2019 SMART Edmonton

March 20, 2019

SMART Remediation talks have focused on innovative technologies for remediating contaminated sites, approaches for site characterization, project case studies, regulatory and industry perspectives, and other related topics.

The 27th SMART Remediation conference was held in Edmonton on Wednesday, March 20th, 2019. Details on the speakers and presentations are provided below.

Speakers

Chet Clarke,
Shell Global Solutions (US), Inc.

An Industry Perspective: Enabling Effective Contaminated Land Management

Chet Clarke

Shell (2013 -present). Senior Hydrogeologist, responsible for providing technical assurance to US and Canada downstream soil and groundwater (SGW) assessment & remediation projects, and served as the global function leader for SGW advocacy for the Shell Projects & Technology SGW team. AMEC Earth & Environment (2006 to 2013). Principal Hydrogeologist and manager for the Austin environmental staff and responsible for business development, and management of a portfolio of SGW assessment & remediation and uranium mine permitting projects. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Remediation Division (1988-2006). Developed two Risk-Based Corrective Action regulations and associated guidance, provided RBCA training to regulatory staff and environmental professionals, held first line and second line manager roles, and managed a portfolio SGW assessment & remediation projects. University of Texas at Arlington, B.S. Geology Montana State University, M.S. Earth Science (Hydrogeology Option)

An Industry Perspective: Enabling Effective Contaminated Land Management

Contaminated land is an important societal and environmental reality in Alberta and around the globe and is deserving of responsible management. Responsible contaminated land management achieves protection of human health and the environment. Effective contaminated land management achieves such responsible endpoints by proactive stakeholders equipped with smart, risk-based, timely and sustainable alternatives. The challenge is approaching contaminated land management in a way that encourages proactive and voluntary stakeholder engagement, achieves or safeguards protection of human health and the environment, and promotes active and productive use of those contaminated lands. For decades Shell has responsibly managed contaminated lands around the globe, but often without opportunity to use more sustainable approaches and the effort expended exceeded derived risk reduction benefits. As regulatory programs developed, environmental expertise improved, and business necessity dictated, various innovative contaminated land management frameworks to balance societal, economic and environmental benefit and sustainability have emerged globally. The industry contributed to their development and has managed contaminated land under such frameworks. This industry perspective is presented to highlight and discuss some of these efforts to encourage broad stakeholder support, eliminate redundancy and focus limited resources on situations posing greatest risk, provide options for long-term liability management, and to collaborate (regulatory, stakeholder, industry) on regulatory development or reform that encourages productive use of contaminated lands.

Matthew Gardner,
Willms & Shier Environmental

Environmental Prosecutions – Latest Cases and Defence Strategies

Matthew Gardner

Matthew Gardner B.Sc. (Hons.), LL.B., is a Senior Associate at Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers LLP. Matt practices environmental law and environmental litigation. He provides advice and solutions about environmental due diligence and compliance to a wide range of clients including industrial corporations, the construction and land development sectors and municipalities. Matthew also provides advice and solutions about contaminated land issues, environmental risk management, environmental transactional due diligence and regulatory compliance. Matthew regularly appears before the Courts and administrative tribunals. He represents plaintiffs and defendants involved in environmental civil disputes and negotiates settlements before and in the early stages of civil litigation, where possible. He also assists clients under inspection or investigation by federal, provincial and municipal environmental regulators, and defends clients against environmental regulatory prosecutions. Matthew is called to the Bar in Ontario and Alberta.

Environmental Prosecutions – Latest Cases and Defence Strategies

Abstract Environmental regulators across the country are seeking higher fines, more onerous plea deals, and in egregious cases, jail time. Owners, operators, corporate directors/officers and even consultants are being charged. Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers will provide an update on the latest environmental prosecution cases across Canada and discuss ways to prevent and defend against environmental charges. This session will focus on key issues including:
• investigations, search warrants, and document production
• strategies for defending environmental prosecutions, and
• implications arising from conviction.

Katrine Nielsen,
Berkley Canada

Managing Consultant and Contractor Risk & Environmental Insurance

Katrine Nielsen

Katrine Nielsen is an AVP of environmental underwriting at Berkley Canada, a niche specialty insurance carrier, where she focuses on delivering creative and technical solutions to a wide range of client-specific risk transfer needs. Katrine joined Berkley Environmental 4 years ago and has been a key contributor to the launch of the department. Prior to joining Berkley, Katrine spent 15 years working for large multi-national environmental insurers as well as an environmental consulting firm specializing in the petrochemical industry. Katrine began her career with a diploma in environmental engineering technology from Georgian College and a Bachelor of Environmental Science from Royal Roads University.

Managing Consultant and Contractor Risk & Environmental Insurance

• Overview of Environmental Insurance and the Canadian real estate marketplace over the past 10 years (i.e., observed losses and trends).
• Overview of Fixed Site Environmental Insurance
• What is required to get a policy?

Joe Ricker,
EarthCon Consultants, Inc.

Plume Stability Analysis and other Groundwater Analytics Tools for Evaluating Petroleum Bulk Terminal Sites

Joe Ricker

For more than 24 years, Mr. Ricker has helped clients optimize a wide range of remediation solutions associated with past and present environmental liabilities under various regulatory programs in more than 30 states, as well as multiple remediation sites in Canada and Brazil. He brings a unique perspective to complex interdisciplinary projects and has managed remedial investigation and design projects involving a wide range of chemicals including petroleum hydrocarbons, pesticides, herbicides, wood-treating chemicals, solvents, and PCBs in soils, sediment, groundwater and air. Mr. Ricker is a licensed Professional Engineer in 24 states. He received a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and a M.S. in Civil Engineering from the University of Memphis.

Plume Stability Analysis and other Groundwater Analytics Tools for Evaluating Petroleum Bulk Terminal Sites

Converting numerical groundwater environmental data into unique, but easy to understand, visual graphics using statistics and mathematics is what we call “Groundwater Plume Analytics®”. Groundwater Plume Analytics® is an innovative evaluation technique to reliably and effectively communicate meaningful patterns in groundwater data and relies primarily on graphical displays to communicate valuable insight into groundwater plume behavior which leads to better site management decisions, from both a technical and financial perspective. The Ricker Method® is an example of a unique Plume Analytics® method of evaluating plume stability that overcomes limitations posed by conventional well-by-well analysis techniques. Outputs from the Ricker Method® can be used as a basis for primary analysis and other plume diagnostic tools that allow the user to further evaluate and communicate groundwater plume dynamics. Some of these innovative tools include: Remediation System Benefit Analysis (RSBA®), Spatial Change Indicator™ (SCI) analysis, and Well Sufficiency Analysis™. These tools have been successfully used as a basis for the cessation of remediation systems, evaluation of remediation progress, identification of potential unrealized source areas, providing additional lines of evidence for natural attenuation; and site closures. Examples of the use of Groundwater Plume Analytics® tools for evaluating petroleum bulk terminal sites will be presented.

Phil Dennis,
SiREM

Advances in Anaerobic Bioremediation of Benzene

Phil Dennis

Phil Dennis has over 25 years of experience working in the fields of molecular biology, microbiology and environmental remediation with a focus on microorganisms that help to clean up our groundwater. Phil holds a Masters of Applied Science in Civil Engineering from the University of Toronto and an Honors B.Sc. in Molecular Biology and Genetics from the University of Guelph. Phil is a founding member of SiREM, an industry leader in bioaugmentation and remediation testing, where as a Senior Manager he focuses on research and development, and management of molecular genetic testing services.

Advances in Anaerobic Bioremediation of Benzene

Widespread use of petroleum products has resulted in contamination with BTEX compounds at numerous sites. BTEX compounds, which are the most soluble of petroleum hydrocarbons, can readily biodegrade under aerobic conditions, however where anaerobic conditions prevail, natural attenuation of BTEX has also been observed. Most often, under anaerobic conditions, benzene is observed to persist, due to its recalcitrance to degradation and can become a regulatory driver for remediation. Several benzene degrading cultures have been identified including a methanogenic benzene enrichment culture (DGG-B), developed at the University of Toronto. DGG-B transforms benzene and produces methane and the key benzene degrader, Deltaproteobacteria ORM2, has been identified. This culture also degrades benzene under sulfate reducing conditions. Recent research efforts have been undertaken to determine 1) whether bioaugmentation with the DGG-B culture is an effective remedy for benzene contaminated sites; 2) if the presence of benzene degrading biomarkers can be correlated to in situ biodegradation activity and 3) if scale up of the culture to volumes sufficient for field pilot testing application is feasible. Numerous anaerobic treatability studies have been conducted using site materials impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons. The time frame for these treatability studies ranged from 8 to 14 months. Degradation of BTEX was monitored with and without DGG-B bioaugmentation and under various electron acceptor conditions. The results to date indicate that bioaugmentation with the DGG-B culture was able to accelerate benzene degradation under methanogenic or sulfate-reducing conditions, while in one case, no benzene degradation was observed despite bioaugmentation. Samples from the original groundwater materials, as well as microcosm samples were taken, to quantify the potential benzene degraders via quantitative PCR testing. The results indicated that increases in Deltaproteobacteria ORM2, the benzene degrader in DGG-B, were corelated with benzene degradation. Also, the putative benzene carboxylase gene (abcA) known to be related to a Peptococcaceae sp., that degrades benzene under nitrate reducing conditions, was detected by qPCR in two groundwater samples. In microcosms where benzene carboxylase was detected, benzene degraded intrinsically, although at much slower rates compared to the bioaugmented microcosms. Results from ongoing treatability studies will be presented to provide insights into the performance of the DGG-B bioaugmentation culture at a range of petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated sites, as well as into the correlation between the presence of benzene degradation molecular biomarkers and in situ biodegradation.

Ben Poltorak,
Earthmaster Environmental Strategies Inc.

Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soil in a Remote Northern Location – A Cost Effective and Predictive Remediation Strategy

Ben Poltorak

Ben has been active in environmental consulting and leadership in the delivery of services to the forestry and upstream oil and gas industry coast to coast across Canada since 2007. He holds a B.Sc. in Forest Management from the University of Alberta and an M.Sc. in Forest Engineering from the University of New Brunswick focused on soil disturbance and heavy equipment. Ben’s forte includes forested site reclamation, contaminated soil and groundwater assessment and remediation, spill response, silviculture, watercourse crossing repair and replacement, and engineering research related to soil science. Ben has been working in the boreal and Acadian forested areas of Canada since 2003. He is the project manager for Northern Operations and leads Earthmaster’s northern office. His focus is remediation, including phytoremediation of northern and remote sites, reclamation, wetlands, and aquatics.

Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soil in a Remote Northern Location – A Cost Effective and Predictive Remediation Strategy

Earthmaster has successfully developed and implemented plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) enhanced phytoremediation systems (PEPSystems™) for cost effective removal of petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and salt from soils. PEPSystems facilitates the production of abundant root biomass and the exponential growth of rhizobacteria which facilitates degradation of PHCs and sequesters salt into plant foliage. PEPSystems has been successfully deployed on many sites across seven Canadian provinces and territories to remediate PHC and salt contamination in soil. PEPSystems has provided significant cost savings and has proven to be very effective in remediating soils in remote/northern areas, where harsh conditions and permafrost exist, and access to landfill facilities is not practical. This presentation will detail phytoremediation activities, field results, and final site closure requirements associated with remediation of PHC and salt contaminated soil at a remote Northwest Territories (NT) well site. PEPSystems was first deployed at the Nota Creek C-17 site near Norman Wells, NT in 2008 to treat historical oil and gas related contamination. Between 2008 and 2010, the surface soil containing elevated salt levels was successfully phytoremediated. In 2011, PHC contaminated soil was partially excavated and placed upon the on-site treatment area or stockpiled for future treatment. This excavated soil was successfully phytoremediated between 2011 and 2016. In 2017, the remaining in-situ PHC impacted soil was excavated, placed onto the treatment area, and was successfully phytoremediated. Backfilling the excavations and recontouring the site using the treated soil plus re-vegetation of the site was completed in 2018 to comply with NT reclamation requirements. Overall remediation costs were significantly less than if offsite landfill disposal or other non-passive remedial technologies would have been utilized. Kinetic modeling of PEPSystems performance will also be discussed as the basis for predicting the length of time required to remediate PHC contaminated sites.

Jean Paré,
Chemco inc

Benefits of Combining In Situ Chemical Oxidation with In Situ Stabilization: Synergies and Solutions for Complex Sites

Jean Paré

Jean Pare, P.Eng., has a degree in Chemical Engineering from Laval University. He has been involved for the last 22 years in the evaluation, development, design, and promotion of both conventional and innovative environmental technologies. As Vice President with Chemco Inc., his responsibilities include the remediation design, technico-economical analysis and technology supply for chemical oxidation and reduction, soil washing, and enhanced bio-remediation. Last year, he worked with over 400 sites applying his expertise to various types of organic and inorganic contaminants in soil and groundwater. He is also involved with many environmental organizations such as CLRA, CBN, ESAA, BCEIA and Reseau-Environnement where he is an active technical committee member and regular technical speaker.

Benefits of Combining In Situ Chemical Oxidation with In Situ Stabilization: Synergies and Solutions for Complex Sites

In situ solidification/stabilization (ISS) has been used at many manufactured gas plant (MGP), brownfield, and Superfund sites. ISS mixes cementitious reagents with contaminated soils reducing the bioavailability and leachability of contaminants. ISS can also be optimized to control certain ll soil characteristics, such as compressive soil strength and reduce hydraulic conductivity. Various reagents are used to promote ISS including Portland cement, blast furnace slag, lime kiln dust, etc. Several of these reagents contain calcium oxide (CaO), also known as quick lime. For example, Portland cement (PC) consists of 60% to 68% CaO by weight. ISS is often applied at highly contaminated petroleum hydrocarbon sites decreasing the leachability of BTEX, naphthalene (NAP) and other organic contaminant in soil. Cementation reactions also decrease hydraulic conductivity (K), which diverts groundwater flow away from the solidified/stabilized soil. ISS treatment also increases unconfined compressive strength (UCS), often critical for redevelopment. However, high concentrations of organic contaminant can interfere with cementation reactions requiring excessive application of amendments increasing both amendment and disposal costs of the displaced soil. This ISS limitation can be minimized by utilizing a combined remedy approach like In Situ Chemical Oxidation to degrade some of the organic contaminants present. ISCO combined with ISS has been found to be able to achieve the same or better leachability and compressive soil strength values with less overall reagent addition and displaced soils. Combining one or more remediation technology generates synergies by exploiting the strengths and minimizing the weak- nesses inherent in individual technologies. When successful, combining remedies enhances performance and/or reduces costs compared to each technology used alone. Approach/Activities. This presentation will review the advantages and limitations of using the combined ISCO/ISS remedy on a contaminated soil from different petroleum hydrocarbon sites.. The presentation will review current literature and explore both bench and field data demonstrating the successes of ISCO-ISS as a combined remedy. The objectives of this study generated by Srivastava et al. were to quantify (1) the ability of a wide range of doses of ISS-activated SP to degrade BTEX and PAH (2) the impact of BTEX and PAH removal from chemical oxidation during ISCO/ISS treatment on synthetic precipitation leaching procedure (SPLP) measurements, compared with a wide range of ISS doses alone (3) the effect of activated PS on other ISS performance parameters, such as hydraulic conductivity and unconfined compressive strength Results/Lessons Learned. Activated SP chemically oxidized a significant portion of the COCs for all the ISCO/ISS treatments, and the mass of COCs oxidized increased with increasing SP dose. The lowest molecular weight contaminants were preferentially oxidized. For the same PC dose, combined ISCO/ISS treatment was more far effective in reducing contaminant leachability than ISS treatment alone, because of the COC removal achieved by the ISCO (activated SP) component.

Heather Lord,
Maxxam

Accurate and Quantifiable Characterization of Biogenic vs. Petrogenic Hydrocarbons in Soil

Heather Lord

Heather Lord is the Manager for Maxxam Environmental Research & Development. She earned her Ph.D. in Analytical Chemistry from the University of Waterloo in 2005 and has published over 50 scientific research papers on the subject. She joined Maxxam in 2012 and works closely with both Maxxam staff and industry stakeholders to address new technical challenges and evolving industry needs. Her focus is on bringing new and improved service offerings to market and reducing time and costs for field work and lab analysis.

Accurate and Quantifiable Characterization of Biogenic vs. Petrogenic Hydrocarbons in Soil

Soil samples containing high levels of naturally occurring organic (biogenic) material can produce false positives when measuring petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs) using CCME Tier I protocols. This can lead to costly remedial activities where no significant PHC impacts are present. This is because biogenic hydrocarbons in muskegs and peats for example, are extracted along with petrogenic (petroleum-based) hydrocarbons. If not properly removed from the extract, biogenic materials are included in the reported PHC result, potentially resulting in concentrations above regulatory standards. CCME methods describe procedures to remove the biogenic species prior to analysis, however, the procedures may be ineffective where the organic content exceeds the capacity of the clean-up procedures to remove them. Non-petroleum hydrocarbons can by identified by GC/MS analysis, however this does not quantify the biogenics contribution to the PHC result and the approach often fails due to co-eluting PHCs. Alternative approaches are available, including among others: 1) Visual evaluation of GC chromatograms for characteristic biogenic hydrocarbon peak patterns; 2) Determining ratios of hydrocarbon concentrations in regions of the chromatogram known to contain vs. not contain biogenic material; and 3) Comprehensive 2-dimensional (2-D) GC evaluation of the proportion of peak area in the 2-D space characteristic of biogenic hydrocarbons. Although useful for identifying potential biogenic bias, these methods still have limitations: 1) May not fully isolate all biogenic materials from petrogenics; 2) Extracts for GC/MS analysis may contain interfering species that preclude accurate identification of biogenic materials; and 3) Results are not obtained in accordance with CCME prescribed procedures. This presentation describes a novel method for the separation and determination of petrogenic and biogenic hydrocarbons from a soil sample. The method is based on an Environment Canada report from 2013*, which describes a column fractionation process to efficiently separate the petrogenic and biogenic components of biodiesel and quantify them separately. Multiple recovery surrogates are used to verify the efficient separation of the components. Because the range of polar biogenic materials in a biodiesel is similar to the biogenic materials arising from soil organic matter, the method appeared ideally suited for soil biogenic hydrocarbon determination. Additionally, the extraction protocols described in the Environment Canada method are similar to those prescribed by CCME for analysis of PHCs in soil and quantification of the obtained extracts by CCME prescribed methods is identical. In this presentation we will demonstrate how this method has been applied to soils with a wide range organic content, contaminated with different types and amounts of PHCs. Advantages of this method include: 1) Use of CCME prescribed methods; 2) Additional recovery surrogate standards for both biogenic and petroleum hydrocarbons are used, demonstrating efficient separation of PHCs from biogenics; 3) The biogenic extract is clean, allowing for accurate GC/MS characterization if required.

Kevin French,
Vertex Environmental

Remediation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Case Studies Using the Trap and Treat Technique

Kevin French

Mr. French is Vice President of Vertex and has over 30 years of experience and expertise in environmental engineering, specializing in site assessment and remediation. Kevin has been involved in the design and implementation of remediation programs across Canada involving PRBs, carbon adsorption, in-situ chemical oxidation and reduction, aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation, etc. in soil, groundwater and bedrock for a variety of contaminants, including petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents and other compounds. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in Engineering from the University of Waterloo, is a Professional Engineer and a Qualified Person in Ontario, and frequently presents on environmental site assessment and remediation at conferences and seminars across Canada.

Remediation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Case Studies Using the Trap and Treat Technique

Organic contaminants in groundwater, including Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs) and other organic contaminants, often represent significant legacy environmental concerns at Brownfield and other contaminated sites. Soil is often quickly and easily remediated; however, relatively minor residuals of contamination remaining in the soil (or bedrock) matrix, even at concentrations below soil quality standards, can result in “rebound” of the compounds in groundwater to concentrations above actionable standards. This is due to the slow and steady back-diffusion of the organic contaminants out of the solid matrix over time. This phenomenon, combined with the orders of magnitude lower concentrations typically allowed in groundwater, is often problematic for site closure. Many common in-situ remedial technologies have significant limitations in addressing back-diffusion including: the requirement for multiple applications of amendments; effectiveness limited to specific contaminants and not others; low persistence; low efficiency; potential for generation of more toxic degradation products, etc. Most of these approaches also require relatively long timeframes to implement (months to years). In the past several years, Vertex has observed first-hand how injecting Activated Carbon (AC)-based amendments, such as Trap & Treat®, can be used to provide a quick, effective and sustained treatment for PHCs and other organic contaminants in a matter of weeks. Previously, the use of AC in the subsurface was limited due to the finite adsorptive capacity of the AC emplaced. New technologies allow for both adsorption and subsequent treatment of organic contaminants using efficient modalities. PHCs are treated via anaerobic biodegradation, which provides a more efficient and sustained treatment compared to aerobic biodegradation. As contaminants are degraded, adsorption sites on the AC once again become accessible to quickly adsorb more contamination from the groundwater, thus overcoming the back-diffusion challenge. Real-world, Canadian case studies of sites where these innovative in-situ remedial technologies have been applied will be presented and discussed, together with follow-up performance monitoring data. The use of these adsorptive technologies may allow more Brownfields and other contaminated sites to quickly be brought to closure, while minimizing long-term risks over contaminant “rebound”.