Conference Call Minutes from July 6, 2006

State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Conference Call

State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Conference Call

July 6, 2006

Conference Call Participants
Connecticut - Sheila Gleason             
Florida – Bill Linn, John Winters                                             
Illinois – Pat Ericksen
Kansas – Bob Jurgens
Minnesota – Allen Dotson
Missouri – Scott Hucksteop, David Kindelspire, Vicky Kugler
North Carolina – John Powers, Delonda Alexander, Al Chapman, Dianne Thomas, Niki Fountain
Oregon - Don Hanson
South Carolina – Eric Cathcart, Rachel Donica, Lisa Appel, Julie Friddell 
Texas – Richard Scharlock, Dan Switek
Wisconsin - Terry Evanson, Jeff Soellner
Virginia – Meade Anderson                             

Opening Remarks

A new SCRD chair person will be elected at the fall meeting in Austin.  Anyone interested in becoming the next SCRD chair should e-mail SCRD members stating why they want to be the chair.  Additionally, elections will be held for the chairs of the three standing subgroups: Administrative, Project Management/Technical and Outreach, and a volunteer will be needed to record teleconference minutes for the next year.  An e-mail will be sent to all SCRD members documenting who has served as SCRD chair and who has served as subgroup chairs.  This is a good opportunity to become more involved in SCRD.  It’s time for some new leaders to step forward with some fresh ideas on the future direction of SCRD.  

Outreach Subgroup

Scott Huckstep, Outreach chair, reported that the Spring Newsletter had been sent out and was also posted on the SCRD website.  This is the first Newsletter to include a “State Updates” section, which hopefully will become a regular part of future newsletters.  Special thanks to Florida, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Oregon and Virginia for submitting state updates.

Administrative Subgroup 

Subgroup Chair Pat Ericksen reminded everyone that each state should update data on the State Drycleaners Remediation Programs tables.  The updated data need to be submitted to the subgroup chair at the fall meeting so that the website can be updated.  Among the topics to be discussed at the Administrative Subgroup meetings at Austin is a paper addressing drycleaning program administrative issues, particularly: What are the problems? and, How are they being addressed?

Project Management/Technical Subgroup

Subgroup chair Eric Cathcart stated that the subgroup is working on a paper summarizing the remedial data on the Site Profile section of the SCRD website.  The data set consists of profiles on 116 drycleaning sites.  A spreadsheet, tracking thirty-three data categories has been compiled and is currently being proofed and revised.  Various graphs, plots and comparisons of the data are currently being generated.  Writing of the paper will begin soon.  A few members of the subgroup will meet prior to the Austin meeting to write a draft paper.

Julie Friddell, of South Carolina DHEC, stated that she has received a number of photos documenting regulatory compliance issues at drycleaning sites.  She is still soliciting photos and narrative for a “Compliance Virtual Tour”.  Eric Swope of North Carolina was “volunteered” to work with Julie on the presentation.  Additional data will be supplied by Florida.  A “prize” will be awarded at the Austin meeting for the best “non-compliance photograph”.  Its not too late to enter your favorite photograph.

Vapor Intrusion Mitigation

Meade Anderson of the Virginia led a discussion on vapor intrusion mitigation.  The question that prompted discussion was: Might it not be more cost effective to install small mitigation units at a site if there is a question of vapor intrusion than to collect data, conduct modeling etc. given all the associated uncertainties?

Fall Meeting

The next meeting for SCRD will be held in Austin, Texas in either late September or late October.  Preferences for meeting dates were discussed.  A draft meeting agenda, compiled by Dick DeZeeuw was discussed.  There were at least two proposals to allot more time for case studies.  The draft agenda currently allots two time slots (total of three hours, fifteen minutes) which would allow for six case studies.  The point was made that it has been nearly two years since the last meeting, most of the SCRD states are currently in the assessment/remediation phase and that a lot of new data is available that would be of interest to all of the states.  One proposal called for conversion of one of the two proposed round table discussions to case studies. 

There are two committee meetings scheduled on the draft agenda for a total of 3 hours, forty-five minutes of committee meetings.  There was a call for more committee meeting time.  It was noted that with only one opportunity a year for a face-to-face committee meeting, more time needs to be spent in committee meetings at the annual meeting if the committees plan to produce products (papers, etc.) for the website and/or for presentations at conferences. 

Conversely, additional time for case studies would be available if the committee meeting times could be shortened.  Some members consider case studies to be invaluable because experiences related by member states on assessment and remedial work are generally accurate and truthful in documenting problems and solutions.  Additional committee work can be conducted via teleconferences, as demonstrated by the Project Management Technical Subgroup, which has conducted two teleconferences this past year devoted to work on the site profiles paper.  If you want to proposed and or lead a round table discussion, present a case study or have any ideas, suggestions, etc. regarding the fall meeting, please contact Dick DeZeeuw of Oregon. (dezeeuw.dick@deq.state.or.us  or phone: (503) 229-6240). 

Training for the Austin meeting will be “A Practical Approach for Assessing Upward Vapor Intrusion Risk” by Blayne Hartman of H&P Mobile Geochemistry. 

At least one vendor and one consultant have expressed a desire to make a presentation to the SCRD at the Austin meeting.  Members need to consider these requests.  The group will need to decide what our preferences are, given a two-and-one-half day meeting

Each member state should decide on who will be attending the Austin meeting.  States should update their state statistics for presentation at the “State Briefings” on the first full day of the meeting.  Since we are meeting once a year at least one person from each attending state should plan on actively participating in the meeting, either by presenting a case study or participating in a round table discussion (exclusive of the State Updates).         

Next Teleconference: Thursday, August 17: 11:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time.