![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
ENGINEERING FORUM TELECONFERENCE MINUTES
January 9, 2008
TOPICS IN THIS MONTH'S MINUTES:
- California DTSC Green Remediation Team
- 2008 NARPM Conference
- Fall 2008 TSP Meeting
- Project Updates/Action Items
- Attendees
California DTSC Green Remediation Team
Charlie Ridenour (California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)) discussed the mission, history, and future direction of DTSC’s recently formed “Green Remediation Team.” The Green Remediation Team was formed in February 2007 by DTSC’s Office of Military Facilities to promote the use of green technologies in site remediation work. The team’s original goals included conducting a literature search on and developing a matrix for green investigation and remediation technologies; inviting research and development labs and company representatives to present green technologies to DTSC staff; developing a program to train DTSC staff in the use of green remediation technologies at remediation sites; identifying regulatory incentives and legislative changes to promote the use of green remediation technologies; and identifying methods to publicize the use of green remediation technologies.
Almost immediately, the team recognized a need to define what green technologies were and to develop a basic rating system that they could apply to known investigation and remediation technologies. They evaluated the inputs and outputs of several technologies and processes for energy consumption, liquid waste production, solid waste production, air quality impacts, recycling/reuse potential, worker safety, community benefits, duration required, effectiveness in reaching treatment objective, and life-cycle cost. For various technologies, these criteria were applied to raw materials, manufacturing, and point-of-use stages. The team’s first attempts were burdened by a lack of system boundaries and a focus on details.
Ultimately, a life-cycle framework was developed to analyze and minimize the impacts of an activity. A life-cycle assessment tool that is used in manufacturing was modified to evaluate environmental or human burdens over the life cycle of a remedial activity. Inputs (raw materials, energy, process water, etc.) and outputs (emissions, solid waste, site quality, land use degradation, etc.) were identified and used to define the system boundaries. The team developed a system boundary for six alternatives (no action, dig and haul, encapsulation, in situ bioremediation, soil washing, and vapor extraction), and used these technologies to identify and evaluate impacts and stressors. The team next plans to develop a life-cycle management approach that focuses on qualitative measures and identifies potential regional stressors and values.
Dave Reisman (NRMRL-Cinc.) noted that ORD encountered a lack of available data while developing a web-based calculator for estimating energy consumption at remediation sites. Dave suggested that Charlie contact Gordon Evans, acting director of ORD’s sustainable technology division in Cincinnati. Dave also noted that the issue of carbon sequestration has become a hot topic at EPA and should be included in DTSC’s evaluation/approach. Charlie agreed with Dave’s suggestion that DTSC, ORD, and the Engineering Forum (EF) collaborate on green remediation topics.
Charlie’s presentation material has been posted on the EF Science Connector website.
2008 NARPM Conference
Nadia Hollan (Region 9, NARPM Co-chair) said the 2008 NARPM conference likely will be held the week of July 7th in either Portland, OR, or Pittsburgh, PA. The EF has proposed several session topics, including the following:
- Green remediation panel session; Mike Gill (Region 9) is EF lead;
- In-situ bioremediation training; Federal Facilities Forum lead training with EF co-sponsorship; Gary Miller (Region 6) is EF contact;
- Application and implication of nanotechnology at Superfund sites; Mike Gill is EF lead; and
- Permeable reactive zones panel session; Gary Miller is EF lead.
(Since the call, it has been determined that Mary Logan of Region 5 will be leading the Nanotechnology session, but the EF may still play a supporting role.) If EF members are interested in helping with these sessions, they should contact the EF lead listed above. The EF will need one full day or two half days for their business sessions. The EF co-chairs will inform the NARPM co-chairs of their preference for scheduling the business sessions.
Fall 2008 TSP Meeting
The EF is responsible for planning the fall 2008 TSP meeting. The co-chairs have been asked to submit three potential locations by February. During last month’s EF call, the EF decided to recommend that the meeting be held in Research Triangle Park (NC), New York City, or Cape Canaveral (FL). Carlos Sanchez (Region 6) suggested Santa Fe, NM. The location of the fall meeting will depend on the location of the spring NARPM conference. Lindsey Lien (USASE) will look into the possibility of holding the fall TSP meeting in conjunction with the joint EPA/USACE conference in January 2009.
Project Updates/Action Items
- The EF brochure needs to be updated to reflect new members and issue papers. Mike Gill will put this on the agenda for a future call;
- Hilary Thornton (Region 3) will place the in situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) lessons learned summaries on the EF’s Science Connector website. Over the next few weeks, EF members should review the lessons learned and decide on the best way, if any, to present this material. Terry Burden (Region 6 STL) will take the lead on this project. All comments should be sent to him by January 25;
- The on-line resources guide is being formatted by EMS;
- Dave Reisman will look into the status of the Ex-Situ Treatment of Oxygenated Hydrocarbons & Perchlorates in Groundwater issue paper and the Technology Alternatives for the Remediation of Soil and Sediment Contaminated with PCBs issue paper;
- Dave Reisman will ask Doug Grosse (NRMRL-Cinc.) about additional funding for the Indoor Air Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Approaches issue paper;
- Kira Lynch (Region 10) has not heard back from Eva Davis (ORD/NRMRL-Ada) regarding the In Situ Thermal Treatment issue paper;
- The second draft of the evapotranspiration covers issue paper has not been completed; co-chairs should contact Michelle Simon (NRMRL-Cinc.) for an update;
- EF members will continue to discuss the need for Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for O&M Reporting;
- Lindsey Lien will check with the cost estimating team at USACE to see if additional information is available on material handling equipment costs.
- Mike Gill will send a copy of the ESTCP DNAPL “FAQ’s” document for review. The GW Forum is working on the same document, but submitting their own comments. EF members should submit comments to Mike and Linda Fiedler by January 29th.
Attendees
Ray Cody, Region 1
Stephanie Vaughn, Region 2
Kevin Bilash, Region 3
Fred MacMillan, Region 3
Andy Palestini, Region 3
Hilary Thornton, Region 3
Jon Bornholm, Region 4
Leo Romanowski, Region 4
Julie Santiago, Region 4
Nate Nemani, Region 5
Bernie Schorle, Region 5
Dave Seely, Region 5
Camille Hueni, Region 6
Raji Josiam, Region 6
Gary Miller, Region 6
Carlos Sanchez, Region 6
Don Bahnke, Region 7
Mike Gill, Region 9 STL
Nadia Hollan, Region 9 (NARPM Co-chair)
Ray Saracino, Region 9
Jennifer Wang, Region 9
Kira Lynch, Region 10
Linda Fiedler, TIFSD
Dave Reisman, NRMRL, Cinc.
Lindsey Lien, USACE
Suzanne Davis, CA DTSC
Charlie Ridenour, CA DTSC
Mikos Fabersunne, CA DTSC
Jim Harrington, NYSDEC
Keith Arnold, EMS, Inc.
In an effort to foster scientific and technical advances in characterization, monitoring and remediation of contaminated sites, the EPA Technical Support Project encourages full and frank discussion of all technical matters and related issues that come before it. Information presented in these minutes represent the views of the participants and has not received formal EPA peer review. Therefore, this information does not necessarily reflect the views of EPA or other participating organizations, and no official endorsement should be inferred. The information is not intended, nor can it be relied upon, to create any rights enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States or any other party. Use or mention of trade names does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use. Errors and omissions in the information will be corrected as they are found and time permits.