SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO 5 TO MASTER AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 9, 2008SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO.5 TO
MASTER AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 9, 2008
THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT is issued as of this Iq day of January, 2011,
by and between THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, d/b/a CLEARWATER GAS SYSTEM
("City") and ARCADIS U.S., INC. (formerly known as LFR, INC. ("LFR")) ("Consultant").
City and. Consultant agree upon the following terms and conditions, which shall be incorporated
into the Master Agreement as supplemental provisions.
1. DESCRIPTION OF WORK:
Consultant, through its wholly owned subsidiary ARCADIS Canada, Inc. ("ACI"), shall
enter into a Sponsored Research Contract with the University in a form consistent with
that provided in Exhibit "A" to this Supplemental Agreement of Waterloo (the
"Sponsored Research Contract"). The Sponsored Research Contract shall provide for
completion of the tasks described briefly below, as those tasks are more fully set forth in
the proposal prepared by Neil R. Thomson, Ph.D., on behalf of the University of
Waterloo, dated October 25, 2010 ("Proposal"), which has been submitted to, and
conditionally approved by, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(" FDEP"). A copy of the Proposal is attached hereto as Exhibit "B."
a) Task l: Source Area Characterization and Establishment of Baseline
Conditions. Conduct additional source area characterization of, and establish
baseline conditions for, City's former manufactured gas plant ("MGP") located in
Clearwater, Florida (the "Site"), which activities shall include, without limitation,
the installation and sampling of additional monitoring wells, and the collection of
additional soil cores;
b) Task 2: Bench-Scale Experiments. Design and conduct bench-scale
experiments, using soils and groundwater collected from the Site, to establish
potential treatability end-points, stable by-product formation, isotope
fractionation, oxidant-solids interaction, optimal catalyst chemistry, dosing
requirements, and biological impacts, such that the information collected from the
bench-scale experiments can be utilized in designing a Site-specific treatment
system;
c) Task 3: Push-Pull Tests. Design and implement a push-pull test to assess the
ability of the Site-specific treatment system to aggressively treat MGP residual
within the surficial aquifer;
1
d) Task 4: Diffusion Modeling to Assess Treatahility of the Clay Unit. Perform
diffusion scenario modeling to estimate mass-flux, time frames and potential
treatment options to be applied in the likely event that dissolved phase
contaminants that have become bound up in the clay layer back-diffuse from the
clay layer to the surficial aquifer once the contaminant concentrations in the
surficial aquifer have been substantially reduced by the implementation of the
Site-specific treatment system;
e) Task 5: Design and Installation of Initial Delivery Infrastructure. Design and
implement a pilot-scale experiment, utilizing the information gathered in Tasks 1-
4, to deliver localized treatment to the Site over the course of multiple treatment
events;
f) Task d: Treatment and Short-Term Monitoring. Collect samples from selected
monitoring wells to gauge treatment performance and to determine whether any
modifications to the treatment delivery method are warranted, prior to conducting
subsequent delivery events; and
0g) Task 7: Long-Term Monitoring. Conduct long-term groundwater monitoring
over a one (1) to two (2) year period (post treatment) in order to capture system
rebound and to establish a new quasi-steady-state condition following treatment;
collect soil cores to evaluate the changes in conditions effected by the Site-
specific treatment system.
Tasks 1 through 7 above shall be collectively referred to herein as the "Work."
Consultant is authorized to proceed with Task 1 and Task 2 immediately upon execution
of this Supplemental Agreement. Consultant shall not initiate Task 3, Task 4, Task 5,
Task 6 or Task 7 without prior written authorization from City and, as applicable, the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection ("FDEP"). Such prior written consent
may be conditioned upon the City's and/or FDEP's receipt and approval of a detailed
work plan for each task, as applicable.
2. FEES AND COSTS:
The fees and costs for the Work described in Exhibit "B" shall be billed on a time and
materials basis by task and shall not exceed a total authorized cost of Three Hundred
Sixty-Eight Thousand and Fifty and 00/100 Dollars ($36$,050.00) (the "Cost").
Consultant shall pass through to City the fees and costs incurred by the University of
Waterloo for performance of the Work, as invoiced by the University of Waterloo to
2
Consultant, at no mark up in cost. Invoices shall be mailed to City within ten (10)
business days of receipt by Consultant from the University of Waterloo. The Cost shall
be allocated by task as follows:
a) the maximum amount for the fees and costs associated with Task 1 shall not
exceed Seventy-Six Thousand, Four Hundred and Forty-Seven and 00/100
Dollars ($76,447.00);
b) the maximum amount for the fees and costs associated with the Task 2 shall not
exceed Eighty-Seven Thousand, Eight Hundred and Eighty and 00/100 Dollars
($87,880.00);
c) the maximum amount for the fees and costs associated with the Task 3 shall not
exceed Twenty-Nine Thousand and Three and 00/100 Dollars ($29,003.00);
d) the maximum amount for the fees and costs associated with the Task 4 shall not
exceed Seven Thousand, Four Hundred and Ten and 00/100 Dollars ($7,410.00);
e) the maximum amount for the fees and costs associated with the Task 5 shall not
exceed Seventeen Thousand, Seven Hundred and Seventy-One and 00/100
Dollars ($17,771.00);
f) the maximum amount for the fees and costs associated with the Task 6 shall not
exceed One Hundred and Two Thousand, Seven Hundred and Fifty-Two and
00/100 Dollars ($102,752.00); and
g) the maximum amount for the fees and costs associated with the Task 7 shall not
exceed Forty-Six Thousand, Seven Hundred and Eighty-Seven and 00/100
Dollars ($46,787.00).
3. TIME FOR COMPLETION;
a) The Work shall be completed within five years from the Effective Date hereof, in
general accordance with the schedule set forth in the attached Exhibit "B."
b) The monitoring wells installed in connection with Task 1 shall be sampled at least
one (1) time each quarter during the twelve (12) month period immediately
following the installation of the same. A report detailing the results of each such
sampling event shall be submitted to FDEP within sixty (60) days of each such
sampling event. A final report evaluating the results of Task 1 and Task 2 shall
be submitted to FDEP within sixty (60) days of the last such sampling event.
•
3
c) At least sixty (60) days prior to proceeding with Task 3, but in no event later than
December 31, 2011, Consultant shall submit a work plan to City and FDEP
seeking approval to proceed with Task 3 and Task 4.
d) All reports, work plans or other written product required to be submitted to FDEP
pursuant to this Supplemental Agreement shall be submitted in draft form to City
and City's counsel no less than ten (10) working days prior to the date on which
each respective report must be submitted to FDEP. Two (2) signed and sealed
originals of each final report shall be submitted to City and two (2) signed and
sealed originals of each final report shall be submitted to FDEP within three (3)
working days of Consultant's receipt of City's comments to the draft report.
4. CONFLICTANCORPORATION BY REFERENCE:
With respect to the Work performed pursuant to this Supplemental Agreement only, the
Master Agreement and this Supplemental Agreement are subject to the terms and
conditions of the Sponsored Research Contract, which is hereby incorporated by
reference, thereby to the extent that there is a conflict between the Master Agreement,
this Supplemental Agreement, and the Sponsored Research Contract, the terms and.
conditions of the Sponsored Research Contract shall apply, it being the intent of the
parties that this Supplemental Agreement is a pass-through agreement and Consultant's
obligations to City shall not exceed the University of Waterloo's obligations to ACZ
under the Sponsored Research Contract. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this
Supplemental Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida, including,
but not limited to, the Florida Public Records Act, Chapter 119, Florida Statutes ("F.S."),
and the Florida Prompt Payment Act, §§ 255.0705-255.078, F.S., and venue shall lie in
the courts of the County of Pinellas, State of Florida, and Consultant hereby consents to
the jurisdiction of said courts.
5. TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
Except as noted herein, this Supplemental Agreement is subject to the terms and
conditions of the Master Agreement, all of which shall remain in full force and effect.
[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]
4
17?
01--_
•
E
APPROVALS REQUIRED:
"CITY"
Countersigned:
Hibbard
CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA
By: ': ??- A, [L
William. B. Horne II
City Manager
Approved as to form: Attest:
?_f '?KVL<
Leslie K. Douga - "des
Assistant City Attorney
"CONSULTANT"
ARCAD S ,U.S?., INC.
By: !,?_
Print Name: Ben Foster
Title: Vice President
Consultant Mailing Address:
14055 Riveredge Drive
Suite 400
Tampa, FL 33637
Employer I.D. No. 57-0373224
Rosemarie Call
City Clerk
OF T;IF
b
Q
5
0 EXHIBIT "A"
SPONSORED RESEARCH AGREEMENT #
(Treatment of Former Manufactured Gas Plant Residuals
Using In Situ Chemical Oxidation: Clearwater Florida)
Between
University of Waterloo
Office of Research
Contracts Research and Industrial Grants
200 University Avenue West
Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1
(hereinafter referred to as the "University")
and
ARCADIS Canada, Inc.
441 5`h Avenue SW, Suite 300
Calgary, Alberta T2P 2V1
(hereinafter referred to as the "Client")
WHEREAS the University and the Client wish to enter into this agreement to have the
University perform the research as set forth in Schedule "A" in accordance with the terms and
conditions of this agreement; and
WHEREAS pursuant to the wishes of the City of Clearwater, Florida, ARCADIS U.S., Inc. is
contemporaneously entering into an agreement for the performance of the research set forth in
Schedule "A".
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants, terms,
conditions and agreements contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1 - DEFINITIONS
1.1 "Agreement" means this Sponsored Research Agreement including all attached
schedules, as the same may be supplemented, amended, restated or replaced in writing
from time to time;
1.2 "Background Intellectual Property" means proprietary or Confidential Information of
the University, Creator(s), or the Client which is disclosed to the other for the purpose of
the Research Plan;
1
1.3 "Confidential Information" means the specific terms and conditions set forth in this
Agreement, and any information, which is disclosed by one party to the other party for
the purpose of the Research Plan provided that tangible materials are clearly marked as
"Confidential" and any information provided orally or visually is identified as
confidential at the time of disclosure, and confirmed as confidential in writing within
fifteen (15) days of such disclosure, but shall not include information that:
(a) is or becomes generally available to the public other than as a result of any act by
a receiving party to this Agreement;
(b) is rightfully received from a third party without similar restriction or without
breach of this Agreement;
(c) a receiving parry is able to demonstrate, in writing, was known to it on a non-
confidential basis; or
(d) was independently developed by a receiving party without the use of any of the
Confidential Information.
1.4 "Controlled Item" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.6;
1.5 "Creators" means collectively, the Principal Investigator(s) and any University Research
Participants;
1.6 "Effective Date" means the date shown in Section 13.1 of this Agreement;
1.7 "Option Period" has the meaning set forth in Section 7.3;
1.8 "Principal Investigator" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.3;
1.9 "Research Participant Agreement" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.4;
1.10 "Research Plan" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.2.
1.11 "Research Results" means the technical information, know-how, copyrights, models,
specifications, prototypes or inventions, whether patentable or unpatentable, developed in
performance of the Research Plan;
1.12 "University Research Participants" means University researchers, including, but not
limited to, students, post doctoral fellows, research associates, who participate in the
Research Plan;
ARTICLE 2 - OBJECTIVES
0 2.1 The Effective Date of this Agreement is as provided in Section 13.1.
2
2.2 The University shall perform, or procure the performance of, the research plan as set
forth in Schedule "A" (the "Research Plan") upon the terms and conditions hereinafter
set forth.
2.3 The Principal Investigator(s) of the Research Plan shall be Neil R. Thomson, PhD, PEng
of the University's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and he shall be
responsible for the technical content of the Research Plan.
2.4 Each University Research Participant shall sign a Research Participant Agreement as set
forth in Schedule "B".
2.5 Notwithstanding Section 2.2 hereof, the Client and the University agree that until such
time as all regulatory requirements have been obtained, including all necessary approvals
of any regulatory or research ethics board concerned, no work requiring such regulatory
or ethics approvals shall commence (excepting any preliminary preparations which are
not restricted by such requirements). For greater certainty, any delay in obtaining such
approvals shall not be considered a default or breach by either the Client or the
University.
2.6 The Client and the University acknowledge that some research, particularly that in the
natural sciences and engineering, may be subject to export control laws and regulations of
Canada or the U.S. For example, transmitting the results of, or information about, certain
research may require first obtaining an export permit or other authorization. Certain
40 research may also be subject to regulation by the Controlled Goods Directorate (CGD) of
Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC), in accordance with the
Defence Production Act (DPA) and the Controlled Goods Regulations (CGR).
Information may be obtained from the CGD Website at
http://www.cgd.ge.ca/cgdweb/text/index-e.htm.
2.7 The Client shall use reasonable efforts to determine whether or not the Research Plan
contains or may result in, items subject to these laws and regulations (a "Controlled
Item"). In the event that a Controlled Item is identified in the Research Plan, then the
Client and the University shall comply with all applicable Canadian and U.S. export
control laws and regulations. In the event that the Client wishes to include a Controlled
Item into the Research Plan at any time during the term of this Agreement, then the
Client and the University agree as follows:
(a) the Client shall promptly notify the University of the Controlled Item's
classification prior to any shipment or transmission to the University;
(b) the University may, at the University's sole discretion, accept or reject the
delivery of the Controlled Item; and
(c) in the event that the University rejects the delivery of the Controlled Item, such
rejection by the University shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement.
3
0 ARTICLE 3 - FEES
3.1 In consideration of the University carrying out the Research Plan, the Client shall pay the
University the sum of Three-Hundred-Sixty-Eight-Thousand-Fifty dollars ($368,050
USD), which amount is inclusive of overhead expenses.
3.2 The sum stipulated in Section 3.1 shall be paid by the Client electronically or by cheque
made payable to the University of Waterloo (Attn: Finance Department, ECH, 200
University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1) within thirty (30) days of receipt
of invoice(s) according to the following schedule:
(a)
3.3 Invoices to the Client shall be sent to ARCADIS Canada, Inc., 441 5th Avenue, Suite 300,
Calgary, Alberta T2P 2V 1.
3.4 Interest on overdue accounts will be charged at current bank rates on amounts not paid
within thirty (30) days of submission of invoice.
3.5 The University shall not be obliged to perform any work beyond the Research Plan which
would cause the aggregate costs to exceed the amount set forth in Section 3.1.
3.6 University and Client both agree that payment to the University is contingent upon
. continued financial support to Client from the City of Clearwater, Florida on a continuing
basis pursuant to separate agreement.
ARTICLE 4 - RESEARCH RESULTS
4.1 The University, through the Principal Investigator, will provide the Client with progress
reports in accordance with the terms set forth in Schedule "A".
4.2 On or within ninety (90) days following the completion of the Research Plan, the
University, through the Principal Investigator, will provide the Client with a final report
of the Research Results.
ARTICLE 5 - EQUIPMENT
Unless otherwise agreed upon by the Client and the University in writing, or specifically
provided for pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, all equipment and materials purchased by
or provided to the University for the carrying out of the Research Plan, shall be, and remain, the
property of the University.
ARTICLE 6 - CONFIDENTIALITY
6.1 All Confidential Information will remain the property of its owner or the party that
furnished it as the case may be.
6.2 For a period of five (5) years from the date of disclosure of Confidential Information, the
receiving party agrees to maintain in confidence all Confidential Information disclosed to
4
it with the same degree of care as the receiving party normally takes to preserve its own
confidential information of similar grade, but in any event, no less than a reasonable
degree of care.
6.3 The receiving party may only disclose Confidential Information to persons with a "need
to know" who shall be made aware of, and be required to observe and comply with the
covenants and obligations contained herein, and the Confidential Information shall only
be used for the purpose of the Research Plan.
6.4 A receiving party may disclose Confidential Information pursuant to the requirements of
a government agency or pursuant to a court order, provided that the receiving party gives
the disclosing party sufficient notice to enable it to seek an order limiting or precluding
such disclosure.
ARTICLE 7 - INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
7.1 All aspects and parts of the Background Intellectual Property shall be exclusively owned
by its owner and nothing herein shall serve to, or should be construed to transfer any
ownership rights whatsoever in the Background Intellectual Property. Such Background
Intellectual Property may be used for the purpose of the Research Plan upon terms and
conditions to be agreed upon in writing between the parties.
7.2 All Research Results shall be owned by the Creator(s). The Creator(s) are required to
Go promptly disclose the Research Results to the University and to the Client.
7.3 During the term of this Agreement and for a term of sixty (60) days following the date of
the final report from the Creator(s) disclosing the Research Results (the "Option
Period"), the Client will have an exclusive option to negotiate a license to the Research
Results owned by the Creator(s). The Client shall notify the University in writing, during
the Option Period, indicating whether or not the Client will exercise its option. Should
the Option Period elapse without the Client responding to the University, the Client shall
be deemed to have rejected this option in relation to the Research Results. For greater
certainty, the Creator(s) then shall be entitled to grant licenses in regards to, and
otherwise commercially exploit the Creator(s) interest in and to the Research Results
without restriction or obligation to the Client.
7.4 The parties agree the University will specifically retain the right to use the Research
Results for continued research and educational purposes without charge, fee, or royalties
notwithstanding any agreement on commercial rights as referenced in Section 7.3.
ARTICLE 8 - PUBLICATION
8.1 The Client and the University agree that it is part of the University's function and policies
to disseminate information and to make it available for the purpose of scholarship.
8.2 At any time during the term of this Agreement, the University will provide the Client
with a draft copy of any proposed publication or disclosure of Research Results for its
review at least sixty (45) days before submission for publication or disclosure. Upon the
5
Client's written request, which shall be received by the University within the same sixty
(45) day period, the University will:
(a) delete any Confidential Information of the Client from the proposed publication
or disclosure; or
(b) delay publication, subject to Section 8.3, up to a maximum of sixty (60) additional
days for the purposes of filing for intellectual property protection on terms and
conditions to be negotiated and agreed upon by the Client, the Creator(s) and the
University.
8.3 Notwithstanding Subsection 8.2(b), the University retains the right to have any thesis
reviewed and defended without delay for the sole purpose of academic evaluation in
accordance with the University's established procedures. The University will, in
consultation with the student and the Client, determine if such a publication delay as set
forth in Subsection 8.2(b) will be provided. The Client may request that a thesis defense
be held in camera and that the members of the thesis examination board, including the
external examiner(s), be required to sign a non-disclosure agreement. The University
shall determine in its sole discretion if such request shall be granted.
ARTICLE 9 - INDEMNITY
9.1 The Client agrees to indemnify and save harmless the University, its affiliates, directors,
officers, employees, agents, students and representatives from and against all claims,
demands, loss, costs, damages, actions, suits, or other proceedings (individually a
"Claim" and collectively the "Claims") by any third party based upon, occasioned by, or
attributed to actions, errors, omissions, or negligence of the Client its directors, officers,
employees, agents or representatives during the performance of this Agreement, except to
the extent such Claim(s) are attributable to the gross negligence or wilful misconduct of
the University.
9.2 The University agrees to indemnify and save harmless the Client, its affiliates, directors,
officers, employees, agents and representatives from and against all Claims by any third
party based upon, occasioned by, or attributed to actions, errors, omissions, or negligence
of the University its directors, officers, employees, agents or representatives during the
performance of this Agreement, except to the extent such Claim(s) are attributable to the
gross negligence or wilful misconduct of the Client.
9.3 The indemnity in this Article 9 shall not affect or prejudice a party from exercising any
other rights it may have under the law.
ARTICLE 10 - REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF
LIABILITY
10.1 Each party represents and warrants to the other party that it is duly organized, validly
existing and in good standing, and it has the right and authority to enter this Agreement
and do all acts and things as required or contemplated to be done, observed and
performed by it hereunder.
6
10.2 The University makes no warranty, express or implied, concerning the Research Results
under this Agreement, which are all provided "as is". THE UNIVERSITY MAKES NO
REPRESENTATIONS AND EXTENDS NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. THERE ARE NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES
OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR
THAT THE USE OF THE RESEARCH RESULTS WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY
PATENT, COPYRIGHT, TRADEMARK OR OTHER PROPRIETARY RIGHT OF
ANY THIRD PARTY.
10.3 NEITHER THE CLIENT NOR THE UNIVERSITY WILL BE LIABLE TO THE
OTHER FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, LOST PROFITS, LOST
SAVINGS, LOSS OF ANTICIPATED REVENUE OR ANY EXEMPLARY,
PUNITIVE, SPECIAL OR INDIRECT DAMAGES, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
ARTICLE 11 - INSURANCE
11.1 Client shall obtain and maintain comprehensive general liability insurance and any other
insurance, for example but not limited to, pollution liability insurance as circumstances
warrant, that a prudent person would deem necessary, in the minimum amount of
$5,000,000 with respect to its operations. Such insurance shall name the University as an
additional insured and shall contain provisions for cross-liability and severability of
• interest, and the Client shall provide a certificate of insurance as evidence of such
coverage if requested by University.
11.2 University shall obtain and maintain comprehensive general liability insurance and any
other insurance, for example but not limited to, pollution liability insurance as
circumstances warrant, that a prudent person would deem necessary, in the minimum
amount of $5,000,000 with respect to its operations. Such insurance shall contain
provisions for cross-liability and severability of interest, and the University shall provide
a certificate of insurance as evidence of such coverage if requested by the Client.
ARTICLE 12 - PERMITS, LICENSES & SUBCONTRACTS
12.1 For work to be carried out off the University's premises, the Client shall identify any
permits, licenses or other required by any governing authority in relation to any of the
work to be performed and agrees to obtain or to assist the University to obtain such
permits, licenses or other.
12.2 In the event that any portion of the Research Plan will be performed by a subcontractor,
the University and the Client acknowledge and agree that:
(a) such subcontractor shall be legally bound to a work-for-hire agreement, in
writing, which agreement shall not be less favorable with respect to any term or
condition of this Agreement. For greater certainty, the University and the Client
represent and warrant that all relevant conditions of this Agreement will be
described to and accepted by the subcontractor;
7
(b) such subcontractor shall carry and maintain in full force and effect comprehensive
general liability insurance (and/or any other insurance as circumstances warrant
and that a prudent person would deem necessary) which insurance policy will
name the University and the Client as an additional insured;
(c) such subcontractor will have the necessary skills and experience to carry out the
subcontract; and
(d) the subcontractor will have the necessary permits and licenses prior to
commencing the subcontract.
ARTICLE 13 - TERM & TERMINATION
13.1 This Agreement shall come into effect upon the Effective Date , and
unless earlier terminated in accordance with the terms hereof, shall terminate
. In the event that this Agreement is funded in part by the Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council ("NSERC"), the term of this Agreement
shall, at a minimum, be equal in duration to the period of the NSERC award.
13.2 This Agreement may be terminated by the Client upon sixty (60) days written notice to
the University.
13.3 This Agreement may be immediately terminated by the University upon sixty (60) days
written notice to the Client if circumstances beyond the University's control preclude
continuation of the Research Plan.
13.4 Upon termination of this Agreement by either the Client or the University, the University
will be reimbursed by the Client for all costs and non-cancellable commitments incurred
by the University in the performance of the Research Plan, such reimbursement not to
exceed the total estimated expenses set forth in Section 3.1.
13.5 Termination as set forth in this Article 13 shall not relieve any of the parties of any
obligations accrued under this Agreement prior to the date of termination. Each of
Articles 5 (Equipment), 6 (Confidentiality), 7 (Intellectual Property), 8 (Publication), 9
(Indemnity), 14 (General Provisions), Sections 10.2 (Disclaimer), 10.3 (Limitation of
Liability) and 13.4 (Reimbursement for expenses), 13.5 (Survival) shall survive
termination of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 14 - GENERAL PROVISIONS
14.1 The Client shall not use the name, or any variation, adaptation, abbreviation, trademark
or other, of the University, nor the name of any member of the University's staff or
governors, in any publicity without the prior written approval of an authorized
representative of the University. Subject to Section 14.2, the University will not use the
name of the Client, or any variation, adaptation, abbreviation, trademark or other, nor the
name of any employee of the Client, in any publicity without the prior written approval of
the Client.
8
14.2 The University may at its own discretion provide a brief listing of this Research Plan as
part of any public compendium disclosing research taking place at the University. Such
disclosure may include, but is not limited to, the title of the Research Plan and the name
of the Client.
14.3 The parties are independent parties and nothing in this Agreement shall constitute either
party as the employer, principal or partner of or joint venturer with the other party.
Neither party has any authority to assume or create any obligation or liability, either
express or implied, on behalf of the other.
14.4 University of Waterloo Contact Names
Administrative Contact: Financial Contact: Intellectual Property
Contact:
Doreen White
Senior Manager Senior Manager Director Commercialization
Contracts Research and Research Finance WatCo
Industrial Grants
14.5 Notices under this Agreement shall be sent by registered mail, return receipt requested or
delivered by hand, return receipt requested to the following address, as shown below,
unless changed by written notice.
University:
, Senior Manager
Contracts Research and Industrial Grants
University of Waterloo
Office of Research
200 University Avenue West
Waterloo, Ontario N21, 3G1
Phone: 519-888-4567 Ext.
Fax: 519-746-7151
E-mail:
Client :
@uwaterloo.ca
14.6 For this Agreement, neither the Client nor the University shall be liable to the other for
any failure or delay in performance by circumstances beyond its control, including but
not limited to, acts of God, fire, labour difficulties or governmental action.
14.7 Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, this Agreement shall supersede all
documents or agreements, whether written or oral, in respect of the subject matter
thereof. For greater clarity, no direct or indirect separate arrangement, whether oral or
written, with the Principal Investigator or other person, involving any component of the
work to be performed, is permitted unless prior agreement, in writing, is given by the
9
authorized signing authorities of the Client and the University. The Client acknowledges
and agrees that the University provides no insurance coverage whatsoever to faculty
members or other university persons who may provide direct or independent services
relating to this Agreement.
14.8 The terms herein stipulated may not be modified in any way without the mutual consent
of the Client and the University in writing given by their authorized signing authorities.
14.9 This Agreement shall not be assigned by either the Client or the University without the
prior written consent of the other party, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld.
The University and the Client shall not subcontract any work to be performed under this
Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party (such consent not to be
unreasonably withheld) except as specifically set forth in the Research Plan and in
accordance with Section 12.2 of this Agreement.
14.10 In the event that a translation of this Agreement is prepared and signed by the Client and
the University for the convenience of the Client, this English language version shall be
the official version and shall govern if there is a conflict between the two.
14.11 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein.
14.12 The Parties agree that a fax signature shall be treated as if it were an original signature
and neither Party shall contest the validity of this Agreement based upon the use of fax
signatures.
14.13 The following appendices are attached to and form part of this Agreement:
Schedule A - Research Plan
Schedule B - Research Participant Agreement
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Client and the University hereto have executed this
Agreement in a legally binding manner.
•
10
UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO
Per:
r -I
LJ
•
Name:
Title:
I/We have the authority to bind the corporation
Date
For the Client:
Per:
Name:
Title:
Acknowledgment and Consent of Principal Investigator
I/We have the authority to bind the corporation
Date
1, having read this Agreement, hereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions
contained herein and further agree to ensure that all University Research Participants who are
involved in the Research Plan are informed of their obligations under the provisions of this
Agreement and have acknowledged and consented by signature of a Research Participant
Agreement (Schedule B).
Date:
Name, Title
11
0 SCHEDULE A
INSERT:
TREATMENT OF FORMER MANUFACTURE GAS PLANT RESIDUALS USING IN
SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION: CLEARWATER FLORIDA
Prepared
For Clearwater Gas System
Proposal dated: October 25, 2010
•
0
0 SCHEDULE B
RESEARCH PARTICIPANT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS the University of Waterloo and the Client are parties to a Sponsored Research
Agreement number # to which this Research Participant Agreement is
appended; and
WHEREAS the undersigned is associated with the University of Waterloo and will be involved
in the Research Plan defined by the Sponsored Research Agreement;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of information and facilities made available to me in
connection with my work in relation to the Research Plan and other valuable consideration, I
agree that:
I. Defined Terms. All terms denoted with initial capital letters herein shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in the Sponsored Research Agreement.
2. Reasonable Efforts. I will use all reasonable efforts to achieve the objectives and
deliverables defined in the Article 2 of the Sponsored Research Agreement for those
activities in which I am involved.
3. Research Results I will co-operate fully and in good faith in discussion and
agreement with all conditions regarding Research Results as set forth in Article 7 of the
• Sponsored Research Agreement.
4. Confidential Information. In accordance with Article 6 of the Sponsored Research
Agreement, I will keep confidential all of the Confidential Information that I may
receive.
5. Publications. I will comply with all publication conditions that are set out in Article 8 of
the Sponsored Research Agreement.
6. Ownership. I understand that ownership of any Research Results shall be determined in
accordance with Article 7 of the Sponsored Research Agreement and the University of
Waterloo Policy #73 (Intellectual Property Rights).
7. Invention Disclosure. I shall keep the Principal Investigator fully and promptly
informed on an on-going basis of the development of Research Results and shall not take
any steps with respect to filing intellectual property protection for any Research Results
without prior consultation with the Principal Investigator.
8. Cooperation in Patent Matters. I will cooperate fully in the signing of documents and
taking such other steps as may be reasonably requested to obtain and maintain patent and
other intellectual property protection for the Research Results relating to the Sponsored
Research Agreement and in connection with any infringement action in any way relating
to said Research Results, and I will sign all documents and do all things necessary or
proper to give effect to this Research Participant Agreement and any rights granted by the
University under the Sponsored Research Agreement.
9. Commercialization Revenue. I agree that allocation of the revenue from sales,
royalties, licence fees or other sources received as a result of the commercialization of
Research Results relating to the Sponsored Research Agreement to which I contribute as
an inventor shall be made in a manner consistent with the University of Waterloo Policy
#73 (Intellectual Property Rights).
10. Acknowledgement. I have obtained or have been afforded the opportunity to obtain
independent legal advice with respect to this Research Participant Agreement and all
documents and transactions related thereto and I fully understand the nature and
consequences of this Research Participant Agreement and all documents and transactions
related thereto.
By signing below, I indicate my acceptance of these terms.
Research Participant's Signature Witness' Signature
Print Name Print Name
Date Date
Research Participant's Signature Witness' Signature
Print Name Print Name
Date Date
Research Participant's Signature Witness' Signature
Print Name Print Name
Date Date
Research Participant's Signature Witness' Signature
Print Name Print Name
2
0 Date
Research Participant's Signature
Print Name
Date
Research Participant's Signature
Print Name
Date
Research Participant's Signature
Print Name
Date
do
Date
Witness' Signature
Print Name
Date
Witness' Signature
Print Name
Date
Witness' Signature
Print Name
Date
3
0 EXHIBIT "B"
TREATMENT OF FORMER
MANUFACTURED GAS PLANT RESIDUALS
USING IN SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION:
CLEARWATER FLORIDA
Prepared
for
Clearwater Gas System
•
Neil R. Thomson
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of Waterloo
October 25, 2010
University of
Waterloo
0
V
Waterloo
""ENGINEERING
• Summary: Remediation of dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs) from subsurface
environments is a significant challenge. The presence of tars associated with former
manufactured gas plants (MGPs) magnifies this challenge due to their complex chemical
composition, dissolution behaviour and recalcitrant characteristics. Chemical oxidation has been
touted as a potential silver bullet to deal with MGP residuals; however, the science-base to
support its use in full-scale applications is lacking. Surprisingly there have been no
comprehensively monitored and un-biased pilot-scale trials reported in the peer-reviewed
scientific or engineering literature. The focus of the research outlined in this proposal is to
perform a multi-year pilot-scale evaluation of the ability of persulfate to treat a MGP residual
area at the former Clearwater Manufactured Gas Plant, Clearwater Florida.
The approach envisioned will consist of series of bench-scale experiments that will be used to
support field activities. The bench-scale experiments will consist of batch (aqueous and slurry)
and column investigations to establish potential treatability end-points, by-product formation,
isotope fractionation, oxidant-solids interaction, dosing requirements, and biological impacts.
Initial field activities will involve collection of sufficient background temporal information to
establish a solid understanding of baseline conditions. This will be followed a series of treatment
episodes and short-term monitoring (weeks). Following the treatment period, long-term
monitoring (12 to 30 months) will be used to capture system rebound to a new quasi steady-state
condition.
This is an exciting opportunity for us to provide an unbiased performance assessment of a novel
remedial technology. This site appears to have the characteristics that are well suited for a
focused field trial and we have no doubt that the findings generated from this research effort will
be a tremendous benefit to the scientific, engineering, and regulatory communities. We look
forward to working with Clearwater Gas System, Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, Baker & Hostetler LLP, and ARCADIS on this initiative.
Background: Sites contaminated with dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs) such as
manufactured gas plant (MGP) residuals or "coal tars" are problematic and hence a variety of
technologies that enhance the rate of mass removal that is vital to attain site restoration have
been developed. Enhancing the rate of mass transfer from. a DNAPL into the aqueous phase can
be achieved by increasing the solubility of the contaminant (e.g., using a cosolvent or surfactant),
or by decreasing the concentration of the contaminant in the bulk aqueous phase through either
biological or chemical reactions (e.g., using a chemical oxidant, or through biodegradation).
In situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) is a potentially effective technology that enhances the rate of
NAPL mass removal by injecting a reagent into the subsurface that oxidizes aqueous phase
contaminants to potentially non-toxic products. Contemporary aqueous oxidants for ISCO
include hydrogen peroxide (H202), permanganate (Mn04") and persulfate (S40 82-).
Persulfate is the newest oxidant to be used and promises numerous advantages over the other two
oxidants. Its capability to oxidize a wide range of organic contaminants when activated (E° = 2.6
V) and lack of interaction with aquifer solids has made persulfate an increasing popular choice.
Further, persulfate generates minimal gas and heat, and no adverse oxidation by-products have
2
been reported in the literature. Persulfate on activation to sulfate free radicals exhibits a high
reactivity towards subsurface organic contaminants that include petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs),
oxygenates and substituted alkanes. While limited treatability of chemicals present in
manufactured gas plant residuals (e.g., BTEX, PAHs, etc) by persulfate has been demonstrated at
the bench-scale no carefully monitored and un-biased pilot-scale experiments have been reported
in the peer-reviewed literature. Although the use of persulfate has increased rapidly, the science-
base to support its use in full-scale applications is lacking as peer-reviewed scientific and
engineering publications have, so far, been restricted primarily to reaction kinetic investigations.
The former Clearwater Manufactured Gas Plant, Clearwater Florida ("Site") is ideally suited for
such an investigation.
Synopsis of Impacts at the Former Clearwater Manufactured Gas Plant Site: The Site
lithology is comprised of a surficial sand and silt unit which sits on an olive green colored
confining clay unit underlain by weathered limestone. The clay unit is encountered at a depth of
between 20 and 40 ft bls, slopes west to south-west, and is -10 ft thick. The buff-colored
limestone unit extends to at least 50 ft bls. The surficial aquifer is characterized as a fairly
uniform fine to very fine grained sand. Horizontal laminations on the millimetre scale, organic
silts nodules, organic muck, and tree rootlets are occasionally present (ARCADIS, 2010a).
Goundwater flow in the surficial aquifer is towards the southeast with a hydraulic gradient of
0.006 ft/ft (ECT, 2003). Based on this geologic deposit the hydraulic conductivity is estimated
to be between 10-3 and 10-2 cm/s. Assuming a porosity of 0.3 is appropriate; the groundwater
velocity in the surficial aquifer is estimated to be between 0.06 and 0.6 ft/day.
The subsurface source areas are in the general vicinity of the locations of the former
manufactured gas production facilities, gas holders, and tar water separators (ECT, 2003). These
source areas currently underlie Clearwater Gas System's Meter Shop/Service Division Building
and adjacent paved parking areas. Based on recent drilling and groundwater sampling performed
by ARCADIS in July 2010 (ARCADIS, 2010a), and additional well installations and sampling in
September 2010 (ARCADIS, 2010b) the following are relevant to this proposal:
1. The 11 borings (DPT-1 to DPT-11) completed through the surficial aquifer to the top of the
clay unit indicated the presence of MGP residual material at DPT-1 and DPT-5, sheens and
stains within 5 ft of land surface at DPT-4 (2.5-4 ft bls) and DPT-10 (3-5 ft bls), and sheen
traces and streaks between 5 to 15 ft bls at DPT-7 and DPT-11 (3-5 ft bls) (see Table 1.).
• At DPT-1 NAPL blebs and stringers, and sheens were observed from 5 ft bls to the clay
contact at 24 ft bls. At the sand/clay contact a 3-inch thick zone of NAPL saturated sands
was observed to sit on the clay capillary barrier.
• At DPT-5, sheen traces were observed from 5-15 ft bls, and at 17 ft bls a 3.5 inch zone of
fine to medium sand was observed to contain NAPL in the pore spaces. Residual NAPL
blebs and heavy sheens were observed from 17 to 20 ft bls. No NAPL accumulation was
observed at the sand/clay contact at this location.
• Based on these borings, the area of the source material is potentially 200 feet x 50 feet.
2. The contaminants of concern (COCs) are benzene, ethylbenzene, naphthalene, 1-
methylnaphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, and acenaphthene.
3
3. The temporary well screens strategically installed in 8 of the 11 borings were used to collect
groundwater samples (analyzed for BTEX and naphthalene) (see Table 1). These
groundwater data indicate that:
• There is minimal groundwater impacts up-gradient of DPT-1 at DPT-10 and DPT-11
(except for the elevated naphthalene concentration observed at a depth of 10-13 ft bls).
This is consistent with the historical groundwater data from MW-1, MW-7, MW-7D, MW-
7DV, and MW-14D.
• Cross-gradient of DPT-1, both DPT-2 and DPT-3 show elevated concentrations of
benzene, ethylbenzene and naphthalene from 5 ft bls to the sand/clay contact.
• Down-gradient of DPT-5 (where NAPL is present at 17 to 20 ft bls) is MW-20 which has
yielded significant groundwater concentrations since 2003 (see Table 2). Cross-gradient of
DPT-5, higher concentrations were observed in DTP-6 compared to DTP-4.
• Further down-gradient of DPT-5, the groundwater samples collected from DPT-8 and
DPT-9 have much higher concentrations than observed at DPT-7.
4. Groundwater concentrations observed from samples collected from permanent monitoring
wells that are above either the FDEP GCTLs or the FDEP MCLs are listed in Table 2. These
data show that besides MW-20, wells HDMW-4D,' HDMW-7, HDMW-8, HDMW-9, and
HDMW-9D have dissolved phase impacts presumably due to the up-gradient source area.
5. The underlying clay unit has most likely served to impede the vertical migration of dissolved
phase COCs. The level to which MGP mass has been able to penetrate the top of this unit has
not been investigated; however, the observations collected during the boring effort indicate
the presence of odors just in the upper few inches of the clay unit.
6. Geochemical data collected to date are sparse. Field parameters collected in 2003 indicate a
pH between 6 and 7, temperature of 21 to 26 °C, ORP reflective of reducing conditions, and.
dissolved oxygen <1.0 mg/L (ECT, 2003).
As part of this research project additional site data will be collected to better characterize the
source area up-gradient of MW-20. In particular a key focus will be the area between DTP-1 and
DPT-5 that underlies the Meter Shop/Service Division Building.
Research Objective: To demonstrate the efficiency and effectiveness of in situ chemical
oxidation using persulfate to treat MGP residuals beneath a former MGP plant.
Proposed Methodology: The approach envisioned will consist of series of bench-scale
experiments that will be used to support targeted field activities.
The bench-scale experiments will consist of batch (aqueous and slurry) and column
investigations to establish potential treatability end-points, by-product formation, isotope
fractionation, oxidant-solids interaction, dosing requirements, and biological impacts.
Initial field activities will involve source area characterization and the collection of sufficient
background temporal information to establish a solid understanding of baseline conditions. A
down-gradient monitoring transect will be established to estimate the mass loading of COCs
from the source area to the plume.
4
To evaluate potential treatment performance a series of push-pull tests will be performed at three
locations. The results from these tests will help in confirming, at the in situ scale, dosing levels,
activator behaviour, and COC treatability.
A number of different parameters can potentially be measured or tests carried out to gain insight
into the various chemical, biological and physical processes occurring in situ during remedial
treatment. An important component of this project is to gather quantitative information on the
mass of a COC that was removed by a specific process, and to use this information to optimize
operational procedures to increase the rate of COC removal. For example, it will be of interest in
this research effort to determine the contribution to COC removal due to chemical oxidation
compared to biodegradation. One potential tool to discern these differences is through the use of
compound-specific isotope analysis.
Source area treatment will likely involve a series of treatment episodes. Each episode will be
followed by short-term monitoring (weeks) focussing primarily on reagent distribution and point
COC behaviour. Subsequent treatment episodes (perhaps over the following year) will be
conditioned on the short-term data. Long-term monitoring (1 to 2 years post treatment) will be
used to capture system rebound to a new quasi steady-state condition following treatment. The
overall success of this research effort will be predicated on this long-term data.
• Task Description: The following are brief task descriptions that provide an indication of the
research effort proposed. A comprehensive scope-of-work for each task or sub-task will be
prepared and submitted to Clearwater Gas System and the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (FDEP) for review and approval as required. In addition, appropriate variances will
be obtained from FDEP in advance of any injection of persulfate solution that will be performed
as part of any field work effort.
Task 1: Source Area Characterization and Establishment of Baseline Conditions
Additional characterization of the source area is required to: (1) delineate the spatial extents and
architecture of the NAPL, (2) determine NAPL composition; (3) estimate NAPL mass; (4)
determine the mass of dissolved COCs present in underlying clay unit; (5) confirm groundwater
flow direction and magnitude; (6) estimate hydraulic conductivity; and (7) collect soil cores to
support the bench-scale effort (Task 2).
To establish baseline conditions additional monitoring instrumentation will need to be installed.
The amount and location depends on the findings and instruments installed as part of the source
characterization effort. We envision that, at a minimum, a number of peripheral and interior
multilevel wells will need to be established. In addition, a monitoring transect that spans the
width of the dissolved phase plume will be installed perpendicular to the groundwater flow
direction. The transect multilevel monitoring wells will be spaced on the order of 5 feet, and
each well will have at least 7-10 monitoring points. The transect and suite of monitoring wells
will be sampled at least 4 times over a 12 month period to establish baseline conditions.
Groundwater samples will be analysed for geochemical parameters (pH, DO, major ions, etc),
5
and COCs (VOCs and PAHs). Piezometric data will. also be collected concurrently. These data
will be used as a baseline to measure treatment performance.
Task 2: Bench-Scale Experiments
A variety of carefully designed bench-scale experiments using batch (aqueous and slurry) and
column configurations will be performed to establish potential treatability end-points, stable by-
product formation, isotope fractionation, oxidant-solids interaction, optimal catalyst chemistry,
dosing requirements, and biological impacts.
Initially, aqueous treatability experiments will be performed in fixed volume batch reactors.
These experiments will use site groundwater (most likely from MW-20) exposed to persulfate to
identify the most effective persulfate activation scheme (e.g., peroxide, chelated metals, alkaline,
etc) and dosages. Samples collected from these reactors will be analyzed for COCs, potential
intermediates and by-products, and will be used to establish treatment efficiency and
effectiveness. This comprehensive screening process will yield the optimal persulfate system(s)
under ideal conditions for the COCs. Relevant kinetic data will be generated for the optimal
persulfate system(s).
Samples of non-impacted solids from the surficial sand unit and the underlying clay unit will be
used to establish the interaction between the optimal persulfate system(s) and these materials.
Sediment sub-samples will be exposed to the optimal persulfate system(s) and the concentration
of persulfate, pH and presence of gas monitored over time. These data will be used to estimate
• oxidant stability following the method outlined by Sra et al. (2010).
These aqueous treatability experiments will be followed by a focused set of soil slurry
treatability experiments. In these experiments both non-impacted (no NAPL present) and
impacted solids from the surficial sand unit and the underlying clay unit will be used in fixed
volume batch reactors. The non-impacted solids series (solids/persulfate/site groundwater) will
seek to understand the interaction of the aquifer sediments on the treatability of dissolved phase
COCs. The impacted solids series (solids with NAPL/persulfate) will provide information on
dosing required to degrade the suspected mass of NAPL that is present at some Site locations. It
is envisioned that multiple oxidant dosing episodes will be required. A treatment end-point
under ideal conditions will be established and stable by-products will be determined.
Impacted surficial aquifer material will also be packed in columns and flushed with the optimal
persulfate solution and dosage levels as suggested by the batch reactor results. Breakthrough
data (e.g., COCs, residual persulfate, pH, etc.) and post-oxidation analyses of contaminant mass
in the columns will help develop treatment performance assessment goals. The results from the
column trials are expected to provide design information more representative of in situ
conditions than the batch reactor data and will be used as a basis for the design of the treatment
system in terms of the reagent (persulfate and activator) loading rates.
As appropriate, samples of both un-impacted and impacted sediments before and after exposure
to persulfate will be used for Denaturing Gel Gradient Electrophoresis (DGGE) analysis, and to
determine the Electron Transport System (ETS) activity by measuring the reduction of 2-(p-iodo-
phenyl)-3-(p-nitrophenyl)-5-phenyl tetrazolium chloride (INT) to iodoni-trotetrazolium formazan
6
(INT-formazan). Other microbiological fingerprinting techniques and probes will be
investigated as we proceed. These data will be helpful to assess the direct impact of the
aggressive treatment on the microbial population. We are also interested in the presence of
indigenous sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) at the Site and the ability of these SRB to recover
following chemical treatment. If suitable, we will attempt to encourage SRB degradation
following treatment.
The use of compound-specific isotope analysis (CSIA) has increased as a complementary tool to
monitor the efficacy of abiotic remediation as well as microbial degradation processes (e.g.,
Hunkeler et al., 2005). This technique is based on changes in the isotopic composition of the
target contaminant associated with its degradation process. For example, due to mass-dependent
differences in activation energies of the different isotopes 13C and 12C, the lighter isotope (12C)
reacts faster than the heavier isotope (13C), leading to fractionation and an enrichment of heavy
isotopes in the remaining portion of compound as the reaction proceeds (Clark and Fritz, 1997).
We plan to investigate the use of CSIA in this research effort to potentially identify and quantify
COC removal by physical processes and transformations. Samples will be collected and
analysed at the University of Waterloo Isotope Laboratory at appropriate times throughout this
bench-scale effort.
Task 3: Push-Pull Tests
Push-pull tests have been used to quantify microbial metabolic activities (Istok et al., 1997) and
in situ reaction rate parameters (Haggerty et al., 1998) in petroleum contaminated aquifers.
Push-pull tests have also recently been used to estimate the natural oxidant demand of an aquifer
(Mumford et al., 2004) and TCE degradation rates and permanganate consumption rates (Ko et
al., 2007). These tests provide a suitable scale-up increment from the bench-scale. In this
research we plan to use the push-pull test to assess the in situ ability of the optimal persulfate
system to aggressively treat a MGP residual within the surficial aquifer. For this purpose the
push-pull test involves a sequence of near identical push-pull events at each test location. Push-
Pull 1 is used to establish a dissolution baseline and involves the injection of a specified volume
of a conservative tracer solution into target zone. After a suitable dissolution/reaction period,
groundwater is extracted and used to establish tracer and COC concentration profiles. Push-Pull
2 is identical except that the injected solution also contains persulfate (+activator). Following
the reaction period, the extracted groundwater is used to establish tracer, COC, residual
persulfate, and sulfate/sodium concentrations profiles. The differences in the profiles will be
used to provide an indication of the in situ treatment potential. In addition, CSIA will be used as
appropriate and suitable as determined in Task 2. Depending on Site conditions we may also use
a variation of this push-pull test to investigate the role that sulfate-reducing bacteria may play in
the degradation of the COCs.
Task 4: Diffusion Modeling to Assess Treatability of the Clay Unit
Although the extent to which the clay is impacted by COCs is unknown, we suspect that the
dissolved phase COCs have diffused into this unit. Once the COC concentrations are reduced
considerably in the surficial aquifer, the COC mass will back-diffuse from the clay unit into the
surficial aquifer. The mass flux associated with this back-diffusion process may be substantial.
Using the data set assembled from Task 1 and Task 2, diffusion scenario modeling will be
performed to estimate mass-flux, time frames, and potential treatment options.
7
•
Task 5: Design and Installation of Initial Delivery Infrastructure
The pilot-scale experimentation is expected to commence after establishment of oxidant loading
and activation requirements from the bench-scale experiments, push-pull tests and diffusion
modeling. It is acknowledged that the delivery of activated persulfate to the target zone will be
an important parameter in determining treatment success. Using the information collected,
defendable oxidant delivery approaches will be developed and the initial delivery infrastructure
installed.
Task 6: Treatment and Short-Term Monitoring
We envision that multiple delivery episodes will be required to meet oxidant dosing and spatial
coverage requirements. At a suitable time following each treatment episode samples will be
collected from a suite of identified wells and the monitoring transect. Changes in the dissolved
phase concentrations and mass discharge across the transect will be used as direct measures of
treatment performance. Indirect measures (e.g., residual persulfate, sulfate, sodium, ORP, pH,
inorganic carbon, dissolved oxygen, and CSIA) will also be employed to assist in performance
evaluation. Prior to each subsequent injection episode, changes in the delivery system will be
made to optimize treatment.
Task 7: Long-Term Monitoring
Long-term monitoring (1 to 2 years post treatment) of the groundwater system will be used to
capture system rebound to a new quasi steady-state condition following treatment. It is
envisioned that sampling will occur at a frequency of once every 4 months. Analytical data
collected will depend largely on the findings from Task 1. Soil cores will be extracted from
strategic locations to assess changes in NAPL conditions within the surficial aquifer, and post
treatment impacts on geochemistry and microbiology. Also soil cores will be extracted from. the
clay unit to determine aqueous COC profiles.
Research Teann : The assembled research team is comprised of three professors, one
postdoctoral student, two graduate students, and four technicians.
Professor Neil R. Thomson, University of Waterloo, Canada. Dr. Thomson is a Professor of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Chair of the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, and a member of the Environmental Modelling and Analysis Group. Dr. Thomson
teaches a number of undergraduate and graduate courses in areas such as environmental
chemistry, contaminant transport and remediation technology design. Dr. Thomson has over 20
years of research experience and expertise in the use of field investigations, laboratory
experiments and numerical models to explore subsurface contaminant fate and remediation
issues. His research interests are focused on the environmental fate of contaminants in
subsurface systems including immiscible liquids, vapours and pathogens, the development and
application of simulation tools, and the development and assessment of soil and groundwater
40 remediation technologies. He provides expert technical assistance on topics that include:
conceptual groundwater model development; groundwater flow and fate analysis; model
8
selection, development, calibration and sensitivity; and remedial alternative selection and system
design. Dr. Thomson is a featured lecturer in short courses in North America and the UK.
Professor Ramon Aravena, University of Waterloo, Canada. Ramon Aravena holds a MSc in
chemistry from the Catholic University of Chile (1973), and University of Waterloo Earth
Sciences degrees (MSc 1982; PhD 1993). He is a Research Associate Professor in the
Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo with 20 years
experience in the application of isotope techniques in hydrology and hydrogeology. He has been
involved in numerous groundwater studies in Latin America, Canada and the US related to the
investigation of groundwater resources and groundwater protection. His current research
program focuses on groundwater contamination caused by industrial, urban and agricultural
activities. He extensively uses environmental isotopes as tracers to provide information about
sources and processes that affect organic compounds in groundwater. Dr. Aravena is the author
and co-author of over 80 refereed publications and over 40 technical papers.
Professor Jim Barker, University of Waterloo, Canada. Jim Barker is a professor at the
University of Waterloo, Canada which hosts a leading center for groundwater research with a
special emphasis on groundwater contamination and remediation. The migration and fate of
organic contaminants in groundwater is his major research interest. Petroleum hydrocarbons and
chemicals associated with petroleum products have been emphasized. Groundwater remedial
technologies such as monitored natural attenuation and in situ reactive barriers using
microbially-mediated transformations are also being developed and critically evaluated.
Laboratory and modeling studies commonly support controlled, natural-gradient field
experiments to better define the processes involved in transport, fate and in situ remediation.
Biodegradation processes are of particular interest and recent research has especially focused on
the fate of gasoline additives such as MTBE and ethanol.
Postdoctoral, Graduate and Undergraduate Students: Kammy Sra (Postdoctoral Student),
Angela McIsaac (MASc), Sophie Ma (PhD) and numerous undergraduate students will
participate in this research project. It is envisioned that portions of this project will form the
basis for the theses generated by Angela McIsaac and Sophie Ma.
Technicians: Marianne VanderGriendt and Mark Sobon are University of Waterloo Laboratory
Technicians who will assist with the bench-scale tests and analytical analysis. Bob Ingleton and
Terry Ridgway are University of Waterloo Field Technicians who will aid the graduate students
with field related activities as required.
Deliverables: A summary of this research will be compiled in various theses and in peer-
reviewed papers and conference proceedings. All publications (except for theses) can be
submitted to Clearwater Gas System for review and approval as required. Bi-monthly e-mail
updates of progress and findings will be provided.
11
9
Schedule: Based on the proposed research methodology, the following general research schedule
is proposed (See Figure 1 for more details).
Year 1 (January 2011-December 2011): Perform additional site characterization. Collect soil
cores for bench-scale efforts. Establish baseline characteristics. Execute bench-scale
experiments. Begin diffusion modeling. Apply to FDEP for necessary variances required for
injection of persulfate solution.
Year 2 (January 2012-December 2012): Complete baseline characterization. Finish bench-
scale experiments. Summarize diffusion modelling results. Design treatment system (delivery,
size of treatment zone, additional monitoring network etc) and perform installations. Begin
treatment and short-term monitoring. Assess short-term post-treatment performance. Optimize
delivery system(s).
Year 3 (January 2013-December 2013):
Proceed with treatment, short-term monitoring and assessment, and optimization of delivery
system.
Year 4 (January 2014-December 2014):
Assess long-term post-treatment performance, and secondary impacts including changes to
geochemistry and microbiology.
Year 5 (January 2015-September 2015):
Continue with long-term post-treatment performance assessment, and secondary impacts to
geochemistry and microbiology.
10
References:
ARCADIS, 2010a. Status Report - July 2010 Additional Assessment Field Activities Clearwater Former
MGP Site, August 25, 2010.
ARCADIS, 2010b. Figure I from Focused Assessment (Draft).
ECT (Environmental Consulting & Technology, Inc.), 2003. Supplemental Assessment Report,
Clearwater Gas System Former Manufactured Gas Plant, Clearwater, Florida.
Clark, I., P. Fritz, 1997. Environmental Isotope in Hydrogeology. Lewis Publishers, New York, 328 pp.
Haggerty, R., M.H. Schroth, J.D. Istok, 1998. Simplified method of "push-pull" test data analysis for
determining in situ reaction rate coefficients. Ground Water, 36(2), 314-324.
Hunkeler, D., R. Aravena, K. Berry-Spark, K., E. Cox, 2005. Assessment of degradation pathways in an
aquifer with mixed chlorinated hydrocarbon contamination using stable isotope analysis. Environ. Sci.
Technol., 39, 5975-5981.
Istok, J.D., M.D. Humphrey, M.H. Schroth, M.R. Hyman, K.T O'Reilly, 1997. Single-well, "pushpull"
test for in situ determination of microbial activities. Ground Water, 35(4), 619-631.
Ko, S.-O., S.-H Ji, 2007. In situ push-pull tests for the determination of TCE degradation and
permanganate consumption rates. Environmental Geology, 53(2), 359.
Mumford, K.G., C.S. Lamarche, N.R. Thomson, 2004. Natural oxidant demand of aquifer materials using
the push-pull technique. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 130(10), 1139-1146.
Sra, Kanwartej, Neil R. Thomson, Jim F. Barker, 2010. Persistence of persulfate in uncontaminated
aquifer materials. Environ. Sci. Technol., 44 3098-3104. doi: 10.1021/es903480k
11
r
m
L
k
L ?
O- L
Z
L
U
a
? ar c
G
N °' v
U U 0
...i
. w O
G? CL
3 E
v
J
4
C
C
O
4]
tOt?
GA
rA
0
U
U
0
U
rn
GA
?.r
O
U
C^C
i..V
.^^rl
rF?1
V
"O
Q?
O
.+i
H
9
Z 0
O
?
fG Wo
N
a
U
Y ?
N
O
u
ai v
c a
a cot a a
O •? p G N aO+
^ N 00 u?i M -+ p
$ •y v o?0
? ? 4 4 v1°i
c
? v
U
4 a+
Y C
U Ia
N ry
n ui ^ a
c a -M
y d
C a+ A P.
O
`
m
v
v
N ? m
O o a
u a
o ar
L t; a
a
a ?
m
m c
.
vo L
sa
J
N
d 0
2 N N
O_
m D
_ N
u
J a
a
co 1 N n "' n n
U1 LA N v d 0 1! N
m en p :? v v
N N C 'O•I O O O? ry
vv O N N C~1 N D Q
v cc T, n
O Op ODD 6?
N N
m v N "'"
f4 Ir n n N N
VV W d; 4 O o
v v
n
co v, n n
W .•-I ? n M ^ .•-? N
N n N
!a Ln
v
MO N N W M M
m -+00
ri v v v
`o
0
C
w
N N N
O
0
12
N
F
0
O
0
p
r
00
?v
v
0
E o
`o
0
d
F
O
0
fG
d
E
V
W
zz? Z;
'? n o0
p o m
n ? n
N' M M
.y m
ui
o0
m
a
v r-I
? ti u,
m Ln
m
N O
v
C
D
r- aO
M
?
n
N ~ ui
m c ul m
N - m
m a m
0
v
? N p N N
n m a
v N u1
v N y ao
O C
W O
rl O O
0
~
'
0p
N 0
0
N
?
n N _ n
a_ o Zn N
a
? M ~
? N uY
m ~ V
° 06
o o
O Ln co Ln m
O
Ln
nZ F7 LO F N 00 Ln N
u
v M 6
v
v N ~
Ot C
°O m '~ m
w
M ~ ?
N
0 CO N
v ! V1
O N tp
rl N
~ vv N
Li
m M
0 co v,
v : to
v
? ? m
O 4
v v
v
r N N
O co V1
v z: Lo
m ca N
l
0 o m
0
v
0
-0
O
c
CO
N
00 Ln
Lo to
r, m
N M N N N N N
0
O
no
c
c
v a 0 v
a v L^ a o v
>.
v `
a
0. R I N ? O
Z C 2 s E 0
0
O
L
O n p
00 C d o
c a, s
o N N to
`o
n
O
m
tf1 tD
6 D
0
4
0
L o
eo m
O
0
Lao
O ?
oA 4
c ar
0 a
F
n
O
0
m
v
w
o
E
d
0
LOa
0
0
L
oC
W
H
6
O
0
m
00
0
0
Lao
O
O
to
rn
F
0
4
0
Lao
O
n
0
Lno
O
0
41
cu -po
L o
m c
V p
N
H
0
c
c
l
S
C
H
C
Con
C".
a
O
a?
O
N
U
U
O
U
N
C?
?i
O
a?
Ln
O
rz
O
1?.
a?
U
O
U
av
7
a
it
OA
'D
a?
U
U
U
N
N
H
a
c
a
r
O.
m
c
a
u
Q
a
C
a
m
L
L
CL
m
C
L
v
N
a
c
a
m
r -L
c
L
v
N
C
a
Ia
t
L
CL
m
z
a
a
c
a
L
A
.C
LU
w
W
c
c
N
co
(14 0
Ln m O Im I I v ~ I? IN In I? i I? I
a
4 ':t C-4
N N , IN N , I , I I O I? I Q I I v '
N ° N I? I I IQ co II? In I?
It v
N m Q -i N 0 Ln O 0
N v
° °
%.6 o o
o m n m to
m
IX?
m m 0
0
0 Lr)
H N H
O
W
o
4
n ri
O _j p0 J N 00 O N 00 Q m
' Q O -4 d 0 ?q 0
E 66
J
?
E
=L
=L 4D C) N 0 N N
C0 ? O O d C d 0 0 0
-j -i
- ?, ^? N ?--1 N d
00
? a
uJ a
w
Ln Y ? ? N G N
00 '
N 0 0 ? u
1
v v; n- °
v M
LM
O
o " m
v Rt
n n n to
4 o d ?
O
op cr,
m r N
O C
O
? m 2 ? 2 ? 2
Lr? p? O
d n
v a-1
v
O ?r ry
ri m
v v
N 00 O
w N
Q Q O
ca a
Q) N
j O
7 U1
m
= N
M
•
Q)
U
U
7:1
O
O
O
qq?.
F+I
u
v
in
d
m
n in
o ?
N a
N T
L ?
v
}
C
CL
Q
C
?
CL
_ N
R V)
N QO
O 7
Va
T
A
a ?
r
d
a
l w
CL
w
m '"
ti 11
o ?
v a
ro
N ?
r
d
Q
m
I?
d
d
rv ?
o ?
N a
N T
? fp
d
r
?.
m
lu
u
d
N ao
a ?
N Q
IO
N
}
F
OC
ur C
C O
m o
° u° E
E
v N ate. N p u
.? a w O, 0 2 r
r
A m c bO Q A i 9
N C - C V1
u O a T a
u w m c c
y y t v ? a m
C C
Q z Ln 7 p N m n N
H O- N t (n d '? l!'1 C C6 E
Jo -Y
7 f?a N C Y t Y 7 N Y ?? (o
ro O V, A C1 p 7 17 m N '? f0 L
F L, W H co 0- H? Q F? C H H
no
O
O
E
n
tp
? C
N
E
•
H
7
a
C
°'
CL
6
G
tV ?
N
w
Y
O
F 0
E
Q
N e
S p m S 0
°
O S$ ? P S? w? 0 0 ? ? i ? d
p
°O M eti ?
p
O d
.e V- `-'?
ry N
W N a .ryi I?
µ
?
v~i w
V
? V
H (pq
00 ?
Sul ul +h +R w y? w y
y
+h w +? N N
o S ? 0 ° ? ? $ pp
V 'R m N ? nl SO M ? O
N v? veil w *m^ '^ w '^ ?' urvi ?^ urvi ? °1 m
N S S O
S p
? p S S O
p ? w rv ? ^
N N
p $ pp
4 S$ ° °O c n
S O O O ?O N v ?/1 cr - O ?
ri
a
m ? °
v
0 0 o vv o 0
pp
? 0 0 O$
Q a
S ° O
S Q
O O
M ?
O ?
1?
S p^ $ V O 4 N
O
N Vmi N ? h N 4/l ? i/l i/l ?
? ? t? Vl
V Q
a 0 0 ° $ $ $ m
p p Lr
L'i
?n in w
O
p $
?A
O
° O
a
O?
0 0
0 9
?
p
N
H °
ul
? OO
'?
a
Vl
F^+
°
O
?
ul p
$
t~/h
p
n O
Ipil
N
00
n a
°O
of a
O O
N
_
iA
°° p
N
t?
O
n N
.-I
N
O
C
p v p h
a
v v}
rv
o
p o a
$
as y
° N
?
1 m
N M H w a
N
S
O
m
O p p pp
W W ?D S
S ? ?
en
w e
G
1r
uT +h m W
w u
i
Vl _
+/F
ul w vmi iA
O O v O
+h 14
ul ev
y` N
y} ' N
0 0
o
0
$
0
o
vv W ?o .y rv
$ o
0
°p
°m
°
o
M +h vn v
V~F °
;Al
H w ul vl
w
N
O p
S
S S O 0 0 ll S S rv
vei
?
°v m m N ?
o 0 0 0
°
$
$
O
m
O m u p p ?_ O O
- ? ri N v?
? +h n
?
00 $ O pp p
? C ?O S
v e S S pp
? W p
aD_ ?? a
?p
b Kj w ?
a a
Y q
O
g ? m d? D O
E
i
ry? d?
U ILL _
v e0
oo 0 r
Z Q d 4 !T o
L' c $ ar u - m y m
e m d c E ??? E u m E v c ??
? ? ?, ? ?? O ? 3 ?g o 3 ? o ? LL S
4
e ?
a x
!A O
l()
rti