WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 PEPOSE strategy or PPOS report as well. So there's a lot of interest. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This is very timely. And so I'm looking forward to being able to participate for as much as I can. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Unfortunately, I've warned that that senior leadership, as much as we'd like to sit and and listen to and learn science, we get pulled into meetings and other to do that we can't escape so I will be looking forward to participating as much as I can but again on behalf of the USGS and all the federal agencies and Department of Interior, welcome and I look forward to hearing about the results. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So thanks and thanks to all the scientists that are going to be presented. It's like a great lineup. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Thank you. Jeff, it's always a pleasure to see you and we come here to USDS headquarters. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Again, the topic for today is recent advances in PEFF characterization technologies the funding for federal agencies in the last 5 years for this type of work has increased, I don't know, exponentially maybe. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And there's a lot of pressure to get on with the task at hand. And so, what we're trying to do today is provide an opportunity for. And so that's what's driven our interest. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so that's what's driven our interest. Specifically, what we're trying to do today is provide an opportunity for we as member agencies to share results of ongoing recent projects to improve our understanding of characterization technology. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And what we've done is assemble what I think is a pretty fair group of speakers with some real expertise on the various aspects of characterization to talk with us. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Conclusions. So brief introduction. So PFOS is used in a wide outreach of various introduction. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So PFAS is used in a wide outreach of various, consumer goods. So you can see in this image here, you know, they're using hardware, range of various, consumer goods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So you can see in this image here, you know, they're using hardware phones, not to cook wear, a lot of personal care products for that reason. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You know, the types of equipment that you'll be using for your handling. It's also important to note here that your workplane should document the materials that you plan to use. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That's just that you don't plan to use, whether it's due to their PFAC content or potentials to store what he does. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I also mentioned that you can consider including ultra clean sample handling protocols is the your work plan so a commonly used one of the clean sample handling protocols within your work plan so a clean sample handling protocols is the your work plan so a commonly used one is a clean hand and dirty cancer protocol that's commonly used in low traits metal sampling the idea is that you have one clean hand person so essentially that is the only person 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah, that way I believe it's public access, so anyone's just able to access that paper. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But essentially what this study did is they looked at 66 materials that are commonly used in PFX sampling process. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Those were analyzed for keep out of content as well as searching keys for flooring context. So essentially what they got is, 22 of those sensing materials, did not contain key fat. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 10 of those actually were, they were able to quantify PFAT. Those are listed here. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So you can just see some of the example items that we're we're actually stop to contain these apps at the top of the concentrations of those things have. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That there's really no multiple way for PCs to enter your sample if you're following, sampling protocols properly. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So since this is happening out of your samples, it's a 60,000, you know, your samples, the intake bottles, and things about your, you know, there's really no way for, you know, it's really no way for, I guess the takeaway from, this, that I'm trying to get across here, that I'm trying to get across 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 here, that I'm trying to get across here, is that she's really placing your focus on the. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So I guess the takeaway from this slide that I'm trying to get across here, is that you'd be really placing your focus on the equipment and materials that will be hugging into direct contact with your samples that I'm trying to get across here, is that you're really placing your focus on the equipment and materials that I'm trying to get across here. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So that's that's the free water or social detergents that don't contain forest or factivity. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And finally, consider the surgeons that don't contain fluoris or factivity. And finally, consider the possible topics that we'll get and finally consider the possible topics that we'll get missing that's specifically the form kind of saw process with selecting. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I'll be going over it's groundwater. So the first one I'll be going over is groundwater. So now we'll go to the field sampling consideration. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 For the concrete materials to make sure that, no fluoridated circumstances are present there. You should also avoid, greases and spread compound. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So, here at this below, this is a comments. So when you're developing your work plan, so when you're involved in your work plan, you should just, specify, set no reason to the Tesla. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So when you're involved in your work plan, you should just, specify, that no, of those may contain feedback. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And I tell us during well installation can potentially present essential for low-level false positives and therefore it's recommended that these and I tell us to be avoided as much as possible, when you're installing wells for PSA. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay, so moving out to surface water and sediment. So when you're collecting. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay, so moving out to surface water and sediment. So when you're collecting surface water samples, you should collect those surface water samples of fire and sediment. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That's pretty straightforward, essentially to avoid any, you know, application on the sediment and, you know, preventing that from going into your, your service water sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Concentration over that time. So this benefits eliminates the problem of purged wire proposal. These are good for reducing or the eliminating trinity of your samples. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And these tends to be a fairly cost effective tool. Okay, moving into soil. So, for oil sampling, I should sample different soil horizons. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This is essentially to, a set of higher concentration strata as well as migration. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And then as well as your, vertical extent of PSAT. So this should be outlined, well in your work plan. So I really like this figure here. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I local agencies. And you should also conduct these sites that just to get an idea of what species are present and if you can actually get, you know, those species and adequate numbers to support your fire manipulation analyses. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And then finally, consider the use of standard reference materials just to add to the. So for error, the US EPA is currently developing the air usage of CFCs. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 3 3 that's also for drinking water, for 25 keypaps analyzed. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And those both are multi-labatory policy that does it. Most recently if we have the USBPA droplet in 1633. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So this essentially includes all matrices other than drinking water. That's currently what the DVD will be using. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This includes up to 40 feedback analyzed and that includes all of the airlines that are present in partners in point one and 5 33. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 There's also this method, 83 27 and that's for groundwater circus water and waist water. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I'm looking at the point 4. And, right now, this is, CU, DCW, which is an RML data quality work group. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We consider this method as a screening message. So, this isn't a method that, we consider this method as a screening message. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So, this isn't a method that, we use for a collection of divisive data. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 There's also the CSV H 1201. So this is the message that's used for, HRFF and that looks at PEFF. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So, this is in a method that, we use for collection of the data. There's also the DSB H 1201. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So this is the method that, we use for collection of divisive data. There's also the DSB H. 1201. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Water blink so I kind of touch the clock needs but those will really give you a good idea of whether your safety of equipment is introducing hockey into your, samples. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Again, your source water link. You wanna make sure that you're any portable wire that you're using. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You all wanted to collect the field creation playing. In other words. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We do have a few minutes this question in the audience or online. Trying to group 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Water. So how can you compare results from 5 37.1 to 1633 going forward. Gotcha. That's one part of the question. Another problem. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Attending to see and Marla, we're dealing with the set up road for the uncertainty in Maila, we're feeling with this set up road for the uncertainty in medical I'm gonna take 1 min to try to swap out the audio. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 If you can hear that worry clicking sound in the room, multiply that by a 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Testing 1 2 3 Testing 1 2 3. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Hey, click a message into. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Hey, how about for those of you in the room? No worse. Where did the clicking stop? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So clicking, okay, but only for you all. This, We're not dealing with that. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Let me bring up that screen share and we'll keep working on resolving. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This issue. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Sure. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 In time. So when did you go now, right? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 All right, our next speaker is Becca Berkett. She's with the EPA. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 She is, Let's see engineering and analysis division, of science technology within the office of water. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And she holds the page. I guess there's notting her head and, is currently working on development. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 People asked methods for waste water. And leading the development effort for an observable organic fluorine method. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And today she's going to speak to us on the topic of mean water act methods overview of Clean Water Act, F fast methods activities. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yes. Hi, I'm Becca, and we did have a bit of an eleventh hour change. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So thank you to the presenters and organizers for inviting me via Troy. And then I'll change. So thank you to the presenters and organizers for inviting me via Troy. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And then I wrote them in at the last minute to also start talking about some SW 8 46 methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So thank you for our last minute additions, also start talking about some SW 8 46 methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So thank you for our last minute additions as we heard back from other offices in so we're gonna kind of break this up into 2 parts. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I'll start the first part of the presentation. And I'll present to you some of our theme Water Act methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We've already sort of heard a bit about them from Mickey. Thank you, Nikki. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And then Troy will take over her SW 8 4 6 methods and we have one slide that outlines a lot of the other efforts that are ongoing right now at the agency. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 There we go. Okay, so disclaimer, the views expressed in this presentation are those of myself and Troy and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the agency. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Any mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute EPA endorsement or recommendation or use. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Alright, so a bit of background to get everybody oriented. There are several EPA offices that publish analytical methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And it could be a little bit confusing navigating through all of them. So we have the Office of Air and Radiation, the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Clean Air Act and there you have stationary source methods and ambient near methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You have the Office of Water, that's where I am, Office of Science and Technology, Methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You have the Office of Water, that's where I am. Office of Science and Technology, doing Clean Water Act Methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You have the Office of Water, that's where I am, Office of Science and Technology, doing Green Water Act Methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You also have the Office of Gradwater and Drinking Water doing safe drinking water. You have Office of Wid and Emergency Management. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Awful, some resource, conservation and recovery. That's choice group. Resource animation and every action. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That is or S. 2846. Then other important EPA sources of methods include ORD and our EPA sources of methods include ORD and our EPA regional laboratories and other important EPA sources of methods include ORD and our EPA regional laboratories and the Office of Chemical Safe sources of methods include ORD and our EPA regional laboratories and the Office of Chemical Safety and 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Pollution Pre-regional Laboratories and the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So there's lots of people to kind of consolidate all of these groups working on methods and all of the different terms and technology that are used for these methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 There was an effort. I guess started in 2022, I think. That took a little bit of time, but there was a big working group with a lot of us from these different working group with a lot of us from these different groups coming together to create this white paper. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Terms used to describe the standing of US EPA methods. So if you're interested, we're give up questions. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You know, like NDL, ML, RL, all these different terms, LED, Locke, what do they need for the different offices? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You can feel free to visit that link and look at that paper and scroll through to see definitions from each of the offices about what those things mean. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So now we'll dive into the Clean Water Act Analytical Methods program. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So many industries and municipalities are permitted to discharge pollutants under Clean Water Act, NPDS permitting program. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 They use analytical methods to analyze chemical, physical, and biological components of wastewater and other environmental samples for monitoring finance. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The Clean Water Act requires that EPA establishes test procedures to measure pollutants for clean water act programs through rulemaking, including taking public comments. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So APA promulgates these test procedures in the 40 CFR part 1 36. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That's where all of the clean water act methods currently live. Method is approved for national use in the NPDs permitting program when it is promulgated and in this regulation. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So for our We've done something a little bit different where we've been, you know, posting the draft. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The early drafts of the single lab methods and, you know, as we complete each matrices. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But eventually our goal is to get some of those PFAS methods into the 40 CFR partners. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 36. Here are our team numbers. So Kevin Tingley, he's our branch chief and the manager for the methods activities. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Adrian Hanley, some of you may know, he's our lead chemists. Lemuel Walker, you also might be familiar with. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 He's our national ATP coordinator and also chemist here by me, Beth Berkhead. I'm the newest chemist on the team. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I joined in the middle of the pandemic. So it's been a lot of fun. Tracy Bone, who's our microbiology lead and Megan Hessen now who does pull up whole effluent toxicity testing as a biologist. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay, so I know a big question that comes up a lot is when we'll be P fast methods be final and when can we start using them? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So I'm just gonna kind of talk a bit about what that process looks like. So we have to go through regulation called the methods update rules. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So we sort of did a lean exercise before I started where the group decided we would have 2 different murders. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 One that would be smaller and go quicker. And one that would be kind of the bear would take a long time and be for more controversial methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Things that we anticipate to get a lot of comment on. So we have something called a routine, that's every one to 3 years. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Those are little updates. Typos, you know, things that have gone out of out of the science, you know, they're not available anymore, things we might need to remove minor editorial updates and things of that sort. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Go into these routines. Then we have non-retemers. So this is what we're calling folders and those contain more controversial items, things that need to be proposed separately and that will take longer. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We are in the process of doing a routine right now. Our last one was in 2021. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 For post in October, 2019 signed in May, 2021, effective July, 2021. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We are doing another routine right now. We have gotten all of the updates and edits from all. We have gotten all of the updates and edits from all the VCSVs and ATP applicants from all the updates and edits from all the VCSVs and ATP applicants proposed in February this year. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Or key fast methods. So PFOS Method, 1633 and 1621. Our goal is to set those up into a full number. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So we are trying our hardest to get ready and get done with that. I've got some timelines here that we'll talk about in a couple of slides. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But those 2 methods will likely go together. With maybe some of the things we've been working on as well. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And a big Fulmer that everybody will be able to provide commenting. So P pass method 1633. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This is our 40 target analyte method in collaboration with the DOD. Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This method was based on an SOP originally developed by SGS Access. And Dod is funding and managing both the single lab and multi laboratory validation studies of the method. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And then EPA is providing review and doing some additional data analysis and then we'll write up a method for our website. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The goal is to provide EPA office water with all the documentation needed to consider publication of this method as a clean water act method and 40 CFR for 136. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 All on plans to leverage this validation data to support an SW 8. 46 method. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So, I think if you've read through this method and you've heard some of the comments already, it's a lot. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 There's a lot in the method. There's a lot of steps. There's a lot of matrices. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This method was validated in so many types of water, so it was validated in several different matrices of water, wastewater, surface water, groundwater, of several different types of wastewater. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 It was also validated in soils, sediments, both freshwater and green. And then a bunch of different tissues. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So we have fish tissue. We even have some invertebrates in the mix. So lots and lots of work went into this method. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And as such, there are several different components to it. So rather than show tables and tables and tables of data, which you can download for all the aqueous matrices on our website right now. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I thought I'd briefly talk through the extraction procedures. And then we can talk a bit about the timeline for completion. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So this method is a solid phase extraction isotope dilution method. So we are using internal standards for this method for each matrices. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The 40 analytes were selected as you saw with Mickey's presentation trying to encompass the analytes and 4 37 part point 1 5 33 and then some others we had heard from stakeholders in 4 33 and then some others we had heard from stakeholders that in addition to you know standards that were available at time trying to see So the analysis by LCMS for the water samples, the sample size is 500 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 mills. The analysis by LCMS for the water samples. The sample size is 500 mills. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We heard so many good comments from And the reason for this is because you need to do a bit of background work, particularly if you're dealing with unfamiliar samples, ways bars you've never worked with before and you're not sure what's there. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 There are some background steps that need to happen. So you can get an idea of total suspended solids. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You know, do you need to dilute the sample? Things in that nature. So it's important to note that you have to collect several replicates, for one sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The whole time for the water samples is 28 days at refrigerated temperatures and 90 days at frozen temperatures. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 There's a caveat here, which is that you can go into the holding time study data and see why we selected these values. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 As the holding time study went on, we didn't notice an increase in some samples for PFOS. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So we suspected precursors. You know, might be transforming. So there's a reason we picked these days, but it doesn't mean that this time and these days are, you know, what you have to use for every single analytes. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So there's, you know, some, some flexibility built into these methods that you can use for your particular analytics of interest if you know can prove that you can meet the criteria. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 For the samples, you need to measure the TSS. To make sure that you're not gonna plug up your cartridges. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And then we've talked about filtration not being allowed for this method, but you can do some use centrifugation to kind of make a pellet at the bottom if you can do some use central to kind of make a pellet at the bottom if you need to. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You need to invert the sample to homogenize before you perform the extraction. Nikki showed that great figure about the air water interface. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So I think we're all sort of familiar with that with so it's important to kind of invert your sample, get it nice and mixed up before you run it through the procedure. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Your sample volume is going to be determined by weight of the container. You're using the full volume for your actual sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You've spiking with internal standards, you check your pH, and then it's ready for your solid face extraction. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You end up only using about one mill of your extract for analysis. You can freeze the remainder of your extract, to do some follow-up work. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Now for the solid matrices for soils and sediments and bio solids. You need to collect enough to have 5 grams dry weight for soil and sediment and a half a gram dry weight for biosolids. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 90 days is the whole time, refrigerated or frozen, same caveat supply. You have to measure the percent solids. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You should try to use stainless steel. To mix everything around to avoid contamination. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Remove your rocks and vertebrates or other form objects. Transfer to your centrifuge tubes and then spike with your internal standard and go through the extraction procedure. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So we've heard a lot about streamlining this extraction procedure and why we have to use 3 different solvent steps. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so that's the way we have it written right now, but again, these methods, 16 or degree is going to be performance based. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So there are method flexibilities allowed. And if you want to make a change to that sort of procedure to streamline how long it takes. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 As long as you can demonstrate if you make the criteria to streamline how long it takes. As long as you can demonstrate if you meet the criteria, you're good to go. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so, Adrian, who's the team lead for this project, as long as you can demonstrate if you meet the criteria, you're good to go. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so, Adrian, who is the team lead for this project said the best way. If you're curious now, you're wanting to speed it up now is to then you're ready basically for your SPE and cleanup after your extraction. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And again, it's one mill of extract for analysis and you can save the rest. For the tissue samples. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You can determine based on your project needs what type of tissue you're going to use. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So we have pull fish, delays. Organs, whatever you're interested in. Same thing with invertebrates. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But basically you need to collect enough so you can have 2 grams of homogenous tissue. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The whole time is 90 days frozen. Transfer to a centrifuge tube, spike with the extract, do the solvent extraction and evaporate reconstitute SPE clean up one mill. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 For analysis. We do have all of the, water data finalized and up on the website. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Nikki set this up perfectly. QC, you set this up perfectly. QUEUESEY, and up on the website. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Nikki set this up perfectly. QUEUESEY samples are important, and up on the website. Nicki set this up perfectly. QC samples are important. Under statement, I think of the day. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But equipment and containers that come in contact the sample. So think about your project. Think about what's gonna touch the sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Make sure you double check all of those things. And do all of your QC that you need so that you can be, you know, things, and do all of your QC that you need so that you can be, you know, you can have this defendable data We are recommending that everybody include a biosult interference check standard for all of your analyses. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Especially if you're doing wastewater. Initially we thought about this only with tissue. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But what we've seen in the development process is that, some samples with wastewater and sort of like human waste in them as well. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 They also need this. So think about including this bio salt interference check standard for PHOS. We recommend that you get it separated by. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So our single laboratory validation was completed and the method has been posted and the report is posted on the web. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The single ad validation report is where you're going to find all the holding time data if you're interested in that. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The multi laboratory validation is underway. So in July, we posted the fourth draft of the method and the first MLV study report that has all of the QC exceptions criteria for all of the that's from all of the labs that participated. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We have an anticipated completion date of this year to get the rest of the data up. So everybody right now is working really hard to get this done. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I know our collaborators at DOD are cranking everybody right now is working really hard to get this done. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I know our collaborators at DOD are cranking. Everybody's looking at all the data for all of these other matrices. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So that's going to be the soils, sediments, biosolids, and tissues. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Our goal is to get all of that all of the data has been in hand and collected we're just going through all of the review and finalizing the criteria right now. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So that's the brief update from 1633 and here is the update for 1621. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So, 1621 is our adorable organic flooring method. And now this method we started pursuing because there was an increasing demand for an aggregate methods like AOS. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You know, we, I think we've seen this a lot with all the different methods that for P fast, there's really not one method that works for every goal. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That for P fast, there's really not one method that works for every goal. And we know that with targeted methods, we' There are many different types of non-targeted methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But we chose to go for AOL as a screening procedure. Naturally organic fluorines are rare. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You know, some plants release them as toxins and some volcanic eruptions but generally speaking when we're looking at wastewaters you know that's going not going to be coming from a naturally occurring organic flooring. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This method was also a collaborative effort, so we collaborated with ASTMD. 19 and EPA ORD on single laboratory validation study for the 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Similar slide here, so the procedure. The draft method, 1621, is going to be a method defined parameter. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So on like 1633, which is performance base. 1621 is method defined. So meaning your result is based on the procedure itself. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Samples are prepared and passed through 2 gap columns in series and analyzed by combustion ion chromatography. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 It will yield a single result that estimates an aggregate concentration of any organ flowing compounds in the sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So that's important to note, stand alone, a value from ALF. So what you have to take some of your own information about your site, your sources, all of those things that you've think and use this method or others like this in conjunction with targeted methods if you truly want to get a good idea of what's happening in that sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So just like 1633, you need multiple bottles, for example. This is a smaller sample size. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 It's 100 mills, but you do need to collect at least 3 100 mill bottles per sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The whole time again 90 days i'm sure it is probably longer than that that's how long we could do the holding time study so you know you can you can think about that as you will and if you if you need to free samples and those sorts of things. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And if you need to free samples and those sorts of things, you do also need to measure the TSS. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So we found that you know you have to you don't wanna plug the cartridges and we do have some criteria. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We're developing in the method for thresholds for the TSS and as well as if you need to use any sort of blast wall on the top of the gap. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Verify the sample pH is greater than 5. Check for chlorine and deep morning if needed. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You also need one of these bottles to determine the concentration of inorganic fluoride in the sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So we have a wash step incorporated, on the cartridges, but you need to know what you started with, especially if you have no information about the sample you're working with. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Volume is also determined by weights. You add a half a mill of 2 molar sodium nitrate, you slowly load the sample onto the gap columns. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 In our study so far, if you try to go too fast, you will pop messes. So slowly load the sample onto the gap columns. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We do have a criteria we're developing and have the, you know, rate. In the method once it's final. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Wash the gap columns to try to remove some of the Rinse with reagent water that's P fast free, dry the columns, transfer the carbon into combustion boats and then the sample is ready for combustion. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Going back to what Nicky said about QC samples, we've observed a lot of really interesting things through this method. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So for those of you who worked with cartridges and methods, you know, you get a package. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 What we have found particularly for AOL is depending on how you sort any remainder, the cartridges in the bag. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You need to think about that. We have one lab that cartridges in the bag. You need to think carefully about that and their cartridges were just stored out on the calendar. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So we have some recommendations in there to help us for your cartridges. We suspect maybe it's picking up something from the A/C system. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We don't know for sure. We have also observed that even the same batches of cartridges. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We'll have different levels of background contamination. So it's important to, you know, check these things. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Do your lab QC. Nikki did such a good outline for all the people. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You see you do the same thing for your lab QC for anything to come and contact samples. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Our single laboratory. Volvation was completed and included calibrations orbit testing. We tried several different vendors, several different types of GAC, recovery of individual PE fast. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We tested 36 individual PFAS, 3 mixed PFA standards. 3 pesticides and 3 pharmaceuticals in this single level validation. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Ipr and method detection limit studies. We use 10 wastewater and surface water matrices at 2 spiking concentrations. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That draft of a single lab was posted in April, 2,022. Just like 1633 our goal for the multi live is completion at the end of this year. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We have almost all the data in hand. I wanna give an on the record shout out to all of our EPA labs that volunteered because they came in first and it was amazing. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So Bolunteer Labs really killed it in the study and we're waiting still for 2 laps to finish and then we can you know finalize our reports and get it up on the website. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And then we can, you know, finalize our reports and get it up on the website. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Hopefully at the end of this year. And we'll see how it goes. Of course, you know, we have a lot of things up in the air still but that is our goal and we're on track so far to get that done. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Now with that, I'll hand it over to Troy, to give an update on SW 8. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 46 and then we'll both stick around for questions. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Thanks, I expect. Hi everybody. So why don't I hear from the, EPA's Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so the, the waste program. So we make the, federal regulatory structure. For how waste, Solid, has just was is managed in the United States. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so the R program publishes a compendium of test methods as SWA. 46, of the test methods, compendium of test methods, this, SWA. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 46, a few of which are incorporated by referenced, this, SWA, 46, a few of which are incorporated by reference in the record regulations and are required or otherwise considered, the data that generated with them are considered definitive, with respect to determining, you know, evaluating compliance with the RECORD regulations for determination that has this waste or, or, complying with the treatment standards for a treatment of 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 hazardous ways, for the land disposal. But most, most, SBA, 46, methods, are, published, this, guidance, they're, non, regulatory, they're, not, required, they're, For the most part, the methods do not have a required reporting limit or limited quantitation. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 They end up being, they have, you know, many of them have statistically based, quality control limits that are defined by the laboratory that's using them. And so we recommend generally consulting with the laboratory. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 It's gonna be doing testing for you, to, you know, find out, you know, what, kind of sensit just in the big picture overview, SW, 46. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So in for, 2023 to 2024, we basically have 3 main categories of PE fast methods that we're working on. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 One of them is expanding the for the targeted analytical methods is basically expand the range of the target analytes and we that we have that are validated with the with the methods you know publishing new new sample preparation methods and cleanup methods, you know, publishing new, sample preparation methods and cleanup methods, you know, publishing new, sample preparation methods and clean up methods, to provide, to provide EPA and our, industry with, additional tools that they could 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 use for sample preparation and clean up and analysis, especially for channels new matrices. You know, the breaker program, you know, we deal with, we do with waist matrices, we deal with a contaminate site cleanup, we do a groundwater and soil sediment. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I mean think you know Taylor they're used for your project specific data quality objectives so that we have we have the flexibility for you to be able to use the methods for the application that you need. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So the, so the target analytical methods is one category, a class based test methods, which is gonna include the total oxidizable precursors essay I'll talk a little bit more about to try to capture a wider variety of P fast prefers that we may not we may not be able to test for with the current targeted analytical methods and also aqueous leeching methods which is our third category and that's you know you know 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 using the laboratory based method to identify you know variables that are can to identify you know variables that are can control you know variables that are can control PFAS, to identify, you know, variables that are, to identify, you know, variables that are can control, P fast, leaching behavior and also to evaluate, you know, variables that are could, control, PFAS, 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 leeching behavior and also, to, evaluate, mobilization strategies in a laboratory environment before they deployed in a 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So, the oxidizable precursors essay, we're, collaborating with, with the really great group on development of this is a the top essay as a standardized note. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So the original paper was published by and said black in 2,012 using a warm Persultate, oxidation, pre-treatment stuff to convert some P fast precursors to some of these intermediate terminal degradation products. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The per floral alcohol assets. That's what we're looking for for degradation products. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And you see there's an example, a cartoon example of a P fast precursor and to the oxidation process you end up generating this. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You know, per floor paroxylic acid. And so the some of the benefits of the top essay or that you hold on this, structural information about your precursors, which is something that, you know, you, you can relate this to, to a structure that, that may degrade over time to these, for, to a structure that, may degrade over time, to these, 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 for Florence, that may degrade over time, to these, for, to a structure that may degrade over time, to these, for floor outlets, some of which we know to be toxic and mobile and some of which bio accumulate. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so, we, we're identifying that, you know, a source, a source sample could have the potential to, to convert over time and oxidated conditions to these to the degradation products. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We're not getting, we're not getting information about kinetics here. So these degradation products. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We're not getting, we're not getting information about kinetics here. And so some of the challenges we have with the top essay, including, you know, maintaining a sufficient oxidation of a redox potential. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So efficient oxidation and monitoring oxidation. You know, some of the, we, for some matrices that have high organic content like a bio solids, for some matrices that have high organic content like the bio solids, you know, you know, oxidizing the PEFAS that have high organic content like the bio solids, you know, you know, oxidizing the PE fast 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 that, you know, you'll, you know, oxidizing the PE fast that are there, may, not be trivial because there's, you know, oxidizing the peak fast that are there, may, not be trivial because there's, there's a bunch of, a bunch of sinks for the, for the oxygen. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And, in, that, way, you know, Blayer building change is another good example of a higher magnetic problem matrix. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That could be really challenging to do sufficiently oxidize the and another way, another important part of this is, using the right, monitoring the oxidation process and using right surrogates to to see that we're getting efficient oxidation in every single sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so that would be mean isotopically labeled a precursor where we're monitoring depletion or isotopically labeled for fluoro acid where we can look at conservation across our process from oxidation to sample preparation and analysis. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so those those 2 elements I think are the essential parts of, you know, making sure that we're officially oxidizing samples. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Another, challenge is, you know, you know, Sorting out do we do we? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 How much P-ass is there? We need to monitor the right oxygen degradation products and some of PE fast precursors, you know, different classes of P. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 F. Bgers just make different oxidative degradation products. And so expanding the target analytic list to the, you know, the alter short chain, be fast, like perchloropopenic acid or trifluoracetic acid. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Some of our, some of our partners here are very knowledgeable about that. About the Europe and S Lancaster lab and the you know and so they're you know to know what is our total mass here. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Of P PSP courses we have to look for the right degradation of PP. PS precursors. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We have to look for the right degradation products and we have to look for the right degradation oxidated degradation and oxidated degradation products stand for different classes of precursors. We can end up with different classes of precursors. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We can end up with different things. So, and so the another, another aspect of this is, trying to control, ball to loss and make sure that we're not losing stuff. Because we have a open system or oxidizing the samples who can have potential for ball to loss, some precursors. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 There's implement a process, gonna minimize it. And then, you know, we may need different approaches like I talked about for a direct oxidation versus extraction followed by oxidation. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We may need different approaches for egg-reasing solid samples. There's some atrus, take these matrices, men are having to treat them like a higher panic content solos, sample, you know, similar in a similar manner. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So the, so our goals here are I think are, we got this great group of a commercial testing laboratories. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The, university researchers, of commercial testing laboratories, the university researchers, the university researchers, people in the office of research, university researchers, university researchers, people in the office of research research and development at EPA. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And we've even talked to, people in the office of research research research and development at EPA and we've even talked to other federal agencies USDA has an interest in that top essay and we talked about to other federal agencies USDA has an interest in development at EPA. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And we've even talked to other federal agencies. USDA has an interest in that top essay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And we talked about, trying to, but right now we're working on putting together a study plan for the development work that we need to finish. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And then our goal is really to complete that development work in this, 2024 and then move on to multi lab validation and, presuming that we can get, we can get the top essay to work and, and we can get, comparable results across, laboratories for a variety of matrices, with, with the, Mohawa, Abraham and he wrote with Karen. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Carolyn, So as far as the analytical methods go, you've already heard about the, you already hear about the work that they're even for 1633, you know, we published a direct inject method for aqueous samples and, 2,000, and, 21, and, and, and it is, very straightforward. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Example preparation analysis of methods. There's 35. 12 and 83, 27. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 A sample, the 35, 12 is a sample preparation method. So it's essentially one-to-one dilution with methanol, you know, for taxing, you know, filtering through a particle filter and the samples ready to be analyzed. And so it's very straightforward. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 It's very, very low, low labor costs. It's a quick sample preparation method and it's also there's there's you sample transfers from the beginning to the end so they're there really are very few places where you can end up introducing contamination or have lost and so in that sense it's I think there's there's some advantages to that particular simple preparation 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 method and and Right now what's happening is, 1633 validation studies aren't going. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The ASCM is collaborating with the EPA region 5 laboratory on ASTMDA 400, and 2 one that, Mickey, I think mentioned earlier. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And, what's these validation studies are completed, we're gonna, we're gonna, leverage this data to make some update system has to be 46 sample preparation analysis numbers. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So that's Big picture story. The other thing that we're working on, I mentioned was, leaching methods, aqueous leeching out this. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so the, the leaf methods we published for inerganics, I think in 2,019 and we're working on validating them for organics including PFAS currently. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We're working on development validation. It's not just a validation, but the development part was first and some in some ways challenging. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But the these leaf methods were, you know, they're multi point methods. So they're not TCLP or not generated a single point, a single data point with them, you know, generally they're looking at, you know, leaching behavior across the independent variable, which could be pH, a independent variable, which could be pH, it could be liquid to solid ratio. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Independent variable, which could be pH, it could be liquid, which could be pH, it could be liquid, which could be pH, it could be liquid, which could be pH, it could be liquid to solid ratio. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And, there, there's also a semi-dynamic tank leaching test, which is looking at, release over time So still, so monolithic or compacty granular material. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so the, so the pace leaf methods are, where they've been published as they're non-regulatory or a packed granular material. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so the, so the pace leaf methods are, where they've been published is they're non-regulatory. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so the, so the piece leaf methods are, where they've been published as they're non-regulatory, they're performance based methods like the other methods I talked about. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Most of the other SV, 46 methods. We're not, we're not replacing the method, 1311 for hashous waste characterization for, with this, with the leak methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But there are 4 of them And so the current status with those methods are that they're, you know, the method development work for PFAS is complete or nearly completed. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 3 of those methods. We're still working on development for the, the semantic take-beaching test. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The the development works largely been performed under a certain grant and it's been a joint effort by Texas Tech and Vayner Bill with the help of officer research and development and we're we're in the initial stages of gear up for multi-lab validation which right now includes initial demonstration, which right now includes initial demonstration of proficiency. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so, they're, we're also using these, leaf methods to evaluate region from Bosolids as a separate. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Research project from right now and this is just a figure showing what this, method 1316. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So it's looking at leaching isn't functional liquid to solve ratio. But what you don't get out of TCLP, so it's looking at leaching as a function of liquid child ratio. But what you don't get out of TCLP, you get a single measurement. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You know, you don't know if you leased all your chemical out of your solid or not. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You know, and so with this method you're looking at leeching, you're looking at leaching, at different, with the celebrations, you can, you can actually look at depletion. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You get some information out of it that you don't get out of a single, a single point method that you can't get out of a single, a single point method that you can't get out of a single point method. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so, this is gonna And so briefly, I just wanna touch on some of these other projects that were from some of the other EPA methods programs that are not are not represented here. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water, they, you know, they published the method by V 3 and by 37.1 they're they're working on a couple at a development of a couple of targeted methods. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Including a solvent dilution direct inject. Method for, for P fast and drinking water. They're also working on an in-line solve-based extraction that is and I think they're expand I think they're working on expanding the targeting analytic list for all 33 to 5 37.1. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But I'm Will Adams, I think they're working on expanding the targeting and I think they're working on expanding the targeting a light list for all 33 to 5 37.1. But I'm Will Adams is the white person to talk to about that. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 He's, who have that's his contact information here. They're also already has also been working on a total organic worrying about it for drinking water. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I think in, in the same vein, but, the Clean Wark Methods program has been working. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so, Dante, Horses is the right person to talk to. You want more information about that. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And, an OATPS. So that's, the, the, Clean, Eraq, program, That's it. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So for more questions, you kind of think back to your, that are eye, here's, Thank you. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But we're scheduled to go on break for about half an hour, but if there's a quick question somebody in the room wants to ask these folks. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Our goal is to get back at 10 to 10. And pick up the next speaker but like I said there's a question. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And of course you can always talk to these folks on break as well. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 16. Okay, Oh. Oh yeah, so we have, that's on a parameter I covered here, but we will have criteria for that, but basically like that's another one of the things we recommend measuring and those extra bottles because there is Right now, if you looked at the draft and the single lab, you'll see that we're burning the car and separately because we are seeing a lot of 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 breakthrough from done, you know, down to the next with some of our standards. We speculate this is tied to working in a carbon and sample. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so that's something that we're diving with the data from the multi lab to decide if we can. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And so that's something that we're diving. And so that's something that we're diving to the data from the multi lab to decide if we can. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 In fact, recommend a single burn a follow that gap or if it needs to remain separate. Right now we're thinking we might put in some language about, keeping it separate if you're not familiar with your sample and then perhaps burning it together if you sort of know what to size. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay, Yes. That's, that's a great reminder because I meant to mention that. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The, Amy Naira, I think John Offenberg in the Office of Research and Development has been working on a high volume of research and development has been working on a high volume sampling method for PFAS and Indian Air. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And honestly, I'm not sure that project is been working on a high volume sampling method for FAFSA and Indian Air. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And honestly, I'm not sure that project is. But I know Brian Schumacher is also, I'm not sure that project is, but I know Brian Schumacher is also, I'm not sure that project is. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But I know Brian Schumacher is also, I'm not sure that project is. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But I know Brian Schumacher is also, officer research and development guy. He's been working on a vapor, but I'm, he'd be a great person to talk more I could give you his contact information if you're interested. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I think they got it. Hey, Right. And at this 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. I, oh yeah, good idea. Oh, so, I need you I need you to say that but louder because I it's funny I could hear you over there but I can't hear you. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. I'm just. You can use that. It doesn't invite. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And Oh, it's, for the Oh yes. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The gentleman in the room, I believe has asked if, given that TCLP is a current regulation for hazardous ways, given that TCLP is a current regulation for hazardous ways. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 What, how might the, how might keep fast testing be affected by the different method, a different, a leeching method, aqueous leeching method versus TCLP. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Maybe I've got this could miss, Erica asked your question. Is that fair? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So I think, you know, when you think about TCOP, you know, sensitivity is probably related to how, you know, sensitivity is probably related to how, you know, sensitivity is probably related to how much, how much aQUEUE sample you could extract or test at at at one clip, you know. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So the, so, 21 liquid to solid ratio, you, you might be a little bit less sensitive. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 If you're leeching a hundred percent solid sample, then if you were using a 10 to one at the solid ratio. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But the sensitivity is probably not that much different. You know, as far as the, you know, you know, using a different approach for the, hazardous ways because we need a big question, you know, it's, and it's a policy question and I have to say that, you know, the TCLP was in designed to a simulate a policy question. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And I have to say that, you know, the TCLP was in designed to, simulate a certain, set of a certain mismanagement scenario and, you know, to revisit that, would be challenging and it would, I think it would take, it would take, a big picture of you, what is that mishap scenario? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 How might it have changed over time since this regulation was published and we may have to start at an earlier step then which method would be the most appropriate. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But it's a but I think the It's, it's sticky to change because it's, it's been ingrained and, you know, has to waste, you know, regulations and management since, you know, 1986 or 1992, whenever the Thank you very well. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. Oh, that we pick that. More that so you can be involved in that. Yeah, that's, I mean, I think that's, that's a great suggestion and I will, but I'm, I think that is requires a whole room of people to talk about because I'm I am a lab guy and when it comes to this this issue of policy you know it's a it is a 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 big question you know really is my I like that then 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Oh. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Oh, Okay. Hello. Okay. I think yes. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I mean, it's, also, so the person has been asked if the method that I was talking about was a small volume aqueous sample method. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The recommended volume of the, of the method that we use for the for the multi-involation study for 35, 12 and 83 27 is $5. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And that was that's what you're asking about. Yep. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. We have you know, No. As we No. Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay, so, so the person in room said that they had a problem with losing their samples because they collected small volume samples because they collected small volume samples and, they had a problem with losing their samples because they collected small volume samples and, in the region 5 and then the lab can manage the samples because they collected small volume samples and in the region 5 and then the region 5 and then the lab can manage the samples 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 and in the region 5 and then the region 5 and then the lab can manage the samples and so they had a hard time finding another mandatory. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I believe that there are there are other laboratories that offer this test date and I'm not sure about the timeframe that's appropriate but if you're like I'm not allowed to recommend specific laboratories but I think I I can help them find what we're looking for if you're if that helps. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But also, you know, there's other issues that have come up, oh gosh, about, about collecting representative samples, you know, and you know, as a 5 sample representative, you know, and it's a it's an opening question and you know the officer research and development is working on a surface microlayer sampling and and so there's there's a lot 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 of there's a lot of different ways to look at Pete Bass, but, I think when it comes to representative sampling, you know, the best way you can be sure you're getting representative sample is replication. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You know, you're looking at field duplicates or field replicates because there's no way to be sure that any sample volume is representative or you know without without you know without having data to show that any sample volumes representative are you know without you know without having data to show that itself you know and so I think replication is is your best friend that it's a you know and so I think replication is is your best friend when it comes to 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 defensible data generated 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. I think we better. The 4 other questions to during the break, for those of us in the room and, I don't know how we wanna handle folks with questions online. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I can submit them and I guess we're gonna take it looks like a short break. We were scheduled to restart at 10 after the hour. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 5 min before the hour. Do we wanna delay the start or do you wanna go, with 1010 for restart. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. No, I'm not. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 10 after 10? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 10 after 10. We're adjourned for now. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. Okay. In It's 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. We have 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay, but if you were saying, if, if we were to try and get the, the. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 The meetings. Yeah, well the issue on So what we were doing is we would taste on it had been using the headphones job. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So what we were doing is we would taste on, we had been using the headphones job into a table, but it wasn't out enough. We didn't get into the team. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We could try it. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I wanted to take a line out. Which should give me all the mic. Right? And I wanted Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Actually, we would not get the wireless. Because wireless don't come here. They go to So, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, Yeah, that That gets everything from the rack. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So that everything that's mixed. That, the wired mics, the wireless mics all come out of that. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. So. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Oh. Yeah, you can pull it off if, okay. So that gives you the house. Now to get the. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Let's see. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. Saw sauce. This is Jean. I'm talking into a boundary night. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yes, there's a lot of background sound. That's because we're on grade. Test fast. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 She wants you. Oh. Yes, yes, I can do that. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Test, test. This is G. 1, 2. So again, for those remote attendees, we are working on a permanent fix. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 If you can hear my voice and you don't hear the crack and popples such as we did earlier, go ahead and send me a message in the QA. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I do understand there's some background sound, but that will die down. You can go on it because I can hear myself nice. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay, Take it. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Response. Did anybody talk? That's good. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 But I'm gonna step into the hallway. Because I'm gonna create That's the, pass code for then, right on the whiteboard on the side of the projector. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah, the whiteboard. See the white poster. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Because I want to cheat it up here, but we don't challenge for 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Let me have. Okay. Super all We need Right, I get it. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yes, that's that. Yes, test test. This is Jean. Do you hear me in the room? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Test, test, can you hear me? La la. Because of all the people. Okay, I can hear myself online. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 So I know I'm coming through. But you're right. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Alright, we're gonna go over here. I bumped that. I'm gonna go to. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Can you hear me? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Because my mic is low here, that's okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. Wait, I don't know. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. So what I the critical thing is I don't hear the clicking and popping and worrying which was deafening for some. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And for those virtual participants as I'm scrolling through messages. It sounds like everyone can hear me. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 It's coming through clear online. So thank you. I'm gonna swap to a different device. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 For those of you who are. In line and switched to a, like. So again, just confirming that you can still hear me. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yes, there is a ton of background. Do you acknowledge that? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 No, I am not. See. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 At this point. That sounds which was gonna be my biggest problem. I do have a lot of enough reason right now. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 You wanna swap it? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Basically. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Yeah. It is. So. There's 1 1. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This is team. Oh, he sounds a lot. We're not. That's nice. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That's nice. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Oh Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. This is Small sitter, Hey, Hmm. Got a choice. See you here, Scott, this is Gene. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I definitely have my sisters. Okay. Does it work? So. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. It's good. So right, I think that's always. I truly appreciate everyone's patience. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I believe we have resolved the online audio stream. It appears as though all microphones. I truly appreciate everyone's patience. I believe we have resolved the online audio stream. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 It appears as though all microphones in the room are working. So go ahead. You can. If you're streaming online with us, go ahead and send me a quick message into the QA and just confirm that the audio still sounds good. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 I believe we have implemented a permanent fix and we should have a pristine broadcast. And I'm seeing a number of messages. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Thank everyone for confirming. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Test 1 2 okay Yeah. Yeah, this, I think. So I'm gonna. Yeah. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Basically, Yeah, So those 2 cables are mine. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 We are able. To, oh yeah, I'm good. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Right. In the banning. It's it's on man. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. They're using Yeah, Hey, your. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 This. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Hey. Me too. Sorry, just one more time and then,'s your next break. It's that money. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 That's testing 1, 2, 3. How do I sound in the room, ladies and gentlemen? 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Is that clicking and popping? That now? Oh, that at all. Happy spaces. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 All right. Okay. Okay, good to know it's in the back those 2 black speakers. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 And from the white ones too. Okay. Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Oh. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Okay. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.000 Well, let's get organized and everybody take a seat and, move on to the presentations that sit between us and lunch. 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:08.000 And they are 3 scheduled, I believe. And they're good ones. The next speaker is, The Marquis. 00:00:08.000 --> 00:00:17.000 And Joe is somewhere. Put on you, Bugs. Did you see your vice president? 00:00:17.000 --> 00:00:24.000 More than 30 years of experience and consulting. He's co-oper of a book I would recommend, right? 00:00:24.000 --> 00:00:32.000 Mediation Hydraulics and, more than 30 years of experience and consulting, co-author of a book I would recommend, right? 00:00:32.000 --> 00:00:37.000 Mediation hydraulics and consulting, co-author of a book I would recommend, right? 00:00:37.000 --> 00:00:51.000 Mediation Hydraulics I don't know what else to say, you know, but you're today you're gonna talk about what high resolution technologies and methods for mapping P fast concentration mass blocks. 00:00:51.000 --> 00:00:53.000 So take it away, Joe. Thank you. Kent. Thank you all. 00:00:53.000 --> 00:01:04.000 It's a pleasure to be here. But, A while I think I was working on remediation hydraulics back the last time I got to speak to this venue. 00:01:04.000 --> 00:01:17.000 I'd like to start the conversation with the question, why does SW matter? And then we'll talk through some of the high resolution site characterization elements for PFOSRIs. 00:01:17.000 --> 00:01:33.000 4 key elements of our approach. Talk about the special considerations for PFOS. I'll try to illustrate some of these concepts with an example from the Buckley Space Force based PFOS R that we're doing. 00:01:33.000 --> 00:01:40.000 And then lastly, I'll finish with some. Blux Monica. So why does floods matter? 00:01:40.000 --> 00:01:49.000 If, you're really paying attention, you'll know that the contaminant concentrations are really only part of the story. 00:01:49.000 --> 00:01:58.000 Understanding. Whether the contaminant like PFOS is in high permeability media or low permeability media. 00:01:58.000 --> 00:02:09.000 Makes all the difference in the world. If you're concerned about potential for transport and behavior. The mass flux describes the concentration of the contaminant movement. 00:02:09.000 --> 00:02:19.000 Essentially gives us a visual target, if you will. To establish treatment objectives and understand how things are moving. 00:02:19.000 --> 00:02:29.000 In the subsurface so we can develop a better understanding of risk for risk assessment. And we can focus remedies to improve performance and cost efficiency. 00:02:29.000 --> 00:02:39.000 Through the graphic you see on the right is from an ESTCP project we did to validate a mobile lab for and deployed high resolution site characterization. 00:02:39.000 --> 00:02:46.000 This is an example where we're using a shaded relief, a heat map, if you will, to help you see how the PFOS is moving. 00:02:46.000 --> 00:02:52.000 It's a product of the concentration and the permeability. We call it stratographic flux. 00:02:52.000 --> 00:02:56.000 Relative flux is also a good moniker. 00:02:56.000 --> 00:03:01.000 So the difference between mass flux and mass discharge. Last flux is the flow across a unit area. 00:03:01.000 --> 00:03:10.000 It's a density of the mass flow, if you will. 00:03:10.000 --> 00:03:20.000 And mass discharge is the integration of that. The mass per time across that plane. So both of these are instructive. 00:03:20.000 --> 00:03:26.000 And if you have the right data, you can compute both. 00:03:26.000 --> 00:03:35.000 So why does high resolution fight characterization matter? Why should we be taking a flux-based CSM perspective? 00:03:35.000 --> 00:03:43.000 I think, 15 years on, I still hear isn't high resolution. Site characterization expensive. 00:03:43.000 --> 00:03:51.000 So let's think about conventional investigation. Multiple iterations of work plans, field work. 00:03:51.000 --> 00:03:56.000 Memos or reports. And that cycle repeats. Once we develop our conceptual site model, then we develop a remedial strategy with a capital expenditure. 00:03:56.000 --> 00:04:11.000 To build and implement the system. And then we got a wrong firm O and M trajectory. To remediate it. 00:04:11.000 --> 00:04:22.000 So this conventional approach takes a lot of time. And if we're doing the investigation with monitoring wells, probably provides a pretty blurry perspective on how. 00:04:22.000 --> 00:04:26.000 Contaminants move in this subsurface. 00:04:26.000 --> 00:04:26.000 Oh, I use this plan words to make it easier for you all to remember what I'm talking about. 00:04:26.000 --> 00:04:43.000 I say return on investigation instead of return on investment. The principle is the same. What we're trying to do is Optimize life cycle costs and performance. 00:04:43.000 --> 00:04:49.000 Through a high res site characterization real time adaptive approaches. So the difference is we do dynamic work plans. 00:04:49.000 --> 00:05:00.000 We develop our data quality objectives. And especially for compounds like fluoridated solvents where we had mobile apps. 00:05:00.000 --> 00:05:07.000 We could basically do the work continuously without a stop. Now with PFOS, it's a little different. 00:05:07.000 --> 00:05:19.000 But the concept is still the same. And I'll talk about how we can manage that. So the idea is we could do smart characterization approaches and a dynamic work plan with data quality objectives. 00:05:19.000 --> 00:05:32.000 Limit the duration of the overall investigation and ultimately limit the cost. Because we've developed a flux based CSM, we really understand how the contaminants move in the subsurface. 00:05:32.000 --> 00:05:40.000 So we can focus the application of the remedy. And the remedy therefore is going to be more effective and cost efficient. 00:05:40.000 --> 00:05:53.000 The bottom line is the difference between these 2 life cycle. Cost projections is the But I like to say return on investigation. 00:05:53.000 --> 00:06:01.000 So a lot of talk about smart characterization and often people will use smart. To kind of Measurable, achievable, etc. 00:06:01.000 --> 00:06:15.000 But I'm thinking just in terms of what really makes sense. So several years ago we started talking about 4 key factors for doing investigation the best way we can. 00:06:15.000 --> 00:06:25.000 The first is to develop a flux- perspective. The next is to make sure you're using the right tools to characterize your site so you can understand. 00:06:25.000 --> 00:06:37.000 Hi,ro geology, the spectrography and the distribution of contaminants throughout. If you can, real time adaptive characterization can shave years off of your RI. 00:06:37.000 --> 00:06:47.000 Or at least get you to the point maybe where you understand the decisions you need to make to try to pick preemptive action to mitigate offsite migration to address drinking water concerns. 00:06:47.000 --> 00:06:58.000 Faster while you're working out all of the details for a whole loan risk assessment and full blown around. 00:06:58.000 --> 00:07:11.000 And then the last thing. Is the interpretation makes all the difference, right? You need to think in terms of three-dimensional characterization to really understand these complex flow and migration pathways. 00:07:11.000 --> 00:07:21.000 And critically, you need to take. It's geologic perspective. So you'll hear lots of people talk about sequence stratigraphy, and environmental sequence trajectory. 00:07:21.000 --> 00:07:29.000 All of that is important. But the key is you also need to think in terms of transport potential. 00:07:29.000 --> 00:07:40.000 So the framework we use is based on relative flux. Hey, what we wanna do is use a simple example to really bring home the point. 00:07:40.000 --> 00:07:47.000 Okay, consider a site where you might have 3 different primary lithology, a sand, a silk and a clay. 00:07:47.000 --> 00:07:52.000 With 5 orders of magnitude variability and hydraulic productivity. Today we have the same concentration in each unit. 00:07:52.000 --> 00:08:03.000 This we're talking PFOS, maybe this should be parts per trillion instead of parts per 1 billion, but you get the point. 00:08:03.000 --> 00:08:13.000 Now we take the product. These 2 to get at the relative flux. And when you do that, you see there's orders of magnitude contrast. 00:08:13.000 --> 00:08:22.000 Flux or transport potential in these different hydrostatographic units. So if you're really focused on managing offsite migration. 00:08:22.000 --> 00:08:36.000 If you're really concerned about risk to potential drinking water receptors off installation. You really wanna follow the flux and focus on those high conductivity zones, at least there's a first measure. 00:08:36.000 --> 00:08:45.000 Understanding how they all interact is key. We also talk about hydrophases. Interpretation. 00:08:45.000 --> 00:08:54.000 And so this is a way to help you all that are not. Don't understand sequence But really boiling it down to a license. 00:08:54.000 --> 00:09:02.000 We talk about the transport zone. The slow adoption zone. And the storage zone. So transport is where most of the action is. 00:09:02.000 --> 00:09:10.000 The slow infection is where transport rates are indistinguishable from diffusion. And the storage zone is where there's really not any mass flux. 00:09:10.000 --> 00:09:22.000 What's your start to frame up a CSM in that context, it gets much easier to understand what the target is and what strategies we need to deploy perfect effective remedy. 00:09:22.000 --> 00:09:30.000 So that's talk a little bit about high res site characterization for PFOS. And specifically, let's start with data quality objectives. 00:09:30.000 --> 00:09:41.000 So from a concentration perspective for PFOS, we need 2 key things. We need selectivity to accurately measure specific PFOS compound, right? 00:09:41.000 --> 00:09:44.000 There's 8 PFATs with respect screening levels today. Where it is that could double pretty quickly. 00:09:44.000 --> 00:09:56.000 And then we need sensitivity to resolve these specific compounds relative to the USCPA risk-based screening levels. 00:09:56.000 --> 00:10:07.000 So. Pick up PFOS at PEOPLE. We really need single digit nanogram per leader in water if we're gonna try to make a decision about whether it's been or not. 00:10:07.000 --> 00:10:15.000 Right? So the fixed laboratory methods can certainly do that. Screening methods probably can't but we're getting close and I'll talk about it. 00:10:15.000 --> 00:10:24.000 And then the next thing. To really honor the high- characterization this near real time results. So. 00:10:24.000 --> 00:10:31.000 You'll see in a second, right now we're working towards that objective, but I think we're getting close. 00:10:31.000 --> 00:10:36.000 The other end of the spectrum, I think is critically important, often undervalued by engineers. So I'm a geologist engine. 00:10:36.000 --> 00:10:46.000 I'm an engineer, but I'll take a slightly through an engineer and I'm coming on too strong, but the geology really matters. 00:10:46.000 --> 00:10:53.000 We need to use methods that enable. Continuous logging so we can see faces trends. 00:10:53.000 --> 00:10:59.000 Understand the scriptigraphy and how to interpolate between the borehole. But I'll tell you a little bit more about that. 00:10:59.000 --> 00:11:10.000 I know we need consistent and reliable estimates of hydraulic conductivity. K, so that we can now understand where the action is and where it's not. 00:11:10.000 --> 00:11:16.000 So the current state of PFOS analytical, we had a great summary. 00:11:16.000 --> 00:11:24.000 The methods API is working through. But as you notice, there's really no screening methods. There was some discussion. 00:11:24.000 --> 00:11:33.000 Of, the ALF method, but you could see that's probably not ready to go into the field and gonna give us real time results. 00:11:33.000 --> 00:11:39.000 So unlike fluoridated solvents where we could use the membrane interface pro, we don't have those technologies. 00:11:39.000 --> 00:11:42.000 We developed a mobile app, but there just wasn't enough. Hey, the methods were too complicated. 00:11:42.000 --> 00:11:51.000 So they backed out. So now, at least in my world, I'm working mostly for the DUD. 00:11:51.000 --> 00:12:01.000 They're leading the way I think and evaluating PFOS at their installation. They're focused primarily on that is 1633. 00:12:01.000 --> 00:12:11.000 They need really good data. And so method 1633 is compliant with QSM 5.4. 00:12:11.000 --> 00:12:19.000 The only problem is it's really slow. There's surging demand. The significant delays. 00:12:19.000 --> 00:12:24.000 In many cases, last year we saw Laboratory Analytical paid 16 weeks and it was almost 6 months before we could have validated data. 00:12:24.000 --> 00:12:36.000 So we were miles away from real-time adaptive characterization, right? Our costs are pretty high, but they're coming down. 00:12:36.000 --> 00:12:44.000 The key really is to think about workflow planning. And high resolution sampling methods, right? So. 00:12:44.000 --> 00:13:06.000 We can't use what can we do? So we can use vertical aquifer profiling so that we can understand groundwater concentrations relative to we could do hand augers and do lots of sufficient soil sampling to understand the footprint of the distribution before we worry about the vertical distribution of soil impact. 00:13:06.000 --> 00:13:17.000 For example. Or even use passive flux meters where we can. Get reasonable data regarding PFOS concentrations and groundwater in monitoring wealth. 00:13:17.000 --> 00:13:23.000 And then we can use the illusion of those tracers to understand groundwater velocities and ultimately. 00:13:23.000 --> 00:13:38.000 Pretty good measure of catamina flux. The key though, I think in the next several years is going to be implementing screening methods with rapid turnaround to strike the balance between the quantitative, 1,633 and. 00:13:38.000 --> 00:13:49.000 Our desire to have rapid New real time characterization. So currently there's 2 categories of methods out there. 00:13:49.000 --> 00:13:58.000 The first one. Are the non-targeted methods like the total petroleum hydrocarbon is to be text, right? 00:13:58.000 --> 00:14:01.000 The gross contaminant indicator. So these non-targeted methods like AOL and we had a great description of that today. 00:14:01.000 --> 00:14:14.000 Our evolving. But from a site characterization perspective. They're not ready to go real-time or rapid or in the field, right? 00:14:14.000 --> 00:14:20.000 The channel flooring results are pretty high in terms of reporting limits. Not feel deployable today. 00:14:20.000 --> 00:14:27.000 They're relatively slow and expensive for what you get. So they don't work for high reside characterization yet. 00:14:27.000 --> 00:14:34.000 Maybe down the road that'll be some as an we're pretty heavily invested in method. 00:14:34.000 --> 00:14:41.000 Hey, STME 8 4 2 one. The 83 27 is another method that I think is also a suitable. 00:14:41.000 --> 00:14:43.000 Creating. I hear that they're kind of coming together in the long run. So that's why we were. 00:14:43.000 --> 00:14:55.000 We were thinking about this 1. 83, 27 could be an alternative. You could do up to 40 compound. 00:14:55.000 --> 00:15:01.000 It's an easier method. It's a direct aqueous injection. So you could do rapid turnaround. 00:15:01.000 --> 00:15:08.000 You can do turn around commercially in 3 to 5 days. In fact, we've got circumstances where we can get it. 00:15:08.000 --> 00:15:16.000 Ship it to the lab that takes a day. They give us the result the next day. So, 48 h is possible if you really need. 00:15:16.000 --> 00:15:29.000 The costs are 2 50 a sample right now coming down. And the good thing is they can meet a lot of the DQO requirements that we're thinking about with our So it's not real time, but it's much better. 00:15:29.000 --> 00:15:36.000 And, it gets us pretty close to the target. With that approach. 00:15:36.000 --> 00:15:46.000 So just a little bit more on 84 21. There are some testing underway to really understand how good the method is and what its limitations are. 00:15:46.000 --> 00:15:52.000 Rigorous multi lab validation study with the different 11 media you could see on the right But they are he has said it's okay to use screening methods. 00:15:52.000 --> 00:16:09.000 You just gotta work through the process and get approval. I'm presently involved in doing a demonstration of method applicability for the Army National Guard and we think it's going to be applicable to all of the DOD. 00:16:09.000 --> 00:16:21.000 So that should be done in the next, 3 to 4 months. And our goal is to do a really rigorous evaluation and comparison of 84 21 compared to 1633. 00:16:21.000 --> 00:16:30.000 Our goal isn't to say this is a definitive method, but rather it's a reliable screening method where we can make the right decision. 00:16:30.000 --> 00:16:44.000 85, 90% of the time. With respect to, is it hot or not? And. Get down close enough to those RSL so we could make reasonable decisions about whether we delineated it, whether we need to step out. 00:16:44.000 --> 00:16:52.000 There are commercial labs that are capable and we're working to get more engaged to make this more viable. 00:16:52.000 --> 00:17:02.000 So if you're gonna do screening, there's definitely some things to think about. You need to define your Think about the regulatory requirements. 00:17:02.000 --> 00:17:10.000 Inter and data versus final data. So we often say screening data versus definitive data. That's what we're really talking about. 00:17:10.000 --> 00:17:21.000 Characterize the land of the land use method 1633. For the final numbers to establish risk assessment and delineation, all those key decisions, right? 00:17:21.000 --> 00:17:28.000 Got to think about your pace of work. If you've already planned it out over 5 years, you probably don't need a screening method. 00:17:28.000 --> 00:17:37.000 You could probably workflow method 1633. You need to get it done faster. The screening method could certainly help you do that. 00:17:37.000 --> 00:17:46.000 You need to think about these comparison studies. We've done some good stuff when we were evaluating and validating, PFOS mobile app. 00:17:46.000 --> 00:17:53.000 In simple terms, you can boil it down to a regression analysis. To see how reliable your estimate of the concentration is. 00:17:53.000 --> 00:18:05.000 And then the other one is, are you gonna make the right decision? How phone are you to make false positive or false negative decisions around the RSL for example. 00:18:05.000 --> 00:18:10.000 So once you do that, then you can establish a framework to use screening methods reliably. A lot of folks make a hard distinction between screening and definitive. 00:18:10.000 --> 00:18:24.000 So screening gets to the lay of the land and all risk-based decisions are based on nothing. 1633 or definitive analysis. 00:18:24.000 --> 00:18:31.000 We think if you do it right, you can ultimately combine the 2 and even get more value out of it. 00:18:31.000 --> 00:18:38.000 But I think the jury's still out. We've got some work to do with with the 84 21 to get there. 00:18:38.000 --> 00:18:48.000 Then the last thing is you got to think about how you're gonna do work. So if you're doing it after characterization, you need an efficient way to communicate with the stakeholders, share information. 00:18:48.000 --> 00:18:55.000 And then march through successive phases of work. So we use a digital CSM that we can share with the stakeholders. 00:18:55.000 --> 00:19:04.000 They can see the data that can test our hypotheses. And they can also walk through the different supporting information just like we can. 00:19:04.000 --> 00:19:10.000 So that when we sit down and say, here's the results, here's what we're going on to do next. 00:19:10.000 --> 00:19:14.000 Easy to establish a consensus. 00:19:14.000 --> 00:19:24.000 Going back to geology. As we all know, lockwickers are complex and depositional environments create heterogeneous systems. 00:19:24.000 --> 00:19:34.000 They're highly variable both vertically and horizontally. They are the features and these systems are directionally dependent. 00:19:34.000 --> 00:19:39.000 Hermi ability will vary. Sometimes the orders are bad that you've been very short distances. 00:19:39.000 --> 00:19:48.000 So it's not only important to understand the But then to start to understand how this comes together in the three-dimensional puzzle. 00:19:48.000 --> 00:20:00.000 To control ground water flow and contaminate transport. Characterizing the opera for variability. Is really essential, but Blockspace CSM. 00:20:00.000 --> 00:20:10.000 So you probably never would have thought that something as simple as soil boring logs matters. But depending on the drilling method and what you're doing, right? 00:20:10.000 --> 00:20:10.000 If you can use a geoprobe and use direct push injection logging, you can get continuous samples. 00:20:10.000 --> 00:20:20.000 But if you're drilling several 100 feet to water and you're doing samples the old-fashioned way. 00:20:20.000 --> 00:20:34.000 You really do need to think about the geology and characterize it. So we focus a lot on Classic geology terms like the Brain Site evaluation. 00:20:34.000 --> 00:20:45.000 We think about principal grain size and sorting. And through these methods, we can understand faces. So if you've got spectators on your team. 00:20:45.000 --> 00:20:52.000 They're not. They understand exactly what I'm saying. If you don't. That's okay because I'm gonna give you an out. 00:20:52.000 --> 00:20:54.000 We could take the grain size distribution and we can estimate hydraulic conductivity and get a pretty good number. 00:20:54.000 --> 00:21:06.000 We're not talking decimals like 3 points. 7 5 8 cm per second decimals like 3.7 5 8 cm per second hydraulic conductivity. 00:21:06.000 --> 00:21:13.000 But I think we are talking about being able to reliably and accurately break these down on the half order of magnitude. 00:21:13.000 --> 00:21:23.000 Which is just what we need if we're trying to separate transport zones from slow infection zones from storage phones. 00:21:23.000 --> 00:21:30.000 At the bottom there is a reference. There's a method out there that you can use for estimating hydraulic conductivity based on sieve analysis. 00:21:30.000 --> 00:21:35.000 So it is something we've used and we've actually automated it. 00:21:35.000 --> 00:21:43.000 So for shallow sites, direct push injection logging. Or hydraulic profiling can be a great duel. 00:21:43.000 --> 00:21:50.000 It's not perfect. It has a sweet spot. But the really important thing is it gives you continuous logging. 00:21:50.000 --> 00:21:57.000 So it if you're a bedrock geologist and you're used to doing Dad, Ball, Giophysics. 00:21:57.000 --> 00:22:05.000 You can see that continuous log and understand the variability. The variability is what helps you to understand how to interpolate between. 00:22:05.000 --> 00:22:18.000 . So these methods are called petrameter testing Not sure if APS is still around. All provide that same sort of continuous relative permeability estimate that you can use. 00:22:18.000 --> 00:22:33.000 You can also combine these methods with other drilling methods to extend the depths. But at the end of the day, if you're talking about bedrock, you really need to rely on work plastic geology and old school permeability estimate. 00:22:33.000 --> 00:22:39.000 So you wrap it all up with sequence Right? And here's the out I'm giving you. 00:22:39.000 --> 00:22:49.000 If you're not a geologist, look at the color shading. If you're a geologist and you really like sequence trajectory, then you can look at these. 00:22:49.000 --> 00:22:58.000 Strategy locks and you can see what the depositional environment is. You know this is a point bar in the Meandering River. 00:22:58.000 --> 00:23:12.000 Getting thicker as you move from the left to right. The permeability is increasing. But if you're not that, you can break it down based on relative permeability and see on the left log the high permeability is that fixed zone. 00:23:12.000 --> 00:23:15.000 And when we use the stratographic logging technique. Where drawing out the relative permeability so your eye can see it too. 00:23:15.000 --> 00:23:30.000 So even if you don't understand by cross-hashes and different symbols you can see that this is where all the action is in the transport zone. 00:23:30.000 --> 00:23:39.000 If you're a certificate for it also enables you to interpolate between the borehole and that is really another key element. 00:23:39.000 --> 00:23:46.000 So in practice, how do we do this? We like to do mass swatch transact. So this is the Buckley Face Force base. 00:23:46.000 --> 00:23:58.000 And, you can see there's a number of, light purple lines. Those are transects where we've done vertical aquifer profile groundwater sampling. 00:23:58.000 --> 00:24:05.000 So around the area between Transact A and B, we've got a radio flow pattern that goes up to H. 00:24:05.000 --> 00:24:18.000 And, after the lower left side of the graphic. But the predominant groundwater flow pattern bore the majority of the mass here goes from A to B through G and C and D and E and F. 00:24:18.000 --> 00:24:27.000 And F is a transact that is at the end of the installation boundary, right? So we do these transsects so we can resolve. 00:24:27.000 --> 00:24:38.000 Very ability and Concentration distribution, make stratigraphy interpretation. But we also plan them so we can refine the resolution to zoom in on hotspots. 00:24:38.000 --> 00:24:55.000 Or step out to achieve delineation. Why do we do transex? So the applied, if we apply and down grading of sources and that installation boundaries, there's a number of decisions we can make and interpretations we can make. 00:24:55.000 --> 00:25:00.000 So as we're doing an investigation between transacts, those spatial trends can tell us how far we need to step out. 00:25:00.000 --> 00:25:17.000 To achieve risk-based screening levels, right? It's not a perfect method, but it sure is beneficial if you have no idea how far your phone is gonna go and you're running after single digit parts per trillion and grad water. 00:25:17.000 --> 00:25:27.000 We can use mass discharge or mass flux. To provide a relative measure of source strength at each of the sources so we can rank and prioritize. 00:25:27.000 --> 00:25:34.000 Which of these sources matter most? To the plume that's developed and to the potential offsite migration that's happening. 00:25:34.000 --> 00:25:48.000 And then we can use that to establish targets for those measures. So this graphic is. Relatively simple, but it's meant to illustrate the steps that we use in completing this analysis. 00:25:48.000 --> 00:25:54.000 So in the upper left on the geology cross-section. We're using the Lithology. 00:25:54.000 --> 00:26:00.000 Chart and the lower lap. We're looking at the mythology and thinking about striatography. 00:26:00.000 --> 00:26:15.000 And developing our interpretation boardholder. As we move to the right where we have the hydraulic productivity and sample collection, now we're making that hydrophases interpretation based on hydraulic conductivity. 00:26:15.000 --> 00:26:19.000 So we're using a grayscale, the brighter. Grace, are the higher permebilities. 00:26:19.000 --> 00:26:31.000 The darker are the lowest permeability. And superimposed on that we've got PFOS concentration measured vertical aquifer profile or wells. 00:26:31.000 --> 00:26:41.000 And then we take the product of that hydraulic conductivity. And the sample concentration and ultimately get at this relative flux estimate. 00:26:41.000 --> 00:26:51.000 So now we have a heat map. Using that relative flex feedback, we can distinguish. Where the majority of the masses moving. 00:26:51.000 --> 00:26:56.000 And define a much more effective target. If our goal is to establish say a pump and treat boundary to stop that offside migration. 00:26:56.000 --> 00:27:04.000 You can see where the hotspots are and you can start to plan better. 00:27:04.000 --> 00:27:14.000 So this is what it looks like in a kind of a quasi 3D rendering. So you can see there's some migration off to the top of the page by the words Buckley. 00:27:14.000 --> 00:27:18.000 But the magnitude of the flux is a lot lower. You can see migration following these surface water features. 00:27:18.000 --> 00:27:31.000 There's preferential flow, higher permeability associated with the hydrophases. Coincident with those, surface water features. 00:27:31.000 --> 00:27:41.000 And then at the edge. Transact app now you can see if you wanted to establish a barrier by concrete or by injectable colloidal carbon. 00:27:41.000 --> 00:27:50.000 You've got it pretty much mapped out. You could refine it as needed. But it's getting you a lot closer to where you need to be. 00:27:50.000 --> 00:28:01.000 I'm gonna talk briefly on source evaluation. Understanding source strength is really the key to understand whether PFOS and a soil poses a risk to ground. 00:28:01.000 --> 00:28:11.000 There's several different methods that you might use. Really simple and effective one is looking at the ratio of the soil concentrations to the ground water concentration. 00:28:11.000 --> 00:28:19.000 It's ideal if you have a But you can start to do averaging just to get a sense of where you're at. 00:28:19.000 --> 00:28:27.000 The SPLP is the go-to, right? USEPA dilution attenuation factor has relied on SPLP. 00:28:27.000 --> 00:28:33.000 That's certainly a reasonable approach. Might be conservative because it's pretty destructive. At P. 00:28:33.000 --> 00:28:42.000 Soyo interactions are more complicated than just hydrophobic interactions. Partitioning at the air water interface. 00:28:42.000 --> 00:28:48.000 So SPLP is probably conservative. Still, it's a repeatable measurement that one can make. 00:28:48.000 --> 00:28:57.000 Then the other end of the spectrum is like symmetry and poor water sampling. So the idea is you could get a sample that's in equilibrium with those contaminated soils. 00:28:57.000 --> 00:29:00.000 See what the actual institute leeching is. Lot of data coming together to better understand how we can use that. 00:29:00.000 --> 00:29:11.000 So stay tuned. I think you'll see much more information. At the end of the day though, you wanna combine these results. 00:29:11.000 --> 00:29:20.000 To understand. What the relationship is between your site soils, your site source. And the potential to create a ground water flow. 00:29:20.000 --> 00:29:34.000 Right. So. The human health based standards for PFOS are many, many orders of magnitude higher than the soil, the groundwater protection standards, screening levels, right? 00:29:34.000 --> 00:29:44.000 So. I think we need to start to dig into this more carefully because Some of the data talk today about background concentrations and precipitation being in the hands, even hundreds of nanograms per leader. 00:29:44.000 --> 00:29:58.000 But figuring out where the background is gonna matter figuring out which part of the source really matters is the discussion and the decision for the day, I'd say. 00:29:58.000 --> 00:30:09.000 So now that switch to the final part of it, which is the flux monitoring. So I can't emphasize enough if you can't do high reside characterization everywhere. 00:30:09.000 --> 00:30:16.000 Today it really does make sense to at least do a metric property boundaries. If you've got receptors at risk. 00:30:16.000 --> 00:30:23.000 Figure out where the migration pathways are and collect the data you need. So that the image you're looking at is Ielson Air Force Base. 00:30:23.000 --> 00:30:36.000 We're doing a PFOSRI there. And this transact is 2 miles long. Probably have 300 vertical aqua for profile samples going down as deep as 200 feet. 00:30:36.000 --> 00:30:44.000 I'll show you that in a second. But, With this image, even just showing the worst case concentration, you can see. 00:30:44.000 --> 00:30:52.000 Based on the heat map, where most of the action is, where the orange and red are, that's where the majority of the, mass is moving. 00:30:52.000 --> 00:31:00.000 Now we can zoom in and figure out. What the potential for offside migration is we could take measures to cut off the majority of that mass flux and that's discharge using this the approach. 00:31:00.000 --> 00:31:13.000 And this is ultimately one of the things we're pushing. When people are thinking about, to use this approach. 00:31:13.000 --> 00:31:17.000 Don't expect you to be able to read the numbers. Hopefully you can see the color dots, right? 00:31:17.000 --> 00:31:24.000 And I've shaded the highest concentration area. So this is 2 miles long, 10,000 plus 50, right? 00:31:24.000 --> 00:31:30.000 Huge vertical exaggeration. Samples are nominally every 20 feet apart going into That's with the aqua part. 00:31:30.000 --> 00:31:39.000 So you can see there's, an area. No, nominally about 2,500 feet wide. 00:31:39.000 --> 00:31:47.000 Where we've got the highest concentrations. And the ground water. So the area that we boxed. 00:31:47.000 --> 00:31:59.000 We're actually going to do an evaluation. With injected. Hello. Test whether that technology is going to be able to reduce SMS discharge. 00:31:59.000 --> 00:32:11.000 To offsite. So we're gonna zoom in in a 500 foot segment. We're going from nominally one to 2 boring with samples every 20 feet. 00:32:11.000 --> 00:32:20.000 So now we're gonna have 8 clusters, triplets. We're gonna do continuous passive flux meters in those 50 foot screens. 00:32:20.000 --> 00:32:27.000 So the screens are set up to a depth of a hundred 60 feet. They were also going to compare these results. 00:32:27.000 --> 00:32:46.000 The slug tasks that you might get from the well and samples that you might get through the well. What's probably even more important though is the comparison we could make it to the high reset that we did that was 2 miles wide and see how representative that really is, right? 00:32:46.000 --> 00:32:57.000 So with that, I think I can take questions. 00:32:57.000 --> 00:33:03.000 Alright, without sounding too confident, I think we've resolved the audio issues here in the room. 00:33:03.000 --> 00:33:12.000 For those of you in the room, if you can't hear, I do apologize. If you're in the back, there are seats closer up front that might be the easiest solution we have for getting better volume. 00:33:12.000 --> 00:33:15.000 But if you have a question in the room, you can raise your hand. Be happy to bring a mic. 00:33:15.000 --> 00:33:22.000 And for those of you around the table, those microphones are working correctly. 00:33:22.000 --> 00:33:29.000 So working. Thanks, Joe. On the mass flux front. Yeah, really. 00:33:29.000 --> 00:33:35.000 We paid for the first past the flux meter deployment at a mic addable shop at it. 00:33:35.000 --> 00:33:42.000 If. It's on. Is it any better? Oh, okay. 00:33:42.000 --> 00:33:52.000 Anyway. You know, when Mike Animal developed the first past 6 months meter, we paid for the deployment at a Marine Corps base and it, we paid for the deployment at a Marine Corps base in the southeast. 00:33:52.000 --> 00:33:58.000 And then now the issue was cost we were working with at a landfill. Camp waste management. 00:33:58.000 --> 00:34:02.000 The only all the 30 or so. Lentels in their portfolio. They only had one. 00:34:02.000 --> 00:34:19.000 They thought they were gonna have to remediate. And they wanted to do a mass rocks. Performance and compliance analysis they had a 400 foot transact at the boundary of their property and they wanted to put in 2 fox meters. 00:34:19.000 --> 00:34:24.000 I'm sorry, that just wasn't enough. So my point is, I'm still not getting even. I'm still getting it very well. 00:34:24.000 --> 00:34:43.000 Yeah. No, anyway, how about now? Anyway, the point is nobody wants to put in as many blocks meters as is usually needed to really make a massive, a mass flux determination and the transsects that you showed both for Reece, I guess, and then the one at I. 00:34:43.000 --> 00:34:49.000 Hundreds of points. The point is, and your non Dod clients, are people willing to infect? 00:34:49.000 --> 00:34:58.000 You just a 2 plug question. Are they are your clients in the, especially in the private sector willing to install the necessary number? 00:34:58.000 --> 00:35:06.000 Of passive flux meters, for example, to be able to make an adequate determination of mass flux and mass discharge. 00:35:06.000 --> 00:35:17.000 So I apologize. You translate for a weekend. 00:35:17.000 --> 00:35:25.000 Bye. In saying is that. Because of a high cost large number of points. 00:35:25.000 --> 00:35:30.000 You may be able to get that kind of money out of the Department of Defense. Are you seeing it elsewhere? 00:35:30.000 --> 00:35:40.000 In other. Industries, other private clients, whatever. Alright, thanks. Sorry, I couldn't hear you, Jen. 00:35:40.000 --> 00:35:49.000 You know, I would say you say. The Department of Defense is far ahead of our commercial clients when it comes to be fast characterization. 00:35:49.000 --> 00:35:55.000 Most of the significant work we're doing in the commercial space I'd say is driven by litigation. 00:35:55.000 --> 00:36:05.000 And, then they followed the 2 categories. Some are. Doing the conventional circle approach. Hello, multiple faces. 00:36:05.000 --> 00:36:13.000 Others are very interested in getting the high-rise site characterization because they want to get to the answers as soon as they can. 00:36:13.000 --> 00:36:23.000 So it's still a mixed bag, but you know the technology is still not. What everybody is used to when it comes to things like Florida and solvents, for example. 00:36:23.000 --> 00:36:31.000 So I think over the course of the next year as the screening methods come into play. I think we will see a lot more people. 00:36:31.000 --> 00:36:39.000 Adopting the approach. Even though even the folks that we've been working with who are willing to try mass flux. 00:36:39.000 --> 00:36:49.000 One of their problems is they say the client has no idea what to do with the data. And the 3D visualization packages that are out there as a general matter. 00:36:49.000 --> 00:37:04.000 Don't have the modules to allow mass flux to be incorporated into their depictions. So what do you guys doing to Especially the latter problem is if you're trying to These mass trucks determinations. 00:37:04.000 --> 00:37:09.000 And decision making. Are you working? Are you developing your own modifications? The 3D packages? 00:37:09.000 --> 00:37:23.000 Are you working with EVS or leapfrog? What, are you doing or needs to be done to incorporate mass flux into the 3D packages? 00:37:23.000 --> 00:37:30.000 You hear that one. I can hear myself. 00:37:30.000 --> 00:37:44.000 Come on back here. I got all of that either, but, I think what you're asking is because many in the public don't maybe have a tool that Joe does or his people have. 00:37:44.000 --> 00:38:10.000 What, what, what, what can be done? What are we doing? What is somebody doing to try and, the general public, I guess, using, Digital CSM, 00:38:10.000 --> 00:38:19.000 . We. 00:38:19.000 --> 00:38:36.000 Okay. Oh, We are working in Okay. 00:38:36.000 --> 00:38:55.000 Okay, Hey, I mean, You know, Alright, so what I think I'm hearing again, Joe didn't catch this, but, I think I might have. 00:38:55.000 --> 00:39:11.000 You're asking, Given that the available 3D packages. Are kind of weak in their ability to incorporate mass blocks data. 00:39:11.000 --> 00:39:21.000 What are we doing to and work with the developers of those. Packages to improve that. Is that right? 00:39:21.000 --> 00:39:27.000 Okay, so thanks for the translation there, Ken. I think my hearing aid batteries just went out on me. 00:39:27.000 --> 00:39:35.000 Yeah, first, you know, I think it's a never ending battle. Talking about irres because the perception is it's high cost. 00:39:35.000 --> 00:39:50.000 Bye. And that's why I always lead with my return on investigation concept because Some aspects of high reside characterization are more expensive, but we can reduce the time frame. 00:39:50.000 --> 00:39:59.000 For example, with the Buckley P. Just with sequencing our work, I think we got the phase one RI done in 2 years, 2 field seasons. 00:39:59.000 --> 00:40:07.000 And that's much faster than a lot of the other ones are. If we start to apply real time characterization. 00:40:07.000 --> 00:40:16.000 Now we're in a situation where you could do things. Quite fast. The key question you asked him about. 00:40:16.000 --> 00:40:36.000 Fusing 3 dimensional interpretation and concentration to get at. Relative flux is really an important one. But I think There's an angle that we can approach it to make it more manageable and more effectively utilized, right? 00:40:36.000 --> 00:40:48.000 So we're probably never gonna be able to do high reside characterization to the point where we can truly characterize every aspect of a sight and Bye. 00:40:48.000 --> 00:40:55.000 That's super expensive. So we've advocated. Since we wrote remediation hydraulics 15 years ago. 00:40:55.000 --> 00:41:10.000 Is let's zoom in and classify the behavior and understand the critical importance of stratigraphy and mass transfer among the addiction slow reduction and storage zones. 00:41:10.000 --> 00:41:17.000 To develop a conceptual model. But then we can extend. To pseudo creating. Because I don't think we'll ever be able to truly do 3 dimensional characterization at these sites. 00:41:17.000 --> 00:41:28.000 But we can get the data where it matters most. And so a good starting point. I think is. 00:41:28.000 --> 00:41:40.000 You do it at the property boundaries to understand your strategy to protect receptors. If you do it at sources, so we have a good idea of what's the mass flux or mass discharge is at every source. 00:41:40.000 --> 00:41:49.000 So now we can rank and prioritize. To be more cost effective, make quicker decisions. I think that's a good first step. 00:41:49.000 --> 00:41:56.000 As we catch up on screening methods. I think there'll be opportunities to fuse this in threed. 00:41:56.000 --> 00:42:08.000 Certainly the power of computers is much different than it used to be and I think we'll get there, but I think the age-old problem is Just because we can, it doesn't mean we will. 00:42:08.000 --> 00:42:18.000 And I think we gotta balance our expectations. Hopefully that answers the question. I appreciate your patience with me not being able to hear the question. 00:42:18.000 --> 00:42:28.000 Good one all day, but let's move on. Thank you, Joe.