1. Recommendations for Developing Effective Risk Management Policies for Contaminated Site Cleanup An Overview of Risk Management Concepts and How Risk Management is Used to Set Priorities in Two Contaminated Site Remedial Programs in the U.S. Presentation by Emily Pimentel U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 pimentel.emily@epa.gov

2. Presentation Overview  Risk assessment and risk management concepts and issues.  Recommendations for setting remedial program priorities.  Overview of two US programs to remediate contaminated sites.  Summary of key points.

3. Recommendations for Setting Priorities 1. Prioritize remedial programs based on: Sites with a known responsible party (owner), Sites that are abandoned, Other sites with complex policy issues. 2. Prioritize contaminated sites with a known release and a pathway that poses greatest threat of exposure. 3. Manage based on chemicals associated with industry-sectors. 4. Promote early risk reduction and site stabilization at all contaminated sites.

4. SEMARNAT’s Goal: To establish a process to identify and prioritize contaminated sites that pose the greatest risk to human health and the environment.

5. Risk Defined “The combination of the probability or frequency of occurrence of a defined hazard and magnitude of the consequences of the occurrence.”

6. Risk Assessment  “The use of the factual base to define the health and ecological effects of exposure of individuals, populations, or environments to hazardous materials or situations.” United States National Academy of Sciences Risk Management  Involves determining and accomplishing those actions that will reduce risks to the greatest degree given any particular level of resources.  Balances risk reduction against resources.  Balances the risk of one action against the risk of another. Risk Management Risk Assessment

7. For those of you who are more visual! Risk Perception Risk Assessment Risk Management

8. Risk Communication Challenges  Due to scientific uncertainty, it is difficult to provide exact numbers to estimate risks.  Two of the most prominent sources of risk communication are the government and industry, yet they are the most mistrusted.  Media plays a big role in providing information, but they often they simplify it, get it wrong, or distort it.  The public evaluates risk based on perception and their own judgment of what is acceptable risk. Scientist/EngineersDecision-makersStakeholders

9. Major Concerns of Traditional Risk Ranking Models  Risk alone should not predominate decision- making.  Risk assessment and comparative risk models are not solely science-based; they involvement judgments and a high degree of uncertainty.  Risk management projects often neglect public participation and social values needed to make good decisions. A regulatory process for the explicit consideration of social and political factors is typically not provided

10. Recommendations for Setting Priorities for Remediation of Contaminated Sites 1. Prioritize remedial programs based on: Sites with a known responsible party (owner), Sites that are abandoned sites, Other sites with complex policy issues. 2. Prioritize contaminated sites with a known release and a pathway that poses greatest threat of exposure. 3. Manage based on chemicals associated with industry-sectors. 4. Promote early risk reduction and site stabilization at all contaminated sites.

11. A Review of What Mexico Wants and Progress Made  SEMARNAT’s Goal: To establish a process to identify and prioritize contaminated sites that pose the greatest risk to human health and the environment.  Progress to date includes: Evaluated a variety of programs; PROFEPA began a list working with 17 states; DGGIMAR created a list of 31 sites.

12. Universe of Contaminated Sites Advantages/Disadvantages Abandoned No funding No owners to work with Spend resources looking for owners Spend resources conducting ranking Little incentive for states to participate Known owners Known owners to work with Available funding Opportunity to prevent new contamination Greater Incentives for states to participate Other sites Agriculture Mining Sites that may represent complex legacy issues Site that may still require new policies to address root cause Resource intensive Mexico’s List of Concerns  Mining (exploration, production)  Petroleum (exploration, production, sales)  Manufacturing (cement, electronics, paper)  Energy (production, conveyance)  Transport (trucks, railroads, bus, shipping)  Agriculture (pesticide use, solid waste)  Landfill (Solid and hazardous waste) Universe of Contaminated Sites Abandoned Sites Sites with a Known Owner/Operator Other Sites Prioritize contaminated sites based on whether they are: Known PRP Abandoned Complex sites

13. Other Sites Examples of possible “other site” categories  Agriculture and Mining: Large landscape impacted; Prevention practices being implemented today; Costly and length process; Policies still require work. These sites are also important, but need to: Create manageable work-loads so that resources are not invested into a small number of sites. Allow time to develop experience and policies to address the more complex remedial program issues for these sites.

14. SEMARNAT is Already Making Risk Management Decisions that Could be Considered in the “Other Sites” Category: Prioritized remediation of heavy metals in mine tailings adjacent to a small community in Sonora.

15. Prioritize Contaminated Sites With a Known Release and a Pathway That Poses the Greatest Threat of Exposure  Pathways to surface water Freshwater wetlands, rivers, lakes Coastal marine, estuaries, inter-tidal wetlands  Pathways to air Indoor residential Other  Pathways to groundwater Large potable drinking waster sources Other  Advantages/Disadvantages Risk-based approach that addresses both human health and ecological risks Non-specific ranking approach  Other Considerations State input Public Input Sensitive or economically important ecosystems

16. Typical Industry-Sector Chemicals  Mining – heavy metals  Petroleum – hydrocarbons  Manufacturing – heavy metals, solvents  Energy – heavy metals, hydrocarbons, solvents  Transport – hydrocarbons, solvents  Agriculture – pesticides, organic wastes  Landfill – metals, solvents, pesticides  Look for patterns: Chemical types and concentrations, Fate and transport behavior, Similarities landscape  Creating industry-sector groupings maximizes opportunity to create templates/programs:  assessments,  presumptive remedies  Advantages/disadvantages: Potential misses, but typically small risk Expedite progress, thus overall prevents risks Saves resources by being more effective Manage Remediation Based On Industry Sector Chemicals There are a lot of chemicals: Decide which ones are at levels that pose a concern

17.  Petroleum Refineries, Chemical-processing, Manufacturing  Above and Underground Storage Tanks  Federal/state owners/operators Oil production Airports Railroads Harbors  Mining Heavy metals Erosion control Manage Remediation Based on Industry-Sector Create sub-lists based on patterns of Behavior or Industry Sector Activity Interim listing: Place a facility on notice if there is a potential concern based on exposure pathways and chemicals being used Final listing: List a facility if you obtain information that affirms your concern

18. Promote Early Risk Reduction and Site Stabilization at All Contaminated Sites  Immediate (Emergency) Response Chemical or oil spills Other chemical releases  Near-term Risk Reduction-Stabilization Measures Provide alternative drinking water Place a secure barrier Remove wastes posing the highest risks Permanently or temporarily move people  Begin working on long-term cleanup remedy, concurrently or after risk reduction or stabilization is done

19. Promote Early Risk Reduction and Site Stabilization at All Contaminated Sites  Early risk reduction and site stabilization measures Expedite management of “glaring” risks. Government has more flexibility to make decisions.  Long-term Remedial Actions Require a base-line risk assessment and an assessment of how the proposed remedies reduce or eliminate risk based on a variety of criteria. Requires greater investment of resources to formulate and implement, often requiring long-term monitoring. Requires a more formal decision-making process Consider land-end use and promote land revitalization

20. Border 2012 Program Binational Guidance on Contaminated Site Clean-up and Revitalization  Process for Cleanup and Revitalization: Establish objectives and a decision-making framework; Consider interim and final cleanup needs; Optimize reuse through economic incentives and legal protections for redevelopment; Provide for early and meaningful public participation. Waste Policy Forum – draft final work in progress

21. Promote Early Risk Reduction & Site Stabilization Actions SEMARNAT is Already Using This Risk Management Approach Metales y Derivados  Lead battery recycling smelter  US owner, operated 1986- 1994, abandoned  7000 -10,000 tons lead- waste  Industrial zone

22. Metales y Derivados Cleanup Accomplishments  Four-phase remedial plan  Removal/Stabilization action -2000 tons of waste disposed  Capping remedy underway Drums & Sacks Removed Interim TarpsAccess restricted Promote Early Risk Reduction & Site Stabilization Actions SEMARNAT is Already Using This Risk Management Approach

23. Overview of US Programs to Address Contaminated Sites  RCRA a program for existing sites: Lists facilities but does not rank them; Set goals to prioritize resources; Industry funded cleanups; Federal oversight of State-led cleanups.  Superfund a program for abandoned sites Ranks sites to qualify access to funding; Government funded cleanup, but with provision for “cost-recovery”; Federal Facilities Agreement tool.

24. Overview of RCRA Program  RCRA is a program to manage solid and hazardous waste.  Key hazardous waste components of the program: Defines a hazardous waste Issues operating permits  Hazardous waste generators  Treatment, storage, or disposal facilities Tracks the generation of hazardous waste (“manifests”)  RCRA has a four-phase Corrective Action (CA) Program: RCRA Facility Assessment RCRA Facility Investigation Corrective Measures Study (CMS), and Corrective Measures Implementation (CMI)

25. Corrective Action Program  When is corrective action (CA) required? When applying for a permit, Upon discovering a release, or Upon discovering other SWMU or releases.  How many facilities are subject to cleanup under RCRA? Currently about 6,900 facilities About 3,746 have CA underway or will need to. Facility owner/operators (including federal, state, and local Gov) are responsible for implementing corrective actions For more information see web page: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/f acility.htm#2020

26. 2020 Corrective Action Universe: 3,746 Facilities Sorted by EPA Region, State, County, and City  Region State County City EPA ID Facility Name Remedy Construction  3358 9 AZ Maricopa Phoenix AZT050010180 Onyx Environmental Services Loc  3359 9 AZ Maricopa Phx AZD049318009 Clean Harbors Arizona Llc  3360 9 AZ Maricopa Tempe AZD085459535 Goodrich Turbomachinery Products  3361 9 AZ Maricopa Tolleson AZD980735500 World Resources Co.  3362 9 AZ Maricopa Tonopah AZT000624429 Aps Company - Pvngs  3363 9 AZ Mohave Lake Havasu AZD041458555 Mcculloch Facility  3364 9 AZ Pima Davis Monthan AZ4570024055 Usaf Davis Monthan Air Force Base  3365 9 AZ Pima Marana AZD980818165 Evergreen Air Center  3366 9 AZ Pima Tucson AZD980880819Esco remedy constructed  3367 9 AZ Pima Tucson AZD000819615 University Of Arizona  3368 9 AZ Pima Tucson AZD980892897 Safety Kleen Systems Inc  3369 9 AZ Pima Tucson AZT000623702 Ibm Corporation  3370 9 AZ Pinal Coolidge AZD081705402 Heritage Environmental Srvcs Llc  3371 9 AZ Pinal Oracle AZD980665814 University Of Arizona Page Ranch  3372 9 AZ Pinal Red Rock AZT050010453 Aps Saguaro Power Plant  3373 9 AZ Santa Cruz Nogales AZT000612135 Conn-Selmer Inc  3374 9 AZ Yuma Yuma AZ5213820991 Us Army Garrison Yuma Proving Ground  3375 9 AZ Yuma Yuma AZR000037382 Barry M. Goldwater Range Wstrn Half  3376 9 CA Alameda Alameda CA1170090012 Cso-Sfba, Alameda Point Annex (Formally  3377 9 CA Alameda Berkeley CA4890008986 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory  3378 9 CA Alameda Berkeley CAD009110867 Courtaulds Aerospace (Desoto)  3379 9 CA Alameda Berkeley CAD027909886 Alcan Ingot & Powders  3380 9 CA Alameda Fremont CAD000051433 New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc.  3381 9 CA Alameda Fremont CAD009152364 Henkel Surface Technologies  3382 9 CA Alameda Livermore CA2890012923 Sandia National Laboratories  3383 9 CA Alameda Newark CAD009147000 Fmc Corporation  3384 9 CA Alameda Newark CAD056197601 Romic Environmental Technologies Corp  3385 9 CA Alameda Newark CAD066562521 Ashland Chemical Co  3386 9 CA Alameda Newark CAD074644659 Newark  3387 9 CA Alameda Newark CAD980887418 Evergreen Oil, Inc.  3388 9 CAAlameda Oakland CA4170090027 Fleet And Industrial Supply Ctr This is public information http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/facility.ht m#2020

27. Prioritizing Resources: RCRA No ranking: To prioritize resources, EPA established specific short-term goals for the 1,968 highest-priority facilities on the current RCRA Cleanup Baseline.RCRA Cleanup Baseline Other steps: Create solid waste management units (SWMU’s) to facilitate management

28. Overview of Superfund Program  Why Superfund? Provides for national emergency response Provides government witht the resources to remediate abandoned sites or those that have a recalcitrant PRP Makes responsible parties pay via a financial recovery mechansim Established a strong incentive to prevent chemical releases because of “liability” clause  A site must be “listed” in order to qualify for use of “Superfund” funding  Superfund sets priorities for use of the fund based on ranking using criteria in the hazard ranking system.

29. Prioritizing Resources: Superfund  The HRS score for a site is determined by evaluating four pathways of potential human exposure: Ground water migration (drinking water); Surface water migration (drinking water, human food chain, and environmental); Soil exposure (resident population and nearby population); and Air migration (population, sensitive environments).  Any site scoring 28.5 or above is eligible for the National Priorities LIst.

30. Recommendations for Setting Priorities 1. Prioritize remedial programs based on: Sites with a known responsible party (owner/operator); Abandoned sites; Create other sub-lists as necessary to create a manageable work-load (ranking not always necessary to set priorities). 2. Prioritize based on a known release and a pathway that poses the greatest threat of exposure. 3. Facilitate management based on chemicals associated with industry-sectors. 4. Promote early risk reduction and site stabilization at all contaminated sites. * Facilitate public involvement – it will take longer, but will be provide long-term benefits

31.  THANK YOU!