![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Status Report for the Week of March 31, 2008
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Technical Assistance to Region IV: On March 12, 2008, Dr. Ralph Ludwig
(GWERD) provided RPM Craig Zeller with comments on a 2007 Post Removal
Action Controls Report for the Former Ashepoo Phosphate/Fertilizer Works
Site in Charleston, SC. Issues included the mobility of arsenic in
ground water due to the presence of dissolved iron, correlation of iron
and arsenic concentrations, reduction of iron concentrations, and the
installation of additional monitoring wells to better assess the fate of
arsenic and lead at the site.
(99-R04-001)
(R. Ludwig(GWERD)580-436-8603)
Technical Assistance to Region VI: On March 25, 2008, Steven Acree
(GWERD) and Dr. Daniel Pope (Shaw Env.) provided Rick Ehrhart with
current information regarding field screening methods for
pentachlorophenol (PCP) useful in making real-time decisions regarding
remediation efforts at the Huffman Wood Preserving Brownfields Site in
Broken Bow, OK. The comments focused on immunoassay analytical methods
to guide proposed remediation activities. In addition to discussions
concerning interferences and simplicity of use, recommendations were
offered with respect to field applications of the technology. It was
suggested that 5-10 percent of the negative samples should be confirmed
by fixed laboratory analysis.
(02BF06-001)
(S. Acree(GWERD)580-436-8609)
Technical Assistance to OSRTI: On March 10, 2008, Dr. Mary Gonsoulin
(GWERD) and Dr. Daniel Pope (Shaw Env.) provided Michael Overbay and
Linda Fiedler with review comments of the Interstate Technology &
Regulatory Council (ITRC) document titled In Situ Bioremediation of
Chlorinated Ethene: DNAPL Source Zones. It was suggested that the
overall tone of the document is perhaps more optimistic than the current
state of DNAPL bioremediation affairs will support, but various caveats
are included so that the reader is at least warned that subsurface DNAPL
bioremediation is not yet a cookbook, readily-applied and
generally-successful remedial technology. Nevertheless, it seems that
DNAPL bioremediation is likely to find a useful place in the
professional's remediation toolkit, and this document will help to get
the basic information out to the user community. Technical comments
included suggestions for revising the Glossary to generalize the
definitions, and rewriting various text portions to clarify and expand
on technical statements. Editorial comments included suggestions for
improving the clarity and evenness of style of the document.
(Misc.)
(M. Gonsoulin(GWERD)580-436-8616)