In degraded ecosystems, manipulating sediments can aid in recreating natural sediment processes, establishing suitable substrate conditions for aquatic life, and supporting the recovery of vegetation and wildlife. In the United States, sediment management revolves around the presence of contaminated sediment. Contaminated sediment sites pose intricate technical challenges that demand significant resources to address and mitigate the associated problems effectively.
Over the past three decades, significant progress has reduced the discharge of toxic and persistent chemicals into waterways throughout the United States. However, a persistent problem remains, characterized by elevated concentrations of contaminants in the sediment found at the bottom of rivers and harbors. The situation has raised considerable concerns about its potential risks to aquatic organisms, wildlife, and humans.
This paper delves into the technical challenges environmental engineers and consultants face in addressing and mitigating this issue, especially during waterfront remediation projects. Furthermore, he explores strategies to optimize resources to tackle the problem at hand effectively and efficiently.
Active monitoring and data collection is critical throughout the remediation process. These activities enable evaluating the chosen strategy’s effectiveness, identifying necessary adjustments, and ensuring compliance with environmental regulations. Adaptive management approaches allow modifying or refining the sediment remediation strategy based on monitoring results and stakeholder feedback.
The utmost importance lies in choosing the appropriate remediation techniques; base the decision on site conditions, the specific contaminants present, and the desired remediation goals. After reading the paper, you may get a better idea of the options available for achieving effective and sustainable sediment remediation outcomes.
Dr. Hostetler will present “A Computational Modeling Approach to Critical Pressure Calculations for Class VI Area of Review Delineation” [Thursday, September 14, 10:30 – Noon, Session Class VI UIC] at the Groundwater Protection Council 2023 Annual Forum in Tampa.
Presentation Category: Carbon Capture and Underground Storage
Subsurface pressure increases as supercritical carbon dioxide is injected into a deep saline reservoir beneath a confining zone. If the pressure buildup is great enough, brine could be lifted upward from the injection zone through an inadequately plugged or abandoned well that penetrates the confining zone. This could result in the endangerment of an underground source of drinking water (USDW). A Class VI Injection Permit requires a delineation of the Area of Review (AoR). The AoR is the superposition of the area of the buoyant supercritical plume itself, together with the area over which the pressure front is large enough to potentially endanger a USDW through some conduit. The USEPA Class VI Guidance offers several approaches to calculating critical pressure. Some of these methods are based on concepts of changes in potential energy in artificial penetration and are very easy to implement. Unfortunately, they are simplified models and are also very conservative. The USEPA Guidance also allows for the computation of the critical pressure by computational modeling. We present a computational modeling approach that is more mechanistic, explicitly addresses uncertainty, can be updated as additional testing and monitoring data become available, and provides a more authentic representation of the critical pressure and hence, the AoR.
Dr. Hostetler has nearly four decades of experience as a geochemist and hydrogeologist. His expertise focuses on subsurface multiphase flow modeling, groundwater flow and transport modeling, and reactive solute transport modeling. Dr. Hostetler is an SCS Engineer’s Deep Well Initiative and Class VI Permit Team member. Charles Hostetler has a BS in Geosciences and a Ph.D. in Planetary Sciences from the University of Arizona.
Find out more:
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to designate perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), including their salts and structural isomers, as hazardous substances. The proposed rule published in the Federal Register designates two per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (collectively, PFAS) constituents as CERCLA Hazardous Substances. While this is a small subset of PFAS constituents, PFOA and PFOS are reportedly the most commonly used and likely to be detectable. Additional PFAS compounds are certainly on the horizon for consideration by EPA and, in fact, an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was issued by EPA in April of 2023 to seek input for seven additional compounds for hazardous substance designation.
What Could This Mean For Property Transactions and Real Estate Development?
When the CERCLA hazardous substance rule becomes final (anticipated in 2023 or 2024), it will be mandatory to consider these PFAS constituents when performing Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) in connection with a property. Because of the ubiquitous use of PFAS, often called “forever chemicals,” in residential, commercial, and industrial products, some Environmental Professionals are concerned that PFAS-related RECs will be commonplace.
In their recent paper, “How Will EPA’S Proposed CERCLA Hazardous Substance Designation of PFOA and PFOS Impact the Environmental Due Diligence Practice?” Jeff Marshall, PE, and Mike Miller, CHMM, discuss the anticipated impacts of the PFAS rule on environmental due diligence. Depending on the former uses, the number of RECs, and ESA results, some sites are more likely to feel the impact on the potential value of a property.
As our PFAS knowledge continues to evolve, so will applying this knowledge to the environmental due diligence practice and, ultimately, real estate conditions. Read the technical paper to understand the terminology and types of properties more likely at risk.
Jeffrey D. Marshall, PE – Vice-President. Mr. Marshall is a Vice President and the practice leader for the Environmental Services Practice for SCS offices in the mid-Atlantic region. He is also the SCS National Expert for Innovative Technologies and Emerging Contaminants. His diversified background is in project engineering and management, with an emphasis on the environmental chemistry and human health aspects of hazardous materials/waste management, site investigations, waste treatment, risk-based remediation and redevelopment, and environmental compliance/permitting issues. He has over 40 years of environmental experience and directs and manages environmental due diligence projects in the mid-Atlantic. He is a chemical engineer, Professional Engineer (VA, MD, WV, NC, and SC) and meets the credentials of an Environmental Professional.
Michael J. Miller, CHMM – Vice President. Mr. Miller is a Vice President and the practice leader for the Environmental Services Practice for SCS offices in the Central region. He also serves as an SCS National Expert for Environmental Due Diligence. He supports firm operations throughout the United States related to Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments and the completion of large portfolios and complex site assessments. A Certified Hazardous Materials Manager (CHMM) since 2009, Mike has more than 28 years of experience in environmental management and consulting with an extensive background in RCRA-related matters and industrial compliance, planning, and permitting.
Additional Real Estate Resources:
Charm Industrial’s (Charm) $53M deal with Frontier to voluntarily sequester bio-oil underground is an example of early market leadership for alternative subsurface deployment methods in the negative carbon emissions market. SCS was instrumental in developing the pilot programs, initial testing, and regulatory approvals allowing Charm to scale up its processes and deliver on this commitment.
This deal will remove 112,000 tons of carbon dioxide by 2030. Charm’s method involves converting excess organic material, like corn stover, into bio-oil and putting that oil into abandoned oil wells.
Carbon capture has been a focus for Frontier for some time now. Prior to this announcement, they partnered with early-stage startups to remove 9,000 tons of carbon. This landmark deal is a continuation of Frontier’s efforts to spark growth and bring attention to the industry and is one of the largest legally binding agreements to date. SCS is thrilled for Charm and Frontier and this huge step forward. See the recent CNBC news article below for more information on this deal and its carbon offset impact.
As you may recall, in September 2022, EPA issued a proposed rule to designate two per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) — perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), and their salts and structural isomers — as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), also known as “Superfund.” EPA is currently reviewing comments received on this proposed rule.
On April 13, 2023, EPA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) asking the public for input regarding potential future hazardous substance designations of additional PFAS substances under CERCLA. The ANPRM includes:
The ANPRM announcement in the Federal Register is available at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-04-13/pdf/2023-07535.pdf
More solutions and information at Liquids Management.
EPA will hold three complementary competitions to strategically distribute grant funding under the $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund program. EPA will implement these programs in alignment with the President’s Justice40 Initiative and expects to open competitions for funding under the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund by the summer of 2023.
The goal is to ensure that households, small businesses, schools, and community institutions in low-income and disadvantaged communities have access to financing for cost-saving and pollution-reducing clean technology projects. EPA aims to deliver tangible benefits, including lower energy costs, good-paying jobs, and improved public health outcomes to households, businesses, and communities. The three competitions will be:
EPA Feedback and Listening Sessions
EPA invites written technical feedback and comments on the competition descriptions as the Agency prepares the program for release as early as June 2023. Stakeholders may send their written feedback to by 11:59 pm ET on May 12. Over the next two weeks, EPA will convene six public listening sessions on this implementation framework. Listening session details and other information about the program are on the GGRF website.
Additional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Resources
Click to find an Earth Day event near you.
Take Action:
Play with ReFED’s interactive, fun, and educational tool!
Earth Day is a great time to remind you that food waste reduction is a top climate change strategy! As you’ll see in this addicting, educational, and fun ReFED tool – everyone helps make a difference. Every small change citizens and businesses make has a major impact on our planet’s health and well-being. Try it out and see how we are building solutions to reduce the 91 million tons of surplus food annually in the U.S.
The ReFED Insights Engine offers the most comprehensive examination of food waste in the United States by incorporating current data from a variety of sources, including public and proprietary datasets, expert interviews, case studies, and industry research. This powerful engine has several components, including:
Food Waste Monitor – A centralized repository of information built with data from more than 50 public and proprietary datasets and providing granular estimates of how much food goes uneaten in the U.S., why it’s happening, and where it goes.
Solutions Database – A stakeholder-specific, comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of 40+ food waste reduction solutions based on a range of impact goals, plus detailed fact sheets on each.
Impact Calculator – An interactive resource that quantifies the greenhouse gas emissions reduction, water savings, and donated meal recovery potential of different food surplus management scenarios in the U.S. by sector and food type.
Capital Tracker – A dashboard to monitor the flow of capital into food waste innovation, allowing users to understand the landscape, identify key players, and plan out future funding strategies.
Use a reusable water bottle, drinking straws, and shopping bags.
Around 380 million metric tons of plastic are being produced yearly; that’s roughly the same as the entire weight of humanity. Approximately 91% of plastic is not recycled. Roughly half of our global annual plastic production is destined for a single-use product.
The average per person use is astounding; some can take 1,000 years to disintegrate.
Think of the money you’ll save along with planet Earth!
SCS Engineers periodically prepare SCS Technical Bulletins – short, clear summaries of rules, plans, and standards. In 2021, ASTM International published an updated consensus guidance document for evaluating environmental conditions at properties involved in commercial real estate transactions.
This SCS Technical Bulletin for the revised E1527-21, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process addresses definitions and terminology, clarifies industry practice for the historical records review of the subject and adjoining properties, and provides for updates and additions to appendices, report outlines, and other collateral.
Our updated edition now includes the revised guidance speaks to the business risk associated with emerging contaminants, such as Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
Read, share, download the A New Standard Practice for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Tech Bulletin here.
For more information about Environmental Due Diligence, please visit our website.
With climate change becoming a center of attention globally, much focus has pointed toward carbon capture and storage (CCS) in recent years. While USEPA has published general guidance for Class VI permitting, it is still a new permitting challenge for both scientists and regulators alike. Drawing on lessons learned from more familiar and well-developed regulatory frameworks will be beneficial.
In our Technical Bulletin, Applying Lessons Learned From Municipal Solid Waste and Coal Combustion Residuals to the Development of Testing and Monitoring Plans for CO2 Storage Projects, we focus on the testing and monitoring aspect of Class VI permitting and related complexities, including the project’s overall scale, enhanced costs, and enhanced regulatory risk. We discuss the key considerations for developing an effective CCS Testing and Monitoring Plan based on lessons learned from developed MSW and CCR monitoring programs, as well as how early planning and good judgment can help navigate the complexities associated with CCS projects and ultimately reduce those complexities and associated project costs.
Recommendations include meticulous site characterization efforts early in the CO2 storage project and tailoring the monitoring network. The latter includes placing monitoring wells based on multiphase modeling predictions, designing geochemically and geomechanically compatible monitoring wells, and using strategic statistical techniques to analyze and interpret monitoring data.
It is important to remember that for CO2 storage, groundwater monitoring is not intended to be the primary monitoring method for detecting fluid leakage and migration. It is only one of many required testing and monitoring methods. Even so, the monitoring network must be planned and established appropriately and then tightly coordinated with the other testing and monitoring methods to maximize the protection of underground sources of drinking water.
SCS Engineers will continue to post timely information, resources, and presentations to keep you well informed. These include additional guidance, industry reaction, and webinars with our teams using our website, on SCS Engineers LinkedIn, and on SCS YouTube on-demand forums.
Additional resources at your fingertips:
Green hydrogen is a clean fuel that produces only water when consumed in a fuel cell. Because it is produced from domestic resources, such as natural gas, nuclear power, biomass, and renewable power like solar and wind it is an attractive energy option for transportation and electricity generation applications.
SCS Engineers’ recent publication “Green Hydrogen – A New Frontier in Energy” evaluates the feasibility of hydrogen as green energy from production, transportation, storage, infrastructure investment, and environmental impact aspects. He discusses the technical and environmental challenges being addressed now through research, design, and development, and addressing the environmental obstacles to successful implementation of fuel cells and the corresponding hydrogen infrastructure.
Keep an eye on the Department of Energy’s Hydrogen and Fuel Technologies Office site where DOE publishes the developing and testing complete system solutions that address all elements of infrastructure and vehicle technology, integrated hydrogen and fuel cell technologies validations for transportation, infrastructure, and electric generation in systems using real-world operating conditions.
Additional Related Resources:
Corporate Headquarters
