CLU-IN Home

U.S. EPA Contaminated Site Cleanup Information (CLU-IN)


U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. EPA Technology Innovation and Field Services Division

Upcoming Live Web Events

More Information
Upcoming Internet Seminars RSS Feed
Participant Comments

CLU-IN's ongoing series of Internet Seminars are free, web-based slide presentations with a companion audio portion. We provide two options for accessing the audio portion of the seminar: by phone line or streaming audio simulcast. More information and registration for all Internet Seminars is available by selecting the individual seminar below. Not able to make one of our live offerings? You may also view archived seminars.

 
 
 
 
 
 

Former BICC Cables Site Construction Hudson River Sediment Cap Under the EPRI Building Yonkers, Westchester County, New York

The Society of American Military Engineers (SAME) Denver Post and Philadelphia Post along with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are hosting a series of webinars based on talks given at recent Design and Construction Issues at Hazardous Waste Sites (DCHWS) Symposiums. The mission of the DCHWS symposiums is to facilitate an interactive engagement between professionals from government and the private sector related to relevant and topical issues affecting applications of engineering and science associated with cleaning up hazardous waste sites. The symposiums also serve as a platform to facilitate the exchange of information, encourage dialogue, share experiences, and build and enhance communication among design and construction professionals.

This presentation will highlight work at the BICC Cables Site, a former cable manufacturing facility whose operation led to contamination of on-site soil and sediment by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), has been the subject of remediation efforts since 2005. The impacted sediment could not be efficiently and safely removed by dredging as a result of horizontal and vertical spatial limitations, safety concerns, and the heavy debris content. Therefore, an engineering control was required to contain and treat the PCB impacted sediment. In addition to the engineering challenges posed by the site conditions, the need to work within the waters of the Hudson River created an extremely complex regulatory context. The presentation will discussion a Multi-Layer Sediment Cover System (SCS) engineering control which was designed and implemented to contain and treat the PCB-impacted sediment under the 29,500-square-foot EPRI Building in the Hudson River. In addition, SCS Remote Sensing System load cells with fiber optic cables were installed to monitor long-term movement and integrity of the SCS. Proactive stakeholder engagement was necessary to navigate the project through the two-year permitting process by leading numerous design presentations and negotiation sessions with the five regulatory agencies. Routinely adjusting the installation approach and construction schedule were also necessitated by the nature of working in a dynamic water body.

Federal Facilities Online Academy: Federal Facility Five-Year Review

Federal Facility Five-Year Review Webinar is a two-hour webinar course that provides an overview of Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) five-year reviews. By taking this course, participants will achieve the following objectives:

  • Understand Five-Year Review purpose and regulatory context
  • Learn how to prepare and conduct a five-year review
  • Identify the information and data needed to support a protectiveness statement
  • Address emerging contaminants and options available to ensure that the federal agencies address these contaminants
  • Identify the different scenarios when EPA makes an independent finding of the protectiveness of the remedy
  • Learn about similarities and differences between federal and private site five-year reviews

The instructional methodology for this course includes lecture, case studies, and quizzes. There will also be an opportunity for participants to ask questions. The target audience for this course are federal, state, and tribal representatives who work on Federal Facility cleanups. Ideally, students should have a basic understanding the CERCLA process. This course is part of the Federal Facilities Academy training program. Please consider registering for other Federal Facility Academy courses and obtain a certificate upon completion of the entire Federal Facility Academy series (12 courses total).

Federal Facilities Online Academy: Military Munitions Policy

Military Munitions Policy Webinar is a two-hour webinar course that provides an overview of the Department of Defense (DoD) Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP), munitions policies, and how the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) is applied to munitions sites. By taking this course, participants will achieve the following objectives:

  • Learn about DoD MMRP;
  • Understand the CERCLA process as applied to a munitions site;
  • Understand munitions policies; and,
  • Explore EPA Munitions Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs).

The instructional methodology for this course includes lecture, case studies, and quizzes. There will also be an opportunity for participants to ask questions. The target audience for this course are federal, state, and tribal representatives who work on Federal Facility cleanups. Ideally, students should have a basic understanding of munitions and the CERCLA process. This course is part of the Federal Facilities Academy training program. Please consider registering for other Federal Facility Academy courses and obtain a certificate upon completion of the entire Federal Facility Academy series (12 courses total).

FRTR Spring 2020 Meeting, Session 2: Bioremediation Advances - New Strategies, Optimization, and Performance Monitoring

The Spring 2020 meeting of the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable (FRTR) will be held as a two-part webinar on Friday, May 29 and Friday, June 5, 2020. As always, FRTR meetings are open to the public.

FRTR's objectives for this meeting are to:
  1. Review the state of the practice of bioremediation: Broad overview of where it is commonly applied, where it is still experimental, and what are the challenges.

  2. Discuss advances in bioremediation for organic and inorganic contaminants, including new approaches, optimization, and tools for monitoring technologies to determine successful performance.

  3. Review brief case studies to demonstrate how new technologies are being applied and optimized.


Session 2: Current Research and Inorganic Contaminants

New Technology Briefings
  • Superfund Research Program (SRP);

  • Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP); and

  • Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP)


Bioreactor and Vertical Wetland Remediation of Metal Contaminated Mine Influenced Water (MIW)
Abstract: There are over half a million abandoned mine sites in the U.S. potentially emanating mining-influenced water, contaminating streams and soils in adjacent areas. These sites present major challenges for remediation, including seasonal inaccessibility, rough terrain, lack of energy sources, high acidity, and metal concentrations (e.g. Fe, Al, Cu, Pb, Zn, Mn, Cd, etc.). To appropriately evaluate mining-impacted water treatment techniques that can provide the best cost benefit with the desired effluent quality, decision-makers usually rely on bench-scale and pilot-scale tests before designing field-scale reactors. Traditionally, the focus has been on metal removal efficiency to determine the feasibility of the proposed treatment, but it is difficult to replicate the high efficiencies of bench-scale tests with field-scale reactors. The integration of aqueous phase analytical chemistry (e.g. pH, alkalinity, metal composition, anions, sulfides, etc.) with solids analysis (e.g. elementary composition, speciation by XPS and XANES, etc.) and microbial transformation of soluble metals provides the tools to evaluate metal removal while elucidating the involved mechanisms. The benefit of this approach is that the impact of several variables (e.g. substrate volume, mass and composition, hydraulic retention time, dissolved oxygen content in the influent, etc.) can be evaluated for metal and sulfate removal. Case studies of passive biochemical reactors using actual mine water from abandoned mine sites will be used to demonstrate the benefits of this approach.

Advances in Long-term Monitoring Technologies for Supporting Bioremediation
Abstract: Bioremediation for heavy metals aims to immobilize them in subsurface and to reduce aqueous concentrations for an extended time. It has been investigated for many years at the Department of Energy (DOE)'s legacy sites; particularly for uranium. A variety of bioremediation technologies and associated monitoring/modeling methodology have been evaluated. Recently, hydroxyapatite-based novel permeable reactive barriers have been developed, which has shown a very promising result at the DOE's Rifle site (Colorado), showing more than two years of immobilization without rebound. During this process, groundwater monitoring has been found to be critical for understanding groundwater system dynamics, and its effect of bioremediation outcomes. We are currently developing a new paradigm of long-term monitoring approach to support bioremediation, by taking advantage of recent advances in in situ sensors and machine learning.

Power and Pollinators: Pollinator-Friendly Landscapes for Solar Facilities

Are you interested in learning how to beautify your solar site and promote pollinator habitat? The Power and Pollinators webinar will examine how planting for pollinators on RE-Powering sites benefits cleaning up contaminated sites while beautifying communities. Planting for pollinators can help protect caps, control runoff, and provide habitat for struggling pollinator communities.

The Power and Pollinators: Pollinator-Friendly Landscapes for Solar Facilities and Beyond is hosted by: the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, VHB, Fresh Energy and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).The webinar explores the relationship between solar installations, contaminated lands and landfills, and pollinators.

The Commonwealth of Virginia will discuss how the solar power industry has an extraordinary opportunity to impact the landscape by encouraging native plants at solar facilities. Solar facilities located on brownfields, landfills and other contaminated lands present a unique opportunity to benefit the local community by cleaning up the property and redeveloping the site according to the community's goals. The Commonwealth will highlight the Virginia Pollinator-Smart Solar Program which is designed to provide incentives and tools for solar industry to adopt a native plant strategy to meet soil and water control regulations, community needs, and the needs of our biosphere.

Consultants VHB and Fresh Energy will share their knowledge and expertise of this growing trend and benefits to communities, developers and pollinators.

EPA's RE-Powering America's Land Initiative encourages renewable energy development on current and formerly contaminated lands, landfills, and mine sites when such development is aligned with the community's vision for the site. The Initiative identifies the renewable energy potential of these sites and provides other useful resources for communities, developers, industry, state and local governments or anyone interested in reusing these sites for renewable energy development. EPA will present case studies and expertise related to renewable energy on underutilized lands.

Superfund Task Force Listening Session, Recommendation 6: Provide Clarification of Principles for Superfund Groundwater Remediation

Superfund Task Force Recommendation 6: Provide Clarification to the Principles for Superfund Groundwater Restoration recommended actions to analyze a select group of major policies and guidances with special emphasis on: 1) beneficial use designation of aquifers in the near- or long-term, 2) remedial timeframe, 3) phased remedial approaches, and 4) completion strategy. This activity has been broadened to also include additional flexibilities such as the use of 5) monitored natural attenuation (MNA) and 6) technical impracticability (TI) waivers. EPA is seeking input on how groundwater remediation under CERCLA currently incorporates these flexibilities, limitations to their use, and potential ways to increase knowledge and application in future. This information, along with information from additional stakeholders listening sessions, will be used to inform potential future actions as the Agency strives to increase efficiency, reduce time and costs, and to improve groundwater cleanup.

The following questions are offered to assist the participants in focusing comments in response to the Listening Session materials.
  • Of the six flexibilities identified and contained in existing EPA guidance, which do you find the most useful in selecting and implementing groundwater remedial strategies and remedies?
  • What aspects of the six policy flexibilities would benefit from clarification?
  • Can you identify any issues in the use of the six flexibilities?
  • How useful is the current Groundwater Beneficial Use Designation policy and could additional clarification be made?
  • What lines-of-evidence for monitored natural attenuation are the most useful in making an MNA determination and are there possible new lines-of-evidence based on advances in science?
  • How can current EPA MNA policy be clarified to better address ineffective remedies?
  • What are the most important factors to consider in determining an appropriate site-specific remedial timeframe?
  • How are current and future groundwater use and other flexibilities factored into a remediation timeframe analysis?
  • What clarifications to existing Technical Impracticability (TI) guidance would be useful to evaluate the site for TI applicability?
  • Is clarification needed for the successful use of a phased approach in a groundwater remedy?
  • Are the advantages of a phased approach to groundwater remediation clear and understandable, and how is phasing most effectively applied?
  • In your experience, has the use of a completion strategy or plan been useful in facilitating a common understanding amongst all parties for steps and metrics needed for achieving completion goals?
  • How has the use of a completion strategy or plan resulted in optimizing or changing the current groundwater remedy?


A second delivery for Regulated and Consulting Communities will be hosted on June 30th, 2020. For more information on that session, please click here.

Superfund Task Force Listening Session, Recommendation 6: Provide Clarification of Principles for Superfund Groundwater Remediation

Superfund Task Force Recommendation 6: Provide Clarification to the Principles for Superfund Groundwater Restoration recommended actions to analyze a select group of major policies and guidances with special emphasis on: 1) beneficial use designation of aquifers in the near- or long-term, 2) remedial timeframe, 3) phased remedial approaches, and 4) completion strategy. This activity has been broadened to also include additional flexibilities such as the use of 5) monitored natural attenuation (MNA) and 6) technical impracticability (TI) waivers. EPA is seeking input on how groundwater remediation under CERCLA currently incorporates these flexibilities, limitations to their use, and potential ways to increase knowledge and application in future. This information, along with information from additional stakeholders listening sessions, will be used to inform potential future actions as the Agency strives to increase efficiency, reduce time and costs, and to improve groundwater cleanup.

The following questions are offered to assist the participants in focusing comments in response to the Listening Session materials.
  • Of the six flexibilities identified and contained in existing EPA guidance, which do you find the most useful in selecting and implementing groundwater remedial strategies and remedies?
  • What aspects of the six policy flexibilities would benefit from clarification?
  • Can you identify any issues in the use of the six flexibilities?
  • How useful is the current Groundwater Beneficial Use Designation policy and could additional clarification be made?
  • What lines-of-evidence for monitored natural attenuation are the most useful in making an MNA determination and are there possible new lines-of-evidence based on advances in science?
  • How can current EPA MNA policy be clarified to better address ineffective remedies?
  • What are the most important factors to consider in determining an appropriate site-specific remedial timeframe?
  • How are current and future groundwater use and other flexibilities factored into a remediation timeframe analysis?
  • What clarifications to existing Technical Impracticability (TI) guidance would be useful to evaluate the site for TI applicability?
  • Is clarification needed for the successful use of a phased approach in a groundwater remedy?
  • Are the advantages of a phased approach to groundwater remediation clear and understandable, and how is phasing most effectively applied?
  • In your experience, has the use of a completion strategy or plan been useful in facilitating a common understanding amongst all parties for steps and metrics needed for achieving completion goals?
  • How has the use of a completion strategy or plan resulted in optimizing or changing the current groundwater remedy?


A separate delivery for Environmental Groups & General Public will be hosted on June 18th, 2020. For more information on that session, please click here.

Cleanup and Redevelopment of Removal Action Sites in the Kansas City Metropolitan Area

Each year, thousands of emergencies involving hazardous substances are reported in the United States. Emergencies range from small-scale spills to large incidents requiring prompt action and evacuation of nearby populations. In response to these emergencies, EPA conducts short-term cleanups - called removal actions - to protect human health and the environment. This webinar will highlight EPA's involvement at removal sites and examples of successful removal site redevelopment in the Kansas City metropolitan area. The webinar will share lessons learned and information for those interested in Superfund site reuse and commercial, residential, agricultural and industrial redevelopment.

Exposures and Latent Disease Risk: Session III - Arsenic as a Case Study

The NIEHS Superfund Research Program (SRP) is hosting a Risk e-Learning webinar series focused on understanding the health effects of exposures when there is a lag between exposure and the onset of the disease.

In the third session, presenters will describe studies linking early-life arsenic exposure and later-life disease risk. The focus on arsenic as a case study may also provide insights into linking other exposures to latent disease risk and identifying windows of susceptibility.

Yu Chen, Ph.D., and Maria Argos, Ph.D., co-investigators of a project with the Columbia University SRP Center, will present research from the Health Effects of Arsenic Longitudinal Study (HEALS) and ancillary studies linking early-life arsenic exposure and disease risk across the life course. For nearly two decades, HEALS has provided individual-level epidemiologic data evaluating risks from chronic arsenic exposure through drinking water in rural Bangladesh with clinical and molecular endpoints.

Fenna Sillé, Ph.D., assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, will discuss her research focused on early-life exposures to arsenic and immune system changes. As an alumna of the University of California, Berkeley SRP Center, she will also discuss studies assessing the long-term effects of a unique early-life arsenic exposure situation in Northern Chile. She will present data from in vitro and in vivo models as well as from the Chilean population study.

Erik Tokar, Ph.D., leader of the NIEHS National Toxicology Program Stem Cell Toxicology Group, will discuss the association between early-life arsenic exposure and cancer in adulthood. His presentation will focus on cancer formation in adulthood following in utero and "whole life" exposure to arsenic. It will cover in vivo and in vitro models and discuss the effects of arsenic on stem cell recruitment and the microenvironment during transformation and cancer stem cell formation.

Exposures and Latent Disease Risk: Session IV - Moving Forward

The NIEHS Superfund Research Program (SRP) is hosting a Risk e-Learning webinar series focused on exposures and latent disease risk. The series features SRP grantees and colleagues who are studying the health effects of exposures when there is a lag between exposure and the onset of disease.

In the fourth and final session, presenters will discuss emerging toxicology and modeling methods, as well as needs, to better link exposure to latent disease risk.

Stefano Monti, Ph.D., associate professor at Boston University, will provide an overview of the experimental and computational approaches he and his team have developed and applied to model environmental chemicals and to predict their long-term adverse effects from short-term omics assays. In particular, he will present vignettes from two studies, the first aimed at predicting chemical carcinogenicity and genotoxicity, and the second aimed at defining a molecular taxonomy of metabolism-disrupting chemicals. The focus will be on the experimental design and the computational approaches adopted, as well as on some of the challenges and lessons learned.

Stephen Ferguson, Ph.D., a scientist in the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Division of the NIEHS, will describe emerging toxicological approach methods (TAMs), which seek to enhance our understanding of human responses to xenobiotic exposures and their translation to human health outcomes. He will discuss progress at NTP towards enhancing the physiological relevance of Tox21 research through qualification of 3D liver screening models paired with informative assay systems (e.g., high throughput transcriptomics) in response to reference human therapeutics and environmental chemicals.

Manish Arora, Ph.D., professor at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, will describe his work focused on environmental biodynamics, which focuses on the interplay between the environment and the body. He will discuss rethinking the role of time in environmental health research and will be sharing his work on neurological disorders at different life stages.

Consumption by Tribes of Plants and Animals Not Accounted for in EPA Superfund Risk Assessment Methodology

This webinar will describe the process and results from a research project concerning two issues that arise when assessing risks from contamination at Superfund sites. The first area of focus analyzed information from Superfund risk assessments and other publicly available studies on fruit and vegetable consumption by Native Americans that are outside of the twenty-four produce categories EPA includes in risk assessment models used to develop cleanup levels for residential gardens and farms at radioactively contaminated Superfund sites. The second area of focus of the project analyzed the sources for information on animal consumption by Native Americans that is outside of the twelve farm animal categories in EPA's risk assessment models.
Interstate Technology Regulatory Council
Seminars Sponsored by the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council


Remediation Management of Complex Sites

Interstate Technology Regulatory Council At some sites, complex site-specific conditions make it difficult to fully remediate environmental contamination. Both technical and nontechnical challenges can impede remediation and may prevent a site from achieving federal- and state-mandated regulatory cleanup goals within a reasonable time frame. For example, technical challenges may include geologic, hydrogeologic, geochemical, and contaminant-related conditions as well as large-scale or surface conditions. In addition, nontechnical challenges may also play a role such as managing changes that occur over long time frames, overlapping regulatory and financial responsibilities between agencies, setting achievable site objectives, maintaining effective institutional controls, redevelopment and changes in land use, and funding considerations.
This training course and associated ITRC guidance: Remediation Management of Complex Sites (RMCS-1, 2017), provide a recommended holistic process for management of challenging sites, termed "adaptive site management." This process is a comprehensive, flexible, and iterative process that is well-suited for sites where there is significant uncertainty in remedy performance predictions. Adaptive site management includes the establishment of interim objectives and long-term site objectives that consider both technical and nontechnical challenges. Periodic adjustment of the remedial approach may involve multiple technologies at any one time and changes in technologies over time. Comprehensive planning and scheduled evaluations of remedy performance help decision makers track remedy progress and improve the timeliness of remedy optimization, reevaluations, or transition to other technologies/contingency actions.
By participating in this training course we expect you will learn to apply the ITRC guidance document to:
  • Identify and integrate technical and nontechnical challenges into a holistic approach to remediation
  • Use the Remediation Potential Assessment to identify whether adaptive site management is warranted due to site complexity
  • Understand and apply adaptive site management principles
  • Develop a long-term performance-based action plan
  • Apply well-demonstrated techniques for effective stakeholder engagement
  • Access additional resources, tools, and case studies most relevant for complex sites
  • Communicate the value of the guidance to regulators, practitioners, community members, and others
Ultimately, using the guidance that can lead to better decision making and remediation management at complex sites. The guidance is intended to benefit a variety of site decision makers, including regulators, responsible parties and their consultants, and public and tribal stakeholders.
Case studies are used to describe real-world applications of remediation and remediation management at complex sites. Training participants are encouraged to view the associated ITRC guidance Remediation Management of Complex Sites (RMCS-1, 2017) prior to attending the class.

TPH Risk Evaluation at Petroleum-Contaminated Sites

Interstate Technology Regulatory Council Remediation at petroleum release sites is often infeasible for technical or cost reasons. Many of these sites could be depleted in typical indicator compounds, such as BTEXN, but still heavily contaminated in terms of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH). The traditional indicator compound approach for managing petroleum contaminants may not fully identify short- and long-term potential environmental concerns, can create delays in project schedules and cost overages for sub-surface utility work or redevelopment. It is important to consider a comprehensive cumulative risk-based approach to more effectively incorporate TPH data in addition to traditional BTEXN data for cleanup and long-term management decisions.

The basis for this training course is the ITRC guidance: TPH Risk Evaluation at Petroleum-Contaminated Sites (TPHRisk-1, 2018). The guidance builds on long-standing and current research and experience, and presents the current science for evaluating TPH risk at petroleum-contaminated sites. The methods and procedures to evaluate human and ecological risk and establish cleanup requirements in the various media at petroleum release sites will assist decision makers in developing and implementing a technically defensible approach. In addition, the guidance provides information and supplemental references to assist practitioners and project managers in the assessment of fate, transport, exposure, and toxicity of TPH. The guidance users will also gain information that may be used in conjunction with classic tiered approaches for risk-based decision making (ASTM 2015b, ITRC Risk 3 2015), including modifications in the assessment and remedial-decision and regulatory framework for TPH impacts through direct comparison to screening levels, site-specific modification of screening levels, and complete site-specific risk assessment for sources, receptors, and pathways, where appropriate.

The target audience for this guidance and training course is:
  • Regulators and Program Managers interested in knowing how site management decisions can influence the TPH risk evaluation process.
  • Risk assessors new to TPH data or those who want additional knowledge and training in the current methods and common practices for collecting and using TPH data in assessments to more accurately determine human health and/or ecological risks at petroleum-contaminated sites.
  • Stakeholders who are either engaged in redevelopment at former petroleum release sites or folks who are involved in community engagement and revitalization activities.
As a participant in this training you should learn to:
  • Recognize the ITRC document as a go-to resource for evaluating TPH risk at petroleum-contaminated sites
  • Recognize how TPH -impacted media interacts with the environment and changes over time
  • Select appropriate analytic method(s) to match site objectives
  • Apply the decision framework to determine when a site-specific target level may be more appropriate than a generic screening level for TPH
Training participants are encouraged to view the associated ITRC guidance, TPH Risk Evaluation at Petroleum-Contaminated Sites (TPHRisk-1, 2018) prior to attending the class.