Permeable Reactive Barriers Action Team
Permeable Reactive Barrier Installation Profiles

TriangleChlorinated Solvents

Metals and Inorganics

Fuel Hydrocarbons



Other Organic Contaminants

Profiles Home View Profiles

Carbon tetrachloride, Chloroform, Freon

Reactive Media:
Granular cast iron


Continuous PRB constructed using vertically oriented hydraulic fracturing

Point of Contact:
Stephen H. Shoemaker
Tel: 704-362-6638
Fax: 704-362-6636
Email: Stephen.H.Shoemaker@
6324 Fairview Road
Charlotte , NC 28210

DuPont, Oakley, CA

A full-scale permeable reactive barrier (PRB) demonstration is being conducted at a DuPont site in Oakley, CA. Contaminants, including carbon tetrachloride (CCl4), 20-40 ppm, chloroform (CHCl3), 1-3 ppm, trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11), 10 ppm, and trichlorotrifluoroethane (Freon 113), 3 ppm, are present.

The PRB was emplaced in a stratified, alluvial aquifer system consisting of fine to medium sands. The upper aquifer extends to a depth of 55 ft below ground surface (bgs), underlain by a 10-ft thick, leaky clay aquitard. The lower aquifer extends from 65-120 ft bgs, underlain by a very thick and competent clay aquitard. The PRB was emplaced across the entire thickness of the lower aquifer.

The goal was to prove the feasibility of emplacing a 6-in thickness of iron to a depth of 120 ft bgs using hydraulic fracturing.

A probabilistic design model was used to make use of all of the available design data and optimize the barrier thickness at a 90% confidence level. Flowing sands and the required
120-ft depth necessitated the use of hydraulic fracturing as the method of construction.

The PRB is 110 ft long and 6 in thick. The PRB begins at 65 ft bgs and extends to a depth of 120 ft below ground surface. Total design cost for the PRB system is estimated at $150,000. Installation cost, including construction materials and reactive materials totaled $1,000,000.

No problems were encountered except that DuPont's attempts to recover an intact core of the emplaced PRB at a depth of
120 ft in flowing sands were unsuccessful. Alternative methods of direct physical emplacement verification are currently being explored.

The lack of success at recovering an intact core from the emplaced PRB does not impact the efficacy of the emplacement technique or the performance of the PRB.

A 1-year monitoring program has begun to verify treatment performance before completing the remainder of the full-scale PRB.

Remediation Technologies Development Forum
Sponsored by the Technology Innovation Program

Date Last Modified: June 29, 2001