[27 Pa.B. 4181]
[Continued from previous Web Page] Subchapter D. Site-Specific Standard
Certain sections under this subchapter, Subchapter F and Subchapter G (relating to exposure and risk determinations; and demonstration of attainment) of the final-form regulations refer to Department-approved guidance documents or references. The Department intends to list guidance documents that it approves in the Manual. The Department also may approve the use of other documents on a case-by-case basis. The Department will work with the SAB to identify guidance documents or references for the Manual.
Section 250.402. Human health and environmental protection goals.
This section defines the level of protection that is afforded to humans from threats posed by soil and groundwater contaminated with regulated substances which are known or suspected carcinogens or systemic toxicants. This section also includes a process to address risks to ecological receptors.
Commentators indicated a concern with doing a risk assessment if pathways will be eliminated in the future. Section 304(l) of Act 2 requires a risk assessment report if exposure pathways exist. The Department intends to allow an abbreviated risk assessment if the proposed remedy will eliminate pathways.
On final rulemaking, an ecological risk assessment and use of Department-approved EPA or ASTM guidance documents to quantify the risk to ecological receptors are required. Subsections (c) and (d) no longer require an evaluation to be performed under the ecological screening protocol in § 250.311. New language was added to subsection (d)(3) to allow for mitigation measures to be implemented for environmental protection. In addition, subsection (e), which contained specific EPA and ASTM referenced documents, was deleted. This change was made in response to comments that the list of references was too limited. The Department intends to publish Department-approved guidance documents in the Manual.
Section 250.403. Use of groundwater.
This section requires compliance with MCLs at all points of exposure, at a minimum, to protect the use of groundwater for drinking water purposes. Groundwater that has naturally occurring total dissolved solids above 2,500 parts per million (ppm) will not be considered a drinking water source in accordance with Act 2.
Commentators suggested that the requirement to meet SMCLs would complicate and increase costs of cleanups. Water is typically treated to achieve SMCLs before delivery at the tap. The final-form regulations allow the SMCLs to be met up to a point of use, rather than at the property boundary, if approved by the Department.
This section was changed on final rulemaking to refer to use of all groundwater, not just groundwater in aquifers. Section 304(d) of Act 2 establishes standards for both groundwater in aquifers and groundwater not in aquifers. On final rulemaking, this section focuses on current and probable future uses of the groundwater for determining cleanup standards. Subsection (b) was changed to delete the reference to § 250.6 for determining ''current and probable future use'' of aquifer groundwater, since that section was deleted on final rulemaking. New language in this subsection requires a determination of current and probable future use on a case-by-case basis. In addition, subsection (d) was added on final rulemaking to require the protection of current drinking water or agricultural uses of groundwater.
Section 250.404. Pathway identification and elimination.
On proposed, subsection (a) required the use of the most recent EPA or ASTM guidance in order to identify potential current and future exposure pathways to humans and ecological receptors. Commentators suggested that the Department should allow the use of EPA or ASTM guidance that becomes available after the effective date of the regulations. On final rulemaking, the language was changed to require the use of ''Department approved'' EPA or ASTM guidance. The list of references in subsection (d) was deleted. It is the Department's intention to provide a list of approved guidance documents in its Manual.
New subsection (c) was added to identify a streamlined process for the site-specific reporting requirements where no exposure pathway exists and no remedy is required to be proposed and completed.
Section 250.405. When to perform a risk assessment.
Persons who choose to develop a site-specific standard, or concentration level, must do so by conducting a risk assessment under Subchapter F (relating to exposure and risk determinations). Submission of a baseline risk assessment report is not required where it can be demonstrated in the remedial investigation report or cleanup plan that there are no current or future exposure pathways or where identified current or future pathways are eliminated through the implementation of a specific remediation measure. These remediation measures must be proposed to the Department in a cleanup plan prior to implementation.
Commentators stated that the phrase ''future exposure pathways'' is too broad. The Department's risk assessment guidance will clarify ''future exposure pathways'' to address this concern. No changes were made to the proposed regulations.
Section 250.406. Relationship to surface water quality requirements.
This section was added on final rulemaking to clarify the relationship between the surface water quality standards and Act 2. The final-form regulations, in subsection (a), require that any regulated discharge to surface water must comply with the applicable provisions of Chapters 91--105, including the antidegradation requirements. Subsection (b) requires compliance with an NPDES permit for point source discharges to surface water. This requirement was in the proposed rulemaking at § 250.406(a).
Subsection (c) is similar to the requirement proposed in § 250.406(b). On final rulemaking, the regulations require a person to determine the expected instream regulated substance concentrations that are attributable to the site. If mass balance techniques indicate that instream surface water quality standards are not met, then the person has an opportunity to conduct sampling. If sampling indicates that the standards are being met, there is no requirement for further remediation. If the results of the modeling, and sampling if any, indicate that surface water quality standards are not being met, further remediation will be required unless a waiver of the surface water quality standards under section 902(b) of Act 2 is obtained. Section 902(b) of Act 2 authorizes the Department to waive applicable requirements where responsible persons can demonstrate, among other things, that the proposed remedial action will attain a standard of performance that is equivalent to that required under the otherwise applicable requirement through the use of an alternative method or approach. In the case of surface water standards, the final-form regulations allow for a waiver if it is demonstrated that the proposed remedial action will result in attainment of a concentration in the stream that does not exceed human health criteria and aquatic life criteria in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 93 (relating to water quality standards). Alternative site-specific exposure factors or design conditions may be proposed that will demonstrate attainment of the human health criteria.
In subsection (d), except where an NPDES permit is required, compliance with surface water quality standards in a spring must be measured at the point of first designated or existing use, as defined in §§ 93.1, 93.4 and 93.9. When the point of first designated use occurs in a surface water into which a spring flows, compliance with surface water quality standards must be determined in the same manner as that which applies to diffuse discharges.
Section 250.407. Point of compliance.
Commentators were concerned that the proposed language allowed the adjustment of the point of compliance only when SMCLs exist without the presence of other contaminants. On final rulemaking, § 250.407(a)(5) was modified to state that the point of compliance may be moved for measuring compliance with the groundwater MSCs that apply to secondary contaminants. ''Secondary contaminants'' is now a defined term in § 250.1.
A commentator suggested that it is not necessary to investigate soil quality down to 15 feet if it can be shown by sampling, and by the absence of releases, that groundwater is not impacted. Once the groundwater is found to be uncontaminated, and proper controls are applied to the soil to eliminate any ingestion and inhalation pathway, then it should not be necessary to investigate soil anymore. It was further stated that what the proposed regulations are indicating is that while it may be safe to drink water with these compounds at or below MCLs, a person can't breathe the vapors from the water you are drinking. The regulations indicate that if the inhalation pathway has not been eliminated, then a person must provide protection for the inhalation route of exposure.
A commentator recommended that the final-form regulations include a reference for the air quality regulations that apply to air quality standards. In subsection (f), the reference to Chapters 121--143 is included.
On final rulemaking, proposed subsections (a)--(c) were deleted and requirements relating to surface water were placed in § 250.406. In new subsection (a), the words ''for ingestion and inhalation exposures'' were deleted for purposes of simplicity and clarity. The language relating to measuring compliance at intervals was deleted and will be discussed in the Manual. New subsection (a) was further changed to clarify that the point of compliance is the property boundary that existed at the time the contamination was discovered. The site-specific standard must be attained at and beyond the point of compliance. Subsection (a)(1) was deleted on final rulemaking because technology exists to meet a remediation standard at the property boundary even if the source of the contamination is at the property boundary. With the exception of the presence of secondary contaminants, the point of compliance can only be moved based on physical obstructions that prevent attainment at the property boundary.
Section 250.408. Remedial investigation report.
Persons electing to remediate a site to the site-specific standard must submit a remedial investigation report to the Department for review and approval. On final rulemaking, changes were made in subsection (a) to provide more direction in a site investigation to the characterization of the rate of movement, extent, and fate of contaminants, as required by Act 2 in a final report. A fate and transport analysis should delineate the extent of contamination over the period of its transport to ensure continued attainment of the remediation standard.
Commentators stated that they did not believe Act 2 required a determination of appropriate technology for each media of concern in the remedial investigation report. In subsection (b), the word ''determination'' was deleted and replaced with the word ''identification.'' The Board believes it is a good idea to evaluate remediation technology options during the investigation stage.
Section 250.410. Cleanup plan.
The site-specific standard is the only one of the three standards which requires Department approval of the cleanup plan prior to implementation. On proposed, the plan was required to describe those alternatives which were evaluated and the alternative which the remediator is proposing to implement, along with an analysis of how these alternatives were evaluated using the remedy selection criteria of section 304(j) of Act 2.
Commentators indicated that the Department's approval of a cleanup plan should be based solely on its concurrence that the plan will attain the site-specific standard. They suggest that the Department should not have the ability to require a person preparing a cleanup plan to evaluate additional alternatives requested by the Department. Section 304(l) of Act 2 authorizes the Department to require further evaluation of the selected remedy or an evaluation of one or more additional remedies in response to comments received from the community through the community involvement plan or as a result of its own analysis.
On final rulemaking, subsection (b) was deleted to indicate that an indepth analysis of alternative remedies is not automatically required with the submission of a cleanup plan. The Department will evaluate the proposed remedial measure in the cleanup plan based on the criteria in section 304(j) of Act 2. If the Department requests further evaluation of alternatives, based on section 304(l) of Act 2, then the evaluation will also be reviewed in accordance with the same criteria as the proposed remedial measure.
Under new subsection (b), paragraph (3) was deleted and replaced with a requirement for submission of adequate design plans and specifications sufficient to evaluate the proposed remedy.
Subsection (d) was renumbered as subsection (c) and the language was slightly revised to state that when a person proposes a remedy that relies on access for remediation or monitoring on properties owned by third parties, documentation of that cooperation or agreement must be submitted as part of the cleanup plan. This provision would be relevant in cases including extension of water supplies, installation of home treatment units for water supply wells and water use restrictions on other properties.
Section 250.411. Final report.
Final reports submitted under the site-specific standard must contain the information necessary to document that the remedy, as approved by the Department in the cleanup plan, was implemented. In subsection (c), a cross reference to § 250.204 was expanded to include a new subsection.
In subsection (d), additional criteria were established to determine when a postremediation care plan is required. Also, additional requirements were added to the postremediation care plan through the cross reference to § 250.204(g).
Subsection (f) was added on final rulemaking to allow for mitigation measures to be implemented to protect ecological receptors identified by the environmental risk assessment. A postremediation monitoring plan must be documented in the final report that includes a plan to maintain the mitigated ecological resource and reporting of the ongoing success or failure of the mitigation measure implemented.
Subchapter E. Special Industrial Areas.
Special incentives were provided by Act 2 to encourage the cleanup and reuse of orphan sites and sites located in an enterprise zone. These incentives include streamlined cleanup requirements that apply only to the portions of the property that would prevent the property from being occupied for its intended purpose. While off-property releases must be investigated, the threats posed from these off-property areas are not required to be addressed by persons entering into special industrial area agreements. These incentives are only available to persons who did not cause or contribute to the contamination at the site and are only available for certain sites that have been used for industrial purposes.
On final rulemaking, there were only minor revisions made to this subchapter. In § 250.503 (relating to remediation requirements), the words ''and other media'' were added and the words ''migration of'' were deleted in subsection (c)(4).
Commentators were concerned that § 250.503(c)(1) was too broad in its requirement to include interviews with any person knowledgeable of the site. The Board believes that the language adequately reflects the need to consult persons who have knowledge of the property during the baseline remedial investigation.
A commentator recommended that § 250.503(e) be revised to more broadly reflect protection from liability afforded under Act 2, rather than be limited to protection from cleanup liability. This subsection was deleted on final rulemaking to avoid confusion about the liability protection.
Commentators stated that Act 2 identifies drummed waste as the only immediate, direct or imminent threat that must be addressed. In addition, it is recommended that ''direct threats'' be defined. The Board believes that Act 2 refers to drummed waste as an example of the types of threats that must be addressed in a remediation of a special industrial area. The Department will provide guidance on direct threats in the Manual.
Subchapter F. Exposure and Risk Determinations
Section 250.601. Scope.
Subsection (c)(3) was deleted on final rulemaking because an indepth risk assessment is not required for each remediation alternative unless the Department requests the evaluation of additional remediation alternatives.
Section 250.602. Risk assessment procedures.
A risk assessment must define unacceptable risks to both humans and ecological receptors. Language has been added to subsection (a) to explain that the risk assessment is required when using a site-specific standard under Subchapter D (relating to site-specific standard). This change was made in response to comments received that interpreted the proposed language to also apply to the background and Statewide health standards.
Commentators suggested that the guidelines referred to in subsection (b) and listed in subsection (g) be modified to state that they serve as examples of appropriate guidance, but are not all inclusive. The references in subsection (g) have been deleted on final rulemaking and the language in subsection (b) has been changed to refer to EPA or ASTM guidelines approved by the Department. The Department intends to publish approved guidelines in its Manual.
Section 250.603. Exposure factors for site-specific standards.
This section explains which exposure factors should be used to perform an exposure assessment. The proposed regulations stated that site-specific exposure factors must be used and must be clearly justified by supporting data. On proposed, if site-specific exposure factors were not used, the exposure assessment was required to be based on the standard exposure factors used to develop the Statewide health standards.
Commentators suggested that a reference to the EPA's Final Guidelines for Exposure Assessment be used for the application of site-specific exposure factors to a risk assessment. This reference is included in the final rulemaking in subsection (a).
Commentators indicated that proposed subsections (a) and (b) were confusing in their description of when site-specific exposure factors could be used. On final rulemaking, subsection (b) was changed to clarify that either site-specific exposure factors or the standard exposure factors used to develop the Statewide health standards shall be used.
Section 250.604. Fate and transport modeling requirements for exposure assessments.
This section explains which models may be used to estimate site-specific, soil-to-groundwater leaching potential for organic contaminants. The soil-to-groundwater model in the Statewide health standards may be used in site-specific exposure assessment. Because the model was based on a number of assumptions, only the values of Koc, water-filled soil porosity, dry soil bulk density, fraction organic carbon and the default dilution factor in the model may be varied based on site-specific measurements.
This section also recognizes that many fate and transport models and methods are available in the EPA and ASTM guidelines. To ensure the proper application of groundwater models, the Department requires that the EPA or ASTM quality assurance/quality control criteria, such as model verification, model calibration and model validation shall be followed.
Commentators recommended that modeling references be more inclusive and allow for use of appropriate alternative models. In response to the comments, all references in subsection (c) have been deleted and the final-form regulations refer to the use of criteria and models approved by the Department. The Department intends to publish a list of approved criteria and models in its Manual.
One minor revision was made in subsection (a)(3). The word ''nonaqueous'' was deleted and replaced with ''separate.'' This change was made to describe in plain language the category of liquids.
Section 250.605. Sources of toxicity information.
When conducting the toxicity assessment, this section establishes sources of toxicology data that are acceptable for use and a hierarchy within these sources for selection of the most appropriate oral reference dose and cancer slope factor. This is the same protocol which was used to select the toxicity values used in generation of the Statewide health standards.
If no toxicity data is available in any of these defined sources, a person may use the background standard or may develop, for the Department's review, one of the following: 1) chemical-specific toxicity values in accordance with the EPA guidance and based on published, peer-reviewed scientific literature; or 2) toxicity values developed from appropriately justified surrogates. If toxicity information is not available from any of the above sources, then the person must use the minimum threshold standard for regulated substances listed in Table 6.
Commentators recommended inserting ''or from other credible and relevant information that is available'' at the end of subsection (a). The list of the EPA guidelines or protocols for chemical-specific toxicity values was extended by adding the words ''approved by the Department'' in subsection (b)(1)(i) and by deleting the references in subsection (c). The Department intends to publish approved guidelines in its Manual.
Section 250.606. Development of site-specific standards.
If an unacceptable risk is identified through the risk assessment, a person may choose to eliminate the pathway or implement a remedy which abates the risks posed by that pathway to the protection levels established for site-specific standard remedies.
Specific factors must be considered in the assessment of risks posed by contamination that include consideration of the fate and transport of released regulated substances through the environment, natural conditions that may affect this fate and transport, specified exposure pathways, current and future land use and the effectiveness of institutional or legal controls placed on the use of the land.
Commentators recommended adding the phrase ''for present or currently planned future use of the property'' after the phrase ''future exposure pathways'' in subsection (a)(1). The Board does not believe that currently planned future land use will be sufficient to address reasonable future pathways. If necessary, the Department may elaborate on the meaning of future exposure pathways in the Manual.
On final rulemaking, minor revisions were made to this section.
Section 250.607. Risk assessment of remediation alternatives.
This section was deleted on final rulemaking because an indepth risk assessment is not required for each remediation alternative unless the Department requests the evaluation of additional remediation alternatives.
Subchapter G. Demonstration of Attainment
Section 250.701. Scope.
This section describes the scope of the subchapter for demonstration of attainment. The subchapter clarifies what information and procedures are necessary to demonstrate attainment with the cleanup standards, where a release of a regulated substance has occurred.
A change was made to subsection (c) to use the phrase ''limits relating to the PQLs'' to be consistent with the title change in § 250.5.
Section 250.702. Attainment requirements.
This section explains that attainment will apply to the horizontal and vertical extent of soil and groundwater identified as contaminated. In the proposed regulations, the areas defined as contaminated were those areas that exceed the cleanup standard selected. Where separate zones of contamination exist on a property from multiple releases, attainment applies to each individual separate zone.
This section also identifies what is required to be included in a final report to demonstrate attainment. The report must include a demonstration that the cleanup standard has been met, based on an analysis of data through the application of statistical tests, and must include a demonstration of a statistical trend analysis, knowledge of the plume stability or other acceptable method that shows that the standard will not be exceeded at the point of compliance. For attainment of the site-specific standard, a demonstration of pathway elimination, if applicable, and a demonstration that the site does not exceed the least protective risk level provided for in Act 2, must be provided.
As requested by commentators, subsection (a) is changed to provide that attainment of a standard shall be demonstrated using appropriate data quality objectives and data quality assessment processes as specified by the EPA. Incorporation of the EPA DQO process responds to the concerns for specifying parameters, spatial and temporal boundaries defining the scale of the decision making process, and identifying practical constraints on data collection.
Subsection (a) is further changed to clarify that attainment of the Statewide health standard and site-specific standard attainment in soil is demonstrated in the vertical and horizontal extent of the soil contaminated from the release above the selected standard, and groundwater attainment is demonstrated at the point of compliance and beyond. This means that the groundwater contamination that has migrated beyond the point of compliance must also attain the standard. For the background standard, the subsection clarifies that attainment of the standard applies to the vertical and horizontal extent of soil and water identified as contaminated from the release across the site. These changes were made in response to comments that the section should identify what the attainment demonstration is required to address.
Subsection (b)(2) has been changed to clarify that the plume stability analysis is applied to groundwater attainment and that the statistical trend is a temporal trend. This subsection has been changed to provide that demonstration of attainment includes an analysis that indicates continued attainment over time. These changes respond to comments concerning the need for spatial and temporal boundaries in statistical analysis. These comments also are addressed in the changes to § 250.707(d)(3)(ii) (relating to statistical tests).
Section 250.702 (b)(3)(ii) has been changed to clarify that calculated site-specific standards are attained using the procedures in § 250.707(c) and (d), rather than a general reference to this subchapter. Section 250.702(b)(3)(ii) and subsection (b)(4) also have been changed to state that for calculated numerical site-specific standards, and for background and Statewide health standards, attainment shall be demonstrated within the soil and groundwater directly impacted by separate phase liquids. This change was to clarify that random sampling should also occur in the soil and groundwater directly impacted by separate phase liquids.
Section 250.703. General attainment requirements for soil.
In the proposed regulations, this section explained that the data collected to demonstrate attainment of a cleanup standard for soil must be random, both horizontally and vertically, over the areal extent which was shown to be contaminated above the selected cleanup standard during the site characterization. This data varies spatially and is used to determine statistically whether or not attainment has been demonstrated. This data is not the same as the data used to characterize the site. The data is collected specifically for the demonstration of attainment. The number of samples needed is dependent on the size of the area.
A comment was made that the regulation should specify particular EPA guidance documents to demonstrate attainment. Methodologies and acceptable references are discussed later in the subchapter. In general, the Department intends to list the guidances it will accept in its Manual.
A commentator suggested that subsection (b) should be changed to specify the uncertainty associated with the estimation of the volume of contaminated soil. The uncertainty estimation would be burdensome in most cases; therefore, no uncertainty is specified in the final-form regulations.
Subsection (c) has been changed to provide that soil sampling is to be random and representative, both horizontally and vertically, based on systematic random sampling. Additionally, the section has been changed to provide that the Department may require additional sampling if three or more adjacent samples exceed the standard by more than 10 times. This provision would allow the Department to require additional characterization and remediation, if there is a localized area of exceedances of the standard in the area that has been remediated. This change responds to the comment that those areas should be addressed.
Subsection (d) has been changed. Eight samples still are required for contaminated soil volumes of less than 125 cubic yards or less, although a commentator noted that fewer samples have been sufficient for some tank closures. Section 250.707(b)(1)(iii) of the final-form regulations allows fewer samples to be taken in accordance with a Department technical guidance document for localized storage tank contamination. Under that circumstance no exceedances of the standard are allowed. For other methods, eight samples are usually required, in part because this is a minimum number to allow the 75%/10X statistical rule to function appropriately. Under that rule, two samples could exceed the standard, but not by more than 10 times. Thus, eight as the number of samples has been retained in subsection (d)(1).
Subsection (d)(2) now provides that at least 12 sample points must be used for contaminated areas of up to 3,000 cubic yards. Subsection (d)(3) provides that for each additional soil volume up to 3,000 cubic yards, an additional 12 sample points will be required. These two changes respond to the comment that an upper limit should be set to the soil volume that a minimum of 12 samples was initially meant to characterize. This subsection also has other minor changes.
Section 250.704. General attainment requirements for groundwater.
This section contains general attainment requirements for groundwater and provides that a sufficient number of sampling points must be installed to demonstrate attainment with a cleanup standard.
Subsection (b) was revised to state that wells should be located so that there is sufficient groundwater to be tested; that is, the water being tested should not merely be condensate on the walls of the well.
Subsections (c) and (d) in the proposed rulemaking had required attainment demonstrations for each aquifer, and required clusters of compliance wells where there was significant vertical migration of contamination within a single aquifer. Commentators had asked for greater specificity. These sections have been deleted, but a requirement has been added in subsection (b) that monitoring should be sufficient to demonstrate attainment within each plume of contamination.
Also, the section was changed to make it clear that the new subsection (d), relating to the 75%/10x test for groundwater, applies to demonstration of attainment for groundwater, rather than ''groundwater subject to remediation'' as stated in the proposed regulations. This responds to the comment that attainment will be demonstrated at some sites where no remediation is performed.
Commentators expressed concern with the requirement in subsection (d) of eight quarters of sampling to demonstrate attainment of groundwater remediation standards. Commentators indicated that a reduced number of samples should be allowed in certain circumstances. This requirement for eight quarters of sampling only applies to the 75%/10x rule and is generally necessary for that rule to function. As an alternative to the 75%/10x rule, under certain circumstances, four quarters only, or fewer, may be required. This subsection has been amended to allow fewer than four quarters of sampling if written approval is obtained from the Department. In order to use only four or fewer quarters of data as an alternative to the 75%/10x rule, conditions regarding the knowledge of the stability and decreasing trend of the plume must be demonstrated, and there can be no exceedances of the groundwater standard or the limit related to the PQL.
This approach is similar to other circumstances where eight samples may be taken over only four quarters or fewer, or sampling may be accelerated, where conditions are satisfied regarding the knowledge and stability of the plume. This occurs in § 250.707(a)(2)(x) and (3)(v) when a person is demonstrating attainment with some background demonstrations.
If statistical tests other than the 75%/10x rule referred to in subsection (d) are used, the documentation of the chosen method dictates the number of required samples. This responds to the comment that the number and type of samples should meet the specified decision error criteria. Additionally, § 250.707(d)(2)(vi) requires tests to control for seasonal and spatial variability, and temporal correlation. This means that methods, other than the 75%/10X rule, must rely on data that is taken over a period of seasons. The period of seasons is determined under the data quality objectives process for those methods, while the period is defined explicitly for the 75%/10X rule in § 250.704(d).
Minor changes were made to subsections (d)(1) and (3) and (e).
Section 250.705. Attainment requirements for groundwater in aquifers not used or currently planned to be used.
This is a new section which establishes requirements for demonstrating attainment, under the Statewide health standards, for groundwater that is in aquifers that are not used or are not currently planned to be used. This section provides that, in addition to the sampling and statistical analyses that apply to attainment of the Statewide health standards in this subchapter, a fate and transport analysis must be conducted, based on sufficient sampling and monitoring data to calibrate the model. The fate and transport analysis must show that the MSC pertinent to groundwater in an aquifer used or currently planned for use must be attained no later than 30 years from the final report approval, at all points at and beyond a radius of 1,000 feet downgradient from the property boundary. This section is designed to respond to persons who prefer to use the Statewide health standard in an area where groundwater is not being used for drinking water or agricultural purposes.
Section 250.706. Demonstration of attainment of surface water and air quality standards.
This section requires that all applicable State and Federal laws and regulations related to surface water and air must be met to demonstrate attainment within the surface water and air media. A minor clarification has been added to indicate that surface water and air are media, as requested by a commentator.
[Continued on next Web Page]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
