![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
ENGINEERING FORUM TELECONFERENCE
October 1, 2008
Topics In This Month's Minutes:
- Technical Topic
- NARPM Highlights Online Seminar Series
- Winter 2009 TSP Meeting
- Evergreen List Review
- Participation Agreements and EF By-laws
- Attendees
Technical Topic
Karen Scheuermann (Region 9) and Britta Beckstead (Region 9 Intern) conducted a pilot analysis of a RCRA Corrective Action remedy to compare the estimated environmental impact of bioremediation to two alternatives: pump and treatment and a hybrid remedy involving the installation of both extraction and bioinjection wells. The site chosen for this analysis was the Romic plant, a 14-acre hazardous waste treatment facility located in East Palo Alto, California, that is now closed and undergoing RCRA Corrective Action for ground water contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs). They analyzed onsite activities and transportation of materials and personnel to the site and attempted to analyze resources required to manufacture materials used onsite. The following aspects of the remedies were compared: resource use (including fresh water, construction materials, and electricity); air emissions (including CO2); and waste generation. Information was gathered from project managers, official documents, Romic staff and consultants, online calculators, conversions, and analyst assumptions. Karen reviewed the methodology used in the analysis and the draft results, which are subject to change.
Karen hopes to analyze the accuracy of the model once the remedy is in place. She also will conduct a sensitivity analysis, go further in the levels of calculation, and run calculations for the aspects of the three alternatives that are the same. In the long term, she plans to work with the states in Region 9 to complete green analyses for as many sites as possible and to develop a baseline of impacts from RCRA Corrective Action remedies in the Region. She anticipates that this methodology can serve as a starting point for green analyses at EPA Region 9.
In response to a question from Jim Harrington (NYSDEC) regarding the amount of resources that were expended in performing this analysis, Karen said that her intern worked on the project full time for seven weeks, and she worked half time on the analysis for six weeks. Other Region 9 personnel spent a minimal amount of time providing input and reviewing results. She expects that future analyses of other sites will require fewer resources because much of the groundwork already has been done and can be transferred to other sites. She hopes to collect the metrics in a database that can be used by other Regions and states to conduct similar analyses. Lindsey Lien (USACE) noted that in many instances, resources (such as cheese whey) that were not used for remedial activities at a particular site would likely be used elsewhere. Karen said she would explore ways to factor that assumption into her analysis. EF members are encouraged to contact Karen (Scheuermann.Karen@epa.gov) with additional comments.
NARPM Highlights Online Seminar Series
Kira Lynch (Region 10) is spearheading an effort to make the training materials and presentations from the NARPM conference available to a wider audience by means of hosting Internet seminars on popular topics. She will be participating in upcoming Ground Water Forum and Federal Facilities Forum teleconferences to solicit input regarding which presentations are best suited for this purpose. Kira asked EF members to review the agenda from the last NARPM conference and send her a list of NARPM presentations that they think would make good seminars. Gary Miller (Region 6) suggested that the NARPM evaluation form be modified to include a question about a topic’s suitability for future Internet seminars. Hilary Thornton (Region 3) further suggested that presenters be informed that their presentations and training materials may be used for future Internet seminars so they can tailor their material appropriately. Gary recommended that Kira ask all TSP forums to make their NARPM presentations available for future Internet seminars. Raji Josiam (Region 6) will email Kira a list of the requirements for Internet seminars.
Winter 2009 TSP Meeting
The winter 2009 TSP meeting will be held the week of January 26, 2009, in San Diego, CA. Mike Gill (Region 9 STL) reviewed a list of potential business session topics and field trip ideas. Mike, Gary Miller, Hilary Thornton, Jon Bornholm (Region 4), and Suzanne Davis (CA DTSC) volunteered to participate on an agenda development subcommittee.
Evergreen List Review
Mike Gill reviewed the status of items on the evergreen list. Among the updates:
- Ray Cody (Region 1) is still awaiting a publication number for the Indoor Air Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Approaches paper.
- The Technology Alternatives for the Remediation of Soil and Sediment Contaminated with PCBs issue paper will be distributed for another round of reviews. Jon Josephs (Region 2 STL) will coordinate the review with the EF.
- Mike and Kira will discuss removing the in situ thermal treatment issue paper from the evergreen list because this is an ORD product that the EF has little control over.
- The technology performance review Selecting and Using Solidification/Stabilization Treatment for Site Remediation has been completed, so Mike will remove this item from the evergreen list.
- Terry Burton (Region 6 STL) will have a first draft of the in situ chemical oxidation (ISCO)lessons-learned paper ready for EF review by October 15.
- Eva Davis’s (ORD/NRMRL-Ada) containment failure project has been moving forward. The workgroup has met at least once since the last EF call.
- Jon Bornholm will wait for the EF participation agreement/bylaws to be completed before beginning the process of recruiting new state participants.
- Jim Harrington (NYSDEC) reported that ITRC’s board has reviewed proposals for emergent teams and will announce the new teams at their fall meeting in late October.
- Raji Josiam (Region 6) reported that the green remediation subgroup has arranged for three Internet seminars on green remediation topics to be held on November 24 (Introduction to Green Remediation), December 16 (Tools and Case Studies I), and January 13 or 14 (Tools and Case Studies II). Carlos Pachon (OSRTI) has completed a draft of the green remediation Intranet website and is looking for feedback. If any EF members would like to review the draft website, they should contact Mike or Raji.
- Ellen Rubin (OSRTI) is leading a team that will develop an online green remediation calculator tool for three ground-water remedies. Mike will be asking for green remediation subcommittee assistance in a couple of areas of the calculator, including the selection of which three ground water models to develop first and also the QA of the existing soil and future ground water energy models. He will send more information to the green remediation subcommittee, but if anyone in the EF is interested in working on this project, they should contact Mike or Raji.
Participation Agreements and EF Bylaws
Hilary Thornton and Gary Miller will continue to work on the development of EF bylaws that link to the EF strategic plan and a streamlined participation agreement. Gary recommended that the signatory line be removed from the document and that the rules of participation be included in the strategic plan. Under this concept, the co-chairs would determine membership based on participation throughout the year. Hilary and Gary will update the EF on this topic during the next teleconference.
Attendees
Jim Brown, Region 1
Kevin Bilash, Region 3
Fred MacMillan, Region 3
Andy Palestini, Region 3
Hilary Thornton, Region 3
Jon Bornholm, Region 4
Nate Nemani, Region 5
Bernie Schorle, Region 5
Terry Burton, Region 6 STL
Raji Josiam, Region 6
Gary Miller, Region 6
Don Bahnke, Region 7
Sandra Bourgeois, Region 8
Mike Gill, Region 9 STL
Karen Scheuermann, Region 9
Kira Lynch, Region 10
Ellen Rubin, OSRTI
Lindsey Lien, USACE
Suzanne Davis, CA DTSC
Jim Harrington, NYSDEC
John Muegge, CA DTSC
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 represents 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.