11 MAC Pt. 3, Ch. 2, R. 2.2.4
Tier 2 Evaluation
Cite as 11 Miss. Admin. Code Pt. 3, Ch. 2, R. 2.2.4
Tier 2 Evaluation.
A.
Tier 2 Evaluation Target Risk Level
For human health, the remediation goal (RG) for each individual contaminant which is
(1) a carcinogen must be calculated to attain a Risk Level of 10-6 (i.e.,1 in a million) and
(2) a systemic toxicant must be calculated to attain a total hazard quotient of not more
than 1 except with regard to a background chemical concentration or a regionally
prevalent chemical concentration. In cases where contaminants with corrective action
concentrations established through federal and/or state programs (i.e., Safe Drinking
Water Act maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)) are present, the MDEQ will determine
the appropriate corrective action concentration on a contaminant by contaminant basis. In
no event, except with regard to a background chemical concentration, may either (1) the
cumulative (total) site carcinogenic risk exceed 1 x 10-4 for carcinogenic CoCs or (2) the
site hazard index (summation of hazard quotients) exceed 3 for non-carcinogenic CoCs
affecting the same organ or organ system without the use of both an engineering control
and an institutional control.
B.
Tier 2 Evaluation Options
(1)
Tier 2 Evaluation is a more in-depth evaluation of site-specific conditions beyond
the Tier 1 Evaluation methodology. The Tier 2 Evaluation may include, but is not
limited to, an evaluation of site-specific conditions by:
(a)
determining the Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) of the Mean for a CoC
utilizing statistical methods and comparing the UCL to the Tier 1 TRGs,
(b)
comparing EPCs to calculated background chemical concentrations,
(c)
comparing EPCs to calculated regionally prevalent chemical
concentrations,
(d)
utilizing site-specific variables (i.e., exposure frequency, exposure
duration, etc.) to calculate site-specific RGs,
(e)
eliminating or minimizing exposure to contaminants,
(e)
conducting an analysis of Petroleum Hydrocarbons using TPH
Fractioning, or
(f)
utilizing other methods approved by MDEQ.
(1)
Statistical Methods - If the Applicant can demonstrate to the
satisfaction of MDEQ that the UCL of the Mean for a CoC
utilizing statistical methods is less than the Tier 1 TRG for that
CoC, this calculated value may be used instead of the highest CoC
concentration. The UCL of the Mean is then compared to the Tier
1 TRG to evaluate remedial options. The Applicant must
demonstrate to the satisfaction of MDEQ that the data are
statistically normal or can be statistically normalized
(i)
The methodology used to determine the UCL of the Mean
should be conducted in accordance with the EPA's
Supplemental Guidance to RAGS: Calculating the
Concentration Term (EPA, 992a), or another method
approved by MDEQ.
(2)
Site Background - CoC concentrations may be compared to site
background chemical concentrations to evaluate appropriate
remedial actions at the Site.
(i)
To establish background chemical concentrations, the
Brownfield Applicant may collect samples from locations
outside of the influence of known contaminated areas and
regionally prevalent chemicals (both vertically and
horizontally), as approved by MDEQ and must analyze
these samples using the same analytical methods as the
CoC analyses.
(ii)
If the Applicant can establish that the background chemical
concentration of a CoC is higher than the Tier 1 TRG
concentration for that CoC listed in Appendix A, the
Applicant shall have the option of using the background
chemical concentration as the Remedial Goal (RG).
(iii)
Remediation of a CoC above its established background
chemical concentration will not be necessary.
(iv)
The methodology used to determine background chemical
concentrations in soil shall be conducted in accordance
with EPA's Engineering Forum Issue: Determination of
Background Concentrations of Inorganics in Soils and
Sediments at Hazardous Waste Sites (EPA/540/S-96/500),
December 1995, or another method approved by MDEQ.
(v)
The methodology used to determine background chemical
concentrations in groundwater shall be conducted in
accordance with EPA's Guidance Document on the
Statistical Analysis of Ground-Water Monitoring Data at
RCRA Facilities (EPA/530/SW-89/026), April 1989, or
another method approved by MDEQ.
(3)
Regionally Prevalent Chemicals - CoC concentrations may be
compared to regionally prevalent chemical concentrations to
evaluate appropriate remedial actions at the Site.
(i)
To establish regionally prevalent chemical concentrations,
the Brownfield Applicant may collect samples from
locations throughout a substantial geographic region and
outside the influence of known contaminated areas, as
approved by MDEQ, and must analyze these samples using
the same analytical methods as the CoC analyses.
(ii)
If the Applicant can establish that the concentration of a
CoC is higher than the concentration of a regionally
prevalent chemical, the Applicant shall have the option of
using the concentration of the regionally prevalent
chemical as the Remedial Goal (RG) provided
(a)
the cumulative (total) site carcinogenic risk does not
exceed 1 x 10-4 for all on-site carcinogenic CoCs
and
(b)
the site hazard index (summation of hazard
quotients) does not exceed 3 for all on-site non-
carcinogenic CoCs that affect the same organ or
organ system.
(iii)
The methodology used to determine regionally prevalent
chemical concentrations in soil shall be conducted in
accordance with EPA's Engineering Forum Issue:
Determination of Background Concentrations of Inorganics
in Soils and Sediments at Hazardous Waste Sites
(EPA/540/S-96/500), December 1995, or another method
approved by MDEQ.
(iv)
The methodology used to determine regionally prevalent
chemical concentrations in groundwater shall be conducted
in accordance with EPA's Guidance Document on the
Statistical Analysis of Ground-Water Monitoring Data at
RCRA Facilities (EPA/530/SW-89/026), April 1989, or
another method approved by MDEQ.
(4)
Site-Specific Variables - If the Applicant can demonstrate to the
satisfaction of MDEQ that site-specific variables (i.e., exposure
duration, exposure frequency, moisture content, etc.) are more
representative of site conditions than the default variables utilized
in the development of the Tier 1 TRGs, the Applicant may modify
site-specific variables in the risk calculation to develop RGs for the
CoCs. Chemical-specific values (i.e., Henry's law constant,
diffusivity in water, etc.) must be taken from EPA's Soil Screening
Guidance: Technical Background Document (EPA/540/R-95/128),
May 1996, unless otherwise approved by MDEQ. The Applicant
shall not adjust the following variables in the development of site-
specific RGs in Tier 2:
(i)
Oral cancer slope factor;
(ii)
Inhalation cancer slope factor;
(iii)
Oral chronic reference dose;
(iv)
Inhalation chronic reference dose;
(v)
Target excess individual lifetime cancer risk;
(vi)
Target hazard index;
(vii)
Body weight, adult; or
(viii) Body weight, child.
(5)
Eliminate/Minimize Exposure Routes - If the Applicant can
demonstrate to the satisfaction of MDEQ that land-use restrictions
and engineering controls at the site will eliminate all complete
exposure pathways or will minimize contamination exposure to
levels that will be protective of human health and the environment,
MDEQ may determine that further remediation is not required. The
Commission considers the presence of free product to be an
unacceptable potential risk to public health and the environment
because it is considered to be a continuing source of contamination
that may increase the level of risk that is the basis for the
remediation requirements, may reduce the margin of safety
provided by the remediation design, or may jeopardize the
permanence of the Brownfield Agreement. Therefore, free product
must be removed unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction
of MDEQ that removal of the free product is technically
impracticable. The Applicant must also demonstrate to the
satisfaction of MDEQ that the contamination is confined and will
remain confined within the site boundaries. Any monitoring plan
must be approved by MDEQ.
(6)
TPH Fractioning - In areas where concentrations of Tier 1
petroleum hydrocarbon indicator compounds are not quantifiable
to the Tier 1 TRGs and where the concentrations of TPH exceed
the Tier 1 TRG for TPH-GRO/DRO, the Brownfield Applicant
may either (1) conduct a more detailed evaluation of petroleum
Hydrocarbons using the methodology outlined in Rule 2.2.7 of this
Subchapter or (2) conduct an evaluation of TPH utilizing another
methodology approved by MDEQ.
(7)
Other Approved Methods - MDEQ may approve other risk
evaluation methodologies or combinations thereof under Tier 2.
(2)
MDEQ may consider utilizing the Method Detection Limit (MDL) as the
site-specific Remediation Goal (RG) on a case by case basis.
(3)
References for any fate and transport models used for the exposure point
calculations (EPA-approved model or models that have been peer
reviewed by experts in the modeling field) and all input values and
assumptions for the models must be provided to and approved by MDEQ.