Environmental Restoration Program – Optimization and

Sustainable Remediation

Environmental Restoration Program – Optimization and

Sustainable Remediation

Dr. Javier SantillanAir Force Center for Engineering and the Environment

E2S2May 6, 2009

Dr. Javier SantillanAir Force Center for Engineering and the Environment

E2S2May 6, 2009

US Air ForceUS Air Force

Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number.

1. REPORT DATE 06 MAY 2009 2. REPORT TYPE

3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2009 to 00-00-2009

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Environmental Restoration Program - Optimization and SustainableRemediation Environmental

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment,JBSA Lackland,TX,78236

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Presented at the NDIA Environment, Energy Security & Sustainability (E2S2) Symposium & Exhibitionheld 4-7 May 2009 in Denver, CO.

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT Same as

Report (SAR)

18. NUMBEROF PAGES

24

19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT unclassified

b. ABSTRACT unclassified

c. THIS PAGE unclassified

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

PBM - 2004

Remedial Process Optimization - 1999

Long-Term Monitoring Optimization - 1997

Streamlined Investigation - 2003

Exit Strategy - 2003

AFSO21

Bette

r Bus

ines

s Pr

actic

esValue Engineering

PBRM - 2008

ERP-O - 2007

Foundation for ERP-OFoundation for ERP-O

Environmental Restoration Program Optimization (ERP-O) is a comprehensive and systematic review of an installation’s past, current and planned cleanup activities whose goal is to ensure protection of human health and the environment over the entire restoration life-cycle at minimal risk and optimal costs

Definition:Definition:

ERP-O provides all the needed tools to manage risk and complies with AFSO21

ERP-O DefinitionERP-O Definition

ERP-O Flow ChartERP-O Flow Chart

Investigation Process Optimization Remedial Process Optimization

Study Program Effectiveness

Time and Cost to Achieve Site RIP Milestone

Timely Feedback to Decision Makers

An Iterative/Systematic Planning Approach for Evaluating Remedial Study Programs with the Goal of Improving Overall:

Definition:Definition:

A component of the overall AFCEE ERP-O

Investigation Process Optimization (IPO)

Investigation Process Optimization (IPO)

Control Effectiveness

Site Cleanup Time and Costs

Timely Feedback to Decision Makers

An Iterative/Systematic Planning Approach for Evaluating Existing/Proposed Remediation Processes with the Goal of Improving Overall:

Definition:Definition:

A component of the overall AFCEE ERP-O

Remedial Process Optimization (RPO)

Remedial Process Optimization (RPO)

Conceptual Site Models and Exit StrategiesDecision DocumentsContractual StrategiesDecision Logic Background Studies

A Systematic Analytical Approach for resolution of regulatory, technical, contractual, programmatic issues

Definition:Definition:

A component of the overall AFCEE ERP-O

Technical AssistanceTechnical Assistance

Example Site: EAFBExample Site: EAFB

Edwards Air Force Base Technical Impracticability waiversBase-related practices for over 50 yearsSeveral large plumes in complex geology including fractured bedrockA variety of cleanup technologiesChemicals of Concern:

TCE, BTEX, MTBE, Perchlorate, NDMA, etc.

EAFB : ERP-O Team Recommendations

EAFB : ERP-O Team Recommendations

Continue Technical Impracticability waivers where applicableEstablish a base-wide LTMO process, build an LTMO decision tree (based on a DQOs), and share with the RPMsPrepare a detailed performance monitoring plan to ensure that remedy maintains effectiveness and efficiencyConsider an overall strategy that does not require perpetual extraction well network to contain the down-gradient migration of the plume

Example: Risk to WorkersExample: Risk to WorkersWhich site at which facility

By operating the groundwater treatment system:

Risk to workers – 1 X10-3

Risk to community – 1 X10-4

Risk to HH & Eco from ground water – 1 X10-6

Is active remediation really justified?

Alternative to remediation

Resources Utilized vs. Resources Protected

Resources Utilized vs. Resources Protected

Which site at which facility

Evaluation of resources being protected

Technology vs. Energy Use

Is active remediation really justified?

Alternative to remediation

Groundwater restoration

California installation

Consuming 1.5M KWH/yr

Removing < 50 grams of TCE

$3.6M/lb removed

ERP-O ToolsERP-O Tools

Support Tools

Uncertainty Tool

Sustainability Tool

Performance Tracking

Recommendation Tracking

LTMOInputInput

Design

Materials &

Consumables Output:

Sustainability

Metrics

Uncertainty Analysis ToolUncertainty Analysis Tool

A series of questionsSite-specific informationEstimates based on ERP-O team recommendationsReal reduction after reasonable time of implementation

SRTSRTWhich site at which facility

SRT estimates sustainable metrics for specific technologies

ExcavationSVEP&TEnhanced Bioremed

Sustainable metrics developed

CO2Energy ConsumedTechnology CostSafety/Accident Risk

InputInput

Design

Materials & Consumables

Output:Sustainability

Metrics

Performance Tracking ToolPerformance Tracking ToolWhich site at which facility

Track Remedy’s Performance and Cost

Projected vs. actual for contaminant reductionProjected cost vs. actual

Normalized output for easy comparisonsSix Technologies

BioslurpingMNAP&TSurfactant ExtractionSVEDual – SVE & P&T

PTTPTT

Capital Cost Operation & Projected Capital

O&Mas b'l Fiscal

Maintenance CostsiMass Cost as Percent of

Year Cost b'l Fiscal Removed Percent

CTC Year (from DD) DD Est.

rL 195,000 $ -~

OY. SlY. OY.

rL 100,000 $ 290,QQQ_ 3Y. - 92Y. 4Y.

r-L 45,000 $ 290,QQQ_ 7Y. lOGY. BY. -$

~~~~ lOY. - 13Y. r--

$ 13Y. 17Y.

f--$ 305,QQQ_ 17Y. 21Y. $ 375~ 20Y. 27Y.

f--

·T! 340,QQQ_ 23Y. 32Y. 340,000 27Y. 3SY.

$ 340,000 30Y. 41Y.

u 340.~ 33Y. 4SY.

f--$ 340,QQQ_ 37Y. 51Y. $ 340,QQQ_ 40Y. 5SY. $ 340,000 43Y. SlY. $ 340,000 47Y. SSY.

J 340,QQQ_ 50Y. 70Y.

$ 340,QQQ_ 53Y. 75Y. $ 34~,QQQ_ 57Y. SOY. $ 340,000 SOY. 85Y.

u 340,QQQ_ S3Y. 90Y. $ 340,QQQ_ S7Y. 95Y.

70Y. -73Y. 77Y. SOY. B3Y. 87Y. 90Y. 93Y. 97Y. 100Y.

Total Total Mass at RA-0 Start-Up (I 30000 Pecent Cost-To-Complete (CTC) (f) $ 7,000,000

Mass DD Capital Cost Est $ 320,000

Removed Impacted Acres 23

OY. -

f-2Y._ 4Y. -r-

Acre-ft of groundwater impacte 265

RA-0 Start Year Urom DDI 1985 RA-0 Completion Year 2015

1- 5Y. -

1-BY. -

1-12Y. 15Y. -

1--. _ 120%

1-lBY._

1-20Y. -

1-22Y. _

1-24::-'!...__ 2SY. _

100%

80% 27Y._

~

1-29::-'!...__ 31Y. -

1-

1-32::-'!...__

1- 34Y. -

1-3SY. _ 37::-'!...__

IC Ql >- 60% iii u In u:::

40%

1- 39Y. -

1-41Y._

20% 1- -

--

-+- Cost Performance

-- Projected Cost/Mass Rem

To Date Cost/Acre $ 288,261

osuAcre ee :J> I ~

Costllb removed $ 541 Total O&M Costs s 6.630.000

Total Mass Removed 12.263 Portion of DO Mass Rem 40.9%

_._ Restoration Performance

-+- CapCost Per formance

Estimated total cost

s 117.832 ::. .a

lbs

120%

100%

80% li w c

60%

Q li 0 (..)

iii .c Q.

40% IC (..)

20%

R2TMR2TMWhich site at which facility

Phase II, IIITrack

ImplementationRisk reductionRC AccelerationTotal Investment Cost avoidanceROI

Track Recommendations (ERP-O Phase IV)

Monitoring Decision LogicMonitoring Decision Logic

Purpose of each well?CoC trends Statistical analysisRational recommendations

Monitoring Decision LogicMonitoring Decision Logic

19

w.111~

c ••••• I s •••• :.,

,,.,., ......

lr.,.,uo~lrr ............ .............. ..... : .... .. ••• a ... :.,, •r•lr,urll 1

••• a ... :.,, .1 •• 1

a ... lil .. liu o: ...... J .... J: •• r .......

t1 .. 1w .. u. £-.......... :.,:.P.J .. ..

P: ......... .

.J .. Ii.liul .................. .. ...... :.~

R ••••••• ~.l; •• ~ ... ~ .......

••• a •• :.,l•·•·· ~ ......... . .no~l,lrli.l1

.... ,J:., •• n •• .l, •••••• 11

R.l; ••• l. ~ •• ••••••••~.1; •• c ••••• 1

ERP-O Supporting AgenciesERP-O Supporting Agencies

ITRC - Interstate Technology Regulatory CouncilITRC Team Members become Advocates for the Process

USGS – US Geological SurveySupport CSM and fate and transport model oversight

USACE – US Army Corp of EngineersAdditional DoD Technical Expertise

ITRC RRM and GSR TeamsITRC RRM and GSR Teams

ITRC - Interstate Technology Regulatory CouncilAFCEE is providing in-kind support to several ITRC teams including Remediation Risk Management (RRM) and Green & Sustainable Remediation (GSR) Teams AFCEE Funds and Supports ITRC RPO Team Members to Participate on ERP-O Reviews

ITRC RRM & GSR Team Products

ITRC RRM & GSR Team Products

RPO Products on www.itrcweb.orgRPO and PBEM Technical Guidance DocumentsRPO related Fact SheetsRPO and PBEM Internet-based Trainings

ITRC RRM Team ProductsTechnical & Regulatory Guidance Document (Fall ’09)Internet-based Training on RRM (Early 2010)

ITRC GSR Team ProductsStatus summary of GSR practicesState survey of GSR practices Technical and Regulatory Guidance Document (2010)Internet-based Training on GSR (2011)

Incorporating Sustainable and Green Practices into ERP-O

Incorporating Sustainable and Green Practices into ERP-O

AFCEE PBM Guidance document is being developed to reflect ERP-O Strategies and sustainable remediation

PBRM a green/sustainable process is also being revisedPBM, ERP-O, IPO, RPO, PBRM all have a common goal

Sustainable, green, & cost effective RIP by 2012 Accelerate clean closure

Investigation Processes Use more sustainable approaches for characterizationUse Triad with a green perspective

Land Use and Institutional ControlsDeveloping sustainable strategies with the active participation from stakeholders

I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e 24 2424