A Practical Guide to Estimating Cleanup Costs

Cost estimates are frequently developed to evaluate hazardous‐waste‐site cleanup options in support of a site investigation, remedy selection decision, or assessment of environmental liabilities. The accuracy of the cost estimate depends largely on the quality of the information available at the time it is prepared. This article presents a practical guide to developing a cleanup cost estimate. It includes information on how to document assumptions, use the latest technical resources, and perform basic adjustments to account for uncertainty and the time value of money. The content is based upon a recent guidance document issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers entitled A Guide to Developing and Documenting Cost Estimates during the Feasibility Study (USEPA, 2000). © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

How changing regulations determine biotreatment options for petroleum wastes

Remediation of refinery wastes is regulated by three major federal environmental statutes: the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); other statutes apply, but to a lesser degree. During the past two years, RCRA's rules have effectively outlawed the passive biological treatment of primary refinery waste sludges in waste ponds and lagoons, even though the law recommends active biological treatment as the second stage in the waste treatment train. RCRA's land disposal restrictions may also outlaw land farming treatment for the bottom sludges involved in crude oil storage. Since 1980, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency listed an initial group of five waste streams as hazardous, the agency has listed two more waste streams and twenty-five organic constituents, several found in petroleum wastes. Now it is about to list fourteen more petroleum refining wastes and is studying the addition of fifteen more waste streams. Treatment standards and restrictions have also been promulgated. This article explores the biotreatment techniques and technologies that are still available to petroleum and environmental engineers.     

Characterizing a Brownfields recreational reuse scenario using the Triad Approach–Assunpink Creek Greenways project

Since the early 1990s the U.S. government has been developing and implementing public policies that advance the redevelopment of brownfields, and the recent passage of the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (SBLRBRA) will significantly advance efforts to integrate environmental contamination mitigation and redevelopment. Experience has demonstrated that successful redevelopment requires the collection, analysis, and interpretation of environmental data in a timely and cost‐effective manner in order to allow developers and lenders to efficiently use cleanup resources, develop response strategies that integrate cleanup with redevelopment, and support meaningful outreach to involved stakeholders. Recent advances in the science and technology of site characterization hold the promise of improved site characterization outcomes while saving time and money. One such advancement, the Triad Approach, combines systematic up‐front planning with the use of a dynamic field investigation process and the generation of real time data to allow in‐field decision making on sample location selection. This article describes an application of the Triad Approach to redevelopment of an urban greenway in Trenton, New Jersey. The Triad Approach, initiated through a partnership between the City of Trenton, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, New Jersey Institute of Technology, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, demonstrated that this approach could accelerate the characterization of the 60‐acre, 11‐parcel project area. Environmental issues that were solved using the Triad Approach included the delineation of the extent of historic fill, determination of no further action for several areas of concern, detailed investigation of specific impacted areas and the acquisition of sufficient data to allow the city to make important decisions regarding remediation costs and property acquisition. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Team approaches to the development of innovative technologies and processes to facilitate remediation

The enactment of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) created a complex liability scheme for owners, operators and prospective purchasers of contaminated properties, particularly brownfields. As the program developed, liability issues related to contiguous property, prospective purchasers, and no further action determinations became barriers to brownfield property redevelopment. The national effort on the cleanup and redevelopment of brownfield sites took on new emphasis with the passing of the federal “Small Business Liability Protection and Brownfields Revitalization Act” in January 2002. This new law provides liability clarifications as well as funding to facilitate the cleanup of brownfield sites. President Bush stated in his 2003 State of the Union address, “In this century, the greatest environmental progress will come about not through endless lawsuits or command‐and‐control regulations, but through technology and innovation.” The subject of this article is the Interstate Technology Regulatory Commission's Brownfield team, its current initiative, goals, and areas of special focus. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

A Slice of Guidance Provides Some Insight to Addressing Contaminated Sediments

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued guidance to improve cleanup risk management decisions at sites involving contaminated sediments. The guidance is titled Principles for Managing Contaminated Sediment Risks at Hazardous Waste Sites and is important because sediment cleanup decisions are often very technical and complex. While the guidance is not a step‐by‐step “how to” document, it does provide the framework for risk‐based decision making and national consistency. Although it does not answer the more technical questions associated with remediation, it will likely provide site managers with greater certainty related to their decisions and help determine what questions need to be asked for many complex issues. Additional and forthcoming EPA reports, seminars, and products will be useful in building upon this framework. This article provides an overview of the risk management principles presented in the guidance. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Understanding and Managing Indoor Air Exposure Assessments at RCRA Sites

The 2000 RCRA National Conference was conducted August 15‐17, 2000, in Washington, D.C., to allow state and federal authorities to review regulatory issues associated with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program. One of the RCRA reform issues discussed at the conference included the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Environmental Indicators (EI). EIs have been designed to provide clarity in cleanup objectives and spur progress towards meeting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA's) national RCRA cleanup goals. This article focuses on the human exposure indicator and, more specifically, on indoor air exposures and how to assess whether such exposure is actually occurring. While indoor air exposure can be a critical component of the human exposure scenarios, realistic predictions of the exposures are difficult to produce. This article provides an overview of the regulatory issues related to the indoor air exposure pathway. It also discusses the use of modeling in criteria development and risk evaluation and presents a case study of how the USEPA wants the modeling to occur, and an opinion of where this RCRA reform issue is heading and how to evaluate indoor air exposures.     

Use of open-path FTIR spectroscopy to address air monitoring needs during site remediations

Although open-path Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy has been an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Toxic Organic Compendium Method since 1996, it has been underutilized as a means to assess exposure to gaseous contaminants during the remediation of hazardous waste sites. This might be considered surprising in light of the many benefits that proper application of this technology can offer. In this article, we provide an overview of the technology and the principle of operation, describe the nature of the data generated, discuss the benefits associated with the technology's use in site clean-up, present emission-rate estimation techniques, and examine the reasons why it has not gained more support over the years. Finally, we present a case study in which the technology was used to drive an 11-month emergency removal action under the direction of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.     

Methodology and model for performance and cost comparison of innovative treatment technologies at wood preserving sites

Wood preserving facilities have used a variety of compounds, including pentachlorophenol (PCP), creosote, and certain metals, to extend the useful life of wood products. Past operations and waste management practices resulted in soil and water contamination at a portion of the more than 700 wood preserving sites in the United States (EPA, 1997). Many of these sites are currently being addressed under federal, state, or voluntary cleanup programs. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) has responded to the need for information aimed at facilitating remediation of wood preserving sites by conducting treatability studies, issuing guidance, and preparing reports. This article presents a practical methodology and computer model for screening the performances and comparing the costs of seven innovative technologies that could be used for the treatment of contaminated soils at user‐specified wood preserving sites. The model incorporates a technology screening function and a cost‐estimating function developed from literature searches and vendor information solicited for this study. This article also provides background information on the derivation of various assumptions and default values used in the model, common contaminants at wood preserving sites, and recent trends in the cleanup of such sites. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

Remediation,land use,and risk at Rocky Flats,and a comparison with Hanford

US Department of Energy (US DOE) responsibilities for its former national atomic weapons complex include remediation of the Rocky Flats facility near Denver, Colorado. In 1993, the site's primary mission shifted from “production'' of plutonium components for atomic weapons to cleanup of extensive radioactive and chemical contamination representing the legacy of production activities. Remediation was governed by the agreements between the US DOE as the responsible party and the US Environmental Protection Agency and the state of Colorado as joint regulators. In 1995, the Rocky Flats Future Use Working Group issued its final report, recommending among other features that long‐term cleanup reduce contamination levels to background. This article describes the circumstances that led the US DOE to complete the Rocky Flats cleanup more quickly and makes comparisons to the situation at the US DOE's Hanford site. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Transuranic waste remediation in Idaho: Pit 9, failed contracts,and lawsuits

The U.S. Department of Energy (US DOE) remediation responsibilities include its Idaho National Laboratory. In 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency placed the Idaho site on its National Priority List for environmental cleanup. The site's contamination legacy from operations included inactive reactors and other structures, spent nuclear fuel, high‐level liquid radioactive wastes, calcined radioactive wastes, and transuranic wastes. Documents governing cleanup include a 1995 Settlement Agreement between the US DOE and the US Navy as responsible parties, and the State of Idaho. The Subsurface Disposal Area contains buried transuranic wastes, lies above the East Snake River Plain Aquifer, and could be the “site's most nettlesome cleanup issue,” according to an outside observer. This article describes the technical and legal difficulties that have been encountered in remediating this area. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Remediation of the Radioactive Waste Landfill and Chemical Disposal Pits Sites at Sandia National Laboratories

Sandia National Laboratories' Environmental Restoration (ER) Project remediated the Radioactive Waste Landfill and Chemical Disposal Pits (RWL/CDPs) sites located in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The remediation was conducted in 1996 using conventional excavation, as well as hybrid remote robotic manipulation technology at a cost of approximately $3 million. Wastes generated included approximately 73 cubic meters (m³) of debris (including thermal batteries, spark gap tubes, radioactive sources, weapons components, and some classified material), 535 m³ of plutonium-contaminated soil, and 2,294 m³ of soil contaminated with thorium, cesium, uranium, and tritium. The remediation was successful since the project goal of risk reduction was accomplished and no injuries or negative occurrences resulted. This cleanup is one example of the Department of Energy's (DOE's) accelerated approach to environmental restoration. The remediation was performed as a voluntary corrective measure to reduce schedule and budget, compared with the traditional approach following Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations.     

Rocky Flats,plutonium, and controversy: Citizen activists provide institutional memory

The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) selected Rocky Flats, east of the Rocky Mountains, as the site to fabricate “plutonium pits,” triggers for H‐bombs, and operations began in 1952. Press reports revealed the plant's connection to atomic weapons in 1956. Denver is downwind and “downslope” by about 16 miles. As western suburbs moved closer to Rocky Flats over time, plant accidents sent plutonium and other contaminants offsite. In 1989, armed agents of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation raided the facility, and the plant operator, Rockwell International, subsequently pleaded guilty to criminal environmental violations. By this time, the U.S. Department of Energy had inherited responsibility for Rocky Flats and atomic weapons production. In 1993, the primary mission at Rocky Flats became cleanup of contamination from plutonium and other hazardous substances. Under Energy's “Accelerated Cleanup” plan, remediation was certified complete in 2005 by the Department's cleanup regulators, EPA, and the Colorado Department of Public Health. But planned uses for the “buffer zone” around the facility's central industrial area, and for off‐site areas continued to generate public controversy. This article examines the controversy and reports on general “stewardship” concepts for long‐term waste management.     

Hanford remediation at 20 years: A glass half‐empty

The U.S. Department of Energy's (US DOE's) responsibilities for its former national nuclear weapons complex include remediation of the Hanford Site in Washington State. In 1989, the site's primary mission shifted from nuclear weapons material production to cleanup of the extensive radioactive and chemical contamination that represented the production legacy. Cleanup is governed by the Tri‐Party Agreement (TPA), between the US DOE, as responsible party, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Washington State Department of Ecology, as joint regulators. Nearly 20 years have passed since the TPA was signed, but the Hanford remediation is expected to require decades longer. This article covers the cleanup progress to date and challenges that remain, particularly from millions of gallons of highly radioactive liquid wastes and proposals to bring new wastes to Hanford. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Remediation Technologies Screening Matrix and Reference Guide: Version III

The U. S. Army Environmental Center (USAEC) is leading an effort to update the Remediation Technologies Screening Matrix and Reference Guide, Third Edition under the auspices of the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable (FRTR). Its purpose is to create a comprehensive “Remediation Technologies Yellow Pages” for use by those responsible for environmental cleanup. The Guide is being produced as a multiagency cooperative effort published under the FRTR. Members of this effort include USAEC, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center (NFESC), the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Energy (DOE), the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Interstate Technologies Regulation Cooperative (ITRC). This article provides a comprehensive look at environmental technology information provided in the electronic user-defined Remediation Technologies Screening Matrix and Reference Guide.     

Accessing EPA's hazardous waste remediation technology information

Hazardous waste remediation technologies are rapidly evolving, and it is a challenge for environmental consultants and those working in the government and public sectors to remain current with those technologies. Fortunately, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through a variety of programs and initiatives, has been a leader in providing information on hazardous waste remediation technologies. This article provides an overview of EPA remediation programs and guides the reader through valuable EPA information sources including publications, databases, and on-line services.     

Travis Air Force Base: A greener cleanups case study

Travis Air Force Base, California, has accelerated the pace of remediation while reducing long‐term costs and cutting greenhouse gas production. This has been achieved through optimizing existing systems and processes, adopting greener cleanups best management practices, and testing and implementing innovative “green” technologies. By optimizing and replacing existing systems that used energy‐intensive infrastructure, and by promoting the use of innovative in situ technologies, the US Air Force (Air Force) led team comprised of the Air Force Civil Engineer Center, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the performance‐based contractor CH2M, and the regulatory agencies consisting of the US Environmental Protection Agency, the California Water Board, and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, has reduced annual system operation and maintenance costs by over $200,000 per year, while reducing annual carbon dioxide production by approximately 930 tons per year. As a result of these actions, chlorinated solvent source areas have been reduced by over 99 percent in some cases, and the predicted cleanup time frame for multiple sites has been reduced by several decades. This article provides a case study for implementation of cost‐effective greener cleanup actions, and summarizes the approach taken by the Air Force led team to complete the greener cleanups self‐declaration process consistent with the ASTM International's E‐2893 Standard Guide for Greener Cleanups.     

Low waste feed concentrations and destruction removal efficiency

In the early 1980s, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) funded research on destruction and removal efficiencies (DREs) at eight hazardous waste incinerators. This research appeared to show that DREs of 99.99% could not be achieved at low waste feed principal hazardous organic constituent (POHC) concentrations. During the mid 1980s and 1990s however, testing at Superfund sites has indicated that DREs of 99.9999% or greater can be achieved at low waste feed POHC concentrations. This paper will summarize testing which includes 32 test runs at five Superfund sites and the EPA's incineration research facility. The tests include POHC concentrations from 6552 parts per million down to 28 parts per million at typical DREs of 6–9 s or greater.     

Evaluation of the available air pollution control technologies for achievement of the MACT requirements in the newly implemented new source performance standards (NSPS) and emission guidelines (EG) for hospital and medical/infectious waste incinerators

After many years of research and debate, in August of 1997 the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and Emission Guidelines (EG) for medical/infectious waste incinerators in the United States. These new emissions and operational standards establish considerably more restrictive limitations on air emissions for medical/infectious waste incinerators and will undoubtedly have a significant impact on the over 2300 hospitals presently operating an incinerator on-site. This paper will explore the options available to these facilities, and those facilities which may be considering installation of an incinerator, relative to achieving compliance with the NSPS and EG for medical/infectious waste incinerators.     

National monument locations and remediation of World War II battle sites

In December 2008, George W. Bush established the World War II Valor in the Pacific National Monument, including eight locations connected with World War II fighting. The executive proclamation designating the monument briefly described the individual sites, mentioning remaining battlefield debris. World War II battle locations in Hawaii and Alaska are currently designated for remediation under different programs of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or Department of Defense (DOD). The Pearl Harbor Naval Complex is a “Superfund” National Priority List site. Former military locations in the Aleutian Islands, involved in Japanese occupation and the U.S. offensive to regain control, are included in DOD's Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) remediation program. These monument sites, the regulatory frameworks of the applicable programs, and the current cleanup status are described. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.