GROUND-WATER RECLASSIFICATION CAN CUT CLEANUP COSTS

 

By Robert F. Good, Jr., CPG, Associate,
Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc., Trumbull, CT

The cost and duration of soil and ground-water remediation efforts in Connecticut depend in large part on how the site ground water has been classified by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). What owners of contaminated property often do not realize is that under revised rules promulgated in 1996, they may be able to change their ground-water classification by demonstrating to the DEP that such reclassification would be appropriate and that certain specified safeguards can be met. Such an action could significantly lower cleanup costs, shorten the remediation process and, in some cases, facilitate property transfer.
   The DEP has developed specific numeric remediation standards for soil and ground-water contamination. Unilateral criteria are in place that protect current uses and prevent direct exposure to contaminants. The most stringent cleanup goals have been reserved for “GA” classified ground-water areas which are within the influence of existing or potential private/public water-supply wells. Less stringent criteria have been established for “GB” ground waters which are within historically urbanized or industrial areas where public water-supply services are available.
   The ground-water classification boundaries are shown on maps that were developed by the state in the late 1970's and early 1980's. The original designations, which were based on DEP records with review and comment by individual municipalities, classified about 7 percent of the state’s ground waters as GB. Recognizing that the original GB boundaries may no have fully encompassed urban and industrial areas with public water supplies, the DEP revised its ground-water quality regulations in March 1996 to make it possible for landowners to apply for a ground-water reclassification.
   For owners whose sites meet the reclassification criteria, the new regulations offer a valuable opportunity to save costs and reduce long-term environmental monitoring obligations. Reclassification, where appropriate, can improve the marketability of industrial properties by lowering the high bar of remedial compliance and relieving the property owner of environmental encumbrances.

Is Reclassification Appropriate?
  Whenever an effort is made to remediate a property or facilitate the transfer of a contaminated property one of the first tasks is to define the compliance standards in relation to the ground-water classification. For sites in GA areas an initial review would include obtaining the necessary data to determine if ground-water reclassification is a viable option.
   Recently, for example, an environmental assessment was performed for a property in Bethel which had been used as a machine shop from 1964 to 1996. The subject property and the adjacent properties were located in an industrial zone which included several residential properties. The area was serviced by public water, although three residential properties still used private wells; contrary to a town ordinance.
   The DEP ground-water classification maps split the subject property into a GA portion and a GB portion, with the boundary line running directly through the machine shop. The boundaries were apparently drawn on the basis of presumed ground-water flows in the area. The ground water beneath the GA portion of the site flowed to a wetland area which discharged to a B-class stream and GB ground-water area.
   A ground-water sample from the GA-classified portion of the site contained chlorinated volatile organic compounds at concentrations that exceeded both GA and GB standards. However, it was determined that compliance with GB standards could be demonstrated by calculating site specific numeric criteria as allowed in the DEP regulations.
   Active remediation to achieve GA compliance beneath the eastern portion of the site would have been costly and protracted, while a natural attenuation option would have required routine monitoring over a long period of time. Reclassifying the ground water was not only preferable from an economic standpoint, but made environmental sense as well.
   For one thing, the investigation showed that contamination was limited to a small area of the property and was not migrating off the site. Sampling of the surface water in the wetlands, moreover, showed that no applicable water-quality standards were exceeded. Also significant was the fact that the surrounding area was already impacted by industry, with releases recorded on at least three neighboring properties.

Meeting Appropriate Standards
  The reclassification procedures set forth in the March 1996 revisions to Connecticut’s Ground-Water Quality Standard GW-8 require an applicant to demonstrate, initially, that a lower classification will not prevent the attainment of adjacent surface-water quality goals or present unacceptable health risks, and that any person within or down gradient of the reclassified area will be provided with an adequate public water supply.
   The applicant must also show at least one of the following: (1) that the ground water is polluted as a result of intense urban, commercial or industrial development occurring prior to 1981 and that the hydrologic conditions of the area are not suitable for the development of a public water supply; or (2) that the ground water is polluted and cannot feasibly be remediated to drinking-water quality; or (3) that there is some overriding social or economic justification for the reclassification and which is supported by the affected municipality.
   Although not sited in regulation, the DEP also requires that the proposed reclassification area be contiguous with or in very close proximity to an existing GB area. They have stated on several occasions that the intent of GW-8 is not to establish numerous GB islands but to redefine previously designated GB boundaries. In the case of the Bethel property, site sampling demonstrated that the ground-water plume was not affecting the nearby surface waters. Low concentrations of chlorinated solvents, below the drinking-water standard, were discovered in the neighboring private water-supply well. This health risk was mitigated by connecting the residence to public water; at the applicant’s expense. The DEP agreed that the other private wells, which were already in a GB area, would not be impacted by the plume so that reclassification did not present a risk to the public health. Because of the local ordinance mandating connection to the public water supply in this area the applicant was relieved of meeting the “adequate public water supply” clause relative to these residences.
   The proposed reclassification area was hydrogeologically unsuitable for the development of a public water-supply well due to the relatively thin stratified drift deposits; less than 20 feet thick. Moreover, the area was serviced by public water.
   Finally, in this case it was not possible to say exactly when the contamination occurred since the machine shop was in operation from 1964 to 1996. The fact that it was in operation since the 1960's, coupled with the absence of any current, identifiable source of contamination, was sufficient to satisfy the “contamination resulted from activities prior to 1981" clause.
   Getting Regulatory Approval
  Before filing a formal application a meeting was held with the DEP to make sure the reclassification passed the “gut check”. When they agreed that the boundaries appeared to be in need of retooling, the application was filed and eventually approved after a public hearing. Property owners within the proposed reclassification area were notified by the applicant and the DEP prior to the public hearing; although their approval was not a stipulation of final DEP approval. The entire process from start to finish took about 4 months to complete. Currently the DEP accepts applications on a semi-annual basis, in June and December.
   After approval the focus of the site investigation shifted to demonstrating compliance with the less stringent GB criteria. Since there was no residual source material on the site, and because contaminant levels were low, it is possible this site might never need active remediation. Without the reclassification, the client would likely have been required, at a minimum, to continue monitoring until concentrations met the GA criteria, at an estimated cost of $75,000 per year. By putting the site into its proper category, the owner was spared this excessive burden and the property transfer was completed in a timely manner.
   In the case of the Bethel property, the reclassification process clarified the path toward reaching compliance with the DEP. This in turn satisfied the intended buyers of the property and the lending institutions involved with the transaction. While only a small percentage of the property in Connecticut has the potential to be reclassified, when it is possible the benefits are significant. First and foremost, the property is relieved of the contamination stigma, which can greatly facilitate a transfer and productive reuse of sites that might otherwise lie fallow for years to come.