MGP CONFERENCE 2027

ABSTRACT GUIDELINES

Deadlines

• Abstract deadline is Tuesday, September 2, 2026 5:00 pm EST

General Guidelines

Because hundreds of abstracts will be received for review, abstracts must be well-written and clearly and concisely outline the material that is proposed for presentation. Abstracts with a pronounced advertising or marketing focus will not be accepted. Abstracts must convey the information and data that are likely to be available at the time of the presentation to permit the reviewer to determine its relevance to the MGP community, compare it with other proposed presentations, and, if accepted for the program, assign it to an appropriate podium presentation or poster session. Those abstracts that are not accepted for podium presentations may be selected for the poster session.

While there is no restriction as to how many abstracts an organization submits, no more than three abstracts will be accepted from any one organization for presentation in order to maintain a balanced Conference Program. Further, a presenting author will only be allowed to present one presentation. The Technical Review Committee reserves the right to alter these restrictions based on the strength of the abstracts reviewed.

Podium presentations will be approximately 15 minutes with five additional minutes for Q&A.

Format

• Abstracts must be in English.
• There is a 1,000-word limit for each abstract.
• Abstracts must identify and include the complete contact information for the presenting author (organization, phone number, and email address). Please identify if a utility representative is an author, co-author, and/or co-presenter (recommended).
• Abstracts must be organized under the following required subheadings:
• Background/Objectives
• Provide a Problem Statement and the objectives of the work that was performed. If the specific site(s) cannot be named for reasons of confidentiality, please provide enough information to establish context for the work that was performed.
• Approach/Activities
• Describe the specific steps that were conducted to complete the work.
• Include a description of the project scale (e.g., paper study, bench/pilot test, full-scale construction, or monitoring etc.) and identify the scientific principles and/or technologies that were utilized.
• Results/Cost Efficiencies/Lessons Learned
• Summarize the data/results that support the conclusions of the work and describe the relevancy of the conclusions to the MGP community.
• Discuss any challenges, problems, and failures as well as successes and present the key lessons learned.
• Emphasize the cost efficiencies and savings.
• Please indicate if this abstract has been submitted, accepted, or presented at another conference within six months of this event. The conference to which the abstract was submitted should be identified. If a similar abstract has been submitted to another conference, a discussion of how this presentation is different should be included (e.g., additional data).

Abstract Evaluation

We’re looking for abstracts that are well written and organized and that address topics with one or more of the following qualities:

• Provides strong, candid lessons learned, including problems, failures, constraints, corrective actions, and successes that others can apply.
• Presents a clearly new or innovative technical/regulatory approach, technology, dataset, or interpretation with strong potential value to the MGP community.
• Clearly presents a current case study or a substantive update to a past project, with enough project-specific context to support useful discussion.
• Directly addresses a relevant and challenging MGP problem and offers clear, transferable value for future projects or decision-making.
• Is provided and/or co-authored by utility representatives.
• Provides useful, specific cost information, cost drivers, cost comparisons, or cost-effectiveness insights that would help others plan or evaluate similar work.
• Topic is likely applicable to many MGP sites, utilities, regulatory settings, or project types and has broad community relevance.

Other Evaluation Factors

• Indicate if you have client permission to publish/present this paper at the time of this submission.
• Indicate the category into which your paper best fits (select just one)
• NAPL/DNAPL Remediation Approaches
• Innovative Remediation Case Studies
• Sediment, Wetlands & In-Water Remediation
• Innovative & High Resolution Site Characterization Techniques
• Multi Contaminant / Complex Sites (MGP + Non-MGP COCs)
• In Situ Technologies
• Analytical Innovation / Advances
• Cost Data, Benchmarking & Market Trends
• Stakeholder Management & Regulatory Engagement
• PFAS / Emerging Contaminants / Co-Contaminant Challenges
• Investigation and Remediation of Challenging Site Conditions
• Long-Term Stewardship, O&M, and Post-Remediation Alternative Uses
• Community Relations & Public Outreach
• Ecological Risk Evaluation and Restoration
• Vapor Intrusion
• AI Integration
• Open Category – Other Strong or Innovative Abstracts
• Green and Sustainable Remediation
• Air Monitoring and Odor Issues
• If your paper isn’t accepted as a presentation, indicate if you would be willing to present it as a poster.

Acceptance/Placement Notification

• By mid-October 2026, the presenting author of each abstract will be notified of the decision regarding the acceptance abstract as either a podium or poster presentation.
• The author’s preference (podium presentation or poster) will be considered by the reviewers, but placement as requested is not guaranteed. Final decisions on podium presentation or poster placement will be based on best overall design of the MGP Conference 2027 program.

Presenter Registration Requirement

All presenting authors and session moderators are expected to register and pay the applicable technical-program registration fees.