Vapor Encroachment Screening (VES) and Vapor Intrusion (VI) Assessment

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Proposed Amendments to Chapter 32, Article V, Solid Waste Management Ordinance Case No. PH-ORD-041 Presented by the Orange County Environmental Protection.
Advertisements

Revised Environmental Site Assessment Guidelines & Asbestos Inspection Guidelines for Bridges.
Guidance on New CEs Emergency Repair Projects Operational Right-of-Way Limited Federal Funds EUM – March questions to:
ODOT's Environmental Site Assessment Process
THE CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL A Visual Journey Though Data and Time October 29, 2013.
Connecticut Brownfield Sites
PHASE II ESA 2014 ESA GUIDELINES. PHASE II ESA 2014 ESA GUIDELINES PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES –PATH 2 AND 3 PROJECTS –PATH 4 AND 5 PROJECTS W/ WORK.
VAPOR INTRUSION: AN INTRODUCTION OHIO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE JENNIFER MILLER NOVEMBER 7, 2012.
2014 Vapor Intrusion Guidance Amendments Discussion Points Waste Site Cleanup Advisory Committee Meeting May 22, 2014.
Vapor Intrusion. What is Vapor Intrusion? The migration of volatile chemical vapors from the subsurface to overlying buildings.
Vapor Intrusion: When to Worry? NAREIM National Assn of Real Estate Investment Managers Las Colinas, TX September 26, 2012 Beverlee E. Silva, Esq. Alston.
ASTM Changes in Presented By Dan Richardson BB&T Roundtable Nashville, Tennessee July 2013.
Understanding the MRBCA Program UST Program Implications Petroleum Storage Tank Insurance Fund May 2004.
Introduction to Brownfields New Partners for Community Revitalization, Inc. June 29, 2009.
Joseph G. Maternowski Minneapolis, MN March 9, 2011.
Environmental Liabilities New Risks and Solutions Cynthia J. Bishop Gardere Wynne Sewell, LLP Dallas, Texas A&WMA Annual Conference June.
Vermilion County Brownfield Assessment Grant. Overview Brownfield Basics USEPA Brownfield Assessment Grant Vermilion County Assessment Grant Site Selection.
Every block of stone has a statue inside it, and it is the task of the sculptor to discover it. ~ Michelangelo Presented By: Dallas Whitmill, P.E.
Environmental Investigation by Con Edison Former E115th Street Gas Works November 13, 2007.
EBC Seminar The IAQ/Mold Assessment – Getting it Right! – Controlling Your Risk Next Speaker Rosemary McCafferty Haley & Aldrich, Inc.
Vapor Intrusion Guidance Proposed Updates
Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments Environmental Specialist Brownfields/Voluntary Cleanup Program June 2014.
DRAFT Field Sampling Guidance To be used this field season by DEC and consultants Initial focus on soil, groundwater, and vapor intrusion Future versions.
Connecticut Department of Public Works -- Rebecca Cutler – Environmental Analyst.
Ohio EPA Targeted Brownfield Assessment and Technical Assistance Programs.
Pennsylvania Brownfields 2013 PRACTICAL APPROACH TO MANAGING THE UNCERTAINTIES OF VAPOR INTRUSION IN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS December 10, 2013 Christopher.
Overview of US EPA’s Vapor Intrusion Guidance VAP CP Summer Coffee July 14 th, 2015 Carrie Rasik Ohio EPA CO- Risk Assessor
Brownfields Odell Zeigler, Katie Dilbeck, Shirley Green, Genarde Garnica.
Final Rule Setting Federal Standards for Conducting All Appropriate Inquiries U.S. EPA Brownfields Program.
CALED’s 35 th Annual Training Conference April 21, 2015 Yvonne Mallory, City of Gardena John Wharff, PM Environmental, Inc. Robert Doty, Cox Castle & Nicholson.
Do It Right or Pay the Price! AAI Property Transfer Environmental Assessments.
Gradient CORPORATION Vapor Intrusion Attenuation Factors (AFs) – Measured vs. EPA Defaults A Case Study Presented by Manu Sharma and Jennifer DeAscentis.
* Old gas stations * Old dry cleaners * Oil/chemical spills from past commercial/ industrial operations * Industrial wastes left on property * Old.
Vapor Intrusion and Environmental Liability Learning From Past Mistakes EDR Insight Webinar, February 12, 2013 Presented by: Joseph Maternowski Hessian.
Phase I ESA Environmental Site Assessment. Purpose Is to provide a professional opinion on the potential for current presence of RECS at the subject property.
The Role of Groundwater Sampling/Monitoring COGCC Proposed Rule 609 University of Colorado Law School Nov 26, 2012.
A PROGRAM THAT OFFERS CUSTOMIZED ASSISTANCE TO PROPERTY OWNERS & INTERESTED PARTIES WITH THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Voluntary Assistance Program (VAP)
MCP Public Hearing Draft Waste Site Cleanup Advisory Committee Meeting March 28,
Monitored Natural Attenuation and Risk-Based Corrective Action at Underground Storage Tanks Sites Mike Trombetta Department of Environmental Quality Environmental.
SITE STATUS UPDATE TOP STOP PETROLEUM RELEASE SITE GUNNISION, UTAH Morgan Atkinson – Division of Environmental Response and Remediation, Project Manager.
Consideration of Brownfields and Contaminated Properties During NEPA 2014 Real Estate Workshop.
Review of Current Conditions Report and Work Plan for Area 1 Presented by The Great Plains/Rocky Mountain Technical Outreach Services for Communities.
Carousel Tract Environmental Remediation Project Update by Expert Panel to Regional Board July 11, 2013.
© 2008 Fox Rothschild MANDATORY GOVERNMENTAL REQUIREMENTS AND INCENTIVES: VAPOR INTRUSION June 25, 2008 By David Restaino, Esq. and Burton J. Jaffe, Esq.
Preparing a Site Conceptual Model. Typical Site Management Problems: Site complexities  Complicated hydrogeology  Multiple contaminants of concern (COCs)
Today’s Lecture Announcements Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Petroleum Vapor Intrusion 2013 Springfield Environmental Summit Valerie Garrett Technical Environmental Specialist Hazardous Waste Program, Tanks Section.
South Australia’s Environment Protection Authority Articulating aesthetics Monday 24 August 2015 Andrew Pruszinski.
Corrective Action Program: Working with Your Local Agency to Solve Local Problems James Clay County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health Site.
NRC Environmental Reviews for Uranium Recovery Applicants and Licensees James Park (301)
Environmental Considerations prior to purchasing Properties Sabine E. Martin, Ph.D., P.G. Center for Hazardous Substance Research Kansas State University.
Massachusetts Waste Site Cleanup Program _________________________________ Privatized program since 1993 Direct oversight of only the highest priority.
Environmental Site Assessments Hazardous Materials/ Regulated Substances Categorical Exclusion Training Class.
November Final Rule Setting Federal Standards for All Appropriate Inquiries Patricia Overmeyer EPA Office of Brownfield Cleanup and Redevelopment.
Brownfields 2004, “Light or Heavy Starch: Cleaning the Cleaners” September 2004 Presented by Matt Shurtliff Roosevelt Towne Apartments.
The World of AUL Presentation by: Atul Pandey, P.E. PANDEY Environmental, LLC 2016 Ohio Brownfield Conference April 7, 2016.
IN THE FIELD Bryttany C, Chris W, Eric S.. Property Address The name of our property is In The Field we thought of that title because we are working out.
ASTM Standard Practice for Assessment of Vapor Intrusion Into Structures on Property Involved in Real Estate Transactions: Status Report presented by Anthony.
Proposed Plan for No Further Action
Minnesota CLE June Webcast Extravaganza Environmental Law Basics for the Business and Real Estate Practitioner Joseph G. Maternowski, Hessian & McKasy,
Dry Cleaning and the Environment
Kane Russell Coleman Logan PC
Environmental Issues Mapping Field Lab
Best Practices for Government Records Review
Providing Expert Opinion to Support Environmental Litigation
Connecticut Remediation Standard Regulations: Volatilization Criteria
Regulated Materials Review
Hold Your Breath—Ohio EPA’s TCE Initiative
Preparing a Site Conceptual Model
Environmental Considerations prior to purchasing Properties
Presentation transcript:

Vapor Encroachment Screening (VES) and Vapor Intrusion (VI) Assessment What the difference is, and why lawyers, bankers, regulators, and the regulated community should care Steve Crider May 7, 2014

News articles

Acronym list AOC: area of concern VES: vapor encroachment screen VEC: vapor encroachment condition VI: vapor intrusion TP: target property COC: chemical of concern LNAPL: light nonaqueous-phase liquids DNAPL: dense nonaqueous-phase liquids EP: environmental professional

Vapor encroachment and the vapor intrusion assessment process Are there actual or potential volatile vapors encroaching on the target property (TP)? (addressed by ASTM E 2600-10) If so, can these vapors migrate into structures on the property? (addressed by federal/state VI guidance) If so, can they represent an indoor air-quality problem? (addressed by federal/state VI guidance)

Informal survey: consultants and the vapor pathway MDEQ has focused on VI, May 2013 published a guidance document; ASTM updated Phase I ESA standard practice which now specifically mentions vapor, so are we, consultants, doing any better? Not yet BEAs still targeting soil and groundwater Vapor typically an afterthought during due-care planning process, resulting in: Insufficient or no vapor data Presumptive remedies Of the five BEAs on desks of district staff, only one mentions vapor assessment in Phase I ESA

Root cause(s)??? Cost and time to conduct soil-gas sampling Soil gas not its own criteria; SVIIC and GVIIC not typically facility status drivers Vapors not thoroughly assessed or considered in Phase I ESA process

Using ASTM E2600-10 or an alternative If a company develops its own methodology, it must be well enough documented in the Phase I ESA to allow a third party to reconstruct the analysis Advantages of using Tier 1 in ASTM E2600-10 Methodology standardized through ASTM consensus process Developed by industry VI experts Ability to use (without further documentation) critical distances in E2600-10 Reduced liability

ASTM E2600-10: overview NOT A REQUIREMENT FOR ASTM 1527-13 Standard guide not standard practice Focused solely on likelihood of migrating vapors to encroach on TP (creating a vapor encroachment condition, or VEC)

ASTM E2600-10: purpose Provide practical guidance and useful process for conducting a vapor encroachment screen (VES) on a property parcel involved in a real estate transaction in the U.S. with respect to chemicals of concern (COCs) that may migrate as vapors onto a property as a result of contaminated soil and groundwater on or near the property

ASTM E2600-10: objective Whether or not encroaching vapors result in intrusion requires investigation beyond scope of standard Objective: identify VECs, analogous to identifying Recognized Environmental Conditions in ASTM E1527

Two levels of screening for VECs: ASTM E2600-10: summary Two levels of screening for VECs: Tier 1: focuses on known or suspected contaminated sites in AOC as identified in ASTM E1527 investigations (government records investigation, historical research, etc.) Tier 2: focuses on plumes from any contaminated sites in AOC and their proximity (critical distance) to TP, or actual sampling to identify if vapors have encroached on TP

ASTM E2600-10: additional terminology Vapor encroachment condition (VEC) Area of concern (AOC) Critical distance

ASTM E2600-10: vapor encroachment condition Actual or likely presence of COC vapors in subsurface of TP, caused by release of vapors from contaminated soil or groundwater on or near TP

ASTM E2600-10: area of concern Measured from TP boundary to known or suspected contaminated property 1/3 mile for known or suspected contaminated sites with COCs (volatile or semivolatile hazardous substances) 1/10 mile for known or suspected contaminated sites with petroleum hydrocarbon COCs May be reduced in cross-gradient and side-gradient direction if groundwater flow direction is known

ASTM E2600-10: critical distance Defined as distance from nearest edge of contaminated plume to nearest TP boundary Measured linearly in any direction: horizontal, vertical, etc. 100 ft. for COCs 30 ft. for dissolved volatile petroleum hydrocarbons 100 ft. for petroleum LNAPL accumulating above water table What about DNAPL?: treat as COC

ASTM E2600-10: methodology Getting down to business

ASTM E2600-10: Tier 1 initial screening for VECs Designed as screening step to supplement Phase I ESA; relies on information already collected in investigation Review of governmental and historical records at specific search distances to identify COC-contaminated properties within AOC 1/3 mile for known or suspected contaminated sites with COCs (volatile or semivolatile hazardous substances) 1/10 mile for known or suspected contaminated sites with petroleum hydrocarbon COCs

ASTM E2600-10: most prevalent sources of concern Present and former: Gas stations and auto repair sites Scrap-metal sites Manufactured gas plant sites Dry-cleaning sites Industrial sites, particularly those using chlorinated solvents for degreasing and parts cleaning Municipal solid waste landfills and open dumps Hazardous-waste disposal sites

ASTM E2600-10: Tier 1 AOC when groundwater flow direction can be estimated Upgradient 1/3 mile for COC sources 1/10 mile for petroleum hydrocarbon sources Downgradient 100 ft. for COC sources/petroleum hydrocarbon LNAPL sources 30 ft. for dissolved petroleum hydrocarbon sources Cross-gradient 100 ft. for COC sources/petroleum hydrocarbon LNAPL sources + plume-width consideration 30 ft. for dissolved petroleum hydrocarbon sources + plume-width consideration

ASTM E2600-10: net reduction in AOC for Tier 1 screening of known or suspected petroleum sources Source location E2600-10 E2600-10 w/ Buonicore methodology* Upgradient 528 ft. Downgradient 100 ft. (LNAPL) 30 ft. (dissolved) Cross-gradient 165 ft. (LNAPL) 95 ft. (dissolved) * Buonicore, A.J., Screening for Potential Vapor Intrusion Problems, Paper #129, Proc. AWMA 102nd Annual Conference , Detroit, MI, June 16–19, 2009, and Buonicore, A.J., Methodology for Identifying the Area of Concern Around a Property Potentially Impacted by Vapor Mitigation from Nearby Contaminated Sources, Paper No. 2011-A-301, Proceedings, AWMA 104th Annual Meeting in Orlando, FL, June 20–24, 2011

ASTM E2600-10: net reduction in AOC for Tier 1 screening of known or suspected COC sources Source location E2600-10 E2600-10 w/ Buonicore methodology* Upgradient 1,760 ft. Downgradient 100 ft. Cross-gradient 365 ft. * Buonicore, A.J., Screening for Potential Vapor Intrusion Problems, Paper #129, Proc. AWMA 102nd Annual Conference , Detroit, MI, June 16–19, 2009, and Buonicore, A.J., Methodology for Identifying the Area of Concern Around a Property Potentially Impacted by Vapor Mitigation from Nearby Contaminated Sources, Paper No. 2011-A-301, Proceedings, AWMA 104th Annual Meeting in Orlando, FL, June 20–24, 2011.

EDR VEC app

EDR VEC app (cont.)

EDR VEC app (cont.)

ASTM E2600-10: EP judgment Type of TP Location of contamination source Cleanup status of contaminated site Depth to groundwater Soil characteristics Presence of “vapor conduits” (MDEQ favorite) Presence of hydraulic or physical barriers

ASTM E2600-10: Tier 1 conclusions A VEC exists (physical evidence) A VEC likely exists (within close proximity, e.g., two properties?) A VEC cannot be ruled out (further away, beyond two properties?) VEC can be ruled out because it does not or is not likely to exist (you are done!!)

ASTM E2600-10: Tier 1 conclusions (cont.) If 1, 2, or 3, determine if VEC is a REC if done in conjunction with Phase I ESA “De minimis” (?) Apply state VI guidance criteria (?) Other (?) If 1, 2, or 3, EP and user decide whether further investigation (such as proceeding to Tier 2 or state program) is warranted

ASTM E2600-10: Tier 2 more refined screening Non-invasive If Phase II data on contaminated source exist, proximity of contaminated plume to TP is evaluated Plume test / critical-distance evaluation

ASTM E2600-10: Tier 2 more refined screening Critical Distance 100 ft for NAPL COCs 30 ft for Dissolved Petro Critical Distance TP Property Boundary Existing or proposed building Vapor Conduits

Invasive (soil, groundwater or soil gas sampling) ASTM E2600-10: Tier 2 invasive Invasive (soil, groundwater or soil gas sampling) If Phase II data on contaminated source does NOT exist, or If preferential pathway exists (natural or constructed), or If VEC is identified in Tier 1 and you want to do confirmatory sampling (follow state program), or If client or lender is more comfortable with sampling (follow state program). Sampling can be done at the TP boundary to identify whether vapors are encroaching on TP Plume test / critical-distance evaluation

ASTM E2600-10: Tier 2 conclusions VEC exists (physical evidence) VEC likely exists (within close proximity, e.g., two properties?) VEC cannot be ruled out (further away, beyond two properties?) VEC can be ruled out because it does not or is not likely to exist (you are done!!)

ASTM E2600-10: Tier 2 conclusions (cont.) If 1, 2, or 3 then determine if VEC is a REC if done in conjunction with a Phase I ESA “De minimis” (?) Apply state VI guidance criteria (?) Other (?) If 1, 3, or 3, EP and user decide whether further investigation (such as state program) is warranted

Why do we care about E2600-10 if it’s not part of a Phase I ESA? ASTM E1527-13 Section 3.2.56 lists term VAPOR— so EP must consider it during Phase I ESA ASTM E2600 and Buonicore method provide hard numbers to rely on for determining REC or no REC Gut feelings are great, but having data to support your position helps lawyers sleep at night

Why do I care about E2600-10 if it’s not part of a Phase I ESA. (cont Both ASTM E1527-13 and E2600-10 rely on EP’s professional judgment, so ultimately it’s still up to you Using guidance in E2600-10 does not mean you have to write a full report…

Scope of work: Tier I Add-on to Phase I ESA Modified questionnaire (see Appendix 3) Report format follows 1527 so you need to add only subsections that discuss vapor in “records review, findings, opinions, and conclusions” section of report

Scope of work: Tier 2 Non-intrusive Intrusive sampling More extensive file review of State/Local records Letter-style report documenting reports reviewed and plume distances measured to nearest TP boundary (the critical-distance assessment) Intrusive sampling Follow state guidelines

Final thoughts Not required for ASTM E 1527-13, but a useful guide!