While the agricultural industry has benefited tremendously from UAS technology, many of the same sensors and data analysis techniques are also applied to environmental remediation projects.  UAS deployed true-color, multispectral, hyperspectral, and thermal infrared sensors are allowing environmental professionals to collect vegetation data at scales and resolutions that were not readily attainable prior to UAS, because of cost and safety concerns. 

High resolution UAS collected data allows for vegetation classification, density, health, and color analysis.  Using these characteristics, a wide verity of environmental factors can be evaluated.   

These factors range from revegetation coverage to stressed vegetation impacted by subsurface contamination.  GIS and photo processing tools allow for rapid automated data analysis and presentation. 

The presentation will include the following:

RCRA FIRST greatly streamlines and optimizes the steps within RCRA Corrective Action by initiating optimized communication between the regulators and industry by setting up a Corrective Action Framework (CAF) meeting at the beginning of the Corrective Action phase your site is approaching, such as the investigation or remedy design.  Challenging issues are discussed and decided before any fieldwork or report writing is done, which allows for early mutual understanding and agreement on goals and expectations. 

CA550 OF (the new EPA Environmental indicator) outlines a way to defer remedy construction at an operating facility if the remedy would cause undue interruption of a critical process or destruction of an integral portion of the operating area(s).

Cryogenic core collection utilizes a customized core collection tool that uses liquid nitrogen to freeze soil cores in situ. This process allows for preservation of sensitive parameters including VOCs and gaseous products.  The data set can ultimately support understanding of ongoing processes (e.g., biodegradation), as well as contaminant distribution. 

Overall, the application of cryogenic core collection can facilitate better resolution of subsurface conditions, support enhanced site conceptual models, and lead to more frequent selection of successful remedies for subsurface restoration. Ultimately leading to lower costs and more rapid cleanup.

This presentation provides findings from one such example. The site is a recent (approximately 2010) LNAPL release at an oil refinery where LNAPL recovery is currently the primary remedy technology. LNAPL recoverability tracking (e.g., LNAPL recovery rates, transmissivities, and LNAPL: water ratios) indicate that this active portion of the remedy will continue for several years longer.  For additional information on hydrocarbon removal at this site, an NSZD data collection effort was conducted in 2016 using dynamic closed chamber, vadose zone gas measurements, thermal monitoring, and groundwater geochemistry sampling. 

The assessment allowed for a broad estimate of both natural and engineered hydrocarbon mass removal, and comparison between various attenuation mechanisms. The assessment also identified 

“incidental bioventing” that was occurring via the LNAPL recovery system. This information has been input to an updated LNAPL conceptual site model and a feasibility study for remedy options when the system transitions from LNAPL recovery. These options include not just NSZD as a standalone remedy, but hydraulic control with “incidental bioventing” to address expected remedy drivers.

This session provides a technical overview of NSZD for LNAPL, which, when appropriately evaluated, can serve as an objective benchmark by which to compare the relative effectiveness of different remedial alternatives.

CDR is an information gathering mechanism under TSCA Section 8(a) used by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to manage the manufacturing and importation of large volume chemicals that have the potential to adversely impact human health and the environment.  CDR reporting is a regulatory compliance requirement for many United States manufacturers and importers, but it is often overlooked because of its quadrennial reporting cycle.  Moreover, staff trained specifically on TSCA CDR frequently transition into new roles between reporting years and replacements are often not in place until just before the next regulatory due date.  A lot can change in the four years between reporting due dates, and institutional knowledge and required data can get lost in the shuffle.  

Unlike the last cycle in 2016, the 2020 CDR will occur under the reformed TSCA.  To make things even more complex, this reporting cycle will also be performed under the recently amended CDR rule.  Organizations need the understand the final CDR rule requirements to correctly complete the 2020 CDR.  With the CDR reporting season opening on June 1, companies may want to review several rule changes.

The EPA estimates the proposed changes will result in an overall net decrease in reporting burdens, including costs.  As an example, the small entities definition change is expected to result in fewer industry sites having to report. However, while the proposed changes may reduce reporting burdens over time, the fact that the proposed changes are likely to take effect close to the start of the 2020 CDR cycle means that regulated stakeholders will have to get up-to-speed on changes quickly. 

This presentation is designed to help you organize and prioritize your reporting preparations and is available to be presented as a webinar or can be viewed on-demand via Trihydro’s website.

Of the thousands of PFAS compounds, the U.S. EPA has published Health Advisory (HA) levels of
70 parts per trillion (ppt) for two compounds: perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). As of March 2020, 23 states have adopted drinking-water standard values for some PFAS compounds; a few of these states have adopted enforceable water quality standards at levels lower than the EPA HA levels. The EPA is making progress toward establishing maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), having passed a positive regulatory determination for PFOA and PFOS in February 2020.

Trihydro offers presentations on multiple aspects of the PFAS Problem, including the following:

• PFAS overview: uses, environmental sources, and site management considerations
• Site characterization and remediation
• Data interpretation, toxicology, and risk assessment
• Aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) management
• Presentations may be tailored to focus on aspects specific to certain site type (e.g., firefighting training, hydrocarbon handling facilities, landfills, wastewater treatment).

Trihydro’s PFAS presentations are developed in accordance with our philosophy on management of sites potentially impacted with PFAS: current guidance must be balanced with insights into where things are headed. Trihydro is actively involved in industry trade groups including Interstate Technology Regulatory County (ITRC), National Ground Water Association (NGWA), and a PFAS coalition organized by a law firm to keep current on regulatory developments. 

In this session, we focus on remedial measures to effectively deal with 1,4-dioxane; 1,2,3-trichloropropane (TCP); and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) impacts to groundwater. It begins with an overview of 1,4-dioxane activities, including a comparative evaluation of differing analytical methods, bench-scale testing of oxidant technologies, and planned field scale testing of ozone in a complex hydrogeologic environment. Next, we walk you through a real-life example of a large and dilute plume of TCP for which Trihydro conducted (a) treatability studies, public outreach, surveys
of potential receptor wells; (b) characterization activities including vertical profiling and 3-D plume visualization; and (c) full-scale remedy implementation, consisting of hydraulic control and water treatment.

The session wraps up with a summary the latest findings and emerging technologies for treating PFAS and walk through the National Groundwater Association and Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC) newly released fact sheets.

If you are an environmental professional who have or suspect the presence of 1,4-dioxane; 1,2,3-trichloropropane (TCP); and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) at a site or series of sites, then this course is for you. You will walk away with up-to-date information that will enable you to better understand issues related to emerging contaminants and have an understanding of how regulatory agencies are approaching this topic.