By JORGE CASPARY, PG
The recent lowering of the funding score in the Petroleum Restoration Program (PRP) to the lowest risk score and the latest dashboard by the program in July is telling.
It showcases several critical elements:
After 40 years of the program’s creation and several Legislative-mandated metamorphoses, the last tranche of discharges is now in the process of being assessed.
99 percent of the riskiest discharges to human health have been addressed.
More than 1,000 discharges are in the Remedial Action Plan (RAP) design phase, with the majority moving to remedial action construction in FY 26/27.
Approximately 1,450 discharges are in the Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) phase – an increasingly growing phase.
These numbers also show the meeting of the main objective asked for by the Florida Legislature in 1986 – classify discharges according to their risk to human health and remediate the riskiest first.
With nearly 100 percent of the riskiest discharges either remediated or in the process of remediation, the PRP can affirmatively state the foremost objective of the program has been met.
Another important milestone is that, at long last, the program switches its focus to address the lowest risk discharges, or those scored between <6 to 14. The program will likely use the majority of future Legislative funding on these sites. As hundreds of these discharge sites were nearing the end of their application period cutoff date in December 1988, owners sought taxpayer cleanup funding. Future assessment work of these discharges will provide clarity in terms of future Program capital obligations.
Other important numbers reflected in the monthly dashboards are that less than 10 percent of discharges are closed by the Low Scored Site Initiative (LSSI) or via LSSI NFA, and very few discharges are closed using institutional controls. In the case of the former, the Legislature-created LSSI aimed to increase the number of site closures, but it appears the initiative’s foundation to close sites with minimal contamination has reached the end.
In the case of the latter, the application of Risk-Based Corrective Action (RBCA) principles to the program and site closure requires a dialogue with all stakeholders, particularly for those discharges that are beyond the criteria of its statutory-required “cost-effective” taxpayer-funded remediation. This is more important in light of area-wide emerging contaminant plumes that may encompass PRP active discharges and may have to be managed using RBCA principles.
A recent inquiry to the PRP indicates that approximately 20 percent of discharges in MNA have been in that phase between three and in excess of five years. This number is expected to increase and MNA likely will constitute the biggest phase in the future.
However, a study commissioned by the PRP in 2014 on a subset of sites in MNA indicated that more than 50 percent would never reach Groundwater Cleanup Target Levels (GCTL) since favorable natural attenuation conditions were not present. We have seen these sites: concentrations of contaminants hover around their GCTLs but never get there.
In practical terms, this means that hundreds of future discharges will not reach closure, thus representing a perpetual monetary obligation to the taxpayer.
Considering this, and the ever-present question by the Legislature of the Program’s end, taking a second look at these discharges in excess of three years, but certainly in excess of five years, and how to bring them to swift closure is worth discussing.
As it marks its 40th anniversary, the PRP has entered its widely believed final phase and the program’s main objective has been successfully met; however, future dialogue with stakeholders on refinements will be necessary to ensure its final objective: bringing the program to a successful landing.
Jorge Caspary is a Senior Principal at Onterris, Inc., and former Division of Waste Director at the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
