Example Application of Long Term Stewardship for the Chlorinated Vapor Intrusion Pathway (and VOC sources)

Similar documents
Oregon Guidance for Assessing and Remediating Vapor Intrusion in Buildings

CASE STUDY OF THE EFFECT OF REVERSE MATRIX DIFFUSION ON REMEDIAL TIME FRAME AT A SUPERFUND SITE

Proposed Changes to EPA s Spreadsheet Version of Johnson & Ettinger Model (and some new spreadsheet tools)

Exclusion Distance Criteria for Assessing Potential Vapour Intrusion at Petroleum Hydrocarbon Sites

November 8, 2016 International Petroleum Environmental Conference. Tim Nickels Pastor, Behling & Wheeler, LLC

7.0 EVALUATION OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

APPLICATION OF SUBSURFACE VAPOUR ASSESSMENT AT HYDROCARBON IMPACTED SITES

Site Profiles - View. General Information. Contaminants: Site Hydrology:

ISOTEC Case Study No. 67 ISCO TREATMENT PROGRAM: IMPACTED GROUNDWATER TREATMENT UTILIZING ACTIVATED SODIUM PERSULFATE

Case Studies of Innovative Use of Tracers, Indicators and Field GC/MS for Assessing the Vapor Intrusion Pathway

UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF SEWER PREFERENTIAL PATHWAYS IN VAPOR INTRUSION. Thomas McHugh, Ph.D., D.A.B.T. Lila Beckley, P.G.

Using Mass Balance to Assist in Determining Remedial Options. Stephen Thomson URS New Zealand Limited

PVI Risk Pathway: Sampling Considerations

Empirical Data to Evaluate the Occurrence of Sub-slab O 2 Depletion Shadow at Petroleum Hydrocarbon- Impacted Vapor Intrusion Sites

PA Vapor Intrusion Guidance

H&H Job No. DS0-05. April 29, South Tryon Street Suite 100 Charlotte, NC

Case Study of Modeled and Observed TCE Attenuation from Groundwater to Indoor Air. Christopher G. Lawless Johnson Wright, Inc.

EPA Region 6 CORRECTIVE ACTION STRATEGY

THERMAL REMEDIATION: TWO ERH CASE STUDIES

THERMAL REMEDIATION OF A CLOSED GASOLINE SERVICE STATION PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION LED BY: GLEN VALLANCE PROJECT MANAGER, CGRS

Dayton Bar Association

Vapor Intrusion: A State s Perspective

Vapor Intrusion Attenuation Factors Based On Long Term Monitoring Data

Use of Crawl Space Sampling Data and Other Lines of Evidence for Evaluating Vapor Intrusion

Case Study Palermo Well Field Use of Stable Isotopes Tumwater, Washington

Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage in Deep Geological Formations. Carbon Dioxide Capture and Geologic Storage

Community Environmental Newsletter

EFFECTIVE CLEANUP AT LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY: INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES AND APPROACHES

U.S. EPA s Vapor Intrusion Database: Preliminary Evaluation of Attenuation Factors

STRATEGIES FOR LNAPL REMEDIATION

Beyond Dig and Haul: A survey of Remedial Technologies. NYS Department of Environmental Conservation

Site Specific Remediation Objectives for Soil Vapour in Alberta (Draft) Norman Sawatsky

Case Study Using Fenton s Reagent Under a Performance- Based Remediation Contract

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Contaminated Sites Database

Modern Electroplating Site Update. Dudley Vision Advisory Task Force September 2008 Meeting

Chlorinated Hydrocarbons A Widespread Issue

Stylistic Modeling of Vadose Zone Transport Insight into Vapor Intrusion Processes

Excavation of petroleum-contaminated soil and tank removal sampling Petroleum Remediation Program

Lessons from Petroleum Hydrocarbon and Chlorinated Solvent Sites Extensively Monitored for Vapor Intrusion

Rock Fill Layer Management and Maintenance Plan Former BNSF Site 13 Highway 99 Eugene, Oregon

Best management practices for vapor investigation and building mitigation decisions

Hazardous Materials December 9, Hazardous Materials Existing Conditions

Naval Base Point Loma Secretary of Defense Environmental Award Environmental Restoration - Installation. Narrative

In Situ, Low Temperature Thermal Remediation of LNAPL with Pesticides and Other Recalcitrant Compounds

August Vapor Intrusion Guidance FAQs

A REVIEW OF VAPOR INTRUSION GUIDANCE BY STATE

Executive Summary. 2. Property Investigations Groundwater Sampling Soil Sampling Soil Vapor Sampling 5

March 16, Dear Mr. Chapman:

Stakeholders Forum on Vapor Intrusion

Thermal Remediation Services, Inc.

Petroleum Restoration Program. Pathway To Closure. March 30, 2017

Site Closure Strategy Model for Creosote Site

Soil Investigation for Volatile Organic Compound Soil To Groundwater Impact Site 1 - Privet Road Compound. NAS JRB Willow Grove Horsham, Pennsylvania

In Situ Thermal Remediation and Principles of Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH)

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Implementation in West Placer County

Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Methods & Strategies

MEMO. Kris Hinskey

Ground Water Remedy Optimization Progress Report: Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation

Vapor Intrusion Issues

Evaluation of Spatial and Temporal Variability in VOC Concentrations at Vapor Intrusion Investigation Sites.

CITY PLACE SANTA CLARA: ADDRESSING VAPOR INTRUSION IN A MASSIVE LANDFILL REDEVELOPMENT

Comparison of EHC, EOS, and Solid Potassium Permanganate Pilot Studies for Reducing Residual TCE Contaminant Mass

Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection and Environmental Professionals Organization of Connecticut, Inc.

The Transport of MTBE through Groundwater in the Bootheel, an Alluvial Setting

DRAFT ANALYSIS OF BROWNFIELDS CLEANUP ALTERNATIVES CITY OF MICHIGAN CITY, INDIANA S BROWNFIELDS CLEANUP PROJECT FOR THE FORMER ERINCRAFT FACILITY TH

Use of Remox SR+ Cylinders in Treatment for Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater. Grant Walsom XCG. SMART Remediation Ottawa, ON February 15, 2018

GROUNDWATER INFORMATION SHEET. Tetrachloroethylene (PCE)

In-Situ Remediation of Chlorinated Solvent Source Zone using ZVI-Clay Treatment Technology

New Data on Attenuation Coefficients for Crawl Spaces and Deep Soil Gas from the Lowry AFB Site, Denver, Colorado

OSWER DIRECTIVE Role of the Baseline Risk Assessment in Superfund Remedy Selection Decisions

DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY PROVEN TECHNOLOGIES AND REMEDIES GUIDANCE

OPTIMIZATION OF A CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATMENT TRAIN PROCESS FOR GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION. Gary Cronk, P.E., CHMM

A Comparison of BioVapor and Johnson and Ettinger Model Predictions to Field Data for Multiple Sites

Thermal Remediation Services, Inc.

September 20, 2015 PN:

OCTOBER 2014 UPDATE: A YEAR OF REAL PROGRESS IN ALL AREAS

ESTCP Research on Optimization of Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Systems in Large Military Buildings

2013 IPEC Conference San Antonio

Sustainability; in Residential, Commercial and Industrial Buildings

Environmental Restoration Program Optimization (ERP-O): A Consultant s Perspective. Sriram Madabhushi BAH and ITRC E2S2 Conference June 17, 2010

Subsurface Fire Identification, Assessment, and Mitigation (A Presentation of Selected Case Studies)

State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

DRAFT BUILDING SURVEY PLAN FOR VAPOR INTRUSION SAMPLING. Former Naval Air Station Moffett Field, California

Environmental Management Division. David Amidei NASA HQ

Under Wisconsin: Vapor Intrusion Issues in Madison by Lenny Siegel September, 2017

Indoor Air Quality Testing at the Middle River Complex. Indoor Air Quality Testing at the Middle River Complex. For More Information

Carbon Dioxide Capture and Sequestration in Deep Geological Formations

In Situ Thermal NAPL Remediation at the Northeast Site Pinellas Environmental Restoration Project

Atlantic RBCA Guidance for Soil Vapour and Indoor Air Monitoring Assessments: Overview. December 7 th, 2006 Moncton, New Brunswick

Southeast Hennepin Groundwater and Vapor Intrusion Site

EPA S 2015 vapor intrusion guides What do they mean for your facility?

A Guide on Remedial Actions at Superfund Sites With PCB Contamination

Keywords: Steam injection, thermal wells, SEE, TCH, CHC, DNAPL, SVE, pump and treat

Contaminant Degradation and Forensics Using Compound Specific Isotope Analysis

PHASE II SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION REPORT

DRAFT. Prepared for: U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY-REGION 5 SUPERFUND DIVISION 77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

THE SKINNY ON GROUNDWATER STATISTICS

Screening Criteria to Evaluate Vapor Intrusion Risk from Lead Scavengers

Interim Records of Decision Paper. ASTSWMO Remedial Action Focus Group. August 2017

Contained-in Determination Nonrule Policy Document & Uncontaminated Soil Nonrule Policy Document

Transcription:

Example Application of Long Term Stewardship for the Chlorinated Vapor Intrusion Pathway (and VOC sources) Megan Hamilton Director of Vapor Intrusion and Risk Assessment EnviroForensics March 24, 2015 EPA VI Workshop at AEHS West Coast Conference San Diego, California

Scenario Background Indiana Site Operated as a dry cleaner from early 1980s until 2007 Operational releases over time Conceptual Site Model (CSM) Early Stages Upper 10 feet of soil is cohesive Clayey Silt, underlain by a poorly graded fine-medium grain Sand Soil impacts of tetrachloroethene (PCE), max 36 ppm Groundwater at 30 feet bgs, max 125 ppb beneath source Soil gas plume extends beyond site boundaries Located in a mixed residential and commercial area Multi-family, senior housing building adjacent

Scenario Background Indiana Site Maximum Soil >36,000 ug/kg PCE Maximum GW < 125 ug/l PCE

PCE Distribution in Soil

Scenario Background Indiana Site Soil Gas Concentrations on Site 7,580,000 ug/m 3 PCE Clay, upper unit 1,400,000 ug/m 3 PCE Sand, lower unit

VI Conceptual Site Model Scenario Background Indiana Site

Risk Evaluation and Point of Exposure Assessment Groundwater plume is stable and dilute. No current, but potential exposure. Soil impacts are in excess of migration to groundwater levels, but not direct contact thresholds. Potential exposure. Vapor Intrusion exposure pathway is potentially complete, and largely a result of impacted soils in shallow fine-grained zone, and residual soil gas plume in deeper sand. Potential exposure.

Remedial Planning Selected approach will result from analysis of variable amounts of contaminant mass removal in soil and groundwater, vs. scope of anticipated VI Long-Term Monitoring & Stewardship requirements. $ Remedy $ LTS

IDEM Vapor Remedy Guidance - 2014

Structures Analyzed for VI Long Term Stewardship Assessment

Potential Remedial Approaches Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Remediation Approach No Source Treatment Excavation Excavation with Soil Vapor Extraction and Groundwater Treatment Long-Term Monitoring Duration 50 Years of Monitoring (50 total years) 25 Years of Monitoring (25 total years) 5 Years of Monitoring (10 total years)

Further Site Investigation Remediation Work Plan Preparation Excavation Soil Vapor Extraction Groundwater Remediation Remediation Progress Monitoring Long-Term Monitoring Regulatory Fees and Case Closure Remedial Approach Comparison Basis Scenario 1 X X X Scenario 2 X X X X X X Scenario 3 X X X X X X X X

Long Term Monitoring Components Groundwater Monitoring All Scenarios assume ICs & some term of groundwater monitoring GW monitoring duration shorter than VI in all scenarios Vapor Intrusion Monitoring Scenario 1: Addresses future VI concerns only by monitoring Scenario 2: Eliminates shallow source of ongoing contaminant flux into soil gas Scenario 3: Adds removal of residual soil gas plume in deeper zone and groundwater treatment to Scenario 2

Scenario 1 Further Site Investigation Long-Term Monitoring (50 Years) Annual Institutional Control Verification/Inspection Groundwater use restriction Future excavation/construction restriction Operation of existing/proposed SSDS systems Annual Sampling Annual groundwater sample collection Annual worst-case vapor intrusion sampling Monitoring Well Abandonment and Case Closure

Scenario 2 Further Site Investigation Building Demolition and Shallow Excavation Activities Long-Term Monitoring (25 Years) Annual Institutional Control Verification/Inspection Groundwater use restriction Operation of existing/proposed SSDS systems Annual Sampling Annual groundwater sample collection Annual worst-case vapor intrusion sampling Monitoring Well Abandonment and Case Closure

Scenario 3 Further Site Investigation Building Demolition and Shallow Excavation Activities Soil Vapor Extraction in Deeper Sand Groundwater Polishing Long-Term Monitoring (5 Years) Annual Institutional Control Verification/Inspection Groundwater use restriction only Operation of existing/proposed SSDS systems Annual Sampling Annual groundwater sample collection Annual worst-case vapor intrusion sampling Monitoring Well Abandonment and Case Closure

Cost Summary of Scenarios Scenario 1 Further Site Investigation 50 Years Long-Term Stewardship Regulatory Fees and Case Closure Scenario 2 Further Site Investigation Source Excavation Progress Monitoring 25 Years Long-Term Stewardship Case Closure Scenario 3 Further Site Investigation Source Excavation SVE and Groundwater Remediation Progress Monitoring 5 Years Long-Term Stewardship Case Closure Further Site Investigation $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 Remediation $ 25,000 $ 465,000 $ 1,410,000 Remediation Planning and Coordination $ 25,000 $ 50,000 $ 70,000 Transport and Remediation Modeling $ - $ 50,000 $ 75,000 Source Excavation $ - $ 285,000 $ 285,000 Soil Vapor Extraction $ - $ - $ 350,000 Groundwater Remediation $ - $ - $ 200,000 Remedial Action Design Report $ - $ 20,000 $ 30,000 Progress Sampling and Plume Behavior $ - $ 60,000 $ 400,000 Long-Term Stewardship $ 3,366,330 $ 1,713,165 $ 390,633 Closure Costs $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Regulatory Review Fees $ 75,000 $ 37,500 $ 15,000 20% Contingency $ 715,266 $ 465,133 $ 385,127 PROJECT TOTAL $ 4,291,596 $ 2,790,798 $ 2,310,760 Years 50 25 10 Cost/Year $ 85,831.92 $ 111,632 $ 231,076

Phase Breakdown of Scenarios $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 FSI Remediation Work Plan Preparation Scenario 3 Further Site Investigation Source Excavation SVE and Groundwater Remediation Progress Monitoring 5 Years Long-Term Stewardship Case Closure Remediation Remediation Monitoring Closure Scenario 2 Further Site Investigation Source Excavation Progress Monitoring 25 Years Long-Term Stewardship Case Closure Scenario 1 Scenario 2 LTS (0-5 years) Scenario 3 LTS (5-25 Scenario 1 years) LTS (25-50 Further Site Investigation years) 50 Years Long-Term Stewardship Regulatory Fees and Case Closure

Cumulative Cost Summary of Scenarios $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 FSI Remediation Work Plan Preparation Remediation Scenario 3 Further Site Investigation Source Excavation SVE and Groundwater Remediation Progress Monitoring 5 Years Long-Term Stewardship Case Closure Remediation Monitoring Closure Scenario 2 Further Site Investigation Source Excavation Progress Monitoring 25 Years Long-Term Stewardship Case Closure LTS (0-5 years) Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 LTS (5-25 years) LTS (25-50 Scenario 1 years) Further Site Investigation 50 Years Long-Term Stewardship Regulatory Fees and Case Closure

Thank You! Megan Hamilton Director of Vapor Intrusion and Risk Assessment EnviroForensics 317-972-7870 mhamilton@enviroforensics.com