Evaluating the Petroleum Vapor Intrusion Pathway

Similar documents
Screening Distances for Petroleum Vapor Intrusion Risk Assessment

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

Screening Criteria to Evaluate Vapor Intrusion Risk from Lead Scavengers

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

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

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

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

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

PVI Risk Pathway: Sampling Considerations

Vapor Intrusion: How, Why, Where, When

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

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

August Vapor Intrusion Guidance FAQs

PA Vapor Intrusion Guidance

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

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

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

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

Full Scale Implementation Of Sulfate Enhanced Biodegradation To Remediate Petroleum Impacted Groundwater

A REVIEW OF VAPOR INTRUSION GUIDANCE BY STATE

NJDEP Vapor Intrusion Guidance

Vertical screening distances for total petroleum hydrocarbon for vapour intrusion risk assessment at petroleum underground storage tank sites

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

Oregon Guidance for Assessing and Remediating Vapor Intrusion in Buildings

6. Organic Compounds: Hydrocarbons. General Comments Borden, Canada, tracer test Laurens, SC, gasoline spill Bemidji, MN, crude oil spill

Armen Cleaners Indoor Air Quality Investigation. Jon Gulch, OSC U.S. EPA, Region V, ERB

APPLICATION OF SUBSURFACE VAPOUR ASSESSMENT AT HYDROCARBON IMPACTED SITES

Remediation Progress at California LUFT Sites: Insights from the GeoTracker Database

STRATEGIES FOR LNAPL REMEDIATION

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

Understanding VI Screening Levels

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

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

Excavation of petroleum-contaminated soil and tank removal sampling Petroleum Remediation Program

Vapor Intrusion Risk Pathway: Updates & Hot topics

Mass Flux Characterization for Vapor Intrusion Assessment

VAPOR INTRUSION TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

Soil Gas Sampling for Vapor Intrusion Assessments: Key Issues

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

Best management practices for vapor investigation and building mitigation decisions

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

MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

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

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

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

Enhanced Anaerobic Biodegradation of a Refinery Benzene Groundwater Plume

In-Situ Remediation of Chlorinated Solvent Source Zone using ZVI-Clay Treatment Technology

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

Soil Gas Analytical Methods (Overview, TAGA, Forensics)

Nez Perce Tribe Groundwater Assessment and Cleanup

Soil Vapor Migration Through Subsurface Utilities

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

Using Fate and Transport Models to Evaluate Cleanup Levels

Self-Sustaining Treatment for Active Remediation (STAR): Overview and Applications of the Technology

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

STRATEGIES FOR CHARACTERIZING SUBSURFACE RELEASES OF GASOLINE CONTAINING MTBE

MEMO. Kris Hinskey

Comments provided by Dave Kacheck, CENWO-ED-GG Dated: November 2, 2007

S-ISCO REMEDIATION OF COAL TAR

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

EPA s Final Vapor Intrusion Guidance

DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR MULTI-PHASE EXTRACTION SYSTEMS USING UNSATURATED AND SATURATED SOIL PROPERTIES

Thermal Remediation Services, Inc.

ISOTEC Case Study No. 67 ISCO TREATMENT PROGRAM: IMPACTED GROUNDWATER TREATMENT UTILIZING ACTIVATED SODIUM PERSULFATE

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

Examples of Data Collection Strategies and Methods

K ATALYST, INC. adding value to our natural resources facilitating community change

Is this the maturation Phase of Vapor Intrusion Investigations?

August Prepared by:

GROUNDWATER: CLEANING UP

Application of Mulch Biowall for Anaerobic Treatment of Perchlorate in Shallow Groundwater

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

Making Better Decisions: Real-Time Data Collection and Interpretation

Determining the Influence of Background Sources on Indoor Air Concentrations in Vapor Intrusion Assessment

2013 IPEC Conference San Antonio

MISSOURI RISK-BASED CORRECTIVE ACTION (MRBCA) FOR PETROLEUM STORAGE TANKS SOIL GAS SAMPLING PROTOCOL

GROUNDWATER INFORMATION SHEET. Methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE)

Evaluating Risk of Heritage LNAPL Bodies. International Petroleum Environmental Conference 10/14/14

PermeOx. Plus. Enhanced Aerobic Biodegradation

Vapor Intrusion Issues

VAPOR INTRUSION TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

Update - Vapor Intrusion and Mitigation in Florida

Stylistic Modeling of Vadose Zone Transport Insight into Vapor Intrusion Processes

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

Rock Fill Layer Management and Maintenance Plan Former BNSF Site 13 Highway 99 Eugene, Oregon

Passive Gas Environmental Site Assessment and Monitoring

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

Subsurface Distribution of ZVI/EHC Slurry Validating Radius of Influence. Josephine Molin, PeroxyChem October

Kentucky and Beyond BOS 200 Success Story. The RPI Group Approach to In-situ Petroleum Hydrocarbon Remediation

Project Description and Environmental Conditions. Hennepin County. CSAH 81 Reconstruction Project Brooklyn Park, Minnesota.

Indiana Perspectives on the Use of Institutional Controls for Leaking UST Sites. ASTSWMO LUST and State Fund-Financial Responsibility Workshop

Groundwater Remediation Using Engineered Wetlands

ASTM E Standard Update. Key Revisions to E Impacting Phase I Investigations

MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT 1800 Washington Boulevard Baltimore Maryland

OPTIMIZATION OF A CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATMENT TRAIN PROCESS FOR GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION. Gary Cronk, P.E., CHMM

Overburden and Bedrock Remediation Using Activated Carbon Based Injectates. Mike Mazzarese AST Environmental, Inc.

How To Effectively Recover Free Product At Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites

Interpreting Analytical Results

Updated J&E Model VIAModel.xls

Remediation of 1, 4-Dioxane

Transcription:

Evaluating the Petroleum Vapor Intrusion Pathway Studies of Natural Attenuation of Subsurface Petroleum Hydrocarbons & Recommended Screening Criteria NEIWPCC Webinar on Petroleum Vapor Intrusion June 26, 2012 11:30 am-2:00 pm MDT by Robin V. Davis, P.G. Project Manager Utah Department of Environmental Quality Leaking Underground Storage Tanks rvdavis@utah.gov 801-536-4177

Slide provided by Tom McHugh, 2012

OBJECTIVES Understand why there are so many petroleum LUST sites yet petroleum vapor intrusion (PVI) is very rare Use Screening Criteria to exclude low-risk sites from PVI pathway SCOPE Build Petroleum Vapor Database from field studies Soil type, depth to GW, LNAPL presence, contaminant source concentrations Show mechanisms & characteristics of petroleum hydrocarbon vapor biodegradation

Petroleum Vapor Database Compilation of concurrent source strength & soil vapor data ~170 Sites ~1000 measurements Canada United States 56/304 2/13 Australia 112/608 Perth Sydney MAP KEY 56 304 # Geographic Locations (sites) Evaluated # Paired concurrent measurements of benzene subsurface soil vapor & source strength Tasmania

Characterize Site Gas Station Building Define full extent & degree of soil & GW contamination Construct Conceptual Site Model UST system High vapor concentrations from LNAPL Clean soil Low vapor concentrations from dissolved source Contaminated soil & LNAPL Dissolved contamination

Case Study 1 Tesoro #40 Salt Lake City, Utah Apartments Contamination from dispensers & USTs Very high concentrations of contaminant source in soil & GW <5 feet below apartment building foundation Vapors are biodegraded & fully attenuated within few feet of clean soil overlying the source PVI pathway is not complete

Case Study 1: Front View of Apartments 35 feet wide x 65 feet long=2275 feet 2 Apartment slab 3 feet bgs

Residential basement apartments A Dissolved Benzene Plume Map Dissolved source Benzene 14,000 ug/l TPH 28,000 ug/l Sub-slab vapors Benzene 9.9 ug/m3 TPH 130 ug/m3 A SG-1 Sub-Slab soil vapor monitoring point Groundwater monitoring well Groundwater flow direction

Long-Term GW Monitoring 7 MW-21 DTW, feet bgs Benzene, ug/l 16000 Contaminated Soil Zone 14000 12000 8 10000 Depth to GW, feet bgs 9 Partial Removal of On-Site Contaminated Soil Zone 8000 6000 4000 2000 Benzene in GW, ug/l 10 0 5/14/10 12/17/10 4/25/11 7/23/11 10/14/11 1/17/12 3/29/12 Date of GW Sampling Event

Boring Log near Apartments Clean Soil Contaminated soil

PVI Investigation

NW Feet Below Grade 0 Apartments Cross-Section A-A 0 20 Scale, feet SE 5 Silty Clay Sub-slab SG-1 9.9 ug/m3 benzene <100 ug/m3 TPH 22% O2 <0.2% CO2 Sub-slab SG-2 Benzene <3.2 ug/m3 TPH 130 ug/m3 O2 22% CO2 <0.2% Soil Benzene 160 ug/kg TPH-gro <30,000 ug/kg Benzene 4000 ug/kg 10 Sand Dissolved Benzene 14,000 ug/l TPH-gro 28,000 ug/l TPH-gro 750,000 ug/kg Benzene 480 ug/kg Silty Clay TPH-gro 130,000 ug/kg Benzene 11 ug/kg 15 TPH gro <3100 ug/kg

Case Study 2 Ogden Mini Mart, Ogden, Utah Gasoline LNAPL directly beneath building slab, PVI reported by building occupants, mitigation implemented immediately LNAPL

Results of Field & Published Studies Clean soil contains sufficient oxygen needed to biodegrade vapors (aerobic) A few feet of clean soil provides a natural barrier to PVI No reported cases of PVI from lowstrength sources Causes of PVI are predictable & wellunderstood

Causes of Petroleum Vapor Intrusion 1 High-strength source (LNAPL, high dissolved/adsorbed) in direct contact with building BUILDING 4 Preferential pathway allows vapors to enter building Unsaturated Soil LNAPL LNAPL 3 Sump draws LNAPL/high dissolved into building Affected GW Groundwater-Bearing Unit LNAPL 2 LNAPL/high dissolved in close proximity to building

The Science of Petroleum Hydrocarbon Biodegradation & Vapor Attenuation

Aerobic Biodegradation and Oxygen Mass Balance Petroleum Hydrocarbon C6H6 + 7.5O2 Aerobic Bacteria 6CO2 + 3H2O Aerobic bacteria use oxygen to degrade the hydrocarbon for the carbon. The waste product is carbon dioxide and water

Conceptual Model of Aerobic Petroleum Vapor Biodegradation Aerobic biodegradation is a robust & rapid process a) LNAPL SOURCE UNSATURATED ZONE high mass flux CAPILLARY ZONE O 2 VOCs sharp reaction front Clean/uncontaminated soil is sufficiently aerobic to biodegrade & attenuate vapors 8 feet for LNAPL 5 feet for dissolved SATURATED ZONE b) DISSOLVED-PHASE SOURCE UNSATURATED ZONE limited mass flux CAPILLARY ZONE SATURATED ZONE constituent distributions O 2 VOCs constituent distributions sharp reaction front Lahvis, Hers, Davis, Wright, DeVaull (2012, in process)

Signature Characteristics of Aerobic Biodegradation Typical O2, CO2, PHC vapor profiles as petroleum vapors are naturally biodegraded & attenuated with sufficient thickness of clean vadose zone soil

Non-Attenuation of Vapors due to Lack of Clean Overlying Soil Conneaut, OH VMP-1 (Roggemans, 1998; Roggemans et al., 2001) AF Subsurface 7E-01 Bio-AF=7E-01 Oxygen Carbon Dioxide Benzene O2 & CO2 (% V/V) 0 0 5 10 15 20 5 Contaminated Soil zone 10 15 1.E+00 1.E+02 1.E+04 1.E+06 1.E+08 Benzene (ug/m3)

Importance of Shallow Vapor VW-11 8/26/06 Completion Points Example of apparent non-attenuation due to no shallow soil completion point, attenuation shown in later sample points VW-11 Hal s, Green River, Utah Benzene SV, ug/m3 TPH SV, ug/m3 VW-11 8/26/06 6/27/07 6/27/07 Benzene SV, ug/m3 TPH SV, ug/m3 0 0 2 2 Depth, feet bgs 4 6 8 10 12 Shallow completion too deep. No attenuation within contaminated zone Depth, feet bgs 4 6 8 10 12 Shallow points confirm attenuation above contaminated zone 14 1.00E+00 1.00E+03 1.00E+06 1.00E+09 14 1.00E+00 1.00E+03 1.00E+06 1.00E+09 SV Concentration, ug/m3 SV Concentration, ug/m3

Comparison of Field Data to Models that Account for Biodegradation & Vapor Attenuation - Abreu & Johnson Numerical Model (Abreu & Johnson) - BioVapor Analytical Model (DeVaull & McHugh)

Numerical Model Effect of Oxygen-Driven Biodegradation & Magnitude of Subsurface Attenuation of Benzene Vapors Beneath Buildings Benzene Vapors Oxygen Atmospheric Oxygen diffuses downward Low source strength Medium source strength High source strength Hydrocarbon vapors diffuse upward Depth below grade (meters) Horizontal Distance from Building Center (meters)

Comparison of Field-Measured Soil Gas Data to Numerical Model (LNAPL example) Chatterton Research Site, British Columbia, Canada (Hers et al 2000) 0 Slab-on-Grade Building Benzene, Field-Measured, Chatterton Benzene, Numerical Model-predicted Depth, feet bls 5 Sand, Gravel Soil Deep SV Sample Depth to GW reported 10 1.E+00 1.E+02 1.E+04 1.E+06 1.E+08 1.E+10 Benzene, ug.m3

Comparison of Field-Measured Soil Gas Data to BioVapor Analytical Model Beaufort, NJ-VW-2 (Lahvis et al, 1999) AF=0.1, O2=1%, foc=0.5% Find it at: api.org

BioVapor Model Compared to Dissolved Site, Beaufort, South Carolina (Lahvis et al 1999) - Soil vapors associated with Dissolved Benzene 16,000 ug/l, TPH-g 67,100 ug/l Beaufort, SC (Lahvis et al, 1999) Soil Vapor Field Data Compared to BioVapor Model from dissolved source - BioVapor Model under-predicts subsurface attenuation by 100x to 10,000x Beaufort, SC (Lahvis et al, 1999) Soil Vapor Field Data Compared to BioVapor Model from Dissolved Source Benzene Field-Measured, ug/m3 Benzene BioVapor Prediction, ug/m3, AF=0.1, O2=1%, foc=0.5%, Bare Earth Benzene BioVapor Prediction, ug/m3, AF=0.1, O2=1%, foc=0.5%, Pavement TPH-gro Field-Measured, ug/m3 TPH-gro Bio Vapor Prediction, ug/m3, AF=0.1, O2=1%, foc=0.5%, Bare Earth TPH-gro Bio Vapor Prediction, ug/m3, AF=0.1, O2=1%, foc=0.5%, Pavement TPH-gro Bio Vapor Prediction, ug/m3, AF=0.1, O2=1%, foc=0.5%, Aerobic Depth Spe Benzene BioVapor Prediction, ug/m3, AF=0.1, O2=1%, foc=0.5%, Aerobic Depth=3.4 0 0 3 3 Depth, feet bls 6 Depth, feet bls 6 9 Benzene in GW 16,000 ug/l 9 TPH in GW 67,100 ug/l 12 1.0E+00 1.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.0E+07 Benzene, ug/m3 12 1.0E-01 1.0E+01 1.0E+03 1.0E+05 1.0E+07 1.0E+09 TPH-gro, ug/m3

Conclusions from Models - UNDER-predict subsurface attenuation by 10xxxx - OVER-predict PVI by 10xxxx

Developing Screening/Exclusion Criteria to Screen Out PVI Low-Risk Sites

Method for Developing Screening Criteria for Dissolved Sources Multi-Depth Vapor Monitoring Well Feet bgs 0 Beaufort, SC, Lahvis et al 1999 NJ-VW-2 3 ft Benzene vapor concentrations at depth <1 ug/m 3 4 ft 2,300 ug/m 3 5 8 feet Clean overlying soil 7 ft 16,700 ug/m 3 Estimated Contaminated soil zone 10 DTW ~11 ft 11 ft 145,000 ug/m 3 Benzene in GW 16,000 ug/l 15 METHOD FORMULA: 11 ft 3 ft = 8 ft clean overlying soil

Screening Criteria for Dissolved Benzene & TPH (Exterior + Sub-Slab) Benzene: Soil Vapor & Dissolved Paired Measurements TPH: Soil Vapor & Dissolved Paired Measurements Near-Slab Multi-Depth, Sub-Slab Benzene: 199 exterior/near-slab + 37 sub-slab = 236 total All Soil Types Near-Slab Multi-Depth, Sub-Slab TPH: 73 exterior/near-slab + 24 sub-slab = 97 total All Soil Types Thickness Clean Soil Required to Attenuate Benzene Vapors, feet 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 Benzene, dissolved, ug/l Thickness Clean Soil Required to Attenuate TPH Vapors, feet 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 100 10,000 1,000,000 TPH, dissolved, ug/l 5 ft Clean Overlying Soil Attenuates Vapors Associated with Dissolved Benzene <1,000 ug/l, TPH <10,000 ug/l

Method for Developing Screening Criteria for LNAPL & Soil Sources 0 VW-7 Hal s, Green River, VW7, 6/26/07 6/26/07 Utah (UDEQ) O2 & CO2 (% v/v) 0 5 10 15 20 Oxygen Carbon Dioxide Benzene Depth feet bgs 5 10 15 contaminated soil zone Top of contamination to top clean soil = feet CLEAN soil needed to attenuate vapors 20 1.E+00 1.E+02 1.E+04 1.E+06 1.E+08 Benzene (ug/m3)

Results for LNAPL & Soil Sources Benzene 48 exterior/near-slab + 23 sub-slab = 71 total Benzene SV Sample Event over LNAPL & Soil Sources TPH 17 exterior/near-slab + 19 sub-slab = 36 total TPH SV Sample Event over LNAPL & Soil Sources Near-Slab Multi-Depth, Sub-Slab Near-Slab Multi-Depth, Sub-Slab Thickness of Clean Soil Overlying LNAPL Required to Attenuate Vapors, feet 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Sites Refineries Thickness of Clean Soil Overlying LNAPL Required to Attenuate Vapors, feet ~8 ft CLEAN overlying soil attenuates vapors associated with LNAPL/Soil Sources 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Sites

Reference Screening Criteria Published & Cited Values (after Lahvis & DeVaull, 2011) Database & Site Type Benzene Soil Gas Screening Level (ug/m3) Screening/Exclusion Distance (feet) Screening/Exclusion Concentration Benzene (ug/l) Other Criteria Davis, R.V. (2009, 2010) International Petroleum Vapor Database Non-detect 5 <1000 5 feet for TPH <10,000 ug/l 8 LNAPL 30 ft poorly-characterized sites Lahvis et al (2012) R.V. Davis & J. Wright (retail sites only, no refineries) 100 0 <15,000 Dissolved phase only, BTEX <75,000 ug/l 15 LNAPL McHugh et al (2010) various publications, professional judgement 10 Dissolved phase only 30 LNAPL Peargin & Kolhatkar (2011) Chevron, all sites 300 0 <1000 Wright, J. (2011) Australia & U.S. sites, all sites + refineries 15 >1000 10, 50, 100, 1000 5 <1000 30 LNAPL California various references, R.V. Davis, McHugh et al 50, 100 5 <100 no SG Oxygen measured 5 <1000 with SG Oxygen measured >4% 10 <1000 no SG Oxygen measured 30 LNAPL Indiana various references, (RV Davis 2009-2010, McHugh et al 2010) 5 <1000 no SG Oxygen requirement AFs for GW & SG 30 LNAPL Distances apply vertically & horizontally New Jersey various uncited references 5 <100 no SG Oxygen measured 5 <1000 with SG Oxygen measured >2% 10 <1000 no SG Oxygen measured 100/30 LNAPL/Gasoline Horizontal & vertical distance Wisconsin Davis, R.V., 2009, Luo et al 2009, McHugh et al, 2010 NONE 5 <1000 20 >1000 Exclusion distances apply vertically & horizontally 30 LNAPL

Screening Criteria EPA OUST PVI Guide (3-15-12 draft)

Conclusions PVI pathway not complete when following criteria apply: Dissolved Sources - 5 feet CLEAN soil overlying Benzene <1,000 ug/l, TPH <10,000 ug/l - >5 feet CLEAN soil overlying Benzene >1,000 ug/l, TPH >10,000 ug/l` LNAPL Sources - 8 feet CLEAN soil overlying top of LNAPL smear zone or soil sources Soil Sources - 5 feet CLEAN soil = TPH <100 mg/kg, PID <100 ppm-v (gasoline), <10 ppm-v (diesel) Vapor Sources - Petroleum vapors are attenuated below the receptor - If measuring soil vapor, analyze ALL COCs, O2, CO2, methane, others - Oxygen to Carbon Dioxide ratios demonstrate petroleum biodegradation

Flow chart in 3-15-12 draft EPA OUST PVI guide

Recommendations Fully characterize sites, determine full extent, degree of contamination Collect basic field data to assess PVI pathway Apply Screening/Exclusion Criteria in deciding if PVI investigation is necessary