FAQs for Evaluating the Soil-to-Groundwater Pathway

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AT SOLID WASTE (SW) LANDFILLS QUIZ Ruxandra Floroiu, Environmental Engineer, ECSSD WB Safeguards Workshop Chisinau, Moldova October.
Advertisements

Case Study of Subsurface Vapor Intrusion at a Dry Cleaner Site Amy Goldberg Day AEHS Annual East Coast Conference on Soils, Sediments.
Remediation Programs Update MSECA Quarterly Meeting March 13, 2012.
Claremore Medical Office Building From Landfill to Medical Office Building A Brownfield Success Story THE GREEN SIDE OF BROWNFIELD REMEDIATION.
Site Cleanup Rules Update Alaska Forum on the Environment February 13, 2008 Bill Janes and Greg Light Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Contaminated.
Brief Review of “Leaching and Toxicity of CCA-Treated and Alternative- Treated Wood Products.
Dale T Littlejohn Senior Geologist. What is fate and transport in the vadose zone? Vadose Zone Hydrocarbon release from buried pipeline Aquifer Surface.
LDEQ’s RECAP Domenico and Summer’s Models. DOMENICO MODEL.
LDEQ’s RECAP Soil Protective of Groundwater - Soil GW Soil Saturation - Soil sat.
Date #, 2009Presenter Name Response and Remediation Program Update June 19, 2013Derrick Williams, Program Manager.
Statistics: Data Analysis and Presentation Fr Clinic II.
Vapor Intrusion Guidance Proposed Updates
DRAFT Field Sampling Guidance To be used this field season by DEC and consultants Initial focus on soil, groundwater, and vapor intrusion Future versions.
1 of 25 The EPA 7-Step DQO Process Step 5 - Define Decision Rules 15 minutes Presenter: Sebastian Tindall DQO Training Course Day 2 Module 14.
Overview of US EPA’s Vapor Intrusion Guidance VAP CP Summer Coffee July 14 th, 2015 Carrie Rasik Ohio EPA CO- Risk Assessor
Introduction to Atlantic RBCA Version 3 Webinar May 4, 2013.
DEPARTMENT OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT, PRIMARY INDUSTRY, FISHERIES AND RESOURCES Mine Site Water Quality Monitoring Michael.
LOGO Feasibility Test of Applying Complex Remediation Technology for Diesel Contamination in Soil and Groundwater 2012 International Conference on Environmental.
LDEQ RECAP Miscellaneous Topics. Exposure Assessment n Site-specific under MO-3 only n Construction worker scenario n Greatly reduced ET, EF, and/or ED.
Results Based Management: Logical Framework Matrix (LFM) December 30 th, 2009 Abeer Shakweer, Ph.D., Planning and Monitoring Manager Science and Technology.
Comparison of Environmental Impacts of Wood Treated with Three Different Arsenic-Free Preservatives and CCA CCA-TAG Meeting B. Dubey 1, T. Townsend 1,
1 RBCA Tool Kit Exercise. 2 Groundwater protection : Tier 1 compliance point Point of compliance=Point of exposure (on site) compliance point (receptor)
7th Avenue and Bethany Home Road Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund Site August 20, 2013.
Waste Site Cleanup Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Waste Site Cleanup Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda April 25, 2013, MassDEP, One Winter Street Boston.
Overview of the Proposed Draft B River Corridor Baseline Risk Assessment Report Public Workshop – January 10 & 11, 2008.
Review of Work Plan for Leaded Gasoline Tank Bottom Disposal Pit Assessment and Interim Stabilization Measures Presented by The Great Plains/Rocky Mountain.
Update on IMPROVE Light Extinction Equation and Natural Conditions Estimates Tom Moore, WRAP Technical Coordinator May 23, 2006.
Supplemental Study for Year 3 Project Completed. Reason for Supplemental Study  Accelerate new lines of research which were identified in August 1999.
SITE STATUS UPDATE TOP STOP PETROLEUM RELEASE SITE GUNNISION, UTAH Morgan Atkinson – Division of Environmental Response and Remediation, Project Manager.
Waste Management Strategy Outline - Geography - Future Needs – 5 and 25-Year Time Frames - Capacity - Near-Term Needs - Long Term Needs.
Route of Exposure: Drinking Water. Measuring chemicals in water The concentration of chemicals in water or soil is often reported in parts or million.
Review of Current Conditions Report and Work Plan for Area 1 Presented by The Great Plains/Rocky Mountain Technical Outreach Services for Communities.
Are SPLP or TCLP testing data adequate for understanding soil adsorption coefficients? Chris Bailey, T&T.
Funded through Florida International University National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences Impacts from CCA-Treated Wood Within Marine and Terrestrial.
1 Draft Final Safe Fill Regulations. 2 W hat’s new in Safe Fill Definition? Definition is short as a result of: – Due diligence procedures moved to existing.
1 Identify Preferred Alternative and Finalize Plan Planning Steps 7 & 8.
7th Avenue and Bethany Home Road Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund Site February 19, 2013.
1 Section 4- Characterization  Characterization is 95% of the Success of ISCO  Develop a complete and comprehensive Conceptual Site Model  ISCO is a.
RECAP Implementation Issues Implementation Issues.
NFA Letter Template: Tips and Hints to Reduce Comments CP Annual Training October 27, 2015 Sydney Poole – DERR.
WELCOME! 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Workshop.
1 Draft Final Safe Fill Regulations Major Changes/Revisions Presented to the CSSAB November 8, 2002.
Long-Term Management of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater – Iwilei District, Honolulu April 16, 2015.
Presentation for Office of Surface Mines on Potential Use of the Leaching Environmental Assessment Framework to enhance source terms for use of CCRs in.
Date #, 2009Presenter Name Response and Remediation Program Update March 29, 2016Jason Metzger, Program Manager.
Risk CHARACTERIZATION
Response and Remediation Program
Uniform Environmental Covenants
Environment and Climate Change Presentation to the Nunavut Water Board Regarding Doris North Project Type A Water Licence Amendment Application Nunavut.
Spill & Historic Release Notification, Investigation & Remediation
Exhibit A: Monitoring well and surface water sampling locations.
Unified Approach to Stormwater Monitoring (UASM)
RINGWOOD MINES/LANDFILL SITE PUBLIC MEETING December 6, 2016
Effects of phosphate rock and iron-oxide on immobilization of lead and arsenic in Florida shooting range soils U. Saha, A. Fayiga, A. Wang, L.Q. Ma, and.
System Monitoring/Regulatory Evaluation
VLEACH Case Study Soil Contamination with trichlorethylene (TCE) at the Chase Brass Site - Ohio 1/14/2019.
Monitoring Guidance Johannes Grath Rob Ward 12th October 2005.
Ohio EPA Beneficial Use Program
Purpose Reflect changes in scientific understanding since 1994
Area Averaging Technical Guidance Overview
Vision for Land Protection branch
Remediation Standards Rule Update NJDEP and A&WMA Regulatory Update Conference November 16, 2018 Barry Frasco, Assistant Director Hazardous Site Science,
HSRA Rule Change Reflect changes in scientific understanding since 1994 Provide Consistency in Cleanup Standards Reduce risk from contaminated sites Correct.
A&WMA Regulatory Conference Symposium UST Risk Based Corrective Action
Brownfield Corrective Action with Revised RRS
2018/2019 Activities. 2018/2019 Activities Revised Regulations - HSRA Reflect changes in scientific understanding since 1994 Provide Consistency in.
Arsenic Leaching out from CCA Contaminated Mulch
the path less traveled Termination of Post Closure Care
Preparing a Site Conceptual Model
California Water Boards PFAS Efforts
Presentation transcript:

FAQs for Evaluating the Soil-to-Groundwater Pathway David Hayes Voluntary Remediation Unit Coordinator GIEC Workshop December 4, 2018

overview Draft guidance document released October 2018 Soil-to-Groundwater Pathway (a.k.a. “Leaching”) Importance of leaching evaluation Overview of document, including key sections Next steps

What is leaching? Migration of contaminants from soil to groundwater

Importance of leaching Evaluation Exposure pathway evaluated to determine soil cleanup standards Soil Cleanup Standard Direct Contact Leaching

How is leaching evaluated? Model Laboratory leaching test Observation-based approach (e.g., old soil release but no groundwater impacts)

Document overview Frequently Asked Questions format Partition Equation (basic model) Leaching Tests Analysis of leaching test results Recommendations for data collection and reporting Models Comparing soil concentrations to leaching values Observation-based approach

Partition equation Conservative Can be used with least amount of site-specific data Used by EPD in determining default soil cleanup standards

Leaching tests TCLP (SW-846 Method 1311) SPLP (SW-846 Method 1312) Others: LEAF methods (SW-846 Methods 1313 – 1316)

Leaf methods

Analyzing TCLP & splp results Adapted methodology from New Jersey guidance Method 1: direct comparison Method 2: linear regression Method 3: determine site-specific Kd for use in model

Analyzing TCLP & splp results Method 1: direct comparison sample identification total contaminant concentration in soil (mg/kg) field leachate concentration (mg/L) target leachate concentration Sample 1 0.5 0.04 0.1 Sample 2 0.8 Sample 3 2 0.002 Sample 4 12 0.03 Sample 5 30 0.09 Sample 6 75 0.3 Sample 7 120 0.2 Sample 8 150 0.08 Sample 9 180 Sample 10 300

Analyzing TCLP & splp results Method 2: linear regression

models Partition Equation SESOIL VLEACH VS2DT Others

Demonstrating compliance Comparing measured soil concentrations to leaching values Maximum measured concentration Mean concentration in soil borings 95% upper confidence limit (UCL) of the mean

Appendix Parameter determination Dilution Attenuation Factor (DAF) Groundwater Recharge Rates Soil-Water Partition Coefficient, Kd Fraction of Organic Carbon, foc

summary Determining site-specific soil cleanups standards Several options available (basic to advanced) Updates include: SPLP data collection & analysis Borehole averaging & 95% UCL of mean Observation-based approach

Next steps Public comment period through December 14th Review comments and finalize document

Questions & comments David Hayes david.hayes@dnr.ga.gov 404-657-8672