1、Designation: E 2205 02Standard Guide forRisk-Based Corrective Action for Protection of EcologicalResources1This standard is issued under the fixed designation E 2205; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last
2、 revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.INTRODUCTIONThis guide for risk-based corrective action for the protection of ecological resources (Eco-RBCA)provides a flexible fram
3、ework for a tiered approach to ecological risk assessment (ERA) and riskmanagement decision-making at chemical release sites. The framework of the Eco-RBCA guideparallels the framework in Guide E 2081 with respect to the tiered approach for data gathering,evaluation and decision-making, and should,
4、when possible, be conducted concurrent with the broaderRBCA process activities. The Eco-RBCA guide directs the user to Guide E 2081 for development andimplementation of a corrective action program. This guide supplements Guide E 2081 and wasdeveloped after careful consideration of the peer-reviewed
5、published literature and existing federal,regional, and state ecological riskassessment guidance. The user of this guide, as defined in 3.1.44,needs to be familiar with Guide E 2081 and the overall RBCA process. The RBCA process providesa flexible, technically defensible framework for corrective act
6、ion that has applicability to a wide rangeof sites and chemicals of concern.ASTM guides are not federal or state regulations; rather, they are consensus standards that can befollowed voluntarily. It is not within the scope of this standard to provide the details of specificregulatory requirements. C
7、ollectively, the Eco-RBCA and RBCA guides provide an integratedframework to corrective action. Eco-RBCA is intended to complement rather than replace thedecision-making structures of regulatory programs. In addition, Eco-RBCA is intended to provide aframework for sites not covered under regulatory p
8、rograms, for sites under regulatory programs thatlack guidance, or for sites under programs with guidance that lack detail. Eco-RBCAmay also providea useful framework to help merge an approach when multiple regulatory programs apply. Even whena site is not currently governed by a regulatory program,
9、 consultation with the appropriate regulatoryagency(ies) will ensure regulatory compliance and provide technical guidance.The Eco-RBCAprocess is intended to accommodate a diversity of sites and conditions by providinga framework that can address site-specific needs. The appendixes provide useful tec
10、hnical details andcase study examples, although the application of this guide does not require their use. Eco-RBCA isa process for evaluating ecological risk and decision making. To facilitate the implementation ofEco-RBCA, the framework is organized into ten steps and three risk assessment tiers th
11、at begin withrelatively simple analyses and progress to more complex assessments as site conditions warrant (seeFig. 1). Although organized into steps and tiers, the user should recognize that Eco-RBCA progressesconceptually in a linear manner, but may not be implemented in a linear manner. The obje
12、ctive shouldbe to conduct the evaluation in the manner that most appropriately meets the needs and goals of theassessment. Each tier includes five types of activities that increase in complexity and level of effortas the evaluation progresses through the RBCAprocess. These activities are (1) plannin
13、g 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 onthe nature and complexity of the site and the tier level. Early in the Eco-RBCA process, ass
14、umptionsare biased toward being overly protective (that is, “conservative”) because of uncertainties inherent innonsite-specific data. Typically, as the site progresses through the tiered evaluation, more site-specificinformation is collected and uncertainty decreases; therefore, less-conservative a
15、ssumptions can beused in the evaluation. As understanding of site conditions improves, confidence often increases. Theprogression of the evaluation through the tiered process is accompanied by an increasing degree of1Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken
16、, PA 19428-2959, United States.formalization that could include the documentation of a screening-level assessment or the use offormal ecological risk assessment (ERA) methods. As additional site-specific information isFIG. 1 Eco-RBCA Process FlowchartAdapted from the RBCA Flowchart (Guide E 2081)E22
17、05022developed, the uncertainty associated with site conditions is reduced. Commensurate with this reduceduncertainty, the user can employ more site-specific and less conservative estimates and assumptionsFIG. 2 Tier 1 Evaluation FlowchartE22050231This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committ
18、ee E50 on Environmental Assessment and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E50.04 on PerformanceStandards Related to Environmental Regulatory Programs.Current edition approved May 10, 2002. Published October 2002.FIG. 3 Tier 2 Evaluation FlowchartE2205024of exposure and effects. The manner
19、in which uncertainty, conservatism, data quality, and othertechnical aspects are addressed is by technical policy decisions.Technical policy decisions (TPDs) are an important part of the Eco-RBCA process, and while it isnot within the scope of this standard to identify the TPDs appropriate for a spe
20、cific site, Appendix X2and Guide E 2081 provide additional insight into their identification, understanding, and development.FIG. 4 Tier 3 Evaluation FlowchartE2205025Technical policy decisions generally fall into three categories: (1) those that are identified as existingprior to the Eco-RBCAassess
21、ment and will not change (that is, prescribed and without flexibility suchas regulations or policy), (2) those that are identified as existing prior to the Eco-RBCA assessmentbut may change or be modified based on site-specific information (for example, sampling protocols,selection of models or othe
22、r tools, or corrective-action goals), and (3) those that are developedspecifically 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 theinitial site assessment (see 7.1).
23、 It is the responsibility of the user of the Eco-RBCA guide to identifyand consider the TPDs and appropriate stakeholders for a site. These TPDs may need to be reevaluatedeach time the Eco-RBCA evaluation proceeds through an iteration or progresses to a new tier. Boththe RBCA and Eco-RBCA processes
24、encourage user-led initiatives and appropriate stakeholderinvolvement in identifying TPDs and developing the Eco-RBCA program. Laws and regulations mayrequire coordination with federal, state, and natural resource trustees.This guide serves to complement existing guidance for hazardous-waste sites a
25、nd facilities and toprovide guidance for sites not under regulatory programs. This guide does not substitute for applicablefederal, regional, state, local, or other regulatory requirements. This guide is not a regulation itself andmay not apply to a particular situation, based on the circumstances.T
26、his guide is not intended to replace professional judgment or to recommend a specific course ofaction.All aspects of this guide might not be applicable in all circumstances. This guide is not intendedto represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service i
27、sjudged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a projects many unique aspects.The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approvedthrough the ASTM consensus process.1. Scope1.1 This is a guide to risk-based corrective action for thep
28、rotection of ecological resources and supplements the RBCAprocess (Guide E 2081). The primary objective of the Eco-RBCA process is to provide a flexible framework for a tieredapproach to ERA and risk management decision making atchemical release sites. To this end, available guidance docu-ments from
29、 various federal and state agencies were reviewedand their common attributes incorporated into this guide,where possible. The Eco-RBCA process complements existingtechnical and regulatory ecological risk guidance (see 4.2). Inparticular, it is intended to be compatible with the USEPAprogrammatic gui
30、delines for ERA (1)2, guidance for theSuperfund program (2), and other USEPA (3) risk assessmentand corrective-action programs. Eco-RBCAmight also be usedin conjunction with corrective action strategies that includehuman health issues (for example, Guide E 2081).1.2 Chemical release sites vary great
31、ly in terms of complex-ity, physical and chemical characteristics, and the risk that theymight pose to ecological resources. The Eco-RBCAprocess, asdescribed in Guide E 2081, recognizes this variability andincorporates a tiered approach that integrates site assessment,response actions, and remedial
32、actions with ERA. The processbegins with relatively simple analyses in Tier 1 and, ifnecessary, proceeds to more detailed evaluations in Tier 2 orTier 3. The process of gathering and evaluating data isconducted in such a manner that only those data that arenecessary for a given tiers decision making
33、 are collected ateach tier. Hence, this can facilitate effective use of resourcesand reduce initial data requirements.1.3 Eco-RBCA is intended to provide a framework for sitesnot covered under regulatory programs and for sites underregulatory programs that lack specific guidance. Eco-RBCAmay also pr
34、ovide a useful framework to help merge severalpossible approaches into a single approach when multipleregulatory programs apply. The user should be aware of thefederal, state, and local corrective action programs and policiesthat are applicable for the site and, regardless of the program,that agency
35、 approvals might be required to implement theprocess for completing ERAs.1.4 Various TPDs will need to be made regarding theaspects of Eco-RBCA. These TPDs may cover both thephilosophical and methodological aspects, from what values toprotect to exactly how the Eco-RBCA process will be per-formed. T
36、PDs may affect every stage of the process, from theinitial site assessment to development and monitoring of theremedy. It is the responsibility of the user to identify theappropriate TPDs. Section 7, Appendix X2, and Guide E 2081provide more detail regarding TPDs in the Eco-RBCAprocess.1.5 The gener
37、al performance standard for this documentrequires that:1.5.1 Applicable TPDs be identified, beginning at the ini-tiation of the Eco-RBCA process, and as appropriate, at laterstages;1.5.2 Data used in the Eco-RBCA process be of sufficientquantity and quality to answer the questions and support thedec
38、isions made at the tier of investigation;1.5.3 Site assessments be distinguished into tiers of appro-priate levels of evaluation;1.5.4 Actions taken should integrate the Eco-RBCA processfor the protection of relevant ecological receptors and habitatsand RBCA for the protection of human health (see G
39、uideE 2081), as appropriate;2The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end ofthis standard.E22050261.5.5 Applicable federal, state, and local laws and regula-tions be followed; and1.5.6 Potential adverse effects on relevant ecological recep-tors and habitats be consi
40、dered when selecting remedial actionalternatives. The remedial action alternatives should be con-sistent with the TPDs and the RBCA process (see GuideE 2081).1.6 Ecological resources are the focus of this guide; risks tohuman health are addressed for petroleum releases and chemi-cal releases in othe
41、r ASTM RBCA standards (Guides E 1739and E 2081). There are many features common to all three ofthe RBCA guides. These three guides share the basic elementsof RBCA: (1) site assessment; (2) tiered evaluations ofexposure, effects, and risk; (3) risk-based decision making; and(4) response, remedial act
42、ion, and monitoring. There are anumber of distinctions between human health and ecologicalrisk assessments. For example, while human health risk assess-ments focus on individuals, evaluations of ecological risktypically focus on populations, communities, or ecosystems.Exceptions are species or habit
43、ats designated for specialprotection (for example, endangered species). Biological datato support an ERA are more amenable to direct field observa-tion than are human exposure and epidemiological data.1.7 The Eco-RBCA process addresses current and potentialfuture risks to relevant ecological recepto
44、rs and habitats atchemical release sites. It is not intended to apply to currentpermitted releases and permit applications.1.8 Eco-RBCA focuses on chemical stressors. However, theuser may need to consider biological or physical stressors at thesite or effects from chemical sources unrelated to the s
45、ite.1.9 The process described in this guide integrates theprinciples of current ERA practices with site assessmentactivities and remedial-action selection to ensure that the riskmanagement decision protects ecological resources. Fig. 1illustrates the following activities in Eco-RBCA and thosedescrib
46、ed in Section 7 (7.1-7.10):1.9.1 Step 1Initial Site Assessment;1.9.2 Step 2Decision Point;1.9.3 Step 3Tier 1 Ecological Risk Assessment;1.9.4 Step 4Tier 1 Decision Point;1.9.5 Step 5Tier 2 Ecological Risk Assessment;1.9.6 Step 6Tier 2 Decision Point;1.9.7 Step 7Tier 3 Ecological Risk Assessment;1.9.
47、8 Step 8Tier 3 Decision Point;1.9.9 Step 9Implementing the Remedial Action Program;and1.9.10 Step 10Monitoring Programs (7.10).1.9.11 The above steps can be applied in a flexible manner.It may not be necessary to conduct a full tier of evaluation ifexisting site information indicates that a subseque
48、nt tier ismore applicable to address site-specific concerns. Where ex-perience indicates that a more sophisticated assessment iswarranted at a site, the user may elect to proceed conceptuallythrough any earlier tiers to conduct a site-specific assessmenttypical of Tier 2 or Tier 3. Additionally, the
49、 decision points inSteps 4, 6, and 8 allow the user to exit the tiered evaluationprocess and select the appropriate remedial action once ad-equate information is available for decision making.1.10 This guide is organized as follows:1.10.1 Section 2 lists referenced ASTM documents;1.10.2 Section 3 defines terminology used in this guide;1.10.3 Section 4 describes the significance and use of thisguide;1.10.4 Section 5 describes the tiered approach to the Eco-RBCA process;1.10.5 Sections 6 and 7 presents Eco-RBCA procedures in astep-by-step process; and1.10.6 The reference
