Technical Sessions - Environmental Management Support, Inc.

Technical Sessions of the Technical Support Project Meeting, Seattle, WA April 22-25, 2003
planning to develop a conceptual site model that is verified and modified using a flexible work plan and
onsite decision-making supported by the real-time field analysis of samples. The document also
discusses data collection and evaluation techniques, with an emphasis on the toolbox approach, and
regulatory issues.
George Hall provided an overview of what the DNAPLs Team is planning for the future. More guidance
documents are planned for 2003-2004 that address remediation performance evaluation and integrated
approaches for DNAPL cleanup. One of the team’s guiding principles is to remediate residual DNAPL
to the point where the rate of natural attenuation exceeds the rate of mass flux from the source area to
the dissolved plume. The team is developing a decision tree document that will address how to decide
when to transition from an aggressive to a more passive approach in the remediation process using a
treatment train approach. This document is due out in 2004.
The DNAPLs Team is also working on a document, Performance Metrics for DNAPL Source Zone
Remediation. The questions they want to answer include: what is performance?, what can be measured?,
how to employ multiple lines of evidence?, and what are the available tools? They anticipate an
aggressive schedule and would like to collaborate with the Army Environmental Center and EPA. They
anticipate that the document will be ready in 2004.
Questions and Answers
Question: How were source removal and mass flux addressed?
Answer: When the DNAPL Team prepared the document, Facing the Challenges, they indicated that
source removal should be done, when feasible. The results of a poll of the states, consultants, and federal
and industry representatives on the team were unanimous that source removal should be done when
possible.
Question: How are the guiding principles translated in practice at the state level?
Answer: The guiding principles are agreed upon by the states. In Arizona, the laws have been changed
and require source removal. Vermont also requires source removal.
Question: Have you polled the states to find out how they are addressing DNAPL removal?
Answer: No, and the DNAPL Team does not know which states are implementing the principles and
which are not.
Question: Agreement among the members of the team on a document and principles, does not mean that
the political leadership of a state will support it, does it?
Answer: Our review process asks the state to concur with a document issued by the ITRC. If the state
concurs, it does not mean they agree with everything in the document, but that they consider the
document useful in decision making and encourage its use.
Superfund Basic Research Program: A Program Update
Larry Reed, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Larry Reed described the Superfund Basic Research Program at the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and how NIEHS is collaborating with EPA and ATSDR in its
research. NIEHS was established in 1986 under SARA and was intended to complement EPA and
ATSDR. It provides training and outreach services (e.g., to public schools and the Technical
25