ASTM E2205/E2205M-02(2014)
(Guide)Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action for Protection of Ecological Resources
Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action for Protection of Ecological Resources
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The Eco-RBCA process presented in this guide is a streamlined decision-making process for implementing corrective action protective of ecological resources at chemical release sites in a consistent manner. Eco-RBCA provides a framework for sites not covered under regulatory programs, for sites under regulatory programs that lack guidance, or for sites under programs with guidance that lack detail. Eco-RBCA may also provide a useful framework to help merge an approach when multiple regulatory programs apply.
4.2 Ecological risk assessment is a science-based process that can be used to provide insight for risk management decision-making. Numerous federal and state programs have guidance for conducting ERA. Available regulatory approaches to ERA were reviewed in preparation for the development of this Eco-RBCA guide. Eco-RBCA was designed to be adaptable to the use of a variety of methods for considering risks to relevant ecological receptors and habitats. Some attributes of the standard are:
4.2.1 Use of a tiered approach, including process flow charts to identify critical steps and facilitate the development of an overview of the entire process;
4.2.2 Identification, development, and use of TPDs from Step 1 and throughout the entire Eco-RBCA process;
4.2.3 Indications of the value and timing of stakeholder involvement, recognizing that some regulations require coordination with federal, state, tribal, and natural-resource trustees, and other stakeholders;
4.2.4 Identification of situations under which an ERA may or may not be necessary; and
4.2.5 Identification of decision points where ERA results are used for risk management decision making.
4.3 Activities described in this guide should involve persons with the appropriate skills and expertise. The user may rely on individuals expert in remediation science and technology, ecology/biology, ecotoxicology, ERA practices, and site characterization techniques.
4.4 This guide and supporting app...
SCOPE
1.1 This is a guide to risk-based corrective action for the protection of ecological resources and supplements the RBCA process (Guide E2081). The primary objective of the Eco-RBCA process is to provide a flexible framework for a tiered approach to ERA and risk management decision making at chemical release sites. To this end, available guidance documents from various federal and state agencies were reviewed and their common attributes incorporated into this guide, where possible. The Eco-RBCA process complements existing technical and regulatory ecological risk guidance (see 4.2). In particular, it is intended to be compatible with the USEPA programmatic guidelines for ERA (1)2, guidance for the Superfund program (2), and other USEPA (3) risk assessment and corrective-action programs. Eco-RBCA might also be used in conjunction with corrective action strategies that include human health issues (for example, Guide E2081).
1.2 Chemical release sites vary greatly in terms of complexity, physical and chemical characteristics, and the risk that they might pose to ecological resources. The Eco-RBCA process, as described in Guide E2081, recognizes this variability and incorporates a tiered approach that integrates site assessment, response actions, and remedial actions with ERA. The process begins with relatively simple analyses in Tier 1 and, if necessary, proceeds to more detailed evaluations in Tier 2 or Tier 3. The process of gathering and evaluating data is conducted in such a manner that only those data that are necessary for a given tier's decision making are collected at each tier. Hence, this can facilitate effective use of resources and reduce initial data requirements.
1.3 Eco-RBCA is intended to provide a framework for sites not covered under regulatory programs and for sites under regulatory programs that lack specific guidance. Eco-RBCA may also provide a useful framework to help merge several possible appr...
General Information
Buy Standard
Standards Content (Sample)
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation: E2205/E2205M − 02 (Reapproved 2014)
Standard Guide for
Risk-Based Corrective Action for Protection of Ecological
Resources
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2205/E2205M; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year
of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval.
A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
INTRODUCTION
This guide for risk-based corrective action for the protection of ecological resources (Eco-RBCA)
provides a flexible framework for a tiered approach to ecological risk assessment (ERA) and risk
management decision-making at chemical release sites. The framework of the Eco-RBCA guide
parallels the framework in Guide E2081 with respect to the tiered approach for data gathering,
evaluation and decision-making, and should, when possible, be conducted concurrent with the broader
RBCA process activities. The Eco-RBCA guide directs the user to Guide E2081 for development and
implementation of a corrective action program. This guide supplements Guide E2081 and was
developed after careful consideration of the peer-reviewed published literature and existing federal,
regional, and state ecological risk–assessment guidance. The user of this guide, as defined in 3.1.45,
needs to be familiar with Guide E2081 and the overall RBCA process. The RBCA process provides
a flexible, technically defensible framework for corrective action that has applicability to a wide range
of sites and chemicals of concern.
ASTM guides are not federal or state regulations; rather, they are consensus standards that can be
followed voluntarily. It is not within the scope of this standard to provide the details of specific
regulatory requirements. Collectively, the Eco-RBCA and RBCA guides provide an integrated
framework to corrective action. Eco-RBCA is intended to complement rather than replace the
decision-making structures of regulatory programs. In addition, Eco-RBCA is intended to provide a
framework for sites not covered under regulatory programs, for sites under regulatory programs that
lack guidance, or for sites under programs with guidance that lack detail. Eco-RBCA may also provide
a useful framework to help merge an approach when multiple regulatory programs apply. Even when
a site is not currently governed by a regulatory program, consultation with the appropriate regulatory
agency(ies) will ensure regulatory compliance and provide technical guidance.
The Eco-RBCA process is intended to accommodate a diversity of sites and conditions by providing
a framework that can address site-specific needs. The appendixes provide useful technical details and
case study examples, although the application of this guide does not require their use. Eco-RBCA is
a process for evaluating ecological risk and decision making. To facilitate the implementation of
Eco-RBCA, the framework is organized into ten steps and three risk assessment tiers that begin with
relatively simple analyses and progress to more complex assessments as site conditions warrant (see
Fig. 1). Although organized into steps and tiers, the user should recognize that Eco-RBCA progresses
conceptually in a linear manner, but may not be implemented in a linear manner. The objective should
be to conduct the evaluation in the manner that most appropriately meets the needs and goals of the
assessment. Each tier includes five types of activities that increase in complexity and level of effort
as the evaluation progresses through the RBCA process. These activities are (1) planning and scoping,
(2) data and information acquisition, (3) analysis and evaluation, (4) decision making, and (5)
remedial actions. The details of the activities and how they are implemented can vary, depending on
the nature and complexity of the site and the tier level. Early in the Eco-RBCA process, assumptions
are biased toward being overly protective (that is, “conservative”) because of uncertainties inherent in
non–site-specific data. Typically, as the site progresses through the tiered evaluation, more site-specific
information is collected and uncertainty decreases; therefore, less-conservative assumptions can be
used in the evaluation. As understanding of site conditions improves, confidence often increases. The
progression of the evaluation through the tiered process is accompanied by an increasing degree of
formalization that could include the documentation of a screening-level assessment or the use of
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
formal ecological risk assessment (ERA) methods. As additional site-specific information is
developed, the uncertainty associated with site conditions is reduced. Commensurate with this reduced
uncertainty, the user can employ more site-specific and less conservative estimates and assumptions
of exposure and effects. The manner in which uncertainty, conservatism, data quality, and other
technical aspects are addressed is by technical policy decisions.
Technical policy decisions (TPDs) are an important part of the Eco-RBCA process, and while it is
not within the scope of this standard to identify the TPDs appropriate for a specific site, Appendix X2
and Guide E2081 provide additional insight into their identification, understanding, and development.
Technical policy decisions generally fall into three categories: (1) those that are identified as existing
prior to the Eco-RBCA assessment and will not change (that is, prescribed and without flexibility such
as regulations or policy), (2) those that are identified as existing prior to the Eco-RBCA assessment
but may change or be modified based on site-specific information (for example, sampling protocols,
selection of models or other tools, or corrective-action goals), and (3) those that are developed
specifically for the Eco-RBCA assessment (for example, development of a site-specific model).
Technical policy decisions are typically identified, negotiated (if appropriate), and documented in the
initial site assessment (see 7.1). It is the responsibility of the user of the Eco-RBCA guide to identify
and consider the TPDs and appropriate stakeholders for a site. These TPDs may need to be reevaluated
each time the Eco-RBCA evaluation proceeds through an iteration or progresses to a new tier. Both
the RBCA and Eco-RBCA processes encourage user-led initiatives and appropriate stakeholder
involvement in identifying TPDs and developing the Eco-RBCA program. Laws and regulations may
require coordination with federal, state, and natural resource trustees.
This guide serves to complement existing guidance for hazardous-waste sites and facilities and to
provide guidance for sites not under regulatory programs. This guide does not substitute for applicable
federal, regional, state, local, or other regulatory requirements. This guide is not a regulation itself and
may not apply to a particular situation, based on the circumstances.
This guide is not intended to replace professional judgment or to recommend a specific course of
action. All aspects of this guide might not be applicable in all circumstances. This guide is not intended
to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service is
judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project’s many unique aspects.
The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved
through the ASTM consensus process.
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E50 on Environmental Assessment, Risk Management and Corrective Action and is the direct responsibility
of Subcommittee E50.04 on Corrective Action.
ε1
Current edition approved Dec. 1, 2014. Published May 2015. Originally approved in 2002. Last previous edition approved in 2009 as E2205 – 02(2009) . DOI:
10.1520/E2205_E2205M-02R14.
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
FIG. 1 Eco-RBCA Process Flowchart—Adapted from the RBCA Flowchart (Guide E2081)
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
FIG. 2 Tier 1 Evaluation Flowchart
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
FIG. 3 Tier 2 Evaluation Flowchart
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
FIG. 4 Tier 3 Evaluation Flowchart
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
1. Scope 1.5.2 Data used in the Eco-RBCA process be of sufficient
quantity and quality to answer the questions and support the
1.1 This is a guide to risk-based corrective action for the
decisions made at the tier of investigation;
protection of ecological resources and supplements the RBCA
1.5.3 Site assessments be distinguished into tiers of appro-
process (Guide E2081). The primary objective of the Eco-
priate levels of evaluation;
RBCA process is to provide a flexible framework for a tiered
1.5.4 Actions taken should integrate the Eco-RBCA process
approach to ERA and risk management decision making at
for the protection of relevant ecological receptors and habitats
chemical release sites. To this end, available guidance docu-
and RBCA for the protection of human health (see Guide
ments from various federal and state agencies were reviewed
E2081), as appropriate;
and their common attributes incorporated into this guide,
1.5.5 Applicable federal, state, and local laws and regula-
where possible. The Eco-RBCA process complements existing
tions be followed; and
technical and regulatory ecological risk guidance (see 4.2). In
particular, it is intended to be compatible with the USEPA 1.5.6 Potential adverse effects on relevant ecological recep-
tors and habitats be considered when selecting remedial action
programmatic guidelines for ERA (1) , guidance for the
Superfund program (2), and other USEPA (3) risk assessment alternatives. The remedial action alternatives should be con-
and corrective-action programs. Eco-RBCA might also be used sistent with the TPDs and the RBCA process (see Guide
in conjunction with corrective action strategies that include E2081).
human health issues (for example, Guide E2081).
1.6 Ecological resources are the focus of this guide; risks to
1.2 Chemical release sites vary greatly in terms of human health are addressed for petroleum releases and chemi-
complexity, physical and chemical characteristics, and the risk
cal releases in other ASTM RBCA standards (Guides E1739
that they might pose to ecological resources. The Eco-RBCA and E2081). There are many features common to all three of
process, as described in Guide E2081, recognizes this variabil-
the RBCA guides. These three guides share the basic elements
ity and incorporates a tiered approach that integrates site of RBCA: (1) site assessment; (2) tiered evaluations of
assessment, response actions, and remedial actions with ERA.
exposure, effects, and risk; (3) risk-based decision making; and
The process begins with relatively simple analyses in Tier 1 (4) response, remedial action, and monitoring. There are a
and, if necessary, proceeds to more detailed evaluations in Tier
number of distinctions between human health and ecological
2 or Tier 3. The process of gathering and evaluating data is risk assessments. For example, while human health risk assess-
conducted in such a manner that only those data that are
ments focus on individuals, evaluations of ecological risk
necessary for a given tier’s decision making are collected at typically focus on populations, communities, or ecosystems.
each tier. Hence, this can facilitate effective use of resources
Exceptions are species or habitats designated for special
and reduce initial data requirements. protection (for example, endangered species). Biological data
to support an ERA are more amenable to direct field observa-
1.3 Eco-RBCA is intended to provide a framework for sites
tion than are human exposure and epidemiological data.
not covered under regulatory programs and for sites under
regulatory programs that lack specific guidance. Eco-RBCA
1.7 The Eco-RBCA process addresses current and potential
may also provide a useful framework to help merge several
future risks to relevant ecological receptors and habitats at
possible approaches into a single approach when multiple
chemical release sites. It is not intended to apply to current
regulatory programs apply. The user should be aware of the
permitted releases and permit applications.
federal, state, and local corrective action programs and policies
1.8 Eco-RBCA focuses on chemical stressors. However, the
that are applicable for the site and, regardless of the program,
user may need to consider biological or physical stressors at the
that agency approvals might be required to implement the
site or effects from chemical sources unrelated to the site.
process for completing ERAs.
1.9 The process described in this guide integrates the
1.4 Various TPDs will need to be made regarding the
principles of current ERA practices with site assessment
aspects of Eco-RBCA. These TPDs may cover both the
activities and remedial-action selection to ensure that the risk
philosophical and methodological aspects, from what values to
management decision protects ecological resources. Fig. 1
protect to exactly how the Eco-RBCA process will be per-
illustrates the following activities in Eco-RBCA and those
formed. TPDs may affect every stage of the process, from the
described in Section 7 (7.1 – 7.10):
initial site assessment to development and monitoring of the
1.9.1 Step 1—Initial Site Assessment;
remedy. It is the responsibility of the user to identify the
1.9.2 Step 2—Decision Point;
appropriate TPDs. Section 7, Appendix X2, and Guide E2081
1.9.3 Step 3—Tier 1 Ecological Risk Assessment;
provide more detail regarding TPDs in the Eco-RBCA process.
1.9.4 Step 4—Tier 1 Decision Point;
1.5 The general performance standard for this document
1.9.5 Step 5—Tier 2 Ecological Risk Assessment;
requires that:
1.9.6 Step 6—Tier 2 Decision Point;
1.5.1 Applicable TPDs be identified, beginning at the ini-
1.9.7 Step 7—Tier 3 Ecological Risk Assessment;
tiation of the Eco-RBCA process, and as appropriate, at later
1.9.8 Step 8—Tier 3 Decision Point;
stages;
1.9.9 Step 9—Implementing the Remedial Action Program;
and
The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end of
this standard. 1.9.10 Step 10—Monitoring Programs (7.10).
E2205/E2205M − 02 (
...
This document is not an ASTM standard and is intended only to provide the user of an ASTM standard an indication of what changes have been made to the previous version. Because
it may not be technically possible to adequately depict all changes accurately, ASTM recommends that users consult prior editions as appropriate. In all cases only the current version
of the standard as published by ASTM is to be considered the official document.
´1
Designation: E2205/E2205M − 02 (Reapproved 2009) E2205/E2205M − 02 (Reapproved
2014)
Standard Guide for
Risk-Based Corrective Action for Protection of Ecological
Resources
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2205/E2205M; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year
of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval.
A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
ε NOTE—The designation and the units of measurement were editorially revised in March 2009.
INTRODUCTION
This guide for risk-based corrective action for the protection of ecological resources (Eco-RBCA)
provides a flexible framework for a tiered approach to ecological risk assessment (ERA) and risk
management decision-making at chemical release sites. The framework of the Eco-RBCA guide
parallels the framework in Guide E2081 with respect to the tiered approach for data gathering,
evaluation and decision-making, and should, when possible, be conducted concurrent with the broader
RBCA process activities. The Eco-RBCA guide directs the user to Guide E2081 for development and
implementation of a corrective action program. This guide supplements Guide E2081 and was
developed after careful consideration of the peer-reviewed published literature and existing federal,
regional, and state ecological risk–assessment guidance. The user of this guide, as defined in 3.1.45,
needs to be familiar with Guide E2081 and the overall RBCA process. The RBCA process provides
a flexible, technically defensible framework for corrective action that has applicability to a wide range
of sites and chemicals of concern.
ASTM guides are not federal or state regulations; rather, they are consensus standards that can be
followed voluntarily. It is not within the scope of this standard to provide the details of specific
regulatory requirements. Collectively, the Eco-RBCA and RBCA guides provide an integrated
framework to corrective action. Eco-RBCA is intended to complement rather than replace the
decision-making structures of regulatory programs. In addition, Eco-RBCA is intended to provide a
framework for sites not covered under regulatory programs, for sites under regulatory programs that
lack guidance, or for sites under programs with guidance that lack detail. Eco-RBCA may also provide
a useful framework to help merge an approach when multiple regulatory programs apply. Even when
a site is not currently governed by a regulatory program, consultation with the appropriate regulatory
agency(ies) will ensure regulatory compliance and provide technical guidance.
The Eco-RBCA process is intended to accommodate a diversity of sites and conditions by providing
a framework that can address site-specific needs. The appendixes provide useful technical details and
case study examples, although the application of this guide does not require their use. Eco-RBCA is
a process for evaluating ecological risk and decision making. To facilitate the implementation of
Eco-RBCA, the framework is organized into ten steps and three risk assessment tiers that begin with
relatively simple analyses and progress to more complex assessments as site conditions warrant (see
Fig. 1). Although organized into steps and tiers, the user should recognize that Eco-RBCA progresses
conceptually in a linear manner, but may not be implemented in a linear manner. The objective should
be to conduct the evaluation in the manner that most appropriately meets the needs and goals of the
assessment. Each tier includes five types of activities that increase in complexity and level of effort
as the evaluation progresses through the RBCA process. These activities are (1) planning and scoping,
(2) data and information acquisition, (3) analysis and evaluation, (4) decision making, and (5)
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E50 on Environmental Assessment, Risk Management and Corrective Action and is the direct responsibility
of Subcommittee E50.04 on Corrective Action.
Current edition approved Feb. 1, 2009Dec. 1, 2014. Published March 2009May 2015. Originally approved in 2002. Last previous edition approved in 20022009 as
ε1
E2205 – 02.E2205 – 02(2009) . DOI: 10.1520/E2205_E2205M-02R09E01.10.1520/E2205_E2205M-02R14.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
FIG. 1 Eco-RBCA Process Flowchart—Adapted from the RBCA Flowchart (Guide E2081)
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
FIG. 2 Tier 1 Evaluation Flowchart
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
FIG. 3 Tier 2 Evaluation Flowchart
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
FIG. 4 Tier 3 Evaluation Flowchart
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
remedial actions. The details of the activities and how they are implemented can vary, depending on
the nature and complexity of the site and the tier level. Early in the Eco-RBCA process, assumptions
are biased toward being overly protective (that is, “conservative”) because of uncertainties inherent in
non–site-specific data. Typically, as the site progresses through the tiered evaluation, more site-specific
information is collected and uncertainty decreases; therefore, less-conservative assumptions can be
used in the evaluation. As understanding of site conditions improves, confidence often increases. The
progression of the evaluation through the tiered process is accompanied by an increasing degree of
formalization that could include the documentation of a screening-level assessment or the use of
formal ecological risk assessment (ERA) methods. As additional site-specific information is
developed, the uncertainty associated with site conditions is reduced. Commensurate with this reduced
uncertainty, the user can employ more site-specific and less conservative estimates and assumptions
of exposure and effects. The manner in which uncertainty, conservatism, data quality, and other
technical aspects are addressed is by technical policy decisions.
Technical policy decisions (TPDs) are an important part of the Eco-RBCA process, and while it is
not within the scope of this standard to identify the TPDs appropriate for a specific site, Appendix X2
and Guide E2081 provide additional insight into their identification, understanding, and development.
Technical policy decisions generally fall into three categories: (1) those that are identified as existing
prior to the Eco-RBCA assessment and will not change (that is, prescribed and without flexibility such
as regulations or policy), (2) those that are identified as existing prior to the Eco-RBCA assessment
but may change or be modified based on site-specific information (for example, sampling protocols,
selection of models or other tools, or corrective-action goals), and (3) those that are developed
specifically for the Eco-RBCA assessment (for example, development of a site-specific model).
Technical policy decisions are typically identified, negotiated (if appropriate), and documented in the
initial site assessment (see 7.1). It is the responsibility of the user of the Eco-RBCA guide to identify
and consider the TPDs and appropriate stakeholders for a site. These TPDs may need to be reevaluated
each time the Eco-RBCA evaluation proceeds through an iteration or progresses to a new tier. Both
the RBCA and Eco-RBCA processes encourage user-led initiatives and appropriate stakeholder
involvement in identifying TPDs and developing the Eco-RBCA program. Laws and regulations may
require coordination with federal, state, and natural resource trustees.
This guide serves to complement existing guidance for hazardous-waste sites and facilities and to
provide guidance for sites not under regulatory programs. This guide does not substitute for applicable
federal, regional, state, local, or other regulatory requirements. This guide is not a regulation itself and
may not apply to a particular situation, based on the circumstances.
This guide is not intended to replace professional judgment or to recommend a specific course of
action. All aspects of this guide might not be applicable in all circumstances. This guide is not intended
to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service is
judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project’s many unique aspects.
The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved
through the ASTM consensus process.
E2205/E2205M − 02 (2014)
1. Scope
1.1 This is a guide to risk-based corrective action for the protection of ecological resources and supplements the RBCA process
(Guide E2081). The primary objective of the Eco-RBCA process is to provide a flexible framework for a tiered approach to ERA
and risk management decision making at chemical release sites. To this end, available guidance documents from various federal
and state agencies were reviewed and their common attributes incorporated into this guide, where possible. The Eco-RBCA process
complements existing technical and regulatory ecological risk guidance (see 4.2). In particular, it is intended to be compatible with
the USEPA programmatic guidelines for ERA (1) , guidance for the Superfund program (2), and other USEPA (3) risk assessment
and corrective-action programs. Eco-RBCA might also be used in conjunction with corrective action strategies that include human
health issues (for example, Guide E2081).
1.2 Chemical release sites vary greatly in terms of complexity, physical and chemical characteristics, and the risk that they might
pose to ecological resources. The Eco-RBCA process, as described in Guide E2081, recognizes this variability and incorporates
a tiered approach that integrates site assessment, response actions, and remedial actions with ERA. The process begins with
relatively simple analyses in Tier 1 and, if necessary, proceeds to more detailed evaluations in Tier 2 or Tier 3. The process of
gathering and evaluating data is conducted in such a manner that only those data that are necessary for a given tier’s decision
making are collected at each tier. Hence, this can facilitate effective use of resources and reduce initial data requirements.
1.3 Eco-RBCA is intended to provide a framework for sites not covered under regulatory programs and for sites under
regulatory programs that lack specific guidance. Eco-RBCA may also provide a useful framework to help merge several possible
approaches into a single approach when multiple regulatory programs apply. The user should be aware of the federal, state, and
local corrective action programs and policies that are applicable for the site and, regardless of the program, that agency approvals
might be required to implement the process for completing ERAs.
1.4 Various TPDs will need to be made regarding the aspects of Eco-RBCA. These TPDs may cover both the philosophical and
methodological aspects, from what values to protect to exactly how the Eco-RBCA process will be performed. TPDs may affect
every stage of the process, from the initial site assessment to development and monitoring of the remedy. It is the responsibility
of the user to identify the appropriate TPDs. Section 7, Appendix X2, and Guide E2081 provide more detail regarding TPDs in
the Eco-RBCA process.
1.5 The general performance standard for this document requires that:
1.5.1 Applicable TPDs be identified, beginning at the initiation of the Eco-RBCA process, and as appropriate, at later stages;
1.5.2 Data used in the Eco-RBCA process be of sufficient quantity and quality to answer the questions and support the decisions
made at the tier of investigation;
1.5.3 Site assessments be distinguished into tiers of appropriate levels of evaluation;
1.5.4 Actions taken should integrate the Eco-RBCA process for the protection of relevant ecological receptors and habitats and
RBCA for the protection of human health (see Guide E2081), as appropriate;
1.5.5 Applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations be followed; and
1.5.6 Potential adverse effects on relevant ecological receptors and habitats be considered when selecting remedial action
alternatives. The remedial action alternatives should be consistent with the TPDs and the RBCA process (see Guide E2081).
1.6 Ecological resources are the focus of this guide; risks to human health are addressed for petroleum releases and chemical
E1739 and E2081). There are many features common to all three of the RBCA
releases in other ASTM RBCA standards (Guides
guides. These three guides share the basic elements of RBCA: (1) site assessment; (2) tiered evaluations of exposure, effects, and
risk; (3) risk-based decision making; and (4) response, remedial action, and monitoring. There are a number of distinctions between
human health and ecological risk assessments. For example, while human health risk assessments focus on individuals, evaluations
of ecological risk typically focus on populations, communities, or ecosystems. Exceptions are species or habitats designated for
special protection (for example, endangered species). Biological data to support an ERA are more amenable to direct field
observation than are human exposure and epidemiological data.
1.7 The Eco-RBCA process addresses current and potential future risks to relevant ecological receptors and habitats at chemical
release sites. It is not intended to apply to current permitted releases and permit applications.
1.8 Eco-RBCA focuses on chemical stressors. However, the user may need to consider biological or physical stressors at the
site or effects from chemical sources unrelated to the site.
1.9 The process described in this guide integrates the principles of current ERA practices with site assessment activities and
remedial-action selection to ensure that the risk management decision protects ecological resources. Fig. 1 illustrates the following
activities in Eco-RBCA and those described in Section 7 (7.1 – 7.10):
1.9.1 Step 1—Initial Site Assessment;
1.9.2 Step 2—Decision Point;
1.9.3 Step 3—Tier 1 Ecological Risk Assessment;
The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.