Environmental Remediation

Environmental remediation must result in conditions that are protective of human health, safety, and the environment.  The number of applicable remediation options for a given project can be twenty or more, depending on contaminant type media affected, and property use and can range from basic removal to long term, high complexity remediation systems.  Therefore, a structured approach to alternative selection is required to support effective decision-making based on information available at the time.

When active remediation is necessary, Peak’s Remedial Alternative Selection (RAS) process provides a comprehensive approach to evaluating alternatives and selecting the best remedial option for a given Site.  Evaluated options include multiple variations of physical removal and disposal or treatment, in-situ treatment systems, abiotic destruction & in-situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) injections, aerobic and anaerobic bioremediation amendment injections, and containment technologies, each potentially applicable to soil, groundwater, surface water, sediment, vapor or combinations thereof.

The process considers the effectiveness for contaminants present, client goals, regulatory mandates and restrictions, future use of property, duration and schedule, cost, logistics, accessibility, disruption to operations, and post-remedial requirements. A typical site is evaluated in two steps.  Initially, a wide set of remedial alternatives applicable to the type of contaminant and the affected media are screened. Subsequently, potentially applicable alternatives are compared based on a series of detailed evaluation metrics to further reduce the list of best alternatives and rank them.

Metric                                                 Task

Costs & Financials                            Estimate life cycle cost, funding, capital costs, expenses, cash flow

Remedial Objective Success           Verify demonstrated effectiveness of alternative

Constructability                                Confirm logistics and site use, infrastructure proximity

Safety                                                 Minimize HSSE risks to team and third parties

Integrity                                             Maximize long-lerm effectiveness/reliability

Typically, the process identifies a short list of less than five primary options that offer best value to achieve goals. Multiple alternatives may be appropriate and can be implemented in parallel or sequence. Detailed cost estimates for the short list and discussion of most important objectives and criteria for the site then leads to final selection.

Related Projects