A Modern Strategy forHazardous Waste Site Clean-Up:

The "Triad" Approach

Sept. 27, 2001ENRY

Belgrade, Yugoslavia

Daniel M. PowellTechnology Innovation Office

US Environmental Protection Agencypowell.dan@epa.gov

Innovative Analytical and Sampling:Opportunities for Cost Savings, TODAY

An excellent target for innovative approaches» Available today» Impacts total project costs» Results in “remedy” savings (e.g. removal, treatment)

All sites require monitoring and measurement activities» Public lead, private lead» High value, low value, no value (redevelopment

perspective) » Big sites, small sites» Clean-up, “no further action” sites

Monitoring and measurement activities occur from site assessment through site closeout, reuse

1

12

1

2

2

We need more information

3

3

It ends It ends when the when the $$ runs $$ runs

out!!out!!

Start: “Define the nature and extent of contamination.”

2

The Historical Process

Identify the site and rapidly charge into the maze

1980s:» Work needed to be

accomplished right away

» Limited experience, knowledge

» Few tools available for monitoring or cleanup

Starthere

Closeout EXIT ????

EXIT ????

EXIT ????

EXIT ????

Conducting Site Activities Without a Systematic Approach

Site Assessment

Close-out/reuse

Clean-up Design/Implementation

Site Investigation

•Without end-use, systematic focus for data collection, must start over, fill gaps, and refit data as move through process

•Each “phase” becomes an end to itself (multiple projects)

•Data collected for each phase may or may not be useful in subsequent phases

Systematic Planning

Dynamic Workplanning

On-Site Measurement Technologies

The Triad Approach

Characteristics of the “Triad”

Fully maximizing capabilities of field analytical instruments and rapid sampling tools

Systematic planning » Meeting site or project-specific goals vs.

prescriptive methods “checklists”» Relying on thorough advance planning/up-front

understanding of the site» Global view of project, ultimate goals

Dynamic or adaptive decision makingBringing together the right teamChanging perception

» Requirements for accurate, protective, and defensible decisions

» Time, money, and quality

Focus: Systematic Planning

Stakeholders involved

Multidisciplinary Team

Exit strategy clearly defined » Identify project decisions» Identify desired certainty

Project-specific Conceptual Site Model » Identifies data/information gaps » Data collection supports evolution

of CSM as data/information gaps filled

Identify most resource-effective means to fill data/information gaps

EXIT

START

Core: Dynamic Work PlansReal-time, decision-making in the field

Real-time analysis makes possible, field analytics makes economical

Experienced, senior technical personnel (scientists & engineers) in the field

Regulator-approved decision trees » Flexible work plans

—Alternate contracting options—Regulator, senior staff involvement

» Adaptive sampling and analysis plans» Evolve the CSM to maturity

Seamless flow of site activities fewer mobilizations

Technical Team

Assemble the technical team

Get the right people involved from the start

Often means going outside the “normal” field-based team

Risk assessor, legal, statistician, analytical chemist, hydrologist, soil scientist, etc.

Requires access to decisionmakers during event

Why Consider the “Triad” Approach?

Lower costs » Assessment, investigation» Cleanup, close-out burden

Decrease time (mobilizations; also affects cost)Creates “seamless” perspective on site work

where data collection builds on previous work vs. segmented, serial approach to site work

Benefits of “Triad,” Systematic Approach: Building on Existing

Information

Site Assessment

Close-out/reuse

Clean-up Design/Implementation

Site Investigation

•Each phase focuses on needs of subsequent work, requirements

•Data focuses on decisions which focus on site objective (one project)

•Maximize use of existing data

Why Consider the “Triad” Approach? (continued)

Focus on systematic planning helps remove biases against effective field technologies» Focus on site objectives/decisions vs. individual data

points/measurement approaches

» Improves communication between parties

» Improves understanding of true site conditions

» Decrease uncertainty (corollary - increase comfort)

» Increases likelihood of consensus-based approaches to address contingencies

Modernizing site activities

involves doing site cleanups:CheaperFasterSmarter, ANDBetter

Theme # 1

Theme 1: Summary

“Cheaper and faster” closely related» Key element: Dynamic Workplans» Require real-time measurement» New field technologies make “real-time” affordable

“Smarter and better” require systematic planning» Key element: focus on managing uncertainty» Requires development of site-specific goals and

strategies to achieve goals

Theme #2Accepting modernized approaches requires realistic

understanding of the role of analytical quality vs. data quality

Must understand that:

Non-Representative

Sample

Perfect Analytical Chemistry

+

“BAD” DATA

Data Quality

Distinguish: analytical quality from data quality

Data quality: the ability of data to provide information that meets user needs

Users need to make correct decisions

“Data quality” is thus a function of the data’s ability to represent the “true state” in the context of the decision to be made

The SYSTEM functions as if it believes that…

{Data

Uncertainty Automatically

Managed

Data Quality=

PrescriptiveAnalytical Methods{

AnalyticalUncertainty

Automatically Managed

= Decision Quality{

DecisionUncertainty

Automatically Managed

Distinguishing Concepts

Analytical Methods

Overall Data

Quality

Decision Quality

Method Modifications

MethodSelection

{

Manage Analytical

Quality

Representative Sampling

Data Assessment

Manage Uncertainty in

Data Generation

{

Manage Uncertainty in

Decision Making{

ClarifyAssumptions

Draw Conclusions

Non-scientific considerations

Core Concept of Systematic Planning:Focus on the Bottom Line

The bottom line: protect the health and well-being of humans and the environment by making scientifically defensible decisions

The goal is “decision quality”

Data quality is one means to this end

Unifying Concept for Triad: Managing Uncertainty

Systematic project planning» Identify decision goals w/ tolerable overall uncertainty» Identify major uncertainties (cause decision error)» Identify strategy to manage each major uncertainty

Use field analytical methods and dynamic work plan to effectively manage sampling uncertainty (sample representativeness)

Use various strategies to manage analytical uncertainty when using field analytical

Few higher quality data points Lower information value of the data set

Data Quality vs. Information Value

Many lower quality data points Higher information value of the data set

Goal: A defensible site decision that reflects the “true” site condition

Less likely

More likely

¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢

$

$

$

$

$

$

Sources of Uncertainty in Data Results

e.g., Method 8260

PLUS

=Total

UncertaintyIn Data Results

+Uncertaintyin Extract Cleanup

Uncertaintyin Extract Analysis

+

Uncertaintyin Sample

Preparation

Analytical Uncertainties

Uncertaintyin Sample

Location+

Uncertaintyin Sample

Preservation+

Uncertainty in Sample Support

Uncertaintyin Sub-

sampling+

Sampling Uncertainties

Sampling = 95%

Analytical = 5%

39,800 On-site41,400 Lab

500 On-site416 Lab

164 On-site136 Lab

27,800 On-site42,800 Lab24,400 On-site

27,700 Lab

1,280 On-site1,220 Lab

1

27

6 3

45

331 On-site 286 Lab

Sampling vs. Analytical Uncertainty

Adding Uncertainties

Uncertainties add according to (a2 + b2 = c2)

Ex. 23 XSampling Uncertainty

Analytical Uncertainty Total Uncertainty

Ex. 1

Ex. 31/3 X

Ex. 1Ex. 2Ex. 3

Use Real-time Results to Decrease Overall Decision Uncertainty

Total UncertaintyAnalytical

Uncertainty

Sampling Uncertainty

Ex. 1

Field Analytical

(alone) Ex. 2

Controlled Sampling Uncertainty

Ex. 3

Controlled Sampling

Uncertaintyin Fixed Lab Data

Set

FA guide Fixed Lab

Ex. 1Ex. 2Ex. 3

Sample Representativeness

Finally able to address this issue defensibly

and affordably! Use cheaper analytical technologies that

allow you to increase sample density.Use real-time measurements at the site of the

sample to support real-time decision-makingBalance analytical uncertainty against overall

data uncertainty

Few higher quality data points Lower information value of the data set

Many lower quality data points Higher information value of the data set

Goal: A defensible site decision that reflects the “true” site condition

Less likely More likely

$ $ $

$ $ $

¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢

¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢

¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢

¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢

Data Quality vs. Information Value

$ $ $

$ $ $

NOW, few ”higher quality” data points

Highly informative data set

Nearly Certain

Case Study of USACE Tree Fruit Project

Problem: Pesticide contamination of soil in the vadose zone

Scope of Remedial Activities:» Locate and remove bags of neat pesticide (focused removal)» Characterize pesticide contaminated soil: excavate to meet

WA state cleanup standards» Manage/dispose excavated material» Residential development - needed clean closure

Case Study: EPA 542-R00-009 (http://cluin.org/char1_edu.cfm)

Case Study of Tree Fruit Project: Results

Action required to achieve clean closure » 390 tons of soil removed (56 tons incinerated; 334 tons

landfilled)» vs. 708 tons if removed all soil

Time» Single mobilization: <4 months of field work to complete

site closureCosts

» Projected: ~$1.2M; Actual: $589K» Savings:~50%

Happy client, regulator, and stakeholders

Wenatchee Tree Fruit Example:Cost Comparison (per USACE)

Traditional ESC+1. Review Existing Data $7,150 $11,0002. Design Site Characterization $0 $17,6403. Implement Site Characterization $0 $84,1344. Review Char. data $0 $10,0005. Design Remedy $16,500 $26,4606. Implement Remedy (- Disposal) $168,094 $271,1167. Waste Disposal $910,000 $153,5708. Closure report $20,305 $20,305TOTAL $1,122,049 $594,225

This traditional cost estimate assumes no characterization, only removal and incineration of the entire plot volume

DWP

Final Remediation BoundaryNorthDrawing not to scale

Top number is feet bgs planned for excavation and the bottom is feet bgs actually excavated

Original Remediation BoundaryX-Y Coordinate Origin

Col 1

Col 2

Col 3

Col 4

Col 5

Col 6

Col 7

Col 8

Col 9

22/1

1/ 55/

11/ 4

4/ 22.5/ 2

2/ 44/

11/

11/

11/

11/

55/ 1

4.5/ 44/ 2

2/22/ 4

4/ 22.5/

44/2

2/22/

44/

55/ 1

1/

Row B

Row C

Row A

FR2/3

FR4/5

22.5/

22.5/

11/

Final CSM: Lateral and Vertical Removals

Resources Specific to Case Study

USACE Cost and Performance Report: www.frtr.gov/cost/pdf/Wenatchee.pdf

EPA Case Study: (http://cluin.org/char1_edu.cfm)

Technical Project Planning Manual (publication number EM-200-1-2) downloadable from: http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-manuals/em.htm

Video: “A Guideline for Dynamic Workplans and Field Analytics” (http://cluin.org/video/hanscom.htm)

Florida DEP’s Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program

Success over 2½ years

10 contractors

156 assessments completed

100 cleanups underway

Compared to conventional» Cost 30-50% less » Better 3-D plume definition (better remedy design) » Assessment completed in half the time or less

Information on state drycleaning efforts: State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners, http://www.drycleancoalition.org/

Resources: General

Hazardous Waste Clean-Up Information (CLU-IN) Internet site (http://clu-in.org)

—Go to “Characterization and Monitoring” link

—“TechDirect Email Newsletter” for automatic updates on new resources

Monitoring and Measurement Resources: General

Technology Information» Case Studies (http://cluin.org/char1_edu.cfm)

—Wenatchee—Oak Ridge drum disposal—Hanscom AFB—Florida Dry-cleaning Program—Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

Internet Site (http://www.frtr.gov)

Monitoring and Measurement Resources: General

Methods information (http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/sw846.htm)

Technology evaluation » Environmental Technology Verification (ETV)

Program, Site Characterization and Monitoring Technology Pilot (http://www.epa.gov/etv/02/02_main.htm)

» Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program (http://www.epa.gov/ord/SITE)

Monitoring and Measurement Resources: General

Technology Information» Technology Screening

—Navy/EPA Technology Matrix (http://www.frtr.gov/site/)

—EPA ReachIT (http://epareachit.org)» New Technologies

—Sensor Technology Information Exchange (http://www.sentix.org)

—Measurement and Monitoring for the 21st Century (21M2) Initiative (http://clu-in.org/21m2)

Monitoring and Measurement Resources: General

Training (http://trainex.org)» 1.5-, 3-, 5-day Field-Based Program» Technologies and strategies» Internet seminars (http://clu-in.org/studio)

—~2hours, no travel—Dynamic Data Collection Strategy Using Systematic

Planning and Innovative Field-Based Measurement Technologies

Perspectives (http://clu-in.org/char1.cfm)» Definitions» PBMS vs. standard methods» Data defensibility (legal)

Procurement “guide” (complete, Winter 2001-02)