Conference Call Minutes from September 7, 1999

RTDF - State Dry Cleaners Remediation Project Conference Call

State Dry Cleaners Remediation Project
Conference Call
September 7, 1999


State Representatives
Brent Hartsfield and William Linn
Leo Henning and Bob Jurgens
Patrice Jensen, Kären Kromar, and Dale Trippler
Tim Eiken
Bruce Nicholson, Scott Stupak, and Lisa Taber
Dick DeZeeuw
James Gilbert
Robin Schmidt

Florida
Kansas
Minnesota
Missouri
North Carolina
Oregon
Tennessee
Wisconsin

Other conference call participants included Richard Steimle from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Technology Innovation Office (TIO), Dennis Goldman from the National Ground-Water Association (NGWA), Robert Langston from Environmental Management Support, Inc. (EMS), and Christine Hartnett from Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG).

Opening Remarks
Richard Steimle welcomed participants to the conference call. He said that several people have contacted him recently to ask about the State Dry Cleaners Remediation Project's activities. Many of these people, Steimle said, are involved with site cleanups and might benefit greatly by participating in the Project's conference calls and activities. As the group's size grows, Steimle said, there will be an increasing need to impose structure and organization. Some consideration should be given, he said, to assigning group leaders, defining rules for membership, and establishing some guidelines on decision-making processes. Steimle said that these topics will be addressed during a separate conference call, which will be held later in September.

The October 1999 Project Meeting
The second official Project meeting will be held on October 6 and 7, 1999, at the Radisson Arlington Heights hotel in Arlington Heights, Illinois. After the Project meeting ends, participants will attend NGWA's Midwest Focus Ground-Water Conference on October 8th. This meeting, which will be held about 3 miles from the Radisson Arlington Heights, will start early in the morning and end around 5:30 p.m.

Steimle noted that travel funds will be available for some meeting participants through a grant that has been established between EPA and NGWA. (All discussions regarding reimbursement should be directed to Dennis Goldman.) States that will definitely have representatives attending include Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. Representatives from other states have also expressed interest, Goldman said, but it is not yet certain whether they will attend.

Leo Henning said that he drafted a preliminary agenda and sent it to ERG for formatting and distribution. Conference call participants said that they received the agenda and had no recommendations for changes. On the first day of the meeting, Henning noted, Project members will split into their Subgroups to discuss activities and future goals. Dale Trippler recommended having each Subgroup draft their own agenda forthe breakout session. Henning agreed to draft the agenda for the Program Development/Administration Subgroup; he asked people to provide suggestions.

Update on the Program Development/Administration Subgroup's Activities
Dick DeZeeuw said that the Program Development/Administration Subgroup has collected information on program elements, fee structures, and program administration from 10 states that have dry cleaner cleanup funds in place. ERG compiled this information into three tables, DeZeeuw said, and submitted it to the Subgroup. DeZeeuw said that he has revised two of the tables to incorporate suggestions that were offered during the Subgroup's August 10 conference call. These revised tables have been redistributed, DeZeeuw said, and need to be checked for accuracy. Trippler said that he received the revised tables and noticed a mistake: he asked DeZeeuw to change $800 to $800,000 under the column for Minnesota in Table 2.

DeZeeuw said that Subgroup members will receive another set of updated tables in about 3 weeks. (This set will contain all three tables.) DeZeeuw said that he hopes to add information for Connecticut, Illinois, and Louisiana before this next version is released. (William Linn suggested calling Alan Davis from Connecticut and Steimle agreed to send DeZeeuw a contact name for Illinois.) DeZeeuw said that the Subgroup will analyze the tables during the October 1999 meeting. During their breakout session, he said, the Subgroup will need to decide how to report their findings.

Update on the Project Management/Technical Issues Subgroup's Activities
Linn said that the Project Management/Technical Issues Subgroup distributed a questionnaire to collect information on the technologies that are being used to address dry cleaner cleanups. Representatives from about 25 states responded, Linn said, and EMS summarized the responses in a report. Linn agreed to send Subgroup members the summary report as well as copies of all of the responses that were received. After going through the report, he said, Subgroup members will need to hold a conference call to discuss how Subgroup members should divide the list of contact names that were identified during the survey.

Linn gave a cursory overview of the information provided in the summary report. He said that respondents who have worked on dry cleaner cleanups reported a broad range for cleanup levels, assessment costs, and the amount of time that is required for assessment. He said that a wide variety of technologies have been used for assessment at dry-cleaning sites. For example, use of active soil gas survey was reported by 76% of the respondents, use of passive soil gas surveys by 38%, use of direct-push vertical profiling by 86%, use of microwells by 29%, use of mobile labs by 52%, use of ground-penetrating radar by 33%, and use of soil conductivity surveys by 43%. In addition, Linn said, some respondents said that they were using induced laser fluoroscopy, membrane interface probes, partitioning interwell tracer tests, and video surveys. As for remedial technologies, Linn said, excavation and vacuum extraction were the most popular choices for soils, but five states have used or are thinking of using bioventing. For groundwater, he said, air sparging is the most popular choice, but multi-phase extraction is also commonly used. Linn said that in situ bioremediation has been chosen as a remedial option in nine states. These projects involve the use of hydrogen release compounds and/or oxygen release compounds.

Linn said that the latter can be used to clean vinyl chloride. Natural attenuation (reported in 12 states), in situ oxidation (reported in 12 states), permeable reactive barriers (reported in 3 states), and thermal treatments (reported in 2 states) have also been used or are under consideration.

Update on the Outreach Subgroup's Activities
Robin Schmidt said that the Outreach Subgroup met in a conference call on August 31, 1999. During the call, the Subgroup talked about recruiting new members and establishing better crosslinks with the other two subgroups. Also, they identified several activities to undertake, one of which--providing information on the link between health effects and dry-cleaning solvents--has been partially accomplished by identifying some relevant Web sites. Schmidt said that the Subgroup talked about the Project's Web site during the conference call and decided that a more relevant list of events needs to be provided under the "Conferences and Shows" section. In addition, Schmidt said, the Subgroup talked about creating a PowerPoint presentation for posting on the Project's Web site. This could be a useful tool, she said, for Project members who need slides for presentations. Lastly, Schmidt said, the Subgroup talked about notifying trade associations about the Project's existence by writing and distributing an introductory letter. Steimle expressed interest in the Subgroup's proposed activities; he agreed to determine whether contractors are available to help with the PowerPoint presentation and letter-writing activities that were proposed.

Future Presentations
During the last conference call, Steimle said, Project members talked about submitting abstracts to two conferences (the Tenth Annual West Coast Conference on Contaminated Soils, taking place in San Diego, California, in March 2000 and Battelle's Remediation of Chlorinated and Recalcitrant Compounds conference, taking place in Monterey, California, in May 2000). Steimle asked whether these abstracts had been submitted. DeZeeuw and Bob Jurgens said that they had been, noting that the Program Development/Administration Subgroup and the Project Management/Technical Issues Subgroup submitted separate abstracts for both conferences.

Miscellaneous Topics
Linn encouraged the conference call participants to use the Project's Web board, noting that he has posted an article on the Lawrence Livermore chlorinated solvent study. Some participants reported difficulties in getting into the Web board. Robert Langston said that these accessibility issues have been resolved.

Conference call participants acknowledged that the Project needs a more official name. They agreed to post suggested names on the Project's Web board and to choose one during the October 1999 meeting.

Next Conference Call
ERG agreed to set up the next conference call for November 16, 1999, between 2:00 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. EST.