| 
 Site 
 | 
 Contaminant 
 | 
 Year Constructed 
 | 
 Project summary 
 | 
 Target AC 
 | 
 Delivery Methods 
 | 
 Project Web Link 
 | 
| 
 AC Projects Completed in North America 
 | 
| 
 USN Hunters Point San Francisco Bay, CA 
 | 
 PCBs & PAHs 
 | 
 2015 
 | 
 1 acre pilot study that includes ca 0.5 acres of SediMite and 0.5 acres of AquaGate+PAC. 
 | 
 4 - 6 % 
 | 
 Telebelt ® 
 | 
 USN Hunters Point Case Study 
 | 
| 
 USN Sierra 1B Pier Pearl Harbor, HI 
 | 
 PCBs & mercury 
 | 
 2015 
 | 
 11,000 ft 2 under-pier pilot study with ~ 4,400 ft 2 of SediMite and 4,400 ft 2 of AquaGate+PAC. 
 | 
 2.5% 
 | 
 Gravity fed hopper with pneumatic conveyance to an under-pier operator who directed the output over specific 10' x 10' cells. 
 | 
 USN Sierra 1 B Case Study 
 | 
| 
 Mirror Lake Restoration Dover DE 
 | 
 PCBs 
 | 
 2014 
 | 
 Full-scale 4.9 acre remediation of lake and downstream with SediMite. 
 | 
 5% 
 | 
 Telebelt® in deeper areas of lake; induction air horn, vortex spreaders, and by hand in nearshore 
 | 
 Mirror Lake Case Study 
 | 
| 
 Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Bremerton, WA 
 | 
 PCBs & mercury 
 | 
 2012 
 | 
 0.5 acre pilot study to evaluate the efficacy of AC application under an active Navy pier. Product was AquaGate+PAC. 
 | 
 4% 
 | 
 Telebelt ® over-water and under pier sections of the project. 
 | 
 PSNS Case Study 
 | 
| 
 Berry’s Creek, NJ 
 | 
 Mercury & PCBs 
 | 
 2012 
 | 
 Small test plots (30 x 30 ft) with AC placed on the surface of a phragmites marsh using three approaches: 1) granular carbon only, 2) granular carbon with a 2 inch coarse sand cap, and 3) fine granular carbon in the form of SediMite™. Activated carbon dose was 5 percent by dry weight of sediment in the top 10 cm. 
SediMite™ application rate was 5 kg/m2 
 | 
 AC 5% 
SediMite™ 5 kg/m 2 
 | 
 GAC as a slurry using a hydroseeder. Coarse sand was delivered to plot using a telebelt and manually layered over the treatment area. SediMite™ was applied using a Vortex TR Aquatic spreader. 
 | 
  EPA, 2013  
 | 
| 
 Lower Duwamish Slip 4 Seattle, WA 
 | 
 PCBs 
 | 
 2011 
 | 
 Dredged areas on the banks and riverbed at the head of the slip included a filter layer of well graded sandy gravel, amended with sand-size granulated activated carbon. 
 | 
 0.5% 
 | 
 Sandy gravel with GAC mixed upland and placed using a dredge bucket. 
 | 
 Slip 4 Lower Duwamish Case Study 
 | 
| 
 Onondaga Lake Pilot Study Onondaga County, NY 
 | 
 Chlorinated benzenes & PAHs 
 | 
 2011 
 | 
 1 acre capping pilot to demonstrate the implementability of mixing/slurrying GAC and sand on-shore and placing the material over a pre-defined depth and area. The project informed full scale construction planning and implementation. 
 | 
 0.25 - 1.0 lb/ft 2 
 | 
 Sand/GAC slurry mix system mixed with water and pumped through a pipeline and booster pumps to a hydraylic spreader barge. Slurry placed in a series of parallel lands. 
 | 
 Onondaga Lake Pilot Case Study 
 | 
| 
 Canal Creek, MD 
 | 
 PCBs & mercury 
 | 
 2010 
 | 
 Twenty-four test plots, each 8 meters by 8 meters to evaluate the performance of three AC applications in a wetland: two pelletized AC products (AquaBlok and SediMite, and a PAC slurry . Pilot project under ESTCP ER-200825 and ER-200835. 
 | 
 3% 
 | 
 Depending upon the test product, a Vortex spreader, hydroseeder, bark blower, or by hand. Many of the test plots were accessible on-foot, in the submerged wetlands the spreaders were used on a boat. 
 | 
 Canal Creek Case Study 
 | 
| 
 Naval Air Station, Cottonwood Bay, Dallas TX 
 | 
 PCBs, PAHs, chromium, lead 
 | 
 2009 
 | 
 Small-scale pilot project that tested reactive mats featuring a 0.28 lb/ft2 activated carbon, 0.23 lb/ft2 apatite, 0.28 lb/ft2 organoclay amendment mixture and an AOS 80 geotextile. 
 | 
 0.28 lb/ft 2 
 | 
 Prototype reactive mats rolled up and deployed from a john-boat by divers. Divers secured the mats in the shallow bay with anchors, anchor screws, and blocks. Some of the treatments were further covered with sand. 
 | 
  SERDP ER-1493  
 | 
| 
  NAVFAC TR-2366-ENV Technical Repor   t  
 | 
| 
 Bailey Creek, Fort Eustice, VA 
 | 
 PCBs 
 | 
 2009 
 | 
 Pilot-scale studies of SediMite in 225 m 2 plots within a marsh and in the main channel. 
 | 
 5% 
 | 
 Vortex spreaders from boat 
 | 
 Bailey Creek Case Study 
 | 
| 
 St. Louis River Superfund Site Duluth, MN 
 | 
 NAPL/PAHs 
 | 
 2006 
 | 
 11 acres of cap that included a reactive core mat withAC to absorb advected PAH-porewater during consolidation. The cross section of the cap was 0.5 ft (15 cm) sand/activated carbon mat/2.5 ft (75 cm) sand. 
 | 
 0.4 lb/ft 2 
 | 
 Reactive mats attached to outer sheet-pile wall and unrolled toward shore from a moveable barge. Overlapping RCMs stapled and allowed to sink, followed by sand placement 
 | 
  ITRC 2014  
 | 
| 
  Olta and Hornday, 2007  
 | 
| 
 Grasse River, Massena, NY 
 | 
 PCBs 
 | 
 2006 
 | 
 0.5 acre pilot project with AC mixed into PCB-contaminated sediment. 
 | 
 3.2 - 5% 
 | 
 Two application methods tested: "roto-tiller" and tine sled. The tiller is an enclosed device that first applied (via spraying) activated carbon onto the sediment surface, followed by mixing of the material into near-surface sediments using the roto-tiller (was used with and without mixing). The tine sled device included direct injection of activated carbon into near-surface sediments. 
 | 
  Grass River Pilot Project Web Site  
 | 
| 
 Hunters Point 2005 Pilot Project San Francisco Bay, CA 
 | 
 PCBs & PAHs 
 | 
 2005 
 | 
 Pilot project under SERDP-1207 and ESTCP ER-200510. 
 | 
 5.1% 
 | 
 Two types of GAC applications were tested. In the first, the AC was spread onto the surface of the sediments via a backpack spreader located on an Aquamog and then a rotovator arm mixed the GAC into the sediments. WIth the second applicationGAC was sprayed onto the rotovator and mixed. 
 | 
  SERDP-1207  
 | 
| 
  ESTCP ER-200150  
 | 
| 
 Hunters Point 2005 Case Study 
 | 
| 
 Anacostia River, Washington, DC 
 | 
 PCBs, PAHs, chromium, lead 
 | 
 2004 
 | 
 1100 m 2 area was capped with a coke-filled RCM and covered with 15 cm of sand. 
 | 
 24 kg/m 2 
 | 
 Twelve 3.1 m x 31 m coke-filled RCMs were placed with a 0.3 m 
overlap using a crane with a clamshell.A diver followed the unrolling mat to insure proper placement. A sand layer (~15 cm) was then placed above the RCM by particle broadcasting to 
 | 
  McDonough et al, 2006  
 | 
| 
  ITRC 2014  
 | 
| 
 AC Projects Completed in Europe 
 | 
| 
 Grenlandsfjords, Norway 
 | 
 Dioxins/furans 
 | 
 2009 
 | 
 Pilot project to demonstrate efficacy of a hydraulic application of AC/clay mixture at depth. Plot size was 40,000 m 2 at a depth of 100 m. Comparative plots also included crushed limestone, and clay-only cpas. 
 | 
 2 kg/m 2 
 | 
 Dredged clean marine clay was mixed with a coal-derived powdered AC (d80 < 45 μm) in 10:1 dw ratio. To increase the density of the clay + AC slurries the salinity was increased by adding NaCl, and was pre-mixed for at least one hour in the hopper dredger tank to a water content of 56−70% prior to placement. A hopper dredge was used in reverse mode: the intake pipe was as a tremie with the material released approximately 5 m above the seafloor. To facilitate settling the powdered AC was mixed with a 10% w/w  
 | 
 Grenlandsfjords Case Study 
 | 
| 
 Trondheim Harbor, Norway 
 | 
 PAHs 
 | 
 2008 
 | 
 Pilot project evaluating three treatments: AC, AC+clay, and AC covered with sand for erosion protection. Test plots were 225 m 2 
 | 
 5 kg/m 2 
 | 
 NaCl in a 100-L cement blender to saturate the AC pore system with water that was slightly heavier than surrounding water. For the AC-only and AC+sand fields, this slurry was pumped out with a flexible manually operated 5 cm hose For the AC+clay field, AC and bentonite were mixed 1:1:6 with 10%-NaCl and pumped out as described above. 
 | 
 Trondeheim Harbor Case Study 
 | 
| 
  NGI 2011  
 |