Remedial specifications should include detailed procedures for the excavation and hauling of contaminated materials off-site to an acceptable disposal facility, and it should also clearly identify specific requirements such as the use of mud mats or a similar truck or wheel washing station/decontamination pad(s), and other considerations such as lining the container that carries bulk shipments of solids, or appropriate drums for liquids, to comply with Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations (TDGR), SOR/2001-286.

Contractor’s Pollution Liability (CPL) insurance covers claims from third parties against bodily injury or property damage caused by hazardous waste materials released during human activities, such as business operations during and/or after any remedial activities occur. Since much of the property being developed today has had some previous commercial or agricultural use, environmental exposures are not limited to heavy industrial or waste disposal sites and are usually required from contractor who is working on these environmentally sensitive projects. Such insurance requirements will provide their own set of parameters outlined to stay within their legal rights and responsibilities throughout the project, whether it is practical or not. Please note: Specifiers are not to adjust insurance requirements, but should be aware of them.

Practicality

The third “P,” practicality, is also important to consider when preparing specifications for remedial projects, based on lessons learned from implementing a variety of projects in the North American industry experience. Some tips, gained from several years of practical experience, are discussed below.

RAPs and permits/approvals from various agencies to implement remedial actions typically provide certain conditions to monitor and demonstrate the effectiveness of the remedial process and show there are no unacceptable discharges or emissions. Typically, the owner’s consultant evaluates remedial success by sampling the soil or groundwater being remediated and taken samples of ambient air, discharges, and emissions as required to demonstrate permit compliance. The results of these sampling activities commonly require changes to remedial processes (e.g. more excavation or additional treatment). The way the specifications and associated pricing are developed is important to ensure smooth project implementation to address these changes. For example, if excavation is priced as a lump sum, but further excavation needs to occur based on AHJ requirements, having a contractor provide additional unit pricing for further excavation could be problematic, so it would have been easier to have a unit price for this item to begin with and likely avoid such disputes.

Field QC can be successfully executed if specified with practicality in mind. An unreasonable requirement for oversight or testing results (e.g. testing every sample or awaiting lab results) can cause setbacks leading to change orders for scheduling delays, additional payment, or an insufficient remediation. Summary tables, either found within or attached to the end of specific specification sections or requested as a submission, should list all testing and inspection requirements, and are also highly beneficial for both the consultant’s on-site representative and the contractor to outline the requirements all in one place. Outlining requirements provides an opportunity to encourage the contractor to read the specs and give them some logical summary of expectations for testing and inspections. This ensures the minimum inspection and testing requirements, as well as the associated QC and quality assurance (QA) are met.

When it comes to pricing, many remediation projects are typically, and more practically, procured as a unit price contract, rather than a lump sum contract type. This is usually considered the most logical approach since the extent of contamination may often be unknown, thereby making precise quantities difficult to determine with certainty prior to soil testing or excavation and are impractical to estimate.

The owner does take on a risk such as running over budget but specifying the requirement for the contractor to be meticulous in tracking critical tasks and project costs, such as providing weigh tickets from transfer facilities of the loaded vehicles or litres (gallons) of treated groundwater, will ensure if records are properly maintained and avoid payment disputes later, especially when quantities may be disputable.

In conclusion, if a specifier remembers the best practices and applies the three “Ps”: planning, parameters, practicality, it will help in the development of a more comprehensive specification, mitigate oversights, and create a foundation for a successful execution of a remediation project.

Author’s note: Special thanks to Mila Legge, Richard C. Hoekstra, Frederick Taylor, and Zofia Sawkiewicz for peer reviewing this article.

 Notes

¹ Information gathered from www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90e19#BK24.

² Refer to the Occupational Heath and Safety Act (OHSA) at www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/
910213#BK9.

Author’s note: *Zone classification as defined by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) HAZWOPER Work Zone categories. Terms marked with an asterisk are also commonly used in the “HazMat” industry. OSHA is an American initiative supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); the leading authorities involved in major contaminated site cleanup since their inception 20 days apart in December of 1970. This was the time of the infamous “love canal” and other such disasters to local environments, which further inflicted the birth of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), informally known as the “superfund.” Unfortunately, Canada is lacking in an equivalent mandate with each province having to invoke individual statutes to apply, such as Ontario’s Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA), R.S.O. 1990, Chapter O.1. or enactment of a Notices of Orders as detailed in Part XI, Section 51 of O. Reg. 153/04, Records of Site Condition, found within CEPA, c. E.19, which also focuses on Remedial Orders in Section 17.

Author

Joanna Wcislo graduated from the University of Waterloo with a bachelor in environmental studies, and a joint honours degree in environment and resource studies (ERS) and peace and conflict studies (PACS) through Conrad Grebel University College. Wcislo has since been an specification writer with GHD for more than 14 years, specializing in the preparation of bid and contract documents for various types of projects including construction, remediation, restoration, waste disposal, wastewater treatment plants, building, transportation, and many projects of various scale in Canada and the U.S. She is familiar with various client-specific formats, and is proficient in developing specifications using various specification editing software systems. In addition, Wcislo is experienced in reviewing the application of municipal, provincial, national, and international standards throughout the Americas, to adhere to overall internal and external quality assurance (QA) standards in specifications. She is also now managing the update of more than 700 model specifications, along with the creation of a platform and guiding documents to provide clients quality project deliverables. Wcislo is a member of CSC’s Grand Valley chapter as program officer since 2015. She can be reached at joanna.wcislo@ghd.com.