Practical Applications to Changes in DEP s RBCA Policy

Transcription

1 Division of Waste Management Practical Applications to Changes in DEP s RBCA Policy July 9, 2015

2 Proposed Rulemaking Allow Incremental Sampling Methodology (ISM) as an op9on for soil sampling Struck 3X requirement for direct exposure Cannot use ISM for comparison to acute numbers Clarify condi9onal closure with Free Product Clarifica>on in RMO II and RMO III to leave free product in place if not migra>ng and does not pose a risk to human health, public safety or the environment. Sugges>on to add language from , F.S. : wherever it is technologically feasible and cost- effec>ve 2

3 Proposed Rulemaking Addi9onal Op9ons for Evalua9ng Leachability Intent is to provide an op>on to take mass into account From: ITRC (Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council) Decision Making at Contaminated Sites: Issues and Op7ons in Human Health Risk Assessment. RISK- 3. Washington, D.C.: Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council, Risk Assessment Team

4 Proposed Rulemaking Clarified switching from ac9ve remedia9on to natural agenua9on monitoring when appropriate RMO II and RMO III criteria can be endpoints to ac>ve remedia>on Go straight from ac>ve remedia>on to NAM if desired Clarified Sampling & Repor9ng Frequency Sampling frequency & repor>ng frequency can be established on a site- specific basis Each sampling event does not necessarily require a corresponding report 4

5 Proposed Rulemaking Strengthened language on use of field screening techniques Allow for use in decision- making, with appropriate verifica>on Not limited to determining op>mal loca>ons for collec>ng samples for lab analysis Separated Emergency Response & Interim Source Removal (ISR) into two rules More straigh^orward to implement Separates requirements for emergency response from ISR requirements 5

6 Proposed Rulemaking Upcoming CMF to sort through op9ons Toxicity Values Exposure Assump>ons Body Weight Exposure Dura>on Skin Surface Area & Dermal Adherence Assump>ons CTL Formulae Newer EPA Methods DraO CTLs based only on toxicity factors uploaded FDEP web site hcp:// 6

7 Groundwater Considerations CTLs based on MCLs will not change Include inhala9on and dermal pathways Currently required for 780 risk assessment Separate equa9ons for mutagenic carcinogens, non- mutagenic carcinogens, and non- carcinogens Current GCTLs based on adult- only exposure Accommodate Age Dependent Adjustment Factors Exclude Rela9ve Source Contribu9on 7

8 Deterministic vs. Probabilistic Considered range of op9ons for upda9ng CTLs 1. Use exis>ng determinis>c equa>ons and just update parameter values 2. Update determinis>c equa>ons and parameter values 3. Update use probabilis>c approach Proposing op9on #2 as best short- term strategy for upda9ng CTLs Poten9al for future probabilis9c approach Need to develop protocols, distribu>ons etc. 06/30/2015 Chapter Rule Workshop 8

9 Soil Considerations Direct Contact Change age averaging of body weight and soil inges>on Use RfC instead of RfD i for inhala>on exposure Include Age Dependent Adjustment Factors for mutagenic carcinogens Eliminate extrapolated RfD d and calculate dermal dose using RAGS D equa>ons for organics and inorganics Leachability Add mass- based leachability equa>on 06/30/2015 Chapter Rule Workshop 9

10 Closure Based on Non-Recorded Institutional Controls (Nov. 2013) examples of ICs that do not require a restric7ve covenant are governmental controls that impose restric>ons on land use or resource use. Typical examples of other forms of ICs for groundwater at a site include groundwater delineated areas under Chapter , F.A.C., county or municipal ordinances prohibi>ng the installa>on of potable water wells in urban areas or manda>ng that any new potable well be connected to the county or municipal water delivery system, groundwater classified as undrinkable, and prohibi>on on installa>on of wells in potable wellhead protec>on areas under Chapter , F.A.C. When using exis>ng governmental controls to close a site, a site owner is not required to place a restric>ve covenant by deed or >tle to the property if the governmental control achieves the necessary degree of restric>on on access to contaminated media. - Jorge Caspary Memorandum Site Closure with Condi9ons

11 Current Evaluation of ICs Sec9on , Florida Statutes Ins>tu>onal controls means the restric>on on use or access to a site to eliminate or minimize exposure. Such restric>ons may include, but are not limited to, deed restric>ons, restric>ve covenants, or conserva>on easements. Rule IC s and EC s for NFA shall apply if they are protec>ve of human health, public safety, and the environment. When using municipal ordinances is it preempted because it acempts to regulate well construc>on or consump>ve use?

12 Current Evaluation of ICs The Division of Waste Management and OGC are currently evalua>ng a suite of possible Ins>tu>onal Controls Mechanisms Under Considera>on include: Local Government Controls: Ordinances MOAs with other governmental en>>es Deed No>ces Con>nue to evaluate alterna>ve ins>tu>onal controls on a case by case basis as we gather informa>on The Contaminated Media Forum is gathering stakeholder input 12

13 FDOT MOU & Case Study hcp:// DEP_DOT_MOU_01Aug14.pdf Takes Advantage of the inherent Barriers To Exposure Provided by the FDOT s Management of the ROW Physical Barriers, i.e., road pavement, clean fill Administra>ve Barriers, i.e., FDOT s perminng process that is designed to control all ac>vi>es in the ROW 13

14 FDOT MOU as an IC Petroleum contamina>on only In FDOT right of way IC = MOU + DOT Map Note + Recorded Deed No>ce 14

15 FDOT MOU Process 1. PRSR submits to DEP a proposal for FDOT Map Note 2. DEP requests Map Note to DOT ROW map 3. DOT records Map Note on ROW Map 4. Map Note = DEP's Request Lecer + summary of soil and groundwater data + survey and other documents detailing contamina>on 5. Map Note provides no>ce of contamina>on to DOT ROW permiced par>es 6. PRSR records Map Note Deed No>ce in County 7. FDEP issues condi>onal SRCO 15

16 Jackson Hospital Case Study 7/29/15 16

17 Specific Purpose Survey with Map Note 7/29/15 17

18 Specific Purpose Survey with Map Note and Descriptions Map Note: Petroleum Contaminated Area FDEP ID#COM_ FDOT FPN SRCO dtd GPS Coordinates Sta9on & Offset Legal Descrip9on Polygon of Area in ROW 7/29/15 18

19 FDOT Right of Way Map Petroleum Contaminated Area FDEP ID#COM_ FDOT FPN SRCO dtd 7/29/15 19

20 Key Dates CMF July 22, 2015 in Tallahassee 9 a.m. to 4 p.m Discussion Con>nued Discussion on ICPG Soil DE, Leachability, and ECs Probabilis>c Risk Assessment Comments due on DraO Rule August 31 st Next Rulemaking Workshop and Mid Fall (Tallahassee)

21 If you need assistance with a specific legal ques>on related to IC/EC, then contact: Mary Stewart at mary.stewart@dep.state.fl.us or Toni Sturtevant at toni.sturtevant@dep.state.fl.us Our Program Acorney for Cleanup Ques>ons is: Rebecca Robinece at rebecca.robinece@dep.state.fl.us I can be reached at: peter.cornais@dep.state.fl.us