Overview of state approaches to vapor intrusion: 2018

被引:16
作者
Eklund, Bart [1 ]
Beckley, Lila [2 ]
Rago, Rich [3 ]
机构
[1] AECOM, 9400 Amberglen Blvd, Austin, TX 78729 USA
[2] GSI Environm Inc, Austin, TX USA
[3] Haley & Aldrich Inc, Rocky Hill, CT USA
来源
REMEDIATION-THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP COSTS TECHNOLOGIES & TECHNIQUES | 2018年 / 28卷 / 04期
关键词
D O I
10.1002/rem.21573
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Regulatory requirements for the evaluation of vapor intrusion vary significantly among states. For site owners and responsible parties that have sites in different regulatory jurisdictions, one challenge is to know and understand how the requirements or expectations for vapor intrusion differ from one jurisdiction to the next. Differences in requirements can make it difficult to manage sites in a consistent manner across jurisdictions. Eklund, Folkes, etal. (2007, February, Environmental Manager, 10-14) published an overview of state guidance for vapor intrusion in 2007 that provided a detailed summary of pathway screening values and other key vapor intrusion policies. An update by Eklund, Beckley, etal. (2012, Remediation, 22, 7-20) was published in 2012, which expanded the evaluation to additional states. Since that time, numerous states have substantially revised their guidance and some states that did not have vapor intrusion-specific guidance have issued new guidance. This article provides an update to the 2012 study. For each state, the review includes tabulations of the types of screening values included (e.g., groundwater, soil, soil gas, indoor air) and the screening values for selected chemicals that commonly drive vapor intrusion investigations (i.e., trichloroethylene [TCE], tetrachloroethylene, and benzene) along with other compounds of potential interest. In addition, for each state, the article summarizes a number of key policy decisions that are important for the investigation of vapor intrusion including: distance screening criteria, default subsurface to indoor air attenuation factors, mitigation criteria, and policies for evaluation of short-term TCE exposure.
引用
收藏
页码:23 / 35
页数:13
相关论文
共 14 条
  • [1] Eklund B., 2007, OVERVIEW STATE APPRO, P10
  • [2] Overview of State Approaches to Vapor Intrusion
    Eklund, Bart
    Beckley, Lila
    Yates, Vivian
    McHugh, Thomas
    [J]. REMEDIATION-THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP COSTS TECHNOLOGIES & TECHNIQUES, 2012, 22 (04): : 7 - 20
  • [3] Identification of Alternative Vapor Intrusion Pathways Using Controlled Pressure Testing, Soil Gas Monitoring, and Screening Model Calculations
    Guo, Yuanming
    Holton, Chase
    Luo, Hong
    Dahlen, Paul
    Gorder, Kyle
    Dettenmaier, Erik
    Johnson, Paul C.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2015, 49 (22) : 13472 - 13482
  • [4] ITRC, 2014, 61 ITRC
  • [5] Vapor Intrusion Screening at Petroleum UST Sites
    Lahvis, Matthew A.
    Hers, Ian
    Davis, Robin V.
    Wright, Jackie
    DeVaull, George E.
    [J]. GROUND WATER MONITORING AND REMEDIATION, 2013, 33 (02) : 53 - 67
  • [6] Evidence of a sewer vapor transport pathway at the USEPA vapor intrusion research duplex
    McHugh, Thomas
    Beckley, Lila
    Sullivan, Terry
    Lutes, Chris
    Truesdale, Robert
    Uppencamp, Rob
    Cosky, Brian
    Zimmerman, John
    Schumacher, Brian
    [J]. SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2017, 598 : 772 - 779
  • [7] New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), 2018, VAP INTR TECHN GUID
  • [8] Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management, 2017, LAND REC PROGR TECHN
  • [9] Rago R. J., 2017, P 28 ANN INT C SOIL
  • [10] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002, FED REGISTER, V67, P71169