Wash. Admin. Code § 173-340-702 - General policies
(1)
Purpose. This section defines the general policies and principles
that shall be followed when establishing and implementing cleanup standards.
This section shall be used in combination with other sections of this
chapter.
(2)
Policy on
expediting cleanups. Establishing cleanup standards and selecting an
appropriate cleanup action involves many technical and public policy decisions.
This chapter is intended to constrain the range of decisions made on individual
sites to promote expeditious cleanups.
(3)
Goal for cleanups. The Model
Toxics Control Act contains policies that state, in part, each person has a
fundamental and inalienable right to a healthful environment and it is
essential that sites be cleaned up well. Consistent with these policies,
cleanup standards and cleanup actions selected under this chapter shall be
established that provide conservative estimates of human health and
environmental risks that protect susceptible individuals as well as the general
population.
(4)
Current and
potential site and resource uses. Cleanup standards and cleanup actions
selected under this chapter shall be established that protect human health and
the environment for current and potential future site and resource
uses.
(5)
Presumption for
cleanup actions. Cleanup actions that achieve cleanup levels at the
applicable point of compliance under Methods A, B, or C (as applicable) and
comply with applicable state and federal laws shall be presumed to be
protective of human health and the environment.
(6)
Cost considerations. Except
as provided for in applicable state and federal laws, cost shall not be a
factor in determining what cleanup level is protective of human health and the
environment. In addition, where specifically provided for in this chapter, cost
may be appropriate for certain other determinations related to cleanup
standards such as point of compliance. Cost shall, however, be considered when
selecting an appropriate cleanup action.
(7)
Cleanup action alternatives.
At most sites, there is more than one hazardous substance and more than one
pathway for hazardous substances to get into the environment. For many sites
there is more than one method of cleanup (cleanup action component) that could
address each of these. When evaluating cleanup action alternatives it is
appropriate to consider a representative range of cleanup action components
that could address each of these as well as different combinations of these
components to accomplish the overall site cleanup.
(8)
Cross-media impacts. The
cleanup of a particular medium at a site will often affect other media at the
site. These cross-media impacts shall be considered when establishing cleanup
standards and selecting a cleanup action. Cleanup actions conducted under this
chapter shall use appropriate engineering controls or other measures to
minimize these cross-media impacts.
(9)
Relationship between cleanup levels
and cleanup actions. In general, cleanup levels must be met throughout a
site before the site will be considered clean. A cleanup action that leaves
hazardous substances on a site in excess of cleanup levels may be acceptable as
long as the cleanup action complies with WAC
173-340-350 through
173-340-390. However, these rules
are intended to promote thorough cleanups rather than long-term partial
cleanups or containment measures.
(10)
Relationship to federal cleanup
law. When evaluating cleanup actions performed under the federal cleanup
law, the department shall consider WAC
173-340-350,
173-340-351,
173-340-355,
173-340-357,
173-340-360,
173-340-370,
173-340-410,
173-340-420,
173-340-440,
173-340-450,
173-340-700 through
173-340-760, and
173-340-830 to be legally
applicable requirements under Section 121(d) of the federal cleanup
law.
(11)
Reviewing and
updating cleanup standards. The department shall review and, as
appropriate, update Part 7 of this chapter at least once every five
years.
(12)
Applicability of
new cleanup levels.
(a) For cleanup
actions conducted by the department, or under an order or decree, the
department shall determine the cleanup level that applies to a release based on
the rules and analytical methods in effect under this chapter at the time the
department issues a final cleanup action plan for that release.
(b) In reviewing the adequacy of independent
remedial actions, the department shall determine the cleanup level that applies
to a release based on the rules and analytical methods in effect at the time
the final cleanup action for that release began or in effect when the
department reviews the cleanup action, whichever is less stringent.
(c) A release cleaned up under the cleanup
levels determined in (a) or (b) of this subsection shall not be subject to
further cleanup action due solely to subsequent amendments to the provisions in
this chapter on cleanup levels or subsequent availability of more sensitive
analytical methods, unless the department determines, on a case-by-case basis,
that the previous cleanup action is no longer sufficiently protective of human
health and the environment.
(d)
Nothing in this subsection constitutes a settlement or release of liability
under the Model Toxics Control Act.
(13)
Institutional controls.
Institutional controls shall be required whenever any of the circumstances
identified in WAC
173-340-440(4)
are present at a site.
(14)
Burden of proof. Any person responsible for undertaking a cleanup
action under this chapter who proposes to:
(a)
Use a reasonable maximum exposure scenario other than the default provided for
each medium;
(b) Use assumptions
other than the default values provided for in this chapter;
(c) Establish a cleanup level under Method C;
or
(d) Use a conditional point of
compliance, shall have the burden of demonstrating to the department that
requirements in this chapter have been met to ensure protection of human health
and the environment. The department shall only approve of such proposals when
it determines that this burden of proof is met.
(15)
New scientific information.
The department shall consider new scientific information when establishing
cleanup levels and remediation levels for individual sites. In making a
determination on how to use this new information, the department shall, as
appropriate, consult with the science advisory board, the department of health,
and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Any proposal to use new
scientific information shall meet the quality of information requirements in
subsection (16) of this section. To minimize delay in cleanups, any proposal to
use new scientific information should be introduced as early in the cleanup
process as possible. Proposals to use new scientific information may be
considered up to the time of issuance of the final cleanup action plan
governing the cleanup action for a site unless triggered as part of a periodic
review under WAC
173-340-420 or through a reopener
under RCW
70A.305.040(4)(c).
(16)
Criteria for quality of
information.
(a) The intent of this
subsection is to establish minimum criteria to be considered when evaluating
information used by or submitted to the department proposing to modify the
default methods or assumptions specified in this chapter or proposing methods
or assumptions not specified in this chapter for calculating cleanup levels and
remediation levels. This subsection does not establish a burden of proof or
alter the burden of proof provided for elsewhere in this chapter.
(b) When deciding whether to approve or
require modifications to the default methods or assumptions specified in this
chapter for establishing cleanup levels and remediation levels or when deciding
whether to approve or require alternative or additional methods or assumptions,
the department shall consider information submitted by all interested persons
and the quality of that information. When evaluating the quality of the
information the department shall consider the following factors, as appropriate
for the type of information submitted:
(i)
Whether the information is based on a theory or technique that has widespread
acceptance within the relevant scientific community;
(ii) Whether the information was derived
using standard testing methods or other widely accepted scientific
methods;
(iii) Whether a review of
relevant available information, both in support of and not in support of the
proposed modification, has been provided along with the rationale explaining
the reasons for the proposed modification;
(iv) Whether the assumptions used in applying
the information to the facility are valid and would ensure the proposed
modification would err on behalf of protection of human health and the
environment;
(v) Whether the
information adequately addresses populations that are more highly exposed than
the population as a whole and are reasonably likely to be present at the site;
and
(vi) Whether adequate quality
assurance and quality control procedures have been used, any significant
anomalies are adequately explained, the limitations of the information are
identified, and the known or potential rate of error is acceptable.
Notes
Statutory Authority: Chapter 70.105D RCW. 01-05-024 (Order 97-09A), § 173-340-702, filed 2/12/01, effective 8/15/01; 91-04-019, § 173-340-702, filed 1/28/91, effective 2/28/91.
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.