Revlon EISB Performance Status Update – February 2016€¦ · Long-term solution / low maintenance. No aboveground equipment. 7 Showed TCE degradation, but accumulation ... Total

OBG PRESENTS:

EVO / Bioaugmentation for Treatment of Trichloroethene by Biobarrier and Source Injection ApproachChristine Fogas (OBG), Michael Kozar, P.G. (OBG), Bella Bakrania (OBG), and Eric Schleicher, P.G. (OBG)

Fourth International Symposium on Bioremediation and Sustainable Environmental TechnologiesMay 22-25, 2017, Miami, FL

http://www.obg.com/

Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) and Bioaugmentation for Treatment of Trichloroethene(TCE) by “Biobarrier” and Source Injection Approach

2

Background

Implementation

Performance Monitoring

3

Background

Site Setting

4

6

Remedial Objectives

Remediate source / reduce CVOC mass flux

Enhance monitored natural attenuation (MNA) downgradient

Meet New Jersey Groundwater Quality Standards (GWQS) – TCE = 1 ppb; 1,1,1-TCA = 30 ppb

Key Considerations

Difficult urban setting

Treatment needed off-Site

Long-term solution / low maintenance

No aboveground equipment

7

Showed TCE degradation, but accumulation of cDCE with electron donor only (MEAL)

Showed complete dechlorination to ethene with Dhc addition (KB-1)

2001 Microcosm

Conducted at a “hot-spot” in shallow source area 1st Injection = 65 lbs sodium lactate;

2nd Injection = 600 lbs sodium lactate Bioaugmentation with Dhc

2003 Field Pilot Study

Used groundwater from off-site monitoring well where “biobarrier” was planned

Tested new commercially available electron donors and buffers

2010 Microcosm

Enhanced In Situ Bioremediation (EISB) Proof of Concept

8

Cross Sectional View of Site

Biobarrier Segment “B”

Biobarrier Segment “A”

Source Area

9

Implementation

10

Overview / Chronology

11

• Initial (8) injection wells for EISB pilot test in source area installed June 2003

• Additional (25) injection wells installed January – March 2014

• Newman Zone® Standard Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) was selected

• EVO injection completed over a period of 14 days (September 2014 – October 2014)

• Bioaugmentation conducted May 2015• TSI-DC Dehalococcoides mccartyii Bioaugmentation Culture®

supplied by Terra Systems, Inc.

• Groundwater (GW) sampling / monitoring events conducted:•Baseline (pre-EVO injection): May 2014•Months 1 through 6: November 2014 – April 2015 (pre-bioaugmentation)•Months 7 and beyond: August 2015 – April 2017 (post-bioaugmentation)

Injection Well

Install

EVO Injection

Bioaugment


Injection WellInstallation

12

Off-site barrier well installations

9-ft high pile of plow snow covering two

planned drill locations

Compact Rotosonicdrill rig

EVO Injections

13

Newman Zone® product tote

Spill containment Gravity feed setup

Mixing tanks

Biobarrier injections

14

Actual vs. Target EVO Injected in Pounds

A total of 25,937 lbs of Newman Zone® Standard EVO at 10% concentration (31,438 gallons in solution) was injected in the EISB treatment zones over a period of 14 days

3,310

9,981

12,646

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

EVO

Inje

cted

(lbs

)

SOURCE AREA BARRIER SEGMENT A BARRIER SEGMENT B

StoichiometricTarget LOW

(1,620)

Injection Porosity Target HIGH

(11,520)


(11,520)

Stoichiometric Target LOW

(3,266)


(12,370)

Stoichiometric Target LOW

(1,814)

Bioaugmentation

15

TSI-DC Bioaugmentation Culture® contains > 1 x 1011 cells/L of Dehalococcoides mccartyii

Self-performed bioaugmentation

Fouling Slowed Progress

Total of 336 liters of culture injected over a period of 7 days to achieve target concentration of 1 x 107 cells/L in groundwater

16


EVO is fermented to release volatile fatty acids (VFAs), which act as a carbon source for Dhc and other microbes

17

EVO InjectionsComplete

Bioaugmentation

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Conc

entr

atio

n (m

g/L)

MW-8C: Volatile Fatty Acids (VFAs) (Source Area - Shallow GW Zone)

Lactic Acid

Acetic Acid

Propionic Acid

Formic Acid

Butyric Acid

Pyruvic Acid

EISB Monitoring Wells

18

19

Baseline TCE = 3,320 ppb

April 2017 TCE = 18.4 ppb

NJ GWQS for TCE = 1 ppb


Bioaugmentation

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

May

-14

Jun-

14Ju

l-14

Aug-

14Se

p-14

Oct

-14

Nov

-14

Dec-

14Ja

n-15

Feb-

15M

ar-1

5Ap

r-15

May

-15

Jun-

15Ju

l-15

Aug-

15Se

p-15

Oct

-15

Nov

-15

Dec-

15Ja

n-16

Feb-

16M

ar-1

6Ap

r-16

May

-16

Jun-

16Ju

l-16

Aug-

16Se

p-16

Oct

-16

Nov

-16

Dec-

16Ja

n-17

Feb-

17M

ar-1

7Ap

r-17

May

-17

Tota

l VFA

Con

cent

ratio

n (m

g/L)

VOC

Conc

entr

atio

n (µ

M)

MW-8C: EISB Source Area - Shallow Overburden Zone

PCE TCE cDCE VC Ethene + Ethane Total VFA's

20



April 2017 TCE = < 0.26 ppb

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

1,050

1,200

1,350

1,500

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

May

-14

Jun-

14Ju

l-14

Aug-

14

Sep-

14O

ct-1

4

Nov

-14

Dec-

14

Jan-

15

Feb-

15M

ar-1

5

Apr-

15M

ay-1

5

Jun-

15Ju

l-15

Aug-

15

Sep-

15O

ct-1

5

Nov

-15

Dec-

15

Jan-

16

Feb-

16M

ar-1

6

Apr-

16M

ay-1

6

Jun-

16Ju

l-16

Aug-

16

Sep-

16O

ct-1

6

Nov

-16

Dec-

16

Jan-

17

Feb-

17M

ar-1

7

Apr-

17M

ay-1

7

Tota

l VFA

Con

cent

ratio

n (m

g/L)

VOC

Conc

entr

atio

n (µ

M)

MW-21: EISB Biobarrier - Deep Till Zone


21





Bioaugmentation

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

1,050

1,200

1,350

1,500

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

May

-14

Jun-

14Ju

l-14

Aug-

14Se

p-14

Oct

-14

Nov

-14

Dec-

14Ja

n-15

Feb-

15M

ar-1

5Ap

r-15

May

-15

Jun-

15Ju

l-15

Aug-

15Se

p-15

Oct

-15

Nov

-15

Dec-

15Ja

n-16

Feb-

16M

ar-1

6Ap

r-16

May

-16

Jun-

16Ju

l-16

Aug-

16Se

p-16

Oct

-16

Nov

-16

Dec-

16Ja

n-17

Feb-

17M

ar-1

7Ap

r-17

May

-17

Tota

l VFA

Con

cent

ratio

n (m

g/L)

VOC

Conc

entr

atio

n (µ

M)

MW-22: EISB Biobarrier - Deep Till Zone


22

TCE Concentrations (ppb)Historic Range* April 2017 Results

Source Area Monitoring WellsMW-8 (shallow overburden)+ 110 – 3,300 < 0.26MW-8B (shallow overburden) 54 - 760 5,270MW-8C (shallow overburden) 130 - 6,100 18.4MW-8D (shallow overburden) 42 - 17,000 < 0.26MW-20 (intermediate till) 400 - 25,000 580MW-18 (deep till) 130 - 340 148Barrier Segment “B” Monitoring WellMW-21 (deep till) 5,500 - 16,000 < 0.26Barrier Segment “A” Monitoring WellMW-22 (deep till) 580 - 9,000 2.1Notes:NJ GWQS for TCE = 1 ppb, cDCE = 70 ppbJ = estimated value* Excludes data from the EISB Pilot Test period (July 2003 – April 2004)+ cis-DCE concentrations shown for MW-8 (pilot test well)

23

1,1,1-TCA Concentrations (ppb)Historic Range* April 2017 Results

Source Area Monitoring WellsMW-8 (shallow overburden) 25 – 1,000 0.72 JMW-8B (shallow overburden) < 1 - 24 714MW-8C (shallow overburden) 1.2 - 190 0.78 JMW-8D (shallow overburden) 2.5 - 710 < 0.22MW-20 (intermediate till) 2.7 – 1,100 25.6MW-18 (deep till) 0.7 – 5.9 0.42 JBarrier Segment “B” Monitoring WellMW-21 (deep till) < 13 - 100 < 0.22Barrier Segment “A” Monitoring WellMW-22 (deep till) 3.6 - 520 < 0.22

Notes:NJ GWQS for TCA = 1 ppbJ = estimated value*Excludes data from the EISB Pilot Test period (July 2003 – April 2004)

Sentinel Monitoring Well

24

25


April 2017 TCE = 2,670 ppb


Bioaugmentation

5/1/20145/31/20146/30/20147/30/20148/29/20149/28/201410/28/201411/27/201412/27/20141/26/20152/25/20153/27/20154/26/20155/26/20156/25/20157/25/20158/24/20159/23/201510/23/201511/22/201512/22/20151/21/20162/20/20163/21/20164/20/20165/20/20166/19/20167/19/20168/18/20169/17/201610/17/201611/16/201612/16/20161/15/20172/14/20173/16/20174/15/2017

0

150

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

May

-14

May

-14

Jun-

14Ju

l-14

Aug-

14Se

p-14

Oct

-14

Nov

-14

Dec-

14Ja

n-15

Feb-

15M

ar-1

5Ap

r-15

May

-15

Jun-

15Ju

l-15

Aug-

15Se

p-15

Oct

-15

Nov

-15

Dec-

15Ja

n-16

Feb-

16M

ar-1

6Ap

r-16

May

-16

Jun-

16Ju

l-16

Aug-

16Se

p-16

Oct

-16

Nov

-16

Dec-

16Ja

n-17

Feb-

17M

ar-1

7Ap

r-17

Tota

l VFA

Con

cent

ratio

n (m

g/L)

VOC

Conc

entr

atio

n (µ

M)

MW-29: Sentinel A - Deep Till Zone


26

Post-Bioaugmentation

Sample collected for CENSUS-DNA analysis by Microbial Insights, Inc.

June 2015 Jan 2016 April 2017MW-8C 1.90 x 109 N/A N/A

MW-20 2.13 x 107 N/A 3.46 x 106

MW-21 2.84 x 104 3.28 x 108 N/AMW-22 7.58 x 108 N/A N/A

MW-29 4.80 x 103 N/A 1.90 x 103

MW-25BR N/A 2.20 x 108 N/A

Note:Literature established 1 x 107 cells/L as a threshold for generally useful rates of dechlorination (Lu et. Al., 2006)

CENSUS-DNA:Dehalococcoides (Dhc) Results (cells/L)

Sheet1

Revlon EISB GW Performance Monitoring

CENSUS-DNA Dhc Results

Well IDMW-8CMW-20MW-21MW-22MW-29MW-25BR

EISB ZoneShallow Source AreaIntermediate Source AreaIntermediate Source AreaGrove BarrierGrove BarrierLyons BarrierSentinel ASentinel ASentinel B

Sample Date6/10/156/10/154/20/176/10/151/16/166/10/156/10/154/20/171/16/16

Dehalococcoides (Dhc) (cells/L)1.90E+092.13E+073.46E+062.84E+043.28E+087.58E+084.80E+031.90E+032.20E+08

Notes:

Cell density of TSI-DC culture is approximately 1.00E+11 cells/L

Research by EPA (Lu et. al., 2006 ) established 1E+07 Dhc cells/L as a threshold for generally useful rates of dechlorination. Also, the Microbial Insights database revealed that ethene production is observed in nearly 80% of samples where Dhc concentrations are at least 1E+04 cells/mL (1E+07 cells/L), which is in good agreement with the threshold Dhc concentration proposed by Lu et. al. (2006).

Revlon Implements Division IIrvington, New JerseyDRAFT - PRIVILEGED && CONFIDENTIAL

O'Brien && Gere Engineers, Inc.February 2016

formatted

Revlon EISB GW Performance Monitoring

CENSUS-DNA Dhc Results

Well IDMW-8CMW-20MW-21MW-22MW-29MW-25BR

EISB ZoneShallow Source AreaIntermediate Source AreaIntermediate Source AreaGrove BarrierGrove BarrierLyons BarrierSentinel ASentinel ASentinel B

Sample Date6/10/156/10/154/20/176/10/151/16/166/10/156/10/154/20/171/16/16

Dehalococcoides (Dhc) (cells/L)1.90E+092.13E+073.46E+062.84E+043.28E+087.58E+084.80E+031.90E+032.20E+08

Notes:

Cell density of TSI-DC culture is approximately 1.00E+11 cells/L

Research by EPA (Lu et. al., 2006 ) established 1E+07 Dhc cells/L as a threshold for generally useful rates of dechlorination. Also, the Microbial Insights database revealed that ethene production is observed in nearly 80% of samples where Dhc concentrations are at least 1E+04 cells/mL (1E+07 cells/L), which is in good agreement with the threshold Dhc concentration proposed by Lu et. al. (2006).

CENSUS-DNA:

Dehalococcoides (Dhc) Results (cells/L)

June 2015Jan 2016April 2017

MW-8C1.90 x 109N/AN/A

MW-202.13 x 107N/A3.46 x 106

MW-212.84 x 1043.28 x 108N/A

MW-227.58 x 108N/AN/A

MW-294.80 x 103N/A1.90 x 103

MW-25BRN/A2.20 x 108N/A

Note:

Literature established 1 x 107 cells/L as a threshold for generally useful rates of dechlorination (Lu et. Al., 2006)

Revlon Implements Division IIrvington, New JerseyDRAFT - PRIVILEGED && CONFIDENTIAL

O'Brien && Gere Engineers, Inc.February 2016

27

January 2012TCE = 850 ppb


EVOInjectionsComplete

Bioaugmentation

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Jan-

12

Mar

-12

Jun-

12

Sep-

12

Dec-

12

Mar

-13

Jun-

13

Sep-

13

Dec-

13

Mar

-14

Jun-

14

Sep-

14

Dec-

14

Mar

-15

Jun-

15

Sep-

15

Dec-

15

Mar

-16

Jun-

16

Sep-

16

Dec-

16

Mar

-17

Jun-

17

Benz

ene

Conc

entr

atio

n (μ

g/L)

VOC

Conc

entr

atio

n (µ

M)

MW-25BR: Sentinel B - Bedrock ZoneChlorinated Ethenes / Ethene + Ethane Concentrations

vs. Benzene Concentration over Time

Ethene + Ethane not measured

Baseline GW Sampling Event

(Pre- Full-Scale EISB)

Methane production is expected as a result of EISB

28

MW-8C MW-20 MW-21Shallow/Source Int/Source Deep/Biobarrier

5/28/2014 8.4 2.9 23011/4/2014 12 19 351/5/2015 280 20 3,3006/10/2015 1,900 120 13,0008/26/2015 3,300 440 27,0001/14/2016 9,700 -- 26,0009/26/2016 11,000 11,000 27,0004/21/2017 15,000 6,300 17,000

Dissolved Methane in GW Results (ug/L)

Multigas meter used to check: Interior of Site building Basement spaces across street Nearby drainage inlets Shallow monitoring wells

downgradientNo evidence of methane accumulation was found

Injection wells fitted with vented well caps to prevent methane gas buildup

Dissolved Methane in GW

Dissolved Methane in GW Results (ug/L)MW-8MW-8BMW-8CMW-8DMW-18MW-20MW-21MW-22

Shallow/SourceShallow/SourceShallow/SourceShallow/SourceDeep/SourceInt/SourceDeep/GroveDeep/Lyons

5/28/14--1008.41.42502.92303400

11/4/142003312--23019352,900

1/5/15320270280--220203,3003,600

4/22/151,7001,500----260--16,0009,100

6/10/155,2007,8001,900----12013,00018,000

8/26/15--8,1003,30025,000--44027,00023,000

1/14/167,10010,0009,70013,000----26,00028,000

4/21/174,50010,00015,00019,000230630017,00022,000

Dissolved Methane in GW Results (ug/L)MW-14MW-16MW-19MW-24MW-25MW-29C-1C-8

Shallow/Sent AInt/Sent ADeep/Sent ADeep/Sent ADeep/Sent ADeep/Sent ADeep/Sent ADeep/Sent A

5/28/140.38182100.582.998--52

1/6/15< 0.10132400.496.4140--50

6/10/15< 0.50123300.653.31104227

Dissolved Methane in GW Results (ug/L)MW-17MW-28MW-19BRMW-24BRMW-25BR

Int/Sent BDeep/Sent BDeep/Sent BDeep/Sent BDeep/Sent B

5/28/1412016013036220

6/9/1513013012062200

Notes:

* - Soil gas monitoring is suggested for groundwater with methane concentrations > 10 mg/L (10,000 ug/L)

Dissolved Methane in GW Results (ug/L)

MW-8CMW-20MW-21

Shallow/SourceInt/SourceDeep/Biobarrier

5/28/148.42.9230

11/4/14121935

1/5/15280203,300

6/10/151,90012013,000

8/26/153,30044027,000

1/14/169,700--26,000

9/26/1611,00011,00027,000

4/21/1715,0006,30017,000

Methane Gas Monitoring - MWs

Methane Gas Detected (%LEL)5/5/156/10/158/26/15

EISB Zone Wells

MW-8--08.3

MW-8B10014.63.7

MW-8C28.120.614.1

MW-8D12.910.95.3

MW-15--06.1

MW-18000

MW-20000.3

MW-2116.011.03.1

MW-2218.016.44.8

Sentinel A Wells

MW-14--00

MW-16--00

MW-19--00

MW-24--0--

MW-25--0--

MW-29--00.1

C-1--00

C-8--00

Sentinel B Wells

MW-17--00

MW-28--00

MW-19BR--00

MW-24BR--0--

MW-25BR--0--

Other

MW-6--00

MW-10--00

MW-23--03.1

Notes:

The explosive range of methane is 5 - 15% methane in air by volume

Methane gas meter measurements presented in percentage of the lower explosive limit (LEL - 5% methane by volume in air)

Methane Gas Monitoring - IWs

Methane Gas Detected (%LEL)5/5/158/26/15

EISB Zone Wells

IW-5019.6

IW-605.2

S-1022.3

S-3020.5

S-503.6

G-300.9

G-6024.4

G-700.2

G-804.8

G-9031.8

L-20100

L-5045.6

L-6015.2

L-8023.6

L-9039.2

Notes:

The explosive range of methane is 5 - 15% methane in air by volume

Methane gas meter measurements presented in percentage of the lower explosive limit (LEL - 5% methane by volume in air)

Sheet1

Performance Monitoring Conclusions

29

EVO + bioaugmentation injections were successful in establishing conditions for EISB in the source area and biobarrier treatment zones

VFA depletion is not an immediate concern along the biobarriers and majority of source area

Dhc population is thriving in EISB treatment zones, as well as in the downgradient bedrock zone

Some of the VFAs are being utilized by methanogens, resulting in high levels of dissolved methane in groundwater

OBG PRESENTS:OBG | THERE’S A WAY

[email protected]

http://www.obg.com/https://www.facebook.com/obriengerehttps://plus.google.com/u/0/102830418912731359819/postshttps://instagram.com/obrien_gere/https://www.linkedin.com/company/o'brien-&-gerehttps://twitter.com/obrien_gerehttps://www.youtube.com/user/obrienandgere

EVO / Bioaugmentation for Treatment of Trichloroethene by Biobarrier and Source Injection Approach�Christine Fogas (OBG), Michael Kozar, P.G. (OBG), Bella Bakrania (OBG), and Eric Schleicher, P.G. (OBG)��Fourth International Symposium on Bioremediation and Sustainable Environmental Technologies�May 22-25, 2017, Miami, FLEmulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) and Bioaugmentation for Treatment of Trichloroethene (TCE) by “Biobarrier” and Source Injection ApproachBackgroundSite SettingSlide Number 5Slide Number 6Enhanced In Situ Bioremediation (EISB) �Proof of ConceptSlide Number 8Slide Number 9ImplementationOverview / �ChronologyInjection Well�InstallationEVO InjectionsSlide Number 14BioaugmentationPerformance MonitoringEVO is fermented to release volatile fatty acids (VFAs), which act as a carbon source for Dhc and other microbesEISB �Monitoring WellsSlide Number 19Slide Number 20Slide Number 21Slide Number 22Slide Number 23Sentinel Monitoring �WellSlide Number 25Slide Number 26Slide Number 27Methane production is expected as a result of EISBPerformance Monitoring ConclusionsQuestions?

Documents

Revlon EISB Performance Status Update – February 2016€¦ · Long-term solution / low maintenance. No aboveground equipment. 7 Showed TCE degradation, but accumulation ... Total