Executive Summary

This document provides a framework for federal, state, local, tribal and territorial (FSLTT) government and non-governmental and private-sector authorities for use in planning and expediting decisions regarding technical incident characterization, remediation, and site re-use/re-occupancy in the aftermath of a nationally significant or large-scale hazardous chemical release. Together, the National Incident Management System (NIMS), National Response Framework (NRF), National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF), and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) provide the general integrated structure for incident command, control, and coordination during such incidents. This integrated structure is based on a fundamental premise – namely, conducting incident management activities at the lowest jurisdictional level possible, augmented by other expertise and resources (including a Federal On-Scene Coordinator [OSC]), as appropriate. Based on the size, scope, and complexity of the incident, additional federal government assistance, including technical capabilities and other resources, may be required to support the response to and recovery from a chemical incident. Federal response and recovery activities are synchronized using the operational constructs detailed in the Oil and Chemical Incident Annex (OCIA) to the Federal Interagency Operational Plans (FIOPs) for Response and Recovery^.5

Consistent with the NIMS and Incident Command System (ICS) doctrine, the technical planning and decision framework presented in this document is intended to support the multi-agency Unified Command (UC)⁶ and other Whole Community senior decision-makers that will be engaged in the management of nationally significant or large-scale chemical incidents. As more agencies representing unique authorities, capabilities, and resources become involved in response and recovery efforts, unified objectives-setting and decision-making are critical.⁷

The framework discussed in this document embraces the concept of a flexible, multi-attribute, site- specific planning and decision process that considers and balances many factors. For example, this process consists of both qualitative and quantitative assessments applied at each stage of site-level consequence management, including site characterization, implementation of the chosen cleanup alternative, and site re-use/re-occupancy activities. This process also provides for the incorporation of the collective professional judgment of technical experts and expectations set by key FSLTT stakeholders to determine a range of decisions in these areas appropriate to site-specific circumstances across a range of potential large-scale incident scenarios. Factors assessed as part of this process include: the extent of outdoor versus indoor contamination, potential magnitude and severity of risk posed by the contaminant, demographics and size of populations affected, site location and area geography, meteorological conditions, cost, and other socioeconomic and environmental factors.

This document is organized into five principal sections as described below:

Introduction: Provides information on the background, purpose, scope, audience, and organizational structure of this document.
Operational Phasing and Planning Framework: Provides an overview of key decision process guidelines, operational phasing, and an overarching planning and decision framework for chemical incident consequence management.
Hazardous Chemicals and Their Characteristics: Identifies the types and characteristics of hazardous chemicals to help inform both the immediate response and longer-term remediation and re-occupancy decisions.
Principles of Risk Assessment for Hazardous Chemicals: Provides background information on risk assessment considerations for hazardous chemicals.
Key Elements in Clearance Decision-Making: Presents points of consideration for each of the key activities required for successful characterization, remediation, and re-use/re-occupation of areas/sites impacted by a large-scale chemical incident, as well as references that provide further scientific or expert guidance.

A list of general references, a glossary of terms, and appendices providing additional sources of information and example scenarios and real-world case studies complete this document.

Footnotes

5. This guidance provide in this document is intended to complement, not affect or alter any existing federal authority, including, but not limited to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. and the National Contingency Plan, 40 CFR Part 300.

6. NIMS defines “Unified Command” as “An ICS application used when more than one agency has incident jurisdiction or when incidents cross political jurisdictions.” Based on the key doctrinal notion that ICS is scalable based on the size, scope, and complexity of a given incident, this document is focused on how the technical information contained herein can be used to support incident planning and decision making rather than provide prescriptive guidance on how such planning and decision processes will be structured/operationalized via the ICS.

7. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has decades of experience in hazardous materials response and cleanup of contaminated sites. An integral part of this experience is the development of environmental, health-based exposure levels that guide different facets of response and cleanup activities.

In addition, many agencies develop a variety of environmental, health-based exposure guidelines, which are discussed in Appendix A.