Emerging Contaminants Vermont Department of Environmental - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

“Evolving Regulations and Emerging Contaminants”

Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Waste Management and Prevention Division Sites Management Section

Evolving Regulations

 AST Rule – Matt Moran, Environmental Program Manager, SMS  LEAN / ANR On Line – Matt Moran, Environmental Program Manager, SMS  Groundwater Rule -Matt Moran, Environmental Program Manager, SMS  Hazardous Waste Management Regulations - Trish Coppolino, Environmental Program Manager, SMS  Solid Waste Rule -Trish Coppolino, Environmental Program Manager, SMS  Net Metering Rule -Trish Coppolino, Environmental Program Manager, SMS  Natural Resource Damages (NRD) – Trish Coppolino, Environmental Program Manager, SMS  Legislative Changes (S.10)-Trish Coppolino, Environmental Program Manager, SMS  IRule – James Donaldson, Environmental Scientist  Extended talk to cover background soil study – Matt Moran/Trish Coppolino/James Donaldson

Evolving Regulations – AST Rule

New Inspection & Certification Standards (Act 76 – H.531)

Current Status

Approved by ICAR Public Hearing - April 5, 2017 Public Comment Period Ended - April 19, 2017 Finalizing: Responsiveness Summary Rule Draft Filing with LCAR first week of June

2016 Heating Oil Release Data

58 Heating Oil AST Releases 39 from indoor basement ASTs 19 from kerosene outdoor ASTs 53 Heating Oil UST Releases

Costs of AST Releases

Based on data from past 5 years

• Average annual heating oil cleanup

expenditures ~$1.4M

• Average annual heating oil cleanup

revenue - $1.3M

• Average annual AST HO cleanup

expenditures - ~$0.93M

Act 76 - Requirements

Adopt rules for AST inspections by 7/1/17 Requires inspections that must follow newly promulgated protocol. Delivery prohibition to noncompliant ASTs ANR keeps public database of noncompliant ASTs Heating oil ASTs and piping must be removed at time of conversion to natural gas

When Inspections are Required

As of July 1, 2017, all storage tank systems shall be inspected at the following times: (1) Immediately after tank system installation; (2) Immediately after initial delivery of fuel to the tank system; (3) Prior to the initial delivery of fuel to the tank system when the tank owner switches fuel carriers; (4) If not otherwise required under (1) to (3) above, the tank system shall be inspected once every three years; and (5) Upon removal of a tank system – essentially to check for evidence of a release.

Five Red-Taggable Inspection Findings

1.) All four legs of the tank are located on a stable foundation

Five Red-Taggable Inspection Findings

2.) The tank and tank legs are free of any cracks and of significant corrosion or pitting, rust, and spores; dents or bulges; and all tank fuel filter, fittings, and valves are free of drips or leaks and any other sign of an actual

• r suspected release of

hazardous material;

Five Red-Taggable Inspection Findings

3.) All tank fuel lines below grade are installed with a plastic coating or within a protective sleeve made of non-corrodible material;

Five Red-Taggable Inspection Findings

4.) The tank is installed with a vent alarm

• r whistle terminating not more than 12

feet from the fill pipe and at a point visible from the fill port.

Five Red-Taggable Inspection Findings

5.) The fill pipe and the vent pipe shall be at least 1-1/4 inches in diameter. The fill pipe shall have a liquid-tight cap and the vent pipe shall have a weatherproof and insect-proof cap. For indoor tanks, the fill and vent lines must terminate outside the structure.

ANR Environmental Research Tool Aboveground Storage Tanks

https://anrweb.vt.gov/DEC/ERT/AST.aspx

Flood Prone Area Changes

 NORARecommended Practices adopted for indoor ASTs with

respect to tank securement methods, e.g., foot flanges, concrete anchors, hold down straps, etc.

 Emphasis was placed on prevention of indoor/basement ASTs from becoming buoyant due to much greater impact on human health, property and the Petroleum Cleanup Fund.  Outdoor AST “compliance” would be much costlier due to much thicker concrete pads needed. Also, cost/benefit of prevention is marginal since most

• utdoor releases have marginal impact due to

massive dilution, and when pools of product remain it is readily cleaned up.

Protection from Ice Damage

 ASTs installed outdoors after 7/1/17 must either be installed on the gable end, or have protection from ice/snow falling off the eaves

Evolving Regulations – LEAN/ANR Online

Evolving Regulations – Groundwater Rule

 A final draft has not yet been filed with ICAR to begin formal rulemaking  The most significant change for us relates to the GW Reclassification Section

 Current draft would require reclassification of hundreds of sites to Class IV

 Changing Enforcement Standards – Once Rule is in effect, changes include:

 MTBE – from 40 ug/L to 11.3 ug/L  Trimethylbenzenes – from 2 isomers at 350 ug/L to 3 isomers at 5.1 ug/L  1,4-dioxane – from 20 ug/L to to 0.3 ug/L (though interim was 3 ug/L)

 Impact of new standards low given IRULE changes.  The VALs are also being added to the rule for point of use (we already manage to this for private wells).

Evolving Regulations - Hazardous Waste Rule

 PFOA and PFOS are listed hazardous wastes when in liquid form and above 20 ppt.  There are several exemptions to the Hazardous Waste Listing:

 Consumer products that were treated with PFOA and are not specialty products;  Remediation wastes managed under a CAP or disposal plan approved by the Secretary; and  Sludges from wastewater treatment facilities, residuals from drinking water supplies, or leachate from landfills when managed under a plan approved by the Secretary.

 The Secretary is in the process of adopting guidance on the management

• f landfill leachate at wastewater treatment facilities.

Evolving Regulations – Solid Waste Rule

 Preliminary stakeholder and public comment was completed this spring (2017)  Currently going through Internal legal review  Formal rule making process to begin in late Fall 2017

* will include language on categorical facilities that can be permitted to receive development soils

Evolving Regulations – Net Metering

 New Net Metering Rules January 2017  Encourage solar development on “preferred sites”  Preferred Sites-Brownfields, Landfills, NPL sites, gravel pits, rooftops, parking lots  Incentives for preferred site development, expedited permit process, generate power up to 500kW  Certification from ANR Secretary that the site is a Brownfield, Landfill, NPL site  Look for solar developer to conduct a Phase I, Phase II and Corrective Action(if necessary)  Shawn Donovan, Shawn.Donovan@Vermont.gov (802-522-5683)

Evolving Regulations – Natural Resource Damages

Evolving Regulations – Natural Resource Damages

 “Natural resources” means any natural resource held in the public trust, such as fish, wildlife, habitats that support fish and wildlife, biota, vegetation, air, surface water, groundwater, wetlands, drinking water supplies,

• r State-held public lands.

 “Natural resource damage assessment” means the process

• f collecting, compiling, and

analyzing information, statistics, and data through prescribed methodologies to identify the scope of injury to natural resources and associated services in order to determine the amount

• f damages for injuries to natural

resources.

Evolving Regulations – Natural Resource Damages

 These Rules apply to any party liable for a release of hazardous materials pursuant to 10 V.S.A. § 6615  The purpose of these Rules is to make the environment and public whole for injuries to natural resources and loss of services resulting from the release of hazardous material.  NRD establish processes to assess injuries to natural resources, to assess alternatives for restoring injured natural resources and services lost, and to pursue implementation and funding of a restoration plan by potentially responsible parties.  These Rules also provide opportunities for soliciting input from the public and other interested parties in conducting a damage assessment and selecting restoration alternatives.

 Upon notification of a release or discovery of a release of hazardous materials, the Secretary may conduct pre- assessment to determine whether to conduct a damage assessment and restoration. Where appropriate, the Secretary may first require early restoration actions prior to any such damage assessment and restoration planning.

Evolving Regulations -Legislative Updates S.10

 Creates strict liability for cost of public drinking water line extension for person who released PFOA and caused potable water supply to fail.  Amends definition of hazardous material, 10 V.S.A.§ 6602(16), to include “a chemical or substance that, when released, poses a risk to human health or other living organisms and that is listed by the Secretary by rule.”  Amends the definition of disposal, 10 V.S.A.§ 6602(12), to include the word “emitting.”  Amends the brownfield statute, 10 V.S.A.§ 6652(b), by adding the following sentence: “The Secretary may establish land use restrictions in the certificate of completion for a property, but the Secretary shall not acquire interests in the property to establish a land use restriction.”  Amends the brownfield statute, 10 V.S.A.§ 6653(a), by adding a release from natural resource damages for a brownfields applicant who has obtained a certificate of completion.  Amends the groundwater classification statute, 10 V.S.A.§ 1392(d), by removing outdated language related to the natural resources board’s review of ANR rules.  Amends the groundwater classification statute, 10 V.S.A.§ 1394(a), by allowing the Secretary to authorize, subject to conditions, the use of Class IV waters as a source of potable water supply.

Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Properties Rule (I-Rule)

James Donaldson, Environmental Analyst Sites Management Section Department of Environmental Conservation

History

 The Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Properties Procedure (IROCPP) has been VT DEC’s long standing guidance document for site investigation and remediation.  Act 52, passed in 2015, required that the VT DEC develop procedures for managing “development soils” and establish statewide background concentrations for arsenic, lead, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).  With Act 52 mandating the promulgation of a Rule, the SMS and VT DEC management elected to include the provisions of the IROCPP guidance document with the procedures for managing development soils.

Today

 ANR is currently finalizing both the responsiveness summary and I-Rule documents.  Responsiveness summary should be made available to the public by June 2, 2017.  Targeted submission date to LCAR for the I-Rule is June 2, 2017.  I-Rule will be posted to the DEC website concurrent with LCAR filing.  Development Soils - DEC and environmental community meeting scheduled for May 31, 2017.

What is the Investigation and Remediation

• f Contaminated Properties Rule?

 The procedural and substantive requirements on a responsible party and Agency for the cleanup of a site.  Takes the previous Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Properties Procedure and makes it a rule.  Rule in the final stages of the adoption process (public comment closed, pending filing with LCAR).  Anticipated Legislative adoption in July 2017.

Major Changes between Procedure and Rule

 Streamlined cleanup of releases from heating oil tanks.  Corrective action feasibility investigation (now evaluation of corrective action alternatives).  Public notice process consistent with Act 150.  All sites leaving contamination in place must have an institutional control plan.  Included development soils and eased some requirements from former policy.  Reimbursement process for municipal water line extensions.  VDH/EPA values now standards.

Subchapter 1 – General Provisions

 Provides authority and purpose for rule. Includes prohibitions, reporting obligations, emergency response provisions, and liability.  Releases of hazardous materials are prohibited. 10 V.S.A. §6616  Any person with knowledge of a release (lenders) and who may be liable for the release is required to report the release to the Secretary of Natural Resources. 10 V.S.A. § 6617

Subchapter 1 - Emergency Corrective Action Authority

 “Spills” authority now in rule. Expanded to include other emergency responses.  Agency of Natural Resources can respond to emergency situations under its emergency response authority. ANR must determine that there is an “immediate and serious threat of harm to human health

• r the environment” to exercise the authority.

 No notice to responsible party required, however, if additional work beyond emergency response then ANR must notify responsible party.

Subchapter 3 - Site Investigation

 Site Investigation work plans must be submitted to the Secretary within 30 days of the discovery of the release.  Once approved, the SI must be implemented in 60 days.  Submission of the SI report is required within 90 days of final laboratory data.  Required elements of the SI report have been expanded.

• Requires detailed data on the site and results of the investigation.
• Must include an evaluation of potential for release to have

impacted the bedrock aquifer.

 The SI Report presents conclusions and recommendations to ANR. Based on this and revisions to the CSM, ANR will determine

• There are no impacts to sensitive receptors requiring corrective action and

the Site can be closed;

• Additional investigation is required; or
• There are risks to sensitive receptors and a CAP is required.

Subchapter 4 – Response Actions, Releases of Heating Fuels

 Applicable only to release of heating fuels from Category 4 USTs, or ASTs that contain heating fuels and service residential or farm properties.  Allows for removal of accessible impacted soils above the water table during AST spill response or UST removal.  Requires post-excavation analytical sampling to document effective source removal or residual contamination.  Bedrock impacts evaluated through drinking water supply sampling.  If impacts cannot be addressed during initial response a streamlined SI process is required.  Pending results of the initial response actions and/or SI, the ANR will determine:

• No further action required (Spill closure);
• Complete SI in accordance with Subchapter 3 is required (Site listing); or
• Impacts to sensitive receptors require additional corrective action (Site listing).

Subchapter 5 – Corrective Action

I-Rule allows for exemptions from corrective action requirements in certain circumstances. Defines the objectives of corrective action. Change in terms from “Corrective Action Feasibility Investigation” to “Evaluation of Corrective Action Alternatives (ECAA)”.

Corrective Action - Exemptions

 Emergency responses;  Heating fuel releases;  RCRA corrective actions;  CERCLA / Superfund cleanups;  Where an SI Report demonstrates

• No exceedance of any

applicable drinking water standard at a drinking water source;

• Groundwater

contamination confined to property where release

• ccurred;
• No off-site migration above

standard;

• No direct contact threats;
• ANR approves Institutional

Control Plan.

Corrective Action - Objectives

 Hierarchy of Cleanup Priorities.  Treat to the maximum extent practicable.  Remove and properly dispose of materials.  Use engineered controls to contain hazardous materials and prevent exposure.  Use legal controls (institutional controls) to control access and limit exposure.

Evaluation of Corrective Action Alternatives - Exemption

 No impacts to drinking water sources, vapor intrusion, or other impact to human health.  Impacts confined to site where release occurred or will be at the site where the release occurred within five years of the completion

• f the Site Investigation;

 There are no direct contact threats (unless those can be mitigated through limited source removal); and  The PRP documents that the proposed remedy has been successfully used at other sites and has a history of being reliable, cost-effective, and technically effective.

Evaluation of Corrective Action Alternatives

 Must evaluate at least 2 alternatives: (1) reduces the toxicity, mobility, or volume through treatment and minimizes long term maintenance; and (2) minimizes treatment and addresses exposure through engineered or institutional controls or long-term monitoring.  Alternatives must analyze the following factors: (1) compliance with legal requirements; (2)overall protection of human health and environment; (3) long-term effectiveness and permanence; (4) reduction of toxicity, mobility, volume through treatment; (5) short term effectiveness; (6) implementability; (7) cost; (8) environmental impact and sustainability; and (9) community acceptance.

Approval of Evaluation of Corrective Action Alternatives

 ANR makes final remedy selection based on alternatives analysis.  ANR can require additional alternatives be considered.  ANR can require greater evaluation of one of the alternatives.

Corrective Action Plan / Implementation

 The CAP is the document directing how the selected remedy will be

• implemented. The CAP has to address the following:
• how the performance standards will be achieved for the site (or that

they are not applicable).

• how waste from the site and from construction will be managed.
• a maintenance plan for any portion of the remedy requiring

maintenance.

• an institutional control plan, if necessary.
• a redevelopment and reuse plan, if applicable.
• a QA/AC plan and a cost estimate

 The CAP is noticed and receives public comment.

Corrective Action Plans - Public Notice

 CAP Public notice process revised to meet the requirements of Act 150.  ANR will provide notice to all interested persons once drafty approval of the CAP has been granted.  Interested parties will have 30 days from the date of notice to provide comment on the draft.  Any interested party may request a public hearing within 14 days of the date of notice.  At the close of the comment period, ANR will consider comments and provide final approval of the CAP along with a response to comments if necessary.  ANR will provide notice of the final approved CAP to interested parties.

Subchapter 6 – Institutional Controls

 Sites needing Institutional Controls will be required to develop a LUR/Stewardship Plan.  Plan will identify the IC or series of ICs to ensure the protection of human health and the environment.  Acceptable ICs:

• Notice to Land Records
• Deed Restriction/Environmental Easement
• Zoning ordinances
• Water ordinances
• Groundwater reclassification
• Judicially approved controls
• Certificate of Completion

Subchapter 7 – Site Closure

 Sites Management Activity Completed (SMAC) designation remains.  All SMAC letters will be recorded on the property deed upon site closure.  For Site closure requiring a Notice to Land Records - the SMAC letter and a site figure will document the residual contamination.  Certificate of Completion (COC) – Brownfields sites.

 The COC will serve as the Land Use Restriction

Background Soils – Act 52

 Act 52, passed in 2015, required that” On or before July 1, 2017, the Secretary shall adopt rules that allow for the management of excavated soils requiring disposal that contain PAHs, arsenic, or lead in a manner that ensures protection of human health and the environment and promotes Vermont’s traditional settlement patterns in compact village or city centers.” At a minimum, the rules shall:

 include statewide or regional background concentration levels for PAHs, arsenic, and lead that are representative of typical soil concentrations and found throughout existing development areas;  specify that development soils with concentration levels equal to or lower than the background concentration levels established by the Secretary shall not be defined as or required to be treated as solid waste;  include criteria for determining site-specific maximum development soil concentration levels for PAHs, arsenic, and lead;

 (continued)

Background Soils – Act 52

 Act 52, passed in 2015, required that” On or before July 1, 2017, the Secretary shall adopt rules that allow for the management of excavated soils requiring disposal that contain PAHs, arsenic, or lead in a manner that ensures protection of human health and the environment and promotes Vermont’s traditional settlement patterns in compact village or city centers.” At a minimum, the rules shall:

 include statewide or regional background concentration levels for PAHs, arsenic, in addition to disposal at a certified waste facility, adopt procedures for the management or disposal of development soils that have concentration levels that exceed residential soil screening levels, but are below the site-specific maximum development soils concentration levels;  adopt a process to preapprove sites to receive development soils from multiple developments; and  be designed to provide that the criteria established under subdivision (3) of this subsection and the process developed under subdivision (4) of this subsection shall be no less protective of human health and the environment than the standard for development soils and the process established under subsection (b)

• f this section.

Background Soils – Act 52

 “Development soils” means unconsolidated mineral and organic matter

• verlying bedrock that contains PAHs, arsenic, or lead in concentrations

that:

 (A) exceed the relevant soil screening level for residential soil;  (B) when managed :

 (i) pose no greater risk than the Agency-established soil screening value for the intended reuse of the property; and  (ii) pose no unreasonable risk to human health through a dermal, inhalation, or ingestion exposure pathway;

 (C) does not leach compounds at concentrations that exceed groundwater enforcement standards; and  (D) does not result in an exceedance of Vermont groundwater enforcement standards.

Background Soils – Act 52

 Act 52 also created the following “disposal” options for development soil:

 Categorical Solid Waste Facility

 Development soils as defined in 10 V.S.A. § 6602(39) shall be eligible for disposal at a categorical disposal facility certified by the Secretary of Natural Resources for the disposal of development soils pursuant to 10 V.S.A. § 6605c.

 Alternative Daily Cover

 Development soils as defined in 10 V.S.A. § 6602(39) shall be eligible to be used as alternative daily cover at a solid waste facility certified pursuant to 10 V.S.A. § 6605.

 Receiving Sites

 Property that has equal or greater concentrations of PAH, Arsenic, Lead can “receive” soils from a site with development soils

Background Soils Study - Design

 Samples were collected spatially throughout Vermont to determine background concentrations of PAHs, arsenic, and lead from locations presumed to not have had a known release or land use that would have been a source of these contaminants.  Study design:

• A 100 square mile grid was overlain on the state map of Vermont which

created 115 grids;

• The largest municipality in each grid was identified for sample

collection;

• Properties targeted for sample collection included State/Municipal

parks and greens, State/Municipal building lawns, school lawns, cemeteries, and State/Town forests.

• A total of 130 samples and 17 duplicate samples (13%) were collected.

Background Soils Study – Data and Evaluation

 EPA’s ProUCL version 5.0 software was utilized to statistically review the data and allow for reproduction by outside parties.  Outliers were omitted from the data sets by using a combination of Rosner’s Outlier Test and visual inspection of the histogram and box and whisker

• plots. 95% confidence interval and 95% coverage were utilized in

determining the background threshold value.  Each data set of analytical results (Arsenic, Lead, and TEQ PAHs) was evaluated to determine whether the data reflected a statistically significant separation, as a result of discernable land use patterns.

Background Soils Study – Spatial Evaluation

 The Density of Habitable Buildings GIS layer, located on the ANR Atlas, was used to establish areas of high population density in Vermont and were considered “urban”.  Areas outside of this layer were considered “rural”.  Sample locations inside or within an approximate 500-foot buffer of the Density of Habitable Buildings GIS layer were considered Urban.  Sample locations that were engulfed, or surrounded by the Density of Habitable Buildings GIS layer were also considered Urban.  Other sample locations (not inside, engulfed, or within 500 feet of the density layer) were considered Non-Urban or “Rural”.  In the case of arsenic, two tailed t-test analysis indicated that there is no statistically significant difference between the datasets, and that one statewide (residential and commercial/industrial)background level applies.

Background Soils Study – Spatial Evaluation

Background Soils Study – Spatial Evaluation

Background Standards for Lead, Arsenic, and PAHs

 Arsenic: statewide background value: 16 ppm  Lead: Urban background value: 111 ppm  Lead: Non-urban background value: 41 ppm  PAHs: Urban background value: 580 ppb  PAHs: Non-urban background value: 26 ppb

Development Soils – “Urban” Background

 Create an “urban” background;  Concentrations of PAHs below this background value will not be regulated – BUT there may be some reporting associated with movement of soils  Movement of soils below background can happen within designated “urban” areas  Map “Urban” areas using:

 Density of Habitable Buildings Layer AND  2010 Census Maps for Urbanized Area

2010 Census Maps for Urbanized Area

2010Census Maps:https://www.censu s.gov/geo/maps- data/maps/2010ua.html 22 Urban Maps for Vermont