Determining Success and Lessons Learned

1

Determining Success and Lessons Learned

Ryan A. Wymore, P.E., CDM

NEWMOA Enhanced In Situ Bioremediation Workshop

October 5October 5--6, 20106, 2010

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

ESTCPId h N ti l L b tIdaho National LaboratoryJoey Trotsky (NAVFAC-ESC)Mario Robles (U.S. EPA)Tamzen Macbeth (CDM)Kent Sorenson (CDM)Mike Lamar (CDM)Mike Lamar (CDM)Nathan Smith (CDM)Neil Smith (CDM)

2

Presentation OutlinePresentation Outline

Introduction – focus on chlorinated ethenes

Case Study – Fast release electron donor

Case Study – Slow release electron donor

Case Study #1 Case Study #1 –– Fast Release Electron DonorFast Release Electron Donor

The passive treatment zone Inject DHC-containing bioaugmentation culture into passive injection wellsBacterial transport by ambient groundwater flow

The active recirculation treatment zone Groundwater continuously injected andGroundwater continuously injected and extractedDHC-containing bioaugmentation culture added through the reinjection wellsTransport occurs by forced advection

3

Selected Seal Beach Site 70 for demonstrationTCE source area has concentrations

Demonstration SiteDemonstration SiteNWS Seal Beach Site 70NWS Seal Beach Site 70

TCE source area has concentrations as high as 190 mg/L during demonstrationWater table occurs at 15 to 20 ft bgsShallow aquifer zone extends to 50 ft bgs; highest contamination concentrations present to ~35 ft bgsAmbient groundwater velocity ~25-30 ft/yrS lf t f 1 500 t 9 000 /LSulfate ranges from 1,500 to 9,000 mg/LScale-up area is centered within the source area and is ~ 400 ft by 150 ftBioremediation/bioaugmentation being implemented as the remedial action for this site

Treatment Cell ConstructionTreatment Cell Construction

4

Treatment Cell Injection System Treatment Cell Injection System --ConstructionConstruction

Perform “pre-conditioning” to t bli h i t destablish appropriate redox

conditions prior to bioaugmentationInjection strategy: approx. 3,000 gallons of 1% lactate into each treatment cellActive cell (started April 2008)

QQuarterly injections conducted until bioaugmentation (January 2009)

Passive cell (started September 2008)

Injections performed monthly

PrePre--conditioning Resultsconditioning Results

Active Cell SummaryModerately reducing conditions achieved nearModerately reducing conditions achieved near reinjection wells; cis-DCE increasing; sulfate decreasingDHC functional gene vcrA not present

Passive Cell SummarySignificant donor in all injection wells and in several monitoring wells; redox conditionsseveral monitoring wells; redox conditions moderately reducing; sulfate decreasingConcentrations of c-DCE lowDHC functional gene vcrA not present

5

Bioaugmentation ActivitiesBioaugmentation ActivitiesBioaugmentation performed week of January 12, 2009

Donor Injection performed week of January 5 in both cellsSDC-9TM culture used for inoculation80-L of SDC-9 inoculated into each cell, equally split between injection wells in each cell

Electron donor injection strategy modified in active cellWeekly injections performed beginning February 2009Injection mass and volume increased beginning June 25, 2009Injection mass and volume increased beginning June 25, 2009

– 3% lactate; 1,000 gallons/well

Monthly injections continued as planned in passive cellMonthly sampling from January through June; quarterly event late September / early October

Active Cell Electron Donor Results Active Cell Electron Donor Results AMW-1 (25’ upgradient)

AMW1‐ 25' BLS COD Donor Wkly Donor 1% Wkly Donor 3% Bioaugmentation

AMW-2 (18’ downgradient)

AMW-4 33’ bgs (28’ downgradient)

CO

D (m

g/L)

CO

D (m

g/L)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

COD Con

centratio

n (m

g/L)

Collection Date

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

COD Co

ncen

tration (m

g/L)

AMW4 ‐ ZONE 1 (33' BLS)COD Donor Wkly Donor 1% Wkly Donor 3% Bioaugmentation

CO

D (m

g/L)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

COD Con

centratio

n (m

g/L)

Collection Date

AMW2‐ 25' BLS COD Donor Wkly Donor 1% Wkly Donor 3% Bioaugmentation

Collection Date

6

Passive Cell Electron Donor Results Passive Cell Electron Donor Results PMW-6 (8’ downgradient) PMW-8 (9’ crossgradient)

4000

PMW6 ‐ 25' BLS COD Donor Inj Bioaugmentation

7000


PMW-9 (13’ downgradient)

CO

D (m

g/L)

CO

D (m

g/L)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

COD Con

centratio

n (m

g/L)

Collection Date

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

COD Con

centratio

n (m

g/L)

Collection Date

PMW-4 34 ft bgs (18’)

CO

D (m

g/L)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

COD Con

centratio

n (m

g/L)

Collection Date


CO

D (m

g/L)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

COD Con

centratio

n (m

g/L)

Collection Date

PMW4 ‐ ZONE 1 (34' BLS)COD Donor Inj Bioaugmentation

Electron Donor SummaryElectron Donor Summary

Active Cell Passive CellGood electron donor distribution along cell axis to at least 28 feet downgradientLittle increase in electron donor observed beyond 25-30 ft from injection

Electron donor increased following lactate injections in CMT wells at least 25 feet from injection wellElectron donor increased in downgradient wells with consistent monthly25-30 ft. from injection

wellsHighest concentrations in the deep zone

consistent monthly injectionsElectron donor is order of magnitude higher in middle zone of CMT wells compared to deepest zone

7

Active Cell Electron Acceptor Results Active Cell Electron Acceptor Results AMW-1 (25’ upgradient)

100005)

AMW1 ‐ 25' BLSNO3‐ Fe2+ CH4 Donor Wkly Donor 1% Wkly Donor 3% Bioaugment SO42‐

AMW-2 (18’ downgradient)

AMW-4 33’ bgs (28’ downgradient)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

0

1

2

3

4

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

NO3‐, Fe2

+ and CH

4Co

ncen

trations (mg/L)

Collection Date

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

0

1

2

3

4

5

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

NO3‐, Fe2

+ and CH

4Co

ncen

trations (mg/L)

AMW4 ‐ ZONE 1 (33' BLS)NO3‐ Fe2+ CH4 Donor Wkly Donor 1% Wkly Donor 3% Bioaugment SO42‐

Collection Date

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

0

1

2

3

4

5

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

NO3‐, Fe2

+ and CH

4Co

ncen

trations (mg/L)

Collection Date

AMW2 ‐ 25' BLSNO3‐ Fe2+ CH4 Donor Wkly Donor 1% Wkly Donor 3% Bioaugment SO42‐

Passive Cell Electron Acceptor Results Passive Cell Electron Acceptor Results PMW-6 (8’ downgradient) PMW-8 (9’ crossgradient)

30005L)

PMW8 ‐ 25' BLSNO3‐ Fe2+ CH4 Donor Bioaugment SO42‐

35005L)


PMW-9 (13’ downgradient)PMW-4 34 ft bgs (18’ downgradient)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0

1

2

3

4

5

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

NO3‐, Fe2

+ and CH

4concen

trations (mg/L

Collection Date

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0

1

2

3

4

5

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

NO3‐, Fe2

+ and CH

4concen

trations (mg/L

Collection Date

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0

2

4

6

8

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

NO3‐, Fe2

+ and CH

4concen

trations (mg/L)

Collection Date


0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0

1

2

3

4

5

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

NO3‐, Fe2

+ and CH

4concen

trations (mg/L)

Collection Date

PMW4 ‐ ZONE 1 (34' BLS)NO3‐ Fe2+ CH4 Donor Bioaugment SO42‐

8

Electron Acceptor SummaryElectron Acceptor Summary

Active Cell Passive CellActive CellSulfate reducing to methanogenic conditions achieved 25-30 feet down-gradient of injection wells

Passive CellSulfate reducing conditions achieved in upgradient portion of cellMethanogenic conditions achieved

Redox conditions relatively unchanged downgradient of CMT wells

in downgradient portion of cell

Active CellActive Cell

AMW-1 (25’upgradient)

AMW-4 33’ bgs(28’ downgradient)

AMW-2 (18’downgradient)

VO

C M

oles

/L/L

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

CVOC Co

ncentration (μmol/L)

Collection Date

AMW1 ‐ 25' BLSPCE TCE DCE VC Ethene Donor Wkly Donor 1% Wkly Donor 3% Bioaugment

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

CVOC Co


Collection Date

AMW2 ‐ 25' BLS

PCE TCE DCE VC Ethene Donor Wkly Donor 1% Wkly Donor 3% Bioaugment

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

CVOC Co


Collection Date

AMW4 ‐ ZONE 1 (33' BLS)

PCE TCE DCE VC Ethene Donor Wkly Donor 1% Wkly Donor 3% Bioaugment

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10AMW1 ‐ 25' BLS ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

16S rDNA

tceA

1 E 08

1.E+09

1.E+10AMW2 ‐ 25' BLS ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

16S rDNA

tceA 1 E 08

1.E+09

1.E+10AMW4 ‐ Zone 1 (33' BLS) ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

16S rDNA

tceA

DH

C (c

ells

/

NC

NC

NC

NC

NC

NC

All distances from AMW-1/AMW-2

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E 08

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

bvcA

vcrA

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

bvcA

vcrA

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

bvcA

vcrA

9

Passive CellPassive CellPMW-6 (8’downgradient) PMW-8 (9’crossgradient)

PMW8 ‐ 25' BLSPCE TCE DCE VC Ethene Donor Bioaugment


VO

C M

oles

/L

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

CVOC Co

ncentration (µmol/L)

Collection Date

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

CVOC Co


Collection Date

1.E+10PMW6 ‐ 25' ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

16S rDNA


16S rDNA

DH

C (c

ells

/L)

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

16S rDNA

tceA

bvcA

vcrA

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

16S rDNA

tceA

bvcA

vcrA

Passive CellPassive CellPMW-9 (13’downgradient)


PMW-4 34’ bgs (18’ downgradient)PMW4 ‐ ZONE 1 (34' BLS)

PCE TCE DCE VC Ethene Donor Bioaugment

VO

C M

oles

/L

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

CVOC Co


Collection Date


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

CVOC Co


Collection Date

1.E+10PMW4 ‐ Zone 1 (34' BLS) ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

DH

C (c

ells

/L)

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

16S rDNA

tceA

bvcA

vcrA

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

16S rDNA

tceA

bvcA

vcrA

10

Active Cell SummaryActive Cell SummaryDHC distribution rapid (observed at ~30 ft downgradient within 1 month)Difficult to distribute donor > 30 ft downgradient

Lactate injection modified in June to increase electron donor in cell

Primarily sulfate reducing conditions where donor distributedDHC growth correlates with donor distribution (30 ft) g ( )Complete transformation to DCE and VC with some ethene 30 feet downgradient less than 3 months after bioaugmentationNo dechlorination beyond 30 feet downgradient

Passive Cell SummaryPassive Cell SummaryTCE present at higher concentrations in deepest zone of treatment cellEffective lateral donor distribution throughout cell; vertical distribution to deeper zones is not uniformFull dechlorination to ethene in downgradient part of cell

Good electron donor distribution and methanogenic conditionsDHC (and vcrA) not observed until February 2009, but populations of DHC/vcrA have been sustained since then

Little dechlorination occurring in upgradient portion of cell despite presence of DHC and vcrA, and methanogenic conditions

Possible inhibition due to co-contaminants

11

ConclusionsConclusions

Similar electron donor distribution achieved in

DHC was distributed to similar distances from

both passive and active cells

More donor was required and more operational issues were encountered with active approach

similar distances from injection points in both treatment cells, and populations were sustained as a function of donor distributionBetter overall distribution throughout the treatmentapproach

Dechlorination to ethene observed in both treatment cells as a function of donor distribution

throughout the treatment cell was achieved using the passive approach

CASE STUDY #2CASE STUDY #2

12

Site mapSite map

Site Hydrogeology - RI

Water table generally encountered at 25 30Water table generally encountered at 25-30 ft bgsSand and gravel zones present to 35-40 ftClay aquitard present below sand and gravel unit; laterally continuous and up to 20 ft thickSeparate sand/gravel aquifer unit belowSeparate sand/gravel aquifer unit below clay, which was not contaminated

13

Insert cross section figure from ROD andInsert cross section figure from ROD and from

HatchCo PropertySite

Site MapSite Map

N

14

Full Scale Design Full Scale Design –– ROD Selected ROD Selected RemedyRemedy

Treat >200 µg/L total chlorinated solvents using enhanced anaerobic bioremediationusing enhanced anaerobic bioremediation (EAB)Treat remainder of plume with monitored natural attenuationSource area treatment using grid pattern of injection wellsDowngradient plume treatment - installationDowngradient plume treatment - installation of one to three biobarriersPre-drilling characterization to refine well design

Full Scale DesignFull Scale DesignN

15

PrePre--RA Characterization Results: RA Characterization Results: Contaminant DistributionContaminant Distribution

MIP results showed responses atMIP results showed responses at depths greater than 40 ft throughout the source area and downgradient plumeDPT sampling confirmed MIP results as source concentrations greater than 15,000 ppb were found below 40 ftppDowngradient concentrations were greater than 3,000 ppb in one location

PrePre--RA Characterization: RA Characterization: HydrogeologyHydrogeology

Clay layer at 35 ft bgs was found to beClay layer at 35 ft bgs was found to be laterally discontinuousModified DPT/EC approach was used to investigate hydrogeology below 60 ft.Below 35 ft, layers of sand and gravel exist to 80 feet bgs, with intermittent thin clay layers present in some areas.thin clay layers present in some areas. A several foot thick clay layer was found at depths of approximately 80 ft throughout the source area.

16

Emulsified Oil InjectionsEmulsified Oil Injections

Target injections of 1,500 gal 2% EOS into each of 121 i j ti l ti121 injection locations

Source area – 37 paired wells and 12 individual wellsBiobarrier – 12 paired wells and 11 individual wellswells

Injections conducted from December 2008 through February 2009Manifold system in heated trailer allowed for injection Manifold system in heated trailer allowed for injection in up to 12 wells simultaneouslyin up to 12 wells simultaneously

17

BioaugmentationBioaugmentation

Pilot study area had active ydechlorinating cultureFollowing completion of emulsified oil injections, original plan was to transfer culture from pilot area to wells throughout the source area and biobarrier in phasesAft li i t fAfter preliminary transfers were completed, it was determined that dechlorinating bacteria were growing following biostimulation alone in most areas

18

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400CO

D Con

centration

(mg/L)

OSMUCOD

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

4 0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

CH4, and

Fe2

+ concen

trations (mg/L)

OSMU

NO3‐Fe2+CH4 (mg/l)SO42‐

0

200

Collection Date

0

50

100

0.0

2.0

4.0

NO3‐, C

Collection Date

200

250

600

700

800

g/L)

OSMUPCE TCE c‐DCE VC ethene

1 E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10OSMU ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

16S rDNA

tceA

bvcA

vcrA

0

50

100

150

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Ethene

Con

centration

(µg

CVOC Co

ncen

tration (µg/L)

Collection Date

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

vcrA

ND

50

100

150

200

250

COD Con

centration

(mg/L)

SLMUCOD

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

CH4, and

Fe2

+ concen

trations (mg/L)

SLMUNO3‐Fe2+CH4 (mg/l)SO42‐

0

50

Collection Date

0

50

100

0.0

2.0

NO3‐, C

Collection Date

250

300

500

600

g/L)

SLMUPCE TCE c‐DCE VC ethene

1 E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10SLMU ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

16S rDNA

tceA

bvcA

vcrA

0

50

100

150

200

0

100

200

300

400

Ethene

Con

centration

(µg

VOC Co

ncen

tration (µg/L)

Collection Date

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

vcrA

ND

19

100

150

200

250

300CO

D Con

centration

(mg/L)

HMW‐15SCOD

100

150

200

250

300

350

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

CH4, and

Fe2

+ concen

trations (mg/L)

HMW15S


0

50

Collection Date

0

50

0.0

2.0

NO3‐, C

Collection Date

120

140

1200

1400

g/L)

HMW‐15SPCE TCE c‐DCE VC ethene

1 E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10HMW‐15S ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

16S rDNA

tceA

bvcA

vcrA

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Ethene

Con

centration

(µg

CVOC Co

ncen

tration (µg/L)

Collection Date

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

vcrA

ND

50

100

150

200

250

COD Con

centration

(mg/L)

HMW‐18DCOD

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

SO42

‐(m

g/L)

CH4, and

Fe2

+ concen

trations (mg/L)


HMW18D

0

50

Collection Date

0

20

40

0.0

2.0

NO3‐, C

Collection Date

200

250

4000

4500

5000

g/L)

HMW‐18DPCE TCE c‐DCE VC ethene

1 E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10HMW‐18D ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

16S rDNA

tceA

bvcA

vcrA

0

50

100

150

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Ethene

Con

centration

(µg

CVOC Co

ncen

tration (µg/L)

Collection Date

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

vcrA

ND

20

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500CO

D Con

centration

(mg/L)

HMW‐17DCOD

0

50

100

Collection Date

600

700

800

25,000

30,000

g/L)

PCE TCE c‐DCE VC ethene

HMW‐17D

1 E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10HMW‐17D ‐ qPCR Results for Dehalococcoides

16S rDNA

tceA

bvcA

vcrA

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

Ethene

Con

centration

(µg

VOC Co

ncen

tration (µg/L)

Collection Date

1.E+00

1.E+01

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

gene

cop

ies/L

Collection Date

vcrA

ND

Summary of ResultsSummary of Results

Complete dechlorination occurring in many ti f th ft 15 thportions of the source area after 15 months

Injection of EOS likely mobilized previously sorbed contaminants, especially in area of HMW-17DHigh concentrations of Dehalococcoides in many areas of the site (many naturally-occurring)L t f TCE l d d d dLarge percentages of TCE already degraded throughout the source areaObserved degradation as fast as 40 day half life, even with slow release electron donor

21

Path ForwardPath Forward

Sodium lactate was injected in hotspot near HMW-17DSecond EOS injection was completed in June-July 2010 for source area and first biobarrierDesign and construction of downgradient biobarriers to start early 2011

Challenge for installation is progression toward artesian conditions for downgradient areaAlternative emplacement methods may be needed

Questions and AnswersQuestions and Answers

Ryan A. WymoreCDM555 17th St Suite 1100Denver, CO 80202720-264-1110720 264 [email protected]

Documents

Determining Success and Lessons Learned