CLU-IN Home

U.S. EPA Contaminated Site Cleanup Information (CLU-IN)


U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. EPA Technology Innovation and Field Services Division

Upcoming Live Web Events

More Information
Upcoming Internet Seminars RSS Feed
Participant Comments

CLU-IN's ongoing series of Internet Seminars are free, web-based slide presentations with a companion audio portion. We provide two options for accessing the audio portion of the seminar: by phone line or streaming audio simulcast. More information and registration for all Internet Seminars is available by selecting the individual seminar below. Not able to make one of our live offerings? You may also view archived seminars.

 
 
January 2021
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21
Download seminar information in iCalendar formatITRC Remediation Management of Comp...

Remediation Management of Complex Sites
22
Download seminar information in iCalendar formatLocal Governments and Superfund Sit...

23
24 25 26
Download seminar information in iCalendar formatITRC ITRC Incremental Sampling Meth...

ITRC Incremental Sampling Methodology (ISM-2) Update Training Modules
27 28
Download seminar information in iCalendar formatITRC Issues and Options in Human He...

Issues and Options in Human Health Risk Assessment - A Resource When Alternatives to Default Parameters and Scenarios are Proposed
29
Download seminar information in iCalendar formatInformation for tribes on EPA's Int...

30
31
 
 
 
 

An Environmental Cold Case Detective Story with a Good Ending: Discovery and Repair of the Soil Cover on the Cell 3 Landfill

The Society of American Military Engineers (SAME) Denver Post and Philadelphia Post along with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are hosting a series of webinars based on talks given at recent Design and Construction Issues at Hazardous Waste Sites (DCHWS) Symposiums. The mission of the DCHWS symposiums is to facilitate an interactive engagement between professionals from government and the private sector related to relevant and topical issues affecting applications of engineering and science associated with cleaning up hazardous waste sites. The symposiums also serve as a platform to facilitate the exchange of information, encourage dialogue, share experiences, and build and enhance communication among design and construction professionals.

This presentation will review work conducted at Landfill Cell 3 on Closed Sanitary Landfill (CSL) at Fort Meade. During activities to remove some waste soil piles in 2013, test pits uncovered general wastes under a plastic liner and it was realized that Cell 3 was a waste site in the past that, based on old figures and aerial photographs, extended for over 38 acres. A remedial investigation was conducted that summarized the landfill history, delineated the boundary of the cell, and assessed environmental impacts from the cell.

This case study begins with discovery and planning the performance-based contract, it includes review of the various phases of site investigations and concludes with the construction of the landfill cover. This work was performed while active soil staging operations occurred on the majority of Cell 3. Critical to success was that Cell 3 was closed in 1976 with a 2-ft soil cover prior to 1988 when MDE altered the requirements for landfill closure.

With the numerous entities involved and evolving site conditions, active project team management was required including reducing the scope of the landfill cover 85%, from 38 acres to 6.2 acres to accommodate ongoing soil staging operations on the remainder of the cell. The team carefully applied state regulations that worked best by reusing and recycling available material and incorporating stable, established side slopes into the landfill cover design. One key to the success of this project was an adaptive contract to manage the evolving issues. As different construction projects on Fort Meade required more of the Cell 3 footprint for staging soils, the performance-based contract for the Cell 3 cover had to be modified. The contract allowed for segregation of the different regulator required documents and of the different portions of the field tasks, which allowed for an easier adaptation to these changing site conditions.

Advances in Modeling Groundwater Flow and Transport with MODFLOW

MODFLOW is a popular open-source groundwater modeling software program developed, supported, and maintained by the U.S. Geological Survey. The MODFLOW program, first released over 35 years ago, has evolved into rich suite of software programs for the simulation of groundwater flow, solute transport, and a wide range of other groundwater related processes. In 2017, the U.S. Geological Survey released a new core version of the MODFLOW program. This new version, called MODFLOW 6 (the sixth core version), extends the core MODFLOW capabilities to include robust solutions for complex water table problems, support for generalized meshes with focused resolution within areas of interest, and support for multiple models and multiple types of models within the same simulation. In addition to the Groundwater Flow Model, MODFLOW 6 now contains a Groundwater Transport Model, which can run simultaneously with the flow model or as a separate simulation using the results from a previous groundwater flow simulation. The purpose of this presentation is to describe the MODFLOW suite of programs and highlight some of the new capabilities currently available and under development for MODFLOW 6.

Local Governments and Superfund Sites - Supporting Redevelopment and Addressing the Superfund Liability Concerns of Local Governments

Local governments can play a critical role in the cleanup, redevelopment, and reuse of contaminated properties. When contamination complicates property acquisition, reuse, or stewardship, local governments can help transform these properties from liabilities into community assets. However, local governments can be reluctant to play an active part in redevelopment efforts due to feeling overwhelmed on how to start or what to do. Also, concerns about potential CERCLA liability at Superfund sites may discourage local governments from this role.


This session will share Superfund Redevelopment Program tools and best practices and highlight real-world case examples where local governments, worked with EPA to facilitate the cleanup, redevelopment, and reuse of contaminated properties in their communities. This session also will explore how Superfund liability protections and EPA's enforcement policies protect local governments during the acquisition, cleanup, redevelopment, and reuse of Superfund sites. Speakers will address EPA's newest policies directly addressing the Superfund liability concerns of local governments. This session will empower local governments by providing specific strategies and tools for local governments to successfully return these blighted properties back to productive use while minimizing their liability risk, including how to attract and form productive partnerships between local governments and developers.

Mining Webinar Series: Evaluation of Rotating Cylinder Treatment System™ at Elizabeth Mine, Vermont

This webinar will present a case study of the rotating cylinder treatment system™ (RCTS™) operated at the Elizabeth Mine in Strafford, Vermont. The webinar will discuss the capabilities and limitations of active lime treatment of water using the RCTS™ technology.

Information for tribes on EPA's Interim guidance on destroying and disposing of certain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) -containing materials (not consumer products)

Under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (FY20 NDAA), the interim guidance generally describes thermal treatment, landfill and underground injection technologies that may be effective in the destruction or disposal of PFAS and PFAS-containing materials.

As required by the FY20 NDAA, the interim guidance addresses PFAS and PFAS-containing materials including:
  1. Aqueous film-forming foam (for firefighting);
  2. Soil and biosolids;
  3. Textiles, other than consumer goods, treated with PFAS;
  4. Spent filters, membranes, resins, granular carbon, and other waste from water treatment;
  5. Landfill leachate containing PFAS; and
  6. Solid, liquid, or gas waste streams containing PFAS from facilities manufacturing or using PFAS.
The interim guidance is not intended to address destruction and disposal of PFAS-containing consumer products, such as non-stick cookware and water-resistant clothing.

The agency is also providing guidance on testing and monitoring air, effluent, and soil for releases near potential destruction or disposal sites.

Because EPA will accept comments on the Interim Guidance until February 22nd, 2021, we wanted to provide an overview of the guidance that might be useful to tribes in submitting comments and outline what the guidance covers and what is not included. For more information, please see www.epa.gov/pfas.
Interstate Technology Regulatory Council
Seminars Sponsored by the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council


Bioavailability of Contaminants in Soil: Considerations for Human Health Risk Assessment

Interstate Technology Regulatory Council Risk-based cleanup goals are often calculated assuming that chemicals present in soil are absorbed by humans as efficiently as the chemicals dosed during the toxicity tests used to determine regulatory toxicity values (such as the Reference Dose or Cancer Slope Factor). This assumption can result in inaccurate exposure estimates and associated risks for some contaminated sites because the amount of a chemical absorbed (the chemical's bioavailability) from contaminated soil can be a fraction of the total amount present. Properly accounting for soil-chemical interactions on the bioavailability of chemicals from soil can lead to more accurate estimates of exposures to soil contaminants and improve risk assessments by decreasing uncertainty.
The basis for this training course is the ITRC guidance: Bioavailability of Contaminants in Soil: Considerations for Human Health Risk Assessment (BCS-1). This guidance describes the general concepts of the bioavailability of contaminants in soil, reviews the state of the science, and discusses how to incorporate bioavailability into the human health risk assessment process. This guidance addresses lead, arsenic, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) because evaluating bioavailability is better understood for these chemicals than for others, particularly for the incidental ingestion of soil.
The target audience for this guidance and training course are:
  • Project managers interested in decreasing uncertainty in the risk assessment which may lead to reduced remedial action costs.
  • Risk assessors new to bioavailability or those who want additional confidence and training in the current methods and common practices for using bioavailability assessment to more accurately determine human health risk at a contaminated site.
As a participant in this training you should learn to:
  • Value the ITRC document as a "go-to" resource for soil bioavailability
  • Apply the decision process to determine when a site-specific bioavailability assessment may be appropriate
  • Use the ITRC Review Checklist to develop or review a risk assessment that includes soil bioavailability
  • Consider factors that affect arsenic, lead and PAH bioavailability
  • Select appropriate methods to evaluate soil bioavailability
  • Use tools to develop site-specific soil bioavailability estimates and incorporate them into human health risk assessment
Learners can envision themselves implementing the ITRC guidance through case study applications. Training participants are encouraged to view the associated ITRC guidance, Bioavailability of Contaminants in Soil: Considerations for Human Health Risk Assessment (BCS-1) prior to attending the class.

ITRC Incremental Sampling Methodology (ISM-2) Update Training Modules

Interstate Technology Regulatory Council Please note that Modules 1-3 will be presented on January 26, 2021 and then archived for on demand listening. Modules 4-6 will be presented on March 11, 2021 and then archived. Registration for Modules 4-6 will open in early February 2021.

The newly updated Incremental Sampling Methodology (ISM) training is a series of six modules providing an overview of ISM and presenting five sections from the ITRC guidance document (ISM-2, 2020):
  • Overview (Sect 1)
  • Heterogeneity (Sect 2)
  • Statistics (Sect 3.2), Data Use Planning (Sect 3.3), and Data Quality Evaluation (Sect 6)
  • Field Sampling Collection (Sect 4)
  • Lab Preparation (Sect 5)
  • Risk Assessment (Sect 8)
After this series, you should understand:
  • Incremental Sampling Methodology (ISM) is a statistically supported technique for assessing the unbiased mean contaminant concentration in soil, sediment, and other solid media which can afford an economy of effort and resources in your
  • How the ISM structured composite sampling and processing protocol reduces data variability and provides for representative samples of specific soil volumes by collecting numerous increments of soil (typically, 30 to 100 increments) that are combined, processed, and subsampled according to specific protocols.
  • The key principles regarding heterogeneous soil sampling errors and how ISM reduces those errors to have more confidence in sampling results.
  • How to use the new ITRC Incremental Sampling Methodology (ISM-2) guidance document to learn the principles and approaches of the methodology to improve representative, reproducible, and defensible data to improve decision-making at your sites.

For regulators and other government agency staff, this improved understanding can hopefully be incorporated into your own programs. ISM is finding increased use in the field, as well as acceptance and endorsement by an increasing number of state and federal regulatory organizations. Proponents have found that the sampling density afforded by collecting many increments, together with the disciplined processing and subsampling of the combined increments, in most cases yields more consistent and reproducible results than those obtained by more traditional discrete sampling approaches.

Prior to attending the training class, participants are encouraged to view the associated ITRC guidance, Incremental Sampling Methodology (ISM-2). Participants interested in ISM background information prior to the ISM-2 training are encouraged to view the ISM-1 training at ITRC Soil Sampling and Decision Making Using Incremental Sampling Methodology 2-Part Training Series.

Connecting the Science to Managing LNAPL Sites a 3 Part Series

Interstate Technology Regulatory Council Connecting the Science to Managing LNAPL Sites - 3-Part Series

The newly updated LNAPLs (Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids) 3-part training course series is based on the ITRC guidance: LNAPL Site Management: LCSM Evolution, Decision Process, and Remedial Technologies (LNAPL-3, 2018) and focuses on connecting the science to managing LNAPL sites and helping you:
  • Build upon your Understanding of LNAPL Behavior in the Subsurface (Part 1)
  • Develop your LNAPL Conceptual Site Model and LNAPL Remedial Goals (Part 2)
  • Select/Implement LNAPL Technologies (Part 3)
After this training series, the expectation is that you will have the skills and understanding to use ITRC science-based resources to improve decision making at your LNAPL sites. For regulators and other government agency staff, this improved understanding can hopefully be incorporated into your own LNAPL programs.

It is recommended that participants have a general understanding of hydrogeology and some familiarity with petroleum contaminated sites. The courses will build on your existing LNAPL knowledge and outline the framework for making LNAPL remediation and management decisions. It is expected that participants will attend this 3-part training series in sequence.

LNAPL Training Part 1: Understanding LNAPL Behavior in the Subsurface
Part 1 teaches how LNAPLs behave in the subsurface and examines what controls their behavior. Part 1:
  • Explains what LNAPL data can tell you about the LNAPL and site conditions
  • Covers how that information is applied to the development of an LNAPL conceptual site model (LCSM) (Part 2) and LNAPL technology selection (Part 3)
Relevant and practical examples are used to illustrate key concepts.

LNAPL Training Part 2: LNAPL Conceptual Site Models and the LNAPL Decision Process
Part 2 teaches participants how to develop an LNAPL conceptual site model (LCSM) and the overall framework for making LNAPL remediation and management decisions. Part 2:
  • Discusses key LNAPL and site data
  • Explains when and why those data may be important
  • Covers how to effectively organize the data into an LCSM
Part 2 also discusses how to address LNAPL concerns by selecting appropriate goals and objectives, choosing applicable technologies, and assigning remedial performance metrics and endpoints.

LNAPL Training Part 3: Using LNAPL Science, the LCSM, and LNAPL Goals to Select an LNAPL Remedial Technology
Part 3 of the training teaches the importance of informed remedial technology selection and appropriate technology application. Part 3:
  • Discusses remedial technology groups
  • Introduces specific and new remedial technologies
  • Reviews the technology selection process, how technologies can be combined to accelerate cleanup, and how the LCSM informs selection
A case study and examples demonstrate the use of these tools for remedial technology selection, implementation, and demonstration of successful remediation.
Training participants are encouraged to view the associated ITRC guidance, LNAPL Site Management: LCSM Evolution, Decision Process, and Remedial Technologies (LNAPL-3, 2018), prior to attending the class.

Optimizing Injection Strategies and In situ Remediation Performance

Interstate Technology Regulatory Council In situ remediation technologies using amendment injections have advanced to mainstream acceptance and offer a competitive advantage over many forms of ex situ treatment of soil and groundwater. Developing a detailed site-specific strategy is absolutely critical to the success of such in situ remedies. These strategies include conducting a thorough site characterization that will allow development of a detailed Conceptual Site Model (CSM) to guide critical analysis of subsurface features and improving remediation effectiveness. In the interest of developing expedited solutions, many past in situ remediation projects have been executed based on an incomplete understanding of the hydrogeology, geology, and contaminant distribution and mass. Some of these sites have undergone multiple rounds of in situ injections but have not advanced to closure. Better strategies and minimum design standards are required to decrease uncertainty and improve remedy effectiveness.

In an effort to overcome these challenges and improve the effectiveness of in situ remediation using injected amendments, ITRC developed the guidance: Optimizing Injection Strategies and In Situ Remediation Performance (OIS-ISRP-1). The guidance and this associated training course identify challenges that may impede or limit remedy effectiveness and discuss the potential optimization strategies, and specific actions that can be pursued, to improve the performance of in situ remediation by:
  • Refining and evaluating remedial design site characterization data;
  • Selecting the correct amendment;
  • Choosing delivery methods for site-specific conditions;
  • Creating design specifications;
  • Conducting performance evaluations, and
  • Optimizing underperforming in situ remedies.
The target audience for this guidance and training course is: environmental consultants, responsible parties, federal and state regulators, as well as community and tribal stakeholders. This training will support users in efficiently and confidently applying the guidance at their remediation sites. An optimization case study is shared to illustrate the use of the associated guidance document.

Prior to attending the training class, participants are encouraged to view the associated ITRC guidance, Optimizing Injection Strategies and In Situ Remediation Performance (OIS-ISRP-1) as well as to be familiar with the characterization process described in Integrated DNAPL Site Strategy (ITRC 2011c).

Remediation Management of Complex Sites

Interstate Technology Regulatory Council At some sites, complex site-specific conditions make it difficult to fully remediate environmental contamination. Both technical and nontechnical challenges can impede remediation and may prevent a site from achieving federal- and state-mandated regulatory cleanup goals within a reasonable time frame. For example, technical challenges may include geologic, hydrogeologic, geochemical, and contaminant-related conditions as well as large-scale or surface conditions. In addition, nontechnical challenges may also play a role such as managing changes that occur over long time frames, overlapping regulatory and financial responsibilities between agencies, setting achievable site objectives, maintaining effective institutional controls, redevelopment and changes in land use, and funding considerations.
This training course and associated ITRC guidance: Remediation Management of Complex Sites (RMCS-1, 2017), provide a recommended holistic process for management of challenging sites, termed "adaptive site management." This process is a comprehensive, flexible, and iterative process that is well-suited for sites where there is significant uncertainty in remedy performance predictions. Adaptive site management includes the establishment of interim objectives and long-term site objectives that consider both technical and nontechnical challenges. Periodic adjustment of the remedial approach may involve multiple technologies at any one time and changes in technologies over time. Comprehensive planning and scheduled evaluations of remedy performance help decision makers track remedy progress and improve the timeliness of remedy optimization, reevaluations, or transition to other technologies/contingency actions.
By participating in this training course we expect you will learn to apply the ITRC guidance document to:
  • Identify and integrate technical and nontechnical challenges into a holistic approach to remediation
  • Use the Remediation Potential Assessment to identify whether adaptive site management is warranted due to site complexity
  • Understand and apply adaptive site management principles
  • Develop a long-term performance-based action plan
  • Apply well-demonstrated techniques for effective stakeholder engagement
  • Access additional resources, tools, and case studies most relevant for complex sites
  • Communicate the value of the guidance to regulators, practitioners, community members, and others
Ultimately, using the guidance that can lead to better decision making and remediation management at complex sites. The guidance is intended to benefit a variety of site decision makers, including regulators, responsible parties and their consultants, and public and tribal stakeholders.
Case studies are used to describe real-world applications of remediation and remediation management at complex sites. Training participants are encouraged to view the associated ITRC guidance Remediation Management of Complex Sites (RMCS-1, 2017) prior to attending the class.

Issues and Options in Human Health Risk Assessment - A Resource When Alternatives to Default Parameters and Scenarios are Proposed

Interstate Technology Regulatory Council Many state and local regulatory agencies responsible for the cleanup of chemicals released to the environment have adopted regulations, guidance and policies that define default approaches, scenarios, and parameters as a starting point for risk assessment and the development of risk-based screening values. Regulatory project managers and decision makers, however, may not have specific guidance when alternative approaches, scenarios, and parameters are proposed for site-specific risk assessments, and are faced with difficult technical issues when evaluating these site-specific risk assessments. This ITRC web-based document is a resource for project managers and decision makers to help evaluate alternatives to risk assessment default approaches, scenarios and parameters.

ITRC's Decision Making at Contaminated Sites: Issues and Options in Human Health Risk Assessment (RISK-3, 2015) guidance document is different from existing ITRC Risk Assessment guidance and other state and federal resources because it identifies commonly encountered issues and discusses options in risk assessment when applying site-specific alternatives to defaults. In addition, the document includes links to resources and tools that provide even more detailed information on the specific issues and potential options. The ITRC Risk Assessment Team believes that state regulatory agencies and other organizations can use the RISK-3 document as a resource or reference to supplement their existing guidance. Community members and other stakeholders also may find this document helpful in understanding and using risk assessment information.

After participating in this ITRC training course, the learner will be able to apply ITRC's Decision Making at Contaminated Sites: Issues and Options in Human Health Risk (RISK-3, 2015) document when developing or reviewing site-specific risk assessments by:
  • Identifying common issues encountered when alternatives to default parameters and scenarios are proposed during the planning, data evaluation, toxicity, exposure assessment, and risk characterization and providing possible options for addressing these issues
  • Recognizing the value of proper planning and the role of stakeholders in the development and review of risk assessments
  • Providing information (that includes links to additional resources and tools) to support decision making when alternatives to default approaches, scenarios and parameters are proposed
ITRC offers additional documents and training on risk management. ITRC's Use of Risk Assessment in Management of Contaminated Sites (RISK-2, 2008) and associated Internet-based training archive highlight variation of risk-based site management and describes how to improve the use of risk assessment for making better risk management decisions. ITRC's Examination of Risk-Based Screening Values and Approaches of Selected States (RISK-1, 2005) and associated Internet-based training archive focus on the process by which risk-based levels are derived in different states.