Background:
The following examples are intended to show how the State of Kansas, Department of Health and Environment (KDHE), has benefited from its participation in the ITRC In-Situ Bioremediation Work Group and its cooperation with the Remedial Technologies Development Forum (RTDF). Kansas has effectively used information gained through this group to more effectively administer and regulate the deployment of in-situ bioremediation projects at a number of sites within the state.

1. Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents at a Landfill
In 1997, the Assessment and Restoration Section within KDHE received a proposal for a natural attenuation pilot. KDHE personnel used information from the ITRC In-Situ Bioremediation Workgroup to help evaluate this proposal, and it was approved after inclusion of a number of elements suggested in the Remedial Technologies Development Forum (RTDF) Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater: Principles and Practices and the RTDF-ITRC Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater seminar.

The landfill was contaminated with low levels of chlorinated solvents. The KDHE project manager had limited experience with remediation by natural attenuation. She asked Randy Farr for help evaluating the proposal, because of his experience with ITRC and RTDF involving Natural Attenuation. As a result they were able to establish that the data in the proposal was sufficient to confirm that Natural Attenuation was occurring at the site and that it was therefore a potentially good candidate for a pilot. However, their review also identified a number of elements, not included in the proposal, which needed to be added in order to assure that the pilot produced adequate performance information and accurate measurements to assure KDHE that Natural Attenuation was working and leading to an acceptable end state. The pilot's sponsor agreed to these additions -- they were included in the pilot.

Benefits: This was the first Natural attenuation pilot for chlorinated solvents approved by the KDHE Assessment and Restoration Section. Having the ITRC/RTDF documents and expertise available provided the knowledge and confidence KDHE staff needed to evaluate, amend and approve the proposal. It sped up the review process by at least 2 weeks, and possibly prevented the proposal from being turned down. It also avoided consumption of significant KDHE staff time that might otherwise have been needed to evaluate other proposals for cleanup on this site.

2. Natural Attenuation of a Chlorinated Solvent plume at an Army Base
In 1997, the Assessment and Restoration Section within KDHE received a proposal for a natural attenuation pilot involving a chlorinated solvent plume that had migrated offsite from an Army base. The KDHE program manager reviewing this proposal felt that the proposed approach probably would not work, but asked Randy Farr to review the proposal and concur on the recommendation to reject the Army's proposal.

Based on his expertise on Natural Attenuation acquired via ITRC/RTDF experience, access to guidance documents and network of experts, Randy was able to conclude with confidence that biodegradation was not going to work at this site and the plume would continue to migrate offsite impacting the water supply from existing wells.

Benefits: The KDHE program manager was able to get rapid access to knowledgeable advice and assistance in evaluating the proposal. This reduced time and expense to conduct the review and provided a sound technical basis for KDHE to reject the proposal. By being able to effectively evaluate the Natural Attenuation potential at this site and give the Army a timely and technically credible response, the likelihood of additional Natural Attenuation proposals for this site was preempted -- saving both organizations time and money.

3. Active In-Situ Bioremediation of Groundwater
In 1997, KDHE received several proposals for active in-situ bioremediation of groundwater. Two proposals, submitted by consultants, involved the remediation of chlorinated solvent contamination at dry cleaning establishments. The consultants proposed to use bacteria to stimulate degradation of PCE in an aerobic environment. In reviewing these proposals, Randy Farr questioned whether the desired degradation was technically possible given the aerobic conditions at the sites. He checked with the leading experts in the U.S. (contacts he knew via the ITRC network) and had his views confirmed that it would not work.

A portion of one of the projects (intended for enhanced anaerobic biodegradation of chlorinated solvents through injection of nutrient and substrate amendments) was allowed to go forward. The two proposals involving aerobic biodegradation of PCE's were rejected. This decision was based in part on information KDHE gained from their involvement with the RTDF in-situ bioremediation projects at Dover AFB, the RTDF-ITRC training and guidance document, and conversations with RTDF personnel.

Benefit:
If KDHE had allowed these proposals to go forward the sponsors would have ended up investing significant funds in failed projects, and KDHE would have wasted time and money in permitting the projects and monitoring the lack of satisfactory performance.

4. Anaerobic Bioventing Pilot
In 1997, KDHE reached agreement with EPA researchers at the Cincinnati Research facility to conduct anaerobic bioventing using hydrogen gas and other amendments at a dry cleaning facility in Salina, Kansas. The pilot began operation in October 1998. KDHE made contact with these researchers through its participation as an ITRC member involved in the RTDF demonstration projects at Dover AFB. This pilot project would not have happened in Kansas were it not for the participation of Kansas personnel as ITRC members in the Dover AFB experience.

Benefits: If this pilot is successful it will significantly improve the available opportunities in Kansas to clean up dry cleaning sites. The alternative method -- excavating the soil and treating it off site -- is too expensive and often impractical since the contaminated soil is under buildings. Consequently, the ITRC in situ bioremediation activities may ultimately lead to greater environmental protection at lower cost for dealing with contaminated dry cleaning sites throughout the state of Kansas.

Overall Benefits:
In situ bioremediation and natural attenuation approaches to remediation of chlorinated solvents in groundwater plumes are relatively new technologies. Kansas considers the deployment of these technologies to be especially important because chlorinated solvent groundwater plumes have been difficult to remediate with more conventional means. It is important at this early stage of development that these technologies be implemented in a knowledgeable and consistent manner. KDHE's use of ITRC products helped the state to make informed decisions on whether to pursue or reject proposals for application of these technologies to chlorinated solvent groundwater plumes, thus saving time and money for the state.

Savings included less KDHE staff time to review and approve or reject remediation proposals. Less time for project sponsors to get informed and definitive decisions from KDHE. Increased potential for new technologies to be approved for use in Kansas -- when new approaches are determined to be viable and appropriate at specific sites. Reduced chance that new technologies will be attempted under circumstances where they are likely to fail --wasting all involved parties time, money, and credibility.

Who to contact for Additional Information:
Saqib Khan, ITRC Point of Contact
Kansas Department of Health and Environment
Building 740, Forbes Field
Topeka, KS 66620
Phone: 785-296-8025
Fax: 785-296-4823
e-mail: skhan@kdhe.state.ks.us

Page last modified: