CONTAINMENT

CONFERENCE

February 9 - 12, 1997

St. Petersburg, Florida, USA

UNIVERSITY"; si::;;HANNGVF

'LIOTHCD

Conference Proceedings

UB/TIB Hannover 89114 267 952

Table of Contents

Preface xvii

Executive Summary xviii

Chapter 1: Plenary Presentations

Containment and DOE's Environmental Management Ten-Year PlanC.W. Frank, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, USA 3

Containment Technology and the Success of a Joint InitiativeH.J. Campbell, Jr., DuPont Company. Wilmington, Delaware, USA 6

Priorities for In-situ Remediation ResearchE.T. Oppelt, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati,Ohio, USA 10

The Application of Containment Technologies on Landfills and Contaminated Sitesin EuropeS. Melchior, IGB - Ingenieurbiiro fur Grundbau, Bodenmechanik undUmwelttechnik, Hamburg, Germany 22

Applications of Containment Technologies in Australia for ContaminationRemediation/Control: Status and ExperiencesA. Bouazza, Monash University, Clayton. Melbourne, Victoria, Australia;R.J. Parker, Golder Associates Pty. Ltd., Hawthorn, Melbourne,Victoria, Australia 33

Chapter 2: Slurry Walls: Materials & QA/QC

Slurry Walls and Slurry Trenches - Construction Quality ControlR.J. Poletto, D.R. Good, Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers,New York, New York, USA 45

The Origins of the Slurry Trench Cut-Off and a Review of Cement-BentoniteCut-Off Walls in the UKS.A. Jefferis, Golder Associates (UK) Ltd, Maidenhead. Berkshire,England 52

Very Low Conductivity Self-Hardening Slurry for Permanent EnclosuresG. Tallard, Pel ham, New York, USA 62

An Improved Method for Interpreting API Filter Press Hydraulic ConductivityTest ResultsG.M. Heslin, G.M. Filz, D.Y. Baxter, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg,Virginia, USA; R.R. Davidson, Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Denver,Colorado, USA 71

Effect of Acidic Leachate on Material Degradation of Slurry Trench Cutoff WallsF. Ahtchi-Ali, M.F. Casper, August Mack Environmental, Inc.,Baltimore, Maryland, USA 78

The Effect of Freeze-Thaw Cycles on the Hydraulic Conductivity and Structure of a10% Sand-Bentonite MixtureT.F. Zimmie, J.D. Quiroz, CM. LaPlante, Rensselaer PolytechnicInstitute, Troy, New York, USA 85

Chapter 3: Slurry Walls: Cementitious & Composite

Containment Barrier at Pride Park, Derby, EnglandP. Barker, Bachy, Godalming, Surrey, UK; A. Esnault, Bachy,Rueil Malmaison, Cedex, France; P. Braithwaite, Ove Arup & Partners,Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK 95

Cut-Off Wall System for Subsurface Liquid ContainmentR. Carlson, F. Khan, Rollins Environmental Services (TX) Inc.,Deer Park, Texas, USA 104

Vertical Cut-Off Walls for the Containment of Contaminated GroundH.L. Jessberger, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany;K. Krubasik, Bilfinger + Berger, Bau AG, Mannheim, Germany;R.A. Beine, Jessberger + Partner, Consultants, Bochum, Germany I l l

Value Engineering Study for Selection of Vertical Barrier Technology at aSuperfund SiteE.E. Bryan, J.L. Guglielmetti, P.B. Butler, M.P. Brill, DuPontEnvironmental Remediation Services, Wilmington, Delaware, USA 118

Investigation of the Performance of Cement-Bentonite Cut-Off Walls in AggressiveGround at a Disused Gasworks SiteP. Tedd, I.R. Holton, A.P. Butcher, Building Research Establishment,Watford, UK; S. Wallace, British Gas Properties, Basingstoke, UK;P. Daly, British Gas Research & Technology, Loughborough, UK 125

Containment Technology at the "Griftpark" Former MGP Site in The NetherlandsP.W. de Vries, De Vries Consultancy & Project Management, Amersfoort,The Netherlands; B. Viveen, Heidemij Advies BV, Arnhem,The Netherlands 133

Chapter 4: Slurry Walls: Soil/Bentonite Case Histories

Case Study: Installation of a Soil-Bentonite Cutoff Wall Through an AbandonedCoal MineM.J. Carey, M.J. Fisher, Geo-Con, Inc., Monroeville, Pennsylvania,USA; S.R. Day, Geo-Con, Inc., Denver, Colorado, USA 141

Case History: Vertical Barrier Wall System for Superfund SiteM.A. Koelling, C.P. Kovac, Hayward Baker, Inc., Seattle, Washington,USA; J.E. Norris, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Federal Way,Washington, USA ' 147

11

Kaolinitic Clay-Based Grouting DemonstrationA.L. McCloskey, C.J. Barry, MSE Technology Applications, Inc., Butte,Montana, USA; R.C. Wilmoth, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Cincinnati, Ohio, USA 154

Design and Construction of a Deep Slurry Trench BarrierP.W. Deming, Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, New York,New York, USA 163

Meeting the Challenge of Constructing a Uniquely Difficult Barrier WallR.L. Stamnes, H.M. Orlean, N.E. Thompson, U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Seattle, Washington, USA 175

Use of Deep Soil Mixing as an Alternate Vertical Barrier to Slurry WallsA.D. Miller, CDM Engineers & Constructors, Inc., Denver,Colorado, USA 182

Chapter 5: Vertical Barriers: Sheet Piling & Geomembranes

Installing a HDPE Vertical Containment and Collection System in One PassUtilizing a Deep TrencherW.M. Bocchino, Groundwater Control Inc., Jacksonville, Florida, USA;B. Burson, Groundwater Control Inc., Houston, Texas, USA 193

A New Alternative in Vertical Barrier Wall ConstructionG.F. Rawl, Horizontal Technologies Incorporated, Matlacha,Florida, USA 200

Sealable Joint Steel Sheet Piling for Groundwater Control and Remediation:Case HistoriesD. Smyth, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada; R. Jowett,Waterloo Barrier Inc., Rockwood, Ontario, Canada; M. Gamble,C3 Environmental, Breslau, Ontario, Canada 206

Use of a Geomembrane Steel Sheet Pile Vertical Barrier to Curtail Organic SeepageJ.L. Guglielmetti, P.B. Butler, DuPont Environmental RemediationServices, Wilmington, Delaware, USA 215

Case Histories Portraying Different Methods of Installing Liners for VerticalBarriersG.K. Burke, Hayward Baker Inc., Odenton, Maryland, USA;R.M. Crockford, Keller Colcrete Ltd., Wetherby, West Yorkshire, UK;F.N. Achhorner, Slurry Walls, Inc., Irving, Texas, USA 221

Case Study: Installation of a HDPE Curtain Wall with Sheetpile Tie-In onBoth EndsR.M. Schindler, P.C. Maltese, Geo-Con, Inc., Monroeville,Pennsylvania, USA 229

in

Containment and Recovery of a Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid Plume at aWoodtreating FacilityD. Crouse, Roy F. Weston, Inc./REAC, Edison, New Jersey, USA;G. Powell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio,USA; S. Hawthorn, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Denver,Colorado, USA; S. Weinstock, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Butte, Montana, USA 235

Chapter 6: Caps: Capillary Barriers

An Ecological Engineering Approach for Keeping Water From Reaching InterredWastes in Arid or Semiarid RegionsJ.E. Anderson, Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho, USA 243

Water Balance of Two Earthen Landfill Caps in a Semi-Arid ClimateM.V. Khire, GeoSyntec Consultants, Boca Raton, Florida, USA;C.H. Benson, P.J. Bosscher, University of Wisconsin-Madison,Madison, Wisconsin, USA 252

A Water Balance Study of Four Landfill Cover Designs Varying in Slope forSemiarid RegionsJ.W. Nyhan, T.G. Schofield, J.A. Salazar, Los Alamos NationalLaboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA 262

The Impact of a Shallow Biobarrier on Water Recharge Patterns in aSemi-Arid EnvironmentJ.W. Laundre, Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho, USA 270

Numerical Simulations of Capillary Barrier Field TestsC.E. Morris, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales,Australia; J.C. Stormont, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque,New Mexico, USA 275

The Effects of Heterogeneities on the Performance of Capillary Barriers forWaste IsolationC.K. Ho, S.W. Webb, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque,New Mexico, USA 282

Comparison of Ross' Capillary Barrier Diversion Formula with DetailedNumerical SimulationsS.W. Webb, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque,New Mexico, USA 289

Prediction of Tilted Capillary Barrier PerformanceS.W. Webb, J.T. McCord, S.F. Dwyer, Sandia National Laboratories,Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 296

Chapter 7: Caps: Innovative Techniques

Surface Barrier Research at the Hanford SiteG.W. Gee, A.L. Ward, M.J. Fayer, Pacific Northwest NationalLaboratory, Richland, Washington, USA 305

IV

Performance Characteristics of a Self-Sealing/Self-Healing BarrierR.G. McGregor, J.A. Stegemann, Water Technology InternationalCorporation, Burlington, Ontario, Canada 312

Laboratory Testing of Closure Cap Repair TechniquesP. Persoff, G.J. Moridis, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory,Berkeley, California, USA; D.M. Tuck, M.A. Phifer, WestinghouseSavannah River Company, Aiken, South Carolina, USA 319

Clay Slurry and Engineered Soils as Containment Technologies for Remediationof Contaminated SitesJ.R. Williams, Reclamation Technology, Inc., Athens, Georgia, USA;S. Dudka, W.P. Miller, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia,USA; D.O. Johnson, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne,Illinois, USA 327

Poly-Urea Spray Elastomer for Waste Containment ApplicationsC.J. Miller, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA;S.C.J. Cheng, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA;R. Tanis, Foamseal, Lapeer, Michigan, USA 334

Performance of Paper Mill Sludges as Landfill Capping MaterialH.K. Moo-Young Jr., Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, USA;T.F. Zimmie, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, USA 341

Innovative Permeable Cover System to Reduce Risks at a Chemical MunitionsBurial SiteC.C. Powels, U.S. Army Garrison, Aberdeen Proving Ground,Maryland, USA; I. Bon, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, USA; N.M. Okusu,ICF Kaiser Engineers, Inc., Savannah, Georgia, USA 348

Enhanced Shear Strength of Sodium Bentonite Using Frictional AdditivesK.E. Schmitt, GeoSyntec Consultants, Huntington Beach, California,USA; J.J. Bowders, R.B. Gilbert, University of Texas at Austin, Austin,Texas, USA; D.E. Daniel, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,Urbana, Illinois, USA 355

Chapter 8: Caps: Performance

In-Situ Studies on the Performance of Landfill Caps (Compacted Soil Liners,Geomembranes, Geosynthetic Clay Liners, Capillary Barriers)S. Melchior, IGB - Ingenieurbiiro fur Grundbau, Bodenmechanik undUmwelttechnik, Hamburg, Germany 365

Inferred Performance of Surface Hydraulic Barriers from Landfill Operational DataB.A. Gross, GeoSyntec Consultants, Austin, Texas, USA; R. Bonaparte,M.A. Othman, GeoSyntec Consultants, Atlanta, Georgia, USA 374

Geosynthetic Clay Liners - Slope Stability Field StudyD.A. Carson, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio,USA; D.E. Daniel, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana,Illinois, USA; R.M. Koerner, Geosynthetic Research Institute,Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; R. Bonaparte, GeoSyntec Consultants,Atlanta, Georgia, USA 381

Prediction of Long-Term Erosion from Landfill Covers in the SouthwestC.E. Anderson, J.C. Stormont, University of New Mexico,Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 389

A Sensitivity Analysis of Hazardous Waste Disposal Site: Climatic and SoilDesign Parameters Using HELP3D.D. Adelman, Adelman and Associates, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA;J. Stansbury, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Omaha, Nebraska, USA 396

Cost Comparisons of Alternative Landfill Final CoversS.F. Dwyer, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque,New Mexico, USA 400

Alternative Landfill Cover Technology Demonstration at Kaneohe Marine CorpsBase HawaiiL.A. Karr, B. Harre, Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center,Port Hueneme, California, USA; T.E. Hakonson, Colorado StateUniversity, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA 407

Enviro-Geotechnical Considerations in Waste Containment System Designand AnalysisH.Y. Fang, J.L. Daniels, H.I. Inyang, University of Massachusetts,Lowell, Massachusetts, USA 414

Modeling of Geosynthetic Reinforced Capping SystemsB.V.S. Viswanadham, D. Konig, H.L. Jessberger, Ruhr - Universityof Bochum, Bochum, Germany 421

Chapter 9: Grouting

Progress in Forming Bottom Barriers Under Waste SitesE.E. Carter, Carter Technologies, Sugar Land, Texas, USA 431

Mathematical Modeling of Permeation Grouting and Subsurface BarrierPerformanceS. Finsterle, CM. Oldenburg, A.L. James, K. Pruess, G.J. Moridis,Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, USA 438

Advanced Hydraulic Fracturing Methods to Create In Situ Reactive BarriersL. Murdoch, FRx Inc. and Clemson University, Cincinnati, Ohio andClemson, South Carolina, USA; B. Slack, FRx Inc. and University ofCincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA; B. Siegrist, Oak Ridge NationalLaboratory and Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado, USA;S. Vesper, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA; T. Meiggs,Foremost Solutions, Golden, Colorado, USA 445

VI

Development of a Design Package for a Viscous Barrier at the Savannah River SiteG.J. Moridis, A. James, C. Oldenburg, Lawrence Berkeley NationalLaboratory, Berkeley, California, USA 452

Bedrock Refractive-flow Cells: A Passive Treatment Analog to Funnel-and-GateV. Dick, D. Edwards, Haley & Aldrich, Inc., Rochester, New York, USA....459

Long-Term Degradation (or Improvement?) of Cementitious Grout/Concrete forWaste Disposal at HanfordM.G. Piepho, Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc., Richland,Washington, USA 467

In-Situ Containment of Buried Waste at Brookhaven National LaboratoryB.P. Dwyer, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico,USA; J. Heiser, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York,USA; W. Stewart, S. Phillips, Applied Geotechnical Engineering andConstruction, Inc., Richland, Washington, USA 474

Chapter 10: Jet Grouting

Constructing Bottom Barriers with Jet GroutingM. Shibazaki, H. Yoshida, Chemical Grouting Company, Tokyo, Japan 483

The Application of Flowmonta for Environmental ProblemsI. Sass, O. Caldonazzi, T. de Beyer, FlowTex GUT, Amsdorf, Germany 489

Use of Jet Grouting to Create a Low Permeability Horizontal Barrier Below anIncinerator Ash LandfillA.J. Furth, G.K. Burke, Hayward Baker Inc., Odenton, Maryland,USA; W.L. Deutsch, Jr., Roy F. Weston, Inc., West Chester,Pennsylvania, USA 499

Multi-Point Injection: A General Purpose Delivery System for Treatment andContainment of Hazardous and Radiological WasteJ.L. Kauschinger, Ground Environmental Services, Alpharetta, Georgia,USA; J. Kubarewicz, Jacobs Engineering, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA;S.D. Van Hoesen, Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Oak Ridge,Tennessee, USA 506

Jet Grouting for a Groundwater Cutoff Wall in Difficult Glacial Soil DepositsR.F. Flanagan, F. Pepe, Jr., Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas,New York, New York, USA 514

Chapter 11: Stabilization/Solidification

Deep Soil Mixing for Reagent Delivery and Contaminant TreatmentN. Korte, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Grand Junction, Colorado,USA; O.R. West, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee,USA; F.G. Gardner, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Grand Junction,Colorado, USA; S.R. Cline, J. Strong-Gunderson, R.L. Siegrist,Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA; J. Baker,AlliedSignal, Inc., Kansas City, Missouri, USA 525

VII

Field Application of Innovative Grouting Agents for In Situ Stabilization ofBuried Waste SitesG.G. Loomis, R.K. Farnsworth, Lockheed Martin Idaho TechnologiesCo., Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho, USA 531

Remediation by In-Situ Solidification/Stabilisation of Ardeer Landfill, ScotlandM. Wyllie, ICI Explosives, Stevenston Ayrshire, Scotland; A. Esnault,Bachy, Rueil-Malmaison, France; P. Barker, Bachy, GodalmingSurrey, England 538

Pilot Demonstration for Containment Using In Situ Soil Mixing Techniques at aChemical Disposal Superfund SiteS.J. Zarlinski, N.W. Kingham, R. Semenak, Kiber EnvironmentalServices, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, USA 546

Implementation of an Ex Situ Stabilization Technique at the Sand SpringsSuperfund Site to Solidify and Stabilize Acid Tar Sludges Involving aQuick-Lime Based Stabilization Process and Innovative Equipment DesignR.W. McManus, SOUND Environmental Services, Inc., Dallas, Texas,USA; P. Grajczak, ARCO, Corporate Environmental Remediation,Los Angeles, California, USA; J.C Wilcoxson, ARCO, Exploration andProduction Technology, Piano, Texas, USA; S.D. Webster,U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Dallas, Texas, USA 553

Stabilization/Solidification of Battery Debris & Lead Impacted Material at SchuylkillMetals, Plant City, FloridaT. Anguiano, D. Floyd, ENTACT, Inc., Irving, Texas, USA 561

Chapter 12: Barrier Materials

A Case Study - Using a Multi-Grout Barrier to Control ^Sr Release at ORNLJ.D. Long, Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., Oak Ridge,Tennessee, USA; D.D. Huff, Lockheed Martin Energy Research, Inc.,Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA; A.A. Naudts, ECO Grouting Specialists,Ltd., Cheltenham, Ontario, Canada 571

Effect of Dilution and Contaminants on Strength and Hydraulic Conductivityof Sand Grouted with Colloidal Silica GelP. Persoff, J. Apps, G. Moridis, Lawrence Berkeley NationalLaboratory, Berkeley, California, USA; J.M. Whang, DuPont CentralResearch and Development, Deepwater, New Jersey, USA 578

Application of Soil Barriers for Encapsulation of Contaminants Using SpecialBlocking Materials and Sealing TechnologiesH.-J. Kretzschmar, DBI Gas- und Umwelttechnik GmbH, Freiberg,Germany; I. Lakatos, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Miskolc -Egyetemvaros, Hungary 585

Lab Scale Testing of Novel Natural Analog In Situ Stabilization AgentsP. Shaw, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Lockheed Martin IdahoTechnology Co., Idaho Falls, Idaho, USA 593

Vll l

Economic Alternatives for Containment BarriersP.J. Nicholson, B.H. Jasperse, M.J. Fisher, Geo-Con, Inc.,Monroeville, Pennsylvania, USA 600

Frozen Soil Barriers for Hazardous Waste ConfinementJ.G. Dash, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA;H.Y. Fu, University of California, Santa Barbara, California; R. Leger,University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA 607

Silicate Grout Curtains Behaviour for the Protection of Coastal AquifersM. Elektorowicz, R. Chifrina, R. Hesnawi, Concordia University,Montreal, Quebec, Canada 614

Engineered Clay-Shredded Tyre Mixtures as Barrier MaterialsA. Al-Tabbaa, T. Aravinthan, The University of Birmingham,Birmingham, UK 621

Design of Dry Barriers for Containment of Contaminants in Unsaturated SoilsC.E. Morris, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales,Australia; B.M. Thomson, J.C Stormont, University of New Mexico,Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 628

Effect of pH on the Heavy Metal-Clay Mineral Interaction0 . Altyn, H.O. Ozbelge, T. Dogu, T.A. Ozbelge, Middle East TechnicalUniversity, Ankara, Turkey 635

Chapter 13: Reactive, Low Permeability Materials

Vertical Barriers with Increased Sorption CapacitiesH.B. Bradl, Bilfinger + Berger Bauaktiengesellschaft, Mannheim,Germany 645

Sorption of Cesium and Strontium on Savannah River Soils Impregnated withColloidal SilicaN. Hakem, I. Al Mahamid, J. Apps, G. Moridis, Lawrence BerkeleyNational Laboratory, Berkeley, California, USA 652

Mass Transport of Heavy Metal Ions and Radon in Gels Used as Sealing Agentsin Containment Technologies1. Lakatos, K. Bauer, J. Lakatos-Szabo, Hungarian Academy ofSciences, Miskolc-Egyetemvaros, Hungary; H.-J. Kretzschmar,DBI Gas- und Umwelttechnik GmbH, Feiberg, Germany 658

Modification of Clay-Based Waste Containment MaterialsK. Adu-Wusu, DuPont Central Research and Development, Newark,Delaware, USA; J.M. Whang, DuPont Specialty Chemicals, Deepwater,New Jersey, USA; M.F. McDevitt, DuPont Central Research andDevelopment, Wilmington, Delaware, USA 665

Biofilm Treatment of Soil for Waste Containment and RemediationJ.P. Turner, M.L. Dennis, Y.A. Osman, J. Chase, L.A. Bulla,University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, USA 672

IX

Metals Attenuation in Minerally-Enhanced Slurry WallsJ.C. Evans, Bucknell University, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, USA;T.L. Adams, Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Blue Bell, Pennsylvania,USA; M.J. Prince, Bucknell University, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, USA 679

Chapter 14: Permeable Reactive Walls: MaterialsDevelopment/Characterization

Long Term Performance of the Waterloo Denitrification BarrierW.D. Robertson, J.A. Cherry, University of Waterloo, Waterloo,Ontario, Canada 691

Phosphorous Adsorption and Precipitation in a Permeable Reactive Wall:Applications for Wastewater Disposal SystemsM.J. Baker, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada;D.W. Blowes, University of Waterloo and Waterloo Centre forGroundwater Research, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada; CJ. Ptacek,Environment Canada and University of Waterloo, Burlington and Waterloo,Ontario, Canada 697

Creation of a Subsurface Permeable Treatment Barrier Using In Situ RedoxManipulationJ.S. Fruchter, C.R. Cole, M.D. Williams, V.R. Vermeul, S.S. Teel,J.E. Amonette, J.E. Szecsody, S.B. Yabusaki, Pacific NorthwestNational Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA 704

Permeable Sorptive Walls for Treatment of Hydrophobic Organic ContaminantPlumes in GroundwaterP. Grathwohl, G. Peschik, University of Tubingen, Tubingen, Germany 711

Active Containment Systems Incorporating Modified Pillared ClaysP. Lundie, Envirotech (Scotland) Ltd., Aberdeen, Scotland andEnvironmental Resource Industries Disposal Pty Ltd., Perth, WesternAustralia; N. McLeod, Envirotreat Ltd., Kingswinford, UK 718

Hydrologic Characterization of the Fry Canyon, Utah Site Prior to FieldDemonstration of Reactive Chemical Barriers to Control Radionuclide andTrace-Element Contamination in Ground WaterD.L. Naftz, G.W. Freethey, U.S. Geological Survey, Salt Lake City,Utah, USA; J.A. Davis, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California,USA; E. Feltcorn, R. Wilhelm, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Washington, DC, USA; R. Breeden, U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, Denver, Colorado, USA; R.R. Spangler, Consultant, GrandJunction, Colorado, USA; S.J. Morrison, Weston, Inc., Grand Junction,Colorado, USA 725

Bear Creek Valley Characterization Area Mixed Wastes Passive In-Situ TreatmentTechnology Demonstration Project - Status ReportD. Watson, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA;M. Leavitt, SAIC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA; C. Smith, LockheedMartin Energy Systems Inc., Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA; T. Klasson,Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA; B. Bostick,Lockheed Martin Energy Systems Inc., Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA;L. Liang, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA;D. Moss, SAIC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA 730

In Situ Precipitation and Sorption of Arsenic from Groundwater: Laboratoryand Ex Situ Field TestsJ.M. Whang, DuPont Specialty Chemicals, Deepwater, New Jersey, USA;K. Adu-Wusu, DuPont Central Research and Development, Newark,Delaware, USA; W.H. Frampton, J.G. Staib, DuPont Central Researchand Development, Wilmington, Delaware, USA 737

Use of a Permeable Biological Reaction Barrier for Groundwater Remediationat a Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) SiteM.S. Thombre, B.M. Thomson, L.L. Barton, University ofNew Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 744

Chapter 15: Permeable Reactive Walls: Zero-Valent Metals

Redox-Active Media for Permeable Reactive BarriersT.M. Sivavec, P.D. Mackenzie, D.P. Horney, S.S. Baghel,General Electric Corporate Research and Development Center,Schenectady, New York, USA 753

Degradation of Trichloroethylene (TCE) and Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) byFe and Fe-Pd Bimetals in the Presence of a Surfactant and a CosolventB. Gu, L. Liang, P. Cameron, O.R. West, Oak Ridge NationalLaboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA; N. Korte, Oak Ridge NationalLaboratory, Grand Junction, Colorado, USA 760

Zero-Valent Iron for the Removal of Soluble Uranium in Simulated DOE SiteGroundwaterW.D. Bostick, R.J. Jarabek, J.N. Fiedor, Lockheed Martin EnergySystems, Inc., Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA; J. Farrell, University ofArizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA; R. Helferich, Cercona, Inc., Dayton,Ohio, USA 767

Injection of Colloidal Size Particles of Fe° in Porous Media with ShearthinningFluids as a Method to Emplace a Permeable Reactive ZoneK.J. Cantrell, D.I. Kaplan, T.J. Gilmore, Battelle, Pacific NorthwestNational Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA 774

Extending Hydraulic Lifetime of Iron WallsP.D. Mackenzie, T.M. Sivavec, D.P. Horney, General Electric CorporateResearch and Development Center, Schenectady, New York, USA 781

XI

Permeable Treatment Wall Design and Cost AnalysisC. Manz, Montgomery Watson, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA;K. Quinn, Montgomery Watson, Madison, Wisconsin, USA 788

RCRA Corrective Measures Using A Permeable Reactive Iron Wall - U.S. CoastGuard Support Center, Elizabeth City, North CarolinaW.L. Schmithorst, Parsons Engineering Science, Inc., Cary, NorthCarolina, USA; J.A. Vardy, U.S. Coast Guard Civil Engineering Unit,Elizabeth City, North Carolina, USA 795

Identification of Precipitates Formed on Zero-Valent Iron in Anaerobic AqueousSolutionsT. Schuhmacher, Levine»Fricke»Recon, Irvine, California, USA;M.S.Odziemkowski, E.J. Reardon, R.W. Gillham, University ofWaterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada 801

Enhanced Zero-Valent Metal Permeable Wall Treatment of ContaminatedGroundwaterD.R. Reinhart, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA;J.W. Quinn, NASA Kennedy Space Center, Kennedy Space Center,Florida, USA; C.A. Clausen, C. Geiger, N. Ruiz, G.F. Afiouni,University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA 806

Chapter 16: Permeable Reactive Walls: Field Studies

Developments in Permeable and Low Permeability BarriersS.A. Jefferis, Golder Associates (UK) Ltd, Maidenhead, Berkshire,England; G.H. Norris, Nortel Ltd, London, England; A.O. Thomas,Golder Associates Geoanalysis s.r.L, Turin, Italy 817

Two Passive Groundwater Treatment Installations at DOE FacilitiesW.D. Barton, P.M. Craig, P-Squared Technologies, Inc., Knoxville,Tennessee, USA; W.C Stone, Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc.,Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA 827

Porous Reactive Wall for Prevention of Acid Mine Drainage: Results of aFull-scale Field DemonstrationS.G. Benner, D.W. Blowes, CJ . Ptacek, University of Waterloo,Waterloo, Ontario, Canada 835

In Situ Remediation of Uranium Contaminated GroundwaterB.P. Dwyer, D.C Marozas, Sandia National Laboratories,Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 844

In-situ Porous Reactive Wall for Treatment of Cr(VI) and Trichloroethylenein GroundwaterD.W. Blowes, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada;R.W. Puls, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ada, Oklahoma,USA; T.A. Bennett, R.W. Gillham, CJ . Hanton-Fong, CJ . Ptacek,University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada 851

xn

Enhanced Degradation of VOCs: Laboratory and Pilot-Scale Field DemonstrationR.W. Gillham, S.F. O'Hannesin, M.S. Odziemkowski, University ofWaterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada; R.A. Garcia-Delgado, University ofMalaga, Malaga, Spain; R.M. Focht, EnviroMetal Technologies Inc.,Guelph, Ontario, Canada; W.H. Matulewicz, J.E. Rhodes,Rodes Engineering, Haddonfield, New Jersey, USA 858

Integrated Funnel-and-Gate/GZB Product Recovery Technologies forIn Situ Management of Creosote NAPL-Impacted AquifersJ.G. Mueller, S.M. Borchert, SBP Technologies, Inc., Pensacola,Florida, USA; E.J. Klingel, IEG Technologies Corporation, Charlotte,North Carolina, USA; D.J.A. Smyth, S.G. Shikaze, University ofWaterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada; M. Tischuk, M.D. Brourman,Hanson Environmental & Legal Group, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA 865

Emplacement of Zero-valent Metal for Remediation of Deep Contaminant PlumesD.W. Hubble, R.W. Gillham, J.A. Cherry, University of Waterloo,Waterloo, Ontario, Canada 872

Chapter 17: Modeling: Groundwater Flow

Hydraulic Performance of Permeable Barriers for In Situ Treatment ofContaminated GroundwaterD.J.A. Smyth, S.G. Shikaze, J.A. Cherry, University of Waterloo,Waterloo, Ontario, Canada 881

Arrays of Unpumped Wells: An Alternative to Permeable Walls for In SituTreatmentR.D. Wilson, D.M. Mackay, University of Waterloo, Waterloo,Ontario, Canada 888

Implementation of a Funnel-and-Gate Remediation SystemK. O'Brien, G. Keyes, Geraghty & Miller, Inc., Richmond,California, USA; N. Sherman, Louisiana-Pacific Corporation,Samoa, California, USA 895

Impact of Vertical Barriers on Performance of Pump-and-Treat SystemsK. Russell, A. Rabideau, State University of New York at Buffalo,Buffalo, New York, USA 902

Use of Computer Modeling to Aid in Hydraulic Barrier DesignW.T. Dean, J.A. Johnson, W.J. Seaton, Environmental Systems andTechnologies, Inc., Blacksburg, Virginia, USA; B.J. Fagan,J.M. Fenstermacher, Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc.,Braintree, Massachusetts, USA 910

The Design of In-Situ Reactive Wall Systems - A Combined Hydraulical-Geochemical-Economical Simulation StudyG. Teutsch, J. Tolksdorff, University of Tubingen, Tubingen, Germany;H. Schad, I.M.E.S. GmbH, Wangen, Germany 917

xiu

Evaluation of Remedial Alternatives of a LNAPL Plume Utilizing GroundwaterModelingT. Johnson, Roy F. Weston, Inc./REAC, Edison, New Jersey, USA;S. Way, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Denver, Colorado,USA; G. Powell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati,Ohio, USA 925

Chapter 18: Modeling: Transport Through Barriers

Modeling Biodegradation of Organic Pollutants During Transport ThroughPermeable Reactive Bio-WallsM.A. Malusis, CD. Shackelford, Colorado State University,Fort Collins, Colorado, USA 937

Flow Rates Through Earthen, Geomembrane, & Composite Cut-Off WallsC. Tachavises, C.H. Benson, University of Wisconsin-Madison,Madison, Wisconsin, USA 945

Selection of Distribution Coefficients for Contaminant Fate and TransportCalculations: Strontium as a Case StudyD.I. Kaplan, K.M. Krupka, R.J. Serne, S.V. Mattigod, G. Whelan,Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA 954

One-dimensional Contaminant Transport Model for the Design of Soil-BentoniteSlurry WallsA. Khandelwal, A. Rabideau, State University of New York at Buffalo,Buffalo, New York, USA; J. Su, DuPont Inc., Wilmington, Delaware,USA 961

Incorporation of Sedimentological Data into a Calibrated Groundwater Flow andTransport ModelN.J. Williams, S.C Young, D.H. Barton, B.T. Hurst, P-SQUAREDTechnologies, Inc., Knoxville, Tennessee, USA 968

Hydraulic Studies of In-Situ Permeable Reactive BarriersR.M. Focht, J.L. Vogan, EnviroMetal Technologies, Inc., Guelph,Ontario, Canada; S.F. O'Hannesin, University of Waterloo, Waterloo,Ontario, Canada 975

Chapter 19: Performance Criteria

European Quality Assurance and Quality Control for Cut-Off Walls and CapsS.A. Jefferis, Golder Associates (UK) Ltd, Maidenhead, Berkshire,England 985

Strategies to Facilitate Stakeholder and Regulator Support for TechnologyDeploymentT.D. Burford, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque,New Mexico, USA 995

xiv

Identification of Long-Term Containment/Stabilization TechnologyPerformance IssuesG.E. Matthern, D.F. Nickelson, Lockheed Martin Idaho TechnologiesCo., Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho, USA 1000

Considerations in the Development of Subsurface Containment BarrierPerformance StandardsS. Dunstan, MSE Technology Applications, Inc., Butte, Montana, USA;D. Lodman, MSE, Inc., Idaho Falls, Idaho, USA; A.P. Zdinak,MSE Technology Applications, Inc., Butte, Montana, USA 1007

Performance of Engineered BarriersV. Rajaram, Tetra Tech EM Inc., Rolling Meadows, Illinois, USA;P.V. Dean, Tetra Tech EM Inc., Vienna, Virginia, USA; S.A. McLellan,Tetra Tech EM Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA; A. Mills,U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA;P.L. Chandler, Black & Veatch, Dallas, Texas, USA; G.W. Snyder,Black & Veatch, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; D.L. Namy,Inquip Associates, Inc., McLean, Virginia, USA 1014

Predictive Tools and Data Needs for Long Term Performance of In-SituStabilization and Containment Systems: DOE/OST StabilizationWorkshop, June 26-27, Park City, UtahD.J. Borns, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque,New Mexico, USA 1022

Reactive Barrier Technologies for Treatment of Contaminated Groundwater atRocky FlatsD.C Marozas, G.E. Bujewski, Sandia National Laboratories,Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA; N. Castaneda, U.S. Departmentof Energy, Rocky Flats Field Office, Golden, Colorado, USA 1029

Chapter 20: Performance Monitoring

Tracer Verification and Monitoring of Containment Systems (II)C.V. Williams, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico,USA; S. Dalvit Dunn, W.E. Lowry, Science & Engineering Associates,Inc., Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA 1039

Containment Performance Assessment Through Hydraulic Testing - BaltimoreWorks Site with ComparisonG. Snyder, G. Mergia, S. Cook, Black & Veatch, Philadelphia,Pennsylvania, USA 1046

A New Geophysical Method for Monitoring Emplacement of Subsurface BarriersW. Daily, A. Ramirez, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,Livermore, California, USA 1053

Large-area, Long-term Monitoring of Mineral Barrier MaterialsA. Brandelik, C. Huebner, Karlsruhe Research Center,Karlsruhe, Germany 1060

xv

Geomembranes with Incorporated Optical Fiber Sensors for Geotechnical andEnvironmental ApplicationsD.J. Borns, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque,New Mexico, USA 1067

Ground Penetrating Radar Investigation of a Frozen Earth BarrierD. Lesmes, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA;D. Cist, D. Morgan, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 1074

Principles and Objectives of Containment Verification and PerformanceMonitoring and Technology SelectionD.K. Reichhardt, A.T. Hart, MSE Technology Applications, Inc.,Butte, Montana, USA; J.D. Betsill, Sandia National Laboratories,Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 1081

Acoustic Tomography and 3-D Resistivity Imaging of Grout Filled Waste CellsF.D. Morgan, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,Massachusetts, USA; D. Lesmes, Boston College, Chestnut Hill,Massachusetts, USA; C. Chauvelier, W. Shi, Massachusetts Instituteof Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 1088

Dielectric Constant and Electrical Conductivity of Contaminated Fine-Grained Soilsand Barrier MaterialsA. Kaya, H.Y. Fang, H.I. Inyang, University of Massachusetts Lowell,Lowell, Massachusetts, USA 1095

Conference Participants 1105

Author Index 1137

xvi