GFOA PS3260 Contaminated Sites Workshop Thursday, November 14, 2013 Whitehorse, YT.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
In-Situ Remediation at Silver Lake Region 4 Hazardous Materials Geo/Bridge/Environmental Unit.
Advertisements

Technical Requirements for Site Remediation Backbone of New Jerseys Site Remediation Program.
Connecticut Brownfield Sites
LEACHATE MANAGEMENT AND TREATMENT
DEQ Waste and Remediation Division Programs Michael McCurdy Ground Water and Remediation Section Manager Boise Regional Office.
Vermilion County Brownfield Assessment Grant. Overview Brownfield Basics USEPA Brownfield Assessment Grant Vermilion County Assessment Grant Site Selection.
AHMET UCANOK JOHN E. ELVIS Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at the United Chrome Superfund Site Corvallis, Oregon.
Plaistow, New Hampshire
Air Sparging at Fort Greely, Alaska Presented by Aung Syn & James Powell.
What Do You Know About Michigan’s Hidden Resource? All photos by Joan Schumaker Chadde, Western Upper Peninsula Center for Science, Mathematics and Environmental.
Redevelopment of Former Industrial Lands in the Australian Capital Territory Toby Hobbs Coffey Geosciences, Australia NATO/CCMS Pilot Study June
Phytotechnologies for Environmental Restoration and Management Micah Beard, M.S. Shaw Environmental, Inc.
Clean-up at BP Paulsboro New Jersey (USA) Roxane Fisher and Mark Ferguson.
Brownfields are “real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous.
By: Martin Lee, Jey Hwan Lee, Wilson Leung. Background Former HKIA, replaced in 1998 ▫World’s busiest in 1997 ▫Overcrowded World famous difficult landings.
Enviromental aspects of Brownfield Regeneration Barbara Vojvodíková, Marcela Maturová „This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
EnviroSense, Inc. An Overview of Environmental Factors in Developing Brownfields Sites in Massachusetts Presented By: Eric S. Wood, P.Hg., PG, LSP President.
The Role of the Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP) Paul Sakson, LSRP Paul D. Sakson Associates, Inc.
Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments Environmental Specialist Brownfields/Voluntary Cleanup Program June 2014.
1 Risk Assessment Develop Objectives And Goals Develop and Screen Cleanup Alternatives Select Final Cleanup Alternative Communicate Decisions to the Public.
What Do You Know About Michigan’s Hidden Resource?
Tritium: Fleet-Wide Assessment Program Zigmund A. Karpa Director Environmental and Regulatory Affairs.
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation NYSDEC Public Meeting September 12, 2013 Brooklyn Navy Yard, Building 92 Former Kent Avenue Site 500 Kent.
Brownfields in Baltic States - Lifelong Educational Project CZ/08/LLP-LdV/TOI/ Environmental Aspects of Brownfield Redevelopment Linas Kliučininkas.
Brownfields Odell Zeigler, Katie Dilbeck, Shirley Green, Genarde Garnica.
Final Rule Setting Federal Standards for Conducting All Appropriate Inquiries U.S. EPA Brownfields Program.
Enviromental aspects of Brownfield Regeneration Barbara Vojvodíková, Marcela Maturová „This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
Brandon Real Estate Board - June 19/20031 Your Logo Here ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENTS Phase I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENTS Phase I.
LOGO Feasibility Test of Applying Complex Remediation Technology for Diesel Contamination in Soil and Groundwater 2012 International Conference on Environmental.
Ms. Mandel  I can explain what a Brownfield site is.  I can explain how a Brownfield site is restored to a usable piece of property.
COMMITMENT & INTEGRITY DRIVE RESULTS Risk Based Corrective Action Using site-specific risk assessment to achieve Regulatory Closure.
Jan Smolders ( 史默德) Independent Consultant Soil & Groundwater Remediation Jan Smolders, Client Advisor Soil & Groundwater Remediation 1.
TURNING BROWNFIELDS. Definition US EPA 1997 abandoned, idled or under-used industrial and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated.
Denver Federal Center Calibration Silo Removal Plan What are the DFC Calibration Silos? Installed in 1981 by Bureau of Mines Support minerals industry.
Phase I ESA Environmental Site Assessment. Purpose Is to provide a professional opinion on the potential for current presence of RECS at the subject property.
Review of Work Plan for Leaded Gasoline Tank Bottom Disposal Pit Assessment and Interim Stabilization Measures Presented by The Great Plains/Rocky Mountain.
History and Cleanup at Chemical Commodities, Inc. Jeff Field US EPA Region 7 1.
CHEMICAL COMMODITIES INC. The History, Cleanup and Ecological Reuse of a Superfund Site 1.
Former Point Cook Fire Training Area Contamination Remediation Works Project Community Information Session 26 September 2013.
Review of Current Conditions Report and Work Plan for Area 1 Presented by The Great Plains/Rocky Mountain Technical Outreach Services for Communities.
Today’s Lecture Announcements Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
The Superfund ERA Process. What is Superfund? Superfund was created on December 11, 1980 when Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Area I Burn Pit Santa Susana Field Laboratory RCRA Facility Investigation Work Plan February 19, 2008 Laura Rainey, P.G. Senior Engineering Geologist California.
September 18, 1998 State of Illinois Rules and Regulations Tiered Approach to Corrective Action (TACO) Presented by The Great Plains/Rocky Mountain Technical.
Chicago Heights Brownfield Sergio,Tierria. Property Names and Aliases 14thst.Lincoln Hwy Southside Lowe to Wallace E.14 th st., Chicago Heights,IL.
By Mitch Cooper & Haley Herbert January 1987 Vertac site manufactured herbicides 1978 National Dioxin Survey 1983 Site placed on the National.
Evaluating the Practicality of LNAPL Recovery Jeff Lane, P.G. November 17, 2015 International Petroleum Environmental Conference (IPEC) IPEC 22 Contact.
Llwyneinion Acid Tar Lagoon
Ukraine Petro Nakhaba All-Ukrainian Public Organization “ Chysta Khvylya ” Deputy Head Kyiv, Ukraine Contaminated Sites Management Joint UMOE-DEPA Project.
Environmental Considerations prior to purchasing Properties Sabine E. Martin, Ph.D., P.G. Center for Hazardous Substance Research Kansas State University.
By Alex Walton Josh Bush Alex Walton, Josh Bush1.
1 FORMER COS COB POWER PLANT From Characterization to Redevelopment Brownfields2006 November 14, 2006.
Environmental Site Assessments Hazardous Materials/ Regulated Substances Categorical Exclusion Training Class.
Long-Term Management of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater – Iwilei District, Honolulu April 16, 2015.
Groundwater Pollution
Global Warming – The Broad Legal Reach of Initiatives to Reduce Carbon Emissions Worldwide Legal Issues Associated with Carbon Capture and Geologic Storage.
GEORGIA PACIFIC WEST PROPOSED INTERIM ACTION Public Meeting & Open House – July 12, 2011.
Using Insurance to Fund Brownfield Development Technical Issues Geoff Glanders, President August Mack Environmental, Inc.
Omaha Riverfront Redevelopment Project Brownfields 2004 C. Dale Jacobson, P.E., DEE.
Site Assessment Fundamentals Problems During Construction Panel Discussion and Forum Mayor’s Office of Housing 1 South Van Ness Avenue July 29, 2008.
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Waste Management Stony Hill Road Contamination Wake County.
What Do You Know About Michigan’s Hidden Resource?
Proposed Plan for No Further Action
Redevelopment Authority of the County of Washington O
ASSESSMENT OF CORRECTIVE MEASURES PUBLIC MEETING
Chemical Metals Industries, Inc. (CMI)
Environmental Issues Mapping Field Lab
IMS-approach to the The Kempen (Flemish-Dutch border)
Chemical Metals Industries, Inc. (CMI)
Environmental Considerations prior to purchasing Properties
Presentation transcript:

GFOA PS3260 Contaminated Sites Workshop Thursday, November 14, 2013 Whitehorse, YT

 Role of the Environmental Professional  Process – from screening to determining financial liability Page 2

 Screening of sites  Initial Assessment ◦ Ranking?  Confirming contamination  Determining extent  Evaluating remediation strategies  Opinion of cost of remediation Page 3

 Inventory all properties ◦ By government body ◦ Screen to select sites that are no longer productive  Non-productive property list ◦ Is it, or might it, be contaminated? ◦ Initial screening to select potential contaminated sites  Owner knowledge of site and adjacent sites Page 4

 An assessment of current and historic site uses and conditions ◦ Historic records:  Air photographs  City directories  Land use maps  Fire insurance maps  Topographic & geological maps  MOE records (Site Registry)  Local government archives  Fire department records  Newspapers Page 5

Page 6 ◦ Interviews:  Persons knowledgeable about current and past property uses and activities  Current and former employees ◦ Site reconnaissance:  Visual or olfactory evidence of possible contamination:  Staining  Distressed vegetation  Aboveground storage tanks  Underground storage tanks - fill or vent pipes  “Patches” in pavement  Oil water separators  Waste material or other storage or disposal  Soil disposal  Etc.

 Can you do part or all of the assessment?  Can the Environmental Professional provide a template that can be used to enable staff to undertake?  How much does it cost? Page 7

 If a large number, may rank for further action: ◦ By potential risk:  Known contamination  Type of contaminant  What “media” is suspect to be contaminated  Potential consequence  Financial constraints Page 8

 Phase I identifies only potential for contamination  Phase II includes collection and analysis of samples (soil, groundwater, and/or surface water)  Results compared to standards  Contaminated if exceed standards Page 9

 Soil: ◦ Land use dependent ◦ Current land use or future land use  Groundwater: ◦ What is current and expected future use  Surface Water – aquatic and other uses Page 10

 Create a risk profile? ◦ Set priority for further assessment  Consider:  Likelihood of adverse effect  Consequence of adverse effect  Receptors affected (human vs. ecological)  Duty to Act – imminent threat Page 11

 To determine the extent of contamination in all affected media ◦ Vertical and horizontal extent (three dimensions)  Conceptual Site Model (CSM) ◦ Shows conceptually where contamination may be Page 12

Page 13

Remediation can be an expensive process and where there are multiple properties, there may be a need to rank them ◦ Is there an imminent threat to human health or the environment? ◦ Is there current or likely contamination migration to other properties or sensitive environments? ◦ Is there a “business” priority? Page 14

 There are dozens of ways to remediate a site  As a rule of thumb, the faster the process, the more expensive it will be  Costs tend to be higher if the Phase II is not rigorous Page 15

 Client considerations: ◦ Schedule ◦ Cost – capital vs. operating and maintenance or long timeframe ◦ Public considerations – transparency ◦ Future land use  Technical considerations: ◦ Contaminant type:  Metals  Organic  Easy to treat/difficult to treat  Mobility ◦ Media contaminated ◦ Geology and hydrogeology ◦ Access constraints Page 16

SOILSOIL  Remove and dispose  Excavate and treat onsite  Excavate and treat offsite  Treat in-situ  Manage in-situ GROUNDWATERGROUNDWATER  Pump and treat  Pump, treat and reinject  Natural attenuation  Modify groundwater movement characteristics  In-situ biological treatment  In-situ chemical treatment (oxidize, reduce, immobilize) SEDIMENTSEDIMENT  Dredge and dispose  Dredge and cap  Cap Page 17

PhysicalPhysical  Soil vapour extraction  Sparging BiologicalBiological  Biological ◦ Amendment with nutrients ◦ Amendment with new carbon source (food) ◦ Modify groundwater flow conditions (direction, mounding) ChemicalChemical  Oxidizing chemicals  Reducing chemicals  Oxygen enhancing  Chemicals to immobilize metals Page 18

 Does the contamination present an unacceptable risk to human health and/or the environment  Can that risk be reduced by engineered controls or administrative controls  Contamination remains  Conditions on use based on controls/assumptions about use in risk assessment Page 19

 Preliminary Site Investigations ◦ Stage 1 about $2,500 or lower when multiple sites ◦ Stage 2 Minimum $10,000 for simple site. Complex sites can reach many tens of thousands  Detail Site Investigation ◦ Suggest budget minimum $25,000 per site if simple ◦ Can be several hundreds of thousands of dollars for complex multiple contaminant sources and multiple media Page 20

 Simple site budget $10,000  Complex sites with multiple contaminants and media – planning a preliminary engineering can be several hundred thousand dollars  Required to determine opinion of cost of remediation Page 21

 Underground Storage Tank - $10,000 - $50,000  Works Yard ◦ Vehicle maintenance - $25,000 - >$100,000 ◦ Fueling station $50,000 - >$250,000  Depends on complexity, extent and media affected Page 22

For further information contact