Modeling Remediation of Chlorinated Solvent Plumes

  • Hanadi S. Rifai
  • Robert C. Borden
  • Charles J. Newell
  • Philip B. Bedient
Part of the SERDP/ESTCP Environmental Remediation Technology book series (SERDP/ESTCP)


Analytical and numerical modeling has emerged as a valuable tool for planning and designing groundwater remediation systems. Models have been used in a variety of settings including (1) research into the fundamental processes controlling chlorinated solvent fate and transport, (2) methods for integrating information on site hydrology, geology, contaminant distribution, transport and fate, and (3) applied aspects of plume management and remediation system design. This chapter focuses on currently available models commonly used by practitioners for simulating dissolved chlorinated solvent plumes and includes a brief summary of modeling principles, mathematical expressions useful for representing biodegradation processes, methods for representing dissolved contaminant release from source areas and case studies of models applied to sites.


Mass Flux Vinyl Chloride Source Function Injection Well Source Zone 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alvarez-Cohen L, Speitel GE. 2001. Kinetics of aerobic metabolism of chlorinated solvents. Biodegradation 12:105–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson MP, Woessner WW. 1992. Applied Groundwater Modeling. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA. 381 p.Google Scholar
  3. Aziz CE, Newell CJ, Gonzales JR, Haas PE, Clement TP, Sun Y. 2000a. BIOCHLOR Natural Attenuation Decision Support System, User’s Manual Version 1.0 EPA/600/R-00/008. USEPA, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC, USA. January. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  4. Aziz CE, Smith AP, Newell CJ, Gonzales JR. 2000b. BIOCHLOR Chlorinated Solvent Plume Database Report. Prepared for the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, Brooks City-Base, TX, USA. June. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  5. Bear J, Verrujit A. 1987. Modeling Groundwater Flow and Pollution. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland. 414 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bedient PB, Rifai HS, Newell CJ. 1999. Ground Water Contamination: Transport and Remediation, 2nd Edition. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA. 604 p.Google Scholar
  7. Borden RC. 2007a. Concurrent bioremediation of perchlorate and 1,1,1–trichloroethane in an emulsified oil barrier. J Contam Hydrol 94:13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borden, RC. 2007b. Effective distribution of emulsified edible oil for enhanced anaerobic bioremediation. J Contam Hydrol 94:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Borden RC, Bedient PB. 1986. Transport of dissolved hydrocarbons influenced by oxygen-limited biodegradation: 2. Field application. Water Resour Res 22:1983–1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bouwer EJ, McCarty PL. 1983. Transformations of 1– and 2–carbon halogenated aliphatic organic compounds under methanogenic conditions. Appl Environ Microbiol 45:1286–1294.Google Scholar
  11. Brady PV, Spalding BP, Krupka KM, Waters RD, Zhang P, Borns DJ. 2001. Site Screening for Monitored Natural Attenuation with MNAtoolbox. Sandia National Laboratories. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  12. Bredehoeft J. 1994. The conceptualization model problem–surprise. Hydrogeol J 13:37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brigham Young University. 2005. The Department of Defense Groundwater Modeling System, GMS v6.0, Environmental Modeling Research Laboratory. Accessed June 9, 2009.
  14. Buscheck TE, Alcantar CM. 1995. Regression techniques and analytical solutions to demonstrate intrinsic bioremediation. In Hinchee RE, Wilson JT, Downey DC, eds, Intrinsic Bioremediation: Proceedings of the Third International In Situ and Onsite Bioremediation Symposium, Vol 3(1). Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, USA, pp 109–116.Google Scholar
  15. Carey GR, Van Geel PJ, Murphy JR. 1999. BIOREDOX MT3DMS: A coupled biodegradation redox model for simulating natural and enhanced bioremediation of organic pollutants – V2.0 User’s Guide. Conestoga Rovers & Associates, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
  16. Carrera J, Alcolea A, Median A, Hidalgo J, Sllot A. 2005. Inverse problem in hydrogeology. Hydrogeol J 13:206–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chapelle FH, Bradley PM, Lovley DR, Vroblesky DA. 1996. Measuring rates of biodegradation in a contaminated aquifer using field and laboratory methods. Ground Water 34:691–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chapelle FH, Widdowson MA, Brauner JS, Mendez E, Casey CC. 2003. Methodology for estimating times of remediation associated with monitored natural attenuation. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03–4057. 51 p.Google Scholar
  19. Chen W, Kan AT, Newell CJ, Moore E, Tomson MB. 2002. More realistic soil cleanup standards with dual-equilibrium desorption. Ground Water 40:153–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chen W, Lakshmanan K, Kan AT, Tomson MB. 2004. A program for evaluating dual-equilibrium desorption effects on remediation. Ground Water 42:620–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Christ JA, Ramsburg CA, Abriola LM, Pennell KD, Löffler FE. 2005. Coupling aggressive mass removal with microbial reductive dechlorination for remediation of DNAPL source zones: A review and assessment. Environ Health Perspectives 113:465–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Christ JA, Ramsburg CA, Pennell KD, Abriola LM. 2006. Estimating mass discharge from dense nonaqueous phase liquid source zones using upscaled mass transfer coefficients: An evaluation using multiphase numerical simulations. Water Resour Res 42:W11420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Clement TP. 1997. A Modular Computer Code for Simulating Reactive Multispecies Transport in 3–Dimensional Groundwater Aquifers. Technical Report PNNL-SA-28967. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA.Google Scholar
  24. Clement TP, Gautam TR, Lee KK, Truex MJ, Davis GB. 2004. Modeling of DNAPL-dissolution, rate-limited sorption and biodegradation reactions in groundwater systems. Bioremediation J 8:47–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cohen RM, Mercer JW. 1993. DNAPL Site Evaluation. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, USA. 384 p.Google Scholar
  26. Coulibaly KM, Long CM, Borden RC. 2006. Transport of edible oil emulsions in clayey-sands: 1–D column results and model development. J Hydrol Eng 11:230–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dekker TJ. 1996. An assessment of the effects of field-scale formation heterogeneity on surfactant-enhanced aquifer remediation. PhD Dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.Google Scholar
  28. Doherty J. 2003. Ground water model calibration using pilot points and regularization. Ground Water 41:170–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Doherty, J. 2005. PEST: Software for Model-Independent Parameter Estimation. Watermark Numerical Computing, Australia.Google Scholar
  30. Domenico PA. 1987. An analytical model for multidimensional transport of a decaying contaminant species. J Hydrol 91:49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Domenico PA, Schwartz FW. 1998. Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology, 2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, USA. 528 p.Google Scholar
  32. Ely RL, Williamson KJ, Hyman MR, Arp DJ. 1997. Cometabolism of chlorinated solvents by nitrifying bacteria: Kinetics, substrate interactions, toxicity effects, and bacterial response. Biotechnol Bioeng 54:520–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Enfield CG, Wood AL, Brooks MC, Annable MD. 2002. Interpreting tracer data to forecast remedial performance. In Thornton S, Oswald S, eds, Groundwater Quality: Natural and Enhanced Restoration of Groundwater Pollution. Publication No. 275. International Association of Hydrologic Sciences Press, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK, pp 11–16.Google Scholar
  34. Falta RW, Rao PSC, Basu N. 2005a. Assessing the impacts of partial mass depletion in DNAPL source zones: I. Analytical modeling of source strength functions and plume response. J Contam Hydrol 78:259–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Falta RW, Basu N, Rao PSC. 2005b. Assessing the impacts of partial mass depletion in DNAPL source zones: II. Coupling source strength functions to plume evolution. J Contam Hydrol 79:45–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Farhat SK, de Blanc PC, Newell CJ, Gonzales JR, Perez J. 2004. SourceDK Remediation Timeframe Decision Support System, User’s Manual. Prepared for the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, Brooks City-Base, TX, USA. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  37. Ferrey ML, Wilkin RT, Ford RG, Wilson JT. 2004. Nonbiological removal of cis-dichloroethylene and 1,1–dichloroethylene in aquifer sediment containing magnetite. Environ Sci Technol 38:1746–1752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Fogel MM, Taddeo AR, Fogel SS. 1986. Biodegradation of chlorinated ethenes by a methane-utilizing mixed culture. Appl Environ Microbiol 51:720–724.Google Scholar
  39. Folsom BR, Chapman PJ, Pritchard PH. 1990. Phenol and trichloroethylene degradation by Pseudomonas Cepacia G4: Kinetics and interactions between substrates. Appl Environ Microbiol 56:1279–1285.Google Scholar
  40. Freyberg DL. 1988. An exercise in ground-water model calibration and prediction. Ground Water 26:350–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gelhar LW, Welty C, Rehfeldt KR. 1992. A critical review of data on field scale dispersion in aquifers. Water Resour Res 28:1955–1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Guyonnet D, Neville C. 2004. Dimensionless analysis of two analytical solutions for 3–D solute transport in groundwater. J Contam Hydrol 75:141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hausman S, Rifai HS. 2005. Modeling remediation time using natural attenuation at a dry cleaner site. Remediat J 16:5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hindmarsh AC. 1983. ODEPACK, a systemized collection of ODE solvers. In Stepleman RS, ed, Scientific Computing, Amsterdam, Holland. 55 p.Google Scholar
  45. Hirschorn SK, Grostern A, Lacrampe-Coulome G, Edwards EA, MacKinnon L, Repta C, Major DW, Sherwood Lollar B. 2007. Quantification of biodegradation of chlorinated hydrocarbons: Added value via stable carbon isotope analysis. J Contam Hydrol 94:249–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hopkins GD, McCarty PL. 1995. Field evaluation of in situ aerobic cometabolism of trichloroethylene and three dichloroethylene isomers using phenol and toluene as the primary substrates. Environ Sci and Technol 29:1628–1637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Howard PH. 1990. Handbook of Environmental Fate and Exposure Data for Organic Chemicals. Volume II, Solvents. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, USA. 576 p.Google Scholar
  48. Hunt RJ, Doherty J, Tonkin MJ. 2007. Are models too simple? Arguments for increased parameterization. Ground Water 45:254–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Johnson CD, Truex MJ. 2006. RT3D Reaction Modules for Natural and Enhanced Attenuation of Chloroethanes, Chloroethenes, Chloromethanes, and Daughter Products. Technical Report PNNL-15938, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Jung Y, Coulibaly KM, Borden RC. 2006. Transport of edible oil emulsions in clayey-sands: 3–D sandbox results and model validation. J Hydrol Eng 11:238–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kamath RK, Newell CJ, Looney BB, Vangelas KM, Adamson DT. 2006. BioBalance–A Mass Balance Toolkit, User’s Manual. May. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  52. Kelson VA, Hunt RJ, Haitjema HM. 2002. Improving a regional model using reduced complexity and parameter estimation. Ground Water 40:132–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kennedy L, Everett J, Gonzales J. 2003. AMIBA (Aqueous and Mineralogical Intrinsic Bioremediation Assessment) Protocol. Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, Brooks City-Base, TX, USA. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  54. Konikow LF, Bredehoeft JD. 1992. Ground-water models cannot be validated. Adv in Water Resour 15:75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lee W, Batchelor B. 2002a. Abiotic reductive dechlorination of chlorinated ethylenes by iron bearing soil minerals: 1. Pyrite and magnetite. Environ Sci Technol 36:5147–5154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lee W, Batchelor B. 2002b. Abiotic reductive dechlorination of chlorinated ethylenes by iron bearing soil minerals: 2. Green rust. Environ Sci Technol 36:5147–5154.Google Scholar
  57. Little CD, Palumbo AV, Herbes SE, Lidstrom ME, Tyndall RL, Gilmer PJ. 1988. Trichloroethylene biodegradation by a methane-oxidizing bacterium. Appl Environ Microbiol 54:951–956.Google Scholar
  58. Long C, Borden RC. 2006. Enhanced reductive dechlorination in columns treated with edible oil emulsion. J Contam Hydrol 87:54–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Malachowsky KJ, Phelps TJ, Teboli AB, Minnikin DE, White DC. 1994. Aerobic mineralization of trichloroethylene, vinyl chloride, and aromatic compounds by Rhodococcus species. Appl Environ Microbiol 60:542–548.Google Scholar
  60. McDonald JM, Harbaugh AW. 1988. A Modular 3D Finite Difference Ground-Water Flow Model. Technical Report. U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Book 6, Chapter A1, Reston, VA. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  61. McGuire TM, McDade JM, Newell CJ. 2006. Performance of DNAPL source depletion technologies at 59 chlorinated solvent-impact sites. Ground Water Monit Remediat 26:73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nelson MJK, Montgomery SQ, Pritchard PH. 1988. Trichloroethylene metabolism by microorganisms that degrade aromatic compounds. Appl Environ Microbiol 54:604–606.Google Scholar
  63. Newell CJ, Adamson DT. 2005. Planning-level source decay models to evaluate impact of source depletion on remediation timeframe. Remediat J 15:27–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Newell CJ, Rifai HS, Wilson JT, Connor JA, Aziz JJ, Suarez MP. 2002. Calculation and Use of First-Order Rate Constants For Monitored Natural Attenuation Studies. USEPA Remedial Technology Fact Sheet, EPA/540/S-02/500. USEPA National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, USA. November. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  65. NRC (National Research Council). 2005. Contaminants in the Subsurface: Source Zone Assessment and Remediation. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA. 372 p.Google Scholar
  66. NRC. 2006. Geological and Geotechnical Engineering in the New Millennium: Opportunities for Research and Technological Innovation. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA. 222 p.Google Scholar
  67. Parker JC, Park E. 2004. Modeling field-scale dense non-aqueous phase liquid dissolution kinetics in heterogeneous aquifers. Water Resour Res 40:W05109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Parkhurst DL, Appelo CAJ. 1999. User’s guide to PHREEQC–A computer program for speciation, reaction-path, 1D-transport, and inverse geochemical calculations. Technical Report 99–4259, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  69. Peck RB. 1969. Advantages and limitations of the observational method in applied soil mechanics. Geotechnique 19:171–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Philp P, Pirkle RJ, McLoughlin PW, Peacock AD, Yang X. 2007. Monitored natural attenuation forum: The use of carbon isotope analysis at MNA sites. Remediat J 17:127–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Prommer H. 2002. PHT3D – A Reactive Multicomponent Transport Model for Saturated Porous Media. User’s Manual Version 1.0. Technical Report of Contaminated Land Assessment and Remediation Research Centre. The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
  72. Prommer H, Barry DA, Zheng C. 2003. MODFLOW/MT3DMS based reactive multi-component transport modeling. Ground Water 41:247–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Quezada CR, Hansen CM, Clement TP, Jones NL, Lee KK. 2003. ART3D- An analytical model for predicting 3–dimensional reactive transport. Proceedings, MODFLOW and More 2003: Understanding Through Modeling, Golden, Colorado, September 17–19. International Ground Water Modeling Center, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA.Google Scholar
  74. Quezada CR, Clement TP, Lee KK. 2004. Generalized solution to multi-dimensional, multi-species transport equations coupled with a first-order reaction network involving distinct retardation factors. Adv Water Resour J 27:507–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Rao PSC, Jawitz JW. 2003. Comment on “Steady-state mass transfer from single-component dense non-aqueous phase liquids in uniform flow fields” by T C Sale and D B McWhorter. Water Resour Res 39:1068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Rao PSC, Annable MD, Sillan RK, Dai D, Hatfield K, Graham WD. 1997. Field-scale evaluation of in situ cosolvent flushing for enhanced aquifer remediation. Water Resour Res 33:2673–2686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Rao PSC, Jawitz JW, Enfield CG, Falta RW, Annable MD, Wood AL. 2001. Technology integration for contaminated site remediation: Cleanup goals and performance criteria. In Thornton S, Oswald S, eds, Groundwater Quality: Natural and Enhanced Restoration of Groundwater Pollution. Publication No. 275. International Association of Hydrologic Sciences, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK, pp 571–578.Google Scholar
  78. Rifai HS, Bedient PB, Wilson JT, Miller KM, Armstrong, JM. 1988. Biodegradation modeling at aviation fuel spill site. J Environ Eng 114:1007–1029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Saiers JE, Genereux DP, Bolster CH. 2004. Influence of calibration methodology on ground water flow predictions. Ground Water 42:32–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Sale TC, McWhorter DB. 2001. Steady state mass transfer from single-component dense non-aqueous phase liquids in uniform flow. Water Resour Res 37:393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Schreiber MD, Feinstein MD, Carey GR, Bahr J. 2004. Physical and chemical mechanisms causing overlap of redox byproducts: Implications for simulating anaerobic biodegradation. J Contam Hydrol 73:99–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Schwille F. 1988. Dense Chlorinated Solvents in Porous and Fractured Media: Model Experiments (English Translation). Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, USA. 175 p.Google Scholar
  83. Steefel CI, MacQuarrie KTB. 1996. Approaches to modeling of reactive transport in porous media. In Lichtner PC, Steefel CI, Oelkers EH, eds, Reactive Transport in Porous Media, Reviews in Mineralogy 34:83–125.Google Scholar
  84. Stroo HF, Unger M, Ward CH, Kavanaugh MC, Vogel C, Leeson A. 2003. Remediating chlorinated solvent source zones. Environ Sci Technol 37:224A–230A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Suarez MP, Rifai HS. 1999. Biodegradation rates for fuel hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents in groundwater. Bioremediation J 3:337–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Terzaghi K, Peck RN. 1948. Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, USA. 592 p.Google Scholar
  87. Truex MJ, Newell CJ, Looney B, Vangelas K. 2006. Scenarios Evaluation Tool for Chlorinated Solvent MNA. WSRC-STI-2006–00096, Rev. 0. Savannah River National Laboratory, Aiken, SC, USA.Google Scholar
  88. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2007. CSMoS Comments on the Potential Limitations of the Domenico-Based Fate and Transport Models, Center for Subsurface Modeling Support (CSMoS), Ada, OK. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  89. USEPA. 2008. BIOCHLOR, Version 2.2 Web Site. Center for Subsurface Modeling Support, USEPA National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Ground Water and Ecosystems Restoration Research Division, Ada, OK, USA. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  90. Vanderberg LA, Burback BL, Perry JJ. 1995. Biodegradation of trichloroethylene by Mycobacterium vaccae. Can J Microbiol 41:298–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Wackett LP, Brusseau GA, Householder SR, Hanson RS. 1989. Survey of microbial oxygenases: Trichloroethylene degradation by propane-oxidation bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 55:2960–2964.Google Scholar
  92. Waddill DW, Widdowson MA. 2000. SEAM3D—A numerical model for three dimensional solute transport and sequential electron acceptor-based bioremediation in groundwater. ERDC/EL TR-00–18. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, USA.Google Scholar
  93. West MR, Kueper BH, Ungs MJ. 2007. On the use and error of approximation in the Domenico (1987) solution. Ground Water 45:126–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Widdowson MA. 2003. SEAM3D: A Numerical Model for Three-Dimensional Solute Transport and Sequential Electron Acceptor-Based Biodegradation in Ground Water. Final Report to the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, USA. 110 p.Google Scholar
  95. Widdowson MA, Molz FJ, Benefield LD. 1988. A numerical transport model for oxygen and nitrate-based respiration linked to substrate and nutrient availability in porous media. Water Resour Res 24:1553–1565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Widdowson MA, Mendez E, Chapelle F, Casey CC. 2004. Natural Attenuation Software, User’s Manual, Version 2. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  97. Wiedemeier TH, Swanson MA, Wilson JT, Kampbell DH, Miller RN, Hansen JE. 1996. Approximation of biodegradation rate constants for monoaromatic hydrocarbons (BTEX) in ground water. Ground Water Monit Remediat 16:186–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Wiedemeier TH, Rifai HS, Newell CJ, Wilson JT. 1999. Natural Attenuation of Fuels and Chlorinated Solvents in the Subsurface. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, USA. 616 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Wilson JT, Wilson BH. 1985. Biotransformation of trichloroethylene in soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 49:242–243.Google Scholar
  100. Yeh G-T, Tripathi VS. 1989. A critical evaluation of recent developments in hydrogeochemical transport models of reactive multichemical components. Water Resour Res 25:93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Zawtocki C. 2005. Naturally cleaner groundwater–soybean-based emulsion is proving to decontaminate groundwater more quickly than traditional remediation methods. Mil Eng 97:55–56.Google Scholar
  102. Zhang XH, Bajpai RK. 2000. A comprehensive model for the cometabolism of chlorinated solvents. J Environ Sci Health 35:229–244.Google Scholar
  103. Zhang X, Banerji R, Bajpai R. 1996. Mathematical models for biodegradation of chlorinated solvents: I. Model framework. Proceedings, Hazardous Substance Research Center (HSRC)/Waste-management Education & Research Consortium (WERC) Joint Conference on the Environment, Great Plains/Rocky Mountain HSRC, Manhattan, KS, USA, May 21–23. Accessed June 9, 2009.
  104. Zheng C. 1990. MT3DMS. A Modular Three-Dimensional Transport Model for Simulation of Advection, Dispersion and Chemical Reaction of Contaminants in Groundwater Systems. Technical Report. USEPA, Ada, OK, USA. 169 p. Accessed June 9, 2009.Google Scholar
  105. Zheng C, Bennett GD. 1995. Applied Contaminant Transport Modeling: Theory and Practice. Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, NY, USA. 464 p.Google Scholar
  106. Zheng C, Wang PP. 1999. MT3DMS: A Modular Three-Dimensional Multi-Species Transport Model for Simulation of Advection, Dispersion and Chemical Reactions of Contaminants in Groundwater Systems; Documentation and User’s Guide. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Contract Report SERDP-99–1, Vicksburg, MS, USA. 202 p.Google Scholar
  107. Zhu J, Sykes JF. 2004. Simple screening models of NAPL dissolution in the subsurface. J Contam Hydrol 72:245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hanadi S. Rifai
    • 1
  • Robert C. Borden
    • 2
  • Charles J. Newell
    • 3
  • Philip B. Bedient
    • 4
  1. 1.University of HoustonHoustonUSA
  2. 2.North Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  3. 3.GSI Environmental Inc.HoustonUSA
  4. 4.Rice UniversityHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations