Blog & Recent Projects

Article originally featured in the Environmental Business Journal (EBJ) Executive Review 2013 Issue, Volume XXVI, Number 1, 2013

 Columbia Technologies, LLC (Baltimore, MD), is a global provider of high-resolution direct sensing and mapping technologies, such as the membrane interface probe (MIP), laser-induced fluorescence (LIF), and the hydraulic profiling tool (HPT), for application in contaminated site characterization. Founded in 1999, the 17-employee company has successfully completed approximately 1,000 high-resolution site characterization surveys throughout Mexico, Canada, and 45 of the 50 states, including Hawaii, serving oil companies, government agencies, commercial real estate owners, developers, and architectural and engineering firms. John Sohl is the company’s CEO.

EBJ: What kind of year was 2012 in terms of revenue growth and profitability for your firm?

John Sohl: It was a good year. We had 20% revenue growth, and roughly 30% growth on the profit line. We had a good, solid set of projects that contributed to growth and profits.

EBJ: What client sectors and regions provided the best opportunities, and what factors were driving those opportunities? Any shifts in the sectors you’re serving?

J.S.: For what we do, the clients that are engaging in more complex projects, where the site characterization and remediation challenges are significant, that’s where we get our best match in terms of value proposition. They often tend to be petrochemical clients and manufacturers.

We did see a good amount of work in the Midwest, which has offered good growth through the resurgence in the economy. General Motors, Ford, and other manufacturers are trying to resolve issues with the assets on their books. I think we’ll see more and more positive impacts when cheap natural gas affects the petrochemical and manufacturers. These clients did do well.

There were no dramatic shifts in our client base. We maintain a fairly broad base, and we’re active in both the industrial sector and the Department of Defense (DOD) market. In the commercial market, if there has been any kind of shift, it’s been by reaching out beyond our traditional borders. In 2012, we’ve done a couple of projects in Hawaii. We have a partner in Mexico, and we’ve done some work in Canada, so we’re exporting our work on a regular basis.

We hope you enjoyed our last blog post, The 7 Myths of Direct Sensing (Part I) outlining the three basic assumptions or principles we have in mind when deploying high resolution direct sensing tools, defining high resolution and direct sensing tools, and disclosing the first three myths related to site characterization projects.

Below are four additional myths related to detection levels, remediation programs, cost of direct sensing, and the need for real time data with the corresponding truths.

Myth 4: The detection levels of direct sensing tools like the Membrane Interface Probe (MIP) are not low enough

If you’re going off the basis that the contaminant levels at your site are too low for direct sensing tools, you’re probably should ask yourself do I really only have 10 ppb and if so, why do I still have 10 ppb? Direct sensing tools for contaminant profiling are first and foremost source area characterization tools.

After 20 years in enviromental sampling and analysis we have come to believe in direct sensing as a means of providing the most rapid and comprehensive information about the distribution and composition of soil and groundwater contamination. Ever evolving, today’s direct sensing tools for remediation focused site characterization projects continue to add a greater range of high resolution information on subsurface conditions including hydrology, lithology and contaminant distribution to support environmental liability decision.

Although direct sensing approaches are used throughout the environmental industry supporting cleanup and closure efforts, there are still several myths associated in applying these methods to site investigation and remediation projects.

There are three basic assumptions or principles we have in mind when deploying high resolution direct sensing tools with as near real time decision-making information:

COLUMBIA Technologies recently supported the Sixth International Seminar on Environmental Characterization and Remediation of Sites Impacted by Hydrocarbons - 2012 in Mexico City, Mexico. The seminar was hosted by Rede Latino Americana de Prevenção e Gestão de Sítios (ReLASC) in partnership with PEMEX Refinery and Ecoterra Servicios Ambientales.

On Friday, September 14, COLUMBIA presented Rapid High Resolution Site Characterization Using Direct Sensing Technologies. With local teaming partner, International Products and Organic Solutions (IPOS) on Saturday, September 15, COLUMBIA provided a hands-on demonstration displaying how these advanced tools can be applied to a wide range of contaminated sites.

For more information contact:

Article originally featured on Tradeology, the official blog of ITA (International Trade Administration)

Doug Barry is a Senior International Trade Specialist in the Trade Information Center, U.S. Commercial Service within the International Trade Administration. 

John H. Sohl III is founder of Columbia Technologies, a Maryland company that maps underground pollution from large manufacturing facilities, oil terminals, pipelines and military bases. The company is a client of the Baltimore Export Assistance Center.

Barry:  How do you map underground pollution?

Sohl:  Mapping involves deployment of sensor technologies that track leakage and migration of pollutants.  Following analysis by our technicians, customers can make decisions on risk assessment, disposition of the property and proper cleanup actions.

Sohl:  I started the company about 15 years ago after doing similar work in the U.S. Navy.  I was always intrigued with the application of sensors and three-dimensional mapping of components, and that’s the approach we brought to the industry.  The world really is getting flat and many of our clients are global industries that have footprints both in the U.S. and North America as well as the globe.  So once we’ve established a good working relationship and reputation with those firms, they sought to bring us into other parts of the globe.

Barry:  So your initial market entry strategy was to piggyback on clients here in the U.S. and ride them into new markets.

One of the most critical points to remember when developing a site closure work plan is that it simply costs too much to assess, remediate, and make decisions on information that is incomplete, inaccurate, and too late. Traditional approaches to characterizing subsurface conditions by drilling, soil sampling, and monitoring wells screened over large intervals are too incomplete to accurately deal with site heteregoneity.

Therefore, a high resolution site characterization approach is a more attractive option as it enables projects to move forward with remediation focused activities such as corrective action, free product recovery efforts, and site closure.

Let’s face it, the heterogeneity geology of a site is going to impact the migration of subsurface contamination opposed to the age old myth that it always follows the direction of groundwater. Introduction of the Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT) for site investigation and remediation efforts supports contaminant mapping activities to provide a greater understanding of subsurface conditions. By measuring direct pressure response, HPT develops weighted lines of evidence indicating the tight (or loose) grains and low (or high) flow zones in order to determine the migration pathways, remediation injection regions, and placements for monitoring wells. With an integrated Soil Electrical Conductivity (EC) array this tool also defines zones of lower conductivity which allows for the movement of contaminants into the subsurface.

 Since 2008, our team at COLUMBIA Technologies has supported site managers in evaluating petroleum contamination at 125 and growing projects using direct sensing or imaging tools. These projects include a wide-range of application from gasoline and diesel fuel retail stations to Superfund sites, as well as petroleum terminals, petroleum storage facilities, pipeline terminals, railyards, oil refineries, complex underground storage tank (UST) sites, military installations, and truck refueling facilities. These sites have spanned across 28 states in the United States including Hawaii, and multiple provinces in Canada. One primary technology deployed at these sites is the Laser Induced Fluorescence, specifically LIF-UVOST^® to determine the LNAPL distribution at these facilities. These experiences have provided us with a number of lessons learned about accurately, rapidly, and cost-effectively characterizing these sites using this technology. 

COLUMBIA Technologies recently completed the Veteran Institute Procurement (VIP), a comprehensive training and certification program that helps veteran-owned businesses strengthen their ability to win government contracts and do business with both military and civilian agencies they once served in uniform.

On October 20, 2011, COLUMBIA Technologies was one of 45 businesses from 17 states to graduate from the National Center for the Veteran Institute for Procurement at the Bolger Center, a government-owned conference facility located in Potomac, MD. During the program’s graduation, John Sohl, CEO of COLUMBIA Technologies was presented with a congressional citation on behalf of U.S. House of Representatives Congressman, John P. Sarbanes.

     COLUMBIA Technologies is currently supporting our first high-resolution direct sensing project in Mexico City.  COLUMBIA’s direct sensing team landed in Mexico City in August to make a difference in the environmental industry on a global level and prove that real-time information can drive a project to satisfy regulatory requirements for investigation of contaminated sites.

Following the proven concept of stakeholder and regulatory involvement, systematic work planning, and dynamic work execution, these site investigations focused on providing a better understanding of how the results would impact the overall remediation scope and property disposition.

 Would a comprehensive site assessment and better data with multiple technology integration make a difference in your overall scope? Before you answer that question, think about whether or not having better, more accurate, and real-time information would motivate you to change your investigation technique on your next project. Are you actually interested in having data that accurately depicts the plume, delineates your source area, and multiple lines of evidence on your subsurface contamination? Or, would you rather “drill blind” and continue to sample areas where you think there may be contamination and install monitoring wells at the wrong depth and location incurring additional costs and time?

If having better data would actually change the way you would execute your project, design a remediation plan, or install monitoring wells, please read on. If you disagree, you may also continue to read, but the thoughts below may conflict with your perspective. Just saying, we warned you.

Data which is collected with advanced direct sensing tools (such as the Membrane Interface Probe (MIP), Laser Induced Fluorescence (LIF), or Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT)) provide a greater level of detail for characterizing the local site geology, a more in depth understanding of the hydrology, and deeper insight into the contaminant chemistry of your site. Wouldn’t all of this allow you to make more informed decisions?