1. MassDEP completed a LII audit of a groundwater extraction and treatment system, and issued a Notice of Audit Finding (NOAF)/Notice of Noncompliance (NON) for failure to meet many remedial system operation requirements. During the inspection, DEP noted that the process and instrumentation diagram of the treatment works is not being maintained in the log book or on the treatment works; that there is no procedure for identifying system malfunction and for communicating such malfunction to the system operator; that the name and telephone of the contact person are not visibly posted in the event of system malfunction; that the log book information is not current (The last system inspection recorded in the log book was conducted more than 8 months before the inspection); and that a Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Operator has not inspected the system in eight months (an inspection must be conducted by a WWTP Operator at minimum intervals of 3 months). MassDEP required correction of the violations within a specified time period. (Brighton, RTN 3-19793, NON-NE-05-3R069, July 28, 2005)
   
   
2. MassDEP completed a LII audit of a groundwater extraction and treatment system, and issued a NOAF/NON for failure to meet many remedial system operation requirements. During the inspection, MassDEP noted that the automatic pressure shutoff switch is not working; that the logbook information is not current (the system inspections have not been recorded in the log book); and that a Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Operator has not inspected the treatment works at a regular interval of 30 days for the first three months following commencement of discharge (an inspection must be conducted by a WWTP Operator at minimum intervals of 3 months thereafter). DEP required correction of the violations within a specified time period. (Watertown, RTN 3-11565, NON-NE-05-3R077, August 29, 2005)

Level III Audits for July and August 2005:
MassDEP completed Level III audits and issued NOAFs at 18 sites between July and August 2005. Fifteen NONs were issued with MassDEP's findings. Level III audits of interest between July and August 2005 include:

1. In September 2004 MassDEP received oral notification that approximately 400 gallons of #2 fuel oil was released into the basement of a commercial building. An oil company delivered oil to two (2) AST’s located in the basement where approximately one (1) week prior to the delivery of oil the fill and vent lines were disconnected. Assessment included installing two soil vapor screening points (VP-1 to VP-22) by drilling through the concrete floor and screening for total organic vapors using a photo-ionization detector. Subsequently, the concrete floor, together with soil and groundwater, was removed. During soil removal, fuel oil was encountered at 1-2 feet below the basement floor. Approximately 1,900 gallons of oil/water and 50 tons of soil were removed. In January 2005, MassDEP received a Class A-2 RAO. MassDEP issued an NOAF/NON concluding that the RAO submittal was not in compliance with MCP requirements and therefore was invalid. MassDEP noted that site investigation and remedial activities failed to include groundwater testing and failed to adequately define the extent of groundwater contamination. MassDEP required submittal of a RAO that addresses the violations identified and that meets the requirements of the MCP within a specified timeframe. (New Bedford, RTN 4-18678, NON-SE-05-3E035, July 05, 2005).
   
   
2. The site is a bulk petroleum storage and distribution terminal. Current on-site and downgradient receptors consist primarily of workers in occupied buildings where the underlying groundwater is contaminated by gasoline, fuel oil, and chlorinated solvents. In February 1980, a sudden release to the surface of 3,000 to 4,000 gallons of perchloroethylene (PCE) occurred from a 10,000-gallon aboveground storage tank (AST). MassDEP issued a Notice of Responsibility (NOR) in November 1987. In January 2002 MassDEP received a Class C RAO Statement supported by a Method 3 risk characterization. The risk characterization included the assumption that the direct-contact exposure pathway was incomplete and, thus, posed no risk. In May 2005, MassDEP received oral notification of detections of PCE in indoor air downgradient of the site that may pose an imminent hazard. On June 8 MassDEP was notified of imminent hazard conditions relative to indoor air at the site location. MassDEP issued an NOAF/NON concluding that the RAO submittal was not in compliance with MCP requirements and therefore was invalid. MassDEP noted that the Class C RAO received in January 2002 concluded a condition of No Significant Risk to human health existed at the disposal site under current conditions. This conclusion relied on the outcome of a Method 3 Risk Characterization in which: (1) inhalation risks to occupants of various buildings were estimated using air concentrations that were modeled using groundwater data rather than measured indoor air data; and (2) the direct contact exposure pathway to contaminated groundwater was considered incomplete. The RAO also concluded that the results of the risk characterization indicated that conditions at the disposal site did not pose an imminent hazard, and would not pose significant risk to human health for a period of five years. A field inspection conducted as part of the audit observed groundwater seepage emanating from the base of the low, timber-constructed retaining wall located at the downgradient property. Previous assessments indicated that this water exhibited chlorinated solvent contamination attributed to the PCE release. MassDEP determined that the RAO was not supported by assessments and evaluations that are of sufficient scope, detail and level of effort to characterize the risks posed by the disposal site, and that are commensurate with the nature and extent of the release and the complexity of site conditions. MassDEP required submittal of a revised Numerical Ranking System Scoresheet for the disposal site based on current conditions, submittal of either a Tier I Permit Extension or Modification Submittal in order to continue response actions at the site in compliance with the MCP, and performance of an Immediate Response Action (IRA) to address the imminent hazard conditions. (Springfield, RTN 1-00394, NON-WE-05-3A072, July 14, 2005).

Helpful Hint :

Q: Once MassDEP grants Downgradient Property Status (DPS) for a location, does the DPS remain for the site after the property is sold to a new owner or does the new owner need to re-file?