1. Managing Construction Activities at Disposal Sites June 15, 2011
Introductions and content of discussion
Why we selected this topic?
Follow up to our previous ROS presentation and to decrease apparent confusion about the regulatory milestones referred to as Phase V, ROS, and Class C-1/C-2 RAOs specific to remedial actions and OMM
Roughly 200 active sites in WERO with OMM being conducted under Phase V, ROS, Class C-1 RAO or Class C-2 RAO that are subject to audit
Regulatory review w/highlights of key areas for four regulatory milestones that incorporate OMM – Phase V, ROS, Class C-1 and Class C-2 RAO based on our knowledge of audit findings
Understand differences between regulatory categories
This is not just a review of the regulations but rather how we have made decisions in applying the regulations
Audit process – what happens and what to expect
Audit data
Case Studies
Please ask questions
Patricia Donahue & Iris Davis
MassDEP Northeast Region Office
Wilmington, MA

2. Presentation Summary Why Construction? Regulatory Requirements
Problems encountered
Regulatory Requirements
MassDEP expectations for submittals
Case Studies/Examples
Q & A Forum
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

3. Why this topic?
Redevelopment of industrial land for commercial/residential use
Level of investigation and cleanup not always commensurate with new uses or project
New or different exposures created without adequate LSP evaluation
Successor LSP/new parties
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

4. Problem Areas
Lack of Site Characterization – particularly for pre-RAO RAMs
Precharacterize before excavation
Better able to manage Remediation Waste
Saves time and money
Documentation of: soil Re-use, background
Soil Stockpiles >120 days or 90 for HW
Not maintained/covered
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

5. Problem Areas
No documentation of feasibility evaluation of remedial alternatives
Inadequate documentation of caps/barriers
How remedial measures were conducted,
e.g. sub slab systems, caps
RAM abuse/misuse
Documentation & level of effort not always commensurate with scope of project , e.g. very large projects
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

6. Regulatory Jurisdiction & Definitions
Remediation Waste
Remedial Action
Response Action Performance Standard
Regulatory vehicles for remediation
Release Abatement Measures
When would OMM be required for a Class C-1 RAO?
Would only apply if a remedial action is necessary to achieve a Temporary Solution but you may achieve a Temporary Solution without the need to conduct a remedial action.
Temporary Solutions not based on a remedial action do not require OMM.
What about monitoring following a Class C-1 RAO to assess site conditions? Monitoring is just that. It is an assessment activity not related to a remedial action. Monitoring could be considered a definitive step to achieving a Permanent Solution and data reported every five years as part of the Periodic Review but is not considered OMM related to a remedial action.
What if conditions change that suggests an expanding plume and C-1 may no longer be valid?
Notify the Department and take appropriate action (310 CMR )

7. Remediation Waste 310 CMR
Remediation Waste – means any Uncontainerized Waste, Contaminated Media or Contaminated Debris that is managed pursuant to 310 CMR
Contaminated Media: soil or water which exceeds release notification threshold (> RCs)
When would OMM be required for a Class C-1 RAO?
Would only apply if a remedial action is necessary to achieve a Temporary Solution but you may achieve a Temporary Solution without the need to conduct a remedial action.
Temporary Solutions not based on a remedial action do not require OMM.
What about monitoring following a Class C-1 RAO to assess site conditions? Monitoring is just that. It is an assessment activity not related to a remedial action. Monitoring could be considered a definitive step to achieving a Permanent Solution and data reported every five years as part of the Periodic Review but is not considered OMM related to a remedial action.
What if conditions change that suggests an expanding plume and C-1 may no longer be valid?
Notify the Department and take appropriate action (310 CMR )

8. Remedial Action 310 CMR
Definition: means any containment or removal
Includes construction activities which involve removal, treatment, disposal or relocation of Contaminated Media (not assessment)
Handling Remediation Waste must be done by one of five MCP remediation vehicles - except where a Class A-1, A-2 or B-1 RAO applies
When would OMM be required for a Class C-1 RAO?
Would only apply if a remedial action is necessary to achieve a Temporary Solution but you may achieve a Temporary Solution without the need to conduct a remedial action.
Temporary Solutions not based on a remedial action do not require OMM.
What about monitoring following a Class C-1 RAO to assess site conditions? Monitoring is just that. It is an assessment activity not related to a remedial action. Monitoring could be considered a definitive step to achieving a Permanent Solution and data reported every five years as part of the Periodic Review but is not considered OMM related to a remedial action.
What if conditions change that suggests an expanding plume and C-1 may no longer be valid?
Notify the Department and take appropriate action (310 CMR )

9. Response Action Performance Standard (RAPS) 310 CMR 40.0191
Applies to all response actions
Reasonable level of diligence to assess, evaluate and design remedial actions to achieve NSR and where feasible reduce OHM to background

10. RAPS – employed during all response actions
Consider relevant policies & guidelines by MassDEP & EPA
Use accurate and up to date methods, practices and technologies
Use scientifically defensible investigative practices

11. RAPS – protective of health, safety, public welfare and environment
Technologies which reuse, recycle, destroy, detoxify or treat OHM
Minimize the need for long term management
Containment where other measures not feasible
Reduce the overall mass and volume of OHM
Restore groundwater where feasible to applicable standards within reasonable period of time

12. Risk Management Considerations
RW Removal - not all or nothing, mass reduction to reduce overall risk
RW Treatment – time, space constraints
Building design & placement
Clean utility corridors
Containment & Consolidation
Capping
Soil reuse
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

13. LRA IRA RAM URAM Phase IV

14. Regulatory Vehicles Limited Removal Action (LRA)
Immediate Response Action (IRA)
Release Abatement Measures (RAM)
Utility-Related Abatement Measure (URAM)
Comprehensive Response Action (Phase IV)
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

15. Limited Removal Action 310 CMR 40.0318
Limited Removal Action (LRA)
Prior to notification (120 days)
100 yd3 oil or waste oil
20 yd3 of hazmat or mixture
RAPs and BOL provisions apply
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

16. Immediate Response Actions 310 CMR 40.0410
Must be taken for 2/72 hour reporting conditions
Could be taken concurrently with other response/remedial actions
Need approval (written or presumptive) by MassDEP
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

17. Utility Related Abatement Measures 310 CMR 40.0461
Used to manage contamination on public ROWs, utility easements and private property
Installation, repair, replacement or decommissioning of utilities
Sanitary sewer, water or drainage systems, steam lines, gas lines, electric, telephone, cables
URAM notification required; not the same as release notification
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

18. Phase IV – Remedy Implementation Plan 310 CMR 40.0874
Required 3 years from TC
Phase III documents the Remedial Action Plan
Then implement Phase IV - RIP
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

19. RAM stats – 10 year

20. Release Abatement Measures 310 CMR 40.0440
May be conducted pre or post RAO
Reduce risk in a cost-effective manner
Limited in scope and complexity
At least commensurate with site complexity
Known source(s), reliable site history, known COCs and characteristics, data variability, prior remediation
Need to have adequate site characterization for the proposed construction activities
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

21. Construction RAMs
Coming soon Mega Mall
Jimmy Hoffa

22. Release Abatement Measures 310 CMR 40.0442(1)
RAMS shall not:
Be implemented without sufficient understanding of site conditions and surrounding receptors
Be continued where conditions are substantially different from what was expected
Be conducted in a manner which could pose a significant risk
Prevent or impede the implementation of future response actions (buildings, caps)
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

23. Release Abatement Measures 310 CMR 40.0442(3)
Construction of buildings, within and adjacent to the footprint must have:
Site assessment and risk characterization
Feasibility evaluation
Reduce below UCLs, where feasible or eng. bar.
Eliminate or control any sources
Remedial actions needed to achieve NSR
Applies to both pre or post RAO activities
Discuss active systems
See RMR – lists various systems that DEP consider active
Vac truck – Does this meet the definition? We have gone back and forth on this. It is not so much whether the remedial system meets the definition to a “T” but rather that the performance standards are being met. In this case, active systems apply only to ROS and that is our emphasis. Does the “remedial system” meet the ROS performance standards?
Discuss active monitoring programs
Department has established that the following qualify as active remedial monitoring programs:
Remedial additive, MNA, reactive walls – involves chemical or biological reaction – transformation of chemical substances
Others?
Why not the following:
NAPL recovery – gauge and bail/absorbent sock – not actively remediating but rather recovering based on what flows into a well.
Excavation followed by monitoring – not active remediation following excavation unless it’s MNA! Act of remediation is no longer occurring when completed.

24. RAM Documentation 310 CMR 40.0440 Plan Describe project and timeframe
Provide summary of OHM data
What and where it is
Document SI, RC, FS within bldg footprint
Management procedures for remediation waste handling, treatment, disposal
Dust/vapor/odor monitoring & control
H&SP
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

25. RAM Documentation 310 CMR 40.0445 Status Reports
Describe activities completed and those pending
Include new site information or data
Modifications to Plan
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

26. Modified RAM Plan 310 CMR 40.0443(4)
Must be submitted if:
Contaminants or conditions are found which significantly increase the degree or change the type of exposure to nearby receptors
Significant change to on-site treatment processes, e.g. off-site disposal to on-site treatment

27. Case Study A Pre-RAO RAM (2003) Former industrial site, multiple OHM
Conversion to residential condominiums
Excavated soils related to redevelopment
No pre-characterization, relied on adjacent site data
No site investigation, feasibility evaluation within footprint of building

28. Case Study A

29. Case Study A

30. Case Study A Very limited discussion of soil re-use
Stated they will comply with Construction Policy, but didn’t
Passive venting system proposed, but no documentation or plans to confirm installation
LSP left company
Start over

31. Case Study B Post-RAO RAM
AUL allowed residential construction on a portion of site
Former municipal dump, possible industrial releases
Limited assessment
Location of proposed buildings moved
Excavation without RAM Plan
Mismanagement of Remediation Waste

32. Case Study B

33. Case Study B -2010

34. Case Study B Audit required additional soil testing
Revised risk characterization
RAM Plan for remainder of construction
Clean utility corridors
Soil management and capping plan

35. Historic Fill What is it? Typically…. historic fill is:
Non-native soil intentionally placed on property, typically in urban areas
No point source of OHM, history of filling
May contain PAHs, metals, petroleum in relatively low concentrations
May contain wood/coal ash
May contain lead from leaded gasoline, lead paint
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

36. 1903

37. Historic Fill
Reporting exemption at (310 CMR (8) for hazmat from residues in the environment from:
Point of application of lead based paint
Emissions from the exhaust of an engine
Application of pesticides consistent with labeling
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

38. Historic Fill
Reporting exemption for fill containing wood/coal ash (310 CMR (9))
Does site meet technical update?
Burden of proof on LSP using lines of evidence approach, site history, microscopy, levels and types of PAHs, metals
Can make a site specific determination that OHM is due to wood/coal ash
If not, must notify and follow MCP
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

39. Wood & Coal Ash
BACKGROUND
REPORTING EXEMPTIONS
COAL & WOOD ASH

40. Resources
MassDEP Technical Update – Background Levels of PAHs and Metals in Soil, 2002
LSPA White Paper – Methods for Evaluating Application of the Coal Ash and Wood Ash exemption under the MCP, 1999
LSPA Online Technical Journal – Identification of Historic Fill Using Readily Available Information Sources, 2010
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

41. Caps/Barriers (for soil)
Common Remedial Action
Designed to form a barrier between OHM and receptor
Caps may need to prevent infiltration, control migration
All Caps & Barriers must
Control vapors or dusts
Prevent direct contact
Minimize erosion which could damage cap
Be monitored and maintained
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

42. Design of Caps/Barriers
Depends on type, location and concentration of OHM
Receptors
Inhalation – dust, vapors
Dermal contact
Leaching
Recommend a minimum of two layers, often 3 or more
Isolation layer – soil, pavement, structure
Demarcation layer – geotextile, highly visible
Gas venting layer for old landfills
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

43. Design of Caps/Barriers
Paved areas
recommended 1 foot separation layer, 2-4” sub-base & top layer
Bricks, gravel, cobblestone, decks, not equivalent to pavement
S-1 areas, generally 3 feet of clean fill or equivalent geotextile
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

44. S-1 Soil Category S-1 has the highest likelihood of exposure
Shall be categorized as S-1 if accessible or potentially accessible, and:
Currently used for growing fruits/vegetables
Child’s frequency or intensity of use is high
Adult’s frequency or intensity of use is high
Bottom line, school, residences & playgrounds
Soil is S-1 to 15 feet

45. Design of Caps/Barriers
More flexibility with a Method 3
Site specific assumptions
Institutional controls, AUL
S-1 areas, using Method 3, generally accept 3 feet of clean fill or equivalent cap using a geotextile or combination thereof
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

46. Maintenance
Periodic Inspection, Maintenance and Repair Requirements Specified in the AUL
Post construction monitoring more frequent over first year, settlement, etc.
Recommend an inspection at least once per year, for pavement caps, more frequent for soil caps
Repairs and inspections should be documented
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

47. Engineered Barriers 310 CMR 40.0996
Must meet technical standards of RCRA Subpart N, 40 CFR
Only for soil
Draft MassDEP Guidance 2002
OMM Plan
FAM
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

48. Post RAO 310 CMR
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

49. Changes in Site Activities/Uses 310 CMR 40.1080
Applies to Sites with AULs
Not specifically permitted activities/uses
LSP Evaluation of proposed activity or use
Risk Characterization
To demonstrate NSR or
Response action plan to achieve NSR
LSP Opinion and RC Submitted to MassDEP
AUL Amendment for permanent changes
Documentation is key. Again, first thing we look at when auditing
Status Report requirements are listed under the Phase V regulations.
Discuss the elements
Should include OMM Plan – either discuss or attach as Appendix or make clear reference to current plan – helps Audit staff and helps you make certain that nothing is missed!
May make significant modifications to OMM Plan and present in Phase V Status Report.
Evaluate site data – figures, tables, trends
Plume maps – we don’t see this very often. True for all graphics.
Statistics – DEP does not have specific guidance on this. WERO staff use Mann-Kendall or Mann-Whitney commonly but there are many appropriate statistical analytical methods available.
RMRs – useful to make certain that you are gathering certain information
Deadline – 6 months from Phase IV; still need to submit even if no action occurred
What if I miss a Status Report?
Site is in noncompliance
May see missed reports identified in an NON but as long as data is submitted no action required. May be an indicator of trouble at a site.

50. Release Notification Exemption 310 CMR 40.0317(17)
Releases of OHM where a RAO, NFA, WCS has been provided UNLESS:
The levels of OHM would negate or change the determination or statement, i.e., RAO
Changes in activities, uses and/or exposures upon which the RAO was based change to cause a new or increased exposure (310 CMR )
Needs evaluation by an LSP and possibly response actions to achieve/maintain NSR
Permanent Solution – Only C-1 should be used if Permanent Solution is not feasible; remainder all require that a Permanent Solution is feasible
System Operation – Caution against going directly to Remedy Operation Status from Phase IV; Phase V is a better place to be until such time that system has operated and there is greater confidence that system will achieve a Permanent Solution
Time to achieve RAO – Have 5 years to achieve an RAO, or could be ROS; again, if not certain, then C-2 may be better.
Measurable Progress/Certainty – ROS has highest certainty of success
Fees – Should not matter as they are all the same
Now, let me turn this over to Mike unless there are additional questions.

51. Release Notification Exemption 310 CMR 40.0317(17)
Intent – to not require notification for RC exceedances at a closed site which have already been evaluated
Exemption language somewhat grey
Permanent Solution – Only C-1 should be used if Permanent Solution is not feasible; remainder all require that a Permanent Solution is feasible
System Operation – Caution against going directly to Remedy Operation Status from Phase IV; Phase V is a better place to be until such time that system has operated and there is greater confidence that system will achieve a Permanent Solution
Time to achieve RAO – Have 5 years to achieve an RAO, or could be ROS; again, if not certain, then C-2 may be better.
Measurable Progress/Certainty – ROS has highest certainty of success
Fees – Should not matter as they are all the same
Now, let me turn this over to Mike unless there are additional questions.

52. What does that mean? Considerations
New contaminant of concern > RCs
New area of contamination, outside RAO boundary
New exposures not considered in RAO or increased exposures, evaluate risk
Evaluate to see if the RAO is still valid
When in doubt…notify (can be retracted if you find out it wasn’t necessary) or call to discuss
Permanent Solution – Only C-1 should be used if Permanent Solution is not feasible; remainder all require that a Permanent Solution is feasible
System Operation – Caution against going directly to Remedy Operation Status from Phase IV; Phase V is a better place to be until such time that system has operated and there is greater confidence that system will achieve a Permanent Solution
Time to achieve RAO – Have 5 years to achieve an RAO, or could be ROS; again, if not certain, then C-2 may be better.
Measurable Progress/Certainty – ROS has highest certainty of success
Fees – Should not matter as they are all the same
Now, let me turn this over to Mike unless there are additional questions.

53. Auditing Sites w/AULs
MassDEP may initiate an audit of an AUL site at any time
AUL sites in NERO are audited on periodic basis
1400+ in NERO
75-100/year
Good morning
Topics:
Nuts-and-bolts of the OMM Audits process
Including a review of the three forms we use to evaluate RA performance and compliance
Then, an overview of OMM Audits findings in the region since 2006
Finally, John & I will go over a few site-specific examples to illustrate the points we’ve been making
Scope:
Again, the MCP milestones John has been talking about
“RSI Audits” – our initial focus
Also includes RAs that don’t meet “active” rem.sys/prog. definition as clearly
Post-Class C-1 RAO monitoring-only situations:
Permanent Solution feasibility
Whether monitoring is needed to ensure NSH is maintained
Definitive and Enterprising Steps
Periodic basis: Generally every 3 years, but can be at any point if site conditions warrant it
Not comprehensive: We focus, at least initially, on how the RA is performing currently

54. Case Study C Post-RAO development into assisted living
High concentrations of PCBs in building materials and soil
AUL required excavation with LSP oversight, H&SP and SMP
Excavation without H&SP and SMP
Rubble stockpiled on site
Mismanagement of remediation waste

55. Case Study C

56. Case Study C

57. Case Study C Audit Required: Removal of contaminated debris
Sampling below foundation
Sampling outside building
Define extent of contamination
Revised RAO

58. Summary Need a good understanding of site before construction starts
Pre-characterize soil before excavating
RAM is not always the proper vehicle, don’t be afraid of Phase IV
Where necessary, install a proper cap and document its construction

59. Thank You!

60. Questions
Patricia Donahue (978) Iris Davis (978)