Transcript OSWER`s Climate Change Adaptation Plan December 4 - CLU-IN

Welcome to the CLU-IN Internet Seminar
Overview of OSWER's Climate Change Adaptation Plan
Sponsored by: OSWER Center for Program Analysis
Delivered: December 4, 2013, 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM, EST (21:00-23:00 GMT)
Instructors:
•
Jennifer Brady, Center for Program Analysis, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
([email protected])
Moderators:
•
Jean Balent, U.S. EPA Technology Innovation and Field Services Division ([email protected])
Visit the Clean Up Information Network online at www.cluin.org
Seminar Homepage
Join the
seminar
online
Download Slides
Feedback
Housekeeping
• Entire broadcast offered live via Adobe Connect
– participants can listen and watch as the presenters advance through materials live
– Some materials may be available to download in advance, you are recommended
to participate live via the online broadcast
• Audio is streamed online through by default
– Use the speaker icon to control online playback
– If on phones: all lines will be globally muted
• Q&A – use the Q&A pod to privately submit comments, questions and
report technical problems
• This event is being recorded and shared via email shortly after live
delivery
• Archives accessed for free http://cluin.org/live/archive/
New online broadcast
screenshot
Enlarge
presentation
Control
online
audio
View
presentation live
online here
Submit
private
questions,
comments
or report
technical
problems
Information
about
Sponsors &
Speakers
OSWER’s Climate Change
Adaptation Plan
December 4, 2013
OSWER Climate Change Adaptation Workgroup members:
Headquarters- ♦Center for Program Analysis: Jennifer Brady;
♦ F e d e r a l F a c i l it ie s : E l l e n Tr e i m e l ; ♦ G e n e r a l C o u n s e l : D a n i e l S c h r a m m ;
♦Innovations, Partnerships and Communications : Jeffrey Kohn;
♦Brownfields: Rachel Lentz, Ann Carroll; ♦Compliance: Elisabeth
Freed; ♦Emergency Response: Richard Canino, Sara Goehl;
♦ R C R A : Ti f f a n y K o l l a r, S c o t t P a l m e r, J e f f G a i n e s ;
♦ S u p e r f u n d : C a r l o s P a c h o n , A n n e D a i l e y, S t e v e C h a n g ;
♦ U n d e r g r o u n d S t o r a g e Ta n k s : A n d r e a B a r b e r y, L i n d a G e r b e r .
Regions- ♦R1: Elsbeth Hearn, John Podgurski, Carol Keating;
♦ R 2 : R e b e c c a O f r a n e ; ♦ R 3 : M i c k e y Yo u n g , K a t i e M a t t a ;
♦R4: Thornell Cheeks, Ben Franco; ♦R6: Camille Hueni;
♦R8: Nat Miullo; ♦R9: Shannon Davis;
♦R10:Michelle Davis, Kristin Ryan.
Agenda
• Overview
• Plan development process
• Discussion of climate change impacts, proposed
vulnerabilities and criteria for selecting actions
• Discussion of proposed actions
• Questions?
6
Overview
OSWER’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan
is now available for public comment.
http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs/EPA-impl-plans.html
Comments will be accepted through
January 3 in the Federal Register comment system.
http://www.regulations.gov (Docket# EPA-HQ-OA-2013-0568)
REMINDER
Comments and questions taken during this session will not be
entered into the comment system. Please visit regulations.gov and
enter your comment by January 3 if you would like it formally
considered.
7
Plan Development Process
Agency Adaptation Plan Completed
June 2012
Development of OSWER Climate Change Adaptation Plan
by OSWER workgroup
Every program office and most Regions
participated in the OSWER workgroup
Identified OSWER
vulnerabilities and
developed criteria
Developed
proposed actions
OSWER Climate
Change Adaptation
Plan submitted for
public comment
Public comment period began in November
2013 and closes on January 3, 2014.
8
Climate Change Impacts
Potential climate change impacts considered in OSWER’s Plan, also
called climate events, agreed upon by climate experts and included in
EPA’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan, are:
Increased extreme
temperatures
Sustained
changes in average
temperature
Sea level rise
Decreased
permafrost in Arctic
regions
Decreased
precipitation days,
increasing drought
intensity
Increased heavy
precipitation events
Increased flood risk
Increased
frequency and
intensity of wildfires
Increased intensity
of hurricanes
Image credit: U.S. Global Change Research Program
(www.globalchange.gov)
9
Characterizing OSWER Vulnerabilities
The workgroup identified 27 unique vulnerabilities.
•
Many of the vulnerabilities apply
to more than one program.
Complete vulnerability table found
on page 6.
Reducing Chemical
Risks and Releases
For example, two types of
vulnerabilities are:
• Surges in waste, particularly
from the impacts of extreme
events and
• Impacts to cleanup remedies.
Preserving Land
comprehensive as possible.
Proper Management of
Hazardous and NonHazardous Wastes
• List of vulnerabilities was as
Design and placement of RCRA Treatment, Storage and Disposal facilities, nonhazardous Subtitle D landfills, Superfund remedies and municipal recycling
facilities may need to change to accommodate climate change impacts.
Hazardous waste permitting requirements may need to be updated to reflect
climate change impacts.
Current waste management capacity may be insufficient to handle surges in
necessary treatment and disposal of hazardous and municipal wastes, as well as
mixed wastes generated from climate events.
Levels of necessary financial assurance at RCRA and CERCLA facilities may need
to adjust for increased risks/liabilities at specific facilities that may be directly
affected by climate change impacts.
Remediation and containment strategies and materials used in construction
may need to be strengthened to reflect changing climate conditions.
Current equipment, scientific monitoring and sampling protocols on sites may
no longer be effective and therefore may require adjustments due to climate
change impacts.
Current assumptions regarding protectiveness of remediation and containment
methods may not reflect changing climate impacts.
Spill Prevention Plans may need to be updated due to the significant increases
in the incidence of flooding and storm events.
10
Prioritizing Vulnerabilities
In order to prioritize and focus OSWER’s efforts, each vulnerability was
evaluated based on a set of criteria, such as scale of impact and EPA’s
technical expertise in that area.
A scorecard with a value assigned to each vulnerability for each criteria is
found in Appendix B (p. 27).
 Each program developed a score for their program only.
 Vulnerabilities were not scored based on their “value” relative other
vulnerabilities, but based on only the criteria.
The programs were then able to use the scorecard as a basis for
determining what vulnerabilities would be assigned actions.
The next several slides reviews many, but not all, of the proposed actions.
The complete list of proposed actions are found in Appendix C (p.31).
11
Proposed Actions: Preserving Land
Proper Management of Hazardous & Non-Hazardous Wastes
This slide includes actions directed at the proper management of non-hazardous and
hazardous waste, both routinely and in times of emergency.
Based on outreach to states and tribes, develop recommendations for these stakeholders
to incorporate climate change into RCRA Permitting Programs as appropriate.
 Prepare Fact Sheets on proper management of wastes/debris associated with large
natural disasters.
 Continue collaborative development with the Office of Homeland Security on an
interactive electronic waste management planning tool to aid federal, state and local
emergency planners and managers in development of waste/debris management plans.

- The last two actions also address
emergency response, discussed
later in the presentation
12
Proposed Actions: Preserving Land
Reducing Chemical Risks and Releases
These actions focus on activities that prevent contamination from occurring.
•
•
•
Incorporate sensitivity for climate change vulnerabilities into oil Spill
Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) and Facility Response
Plan (FRP)
Incorporate into SPCC and FRP guidance the statement of potential
vulnerabilities to oil facilities from catastrophic weather events due to
climate change.
Incorporate sensitivity for climate change vulnerabilities in risk
management plan (RMP) inspector training and guidelines.
13
Proposed Actions: Restoring Land
Cleaning up Sites
Many offices in OSWER are involved in cleaning up sites and making sure that contamination
is contained. The next two slides feature some of the proposed actions by these offices.
Brownfields
 Update the Analysis of Brownfields Cleanup Alternatives (ABCA)
language in the brownfield grant Terms and Conditions to include
language that requires recipients take potential changing climate
conditions into consideration when evaluating cleanup alternatives.
Superfund
 Share vulnerability screening protocol for regional application.
•
Develop criteria to identify remedies where performance may be
impacted by climate change.
•
Develop a methodology to evaluate and ensure remedy
protectiveness.
 Prepare remedy-specific climate change adaptation fact sheets for
selected remedies.
 Identify existing Superfund program processes (Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study, Record of Decision, Remedial
Design/Remedial Action, Five Year reviews, etc.) for implementation of
climate change adaptation protocols to ensure continuing
protectiveness of current and future remedies.
 Prepare training materials.
14
Proposed Actions: Restoring Land
Cleaning up Sites
RCRA Corrective Action
 Develop recommendations for states and tribes to encourage
climate change considerations be incorporated into all of their
RCRA Corrective Action Programs.
Underground Storage Tanks
 Work with the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials (ASTSWMO) to gather information on if
and how states currently:
•
alter remediation plans in response to changing climate
impacts;
•
alter site assessments in response to flooding or drought
conditions;
•
alter risk factors and rankings in response to flooding or
drought conditions.

Share information among states, tribes, and EPA regions
regarding:
•
new or modified investigation strategies and remediation
techniques;
•
new or modified assessment techniques;
•
how climate conditions may impact risk-based cleanup
factors and rankings.
15
Proposed Actions: Emergency Response
Several actions related to severe weather event response were highlighted in the earlier
waste management slide. This slide features additional emergency response actions,
focused on areas other than waste and debris management.
Underground Storage Tanks
• Work with ASTSWMO to gather information on if and how states currently respond to climate-related
emergencies (e.g., use of GIS mapping in flood-prone areas).
• Analyze lessons learned from Hurricanes Katrina (2005) and Sandy (2012) to identify how EPA can help
states respond to UST-related hurricane impacts.
• Share information among states, tribes, and EPA regions regarding emergency response and
preparedness (e.g., OUST’s Flood Guide).
Emergency Response
• Utilize the National Response Team multi-agency membership (e.g., National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Coast Guard) to monitor the state of
preparedness. Based on these meetings, evaluate if additional resources and planning exercises will be
needed to address the impacts from changes in the frequency and/or severity of extreme weather events.
• Incorporate materials on the impacts of climate change as EOC training materials are updated and
exercises are planned
16
OSWER-Wide Actions
There is information and data that all
programs will need to appropriately consider
the potential impacts of climate change.
Several actions are proposed to ensure this
is done uniformly across OSWER.
 Ensure consistent data for mapping.
 Remain informed on emerging climate
science.
 Identify training needs.
Image credit: U.S. Global Change Research Program
(www.globalchange.gov).
17
Tribes and vulnerable populations
 OSWER acknowledges that climate change impacts will have
disproportionate effects on particular communities, demographic
groups and geographic locations.
 Providing data and tools is a key component of OSWER’s proposed
actions with both tribes and vulnerable populations.
 OSWER will continue to consider other ways in which we can assist or
partner in these areas.
18
Review – Public Comment Period
REMINDER
Comments and questions taken during this session
will not be formally entered into the system. Please
visit regulations.gov and enter your comment if you
would like to have it formally considered.
Comments will be accepted through January 3 in the Federal Register
comment system.
•
•
http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs/EPA-implplans.html
http://www.regulations.gov (Docket# EPA-HQ-OA-2013-0568)
19
Questions?
Jennifer Brady
[email protected]
202-566-1701
20
Complete list of vulnerabilities
p.1 of 3
Proper Management of Hazardous and Non-Hazardous Wastes
 Design and placement of RCRA Treatment, Storage and Disposal facilities, non-hazardous
Subtitle D landfills, Superfund remedies and municipal recycling facilities may need to change
to accommodate climate change impacts.
 Hazardous waste permitting requirements may need to be updated to reflect climate change
impacts.
 Current waste management capacity may be insufficient to handle surges in necessary
treatment and disposal of hazardous and municipal wastes, as well as mixed wastes generated
from climate events.
 Levels of necessary financial assurance at RCRA and CERCLA facilities may need to adjust for
increased risks/liabilities at specific facilities that may be directly affected by climate change
impacts.
Reducing Chemical Risks and Releases
 Remediation and containment strategies and materials used in construction may need to be
strengthened to reflect changing climate conditions.
 Current equipment, scientific monitoring and sampling protocols on sites may no longer be
effective and therefore may require adjustments due to climate change impacts.
 Current assumptions regarding protectiveness of remediation and containment methods may
not reflect changing climate impacts.
 Spill Prevention Plans may need to be updated due to the significant increases in the incidence
of flooding and storm events.
21
Complete list of vulnerabilities
p.2 of 3
Restoring Land
 Site characterization and design of cleanups may not reflect changing climate conditions.
 Risk factors and rankings for risk-based cleanup strategies may need to be reassessed based on
changing climate conditions.
 Changing climate conditions may impact continued remedy effectiveness.
 Remedies that are “complete” or are long-term actions may no longer be protective and resilient
as climate conditions change at site.
 Increased contaminant migration may lead to boundary changes at current sites or creation of
new sites.
 Changes in climate conditions may alter assumptions about contaminant form/volatility.
 Current scientific monitoring and sampling protocols on sites may no longer be effective.
 Safety procedures on sites may not reflect likelihood or intensity of surrounding conditions.
 Availability of utilities and transportation infrastructure may be limited as a result of increased
impacts to those systems.
 Current assumptions regarding protectiveness of remediation and containment methods may
not reflect changing climate impacts.
 Periodic evaluations of implemented remedies may not incorporate all climate change impacts,
including changes in frequency and intensity that may impact remedy effectiveness.
 Use of natural resources impacted by sites may change as a result of increased need, resource
scarcity, or compromised resources.
22
Complete list of vulnerabilities
p.3 of 3
Emergency Response





Current levels of administrative, enforcement, and emergency response staff may be insufficient
to cover needs if number of extreme events increase.
Sufficient capability and capacity for conducting necessary lab analysis following significant
weather events may not be available.
Current waste management capacity, including interim capacity, may be insufficient to handle
surges in necessary treatment and disposal of hazardous and municipal wastes, as well as mixed
wastes generated from climate events.
Training needs (both current and future) are likely to increase in order to meet the increase
demand for response actions.
Existing emergency planning currently required or employed by OSWER may not sufficiently
consider elevated risks from multiple climate impacts.
Tools, Data, Training and Outreach
Outreach and educational materials may need to be developed for owners and operators with
facilities in areas of changing environmental conditions.
 Revised training protocols and SOPs that take into account climate change impacts and what to
look for may need to be developed.
 Reliable data sources to use in site-specific analyses may need to be identified
 Models, decision tools, site environmental data and information feeds may need to be updated
to reflect changing climate conditions

23
New Ways to stay
connected!
• www.cluin.org
• Follow CLU-IN on Facebook, LinkedIn, or Twitter
https://www.facebook.com/EPACleanUpTech
https://twitter.com/#!/EPACleanUpTech
http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Clean-UpInformation-Network-CLUIN-4405740
Resources & Feedback
• To view a complete list of resources for this
seminar, please visit the Additional Resources
• Please complete the Feedback Form to help
ensure events like this are offered in the future
Need confirmation of your
participation today?
Fill out the feedback form and
check box for confirmation email.