2020 SMART Calgary

Edward Domijan, Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC
Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) and the separate Northern Abandoned Mines Reclamation Program (NAMRP)
Bio | Abstract | Presentation

Mark Youden, Gowling WLG
CO-PRESENTING: The New Reliance on Criminal Prosecutions to Enforce Environmental Compliance
Bio | Abstract | Presentation

Josh Jantzi, Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP
CO-PRESENTING: The New Reliance on Criminal Prosecutions to Enforce Environmental Compliance
Bio | Abstract | Presentation

Albert Ho, First Capital Realty
Environmental Risk Management in Real Estate
Bio | Abstract | Presentation

Jacquelyn Stevens, Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers LLP
You Have Been Retained as an Expert Witness in Environmental Litigation – Now What?
Bio | Abstract | Presentation

Ryan Riess, Pinter & Associates Ltd
Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation – Case Studies
Bio | Abstract | Presentation

Kevin French, Vertex Environmental
Case Study: When In-Situ Technologies Fail
Bio | Abstract | Presentation

Case Study: When In-Situ Technologies Fail

In-situ remediation of petroleum hydrocarbon compounds (PHCs) is commonly applied across Canada. So why is it that some such projects are successful while other fail? How is a practitioner to know when is the right time to start remediation, what product(s) to use, how to select and how apply an appropriate in-situ remediation technique? How does one know how much data to collect beforehand, during and after remediation, and what data is the most important to remediation success? It seems that rarely do people highlight their remediation failures, yet much can be learned from studying what does not work to figure out the cause(s). The purpose of this talk is to present a case study of an actual site where two different in situ remediation techniques were used to treat PHCs and they both failed. Within this presentation, the site background and subsurface data will be reviewed, the remediation approaches will be presented, and possible reasons for the failed remedial efforts will be put forth. The talk will conclude by showcasing what additional Site data was collected and how a different in-situ remediation approach was selected and applied. This decision making process resulted in a delayed, but ultimately successful, remediation project. The site is a former fueling station located at the corner of a busy intersection in an urban area. There was significant on-site contamination, yet Risk Management Measures were used so remediation of the source area was not required. However, it was essential that the PHC plume be controlled to prevent its continued off-site migration. This talk will highlight how an injected Permeable Reactive Barrier (PRB) for PHCs was at first unsuccessfully, and then successfully, installed along a busy down-gradient property boundary. Throughout the presentation recommendations and insights will be offered into how to avoid failure and how to maximize success for in-situ remediation projects.

Jean Paré, Chemco inc.
In Situ Chemical Reduction for Remediation of Soil Containing Chlorinated Pesticides and Herbicides
Bio | Abstract | Presentation

In Situ Chemical Reduction for Remediation of Soil Containing Chlorinated Pesticides and Herbicides

Problematic: Soil sterilant are non-selective residual herbicides that render the treated soil unfit for plant growth for relatively long periods of time. Sterilant, were commonly used in Alberta from the 1960s to late 1990s for non-selective vegetation control on oil and gas wells, gas processing plants, rights-of-way, railways, saw mills, pulp mills, and electrical utility sites ([1], [2], [7]); residues may also be found at agrochemical dealer sites ([8]). Sterilant treated areas can remain devoid of vegetation for many years, depending upon the type, rate and frequency of application of soil sterilant and the climatic conditions. Soils treated with sterilant can be a source of contamination through leaching, surface runoff and wind dispersion of the sterilant to adjacent land and waterbodies. Reclamation and remediation issues arise when a treated site is no longer needed for industrial use and the site must be returned to equivalent land capability. At present, many of these sites either remain as liabilities for industry, or impacted soil is excavated and disposed at a landfill. In Alberta, awareness of the issues associated with soil sterilant is on the rise as more legacy oil and gas sites (constructed prior to 1970; operational prior to 1990), where sterilant were typically used, are abandoned and slated for remediation and reclamation. Cotton and Sharma ([1]) estimated the number of oil and gas sites in Alberta with soil sterilant residues to be as many as 61,750 sites. Historical work has focused on upstream oil and gas sites, however there are many others in the province. It’s estimated that there are well over 3,000 additional sites associated with distribution sites, pipelines and electric metering stations and many other industrial facilities not yet identified. While a considerable amount of literature review, experimentation and operational activities have occurred over the past 20 years on this topic in Alberta, as of 2018, many of these sites are still in the queue for reclamation and remediation due to the recalcitrant nature of the contaminants that have impacted soil and groundwater and remain as liabilities for their owners.. Overview. Peroxychem manufactures a family of in situ chemical reduction (ISCR) products (i.e., soil amendments) for treatment of soil, sediment and other solid wastes contaminated with halogenated organic compounds. When the contaminants of interest are organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) or herbicides, the keys to this remedial approach are the composition of the soil amendment and application of repeated and sequential anoxic then oxic conditions to the contaminated matrix. The patented products are composed of plant fiber-based organic material and micro-scale elemental iron (US Patent No. 6,083,394) and may be supplemented with sulfate in the form of alkaline earth salts. Approach. Treatment proceeds via reductive dechlorination of the pesticides/herbicides followed by aerobic biodegradation of the partially or fully dechlorinated breakdown products. The soil amendment is typically applied at dosages of between 0.4% and 4% w/w) and therefore causes very little, if any, increase in soil volume following treatment. Over the last 15 years, the technology has been used successfully for in situ and ex-situ treatment of soils contaminated with a range of OCPs, including Chlordane, Lindande, DDT, Toxaphene, 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T, Atrazine, Dieldrin and Metolachlor at sites in North America and Europe. Results. This presentation will include an overview of chemistry involved in OCP degradation using the ISCR products, along with case studies from several completed applications in the United States, Canada, and Europe, and cost analysis.

George (Bud) Ivey, Ivey International Inc.
Surfactant Enhanced Extraction (SEE) at LNAPL and DNAPL Impacted Sites Pilot to Full Scale
Bio | Abstract

Surfactant Enhanced Extraction (SEE) at LNAPL and DNAPL Impacted Sites Pilot to Full Scale

Background/Objectives. This applied presentation will explain hydro-geo-chemical fundamentals of hydrophobic organic chemical (HOC) behavior, including petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents, PFAS, and Pesticides, in saturated and unsaturated regimes, from their general physical chemistry characteristics to detailed phase partitioning and sorption (i.e. absorb and adsorb), and how this behavior kinetically limits their ‘Availability’ for remediation, and their root causes of contaminant rebound (a.k.a. back-diffusion). Contaminant sorption and reduced availability can be significantly reduced with integration of surfactant enhanced extraction (SEE), to enhance contaminant phase-desorption (i.e. of vapour, liquids, and solids) and significantly increase their ‘Availability’ for improved in-situ and ex-situ Physical, Biological and Chemical remediation methodologies. Approach/Activities Three (3) international SEE brownfield remediation site case studies, are presented that each evolved from pilot scale to full scale applications, will be used to provide integration details and the client’s evidence based findings and the statistically measurable benefits realized at each site, using SEE as part of site specific physical (MPE), biological (MNA) and/or chemical (ISCO/ISCR) treatment train strategies that expedited vapour, soil and groundwater remediation to achieve the applicable regulatory and/or risk assessment based clean-up objectives for the sites. The presentation will be technically underpinned by established scientific principles, well supported by client data and visually driven using figures, charts and three dimensional computer animation models, using adult learning principles, for improved audience interaction. Results/Lessons Learned: The three full-scale SEE remedial efforts resulted in the recovery of approximately greater than 99% of the NAPL at each site, prior to on-set of second physical, biological or chemical remediation, with soil groundwater contaminant concentrations in the source areas having been reduced by >90 to 95%. Based on these results, SEE as a combined 2-step remediation strategy was easy to implement, and can resulting in significant project life-cycle cost savings to achieve regulatory or risk based site clean-up objectives.