CT DEP'S PERSPECTIVE ON SITE CHARACTERIZATION June 6, 2002 Presented by: Christine Lacas, Supervising Environmental Analyst Permitting, Enforcement & Remediation.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Regulatory Perspective
Advertisements

Radiopharmaceutical Production
Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection.
Department of Environmental Protection “…conserving, protecting and improving the natural resources and environment of the state…” Graham J. Stevens and.
Institutional Controls Pamela Elkow and Richard Fil.
TITLE OF PROJECT PROPOSAL NUMBER Principal Investigator PI’s Organization ESTCP Selection Meeting DATE.
1 High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program Diane Sheridan Chief, Existing Chemicals Branch, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention.
The Institutional Review Board. What is an IRB? An IRB is committee set up by an institution to review, approve, and regulate research conducted under.
DEP’s Position on Pressure Washing as of Tue 10/5/ :13 AM Ted, Below is DEP's position regarding vessel pressure washing discharges to the ground.
NARUC/NIGERIA REGULATORY PARTNERSHIP Peer Review Presented by Elijah Abinah Assistant Director Public Utilities Division Arizona Corporation Commission.
Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection.
Connecticut Remediation Programs Elsie Patton Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection.
Workers’ Compensation Claims Adjuster Regulations Insurance Code Section and Title 10, California Code of Regulations Section 2592, et seq., effective.
Considerations for Transactions with Environmental Issues Richard M. Fil, Esq.
Environmental Management Systems An Overview With Practical Applications.
1 Food and Dairy Safety Program Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection Legislative Audit Bureau July 2008.
SCOPING MEETING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED BY PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 3161 (b)(3) AND (4) (SENATE BILL 4) (PAVLEY) C ALIFORNIA D EPARTMENT.
ISO 9001:2015 Revision overview - General users
CUI Statistical: Collaborative Efforts of Federal Statistical Agencies Eve Powell-Griner National Center for Health Statistics.
IMPROVING SITE CHARACTERIZATION Rhode Island’s Perspective IMPROVING SITE CHARACTERIZATION Rhode Island’s Perspective Overview by Leo Hellested, P.E. Chief.
New Decade - New Challenges Annual Conference September 2010 Water Services Training Group 14 th Annual Conference New Decade – New Challenges 9 th September.
Human Research Protection Program Institutional Review Board Requirements and Expectations of Researchers and Research Staff Moira A Keane, MA, CIP Executive.
Agricultural Careers By: Dr. Frank Flanders and Anna Burgess Georgia Agricultural Education Curriculum Office Georgia Department of Education June 2005.
Professional Sign Off for Reclamation Certificates College of Alberta Professional Foresters Professional Workshops, February 15-17, 2011 Grande Prairie,
Water Supply Planning Initiative State Water Commission November 22, 2004.
1 Supplemental Regulations to 34 CFR Part 300 Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities and Preschool Grants for Children with.
ADWR COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT MANUAL PHOENIX AMA GUAC 1/6/09.
NSDI Strategic Plan Update FGDC Coordination Group Meeting September 10, 2013.
1 Information Sharing Environment (ISE) Privacy Guidelines Jane Horvath Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties Officer.
Main Requirements on Different Stages of the Licensing Process for New Nuclear Facilities Module 4.1 Steps in the Licensing Process Geoff Vaughan University.
1 Environmental Business Council September 22, 2009 Janine Commerford Assistant Commissioner BWSC in FY10.
5-1 Lesson 5 | Common Issues & Challenges. Describe how RSAs address project schedule (time), project cost, and agency liability concerns. Explain the.
UMBC POLICY ON ESH MANAGEMENT & ENFORCEMENT UMBC Policy #VI
Project Guideline for Auditing Internal Control Systems Claudia Kroneder-Partisch Austrian Court of Audit.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Summary and Overview of TECDOC Russel Edge Decommissioning and Remediation Unit Division of Radiation,Transport.
Tier I: Module 5 CERCLA 128(a): Tribal Response Program Element 4: Verification & Certification.
10/03/021 Stormwater Video-conference Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Videoconference October 3, 2002.
1 Pollutant Release & Transfer Registers The Canadian Government Experience National Workshop on PRTRs Santiago, Chilé - May 29, 2002.
Area I Burn Pit Santa Susana Field Laboratory RCRA Facility Investigation Work Plan February 19, 2008 Laura Rainey, P.G. Senior Engineering Geologist California.
Congratulations! It’s a Burn Dump. What Do You Do Now? LEA/CIWMB PARTNERSHIP CONFERENCE Anaheim, California May , 2005 California Environmental.
Corrective Action Program: Working with Your Local Agency to Solve Local Problems James Clay County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health Site.
The NCI Central IRB Initiative Jacquelyn L. Goldberg, J.D. VA IRB Chair Training April 8, 2004.
1 Waste Discharge Authorization Application - British Columbia WG6 Application Process WG Document Review presented by Helga Harlander October x, 2008.
Intervention – 2004 Nanisivik Reclamation and Closure Plan Arctic Bay June 3-4, 2004 Nunavut Water Board Public Hearing.
1 RAB Update Trap and Skeet Range 17 Remedial Investigation Activities 25 March 2010.
NSDI Strategic Plan Update National Geospatial Advisory Committee Meeting December 11, 2013.
Update: AUL Guidance Revisions Summary of Comments June 23, 2011 Peggy Shaw Workgroup Chair.
EPA P-1 Corrective Action Streamlined Consent Orders Bob Greaves Region 3 Deb Goldblum Region 3 Tom Krueger Region 5.
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation Flow Standard Amendment to New York’s Water Quality Standards Regulations Scott J. Stoner Chief, Standards.
Middle Fork Project Relicensing Process Plan April 25, 2006.
Forging Partnerships on Emerging Contaminants November 2, 2005 Elizabeth Southerland Director of Assessment & Remediation Division Office of Superfund.
Massachusetts Waste Site Cleanup Program _________________________________ Privatized program since 1993 Direct oversight of only the highest priority.
Cumulative Hydrologic Impact Assessment. Quality Assurance \ Quality Control Panel.
FDIC Perspective on Environmental Risk Presented by: Gordon Stoner Legal Division Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation May 6, 2008.
The City of Rochester New York Environmental Institutional Control System Prepared By: Mark Gregor City of Rochester, New York Division of Environmental.
Improving The Quality of Site Characerization Jennifer Griffith Northeast Waste Management Officials’ Association.
Licensed Environmental Professionals (“LEPs”) in Connecticut CT DEP overview Gina McCarthy, Commissioner.
Welcome to the Permit Implementation Regulations (AB 1497) Workshop.
Principal Investigator ESTCP Selection Meeting
Minnesota CLE June Webcast Extravaganza Environmental Law Basics for the Business and Real Estate Practitioner Joseph G. Maternowski, Hessian & McKasy,
Evaluation of Tenure-Accruing Faculty
Principal Investigator ESTCP Selection Meeting
Public Comment Webinars January 14, 2015 and January 15, 2015
TOPICAL TRAINING SESSION TENORM
Update on Cape Wind June 2, 2004 EOEA #12643
Principal Investigator ESTCP Selection Meeting
Kenya Mann Faulkner Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer April 2019
Principal Investigator ESTCP Selection Meeting
Radiopharmaceutical Production
IRRS REFRESHER TRAINING Lecture 7
Presentation transcript:

CT DEP'S PERSPECTIVE ON SITE CHARACTERIZATION June 6, 2002 Presented by: Christine Lacas, Supervising Environmental Analyst Permitting, Enforcement & Remediation Division Bureau of Water Management Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT (860)

CT DEP'S PERSPECTIVE ON SITE CHARACTERIZATION –In CT, Licensed Environmental Professionals are authorized by statute to provide verifications for specific types of sites. –Pursuant to CGS § 22a-134(19), "Verification" means the rendering of a written opinion by a licensed environmental professional that an investigation has been performed in accordance with prevailing standards and guidelines and that the parcel has been remediated in accordance with the remediation standards.

CT DEP'S PROGRAM FOR AUDITING LICENSED ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL (LEP) VERIFICATIONS (THE AUDIT PROGRAM) HAS TWO PRIMARY PURPOSES: to identify LEP verifications that may represent violations of the LEP or Remediation Standard Regulations, and to identify topics and areas for which further training and guidance is needed. –Site Characterization was identified as one of the areas in which additional training and guidance is needed.

THE MOST COMMON SITE CHARACTERIZATION DEFICIENCIES IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE AUDIT PROGRAM ARE: –Failure to identify all potential release areas –Failure to identify all contaminants of concern –Failure to fully understand or document the distribution of contaminants for a specific release area (without regard for regulatory criteria) before reaching a conclusion on the need for remediation –Failure to document the rationale for conclusions reached on the need for no additional investigation and/or remediation for a specific release area or area of concern.

INITIATIVES FOR CHANGE –A Draft Site Characterization Guidance Document was issued by DEP (June 2000). This document advocates the use of phased investigations and a Conceptual Site Model approach, and is available from the Environmental Professionals of Connecticut website at –Conceptual Site Modeling Training workshops have been given several times since the Draft Guidance was issued. –An Expedited Site Characterization CD has been developed for UST sites –DEP encourages the use of field characterization methods (with appropriate documentation) whenever possible.

INITIATIVES FOR CHANGE, continued –Since the release of the Draft Site Characterization Guidance Document and the associated Conceptual Site Modeling Workshops, there has been an improvement in the quality of the site characterization work submitted to DEP. We are seeing more reports that describe the conceptual site model as well as the rationale for investigation and remediation decisions that are made.

CHALLENGES REMAINING –Comments received by DEP on the June 2000 Draft Site Characterization Guidance document are being reviewed, and the Guidance is scheduled to be finalized this summer. –DEP staff and the EPOC Education Subcommittee continue to work together to develop and present training. A comprehensive course on Site Characterization is being developed and will likely be offered by EPOC late this year (December).

CHALLENGES REMAINING, continued –Despite the guidance and training efforts described above, we continue to see some site investigations that do not identify or adequately address all release areas, do not identify or address all constituents of concern, or do not adequately define the extent of contamination in all media.

SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT: –Better documentation of the rationale for site characterization decisions. –Improved documentation that environmental improvements (documented by sampling results after remedial actions have been undertaken and completed) are consistent with the Conceptual Site Model developed for the site.