5.1 The information gained through the site investigation is used to characterize the physical, biological, and chemical systems existing at a site. The processes that determine contaminant releases, contaminant migration, and environmental receptor exposure to contaminants are described and integrated in a conceptual site model.5.2 Development of this model is critical for determining potential exposure routes (for example, ingestion and inhalation) and for suggesting possible effects of the contaminants on human health and the environment. Uncertainties associated with the conceptual site model need to be identified clearly so that efforts can be taken to reduce these uncertainties to acceptable levels. Early versions of the model, which are usually based on limited or incomplete information, will identify and emphasize the uncertainties that should be addressed.5.3 The conceptual site model is used to integrate all site information and to determine whether information including data are missing (data gaps) and whether additional information needs to be collected at the site. The model is used furthermore to facilitate the selection of remedial alternatives and to evaluate the effectiveness of remedial actions in reducing the exposure of environmental receptors to contaminants.5.4 This guide is not meant to replace regulatory requirements for conducting environmental site characterizations at contaminated (including radiologically contaminated) sites. It should supplement existing guidance and promote a uniform approach to developing conceptual site models.5.5 This guide is meant to be used by all those involved in developing conceptual site models. This should ideally include representatives from all phases of the investigative and remedial process, for example, preliminary assessment, remedial investigation, baseline human health and ecological risk assessments, and feasibility study. The conceptual site model should be used to enable experts from all disciplines to communicate effectively with one another, resolve issues concerning the site, and facilitate the decision-making process.5.6 The steps in the procedure for developing conceptual site models include elements sometimes referred to collectively as site characterization. Although not within the scope of this guide, the conceptual site model can be used during site remediation.1.1 This guide is intended to assist in the development of conceptual site models to be used for the following: (1) integration of technical information from various sources, (2) support the selection of sample locations for establishing background concentrations of substances, (3) identify data needs and guide data collection activities, and (4) evaluate the risk to human health and the environment posed by a contaminated site. This guide generally describes the major components of conceptual site models, provides an outline for developing models, and presents an example of the parts of a model. This guide does not provide a detailed description of a site-specific conceptual site model because conditions at contaminated sites can vary greatly from one site to another.1.2 The values stated in either inch-pound or SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.1.3 This guide is intended to apply to any contaminated site.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 加购物车

4.1 This guide assumes that a decision has been made that an ecological risk assessment is required for a contaminated site. In some cases, this decision could be made before any site data are collected. See Fig. 1.FIG. 1 Conceptual Relationships between Assessment Endpoints, Measurement Endpoints and Lines of Evidence (Source: Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance, Government of Canada, March 2012)4.2 The selection of assessment endpoints (defined as ecological values to be protected) and measurement endpoints (ecological characteristics related to the assessment endpoints) is a critical step in conducting an ecological risk assessment. Endpoint selection identifies those effects which are ecologically significant and not merely those that are adverse, thus providing a more rational and defensible basis for making risk and remedial decisions.4.3 This guide provides an approach for identifying, selecting and using assessment and measurement endpoints in an ecological risk assessment for a contaminated site. This guide has been developed because there is no universal, simple measure of ecological health analogous to measures used in human health risk assessment. Assessment and measurement endpoints have to be identified and selected from a variety of individual circumstances on a stressor-, ecosystem- and scale-specific basis. It is important to recognize that a diverse set of ecological endpoints could be required for a specific site. EPA/100/F15/005 Generic Ecological Assessment Endpoints (GEAEs) For Ecological Risk Assessment: Second Edition With Generic Ecosystem Services Endpoints Added. July 2016)4.4 This guide is intended to be used primarily by a biologist, ecologist, ecotoxicologist, or a team of environmental scientists during problem formulation and work plan development prior to initiating data collection activities at a contaminated site (3-8, 10).4.5 Ecological risk assessment is usually an iterative process. In many circumstances it proceeds as a series of tiers, that is, desktop/screening, preliminary, and detailed/focused phases. This guide can be used to refine or modify assessment and measurement endpoints developed in earlier phases of the process.4.6 This guide can be used whenever assessment and measurement endpoints must be identified and selected following an initial or preliminary problem formulation/planning phase:4.6.1 Analysis phase (exposure assessment, hazard/effects assessment, stress/dose-response assessment;4.6.2 Risk characterization phase; or4.6.3 Remediation phase and possible subsequent ecological monitoring.4.7 This guide is intended to be used in the evaluation of baseline conditions (current and future) and in the evaluation of conditions resulting from remedial actions or corrective measures.AbstractThis guide deals with an approach to identification, selection, and use of ecological endpoints (both assessment and measurement endpoints) that are susceptible to the direct and indirect effects of both chemical and non-chemical stressors and agents associated with wastes and contaminated media at specific sites under current and future land uses. It does not address assessment and measurement endpoints for non-site specific studies (for example, chemical specific or regional risk assessments) or measurements in abiotic media (soil, water, or air). Conditions of the site and risk assessment that should be considered in identifying and selecting assessment and measurement endpoints include stressor characteristics, ecosystem types, spatial scale, temporal scale, ecological organization, and functionality/values. The following subsections present a partial listing of representative measurement endpoints: measurement endpoints representing ecosystem assessment endpoints, measurement endpoints representing community assessment endpoints, measurement endpoints representing population assessment endpoints, and measurement endpoints representing individual organism assessment endpoints. Other general considerations, desirable characteristics of assessment and measurement endpoints, candidate site-related ecological receptors, candidate assessment endpoints, specific steps in identifying, selecting and using assessment and measurement endpoints, addressing uncertainties in the identification and selection of assessment and measurement endpoints, documenting the selection of assessment and measurement endpoints.1.1 This guide covers an approach to identification, selection, and use of ecological endpoints (both assessment and measurement endpoints) (1-8)2 that are susceptible to the direct and indirect effects of both chemical and non-chemical stressors or agents associated with wastes and contaminated media at specific sites under current and future land uses. It does not address assessment and measurement endpoints for non-site specific studies (for example, chemical-specific or regional risk assessments) or measurements in abiotic media (soil, water, or air).1.2 This guide addresses only the identification, selection, and use of assessment and measurement endpoints, not the full range of activities that occur in an ecological assessment or ecological risk assessment at a contaminated site (1, 3-8). These activities are addressed in other ASTM guides and references provided at the end of this guide.1.3 This guide is intended to identify assessment and measurement endpoints to be used for screening, preliminary, focused, detailed, and quantitative ecological risk assessments conducted in a linear or iterative fashion (3, 8). This is a partial, incomplete listing of possible levels of assessment. In a tiered ecological risk assessment, it may be necessary to redefine ecological endpoints when planning to collect more data or when additional site data are obtained and evaluated.1.4 This guide is intended to be used by trained biologists, ecologists, and ecotoxicologists familiar with risk assessment, and ecological and ecotoxicological concepts.1.5 This guide (including Appendix X1) consists of a series of options or instructions and does not recommend a specific course of action or provide detailed guidelines to be followed at all sites. See 2.2.2 of Regulations Governing ASTM Technical Committees.31.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 646元 加购物车

定价： 918元 加购物车

4.1 Purpose—This guide provides a process (complementary to various regulatory agency waste site use programs) for evaluating and restoring among eight site use activities at eleven types of waste / chemically impacted sites. The site use activities include: (1) Active Recreation; (2) Passive Recreation; (3) Alternate Energy / Deep Anchoring Need; (4) Materials Recovery; (5) Stormwater Management; (6) Composting Imported Debris; (7) Agricultural Cultivation (non- or lightly mechanized) or Marketing; and, (8) Nature Preserve / Nature-based / Buffer Area Use. The waste / chemically impacted sites include: (1) MSW / Pre-RCRA; (2) MSW / Post-RCRA Closure – Operated pre-RCRA; (3) MSW / Operating(ed) or Closed Post-RCRA; (4) MSW / In-design; (5) C&D Landfill / Closed; (6) C&D Landfill / Operating or In-design; (7) Historic Fill; (8) Airborne Deposition; (9) Monofill / Coal Ash; (10) Monofill / Foundry Sand; (11) Non-impacted Buffer Area. More detailed descriptions of these use activities follow.4.1.1 Active Recreation—Utilization of a waste / chemically impacted site where the likelihood of physical contact with and accidental ingestion of soil is high, due to the nature of the sport (for example, football, baseball, soccer). Note that active sports played on synthetic turf are not active recreational uses in this definition, as the focus is on potential human exposure to chemicals in soil and not on the activity, per se. See Appendix X5 for a listing of chemical compounds and their concentrations considered appropriate for this site use. Also, see 3.1.65 for additional discussion of SCOs.4.1.2 Passive Recreation—Utilization of a waste / chemically impacted site where physical contact with and ingestion of soil is possible but unlikely (for example, biking, walking, bird watching). See Appendix X5 for a listing of chemical compounds and their concentrations considered appropriate for this site use. Also, see 3.1.65 for additional discussion of SCOs.4.1.3 Alternate Energy / Deep Anchoring Need—Penetration of the cover soil or capping layer of a waste / chemically impacted site to establish a foundation for a structure subject to weight or wind loading, or seismic forces (for example, photovoltaic arrays, wind turbines, solar water heating systems).4.1.4 Materials Recovery—Capture and utilization of landfill gas, or excavation of materials once considered waste but found to have high value (for example, beneficial capture and recovery of MSW methane, or excavation of coal ash for use as a beneficial cement or grout additive or fill material in soil stabilization projects such as those involving road beds). See Appendix X2, item 6 for additional information.4.1.5 Stormwater Management—Installation of a stormwater management practice that retains, detains, or slows down the flow of rainwater into an urban combined sewer (that is, combination sanitary and storm sewer) (for example, raingarden, bioswale, constructed wetland) and/or allows eroded sediments to settle out before entering a natural surface water body.4.1.6 Composting Imported Debris—Placement of non-site organic waste and non-site soil upon a waste / chemically impacted site, and allowing the organic waste to decompose while the mixture is blended and turned; site cover material risks becoming part of the composting product unless a barrier is placed between the compost and cover.4.1.7 Agricultural Cultivation (non- or lightly mechanized) or Marketing—The placement of soil (assured quality appropriate for the intended use) upon a waste / chemically impacted site in raised beds for the growing of vegetables (that is, leaf, root, or fruit types) (for example, community gardens and cooperative farms); the raising of animals for human consumption at a waste site; and, the marketing of produce from the above identified cultivation activities (for example, neighborhood green markets) according to established code and regulation.4.1.8 Nature Preserve / Nature-based / Buffer Area Use—Natural or intentionally engineered surface vegetation and/or water features with limited access to human intrusion of the space. Some waste / chemically impacted sites utilize buffer areas (beneath which no waste or only de minimis concentrations of chemicals exist) to create distance between the public and waste site operations. Although, such areas could be “nature” areas, it may be appropriate and desirable (for example, by adjacent property owners) for buffer areas to host limited, active or passive recreational uses, or low impact site use activities. These uses may occur in locations identified as easements, buffers, and rights-of-way. See Appendix X3, item 8 for additional information.4.2 Regulatory Context—This guide does not supersede federal, State, or local regulations.4.2.1 The user is responsible for determining the regulatory context, and associated constraints and obligations at a designated waste / chemically impacted site and should comply with all established applicable laws and regulations, including CERCLA, RCRA, TSCA, and other environmental laws and municipal codes in the development of the site for a new use activity. The typical waste / chemically impacted site where this guide is intended to be used are ones that are not currently (and not anticipated to be in the future) within a regulatory agency program.4.2.2 The user should comply with health and safety requirements under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) (2), worker right-to-know laws, and parallel requirements of applicable local, State, or tribal (regulatory agency) organizations. See (2) for more information.4.3 Use of Guide—Regulatory agencies may incorporate this guide, in whole or in part, into general guidance documents or site-specific regulatory documents. This guide may also be integrated into complementary standards, guidelines, or contractual agreements, relating to the post-construction / end use phase of sustainable or greener cleanups; see Guide E2876 and Guide E2893, respectively.4.4 Professional Judgment—This guide presumes the active involvement of an Environmental Professional who is knowledgeable in how to design and construct use activity features at a waste / chemically impacted site and how to identify acceptable site conditions or (when required) satisfy applicable statutory or regulatory agency limitations on the use of an operating, closed, abandoned, or legacy waste / chemically impacted site, including those with community engagement and Environmental Justice concerns. The Environmental Professional must be current (that is, is a qualified and registered professional in her/his field of expertise and have satisfied requirements for continuing education) in her/his knowledge of developments in the use of waste / chemically impacted sites, as well as case studies where some use activities succeed and others express potential adverse impacts to human health, public safety, or welfare.4.5 Elimination of Uncertainty—Professional judgment, interpretation, and some uncertainty are inherent in the processes described herein even when decisions are based upon objective scientific principles and accepted industry practices. In addition, new methods are continually being developed for this evolving field.4.6 Process Entry—This guide may be initiated at any stage of waste / chemically impacted site development from planning, construction, closure, and post-closure, or upon discovery of an unplanned or unsafe site, and/or a site with an emergency chemical spill or release of a hazardous substance.4.7 Process Reporting and Documentation—The user should decide (in coordination with relevant stakeholders) when site evaluations, reporting, and documentation will occur during Planning and Scoping, Section 5.4.8 Process Overview—At initiation, the user should review: Section 3, Terminology; and then proceed to Section 4, ; Section 5, Planning and Scoping; Section 6, Site Use Activity Evaluation and Selection Process; and Section 7, Site Use Evaluation, Reporting, and Documentation.4.8.1 Section 5, Planning and Scoping, describes the Project Team approach (see 3.1.56) for implementing this guide, including, but not limited to: a) Selecting the waste / chemically impacted site; b) selecting a desired site use and making a due diligent assessment of environmental conditions; c) evaluating possible engineering controls, site safety, and opportunities for material recovery; d) submitting the project to a regulatory agency and receiving approval (if required); e) selecting a site evaluation process (that is, choosing Site Evaluation Forms 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5); f) soliciting concurrence for the Environmental Professional's proposed approach at a stakeholder and community engagement charrette (meeting) (if a regulatory agency's approval is required but approval is not granted, go back a step, if approval is given or not needed, proceed); and g) arriving at two possible outcomes. These outcomes are: (1) The Environmental Professional prepares a final report that contains one or more Completed Site Evaluation forms for the use activity, delivers the report to the user of the guide, and completes all documentation – this includes having the Project Team and stakeholders making applicable planning and scoping documents available to the public; and (2) the Environmental Professional terminates the evaluation because the Due Diligence Threshold (of knowledge) of the Environmental Professional of the site had not been reached.4.8.2 Section 6, Site Use Activity Evaluation and Selection Process describes steps for identifying, selecting, and implementing (a) use activity(ies) at (a) specific waste / chemically impacted site(s).4.8.2.1 Section 6 provides the four-step process for Site Use Activity Evaluation and Selection, including: Site Use Opportunity Assessment; Site Use Priority Listing; Site Use Selection and Reporting; and Site Use Implementation and Documenting.4.8.3 Section 7 describes use activity evaluation, reporting, and documentation. Section 7 does not instruct the user on how to perform the use activity analysis; it presumes that at least one member of the Project Team is knowledgeable about each type of proposed use activity at the waste /chemically impacted site, and sufficient, readily available information is available to them/her/him to complete one or more of the Site Use Evaluation Forms 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. See Appendix X2 and Appendix X4 for more information on the use of those Forms. See Appendix X1 for supporting documents cited in the body of this guide.4.8.3.1 Section 7 identifies when the five Site Use Evaluation forms are to be used for which site uses and for which waste / chemically impacted sites. Appendix X2 supports Section 7 by providing additional considerations on which Site Use Evaluation forms should be completed for the selected use activity.4.8.3.2 Appendix X3 provides the user with ten additional considerations in the beneficial use process / framework for site evaluation for eight possible uses. Appendix X3 includes discussions of: a) Establishing when and how a MSW landfill could achieve conditions where active controls are limited or terminated (that is, removed or abandoned); b) need for special care regarding the venting of carcinogenic gases versus methane and other less harmful (to human health, public safety, or welfare) gases; c) physical safety requirements related to firm foundations for a proposed site use; d) special considerations for pre-regulatory waste sites; e) alternative methods for testing the solubility of waste materials; f) opportunities to enhance the flow of methane where it is being commercially recovered; g) the use of phytoremediation for beneficial site use; h) use of the guide by municipalities in the designation of easements, buffers, and rights-of-way; i) how this guide complements regulations, laws, and policies of regulatory agencies; and j) how the guide contributes to the sustainable use of urban resources.4.8.3.3 Appendix X4 includes five forms that the Environmental Professional selects for her/his evaluation that (a) use activity(ies) is(are) acceptable and thereby considered protective of human health, public safety, and welfare: Form 1 is for expedited use involving no cover or cap disturbance and a low chance of exposure to chemicals in soil (for example, see exposure assumptions of passive recreational use, Section 4.1.2); Form 2 is for conditional expedited use that may involve cover or cap disturbance and repair (note that a Form 3 evaluation is needed if a required capping system is disturbed or if a new cap is installed), with a sufficient number of control measures to protect human health, public safety, and welfare (for example, see exposure assumptions of active recreational use, Section 4.1.1); Form 3 is for cap disturbance (that is, that which may compromise the effectiveness of this engineering control), such as full intrusion of a protective cap, and a more extensive number of engineering and institutional controls to limit chemical exposures; Form 4 is for evaluating agricultural operations or marketing; and Form 5 is for site-specific use activities for sites that may require regulatory agency permit modifications to allow the development of a use activity at sites with irregular circumstances (for example, regulatory agency orders that limit what can be placed at a site, or operation and maintenance activities that may increase chemical exposures). An important feature of Form 5 is that it provides information about what needs to be controlled, and what engineering and institutional controls are needed to protect human health, public safety, and welfare, what settings are needed for the engineering controls, the names and contact numbers for the person(s) responsible achieving an acceptably safe condition, and the conditions upon which the various controls and monitoring frequencies can be relaxed or terminated (as discussed in Appendix X2 and Appendix X3). In each case the Environmental Professional completes the evaluation forms after a due diligent assessment of potential adverse impacts to human health, public safety, or welfare at the site by her/him and other professionals (as needed) with expertise to perform such assessments.4.8.4 The Environmental Professional identifies an acceptable quality of soil in the conduct of her/his waste / chemically impacted site evaluation (that is, the soil cleanup objective, or SCO) as described below. See Appendix X5 for more information.4.8.4.1 Appendix X5 includes a table of chemicals and chemical compounds with two columns of information. The first column is a set of maximum concentrations for those chemicals and chemical compounds that may be present in the upper six inches of uncovered, bare soil if the use activity involves active recreational use (where contact and ingestion of soil is likely because of the intended activity). The second column is a set of maximum concentrations for those chemicals and chemical compounds that may be present in the upper six inches of uncovered, bare soil if the use activity involves passive recreational use (where contact and ingestion of soil is possible but unlikely because of the intended activity). No single concentration should be considered a “bright line” limit, but rather an order-of-magnitude consideration when the Environmental Professional evaluates a use activity. For example, if a few concentrations are slightly above respective limits, the soil may still be acceptable. However, if ten or more are considerably above their limits or one is significantly above its limit, then the Environmental Professional may recommend against a use activity on those grounds. See (10) and (11) for more information.4.8.5 The Environmental Professional determines whether or not a threshold of knowledge exists upon which she/he may offer recommendations on a site use. See 5.6 and Appendix X6 for more information.4.8.6 Appendix X7 provides definitions for terminology used in the Appendices.1.1 This guide provides a beneficial, acceptable use framework for the development of: (1) Inactive and pre-RCRA (or pre-regulatory) solid waste landfills that are considered orphan or latchkey to be repurposed, despite having offsite migration impacts of landfill gases and/or leachate, albeit at de minimis levels; (2) other types of unregulated waste landfills; (3) sites impacted by chemical releases; (4) legacy or ongoing, intentional, or unintentional fill placement; (5) closed, open, or operating post-RCRA landfills or landfills in the planning stages such that materials may be placed in ways that optimize a landfill's use in future years; and (6) underutilized or heavily used (for example, pedestrian; recreational; or repetitive, entertainment, single event) chemically impacted sites. Also, this guide identifies land usage and conditions of adjacent/non-waste portions of a landfill (that is, buffer areas not within the footprint of an actual landfill or chemically impacted site itself) that should be evaluated before a site use is considered acceptable.1.2 Provided herein is instruction on evaluating and judging the acceptability of: (1) Chemical exposure barrier(s) (and other engineering and institutional control measures) in place between actual or potential chemically impacted soil; and/or (2) time of use restriction(s) established at a waste / chemically impacted site.1.3 Additionally provided is instruction on assessing the terminal conditions at a municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill; that is, flows of methane below which passive rather than active venting is recommended, and flows of leachate of a long-term, consistent quality that is clean enough to allow direct discharge of the liquid to surface waters. See Appendix X3 for additional information.1.4 This guide complements solid waste regulatory programs where guidance on beneficial usage is unavailable or insufficient, thereby improving the chance that such sites may be repurposed for public and/or private benefit.1.5 This guide may be implemented in conjunction with ASTM's Standard Guide for Integrating Sustainable Objectives in Cleanups (Guide E2876-13) with respect to community engagement activities. See Guide E2876 for more information.1.6 This guide should not be used as a justification to avoid, minimize, or delay implementation of specific cleanup activities as required by law or regulation.1.7 This guide should not be used to characterize (that is, environmentally assess) a site for the purpose of ownership transfer, although it could supplement other environmental assessments that are used in such a transfer.1.8 Users of this guide make professional judgments that only apply to a particular site, at a particular date and time, and do not warrant safe conditions existing beyond that date. It is not impossible that a significant environmental exposure condition exists at a site but was missed by the user of this guide or the Environmental Professional who led the evaluation, or that the condition was introduced subsequent to the evaluation. The evaluation of a site by an Environmental Professional is not intended to be exhaustive; there may be significant unknown conditions that may not be apparent through reasonable site characterization efforts. Further, the user of the guide should advise the site owner to maintain any Environmental Professional-recommended engineering and institutional controls and any established signage into the future for the planned, identified beneficial use. Those who use the final reports generated through the use of this guide are cautioned to understand the limits of what the Environmental Professional's Completed Site Evaluation describes. Compared to a waste / chemically impacted site NOT evaluated (in the manner described herein) before a use activity is implemented is clearly subject to greater potential adverse impacts to human health, public safety, or welfare than a waste / chemically impacted site that is. See 3.1.24 for a discussion of the Due Diligence Threshold of the Environmental Professional and 4.4 for additional information.1.9 Users of this guide should comply with all applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations requiring and/or relating to protection of human health. This includes, and is not limited to, laws and regulations relating to health and safety of the people using a developed waste / chemically impacted site, the surrounding community, and/or public sector and private sector personnel who are involved in the management or oversight of waste / chemically impacted sites. See (1)2 for useful information on land revitalization and (2) for information on chemical safety.1.10 Use of this guide is considered a sustainable urban governance practice as identified by Rowland (2008) (3).1.11 This guide is composed of the following sections: Referenced Documents; Terminology; ; Planning and Scoping; Site Use Activity Evaluation and Selection Process; and Site Use Activity Evaluation, Reporting, and Documentation.1.12 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 918元 加购物车

4.1 The approach presented in this guide is a practical and streamlined process for determining the appropriateness of remediation by natural attenuation and implementing remediation by natural attenuation at a given petroleum release site. This information can be used to evaluate remediation by natural attenuation along with other remedial options for each site.4.2 In general, remediation by natural attenuation may be used in the following instances:4.2.1 As the sole remedial action at sites where immediate threats to human health, safety and the environment do not exist or have been mitigated, and constituents of concern are unlikely to impact a receptor;4.2.2 As a subsequent phase of remediation after another remedial action has sufficiently reduced concentrations/mass in the source area so that plume impacts on receptors are unlikely; or4.2.3 As a part of a multi-component remediation plan.4.3 This guide is intended to be used by environmental consultants, industry, and state and federal regulators involved in response actions at petroleum release sites. Activities described in this guide should be performed by a person appropriately trained to conduct the corrective action process.4.4 The implementation of remediation by natural attenuation requires that the user exercise the same care and professional judgement as with any other remedial alternative by:4.4.1 Ensuring that site characterization activities focus on collecting information required to evaluate and implement remediation by natural attenuation;4.4.2 Evaluating information to understand natural attenuation processes present at the site;4.4.3 Determining whether remediation by natural attenuation is the most appropriate and cost-effective remedial alternative with a reasonable probability of achieving remedial goals; and4.4.4 Monitoring remedial progress.4.5 Application and implementation of remediation by natural attenuation is intended to be compatible with Guide E1739 or other risk-based corrective action programs.4.6 This guide does not address specific technical details of remediation by natural attenuation implementation such as site characterization (see Guide E1912), sampling, data interpretation, or quantifying rates. For additional discussion and guidance concerning these technical issues for remediation by natural attenuation see Appendix X1 through Appendix X7.4.7 This guide does not specifically address considerations and concerns associated with natural attenuation of non-petroleum constituents, such as chlorinated solvents. Care must be taken to ensure that degradation by-products will not cause harm to human health or the environment. In addition, if constituents are present which do not readily attenuate, such as methyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE), remediation by natural attenuation may not be a suitable remedial alternative or may need to be supplemented with other remedial technologies.4.8 This guide is intended to be consistent with Guide E1599 and U.S. EPA guidance for implementation of remediation by natural attenuation (U.S. EPA, 1995, Chapter 9).51.1 This is a guide for determining the appropriateness of remediation by natural attenuation and implementing remediation by natural attenuation at a given petroleum release site, either as a stand alone remedial action or in combination with other remedial actions.1.2 Natural attenuation is a potential remediation alternative for containment and reduction of the mass and concentration of petroleum hydrocarbons in the environment to protect human health and the environment. Remediation by natural attenuation depends upon natural processes such as biodegradation, dispersion, dilution, volatilization, hydrolysis, and sorption to attenuate petroleum constituents of concern to achieve remedial goals.NOTE 1: Remedial goals must be established through another process as determined by the appropriate regulatory agency.1.3 In general, remediation by natural attenuation should not be considered a presumptive remedy. A determination of whether remediation by natural attenuation is appropriate for an individual petroleum release site, relative to site-specific remedial goals, requires site characterization, assessment of potential risks, evaluation of the need for source area control, and evaluation of potential effectiveness similar to other remedial action technologies. Application and implementation of remediation by natural attenuation requires demonstration of remedial progress and attainment of remedial goals by use of converging lines of evidence obtained through monitoring and evaluation of resulting data. When properly applied to a site, remediation by natural attenuation is a process for risk management and achieving remedial goals. Monitoring should be conducted until it has been demonstrated that natural attenuation will continue and eventually meet remedial goals.1.3.1 The primary line of evidence for remediation by natural attenuation is provided by observed reductions in plume geometry and observed reductions in concentrations of the constituents of concern at the site.1.3.2 Secondary lines of evidence for remediation by natural attenuation are provided by geochemical indicators of naturally occurring degradation and estimates of attenuation rates.1.3.3 Additional optional lines of evidence can be provided by microbiological information and further analysis of primary and secondary lines of evidence such as through solute transport modeling or estimates of assimilative capacity.1.4 The emphasis in this guide is on the use of remediation by natural attenuation for petroleum hydrocarbon constituents where ground water is impacted. Though soil and ground water impacts are often linked, this guide does not address natural attenuation in soils separate from ground water or in situations where soils containing constituents of concern exist without an associated ground water impact. Even if natural attenuation is selected as the remedial action for ground water, additional remedial action may be necessary to address other completed exposure pathways at the site.1.5 This guide does not address enhanced bioremediation or enhanced attenuation.1.6 Also, while much of what is discussed is relevant to other organic chemicals or constituents of concern, these situations will involve additional considerations not addressed in this guide.1.7 The guide is organized as follows:1.7.1 Section 2 lists referenced documents.1.7.2 Section 3 defines terminology used in this guide.1.7.3 Section 4 describes the significance and use of this guide.1.7.4 Section 5 provides an overview of the use of natural attenuation as a remedial action alternative, including;1.7.4.1 Advantages of remediation by natural attenuation as a remedial alternative;1.7.4.2 Limitations of remediation by natural attenuation as a remedial alternative; and1.7.4.3 Using multiple lines of evidence to demonstrate the appropriateness of remediation by natural remediation.1.7.5 Section 6 describes the decision process for appropriate application and implementation of remediation by natural attenuation including;1.7.5.1 Initial response, site characterization, selection of chemicals of concern, and establishment of remedial goals;1.7.5.2 Evaluation of plume status;1.7.5.3 Collection and evaluation of additional data;1.7.5.4 Comparing remediation by natural attenuation performance to remedial goals;1.7.5.5 Comparing remediation by natural attenuation to other remedial options;1.7.5.6 Implementation of a continued monitoring program;1.7.5.7 Evaluation of progress of remediation by natural attenuation; and1.7.5.8 No further action.1.7.6 Section 7 lists keywords relevant to this guide.1.7.7 Appendix X1 describes natural attenuation processes;1.7.8 Appendix X2 describes site characterization requirements for evaluating remediation by natural attenuation;1.7.9 Appendix X3 describes considerations for designing and implementing monitoring for remediation by natural attenuation;1.7.10 Appendix X4 describes sampling considerations and analytical methods for determining indicator parameters for remediation by natural attenuation;1.7.11 Appendix X5 describes the interpretation of different lines of evidence as indicators of natural attenuation;1.7.12 Appendix X6 describes methods for evaluation and quantification of natural attenuation rates; and1.7.13 Appendix X7 describes example problems illustrating the application and implementation of remediation by natural attenuation.1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of any regulatory limitations prior to use.

定价： 918元 加购物车

定价： 983元 加购物车

定价： 918元 加购物车

4.1 This guide provides a consistent and transparent decision-making process for selecting risk-based corrective actions at sediment sites (that is, a Sediment-RBCA). Sediment-RBCA shares the same process as other RBCAs described in E1739, E2081, and E2205/E2205M but with explicit consideration of the constraints on how the available sediment assessment techniques impact decision making. Several factors exist that distinguish sediment sites from upland sites and warrant unique consideration, including background, potential for recontamination, sediment stability, sediment processes, lack of control on exposure and transport, exposure pathways and receptors, and unique site characteristics such as public lands, lack of site control on use and access. The diversity of available assessment techniques for a sediment site is considerably larger than for other media. Guidance on the technical tools themselves are described in other ASTM guides and regulatory guidance manuals.4.2 Sediment-RBCA incorporates the same paradigm of planning and scoping, problem formulation, exposure and effects assessments, risk characterization, and uncertainty analysis that is common to ecological and human health risk assessment guidance documents. Irrespective of terminology, both Sediment-RBCA and risk assessment share the same science-based process and share the same goal of informing risk management decisions. The specific approach used to develop risk-based human health and ecological criteria and risk-based management plans may vary from site to site based on jurisdictional requirements, site complexity, TPDs, and best professional judgment regarding the appropriate use of different assessment techniques. Some attributes of Sediment-RBCA are:4.2.1 Description of a tiered approach, including process flow charts, to identify critical steps and provide an overview of the entire RBCA process;4.2.2 Identification, development, and use of TPDs throughout the Sediment-RBCA process;4.2.3 Indications of the value and timing of stakeholder involvement, recognizing that some jurisdictions require varying degrees of coordination with a variety of stakeholders;4.2.4 Identification of situations under which a risk assessment may or may not be necessary;4.2.5 Identification of decision points where risk assessment results are used as part of the risk management decision making; and4.2.6 Identification and development of appropriate RAOs to support risk management.4.3 Activities described in this guide should be conducted by qualified professionals familiar with site characterization, remedial action science and technology, human health and ecological risk assessment methodologies, or related scientific and engineering subject areas, as they relate to complex sediment sites. A defensible application of a RBCA process is often a collaboration of multiple subject matter experts.4.4 To properly apply the Sediment-RBCA process, the user should AVOID the following:4.4.1 Using Tier 1 RBSLs as a default remedial action standard without considering if proceeding to develop more refined RBSLs through a Tier 2 or Tier 3 evaluation is appropriate;4.4.2 Placing arbitrary time constraints on the corrective action process that do not reflect the actual urgency and risk posed by the site;4.4.3 Failing to document the purpose of the Sediment-RBCA process (that is, defining the management goal per the problem formulation requirement) and connecting that management goal to the specific assessment techniques in a logical and transparent way (that is, developing a clear set of assessment endpoints and measures of effects per risk assessment guidance);4.4.4 Using unjustified or inappropriate exposure factors, toxicity parameters, or other assumptions required by an assessment technique or applying a model that is not supported by site-specific data;4.4.5 Developing ecologically-based RBSLs from data that do not exhibit a dose- or concentration-response relationship, or failing to consider cumulative risks or additive effects when required to do so by jurisdiction-specific guidance;4.4.6 Neglecting aesthetic, narrative, or other constraints when using RBSLs to establish the RAOs for a site;4.4.7 Initiating remedial action(s) (other than an action taken to address imminent or priority issues) before determining the appropriate RAOs for the site. RAOs must be attainable using existing technology (that is, technically practicable and cost effective) and must reflect the desired long-term outcome for a sediment site in the context of current and realistic future site uses, as well as background concentrations and the potential for recontamination. It is also inappropriate to proceed with remedial action(s) without consideration of site source-control measures (due to the potential for recontamination from uncontrolled sources).4.4.8 Limiting remedial action options to a single type of remedial technology, failing to consider options for remedial activity or failing to consider use limitations of remedial technologies. In all cases, a robust remedial options analysis that is not biased towards a particular remedial action option is needed;4.4.9 Using an interim remedial action to delay the RBCA process rather than to reduce risk;4.4.10 Failing to consider the impact of a potential remedial action on relevant receptors as part of the selection process;4.4.11 Failing to consider the long-term effectiveness of a potential remedial action during the selection process, or failing to monitor the effectiveness of the option once selected and implemented; and4.4.12 Continuing to monitor a site once the RAOs have been achieved (unless the RAOs were explicitly designed to involve such monitoring). (Guide E3164)1.1 Sediment-RBCA is based on protecting human health and the environment. The guide supplements the RBCA (Guide E2081) and Eco-RBCA (Guide E2205/E2205M) processes and provides a decision-making process for the management of contaminated sediment. Contaminated sediment sites vary greatly in terms of setting, usage, spatial and temporal complexity, and physical and chemical characteristics; and, therefore, they also vary greatly in terms of the risk that they may pose to human health and the environment. The Sediment-RBCA recognizes this diversity by using a tiered approach for gathering and evaluating data to determine the need for additional evaluation or risk management tailored to site-specific conditions and risks.1.2 This guide is intended to help direct and streamline the corrective action process and to complement (but not supersede) jurisdiction-specific guidance and regulations. It can be employed where jurisdiction-specific guidance is absent or insufficiently detailed; it can also assist to unify guidance when overlapping jurisdictions apply. It is compatible with a variety of programmatic guidelines for risk assessment and guidance from US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Environment Canada, European, US states, that share the underlying risk assessment approach. In all applications, regulatory agencies should be consulted, as appropriate. Sediment-RBCA is not intended to apply to current permitted releases or permit applications.1.3 There are numerous TPDs related to the Sediment-RBCA process. Common examples are defining DQOs, identifying relevant receptors, defining toxicity values for risk evaluation, determining target risk levels, specifying the appropriate statistics and sample sizes, determining exposure assumptions, determining when and how to account for cumulative risks and additive effects among chemical(s) of concern, addressing resource protection, along with remedial action constraints (RACs). It is not the intent of this guide to define appropriate TPDs. Users should be aware of jurisdiction-specific guidance and should seek approvals and/or technical policy input as applicable.1.4 The general performance standard for this guide requires that:1.4.1 TPDs will be identified early in the Sediment-RBCA process and reevaluated throughout the process (at each tier),1.4.2 Data and information compiled during the Sediment-RBCA process, including historical data and new data collected during the site assessment, will be relevant to and of sufficient quantity and quality to answer the questions and support the decisions made at each tier of investigation,1.4.3 Actions taken during the risk-based decision-making process will be protective of human health and the environment, consistent with current scientific principles and practices, and in accordance with jurisdiction-specific requirements (for example, regulations, policies, and guidance), and1.4.4 Remedial actions implemented consistent with TPDs and the Sediment-RBCA process will not result in greater long-term risks than existed before taking actions.1.5 There are basic elements common to all RBCA guides:1.5.1 site assessment;1.5.2 tiered evaluations of exposure, effects, and risk;1.5.3 risk-based decision making;1.5.4 remedial action, and1.5.5 monitoring.1.6 This Sediment-RBCA focuses on releases of chemicals from sediment and is intended to be a companion to Guides E1739, E2081, and E2205/E2205M. Risks to human health from contaminated sites are discussed in Guides E1739 and E2081, while risks to ecological receptors are discussed in Guide E2205/E2205M and Guide E2020.1.7 Both human health and ecological resource risks from contaminated sediment are addressed in this guide. Guidance on conducting human health and ecological risk assessments is available, including from various regulatory agencies, published literature, and scientific associations (see Appendix X1 to Appendix X7, Guide E2205/E2205M, and Guide E2020).1.8 For sites that warrant remedial action, guidance is provided on developing remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) (Appendix X7) that support a remedial action plan.1.9 This guide is organized as follows:1.9.1 Section 2 lists referenced ASTM documents;1.9.2 Section 3 defines terminology used in this guide;1.9.3 Section 4 describes the significance and use of this guide;1.9.4 Section 5 describes the tiered approach to the Sediment-RBCA process;1.9.5 Sections 6 and 7 present Sediment-RBCA procedures in a step-by-step process; and1.9.6 The reference section lists documents cited in this guide.1.10 This guide also includes the following appendices, which are provided as supplemental information:1.10.1 Appendix X1: Considerations for Design and Execution of Weight of Evidence (WOE) Approaches in Sediment Risk Assessment;1.10.2 Appendix X2: Use of Sediment Quality Guideline Values (SQGs) in Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessments (SLERAs);1.10.3 Appendix X3: Derivation and Use of Site-specific Ecological Criteria (SSEC) in Ecological Risk Assessments;1.10.4 Appendix X4: Uncertainty in Risk Evaluation;1.10.5 Appendix X5: Application of Reference Area Data in Sediment Ecological Risk Assessment;1.10.6 Appendix X6: Biological Test Methods, and1.10.7 Appendix X7: Guidance for Developing RAOs.1.11 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.1.12 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 983元 加购物车

5.1 This guide is significant in that it addresses the data and information options of each component of the ecological risk assessment process, for both a screening and complex ERA. It outlines the data and information options while recognizing that an ecological risk assessment may be focused to achieve a particular stated goal. This guide is not intended to represent the views of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), or any other regulatory agency, on data collection for ecological risk assessment.5.2 This guide is to be used by managers, scientists, and technical staff of contractors, industry, government agencies, and universities responsible for conducting ecological risk assessments at contaminated sites. It is to be used to guide data collection phases of the ecological risk assessment. It will assist in the development of the conceptual site model (see Guide E1689) and the identification of potential assessment and measurement endpoints (see Guide E1848 and US EPA’s Generic Ecological Assessment Endpoints, 2016 (5)). While it was written to assist in planning an ERA, the list also may be used in the review of a completed ERA.1.1 An ecological-risk assessment (ERA) is a process for organizing and analyzing data, information, assumptions, and uncertainties to evaluate the likelihood that adverse ecological effects might occur or are occurring as a result of a stressor. This guide is intended to assist remedial project teams, specifically ecological risk assessors, in identifying data and information options that may be used to perform a screening or complex ecological risk assessment (ERA) at a contaminated site.NOTE 1: While the intent of ERA is to evaluate risk (that is, the probability of adverse effects occurring in ecological receptors), there are no measures, statistics, or metrics that calculate or express risk explicitly. However, various metrics or indices, a common example being the hazard quotient, are used to inform risk assessments.1.2 The identification of data and information options for human health risk assessment is outside the scope of this guide.1.3 This guide is intended to provide a list for identifying data and information options and does not recommend a specific course of action for ERA activities.1.4 This guide addresses data and information options for the ecological risk assessment, not verification or long-term monitoring studies.1.5 This guide lists many of the common data and information options for ERA, but there may be others relevant for any particular site.1.6 This guide considers one component of an ERA, that is, identification of data and information options. Other ASTM guides have been developed, for example, Guides E1689 and E1848, and are being developed to cover other components of the risk assessment process.1.7 This guide does not provide information on how to perform any of the analytical procedures used to perform a risk assessment once data collection options are defined.1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

定价： 590元 加购物车

定价： 590元 加购物车

定价： 927元 加购物车

定价： 843元 加购物车