The Use of Future First Planning, the Triad, and Performance-Based Contracting to Accelerate

Site Closure at Seymour Johnson AFB

Contract Overview

NOV 2011Landfill No. 3

NOV 2011Landfill No. 2

DEC 2010Landfill No. 1

DEC 2010Landfill No. 4

DEC 2010Old Entomology Shop

DEC 2010Fire Training Area No. 2

NOV 2011Fire Training Area No. 1

NOV 2011Fire Training Area No. 3

NOV 2011BX Service Station

DEC 2010KC-135 Ramp

DEC 2010

DEC 2010

DEC 2010

DEC 2010

Bulk Fuel Storage Area (BFSA)

MAY 2010Radar Tower Site

MAY 2010F-15 Ramp

CURRENT STATUSSITE CLOSURE

DEADLINESITE NAME

SITE CLOSURE MAY 2006

REMEDIAL ACTION OPERATIONS

SITE CLOSURE MAY 2006

SITE CLOSURE NOV 2008

SITE CLOSURE FEB 2007

SITE CLOSURE JULY 2007SITE CLOSURE OCT 2006

SITE CLOSURE NOV 2008SITE CLOSURE NOV 2007SITE CLOSURE NOV 2007SITE CLOSURE NOV 2007

SITE CLOSURE NOV 2007

REMEDIAL ACTION OPERATIONS

REMEDIAL ACTION OPERATIONS

REMEDIAL ACTION OPERATIONS

REMEDIAL ACTION OPERATIONS

Regulatory Framework

Regulatory oversight performed through Regulatory oversight performed through three NCDENR regulatory programs:three NCDENR regulatory programs:

Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program: SS-04, SS-12, ST-14 and BFSA (ST-01, SD-02, SD-03, ST-05)

Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Program:FT-07, FT-19, FT-20, OT-21, OT-29

RCRA Program (Landfill) Sites:LF-06, LF-08, LF-15, LF-16

Site Closure Strategy

Site Closure Strategy Based on a Marriage of:Site Closure Strategy Based on a Marriage of:Future First Planning

Triad

Innovative Technologies

Remedial Process Optimization

Decision-Based Partnering

Future First Planning

Future First Planning (F2P):Future First Planning (F2P):A process that fuses Base development planning with environmental cleanup to optimize land use.

Represents a shift in policywhere environmental restoration sites are viewed as potential assets instead of liabilities.

The Triad

Uncertainty Management through the Triad:Uncertainty Management through the Triad:Systematic Project Planning

Dynamic Work Strategies

Real Time Measurement Technologies

SJAFB Triad ElementsSystematic Project Planning:Systematic Project Planning:

Developed preliminary Conceptual Site Model (CSM) using data from past investigations

Evaluated real time analytics and feasibility of use based on anticipated in-field decisions

Incorporated potential remediation approaches into data collection techniques

Cost savings realized through reduced mobilizations

SJAFB Triad Elements (cont.)

Dynamic Work Strategies:Dynamic Work Strategies:Decision Trees allowed in field decision-making, preventing equipment down-time and reducing fixed-lab costs

Flexible work plan allowed changes to occur when the CSM changedIteratively updating the CSM and continuously adapting the investigative strategy helped to reduce uncertainty and allow for full characterization of the site

SJAFB Triad Elements (cont.)

Real Time Measurement Technologies:Real Time Measurement Technologies:Real time data used to update the CSM throughout the investigation for continuous use to direct additional data collection

Electronic data (CPT data, stratigraphic logs, LIF data) produced/transmitted daily and posted to Bay West’s web site for access/review by Client

Real Time Measurement allowed the Team and stakeholders to make informed, quantitative site decisions while in the field

OT-29Former Radar Tower Site

Original SystemBiosparge/biovent wells and groundwater extraction trench2018 projected cleanup

Pending Mission Critical fuel hydrant systemMixed plume of petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated hydrocarbonsOriginal system installed as Interim Remedial Action1998 construction completed and system started

Overview

Proposed Hydrant Proposed Hydrant System ConstructionSystem Construction

ΟΤ−29

OT-29Cleanup Strategy

Site characterization utilizing the TriadRemoval of residual LNAPL using surfactant flush and recoveryExcavation of contaminated soilsGroundwater treatment through chemical oxidation events

OT-29 Site Boundary

OT-29 Site Boundary

OT-29Dynamic Work Strategies

Delineation Decision Tree

OT-29Characterization Actions Performed

Membrane Interface Probe Characterization

55 points analyzedMIP enabled determination of source area and extents

Rapid AnalysisSoil and groundwater samples used to correlate data with MIP PID headspace analysis performed on potentially contaminated soil

June 2005 Benzene Plume35,000 ft2

OT-29Surfactant Injection

Field Activities:Field Activities:Installed temporary injection points within targeted LNAPL area based on Triad resultsInjected 10,000 gal of 1.6% non-ionic surfactant (1,250 gal/well)Used MMPE to recover surfactant and >700 gal of petroleum productWork completed in 2 weeks

OT-29“Hot Spot” Excavation

TCE Source Removal adjacent to Radar Tower

Source removal of 2,000 tonsof impacted soilExcavation extents based onTriad delineation results – soilremoved from 2 areas

OT-29Biopile Construction

Actions Completed:Actions Completed:Constructed biopile to treat petroleum/VOC-impacted soil on-site

Biopile actively vented and moisture content managed

Highly-impacted soil amended with approx 1,000 gal hydrogen peroxide (12 wt %) and tilled

Beneficial reuse of cover material for local landfill following treatment

35581934Arom. C9-C22

71271--Aliph. C19-C36

9104843,260Aliph. C9-C18

2865972Aliph. C5-C8

0.0331.95Xylenes

0.0025.140.24Ethylbenzene

ND0.57.3Toluene

ND0.0030.006Benzene

Oct. 2005

(mg/kg)

Jan. 2005

(mg/kg)

NCDENR Unrestricted

(mg/kg)

ISCO #1 LocationsNov 2005

ISCO #2 LocationsJan 2006

OT-29In Situ Chemical Oxidation

Actions Completed:Actions Completed:ISCO Bench Scale Tests (modified Fenton’s)3 ISCO events w/287 injection points and approx 75,000 gal oxidizer/catalyst over 50,000 ft2 area

ISCO #3 LocationsApr 2006

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

MW-14 MW-15 MW-17cis

-DC

E C

once

ntra

tion

(ug/

L)

Apr. 05:cis-DCE Pre-ISCO #1Dec. 05:cis-DCE Post-ISCO #1Feb. 06:cis-DCE Post-ISCO #2May. 06:cis-DCE Post-ISCO #3

OT-29Current Status

Site remediation activities completed with no impact to the mission-critical fuel hydrant system construction

Awaiting NCDENR concurrence on No Further Active Remediation Status

Cleanup timeframe reduced from 20+ years to 4 yearsProjected Savings to Government in excess of $1.5M

Bulk Fuel Storage Area (BFSA)Setting:Setting:

400,000-gal jet fuel (JP-4) release (>50,000 gal in subsurface requiring cleanup)

Estimated 29,000 ft2LNAPL plume

Estimated 395,000 ft2dissolved plume

Legacy treatment system installed in 1998

BFSA Cleanup Strategy

Optimize legacy treatment system to maximize performance prior to design and installation of updated recovery system

Perform Triad-based characterization to expedite plume definition

Design, install, and operate enhanced recovery system

BFSATriad LIF/CPT ROST Investigation

Rapid Optical Screening Tool (ROST) used forsimultaneous collection of LIF and CPT data

Data collection provided integrated 3Dinvestigation and mapping of LNAPL andsmear-zone vadose soils

9-day field effort with collection of 98 boringswith minimal disturbance to AF mission

Decision Tree utilized to direct field activities

BFSAReal Time Data Collection

BFSAData Rendering

CPT & LIF Data

ROST Data

BFSAUpdating the Conceptual Site Model

Estimated Pre-Triad LNAPL

Estimated Post-Triad LNAPL

Estimated Pre-Triad LNAPL

BFSATreatment System Expansion

Installation of 65 MPE wells in target areas identified during the Triad investigation

Horizontal drilling and installation of systempiping (~3,000 linear ft) to minimize impact tohigh-traffic, mission critical site area

Installation/Integration of 650-cfm extractionskid to increase recovery volume as estimatedfrom the 3D site models

BFSA System Enhancement

Basic Process Diagram for MPE System

ROST Point, used to locate contamination and evaluate

soil characteristicsExtraction well point installed

based on ROST data

Bottom of smear zone based on

ROST data

Static WT

Post-MPE WT

BFSAExtraction Well and Manifold Pipe

Isolation/Bypass Valve

Well Field Operation Valve

Air Velocity Site Tube

8"METAL

15"RCP

8"METAL

STORAGEBUILDING

STORAGEBUILDING

STORAGESHELTER

STORAGEBUILDING

OIL-WATERSEPARATOR

OIL-WATERSEPARATOR

EYE WASHSTATION

FUELSTORAGE

TANK

FUELSTORAGE

TANK

FUELSTORAGE

TANK

FUELSTORAGE

TANKFUEL

STORAGETANK

STORAGEBUILDING

MW-26

EW 14-17

EW 14-04

MW-1414S

MW-1401

MW-21

MW-25

MW-96-09

30MW-28

MW-23

MW-24

MW-1409

MW-27

MW-1408

MW-1407

MW-1405

MW-96-11

MW-96-10

MW-1404

MW-1403

MW-1402

MW-1413

EW14-08

MW-1418S

EW14-13

EW14-11

MW-1416S MW-1411

MW-22

EW 14-01

FUEL TANKPAD

RECOVERYTANK PAD

CONTAMINATEDWATER TANK

PAD

GENERATORPADTRANSFORMERPAD

MW-1415S

MW-1417S

INV.79.6

INV.82.8

NON ACCESSIBLEINVERT

INV.75.5

INV.79.3

INV.81.8

INV.83.6

INV.84.5

INV.83.2FULL OFDIRT

INV.84.9

INV.84.6

INV.83.9

INV.82.3

INV.82.7INV.83.2

INV.84.3INV.84.8

INV.IN 80.9INV.80.7

INV.IN 81.4INV.80.8

INV.84.2

INV.83.8

INV.88.1

INV.86.6 INV.85.9

INV.85.4

INV.84.5

INV.90.2

INV.89.3

INV.89.5

INV.87.6

INV.87.1

INV.IN 83.6INV.IN 85.4INV.82.7

INV.83.2

INV.80.2

INV.IN 80.1

INV 86.4

CO

MBI

NE

D F

ACTO

R =

0.9

9987

48

ABANDONEDWELL

IRSN584011.859800E2307098.856490ELEV.= 92.27

IRSN583911.368710E2307290.049400ELEV.= 97.64

EX.NAILN583590.970310E2307225.070870ELEV.= 95.59

IRSN583467.981580E2306838.595080ELEV.= 83.59

IRSN583470.171040E2307464.662900ELEV.= 96.31

IRSN583400.533889E2307057.177740ELEV.= 85.92

IRSN583295.751364E2307084.574720ELEV.= 86.22

IRSN583016.472718E2307082.094370ELEV.= 84.75

NA

D 8

3

GR

ID N

OR

TH

MW 96-12

EW 96-13

RW 14-02

RW 14-01

RW 14-03

RW 14-04

RW 14-05

RW 14-09RW 14-07

MW 96-14

EW 14-14

EW 14-12

EW 14-10

EW 14-09

RW 14-10

RW 14-11

RW 1412EW 14-19

EW 14-18

EW 14-16

EW 14-02

EW 14-03

EW 14-05

EW 14-06

EW 14-07

MW 96-15

EW 14-15

60 120

APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET)

ZONE 1

ZONE 2

ZONE 3

ZONE 4

ZONE 5

ZONE 5

BFSATreatment Zone Configuration

MPE Trailer

Zone Zone 55

Zone Zone 44

Zone Zone 33

Zone Zone 22

Zone Zone 11

Trailer Manifold Piping

BFSA Current Status

MPE targeting of Triad-defined LNAPL removed approx 50,000 gal of LNAPL in 12-month period

Cleanup timeframe estimated to be reduced from 10+ years to 3.5 years

Summary

TRIAD reduced:Number of mobilizations & fixed-base lab costsField and reporting effortsTime to design and implement remedial action enhancements

Provided data to revise CSM reflecting:More accurate LNAPL distribution (vertical and horizontal)Soil impacts below regulatory criteriaRole of stratigraphy in contaminant transport/recovery

Resulted in a design targeting source and “hot-spot” areas, reducing cleanup time