1 / 44

Discerning Background Sources from Vapor Intrusion

Discerning Background Sources from Vapor Intrusion. Jeffrey Kurtz, Ph.D. and David Folkes, PE EnviroGroup Limited Denver Boston Albuquerque Seattle Colorado Bar Association – October 26, 2005. Proliferation of Vapor Intrusion Guidance.

Download Presentation

Discerning Background Sources from Vapor Intrusion

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Discerning Background Sources from Vapor Intrusion Jeffrey Kurtz, Ph.D. and David Folkes, PE EnviroGroup Limited Denver Boston Albuquerque Seattle Colorado Bar Association – October 26, 2005

  2. Proliferation of Vapor Intrusion Guidance • At least 14 states, as well as the EPA, have developed Vapor Intrusion Guidance in the past few years. • These documents vary widely in their approach to, and discussion of, background indoor air.

  3. New Risk Levels for 1,1-DCE and TCE • Recently the EPA, and several states, have implemented new risk levels for 1,1-DCE and TCE. • TCE is now the risk driver at many sites. • TCE is a trace to major component of many common consumer products.

  4. Consumer Product Examples • correction fluids • paints & varnishes & removers • glues, adhesives and sealants • spot removers & laundry aids • rug cleaning fluids • metal cleaners • lubricants • pesticides

  5. Approach for Separating Indoor and Subsurface Sources • Experience at several large sites led to “lines of evidence” approach for separating indoor & subsurface sources. • Accepted by CDPHE and applied at several Colorado sites.

  6. Application Lines of Evidence approach can be used to: • Identify false positives • Limit unnecessary mitigation • Limit indoor air sampling • Identify indoor air COCs • Limit continued sampling & mitigation

  7. VOC Ratio Method • Principal line of evidence relies on basic chemical properties of the chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOCs). • This line of evidence requires at least 2 chlorinated VOCs in the subsurface.

  8. VOC Chemical Properties • Relative volatility (expressed as Henry’s Law Constant). Factor of 50 range for common chlorinated VOCs. • Relative soil sorption (Koc) – similar for most chlorinated VOCs. • Relative degradability – similar for most chlorinated VOCs.

  9. Groundwater Sources • Calculate VOC ratios • Evaluate ratio trends over time • Evaluate spatial variation of ratios • Adjust for relative volatility of VOCs (Henry’s Law Constants) • Map predicted soil vapor ratios • Predict indoor air ratios and TCE concentrations

  10. Soil Vapor Sources • Calculate VOC ratios • Evaluate ratio trends over time • Evaluate spatial variation of ratios • Map measured soil vapor ratios • Predict indoor air ratios and TCE concentrations • High quality, reproducible soil vapor data essential

  11. TCE (VI) = 0.5 x DCE TCE 80 ug/m3 DCE 20 ug/m3 TCE (BG) = TCE (OBS) – TCE (VI) TCE 1000 ug/m3 DCE 2000 ug/m3 TCE = 0.5 x DCE COC Ratios (Soil Gas)

  12. Ideal Case • Denominator is a VOC with no, or very low, indoor air background (e.g. 1,1-DCE). • Indoor air concentration of denominator VOC is direct measure of vapor intrusion. • Ratio directly predicts vapor intrusion concentration of other COCs.

  13. Typical Case • Use a VOC with the lowest indoor air background as the denominator in the ratio (e.g. TCE). • Indoor air concentration of the denominator VOC is an upper limit measure of vapor intrusion. • Can estimate predicted upper limit vapor intrusion concentration of other COCs from the ratio.

  14. Case Study • A Colorado site with a large chlorinated solvent groundwater plume. • Groundwater COCs are TCE; 1,1-DCE; PCE and 1,1,1-TCA. • Hundreds of single family residences overlying the plume. • Documented vapor intrusion based on indoor air 1,1-DCE.

  15. Case Study • Change in 1,1-DCE and TCE action levels required re-evaluation of indoor air data. • Decision needed on new extent of vapor intrusion exceeding action levels. • Indoor air background TCE caused numerous “false” exceedances of action level.

  16. Case Study • Background varies on a “house-by-house” basis. • Statistics from homes outside plume and from post-mitigation indicate 15% of homes in area would exceed action level due to background. • Household chemical surveys generally fail to identify all indoor sources.

  17. Case Study • Groundwater COCs present in relatively consistent proportions spatially. • Little variation (or predictable trend) over time in TCE/DCE in groundwater. • Adjust groundwater ratios for relative volatility (Henry’s Law Constants). • Predict soil vapor TCE/DCE ratio.

  18. Predicted TCE/DCE Ratio in Soil Vapor Estimated DCE Plume Boundary (7 ug/L) Interpolation Boundary TCE/DCE > 0.5 (Henry’s Law Corrected) TCE/DCE 0.4 – 0.5 TCE/DCE 0.3 – 0.4 TCE/DCE 0.2 – 0.3 TCE/DCE 0.1 – 0.2 TCE/DCE 0.01 – 0.1

  19. Case Study • Map predicted soil vapor TCE/DCE ratio. • Compare to measured indoor air TCE/DCE ratio. • Generally excellent agreement, with some prominent exceptions due to background. • Edge of groundwater plume clearly marked.

  20. TCE / DCE Ratios in Pre Mitigation and Unmitigated Indoor Air Estimated TCE 5 µg/L Contour in Groundwater 0.01 – 0.3 TCE NOT DETECTED / DCE DETECTED 0.31 – 1.0 TCE DETECTED/ DCE NOT DETECTED 1.01 – 5.0 > 5.0 TCE AND DCE NOT DETECTED

  21. Spatial Patterns • General correlation with plume • Absolute concentrations within plume can be more variable and hard to correlate • Indoor air COC ratios often indicate anomalies

  22. Spatial Patterns (IA Ratios)

  23. TCE Source Attribution from Multi-media Ratio Comparison Predominately Vapor Intrusion Derived TCE Predominately Indoor Source (background) TCE Estimated TCE 5 µg/L Contour in Groundwater

  24. DCE > 7 ug/L DCE > 0.49 ug/m3 Correlation with GW Plume

  25. Case Study Results • TCE/DCE ratio pattern distinctly marks edge of vapor intrusion – limits indoor air sampling to define “extent”. • TCE/DCE ratio for indoor air compared to groundwater clearly shows locations with “anomalously high” background TCE. • TCE/DCE ratio allows direct determination of maximum potential vapor intrusion derived TCE.

  26. Implications • COC ratios for chlorinated VOCs can provide an accurate method to separate background from vapor intrusion. • Can use ratios from groundwater, soil vapor, or mitigation system emissions. • Useful when at least two chlorinated VOCs are present in the subsurface source.

  27. Line of EvidenceSecondary Factors • Building survey • Indoor air background databases

  28. Building Survey • Identify potential background sources • Household products • Resident activities • Options • Delay testing • Remove and test • Residual impacts?

  29. Residual Background Impacts

  30. Residual Background Impacts

  31. Background Databases • Compare IA concentrations to “typical” levels in published surveys • Concentrations within typical ranges may support other background LOE’s

  32. Databases Issues • Data sparse for many compounds • Comparability issues • Building type and use differences • Regional differences • Time period differences • Extremes often removed from databases

  33. Site-specific background • Control and/or mitigated buildings may not be available • Background study may be impractical, especially for small sites • Large number of samples required to achieve required statistical confidence

  34. Other Lines of Evidence • Radon system emission levels/ratios • Temporal patterns

  35. Radon System Emission Ratios

  36. Temporal Patterns • Requires indoor air tests over time • Post versus pre-mitigation concentrations • Change in resident • Correlation with activities

  37. Pre vs Post Mitigation

  38. Impact of Resident 33

  39. Impact of Resident 34

  40. Summary • Several lines of evidence may be needed to separate background from vapor intrusion sources of indoor air VOCs • Comparison of COC ratios in various media is often the most compelling LOE • If available, temporal and spatial patterns are also useful lines of evidence

  41. Conclusions • VOC ratios can provide more definitive answers than assumed sub-slab to indoor air attenuation factors or the JE Model. • VOC ratios can discriminate background on a “house-by-house” basis. • VOC ratios can prevent the need for “background sampling”.

  42. Information Resources • www.envirogroup.com • Vapor Intrusion Newsletter signup • Links by state and by topic • jkurtz@envirogroup.com • Questions

More Related