Premium
Integration of RBCA frameworks and remediation technologies
Author(s) -
Odencrantz Joseph E.,
Duran David
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
remediation journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.762
H-Index - 27
eISSN - 1520-6831
pISSN - 1051-5658
DOI - 10.1002/rem.3440070308
Subject(s) - context (archaeology) , risk analysis (engineering) , environmental remediation , variety (cybernetics) , sparging , computer science , process (computing) , reduction (mathematics) , software , agency (philosophy) , environmental science , business , contamination , chemistry , paleontology , ecology , philosophy , geometry , mathematics , epistemology , artificial intelligence , biology , programming language , operating system
Abstract Decisions that determine the proper risk‐based remediation approach are based on technical, regulatory, cost, legal, and political factors. A wide variety of options such as the ASTM RBCA tiered approach, the API Decision Support Software, and a host of agency‐specific methods and commercial risk assessment software are all available. The optimization of a remediation project requires the right remediation technology coupled with the appropriate analytical framework. For groundwater remediation, the application of various “risk reduction” technologies can be classified as aggressive (pump and treat), moderate intensity (air sparging), low intensity (oxygen release compound‐ORC®), and intrinsic (monitor only). The time frame of risk analysis will establish the proper risk reduction strategy. The selection process is inherently iterative, and the approach by which an optimal solution can be derived forms the basis of this article. A case study of a Texas site put these issues into context.