(1)
Purpose. Institutional controls are measures undertaken to limit
or prohibit activities that may interfere with the integrity of an interim
action or cleanup action or that may result in exposure to hazardous substances
at a site. Institutional controls may include:
(a) Physical measures such as
fences;
(b) Use restrictions such
as limitations on the use of property or resources; or requirements that
cleanup action occur if existing structures or pavement are disturbed or
removed;
(c) Maintenance
requirements for engineered controls such as the inspection and repair of
monitoring wells, treatment systems, caps or groundwater barrier
systems;
(d) Educational programs
such as signs, postings, public notices, health advisories, mailings, and
similar measures that educate the public and/or employees about site
contamination and ways to limit exposure; and
(e) Financial assurances (see subsection (11)
of this section).
(2)
Relationship to engineered controls. The term institutional
controls refers to nonengineered measures while the term engineered controls
means containment and/or treatment systems that are designed and constructed to
prevent or limit the movement of, or the exposure to, hazardous substances. See
the definition of engineered controls in WAC
173-340-200 for examples of
engineered controls.
(3)
Applicability. This section applies to remedial actions being
conducted at sites under any of the administrative options for remedial action
described in WAC
173-340-510.
(4)
Circumstances required.
Institutional controls shall be required to assure both the continued
protection of human health and the environment and the integrity of an interim
action or cleanup action in the following circumstances:
(a) The cleanup level is established using
Method A or B and hazardous substances remain at the site at concentrations
that exceed the applicable cleanup level;
(b) The cleanup level is established using
Method C;
(c) An industrial soil
cleanup level is established under WAC
173-340-745;
(d) A groundwater cleanup level that exceeds
the potable ground-water cleanup level is established using a site-specific
risk assessment under WAC
173-340-720(6)(c)
and institutional controls are required under WAC
173-340-720(6)(c)(iii);
(e) A conditional point of compliance is
established as the basis for measuring compliance at the site;
(g) Where the department determines such
controls are required to assure the continued protection of human health and
the environment or the integrity of the interim or cleanup action.
(5)
Minimum
requirements. A cleanup action relying on institutional controls must
meet the requirements specified in WAC
173-340-360, just as any other
cleanup action. To ensure a cleanup action relying on institutional controls is
protective, institutional controls should demonstrably reduce risks. This
demonstration should be based on a quantitative, scientific analysis where
appropriate.
(6)
Requirement
for primary reliance. As specified in WAC
173-340-360(3)(a)(vii),
a cleanup action must not rely primarily on institutional controls and
monitoring at a site, or portion thereof, if it is technically possible to
implement a more permanent cleanup action.
(7)
Periodic review. The
department shall review compliance with institutional control requirements as
part of periodic reviews under WAC
173-340-420.
(8)
Format.
(a) For properties owned by a person who has
been named as a potentially liable person or who has not been named a
potentially liable person by the department but meets the criteria in
RCW
70A.305.040 for being named a potentially
liable person, appropriate institutional controls shall be described in a
restrictive covenant on the property. The covenant shall be executed by the
property owner and recorded with the register of deeds for the county in which
the site is located. This restrictive covenant shall run with the land, and be
binding on the owner's successors and assigns.
(b) For properties owned by a local, state,
or federal government entity, a restrictive covenant may not be required if
that entity demonstrates to the department that:
(i) It does not routinely file with the
county recording officer records relating to the type of interest in real
property that it has in the site; and
(ii) It will implement an effective
alternative system to meet the requirements of subsection (9) of this section.
The department shall require the government entity to
implement the alternative system as part of the cleanup action plan. If a
government entity meets these criteria, and if it subsequently transfers its
ownership in any portion of the property, then the government entity must file
a restrictive covenant upon transfer if any of the conditions in subsection (4)
of this section still exist.
(c) For properties containing hazardous
substances where the owner does not meet the criteria in
RCW
70A.305.040 for being a potentially liable
person, the department may approve cleanup actions that include restrictive
covenants or other legal and/or administrative mechanisms. The use of legal or
administrative mechanisms that do not include restrictive covenants is intended
to apply to situations where the release has affected properties near the
source of the release not owned by a person potentially liable under the act. A
potentially liable person must make a good faith effort to obtain a restrictive
covenant before using other legal or administrative mechanisms. Examples of
such mechanisms include zoning overlays, placing notices in local zoning or
building department records or state lands records, public notices and
educational mailings.
(9)
Restrictive covenants. Where required, the restrictive covenant
shall:
(a) Prohibit activities on the site
that may interfere with a cleanup action, operation and maintenance,
monitoring, or other measures necessary to assure the integrity of the cleanup
action and continued protection of human health and the environment;
(b) Prohibit activities that may result in
the release of a hazardous substance that was contained as a part of the
cleanup action;
(c) Require notice
to the department of the owner's intent to convey any interest in the site. No
conveyance of title, easement, lease, or other interest in the property shall
be consummated by the property owner without adequate and complete provision
for the continued operation, maintenance and monitoring of the cleanup action,
and for continued compliance with this subsection;
(d) Require the land owner to restrict leases
to uses and activities consistent with the restrictive covenant and notify all
lessees of the restrictions on the use of the property. This requirement
applies only to restrictive covenants imposed after February 1, 1996;
(e) Require the owner to include in any
instrument conveying any interest in any portion of the property, notice of the
restrictive covenant under this section;
(f) Require notice and approval by the
department of any proposal to use the site in a manner that is inconsistent
with the restrictive covenant. If the department, after public notice and
comment approves the proposed change, the restrictive covenant shall be amended
to reflect the change; and
(g)
Grant the department and its designated representatives the right to enter the
property at reasonable times for the purpose of evaluating compliance with the
cleanup action plan and other required plans, including the right to take
samples, inspect any remedial actions taken at the site, and to inspect
records.
(10)
Local
government notification. Before a restrictive covenant being established
under this chapter, the department shall notify and seek comment from a city or
county department with land use planning authority for real property subject to
the restrictive covenant. Once a restrictive covenant has been executed, this
same department shall be notified and sent a copy of the restrictive covenant.
For independent cleanups reviewed by the department under WAC
173-340-515 that use restrictive
covenants, the person conducting the cleanup shall be responsible for these
notifications.
(11)
Financial
assurances. The department shall, as appropriate, require financial
assurance mechanisms at sites where the cleanup action selected includes
engineered and/or institutional controls. It is presumed that financial
assurance mechanisms will be required unless the PLP can demonstrate that
sufficient financial resources are available and in place to provide for the
long-term effectiveness of engineered and institutional controls adopted.
Financial assurances shall be of sufficient amount to cover all costs
associated with the operation and maintenance of the cleanup action, including
institutional controls, compliance monitoring, and corrective measures.
(a)
Mechanisms. Financial
assurance mechanisms may include one or more of the following: A trust fund, a
surety bond, a letter of credit, financial test, guarantee, standby trust fund,
government bond rating test, government financial test, government guarantee,
government fund, or financial assurance mechanisms required under another law
(for example, requirements for solid waste landfills or treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities) that meets the requirements of this section.
(b)
Exemption from requirement.
The department shall not require financial assurances if persons conducting the
cleanup can demonstrate that requiring financial assurances will result in the
PLPs for the site having insufficient funds to conduct the cleanup or being
forced into bankruptcy or similar financial hardship.
(12)
Amendment or removal of
institutional controls.
(a)
Request. Any person who has an interest in the real property
subject to an institutional control may submit a request to the department that
the control be amended or removed if the conditions at the site requiring the
control under subsection (4) of this section have changed or no longer exist.
The request must be in writing.
(b)
Determination. If the department determines that the conditions
requiring an institutional control under subsection (4) of this section have
changed or no longer exist, then the institutional control must be amended or
removed.
(c)
Public
participation or notification.
(i) For
ecology-conducted or ecology-supervised remedial actions, the department will
provide or require public notice of any proposal to amend or remove an
institutional control in accordance with WAC
173-340-600(19).
(ii) For independent remedial actions, the
department will notify the public of any amendment or removal of an
institutional control in accordance with WAC
173-340-600(20).