Site Characterization Status Report Anacostia River Comparative Validation of Innovative Capping Tec

1
Site Characterization Status ReportAnacostia
RiverComparative Validation of Innovative
Capping Technologies
Presented to Anacostia Watershed Toxics Alliance

• Presented by
• Danny D. Reible and W. David Constant
• Hazardous Substance Research Center/South
• Southwest, Louisiana State University
• Yuewei Zhu, Horne Engineering, Inc.
• April 1, 2003
• Will post to website www.hsrc.org SSW -
  Anacostia

2
Objectives Project SCP on web

• Establish the contamination baseline at
  demonstration areas
• Determine the geotechnical characteristics of the
  sediment
• Provide necessary baseline data for future
  evaluation of effectiveness of capping placement
  and capping technologies

3
Site Characterization Plan Components

• Stage 1
• Geophysical characterization with side scan
  sonar, chirp sonar, magnetometry and sediment
  profiling camera
• Bathymetry
• Sediment sample collection
• Sediment radionuclide characterization
• Sediment pore water evaluation
• Current velocity measurement w/Acoustic Doppler
  Current Profiler
• Geotechnical data for the cap design
• Stage 2
• Benthic community sampling collection
• SAV sampling
• Limited additional sampling as needed

4
Geophysical Survey Purpose

• Used bathymetry, side scan sonar, sub-bottom
  profiling, SPC and magnetometry surveys
• Identify the geotechnical characteristics of the
  surficial sediments, identify the size and
  character of the debris as well as depth in the
  sediment
• Detect potential ferrous objects buried in
  shallow sediments
• Detect underwater hazards such as partially
  buried stumps or logs
• Survey (SPC) of the first six inches of sediment
  for benthic and grain size interpretation
• Refine future sediment sampling approach
• Establish the pre-capping conditions

5
Survey Areas
6
Survey Method

• A series of 20-foot interval tracklines oriented
  parallel to the river shoreline in the two areas.
  
• Several survey transects oriented perpendicular
  to the primary survey transects were investigated
  to provide quality control and to enhance the
  overall geophysical interpretation.
• A total of 32 transects were surveyed, equating
  to more than 28,000 feet of data acquisition
• Hydrographic, magnetometer and sub bottom profile
  data acquired along all tracklines surveyed
• Side scan sonar data acquired independently on
  fewer tracklines sufficient to provide coverage
  of 100 percent of the two sites.
• A total of 86 of sediment images collected.

7
(No Transcript)
8
Preliminary Findings

• Area 1 is characterized by a gently undulating
  surface with few surface irregularities. River
  bed elevations range from 5 near shore to 20 at
  the southern boundary of the area.
• Area 2 is characterized by a gently undulating
  surface with depths ranging from 5 near shore to
  19 near the southern extents of the area.

9
Preliminary Findings (Cont.)

• The riverbed in both areas is best characterized
  as fine grained sediments likely ranging from
  soft aqueous silts and muds to aqueous fine
  grained sand and silt. The sonar mosaics are
  shown superimposed on the depth contours.
• Darkened areas on the sonar mosaics are
  representative of features extending above the
  river bed, while light areas are representative
  of shadows behind features or surface depressions.

10
Preliminary Findings (Cont.)
Area 1 Sonar mosaics superimposed on the depth
contours
11
Preliminary Findings (Cont.)
Area 2 Sonar mosaics superimposed on the depth
contours
12
Preliminary Findings (Cont.)

• Subbottom penetration of the profiler system was
  restricted along all tracklines in the survey
  areas due to the presence of gaseous-type
  sediments in the near-subsurface. The gases
  trapped in the sediment inhibit acoustic
  propagation and reduce the ability of the
  subbottom profiler to resolve subsurface acoustic
  reflectors.
• The presence of organically derived gases in
  sediments is not an uncommon phenomenon and often
  characterizes sediments in upland rivers, bays
  and estuaries.

13
Preliminary Findings (Cont.)
Typical area 1 station, sandy-silty sediments,
lots of gas voids, one gas bubble rising to
the surface in the water column.
14
Preliminary Findings (Cont.)
Typical image from area 2, surface sediments very
unconsolidated and easily disturbed, piece of
what might be pottery near the bottom of the
image, dark specks in sediment are pieces of
detritus.
15
Field Sampling, etc.

• Field sampling next slides
• Analytical work in progress
• Exploring gas monitoring how to do best
• Preliminary results from research groups
• Potential cap configurations
• Impact on design
• Logistics and Permits
• Funding status for construction
• staged approach
• Geotechnical characterization
• Clu-In Seminar

16
Activity During Field Sampling

• Surficial Sediment Samples
• Pore and Surface Water Samples
• Shallow Cores
• ADCP
• This Week
• Geotech Coring
• Shear Tests

17
Note Surficial Sediment Sampling The
surficial sediment sampling starts from the mount
line and progress to southwest direction (Earth
Conservation Pier) at an interval of 50-foot.
The sampling station is at the node. The first
surficial sediment sample will be collected 15
feet off the shoreline on the first transect and
progress toward south at an interval of 50-foot.
Please note, I have add the extra transect line.
Therefore, we will collect about 10 extra
sediment samples. In addition, we will collect
extra three surficial sediment samples marked
with X Sediment Coring 8 coring locations
marked with C
RS1
A
10
RS2
B
9
8
C
RS3
D
7
C6
E
6
5
F
W1
C4
C7
C8
10
4
PW
9
3
8
C2
C5
2
7
W2
1
6
A
PW
C1
C3
5
S SR SRG SRGC
B
4
C
3
D
E
2
W
Water Column Sample Location
F
1
PW
Pore Water Core Location
RS
Random Out Fall Sample Location
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
Sample of PCB Data

• ..\Analytical Results\PCB Data March 24.xls

21
Coring Video

• Anacostia River Coring Sample Core No 7.wmv
• Anacostia River Coring Sample Core No 8.wmv

22
Target Technologies for Area 1

• Apatite
• Coke Breeze/ZVI
• Aquablok (with EPA SITE)

23
Concept of Reactive Barrier Sorption Reactions
Melton et al., UNH
Pb2 Ca5(PO4 , CO3)3OH gt Pb5(PO4 ,CO3)3OH
Pb2 Ca5(PO4)3OH gt Pb5(PO4)3OH
Pb2 Ca5(PO4)3F gt Pb5(PO4)3F
24
Sorptive Media Lowery et al., CMU

• Coke
• Strong PCB sorption (Kd)
• Less bioavailable (Talley et al. 2002)

Kd (L/kg)
SORPTION STRENGTH
b Jonker et al. 2002
25
Rationale for Fe(0)

• Fe(0)-based reactants are proven dechlorinators
• Fe(0) dechlorinates halogenated hydrocarbons
• e.g. TCE and other chlorinated solvents
• Extensive use in reactors
• Pd/Fe(0) dechlorinates PCBs
• Grittini et al. 1995, Wang et al. 1997
• Nano-sized Fe(0) may dechlorinate PCBs
• Wang et al. 1997
• Low levels of H2 produced during Fe(0) corrosion
• Potential to stimulate microbial dechlorination

26
AquaBlokTM

• Gravel/rock core covered by clay layer
• Expands in water decreasing permeability
• Applicable to seep locations (Site 2)
• May be useful as funnel in funnel and gate
  reactive barrier design
• Semi-commercial technology
• Hull and Associates

27
Acknowledgements

• AWTA Members
• Washington Navy Yard (Mr. Robert Jordan)
• D.C Department of Health, Water Quality Division
  (Ms. Diane Douglas)
• Earth Conservation Corps (Mr. James Willie)
• National Park Services
• Coast Guard and DC Harbor Police
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
• Washington Gas (Mary Jean Brady)