Newer GPS Technology and Its Application to Improved Site Characterization
Cathy Creighton, Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, Stoughton, MA

Passive Vapor Sampling- Advances in Vapor Concentration Capabilities
Jay W. Hodny, W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Elkton, MD

What LSPs Don't Know about Site Characterization and Soil Management
Michael Flynn, Precision Environmental Management Corporation, Billerica, MA

Beneficial Use of C&D Recovered Screen Material in Residential Applications: A Case Study
Christopher Teaf, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

Dissolved Phase Bedrock Groundwater Contamination: Uniform or Depth-Stratified? A Case Study from Coastal Maine
James H. Vernon, ENSR International, Guilford, NH

INL Wireless Sensor Platform

Dennis C. Kunerth, Idaho National Laboratory, P. O. Box 1625, MS 2209, Idaho Falls, ID, 83415-2209, Tel: 208-526-0103, Fax 208-526 0690, Email: Dennis.Kunerth@INL.GOV
John M. Svoboda, Idaho National Laboratory, P. O. Box 1625, MS 3779, Idaho Falls, ID, 83415-3779, Tel: 208-526-0857, Email: John.Svoboda@INL.GOV   
James T. Johnson, Idaho National Laboratory, P. O. Box 1625, MS 2209, Idaho Falls, ID, 83415-2209, Tel: 208-526-0557, Email: James.Johnson@INL.GOV    

The Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is developing a versatile micro-power sensor interface platform for the purpose of periodic, remote sensing of environmental variables such as subsurface moisture, temperature, pressure, contamination, or radiation.  The key characteristic of the platform architecture is that all platform components are inactive until energized by a remote power source, thus no internal power source such as a battery is required.  Another characteristic is that the platform communicates via short-range telemetry, i.e. no wires need penetrate to the subsurface or through a barrier.  Other significant attributes include the potential for a long service life and a compact size that makes it well suited for retrofitting existing structures. 

Functionally, the sensor package is “read” by a short-range induction field that both powers/activates the sensor platform and carries sensor information via a response signal superimposed on the field by the embedded microprocessor.  Although well suited for the intended application, this approach does have inherent limitations and/or tradeoffs.  Those include a limited functional range as defined by the extent of the interrogating induction field and a power budget as defined by the onboard energy storage capacitors.  Specific applications require tradeoffs between charge time (measurement cycle time), available power, and working depth.  For example, an increase in required power to run sensors will result in either a reduced working depth and/or an increase in charge time.

Although the platform is being developed to address Department of Energy (DOE) long-term stewardship needs, it has the potential to address other monitoring applications where sensors must be buried beneath a surface that must not be penetrated by wires.  Examples include applications where above ground sensors or wiring might be damaged by the weather, equipment, or personnel, or in areas where it may be desirable to avoid visual impact or conceal sensors to avoid theft or vandalism. 

Newer GPS Technology and its Application to Improved Site Characterization

Kevin Cote, Geologist, Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, 100 Technology Center Drive, Stoughton, MA 02062, Tel: 617-589-8033, Email: Kevin.cote@shawgrp.com
Mark Leipert, Remedial Project Manager, Navy, EFA Northeast, NAVFAC, 10 Industrial Highway, Lester, PA  19113-2090, Tel: 610-595-0567 x146, Email: mark.leipert@navy.mil
Kathy Creighton, Project Manager, Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, 100 Technology Center Drive, Stoughton, MA 02062, Tel: 617-589-7475, Email: Kathy.creighton@shawgrp.com
               
This paper presents an innovative method combining global positions systems (GPS), historical aerial photographs and Microstation drafting software to determine the present location of a former potential release area.   This is an economic and accurate method that has been proven to be cost effective in determining the correct locations for sampling.  By accurately identifying the potential release areas, sampling and assessment are straightforward and streamlined.  This approach was used successfully in the case studies described in this paper.  The approach used is described below:

• Possible locations of staining/spills are identified on historical photographs;
• Benchmark locations to key the historical photographs are identified; 
• The GPS unit utilizes recent field surveys to register the points in the photograph, using drafting and geo-reference software; and
• This manipulated electronic file is then installed in a data-logger within the hand-held GPS unit. The GPS unit is then carried to relative location of the historical aerial photo and in real time; the location of the historical photograph can be charted.

This is a visual field tool for complicated sites.  The significance of this approach is that the end user can determine the present location of the former potential spill area depicted on a historical aerial photo in real time. Locations of potential sampling locations can be entered and seen in real time in the field.  By using this method, locations of historically identified potential release areas are sampled with great assurances that the sample collections are conducted in the proper location.  This method can save money by eliminating the repetitive sampling rounds that traditionally occur at many sites.  This method was used successfully for the case studies discussed in this paper.  The use of this methodology saved cost and time while at the same time provided sufficient evidence for regulatory concurrence.

Passive Vapor Sampling – Advances in Vapor Concentration Capabilities

Jay W. Hodny, Ph.D., W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc., 100 Chesapeake Boulevard, Elkton, MD, 21921, Tel: 410-392-7600, Fax: 410-506-4780, Email: jhodny@wlgore.com
Harry S. Anderson II, W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc., 100 Chesapeake Boulevard, Elkton, MD, 21921, Tel: 410-392-7600, Fax: 410-506-4780, Email: handerso@wlgore.com

In recent years, vapor concentrations of organic compounds entering buildings, emanating from subsurface contaminant sources, have gained considerable attention from federal and state regulatory agencies. Active sampling techniques are commonly used for this type of site assessment and monitoring.

Passive sampling techniques present an effective alternative to active methods for sampling vapors in the vadose zone, beneath building slabs, in crawlspaces, and in other indoor and outdoor air environments.  Most passive techniques are simple to install and operate, require no energy, and have no mechanical parts, and therefore minimal field sampling error.

The sorbent-based, vapor permeable membrane sampler, in particular, has been largely recognized for more than a dozen years as an accurate investigative tool for site assessment.  As compared to discrete matrix sampling and active vapor sampling methods, the sampler is known to exhibit a greater sensitivity to a broader range of compounds while minimizing field sampling errors. Recently, methods to report organic vapor data in the parts per trillion range have been developed and applied to this vapor permeable membrane sampler. To provide an accurate estimate of the volume of air the sampler encounters, investigations have been performed to determine the sampler uptake rate.

The presentation will be a status update on the properties of the vapor permeable membrane sampler, along with the research and development of the vapor concentration capabilities and comparable datasets.

What LSPs Don’t Know about Site Characterization and Soil Management 

Terry Peterson, Ph.D, Precision Environmental Management Corporation, 3 Survey Circle, Billerica, MA 01862.  Tel: 978-262-9754, Fax: 978-663-5240, Email: terry@precisionemc.com
Michael Flynn, CHMM, Precision Environmental Management Corporation, 3 Survey Circle, Billerica, MA 01862, Tel: 978-262-9754, Fax: 978-663-5240, Email: mflynn@precisionemc.com

There is a significant difference between site characterization needs to evaluate risks to the public health, welfare and environment under the MCP and evaluating soil conditions relative to future site development and disposal.  Many property owners are shocked to discover that the site they thought was “Clean” turns out to be contaminated and in some cases turns out to contain hazardous waste despite having received a Response Action Outcome statement from their LSP.   Even relatively sophisticated owners and consultants alike are sometimes caught off guard when the site they thought was adequately characterized for site development needs significant additional testing.   The paper presents several commonly made mistakes made by land owners and consultants and LSPs when characterizing a site for future site development purposes.   Several examples will be presented illustrating when a soil contaminant may be present which does not pose a risk to the public health, welfare or environment under the MCP but may still be characterized as a hazardous waste.  Recommendations for incorporating soil management and disposal needs into the site design program are offered. 

Beneficial Use of C&D Recovered Screen Material in Residential Applications: A Case Study

Brenda S. Clark, Globex Engineering & Development, Inc., 1239 E. Newport Center Dr., Suite 117, Deerfield Beach, FL, 33442, Tel: 954-571-9200, Fax: Fax (954) 418-9800, Email: clark@globexeng.com. 
Philip T. Medico, Sun Recycling, LLC, 3251 SW 26th Terrace, Dania Beach, FL, 33312, Tel: 954-583-7973, Fax: 954-583-6455.
Frank N. Bermudez, Sun Recycling, LLC, 3251 SW 26th Terrace, Dania Beach, FL, 33312, Tel: 954-583-7973, Fax: 954-583-6455, Email: fbermudez@southernwastesystems.
Myles Clewner, Globex Engineering & Development, Inc., 1239 E. Newport Center Dr., Suite 117, Deerfield Beach, FL, 33442, Tel: 954-571-9200, Fax: 954-418-9800, Email: clewner@globexeng.com.  
Richard G. Wilkins, Broward County Environmental Protection Department, 218 S.W. 1^st Avenue, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301, Tel: 954-519-1261, Fax: 954-765-4804, Email: rwilkins@broward.org.
R. Marie Coleman, Hazardous Substance & waste Management Research, Inc., 2976 Wellington Circle West, Tallahassee, FL, 32309, Tel: 850-681-6894, Fax: 850-906-9777, Email: staff@hswmr.com.
Christopher M. Teaf, Center for Biomedical & Toxicological Research, Florida State University, 2035 E. Dirac Dr., Tallahassee, FL, 32310, Tel: 850-644-3453, Fax: 850-574-6704, Email: cteaf@mailer.fsu.edu.

Florida has established criteria and guidelines to encourage recycling and the use of recycled materials in a manner that protects public health and the environment.  Recovered screened material (RSM) generated at a construction and demolition (C&D) debris recovery facility is a recycled material that can be reused in a variety of applications.  In order to reuse RSM from a C&D facility, it is necessary to demonstrate that the material poses no significant threat to public health or the environment.  The Sun Recycling LLC facilities in Broward and Palm Beach counties are C&D facilities, generating RSM (i.e., soil with wood, concrete, other particles of C&D debris) through mechanical separation using a screen <0.5 inch.  The process generates RSM meeting state requirements for use in industrial, commercial and residential settings.  RSM was used on dozens of lots in a residential development in Miramar, Florida to elevate low-lying areas (excluding building pads).  In accordance with Broward County Environmental Protection Department (EPD) and Palm Beach County Department of Health (DOH) permits, the Sun facilities perform regular testing of RSM for arsenic.  RSM tests showed arsenic concentrations below residential criteria.  Quarterly testing did not detect VOCs, SVOCs, or pesticides. RSM was delivered to homesites and mixed with existing on-site soils (e.g., muck).  Neighbors of some residents who received RSM raised concerns about contamination.  To address concerns, the City of Miramar hired a consultant to collect and analyze samples for arsenic and total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons (TRPH).  Results of that testing indicated arsenic concentrations exceeding residential criteria.  Further sampling and analysis of the RSM and local soils in the residential setting were performed by Broward EPD and Sun representatives.  Results of arsenic and speciated TRPH analysis performed by the City of Miramar, Broward EPD, and Sun will be discussed.  A consensus conclusion of acceptable conditions was reached by all parties. 

Dissolved Phase Bedrock Groundwater Contamination:  Uniform or Depth-Stratified?  A Case Study from Coastal Maine

James H, Vernon, Ph.D., ENSR International, 401 Gilford Avenue, Suite 220, Gilford, NH, 03249, Tel:  603-524-8866, Fax:  603-524-9777, Email: jvernon@ensr.com
Mark D. Kauffman, P. E., ENSR International, 2 Technology Park Drive, Westford, MA, 01886, Tel: 978-589-3119, Fax: 978-589-3229, Email: mkauffman@ensr.com
Drew M. Clemens, P. G., US Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, 696 Virginia Road, Concord, MA, 01742-2751, Tel:  978-318-8861, Fax:  978-318-8614, Email: Drew.M.Clemens@nae02.usace.army.mil
Robert A. Leitch, P. E., US Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, 696 Virginia Road, Concord, MA, 01742-2751, Tel: 978-318-8033, Fax:  978-318-8663, Email: Robert.a.Leitch@usace.army.mil

Dissolved-phase transport of groundwater contaminants through crystalline bedrock fractures can be highly heterogeneous and challenging to conceptualize.  Groundwater flow can be restricted to a discrete subset of connected bedrock fractures.  Contaminant persistence may be influenced by matrix diffusion and dead-end fractures, while contaminant transport may not be well correlated with the degree of fracture-zone hydraulic activity.  Whole-well sampling assesses the contamination in drinking water wells; however, discrete water sampling from isolated zones is crucial for developing an appropriate conceptual model of contaminant transport. 

The case study area in coastal Maine is dominated by fractured volcanic and intrusive bedrock, present at or near the ground surface.  Groundwater flow is restricted to fractures or faults within the bedrock.  Chlorinated solvents from past operations have been detected in both monitoring and drinking water wells, and historic data collection over the past decade has been appropriately focused on whole-well sampling to ensure receptor protection.  Chlorinated solvents have been detected in some whole-well samples at concentrations up to 3,000 micrograms per liter, whereas solvents have not been detected in several nearby locations.

Borehole geophysical surveys indicate that most wells have multiple, discrete hydraulically active zones that exhibit very different flow rates.  Thus, the whole-well samples represent an average contaminant condition, combining information from different hydraulically active zones, depth, hydraulic head, orientation, and contaminant concentrations.  Isolating and sampling discrete fracture zones with inflatable packers has allowed an assessment of contaminant transport pathways, a refinement of the conceptual site model, and a more direct evaluation of remedial options.  An added benefit to the depth-discrete knowledge gained from this case study is the program efficiency and cost savings associated with excluding highly hydraulically active zones that are uncontaminated and focusing on only those zones that contain contamination.

Top