/
State of Rhode Island State of Rhode Island

State of Rhode Island - PowerPoint Presentation

phoebe-click
phoebe-click . @phoebe-click
Follow
449 views
Uploaded On 2015-09-26

State of Rhode Island - PPT Presentation

Department of Environmental Management Office of Waste Management Policy Memo 201401 Guidelines for the Management of Historically Agricultural Properties for Future Use as Open Space andor Recreational Land ID: 140932

ppm nursery crops rdec nursery ppm rdec crops samples sites site agricultural 6not analyzedorchard cdec 141 rule chlordane 130 meet requirements 413

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "State of Rhode Island" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

State of Rhode IslandDepartment of Environmental ManagementOffice of Waste ManagementPolicy Memo 2014-01Guidelines for the Management of Historically Agricultural Properties for Future Use as Open Space and/or Recreational Land

Historical Agricultural Use PolicySlide2

Several other states have addressed this issue (NJ, OR, CA, CT)Intent: provide streamlined, practical, and economically feasible options for managing historically agricultural properties while simultaneously maintaining the Department’s overall mission of protecting human health and the environment.Common HurdlesSite SizeWide-spread application of pesticides resulted in jurisdictional levels

BackgroundSlide3

Soil sampling data from 15 appropriate sites on fileSample depth 0 – 1’ bgsApplicable ContaminantsArsenicLeadDieldrinChlordane

Data AnalysisSlide4

SiteSite Size

# Samples# >RDEC

# >I/CDEC

Avg.

(ppm)

Range

(ppm)

Orchard

1

93393166.59ND – 674Orchard 2106Not AnalyzedOrchard 3507NoneNone46.36ND – 138Orchard 413.615NoneNone14.686 – 46Orchard 511.6Not AnalyzedOrchard 66.32NoneNone67.655.3 – 130Row Crops 7179NoneNone20.28.5 – 28.9 Row Crops 85728NoneNone18.2ND – 38Row Crops 94.57NoneNone11.18 – 23Orn./Nursery 1014014NoneNone11.95.3 – 22 Orn./Nursery 11813NoneNone9.142.7 – 20Orn./Nursery 121.4136None1627.2 – 390Orn./Nursery 130.592NoneNone3819 – 57Orn./Nursery 141.6Not AnalyzedUnknown Ag. 156.35NoneNone2319.6 – 25.4ND (non-detect) results evaluated at one half the laboratory MDL/MRL value

Lead

(RDEC – 150ppm, I/CDEC – 500ppm)Slide5

SiteSite Size

# Samples# > 7ppm

% > 7ppm

Avg.

(ppm)

Range (ppm)

NJD per Rule 12.03

Rule 12.04 options

Orchard

193341235%9.19ND – 72.112.04 AOrchard 210633212939%7.63ND – 62.412.04 AOrchard 350655382%30.1ND – 13312.04 BOrchard 413.615320%4.821.2 – 21NJD1,2Orchard 511.64924%2.920.76 – 16NJD1Orchard 66.3241875%48.80.85 – 140Row Crops 71730620%5.722.9 – 12.7NJDRow Crops 85719737%6.321.6 – 1312.04 ARow Crops 94.51318%3.61.4 – 9.3NJD2Orn./Nursery 101401417%4.141.7 – 7.1NJD2Orn./Nursery 11832722%5.16ND – 21NJD1Orn./Nursery 121.4131185%11.32.8 – 2312.04 AOrn./Nursery 130.596725

37%

7.96ND – 3612.04 AOrn./Nursery 141.6282693%9.716 – 1812.04 AUnknown Ag. 156.311nonenone4.952.2 – 6.6NJD21 – Site would be non-jurisdictional per Rule 12.03 with “hot-spot” removal2 – Site does not meet the minimum sample requirements for Rule 12.03ND (non-detect) results evaluated at one half the laboratory MDL/MRL Value

Arsenic

(RDEC – 7 ppm, I/CDEC – 7 ppm)Slide6

SiteSite Size

# Samples# >RDEC

# >I/CDEC

Avg.

(ppm)

Range

(ppm)

Orchard

1

9334910.048ND – 0.42Orchard 2106Not AnalyzedOrchard 35083None0.049ND – 0.152Orchard 413.68420.42ND – 1.7Orchard 511.6Not AnalyzedOrchard 66.32017120.5290.004 – 2.6Row Crops 7178NoneNoneNDNDRow Crops 857266None0.021ND – 0.1Row Crops 94.513NoneNoneNDNDOrn./Nursery 1014014910.099ND – 0.51Orn./Nursery 11822NoneNone0.002ND – 0.024Orn./Nursery 121.493None0.034ND – 0.17Orn./Nursery 130.59Not AnalyzedOrn./Nursery 141.6Not AnalyzedUnknown Ag. 156.3Not AnalyzedND (non-detect) results evaluated at one half the laboratory MDL/MRL valueDieldrin (RDEC – 0.04 ppm, I/CDEC – 0.4 ppm)Slide7

SiteSite Size

# Samples# >RDEC

# >I/CDEC

Avg.

(ppm)

Range

(ppm)

Orchard

1

9334NoneNoneNDNDOrchard 2106Not AnalyzedOrchard 3507NoneNoneNDNDOrchard 413.641None0.932ND – 1.3Orchard 511.6Not AnalyzedOrchard 66.3Not AnalyzedRow Crops 7178NoneNoneNDNDRow Crops 857264None0.292ND – 1.6Row Crops 94.513NoneNoneNDNDOrn./Nursery 1014014NoneNone0.046ND – 0.32Orn./Nursery 118282None0.179ND – 1.6Orn./Nursery 121.41NoneNoneNDNDOrn./Nursery 130.59Not AnalyzedOrn./Nursery 141.6Not AnalyzedUnknown Ag. 156.3Not AnalyzedND (non-detect) results evaluated at one half the laboratory MDL/MRL valueChlordane (RDEC – 0.5 ppm, I/CDEC – 4.4 ppm)Slide8

LeadOf 154 samples, only 6% exceeded RDECJust 1 sample exceeded I/CDECArsenicApprox. half of the sites could meet the requirements to be considered NJD for arsenic per Rule 12.03, though three would need limited “hot-spot” removalThe remainder of the sites could use the remedial options under Rules 12.04 A or 12.04 B

Conclusions from Data AnalysisSlide9

Dieldrin10 sites sampled for dieldrinDetected above RDEC in 31% of samples, 10% >I/CDECWhen detected, site wide averages of dieldrin seemed to hover around the RDECChlordane

Sampled for on 9 sites, detected above RDEC on 3No I/CDEC exceedancesAvg. chlordane levels were below RDEC on all 9 sites

Conclusions from Data AnalysisSlide10

Vast majority of exceedances were considered “low-level” exceedancesAverage contaminant concentrations were lower than expectedAg policy inspired by Rule 12Other Findings..Slide11

Sites or portions of sites where pesticides were historically applied and only COCs are lead, arsenic, dieldrin, and/or chlordaneEnd use:Undeveloped open space (not for recreational use)Passive RecreationActive Recreation

ApplicabilitySlide12

Spills or other activities that would constitute a “release” under CERCLA“Hot-spots” or concentrated areas of the Ag COCs attributed to spills, leaks, or improper disposalAreas not utilized as agricultural fieldsAreas that have been redevelopedAny contaminants other than lead, arsenic, dieldrin, or chlordane Not Applicable To:Slide13

Notification to the Department Conduct Limited SI for Ag COCs if:Phase I ESA demonstrates the site or portion of the site subject to the policy was used only for agricultural purposes.Minimum sampling requirements are metEnd result will be a No Further Action Letter relative to the Agricultural Contaminants of ConcernSubmit Agricultural Property SIR/RAWPProgram Letter Public Notice RDL/RAL

ProcessSlide14

Protocol:Sample for Ag COCsDiscrete grab samples from 0-1’ bgsLocated within the applicable areasFrequency:1 acre – 8 samples minimum

1 to 5 acres – 8 samples + 2 per additional acre over 1st acre

Over 5 acres – 16 samples + 1 per additional acre over 5

th

acre

Sampling RequirementsSlide15

ELUR/SMP restricting the site or portions of the site to specific useMust meet specific conditions depending on end useFor example: A passive recreation area must meet the following conditions with respect to chlordane:No individual sample shall be greater than 4.4 ppm (I/CDEC)No greater than 25% of samples shall exceed 0.5 ppm (RDEC)The average chlordane concentration shall be below 0.5 ppm (RDEC)

Remedial OptionsSlide16

Offers an alternative to the standard capping remedial approach for large sites that contain lower levels of the Ag COCs as a result of years of proper pesticide useAllows for averaging of soil dataCombined Ag SIR/RAWP expedites the process to obtain an NFACan be used on entire or portions of former Ag sitesAlternative to Residential or I/C reuseBenefits of Ag PolicySlide17

RISEP Legislative/Regulatory Sub-CommitteePatrick Cavanagh, URI – InternMatt DeStefano & Leo Hellested, RIDEM/OWMAcknowledgements