November 8, 2016 International Petroleum Environmental Conference. Tim Nickels Pastor, Behling & Wheeler, LLC

Similar documents
Detailed discussion of the Petroleum Vapor Database is provided in Davis R.V., 2009, LUSTLine #61 and EPA Jan

Empirical Data to Evaluate the Occurrence of Sub-slab O 2 Depletion Shadow at Petroleum Hydrocarbon- Impacted Vapor Intrusion Sites

Vapor Intrusion Update: Separating the Environmental exposure from Indoor Air Quality Issues Guidance

Proposed Changes to EPA s Spreadsheet Version of Johnson & Ettinger Model (and some new spreadsheet tools)

Evaluating the Petroleum Vapor Intrusion Pathway

Draft Petroleum Vapor Intrusion Information Paper. Michael Lowry, RTI International Matthew Young, EPA OUST


BEYOND THE GUIDANCE. The making of the ITRC PVI Guidance Document. Catherine Regan, ERM Boston Matt Lahvis, Shell Houston

Part 3 Fundamentals. Most Common VI Bloopers. Handy Unit Conversions:

A REVIEW OF VAPOR INTRUSION GUIDANCE BY STATE

Assessing Variability in Petroleum Vapor Intrusion

Screening Distances for Petroleum Vapor Intrusion Risk Assessment

Update - Vapor Intrusion and Mitigation in Florida

EPA s Final Vapor Intrusion Guidance

Screening Criteria to Evaluate Vapor Intrusion Risk from Lead Scavengers

Evaluation of Spatial and Temporal Variability in VOC Concentrations at Vapor Intrusion Investigation Sites.

Vapor Intrusion Guidance and Policy Activities at U.S. EPA

VAPOR ENCROACHMENT VAPOR INTRUSION; TRANSACTIONAL ASSESSMENT OF THE POSSIBLE VAPOR INTRUSION PATHWAY

Oregon Guidance for Assessing and Remediating Vapor Intrusion in Buildings

EPA Vapor Intrusion Update

Attenuation of Hydrocarbon Vapors from LNAPL Under Residential and Commercial/Industrial Buildings

Attenuation Factors for Hydrocarbons Associated With a Diesel Spill

Evaluation of VI Data Relative to Separation Distance Screening Criteria A Michigan Case Study

Risk-Based Clean-Up in Georgia Under the VRP Vapor Intrusion

Evaluation of the Petroleum Vapor Intrusion Risk of Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) and 1,2 Dichloroethane (1,2 DCA) RemTech

Tier 1 Vapor Migration Screening for Property Transactions Using ASTM E

EPA S 2015 vapor intrusion guides What do they mean for your facility?

California Low-Threat Closure Policy

DECISION DOCUMENT. Kent Avenue Station Site Voluntary Cleanup Program Brooklyn, Kings County Site No. V00732 October 2013

RISK BULLETIN. Vapor Intrusion An Emerging Environmental Liability WHAT IS VAPOR INTRUSION?

Vapor Intrusion Regulatory Guidance and IRIS Updates with Mitigation Case Studies. Richard J. Rago Haley & Aldrich 20 June 2012

Vapor Intrusion - Site Characterization and Screening. NEWMOA Workshop on Vapor Intrusion Chelmsford, MA April 12, 2006

August Vapor Intrusion Guidance FAQs

H&P Breakfast Seminar

Methodology for Identifying the Area of Concern Around a Property Potentially Impacted by Vapor Migration from Nearby Contaminated Sources

Ask The Expert Webinar Series Vapor Intrusion Assessments Part Two: Improving Data Quality Using Today s Best Practices for Sample Analysis

Exclusion Distance Criteria for Assessing Potential Vapour Intrusion at Petroleum Hydrocarbon Sites

Best management practices for vapor investigation and building mitigation decisions

23 February 2017 Reference No L-Rev1-8500

FACTS ABOUT: Vapor Intrusion

MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. Monitored Natural Attenuation of Groundwater Contamination at Voluntary Cleanup Program Sites

Have You Caught a Case of the Vapors?

U.S. EPA s Vapor Intrusion Database: Preliminary Evaluation of Attenuation Factors

Understanding VI Screening Levels

Vapor Intrusion Assessments Program considerations and comments on U.S. EPA s Technical Guides Tom Yoder Product Manager

PA Vapor Intrusion Guidance

FACTS ABOUT: Former GE Power Systems Apparatus Service Center (Voluntary Cleanup Program) Site Location

Area B Groundwater Investigation Fort Detrick

Volatilization to Indoor Air Pathway (VIAP) and Vapor Intrusion (VI)

EKOS Oct 2010 COMBINING SOIL GAS SAMPLING AND MIP INVESTIGATION TO OPTIMIZE A DNAPL SOURCE ZONE CHARACTERIZATION

Use of Soil-Gas Data in Vapor Intrusion Decisions

Proposed Low-Threat Petroleum UST Closure Policy

Commingled Plumes Petroleum and Chlorinated Solvent Sites in OLQ Remediation Programs

Eric M. Nichols, PE Amy Goldberg Day

The IAQ/Mold Assessment Getting it Right! Controlling Your Risk

PROPOSED DECISION DOCUMENT. CE - E. 17th St. Station Voluntary Cleanup Program New York, New York County Site No. V00541 October 2017

Vapor Intrusion Attenuation Factors Based On Long Term Monitoring Data

Ensuring Occupational Worker Safety At Vapor Intrusion Sites

Example Application of Long Term Stewardship for the Chlorinated Vapor Intrusion Pathway (and VOC sources)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. 2. The effect of remediation on the distribution and mobility of both the LNAPL and water within the zone of interest.

Remedial Methods for Mitigating Vapour Intrusion to High Density Urban Developments

Application of Human-health Risk Assessment in Italy: Regulatory aspects and technical guidelines

In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater: Lessons Learned from the Field

Navy VI Web Tool: A Systematic Approach for Assessing Strength of Evidence

NJDEP Vapor Intrusion Guidance

MNA CLOSURE STRATEGY AT A REDEVELOPED MGP SITE IN FLORIDA Jacksonville Recycling Facility Former MGP Site in Florida September 2018

IPEC Conference San Antonio, TX November 13, 2013 Glenn Nicholas Iosue

Early History of the Vapor Intrusion Pathway

STRATEGIES FOR CHARACTERIZING SUBSURFACE RELEASES OF GASOLINE CONTAINING MTBE

Presenters' Contact Information

Post-Remedy Vapor Intrusion Evaluation for the Laboratory for Energy-Related Health Research (LEHR) Superfund Site

IXPER 70C Calcium Peroxide CASE STUDY

PROPOSED DECISION DOCUMENT. CE - E. 19th St. Station Voluntary Cleanup Program New York, New York County Site No. V00542 October 2017

Is this the maturation Phase of Vapor Intrusion Investigations?

4.1 Evaluation Criteria

Vapour Intrusion Regulatory Framework and Case Law Review

Green Remediation of Petroleum Contaminated Groundwater Using Oxygen Injection in Western Maine

Variation of NEPM Schedule B1

MassDEP Response. Comment Number. Comment Set(s)

PVI Risk Pathway: Sampling Considerations

RISK BASED CLOSURE ALTERNATIVE TO REMEDIATION AT AN URBAN SITE. Brian H. Hackett CP, EMS LLC January 17, 2011

NJDEP VAPOR INTRUSION GUIDANCE Ground Water Screening Levels: Default Values and Site-Specific Specific Evaluation

'REE OF RUM WALTER o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~D.B. Telephone: (907)

THERMAL REMEDIATION OF A CLOSED GASOLINE SERVICE STATION PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION LED BY: GLEN VALLANCE PROJECT MANAGER, CGRS

The total estimated project costs and funding sources are summarized in the table below. Description Total Project Expenditures 20

Residual LNAPL Remediation Using BOS 200 at Budget Rental Car Site in Louisville, Kentucky USA

Lack of Final Guidance on Vapor Intrusion Impedes Efforts to Address Indoor Air Risks

LNAPL Recovery Using Vacuum Enhanced Technology. Theresa Ferguson, R.G. June 2014

Collect deeper soil samples and groundwater from beneath site?

FINAL. Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels and Removal Action Levels 700 South 1600 East Street PCE Plume Salt Lake City, Utah

Vapor Intrusion from Subsurface to Indoor Air:

FINAL PLAN OF REMEDIAL ACTION

Receive Site Fact Sheets by . See "For More Information" to Learn How. PUBLIC MEETING ANNOUNCEMENT:

23 rd National Tanks Conference Petroleum Vapor Intrusion Session March 19, 2012 Matthew D. Young Cumberland Farms Inc.

March 2010 Frequently Asked Questions

Evaluation of Vapor Intrusion from a Subsurface Diesel Plume UsingM ultiple Lines of Evidence

Use of Crawl Space Sampling Data and Other Lines of Evidence for Evaluating Vapor Intrusion

NEWMOA/ Brown SRP Vapor Intrusion Workshop. September 26 and 26, η T. q = k ρ g. D ig. = d i air η g. dφ = gz + 10 / 3

Calculation of Site Specific Groundwater to Indoor Air Volatilization Factors (GIVFs)

January 13, Mr. Mike Zamiarski New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Region East Avon Lima Road Avon, New York 14454

Transcription:

November 8, 2016 International Petroleum Environmental Conference Tim Nickels Pastor, Behling & Wheeler, LLC

Long term, non-voluntary constant inhalation exposure to toxic compounds Non-voluntarily inhale 20,000 liters per day Vs Voluntarily drink 2 liters of water per day Risk is toxicity multiplied by exposure Vapor Intrusion is the migration of volatile organic chemicals from the subsurface into overlying or adjacent buildings

US EPA Vapor Intrusion Guidance 2002 OSWER Draft Guidance overly conservative, particularly for petroleum hydrocarbons 2012 Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Chlorinated Hydrocarbons Differ in Their Potential for Vapor Intrusion (EPA, 2012) 2013 Evaluation of Empirical Data To Support Soil Vapor Intrusion Screening Criteria for Petroleum Hydrocarbon Compounds (EPA, 2013) General Vapor Intrusion (VI) Technical Guide for Assessing and Mitigating the Vapor Intrusion Pathway from Subsurface Vapor Sources to Indoor air. (EPA OSWER, 2015) Petroleum Vapor Intrusion (PVI) Technical Guide for Addressing Petroleum Vapor intrusion at Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites. (EPA OUST, 2015) 3

2012 - Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Chlorinated Hydrocarbons Differ in Their Potential for Vapor Intrusion Source: EPA OUST 2012 4

2013 - Evaluation of Empirical Data To Support Soil Vapor Intrusion Screening Criteria for Petroleum Hydrocarbon Compounds Source: EPA OUST 2015 Source: EPA OUST March 2013 5

2013 - Evaluation of Empirical Data To Support Soil Vapor Intrusion For groundwater Screening Criteria for Petroleum Hydrocarbon Compounds Separation Distance Method - 97% of benzene soil vapor concentrations are less than 100 ug/m 3 for source-to-building separation distances as small as 0 ft. Clean Soil Method - The 95 th percentile vertical clean soil thickness for benzene attenuation to 100 ug/m 3 is approximately 5.4 ft. For free product Separation Distance Method - 95% of benzene soil vapor concentrations are less than 100 ug/m 3 for source-to-building separation distances of ~ 15 ft. Clean Soil Method - Insufficient data for vertical clean soil thickness but estimated at 20 ft. Source: EPA OUST March 2013 6

2013 - Evaluation of Empirical Data To Support Soil Vapor Intrusion Screening Criteria for Petroleum Hydrocarbon Compounds For large sources such as fuel terminal, refinery and petrochem facilities 90% of benzene soil vapor concentrations are less than screening thresholds for a source-to-building separation distances of ~ 18 ft. Other findings Benzene is the risk driver, and requires greatest separation distance. Poor correlation between benzene concentration in groundwater and deep soil gas above groundwater, groundwater concentration not appropriate for screening at PVI sites. Ground cover matters oxygen exchange. Source: EPA OUST March 2013 7

PVI Guidance Lateral Separation Distance Determines if a structure is at risk from PVI based on proximity of structure to the contamination. May combine lateral and vertical separation through use of site characterization data. Source: EPA OUST 2015 8

PVI Guidance Vertical Separation Distance Determines if a structure is at risk from PVI based on proximity of structure to the contamination. Greater distance required for a stronger source. Source: EPA OUST 2015 9

Remedial Investigation for Superfund Site

Conceptual Site Model for VI Origin of primary BTEX plume in NW corner (historical gasoline loading) North side of Site location of former refinery and more recent oil recycling facility (tank battery) South side of Site location of former refinery and gasoline blending LNAPL present throughout northern portion of Site, benzene plume extends slightly beyond boundary of Site (downgradient) 11

PVI Data Collected For RI - North Area 12

PVI Data Collected For RI - South Area 13

PVI Data Collected For RI - Subslab Data 14

PVI Data Collected For RI - Downgradient Site Boundary 15

PVI Data Collected For RI - Off-Site Data 16

Issues With Regulators and Risk Assessors May not use or mention biodegradation in risk assessment. Subslab data not relevant/representative because most homes in area are pier & beam. How do we know soil vapor isn t migrating off site? ON SITE - Shallow vapor sources were present at the Site, no inhabitable buildings on Site Institutional Control requiring PVI mitigation for future construction. OFF SITE Collect sufficient shallow data to support no risk, present research data and 2015 EPA guidance information that shows minimal chance of PVI risk given off site conditions. 17

Issues With Regulators and Risk Assessors EPA eventually agreed that risk was addressed on site by controlling potential future exposures and that risk off site was minimal based on the nature of PVI. Epilogue ATSDR/CDC issued a letter stating data was inconclusive, more data should be collected, and risk may be present. 18

Questions?