Excess Soil Management: Successes, Challenges, and Lessons - PDF document

11/27/2015 Excess � Soil � Management: � Successes, � Challenges, � and � Lessons � Learned Krista � Barfoot ���� Ph.D., � C.Chem, � QP RA Outline • Case � Studies � – Soil � Importation, � Stockpiling, � Matching o Successes o Challenges • Lessons � Learned • Future � Considerations 1

11/27/2015 Case � Studies � – Soil � Importation � 100,000s � m 3 required � 2 � year � time � period � targeted � RSC � site � Contractor � responsible � for � importation 3 � Case � Studies � – Soil � Importation Approach Source � Sites • Tender � call � for � sources • Infrastructure projects � within � 2 � km � of � site • Owner � identified � additional � source • Sampling Parameters � for � sampling � identified � via � Phase � One � type � assessment � by � QP • In � situ � and � ex � situ; � pre � importation • Frequency � per � O.Reg. � 153/04 4 2

11/27/2015 Case � Studies – Soil � Importation • Testing � pace � vs � importation • Tracking � of � soils � and � results • Problematic � parameters – EC, � SAR – Metals – PHCs 5 Case � Studies � – Soil � Stockpiling Lakeview � WC Hanlan Feedermain Stockpile � Site 3

11/27/2015 � Case � Studies � – Soil � Stockpiling Approach • MOECC Consultation; � first � stockpile site � under � BMP • Design Assess � capacity and � implications � for � neighbouring areas • Standard Confined � Fill � Material � Criteria � (Table � C � 1) • Sampling � Source � Site � and � Audit � Program; � QP � decision � per � MOECC � BMP � based � on � source/risk Frequency • Auditing � at � Stockpile � site � allowed � visual � versus � analytical � for � low � risk � sources • Contractor Responsible � for � testing � and � tracking � program 7 Case � Studies � – Soil � Stockpiling Low � Risk � Fill Medium � Risk � Fill • Rock, � soil �� 10m � depth • Shallow � rock � and � soil � • 1 � sample � every � 3,000m 3 meeting � criteria � insitu • Audit � daily � or � weekly � by � • 1 � sample � every � 1,000m 3 • Audit � 1/10,000m 3 visual � inspection High � Risk � Fill Known � High � Risk � Fill • Soil � <1.5m, � non � native, � • Contaminated � sites; � untested � APEC unknown � soil � quality • 1 � sample � every � 300m 3 • 1 � sample � every � 160m 3 • Audit � 1/3,000m 3 • Audit � 1/800m 3 8 4

11/27/2015 Case � Studies – Soil � Stockpiling • ECA � for � stormwater interceptor • Impermeable � surface • Problematic � parameters – EC, � HWS � Boron • Accountability � for � failed � samples, � rejected � soil • Contract; � demonstrating � cost � savings 9 Case � Studies � – Soil � Matching Amherstburg Windsor � Essex � Parkway • 3.5 � million � m 3 of � fill � generated � • RA/remediation � project • 1 � million � m 3 of � fill � needed � to � • Contractor solely � responsible � for � soil � disposal infill � quarry � and � cap � site 5

11/27/2015 � Case � Studies � – Soil � Matching Approach • Clients Willingness � to � connect � and � discussion � options • Testing � indicated � appropriate soil � quality � for � Quality receiving � site • Construction � schedules � aligned Time • Volume One � source � could � supply � entire � capping � operation 11 Case � Studies – Soil � Matching • Negotiating � contract • Closer � receiving � sites • Demonstrating � cost � savings � to � contractor 12 6

11/27/2015 Lessons � Learned Lessons � Learned Management Technical Contractual 7

11/27/2015 Lessons � Learned Management Communication Schedule � MOECC � ECAs � Environmental � � Testing � vs � and � construction � importing teams 15 Lessons � Learned Technical Re � use � and � Statistical � standards analysis Natural � parameters 16 8

11/27/2015 Lessons � Learned Contractual Rejected � soil � Tendering � process, � material � planning contract � terms Clarity � on � party � responsible � for � soil � quality � 17 Future � Considerations 9

11/27/2015 Future � Considerations � – Traditional � Approach Excess � Meets One � set � of � Imported Soil/Sediment � Standards Assessment Doesn’t � Landfill Meet 19 Future � Considerations � – Future � Approach Excess � Multiple � applicable � Criteria � Soil/Sediment � aligning � with � placement/re � use Assessment Meets Doesn’t � Meet Import � and � Amendment, place � per � Remediation criteria; � Doesn’t � Meet complete � tracking Landfill 20 10

11/27/2015 Future � Considerations � – Future � Approach Excess � Multiple � applicable � Criteria � Soil/Sediment � aligning � with � placement/re � use Assessment Meets Doesn’t � Meet Import � and � Amendment, place � per � Remediation criteria; � Doesn’t � Meet complete � tracking Landfill 21 Thank � You 22 11