NR 722.05(2)(c) (c) Department–funded response actions. For those sites or facilities where the department is responsible for selecting the appropriate remedy, significant consideration shall be given to options that provide for long-term sustainability.

NR 722.05(2)(d) (d) Sites or facilities being addressed under an administrative order issued under s. 292.11 (7) (c), Stats.

NR 722.05(3) (3) The department shall document the remedial action selected for those sites or facilities listed in sub. (2) following the requirements of s. NR 722.07, at a minimum, and conduct the applicable public participation and notification activities as required in ch. NR 714.

NR 722.05(4) (4) To select a remedy or combination of remedies, responsible parties shall identify, evaluate and document an appropriate range of remedial action options to address each contaminated medium in accordance with the requirements of this chapter, when one of the following happens:

NR 722.05(4)(a) (a) A site investigation report is completed in accordance with ch. NR 716.

NR 722.05(4)(b) (b) An evaluation of remedial action options is required in accordance with ch. NR 508.

NR 722.05(5) (5) The identification, evaluation and documentation of an appropriate set of remedial action options, to address each medium and migration or exposure pathway shall be based on the complexity of the site or facility and the legal requirements applicable to the response action and the site or facility.

NR 722.05 Note Note: Each remedial action option identified may be used to address more than one contaminated medium or migration or exposure pathway if that remedial action option would be protective of public health, safety and welfare and the environment for each media and migration or exposure pathway that it is proposed to address.

NR 722.05(6) (6) The evaluation and documentation of an appropriate set of remedial action options shall be conducted by a qualified person or persons pursuant to s. NR 712.07 and shall be signed and sealed by the qualified person or persons in accordance with s. NR 712.09.

NR 722.05 History History: Cr. Register, April, 1995, No. 472, eff. 5-1-95; CR 12-023: am. (2) (b), (c), (4) Register October 2013 No. 694, eff. 11-1-13.

NR 722.07 NR 722.07 Identification and evaluation of remedial action options.

NR 722.07(1) (1) General. Unless otherwise directed by the department, responsible parties shall identify and evaluate an appropriate range of remedial action options in accordance with the requirements of this section.

NR 722.07(2) (2) Identification of likely remedial action options. An initial screening of remedial technologies shall be conducted to identify remedial action options for further evaluation which are reasonably likely to be feasible for a site or facility, based on the hazardous substances present, media contaminated and site characteristics, and to comply with the requirements of s. NR 722.09.

NR 722.07(3) (3) Evaluation of remedial action options.

NR 722.07(3)(a) (a) Except as provided in par. (b), responsible parties shall use all of the criteria in sub. (4) to further evaluate appropriate remedial action options that have been identified for further evaluation under sub. (2), for each contaminated medium or migration or exposure pathway. This evaluation process shall be used to determine which remedial action option constitutes the most appropriate technology or combination of technologies to restore the environment, to the extent practicable, within a reasonable period of time and to minimize the harmful effects of the contamination to the air, land, or waters of the state, to address the exposure pathways of concern, and effectively and efficiently address the source of the contamination.

NR 722.07 Note Note: The purpose of the technical and economic feasibility evaluation is to evaluate a range of remedial action options suitable for a particular site or facility to determine the practicability of implementing those options. If a particular option is not suitable for a particular site or facility, such as in situ air sparging in dense clay soils, it should not be evaluated. Emphasis should be placed on remedial action options suitable for a particular site or facility. Any remedy selected should attempt to limit secondary impacts including air and water discharges, destruction of ecosystems, and excessive use of energy.

NR 722.07 Note Note: For cases involving a discharge and migration of organic contaminants that do not readily degrade in soil or groundwater, an active remedial action that will reduce the contaminant mass and concentration will typically be necessary. Natural attenuation, covers, and barriers do not actively reduce contaminant mass and concentrations. Chlorinated compounds are the most common contaminants that fall under this provision. Some organic contaminants, such as PCBs and PAHs may not readily migrate, depending on site characteristics.

NR 722.07(3)(am) (am) Responsible parties shall document their evaluation of a remedial option or combination of options which would use recycling or treatment technologies that destroy or detoxify contaminants, rather than transfer the contaminants to other media.

NR 722.07(3)(b) (b) A detailed evaluation based on the criteria in sub. (4) is not required in those cases where a remedial action option identified during the initial screening results in the reuse, recycling, destruction, detoxification, treatment, or any combination thereof of the hazardous substances present at the site and this proposed option meets all of the following requirements:

NR 722.07(3)(b)1m. 1m. Is proven to be effective in remediating the types of hazardous substances present at the site, based on experience gained at other sites with similar site characteristics and conditions;

NR 722.07(3)(b)2m. 2m. Can be implemented in a manner that will not pose a significant risk of harm to human health, safety, or welfare or the environment; and

NR 722.07(3)(b)3. 3. Is likely to result in the reduction or control, or both, of the hazardous substances present at the site to a degree and in a manner that is in compliance with the requirements of s. NR 722.09 (2) to (4).

NR 722.07 Note Note: Section NR 722.07 (3) (b) is intended to provide a streamlined evaluation process for certain remedial actions that are presumed to meet the evaluation and selection criteria in ss. NR 722.07 and 722.09.

NR 722.07(4) (4) Evaluation criteria. Except as provided in s. NR 722.07 (3) (b), the remedial action options identified by the initial screening shall be evaluated based on the following requirements and in compliance with the requirements of s. NR 722.09.

NR 722.07(4)(a) (a) Technical feasibility. The technical feasibility of each appropriate remedial action option that effectively and efficiently addresses the sources of contamination shall be evaluated using the following criteria:

NR 722.07(4)(a)1. 1. ‘Long-term effectiveness.’ The long-term effectiveness of appropriate remedial action options, taking into account all of the following:

NR 722.07(4)(a)1.a. a. The degree to which the toxicity, mobility and volume of the contamination is expected to be reduced.

NR 722.07(4)(a)1.b. b. The degree to which a remedial action option, if implemented, will protect public health, safety, and welfare and the environment over time.

NR 722.07(4)(a)2. 2. ‘Short-term effectiveness.’ The short-term effectiveness of appropriate remedial action options, taking into account any adverse impacts on public health, safety, or welfare or the environment that may be posed during the construction and implementation period until case closure under ch. NR 726.