Accelerating environmental cleanup at DOE sites: Monitored natural attenuation/enhanced attenuation—A basis for a new paradigm

The U.S. Department of Energy is conducting a project to accelerate remediation through the use of monitored natural attenuation and enhanced attenuation for chlorinated ethenes in soils and groundwater. Better monitoring practices, improved scientific understanding, and an advanced regulatory framework are being sought through a team effort that engages technology developers from academia, private industry, and government laboratories; site cleanup managers; stakeholders; and federal and state regulators. The team works collaboratively toward the common goals of reducing risk, accelerating cleanup, reducing cost, and minimizing environmental disruption. Cutting‐edge scientific advances are being combined with experience and sound environmental engineering in a broadly integrated and comprehensive approach that exemplifies socalled “third‐generation R&D.” The project is potentially a model for other cleanup activities. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Perchlorate: Sources,uses, and occurrences in the environment

Perchlorate contamination of groundwater and soil continues to be a hot topic in many sectors, including industry, the federal Departments of Defense and Energy, regulators, and the general public. This article presents information on what is currently known regarding perchlorate uses, known and suspected naturally occurring versus anthropogenic perchlorate sources, and past and present manufacturing locations. It provides the reader with a baseline as well as background information to facilitate an understanding of perchlorate in the environment for the ultimate purpose of remediation. The article is based on research conducted by the Interstate Technology Regulatory Council for a forthcoming, more substantial perchlorate overview document scheduled for publication later in 2005. The document will include an overview of the chemical and discussions of remediation techniques and methods of analysis. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Hazardous Substance Research Centers program: An incubator for remediation research

The Hazardous Substance Research Center (HSRC) was established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to assist in the implementation of Superfund and to address major hazardous substance environmental problems at a regional level. Over the past 12 years, the HSRC program has produced more than 1,200 peer‐reviewed technical articles, 27 patents and licenses, 21 new technologies for the remediation marketplace, and provided technical assistance to more than 300 communities. Research, technology transfer, and training are conducted by five regional multi‐university centers, which focus on different aspects of hazardous substance management. Areas of focus include urban environments, contaminated sediments, natural remediation and restoration technologies, abandoned mine lands, and chlorinated solvents in groundwater. This article provides an overview of the five HSRC programs including current areas of research, field studies, and technology transfer Internet links to access research results and remediation technology information. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

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.     

Managing contaminated sites and the role of domestic and international forums

Domestic and international cooperation in the field of contaminated‐site management has increased dramatically in the past decade. The expected benefits of this cooperation include the reduction of duplication in remediation efforts, the coordination of contaminated‐site research, improved synergy between various stakeholders, enhanced policy development, and better information dissemination and technology transfer. This article identifies and briefly discusses key domestic and international collaborations, partnerships, and networks relating to contaminated‐site management and remediation. Also provided is information on how the forums can be accessed. Common themes identified across the forums discussed in this article include (1) the development and demonstration of innovative technologies, (2) the use of risk assessment, (3) the use of toxicology, bioavailability, and ecotoxicity testing, and (4) the increasing need to find holistic approaches for managing contaminated sites, such as guaranteed remediation programs and transfer of environment liability, and the need for understanding implications of remediation financing mechanisms. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

End‐state land uses,sustainably protective systems,and risk management: A challenge for remediation and multigenerational stewardship

This article discusses creating a sustainably protective engineered and human management system in perpetuity for sites with long‐lived radiological and chemical hazards. This is essential at this time because the federal government is evaluating its property as assets and attempting to reduce its holdings, while seeking to assure that health and ecosystems are not put at risk. To assist those who have a stake in the remediation, management, and stewardship of these and analogous privately owned sites, this article discusses current end‐state planning by reviewing the federal government's accelerated efforts to reduce its footprint and how those efforts relate to sustainability. The article also provides a list of questions organized around six elements of risk management and primary, secondary, and tertiary disease and injury prevention. Throughout the article, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is used as an example of an organization that seeks to reduce its footprint, manage its budget, and be a steward of the sites that it is responsible for. However, the approach and questions are appropriate for land controlled by the Department of Defense (DOD), the General Services Administration (GSA), and other public and private owners of sites with residual contamination. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Nanoremediation and International Environmental Restoration Markets

Nanoscale zero‐valent iron (nZVI) is the most commonly used nanoremediation material. While there has been a reasonable level of application of nZVI technologies for in situ remediation in the United States, its utilization across Europe has been much more limited. There has been significant uncertainty about the balance between deployment risks and benefits for nanoparticles (NPs), which has affected the regulatory position in several countries. Some member states of the European Union (EU) take a strong precautionary view of the risks from the deployment of NPs into the subsurface, preventing the adoption of the technology. This article provides a risk–benefit assessment for nZVI based on published information and describes the steps that will be taken by a major European research project (NanoRem), as part of its work to provide a basis for better informed decision making in European environmental restoration markets. A key part of this process is dialogue between practitioners and researchers. NanoRem therefore has an active process of communication with different stakeholder networks (regulators, service providers, and site owners). NanoRem hopes to stimulate a consensus on appropriate use of nanoremediation and thereby stimulate effective technology transfer to the European remediation market. ©2015 The Authors     

Remediation,land use,and risk at Hanford

U.S. Department of Energy (US DOE) remediation responsibilities include the Hanford site in Washington State. Cleanup is governed by the Tri‐Party Agreement (TPA) between the US DOE as the responsible party and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Washington State Department of Ecology as joint regulators. In 2003, the US DOE desired to implement a “Risk‐Based End State” (RBES) policy at Hanford, with remediation measures driven by acceptable risk standards using exposure scenarios based on the 1999 Hanford Comprehensive Land‐Use Plan. Facing resistance from regulators and stakeholders, the US DOE solicited public input on its policy. This led to a Hanford Site End State Vision in 2005 and a commitment that the TPA would continue to control remediation. This article describes how regulator and public participation modified RBES to an end‐state vision. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Managing environmental problems during transitions: The department of energy as a case study

Many federal, state, and private agencies deal with long‐term environmental problems within a transition framework where political administrations, funds, regulators, regulatory requirements, environmental conditions, and tribal and stakeholder concerns change. In this article, we examine the types of transitions, as well as important stabilities, that agencies face, the interactions with stakeholders that are vulnerable to disruption or failure, and some of the problems that develop as a result of these conditions, using the U.S. Department of Energy (US DOE's) Office of Environmental Management (EM) as a case study. Transitions, or instabilities, include changes in administrations at the federal, state, and local level; public perceptions and concerns; political climate; available funds; environmental conditions (e.g., global climate change, global contaminant transport, local and regional contamination); international and national business conditions; and site conditions (physical, chemical, biological). Governmental agencies operate under several different kinds of uncertainties, including scientific, fiscal‐year economic, technological, and societal. Not all information can be known, and the outcomes from scientific issues or technologies cannot always be predicted. The authors believe that transitions from one set of conditions to another can be more effectively integrated with the long‐term stability of environmental laws and regulations, and with the stability of the treaty rights and concerns of tribal nations, as well as the shorter‐term stability of career personnel and established programs. A sense of stability for government agencies allowing maintenance of ongoing environmental management programs can also be achieved through processes and programs, such as establishing long‐term contracts (for remediation or restoration work), schedule and scope documents, future land‐use documents, National Environmental Research Parks (which obligate lands to study and conservation), and other programs that set the direction of work and activities for many years. Further, two other factors are essential for success within any agency facing transitions: (1) expectations should be both forward‐looking and realistic, and (2) there must be flexibility in both programs and processes. The authors conclude that several features are essential to addressing some of the problems created by transitions, including information, integration, iteration, interaction, and inclusion. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Communication at inactive hazardous waste sites

The remediation of inactive hazardous waste sites frequently involves a protracted negotiation with the respective state or federal agency and the entity responsible for creating the site and paying the costs. At orphaned sites, decisions are made almost exclusively by agency staff. Most of remedial decisions are made with little input or participation by the interested public. The public usually receives information in a highly technical and difficult-to-understand format after decisions are made. This ineffective form of communication can lead to mistrust and delays or changes in the remediation process. Effective public participation requires multidirectional modes of communication that provide for active and full involvement by all interested parties. At the present time, most agencies pay minimal attention to the needs of the interested public, often leaving area residents suspicious and dissatisfied with the overall program. There is an opportunity to significantly improve the public participation component of the federal Super-fund program through reauthorization. Subtle changes in the program can result in a significant increase of the public's sense of participation and overall satisfaction.     

Effectiveness of Capture Zones Generated by Intermittent Pumping of a PV‐Powered Pump‐and‐Treat System Without Energy Storage

A common technology to remediate and/or contain contaminated groundwater is pump‐and‐treat remediation (P&T). Traditionally, P&T systems have been designed to operate continuously to achieve steady‐state capture zones, for which large amounts of energy are required. Green and sustainable remediation (GSR) is emerging as a viable method to minimize the adverse effects of remediation on the environment. One of the challenges associated with photovoltaic‐ (PV‐) powered P&T systems is the assessment of their performance given the intermittent nature of the power availability. This article characterizes the hydraulic containment effectiveness of a PV‐powered P&T system without energy storage using data collected at two different remediation sites, a Dry‐Cleaning Environmental Response Trust Fund site in Rolla, Missouri, and the Former Nebraska Ordnance Plant near Mead, Nebraska. Additionally, a method to estimate the effectiveness of the hydraulic containment as a function of the total volume of groundwater expected to be extracted is being proposed. Two transient and a continuously pumped capture zones were modeled using Visual MODFLOW^® 2012.1 along with MODPATH and compared. The study shows that smaller capture zones will be generated from intermittent pumping when compared to continuous pumping. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Environmental impacts associated with manufacturing of solar and wind power alternative energy systems

The Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment (AFCEE) is performing Environmental Restoration Program Optimization (E‐RPO) at various United States Air Force (USAF) installations to evaluate existing remediation strategies and recommend actions to advance issues impacting the remediation program. As sustainability practices (including green and sustainable remediation [GSR]) increase at Air Force facilities and throughout the environmental industry, the use of alternative energy‐collection sources (i.e., solar photovoltaics [PV] and wind turbines) is likely to increase dramatically. Although PV and wind power systems exhibit a low environmental footprint during their use, there are potential human health and environmental impacts from the manufacturing and recycling processes. This article presents a summary of available information regarding the environmental impacts associated with life‐cycle assessments that include raw material extraction and refinement, product manufacturing, use, and postuse disposal for PV and wind turbines (i.e., cradle‐to‐grave impacts). © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

An evaluation of permeable reactive barrier projects in California

Permeable reactive barriers made of zero‐valent iron (ZVI PRBs) have become a prominent remediation technology in addressing groundwater contamination by chlorinated solvents. Many ZVI PRBs have been installed across the United States, some as research projects, some at the pilot scale, and many at full scale. As a passive and in situ remediation technology, ZVI PRBs have many attractive features and advantages over other approaches to groundwater remediation. Ten ZVI PRBs installed in California were evaluated for their performance. Of those ten, three are discussed in greater detail to illustrate the complexities that arise when quantifying the performance of ZVI PRBs, and to provide comment on the national debate concerning the downgradient effects of source‐zone removal or treatment on plumes of contaminated groundwater. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The challenge of remediation technology development

A huge commercial environmental industry, currently estimated at some $130 billion in size in the United States alone, has sprung up to manage and remediate environmental problems. Hundreds of innovative remediation technologies are being developed under EPA's SITE program, which has provided R&D funding for more than 100 new treatment technologies. Despite the obvious demand, numerous regulatory, marketing, technical, and financial barriers have impeded progress in the field of remediation technology development. Developers of remediation technologies are faced with a significant challenge to overcome these barriers and successfully bring a technology to market. This article examines the barriers to technology development and offers strategic planning alternatives for long-term economic success and commercial viability of remediation technologies.     

Remote monitoring and control of hazardous waste remediation activities

With increasingly stringent federal, state, and local regulations, reliable operation of environmental remediation systems is critical. Most environmental systems are required to operate continuously—night and day—and to be closely monitored for performance and reporting. For the owners of these systems, the cost associated with their long-term operation and monitoring is a growing concern. This article describes a cost-effective solution to control and monitor these systems, both locally and from remote locations. Two case studies are provided.     

Resilience: A New Consideration for Environmental Remediation in an Era of Climate Change

There has been a growing movement within the environmental industry to develop more sustainable approaches in environmental remediation. These have generally included carbon footprint analysis, life cycle assessment, and best management practices to reduce the overall net environmental, social, and economic impacts of investigation and remediation activities. One of the foundational reasons net environmental impacts are currently evaluated is to identify and, subsequently, reduce contributions to climate change, primarily greenhouse gas emissions. While this trend toward sustainability and reduction in impact to the global environment is both important and admirable, the approach to remediation design and long‐term planning now needs to evolve further to better incorporate climate resilience into sustainable remediation design and implementation: designing remediation solutions that account for the projected impacts of climate change, as well as have the capacity to adapt to changing conditions. As a global population, we are now beyond the point of being able to prevent climate change and instead need to plan for adapting to it. In remediation, the effects of climate change create both risks and opportunities which should be considered during remedial design and long‐term planning. Responsible parties may see the push for—and management of—these considerations through their internal corporate risk management. The authors of this paper propose a simple framework for climate adaptation and resilience evaluations and plan development for remediation projects. ©2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Directionally drilled horizontal wells offer cost savings and technical advantages over alternative soil and groundwater remediation systems

Directionally drilled horizontal wells offer the opportunity for significant cost savings and technical advantages over alternative trenched well and vertical well soil and groundwater remediation systems in many cases. The magnitude of the cost savings is a function of the remediation technology deployed and the values placed on the reduction of site impacts, dramatic reduction in the time required to achieve site remediation goals and requirements, the ability of horizontal well remediation to easily treat normally recalcitrant contaminants such as MTBE, and the ability to drill under paved areas, operating plants, residential areas, landfills, lagoons, waterways, ponds, basins, and other areas that are normally difficult or impossible to access with conventional drilling or trenching methods. In addition to improvements in site access capabilities, horizontal wells have been found capable of addressing contaminants that vertical wells do not readily treat, even with the same remediation technology deployed, especially if air‐based remediation technologies are deployed. With biosparging, for example, greater treatment capabilities of horizontal wells over vertical wells are attributed to greater oxygen flux over a broader area, a larger treatment zone, and extremely prolonged residence of groundwater contaminants in the aerobic treatment area, typically months or years. This article describes the use of directionally drilled horizontal wells for application of a variety of treatment technologies and includes costs of various options with a detailed comparison of biosparging options. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Guidance for performing footprint analyses and life‐cycle assessments for the remediation industry

The US Sustainable Remediation Forum (SURF) proposes a nine‐step process for conducting and documenting a footprint analysis and life‐cycle assessment (LCA) for remediation projects. This guidance is designed to assist remediation practitioners in evaluating the impacts resulting from potential remediation activities so that preventable impacts can be mitigated. Each of the nine steps is flexible and scalable to a full range of remediation projects and to the tools used by remediation practitioners for quantifying environmental metrics. Two fictional case studies are presented to demonstrate how the guidance can be implemented for a range of evaluations and tools. Case‐study findings show that greater insight into a study is achieved when the nine steps are followed and additional opportunities are provided to minimize remediation project footprints and create improved sustainable remediation solutions. This guidance promotes a consistent and repeatable process in which all pertinent information is provided in a transparent manner to allow stakeholders to comprehend the intricacies and tradeoffs inherent in a footprint analysis or LCA. For these reasons, SURF recommends that this guidance be used when a footprint analysis or LCA is completed for a remediation project. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Debunking myths about sustainable remediation

Sustainable remediation concepts have evolved during the decade 2007–2017. From the establishment of the first Sustainable Remediation forum (SURF) in 2007, to publication of ASTM and ISO standards by 2017. Guidance has been developed around the world to reflect local regulatory systems, and much has been learned in applying sustainability assessment to contaminated site management projects. In the best examples, significant improvements in project sustainability have been delivered, including concurrent reduction of the environmental footprint of the remediation program, improved social performance, and cost savings and/or value creation. The initial advocates for the concept of sustainable remediation were quickly supported by early adopters who saw its potential to improve the remediation industry's performance, but they also had to overcome some inertia and scepticism from other parties. During the debates and discussions that occurred at numerous international conferences and SURF workshops around the world, various opinions were formed and positions stated. Some proved to be correct, others not so. With the recent publication of ISO Standard 18504 and the benefit of a decade's‐worth of hindsight on sustainable remediation programs implementation and project delivery, this paper summarizes a number of myths and misunderstandings that have been stated regarding sustainable remediation and seeks to debunk them. Sustainable remediation assessment shows us how to manage unacceptable risks to human health and the environment in the best, that is to say the most sustainable, way. It provides the contaminated land management industry a framework to incorporate sustainable development principles into remediation projects and deliver significant value for affected parties and society more broadly. In dispelling some myths about sustainable remediation set out in this paper, it is hoped that consistent application of ISO18504/SuRF‐UK (or equivalently robust guidance) will facilitate even wider use of sustainable remediation around the world.