fields,"in fi_dl_, Volume 260, pp. 498-503.

Siegrist, R. L., 1993, In Situ Physical/Chemical Treatment Technologies Subarea Proeram Plan(draft), ORNL/TM-xxxxx, Oak iT,idge NationalLabora-tory,-OakRidge.,TN. - - -.J

Siskind, B. and J. !-Ieiser, 1993, Re_latorv Issues and Assumutions Associated with Barriers inthe Vadose Zone Surroundirlf Bur_ed Waste, BNI_48749, l_rookhaven National Laboratory,Upton, NY.

United States Department of Energy, 1990, Basic Rese_rcl_ for Environmental Restoration.DOE_R-0482T, Washington, D.C.

United States Department of Energy, 1991, Technglogy H_eds Assessment. Final Report.DOFTID/12584-92, Chem-Nuclear Geotech, Inc., Grand Junction, CO.

United States Department of Energy, 1993, Technology Nec_ds Crosswalk Report.DOFJID/12584-117, Chem-Nuclear Geotech, Inc., Grand Junction, CO.

United States Department of Energy, 1993, EM:-54 Tech,ology Developn3ent In SituRemediation Integrated program Annual Report. DOE_M-0108P, Washington, D.C.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1985, Handbook: Remedial "Actionpt WasteDisposal Sites (Revised), EPA/625/6,85/006, Washington, D. C.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1987, _ro_ndwater Handbook_ EPA/625/8-87/016, Center for Environmental Research Information, Cincinnati, Ohio.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, Ground-Water Research. ResfarchDescription. Third Editi_yn.EPA/600/R-92/(D4, Washington, D. C.

18

United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1993; In Situ Treatment of ContaminatedGround Water:.An Inventory of R_e_xch and Field Demonstrations and Strate_es for lmprovin_0round Water Renlediation_ EPA/5(X)/K-93/001, Washington, D, C.

WUson, D. D. and D. $. Kaback, 1993, "Horizontal Environmental Well Toclmolog_ inPCtmeedin_ 19th Environmental Svmnostum & Exhibition. Ammican I)efens¢Anocbtk Arlington,VA.

Yam, Jesse L., Jr., 1992, "Innovative Toclmologios for SoU Cleanup" and "Innovativo

Groundwater,Joint Research Centre of Commtsston of the Eumlw.an e,s, Ispra, Italy.

. °

19

Appendix A: Timing of DOE Needs for Environmental Remediation Technology

• This appendix includes needs histogrmns showing DOPJBM-40 needs for remediationtechnology by geographic area, problem type, and year (DOE, 1993). The large number of "tooearly to tell" ca"no response data "..nnpl_that technology needs are not yet de.fined well enough todetmaine the actual need or deedl_ for many DOE envtmameatal nu_t-aam pmblem_

QI

2O

Soil and Ground Water Contaminatedby Volatile Organics(Eastern Area program,Problem 2)

Remedlatlon Technologies

35

3O

0 NOW FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000+When Technologies Must BeAvailable

"" ("too early to tell" or no response: 34% of the applicableworksheets)

JFT.U4)I 3-271;'r3-28

I

Burial Grounds(EastemArea Program,Problem3)

RemedlatlonTechnologies

10 -

9-

8

|7-g

J:E_4- .-

j:-2-

1-

•0 - NOW _ 1994 _ 1995 FY1996 _ 1997 VY1998 _ 1999 FY 2000+WhenTechnologiesMustBeAvailable

." ("tooearlyto tell" or no response:29%oftheapplicableworksheets)

JFT.U,OI3-27973.3B

SoilContaminatedwithRadionuclides(EasternAreaProgram,Problem4)

RemedlatlonTechnologLas

20-i

18 -

16

II,:tm . "

•. _6

4-

2-

0 - NOW _t' 1994 FY1995 I_' 1996 FY1997 FY 1998 _ 1999 FV'2000+-" WhenTechnologies Must Be AvaiLable

("too early to tell" or no response: 40%of the applicableworksheets)

JFT-U,013-27973-.46 r

Ground Water Contaminated with Radionuclides(Eastern Area Program, Problem 7)

RemedlationTechnologies

14

12

0 NOW FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000+When Technologies Must Be Available

. ("too early to tell" or no response: 37% of the applicable workabeets)4'

JFT.U.013.27973.78

Measurements,Modeling,andTreatmentforSolventsandRadlo_'.Uvlty(EastsmAreaProgram,Problem8)

RemedlationTechnologlea

60

5Ot

Ii "2OZ

10

0 HOW FY 1994 FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 ' FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000+WhenTechnologiesMustBeAvaiLable

"" ("too earlyto tell"or noresponse:43%of theapplicableworksheets)

JFT-U-013.27973-86

GroundWaterContaminatedwithMetalo(EastemAreaProgram,Problem10)

RemedlstlonTechnologies

0NOW FY 1994 FY1995 FY 1996 FY1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 20004.

WhenTechnologiesMustBeAvailable("tooearlyto tell"or no response:41%of theapplicableworkeheets)

J

JFT4J.O13._rpi173- lOB

r8oll Contaminatedwith Metals

(Ea_em AreaProgram,Problem11)

RemedlstlonTeohnologles

0NOW FY1994 FY 199S FY 1996 FY1997 I=Y1998 I=Y1999 FY2000+.. WhenTecflnoloolesMustBeAvailable

" ("tooearlyto tell" or no response:28%ofthe8ppllc:ablewodmhest8)

JFT.U,Q!3.27973.! 1B

RemedlatlonMethodsforExplo4dvel(EaItem AreaProgram,Problem15)

•RemedlatlonTechnologies

5

4

'i' "

1

° •

0 NOW FY1994 FY.1995 FY 1996 FY1997 FY1998 FY1999 FY 2000+. WhenTechnologiesMustBeAvailable

" ("tooeadyto tell"or no rupon!e: 38%of thelpplloablewod_heetl)

JFT.U,o13,27973-136

InSltuTreatmentnmmoblllzatlonMethodsfor8ollContemlnatedv,lthOrgonioe

(SouthwesternAreaProgram,Problem1.4)

in SltuTreatment,Separation,andImmobilizationTer,hnologles9

8

7

12

1

0NOW FY 1994 FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 FY1998 FY 1999 FY2000+

WhenTechnologiesMustBe Available("tooearlyto tell"or no response:36%of theapplioablewo_set$)

8oll ContaminatedwithPlutonium(SouthwesternAreaProgram,Problam1.6)

RemedlatlonTeohnologlee

14

0HOW FY1994 FY 1995 FY1996 I=Y1997 FY 1998 FY199g FY 2000+

- WhenTechnologlu Mu_ BeAvailable• " ("tooearlyt° tell"or no response:31%of theapplicableworksheets)

JF'lr.U.01$.27973-1.S8

%

\

In 81tuTreatmentof GroundWaterContaminatedwithTritiumand HazardousConatltuents(Southwe_emAreaProgram,Problem3.3)

InSltuTreatmentTechnologies

ii .•. _ • "°°

o9

1

0NGW FY 1994 FY1995 FY1996 I=Y1997 FY1998 FY 1999 I=Y2000+

WhenTechnologiesMustBe Available("1ooearlyto tell"or noresponse:84%of theapplicableworksheets)

JFT-U-01:_l_1344

In SltuIsolationMethodsfor BurialGroundswithLowLevelWaste(SouthwesternAreaProgram,Problem2.5)

InSIN ContainmentandImmoblllz_lonTeohnologlu5-

0NQW FY1994 FY 1995 FY1996 FY 1997 FY1998 I=Y1999 FY2000+

WhenTechnologiesMustBeAvailable("tooearlyto tell"or no response:19%ofthe applicablewot!csheets)

JFT-U4) 13-27_73.24 •

In Sltu Immobilizationof ContaminantsIn Ground Water(NorthwesternArea Program,Problem 4-A)

Containment and ImmoblllzaUonTechnologies

0 HOW FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 F_ 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000+When "technologiesMust BeAvailable

("too early to tell" or no response: 11%of the applicable worksheets)

J_.U,013-_73-NANA

Subsurface Barriers for Isolation of Waste and Ground Water(Northwestern Area Program, Problem 4-B)

CoNalnment and Immobilization Technologies9

,. 8

|5

i2

1

0NQW FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000+

When Technologies Must Be Available('too early to tell" or no response: 39% of the applicable worksheets)

JFT-U-013-27973-NAP4 B