Loading…

Laboratory Evaluation of Remediation Alternatives for U.S. Coast Guard Small Arms Firing Ranges

The purpose of this study was to identify and investigate technologies that may be effective in reducing soil contamination resulting from current or past U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) small arms firing range (SAFR) activities. The study identified USCG SAFRs and selected those that were either representa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION VICKSBURG MS ENVIRONMENTAL LAB
Format: Report
Language:English
Subjects:
Online Access:Request full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title
container_volume
creator ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION VICKSBURG MS ENVIRONMENTAL LAB
description The purpose of this study was to identify and investigate technologies that may be effective in reducing soil contamination resulting from current or past U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) small arms firing range (SAFR) activities. The study identified USCG SAFRs and selected those that were either representative of typical USCG activities or were sites with a high probability that corrective measures would be needed in the near future. After the ranges were identified, soil samples were collected and evaluated to determine the effectiveness of physical and chemical treatment processes in removing metal contaminants from the soil. Both physical separation and extraction technologies appear to have merit when applied to the USCG soils. Physical separation and chemical extraction were not effective for all the soils, but each technology was effective for at least one of the soils tested. Electrokinetic remediation technology appears to be effective for all soils. Regardless of the technology applied, all the alternatives will produce a metal contaminated residual that will require disposal or additional treatment. The volume of this residual produced will depend on the technology applied and the amount of contamination in the soil.
format report
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>dtic_1RU</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_dtic_stinet_ADA374966</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>ADA374966</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-dtic_stinet_ADA3749663</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFibsKwkAQANNYiPoHFvsDpolELI-YaGGVaH2s3l44uAfsbQL-vYL2VjPDLAt9xUdilMQvaGf0E4pLEZKFngIZ903lhTh-fKYMNjHcy6GEJmEWOE_IBoaA3oPikKFz7OIIPcaR8rpYWPSZNj-uim3X3prLzoh76iwukmh1UtVhf6zr6s9-A68mOPo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>report</recordtype></control><display><type>report</type><title>Laboratory Evaluation of Remediation Alternatives for U.S. Coast Guard Small Arms Firing Ranges</title><source>DTIC Technical Reports</source><creator>ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION VICKSBURG MS ENVIRONMENTAL LAB</creator><creatorcontrib>ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION VICKSBURG MS ENVIRONMENTAL LAB</creatorcontrib><description>The purpose of this study was to identify and investigate technologies that may be effective in reducing soil contamination resulting from current or past U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) small arms firing range (SAFR) activities. The study identified USCG SAFRs and selected those that were either representative of typical USCG activities or were sites with a high probability that corrective measures would be needed in the near future. After the ranges were identified, soil samples were collected and evaluated to determine the effectiveness of physical and chemical treatment processes in removing metal contaminants from the soil. Both physical separation and extraction technologies appear to have merit when applied to the USCG soils. Physical separation and chemical extraction were not effective for all the soils, but each technology was effective for at least one of the soils tested. Electrokinetic remediation technology appears to be effective for all soils. Regardless of the technology applied, all the alternatives will produce a metal contaminated residual that will require disposal or additional treatment. The volume of this residual produced will depend on the technology applied and the amount of contamination in the soil.</description><language>eng</language><subject>COAST GUARD OPERATIONS ; CONTAMINANTS ; ELECTROKINETICS ; FIRING TESTS(ORDNANCE) ; Logistics, Military Facilities and Supplies ; RANGES(FACILITIES) ; SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION ; SOIL REMEDIATION ; Solid Wastes Pollution and Control ; WASTE DISPOSAL</subject><creationdate>1999</creationdate><rights>APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,776,881,27544,27545</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA374966$$EView_record_in_DTIC$$FView_record_in_$$GDTIC$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION VICKSBURG MS ENVIRONMENTAL LAB</creatorcontrib><title>Laboratory Evaluation of Remediation Alternatives for U.S. Coast Guard Small Arms Firing Ranges</title><description>The purpose of this study was to identify and investigate technologies that may be effective in reducing soil contamination resulting from current or past U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) small arms firing range (SAFR) activities. The study identified USCG SAFRs and selected those that were either representative of typical USCG activities or were sites with a high probability that corrective measures would be needed in the near future. After the ranges were identified, soil samples were collected and evaluated to determine the effectiveness of physical and chemical treatment processes in removing metal contaminants from the soil. Both physical separation and extraction technologies appear to have merit when applied to the USCG soils. Physical separation and chemical extraction were not effective for all the soils, but each technology was effective for at least one of the soils tested. Electrokinetic remediation technology appears to be effective for all soils. Regardless of the technology applied, all the alternatives will produce a metal contaminated residual that will require disposal or additional treatment. The volume of this residual produced will depend on the technology applied and the amount of contamination in the soil.</description><subject>COAST GUARD OPERATIONS</subject><subject>CONTAMINANTS</subject><subject>ELECTROKINETICS</subject><subject>FIRING TESTS(ORDNANCE)</subject><subject>Logistics, Military Facilities and Supplies</subject><subject>RANGES(FACILITIES)</subject><subject>SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION</subject><subject>SOIL REMEDIATION</subject><subject>Solid Wastes Pollution and Control</subject><subject>WASTE DISPOSAL</subject><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>report</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>report</recordtype><sourceid>1RU</sourceid><recordid>eNqFibsKwkAQANNYiPoHFvsDpolELI-YaGGVaH2s3l44uAfsbQL-vYL2VjPDLAt9xUdilMQvaGf0E4pLEZKFngIZ903lhTh-fKYMNjHcy6GEJmEWOE_IBoaA3oPikKFz7OIIPcaR8rpYWPSZNj-uim3X3prLzoh76iwukmh1UtVhf6zr6s9-A68mOPo</recordid><startdate>199911</startdate><enddate>199911</enddate><creator>ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION VICKSBURG MS ENVIRONMENTAL LAB</creator><scope>1RU</scope><scope>BHM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199911</creationdate><title>Laboratory Evaluation of Remediation Alternatives for U.S. Coast Guard Small Arms Firing Ranges</title></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-dtic_stinet_ADA3749663</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>reports</rsrctype><prefilter>reports</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><topic>COAST GUARD OPERATIONS</topic><topic>CONTAMINANTS</topic><topic>ELECTROKINETICS</topic><topic>FIRING TESTS(ORDNANCE)</topic><topic>Logistics, Military Facilities and Supplies</topic><topic>RANGES(FACILITIES)</topic><topic>SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION</topic><topic>SOIL REMEDIATION</topic><topic>Solid Wastes Pollution and Control</topic><topic>WASTE DISPOSAL</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION VICKSBURG MS ENVIRONMENTAL LAB</creatorcontrib><collection>DTIC Technical Reports</collection><collection>DTIC STINET</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><aucorp>ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION VICKSBURG MS ENVIRONMENTAL LAB</aucorp><format>book</format><genre>unknown</genre><ristype>RPRT</ristype><btitle>Laboratory Evaluation of Remediation Alternatives for U.S. Coast Guard Small Arms Firing Ranges</btitle><date>1999-11</date><risdate>1999</risdate><abstract>The purpose of this study was to identify and investigate technologies that may be effective in reducing soil contamination resulting from current or past U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) small arms firing range (SAFR) activities. The study identified USCG SAFRs and selected those that were either representative of typical USCG activities or were sites with a high probability that corrective measures would be needed in the near future. After the ranges were identified, soil samples were collected and evaluated to determine the effectiveness of physical and chemical treatment processes in removing metal contaminants from the soil. Both physical separation and extraction technologies appear to have merit when applied to the USCG soils. Physical separation and chemical extraction were not effective for all the soils, but each technology was effective for at least one of the soils tested. Electrokinetic remediation technology appears to be effective for all soils. Regardless of the technology applied, all the alternatives will produce a metal contaminated residual that will require disposal or additional treatment. The volume of this residual produced will depend on the technology applied and the amount of contamination in the soil.</abstract><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier
ispartof
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_dtic_stinet_ADA374966
source DTIC Technical Reports
subjects COAST GUARD OPERATIONS
CONTAMINANTS
ELECTROKINETICS
FIRING TESTS(ORDNANCE)
Logistics, Military Facilities and Supplies
RANGES(FACILITIES)
SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION
SOIL REMEDIATION
Solid Wastes Pollution and Control
WASTE DISPOSAL
title Laboratory Evaluation of Remediation Alternatives for U.S. Coast Guard Small Arms Firing Ranges
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-23T16%3A22%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-dtic_1RU&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=unknown&rft.btitle=Laboratory%20Evaluation%20of%20Remediation%20Alternatives%20for%20U.S.%20Coast%20Guard%20Small%20Arms%20Firing%20Ranges&rft.aucorp=ARMY%20ENGINEER%20WATERWAYS%20EXPERIMENT%20STATION%20VICKSBURG%20MS%20ENVIRONMENTAL%20LAB&rft.date=1999-11&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cdtic_1RU%3EADA374966%3C/dtic_1RU%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-dtic_stinet_ADA3749663%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true