Atlantic RBCA Guidance for Soil Vapour and Indoor Air Monitoring Assessments: Overview. December 7 th, 2006 Moncton, New Brunswick

Similar documents
Examples of Data Collection Strategies and Methods

2. Appendix Y: Vapor Intrusion Modeling Requirements (Appendix to Statewide health standard VI guidance in the Technical Guidance Manual)

Lessons from Petroleum Hydrocarbon and Chlorinated Solvent Sites Extensively Monitored for Vapor Intrusion

Atlantic RBCA (Risk-Based Corrective Action) for Petroleum Impacted Sites in Atlantic Canada. Version 3. User Guidance

Case Study of Modeled and Observed TCE Attenuation from Groundwater to Indoor Air. Christopher G. Lawless Johnson Wright, Inc.

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

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

August Vapor Intrusion Guidance FAQs

Is this the maturation Phase of Vapor Intrusion Investigations?

Overview of Soil Gas Probe Emplacement & Sampling Methods

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

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

Water Well Decommissioning Guidelines

Screening Criteria to Evaluate Vapor Intrusion Risk from Lead Scavengers

New Data on Attenuation Coefficients for Crawl Spaces and Deep Soil Gas from the Lowry AFB Site, Denver, Colorado

PA Vapor Intrusion Guidance

Soil Vapor Installation

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

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

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Soil Vapor Extraction Subsurface Performance Checklist

Vapor Intrusion Assessment A Comparative Analysis of Subsurface Vapor Sampling Methods

MTBE Fact Sheet #2 Remediation Of MTBE Contaminated Soil And Groundwater Background

Endpoint Selection Standard. Saskatchewan Environmental Code

NGWA s Water Well Construction Standard: ANSI/NGWA 01-14

A Comparison of BioVapor and Johnson and Ettinger Model Predictions to Field Data for Multiple Sites

Soil vapor surveys can be used for a number of purposes, including the following:

In Situ, Low Temperature Thermal Remediation of LNAPL with Pesticides and Other Recalcitrant Compounds

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

In-Situ Containment and Treatment of a Free Phase Hydrocarbon Plume beneath Plant Infrastructure

Steve Mailath, M.Sc., P.Geol. April 10, 2014 WATER NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENT INFRASTRUCTURE ENERGY

MEMO. Kris Hinskey

Guidelines for Assessing and Managing Petroleum Hydrocarbon Contaminated Sites in New Zealand (Revised 2011)

Using Mass Balance to Assist in Determining Remedial Options. Stephen Thomson URS New Zealand Limited

Sampling and Analysis in Vapor Intrusion Investigations. Andy Rezendes, Technical Sales-Air Analysis

Vapor Intrusion Attenuation Factors Based On Long Term Monitoring Data

AN ALTERNATIVE TO VACUUM ENHANCED MULTI-PHASE EXTRACTION. Allan Shea, P.Eng.

Case Studies of Innovative Use of Tracers, Indicators and Field GC/MS for Assessing the Vapor Intrusion Pathway

MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT 1800 Washington Boulevard Baltimore Maryland

DRAFT Alberta Risk Management Plan Guide

Oregon Guidance for Assessing and Remediating Vapor Intrusion in Buildings

Updated Massachusetts Indoor Air Quality Threshold Values: A Case Study

Vapour Intrusion Regulatory Framework and Case Law Review

Vapor Intrusion Issues

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

H&H Job No. DS0-05. April 29, South Tryon Street Suite 100 Charlotte, NC

GUIDE FOR THE SUBMISSION OF REMEDIAL ACTION WORKPLANS

Soil Treatment Facility Design and Operation for Bioremediation of Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soil. Version 1.0

A REVIEW OF VAPOR INTRUSION GUIDANCE BY STATE

Worksheet #1 Assessing the Risk of Groundwater Contamination from Drinking Water Well Condition

Soil Gas Sampling for Vapor Intrusion Assessments: Key Issues

Updated J&E Model VIAModel.xls

7.0 EVALUATION OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

PHASE II SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION REPORT

Advancing the Science of In Situ Groundwater Remediation Petroleum Hydrocarbon Remediation Technologies

Best management practices for vapor investigation and building mitigation decisions

Corrective action design and implementation Petroleum Remediation Program

ESTCP Research on Optimization of Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Systems in Large Military Buildings

Groundwater Monitoring Requirements of the CCR Rule What s Next?

An Integrated Model for Design of Soil Vapour Intrusion Mitigation Systems

Engineering Specifications

COMMENTS RECEIVED ON PROPOSED GUIDANCE Land Recycling Program Technical Guidance Manual Section IV.A.4 Vapor Intrusion into Buildings from

ADVISORY ACTIVE SOIL GAS INVESTIGATIONS

VAP Introduction to the Voluntary Action Program. Division of Emergency and Remedial Response

APPENDIX E SOIL VAPOR PROBE AND PIEZOMETER INSTALLATION AND MONITORING PROCEDURES Central Los Angeles High School#11 and Vista Hermosa Park

Soil Gas Analytical Methods (Overview, TAGA, Forensics)

New Models to Support Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Design

Advancing the Science of In Situ Groundwater Remediation Petroleum Hydrocarbon Remediation Technologies

ADVISORY ACTIVE SOIL GAS INVESTIGATION

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

Vapor Intrusion: How, Why, Where, When

Characterizing TCE Exposure Distribution for Occupants of Houses with Basements

Effects of Alternate Petroleum Hydrocarbon Sources in the Vadose Zone on the Vapor Intrusion Pathway beneath a Residential Community

BIOVENTING. History. Where was the mass of contaminant going? The answer: Bacterial degradation!

Chlorinated Hydrocarbons A Widespread Issue

Use of Building Pressure Cycling in Vapor Intrusion Assessment

Questar ThermWise Duct Technical Specifications

Surfactant Enhanced Remediation Of Petroleum and Chlorinated Contaminated Sites. Bud Ivey Ivey International

August Prepared by:

Have You Caught a Case of the Vapors?

PILOT PROJECT «ILE DE FRANCE»

Thermal Remediation Services, Inc.

AECOM tel 8000 Virginia Manor Road, Suite fax Beltsville, MD 20705

Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Methods & Strategies

Vapor Extraction / Groundwater Extraction (VE/GE) System Initial Report

Modeling the Vapor Intrusion Pathway: Revisions to the MCP GW-2 Groundwater Standards

Thermal Remediation Services, Inc.

LANDFILL GAS CONTROL SYSTEMS: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS. Mike Bradford, P.E.

Empirical Data: Challenges and Future Directions

Esdat Environmental Database Management Software

MODEL SJ10. Installation Manual. SumpJet TM - Water Powered Backup System C IMPORTANT: MODEL SERIAL

Radon Control Methods for Existing and New Residential Structures

Case Study Casing Path Well An Effective Method to Deal with Cascading Water

SLAB ON GRADE Insul-Joint or Expansion Joint Material as Required by A/E Specifications AquaCheck Liquid Coating 400 (Waterproofing Membrane) with Aqu

Making Better Decisions: Real-Time Data Collection and Interpretation

Electrical Conductivity & Hydraulic Profiling. The Combining of Two Subsurface Investigation Methods (With More to Come)

PermeOx. Plus. Enhanced Aerobic Biodegradation

USERS GUIDE. Guidelines for Assessing and Managing Petroleum Hydrocarbon Contaminated Sites in New Zealand

Optimization of Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons Analysis by Automated Headspace Using Method Development Tools

Investigation Requirements for Ethanol-Blended Fuel Releases Petroleum Remediation Program

INVESTIGATION RESULTS

Transcription:

Atlantic RBCA Guidance for Soil Vapour and Indoor Air Monitoring Assessments: Overview December 7 th, 2006 Moncton, New Brunswick

Who? Outline Came up with this document Why? Soil vapour/indoor air sampling in the Atlantic Canada regulatory context How? High level technical overview What? Are the regulatory expectations When? Phase-in and implementation

Who?

PIRI Task Group Participants Co-ordinator PIRI committee representative Participants Technical expertise from across Canada Local knowledge from Atlantic consultants Reviewed by PIRI Committee

Why?

Atlantic RBCA History 1999 Atlantic RBCA software V.1 2003 Atlantic RBCA software V.2 Harmonizes with Canada-Wide Standard for Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil released in December 2000. New Atlantic PIRI User Guidance New Tier I Lookup Tables

Atlantic Provincial Uniformity Atlantic PIRI process provided: Uniformity of remedial criteria (level playing field) Shared technical resources Common site assessment protocol Common laboratory methods Common human health risk assessment method Common computer model tool Common screening for ecological receptors Now a common guideline for direct assessment of the indoor air pathway

Atlantic RBCA Tiered Approach Summary: Tier I: RESIDENTIA L COMM ERCIAL/ IND USTRIAL SAND CLAY /SILT BEDRO CK S AND No POTABLE NON -PO TA BLE Further Lookup numbers f or... Action Benzene Tol uene Et hyl benzene Xylenes TP H F ract ion...would appear here. CLAY /SILT BEDRO CK Remediation $$$ No Further Action Tier II: Remediation $$ No Further Action Tier III: Remediation $

Atlantic Regulatory Processes Emergency Response Notification Site Assessment Tier I Tier II Tier III Corrective Action Monitoring Site Closure

Tier II Modelling Soil Vapour Monitoring Atlantic RBCA

How? Soil Vapour Sampling

Typical Model of Soil Vapour Migration Atmosphere and indoor air Vadose zone soil vapours Advective soil gas flow basement crawl space dirt floor Aerobic biodegradation Hydrocarbon vapour diffusion Groundwater plume Soil source Oxygen gas migration

Pathway Operability Abreu and Johnson (2005) conducted 3-D numerical modelling to access effect of vapour source to building separation and construction on soil vapour intrusion Model Assumptions No biodegradation Relatively high volatility and low soil sorption potential Soil vapour permeability of 10-7 cm 2 Source vapour concentration of 208 mg/l 30 m * 30 m source zone Typical residential construction

Pathway Operability Atlantic PIRI recommended source to building separation distances greater than 30 m indoor air pathway inoperable for distances < 30m, use Tables 1 & 2 based on Abreu and Johnson (2005) they incorporate contamination source concentration, depth to source and separation distance factors such as presence of potential pathways preclude use of these tables

Pathway Operability Table 1 Pathway Operability Soil Source Soil Source Concentration (ppm) Separation Distance horizontal or vertical (m) (source edge to building) Benzene TPH TOTAL 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0.16 39 >0.16 1 >39 100 >1 10 >100 1,000 >10 100 >1,000 10,000 >100 1,000 >10,000 100,000 >1,000 >100,000 Notes: 1.Total TPH including toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylenes Indicates pathway is not operable. If any of the following features are present, Table 1 cannot be applied and the subsurface vapours to indoor air pathway must be assessed up to a separation distance of 30 m: Preferential pathways (e.g., utility conduits, coarse gravel seams); Landfill gas, migrating under pressure; Surface features that would block the flow of oxygen or prevent dissipation of vapours (e.g., impermeable cover); Mobile phase-separated petroleum hydrocarbons (free product); Expanding source zone; and Site conditions that do not conform to the default site conditions used to calculate the Tier I RBSLs.

Site Characterization Atlantic PIRI Minimum Site Assessment Requirements Adequate site characterization and delineation of impacts to Tier I RBSLs, regardless of property lines, is a fundamental requirement of the PIRI process and is the basis for sound decision making on contaminated site management. Any approach using soil vapour or indoor air sampling should not reduce or eliminate this basic requirement.

Site Characterization Table 3 Minimum Requirements of a Conceptual Site Model Source Area Characteristics A description of the types of petroleum products previously or currently handled or stored on the site. For sites where the scope of work is limited to a specifically identified release (e.g., fuel oil spill) follow applicable Provincial management process requirements. A description of the petroleum hydrocarbon constituents present in soil and groundwater, including their concentrations and physico-chemical properties (e.g., Henry s Law constant). An evaluation and reporting on the presence/absence of phase-separated liquid hydrocarbons (free product). A discussion of the lateral and vertical dimensions and the extent of contamination delineated at the site. A discussion of the predicted source stability (e.g., presence of free product may result in an expanding source; groundwater plumes may be characterized as expanding, stable, or shrinking based on time-series data). Subsurface Characteristics Vadose zone soil stratigraphy, including layering. Hydrogeological information including depth to the water table, anticipated or measured seasonal fluctuations, and flow direction. A discussion of the presence of perched water tables or low permeability layers that may impact vapour migration. The distance from source to nearest building. The identification and evaluation of natural or man-made preferential pathways that may impact vapour migration. Building Characteristics Size, location, and type. A description of construction features including age, basement or slab on grade, foundation cracks, sumps. A description of heating systems (e.g., forced air furnaces, baseboard heaters). A description of mechanical systems (e.g., HVAC) and appliances.

Phased Approach Subsurface vapour sampling and analysis generally performed before any indoor air sampling estimate indoor air concentration by multiplying soil vapour concentration with measured, modeled or generic dilution factors list chemicals of potential concern assess partitioning of chemicals between groundwater and soil vapour physical data (e.g. soil texture, moisture content etc..)

Phased Approach Sub-Slab Monitoring Design Considerations Sub-slab soil gas sampling relatively simple Accomplished with an electric hammer-drill, avoiding the need for a more-costly drilling rig Drawbacks Need access agreement with building owner Intrusive, disruptive or unpleasant for property owners U.S.EPA(2004) recommends 3 samples for a building the size of a typical domestic residence

Phased Approach Indoor Air Sampling Should be conducted by a specialist with experience in this area Target analyte list should be given very careful consideration Health-based target indoor air concentration should be established Outdoor air samples should be collected as controls when indoor air samples collected Sampling plan should specify: # of samples & locations duration 8 hr (workplace setting) 24 hr (residential setting) Samples collected using SummaTM Canister or sorent tubes

Figure 2 Soil Vapour Sampling Approach Emergency action required? Y Implement mitigative action N N Y Adequate site characterization? - Tier I delineation Y Contamination or water table <1m below foundation? N Pathway potentially operable? - Tables 1 and 2 Y N Incomplete pathway Y Tier I/II assessment - Tier I/II applicable? - Concentrations < RBSLs/SSTLs? N Y Measure source vapour concentrations - Concentrations < RfCs, RSCs? Apply dilution factor of 100* N N Dilution factors applicable? Y Measure sub-slab or indoor air concentrations - refer to Figure 3 Y Predict indoor air concentrations - Concentrations > RfCs, RSCs? N Y Further assess subsurface vapour concentrations closer to building Closure monitoring RfC RSC - Reference Concentration - Risk Specific Concentration Site closure * Refer to Section 6.2 for rationale for dilution factor.

Figure 3 Sub-Slab and Indoor Air Sampling Approach Y Measure sub-slab vapour concentrations - Concentrations < RfCs, RSCs? N Apply dilution factor of 50* Y Predict indoor air concentrations - Concentrations < RfCs, RSCs? N Y Measure indoor air concentrations - Concentrations < RfCs, RSCs? N Y Background checks - outdoor air, reference buildings Measured concentrations < background? N Remove source of interference Review Occupant Survey results - potential interferences identified? Y N Remedial Action Plan RAP objectives achieved? N Y Closure monitoring * Refer to Section 6.3 for rationale for dilution factor. Site closure

Specific Technical Issues Sampling Depth Table 4 Recommended Soil Vapour Sampling Depths (m) Depth to Top of Source (m) 1 <1 >1 5 Recommended Approach Soil vapour sampling not recommended. Site Professional should proceed directly to sub-slab and/or indoor air monitoring. Screened interval of vapour probe must be located greater than halfway from the bottom of the building foundation to the top of the vapour source or the water table. For instance, at a source depth of 3 m below the building foundation, the vapour probe must be installed greater than 1.5 m below the bottom of the building foundation. Vapour probes should be installed as close above the top of the capillary zone as is practicable, though care should be exercised not to place the probe through the capillary transition zone. >5 Screened interval of vapour probe must be located greater than halfway from the bottom of the building foundation to the top of the vapour source or the water table, up to a maximum depth of 5 m. For instance, at a source depth of 7 m below the building foundation, the vapour probe must be installed greater than 3.5 m below the bottom of the building foundation. Notes: 1. Depth from bottom of building foundation to top of contamination source or water table.

Specific Technical Issues Probe Construction Installed in similar fashion to monitoring wells short screen, 0.15 to 0.3 m (slotted PVC pipe, steel-mesh, or holes drilled through inert tubing) Probes relatively small diameter (normal 1-inch to ¼ inch) constructed of pipe or tubing where pipe is used, the joints should be threaded, and the threads wrapped with Teflon tape to prevent leaks

Specific Technical Issues Probe Construction Coarse sand or fine gravel placed surrounding screened portion of probe and bentonite seal constructed above screened portion of probe Remainder of borehole annulus filled with a slurry powdered bentonite and water Top soil gas probe with air-tight valve and protective casing

Specific Technical Issues Purging Recommended Purging Procedure: Calculate dead volume based on the inner volume of the probe and sample tubing Purge probe using a flow rate maintaining a vacuum less than 10 H 2 0 Purge between 3 to 5 casing plus sample tubing volumes Smaller sample volumes provide better resolution, but more spatial variability Larger sample volumes provide more integrated average concentration

Specific Technical Issues Testing for Leaks Helium Shroud Annular seal between probe and surronding material tested by constructing a shroud around the ground surface at the top of the probe and filling it with helium (He) Tube connected through shroud to the top of the soil gas and a pump The pump is used to draw soil gas into a Tedlar TM bag, which is screened for concentration of He If He concentration is very small (<1%) any leakage may be negligible If He concentration is >10%, probe should be replaced

Specific Technical Issues Helium Shroud Reference: http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/gas/svi_guidance/training/docs/svi_investigation.pdf

Specific Technical Issues Sampling Device and Analytical Methods Table 6 Common Analytical Methods Analyte Collection Device Methodology Detection Limit Benzene Thermal desorption tube GC/FID or MS 0.4 µg Charcoal tube GC/FID 0.4 µg BTEX Summa canister GC/MS 1 ppb (3.19 µg/m 3 for Benzene) TPH Fractionation Charcoal tube GC/FID BTEX 0.4 µg each C 6 C 10 2 µg C 10 C 21 10 µg Summa canister GC/MS 1 ppb Charcoal tube GC/FID 10 µg Naphthalene Summa canister GC/MS 1 ppb (5.24 µg/m 3 )

Interpretation Table 7 Soil Gas to Indoor Air Dilution Factors (DFs) Residential Commercial Distance (m) Coarse Fine Coarse Fine 1 8,580 71,600 24,900 141,000 2 10,100 82,100 26,700 154,000 3 11,600 92,500 28,600 167,000 5 14,600 113,000 32,200 193,000 10 22,100 166,000 41,400 257,000 20 37,000 270,000 59,900 385,000 30 52,000 374,000 78,300 513,000

Interpretation Alternative Dilution Factor (DF) required for non-default site conditions DF for soil vapours to indoor air range from 100 to 10,000 100 recommended as conservative value for soil vapours (collected from >1m below building foundations) to indoor air DF of 50 is recommended for sub-slab vapours (<1m below building foundations) to indoor air

Interpretation Carcinogens Indoor air concentration < Risk Specific Concentration (RSC) Where RSC = 10-5 / URF Non-carcinogens Indoor air concentration < Reference Concentration (RfC) RfCs and URFs from the RBCA Toolkit v2.1 Petroleum hydrocarbons only

What?

Submission Requirements Site Characterization Understanding of history of petroleum storage/handling, expected product types on-site Delineation to Tier I RBSLs in soil and groundwater Confirmation of the presence/absence of free product Discussion of source stability, implications for vapour pathway CoPC concentrations Soil type Depth to groundwater, seasonal fluctuations addressed Source-building separation distance quantified Preferential pathways evaluated Completed building inspection and occupant survey form

Submission Requirements Rationale for Approach Discussion of source vs sub-slab vs indoor air, site-specific pros and cons, rationale for selected approach Number and placement of sampling points Depth of sampling points Selection of CoPCs

Submission Requirements Field/Laboratory Methods Discussion of leak testing procedures or confirmation that sampling equipment is air-tight Record of purging procedure Documentation of sampling parameters run time, flow rate, vacuum at a minimum Verification that detection limits are less than RfCs and/or RSCs Laboratory certificates of analysis

Submission Requirements Remedial Action Plan Schedule Workplan of proposed activities Statement of remedial criteria or objectives Detailed conceptual site model Rationale for CoPC to be monitored Description of the monitoring program (e.g., location, frequency, duration) Description of how achievement of RAP objectives will be confirmed

Submission Requirements Closure Rationale for frequency and duration of closure monitoring Confirmation that results meet criteria Documentation of any institutional and/or engineered controls Stamped by P.Eng. or P.Geo. in Province

When?

Transition Period Existing files with approved Remedial Action Plans (RAPs): Work will be conducted in accordance with approved RAP Site closure will be based on approved RAP regardless of timelines

Transition Period Existing projects without an approved RAP but soil vapour/indoor air approach selected and sampling events already completed: Closure Reports submitted by March 31 st, 2007 will not be subject to evaluation under the new guidance

Transition Period Sites at the site characterization phase or remedial planning stage, no sampling events conducted: Subject to new guidance

Resources American Petroleum Institute (API), 2005. Collecting and Interpreting Soil Gas Samples from the Vadose Zone: A Practical Strategy for Assessing the Subsurface Vapour-to-Indoor-Air Migration Pathway at Petroleum Hydrocarbon Sites. Publication No. 4741. Golder Associates, 2004. Soil Vapour Intrusion Guidance for Health Canada Screening Level Risk Assessment (SLRA). Prepared for Health Canada. Final Draft, November, 2004. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2002. OSWER Draft Guidance for Evaluating the Vapor Intrusion to Indoor Air Pathway From Groundwater and Soils (Subsurface Vapour Intrusion Guidance). http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/eis/vapor.htm