Evaluation and Screening of Remedial Technologies for Uranium at the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Washington

Nimmons, Michael J.

doi:10.2172/912985

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Soil washing and pump-and-treat strategies are performed ex situ whereby soil or groundwater is removed from the aquifer, treated above ground, and replaced/reinjected into the subsurface (Kerr, 1990;Mackay and Cherry, 1989). During treatment, uranium may be removed from the soil matrix through mechanical separation and from groundwater by flocculation, precipitation, adsorption, ion exchange resins, or reverse osmosis (Dawson and Gilman, 2001;Nimmons, 2007). Because soil washing and pump-and-treat technologies are cost prohibitive on large scales and require the handling of toxic contaminants, in situ remediation strategies have been explored (Jardine et al, 2004;Riley et al, 1992).…”

Section: Chemical Remediation Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geochemical controls of the microbially mediated redox cycling of uranium and iron

Belli

Taillefert

2018

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Chemical Remediation Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geochemical controls of the microbially mediated redox cycling of uranium and iron

Belli

Taillefert

2018

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Principal investigations leading to the current conceptual site model for this plume include early work to describe the hydrogeology and groundwater contamination of the 300 Area (Lindberg and Bond 1979); detailed investigations to support Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements at the 300 Area Process Trenches (Schalla et al 1988); and the initial remedial investigation under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) for the 300-FF-5 groundwater operable unit (DOE 1995). More recently, detailed geochemical research involving uranium in 300 Area sediment has been conducted to support decisions associated with cleanup of surface waste sites (Serne et al 2002;Zachara et al 2005;Brown et al 2008) and the renewed feasibility study of potential remedial action alternatives for the plume (Nimmons 2007).…”

Section: Site Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

300 Area Uranium Stabilization Through Polyphosphate Injection: Final Report

Vermeul¹,

Bjornstad²,

Fritz³

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

 Demonstrate field-scale application of polyphosphate injections to identify implementation challenges and evaluate whether a full-scale deployment is feasible.  Determine the number of wells, reagent concentrations, volumes, injection rates, operational strategy, and longevity for polyphosphate injections for remediating uranium such that costs for larger-scale application can be effectively estimated. Key design parameters associated with these objectives include the radius of influence of the polyphosphate amendment injections, injection concentrations, types and amounts of phosphate minerals formed, reduction of aqueous uranium concentrations, and long-term treatment capacity of the amended zone. 2.2 Conceptual Design The general treatability testing approach consisted of 1) bench-scale evaluation of the technology, 2) site-specific characterization of the field test site, 3) an injection design analysis that synthesized bench-and field-scale information, 4) a polyphosphate injection test, and 5) post-treatment performance assessment. The initial field site characterization involved well drilling, geohydrologic/geochemical characterization (hydraulic testing, tracer tests, baseline monitoring), and site setup (mobile laboratory setup, installing pumps and pressure transducers in monitoring wells, injection and sampling equipment). These activities are described in Section 3.0. In addition to these activities, bench-scale studies with site sediment were conducted to develop an effective chemicals formulation for the polyphosphate amendments and evaluate the transport properties of the amendments under site conditions (see Section 3.0). 2.3 Equipment and Material This section includes a description of the site location, site utilities, injection equipment, chemical delivery, monitoring equipment, analytical equipment, and the integration of these components into the operational system required to conduct the polyphosphate injection. PNNL worked with Flour Hanford

show abstract

“…The studied site has a history of inaccurate future predictions (Waichler and Yabusaki, 2005) and ineffective remedies (Peterson et al, 2005(Peterson et al, , 2008Nimmons, 2007). These failings underscore the need for a firm scientific understanding of the coupled effects of geochemical reaction, dynamic hydrologic processes, and waste chemistry on seasonal and long-term groundwater U(VI) concentrations as a basis for selecting an effective remedial option.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resupply mechanism to a contaminated aquifer: A laboratory study of U(VI) desorption from capillary fringe sediments

Zachara

Liu

et al. 2010

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation and Screening of Remedial Technologies for Uranium at the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit, Hanford Site, Washington

Cited by 4 publications

References 4 publications

Geochemical controls of the microbially mediated redox cycling of uranium and iron

Geochemical controls of the microbially mediated redox cycling of uranium and iron

300 Area Uranium Stabilization Through Polyphosphate Injection: Final Report

Resupply mechanism to a contaminated aquifer: A laboratory study of U(VI) desorption from capillary fringe sediments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About