REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe
Maria D. Watt Michael Burlingame Jessica R. Beattie Melissa Koberle Brad Carlson

Redevelopment and reuse plans are often based upon an expedited delineation and remediation life cycle, since delayed reuse usually has economic consequences. It has also become increasingly important to utilize sustainable practices to achieve investigation and remediation goals. In this article, the Triad approach is used to expedite the delineation of a source area within a municipal landll to complete the remedial effort prior to construction of an urban civic center. The Triad approach uses the three elements of systematic project planning, dynamic work strategy, and realtime measurement to expedite site characterization (Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council, 2003). In this article, the Triad sampling strategy consisted of two phases. The rst phase included in
situ screening of soil and groundwater using the membrane interface probe (MIP), and the second

phase included conrmatory sampling via vertical proles in the soil and groundwater. This study found that, using the MIP in a dynamic sampling strategy, a critical element of the Triad approach, combined with the proper placement of conrmatory samples, signicantly reduced overall project cost and will expedite the site redevelopment. The use of the Triad approach also contributed to c the integration of green and sustainable practices into the project. O 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

INTRODUCTION

Optimizing contaminant delineation by the Triad approach has been practiced since at least 1997 (Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council [ITRC], 2003), including in situ testing with the membrane interface probe (MIP) as reported by the ITRC (2003), Saboya et al. (2004), and Huang et al. (2010). The Triad approach uses real-time eld measurements to allow sampling strategies to be dynamic and evolve to establish the range of contaminant concentrations, the degree of heterogeneity, and spatial correlation of contaminant distributions. However, real-time screening does not replace off-site laboratory analysis, which has a high degree of certainty to support risk characterization, risk-based cleanup negotiation, remedy selection, and protective site-reuse strategies. The Triad approach can expeditiously reduce uncertainty in site characterization, thereby reducing the risk of failure for site remediation and impeding site redevelopment. Numerous remediation/redevelopment efforts have either failed or greatly increased in cost due to inadequacies in site characterization. By using real-time eld measurements to guide sampling, the possibility of missing an area of contamination or underestimating the
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. View this article online at wileyonlinelibrary.com. DOI: 10.1002/rem.20267

17

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

aerial extent of contamination is signicantly reduced. Also, the potential of inadequately characterizing potential future exposure caused by site redevelopment can lead to unanticipated increased risk to human health and the environment. The three concepts comprising the Triad approach are (ITRC, 2003): 1. Systematic project planning, 2. Dynamic work strategies, and 3. Real-time measurement tools.
Consideration of potential remediation approaches/ technologies should be considered, if possible, during project planning to allow for early data collection critical to remedial technology feasibility and selection.

The unifying concept for these ideas is the need to understand and manage uncertainties that affect decision making in the remedial process. Many of the concepts and ideas have been used previously to characterize sites, but their combination can allow the user to: r r r r r expedite complete delineation; avoid late discovery of unknown sources; accurately evaluate risks, remedial alternatives, and remedy selection; optimize design for increased efciency; and increase probability of remedial success.

A conceptual site model (CSM) should be part of the systematic project planning process to identify and clarify project objectives. A CSM consists of a 2-D, 3-D, or 4-D representation of physical, chemical, and biological information organized into potential fate, transport, and exposure scenarios in order to focus a remedys assessment, design, and implementation. A CSM can include information regarding contaminant distribution, movement, and potential receptors; hydrogeologic and stratigraphic conditions; land use; monitoring features; and data gaps. Although visual representations may not be cost-effective for simple site models, they can be justied where contaminants pose greater risks for remedial decision makers, including responsible parties, consultants, regulators, and other stakeholders. During systematic project planning, the numerical and/or qualitative cleanup goals should be identied or at least estimated, and should be re-referenced during later data analysis and decision making. Consideration of potential remediation approaches/technologies should be considered, if possible, during project planning to allow for early data collection critical to remedial technology feasibility and selection. Project planning should include/consider: how background conditions will be evaluated, data ow and decision making, analytical methods (e.g., eld and laboratory, qualitative and quantitative), team selection (with the necessary expertise), and integration planning with regulators and stakeholders. Dynamic work strategies are different from conventional work strategies in that dynamic planning documents will include decision logic when complexities are encountered. This will allow eld personnel to change the site activities as needed, so as to continue to achieve the project objectives with increased quality and control. This does not require that decision makers be present on-site during data collection, only that they are accessible to evaluate data and support the eld staff. A key cost-saving component of the Triad approach is the potential to complete eldwork more quickly and ideally with one mobilization. A dynamic work strategy allows for this by providing for data exchange
18
Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

(via telecommunications tools, such as an FTP Internet site), data management systems, and contingencies to modify eld activities during implementation. Real-time measurement technologies, necessary to the Triad approach because they facilitate expedient and exible decision making, include data-collection and management tools, processing, analysis, and transmittal. Real-time technologies can include not only eld tests, such as immunoassay kits, but also eld laboratories. Reliance on arbitrary conrmation sampling of a percentage of eld samples should be avoided. Rather, the desired approach uses the eld data and laboratory data in a combined approach with the goal to enhance the CSM. For example, where data certainty is sufcient (i.e., in areas that are either well above or well below the regulatory or other remediation goal), less expensive eld methods can be used to increase sample density and enhance the CSM. Laboratory analyses can be used in areas where an unacceptable level of uncertainty (in terms of compliance with the remedial goals) remains. In the project discussed in this article, the Triad approach using the membrane interface probe specically supported: r accurate daily interpretation of real-time data; r use of lines of evidence in evaluation; r proper placement of conrmation samples, not just a random percentage of samples, to conrm plume geometry, high/source zones, mid/core zones, and low/distal/fringe plume delineation; and r a well-distributed sample database yielding accurate assessment of contaminant mass removal requirements. Real-time The MIP uses the following three probes to screen for site contamination: 1. An electron capture device (ECD) to detect chlorinated compounds, 2. A photo-ionization detector (PID) to detect aromatic hydrocarbons, and 3. A ame ionization detector (FID) to detect straight-chain hydrocarbons. Results from the above detectors can be evaluated daily to optimize the sampling strategy and reduce the number of samples required to characterize the spatial contaminant distribution. Because chemical speciation is not achieved by any of these three detectors, selected supplemental conrmatory sampling is necessary at critical locations to determine the nature and extent of contamination with a high degree of certainty. BACKGROUND An 85-acre municipal landll is located within a 200-acre brownelds development area (BDA). The BDA consists of eight abandoned brownelds sites along 2 miles of the New Jersey shoreline on the Delaware River, overlooking the Philadelphia skyline and within a highly urbanized area of New Jersey. The municipality has received signicant brownelds funding to stimulate redevelopment and revitalization. Redevelopment plans for this landll include a state-of-the-art, 132,000-square-foot community center that will feature an atrium-style town plaza, a family service center, indoor and outdoor recreational facilities, an aquatic center, and a child care center, as well as community-enrichment,
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

measurement technologies, necessary to the Triad approach because they facilitate expedient and exible decision making, include data-collection and management tools, processing, analysis, and transmittal.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

19

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

To meet the aggressive construction and redevelopment schedule, an expedited Triad approach was utilized to comprehensively delineate a contaminated industrial source area within this site.

job-training, and antipoverty programs. To meet the aggressive construction and redevelopment schedule, an expedited Triad approach was utilized to comprehensively delineate a contaminated industrial source area within this site. The unlined landll operated from 1952 until 1971, when it was closed with a vegetative soil cover. The preliminary investigations revealed it contained mainly municipal solid waste. An area of industrial chemical waste material saturated with chlorobenzene (CB) and dichlorobenzenes (DCBs) was identied in the southeast portion of the landll. This material is approximately 20 to 30 feet below ground surface (bgs) and acts as a continuing source of groundwater contamination and localized soil-vapor contamination. Although operations at the landll ceased in 1971, illegal dumping activities continued at the site through the 2000s. While evaluating the property for redevelopment in 2006, a source area of volatile organic compound (VOC) contamination was identied in the southeast quadrant of the landll. Investigations at the site identied concentrations of benzene, CB, isomers of DCB (1,2-, 1,3-, 1,4-), and 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (TCB) above the state cleanup standards in both soil and groundwater. More specically, it was identied that a grey-black clay layer situated below the waste ll was highly contaminated and was likely acting as the source of groundwater contamination in this area of the parcel. In late 2007, an initial interim remedial measure (IRM) was implemented consisting of excavation and off-site disposal of an estimated 14,000 cubic yards of material within this source area contaminated with CB and DCBs. This IRM excavated a portion of the contaminated clay layer in this source area; however, residual contamination remained in the clay outside the perimeter of the IRM excavation area (hot spot) that required expedited delineation in order to meet an aggressive construction and redevelopment schedule. The objective of this Triad investigation was to expedite the delineation of the remaining source material. Using the Triad approach, a systematic sampling plan was established wherein a MIP was evaluated to collect real-time data. These data were used to select subsequent conrmatory samples in order to comprehensively delineate the remaining source material.

Physical Setting
The site is located in the New Jersey Coastal Plain and is underlain by the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy (PRM) aquifer system. The PRM aquifer system consists of three principal layers of ne to coarse sand and gravel separated by stiff clay layers that are 20 to 50 feet thick. The three sand/gravel layers are referred to as the lower, middle, and upper aquifers of the PRM system. At the site, only the middle and lower aquifers of the PRM are present, and in the hot spot area, only the middle aquifer of the PRM is contaminated. Depth to groundwater in the middle aquifer of the PRM in the source area ranges from approximately 27 to 29 feet bgs, and groundwater ow is to the east-southeast. The waste ll is 15 to 20 feet thick and consists of ne tan sand, black silt, lenses of clay, gravel, rocks, concrete, wood, roots, construction and demolition (C&D) debris, and municipal solid waste. The C&D debris includes pieces of brick, asphalt, cement, plastic, glass, paper, tires, drums, metal scraps, wood, and cinders. The municipal solid waste includes plastics (e.g., bags, bottles), glass bottles, cans, cardboard and paper,
20
Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

clothing, fabrics and rags, ceramic fragments, car metal fragments, wires, large rubber belts, and Styrofoam. The waste ll is underlain by 6 to 12 feet of dark grey to black medium plasticity clay (CL)/silty-clay (ML). The clay has a hydraulic conductivity ranging from 2.0 106 centimeters per second to 7.7 108 cm/sec. Clay surface contouring suggests that the topography of the clay forms a U shape to the east of the excavated area, with highs to the northwest and southeast and an undulating trough running southwest to northeast. The clay layer is underlain by the middle aquifer of the PRM, a light brown to gray ne to medium sand (SP) to silty-sand (SM), with trace to some gravel. This unit is approximately 25 feet thick. Beneath the middle aquifer of the PRM is a red fat clay (CH) layer with a very low hydraulic conductivity of 2.2 108 cm/sec extending from about 55 feet bgs to about 97 feet bgs. The clay is underlain by the lower aquifer of the PRM, a light brown to gray ne to coarse sand with gravel, which extends to bedrock. TRIAD APPROACH FOR EXPEDITED DELINEATION To conduct a streamlined Triad approach for the contaminant delineation of the remaining on-site hot spot, a sampling strategy was developed that consisted of two phases. The rst phase included in situ screening of soil and groundwater using the MIP, and the second phase included conrmatory sampling via vertical proles, by means of a The MIP investigation was Geoprobe , in the soil and groundwater. designed to start at the

Phase I: Membrane Interface Probe Investigation

In the planning stages of the MIP investigation, a series of six transects (labeled A through F in Exhibit 1) oriented perpendicular to the groundwater ow direction were established covering the hot-spot area and downgradient. On each transect, between two and ve potential MIP locations were selected, spaced approximately 60 feet apart. These points were selected to try to identify the most signicant soil and groundwater contamination in the hot spot, based on the available data. A 3-D model showing the ECD responses was then generated and updated daily during the MIP investigation. This enabled the project team to generate a detailed conceptual model of the contaminant distribution in both the saturated and unsaturated zones in an efcient, effective, and sustainable manner. The MIP investigation was designed to start at the upgradient transect and proceed toward transects downgradient of the hot spot, but the exact placement and order of the locations was a dynamic process based upon the data obtained daily and best judgment. The objective was to use the MIP to provide real-time data at 1-foot intervals from the ground surface to the top of the conning red clay layer, 55 feet bgs, producing a vertical prole of the contamination. At each 1-foot interval, detectors on the MIP would screen the subsurface for chlorinated compounds (e.g., tetrachloroethene [PCE], trichloroethene [TCE], DCB, CB), aromatic hydrocarbons (e.g., benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene [BTEX] compounds), and aliphatic hydrocarbons (e.g., methane, butane). An electrical conductivity meter on the MIP was used to aid in distinguishing between the grey-black clay layer (source material) and the sandy aquifer below. Once the vertical prole of contamination was obtained from one location, it would be analyzed and compared against the data obtained at the other points to select the next sampling
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

upgradient transect and proceed toward transects downgradient of the hot spot, but the exact placement and order of the locations was a dynamic process based upon the data obtained daily and best judgment.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

21

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

Exhibit 1. MIP and vertical prole sampling locations (the vertical prole locations were located
along six transects displayed in the box in the lower-right-hand corner)

location. At this point, the original transects that had been established were just a guide, and MIP points were adjusted to better dene the plume. A total of 18 locations (A1, B0 through B4, C1 through C7, D1 through D4, and E2) were screened with the MIP during the investigation (Exhibit 1). Once the area of contamination was dened with the MIP screening, the next phase of the investigation involved collecting conrmatory samples at 13 locations (VP01 through VP13) (Exhibit 1). Since the MIP only provides qualitative data, quantitative analytical data is needed to identify the specic compounds and concentrations.
Membrane Interface Probe Screening

For MIP screening, the ASTM Standard D-7352 and Geoprobe MIP standard operating procedure (SOP) (Geoprobe, 2006) were followed. The MIP acts as an interface between VOCs in the subsurface and the detectors at the ground surface. As the MIP tool (Exhibit 2) is advanced through the subsurface, the tip of the tool is heated to volatize contaminants. VOCs in soil and water particles diffuse across the MIP membrane, enter into a carrier gas stream, and are conveyed to gas-phase
22
Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

Exhibit 2. MIP tool

detectors at the ground surface for measurement. The MIP uses a replaceable, thin-lm uorocarbon, polymer membrane, approximately 6.35 mm in diameter, that is in direct contact with the soil. This thin-lm membrane is impregnated into a stainless steel screen. The screen serves as a rigid support for the uorocarbon polymer. The downhole, permeable membrane serves as an interface for detectors at the surface. Geoprobe currently provides two different congurations of its MIP trunkline. This project used a PEEK return line and a TFE Teon supply line to transport the supply gases. The PEEK return gas tube (part of the MIP trunkline) is typically 100 to 200 feet in length
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

23

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

Exhibit 3. MIP site setup

and allows the transport of the VOCs to the surface detector. The trunkline is able to clear itself of the VOCs much more efciently than the TFE Teon . The time required for the MIP sampling depends on the carrier gas ow rate and the types of contaminants. Subsurface contaminants in the gaseous, dissolved, and free-product phases can partition via molecular diffusion into the membrane. Bulk uids, either gases or liquids, do not travel across the membrane. This allows the MIP to be used in both saturated and unsaturated subsurface matrices. The gas-phase detectors used in this project were a PID, an ECD, and an FID. All three detectors provided a relative screening response rather than a concentration. Electrical conductivity is also measured to generate a lithological log of the subsurface, by using a dipole measurement arrangement at the end of the MIP loop. Both conductivity and VOC detector readings were logged simultaneously as the MIP advanced. A schematic drawing of the MIP tool and system components is presented in Exhibit 3.
24
Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

Ex Situ Response Test An ex situ response test is used to test the response of the probe to a known concentration of a target contaminant in a test cell. During the response test, the MIP operator is able to measure the time it takes for the contaminant to go from the probe, through the trunkline, and to the detectors. The trip time is used is by the MIP software for depth calculations. An ex situ response test was run at the start of each day, and if more than three hours elapsed between the last response test and the next logging run, the MIP probe, membrane, trunkline, dryer, probe rod, or any major components of the MIP system were repaired or replaced. A CB standard was prepared for the response test using the following calculation provided by Geoprobe (2006): (25 mL methanol 50 mg/mL chlorobenzene) (1/density of chlorobenzene) = amount of material to be placed into 25 mL of methanol The following procedure was conducted for the response test: r The baseline was stabilized by immersing the MIP into a container lled with water that covered the probes membrane. r The detector versus time data log of the MIP software was checked for stability before proceeding. r The working standard was poured into a nominal 2-inch-by-24-inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe. r The MIP probe was immediately inserted into the solution for 45 seconds. r The probe was then placed back into the container of water. r The MIP software results then calculated the trip time and response time.
Field Operations

A biodiesel-powered generator was used to power the MIP controller and eld instrument. Nitrogen, the trunkline carrier gas, and hydrogen and air for the FID were then fed to the system. The probe heater was activated to warm up to a constituent-specic temperature of 140C in order to volatilize site-specic CB compounds (CB has a boiling point of 132C). The preprobe was then advanced to 4 feet bgs at the location to be logged. A response test, as described above, was performed to record the height of the peak response and the trip time. The trip time during the response testing was entered into the MIP software. The following system parameters were then recorded into the eld notebook: borehole name; date; mass ow; trip time; pressure; and maximum ECD, PID, and FID values. The trigger switch was turned on, and the MIP probe was advanced at a rate of 1 foot per minute or until a temperature greater than 132C was reached. This procedure was repeated until terminal depth of the borehole was achieved. The advancement rate of the MIP was often slowed in order to retain the 140C constituent-specic temperature. Times up to 10 minutes elapsed before advancing the MIP the next foot. Upon completion of the MIP log, the MIP was decontaminated followed by a response test. The response-test results were compared to the initial test to ensure the data for that borehole log are valid (Kejr, 2006). All response-test results were comparable.
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

During the response test, the MIP operator is able to measure the time it takes for the contaminant to go from the probe, through the trunkline, and to the detectors.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

25

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

Exhibit 4. MIP detector parameters Contaminants PID FID ECD BTEX Methane, butane Chlorinated substances Detection Limit 1 part per million NA 250 parts per billion Carrier Gas Nitrogen, helium Nitrogen, helium Nitrogen

Limitations

The MIP is highly sensitive to hard lithological material, such as bedrock, brick, and ll debris. The FID, ECD, and PID detectors associated with the MIP are limited to detecting specic compounds, which have the ability to volatilize and stay in a gaseous state during the trip from the membrane at the probe, through the rod string, to the detectors at the surface. Exhibit 4 presents the detection limits of BTEX for the PID, methane and butane for the FID, and chlorinated substances for the ECD. The detection limits are reliable at about 1 part per million (ppm) and can be pushed to about 250 parts per billion (ppb) total VOCs, but not much below that. Sufcient temperature must also be maintained in the trunkline itself, as mentioned previously concerning the site-specic temperature of 132C, or the CB compound could condense. The FID, ECD, and PID cannot detect screening concentrations below the detection limits and above the concentration that supersaturates the upper limits of the detectors. Because the thermal conductivity of soil varies depending on degree of saturation, particle size, density, and composition (Mitchell, 1993), a qualitative comparison of MIP detector data across different strata can be misleading.

Phase II: Conrmatory Delineation Sampling

All soil samples were analyzed for target compound list (TCL) VOCs by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Method 8260, and a select number of soil samples were analyzed for total organic carbon (TOC) by US EPA Method 9060. All of the groundwater samples were analyzed for VOCs+10 by US EPA Method 624, and TOC by US EPA Method 9060. Conrmatory soil and groundwater sampling was conducted via direct-push technology using an 8010 Geoprobe to facilitate penetration of waste ll and C&D debris. At each boring location, between one and four soil samples were collected in the grey-black clay, depending on the thickness of the clay layer and the number and intensity of the MIP detections. In the saturated zone at each location, between two and ve groundwater samples were collected through the aquifer thickness, again biased to intervals with elevated MIP responses. Soil samples were collected from a 2-inch acetate sleeve using a stainless steel trowel. VOC samples were rst collected using an EnCoreTM sampler. TOC samples were collected after homogenizing the remaining soil in a stainless steel bowl. Groundwater samples were collected through a check valve connected to Teon -lined tubing. Temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH,
26
Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

oxidation-reduction potential, and turbidity were also measured and recorded using a YSI Model No. 600 XL and LaMotte Model No. 2020 Turbidity Meter. Both meters were calibrated daily according to the manufacturers instructions. All nondedicated sampling equipment was decontaminated by washing with an Alconox water mixture, followed by a deionized/distilled water rinse. Quality control samples, including trip blanks, eld blanks, and duplicate samples, were collected according to New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) requirements during the investigation. Trip blanks were collected on-site daily to determine if any on-site atmospheric contaminants seeped into sample vials or if any cross-contamination of samples occurred during handling, storage, and/or shipment of samples. Field blanks were collected to evaluate the efcacy of equipment decontamination and general cleanliness of the eld sampling procedures, at a rate of one per decontamination event. Duplicate samples were collected at a rate of one for every 20 samples, to evaluate laboratory analysis repeatability. Three duplicate samples were collected during the groundwater investigation. None of the analytical data was rejected based on quality control samples.

Sustainable Attributes
For this project, the MIP fuel was switched from diesel to biodiesel, which is a clean-burning alternative fuel, produced from domestic, renewable resources. Biodiesel is biodegradable, nontoxic, and essentially free of sulfur and aromatics (National Biodiesel Board, 2009). The MIP, Geoprobe track unit, and support vehicles used 5 percent biodiesel as their main fuel. The project also involved the replacement of all petroleum-based hydraulic uids with bio-hydraulic uids. These are nonhazardous, high-performance, hydraulic uids engineered as drop-in replacements for petroleum-based hydraulic uid formulas. Bio-hydraulic uids meet the newest original equipment manufacturer industrial requirements for premium, heavy-duty energy-conserving hydraulic uids (U.S. Department of Energy, 2008). Using the Triad approach, we were able to expedite characterization with fewer borings. Instead of having to grid the site with borings, we were able to target specic sampling locations and depths using real-time data. During the study, the reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (reported in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2 e)) was calculated using emission factors for diesel (distillate Fuel Oil No. 2) and 5 percent biodiesel provided in the US EPAs Mandatory Reporting Rule (US EPA, 2010). The calculations assumed that a traditional sampling program would have used 668 hours of rig operation to complete all of the proposed borings along Transects A through F compared to the 405 hours of operation utilized during the Triad approach. It was calculated that the traditional approach would have generated 45 tons of CO2 e compared to 26 tons of CO2 e generated using Triad and biodiesel. So compared to a traditional (non-Triad) sampling program, we were able to cut carbon dioxide emissions almost in half by the use of the Triad approach and biofuels during the investigation. In addition, we completed full delineation of the source area within a six-week eld program as opposed to several phased investigations extending over several months to years.
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

For this project, the MIP fuel was switched from diesel to biodiesel, which is a clean-burning alternative fuel, produced from domestic, renewable resources. Biodiesel is biodegradable, nontoxic, and essentially free of sulfur and aromatics.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

27

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

NATURE AND EXTENT OF SOURCE AREA/HOT SPOT For this study, an elevated ECD detection was considered equal to or greater than 1 million microvolts (uV). The ECD readings present at less-contaminated areas were between 119,000 and 500,000 uV. Based on the MIP detector responses, two hot spots were located adjacent to the former IRM. One hot spot was observed to the north and northeast of the IRM excavation based on screening results from MIP locations C1, C2, C3, C5, and C7. A second hot spot was observed to the southeast of the IRM excavation based on MIP locations B2 and B4. Exhibit 5 displays the ECD responses at each MIP location, and Exhibits 6 and 7 display the ECD responses at hot-spot boring locations at various depths.

Based on the soil samples and MIP logs, a mass of soil contamination is present in two hot spots: along the north/northeastern and southeastern portion of the former IRM in the greyblack clay layer situated immediately below the waste ll material.

Soil/Clay Contamination
Soil sampling results were compared to NJDEP site-specic impact to groundwater soil cleanup criteria (SCC) using an average TOC value for soil of 16.5 kg/g (NJDEP, 2008). A total of nine VOCs exceeded the site-specic soil cleanup criteria: 1,2,4-TCB; 1,2,3-TCB; 1,2-DCB; 1,3-DCB; 1,4-DCB; benzene; CB; 1,1-dichloroethane (DCA); and trichloroethene (TCE). Soil analytical samples from vertical prole locations VP05, VP06, and VP07 exhibited the highest concentrations of TCBs, DCBs, and CB. VP05 and VP06 are located along the northeastern side of the excavation area within the north/northeastern ECD hot spot of MIP locations C1, C2, C5, and C7. VP05 is located next to MIP location C2, which exhibited the greatest ECD response. The highest concentrations of TCBs and DCBs were detected at VP05. The highest CB concentration was detected at VP07, located along the northern side of the excavation area and east of MIP location C6 and north of C3. Concentrations of TCBs, DCBs, and CB exceeding the site-specic criteria were also detected at VP03, located at MIP location C3. This MIP location exhibited an elevated ECD response and is associated with the north/northeastern ECD hot spot. Concentrations of TCBs, DCBs, and CB exceeding the site-specic criteria were detected in soil samples collected from VP04. This vertical prole location (VP04) is located along the southeastern side of the excavation area, south of MIP location B2 and west of B4. The southeastern ECD hot spot is located within MIP locations B2 and B4. These two MIP locations also exhibited ECD hits within the waste ll between 5 and 6 feet bgs at MIP location B2 and 2.5 to 3.5 feet bgs at MIP location B4. The soil sample collected from 3 feet bgs from sample location VP04 did not contain any analyzed compounds above the site-specic soil cleanup criteria. Based on the soil samples and MIP logs, a mass of soil contamination is present in two hot spots: along the north/northeastern and southeastern portion of the former IRM in the grey-black clay layer situated immediately below the waste ll material. In both of these areas, high ECD responses were observed in the grey-black clay during the MIP investigation, which were veried by conrmatory soil samples. These areas of impacted clay appear to be acting as sources of contamination by means of diffusion and desorption to the PRM aquifer below. The hot spot/source area located north/northeast of the former IRM contains high concentrations of TCBs, DCBs, and CB in soil samples collected in the grey-black clay
Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

28

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

Exhibit 5. MIP ECD and lithological results MIP Location MIP-A1 MIP-B0 Signicant ECD Responses (feet bgs) 25 2735 1 21.524.5 38 13 1112 22 24 56 23.527 41.545 2.53.5 4.5 2026.5 57 11 1718 1920 13.514.5 2539 16.517.5 22.531.5 31.538 21.526.5 12 1821 32.550 27.531.5 02 68 13.514 3043 1718.5 29.530.5 30.534.5 36.538.5 4246 1.5 17.522 Highest Approximate ECD Response (uV) 220,000 170,000 210,000 240,000 190,000 180,000 180,000 200,000 190,000 3,900,000 10,000,000 5,800,000 1,000,000 300,000 290,000 390,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 290,000 1,000,000 13,900,000 1,000,000 14,100,000 10,000,000 14,000,000 190,000 130,000 275,000 1,000,000 150,000 200,000 150,000 210,000 400,000 1,700,000 500,000 490,000 495,000 160,000 119,000 Approximate Top of Clay 16 18 Approximate Bottom of Clay 35 24 Approximate Top of Lower Clay 50 >49

MIP-B1

18.5

29.5

>50

MIP-B2

19.5

26

ND

MIP-B3

21

27.5

>48

MIP-B4

17.5

27

>50

MIP-C1 MIP-C2

17.5 14

31 22

45.5 43

MIP-C3 MIP-C4

18.5 20

26.5 28

47 51.5

MIP-C5 MIP-C6

17 15

28 24

42 50

MIP-C7

17

29

44

MIP-D1

13

22

>50

(Continued)

c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

29

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

Exhibit 5. (Continued) MIP Location Signicant ECD Responses (feet bgs) 36 36.547.5 04 22.5 22.528 05.5 5.512 17.525 4146 02 22 2235.5 01 67 10.511.5 1317 17.5 18.525.5 5055.5 Highest Approximate ECD Response (uV) 159,000 129,000 250,000 225,000 149,000 370,000 150,000 190,000 160,000 220,000 220,000 125,000 150,000 155,000 140,000 120,000 220,000 135,000 160,000 Approximate Top of Clay Approximate Bottom of Clay Approximate Top of Lower Clay

MIP-D2

17

27

50

MIP-D3

18

28

52

MIP-D4

14.5

22.5

46.5

MIP-E2

11.5

24

46.5

Notes: Soil type based on electric conductivity readings. Acronyms: bgs: below ground surface. ECD: electron capture detector. MIP: membrane interface probe. uV: microvolts.

Exhibit 6. Groundwater concentrations exceeding 1 percent of their solubility limits VOCs CB VP02 VP03 VP04 VP06 VP07 VP08 VP09 VP11 3.8% (36 ft) <1% <1% <1% VP12 1.9% (38 ft) <1% <1% <1% VP13 1.2% (38 ft) <1% <1% <1%

2.7% 2.8% 2.4% 1.3% 2.8% 3.9% <1% (36 ft) (26 ft) (51 ft) (41 ft) (41 ft) (28 ft) 1,2-DCB <1% 30.1% (26 ft) 15.7% (36 ft) 28% (28 ft) 21.7% (28 ft) 5.1% (28 ft) 4.5% (36 ft) 1,3-DCB <1% 3.8% (26 ft) 2.6% (36 ft) 3.1% (28 ft) 3.6% (28 ft) 1.8% (28 ft) 1% (28 ft) 1,4-DCB <1% 15.1% (26 ft) 7.6% (36 ft) 9% (28 ft) 14.1% (28 ft) 2.8% (28 ft) 3.8% (28 ft)
Notes: Concentrations shown are percent of solubility limit (depth of highest sample concentration). All samples were collected in the middle PRM aquifer.

30

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

0
(m S/ m )

( V)

( V)

( V)

il E

25

MIP-C3

VP03

25

EC D

FI D

So

PI

20

20

15

>> >>

15

10

10

5
>>

Elevation (feet above mean sea level)

2350 556 24.5 86.1 47000 D 12100 14100 244

-5

-5

-10

-10

-15
13800 7020 11300 162

-15

-20

-20

-25

-25

-30

8970 D 1950 1910 114

-30

-35

-35

-40

-40

Distance Along Baseline (ft)

Analytes 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Chlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trich lorobenzne
Sample Interval
Soil results in black, groundwater results in gray. Soil results in milligrams per kilogram. Groundwater results in micrograms per liter.

EC - electrical conductivity, linear scale ECD - electron capture detector, log scale FID - flame ionization detector, log scale PID - photo ionization detector, log scale mS/m - milliSiemens per meter V - microvolt

Low Plasticity Clay

Exhibit 7. Correlation of MIP logs at C3 to boring log at VP03

c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

31

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

Overall, the highest benzene and CB concentrations were detected in groundwater samples collected from the middle aquifer of the PRM at locations VP08 and VP11.

from 18 to 24 feet bgs at vertical prole locations VP03 and VP05 through VP07. Soil samples collected from the upper portion of the middle aquifer of the PRM, immediately below the grey-black clay at VP06 and VP07, also had elevated concentrations of chlorinated benzenes. The second source area, located southeast of the former IRM excavation, contains high concentrations of TCBs, DCBs, and CB above the site-specic SCC in the soil sample collected from 19 feet bgs at vertical prole VP04. Based on MIP responses at MIP-B2 and MIP-B4, and the absence of soil contamination at VP09, the southeast source appears to be limited to the area adjacent to the excavation area encompassing sample locations VP04, MIP-B2, and MIP-B4.

Groundwater Contamination
Groundwater analytical data was compared to NJDEPs New Jersey Administrative Code (NJAC) 7:9C Groundwater Quality Standards (GWQS) (NJDEP, 2009). Eight VOCs exceeded GWQS: 1,2,4-TCB; 1,2-DCB; 1,3-DCB; 1,4-DCB; benzene; CB; cis-1,2-dichloroethene (DCE); and vinyl chloride (VC). All 13 vertical proling locations (VP01 through VP13) detected VOCs exceeding GWQS. Benzene and CB detections exceeded GWQS in all groundwater samples collected from each of the 13 vertical prole locations (VP01 through VP13), since both benzene and CB have a high solubility and, therefore, are relatively mobile. Overall, the highest benzene and CB concentrations were detected in groundwater samples collected from the middle aquifer of the PRM at locations VP08 and VP11. These locations are located within a U-shaped channel in the stratigraphy east/southeast of the IRM excavation and the northeastern ECD hot spot. TCB and DCB compound detections exceeded GWQS in groundwater samples collected within all three lithological units. The highest TCB and DCB concentrations were detected in groundwater samples collected from the grey-black clay at location VP03 and the middle aquifer of the PRM immediately below the clay at locations VP06 and VP09. Vertical prole locations VP03 and VP06 are located within the northern/northeastern ECD hot spot in close proximity to MIP locations C3 and C1. Samples from these MIP locations exhibited the highest ECD detections (C1 at 13 million uV and C3 at 14 million uV). Vertical prole location VP09 is downgradient of the southeastern ECD hot spot. The groundwater sample collected from the sand layer at VP07 also contained elevated concentrations of DCB. Groundwater contamination at concentrations signicantly above NJDEP GWQS is present in the middle aquifer of the PRM. The highest concentrations of DCB isomers in the groundwater are in the upper and middle portion of this aquifer in the source areas north-northeast (VP03, VP06, and VP07) and southeast of the excavation (VP04). However, the distribution of CB and benzene contamination extends the full thickness of the aquifer at, and downgradient of, the IRM excavation. The discrete groundwater analytical data as well as the MIP logs show contaminant concentrations at vertical prole locations VP04, VP06, VP08, VP09, and VP11 have concentrations of VOCs at the same order of magnitude in the lower portion of the aquifer as in the shallower portion. The CB and benzene plume in the middle aquifer of the PRM was found to extend from the source areas off-site.
Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

32

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

Based on the water-solubility properties presented in Exhibit 6, free-phase product may be present in the upper portion of the middle aquifer of the PRM at locations VP03, VP06, and VP07 through VP09, and in the middle to lower portion of the middle aquifer at locations VP02, VP04, VP08, VP09, and VP11 through VP13. Exhibit 6 summarizes the groundwater analytical results where the contaminant concentration for a particular compound was greater than 1 percent of the solubility limit for that compound, calculated by dividing the highest concentration of a compound within the aquifer at the vertical prole location by the water solubility of that compound. Locations with the greatest potential for product, or residual product in the aquifer, are VP04 (southeast source area) and VP03, VP06, and VP07 (north-northeast source area). These data further validate the presence of source material in the grey-black clay in these areas.

Streamlining Delineation With MIP

The MIP logs generated from the investigation correlated well with direct data from soil and groundwater sampling analysis. Soil boring logs validated the electrical conductivity data, which tentatively dened the top and bottom of the grey-black clay layer. Soil and

Exhibit 8. ECD response based on a baseline of 1,000,000 microvolts (V)

c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

33

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

groundwater sampling results also correlated well with the ECD responses presented in the MIP logs. Exhibit 7 displays the MIP log for location C3. The results presented in this log can be directly correlated to the ECD responses and lithology characteristics presented in Exhibits 8 and 9. Exhibit 10 displays a cross-section running from the south to north and displaying both ECD and electrical conductivity results. The real-time data collected at the MIP locations enabled the project team to pinpoint additional MIP locations and subsequent conrmatory vertical proling locations based on elevated ECD responses. The ability to promptly site MIP and sampling locations enabled the project team to reduce mobilization and demobilization time, as well as the reduction in investigation-derived waste (IDW) by minimizing the amount of conrmatory samples needed to meet the project objectives. These positive correlations suggests the MIP tool can be used effectively and efciently to streamline delineation of hot spots at a site. Three-dimensional models of the hot-spot areas were produced using data generated by the MIP, in conjunction with conrmatory analytical data. This enabled the project team to generate a detailed CSM of the contaminant distribution in both the saturated and unsaturated zones. The 3-D visualizations were developed using a modeling algorithm.

Exhibit 9. ECD response above 1,000,000 microvolts (V) overlaid by electrical conductivity results
(lithology) (the location of potential sources is straddling the grey-black clay/sand interface)

34

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

Exhibit 10. Displays a cross-section slice running from the south end to the north end of the site
displaying both ECD and electrical conductivity results

CONCLUSIONS The use of the MIP as part of a Triad approach was proven an effective tool for horizontal and vertical delineation of hot spots and source areas at the landll. The real-time data allowed placement of screening and sampling points more effectively, and resulted in well-dened source areas to be further analyzed for remedial feasibility. The screening data generated by the MIP compared very favorably with the qualitative analytical data and enabled gathering the data needed to dene the target remediation area in one mobilization. Because of detector sensitivity limitations, the MIP may not be appropriate at all sites. The tool is geared toward sites with known contamination at concentrations above detection limits. In this investigation, it was critical that the temperature be maintained above 132C (boiling point of CB) in order that it would volatilize and be detected by the ECD. The MIP contributed to meeting sustainability objectives for the project, and overall project objectives were met on an expedited basis due to real-time eld measurements and dynamic work strategies. Use of technologies promoted by the Sustainable Remediation Forum (Ellis & Hadley, 2009) resulted in a nearly 50 percent reduction of the investigations carbon footprint including the use of biodiesel, decreasing the amount of IDW produced from
c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

35

Expediting Sustainable Brownelds Redevelopment by Applying Triad Using the Membrane Interface Probe

soil and groundwater sampling (e.g., bottleware, shipping materials, and decontamination uids), by only collecting conrmatory samples, and requiring one mobilization and demobilization. This was aided by streamlining the investigation using real-time screening data during the Triad approach, which saved time and money compared to the traditional nondynamic approach. REFERENCES
Ellis, D. E., & Hadley, P. W. (2009). Sustainable remediation white paperIntegrating sustainable principles, practices, and metrics into remediation projects. Remediation, 19(3), 5114. Geoprobe Systems. (2006). Geoprobe membrane interface probe (MIP) standard operating procedure. Salina, KS: Author. Huang, W. Y., Kao, C. M., Cho, W. C., Li, Y. Y., & Lin. G. L. (2010). Using Triad approach to manage uncertain decisions for a chlorinated ethane contaminated site in Taiwan. Gung-Cheng Environ-Tech Protection Corp. Ltd. Retrieved from www.gcep.com.tw/upload/le/533 le 1 en.pdf Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC). (2003, December). Technical and regulatory guidance for the Triad approach: A new paradigm for environmental management. SCM-1. Retrieved from http://www.ITRCweb.org Mitchell, J. K. (1993). Fundamentals of soil behavior (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley. National Biodiesel Board (NBB). (2009). Biodiesel myths busted (V3). Retrieved from http://www.biodiesel.org/pdf les/fuelfactsheets/Myths and Facts.pdf New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). (2008, June). New Jersey Administrative Code 7:26D: Soil cleanup criteria. Trenton, NJ: Author. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). (2009, November). New Jersey Administrative Code 7:9C: Groundwater quality standards. Trenton, NJ: Author. Saboya, A. V., Collins, K. G., & Shields, T. (2004, Winter). Triad case study: Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. Remediation, 15(1), 5768. United States Department of Energy (US DOE). (2008, April). Clean cities fact sheet: Biodiesel blends. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Midwest Research Institute, Battelle. DOE/GO-102008-2542. Retrieved from http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/pdfs/42562.pdf United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). (2010, June). 40 CFR Parts 86 and 98: Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, Tables C-1 and C-2 of Subpart C. [EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0109; FRL-9158-6], RIN 2060-A079. Washington, DC: Author.

Maria D. Watt, PE, is a senior project manager at CDM. She has more than 25 years of environmental
experience. Her background contains a unique blend of chemical engineering combined with groundwater and surface-water hydrology, providing exceptional skills for the evaluation of source-pathway-receptor relationships, as well as evaluating, designing, and implementing remediation techniques. Watt has been the program manager and project manager on projects for private clients, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (US ACE), U.S. Department of Energy (US DOE), New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). These

36

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

REMEDIATION Autumn 2010

contracts included hazard ranking system (HRS) scoring; remedial investigation/feasibility studies (RI/FS); remedial designs (RDs); and remedial actions (RAs). She earned her BS in chemical engineering from Rutgers University and is a registered professional engineer in New Jersey.

Michael J. Burlingame, PE, is a senior project manager at NJDEP. He has more than 25 years of experience
with remedial investigations, design, and construction on state and federal hazardous waste sites where cleanup is being performed with public funds. Burlingame has published numerous papers concerning the geotechnical and geohydrological challenges posted by site remediation. He has a BS in civil engineering and an MS in geotechnical engineering from Drexel University. He is a registered professional engineer in New Jersey.

Jessica R. Beattie, PG, is a project manager at CDM. She has more than 13 years of experience managing
and performing environmental projects, with an emphasis on site assessments and investigations. Beatties background in both geology and environmental engineering provides a foundation suited to the evaluation of contaminant fate and transport, as well as designing and evaluating remediation techniques. She has been the project manager on projects for private clients, as well as projects for NYSDEC and NJDEP. These contracts included environmental site assessments, RI/FS, RDs, and RAs. Beattie earned her BA in geological science from the State University of New York at Geneseo and her MEng in environmental engineering from the Stevens Institute of Technology. She is a registered professional geologist in Delaware.

Melissa Koberle is an environmental scientist eld manager at CDM. She has more than four years of
experience managing and performing environmental projects, with an emphasis on site assessments and remedial investigations. Koberle has been the eld manager on projects for NYSDEC, NJDEP, and the US EPA, as well as private-sector clients. Koberle earned her BA in environmental science and biology from Muhlenberg College, and MS in environmental science from Rutgers Newark/New Jersey Institute of Technology.

Brad Carlson is the direct sensing manager at ZEBRA Environmental Inc. He has more than eight years of
experience managing environmental site characterization projects. Carlsons experience in information technology, direct-sensing, and direct-push tools provides a foundation suited to the evaluation of site-characterization tools. Carlson has been the project manager on projects for private clients and major consulting rms. He earned a BS in computer science from the University of South Florida.

c 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Remediation DOI: 10.1002/rem

37