The latest technical guidance document from the BC Ministry of Environment and Parks (ENV) provides guidance for qualified professionals to evaluate and select the best remediation alternatives for contaminated sites, typically for large or complex projects. The process highlights a robust, evidence-based approach considering multiple factors.
Provided below is a summary of the technical updates.
The Three-Step Feasibility Study Process – The guidance outlines three general steps to completing a feasibility study:
Step 1: Identifying Alternatives
This involves considering a range of achievable options, including in-situ and ex-situ technologies, containment, and monitored natural attenuation. At least three distinct remediation alternatives should be evaluated.
Step 2: Measuring Performance
Each alternative is scored against key performance criteria using a clear scoring system. The most important criterion is the protection of human health and the environment, which may be scored as low, moderate, or high protection.
Step 3: Selecting the Best Option
The best option is normally selected for its ability to comply with regulatory standards. A lower-ranked option may be chosen if there is sufficient rationale, such as public preference or greater sustainability benefits.
Key Performance Criteria – Remediation alternatives are evaluated against several critical criteria:
- Protection of Human Health and the Environment: This is the primary objective, and the options will be evaluated if they are protective in current and future conditions.
- Effectiveness and Permanence: Preference is given to permanent solutions that reduce contaminant volume, toxicity, and/or mobility. This includes short-term effectiveness during implementation and long-term effectiveness to minimize future risk and the need for ongoing intervention.
- Technical Feasibility: Confirmation that the option can be applied in this specific scenario and given site-specific conditions (e.g., underground utilities, complex topography).
- Timeframe: The estimated time to complete remediation, which should be ranked based on potential risks (high risk conditions require faster action).
- Costs: Analysis of total costs, including capital expenditures and ongoing operation and maintenance costs.
- Public Acceptance: Consideration for public consultation and engagement with potentially affected First Nations communities.
- Additional Benefits: Other environmental or social benefits, such as job creation or using green and sustainable remediation technologies, may also be considered.
***
Keystone Environmental provides expert support in navigating BC’s regulatory landscape. If you have a project that requires Contaminated Sites services, Keystone Environmental has the expertise to ensure your environmental project meets these new requirements seamlessly. Connect with your Keystone Environmental Project Manager, or one of our Contaminated Sites Department Heads – Kevin Wong or Keree Orso – to learn more.
****
Summary written by: Kevin Wong, P.Eng., CSAP, Contaminated Sites Department Head