|
THIS SESSION IS NOT
CONCURRENT WITH THE OTHERS
Remedial investigations often leave
data gaps that make evaluation and selection of
remediation alternatives difficult.
This special working session will: identify the
data requirements to evaluate and scope some common and
innovative technologies; describe methods for
streamlining the RI/FS process to accelerate remedy
selection; explore barriers to collection of necessary
data.
Investigation, remedial evaluation, and technology
experts will present technology overviews, data
requirements, and case studies.
A robust roundtable discussion involving the
panel and the audience will follow.
Introduction
and Moderator
Chris Mitchell, AECOM,
Westfield,
MA
State of the
Practice for Site Investigation
Ernest Ashley, CDM, Cambridge,
MA
Performing
Feasibility Evaluations with Incomplete Conceptual Site
Models
Daniel Groher, PE, AECOM, Westfield,
MA
Scoping
In-Situ Bioremediation
Maureen Dooley, Regenesis, Inc.,
Wakefield, MA
Pricing an Excavation Based Remedy – A Working Session
Jon Simpson, Charter Environmental
Issues of Scoping Chemical Oxidation-Based Remediation
George E Hoag, VeruTEK Technologies, Inc.,
Bloomfield, CT
John Collins,
VeruTEK
Technologies, Inc., Bloomfield, CT
Source Zone Delineation Techniques and Needs for Thermal
Remediation
John LaChance, TerraTherm, Inc., Fitchburg, MA
Gorm Heron, TerraTherm, Inc., Keene, CA
Ralph S. Baker, TerraTherm,
Inc., Fitchburg, MA
Panel
Discussion:
Roundtable Working Session
to Evaluate Data Quality Objectives
Ernest Ashley, CDM, Cambridge,
MA
Maureen Dooley,
Regenesis, Inc.,
Wakefield, MA
Daniel Groher, PE, AECOM, Westfield,
MA
George E Hoag, VeruTEK
Technologies, Inc
John LaChance, TerraTherm, Inc., Fitchburg, MA
Chris Mitchell, AECOM,
Westfield,
MA
John
Simpson, Charter Environmental
State of the Practice for
Site Investigation
Ernest C. Ashley,
P.G., LSP, LEP, CHMM, Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., One
Cambridge Place, 50 Hampshire Street, Cambridge, MA
02139, Tel: 617-452-6416, Email: ashleyec@cdm.com
Remedial investigations often leave
data gaps that make evaluation and selection of
remediation alternatives difficult.
Many factors including budget, schedule,
unfocused approaches, inadequate or inappropriate data
collection all contribute to limit the scope of remedial
investigations resulting in incomplete conceptual site
models and insufficient data to make sound remedial
decisions and prepare remedial designs.
This portion of this special working session will
identify the data requirements to evaluate and scope
some common and innovative technologies; explore
barriers to collection of necessary data; and describe
methods for streamlining the RI/FS process to accelerate
remedy selection.
Performing Feasibility Evaluations with Incomplete
Conceptual Site Models
Daniel Groher,
PE, AECOM, 2 Technology Park Drive, Westford, MA, 01886,
Tel: 978-589-3000, Email: daniel.groher@aecom.com
Remediation engineers are often
asked to develop strategies, cost estimates, and even
make detailed proposals for soil and groundwater
remediation with sparse site data.
Even sites that have been extensively
investigated can have crucial data gaps that make
remediation selection and costing uncertain.
Typical remedial site investigations are designed
to understand the nature and extent of the
“contamination” at the site with a focus on evaluating
potential risks to human health and the environment.
While these are appropriate and necessary
objectives for a remedial investigation, they often
result in site databases that are insufficient for
accurately evaluating remediation alternatives.
Different site remediation approaches require
technology-specific site data, such as contaminant mass,
stratigraphic details, or bio-geochemical aquifer
conditions.
For example, assessment of the suitability and cost of
in-situ chemical oxidation depends on knowledge of total
oxidant demand in an aquifer.
At sites many sites, the contaminants of concern
that are the focus of the RI are only a small fraction
of the total organic carbon (TOC) in the subsurface,
which may drive the feasibility of ISCO for that site.
Knowledge of TOC is often a key element of the
conceptual site model (CSM) that is required to fully
evaluate remediation technologies.
Performing feasibility evaluations
with incomplete CSMs is as much art as science.
When key site data cannot be collected due to
financial or schedule limitations, the necessary
parameters must be inferred from other site data,
experience, and good engineering judgment.
This presentation will discuss some of the common
data gaps that are encountered when performing
remediation feasibility evaluations and some techniques
for performing FS evaluations with sparse data.
Scoping In-Situ
Bioremediation
Maureen Dooley,
Regenesis, 19 Belmont Road,
Wakefield,
MA, Tel: 781
245-1320, Fax: 781 245-1329, Email:
mdooley@regenesis.com
Bioremediation is a microbially
mediated approach that can be used to treat a wide range
of contaminants such as petroleum hydrocarbons and
chlorinated solvents within a diverse range of
hydrogeological settings. Successful enhanced,
in-situ bioremediation projects are often a function of
supplying enough injectable electron donor or electron
acceptor material to meet contaminant and geochemical
“demand” as well as the ability to effectively
distribute these materials. Another important
consideration for enhanced bioremediation projects is
the selection and or use of injectables that can
maintain optimal subsurface conditions long enough so
that treatment objectives can be met. The
presentation/discussion will include recommendations for
data collection, setting realistic expectations, trouble
shooting suggestions and lessons learned from our
experience with design and review of thousands of
enhanced bioremediation projects using
controlled-release injectables.
Pricing an Excavation Based Remedy – A Working Session
Jon Simpson,
Project Manager, Charter Environmental, Inc.,
72 Jonspin Road,
Wilmington, MA 01887,
Tel: 978-658-2232 x201, Fax: 978-658-4505
Understanding the chemical, physical, and capacity
limitations of today’s offsite recycling and disposal
options are one of most important aspects of keeping a
large scale soil removal project on time and on budget.
Missing the opportunity to gather key soils information
during the development of a pre-characterization program
can drive bid prices up as contractors attempt to cover
potential cost exposures or result in large
change-orders once the project is underway.
Issues of Scoping Chemical Oxidation-Based Remediation
George E. Hoag,
Ph.D., VeruTEK Technologies, Inc., 65 West Dudley Town Road,
Suite 100, Bloomfield, CT 06002, Office: 860-242-9800
ext. 301, Fax: 860-242-9899,
Email:ghoag@verutek.com
John Collins, Ph.D.,
VeruTEK
Technologies, Inc., 65 West Dudley Town
Road, Suite 100, Bloomfield, CT 06002, USA, Tel:
860-242-9800 ext. 300, Fax: 860-242-9899,
Email:jcollins@verutek.com
The conversation…
ABC123 Consulting: Can you provide
me with a full-scale cost estimate for using In-Situ
Chemical Oxidation (ISCO) and your new Surfactant
Enhanced Chemical Oxidation (S-ISCOTM)
Technology?
Hoag: What is the estimate for?
ABC123 Consulting: We need to finalize a Feasibility
Study (FS) by Friday [it’s Wednesday]. I can email the
information that we have on this site, we want to
clean-up the groundwater, it’s only a groundwater
problem.
Hoag: How big is the site, what’s the hydrogeology like,
do you have soil data, are there any Non Aqueous Phase
Liquids, what are the receptors?
ABC123 Consulting: The groundwater plume covers about 3
acres and the saturated thickness is about 15 feet and
goes to bedrock, but we don’t have any bedrock wells.
We only have a few soil analyses, because it’s a
groundwater problem, we need to meet the State’s
unrestricted use standards. We haven’t seen any NAPLs at
the site but we have tetrachloroethylene (PCE)
concentrations at 50 ppm, so there is a possibility
there could be some sorbed phase materials.
We have delineated to non-detect in the
overburden groundwater. There are no receptors, we just
need to meet groundwater standards.
Hoag: What is the source of the PCE?
ABC123 Consulting:
This was a compressor refurbishing facility and
there was a drum storage area that was removed and we
excavated 1000 cubic yards of material and the source
area was removed.
Hoag:
Did you ever test soils or groundwater for Total
Petroleum Hydrocarbons.
Do you know the oxidation-reduction potential
(ORP) of the groundwater?
Have you estimated the mass of contaminants in
the subsurface?
ABC123 Consulting:
No, we ran semivolatiles and there were none and
we haven’t done any TPH as a result.
The groundwater is reducing in the zone
immediately downgradient of the former source area, but
is oxidizing over most of the plume.
We have made a mass estimate based on groundwater
concentrations and the measured foc of the
soil.
This presentation will identify
what is wrong with this all too common scenario.
Realistic data needs are discussed necessary to conduct
chemical oxidation and surfactant enhanced chemical
oxidation in the subsurface.
The focus of this presentation will be an
analysis of the disconnect between RI/FS-modeled data
collection, interpretation, technology screening,
decision making and remedy implementation needs.
Recommendations are made to streamline the RI/FS
process with input from remediation technology
specialists.
Source Zone Delineation Techniques
and Needs for Thermal Remediation
John LaChance,
TerraTherm, Inc., 10 Stevens Road,
Fitchburg,
MA 01420,
Tel: 978-343-0300, Fax: 978-343-2727, Email:
Jlachance@terratherm.com
Gorm Heron, TerraTherm, Inc., 28900
Indian Point, Keene,
CA
93531,
Tel and Fax: 661-823-1620, Email: Gheron@terratherm.com
Ralph S. Baker, TerraTherm, Inc., 10 Stevens Road,
Fitchburg,
MA 01420,
Tel: 978-343-0300, Fax: 978-343-2727, Email:
Rbaker@terratherm.com
When applied correctly, in situ
thermal remediation is a robust and efficient approach
for cleaning up source zones contaminated with organic
chemicals.
For example, thermal remediation has been successfully
used to achieve stringent cleanup goals (e.g.,
residential standards) even at sites contaminated with
chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) occurring
as dense non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPL), and
high-boiling point chemicals such as polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons.
However, the successful application of thermal
remediation first requires development of an accurate
conceptual model of the source zone and the surrounding
site that includes the following:
-
Nature and extent of contamination; including: VOCs,
semi-volatile organic compounds, and the presence of
NAPL;
-
Estimate of contaminant mass present in the
treatment zone;
-
Soil stratigraphy (soil type, grain size
distribution, permeability);
-
Bedrock lithology and nature and occurrence of
fractures (if applicable);
-
Groundwater flux rates through soil and bedrock; and
-
Remedial goals (soil and/or groundwater
concentrations, percent reductions).
This presentation discusses how
these data are used to (a) select the proper thermal
remediation approach and technology and (b) design an
effective and efficient thermal remediation system.
With this understanding, we will then work
backwards to present the types of information and level
of detail required for the conceptual model.
Effective methods and strategies to obtain this
information from the field will also be covered.
Top
|
