SUMMARY OF THE REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES DEVELOPMENT FORUM
PERMEABLE REACTIVE BARRIERS ACTION TEAM
STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
Holiday Inn Select
Niagara Falls, New York
October 15, 2003
On Wednesday, October 15, 2003, the following members of the Remediation Technologies Development Forum's (RTDF's) Permeable Reactive Barriers (PRB) Action Team Steering Committee met:
Bob Puls, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
John Vidumsky, DuPont
Bob Gillham, University of Waterloo
Tom Krug, GeoSyntec
Chuck Reeter, U.S. Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center
Richard Steimle, EPA
Michelle Thomson, URS Corporation
David Hubble of ACG Geo & Environmental and Christine Hartnett of ERG were also present. In addition, Pete Riddle of Environmental Management Support, Inc., participated via conference call.
UPDATE ON THE PRB PROFILES
Pete Riddle is updating the PRB Action Team's Site Profile database. This effort involves:
GENERATING COST OF PERFORMANCE REPORTS
As noted by Riddle, EPA's John Kingscott and John Quander have expressed interest in generating cost of performance reports for PRBs. When writing such reports, Steering Committee members agreed, it is important to focus on new PRB sites. This is because the costs associated with PRBs has decreased significantly over time. Old PRB sites provide valuable information about PRB performance, said Puls, but they yield outmoded information on costs.
REVISITING THE PRB ACTION TEAM'S PURPOSE AND MISSION
Puls asked Steering Committee members whether they thought it was time to sunset the PRB Action Team. In 1995, when the PRB Action Team first formed, he noted, PRB technology was in its infancy and the PRB Action Team played an important role in furthering the development of this technology. The situation is different now: PRBs have gained a strong foothold and many people regard them as a well-established mature technology. Steering Committee members agreed that PRBs have come a long way, but they said that the PRB Action Team still plays an important role in advancing the technology. They agreed that the technology is evolving and that the PRB Action Team provides an ideal forum for discussing difficult data interpretation issues, new applications, and the intricacies of PRB performance. Attendees identified the following list of future activities for the PRB Action Team: (1) maintaining the PRB Action Team Web site, (2) holding annual or biennial meetings, and (3) writing a short position paper.
Attendees spoke briefly about the scope of the PRB Action Team's mandate. One attendee asked whether biobarriers or source zone treatment projects really fall under the team's purview. Attendees were split in their opinions. In the end, they agreed that it is acceptable to bring up cutting-edge topics at Action Team meetings even if the topics fall outside the Action Team's main focus area.
NEXT PRB MEETING
Steering Committee members talked about holding the next PRB Action Team meeting on the West Coast. If possible, it will be held in conjunction with another conference, such as an Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council meeting or an Association for Environmental Health and Sciences meeting.
REVIEW OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBER LIST
Attendees agreed to invite more people to participate in the Steering Committee. John Vidumsky said that Tom Krug, a recent addition to the Committee, has provided valuable input over the last year. Vidumsky said that he would like to invite Michelle Thomson to participate as a Steering Committee member. No objections were raised. Reeter said that he would contact Tom Early, a Department of Energy (DOE) representative, to see if he would be interested in participating actively in the Steering Committee.
ACTION ITEMS