Historical Agricultural Use Policy State of Rhode Island

Historical Agricultural Use Policy State of Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Office of Waste Management Policy Memo 2014 -01 Guidelines for the Management of Historically Agricultural Properties for Future Use as Open Space and/or Recreational Land

Background � 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 Hurdles ◦ Site Size ◦ Wide-spread application of pesticides resulted in jurisdictional levels

Data Analysis � Soil sampling data from 15 appropriate sites on file � Sample depth 0 – 1’ bgs � Applicable Contaminants ◦ ◦ Arsenic Lead Dieldrin Chlordane

Lead (RDEC – 150 ppm, I/CDEC – 500 ppm) Site Size # Samples # >RDEC # >I/CDEC Avg. (ppm) Range (ppm) Orchard 1 93 39 3 1 66. 59 ND – 674 Orchard 2 106 Orchard 3 50 7 None 46. 36 ND – 138 Orchard 4 13. 6 15 None 14. 68 6 – 46 Orchard 5 11. 6 Orchard 6 6. 3 2 None 67. 65 5. 3 – 130 Row Crops 7 17 9 None 20. 2 8. 5 – 28. 9 Row Crops 8 57 28 None 18. 2 ND – 38 Row Crops 9 4. 5 7 None 11. 1 8 – 23 Orn. /Nursery 10 14 None 11. 9 5. 3 – 22 Orn. /Nursery 11 8 13 None 9. 14 2. 7 – 20 Orn. /Nursery 12 1. 4 13 6 None 162 7. 2 – 390 Orn. /Nursery 13 0. 59 2 None 38 19 – 57 Orn. /Nursery 14 1. 6 Unknown Ag. 15 6. 3 23 19. 6 – 25. 4 Not Analyzed 5 None ND (non-detect) results evaluated at one half the laboratory MDL/MRL value None

Arsenic (RDEC – 7 ppm, I/CDEC – 7 ppm) Site Size # Samples # > 7 ppm % > 7 ppm Avg. (ppm) Range (ppm) Orchard 1 93 34 12 35% 9. 19 ND – 72. 1 12. 04 A Orchard 2 106 332 129 39% 7. 63 ND – 62. 4 12. 04 A Orchard 3 50 65 53 82% 30. 1 ND – 133 12. 04 B Orchard 4 13. 6 15 3 20% 4. 82 1. 2 – 21 NJD 1, 2 Orchard 5 11. 6 49 2 4% 2. 92 0. 76 – 16 NJD 1 Orchard 6 6. 3 24 18 75% 48. 8 0. 85 – 140 Row Crops 7 17 30 6 20% 5. 72 2. 9 – 12. 7 Row Crops 8 57 19 7 37% 6. 32 1. 6 – 13 Row Crops 9 4. 5 13 1 8% 3. 6 1. 4 – 9. 3 NJD 2 Orn. /Nursery 10 14 1 7% 4. 14 1. 7 – 7. 1 NJD 2 Orn. /Nursery 11 8 32 7 22% 5. 16 ND – 21 NJD 1 Orn. /Nursery 12 1. 4 13 11 85% 11. 3 2. 8 – 23 12. 04 A Orn. /Nursery 13 0. 59 67 25 37% 7. 96 ND – 36 12. 04 A Orn. /Nursery 14 1. 6 28 26 93% 9. 71 6 – 18 12. 04 A Unknown Ag. 15 6. 3 11 none 4. 95 2. 2 – 6. 6 1 – Site would be non-jurisdictional per Rule 12. 03 with “hot-spot” removal 2 – Site does not meet the minimum sample requirements for Rule 12. 03 ND (non-detect) results evaluated at one half the laboratory MDL/MRL Value NJD per Rule 12. 03 Rule 12. 04 options NJD 12. 04 A NJD 2

Dieldrin (RDEC – 0. 04 ppm, I/CDEC – 0. 4 ppm) Site Size # Samples # >RDEC # >I/CDEC Avg. (ppm) Range (ppm) Orchard 1 93 34 9 1 0. 048 ND – 0. 42 Orchard 2 106 Orchard 3 50 8 3 None 0. 049 ND – 0. 152 Orchard 4 13. 6 8 4 2 0. 42 ND – 1. 7 Orchard 5 11. 6 Orchard 6 6. 3 20 17 12 0. 529 0. 004 – 2. 6 Row Crops 7 17 8 None ND ND Row Crops 8 57 26 6 None 0. 021 ND – 0. 1 Row Crops 9 4. 5 13 None ND ND Orn. /Nursery 10 14 9 1 0. 099 ND – 0. 51 Orn. /Nursery 11 8 22 None 0. 002 ND – 0. 024 Orn. /Nursery 12 1. 4 9 3 None 0. 034 ND – 0. 17 Orn. /Nursery 13 0. 59 Not Analyzed Orn. /Nursery 14 1. 6 Not Analyzed Unknown Ag. 15 6. 3 Not Analyzed ND (non-detect) results evaluated at one half the laboratory MDL/MRL value

Chlordane (RDEC – 0. 5 ppm, I/CDEC – 4. 4 ppm) Site Size # Samples # >RDEC # >I/CDEC Avg. (ppm) Range (ppm) Orchard 1 93 34 None ND ND Orchard 2 106 Orchard 3 50 7 None ND ND Orchard 4 13. 6 4 1 None 0. 932 ND – 1. 3 Orchard 5 11. 6 Not Analyzed Orchard 6 6. 3 Not Analyzed Row Crops 7 17 8 None ND ND Row Crops 8 57 26 4 None 0. 292 ND – 1. 6 Row Crops 9 4. 5 13 None ND ND Orn. /Nursery 10 14 None 0. 046 ND – 0. 32 Orn. /Nursery 11 8 28 2 None 0. 179 ND – 1. 6 Orn. /Nursery 12 1. 4 1 None ND ND Orn. /Nursery 13 0. 59 Not Analyzed Orn. /Nursery 14 1. 6 Not Analyzed Unknown Ag. 15 6. 3 Not Analyzed ND (non-detect) results evaluated at one half the laboratory MDL/MRL value

Conclusions from Data Analysis � Lead ◦ Of 154 samples, only 6% exceeded RDEC ◦ Just 1 sample exceeded I/CDEC � Arsenic ◦ Approx. 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” removal ◦ The remainder of the sites could use the remedial options under Rules 12. 04 A or 12. 04 B

Conclusions from Data Analysis � Dieldrin ◦ 10 sites sampled for dieldrin ◦ Detected above RDEC in 31% of samples, 10% >I/CDEC ◦ When detected, site wide averages of dieldrin seemed to hover around the RDEC � Chlordane ◦ Sampled for on 9 sites, detected above RDEC on 3 ◦ No I/CDEC exceedances ◦ Avg. chlordane levels were below RDEC on all 9 sites

Other Findings. . � Vast majority of exceedances were considered “low-level” exceedances � Average contaminant concentrations were lower than expected � Ag policy inspired by Rule 12

Applicability � Sites or portions of sites where pesticides were historically applied and only COCs are lead, arsenic, dieldrin, and/or chlordane � End use: ◦ Undeveloped open space (not for recreational use) ◦ Passive Recreation ◦ Active Recreation

Not Applicable To: � 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 disposal � Areas not utilized as agricultural fields � Areas that have been redeveloped � Any contaminants other than lead, arsenic, dieldrin, or chlordane

Process � 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 met ◦ End result will be a No Further Action Letter relative to the Agricultural Contaminants of Concern � Submit Agricultural Property SIR/RAWP � Program Letter Public Notice RDL/RAL

Sampling Requirements � Protocol: ◦ Sample for Ag COCs ◦ Discrete grab samples from 0 -1’ bgs ◦ Located within the applicable areas � Frequency: ◦ 1 acre – 8 samples minimum ◦ 1 to 5 acres – 8 samples + 2 per additional acre over 1 st acre ◦ Over 5 acres – 16 samples + 1 per additional acre over 5 th acre

Remedial Options � ELUR/SMP restricting the site or portions of the site to specific use � Must meet specific conditions depending on end use ◦ For 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)

Benefits of Ag Policy � 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 use � Allows for averaging of soil data � Combined Ag SIR/RAWP expedites the process to obtain an NFA � Can be used on entire or portions of former Ag sites � Alternative to Residential or I/C reuse

Acknowledgements � RISEP Legislative/Regulatory Sub-Committee � Patrick Cavanagh, URI – Intern � Matt De. Stefano & Leo Hellested, RIDEM/OWM