Vapor Intrusion or Process Emissions – Help Me, Help You

Written by Stephen R. Henshaw, President & CEO, EnviroForensics

As seen in the August 2014 issue of Cleaner & Launderer

PDF Version

I’ve talked a lot about vapor intrusion over the past few years. Vapor intrusion occurs when volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in soil and groundwater off-gas and migrate into occupied buildings and store fronts. The need to conduct vapor intrusion sampling is often times the result of VOCs in the soil and groundwater. Typically a vapor intrusion assessment will include collecting sub-slab soil gas samples along with the collection of indoor air samples. This paired sampling, as it is often times referred to, is designed to show two things: 1) whether or not there is contamination in the subsurface soil gas sample that could create a vapor intrusion issue; and 2) whether or not there are concentrations of VOCs in the breathing air that could be attributable to the subsurface contamination.

I want to tell you this because if it is determined that vapor intrusion exists and VOCs are migrating from the subsurface into occupied building structures, you as the responsible party for the subsurface impacts, would also be responsible for mitigating those vapors. Additionally, the identification of a vapor intrusion issue in buildings not owned by you could lead to the potential for third party litigation should it be determined that people have been breathing contaminated air.

If vapor intrusion is identified, the first thing you will wonder is whether or not the results are accurate and valid. Because the stakes are high when it comes to the identification of a vapor intrusion issue, it is important for you to know what things can affect the sampling results.

The most important thing to understand about what I am telling you is that the results of your vapor intrusion assessment matter. The samples collected must be representative of the actual conditions. As you know, the allowable levels of airborne perchloroethylene (perc) and other VOCs inside an operating dry cleaning operation are regulated by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) and those acceptable levels are about 100 parts per million by volume for acceptable exposure to a worker over an 8 hour workday. Conversely, the acceptable indoor air levels for occupants in a neighboring commercial suite or in a nearby house are regulated by the state or federal environmental agencies and these acceptable levels are in the low part per billion by volume range. To illustrate the discrepancy, in terms of volume, the acceptable OSHA standard would be equivalent to having a hot tub of red colored water introduced into an Olympic sized pool, while the acceptable level for indoor air exposure in a residential dwelling would be equivalent to a red colored water in a small Visine bottle introduced into an Olympic sized pool.

This huge discrepancy between the acceptable limits of VOCs in the breathing zone could result in your dry cleaning operations affecting the vapor intrusion assessment results. That is to say that your dry cleaning operations could contribute to the VOCs detected in outdoor air or indoor air samples of neighboring structures. That’s right, your very legal business operations could be adversely affecting the results of the vapor intrusion assessment, even indicating a risk to building occupants when one doesn’t exist.

Now that you understand that, you can do the following things to minimize this from happening:

Always work with qualified experts. Just because someone tells you they are an environmental consultant does not mean they have the qualifications to hold themselves out as a vapor intrusion expert.  There are specific safeguards and sampling strategies that a vapor intrusion expert will employ to avoid confusing sample results.  They will be able to confidently tell whether perc vapors in air are coming from the ground, from off-gassing chemicals inside the building being assessed, or from your operations.

Ask the expert what measures they are taking to ensure that the samples will not be cross-contaminated or compromised from the process operations.  Ask the expert whether they have conducted an audit of the cleaning products being used in all buildings being assessed for vapor intrusion, so they are noted as a potential contributor to the air quality results.

If you are in a shared strip mall, identify any openings you see between your suite where perc is being used and the neighboring suites. Such openings that allow indoor air mixing could include piping runs between the suites (e.g. gas lines, water lines, heating and cooling duct work, etc.) or could be a common sewer and cleanouts underlying your space and the neighboring spaces.

Make sure you take steps to minimize your process emissions.

In understanding how process emissions can affect a vapor intrusion assessment, I am reminded of the movie Jerry Maquire. In the movie, Jerry is frustrated because he is working hard to promote his star client and standout wide receiver, Rod Tidwell. He pleads with Rod saying, “Help me, help you.” Sometimes we feel this way, because we are working our tails off to make sure that the data we are collecting is accurate, but the data can be skewed if the process emissions, even the emissions coming off dry cleaned garments can impact indoor air samples. Remember, the indoor air in an operating dry cleaner is regulated under OSHA, while the air in the building sharing a common wall will be governed under state and federal “environmental” regulations.

In order to help me, you can make sure that you tell the expert conducting the vapor intrusion sampling if and at what time you are venting air from inside your business that could contain perc vapors. Vents do not have to operate all of the time and during sampling particularly they should be turned off when the doors to your machine are opened, or when clothes are removed and handled, which is when perc may be off-gassing from garments. Make sure that you maintain stills and misters and that this maintenance includes minimizing emissions by having carbon replaced routinely as specified in the owners manual. Make sure that spills, no matter how small, are promptly cleaned up and that rags and sorbent pads used to wipe up spills are placed in drums.  Make sure that the lids are placed on all drums of waste and that the lids are secured. Keep an inventory of all products you are using that contain chlorinated solvents, because those are the constituents that are being analyzed for as part of the vapor intrusion assessment.  Such products would certainly include spotting agents.

Understanding the above information will benefit you because you as the operator are the true expert in how your business operates and the different ways in which emissions containing VOCs can leave your premises. Knowing that your operations could influence indoor air and sub-slab soil gas samples can help ensure that the data being collected and generated as part of a vapor intrusion assessment will be representative of the contribution from the subsurface and not from your processes.

Help me, help you by keeping your business operations tidy and as odor free as possible. Tackle unnecessary emissions of VOCs and this in turn will help your vapor mitigation experts collect high quality defensible data during their vapor intrusion assessment.

Vapor Intrusion – A Concern, but an Easy Fix

Written by Stephen R. Henshaw, President and CEO of EnviroForensics & PolicyFind

As Seen in the January 2014 issue of the Cleaner & Launderer

PDF Version

Those of you who have read my past articles, have heard me speak, or have ever looked at EnviroForensics’ website, know that we specialize in helping dry cleaners work through the regulatory and insurance maze of investigating and remediating soil and groundwater impacts caused by the release of percholoroethene (PCE).  The EnviroForensics team takes pride in helping to solve environmental problems for the dry cleaning industry; and over the past 18 years, we have helped more than 400 dry cleaners.

So much has changed since I started working with dry cleaners.  The laws and regulations enforced by the regulatory agencies, the cleanup technology, and the perceived human health exposure of vapors, known as vapor intrusion, are continually changing and evolving.   It seems that the only constants are that dry cleaners are targets and continue to be blamed when PCE is found in soil and groundwater. PCE is considered a risk to public health, contaminated soil and groundwater makes property transactions difficult to complete, and cleaning up PCE in soil and groundwater is expensive.  Oh, and old CGL insurance policies continue to be one of the saving graces for dry cleaners when faced with the daunting reality that they have been named as a party responsible for PCE contamination. I first used historical CGL policies to pay for environmental investigations, remediations, and legal fees in 1990.   The process worked then and it continues to work today.

While it is not always a cake walk to use CGL policies, our firm has garnered more experience than any other environmental consulting company in bringing old policies to bear on the environmental problems that small business owners and family members face.  As the insurance laws change over time, and are different from state to state, and while the insurance industry continues to react and respond to these changes, we have had to be nimble and ever changing in the way we approach the use of historical insurance.  That’s why we work with the most talented and knowledgeable legal counsel and find the most talented and motivated environmental scientists, engineers and hydrogeologists to work with us. Today, when more and more dry cleaners and former dry cleaners are being targeted because of new standards concerning indoor air and Vapor Intrusion (VI), we are focusing on developing the highest standards for measuring and mitigating the off-gases from PCE.  There’s a new surge of environmental enforcement that is not going away; and last month a national standard for lending institutions was formally enacted as law which will put more focus on vapor intrusion as an element of the property due diligence and transaction requirements.

We have experts on our staff like Jeff Carnahan and Megan Hamilton, who deal with vapor intrusion issues every day and who have worked tirelessly with vapor mitigation contractors to develop and implement cost effective vapor mitigation measures to thwart the threat posed by vapor intrusion into residential and commercial buildings.  Anyone who has read those articles, or other information about VI, understands that it can have an impact on neighboring businesses, schools and residences in the area around your dry cleaner or former dry cleaning site.  And while many dry cleaners are or will be faced with vapor intrusion issues, mitigating these vapors is a relatively inexpensive process; but there are protocols and standards that must be followed and experience in this field is critical.   Beware of the cheap radon mitigation contractor, because vapors emanating from PCE and other volatile organic compounds are typically more complicated to abate than what has been the standard practice for radon gas mitigation. From this point forward, almost every environmental investigation is going to include a vapor intrusion assessment and testing of sub-slab or indoor air.  We live in a litigious society. It’s always only a matter of time before individuals who fear perhaps that their health, the health of their family, or the value of their property might be impacted by neighboring dry cleaning sites, would consider seeking legal remedy.  It is important to protect yourself and your business by understanding some possible options. Choose your consultant and your legal counsel wisely.

In my next article, I will outline the essential points in a site closure strategy for your dry cleaning site that addresses vapor intrusion issues, which when addressed, can protect you and your heirs. Like having a successful business or good health, there is no guarantee that your environmental issue will be smooth sailing.  No one knows going into an investigation what will be found or how big the problem might be.  From experience, I can tell you that more times than not the problem is manageable and with property strategy a practical solution can be achieved. If you need someone to bounce your thoughts off, we are always a phone call or email away.  Contact us and we will answer your questions and give you our opinions.  Don’t be a stranger.  We are the experts and have been helping dry cleaners and serving the dry cleaning industry for 18 years.

DEALING WITH THE PERCEPTION OF RISK; THE VALUE OF HAVING AN EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

Written by Stephen Henshaw, P.G., President & CEO, EnviroForensics
As seen in the October 2013 issue of Cleaner and Launderer

Over the years, environmental regulations have gotten more and more restrictive.  The permissible levels of chlorinated solvents in groundwater, soil and indoor air continue to be pushed lower.  While the acceptable level of PCE in indoor air was actually increased by the federal government, the acceptable level of TCE (a breakdown product of PCE) was drastically lowered, which has resulted in an increase of Sites posing a public health risk.  It is the vapors, which contain volatile organic compounds from releases of cleaning solvents or gasoline, which is posing the greatest risk to people living or working near the Sites where the contaminants were released.  The regulatory requirement to evaluate the fate and distribution of these contaminated vapors into homes, apartments, schools, and businesses is raising the publics concern and could create the perception of risk and with those perceptions associated concerns and fears of health effects.

Continue reading “DEALING WITH THE PERCEPTION OF RISK; THE VALUE OF HAVING AN EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATIONS PLAN”

VAPOR INTRUSION CAN POSE SIGNIFICANT LIABILITIES; TAKE STEPS TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES

Written by Steve Henshaw, PG, President & CEO, EnviroForensics

As seen in the August 2013 issue of Cleaner & Launderer

Download PDF

The field of vapor intrusion is far from being considered a sound science.  I want to tell you this because the stakes are very high when it comes to potential risks to human health from vapors comprised of volatile organic compounds (VOCs).  The emerging field of vapor intrusion is not only rapidly evolving and the risk levels are continuing to shift and change, but also the potential liabilities associated with vapor intrusion exposure can be very expensive and could damage a company’s reputation.  When it comes to vapor intrusion exposure issues, you and your team of scientists and lawyers need to be in front of the problem, proactively dealing with results and developing a communication plan and strategy of ensuring that appropriate steps are being taken to protect people from risk and harm. Continue reading “VAPOR INTRUSION CAN POSE SIGNIFICANT LIABILITIES; TAKE STEPS TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES”

PREFERENTIAL PATHWAYS; UNDERGROUND PIPES AND UTILITY LINES CAN BE CONDUITS FOR THE MIGRATION OF CONTAMINANTS

Written by Stephen R. Henshaw, P.G., President & CEO, EnviroForensics

As seen in the March 2013 issue of Cleaner & Launderer

PDF Version

You can imagine that if wastewater is discharged into a sewer line with cracks in it that the wastewater could contaminate the soil and groundwater.  After all, sewer pipes can be very old and made of a variety of material such as transite, clay, concrete, plastic, or steel.  Of course, leaks are not uncommon in sewer lines.  Sewer lines can crack or break, they can corrode, or the couplings, where pipes are fitted together, can leak and result in “point source” areas of contamination.  Sags and low points are common when a sewer line goes underneath streets and structures.  These low areas can result in sediment and dense chemical liquids pooling in these sag points, resulting in contamination source areas.  Sewer pipes can become blocked and clogged and result in backups that can create points of leakage. 

Historically speaking, sewer pipes were not designed to be leak proof.  The first sewers were essentially brick lined tunnels.  Later, short sections of clay pipes were coupled together to create long lengths of sewer.  The clay sections consisted of a male end and a female (bell) end and the lengths of clay pipe were coupled together.  Gaskets were hopefully placed in the bell end to minimize the leakage, but of course those gaskets would degrade over time.  Transite pipes and concrete pipes similarly had male and female ends and were coupled together.  Continue reading “PREFERENTIAL PATHWAYS; UNDERGROUND PIPES AND UTILITY LINES CAN BE CONDUITS FOR THE MIGRATION OF CONTAMINANTS”