AEG News March 2015 Vol. 58, No. 1

s w Ne

Vol. 58, No. 1 – March 2015

A Focus on

Geology & the Environment

s w Ne

Vol. 58, No. 1 – March 2015

AEG News (ISSN 0899-5788; USPS 954-380) is published six times a year by the Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists (AEG), with the quarterly issues Nos. 1–4, published in March, June, September and December, respectively. The Annual Report and Directory issue is published in January. The Annual Meeting Program with Abstracts issue is published in September. Print copies are distributed at the meeting. Subscriptions for Association members, which includes all six issues of the AEG News, are included in annual membership dues. Nonmember annual subscription is $40.00, and includes only the four regular issues (#1–4) of the News. The Annual Report and Directory issue and the Annual Meeting Program with Abstracts issue are priced separately. Back issues of the AEG News are $10 each. Inquiries should be sent to AEG Headquarters: Rhonda Weidman, Association Manager, 1100 Brandywine Blvd. Suite H, Zanesville, Ohio 43701 303-757-2926.

Periodical Postage paid at Zanesville, OH, and additional mailing offices: POSTMASTER: Send address changes to AEG News, 1100 Brandywine Blvd. Suite H Zanesville, Ohio 43701, USA. AEG News is printed by The Ovid Bell Press, Fulton, MO 65251, USA. © 2014 Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists—All Rights Reserved Views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those officially representing the Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists except where expressly stated.

AEG News Editor Anna Saindon Geotechnology, Inc. 11816 Lackland Road, Suite 150 St. Louis, MO 63146 314-581-6286 news@aegweb.org

Managing Editor/Production Andrea Leigh Ptak Communicating Words & Images 6542 52nd Ave. So. Seattle, WA 98118 Office: 206-725-9169 Cell: 206-300-2067 andrealeighptak@me.com

Table of Contents News of the Association 2 The President’s Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 The Treasurer’s Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Constitutional Vote and Governance Restructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Committee Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 News of the Profession 9 2015 EERI Annual Meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 California Enacts Groundwater Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Engineers without Borders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Coal Ash Regulation Final Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Tunneling News: An Update on Bertha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Environmental Safety and Construction in Karst Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Environmental Minute News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Professional Contributions 14 The Emergence of LNAPL Transmissivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Challenges and Advances in the Understanding of Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 Field Trips 23 Irrawaddy River, Myanmar (Burma) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 Issues in Professional Licensure

27

Perspectives

30

The HomeFront

34

Index to Advertisers

29

Submission Information On the Cover

In order of preference: 1. Send files via email, preferably as attachments, to both email addresses above. Optimum file format is MSWord 2004. Users of other software programs should convert their file to ASCII or text only.

Environmental issues are varied and take both geology and engineering knowledge to successfully mitigate the issues.

2. Images should be sent as high-resolution jpeg or tiff files. Questions? Contact Andrea Ptak at 206-725-9169/andrealeighptak@me.com.

The association

3. The policy of AEG News editorial staff is to limit the credentials of an individual to two. For example, if John Smith has a MS, a PhD and a PG plus a CEG and a CGWP, his credentials would be limited to John Smith PhD, PG, the two principal credentials. BS/BA and MS degrees will not be recognized. No effort will be made by the AEG News editorial staff to determine if individuals whose credentials are missing from the submitted copy actually have academic or professional credentials, nor will the staff verify the existence or correctness of the credentials submitted.

For detailed guidelines visit: www.aegweb.org/publications/aeg-news/submit-to-aeg-news

President: KENNETH C. FERGASON AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc., 602-329-9714, fergasonaeg@gmail.com Vice President/President Elect: PAUL M. SANTI Colorado School of Mines, 303-273-3108, psanti@mines.edu Treasurer: DALE C. ANDREWS Carmeuse Lime & Stone, 412-777-0728, dale.andrews@carmeusena.com Secretary: KATHY G. TROOST University of Washington, 206-909-9757, ktroostaeg@gmail.com Past President: GARY C. LUCE Resource Concepts Inc., 775-690-0537, lucegc@charter.net

Association Contacts

Advertising in the News

Headquarters—Association Manager: 1100 Brandywine Blvd. Suite H Zanesville, Ohio 43701 Phone: 303-757-2926, Fax: 740-452-2552 contact@aegweb.org

Contact AEG Headquarters at advertising@aegweb.org.

Next Submission Deadline April 30, 2015, for the June Issue

AEG Foundation—President: DAVE FENSTER, dffenste@bechtel.com

Canada Agreement number: PM40063731; Return Undeliverable Canadian Addresses to: Station A, PO Box 54; Windsor, ON N9A 6J5; Email: returnsil@imex.pb.com

March 2015

Officers

Communications Directors: MATT BRUNENGO, 503-534-0414, mbrunengo@aol.com and KAMI DEPUTY, kdeputy@kleinfelder.com, 425-463-5903

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

1

NEWS OF THE ASSOCIATION – THE PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

Maintaining Pace Ken Fergason, AEG 2014 –15 President ’ve had a busy first half of my presidency so far. As strategic one (see related article in this issue). Over the coming part of this effort I’ve had the opportunity to visit with 10 year you will be seeing lots of communication and requests for Sections, the IAEG Congress in Torino, Italy last Sepcomments regarding the future shape of the AEG governance tember, and GSA in Vancouver, British Columbia last October. structure. And there are plenty of opportuniIt’s been great to travel to catch up with new and old friends, ties for you to be involved, so contact me connect with AEG members, and hear what’s going at the local if you are interested. level with AEG. Many AEG Sections are doing some very Additionally, as discussed in the exciting things.

Treasurer’s Report, 2015 still has chalAs I write this article I am also looking forward to visiting lenges for AEG’s finances. I am the Washington Section and attending the AEG Professional focusing on one particular aspect of Forum on Landslides: Time to Face the Landslide Hazard the finances: membership. If we exceed Dilemma: Bridging Science, Policy, Public Safety, and Potential budgeted membership revenues, we are Loss. This meeting occurred at the end of February and feabetter financially and the Association is tured a spectacular slate of speakers both within the geohazard stronger a whole. I urge you to think of ways to help retain and world and stakeholders that we all hope to connect with, as grow membership at the local level—after all, most members well as a field trip to the Oso Landslide site. see the biggest benefits locally. As leaders, we have to plan for I’m still in the process of recovering from my first month as the worst, however, every new member who signs up makes President of AEG, which has been fast and furious and a very things better. If we can meet the challenge, this conversation exciting time. It really began the week prior to 57th Annual become how best to manage a surplus. That’s the problem I’m Meeting in Scottsdale when I was in Italy at the IAEG Congress working toward. in Torino. AEG was awarded the 2018 IAEG Congress in San Finally, I am actively pursuing utilization of social media Francisco, AEG Past President Scott Burns became the first as AEG President. So, please follow me on Twitter U.S. President of IAEG, AEG Past President Jeff Keaton (https://twitter.com/AEGFergason) and at my blog stepped into the role of Vice President for North America, and (http://www.aegarizona.blogspot.com/). It is a tremendous AEG Past President Eldon Gath will represent the U.S. honor for me to become the 58th President of AEG and to Immediately following the Italy trip was the 57th Annual join the prestigious lineage of those who have served before Meeting in Scottsdale. This was a wonderful meeting that was me. Please join me on my adventure and I hope to see you highlighted by a tremendous technical program and excellent all at this year’s Annual Meeting in Pittsburgh, PA. field trips. It was a lot of fun to catch up with old friends, make new friends, and become a better applied geologist along the way.

As many of you heard from me in speeches and discussions I had at the Annual Meeting, my biggest focus as President is on membership. In recent years the trend in our full-paying membership has been downward (though last year’s numbers indicate we may be leveling off). With the looming retirement of the baby boomer generation, we will face continued attrition of our membership.

However, those retirees will leave a huge demand for new applied geologists to step into the profession. This provides AEG with a big opportunity. I challenge each of you to reach out and help explain the benefits of membership as we encourage others to join.

In parallel with the membership push, I am striving to help make the AEG Board AEG President Ken Fergason presenting at Georgia State as part of his visit to the Association’s Southeastern of Directors a more involved and Section.

2

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

NEWS OF THE ASSOCIATION – THE TREASURER’S REPORT

Overcoming Challenges and Capitalizing on Opportunities

A

Dale C. Andrews, PG, AEG 2014 –15 Treasurer

EG underwent a major change last year that was not anticipated at the onset of 2014. Due to unexpected contractual issues, AEG accepted the resignation of our management company Phoenix AMC (PAMC) in August, 2014, and contracted with Offinger Management Company (OMC). I mention this because this change has impacted our 2014 fourth quarter budget. And, since the 2015 budget was approved in September of 2014, before the financial impacts of these changes were fully understood, it has also impacted our Board of Directors (BOD) approved 2015 budget. As a result, in January I submitted a revised budget, which more accurately accounts for these changes to the BOD for their review, discussion, suggested revisions, and approval by the midyear BOD meeting at the end of April.

Without getting too deep in the weeds, the recent impacts will likely prevent us from reaching our budgeted revenue goals for 2015 and may result in the need for a Treasurer’s Reserve withdrawal later in 2015.

On the plus side, gaining OMC’s breadth of expertise will help AEG generate new revenue and better manage current expenses, and we should begin reaping the benefit of their leadership as we move into 2016. They are very aware that this is the expectation we have of them and they have assured us they are up to the challenge.

So as I describe what has changed, I will confine my bullet points to specific areas of our budget.

Administrative

“

…in January I submitted a revised budget, which more accurately accounts for these changes…

The first proposed budget revision is to our 2015 Administrative revenue. Administrative income predominately shows up as money that is transferred into our Operations account from the Treasurer’s Reserve or Meetings accounts, or commitments that are made by the AEG Foundation. Last summer, it appeared that we could budget taking $20,000 from our Meetings account and add it to our Operations Budget. Unfortunately, after we reconciled the accounts that were previously managed by P-AMC, we found large amounts of A/R (money billed but never collected) that needed to be written off. Also, there were items that were being billed to the Operations accounts that needed to be billed to the Meetings account per policy. After sorting through all the num-

”

March 2015

bers, the end result is that the $20,000 thought to be available for transfer is now significantly less.

Annual Meeting With the recent negative impacts on revenue and our current membership levels, AEG’s expenses are forecasted to exceed its budgeted revenue. AEG is typically able to more than make up for this shortfall by the success of our Annual Meeting. However, the 2014 Annual Meeting netted $2,963, essentially making 2014 a breakeven year.

The end result is that there will be no money made available for our 2015 budget. To break this cycle, the council and the BOD are exploring adding additional continuing education opportunities to spur more interest in membership and as a means of generating more revenue.

Membership Over the last several years, the budget was over estimating the amount of membership income from dues. Recognizing this, the BOD approved a more conservative membership revenue number for 2015 and that number is trending to be ahead of budget, which is very positive news.

Periodicals The company that acted as AEG’s (and many others) distributor of Periodicals filed bankruptcy in 2014. This had a significant impact on periodical sales and I suspect that it will continue to a lesser degree in 2015. This is why I have proposed a reduction to the Periodical revenue.

Sponsors & Website Two significant things are occurring with the website. One, P-AMC was contracted to seek and collect advertising and corporate sponsorships for our website and failed to meet our expectations in 2014. I believe it will take OMC more than a year to recover our lost sponsors. Therefore, I have proposed to reduce the projected revenue number for 2015.

Legislative One option under consideration by the BOD to help bridge our Operations budget is to suspend any transfer of dues revenue to the Legislative fund in 2015. With the suspension, the budget is projecting close to a $15,000 Operations deficit; without a suspension, the deficit is projected to be over $30,000. To cover this loss, a TR fund withdrawal is

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

3

NEWS OF THE ASSOCIATION – THE TREASURER’S REPORT anticipated. The BOD is deciding which takes priority—the Treasurer’s reserve, which is down about $18,000 dollars from where it was five years ago, or the Legislative fund, which has increased over $10,000 per year since its inception in 2012.

Treasurer’s Reserve Fund The TR is AEG’s rainy-day fund. It provides protection to AEG in years when expenses exceed revenue, particularly should the Annual Meeting lose money. After a large withdrawal in 2013, no withdrawals and two deposits were made into the TR in 2014—the first was an Operations account transfer in September for $25,000 and the second deposit was made in December for $2,500 thanks to a donation from a percentage of the surplus made on behalf of the Vapor Intrusion Conference and Carolina Section. The account also grew an additional $15,544 in interest income to close the year up $43,044 for a total of $257,003. Per policy, the BOD will choose the amount of the prior year’s Annual Meeting profits to be deposited into the TR until the fund reaches one year’s operating expenses (approximately $375,000). Based on the essentially breakeven Annual Meeting in 2014, no deposits are anticipated for 2015.

Overall My last comment is that when you take everything into account for 2014 (revenue and expenses from all our accounts). AEG ended the year with a net surplus of $8,467. So even in a challenging year, AEG was able to achieve an overall surplus. 2015 has more challenges, and stands likelyto be an overall deficit year, but the changes and expenditures taking place this year will put AEG on financially stronger path in 2016 and beyond.

In closing, we have recently implementing improved methods for tracking membership and meeting revenue and will use the latest information to help guide our direction at the midyear BOD meeting. I, along with guidance from the Executive Council and Finance Committee, understand fiscal health better than we were able to in the past and are collectively working hard to make the tough decisions about budget cuts, growing our membership, improving member benefits, expanding continuing education opportunities, and better ensuring successful Annual Meetings. If you made it this far, you know that this report is more detailed than our typical financial reports have been in the past. Let us know if this is too much, not enough, or the right amount of information. Any and all objective feedback is always welcome.

Governance Restructure Update Ken Fergason, AEG 2014 –15 President Providing cost-effective Geophysics, Water Resource Management,

Drilling,

Geotechnical,

Environmental,

Construction Observation and Materials Testing services to explore and characterize subsurface and environmental conditions throughout the mid-continent.

QUALITY. INTEGRITY. SAFETY. PARTNERSHIP. OPPORTUNITY. RESPONSIVENESS

AEG News Disclaimer Authors alone are responsible for views expressed in signed articles.

Advertisers and their agencies are solely responsible for the content of all advertisements printed and also assume responsibility for any claims arising therefrom against the publisher. AEG and AEG News reserve the right to reject any advertising copy.

4

In the interest of time and space, I refer to the December 2014 AEG News with the details on the Governance Restructure.

However, I do want to provide an update on the governance restructure efforts that are currently underway.

An ad hoc committee is continuing to explore geographic, demographic, and financial implications of moving to a regional model and members are encouraged to submit their thoughts and concerns. At this time, they are looking into the changes that will need to be made to the Association’s Bylaws.

A second ad hoc committee with representatives from the Board of Directors, Executive Council, and Governance Committee is looking into changes with the Constitution and Articles of Incorporation to bring them up to date with current law and AEG governance. This is ongoing and recommendations will be brought to the Board of Directors at our Mid-Year meeting in April and likely a Constitutional vote by our voting members will occur this summer.

Change can be an uncomfortable process, however, it is in the best interest of AEG’s future success. These changes will make AEG’s governance more strategic and effective and will improve the overall management of the Association. As geologists we understand that what fails to evolve is doomed to extinction, and it is changes like these that will help AEG have a bright future.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

NEWS OF THE ASSOCIATION – COMMITTEE REPORTS

Communications Committee Matt Brunengo and Kami Deputy, Co-Directors

“What we’ve got here is an attempt to communicate – better …”

The Communications Committee oversees AEG’s various communications media, including our technical publications and digital platforms (the latter becoming the dominant forms of dissemination). We are responsible for maintaining their quality, advising the officers and BOD on improvements, and enhancing the exchange of information between the Association and its members, among members, with the wider scientific and technical community, and with the public. Since our last report a year ago, in addition to managing our existing media, the committee has been moving forward on some new projects ensuing from the Needs Assessment surveys, as well as dealing with unforeseen challenges caused by the change in Association administration and headquarters’ geographic location.

Communication was the focus of the Needs Assessment Strategic Area #4 (sounds like a battle zone), and several new projects were assigned to this committee. Nate Saraceno led the effort to develop a social media strategy for AEG, which was accepted in outline at the board meeting in Scottsdale. Further plans and recommendations will be considered at the mid-year meeting in May. In order to build a catalogue of AEG field trip guidebooks that could be made broadly available, we are conducting an inventory of past guides. These guides from Sections, Chapters and Annual Meetings can be in print (formal or informal), digital files, CDs, or whatever. Sarah Kalika developed a Google form for the inventory, and sent it in January to Section chairs and trip coordinators. We encourage any other members with information on field guides (especially the older and more obscure ones) to participate (goo.gl/forms/w6Tqq62M6h). In the meantime, Bill Smith has recorded which guides are in storage in Denver. Our aim is to get these all to a central point (probably the new HQ in Ohio), scan the print materials into digital form, and make them all available to members and others. The ultimate media, prices and distribution system are still to be decided.

A second NA #4 assignment was to conduct a survey regarding AEG’s weekly email newsletter, The Insider. Launched in early 2013, it was too new to be evaluated previously, so we are formulating a set of questions to determine reader consumption rates, satisfaction with its content, how often links to stories and sponsors are followed, etc. The survey should be ready this spring, and will be emailed to all Insider subscribers; please participate—your opinions count!

Other NA #4 projects are slated a few months out, including one to revise AEG’s general communications plan. The current version of the communications manual, prepared in 2005, contains the plan, media kit, style guides and templates, with information ranging from lists of officers and HQ address (way out of date!), to official logos and typefaces, and much more. It’s time for an update.

Meanwhile, the committee continues to manage our publications and digital outlets. You have this AEG News in your March 2015

hands (for us luddites) or on some device, testament to the work of Anna Saindon and Andie Ptak. A Cities of the World paper on the geology of the Pittsburgh area is in review, in anticipation of the annual meeting there in September. Our flagship technical journal, Environmental & Engineering Geoscience (E&EG) is available through the website; Abdul Shakoor and the editorial board would like to expand to six issues per year.

We are even trying to revise the article about AEG on Wikipedia, although that attempt has proven to be far more “educational” (i.e., frustrating) than expected.

So keep sending us your news, your pictures, your field-trip reports, and your scientific papers (news@aegweb.org for the News; enews@aegweb.org for the Insider; the editors for E&EG). And if you want to get involved in Association communications, please contact us (see www.aegweb.org/committeesvolunteers#communications).

Like almost everything in AEG, we exist and function by the grace of volunteers, and can always find use for more. Anna has plotted a glide-path out of the News editor’s chair (mixing metaphors) in a year or two; and we should be planning to rotate out someday as well…you could be wielding the vast powers of co-director of communications someday soon!

Finance Committee Increasing Fiscal Responsibility in 2015 This message will begin with some sobering information and is followed by details about the Finance Committee (FC).

AEG has ongoing fiscal changes as the 2015 Fiscal Year begins. The conditions are not dire, but these fiscal issues require action from AEG in the long-term. The association has expended as a total over four years more from its Operational account than it received in total Operational revenue for the past five-year period. The FC’s opinions are that recent annual revenue projections have been too optimistic, and revenueenhancing programs have been budgeted and spent before the imagined revenue was produced. This overspending has been exacerbated by a gradual decline in dues-paying members, increased publication costs over its revenue produced, and the recent management change. Although the management shift to Offinger has increased expenditures, the move provides improved delivery and less task duplication of services. This management transition has enhanced both benefits to members and comprehensive fiscal evaluation. AEG must tackle deficit spending in 2015 and beyond. The EC began this process a few years ago by instituting an in-depth evaluation of AEG’s governance structure and mission, and as a result future changes may help reduce costs associated with governance while improving service to our members. However, other changes are probably necessary to streamline and balance AEG’s budget.

All levels of AEG, Members, Sections/Chapters, the Board of Directors (BOD) and the Executive Council (EC), must not only understand the fiscal issues, but also accept responsibility for long-term viability of AEG as an organization. This includes challenging individual members to convey the benefits of being a member of AEG, and actively recruiting younger professionals

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

5

NEWS OF THE ASSOCIATION – COMMITTEE REPORTS into our organization or re-engaging former members. The FC will make some general recommendations concerning both income-generating programs and revisions to the approved 2015 Expense Budget in the upcoming months to the BOD. All members might note some coming changes to help reduce costs and to ensure AEG’s continuing fiscal strength.

Current AEG members must seriously consider what they can individually do to help maintain robust membership in our organization, and what changes they are willing to accept to help reduce the expense of current member benefits. For example, electronic delivery of AEG publications is a viable alternative that can help AEG reduce its expenses. Keep in mind, if the AEG headquarters increases member benefits to attract more members, those expenses will increase deficit spending. If membership benefits are reduced (to balance the budget), we risk further decline in membership. Much of the vitality of AEG stems from efforts at the Section level, which have an enormous impact on our ability to recruit and retain lifelong members. We should realize that assembly is our greatest benefit. Chapter, Section and Annual Meetings, local and regional seminars and short courses, and Shlemon Conferences are our members’ greatest benefits. Those meetings and conferences do not need to diminish, while the budget is balanced. In fact, seminars and conferences should be increased during this time to improve member benefits and to increase interest in the AEG. The FC has been providing its assessments to the BOD and consultations with the EC for decades. The FC is one of only two committees that report directly to the BOD. The BOD takes this committee’s duties seriously and with such regard that the BOD appoints the members to the FC. The FC is presently composed of Brook Brosi, Emily Corkery, David Fadling, Greg Hempen (Co-Chair), Niall Henshaw (Co-Chair), Garry Maurath, James May, and Kevin Richards. The FC keeps its committee members actively participating for long timeframes for corporate memory benefits. FC members elect its co-chairs at the end of the calendar (and fiscal) year. We attempt to have actively involved co-chairs who rotate in approximately two, one-year terms. We thank Garry Maurath for being Co-Chair through December 2014. We welcome Niall Henshaw, as the incoming 2015 Co-Chair. The EC and any interested Directors are invited to attend FC conference calls or to volunteer to serve on the committee. We collaborate with the Governance and the Strategic Planning Committees and invite their chairs to participate in our conference calls. Both of these committees, the EC, and the BOD also receive minutes of our meetings. The BOD requires at least one current AEG Director as a FC member.

The FC’s directive is stated in its charter: “The Finance Committee’s primary mission is to review AEG’s budget and advise and educate BOD and AEG Members about financial matters independent of the BOD’s EC.” The FC’s goal is to assist the BOD in maintaining a fiscally sound organization. We are an investigating and reviewing group for the BOD, working in close cooperation with the AEG Treasurer and EC. The FC enjoys great camaraderie in conducting our assignments for the AEG. We take our roles seriously as counselors 6

to the BOD on the fiscal state of the AEG. If you have an interest in the fiscal affairs of the AEG, contact any one of our FC members and get involved.

Licensure Committee Ken Neal, Co-Chair

Professional Legislative Support Fund Since AEG’s Board of Directors consists of many new members that were not part of AEG’s leadership team when the Professional Legislative Support Fund (PLSF) was established, we are summarizing the purpose for this fund, how to get involved, and information on how to apply for assistance if needed.

The PLSF was established for legislative activities, include lobbying, legal representation, and travel for hearings and statewide meetings. These funds are not tax-deductible, and must be tracked separately. The PLSF is funded with $10.00 of each member’s annual dues and by donations. Currently, the fund has about $41,000 available.

Each AEG Section with future objectives to initiate or modify a licensure effort on the state level or anticipating possible legislative or legal issues with their current program must establish and have in place one or more funding mechanisms that are the primary source for all state legislative activities.

This may be internal to the Section, or may be implemented in combination with other organizations. As is true for national AEG, the local Section must track funding for their legislative efforts separately from other funding.

The resources allocated from the PLSF will supplement local funding, to a percentage to be determined based on the availability of funds in the PLSF and circumstances specific to the local situation. The maximum grant is matching funds. In order to receive a grant, the local AEG section must involve the Licensure Committee (LC) in their efforts, so that the committee can provide informed advice to the EC regarding the request for and use of funding.

In requesting funds from the PLSF, the Section must identify their funding mechanism and levels of funding, and request supplemental funding from the LC for their activities. The LC will evaluate the request, negotiate changes where appropriate, and send a recommendation to the EC for their review and approval. The Section will monitor income and expenditures and provide a financial report periodically to the AEG Treasurer. The EC will update the BOD regarding distributions from the PLSF as they occur.

The general guidelines and application forms are available on AEG’s Legislative and Licensure Resource Center on the aegweb.org website under “member’s only content.” On the “members-only content homepage,” click on “legislative and licensure center resource center online” and then click on the “additional resources can be found on the members-only section here.” In that section, there are three links, “professional licensure resource fund,” “letters” (correspondence examples used during previous efforts), and “application forms.”

The following steps must be accomplished in order for a Section to obtain funding from this account:

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

NEWS OF THE ASSOCIATION – COMMITTEE REPORTS • Complete one of the three forms (Geology Program Threat Form, Licensure Status Form, or Geologist Licensure Threat Form), as applicable. Supply associated documentation (proposed legislation or other related documents), clearly identify your funding sources and available funds, and the amount you are requesting from the PLSF. The PLSF will only be available for funding up to a maximum of the total dollars raised locally.

• Submit the form to one of the LC Co-Chairs, Ken Neal (kengneal@aol.com) or Charles Nestle (CNESTLE@dpw.lacounty.gov) for review, along with contact information. The LC will provide a recommendation on funding to the EC. If the LC recommends funding and the EC concurs, then amounts up to $5,000 will be made available without the BOD approval. The BOD will have to approve any expenditure from the PLSF over $5,000.

Any use of funds from the PLSF, along with funds from other sources, must be monitored by the Section, and a monthly report must be provided to the AEG Treasurer. The EC will update the BOD regarding distributions from the PLSF as they occur.

We encourage Sections who are anticipating a possible licensure effort to go to AEG’s Licensure and Legislative Resource Center to learn about various aspects of the legislative process, kinds of contents needed in order to have an effective licensure act, and other resources that can be useful prior to and during the legislative process.

If you have questions or need additional information, contact either of the LC Co-Chairs, Ken Neal (kengneal@aol.com) or Charles Nestle (CNESTLE@dpw.lacounty.gov).

Strategic Planning Committee Nate Saraceno & Cynthia Palomares, Co-Chairs

Partnering for Effective Operational Committees As Co-Chairs of the Strategic Planning Committee (SPC), we have the privilege of being involved in all of AEG’s operational committees. On a monthly basis, we each sit in on at least half a dozen phone calls with AEG members like you who enjoy volunteering their time to better the Association by focusing on issues they are passionate about. One of the things we find most exciting about AEG is that these committees are very ambitious! They are constantly working to bring you the best they have to offer—from informative articles to new grant opportunities to better ways to advocate for our profession of environmental and engineering geology.

If you read AEG News regularly (which we’re sure you do), you’ll see articles by one or more of our operational committees in each issue. These articles are great ways to find out what each committee is up to and learn about issues that may affect you as a professional, such as state licensure.

Our operational committees stay active! The Advocacy Committee is currently developing AEG’s first true media kit, which will be used to inform news outlets of interesting geoscience topics and the expertise AEG and its members can March 2015

Strategic Planning Committee Co-Chairs Cynthia Palomares and Nate Saraceno

offer. The Communications Committee is currently cataloging all of AEG’s past field trip guidebooks from the Section, Chapter, and Association levels, and will be offering them in one place for easy access to all our members. The Licensure Committee constantly has their ears open for new opportunities for and threats against Professional Licensure. In addition to the existing Young Professional Travel Grant, a new travel grant will be available to educators to help them attend AEG Annual Meetings thanks to the Student & Young Professional Support Committee. The Section/Chapter Support Committee continues to support our Sections and Chapters by offering Officer Training webinars and hosting monthly Collaborative Calls, where Section leaders are welcome to join and learn from each other.

This is just a sampling of what these committees are currently working on, and there are, of course, several other active committees with exciting initiatives of their own! One of the goals of the SPC in 2015, is to begin posting Operational Committee minutes to the AEG website. You’ll be able to read these on the Committees & Volunteers page at http://www.aegweb. org/committees-volunteers. Check it often to find the latest and greatest from each committee!

Volunteers are the life of this Association. They constitute everyone from our Student Chapter officers to the Association’s Executive Council and from the members and chairs of all our operational committees to the leaders of your local Sections and Chapters. Volunteers plan and execute our Annual Meetings and edit our publications. We appreciate every one of our volunteers, and as volunteers ourselves, we find the time and effort we contribute to be extremely rewarding. Our involvement helps us grow professionally and personally through honing our leadership and teamwork skills as well as building lasting friendships.

If you’re not already volunteering on an AEG committee— why? There’s room for everyone! We take pride in having volunteers that range from students to retired professionals. There are volunteers who sit on three different committees and can make every meeting, and others whose schedules don’t allow

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

7

NEWS OF THE ASSOCIATION – COMMITTEE REPORTS them to make their committee calls, but who contribute via email. We value each and every one of you. So take five minutes to find a committee that speaks to your interests and get involved. You’ll be glad you did!

Even if you decide not to join an AEG committee, we encourage you to read the articles by committee chairs in the AEG Insider and AEG News, read the committee meeting minutes at the link above, and even connect with AEG via Social Media (http://www.aegweb.org/about-aeg/connect-with-aeg).

You’ll not only stay informed about benefits and opportunities for AEG members, but you might actually learn something, too!

Student & Young Professional Support Committee Adair Gallisdorfer, Co-Chair

Top 10 Reasons Why I Belong To AEG You’ve probably been encouraged to join professional societies like AEG for the obvious benefits of networking and continuing education. Yet there are so many other great reasons to not just renew your AEG membership, but to be involved in meetings and operational committees. Here are the personal reasons why the members of the Student and Young Professional Support Committee belong to AEG. 1. Exploring Career Fields: An education in geology is just the beginning. How do you decide between, geologic engineering, consulting, mining, environmental geology, academia, etc.? Attending regional and annual meetings is the best way to get exposure and pick the brains of professionals in all these fields to learn what the career path is like, what to expect, and how to prepare.

2. Online Databases: Many journals and research papers, including AEG’s own publications, require professional memberships in order to gain access to information.

3. Open Doors: If you ever have a question, need to reach out for a reference, or need to collaborate with a professional in a different field of geology, you can—and will— find someone in AEG to help you. I could write an entire book of examples of AEG members sharing information and contacts across the country, often without having ever meeting face to face, all for the common desire to support our industry and help each other succeed.

4. Meet Other Students: Let’s not forget the value of other students—an often underestimated resource for field trip tips, research ideas, study tools, helpful textbooks, or advice on the best hiking boots.

5. Make an Impression on Potential Future Employer: If you plan on applying for work in your current location, what better way to wow local professionals than show them you will go the extra mile by being involved in a professional association like AEG. Attending a meeting, shaking the hands of professionals, participating in conversations, and displaying your professional confidence are great ways to make a lasting impression.

8

6. Pass it On: When the time comes to give back, you may be able to recommend a great candidate to an employer in need.

7. Stay Up To Date: Technology is changing at a pace that can be hard to track. Staying up to date on the tools and techniques used in our field via AEG Section meetings and field trips or articles in the AEG Insider or News can keep your skills and knowledge sharp.

8. Collaboration: Why reinvent the wheel when you can confer with one of your colleagues? If you’ve encountered challenges in your field, chances are good that another AEG professional has tackled something similar or can give you an objective outside view for creative solutions.

9. Advance Your Leadership Skills: Getting involved in one of AEG’s operational committees or local sections is a great way to gain experience by taking the initiative to launch proposals, learn the structural organization of professional societies, and see your ideas and efforts take shape. Promoting your industry and company can also be a great way to show your commitment and have a competitive edge.

10. Develop Lasting Friendships: Whether at your local level or the Annual Meeting, you will find like-minded people that are easy to get along with, have similar hobbies, and frequently have a favorite microbrew to recommend.

The members of the Student and Young Professional Support Committee are truly an exciting and energetic group of individuals spread across the country in a variety of fields that have all personally benefited from our AEG memberships and involvement. We hope our enthusiasm will encourage and engage you. If you have a request for a list you would like to see from us, please let us know.

Have a tip of your own to share with us? Send your suggestions to agallisdorfer@yahoo.com and use “Things my advisor didn’t tell me” in the subject line. Or send us a message on any of our social media sites: Facebook.com (AEGweb), Twitter (@AEGweb), or LinkedIn (Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists – AEG).

AEG’s Mission: AEG contributes to its members’ professional success and the public welfare by providing leadership, advocacy, and applied research in environmental and engineering geology.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

NEWS OF THE PROFESSION

2015 EERI Annual Meeting

T

Boston March 31-April 3 – http://2015am.eeri-events.org/

he Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI) will hold its 67th Annual Meeting in Boston, MA on March 31–April 3, 2015. The theme for the meeting is Old Cities, New Earthquakes, and the program will highlight the particular seismic hazards and vulnerability of older structures common to so much of central and eastern North America.

Robert Olshansky, Head at the Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign, will deliver the EERI Distinguished Lecture on improving earthquake mitigation and recovery efforts over time.

Paul Somerville will give the William B. Joyner Memorial Lecture, Geoscientists’ Capacity to Supply Engineers’ Demands for Seismic Hazard Inputs.

Program sessions will include Inventorying and Prioritizing Actions to Reduce Risk of Older Structures, and Seismic Response and Vulnerability—New Design. There will be unique sessions providing updates on EERI special projects, such as Learning From Earthquakes and the School Earthquake Safety Initiative.

Pre- and post-conference continuing education and training opportunities are available. On March 31, participants will learn from the National Earthquake Technical Assistance Program (NETAP) on how to identify potentially hazardous buildings

before earthquakes occur (FEMA P-154), and how to utilize open-source software ROVER (Rapid Observation of Vulnerability and Estimation of Risk). Training on FEMA E-74, Reducing the Risk of Nonstructural Earthquake Damage, will be conducted in the afternoon. On Friday, April 3, EERI will offer workshops on earthquake reconnaissance for students and professionals, with presentations and a field exercise in the use of data collection tools.

Program details and registration instructions are available on the 2015 EERI Annual Meeting website.

About EERI The Earthquake Engineering Research Institute is a national, nonprofit, technical society of engineers, geoscientists, architects, planners, public officials, and social scientists. EERI members include researchers, practicing professionals, educators, government officials, and building code regulators. EERI’s objective is to reduce earthquake risk by (1) advancing the science and practice of earthquake engineering, (2) improving understanding of the impact of earthquakes on the physical, social, economic, political, and cultural environment, and (3) advocating comprehensive and realistic measures for reducing the harmful effects of earthquakes.

Central California Engineering Geology Practice and Industry News

California Enacts Groundwater Legislation Chase White, Sacramento Section Secretary For the first time in its history, California has enacted legislation to provide management and monitoring of groundwater basins. On September 16, 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law a three-bill legislative package collectively known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Unlike surface water, which is regulated directly by the State, the new groundwater law allows local agencies to tailor sustainable groundwater plans in accordance with their regional economic and environmental considerations under the general direction of State government. The new legislation was enacted in response to the over-drafting of groundwater, which is occurring due to the current drought, which is entering its fourth year. Over-drafting has caused widespread subsidence especially in the San Joaquin Valley, where over the past several years as much as one foot per year of subsidence endangers irrigation and drainage canals as well as transportation corridors.

The new law is expected to provide employment opportuMarch 2015

nities for groundwater geologists in both the public and private sectors as the basin management plans are developed, monitoring arrays designed and installed, and the response of the basin to proposed level of pumping is analyzed. Further information on the legislation and the related programs being implemented by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) may be found on the DWR Groundwater Information Center website at http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/ gwinfo/index.cfm.

We APPRECIATE your MEMBERSHIP in AEG. Names in bold throughout the News indicate current members.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

9

NEWS OF THE PROFESSION

S

Engineers without Borders

acramento Section members Bruce Hilton (Past National AEG President ) and Byron Anderson volunteered a significant amount of their time planning an Engineers Without Borders (EWB) project. They gave further of themselves by traveling to Kenya last September to help firsthand with direction and construction of the Shisasari Community Spring Rehabilitation Project.

The two were part of a five-person field team that included Bruce’s wife Sandy Hilton and other Sacramento-area EWB volunteers. Section member Meredith Beswick did not travel to Kenya with the team, but was instrumental in developing the design of the project and providing support to complete the required EWB reports.

The original water collection and filter project consisted of designing and constructing a spring box at the head of a small creek in the middle of a rural community of approximately 1,000 people. The community obtains all of their water needs (drinking, cooking, bathing, laundry, and dishes) from a small spring source from which the water is collected in five-liter containers and carried back to their homes (on top of their heads).

The team was on the ground in Shisasari for a total of nine days, during which the project had to be completed.

Challenges of the project were made very apparent from the first day they arrived to find an untenable project site due to minimal spring flow and identified coliform contamination, and no contractor and construction supplies on site as promised.

The team quickly changed gears and decided to build the project at a new location with even greater challenges, including a source area many times larger than planned and with multiple springs. The team put their field skills to work to resurvey the new location and thalweg of the spring outlet, probe and identify depth to firm subgrade—all in order to redesign a new water collection system.

Because the new spring source was much larger than planned, a field assessment of the anticipated flow from the new spring was completed in the field by the team’s hydrogeologist Joe Zilles using standard Weir box flow calculations applied to the field conditions (which weren’t always text book).

The flow calculations were used to design the discharge piping of the new water collection structure.

Joe also tested the spring water for contaminants. The testing procedures included field kits for general minerals, nitrates, metals, and bacteria. Most testing was completed with colorimetric test strips, while the bacteria testing was completed with a compartment bag test (CBT). Results showed no adverse levels of most analytics except coliform bacteria, which showed harmful levels (Unfortunately, additional treatment of the water is required due to the coliform contamination).

Under Byron’s supervision, the Kenyan crew started construction of the project by clearing the vegetation around the spring and channelizing the multiple spring flows into a single diversion channel in order to collect and divert the spring 10 10

Byron Anderson, Bruce Hilton, and Joe Zilles celebrate the successful completion of the EWB Shisasari Community Spring Rehabilitation Project in Kenya.

water around the construction area. Construction of the new collection structure required excavating a five feet deep by 144-square-foot pit in wet clay in order to reach a firm, nonyielding foundation layer.

The excavation allowed the team to provide a lesson to the Kenyan crew on trench safety, and how sidewall collapses can lead to injury and even death. The lesson, however, had an exclamation mark put on it as the team awoke the next morning to find an entire sidewall of the excavation had collapsed overnight! This put a stop to construction as the debris had to be cleaned out and the excavation shored with timbers, stakes, rebar, and bailing wire (which had not been available the previous day).

As the project manager, Bruce was instrumental in coordinating the local labor and obtaining construction materials as the project progressed. He also worked daily with the project’s non-government organization (NGO) representative who often had to canvass hundreds of square miles and many towns late into the night in order to secure the needed construction materials.

The final water collection structure design (after many iterations) included an 81-square-foot concrete floor and cutoff

AEG AEG NEWS NEWS 58 57 (1) (1)

March March 2015 2014

NEWS OF THE PROFESSION trench with four-foot high cinder block masonry walls and 18inch-long wing walls extending from the back ends of the sidewalls into the excavated embankments. The structure’s water outlets were designed at the existing (natural) flow elevation and consisted of three two-inch diameter steel pipes designed to convey the estimated flow of 45–50 gallons per minute out to a concrete apron where community members could place and fill their water collection buckets.

The project was completely constructed with hand labor and hand tools and was successfully constructed with no time to spare before the team had to leave. The many challenges the team had to overcome were a true testament to the teams

experience and die-hard attitude that this project would be completed. The team members volunteered countless hours to this project during its planning and design phase, and using personal vacation time to execute its construction. It should be noted the team includes more than just the five that traveled to Kenya, but many, many other individuals, corporations, and professional associations that gave their time and money to make it happen. There is a second phase to this project to convey water from the spring to the school which is located approximately 1/5th mile uphill from the new water collection structure. There is ample opportunity to get involved for future phases or other projects.

Coal Ash Regulation Final Rule

Tunneling News

An Update on Bertha

Anna Saindon, PE, RG, Geotechnology, Inc.

Sabine Datum

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the final rule to regulate the disposal of coal combustion residuals (CCR) on December 19, 2014. The EPA states that CCR warrant regulatory controls but are not classified or regulated as a hazardous waste. CCR will be regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle D rules that currently apply to solid waste. Under Subtitle D, CCR impoundments and landfills are required to have composite liners (or an equivalent performance based liner system), leachate collection systems, and a system to monitor groundwater quality.

The rule requires existing unlined CCR surface impoundments that are impacting groundwater above the groundwater protection standards to be closed or retrofitted. In addition, if a surface impoundment does not meet structural performance criteria, it should be closed or retrofitted.

This rule applies to all new and existing CCR generated by electric utilities and independent power producers. The beneficial reuse of CCR is not addressed in the new rule but it will continue to be addressed by previous rulings on the beneficial use of CCRs. The placement of CCR in coal mines and non-utility boilers is not addressed in this rule, but it will be addressed in a separate rulemaking effort.

For further information, the pre-publication copy of the final rule is located at http://www2.epa.gov/coalash/coal-ashrule#rulesummary or you can contact Anna Saindon, PE, RG at a_saindon@geotechnology.com.

Bertha, the world’s largest tunneling machine, has been stalled while digging the Alaskan Way Tunnel under downtown Seattle since December 2013. Excavation crews have now reached the 120-foot depth of the access vault needed to lift Bertha out of the ground for repairs. A giant crane, which is being assembled along the waterfront, will hoist the front end of Bertha to the surface. Groundwater pumping, which caused Pioneer Square soils to subside about one inch last fall, will continue until the repairs are completed. According to the Washington State DOT the ground has remained stable since Thanksgiving 2014. A video of the rescue-pit excavation work can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqH1zSkxz0c&feature =youtu.be.

Reference

March 2015

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

PHOTO COURTESY OF WSDOT

Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System; Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities 40 CFR Parts 257 and 261

11

NEWS OF THE PROFESSION

Environmental Safety And Construction in Karst Areas International Symposium May 26–29, 2015, at Perm State University (Russia, Perm) IAEG (International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment) invites you to take part in this symposium, which will provide a good opportunity for strengthening personal contacts between karst researchers for promoting international cooperation. The symposium will elucidate the significant role of theoretical and practical karstology in the scientific community of the 21st century.

Official working languages of the Symposium are Russian and English.

Abstracts are welcome on the following subjects:

• Design of the foundations and underground construction in karst areas • Examples of designing buildings in karst regions • Karst-control measures upon projecting of highly dangerous and technologically complex objects • Analysis of emergencies and insurance specifics of engineering structures with the account of karst risks • Regulatory and methodical documents on survey, design and construction in karst regions • Construction and exploitation of buildings and structures in karst areas

• Engineering research methods in karst regions and organization of karst monitoring • Evaluation of karst hazard and risk • Pollution of the geological environment in karst regions and protective measures

The application for participation in the symposium must be received by March 15, 2015 either via the website karst.psu.ru or by e-mail to Anna Shilova at karst2015@gmail.com.

For more detailed information about the symposium and requirements for abstracts can be found at karst.psu.ru.

Environmental Minute News The NPDES Industrial Stormwater Permit Is Under Review

EPA 2014 Enforcement Results

Industrial stormwater has been regulated under the EPA NPDES program since the first multi-sector general permit (MSGP) was issued in 1995. This permit only applies to stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity in areas where the EPA remains the NPDES permitting authority. The MSGP was reissued in both 2000 and 2008, and the 2013 version was sent to the White House on Decmeber 22, 2014 and may be issued as soon as March or April 2015. According to the EPA, the 2013 MSGP will be similar to the 2008 permit, though there are changes for clarity and to streamline the permit.

Wondering what the EPA was up to this year? The 2014 enforcement results are now available on line at http://www2.epa. gov/enforcement/enforcement-annual-results-fiscal-year-fy-2014.

Carbon Monoxide Carbon monoxide is an odorless colorless gas created when fossil fuels are burned. It can cause sudden illness or death, but doesn’t get the same air time as other serious hazards in the home and at work. It is now inexpensive to buy carbon monoxide meters that don’t require yearly batteries. Check out the CDC’s website at http://www.cdc.gov/co/ for more information on the symptoms and how to protect you and those you care about.

Abandoned facility's hazardous waste storage

OSHA Issues Booklet on Fracking Site Hazards Fracking is a hot topic from an environmental standpoint, but it also poses safety hazards for workers. OSHA issued the booklet “Hydraulic Fracturing and Flowback Hazards Other than Respirable Silica” to help educate workers on potential safety hazards on site and how to avoid them.

This booklet is available for free at https://www.osha.gov/ Publications/OSHA3763.pdf.

12

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

NEWS OF THE PROFESSION

More Environmental Minutes The Great Pacific Garbage Patch Without scientifically sound and verified estimates on the size of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, it’s easy to get fact mixed with myth. Check out the NOAA’s site to get the current state of information on it. http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/about/media/how-biggreat-pacific-garbage-patch-science-vs-myth.html

Climate Change – Facts Not Hype We are uniquely situated as geologists and engineers to understand the complicated and interconnected mechanisms that go into climate change. We know our individual actions affect others and the environment, but sometimes it is hard to explain the details to others or we haven’t been keeping up on the current information. The EPA has put together a website that covers everything from common questions, student activities, upcoming laws, scientific references, things everyone can do to help, and current climate change news at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/.

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch PHOTO CREDIT: STEVEN GUERRISI, FLICKER CREATIVE COMMONS, HTTPS://WWW.FLICKR.COM/PHOTOS/SJGUERRISIPORTFOLIO/8687410631

GeologyoftheCitiesof theWorld AEG is working with GeoScienceWorld to publish future and previously submitted “Cities” papers in a special online publication. This step ensures that all of the papers published in the “Cities” series are available to potential readers from around the world. Similar in format to the Environmental and Engineering Geoscience journal, these papers will remain available to AEG members at no cost, with a pay-per-view option available to non-members.

Current cities include: Albuquerque, Boston, Boulder, Cairo, Christchurch, Dallas, Denver, Hong Kong, Indianapolis, Johannesburg, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Long Beach, Montreal, Port Elizabeth, Reno and Truckee Meadows, Rome, Salt Lake City, and Seattle. Papers covering many more cities are in production.

If you would like to contribute to this project as an author or reviewer, please contact Joseph Krupansky PG; Gannett Fleming, Inc.; PO Box 80794; Valley Forge, PA 19484-0794; 610-650-8101; jkrupansky@gfnet.com.

March 2015

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

13

HEADER HERE CONTRIBUTIONS PROFESSIONAL

The Emergence of LNAPL Transmissivity

O

Trevre Roys Andrews and Andrew J. Kirkman, PE

f all of the drivers present at today’s environmental sites, the stability of contaminant source material is both a first and last consideration, or at least it should be. Without understanding source mobility, it is difficult, if not impossible to identify or address associated risks present at an environmental site. As geologists we often need to hand wave, at times we have been known to revel in it. It is not for lack of effort; rather we recognize the limitations in our data, the number of unknowns in earth systems, and the relatively large (speaking in magnitudes) margin for error required in our answers. Or as my teacher used to say, “Barley and hops in, beer out; leave the wine to the engineers.” At the same time, geologists are wise to pick up new tools as they are available.

It’s useful to start with an analogy between traditional hydrogeology and multiphase hydrogeology. “You wouldn’t give a farmer an estimate of his water well yield in terms of feet of water in the well, so we shouldn’t base our oil or LNAPL recovery on it either.” On the surface this concept is a no-brainer. It shouldn’t be a far leap between the two disciplines. The differences and difficulties however, lie in the assumptions we take for granted in hydrogeology. Our water aquifers are blessed with near 100 percent saturation, fluid properties hovering around unity falling out of most equations, and historically at least our boundary conditions were all but infinite.

While there are many factors associated with Light NonAqueous Phase Liquids (LNAPL) mobility, a relatively new cornerstone to understanding it is LNAPL Transmissivity. In this article we focus on four critical concepts related to the application of LNAPL transmissivity: 1. LNAPL Transmissivity Is Directly Related to LNAPL Mobile Saturation. When LNAPL transmissivity (Tn) values are low at one or more wells the majority of the LNAPL volume within the represented area is not recoverable because it is immobile to gravity drain mechanisms. Immobile LNAPL is termed residual. Attempting to hydraulically pump LNAPL from a site with a small ratio of recoverable to residual LNAPL will not meaningfully reduce the total volume of the remaining LNAPL. 2. Tn Is Related to Recovery Effort. The lower the transmissivity the less mobile LNAPL is present, the more hydraulic energy must be expended to move it (whether migrating naturally or being hydraulically recovered.)

3. Tn Changes Over Time and Those Changes Are Important. Tn might vary temporally but may not necessarily vary at all sites. It is a worthwhile part of the site conceptual model to understand how recovery efforts and future changes in the water table or site setting (e.g., fill, soil profile) affect Tn.

14

4. Tn Is Best Understood in the Context of Total Contaminant Mass. Universal Tn endpoints for remediation will likely be qualified by site specific conceptual models, however in most cases establishing the fraction of mass which is residual and mobile at a site in combination with Tn provides a quantified line of evidence to support remedial decisions.

Although peer reviewed work is not yet available, this work is based on professional experiences at multiple sites, industry guidance, and various regulatory agency experiences. A highlight of these works includes: • The 2009 Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC) document entitled Evaluating LNAPL Remedial Technologies for Achieving Project Goals. This ITRC guidance provides a basic understanding of LNAPL fundamentals and why Tn is an appropriate metric for LNAPL recoverability. The guidance also advocates for a less arbitrary definition of maximum extent practicable, and identifies a Tn range of 0.1 to 0.8 ft2/day.

• The ASTM standard entitled Standard Guide for Estimation of LNAPL Transmissivity provides a strong technical backbone for consistently estimating Tn from a variety of field methods.

• Regulatory implementation of requesting the use of Tn is now present in Michigan, Minnesota, and Virginia cleanup guidance for NAPL sites. Michigan and Virginia have adopted guidance that incorporates Tn as a metric for hydraulic recoverability. Michigan has set a specified value of 0.5 ft2/day as one line of evidence for low recoverability of LNAPL, while Virginia utilizes the ITRC range of 0.1 to 0.8 ft2/day to identify when LNAPL recoverability is low and maximum extent practicable has been met.

ITRC’s Guidance When ITRC published their LNAPL guidance, Tn was recognized as a preferred recoverability metric, and gauged LNAPL thickness was recognized as an inaccurate metric for recoverability.

The following quote from this ITRC guide provides an overview of these metrics.

“This guidance advocates ending historic “poor” practices, some of which have become commonplace and have resulted from the “recover LNAPL to the maximum extent practicable” requirements. For example, setting an arbitrary maximum allowable in-well apparent LNAPL thickness (e.g., LNAPL ≤1/8 inch) as a remedial objective ignores site conditions, LNAPL type, and subsurface characteristics and may have limited or no correlation with LNAPL mobility, recoverability, or dissolved-phase groundwater or vapor-phase soil gas concentrations.”

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

PROFESSIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS HEADER HERE With respect to gauged in-well LNAPL thickness, the ITRC guidance explains why it is a poor metric: “For the same LNAPL in-well thickness, the volume of LNAPL per unit area of the formation can be different; it is generally higher in coarse-grained soils than in fine-grained soils.”

Due to the dependence of LNAPL thickness on geology and water table fluctuations, caution should be exercised in using it as a sole metric for recoverability and migration.

With respect to Tn, the ITRC guidance explains why this is a preferred metric:

• Tn is an indicator of the formation to transmit LNAPL to a well.

• Tn depends on soil type, LNAPL type, LNAPL saturation, and thickness of mobile LNAPL. • Since Tn is related to all key variables (see above) that can affect recoverability, it is a better metric than the conventionally used metric of in-well thickness.

• The higher the Tn, the higher the LNAPL recoverability.

• While the ITRC guide does not provide detailed guidance for the utilization of Tn as a recoverability metric for LNAPL, it does generally discuss the magnitude of values below which mass removal is ineffective. This “decision point” is presented as a range of values from 0.1-0.8 ft2/day.

ITRC LNAPL Team members’ experience indicates that hydraulic transmissivity testing or pneumatic recovery systems can practically reduce Tn to values between 0.1 and 0.8 ft2/day. Sites in state regulatory programs in California, Kentucky, and Florida have been closed or granted no further action after developing comprehensive LCSMs and operating recovery systems, followed by demonstrating lack of LNAPL recoverability (irrespective of in-well LNAPL thickness) remaining. The Tn values at these sites were estimated to be between 0.1 and 0.8 ft2/day.

The ITRC guide didn’t just toss this range into the ring without explanation as to why it makes little sense to attempt to remove LNAPL mass below this threshold range: Further lowering of Tn is difficult and can be inefficient; that is, it can take very long to marginally reduce Tn without much benefit in terms of reduction of LNAPL mass, migration potential, risk, or longevity.

Finally, the ITRC guide recognized that the proposed Tn threshold range was relatively new an may be refined

The LNAPL Recovery Endpoint LNAPL exists in the subsurface as either mobile or residual.

Mobile LNAPL represents LNAPL that has a sufficient saturation to create a continuous pore network through which LNAPL may flow. As LNAPL is recovered the saturation and pore network decrease, limiting the ability of LNAPL to flow. At residual saturation the continuous network no longer exists and LNAPL saturated pores are discontinuous (i.e., residual LNAPL). Measuring the Tn at a site helps us understand the volume of mobile LNAPL. Additionally the lower the transmissivity the higher the proportion of residual LNAPL volume to mobile LNAPL volume.

March 2015

Figure 1a. Cumulative recovered LNAPL and LNAPL transmissivity over time.

Figure 1b. LNAPL transmissivity decline curve.

The macro-scale result of this micro-scale behavior is fairly easy to observe and evaluate when the LNAPL recoverability is initially high (e.g., 10 gallons per day (gpd)). Typically, LNAPL recovery rates observed shortly after an initial period do drop off at a fairly predictable rate that can be illustrated graphically using various types of decline curve graphs. The graphs can provide evidence that LNAPL recovery has reached its effective limit in further reducing source impacts which are mostly residual.

Site 1.

In Figure 1a, for example, the Site 1 LNAPL recovery was conducted from 13 wells each with a 100 to 200 foot finite radius of capture. The site is a former refinery and the subsurface aquifer consists of a sand and gravel unit that exhibits hydraulic conductivities of 200 to 500 ft/day.

Frequently LNAPL recovery systems that induce drawdown redistribute the LNAPL centrally around a recovery well. The conceptualization for these observations is that recovery wells are placed based on limited point data, so it is likely an area of higher Tn is offset from the recovery well. Upon start-up, the extraction well produces water and LNAPL as fast as it flows; however the conditions are transient due to transient groundwater drawdown distance relationships. As the areas of higher transmissivity recentralize around the extraction well, Tn increases to a peak and then declines.

The Figure 1a time-series graph of cumulative LNAPL and Tn demonstrates the decline in Tn as the recovery asymptotes.

If a recovery endpoint of 0.7 ft2/day Tn is selected, then as Tn decreases below 0.7 ft2/day, it is observed that the bulk of the LNAPL has been recovered and the cumulative volume recovered does not significantly increase. The transmissivity value provided represents an average value of the recovery area represented by the 13 LNAPL recovery wells.

In this case it is easy to understand, based on the cumulative volume graph, that the majority of LNAPL has been recovered and perhaps Tn is not required to illustrate a majority of

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

15

HEADER HERE CONTRIBUTIONS PROFESSIONAL the mobile LNAPL fraction has been recovered. However, could the same argument be made if a well started at out at 0.7 ft2/day deep within the asymptote? We’ll answer this question shortly.

Figure 1b presents the same data in a different format (a typical decline curve) which allows predicting the total recoverable volume.

Tn is plotted against cumulative volume and used to forecast Figure 2. Recoverable vs. residual LNAPL fractions. the volume of recoverable LNAPL (approximately 700,000 gallons) and the limits of hydraulic recovery. The initial Tn peak seen after startup is commonly observed as a system establishes boundary flow conditions and the highest transmissivity NAPL centers itself around the recovery well. The subsequent decline in Tn as LNAPL recovery progresses is typical of fluids recovered from a finite volume in a porous media.

Figure 2 provides a bar chart of the relative volume of recovered LNAPL, unrecovered LNAPL, and residual LNAPL within the original mobile interval. After removal of 670,000 gallons (Figure 1b) of LNAPL the plume longevity was reduced by 82 percent, whereas the continued recovery of LNAPL beyond this point would at most reduce the plume longevity by an addition 6 percent. However the effort (water induced drawdown, energy, and time) to remove the additional 6 percent would be significantly greater than the previous recovery efforts which removed 82 percent.

While comparisons of initial and final mobile volumes are useful, the elephant in the room is usually always the residual LNAPL volume. In this case the residual LNAPL saturation was estimated based on soil-core analyses. At the selected LNAPL recovery endpoint, 0.7 ft2/day, the remaining unit volume of recoverable LNAPL was smaller than the residual LNAPL unit volume.

So is this scenario directly applicable to a smaller site?

Smaller sites are not likely to require 13 recovery wells that are extracting LNAPL from a 100 to 200 foot radius. However, if a site exists with 14 ft2/day Tn values over a given area, that area is likely to exhibit a significant amount of recoverable 16

LNAPL relative to residual. The removal of the mobile fraction may represent a potential to reduce plume longevity.

If any size site exhibited 0.7 ft2/day, rather than focusing efforts toward recovery, it would be worthwhile to focus efforts on understanding the mass of mobile LNAPL relative to residual LNAPL. This can be done by reviewing existing data (e.g., photo-ionization detector, laser induced fluorescence) to give a qualitative understanding of residual LNAPL versus mobile LNAPL interval.

To more accurately quantify the residual LNAPL volume Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) sampled across the gauged thickness and total smear zone is a valid quantitative means. Alternatively calibrated LNAPL distribution models can provide quantitative estimates of LNAPL mobile and residual mass. If the residual mass dominates the total mass at the site, the plume is stable and hydraulic recovery will not likely be an effective remedial technology. In many cases residual LNAPL volumes do not present a significant risk and where they do alternative remedial technologies should be considered to address that risk.

What if one of the Tn values obtained from one well at a site exhibits 2 ft2/day and three of my site wells are at 0.5 ft2/day? Should recovery be conducted at that one well with the higher Tn value? This is a site-specific decision and dependent on the individual conceptual site model. If that one well represents a small area relative to the three other wells, and the mass across the site is still dominated by residual, then it may not make sense to recover from a minority portion of the site.

If that well represents a large area and a substantial reduction in source mass or significant improvement to the long-term stability of LNAPL, it may be appropriate.

Site 2.

This site (Figure 3) is an active rail yard with weathered diesel fuel in the subsurface, where no previous recovery system existed. The site consists of fine-grained silts overlying sand.

The water table is typically eight feet below the silt materials, and mobile LNAPL exists solely within the sand unit, which exhibits hydraulic conductivity values ranging from 5 to 30 ft/day. The associated dissolved-phase plume was not a risk to receptors as no constituents exceeded regulatory standards beyond the property boundary. The plume was stable and no groundwater extraction wells existed onsite.

Initial LNAPL transmissivities were estimated to range from 0.01 to 0.35 ft2/day, and a vacuum enhanced skimming (VES) remediation system was implemented at three well locations.

Well 21 initially exhibited LNAPL transmissivities up to 0.35 ft2/day and produced the majority of the LNAPL at the site, recovering 680 gallons of LNAPL in four years of operation.

The other two wells combined produced only 85 gallons over the same period.

Figure 3 provides the cumulative volume of LNAPL recovered versus the Tn over time for well 21. No observable recovery trends could be seen in the two other wells. The 680 gallons of LNAPL recovered over four years match a Tn decrease over this time period by a factor of five. While the data is scattered all wells at this site exhibited intermittent

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

PROFESSIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS HEADER HERE also likely to be dominated by residual impacts, and hydraulic recovery will likely not be effective at removing site mass.

By knowing Tn values at a site professionals can easily evaluate the benefit of hydraulic recovery. Efforts at the site can then focus on developing the conceptual site model and understanding if the majority of LNAPL mass is residual or if remediation is needed due to dissolved or vapor-phase risks which are generally independent of all but the lowest NAPL saturations. If additional risk-driven remediation is required, then it’s a good idea to consult the LNAPL conceptual site model to determine and focus remedy decisions on which phase-change, containment, or removal technologies target residual LNAPL (specifically the fraction of the LNAPL that represents the chemicals of concern).

Variability in LNAPL Transmissivity Figure 3. LNAPL transmissivity and recovery rate over time – well 21.

recovery and this was the well that provided a noticeable recovery trend.

The strong recovery trend data from the former refinery (Site 1) was utilized in the previous portion of this article to provide a good understanding of ideal LNAPL recovery behavior during recovery efforts. At low Tn values, LNAPL is close to residual and factors such as soil heterogeneities and water-table fluctuations can induce variability to the LNAPL mobility that results in less defined trends compared with those observed in Figure 3.

Although 765 gallons of LNAPL were recovered from all three wells total, the overall saturation reduction across the three wells was one percent of the pore space, based on the area of impacts, representing a 150-foot diameter zone and a 1.4-foot vertical interval of soil treated. The residual LNAPL saturation estimated by calibrating the API LNAPL distribution model to a sitespecific soil type was five percent. The achieved reduction in saturation of one percent did not significantly improve site conditions but did require energy consumption sufficient to run a onehorse power (1 HP) blower motor continuously for four years, equivalent to 3 times the energy in the recovered LNAPL. Furthermore, based on the LNAPL/water ratios from Site 1 and the energy consumption from Site 2, hydraulic recovery systems targeting low Tn values require large amounts of effort (e.g., energy, water extraction, treatment, and/or time) to recover the remaining fraction of mobile LNAPL. Equivalent Tn values for separate sites with different soil and LNAPL types require the same energy input to recover a given volume of LNAPL, though the residual LNAPL impact magnitude may vary.

Sites 1 and 2 illustrate the importance of understanding residual LNAPL mass and how it dominates the total LNAPL mass remaining as Tn approaches the ITRC range. These empirical results are not intended to comprehensively represent all possible scenarios. The universally applicable understanding is that hydraulic recovery of LNAPL will not result in meaningful source reduction when the majority of the LNAPL mass is residual and non-recoverable. In combination with the sites discussed in the ITRC guidance (ITRC 2009), these two sites provide evidence that sites dominated by low Tn values (0.1 to 0.8 ft2/day) are March 2015

When considering Tn it is important to understand how it may vary with changes in the water table. In the first site example we say how Tn can vary based on spatial distribution of LNAPL and recovery systems over time. In addition the temporal variability in Tn for each site will be affected by water table fluctuations, site heterogeneities, plume stability, and LNAPL weathering. Temporal variations are typically observed because LNAPL redistributes vertically during water table fluctuation in the subsurface. Tn is directly proportional to the magnitude of saturated pore space above residual saturation. Residual LNAPL saturation values are lower for the vadose zone than the saturated zone because water inhibits LNAPL flow more than air. This often leads to mobile LNAPL saturation in the vadose zone becoming residual when water tables rise.

Consequently, the impact of these variables on LNAPL recoverability should be evaluated in a suitably comprehensive LNAPL conceptual site model, which will drive testing protocols with respect to the frequency and number of wells tested over time.

Site 3.

At Site 3, LNAPL occurs primarily in a sand exhibiting hydraulic conductivity values near 25 ft/day that is overlain by a fining upward sequence starting at 706 ft mean sea level. As the water table rises, LNAPL goes from an unconfined to a confined state.

During unconfined conditions, as the water table rises a portion of the mobile LNAPL becomes submerged (residual) in the sand; however, as the water table continues to rise the remaining mobile LNAPL becomes confined against finer grained soils and ceases to move vertically with additional rises in the water table.

Then, as the water table elevation lowers, the submerged LNAPL is released and becomes mobile LNAPL again.

A dual-pump extraction system maintains a constant fluid level at the site recovering water and LNAPL. As the water level in the formation rises or falls, the recovery rate of both LNAPL and water increases or decreases proportionally to the watertable elevation to maintain a constant fluid elevation in the well, rather than a constant flow rate.

Well 6 has provided a useful data set for evaluating Tn versus both time and water table fluctuations. Figure 4 shows a graph of the LNAPL recovery rate and Tn over time. The piezeometric surface, or water table, over time is also provided in Figure 4.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

17

HEADER HERE CONTRIBUTIONS PROFESSIONAL

Figure 4. LNAPL recovery rate and LNAPL transmissivity over time – well 6.

submerged additional confining pressure doesn’t further inhibit the flow of NAPL. When looking at the recovery rate data in Figure 5, the confined portion of the data (circles) identifies how increases in the water table above 707 feet are associated with increases in the LNAPL recovery rate. The mobility of transmissivity over this range is relatively constant; however, because these pumps maintain a constant fluid level in the well rising water tables increase the drawdown and therefore fluid recovery rates. This trend is not observed in the unconfined portion (solid filled black squares) of the recovery-rate data because while the water extraction rate is going up with the water table rise; the Tn is decreasing simultaneously, which tends to negate the increase in water extraction.

These data indicate that Tn can vary under changes in the water table but will not necessarily always do so. When utilizing Tn as a metric, considering these temporal Tn changes will provide increased confidence in the site conceptual model and remedial decisions. This case supports both the use of Tn over other potential metrics (recovery rate) as well as the factors which may cause transmissivity to change at a site without an ongoing release.

One final note, which should go without saying but is easily overlooked, is the importance of well construction at LNAPL sites in particular. Because Tn is measured through tests that rely on the connectivity of LNAPL between the well and the formation, it is important to have wells that are developed using surge blocks rather than pumping alone.

Moving Forward Figure 5. Water table elevation versus LNAPL recovery and LNAPL transmissivity.

LNAPL recovery rates have varied between 65 gpd and 10 gpd over the past few years. It is difficult to see a clear relationship between the water table and LNAPL recovery rate, or Tn, in Figure 4. Figure 5 shows a direct comparison by plotting LNAPL recovery rate and Tn versus water-table elevation. Figure 5 uses discrete time period data from 2006.

The conceptual model for the site suggests that higher water-table elevations would both submerge LNAPL and eventually confine it where the water table may rise but no additional submergence of LNAPL would occur. This dual nature is evident in the Figure 5 Tn data. Transmissivity data is plotted in two different series, the first series representing unconfined conditions (solid black triangles) and a second series representing confined data (diamonds).

The highest Tn values are observed at low water-table elevations in the unconfined portion (black triangles) of the data.

This is the portion of data where the LNAPL is not submerged, the LNAPL mobile saturation is relatively high and exists in the coarsest materials. As the water table rises from 705 to 707 feet, Tn decreases to values near 0.15 ft2/day (diamonds) and then stabilizes. As the water table continues to rise above 707 feet the Tn value remains the same. This constant transmissivity period exists because once LNAPL is

18

The industry is continuing to confirm that Tn is a useful metric for understanding the recoverability of LNAPL. Tn might vary temporally but may not necessarily vary at all sites. In many cases, these temporal fluctuations when observed and explained help improve the understanding of the conceptual site model and understanding how future changes in the water table or site setting could affect any site metric is important when making remedial decisions. As this metric is utilized more often, on-going improvements are to be expected. For example, it is now understood that wells representing the lowest recoverability are often the most difficult and costly conditions for measuring Tn. For sites such as these, we, the authors, are developing improved methods and hope to share any insight in the near future.

About the Authors Trevre Andrews is a LNAPL Subject Matter Expert at CH2M HILL who has helped develop, implement, and advocate for LNAPL transmissivity at dozens of sites around the U.S. and World. He can be reached at Trevre.Andrews@CH2M.com or andr0373@umn.edu.

Andrew Kirkman is the lead LNAPL Technical Specialist for BP America. Andrew has led and participated in multiple industry advocacy efforts related to LNAPL. These include: chairing the ASTM task groups related to LNAPL transmissivity and LNAPL Conceptual Site Models. He can be reached at andrew.kirkman@bp.com.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

PROFESSIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS HEADER HERE

Challenges and Advances in the Understanding of Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) A California Pespective

T

R. Mark Bailey, PG

he term NOA (naturally occurring asbestos, or natural occurrences of asbestos) has become a prominent buzzword in the field of environmental and engineering geology in the last decade. As geologists and others open their eyes and begin to assess the world around them to see if NOA is present in the various locations they work, they find it is significantly more common than previously recognized. In addition, as more data comes in from sites like Libby, MT (USEPA 2014), the health effects of exposure to low levels of NOA are being viewed with greater concern.

On a practical level, when NOA is found at a location such as a construction site, it often triggers requirements for a range of health-protective measures which then become part of daily workplace safety practices. These practices include: 1) minimizing the generation of asbestos-containing dust at the site through a variety of engineering controls to keep levels down to an absolute minimum, 2) protection of workers through asbestos safety training and wearing of respiratory protection (i.e. full or half face respirators, personal air monitoring), 3) protection of the general public who may be exposed to uncontrolled release of asbestos dust blown off the site (perimeter and off-site ambient air monitoring) with strict level enforcement. These practices, besides being daunting to implement, are often considerably expensive and can raise a number of legal liability issues. Therefore, it is important for geologists who are, or who may become, involved with NOA issues, to understand the challenges associated with identifying asbestos in the natural environment, as well as the broad range of geologic environments in which NOA is known to occur. This is discussed below with a major focus on California where the strictest standards for the investigation and control of NOA have become routine.

NOA Definition and Analytical Issues One of the biggest challenges in talking about NOA is one of definitions—what is NOA? Numerous definitions are present in the scientific literature, the interpretation of which challenges everyone working in the field. The first issue is related to mineral names. For some, only the six “EPA regulated” asbestos minerals (USEPA 1993) can be NOA: Serpentine asbestos— chrysotile and Amphibole asbestos—tremolite, actinolite, grunerite (amosite), riebeckite (crocidolite) and anthophyllite.

For others a broader definition expands the range to include all of the amphiboles—some of the more common of which March 2015

include winchite, richterite, glaucophane, hornblende, edenite and arfvedsonite - as being possible NOA. Even others include minerals such as the fibrous zeolite erionite which, while not meeting the above definitions, is documented to cause similar health effects such as mesothelioma. The choice of definitions ranges from a narrow by-the-book interpretation of existing regulations, to a broad and maximally protective approach.

An example of where using a broader range of asbestos definitions would have been appropriate is the case represented by the vermiculite mine at Libby, MT, where hundreds of people, including both workers in the mine and the general public, were exposed to asbestos-containing dusts from the mine and processed material. The vermiculite deposit, one of the largest in the world, is the result of a very unusual series of igneous intrusions. These intrusions include an initial ultramafic biotite pyroxenite which was hydrothermally altered by a number of subsequent intrusions including syenite, fenite/ carbonatite, alkaline pegmatitie, alkaline granite and quartz-rich granite. It is in the veins and wall rock adjacent to these dikes and veins that a significant portion of the fibrous amphiboles occur. (Meeker 2003) This asbestos, unfortunately, was dominantly “unregulated” asbestos primarily composed of asbestiform amphibole winchite and richterite, with minor tremolite and magnesioriebeckite, with all being a natural contaminant found within the vermiculite ore. As such it was not considered a problem until the 1980’s when it was realized that many people in Libby had asbestos related lung disease. WR Grace, the owner of the Libby vermiculite mine, was ultimately forced to settle asbestos-related lawsuits for well over a billion dollars.

Another challenge is related to the morphological criteria used to determine when a mineral becomes “asbestiform,” or fibrous, and thus capable of causing lung disease. Amphiboles are most commonly found in nature as non-asbestiform crystals, but there appears to be a gradation between what is considered asbestiform and non-asbestiform. The criteria used to classify an amphibole as asbestos varies by regulation and analytical method. Some definitions focus on individual particles.

For instance, the National Institute of Safety and Health (NIOSH) uses a definition that says any regulated mineral particle with an aspect ratio >3:1 (NIOSH 1989) and roughly parallel sides is asbestos, while EPA’s Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) uses an aspect ratio of >5:1 (USEPA 1998). Other definitions focus on a group or population where average

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

19

HEADER HERE CONTRIBUTIONS PROFESSIONAL aspect ratios of 20:1 to 100:1 or greater should be used as the defining criteria (USEPA 1993). Others place limits on particle length and width: NIOSH PCM Equivalent (NIOSH 1989) >0.25µm in width and > 5µm in length, AHERA (USEPA 1998). >0.5µm in length. Therefore, the concentration of asbestos in a sample can vary dramatically depending on what test method is chosen and what the purpose of the investigation is.

Further complications arise from variations in analytical methods and the way asbestos concentration is determined.

Because asbestos fibers of concern are such small particles, a range of microscopical analytical techniques are used including phase contrast microscopy (PCM), polarized light microscopy (PLM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM)—each with their strengths and weaknesses. In addition, each of these methods typically quantify asbestos concentration in different ways. For instance, PCM counts all fibers seen, both asbestos and non-asbestos, per unit volume of air in fibers/cc (NIOSH 1989). PLM (USEPA 1993, CARB 1991) uses either a) visual area estimate of weight percent, or b) a point count determination of dimensionless percent—i.e. X points out of 400 total points—but which does not take into account the considerable variation of particle sizes observed. TEM is the most flexible and precise, able to count asbestos particles per unit volume of air, or to measure particle lengths and widths to calculate a weight percent of asbestos (USEPA 1993). The latter method is, however, more expensive.

Another complication is caused by the consistent lack of statistical certainty when fiber counts are low, though this low value is sufficient to define the material as NOA-containing. For instance, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Asbestos ATCM (CARB 1990, CARB 1991) defines a rock/soil sample to be categorized as NOA when just one particle out of 400 is identified as NOA (0.25 percent) when analyzed using the CARB 435 test method. The lack of statistical certainty can be a very big problem and has led many consultants go to a TEM analytical method where almost always a considerably larger numbers of asbestos fibers are counted when the rock is in the range of 0.25% and a calculated asbestos weight percent can be determined.

Lastly, in terms of asbestos identification and analytical issues, many asbestos laboratories have little or no NOA analysis experience, and lack the basic equipment to perform proper NOA sample preparation (jaw crushers, disc pulverizers, sieves, sieve shakers, etc.) and analysis. Lack of trained analysts, applicable certifications/accreditations, proficiency testing samples, proper NOA standards, weak analytical methods, etc. mean the end user must be careful which lab they use to test their samples.

Changing Understanding of NOA The understanding of the nature and extent of problems presented by NOA problem is rapidly changing. One example is the broadening of the application of the CARB 435 test method (CARB 1991) and the accompanying “Asbestos Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Surfacing Applications” (CARB 1990).

Initially, these regulations were promulgated to address a single 20

Fig. 1. Chrysotile veins (yellow/green) in serpentine, thin section viewed in crossed polarizers w/ compensator plate, Diablo Range, Fremont, CA. PHOTO COURTESY OF BRADLEY ERSKINE, KLEINFELDER.

focused problem—that various gravel roads in California were covered with ultramafic serpentine aggregate which contained some amount of asbestos, dominantly as chrysotile (See Fig. 1), which was released into the air when vehicular traffic rolled over it. To attempt to control this situation, these regulations specifically focused on serpentine aggregate in storage piles, on conveyor belts and surfaces such as roads and parking lots, ultimately leading to the closing of virtually every serpentine quarry in California and the paving of a number of rural roads.

Soon, however, the CARB 435 test method was being applied to other very different situations including construction sites, levees, landfill soil disposal, property sale evaluations, school yard testing, and most recently, concrete in buildings which may contain aggregate with NOA. In 2000, the California Geological Survey released A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California—Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos which was focused primarily on chrysotile, but also noted occurrences of tremolite-actinolite (CDMG 2000). In 2001, in response to the need for further guidance on how to address NOA issues, and the realization that asbestos exposures occur in many other construction related situations, CARB released the Asbestos ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying and Surface Mining Operations (CARB 2001). This further expanded the application of the CARB 435 test method to a much broader range of activities, though it still focused on ultramafic serpentine rocks.

This was soon followed by the California Geological Survey’s release in 2002 of Special Publication 124, Guidelines for Geologic Investigations of Naturally Occurring Asbestos in California (CDMG 2002). In 2005 Cal-EPA released a report on Slodusty Road (CalEPA 2004), a chrysotile-bearing serpentine aggregate covered road where a fence line of air monitors was placed perpendicular to the roadway and air samples were collected as activity-based samplers drove up and down the road at various speeds, intervals and wind conditions. The tests were run both pre and post paving of the road. Needless to say, asbestos exposures, which were high prior to paving, dropped dramatically afterward.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

PROFESSIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS HEADER HERE

Fig. 2. Vein of asbestiform tremolite-actinolite from El Dorado Hills, CA. Note quarter used for scale.

PHOTO COURTESY OF DAVID SEDERQUIST, YOUNGDAHL CONSULTANT GROUP, INC.

Fig. 3. Fracture surface of blueschist revealing 80-90 percent concentration of asbestiform glaucophane and winchite fibers viewed by FESEM, San Anselmo, Marin County, CA. PHOTO COURTESY OF ASBESTOS TEM LABS.

Another change in the understanding of NOA came when activists who lived in the El Dorado Hills area outside of Sacramento, CA made the connection between exposures happening in Libby, MT with the tremolite-actinolite asbestos observed in the rock and soil in their area (Fig. 2) which was in the throes of major housing development. Several established residents pointed out the presence of “Libby-like” asbestos. This drew the interest of the California Air Resources Board, which became particularly focused on Oak Ridge High School in El Dorado Hills. As heated rhetoric flew, the EPA decided to move in and take over handling issues at the site (USEPA 2005). Now, rather than concern over serpentine asbestos, all eyes were turned toward amphibole asbestos in California. The amphibole was found to occur as hydrothermal alteration of ultramafic rocks called peridotites, not serpentine. Then, as additional sampling occurred in the area, tremolite-actinolite was found not in ultramafic rocks, but in mafic basalts of the Copper Hills Volcanic formation. The tremolite-actinolite found in these rocks was the result of both low-grade regional metamorphism of mafic volcanic rock and with localized hydrothermal deposition in veins. Euhedral clino-pyroxenes in basalt can be replaced by fibrous amphibole through a process called uralitization, a paramorphic transition where mineral chemistry remains the same, but the crystal structure is changed. Also at this time, USGS began publishing a series of maps of known NOA locations around the country beginning in 2005 and revised every year or two as new data came in (USGS, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010).

Then, with the coming of the recession, and the virtual cessation of development in the El Dorado Hills, interest in NOA shifted back to the San Francisco Bay Area with numerous projects encountering chrysotile-bearing serpentine. Then the focus shifted back to amphiboles, but in the SF Bay Area. A site in the hills above Fremont, CA was slated for a major construction project called the Calaveras Dam Replacement Project (SFPUC 2014). Serpentine rock was known to occur in the area so an March 2015

effort was undertaken in 2007 to identify the extent of NOA occurrence at the site by analyzing drill core from the area to be excavated. While chrysotile-bearing serpentine was found in several localized zones, the biggest surprise was the extensive presence of asbestiform glaucophane, a non-regulated amphibole, which was found to occur in blueschist. Blueschist is a metamorphic rock whose progenitor is basalt. However, unlike the alteration of clino-pyroxene crystals only found in the metabasalts of the Copper Hill Volcanics, blueschist involves whole sale recrystallization of the entire rock with, in some cases, virtually the whole rock becoming replaced by fibrous glaucophane. Dealing with a rock containing 80–90% asbestos is a particularly challenging activity requiring exceptional engineering controls and air monitoring. Analysis by Asbestos TEM Labs using PLM, TEM and field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) shows that the amphiboles in the glaucophane amphibolite (“blueschist”) exhibit an asbestiform habit (Fig. 3). Actinolite amphibolites at the CDRP site generally exhibit a non-asbestiform habit; however, several samples reveal textures characterized by non-asbestiform amphiboles with an overprinting of asbestiform intergrowths.

Another type of rock unit identified to contain asbestos was found at a mine in the Sierra Foothill Metamorphic Belt southeast of Fresno where highly metamorphosed sedimentary rocks (such as impure limestone or marl) or serpentine, had been metamorphosed by local intrusion of granitic rocks forming talc tremolite schist where the tremolite is both asbestiform and non-asbestiform. This type of alteration is also known to be present in small scale asbestos occurrences throughout California, including the Berkeley Hills.

Up until this time in California, concern over asbestos containing rocks extended to both ultramafic and mafic rock, as well as alteration of sedimentary rocks by local igneous intrusions. This understanding was shattered in December of 2013, with the release of a paper by Professors Brenda Buck, Rod

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

21

HEADER HERE CONTRIBUTIONS PROFESSIONAL website at http://www.astm.org/SYMPOSIA/filtrexx40.cgi?+P+MAINCOMM+D22+-P+EVENT_ID+2719+P+MEETING_ID+92614+sympotherinfo.frm

About the Author: R. Mark Bailey, PG, holds licensure as a geologist in California. He is the president of Asbestos TEM Labs, an asbestos testing lab that specializes in NOA analysis with offices in Berkeley, CA and Sparks, NV. He is an expert mineralogist/crystallographer with extensive experience working on and consulting for NOA projects including El Dorado Hills, Libby, Calaveras Dam Replacement Project, Boulder City, NV, and numerous others. He is a regular speaker at asbestos conferences on NOA issues and has chaired four geological meetings on NOA (two for AEG and two for GSA). He is also the primary co-chair for the upcoming ASTM International NOA Symposium.

References

Fig. 4. Actinolite asbestos fibers in cut rock surface of thin section billet viewed

by FESEM. PHOTO COURTESY OF ASBESTOS TEM LABS.

Metcalf and others of UNLV (Buck et al, 2013 and Metcalf & Buck, 2014) describing Miocene granitic bedrock and related colluvium and alluvium in the area of Boulder City, NV which contained NOA dominated by fibrous actinolite and minor winchite (Fig. 4). This occurrence violated rules which most geologists who dealt with NOA had held to—that NOA occurred primarily in ultramafic rocks, sometimes in metamorphosed mafic and sedimentary, but never in siliceous granitic igneous rocks, in this case a quartz monzonite. Detailed mineralogical analysis of the host rock revealed what appears to be replacement of euhdral hornblende by asbestiform actinolite. It appears that a late stage thermal metamorphic event caused the metamorphism. The area underlain by these NOA rocks is several hundred square miles in area.

Conclusion The field of NOA assessment, analysis and mitigation is undergoing major changes. NOA analysis, while effective, needs better methods and a better trained and equipped analytical base of labs to properly analyze NOA samples. Geologists working in the field must keep up with new developments in the field as increasing varieties of rock types are shown to potentially contain NOA. In this vein, so to speak, AEG has hosted two NOA conferences in Oakland, CA (2012 & 2014) where geologists, environmental scientists, industrial hygienists and regulators have met to share their expertise, experiences and concerns. Additionally, the NOA issue has become such a growing endeavor that ASTM, which hosts some of the largest asbestos conferences in the world, is hosting its first ever International NOA Symposium in Anaheim, CA over the two day period of April 30th–May 1st, 2015. All are welcome to attend.

For more information contact myself, Mark Bailey, PG at mark@asbestostemlabs.com or go the ASTM NOA Symposium 22

USEPA, 2014, Toxicological Review of Libby Amphibole Asbestos, EPA/635/R11/002F USEPA, 1993, Method for the Determination of Asbestos in Bulk Building Materials, 600/R-93/116 NIOSH, 1989, Asbestos and Other Fibers by PCM, 7400 USEPA, 1998, 40 CFR 763, Subpart E, Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools CARB, 1990, Asbestos Airborne Toxics Control Measure for Surfacing Applications, http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/atcm/asb2atcm.htm CARB, 1991, Method 435, Determination of Asbestos Content of Serpentine Aggregate, http://www.arb.ca.gov/testmeth/vol3/m_435.pdf CDMG, 2000, A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California— Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos, ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/ofr/ofr_2000-019.pdf CARB, 2001, Asbestos Airborne Toxics Control Measure for Construction, Grading, Quarrying and Surface Mining Operations, http://www.arb.ca.gov/ toxics/atcm/asb2atcm.htm CDMG, 2002, Special Publication 124, Guidelines for Geologic Investigations of Naturally Occurring Asbestos in California, http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/ minerals/hazardous_minerals/asbestos/Asbestos_Guidelines_SP124.pdf Meeker, G.O. et al, 2003, The Composition and Morphology of Amphiboles from the Rainy Creek Complex, Near Libby, Montana, Am. Min., vol. 88, pgs 1955–1969 CAL EPA, 2004, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Slodusty Road Study: Airborne Asbestos Quantitative Cancer Risk Assessment, https://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Projects/upload/Garden-Valley_REP_ OEHHA_Risk-Assessment_9-04.pdf USGS, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, Reported Historic Asbestos Mines, Historic Asbestos Prospects, and Other Natural Occurrences of Asbestos in California, USGS Open-File Report 2011-1188 USEPA, 2005, Asbestos Assessment for El Dorado Hills, http://www.epa.gov/ region9/toxic/noa/eldorado/pdf/eldorado-asb-flyer.pdf SFPUC, 2014, Calaveras Dam Replacement Project Fact Sheet – Naturally Occurring Asbestos http://www.sfwater.org/modules/showdocument.aspx? documentid=4851 Buck, B. et al, 2013, Naturally Occurring Asbestos: Potential for Human Exposure, Southern Nevada, USA, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 77:2192–2204 Metcalf, R. & Buck, B., 2014, Genesis and health risk implications of an unusual occurrence of fibrous NaFe3+-amphibole, Geology, v. 43, p. 63-66

Working on a Great Project?

AEG News is always looking for interesting technical papers. Send your query to News Editor Anna Saindon at news@aegweb.org.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

HEADER FIELD TRIPS HERE

Irrawaddy River, Myanmar (Burma)

M

Jim Hamel – Allegheny-Ohio Section, AEG

y wife, Betsy Hamel, and I cruised up the Irrawaddy River in Myanmar from December 21–30, 2014.

We boarded ship in Pyay (formerly Prome) and traveled 520 km upriver to Mandalay, with stops at various points of interest along the way. We were definitely a long way from of Hamel Geotechnical Consultants, in Monroeville, PA. The Irrawaddy, Myanmar’s largest river and most important commercial waterway, was immortalized as “The Road to Mandalay” in Rudyard Kipling’s poem Mandalay. The Irrawaddy rises at the confluence of the N’mai and Mali Rivers in Northern Myanmar, and then flows 2,170 km south, emptying into the Andaman Sea through its large delta.

Monsoonal rains from mid-May to mid-October, along with melting of snow and glaciers in the Himalayan headwaters of the N’mai and Mali Rivers during summer, cause large variations in the discharge and stage of the Irrawaddy. At Mandalay and Pyay (Prome), a range of 9.66 to 11.37 m has been measured between low water and flood level, respectively (Wikipedia, 2015). The water level was very low in late December (dry season) and appeared to be about 10 m below high water marks along the banks at various locations, consistent with this data.

These annual fluctuations of discharge and stage cause extensive instability and erosion of the alluvial banks, both inplace alluvium and bank failure debris as well as channel changes due to sediment movement. The cruise ship has a 1.5 m draft, making it sometimes necessary to probe the navigation channel; the ship scraped over a few shallow sandbars.

Seasonal variations in water level also require landing and mooring facilities at various levels along the banks.

River training and bank protection measures are few and far between on the Irrawaddy. Sand and gravel dredging is common in certain reaches. The annual sediment load extends the delta surface into the Andaman Sea about 50 m per year (Wikipedia, 2015).

Myanmar’s military government has made agreements with China for construction of many hydroelectric dams along the Irrawaddy, N’mai, and Mali Rivers. Most of the power from these dams will go to China.

There are major concerns regarding the environmental effects of these dams (Wall Street Journal, July 6, 2011, p. A9; Wikipedia, 2015). These include losses of villages, farmland, and fish spawning areas; flooding of rainforests and cultural sites; reduction of downstream movement of sediment and nutrients which enrich farmland, particularly in the delta; and impacts on biodiverse ecosystems. Particularly threatened species are the Irrawaddy dolphin and the extremely rare Irrawaddy river shark.

Myitsone Dam, one of the largest with a height of 152 m and an inundation area of 766 km2, is to be built at the confluence of the N’mai and Mali Rivers, i.e., the head of the

March 2015

Betsy and Jim in Longyis (Burmese sarongs)

The Irrawaddy cruise ship

Irrawaddy. This dam site is less than 100 km from the fault along the edges of the Eurasian and Indian tectonic plates, leading to additional concerns regarding seismic activity and seismic stability.

The Irrawaddy River is a great place to study fluvial geomorphology, bank instability, and environmental interactions, but Myanmar has much more to offer relative to its long history and unique cultures.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

23

HEADER FIELD TRIPS HERE

Probing channel depth

Low water on the Irrawaddy

24

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

HEADER FIELD TRIPS HERE

Drawdown-induced bank sliding on the Irrawaddy

Sandbars on the Irrawaddy

March 2015

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

25

HEADER FIELD TRIPS HERE

Sunset on U Bein's Bridge, Taungthaman Lake, Amarapura (world's longest teak bridge, 1.2 km long, 200 years old)

Pagoda, Sale

26

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

ISSUES IN PROFESSIONAL HEADER LICENSURE HERE In this series, we present the opinions of the author as he explores the issues that are important in the implementation and operation of statutory licensure for geologists. The author’s opinions are not necessarily those of the Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists or any other organization or entity.

Issue LXXIII The Industry Exemption in Geology Licensure Laws: Should It Stay?

Robert E. Tepel, PG, CEG, and Past President AEG

Introduction

T

Business Administration Aspects of the Industry Exemption

he “industry exemption” is a common, but not ubiquitous, feature in design professional licensure Risk Management laws. It is also called the “industrial exemption” but that From the standpoint of managing business risks, under an term has different meanings in other contexts, so industry exemption the employing company assumes responsi“industry exemption” is the term of choice adopted here. Much bility, accountability, and liability for the work of its exempt proof the general information here was gathered from web fessional employees. The employed professionals, being searches for “industry/industrial exemption.” exempt from licensure, have no legal or board-imposed ethical In geology licensure laws, the purpose of an industry obligations to protect (or even consider) the public health, exemption is to exempt from licensure geologists (or, broadly, safety, and wellbeing, and therefore have no risk of discipline as in some laws, geoscientists) employed in the extractive from a licensure board. Why would an employer be willing to industries if their professional services are purely internal to the assume this risk? See discussion below. company that employs them, i.e., the professional’s services are not offered to the public by the employer.

Employee Loyalty Both from a business administration perspective and a An insight into a deeper reason why industry might oppose public interest perspective, the fundamental question raised by licensure for its design professional employees is provided by the industry exemption is who in the industrial organization shall Musselman (2009); see text box. In this context, we can see an be authorized (and obligated) to assess the risk to the public industry concern that licensed posed by the organization’s activities and products? Managerialprofessional employees ists say the answer is managers, professional organizations say Industries exerted could have a divided the answer is knowledgeable, licensed, professionals. powerful political influence on a duty of loyalty, and Who favors the industry exemption and who would like to state-by-state basis in the 1940s industry wants total see it eliminated, or at least reduced in scope and applicathrough 1960s to get these exemptions loyalty to the tion? Not surprisingly, industry groups argue in favor of the enacted. A friend of mine who worked for a employer. exemption, viewing required licensure as unnecessary and major U.S. manufacturer throughout that period indicated that the external communication at the burdensome. In summary, the industry argument is that, Functional time stressed the nature of our legal system, product given the public, environmental, and consumer protecPower Shifts liability law, and a variety of other broad arguments, tions conferred by the laws and regulations under which it but this friend indicated that the internal discussion operates, it is unnecessary to hold the company’s profesOn a functional was that their engineers were to work for one sional employees personally accountable for considering basis, if profesemployer—the company—and not have to the public interest in their workplace practice via statutory sional licensure is answer separately to an outside authority. licensure. That is the surficial reasoning presented by required for That was the bottom line. industry; a deeper industry concern is discussed under the industry employees, (Excerpted from Musselman, heading “Employee Loyalty” below. it shifts some decision2009) Design professionals (in this example, engineers) tend to making power away from bring up examples of industry failure such as the General industry managers and into Motors ignition switch problems and the BP Deepwater the hands of the licensed profesHorizon oil spill (see National Society of Professional Engisionals. This power shift could disrupt the established authority neers, 2012, and comments following the blog post of Mushierarchy of the employer. Managers may not welcome this selman, 2009). Their general argument is that the extra level power shift because the licensed professionals will raise quesof professionalism imposed by licensure might have empowtions about products, projects, processes, and operations ered, and perhaps required, the engineers involved in the based on their overriding obligation to protect the public health, design, manufacturing, or operational decision-making safety, and well-being. processes to act in ways that would have better protected the public or the environment.

March 2015

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

27

HEADERIN ISSUES HERE PROFESSIONAL LICENSURE Table 1. General Classification of the Industry Exemption in Geology Licensure Laws Type of Industry Exemption

Jurisdictions

No Exemption

Arizona, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Tennessee, and Utah.

Petroleum Geologists

Kansas and Mississippi.

Mining Geologists

Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Both Petroleum and Mining Geologists

Alabama, Louisiana, and Texas.

Note: Exceptions and conditions might apply, both in general and on a case-by-case basis. Geologists should check current law and regulations after consulting this table for general information.

law and the licensure board’s regulations or interpretation of the law.

The Industry Exemption in Geology Licensure Laws There are now 32 U.S. jurisdictions (31 states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) that have statutory licensure for geologists. A broad industry exemption in a geology licensure law would exempt geologists employed by companies in the extractive industries: petroleum exploration, development, and production companies; and mining companies. Not all exemption clauses go that far. Table 1 groups the licensing jurisdictions into four classes according to the extent of their industry exemption: no industry exemption, exempting petroleum geologists but not mining geologists, exempting mining geologists but not petroleum geologists, and exempting both mining and petroleum geologists. Table 1 is based on information from the ASBOG® State Matrix available at www.asbog.org. New York and Louisiana are not yet included in the ASBOG® State Matrix because their geology licensure laws are not yet fully effective; their classification is based on my interpretation of their respective statutes.

The variations among industry exemptions in geology licensure laws probably stem from input by interested geological professional associations and industry representatives during the development of each law. In about half the jurisdictions with geology licensure laws, industry apparently accepts the lack of an industry exemption for geo-professionals. Many of these states have significant extractive industry operations, so the lack of an industry exemption does not seem to be a problem for industry in those states. Industry might not have a problem in the absence of an industry exemption because enough industry geologists become licensed, even if exempt; to meet industry needs for a licensee on staff.

Exceptions to the Industry Exemption An exception may occur if the work products of the exempt geo-professional employee are used outside the employing company in a way such that the public will rely on that work.

Examples include use of the employed geo-professional’s work products in support of an operating permit, license, or rights application, or in an environmental compliance report, or in a regulatory filing. This is geoscientific work on which the public will rely, work in which the public has an interest.

The need for licensure in these cases is governed by state 28

Studies of the Industry Exemption and Attempts to Modify It The industry exemption has not been a topic of discussion or activity among geologists, but the engineering community has been involved in reviews, commentary, and studies regarding the industry exemption, including a recent attempt to modify it in one state. The discussion in the engineering community is founded on a perceived risk that, dependent on company-specific values, the industry exemption can allow disregard of the risks that industry functions poses to the public or the environment. Is this also a concern for the practice of geology?

Given the parallel politics of licensure in the two professions, the experience of the engineering organizations is of value to geologists and their organizations. An introduction to the literature is provided below.

Norman (2005) describes the long history of the industrial exemption in engineering licensure laws. Examples of more recent discussion and opinion about the industry exemption in laws and organizational policies are found in Launey (2013), Musselman (2009, 2010, 2011), IEEE-USA Staff, (2011), and National Society of Professional Engineers (2012). In Pennsylvania, engineering organizations supported legislation to remove or modify the industrial exemption (Anonymous, 2012).

Should The Industry Exemption Stay in Geology Licensure Laws?

The industry exemption, where extant in geology licensure laws, apparently works without great harm to the public (to date). In states without an industry exemption for either or both petroleum and mining geologists, the occasional extractive industry company need for a licensed geologist to be in responsible charge of work on which the public will rely is apparently met by having one or a few staff geologists who are licensed, or by retaining licensed consultants.

Given how contentious the issue could become, it seems the geoscience professions should simply maintain awareness of the industry exemption concept and how and where it is applied.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

ISSUES IN PROFESSIONAL HEADER LICENSURE HERE

References Anonymous, 2014, PE REPORT: Pennsylvania PEs Take Aim at Industry Exemption. Posted at http://www.nspe.org/resources/pe-magazine/april2014/pennsylvania-pes-take-aim-industry-exemption#sthash.vwknxZWi.dpuf IEEE-USA Staff, 2011, Model Law al Exemption to Professional Engineering Licensures is Under Review, IEEE=-USA Today’s Engineer, May 201 posted at http://www.todaysengineer.org/2011/may/licensure2.asp Launey, A. J. P., 2013, Industrial Exemption Task Force (Report), National Council of Examiners in Engineering and Surveying, PDF posted at http://www.todaysengineer.org/2013/Jul/files/Industrial-Exemption-TFreport-2013.pdf Musselman, Craig, 2009, The Industrial Exemption: What, f Anything, Should the Profession Do? National Society of Professional Engineers Blog at www.nspe.org/ resources/ blogs/ pe-licensing-blog/ industrial-exemptionwhat-if-anything-should-profession-do Musselman, Craig, 2010, The Industrial Exemption – Which States Have Them and Which Do Not? National Society of Professional Engineers, blog at athttp://www.nspe.org/resources/blogs/pe-licensing-blog/industrial-exemption-which-states-have-them-and-which-states-do Musselman, Craig, 2011, Industrial Exemptions: NSPE and NCEES Take Clear Action, National Society of Professional Engineers, blog at http://www.nspe.org/resources/blogs/pe-licensing-blog/industrial-exemptions-nspe-and-ncees-take-clear-action National Society of Professional Engineers, 2012, The Compelling Rationale to Remove Engineering Industrial Exemptions. Posted at http://www.nspe.org/resources/blogs/pe-licensing-blog/compellingrationale-remove-engineering-industrial-exemptions Norman, Neil A., 2005, Where Does NSPE Stand on the Industy Exemptions?

Available at http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/pdfs/blog/ industry_exemptions-neil_norman.pdf

Index of Advertisers AEG 2015 Annual Meeting ..................................Back Cover AEG 2016 Annual Meeting................................................29 AEG Sponsors ...................................................................40 Geotechnology....................................................................4 REG Review.......................................................................40

For Information on supporting AEG through sponsorship and/or advertising in AEG News, contact AEG Headquarters: advertising@aegweb.org.

Fastest way to make an editor like you— Remember the deadlines! They are always online at aegweb.org, and the next issue’s is always on page 1, bottom of left-hand column.

AEG 59th Annual Meeting – September 18–25, 2016

Kona – Island of Hawaii Waikoloa Beach Marriott Resort & Spa – Group Rate Only $185 Located beachfront along the sun-splashed Kohala Coast, the luxurious Waikoloa Beach Marriott Resort welcomes guests with gracious style and Hawaiian service. With the bounty of land and sea captured in stunning views, this Big Island Hawaii hotel and resort is the perfect place for a memorable meeting with colleagues. Experience an authentic Polynesian show at the Sunset Luau as our Special Event. Set upon 15 acres of oceanfront splendor, the Waikoloa Beach Marriott Resort & Spa offers a truly magical setting.

March 2015

Field Trip Ideas

Conceptual Guest Tours

• Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park • Mauna Loa – star gazing at the Onizuka Center for International Astronomy • Laupahoehoe and Pololu Valley – tsunami impact areas • Waipio Valley – earthquake-induced landslides • Puna Geothermal Station • Honolulu and Oahu – geotechnical projects

• Plantation Tours (coffee and macadamia nut) • Puu Kohala Helau National Historic Site & Spencer Beach • Snorkeling • Umauma Falls and Tropical Garden, The Umauma Experience Zipline • Horseback Riding • Kailua/Kona Walking Tour • Pearl Harbor and Iolani Palace

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

29

HEADER HERE PERSPECTIVES

Perspectives are articles dedicated to the belief that mature Engineering Geologists, in addition to possessing a thorough knowledge of fundamental science, should have up-to-date personal perspectives on the application of their technology.

Perspectives No. 65

Environmental “Expertise” Developing a Personal Career-Survival Pathway

S

Allen W. Hatheway, HM AEG, Past President, 1985

ome aspects of our profession never change ... that I can say with some surety, now in my 53rd year in our profession ... and so now I have words and thoughts on what each of us can plan for and accomplish in order to survive as an employed professional, and to do so at the most personally rewarding level.

I define Environmental Expertise in the context of our own allied professions: The body of personal capabilities and demonstrated experience that one brings to the source of their employment, wherein every moment, in one way or another, turns out to be beneficial to our employer, to our clients, and to ourselves. As applied to the geoscience aspects of the Environmental field, this equates to a capacity to be recognized as a “go-to” person who can deliver good or better value, on time, on budget, and with a smile.

I further define Success in the context of achieving external recognition of your Environmental Expertise: Achieving a personal stability in employment as a professional geoscientist, meaning mainly that you can land a job “tomorrow” when you need one “today,” and with the underpinning of a wide reputation of being able to perform your professional duties, as defined by your record of Environmental Expertise for delivering honest, forthwith, and accurate results of each engagement. And so, as in all life endeavors, each of us holds the key to our own success, however we choose to measure that elusive target.

Today’s General Playingfield in Environmental Practice North American environmental technical practice began in 1969, with the Presidential (Nixon) signing of the National Environmental Policy Act, and its Congressional mandate began on January 1, 1970, with the creation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). In most ways, the world has followed suit and the USEPA no longer holds most of the “cards” of the applicable technologies or of the regulatory programs.

Though the means often are different around the world, the general process set forth in the USEPA National Contingency Plan (Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 300) are steeped in common sense and will generally be seen to also be similarly applied in other nations.

Now that we are half way into the fifth decade of American environmental protection law and regulation, there are some simple unwritten and un-prescribed rules of thumb that I have

30

found to be helpful in judging how each of us might prepare our own Environmental Expertise.

The environmental response consulting and remedialaction contracting fields are rife with “cut-throat” competition; pick your target elements of expertise in areas of practice that are least affected by “bid-shopping” and over-population of people seeking competitive assignments; Government abets bid-shopping and bid-shopping attracts a full measure of marginally-qualified competition; not your “cup of tea” if you can manage to steer a wide berth here; The ten USEPA Regions are functionally unapproachable, unless you have cultivated individual friendships. Approach the USEPA where and when you have friendly contacts. FOIA has not been useful for reasons other than to thwart “public access”—and you are one of the public; The Army Corps of Engineers is known to have a generally more amicable attitude toward the public, and will be worth your effort to develop a contact if you choose one or more areas of expertise within its regulatory environmental compliance authority; State Environmental Agencies are famous for being decent about outside practitioners who are sensitive (i.e. don’t waste their time; they truly all are over-worked and understaffed); and they make their files accessible on appointment, for review, and; Government (Federal and State alike) regulations and their implementation guidance often are difficult to comprehend; small areas of these regulations are good places at which to grit your teeth and develop expertise in understanding what works and how to apply such to regulatory compliance actions based in applied geoscience.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

Derelict Brits Norite DimensionStone Quarry, Botswana, Southern Africa PHOTO BY ALLEN W. HATHEWAY, 1990

March 2015

PERSPECTIVES HEADER HERE Table 1. Presenting Your Personal Environmental Expertise Presentation Mode

Contents

Making Use of These Elements

Resume

One-page summary resume backed up by a three-page detailed resume.

Consider every event of your professional career !

Add the most substantial and seek to replace any single event when such becomes secondary to the value of later events.

Experience List (s)

One master list—add every project involvement. Pare these off and move such to separate topical lists for each major specialty of your expertise.

Make individual entries showing location, description of key characteristics of each project; add your contributions and year date.

Join Key Professional Societies

Even when your employer is too cheap to assist in payment of dues.

Think constantly about presenting posters and giving/publishing technical papers; take the substantive data from your own database entries!

Attend Professional Society Local Meetings

Never dine with your own work colleagues—meet others.

Carry business cards; make friends; chat them up with honest questions about which you wish to know more within your own developing areas of expertise.

Volunteer for committee work.

Offer talks on your new topics of expertise.

Stand for election of leadership positions.

Seek Professional Licensure

Geologist or Engineer, or both

A “must” action at the earliest possible time.

Create a LinkedIn Profile

Struggle to get a profile up and posted

Add to the profile every time you have a new, claimable achievement!

Geoscience Library of Applied Technology (GLAT)

The AEG Foundation internet website of topical expertise.

Consider becoming a Topic Curator and then populating a Topic Collection with information gathered and presented by you, as demonstration of your topical expertise.

Choosing a Successful Pathway— Private Sector v. Public Sector

are very favorable for those who have taken the trouble to gather and to present their environmental expertise.

My six-point list goes to the point that there are three economic pathways for the more aggressive career-oriented applied Geoscientists; pathways that can, if vigorously pursued, can result in personal survival into and beyond retirement. I am one of these people, and believe me, I do not disparage my competent brothers and sisters who are interested in more quiescent pathways in which quality of life is merged with devoted service in the public sector. Nonetheless, I sense that the elements of Survival and of Success apply both to professional Applied Geoscience careers in both the public and private sectors: my advocated expertisebased track; excellence in delivering project management to meet the paying client’s needs (I won’t comment on the opportunities for heartburn over the ethics that patch the client into the environmental agency requirements; and, excellence in selling environmental consulting services to clients (Here we have apparitions from Death of A Salesman to contend with).

Good Work Habits

Preparing for the Pathway Based on Personal Environmental Expertise In the course of creating a reputation based on Environmental Expertise one has to imagine what is going to “sell” and that “clients” (substantial people and their organizations with the funds to hire us) have take notice of our Expertise and then “stand still long enough” to take an interest in what we have to offer. The contents of Table 1 strike me as examples of our “wares” as being the lure for the contact. I do not lose sight of the fact that “contact” is a two-way street, but first we have to prepare ourselves with the substance that will act as an attractant. Fortunately the digital age and the Internet March 2015

Fortunately, my sense is that proper work habits actually require any of us to recognize that we can carefully manage the results of our labors, just as we work to meet our terms of employment. The difference here is focused on the adverb carefully, in which we are ever mindful that our employment obligations, faithfully executed are just an enduring series of “opportunities” to take full advantage of that subtle difference between a job and a career! Take one more step of commitment, and turn that career into a calling, and your employer is properly served, and The author’s ubiquitous Field Book, containing printed notes, sketches and drawings you are solidly on the way to an exciting new life in which you have become devoted to your profession as a life-long student. Table 2 puts forth the actions (good work habits) that will assure you that you will not “waste” the opportunities that surround you.

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

31

HEADER HERE PERSPECTIVES Table 2. Setting Up Good Work Habits—Leading to Enhanced Personal Expertise Good Work Habits

Dimensions of Habit

Making Use of Good Habit Results

Digital Photography

Never be without your digital camera.

Process each day’s imagery; devise a caption code: Year/Month/Place/Topic-1, -2, -3, etc., for chronologic filing in topic folders.

Your Field Note Book

Use the bound variety; note each page with sequential number; trust nothing to memory.

Force yourself to sketch layouts and profiles; add a scale and North arrow; note all images taken; make backup copies, scanned or facsimile; keep them at home in safe order.

Your Personal Job List

Date, place, description; all chronologically sequential.

You will need this for: substantiation of experience; professional registration, and filling out your experience list.

Practice Field Sketch Art

Sketch in erasable pencil; ink-up the image that night.

This talent will place you ahead of most of your competition and hold others in awe of your ability to record the substance of field observations.

Print Copies of Your Best Field Photography

Use them for postal cards.

Stay in touch with others who matter to you in terms of career, friends and family.

Create a Computer Database

Employ a hierarchy of entries within your selected “areas of personal interest”— which will become your personal items of expertise.

Force yourself to make entries, on the day that you discover anything of interest; make them quotes that will stand as future citations for forthcoming technical writing or as the basis for future courtroom testimony! FileMaker Pro works fine for this author.

Join (or create) a LinkedIn “Discussion Group”

Join and monitor one “group” for each topic of professional “expertise” for which you intend to become an “expert.”

Engage in discussions by offering factual input related to your expertise, to include reference citations concerning what you have discovered from relevant literature—far more productive than vacuous frittering of time and effort on social media!

Participate in One or More LinkedIn Technical Discussion Groups

Don’t be afraid to post questions for discussion.

Force yourself to show “liked” entries of your sincere interest. Earnestly put forth comments. Comment by including number-and-place based facts to improve your creditability.

Develop Thoughtful “Opinions”

For every technical topic that excites your mentality

Put those thoughts into your database, as a universal “bank” of source data.

Learn to Keyboard Type

Teach yourself to write from flow of consciousness.

Transfer your thoughts, findings, and clues to additional expertise, to your relevant database entries.

Never Miss a Chance to Go to The Field

Make copious notes; execute many images.

Quickly focus on developing topics of expertise; file your notes in your database and images in support folders.

Become an “Expert” in One Nasty Task

Carefully pick a technical/regulatory task that terrifies your own age/experience competition.

Ask your employer to support your effort to master the nasty task; get better than good; offer friendly help, but always ask for a time-charge account number.

If an Agency Employee, Never Pass Technical Training Opportunities

Learn, learn, learn; keep an eye out for potential topics of expertise.

Quickly focus on developing topics of expertise; file your notes in your database and images in support folders.

Smile Like Your Life Depended on Such

What have you got to lose?

This will open the doors to places where you will encounter new topics of expertise, and then, “you’ll know what to do!”

Never Make an Empty Promise

Your professional life depends on people who can trust you.

It costs no more ... and honesty is the undisputable pathway to achieve your own potential.

Potential Elements of Your Environmental Expertise You are in charge of what will constitute your own Environmental Expertise! My biases are definitely toward what I call Show & Tell Evidence—wherein I work hard to organize my Environmental Expertise in ways that grab attention, eyes to mind, and then to thrust out numbers, names, places, examples, and always substantial reference-cited that locks my expertise up for the ultimate test, courtroom testimony, crossexamination and efforts to shake my associated opinions.

Never mind that you may dislike forensics and have no desire to perform expert testimony, just consider that every bit of your expertise should be supported by a personal opinion and that your personal opinion should be grounded with the same form of personal protection that experts should be prepared to demonstrate under courtroom “fire.”

32

In Table 3, I offer my personal outlook on the “universe” of efforts that I have learned to take in my search for the truths that I seek to identify, structure, compose and define my opinions; all of which make up the elements of my own type Elements of Environmental Expertise. In fact, I have allowed myself to become so “hungry” for basic knowledge as support for my Environmental Expertise, that I take true joy in seeking, evaluating, interpreting and lodging evidence into my database.

With the resources of your database, you will learn to cross search and to discover relational evidence that can be utilized to expand (breadth, depth and citable detail) for your Expertise topics, that, eventually you will become adapt to counter challengers with “more” information than they had hoped to hear from courtroom examination. Of course, I freely

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

PERSPECTIVES HEADER HERE Table 3. Potential Elements of Your Environmental Expertise Element

Source

Making Use of the Element

Agency Contacts

Develop a friendship with one reliable person in the remedial action unit of your State regulatory agency and one in each directly surrounding state.

Have a good question to ask that person every time you meet, ask: how to access electronic guidance documents and specific case documents, how to gain visitor access to regulatory review regulatory compliance files, about functional aspects of related compliance actions.

State Regulatory Compliance Act for Toxic Site Remediation

This is the single document by which State Agencies take over Compliance with USEPA oversight.

Generally results in a State Compliance Plan, which becomes the framework for conduct of environmental science and technology applications of your own skills.

Regulatory Action Types

Prescribed by State Compliance Act IAW USEPA

Specifies how State will meet minimal USEPA requirements for State lead action.

Applicable Regulatory Technologies

USEPA website; Technical guidance

Since about 2005, USEPA has made outstanding strides in bringing forth the thousands of technical guidance documents published over the past 45 years.

Applicable Regulatory Technologies

USEPA website; RODs: Records of Decision

Select a collection of pdf-format Records of Decision for a particular genre of derelict toxic waste sites, and read yourself into further expertise.

Site & Waste Characterization

This is the regular pro-forma geologicbased site investigation for uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.

The basic process; Exploratory techniques

Internet Search Engine Alerts

Place alerts selected to bring forth news releases and topical announcements that mirror the content of your individual topical expertise.

Faithfully gather this information and place it in related entries in your database.

admit that your legal counsel should always be minded in terms of your responses to cross-examination.

Summary Pyramids represent the most stable of all equilateral geometric solids; they are characterized by a peak-point of advantageous height, and their bases are broad; just as should be the shape of your own professional career.

Have fun and enjoy increasing stability in your professional career; and if you fancy yourself as a caring individual, you will be further admired for continually advancing in ways that will allow you to help others who are worthwhile and caring individuals, and you will leave our profession and our environment in considerably “better” condition than it was upon your own entry.

Editor’s Note: Readers will find Allen’s earlier 64-article professional practice commentary in the body of AEG Special Publication no. 13, Perspectives: A Collection of Lessons Learned from a Career of Intense Practice in Engineering Geology (2005), selected as the Holdredge Award subject for 2009.

AT LEFT: Author’s later-drafted tape-and-pace underground map of roof-support pillars and roof collapse “dome-outs” of a derelict, abandoned and partiallyflooded Kansas limestone aggregate-quarry room-and-pillar mine underlying a RCRA Class D Sanitary Landfill

March 2015

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

33

HEADER HERE

Carolinas Section

t n o r f e m o The H

Alex Rutledge, Chair AEG President Ken Fergason visited the Carolinas for our Section meeting in Concord, NC, on January 21. It was a joint meeting with the Southern Branch of ASCE, and we had 67 people in attendance—including 11 students. Ken’s talk on the geologic investigation for the Hoover Bypass Bridge was well received, and I know he inspired many of the students by showcasing some of the opportunities that are available to young engineering geologists.

Joanna Harbison, our newly elected Section Secretary, deserves recognition for her dedication to the Section and her role as meeting planner for the winter section meeting. Joanna gave birth to a healthy baby girl on January 15, and was helping sign people in at our Section meeting less than a week later! Congratulations, Joanna!

Once again we have an aggressive schedule planned for the 2015 Jahns Lecturer, Eldon Gath. We have tentatively scheduled Eldon to visit and present at eight colleges and universities in eastern Tennessee, North Carolina, and South Carolina, as well as our spring section meeting in Raleigh, NC, on April 16. A special thanks goes to Rick Kolb who has worked with the schools and volunteers to help make Eldon’s trip so productive.

Sue Buchanan, Jane Gill-Shaler, and Steve Harper have been working hard to prepare for our spring and fall field trips.

In the fall, we plan to have a one-day trip to the Reid Gold Mine outside of Charlotte, NC, followed by a spring terroir-centric field trip to the Yadkin Valley American Viticultural Area. Jane and Steve have been “hard at work” visiting every winery in the area to see who can best accommodate a group of wine-loving geologists. More details on both trips coming soon!

Our section is in the final stages of setting up the Carolinas Scholarship Fund through the AEG Foundation, thanks to efforts of Briget Doyle and Paul Weaver who spearheaded drafting the charter. The scholarship fund will be used to support undergraduate students studying in geoscience-related programs in the Carolinas. If there are any Carolina students reading this now, we should be ready to award funds in 2016!

Our annual Section Sponsors allow us to provide activities and outreach opportunities to our membership and the public.

Rick Kolb, our Sponsorship Chair, has already recruited 12 sponsors this year, with contributions ranging from $250 to $600! Thanks to Rick for all of his hard work, and thanks to all of our sponsors who allow our section the opportunity to serve our members well.

New York–Philadelphia Section Mia Painter, Newsletter Editor We continue to thank everybody for keeping our NY–P Section vibrant, either by attending, speaking at meetings, serving on a committee (Program, Internal Affairs, and External Affairs), or 34

by offering feedback or ideas. We welcome new ideas and feedback anytime!

In November 2014, the NY–P Section held an Aspiring Professional Evening Reception at The Office in Bridgewater, NJ. It was a resounding success, and we welcomed a few new Section members as a result! We plan to hold another joint reception with the AHMP and LSRPA very soon, most likely in southern NJ. In January 2015, we organized a joint meeting with ASCE’s Delaware Valley GeoInstitute. The meeting was held in King of Prussia, PA, in order to boost our active presence in the Philadelphia area. David Chapman, PE, Lachel & Associates of Morristown, NJ, presented a well-received talk entitled Hudson River Tunnels, Mega-Projects, and Risk – A Designer’s Perspective.

February 26, 2015, we welcomed Dr. Lee Slater who presented at our dinner meeting in Somerset, NJ. Dr. Slater is Professor and Chair of the Department of Earth & Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University Newark, where he has established a strong research program primarily centered on hydrogeological and biogeochemical applications of electrical geophysical methods. He presented a talk entitled A Fractured Rock Geophysics ToolBox (FRGT) for Improving Characterization and Monitoring at Chlorinated Solvent Contaminated Sites.

Following the February presentation by Dr. Slater, we have an active spring planned: Dr. Greg Herman will be on hand to give us another great presentation about his work with downhole geophysics on March 26. On April 28, we will hold our First Annual Student Night! Our Student Night Committee, chaired by Chad Freed of West Chester University is hard at work. In May, we are looking to have Steve Spayd speak on the naturally occurring boron and arsenic in the Newark Basin.

Finally, the Field Trip committee is about to kick it in gear to be ready for our annual June Field Trip, so stay tuned!

Later in the fall, the RE3 Conference will be held in Philadelphia on September 16–18. NY–P members will be assisting in the review of the abstracts and marketing of the Conference.

We will likely host an exhibition table and spend some time promoting AEG. Stop by to see us!

Oregon Section Mark Swank, Secretary The Oregon Section continued its November and December presentations with Dick Iverson, senior research hydrologist at the USGS Cascades Volcano Observatory in Vancouver, WA, discussing Landslide Mobility and Hazards: Insights from the 2014 Oso Disaster and Jim O’Connor from the USGS Water Science Center presenting A Tale of Two Rivers (and a Few Others): Geologic and Physiographic Controls on Gravel Bed Rivers in Oregon.

Iverson’s presentation packed the house with 105 attendees, the largest number of people that we have ever had at an AEG Oregon Section meeting! The talk attracted a wide-range of professionals and showcased the applicability of our

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

THEHEADER HOMEFRONT HERE technical expertise across different disciplines. He gave a fascinating talk on the Oso Landslide and provided a compelling case for how the Oso event began gradually and then transitioned abruptly to a contractive deformation, widespread liquefaction, and catastrophic acceleration, resulting in a debris avalanche flow (DAF) of exceptional mobility for a landslide of its size. His incorporation of eyewitness accounts to interpret the seismic data through the duration of the landslide was a great reminder to never exclude evidence even when at first it may not appear to correlate. His talk clearly captured—and kept—the attention of the audience throughout his presentation and the extra-long Q&A session.

O’Connor’s talk discussed how from a regional analysis of river morphology, sediment yield, and aspects of sediment transport, lithologic controls exert overarching and far-reaching influence on the distribution of alluvial and non-alluvial channels.

Jim provided insights into how the geology of different river basins affects river morphology and sediment yield.

The New Year started off with a bang as we held our annual joint meeting with the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). J. David Rogers, University of Missouri Science & Technology, presented his talk entitled The Panama Canal: Where American Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology Began 100 Years Ago. In 1909, slope failures began plaguing the project with increasing frequency. As the cut slopes approached depths of 500 feet, landslides began plaguing the project, bringing it to a complete standstill in 1913. Because of these issues, National Academy of Sciences undertook a scientific study of the landslides and reported on how they might be mitigated.

The project continued to challenge the ability of geotechnical engineers and engineering geologists to understand landslide causation but, in the process, has solidified the necessity of our professions.

By the time this article is published we will have had our February meeting. Eldon Gath, this year’s Richard H. Jahns Distinguished Lecturer in Engineering Geology, will present Mitigation of Surface-Fault Rupture: Updating California’s Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act for the New Millennium. His discussion will focus on how the public, and our profession, is better served by upgrading the A-P for consistency with the risks associated with other natural hazards.

Fault rupture mitigation could be required for faults that are within 500 years of their average recurrence interval with mitigation that can include geotechnical and structural solutions for smaller displacements or avoidance if the offsets are large. We are looking forward to hearing the applicability of these guidelines, which has been so important in developing in California, in our state.

Don’t see your Section News?

Volunteer to be your Section editor, or ask your Section officers to submit an item for AEG News before APRIL 30.

March 2015

Sacramento Section Chase White, Secretary On December 17, 2014 the Sacramento Section held our annual joint holiday meeting with the Groundwater Resources Association of California (GRA) at Aviator’s Restaurant at the Sacramento Executive Airport in South Sacramento. In addition to the holiday season revelry, a raffle of donated items to benefit scholarship funds, and dinner, attendees were treated to a presentation by Michael Mills of Stoel Rives, LLP. His talk, Here Today and Fracked Tomorrow: A Rollercoaster Year for SB 4 Implementation, that discussed and reviewed the “thrill ride” for industry and regulators of oil and gas production in response to the recently enacted state legislation (SB 4) on fracking in California.

The Sacramento Section kicked off the New Year activities with our first Section meeting of the year at Aviator’s Restaurant. We were pleased to host Michelle Sneed, hydrologist with the USGS and a graduate of California State University, Sacramento. Michelle gave a presentation entitled Land Subsidence – The Lowdown on the Drawdown that covered studies and results from monitoring of recent land subsidence caused by aquifer system overdraft and compaction in the San Joaquin Valley of California.

Member News Congratulations to Section members Brad von Dessonneck of DWR and Casey Smith of SAGE for earning their California Certified Engineering Geologist (CEG) Licenses!

Section members Bruce Hilton (AEG Past President) and Byron Anderson volunteered a significant amount of their time participating in a very meaningful project last year with Engineers Without Borders. They gave further of themselves by traveling to Kenya last September to help firsthand with direction and construction of the Shisasari Community Spring Rehabilitation Project. Bruce and Byron will be presenting their efforts at the May 2015 Section meeting in Sacramento. (See article on page 10 in this issue for more information.)

St. Louis Section Stefanie Voss, Editor AEG St. Louis wishes everyone a wonderful 2015! Our section had a series of great speakers in the last quarter of 2014. The November meeting featured Dr. Ronaldo Luna, Saint Louis University’s Civil Engineering Chair. He presented on micropiles for a bridge on the Great Smoky Mountains Parkway. Piles were taken 50 feet into sound rock. This type of foundation was chosen because it created minimal spoils. Rock anchors were used in combination with the micropiles due to landslide issues.

Strain gauges were used to measure strains along the bond zone and other depths along the piles.

We were happy to have AEG President Ken Fergason speak at our December meeting. His topic was The Geologic, Geohazards, and Geotechnical Field Investigation for the

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

35

HEADER THE HOMEFRONT HERE

Hoover Dam. The Hoover Bypass Bridge investigation began after 9/11/2001. It is 800 feet above the water and 2,000 feet long. It has the longest concrete arch in North America.

Over 10,000 feet of core was drilled into tertiary volcanic and sedimentary rock. Field mapping involved rock climbing and rappelling. He also spoke on developments in AEG, including the proposed idea for Section realignment. Greg Hempen did his annual push for the AEG Foundation Drive and offered his price match for the St. Louis Section.

The January meeting featured a panel of presenters from various Missouri agencies that handle geology issues around the state. The panelists included: Duane Kreuger with Missouri Geologists’ Consortium; Sara Parker Pauley, Director of the Missouri Department of Natural Resources; Joe Gillman, State Geologist and Director of the Missouri Geological Survey; and Pam Groose, Executive Director of the Missouri Geologist Registration Board. Each panelist discussed the outlook for the upcoming year for their agencies.

handle environmental issues that arise out of natural disasters with pre-disaster mitigation.

Finally, Pam Groose discussed the decreasing trend of licensures among registered geologists in the state. As of 2013 the Board added a new requirement that field camp or equivalent classes must be completed in college in order to sit for the ASBOG exam. This unfortunately coincides with many universities dropping the field camp requirement for graduation.

How the rule change will impact the applications for licenses for registered geologists in Missouri remains to be seen. The Missouri Geologists’ Consortium may focus on this issue and work toward updating geologists’ registration requirements to better reflect skills needed in the 21st century.

Southeastern Section Matthew Howe, PG – Chair The Southeastern Section of AEG is in the midst of a busy winter. On January 22 and 23, 2015, the 2014-2015 AEG President, Ken Fergason visited the Atlanta metropolitan area. While he was in Atlanta, he presented talks at Georgia State University, the University of West Georgia, and the University of Georgia. While at these universities he presented three different talks, Between a Rock and Geologic Disaster, Working as an Applied Geologist; Someone is Paying Me to do This! The Geologic, Geohazard, and Geotechnical Field Investigation for the Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge; and Application of Satellite-Based Interferometry (InSAR) to Geologic and Geotechnical Investigations. Each of the presentations had good student turn outs and an impressive number of questions for the speaker.

Three of the panelists from the January STL Section meeting, l to r: Joe Gillman, Pam Groose, and Sara Parker Pauley PHOTO BY MICHAEL ROARK

Duane spoke about the need for the Missouri Geologists’ Consortium to keep getting in front of any geology-related political issues, such as bills that will impact geologists to the practice of geology around the state. [AEG St. Louis and Kansas City held their Shaking Hands in Jefferson City on February 3, 2015, meeting with legislators and reminding them of who we are and what we do.]

Director Pauley is in her fifth year as director of MDNR. The MDNR is now developing a comprehensive water plan for the state, which last was updated ten years ago. A new drive called “Our Missouri Waters” will bring in different groups and stakeholders to discuss the state’s many watersheds.

Joe Gillman discussed a cultural shift in the Missouri Geological Survey and the need to better prepare the state for future mineral resource development. More focus is needed for mining and subsurface areas. The state also needs to update their oil and gas rules to today’s standards. The importance of water resources was echoed in his talk. Based on historical data, the state is in a wet period. Our drought in 2012 could be a view of what the future may hold. There is also a plan to 36

AEG President Ken Fergason giving presentation at the University of West Georgia in Carrollton, GA

On the evening of January 22, 2014, the AEG Southeastern Section hosted a “Meet & Greet with AEG President Ken Fergason” event at the Rose & Crown Tavern in Atlanta, GA. This was an informal event for members to network with

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

THEHEADER HOMEFRONT HERE one another, meet the AEG President, as well as to gather and discuss upcoming Section activities. We enjoyed the small gathering of members and non-members that were able to make it to the event.

Foster Wheeler will serve as Membership Chair after stepping down as Chairperson, where he served the last three years.

The Section has held several technical meetings since our last News report. In November, James Chinchiolo, Project Development Director, Geostabilization International, presented on several hillside stabilization projects using new technologies for geohazards mitigation. In January, Ken Fergason, 2014–15 AEG President and Senior Geologist at Amec Foster Wheeler, presented on the geologic, geohazard, and geotechnical field investigation for the Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge. Ken also gave the Section an update of the Governance changes and proposed geographic models under consideration.

Planning is underway for a Section field trip along the trace of the Hollywood – Santa Monica fault zone in the late spring or early summer. Please contact Shant Minas or David Perry to become involved with the field trip planning or making a presentation.

Inland Empire Chapter (Riverside and San Bernardino Counties) Shaun Wilkins, Secretary AEG President Ken Fergason (back, right) gathered with members and guests of the Southeastern Section at the Rose & Crown Tavern in Atlanta, GA.

We continue to connect and network with colleges, universities, and sister organizations in the Southeast, particularly in areas with large numbers of members. Our approach has been largely effective and we are happy with our progress. However, we continue to look for new opportunities. We will continue to develop relationships with local schools, including: Georgia State University, University of Georgia, and University of West Georgia. We have also continued to reach out to the Atlanta Geological Society (AGS), the American Institute of Professional Geologists (AIPG), and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Geo-Institute about combining our efforts, whenever possible.

As a reminder, I would encourage our Section members to check out the Southeastern Section’s webpage that can be found on the AEG website (http://www.aegweb.org/) as well as on social media (Facebook, Twitter, and Google+) for information on upcoming meetings and events. Our Section is always looking for energetic volunteers, so if you are interested or know of someone that might be interested, please contact Section Chair, Matthew Howe at matthew.r.howe@gmail.com.

Stay tuned for announcements about talks from the Jahns Lecturer, Eldon Gath, in late March.

Southern California Section David L. Perry, Membership Chair The Southern California Section elected new officers in January.

Shant Minas of Applied Earth Sciences is the newly elected Chairperson, moving up from the Vice Chair position. Darrin Hasham, of Kleinfelder has been elected Vice Chair after having served as Secretary last year. Edmond Lee of GeoConcepts, Inc. will remain as Treasurer and Pedram Rahimikian of GeoConcepts, Inc. is the new Secretary. David Perry of Amec March 2015

During the end of 2014 and early 2015, the AEG IE Chapter offered three talks covering environmental and engineering geology issues specifically related to the Southern California geologic setting.

The November meeting found us back at the Lonestar Steakhouse in Lake Elsinore, CA. The discussion was provided

by Austin Marshall, mine manager of the Mitsubishi Cement Corporation’s mine located in the Lucerne Valley in San Bernardino.

Marshall’s discussion, entitled Planning and Permitting Process for Mitsubishi Cement Corporation’s South Quarry Expansion, detailed the numerous steps the mine has undertaken to expand toward the south, in light of the dwindling reserves available in the original open pit mine areas. Marshall provided a historical summary of the mine development, as well as the many uses for which the mine products are utilized through the greater Los Angeles area. Finally, he described the proposed expansion area for the mine and the permit process undertaken with the U.S. Forest Service and the County of San Bernardino.

Our December meeting was held at our usual venue, the Cask ‘n Cleaver restaurant in Rancho Cucamonga, CA. The talk for this meeting was given by Thomas Deane, principal hydrogeologist of Deane Consulting, Inc. His discussion was entitled Effects of Debris Flow and Superposition of Seasonal Spring Flow on Multi-Year Variable Spring Base Flow Conditions at Ruby Springs, OMYA Inc’s White Knob Mine, Lucerne, CA South Quarry Expansion. While this talk was related to another limestone quarry located in the Lucerne Valley, like the November meeting, it focused on a very different environmental and/or engineering aspect of mine development. The focus of this discussion revolved around a 40-minute long, monsoon-type storm event that occurred on the borders of the mine in 2003 and the effect this storm had on talus slope stability and redistribution of the native soil and talus materials in a natural channel below the mine. Based on a study performed in 2008, Deane provided cross-sectional analysis of the natural channel at numerous points below the mine in

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

37

HEADER THE HOMEFRONT HERE order to help quantify sedimentation redistribution. Recent work within the study area has been performed to provide a “baseline” soil transport rate as well as to document the effects of storms on the discharge rate of a natural springs located further down the drainage channel.

Finally, our meeting in January was held at the Marie Callender’s in Corona, CA. AEG-IE officer Desmond Chung, a solutions specialist working for Geobrugg North America, gave the presentation Dirt Can Hurt: Utilizing Flexible Solutions.

Chung intended to describe the options available to stabilize slopes, especially those with rock fall concerns. Descriptions of hard, soft, and flexible facings for slope surfaces were to be provided with an emphasis on flexible solutions. Included in these discussions were engineering, testing, and computer programs Geobrugg uses and provides to engineers and contractors, with examples of local projects in which flexible facings have been utilized. However, low member turnout prompted the postponement of this discussion.

Our Chapter held an officer’s meeting to discuss options to increase attendance within the Chapter, by both members and students from nearby universities. Numerous suggestions were presented, including “standardizing” monthly venue locations, reducing student pricing and/or offering incentives to attend meetings, locating new venue locations with decreased cost, seeking sponsorships to help offset meeting costs, offering raffles or opportunity drawings, offering social events in addition to the monthly technical meetings, and reconnecting with and/or reaching out to local university and community college geology departments. Additional topics of discussion included our upcoming field trip, short course, and the possibility of offering a first annual golf tournament. In spite of the cancelled member meeting, the time was well used and we hope it will significantly bolster interest and attendance in our chapter both in the short and long term.

Texas Section Christina Dance, Secretary The joint GSA/AEG Texas Section Winter Meeting, GSA/AEG Jahns Distinguished Lecturer and Geology of Pilot Knob Field Trip, was held in Austin on January 24, 2015. The 2015 Jahns Lecturer gave one of his wonderful presentations on Tectonic Geomorphic and Paleoseismic Investigations for the Panama Canal.

Marie Garsjo taking photos of Texas Lace Cactus After the presentamaking a home in a basalt exposure tion we all loaded up in the bus for our Pilot Knob volcano field trip. We learned not only about the volcano and its geologic history, but the geology and ecology of the area as well. At McKinney Falls State Park, Chris Caran went into detail about the volcanic ash’s journey. How it settled onto the seafloor after being transported by waves and currents 80 Mya after which going through diagenesis to it’s now green clay, nontronite, state.

Attendees of the Texas Section Winter Meeting on the Pilot Knob field trip.

38

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

THEHEADER HOMEFRONT HERE a special thank you to Freese & Nichols for sponsoring the printing of all the elaborate guidebooks, CDs, and poster boards.

We had a day packed full with geology fun and are looking forward to our Spring Section meeting April 25th in Houston!

Washington Section Sabine Datum, Editor

Chris Caran describing volcaniclastic deposit at the Texas Section meeting

In addition to examples of volcanic bombs and crystal samples from the area, Alan Cherepon shared about the economic contribution the Balcones Magmatic Province, with its over 200 volcanoes, igneous intrusions, and “Serpentine Plugs,” has given to the oil and gas industry. Lastly, Mustafa Saribudak presented the results of his resistivity imaging research for the Pilot Knob area.

Thank you to the field trip leaders, AGS’ Chris Caran and Alan Cherepon as well as the presenters, Eldon Gath and Mustafa Saribudak, for taking time to speak at the meeting. And

For the first time, the Section held a meeting in Bellevue. The November 2014 meeting featured Taryn Sparacio, LG, Managing Scientist at Exponent, Inc., who spoke on An Environmental Forensic Case Study: Reconstructing Historical Chemical Releases in the Hylebos Waterway. Instrumentation Northwest (INW) graciously sponsored dinners for a limited number of AEG Student Members.

Our annual holiday party was held in December 2014 in Seattle. Over pizza and beer, members gave short presentations on cool projects and trips they completed in 2014 or other times in the past. We saw great slide shows on field trips, interesting fieldwork, and vacations, from trekking in Simien Mountains National Park to volunteering in Ethiopia to local adventures. The meeting included a gift exchange and a food drive for a Seattle-area food bank.

The January 2015 meeting was held in Seattle and featured Trenton Cladouhos, PhD, Senior Vice President with Alta Rock Energy. Trenton spoke on Newberry Volcano Engineered Geothermal System Demonstration. Holt Services graciously sponsored dinners for a limited number of AEG Student Members.

Call for Papers: AEG Members are encouraged to submit papers on interesting case histories, original research or other projects to its journal on the following topics: • Environmental geology • Engineering geology • Feasibility studies • Geotechnical engineering • Geomorphology • Low-temperature geochemistry • Applied hydrogeology • Near-surface processes • Review papers in applied geosciences and technical notes (< 6 pages)

Benefits Include: • 4 Issues Per Year • Papers Are Peer Reviewed • Best Student Paper Award • Best Paper Award

Instructions for Authors: http://eeg.allentrack.net/ March 2015

AEG NEWS 58 (1)

39

HEADER HERE

s r o s n o p S Corporate

AEG is grateful to the corporations and individuals who contribute to our operating fund through their sponsorship.

Platinum Kleinfelder, Inc. Chad Lukkarila 550 West C Street, #1200 San Diego, CA 92101 619-831-4600 CLukkarila@kleinfelder.com www.kleinfelder.com

Ruen Drilling, Inc. Arlan Ruen 2320 River Road Clark Fork, ID 83811 208-266-1151 office@ruendrilling.com www.ruendrilling.com

Gold Parratt-Wolff, Inc. Gary Ellingworth 501 Millstone Dr. Hillsborough, NC 27278 919-644-2814 Gellingworth@pwinc.com www.pwinc.com

Silver

Gregg Drilling & Testing, Inc. Patrick Keating 2726 Walnut Ave. Signal Hill, CA 90755 562-427-6899 Info@greggdrilling.com www.greggdrilling.com Michael F. Hoover Consulting Michael F. Hoover PO Box 30860 Santa Barbara, CA 93130 805-569-9670 www.hoovergeo.com Robertson Geotechnical, Inc. Hugh S. Robertson 2500 Townsgate Road, Suite E Westlake Village, CA 91361 805-373-0057 info@robertsongeotechnical.com www.robertsongeotechnical.com

Bronze Pace Analytical Services, Inc. Lori McLennan 9800 Kincey Avenue Suite 100 Huntersville, NC 28078 704-875-9092 Lori.McLennan@pacelabs.com www.pacelabs.com

Enviro-Equipment, Inc. Denise Chew 2390 Forest Street Denver, CO 80207 303-333-6071 www.hydroscreen.com

Geodynamics Consulting Group, Inc. Harry Audell 33282 Golden Lantern Street Dana Point, CA 92629 949-493-1352 www.geodynamicsinc.com

ADD YOUR NAME TO THIS LIST OF SUPPORTERS. See the ad on the inside cover to learn about the benefits of AEG Sponsorships.

REG REVIEW, Inc. STUDY AIDS and COURSES for the NATIONAL (ASBOG速 ) GEOLOGY LICENSING EXAMS

Sage Engineers, Inc. Ara Sanjideh 2251 Douglas Blvd., Suite 200 Roseville, CA 95661 916-677-4800 asanjideh@sageengineers.com www.sageengineers.com

Earth Consultants International, Inc. Tania Gonzalez 1642 East Fourth Street Santa Ana, CA 92701 714-544-5321 tgonzalez@earthconsultants.com www.earthconsultants.com

Exponent Betsy Mathieson 475 14th St., Suite 400 Oakland, CA 94612 510-268-5011 emathieson@exponent.com www.exponent.com 40

Looking for help to get focus and direction for the ASBOG速 exams?

REG REVIEW , Inc. has the class for you!

One-day courses are taught regionally nationwide.

Increase your likelihood to pass by 25% over the national average.

REG REVIEW , Inc. is the leader in providing study aids and courses for geological professionals preparing for the geology licensing exams.

Instructors are professionals with direct ASBOG 速 and California exam experience.

Study Aids REG REVIEW , Inc. provides the only professional-quality Study Manuals and Flash Cards available for the ASBOG 速 Geology Licensing Exams, the California Supplemental exam, and the Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology Certification Exams.

Order study aids or register for courses at regreview.com e-mail: regreview@aol.com 1091 Mercury Drive, Lafayette, CO 80026 (303) 484-1203 fax: (303) 997-2151 (916) 456-4870 AEG NEWS 58 (1)

March 2015

Contact us at advertising@aegweb.org or 303-757-2926 for more information on how you can connect with your next customer.

PITTSBURGH, PA I SEPTEMBER 19-26, 2015 Below the steep slopes es of Mount W Washington ashington a create created by three great rivers, the City of Pittsburgh blends its industrial heritage with its forward focus on technology y. Throughout this dynamic technology. urban landscape, past and present collide in land use, environmental impacts, and shifting economic forces.

The AEG 2015 Annual Meeting Planning Committee invites you to join us for the “Conference at the Confluence”.

WYNDHAM GR GRAND RAND DOWNT DOWNTOWN OWN Discover the 90 distinct nct neighborhoods oof Pittsburgh Pennsylvania ylvania when you sta stay at the centrally located W Wyndham yndham Grand Pittsburgh gh Downtown.

The hotel is located ated in the Central Business District,, also known as the Golden Triangle, angle, at the meeting of the Allegheny eny and Monongahela Rivers to form the Ohio River River..

Where soaring skyscrapers and Pittsburgh’s burgh’s famous three rivers meet, an upscale hotel experience awaits in do downtown. owntown.

CALL FOR ABSTRA ABSTRACTS BSTRA ACTS C

SPONSORSHIP & EXHIBIT EXHIBITOR OR OPPORTUNITIES OPPOR RT TUNITIES

Leave the paper behind Event sponsorship nsorship is ef effective fffective advertising and don't miss that builds lasting recognition and good a thing! will for your company company.. We We anticipate over 500 professional registrants at AEG2015 in Pittsburgh! W new, fully interactive innteractive mobile app Wee also have a brand new, that provides even more sponsorship opportunities, so be sure to check it out!

FIELD TRIPS, GUEST T TOURS OURS AN SPECIAL EVENTS AND We We have an exciting lineup of trips, tours and a very special event this year, year, an evening aboard the Gateway Clipper Clipper.. Join us for a reception cruise and see the spectacular city skyline as the sun sets on the three rivers.

See our website for complete details:

www.aegannualmeeting.org

(Oral and Poster Presentations Presentations))

TToo submit an abstract go to:

Do not miss this opportunity to provide an oral or poster presentation at this year's meeting!

www.aegannualmeeting.org www.aegannualmeeting.org Username: AEG Password: Pittsburgh2015

Abstract submission deadline is May 1, 2015

(DO NOT USE YOUR AEG MEMBERSHIP LOGI LOGIN) N)

Pittsburgh photo courtesy Roy Engelbrecht

NEW!

Cutting edge interactive app.