midwest states risk assessment symposium november 3, 2009
TRANSCRIPT
Mid
west S
tate
s R
isk
Assessm
ent S
ym
posiu
m
Novem
ber
3, 200
9T
hom
as W
. E
aste
rly, P
.E., D
EE
,
QE
P
Com
mis
sio
ner,
India
na
Depart
ment of E
nvironm
enta
l
Managem
ent
6
IDEM’sMission
We Protect Hoosiers and Our
Environment
IDE
M is r
esponsib
le for
pro
tecting h
um
an
health a
nd the e
nvironm
ent w
hile
pro
vid
ing
for
safe
industr
ial, a
gricultura
l, c
om
merc
ial
and g
overn
menta
l opera
tion v
ital to
a
pro
spero
us e
conom
y.
India
na’s
Institu
tional C
ontr
ol
Regis
try
•In
stitu
tional C
ontr
ols
are
legal re
str
ictions
to c
ut off e
xposure
to u
naccepta
ble
ris
k
posed b
y c
onta
min
ation left in p
lace d
uring
a r
em
edia
l action.
–E
nvir
on
me
nta
l R
estr
ictive
Co
ve
na
nts
(E
RC
s)
–E
nvir
on
me
nta
l R
estr
ict
Ord
ina
nce
s (
ER
Os)
7
New
Em
phasis
on IC
s
•A
2009 India
na L
aw
(P
.L. 78-2
009)
requires India
na’s
site s
pecific
ris
k
assessm
ents
to: “t
ake into
account site
specific
facto
rs, in
clu
din
g r
em
edia
l
measure
s, restrictive covenants, and
environmental restrictive ordinances
that
manage r
isk a
nd c
ontr
ol com
ple
ted
exposure
path
ways.”
8
IC C
halle
nges
•In
stitu
tional C
ontr
ols
not
effective if
no o
ne k
no
ws
about
them
–N
ew
ow
ners
/tenants
may b
e u
naw
are
of IC
s
–A
dm
inis
trative r
ecord
s m
ay b
e lost (n
ot re
cord
ed p
roperly,
pro
pert
y s
ubdiv
ided, etc
.)
–Local govern
ment units a
nd d
ecis
ion m
akers
(pla
nnin
g, zonin
g,
build
ing p
erm
its, etc
.) m
ay b
e u
naw
are
of conta
min
ate
d s
ites
–E
nvironm
enta
l re
gula
tors
typic
ally
not in
volv
ed w
ith local
redevelo
pm
ent pro
jects
9
IC F
ailu
res
•P
ug
et
Sound N
ava
l S
hip
yard
, “D
o N
ot
Dig
”-
conta
min
ate
d s
oil
excavate
d w
ithin
3 w
eeks o
f pro
pe
rty
transfe
r
•S
tate
audits
–R
hode Isla
nd a
udit r
esults ~
19%
of IC
sites o
ut of com
plia
nce for
technic
al re
asons
–K
ansas a
udit
•S
om
e o
wn
ers
una
wa
re o
f IC
s
•12%
im
pro
perl
y f
iled
•68%
met
all
IC c
onditio
ns
–R
ecord
s lost, n
ot tied to p
ropert
y, not carr
ied o
ver
when p
ropert
y
subdiv
ided
10
Why a
n IC
Regis
try?
•T
o tra
ck w
hen a
nd w
here
IC
s e
sta
blis
hed
–P
rior
to 2
008 ID
EM
had n
o c
om
pre
hensiv
e lis
t of IC
sites
–T
he m
ore
conta
min
ation left in p
lace, th
e h
igher
the long
term
ris
k o
f exposure
if IC
s n
ot m
onitore
d
•R
ecom
mende
d b
y E
PA
–
Stu
dy found lack o
f easily
availa
ble
info
rmation o
n IC
s
–S
tudy found s
ignific
ant num
ber
of IC
s n
ot in
pla
ce
•ID
EM
researc
h f
ound less t
ha
n 5
0%
in d
eed r
ecord
searc
h
–M
ajo
rity
of sta
tes n
ow
have r
egis
trie
s
•E
PA
Bro
wn
field
gra
nt stipu
late
s p
ub
lic r
ecord
of IC
sites; IC
regis
trie
s a
lso e
ligib
le f
or
EP
A fundin
g
•N
o c
om
pre
hensiv
e f
edera
l re
gis
try
•P
rovid
es n
otice t
o p
ublic
an
d local govern
ment
units
11
LUST
BF
SCU
VRP
RCRA
SF
ER
C N
um
bers
by P
rogra
m
•In
dia
na B
row
nfie
lds
Pro
gra
m
–76 E
RC
s
•LU
ST
/ELT
F–
207 E
RC
s
•V
RP
–31 E
RC
s
•S
CU
–31 E
RC
s
•S
up
erf
und/D
ER
P–
41 E
RC
s
•R
CR
A –
Corr
ective A
ction
–7 E
RC
s
APPROXIMATELY
400 ERCsTO DATE
12
IDE
M IC
Regis
try
•In
terim
: A
ccess D
ata
base
–R
olle
d-o
ut la
te 2
008
–In
form
ation tra
cked inclu
des c
ounty
, city, addre
ss, ty
pes o
f re
str
ictions, engin
eering c
ontr
ols
, county
record
er
info
rmation
–Lin
ked to e
lectr
onic
fili
ng c
abin
et (V
FC
) and India
na M
ap
–S
um
mary
report
com
pile
d fro
m d
ata
base a
nd u
pdate
d o
n ID
EM
w
ebsite m
onth
ly
–Lim
itations
•N
o w
ay t
o s
earc
h (
query
) –
so
rt f
unction o
nly
•E
RC
bou
ndari
es n
ot
requir
ed
so m
aps lim
ite
d
•C
han
ge in o
wn
ers
hip
not
requ
ired
•Lon
g-t
erm
: T
EM
PO
Softw
are
–IC
module
fun
ded b
y E
PA
Bro
wnfield
sgra
nt
–D
evelo
pm
ent
~2010
13
Re
str
ictio
n o
r
En
gin
ee
rin
g C
on
tro
l
Aff
ecte
d M
ed
ia
Co
nta
min
an
t C
lass
Co
mm
en
ts
19