Platform Presentation Abstracts
Harnessing the power of landfill gas (LFG) energy provides environmental and economic benefits to landfills, energy users, and the community. In particular, LFG energy projects:
• Reduce emissions of greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change.
• Offset the use of non-renewable resources, such as coal, oil, and natural gas.
• Help improve local air quality.
• Provide revenues for landfills and energy cost savings for users of LFG energy.
• Create jobs and economic benefits for communities and businesses.
Typically, LFG collection involves installing wells in the waste and connecting those wellheads to lateral piping that transports the gas to a collection header using a blower or vacuum induction. After collection, LFG can either be flared or used in an energy recovery system to combust the methane and other trace contaminants. Several technologies can be used to maximize LFG when producing these forms of energy, the most prevalent of which are power production, cogeneration, and direct thermal use.
The best type of project for a particular landfill will depend upon a number of factors, including existence of an available energy market, project costs, potential revenue sources, and many technical considerations. To off-set costs at remediation sites, LFG may be used to produce electricity to power equipment such as pumps and blowers, used to heat buildings or sold to an off-site end user.
Landfill owners, energy service providers, businesses, state agencies, local governments, communities, and other stakeholders interested in developing this valuable resource can work together to develop successful LFG energy projects. EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) and its associated international program, the Methane to Markets Partnership, encourages and facilitates the development of environmentally and economically sound LFG energy projects by partnering with stakeholders and providing a variety of information, tools, and services. www.epa.gov/lmop www.methanetomarkets.org.
Kelly Fagan is a Project Manager with Shaw Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc. She provides contract support for LMOP’s mid-Atlantic and Northeast outreach efforts. She obtained her B.S. in Civil Engineering from Drexel University in 1988, when she began her career in the environmental industry. Ms. Fagan’s early work involved engineering, construction, and permitting of solid waste and hazardous waste landfills. Over the course of her career, she has been involved in groundwater remediation, various capping design and construction projects, indoor vapor mitigation, air permitting, and landfill gas operation and maintenance projects.
WRScompass developed an internal sustainability group lead by senior management. Since that time, the group researched and developed metrics to use specifically for construction and hazardous waste remediation projects. This presentation will briefly describe the path taken leading to the eventual development of a comprehensive template used at a potential responsible party (PRP) lead: EPA Region IV Superfund Site located in Central Florida which was impacted by a former manufactured gas plant. During the development of the Final Design Report it was brought to the PRP’s attention that the EPA wanted to “Green” the project. In cooperation with the PRP committee, the EPA and WRScompass developed and submitted a comprehensive Sustainability Plan with the Final Design Report. The development included metrics on fuel consumption and type, idling requirements, material substitutions, and equipment selection. Other metrics included the recycling of metal, paper, organic matter, concrete asphalt, plastic and card board. The pilot test was modified to test alternative additives to reduce the CO2 foot print. However, the single most important factor was to do this in the most economic way possible, with the idea in mind to keep the net costs for implementation at zero.
Mr. Fleri is a Senior Vice President with WRScompass located in Stone Mountain, Georgia. He received his BS in Chemical Engineering from Auburn University. He is a PE, CIH, and CSP and has worked more than 23 years in the hazardous remediation industry. Mr. Fleri specializes in thermal desorption as well as in situ/ex situ stabilization technologies. He is currently a member of the sustainability group at WRScompass which develops and tracks sustainability initiatives throughout the company and its operations.
With increasing energy costs and the need to operate in more sustainable ways, the environmental remediation sector is now integrating more energy efficient and sustainable solutions. The Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment (AFCEE) has applied this approach to groundwater remediation systems at the Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR).
This case study presents a more sustainable approach to remediation at the MMR through the use of renewable energy, in the form of a 1500 kW wind turbine. Power costs for operating the treatment systems, which process up to 16 million gallons per day, amounted to approximately $2.2 million in 2008. The wind turbine is anticipated to reduce the program’s electricity costs and offset air emissions, generated indirectly through the use of electricity from fossil fuel based power plants, by approximately 30%. Based on a range of utility cost projections and an estimate of the turbine’s output, the $4.6 million project is anticipated to have a payback period between six and eight years.
The presentation will discuss energy conservation initiatives as well as the planning, design, and acquisition process for construction of a utility class wind turbine. The wind turbine project is jointly funded with Air Force and Army Environmental Restoration Account funds and resulted from program-wide optimizations in other areas of the restoration efforts. AFCEE/MMR engaged dozens of stakeholders and issued a draft Environmental Assessment for public comment and subsequent Finding of No Significant Impact during the planning process. In addition, AFCEE/MMR issued contracts for the wind turbine planning, design, Title II oversight and construction. The current schedule, which is dependent on turbine delivery date, indicates a Fall 2009 completion and start-up.
Rose Forbes is a Professional Engineer with 17 years experience in contaminated site investigation and remediation. Ms. Forbes is a project manager with the Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment (AFCEE) and has worked on the Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR) project since 1999 where she is responsible for construction, operation and maintenance of remediation systems, monitoring of the groundwater plumes, program optimization, energy conservation and renewable energy implementation. Ms. Forbes graduated with a B.S. (1992) and an M.S. (1993) degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of North Dakota (UND) School of Engineering and Mines.
Treadwell and Rollo, in partnership with EnviroLogek, has developed a detailed greenhouse gas emissions (“carbon footprint”) estimate comparing potential remedial technologies for two environmental remediation sites. At the first, a manufacturing company in Santa Clara, California, recently pilot tested an enhanced reductive dechlorination technology configured as a groundwater biobarrier, as a potential long-term replacement for an existing line of groundwater extraction wells. At the second, a firm managing at a site in Modesto, California, is evaluating whether to pursue an air sparging or in-situ reductive dechlorination approach to address chlorinated-solvent-impacted groundwater.
This paper presents a greenhouse gas emission calculation for the two technologies under consideration at each of the two case study sites, including emissions associated with raw materials, manufacturing, transportation, system installation, operation and maintenance, and ultimately disposal or recycling.
These case studies will add to the growing number of studies in which remediation firms, such as Treadwell and Rollo, have quantified the sustainability of remediation projects and attempted to include this new criterion in the decision-making process. It is the hope that this paper will contribute to the standardization of a sustainability framework and metrics amongst the community of remediation professionals for use on future projects.
Mr. Lowell Kessel is experienced in soil and groundwater remediation, is involved in research and development for remediation technologies and regularly provides technical support with remediation performance optimization monitoring and implementation. Mr. Kessel is a Registered Professional Geologist and has completed a Masters degree in Geological Sciences focused on Hydrogeochemistry and a Masters in Business Administration.
EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), located in Headquarters, provides policy and technical direction to EPA Regional offices on the cleanup of contaminated sites. In August 2009, OSWER issued its Greener Cleanup Principles which provides an overarching framework for Regions overseeing and implementing cleanups under several programs including Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, Leaking Underground, Federal Facilities and Brownfields. This presentation will describe activities taking place across the Regions to facilitate greener cleanups and will provide a regional perspective on this evolving field
Deb Goldblum has worked in EPA’s Mid-Atlantic Office (Region 3) RCRA Corrective Action Program for 17 years. She is currently Region 3's RCRA Revitalization Coordinator and is a key contributor to a national effort to integrate green remediation into the cleanup programs. She has worked on several projects in collaboration with EPA Headquarters including the RCRA Groundwater Handbook and the development of measures to assess the status of land use at cleanup sites. Prior to joining EPA, Ms. Goldblum taught geology at Temple University and LaSalle University. She received her B.S. in Geology from Haverford College and an M.S. in Geology from Temple University.
Self-Sustaining Treatment for Active Remediation (STAR): Scientific Principles and In Situ Field Application for the Treatment of Coal Tar in Soils
Gavin Grant and David Major, SiREM Laboratories; Jason Gerhard, University of Western Ontario; Jose Torero, University of Edinburgh; Christine Switzer, University of Strathclyde
Self-sustaining Treatment for Active Remediation (STAR; UK Patent Application 0525193.9 and PCT Application PCT/GB2006/004591, priority date December 2005) is a novel technology that employs smoldering combustion for the remediation of subsurface contamination by non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) and shows particular promise for the treatment of coal tar-impacted soils at manufacture gas plant (MGP) sites. Recent research has revealed that STAR has the potential to provide one of the most cost effective and technically efficient remedies at MGP sites due to a number of key properties of the process: (1) STAR requires only a short duration energy input (i.e., ignition) at a single location to initiate the reaction; (2) STAR is then self-sustaining, such that the reaction propagates itself through the coal tar source zone without additional energy input, (3) STAR is self-targeting, such that the reaction naturally tracks through the subsurface zones occupied by coal tar, (4) STAR is self-terminating, such that the reaction naturally ceases when no coal tar remains, and (5) STAR avoids injecting costly fluids or conveying coal tar or contaminated groundwater to the surface for treatment.
This presentation provides a summary of the proof-of-concept experiments and scientific principles underpinning the STAR technology as well as the design and results of the first in situ STAR pilot study conducted at a former cresol manufacturing facility in New Jersey. The site exhibits a substantial coal tar-contaminated horizon between 10- and 5-feet below ground surface and the pilot was designed to test STAR at a large scale and under saturated conditions (i.e., below the water table). Results of pre-design treatability studies (which showed total petroleum hydrocarbon reductions from up to 23,400 milligrams per kilogram [mg/kg] to as low as 90 mg/kg) and post-pilot test characterization will be presented.
Dr. Grant is a civil engineer with extensive experience in the fate and behavior of DNAPLs in porous media, as well as the design and interpretation of innovative in situ remediation technologies. Dr. Grant completed his Ph.D. studies at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, investigating the interrelationship between Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (DNAPL) source zone architecture and downgradient dissolved phase concentrations. As part of this work, Dr. Grant conducted laboratory and numerical modeling experiments designed to evaluate the physical factors governing the rate of DNAPL migration and the rate of DNAPL dissolution to the aqueous phase in saturated porous media. In addition, Dr. Grant developed the numerical model DNAPL3D-MT (Grant et al., 2007) which is a modified version of DNAPL3D (Gerhard and Kueper, 1995 and 2003) with the added capabilities of simulating mass transfer and contaminant transport. His publications include several examining contaminant fate in the subsurface.
Dr. Grant has been involved in the STAR project since its inception. He has been primarily responsible for the design and application of STAR pilot tests and remedial actions, as well as overseeing the execution of treatability studies of the technology.
Urban Contaminated Site and Sustainable Requalification: Economical, Technical and Public-Private Cooperation
Annalisa Gussoni (Presenter) and Alessandro Ummarino, Municipality of Milan - Claudio de Albertis, Assimpredil ANCE - Domenico Santi (Presenter), Arcadis SET
Big European cities have to deal with the “hunger of land” due to the lack of building areas. A good opportunity is offered from the recovery of “abandoned, underutilized and contaminated properties.”
The traditional reclamation technologies (mainly direct land removal) are often environmentally disadvantageous and their high costs cause a lack of private investors involvement, charging the full costs to the public administration that hardly has the economic resources.
It’s a priority to find a sustainable solution. The direct interaction of all the stakeholders (local government authorities, environmental protection agencies and the private investors) involved in all the steps of the "site requalification decisional process" for the recovery of contaminated properties creates the chance for a real application of sustainable remedial practices covering the full range of environmental, energy and economic aspects of green and sustainable remediation and it can also represent an opportunity for the private investor to increase the property value.
The contaminated site considered in the present study used to be a quarry (30 hectares) that has been filled with made ground and waste material. A Site Specific Conceptual Model has been developed based on a thorough investigation carried out on soil, groundwater and soil-gases during a period of ten years.
The Environmental Risk for residential area and recreational end-use has been evaluated using the RBCA procedure. The final remedial design has been conducted in synergy with the housing project design and the planning of the area. Green technologies have been used in order to limit the displacement of the environmental liability off-site and the environmental impact of the remedial activities.
This will be the first case of a successful urban quarry recovery with a combination of high levels of effective environmental protections and economic payback achieved by means of private-public cooperation.
Annalisa Gussoni, Director of the Contaminated Site Remediation Office since year 2000 and, starting from the year 2008, Chief Director of the Department for Environmental Implementation of the Municipality of Milan.
She obtained her master degree in Biology at the University of Milan in 1986 by working at the Institute of Water Research run by the National Research Council.
Afterwards she worked as a free lance consultant in the private and public sector dealing with a lot of environmental issues, especially about water quality, site remediation, and soil and water microbiology.
She worked from 1992 to 2000 also as a director of private Environmental Research Company.
At present, for the Municipality of Milan, she’s involved in all the biggest city requalification projects (i.e. EXPO 2015) where she’s in charge for the environmental sustainability applications.
Mission commitment, energy security, environmental stewardship, and public relations continue to be of the utmost importance to the United States Air Force (AF). The AF developed a plan, which sets goals for reduction of energy intensity and water and fossil fuels consumption along with increased use of renewable energy sources. The Hill Air Force Base (AFB) Environmental Restoration Group has committed to several projects in support of these goals. One such project is the development of cost, energy and water consumption baselines followed by a “Conservation Audit” of 13 remediation systems identifying areas for improvement. A cost/benefit analysis tool has also been developed allowing comparison of alternatives for return on investment, life-cycle costs, carbon emissions, chemical consumption, and health and safety considerations that allow the AF to make a fully-informed decision.
Other supporting projects include:
• Installation of alternative energy systems,
• Selection of equipment and sampling methods to minimize carbon footprint and life-cycle cost (e.g., transitioning from a standard purge to a passive sampling technique would result in a reduction in carbon emissions (84%), water extraction (99%), and expenditures ($1M annually),
• Implementation of light-emitting diode (LED) lighting and on-demand hot water,
• Grinding of demilitarized dummy bomb units into granular iron for in-situ remediation in a permeable reactive barrier,
• Completion of two xeriscaping projects, and
• Performing community outreach and education of Hill AFB’s Restoration Advisory Board and local elementary schools on climate change concepts and what individuals can do to reduce their own carbon footprint.
Hill AFB’s commitment to sustainability has proven that “going green” is not more expensive. If sustainable choices are consciously made during site investigation, design, construction, and operation and maintenance phases, the net environmental benefit of cleanup actions can be maximized while achieving a reduction in life-cycle costs.
Dr. Barbara L. Hall is an Environmental Engineer with the Air Force. She is the Strategic Program Manager for the Environmental Restoration Program at Hill AFB, Utah. Dr. Hall received her B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Virginia Tech and M.S. from Pennsylvania State University. She received her Ph.D. in Civil and Environmental Engineering from Utah State University. She has fifteen years experience in all phases of soil and groundwater investigation and cleanup for sites contaminated with chlorinated solvents and BTEXN compounds. Her current focus is on strategic planning for life-cycle cost reduction and sustainability, with an emphasis on treatment system selection and performance monitoring.
NAVFAC recognizes that opportunities to increase sustainability can be considered throughout all phases of remediation (i.e., site investigation, remedy selection, remedy design and construction, operation, monitoring, and site closeout) regardless of the selected cleanup remedy. The NAVFAC Optimization Workgroup is developing a strategy for applying sustainable environmental remediation (SER) to the remediation process as part of the optimization program.
SER should be considered during (a) evaluation of remedies during the remedy selection process, (b) the remedial design phase, and (c) optimization of remedial actions during the remedial action operation phase. The general approach for a Navy remedial project manager (RPM) is outlined in the NAVFAC SER Fact Sheet (August 2009):
• Determine which sustainability metrics should be considered for the site;
• Establish and apply a methodology to quantify or characterize each metric;
• Obtain consensus regarding how metrics are weighed against each other and against traditional criteria in selecting the remedial approach;
• Identify methods to reduce environmental footprint of remedy components; and
• Prioritize, select, and document what footprint reduction methods should be implemented with consideration of the overall net environmental benefit and available funding.
The Navy has developed a list of metrics for considerations as part of sustainable remediation comprised of energy consumption, GHG emissions, criteria pollutant emissions, water impacts, resource consumption, worker safety, and community impacts. An environmental footprint can be assessed to determine which potential remedies and which elements of the remedy have the greatest environmental footprint. This allows the RPM to better focus on footprint reduction methods. The evaluation should include effects from on-site and off-site actions, and consider alternate energy sources and more energy efficient alternatives for high-energy demand remedies. A more comprehensive evaluation could also consider impacts from raw materials, supplies, and manufacturing of equipment needed for remedial actions.
During remedy selection, the environmental footprint of each remedy should be analyzed and presented along with other evaluation criteria. Sustainability fits into the existing framework for CERCLA and RCRA programs and usually can be included under short-term effectiveness. During remedy selection and remedial system design, it is important to develop well-defined performance objectives and exit strategies. This is an important SER consideration because as remedial systems continue to operate over time, the effectiveness tends to decline, and thus the benefit of continued operation declines, causing an increase in the footprint to benefit ratio. For systems already in operation, the monitoring and reporting plan can be modified to include this type of analysis and prevent systems from operating beyond the point of diminishing returns.
Karla Harre is the Environmental Restoration Technology Transfer Team Lead
at the Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center. She manages NAVFAC’s strategic plan to overcome barriers to the use innovative environmental remediation technologies and facilitates the NAVFAC Optimization Workgroup. She obtained her B.E. in Civil and Environmental Engineering at Vanderbilt University in 1992 and her Masters of Business Administration at Pepperdine University in 2002.
The goal of green remediation is to design that carefully consider the impacts of the action on the surrounding environment and local communities. Therefore, it is important to have a clear understanding of the relative importance of these impacts and the trade-offs stakeholders are willing to make among them. Moreover, evaluating the alternatives and their impacts is best done within the context of the CERCLA nine criteria in order to improve the prospects for regulatory acceptance. In particular, while it is clear that all proposed green remediation strategies must meet the threshold criteria, the relative importance of each of balancing and modifying criteria is not clear. This presentation will help shed light on the appropriate criteria for assessing green remediation strategies through an interactive multi-criteria decision analysis. To give the decision analysis context, the first part of the presentation will provide an overview of an illustrative, but realistic sediment site. The second part of the presentation will allow participants to interactively “vote” for the types of specific criteria that they feel should be used to implement green remediation alternatives for the balancing and modifying criteria and how much weight should be given to each criterion. The final portion of the presentation will be a discussion about the results and how they should or can be used to advance the implementation of green remediation.
Mr. Havranek is a Vice President of Business Solutions and Risk Management with ENTRX, Inc. with over 25 combined years experience in the environmental remediation and the oil and gas production industries. Mr. Havranek has managed numerous large-scale environmental projects throughout industry, working with multiple site owners, regulatory agencies, and other stakeholders in the development of strategic and sustainable business liability and asset management solutions to minimize environmental and social risk. He is highly skilled in the application of quantitative decision analysis and probabilistic modeling to facilitate strategic planning for environmental projects, having developed a wide range of successful decision analysis models for more than 400 sites. Mr. Havranek holds MBA degree from Carnegie Mellon University and a Bachelors Degree in Petroleum Engineering from Marietta College. He is a Certified Project Management Professional (P.M.P.) and author of the book Modern Project Management Techniques for the Environmental Remediation Industry.
After three years of pilot tests and two years of a full-scale test, a low cost, energy saving passive aeration system that removes chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from contaminated ground water is replacing a multi-million dollar, energy consuming water treatment plant at an Oklahoma Superfund Site. The water treatment plant uses conventional air stripping technology and carbon polishing to remove VOCs before discharging the treated ground water to an infiltration gallery. Although efficient at removing VOCs, the water treatment plant requires many chemicals, process tanks, pumps, and electricity as well as operation and maintenance costs. The passive aeration system also employs air stripping and polishing steps but utilizes the sun and wind to remove the VOCs without electricity or chemicals with minimal operation and maintenance costs. Over 90 percent of the VOCs are removed in the passive air stripping step, and the remaining VOCs are removed (to non-detectable concentrations) in a retention pond before discharge into the ground. The electricity savings alone using the passive aeration system amount to more than $20,000 per year. The Superfund Site was a permitted disposal site for industries in Texas and Oklahoma and received over 20 million gallons of waste in 8 years. Contaminated ground water is captured behind a 2,600-feet long, gravel filled, v-shaped interceptor trench with six recovery sumps. Since 1995, influent total VOC concentrations have fluctuated from less than 100 μg/L to approximately 2,000 μg/L. Typically the effluent samples from the passive aeration system have reported detections of 1,1,2-trichloroethane and cis-1,2-dichloroethene. However, the pilot tests have shown that these compounds are removed within 24 hours in an equilibration/polishing pond. Calculations have shown that air emission standards are not exceeded using the passive aeration system with flow rates up to 12 gallons per minute.
Brian LaFlamme is an environmental consultant with Nationwide Environmental Services, Inc. in Golden, Colorado. Mr. LaFlamme obtained his Master’s in Chemical Oceanography at the University of Washington in 1985. Mr. LaFlamme was involved in studying water-rock interactions and videoing ‘black smokers’ off the Juan de Fuca Ridge before joining a national environmental consulting firm in 1988. Mr. LaFlamme has evaluated geochemical data to assess the natural background concentration of metals for active mine sites; interpreted radioisotope data to delineate multiple aquifers at complex sites; managed the design of software programs to streamline the review on an environmental database, enhance the quality and usability of the environmental database, and provide real-time tools for interpretation; conducted numerous fate and transport modeling efforts; and managed multi-million Superfund projects through the RI/FS and RD/RA process. Mr. LaFlamme currently manages the long-term remediation operation & maintenance at Superfund sites and provides technical and regulatory strategy to avoid and limit environmental liability.
Hardrock mineral mining and ore processing generate thousands of tons of waste, even for relatively small mines. A typical byproduct of such mining operations is acidic mine drainage containing high concentrations of metals and other minerals. Another is fine-grained tailings resulting from the crushing and processing of ore. With thousands of abandoned, inactive, and active hardrock mines nationwide, the quantity of waste is tremendous and it is often in urgent need of remediation or stabilization. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation recently launched an effort to find ways to reuse these wastes for beneficial purposes and, in the process, address the contamination. The Beneficial use of Mine Waste (BMW) workgroup is exploring end-use options for specific categories of mine waste that will dually address the need to stabilize or remediate the waste and protect human and environmental health with a permanent solution. One example of beneficial reuse is known as the “Chat Rule,” (see FR 72, No. 137, July 18, 2007). In 2007, EPA promulgated this Federal Register notice providing specific instructions as to how granular fine tailings known as “chat” from the Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri tri-state area could be safely reused. Using this approach as a model, the BMW workgroup is evaluating market opportunities, cost effectiveness, waste characteristics, and safety considerations for other large quantity, low contamination waste prevalent at hardrock mines. This paper summarizes the goals of the EPA initiative and outlines the basic steps for determining whether it is safe and cost effective to use the specific waste for a particular purpose.
Kenyon Larsen is a Principal Environmental Scientist, SRA International, Inc. in the Environmental and Organizational Services (EOS) business unit. He manages SRA’s Applied Sciences and Collaboration practice area consisting of nearly 20 scientists, engineers, facilitators, and dispute resolution specialists. Kenyon has over 20 years of environmental consulting experience in both California and in the Washington DC area. Since the late 1990s, Kenyon has supported efforts by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other Federal and State agencies to facilitate the productive reuse of hardrock mining and mineral processing facilities primarily located across the mountainous West. Mr. Larsen specializes in evaluating mine site remediation technologies and their effectiveness in addressing contamination in acid mine drainage, surface water, ground water, and waste materials. He has extensive experience in EPA’s Superfund program, particularly in the Hazard Ranking System (HRS) used to evaluate hazardous waste site eligibility for inclusion on the National Priorities List (NPL). He also has experience in wetland delineation, site assessment, habitat evaluation, alternative fuels analysis, carbon sequestration calculation, and facilitation. Kenyon received his B.S. in Conservation and Resource Studies from the University of California, Berkeley and his M.S. in Earth Sciences from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. He is a certified Project Management Professional (PMP).
Interest in green and/or sustainable remediation (GSR) has increased in popularity in the environmental remediation business over the past few years. GSR refers to an approach that consciously considers and balances environmental factors with social considerations and economic impacts. GSR tools and metrics are still in the early stages of development. GSR practices and standards are just beginning to be developed by EPA, states, and other organizations, such as the American Society for Testing and Materials International. This presentation will compare a variety of approaches and tools that have been developed and can be used to identify and select a green approach or to “green” an existing remedy. The simplest tools include best management practices and “common sense” approaches to resource conservation and emissions reduction process (e.g., reducing motor vehicle idling). Other tools use a Life Cycle Assessment framework, tallying user inputs to calculate total life-cycle energy consumption, emissions, use of water and other resources, waste generation, cost, and other factors. These tools, generally in a spreadsheet form, allow the user to assess the environmental impacts of remedies. They are relatively easy to use, and usually flexible, allowing for site-specific inputs. These tools can be either publically or commercially available. Examples include the Sustainable Remediation Tool developed for the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, SiteWise by Battelle, and spreadsheet tools by ARCADIS/Malcolm Pirnie. This presentation will briefly describe the available tools, key differences, similarities, and uses. Site case studies/scenarios will be presented to compare the results of each approach/tool and extract lessons learned that can be used to inform remedial approaches at a variety of sites. This presentation will help site managers decide what level of detail to include in their evaluation, which tool(s) can be used, and typical outcomes for a variety of site scenarios.
Ms. Laugier is a California-registered professional engineer at Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. in Irvine, California. She obtained her B.S. in Geological Engineering at the Ecole Nationale Superieure de Geologie in Nancy, France and her M.S. in Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of California at Berkeley. She has extensive experience in hazardous waste remediation with an emphasis on site characterization and groundwater and soil remediation for industrial clients. She co-leads the green and sustainable remediation initiative at Malcolm Pirnie and developing sustainable applications for remediation design. Ms. Laugier is involved in SuRF and She is also helping to develop the ASTM Standard Guide on green remediation. She is also a LEED AP and an active member of the U.S. Green Building Council.
In Situ Biogeochemical Degradation of Chlorinated Solvents at Hickam AFB, Hawaii Using Sustainable Remediation Technologies
Dan Leigh and Robert Steffan (Presenter), Shaw Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc.
A pilot study is underway at Hickam Air Force Base in Honolulu, Hawaii, to evaluate sustainable remediation technologies to treat groundwater contaminated by chlorinated solvents. The study incorporates a solar-powered groundwater recirculation system that distributes food-grade substrate, soluble iron, and a dechlorinating microbial culture that is indigenous to Hawaii to restore the groundwater to its original condition.
Very high concentrations of chlorinated ethenes (CEs) and sulfate ions are present in the groundwater at the LF-05 Site at Hickam AFB. The high concentrations of sulfate ions and biologically-produced sulfide ions inhibit the biological degradation of the CEs. Adding lactate to the groundwater instigated the biological reduction of sulfate ions to sulfide ions; however, the elevated sulfide concentrations inhibited the degradation of the CEs. Adding iron (II) chloride to the aquifer effectively precipitated iron (II) sulfide. Upon removal of sulfide ions and distribution of substrate and dechlorinating microbial consortium, rapid biological degradation of the CEs was observed.
AFCEE, Hickam AFB and Shaw E&I, Inc. are conducting a combined laboratory and field study to evaluate the combined abiotic and biotic degradation processes occurring at the LF-05 site. Bench test studies are being conducted to measure the biological and abiotic CE degradation processes in microcosms established with site aquifer matrix and groundwater. In a simultaneous field study at the LF-05 site, a food-grade substrate (lactic acid) iron (II) chloride, and the Hawaii-05™ are distributed through part of a plume contaminated with high levels of CE and sulfate ions using a solar-powered groundwater recirculation system. The rates of degradation of the CEs in the field will be compared to degradation rates measured in the bench tests. The amount of degradation of CEs attributable to abiotic and biotic processes will be determined. These results will be used to define a remediation strategy for LF-05 site.
Dr. Robert J. Steffan earned his Ph.D. in biology from the University of Louisville in 1988, and then received an Alexander von Humbolt Fellowship to perform research at the National Institute for Biotechnology (GBF) in Braunschweig, Germany from 1988 to 1990. He joined Envirogen, Inc. as a research scientist in 1990, and from 2001 to 2003 served as Envirogen’s Vice President of Technology Development. Since the acquisition of Envirogen by Shaw Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc. in March 2003, Dr. Steffan has served as Shaw E&I’s Director of Biotechnology Development and Applications. He has published more than 65 research papers, manuscripts and book chapters, has earned 7 U.S. Patents, and has served on a wide array of national and international committees and scientific review panels. In addition, Dr. Steffan earned a Juris Doctorate degree from the Temple University School of Law in 1997, and he is licensed to practice law in the states of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. He has worked for more than 20 years on the development and application of biotechnologies for treating some of the nation’s most challenging pollutants including chlorinated solvents, MTBE, and 1,4-dioxane.
Brownfields are formerly occupied sites that are now derelict and can only be reused if they are rehabilitated. Brownfield rehabilitation can aim both at managing the physical legacy of the past occupation and making the site available for new development. Three types of environmental impacts can be linked to decisions regarding the management of brownfields: those resulting from changes in the site’s contamination level (primary impacts); those stemming from the site reuse and associated avoided use of other, often suburban, sites (tertiary impacts); and those resulting from the actual rehabilitation processes (secondary impacts).
This project compares the environmental aspects of two management options for a Montreal urban contaminated brownfield using life cycle assessment (LCA). LCA is a holistic environmental assessment tool that allows the compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs, and potential environmental impacts of a product or service throughout its life cycle, from cradle to grave (i.e., from resource extraction and transformation to final disposal, including production and use stages).
The first management option is rehabilitation aimed at transforming a brownfield into residential site. Rehabilitation activities included soil and waste excavation, onsite and offsite landfilling, infrastructure demolishing and site backfilling. The second option is an intervention aimed at minimising risk, where the site is simply covered with a layer of clean soil and the site is abandoned.
The LCA showed that there is a trade-off between primary and secondary impacts: the more ambitious were the requirements in terms of residual quality, the more secondary impacts were generated. The tertiary impacts, however, trumped these trade-offs. The environmental benefits of developing and occupying the site rather than an equivalent suburban were 12 to 17 times greater than the secondary impacts. Rehabilitation is concluded to be the environmentally preferred option, even if primary impacts are excluded from the study.
Pascal Lesage is an associate professor at the CIRAIG at the École Polytechnique de Montréal. He obtained his Ph.D. in 2005 at the École Polytechnique de Montréal. His thesis focused on the environmental assessment of brownfield management options using consequential life cycle assessments. He worked from 2005 to 2007 as a research officer at the CIRAIG and headed the Montreal office of an LCA consulting firm, Sylvatica. He has been acting as associate professor at the CIRAIG since early 2009.
AFCEE Legacy BRAC Performance-Based Remediation: alternative contracting strategies to reduce liabilities by incorporating sustainable practices.
Dennis Lundquist and David Strainge (Presenter), AFCEE
The Air Force has been identifying and promoting sustainable approaches to all areas of restoration program management including performance-based acquisitions. The fence-to-fence Performance Based Remediation (PBR) concept is becoming more common as the Air Force endeavors to reduce overall comprehensive environmental liabilities that oft times extend decades into the future. PBR contracts to be awarded in FY10 will include green remediation and sustainable management approaches as part of the evaluation and source selection criteria. This is a result of the increasing focus on sustainable practices set forth in recent communications including Executive Order 13514 issued on 5 October 2009 by President Obama and the policy on Consideration of Green and Sustainable Remediation Practices issued on 10 August 2009 by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (OSD).
In support of the Air Force Real Property Agency (AFRPA), the Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment (AFCEE) is encouraging sustainable management practices by incorporating a comprehensive approach to all environmental remediation contracts in support of the Air Force’s Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) bases. The June 2010 presentation will provide insight on AFCEE’s incorporation of sustainable practices (green remediation, energy savings, etc.) into the technical evaluation criteria of five whole-base performance based acquisitions collectively valued at approximately $60M. Not only will these performance based acquisitions reduce the burden of long-term environmental liabilities on the tax payer and the war fighter, but they will promote sustainable practices through the incorporation of green remediation efforts and sustainable management approaches.
Dennis E. Lundquist, P.E., R.E.M, has more than 35 years of experience in civil and environmental engineering programs with the United States Air Force on Active Duty, in the reserves, and in Civil Service; he is currently BRAC Program Execution Manager, in the BRAC Conversion Branch, at the Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment (AFCEE), 3300 Sidney Brooks RD., Brooks City-Base, TX 78235.
Mr. Lundguist is responsible for the contract execution of environmental restoration programs valued in excess of $250M at 32 Legacy BRAC and seven BRAC 05 sites for the Air Force Real Property Agency (AFRPA) across the United States. Also responsible for the contract execution of the AFRPA Value Based Transaction (VBT)/ Enhanced Use Lease (EUL) program at 25 major active Air Force installations nationwide valued at over $25M.
Mr. Lundquist holds a B.S. Civil Engineering and M.S. Environmental Engineering, from the University of California at Los Angeles.
Mr. Lundquist retired from the Air Force Reserves in 2000 with the Rank of Colonel.
This presentation compares the carbon footprints of two remediation approaches to address chlorinated solvents in groundwater: in situ bioremediation, groundwater extraction and treatment (pump & treat). The comparison is based on a case study for a site in Tennessee; both approaches were employed.
Pump & treat historically is used to treat groundwater impacted by chlorinated solvents. It has a relatively large carbon footprint compared with in situ remediation technologies, and it can have a high cost to mass removal ratio. In situ bioremediation proves to be a viable approach for in situ destruction of chlorinated solvents. This presentation compares the ability of pump & treat and bioremediation to remove contaminant mass, and evaluates each in terms of carbon footprint and cost.
Focus on bioaugmentation is based on a case study in which percolation of TCE into overburden and bedrock was due to TCE being released into a leaky sewer system. Pump & treat was implemented at the site for over a decade with an annual cost of $50,000 and TCE mass removal rates of about one pound annually. Bioremediation replaced pump & treat in the source area in 2005.
Bioremediation decreased CVOC concentrations on average over 99% at some wells and by 97% within the source area, equating to approximately 13 pounds of aqueous TCE removed in less than three years. In contrast, the carbon footprint of bioremediation was significantly lower than the annual footprint to operate the pump & treat system. The complete bioremediation process emitted less than 1 ton of CO2 (i.e., approximately 1/3 ton/year) versus an estimated 13.5 tons/year for the pump and treat system. The total cost to treat the source area with bioremediation was approximately equal to the cost for 18 months of operation of the pump & treat system.
Mr. Lurgio has a strong background in a wide range of environmental practices from management and planning of large bioremediation project to geotechnical oversite. He attained a bachelor of arts in Environmental Studies from Green Mountain College in Poultney, Vermont in 2002. Mr. Lurgio has managed a variety of industrial and private remediation sites throughout the United States where PCE and TCE have challenged traditional treatment options. He is proficient in at multiple methods for the collection of water, soil, air and gas samples. Mr. Lurgio has also completed diverse wildlife research projects throughout New England and Quebec looking at the connectivity and use of habitat by large ranging carnivores. He has experience with den habitat surveys, track counts, remote camera studies, and water and soil testing.
Increasingly, ecological restoration is being integrated into remedy analyses and decision making to enhance ecological value beyond simply controlling contaminant transport and exposure. For example, bank and shoreline stabilization actions implemented for source control purposes can incorporate significant habitat enhancement measures that include the use of deep rooted, native plants. Where functioning habitats exist, MNR may be a restoration-friendly alternative, because it does not incur short- or long-term construction-related habitat damage.
Because the US Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) cannot mandate supplemental habitat restoration under CERCLA, a regulatory framework for integrating remediation and restoration is lacking. In fact, threats of natural resource damage (NRD) suites and an over preoccupation with contaminant removal often creates an artificial regulatory or legal barrier between remediation and restoration, thus limiting opportunities for habitat enhancement during site remediation processes.
Although U.S. EPA cannot mandate restoration under CERCLA, responsible parties can elect to include restoration elements as part of, or in addition to, remedial actions. Reasons to consider restoration during the remedy selection process include:
- Increasing overall environmental benefits
- Promoting community acceptance
- Offsetting natural resource damage (NRD) liabilities, where applicable.
Increased awareness of habitat restoration opportunities can shift attention from a chemistry-centric focus to a more balanced evaluation of both chemical and non-chemical stressors, to include the overall protectiveness of the environment and habitat quality. At many sites, habitat quality can be more limiting than chemical effects with respect to fish and wildlife populations and effects.
This talk will review opportunities to integrate restoration and remediation, and will present restoration case studies where restoration was an integral component of remediation and ecological recovery.
Kristin Searcy Bell is a Manager at ENVIRON in Chicago, IL. Her environmental engineering experience has focused on sediment management and the fate and transport of contaminants in river systems. Kristin has assisted in the development of conceptual site models for contaminated river sites and used this information to describe historical contaminant deposition and transport, and evaluate potential sediment remedial alternatives. She works with interdisciplinary teams of engineers, risk assessors and ecologists on sediment remediation and restoration projects to select remedy technologies that provide a balance between site-specific effectiveness, cost, and overall protection of the environment.
Ecological revitalization refers to the process of returning land from a contaminated state to one that supports a functioning and sustainable habitat. Although the final decision on how a property is reused is inherently a local decision that often rests with the property owner, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) actively supports and encourages ecological revitalization, when appropriate, during and after the assessment and cleanup of contaminated properties under its cleanup programs. Ecological revitalization of contaminated properties is consistent with EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment, and it is an integral component of EPA’s cleanup programs. Under its cleanup programs, EPA ensures that (1) ecological revitalization does not compromise the protectiveness of the cleanup and (2) the best interests of stakeholders are considered. EPA’s cleanup programs have established initiatives that support ecological revitalization and provide a variety of tools, information resources, and technical assistance. Collaboration and coordination with stakeholders is important for promoting ecological revitalization across EPA’s programs.
Michele Mahoney works on contaminated site restoration within the Superfund program. Michele researches, compiles and communicates information on rehabilitation and remediation of damaged soils at
contaminated sites. Michele studies and educates on the use of soil amendments for remediation and reuse, ecological revitalization, terrestrial carbon sequestration, and urban gardening. She creates easy access to resources and tools available to site managers via www.cluin.org/ecotools.
Michele has worked with EPA for 10 years, and was a consultant to the Agency for 2 years prior to joining. Michele has experience working on organic materials management issues for EPA's Office of Resource Conservation & Recovery (formerly Office of Solid Waste). Michele also worked in EPA's Office of Pesticides Program where she evaluated scientific data and developed hazard and risk assessments on pesticide fate and resulting effect of use on humans and the environment.
Michele earned a B.S. in Agronomy and Environmental Science from Delaware Valley College in Doylestown, PA, and a M.S. in Soil Science from Washington State University in Pullman, WA. Michele is a volunteer Master Gardener of Northern Virginia who promotes environmental horticulture and land stewardship in her community.
The Barker Chemical site was the location of a fungicide manufacturer in a rural part of Niagara County, New York. The site contained two, 1-acre lagoons (on a 10 acre property) that were acidic (pH<2) due to the fungicide production. The lagoons also contained tons of a residual fungicide sludge.
EPA assessed the site with its Environmental Response Team, developed a removal plan that involved stabilization and capping of the fungicide sludge. The stabilization was accomplished in part by utilizing waste lime from a Buffalo, NY brownfield site. The waste lime was a by-product of acetylene gas production and this reuse helped to reduce the volume of materials at the Buffalo Site. The lime was coincidentally impacting a wetlands rehabilitation project being conducted by the New York State Department of Conservation.
Part of the Barker site was capped with stabilized sediments and restored into a prairie grass land with native bluestem and other ecologically useful grasses. The other pond was completely remediated, and restored with sediments from Buckhorn Marsh dredge sediments (a wetland near Niagara Falls). American Elm trees were also planted to replace those destroyed by Dutch Elm disease. The resulting remediation and restoration resulted in an ecologically friendly environment for critters, and redevelopment potential for the front portion of the site.
Site case study will discuss the use of grasses and available marsh materials in providing habitat, summarize community involvement in the process, and discuss trial and error, and other issues that the site presented.
Kevin Matheis is an On Scene Coordinator (OSC) for the U.S. EPA Region 2 Superfund Program. As an OSC, Mr. Matheis is responsible for coordinating cleanup activities at Superfund sites, which include enforcement, technical, community, financial, contractual, and other associated cleanup issues. Mr. Matheis has been employed by EPA in this capacity since 1990. Prior to working for EPA, he worked for three years at Chemical Waste Management, Inc. as a chemical analyst. He received his B.S. in Geosciences from SUNY College at Buffalo in 1987. In addition to OSC duties, Mr. Matheis formarly was a brownfields project manager overseeing the Buffalo projects, a current member of the EPA National OSC Readiness Training Board, guest lecturer at local schools, colleges, EPA-sponsored training, and emergency preparedness programs, and has prepared and presented a removal process course for government officials in Bulgaria.
In fall 2008, EPA launched the RE-Powering America's Land: Siting Renewable Energy on Potentially Contaminated Lands and Mine Sites initiative. EPA worked with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to identify more than 11,000 EPA tracked sites and 15 million acres with potential to generate electricity from renewable resources. Contaminated sites across the country are developing renewable energy resources to support clean up energy needs and offset energy use for the site’s reuse.
This session will describe the resources EPA has developed to identify sites with renewable energy potential, including an interactive Google Earth Mapping tool, national and state renewable energy maps, a searchable dataset, success stories, and federal and state incentive fact sheets. EPA also provides resources, such as liability relief information, on its website (www.epa.gov/renewableenergyland). We will explain how you can use these tools to determine whether your contaminated site has renewable energy generation potential. In addition, it will highlight success stories, where hydroelectric, concentrating solar power, wind, photovoltaic, and landfill gas are being used to power remediation, and will discuss best practices realized from these successful applications.
Lura Matthews is the project lead for EPA’s RE-Powering America’s Land: Siting Renewable Energy on Potentially Contaminated Land and Mine Sites initiative. Ms. Matthews has been at EPA since July 2006, where she has worked on climate change issues related to land and materials for several years, including helping to document and report how materials management and land management decisions relate to greenhouse gas emissions. Ms. Matthews has a Masters in Public Policy from Indiana University’s School of Public and Environmental Affairs and a BA in Economics from Lawrence University in Appleton, WI.
Sustainable Remediation: Green Building Elements of Landfill Cap/Cover Construction Projects at the Barksdale Air Force Base, Bossier City, Louisiana
Brian Meyer and Danielle Davis, Weston Solutions Inc., and Wallave Robertson, Barksdale Air Force Base
The core elements of Green Remediation as promoted in Green Remediation: Incorporating Sustainable Environmental Practices into Remediation of Contaminated Sites (EPA 542-R-08-002) were implemented at the project level and resulted in direct environmental and economic benefits to the Environmental Restoration Program (ERP) at the Barksdale Air Force Base (BAFB). The benefits were achieved by addressing the core elements of green remediation and employing best management practices in green construction materials/methods thereby minimizing materials use and energy costs, recycling of materials, and using native species of plants. The subject sites (3) are locations of former landfills that received construction and demolition debris (C&D), general waste and shop refuse and operated from the mid-1940s until 1988 at the BAFB in northwestern Louisiana. The primary objectives of the remedial actions were to install permanent low permeability soil caps (18-inch thickness) over the former disposal areas to prevent exposure to landfill materials, and inhibit the infiltration of rainwater in order to protect groundwater quality. Material consumption was minimized by utilizing recycled concrete from demolition projects at the Base. This material was crushed, sized and incorporated as aggregate materials for stormwater runoff management and used to construct access roads to the groundwater monitoring network. In addition, the consumption of materials was mitigated by using low permeability soils generated by other base civil works projects. These soils were incorporated as fill and landfill cap material, thereby eliminating the need for soil to be transported from off-base sources. Land and ecosystem impacts were minimized as vegetation was selectively removed from the immediate work areas. Waste minimization was accomplished by chipping and recycling the wood debris and using it as erosion control materials and mulch on the Base hiking trails. Long-term stewardship was enhanced by using native species of drought resistant wildflowers for lasting vegetative cover and habitat restoration, as well as decreased maintenance needs.
Mr. Brian K. Meyer, P.G. is a Senior Project Manager with Weston Solutions Inc. in Atlanta, Georgia and a Doctoral Candidate at Georgia State University. Mr. Meyer received his B.S. in Geology from Georgia Southern University in 1986, and his M.S. in Geology from Georgia State University in 2001. Mr. Meyer’s research interests include contaminant fate/transport, sea level changes and associated coastal dynamics along the Georgia Coast, and groundwater and surface water interactions.
The concepts and practices of sustainability and green remediation have become noticeably more common when it comes to the planning and implementation of site restoration. In addition to these key practices, the use and awareness of green chemistry as it applies to the actual materials and products used to accomplish the cleanup are of equal importance especially when assessing the sustainability of an entire project.
The term “green” in green chemistry is used to describe processes, products, or activities that have little or no detrimental effects to the environment and human health and safety. In recent years, the American Chemical Society (ACS) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) have emphasized the importance of green chemistry for the chemical industry. The U.S. EPA defines this concept as follows: “Green Chemistry, also known as sustainable chemistry, is the design of chemical products and processes that reduce or eliminate the use or generation of hazardous substances. Green chemistry applies across the life cycle, including the design, manufacture, and use of a chemical product.”
To further define the concept of green chemistry, both the U.S. EPA and the ACS have cited the book “Green Chemistry, Theory and Practice” by Anastas and Warner, which defines twelve principles of green chemistry. In the context of these twelve principles, certain products and materials used to facilitate soil and groundwater remediation can be classified as being “green” or meeting some or all of the green chemistry principles. This presentation will outline the 12 principles of green chemistry and evaluate specific enhanced bioremediation products including both electron donors and electron acceptors as well as in-situ chemical oxidants in relation to these principles.
Maureen Dooley is Northeast Region Manager for Regenesis in Wakefield, Massachusetts
The Pioneer Valley Resource Recovery Facility located on the banks of the Connecticut River in the Town of Agawam, MA, is a model case study for remediation that took place well over 25 years ago. Through intergovernmental cooperation, the now-called Covanta Springfield energy-from-waste facility should serve as a model for green site remediation as well as green energy production.
This presentation will walk attendees through the issues and challenges of siting a waste-to-energy facility in Agawam on the former City of Springfield maintenance garage, next door to the regional wastewater treatment plant, across the street from a notorious landfill and across the river from the nationally known Basketball Hall of Fame. This successful remediation project should serve as an early example for consideration when applying today’s even more sophisticated remediation techniques.
Additionally, modern energy-from-waste facilities can provide much needed, safe, disposal options for certain products discovered during remediation sitework. The presentation will cover existing and potential examples of this opportunity including the combustion of fats, oils and grease.
Margretta Morris is Director of Environmental Science & Community Affairs for Covanta Energy's North East Region. She obtained her Bachelor's Degree in Geography from Radford College, the Women's Division of VPI. Her career in solid waste management spans 25 years including time in the public, private and not-for-profit sectors specializing in reuse, recycling, composting and energy-from-waste. She is a Past President of the National Recycling Coalition and currently is on the board of several state recycling organizations as well as the Go Green Initiative. She has made numerous presentations locally, nationally and globally on various aspects of best practices in solid waste management.
This presentation describes green components of traditional remedy selections, and how green metrics can be applied to remedial decisions. In addition to increased cost accountability, sustainable solutions are sought, with transparent bases and measures. EPA and other agencies continue to issue new policies and guidance requiring transparent and sustainable decision-making. EPA’s latest guidance offers five green elements (energy, air pollutants, water, materials, and land management); each affords green opportunities at multiple levels. While “sustainability” and “green” are new terms, the traditional CERCLA remedy selection criteria already include several sustainability components.
Remedy selections compliant with CERCLA apply nine criteria to remedy selection; four of the five balancing criteria contain sustainable components - “long term effectiveness,” “reduction in toxicity, mobility and volume,” “cost,” and “implementability.” Previously issued CERCLA RODs, for example, Boarhead Farms (PA) and Imperial Oil (NJ), illustrate that sustainable components have been included in prior RODs.
New RODs may emphasize sustainable components of remediation; measures of green remediation are needed to convey transparency. This paper identifies and applies three levels for the evaluation of sustainable remedies:
A. Direct components integral to the remedy,
B. Offsite components, and
C. Indirect off site components (upstream costs and benefits).
These levels are converted to relative measures for four recent remedial decisions including two at Phoenix award brownfields sites, Fulton Fish Market (NYC) and Bethlehem Steel (PA), and two at CERCLA sites. The cases illustrate that the sustainable benefits directly related to the remedy implementation are the most clear and objective when measuring green.
Achieving transparency in sustainable remediation requires that the remedy selection is protective of human health and the environment, and that it is sustainable in the short and long term. EPA, ASTM, and others continue to develop a variety of methods and metrics for measuring green.
Mr. Musso, P.E. is experienced in site investigations, human health risk and exposure assessments, and remedial design projects. He has developed conceptual designs and cost evaluations for remedial and other engineering projects. Mr. Musso holds a B.S. degree in Civil Engineering, and advanced degrees in Environmental Engineering and Public Health. He has presented papers on various aspects of site investigation and remediation.