Welcome to the CLU-IN Internet Seminar

1. Welcome to the CLU-IN Internet Seminar US and EU Perspectives on Green and Sustainable RemediationDelivered: July 12, 2010, 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM, EDT (14:00-16:00 GMTPresenters: Carlos Pachon, U.S. EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, pachon.carlos@epa.govDietmar Müller, dietmar.mueller@umweltbundesamt.at Chantale Côté, Environment Canada Environmental Protection Operations, chantale.cote@ec.gc.caStephanie Fiorenza, stephanie.fiorenza@bp.comPaul Bardos, p-bardos@r3-bardos.demon.co.ukLaurent Bakker, laurent.bakker@tauw.nlOlivier Maurer, CH2M HILL International, omaurer@ch2m.comDominique Darmendrail, d.darmendrail@brgm.frModerator:Carlos Pachon, U.S. EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, pachon.carlos@epa.gov Visit the Clean Up Information Network online atwww.cluin.org

2. Housekeeping Download slides as PPT or PDF Go to slide 1 Submit comment or question Report technical problems Move back 1 slide Go to seminar homepage Go to last slide Move forward 1 slide • Please mute your phone lines, Do NOT put this call on hold • press *6 to mute #6 to unmute your lines at anytime • Q&A • Turn off any pop-up blockers • Move through slides using # links on left or buttons • This event is being recorded • Archives accessed for free http://cluin.org/live/archive/

3. US and EU Perspectives on Green and Sustainable Remediation US EPA Perspectives on Green Remediation Carlos PachonUSEPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation 12 July 2010 3

4. US EPA What is “Green Remediation”? The practice of considering all environmental effects of remedy implementation and incorporating options to minimize the environmental footprints of cleanup actions.

5. US EPA Related But Not Synonymous Climate Change Renewable Energy Sustainable Reuse Green Remediation

6. US EPA “Minimize, Reuse, and Recycle…” “Reduction, Efficiency, and Renewables…” Core Elements “Protect Air Quality; Reduce Greenhouse Gases…” “Conserve, Protect, and Restore…” “Improve Quality; Decrease Quantity of Use…” Core Elements of Green Remediation

7. US EPA Estimating the Baselines Adding retrofitting devices such as a NOx catalyst and a diesel particulate filter could reduce these emissions by as much as 25% for NOx and 90% for PM.

8. US EPA Long Term Goals Estimated Number of Sites and Cleanup Cost 2004-2033* Source: www.clu-in.org/market

9. US EPA OSWER Policy: Principles for Greener Cleanups As a matter of policy, OSWER’s goal is to evaluate cleanup actions comprehensively to ensure protection of human health and the environment and to reduce the environmental footprint of cleanup activities, to the maximum extent possible. (OSWER A.A. Mathy Stanislaus) EPA Strategic Plan: Goal 5 Compliance and Environmental Stewardship Stewards of the environment recycle wastes to the greatest extent possible, minimize or eliminate pollution at its source, conserve natural resources, and use energy efficiently to prevent harm to the environment or human health.  By 2011, enhance public health and environmental protection and increase conservation of natural resources by promoting pollution prevention and the adoption of other stewardship practices by companies, communities, governmental organizations, and individuals. (EPA Administrator Steve Johnson) EO 13514: Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance It is the policy of the United States that Federal agencies shall increase energy efficiency; measure, report, and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions from direct and indirect activities; conserve and protect water resources through efficiency, reuse, and stormwater management; eliminate waste, recycle, and prevent pollution (President Obama) A Priority at Many Levels

10. US EPA OSWER Green Remediation “Strategy” • Principles for Greener Cleanups: Common policy position for all U.S. EPA cleanup programs • Superfund Green Remediation Strategy: “Operationalizing” the Principles in the Superfund Cleanup Program • Voluntary Green Cleanup Standards & Certification System: Robust tool for fostering greener cleanups in various cleanup programs • RE-Powering America’s Land: Renewable energy on contaminated lands • Regional Initiatives: • Climate change strategies • Policy and guidance development, etc. 10

11. US EPA www.clu-in.org/greenremediation More Information from U.S. EPA • Guidance Documents • Special Issues Primers • Technical Bulletins • Fact Sheets / Case Studies • Technology Descriptions • Internet Resources www.epa.gov/superfund/greenremediation

12. US EPA Thank You! Carlos Pachon pachon.carlos@epa.gov USEPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation 12

13. US and EU Perspectives on Green and Sustainable Remediation EURODEMO+ Dietmar MÜLLER - Environment Agency Austria 12 July 2010 13

14. Constituency • European co-ordination action (2004 – 2006) • since 2008 – umbrella to a voluntary network • 4 national/regional demonstration platforms • 18 partners from 9 European countries • assist and connect stakeholders on "good quality" demonstration practices across Europe • promoting innovation for sustainable and cost-effective remediation practices 14

15. Drivers and Constraints • European Policy: • Environmental Technology Action Plan • Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources • Climate and Energy targets (20-20-20-target) • Regulatory: None • (hindering: draft European Soil Framework Directive) • Market: • decreasing awareness and willingness to act/pay • decreasing public funds • innovation-resistant and sensitive regarding uncertainties • windows of opportunity through redevelopment 15

16. Impact of Drivers and Constraints • emphasis towards relations of economic and ecological aspects: eco-efficiency • raise understanding and confidence regarding innovate technologies and strategies • encourage stakeholders for voluntary norms • voluntary network • asks for commitment • missing monetary background limits activities 16

17. ECO-EFFICIENCY SUSTAINABILITY better understanding through economic and ecological analysis to optimize processes and products and create benchmarks decoupling factor 4 equitable bearable viable Fromviabletoefficient!

18. US and EU Perspectives on Green and Sustainable Remediation Integrating Sustainability in the Canadian Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan Chantale Côté, Environment Canada FCSAP Secretariat 514 283-5770 chantale.cote@ec.gc.ca 12 July 2010 www.federalcontaminatedsites.gc.ca 18

19. Constituency Environment Canada • Who are your members • Federal departments and consolidated Crown corporations • Who are you seeing to influence • Program partners including members, remediation industry and academia • What do you want to achieve • Develop and implement a framework to support the use of sustainable approaches to remediation that considers the environmental and socio-economic effects of a remediation strategy, resulting in an optimization of benefits 19

20. Drivers Environment Canada • Drivers for sustainable remediation we are responding to are: • Policy: • Federal Sustainable Development Act (June 2008) • Federal Government Policy on Management of Real Property • Climate change adaptation • Regulatory • none • Market • none 20

21. Constraints Environment Canada • What we consider as sustainable remediation is also constrained by: • Policy • Potential misuse of sustainable approaches • Property transaction: low levels of uncertainties and time constraint • Demonstration of costs and savings associated with sustainable approaches – case studies • Regulatory • No real regulatory constraint • Market • Availability and market sensitizationof sustainable technologies, approaches and best practices 21

22. Impact of Drivers and Constraints Environment Canada • On “scope” of what is considered • Improve decision-making by providing tools, training and indicators that assess the impacts of various remediation options on sustainability • On how it is presented • Flexible framework, decision support tools • On the “platform”: i.e. regulation / industry guidance / voluntary framework etc • Sustainability principles • Voluntary framework • Incentives : eligible costs, awards • Greener procurement 22

23. Environment Canada 23

24. US and EU Perspectives on Green and Sustainable Remediation SURF Stephanie Fiorenza, Ph.D. 12 July 2010 24

25. Constituency SURF • Our members are from academia, consulting, industry, and government • SURF is a non-profit corporation and professional society and refrains from activities that would be in conflict with its tax-exempt status, such as lobbying or exerting influence • SURF’s primary objective is to provide a forum for various stakeholders in remediation — industry, government, environmental groups, consultants, and academia — to collaborate, educate, advance, and develop consensus on applying sustainability concepts throughout the lifecycle of remediation projects, from site investigation to closure

26. SURF Drivers • Drivers for sustainable remediation we are responding to are: • Policy • Member-driven desire to improve remediation as historically practiced • Inconsistencies in environmental and sustainability policies have created conflicting objectives • Regulatory • Need to integrate sustainability into different regulatory programs at US Federal and State levels • Market • Increased focus on sustainability for corporations and governmental entities has increased interest in and practice of sustainable remediation, along with a desire to reduce GHGs • Need to increase value of remediation expenditures by integrating sustainability, aligning with stakeholder goals and demonstrating that burdens are not merely shifted among impact categories

27. Constraints SURF • What we consider sustainable remediation is constrained by: • Knowledge • Lack of understanding of subject, unfamiliarity with metrics and life cycling thinking, and availability of data and tools for analysis • Lack of a significant number of case studies documenting benefits • Regulatory • Rigid cleanup process at state and federal level • Market • Private tools for application and analysis • Lack of experience in balancing trade-offs between costs and sustainability benefits

28. Impact of Drivers and Constraints SURF • On “scope” of what is considered • For SURF, the drivers are what led to initiatives that we are undertaking • On how it is presented • Our emphasis is multidisciplinary and multi-stakeholder • On the “platform”: • the constraints indicate where we need to focus effort, e.g., education, training modules, development of a framework, mapping of metrics

29. US and EU Perspectives on Green and Sustainable Remediation SuRF-UK framework for evaluating sustainable remediation options Professor Paul Bardos 12 July 2010 29

30. Co-authors SuRF-UK R. P. Bardos B. D. Bone, Environment Agency R. Boyle, Homes and Communities Agency D. Ellis, Du Pont F. Evans, National Grid Properties Ltd N. Harries, CL:AIRE J.W.N. Smith, Shell Global Solutions (Steering Group for SURF-UK) www.claire.co.uk/surfuk

31. Content SuRF-UK • SuRF-UK • Constituency, drivers, constraints • SuRF-UK framework for sustainable remediation • Published outputs • What next?: SuRF-UK Phase 2 www.claire.co.uk/surfuk

32. SuRF-UK Constituency SuRF-UK • Established in 2007, following the lead of SURF. • UK-based collaboration of regulators, industry, academics and consultants. Open forum meetings. • Independent co-ordination by CL:AIRE (www.claire.co.uk/surfuk) • Focus on holistic sustainability assessment of • remediation input to high-level land-use planning • remediation input to overall site / project design (‘Better by design’) • remedial strategy selection and remediation technology selection • remediation implementation and verification • Goals • A framework for assessing sustainable remediation • effective, practical, regulatory acceptance • Sustainability indicator review www.claire.co.uk/surfuk

33. Drivers SuRF-UK • Industry (SAGTA) • Good practice, Business ethics, Sustainable procurement, CSR • Regulatory (and indeed cross-sectoral) • Appropriate and reasonable solutions • Soil Framework Directive (draft); Water Framework Directive • Planning • Sustainability tests in planning applications • Sustainablity criteria in regional and local spatial planning • Soil framework Directive • Cross-sectoral backing in the UK • Also response to worldwide interest: • EU (NICOLE, SURF-UK, SURF-NL?, EURODEMO+) • USA (e.g. SURF, US EPA “green remediation”, ASTM) • Canada, Australia www.claire.co.uk/surfuk

34. Constraints SuRF-UK Voluntary code only Consensus based (Achieved! So = opportunity?) May be more difficult as we head into guidance on tools and indicators and cut across existing interests (e.g. existing offerings from service providers) www.claire.co.uk/surfuk

35. SuRF-UK definition Based on Brundtland Commission, 1987 ‘the practice of demonstrating, in terms of environmental, economic and social indicators, that the benefit of undertaking remediation is greater than its impact and that the optimum remediation solution is selected through the use of a balanced decision-making process’ SuRF-UK www.claire.co.uk/surfuk

36. SuRF-UK: Key principles SuRF-UK www.claire.co.uk/surfuk • Optimise risk-management based on consideration of social, environmental and economic factors, but always ensure: • Principle 1: Protection of human health and the wider environment • Principle 2: Safe working practices • Principle 3: Consistent, clear and reproducible evidence-based decision-making • Principle 4: Record keeping and transparent reporting.   • Principle 5: Good governance and stakeholder involvement • Principle 6: Sound science

37. www.claire.co.uk/surfuk

38. SuRF-UK, www.claire.co.uk/surfuk 38

39. Regulatory acceptance: Foreword to report www.claire.co.uk/surfuk

40. SuRF-UK Phase 2 SuRF-UK www.claire.co.uk/surfuk • Objectives: • Trial the framework with real cases studies • Investigate the indicator categories further • Benchmark different assessment methods for the same site(s) • Timescale • April 2010 to April 2011

41. US and EU Perspectives on Green and Sustainable Remediation SURF-NL Sustainable Soil Quality Management Laurent Bakker MSc. Tauw bv 12 July 2010 41

42. SURF-NL Set up of SURF NL • Initiative of Hans Slenders (Arcadis), Laurent Bakker (Tauw) and Elze-Lia Visser (WMA) started during NICOLE WS • Initiative was presented on National Soil Congress in NL in 2009 (‘Bodembreed’) • About 15 organizations are interested • Funding request SKB (Dutch Foundation on Soil Quality Management) in February 2010 • ‘Positive’ response from MT SKB, but still under negotiation • Hopefully start second half of 2010, objectives: • ‘How to express, embed and balance sustainability in the field of Soil Quality Management in NL => SUSQM! • Case based versus Areal approach • Interaction and communication with SURF-UK, SURF-US and NICOLE Sustainability WG • Setting up decision support framework based on the Dutch ROSA (and REC) tool

43. Drivers SURF-NL • Drivers for sustainable remediation we are responding to are: • Policy: • Need for Soil Quality Management – soil as a common good, the use of soil functions • Sustainable sourcing and procurement at governmental organisations • CO2 reduction, energy saving programs: e.g. Integrated Groundwater management for implementation of ATES systems • Regulatory • EU WFD: Approach for large scale groundwater contamination • Market Industry • Costs savings • Sourcing and procurement as driving forces for sustainable business for the industry (image building)

44. Constraints SURF-NL • Conflicting interests - Sectorial approaches and verification • Re-evaluation of the holistic approach environmental benefits of soil remediation • Impact of soil remediation not considered • What is the balance between risk reduction and environmental benefits? • Dilemmas in Soil Quality Management: • Exploitation vs protection • Individual vs common good • Short term vs long term • Fast vs slow • Set free vs secure • Centralised vs decentralised • Ratio vs heart • Soil remediation business is fading out too soon

45. Impact of Drivers and Constraints SURF-NL • There is a ‘will’ but no consensus • There a lot of opportunities but difficult to ‘score’ • But… some good examples are available So.. • Discussion needed on the dilemma's and existing approaches • Let sustainable assessments be a forerunner of sustainable legislation • Adaptation of strategies from other disciplines to help implementation • Look at all the functions of the soil system • Integrated management of contaminated groundwater bodies = revaluation of contaminated sites

46. US and EU Perspectives on Green and Sustainable Remediation NICOLE’s Shared vision on Sustainable Remediation Olivier Maurer 12 July 2010 46

47. NICOLE = European Network of site remediation professionals Industry + Consultants + Academics + Regulators Research on sustainability and remediation Barcelona 2003, Akersloot 2007, London 2008 (with SAGTA), Leuven 2009 Steering Group decision to launch a dedicated Workgroup on SR, kickoff October 2008 Charter Provide a working definition of sustainability applied to remediation Describe how sustainability thinking can be applied to remediation projects Leverage other Think Tanks Guidance Document, to support remediation projects of any size Work Group of about 20 active members, 5 subgroups: Communication, Risk management, Economics, Indicators, Case studies Background www.nicole.org 47

48. Nicole’s position A Sustainable Remediation project is about building consensus from stakeholders on the solution that benefit the best considering environmental, social and financial factors.  The earlier the stakeholders agree on a project’s goals, scope, boundary conditions and performance indicators, the more opportunity it generates for sustainable gain. Green Remediation is a component of Sustainable Remediation, typically focusing on the remedial option appraisal once a strategy has been adopted by stakeholders. Measuring performance throughout the execution of a SR project is key to build trust and consensus. Not a technical issue. Communication is Number one barrier and enabler. Conflicting interests between Liability Management, or Risk Assessment, and Sustainable Remediation. Favor a“Bottom-up” approach. www.nicole.org 48

49. 2009 Questionnaire outcome Confirms SR is a new concept SR principles are currently referred to and used across Europe in very different ways Legislation refers to sustainable principles to varying degrees across the European countries Risk assessment is widely used and referred to in Europe Cost benefit analysis (or equivalent) is an accepted tool only in some countries Economic and social impacts are not widely considered in remediation projects www.nicole.org 49

50. Sustainability Management Road Map (under finalization) Sustainability Assessment Road Map www.nicole.org 50