1 / 24

Remediation Standards Key Perspectives

Current Status of RSR Revisions. Commissioner Gina McCarthy announced on May 26, 2009 that DEP is pulling the plug on its efforts to revise the RSRsDespite over 4.5 years of effort, DEP indicated that the State received only negative feedback with no support from any constituency groups . DEP Goals for RSR Revisions.

theodora
Download Presentation

Remediation Standards Key Perspectives

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. Remediation Standards – Key Perspectives ALTA Environmental Corporation Kelly Meloy, V.P., LEP 860-537-2582; kelly@altaenv.com

    2. Current Status of RSR Revisions Commissioner Gina McCarthy announced on May 26, 2009 that DEP is pulling the plug on its efforts to revise the RSRs Despite over 4.5 years of effort, DEP indicated that the State received only negative feedback with no support from any constituency groups

    3. DEP Goals for RSR Revisions Provide simplification/clarification Streamline (e.g., more self-implementing provisions) Increase certainty and flexibility in process Revise based on lessons learned Update technical foundation of RSRs (e.g., VC, early childhood exposure)

    4. Greatest Areas of RSR Concern Applicability of RSRs Numeric criteria – modified toxicity factors, ceiling limits, more conservative approach for early childhood exposure (RDEC, RVC), overly conservative DAFs VC – deletion of self-implementing provisions, site-specific flexibility and stats, with overly conservative model; SWPC impaired waters Development of criteria for all APS for Commissioner review and approval Urban fill and asphalt

    5. New DEP-Proposed Approaches Fast-Tracked Cleanups – for any LEP-lead sites in existing DEP remedial programs where meet certain criteria Presumptive Remedy for Selected Brownfields Sites – for abandoned sites in GB areas where meet certain criteria

    6. Fast-Tracked Cleanups Can volunteer to engage in this process if want to get fast-tracked DEP approvals (e.g., for ELUR, engineered control) BUT must use draft proposed RSR numeric criteria (i.e., where more stringent than existing criteria, and where proposed for add’l substances) AND must use such criteria for entire site

    7. Fast-Tracked Cleanups (cont’d) Must complete full site characterization, including screening level ecological risk assessment Will agree to 1 year post-verification audit window (with same exceptions as in current law) Can get covenant not to sue (plan to propose add’l guidance for this)

    8. What DEP Hopes to Achieve? Some success stories using draft proposed criteria Build momentum towards making proposed RSR revisions in a couple years Prove that the draft proposed numeric criteria are appropriate Are they appropriate, and will this voluntary process demonstrate that?

    9. Presumptive Remedy for Selected Brownfields Sites Narrow definition initially – abandoned sites with no responsible parties Goal to increase timeliness and certainty for these brownfields sites DEP to propose guidance on approach for public review and comment in approximately 30 days

    10. Presumptive Remedy (cont’d) Complete Phase I and targeted Brownfields investigation upfront Make sure no complexities precluding use (e.g., PCBs, ecol. risk, APA, tricky subordination agreements) Evaluate groundwater flow directions and quality leaving site, evaluate status of USTs, and presence of NAPL

    11. Presumptive Remedy (cont’d) Maintain soil beneath buildings as inaccessible and environmentally isolated Outside building, can make inaccessible or use engineered controls (not “light”?) Installation/operation of SSVS beneath all buildings on site “No net impervious cover” – DEP doesn’t want to expedite paving of America

    12. Presumptive Remedy (cont’d) Still complete full site-wide investigations but over longer term BUT get DEP signoff on presumptive remedy early on (e.g., pre-transfer to developer) May later expand universe of brownfields sites which can use this approach (e.g., where RPs agree to forego litigation)

    13. Presumptive Remedy (cont’d) Will consider using this approach for a portion of a site, with traditional approach used for rest of site Where brownfields redevelopment being completed in phases Where significant portion of site was undeveloped historically – capping/SSVS would be going overboard

    14. PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE RSRs – Legal Perspectives CBIA Environment 2009 Conference June 10, 2009 Presented by Doug Pelham, Esq., P.E. Cohn Birnbaum & Shea P.C.

    15. Section 22a-133k-1(b)(1) Applicability RSRs do not dictate when but what: if remediation must be performed, the RSRs establish the “clean” standards. RSRs currently apply to remediation performed pursuant to: Voluntary Remediation (22a-133x and 22a-133y). Transfer Act (22a-134). Underground Storage Tank programs.

    16. Section 22a-133k-1(b)(1) Applicability RSR revisions would extend applicability to remediation of unpermitted solid waste landfills under 22a-208a(c). RSRs apply to 3 media: soil, surface water and groundwater. Revisions would extend applicability to remediation of polluted sediment.

    17. Site Characterization Revised RSRs reference the Site Characterization Guidance Document (September 2007). Regulation by guidance not in accordance with rule of law (Administrative Procedures Act). DEP does have the authority to regulate how site characterizations are performed (see 22a-134).

    18. Certainty of Prior Remediation New Section 22a-133k-1(b)(6) says if remediation was completed to the standards of the day, DEP will not second-guess the approval. DEP retains authority to revisit a closed site if it poses a hazard to human health or the environment.

    19. Grandfathering Window Generally, a 2 year window is provided to complete remediation of a site under the existing standards. In order to be eligible: Investigation complete. Public notice published. Remediation initiated. Notification sent to DEP.

    20. Grandfathering Window (Cont.) Eligibility (cont.): Soil remediation must be completed within 24 months of effective date. No groundwater used for drinking without treatment. Vapor intrusion control measures installed in buildings. If requirements not met, then new groundwater standards apply. Grandfathering problems: Completion of remediation many times requires DEP approval, which can take time. No mechanism for extensions. No allowance for audit time.

    21. New Section 22a-133k-1(f) Additional Remediation Revisions allow DEP to require remediation to abate an aesthetic impairment of groundwater. No standard given for what constitutes an “aesthetic impairment.” Revisions appear to keep existing requirement to perform an Ecological Risk Assessment on a case-by-case basis.

    22. Ecological Risk Assessments (“ERAs”) Proposed RSRs add definition of ERA that includes “Connecticut Guidance for Ecological Risk Assessments.” EPA guidance available. Connecticut guidance is under development. More consultants are including ERAs as a standard part of site characterization.

    23. Sediment Sediment has been included in Transfer Act definition of “Remediate” since 1995 revisions, and is part of the Form III certification. DEP believes sediments have always been required to be investigated and remediated under the Transfer Act.

    24. Sediment (Cont.) Notwithstanding, DEP has not provided guidance, and consultants have not addressed sediment because the RSRs do not contain sediment standards. Sediment definition added to RSR Revisions, included in definition of “Release Area,” and added to Applicability section.

    25. Questions

More Related