SUMMARY OF THE REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES DEVELOPMENT FORUM
NAPL CLEANUP ALLIANCE
CONFERENCE CALL

11:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m.
August 23, 2005

On Tuesday, August 23, 2005, the following members of the Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (NAPL) Cleanup Alliance met in a conference call:

Mark Lyverse, Chevron (Energy Technology Company) (Alliance Co-Chair)
Bob Maxey, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Alliance Co-Chair)
Todd Creamer, TriHydro Corporation
Bob Disney, North Dakota Division of Waste Management
Don Ficklen, Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE)
Greg Fletcher, Suncor
Sanjay Garg, Shell Global Solutions, Inc.
Harley Hopkins, American Petroleum Institute (API)
Dawn Kaback, Geomatrix Consultants, Inc.
John Meyers, The Retec Group, Inc.
Ellen Rubin, EPA
Ali Tavelli, Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (Wyoming DEQ)
David Zabcik, Shell Oil Products U.S. Company and Motiva Enterprises

Also participating in the call were Carolyn Perroni of Environmental Management Support, Inc., and Christine Hartnett of ERG.

THE ALLIANCE'S TRAINING PROGRAM

The Alliance is developing and delivering training materials that describe the technical aspects of NAPL distribution and mobility, correct common misconceptions about NAPL, and explore NAPL management issues. The text that follows provides an update on the status of Module 1 (The Basics) and Module 2 (NAPL Management).

Module 1 (The Basics)

The Module 1 training package (completed last year) is being delivered to groups across the nation. For example, it was delivered in Kentucky, California, Colorado, and Michigan this year; it is scheduled to be delivered in Georgia in September; and efforts are currently underway to identify dates for delivery in Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Bob Maxey (who has been collaborating with Mark Lyverse and Vic Kremesec to deliver the training) said that attendees have responded favorably to it.

Interest has been expressed in offering Module 1 as an Internet seminar via EPA's Clu-In Web site; doing so will allow people from all over the world to attend the Module 1 training session. Call participants identified the following as steps that need to occur to bring this idea to fruition:

• Modify the presentation. Module 1 currently takes about 3 hours to present. For the Internet seminar, the module should be shortened to 2.5 hours, with 2 hours devoted to the actual presentation and 30 minutes allocated for questions. (Ellen Rubin said that the question-and-answer session can be split into two 15-minute sessions if that is desirable. She also explained how the question-and-answer process works: attendees email their questions during the seminar and presenters choose from the questions they receive.) Carolyn Perroni said that the Internet seminar should be tightly scripted so that presenters do not fall behind schedule. Maxey said that he, Lyverse, and Kremesec would work with Perroni to prepare the Internet seminar. To initiate the process, they will send Perroni a list of slides that can be deleted from the Module 1 training package.



• Set a date for the Internet seminar. Once the group has a better understanding of when the revised presentation will be available, Rubin will reserve a spot for the Module 1 training on EPA's Intranet seminar schedule. Kaback advised getting on the schedule early so that there is ample time to advertise. Rubin said that at least 1 month's advance notice is desirable so that the seminar can be advertised through TechDirect.

Module 2 (NAPL Management)

Harley Hopkins said that a small workgroup (consisting of himself, Maxey, Rubin, and Jim Higinbotham) met in March 2005 and June 2005 to discuss the development of the Module 2 training package. At the last meeting, Hopkins said, the workgroup decided that it would be beneficial to develop two versions of Module 2: a detailed version and shorter version that targets upper management. The workgroup is concentrating on developing the latter (referred to as the "Overview Version"). Hopkins said that the Overview Version will be about 1 hour in length and that it will present: (1) a brief overview of LNAPL behavior, (2) information on NAPL Management Decision Frameworks (including the one compiled by the Alliance), and (3) information on existing tools (such as API's interactive LNAPL guide). A draft will be distributed to Alliance members for review in the near future.

REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTATION

Modules 1 and 2 state that NAPL plumes have a tendency to stabilize over time. Maxey said that he needs more documentation to substantiate that claim. To be specific, he asked call participants to send him information about actual sites where NAPL plume stability has been formally documented. Greg Fletcher said that Suncor has a report that might provide pertinent information, Lyverse advised contacting the Navy for documentation, and Kaback said that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has published a report that might be useful.

Lyverse and Hopkins agreed that documentation is important, but said that some observations made in the field have not been formally documented in the literature yet. For example, Hopkins said, ExxonMobil has identified some sites where NAPL stability has been observed for decades, but information has not been published on these sites because they are tied up in litigation. David Zabcik requested guidance on what constitutes "documentation," asking whether EPA seeks published articles. Maxey said that published articles would be ideal but that non-published materials would also be welcome at this point.

NEXT ALLIANCE MEETING

Call participants expressed interest in meeting face-to-face in early 2006. Don Ficklen said that the Air Force is willing to host a meeting in San Antonio, Texas, between January 16 and March 1. If the group wishes to pursue this option, Ficklen said, he would be happy to line up speakers for the meeting. For example, Patrick Haas and a consultant from Parsons could be invited to speak about LNAPL characterization, recovery, and monitored natural attenuation projects that have been performed on the Air Force's behalf. Also, someone could be invited to speak about the Air Force's experience with closing out NAPL sites. Ficklen said that he is also willing to investigate the possibility of planning a site visit. Although he did not know of any sites in San Antonio that would be applicable, he agreed to investigate whether opportunities exist at nearby Camp Stanley. Perroni agreed to send an email to the Alliance's Core Team to solicit their opinions on meeting date, location, and agenda items.

MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION

• Maxey said that he had visited a Chevron refinery during a recent trip to Los Angeles, California. He was impressed with the steps that facility has taken to treat existing releases and prevent new ones from occurring. He advised documenting the facility's accomplishments.



• Rubin said that she had asked the organizers for the 2006 National Association of Remedial Project Managers (NARPM) meeting if they would be willing to put the Alliance's Module 1 training session on the agenda. Even though the meeting organizers expressed little enthusiasm for this idea, Rubin will consider submitting a more formal proposal to them soon.



• Ali Tavelli said that Randy Breeden cannot resume participation in the NAPL Cleanup Alliance at this time.

ACTION ITEMS

• Maxey and Lyverse will send Perroni a list of slides that can be deleted from Module 1.



• Kaback will send Maxey a report (issued by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) that provides information about NAPL plume stability. Likewise, Fletcher and Meyers will send Maxey information on the Commerce City site.



• Todd Creamer will let Hopkins know if TriHydro still plans to make a presentation at NPRA.



• Tavelli will ask Dave Finley (Wyoming DEQ) to contact the Interstate Technology Regulatory Council on the Alliance's behalf and to explore the idea of establishing a cooperative relationship between the two groups.