This guidance document (1) provides instructions on preparing the components of an ecological work plan to complement the overall site remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) work plan and (2) directs the user on how to implement ecological tasks identified in the plan. Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), and RI/FS work plan will have to be developed as part of the site-remediation scoping process. Specific guidance on the RI/FS process and the preparation of work plans has been developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 1988a). This document provides guidance to US Department of Energy (DOE) staff and contractor personnel for incorporation of ecological information into environmental remediation planning and decision making at CERCLA sites--P. I-3.

This guidance document (1) provides instructions on preparing the components of an ecological work plan to complement the overall site remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) work plan and (2) directs the user on how to implement ecological tasks identified in the plan. Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), and RI/FS work plan will have to be developed as part of the site-remediation scoping process. Specific guidance on the RI/FS process and the preparation of work plans has been developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 1988a). This document provides guidance to US Department of Energy (DOE) staff and contractor personnel for incorporation of ecological information into environmental remediation planning and decision making at CERCLA sites.

This guidance document (1) provides instructions on preparing the components of an ecological work plan to complement the overall site remedial assessment investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) work plan and (2) directs the user on how to implement ecological tasks identified in the plan. Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfired Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), an RI/FS work plan win have to be developed as part of the site-remediation scoping the process. Specific guidance on the RI/FS process and the preparation of work plans has been developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 1988a). This document provides guidance to US Department of Energy (DOE) staff and contractor personnel for incorporation of ecological information into environmental remediation planning and decision making at CERCLA sites. An overview analysis of early ecological risk assessment methods (i.e., in the 1980s) at Superfund sites was conducted by the EPA (1989a). That review provided a perspective of attention given to ecological issues in some of the first RI/FS studies. By itself, that reference is of somewhat limited value; it does, however, establish a basis for comparison of past practices in ecological risk with current, more refined methods.

This manual provides detailed guidance on Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Studies (RI/FSs) conducted pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) at Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. The purpose of the RI/FS, to assess the risk posed by a hazardous waste site and to determine the best way to reduce that risk, and its structure (site characterization, risk assessment, screening and detailed analysis of alternatives, etc.) is defined in the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) and further explained in the Environmental Protection Agencys̀ (EPAs̀) Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA (Interim Final) 540/G-89/004, OSWER Directive 9355.3-01, October 1988. Though issued in 1988, the EPA guidance remains an excellent source of information on the conduct and structure of an RI/FS. This document makes use of supplemental RI/FS-related guidance that EPA has developed since its initial document was issued in 1988, incorporates practical lessons learned in more than 12 years of experience in CERCLA hazardous site remediation, and drawing on those lessons, introduces the Streamlined Approach For Environmental Restoration (SAFER), developed by DOE as a way to proceed quickly and efficiently through the RI/FS process at DOE facilities. Thus as its title implies, this guidance is intended to describe in detail the process and component elements of an RI/FS, as well as techniques to manage the RI/FS effectively.

The Environmental Management Division of Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG), Maryland, is conducting a remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS) of the J-Field area at APG pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended. J-Field is within the Edgewood Area of APG in Harford County, Maryland, and activities at the Edgewood Area since World War II have included the development, manufacture, testing, and destruction of chemical agents and munitions. The J-Field site was used to destroy chemical agents and munitions by open burning and open detonation. This work plan presents the approach proposed to conduct an ecological risk assessment (ERA) as part of the RI/FS program at J-Field. This work plan identifies the locations and types of field studies proposed for each area of concern (AOC), the laboratory studies proposed to evaluate toxicity of media, and the methodology to be used in estimating doses to ecological receptors and discusses the approach that will be used to estimate and evaluate ecological risks at J-Field. Eight AOCs have been identified at J-Field, and the proposed ERA is designed to evaluate the potential for adverse impacts to ecological receptors from contaminated media at each AOC, as well as over the entire J-Field site. The proposed ERA approach consists of three major phases, incorporating field and laboratory studies as well as modeling. Phase 1 includes biotic surveys of the aquatic and terrestrial habitats, biological tissue sampling and analysis, and media toxicity testing at each AOC and appropriate reference locations. Phase 2 includes definitive toxicity testing of media from areas of known or suspected contamination or of media for which the Phase 1 results indicate toxicity or adverse ecological effects. In Phase 3, the uptake models initially developed in Phase 2 will be finalized, and contaminant dose to each receptor from all complete pathways will be estimated.

At the heart of environmental protection is risk assessment: thelikelihood of pollution from accidents; the likelihood of problemsfrom normal and abnormal operation of industrial processes; thelikely impacts associated with new synthetic chemicals; and so on.Currently, risk assessment has been very much in the news--therisks from BSE and E. coli, and the public perception of risks fromnuclear waste, etc. This new publication explains how scientificmethodologies are used to assess risk from human activities and theresultant objects and wastes, on people and the environment.Understanding such risks supplies crucial information--to framelegislation, manage major habitats, businesses and industries, andcreate development programmes. Unique in combining the science of risk assessment with thedevelopment of management strategies. Covers science and social science (politics, economics,psychology) aspects. Very timely - risk assessment lies at the heart of decisionmaking in various topical environmental questions (BSE, Brent Spar,nuclear waste).