(1) It is the intent of the Legislature to protect the health of all people under actual circumstances of exposure. By July 1, 2001, the secretary of the department shall establish criteria by rule for the purpose of determining, on a site-specific basis, the rehabilitation program tasks that comprise a site rehabilitation program and the level at which a rehabilitation program task and a site rehabilitation program may be deemed completed. In establishing the rule, the department shall apply, to the maximum extent feasible, a risk-based corrective action process to achieve protection of human health and safety and the environment in a cost-effective manner based on the principles set forth in this subsection. The rule must prescribe a phased risk-based corrective action process that is iterative and that tailors site rehabilitation tasks to site-specific conditions and risks. The department and the person responsible for brownfield site rehabilitation are encouraged to establish decision points at which risk management decisions will be made. The department shall provide an early decision, when requested, regarding applicable exposure factors and a risk management approach based on the current and future land use at the site. The rule must include protocols for the use of natural attenuation, including long-term natural attenuation where site conditions warrant, the use of institutional and engineering controls, and the issuance of “no further action” letters. The criteria for determining what constitutes a rehabilitation program task or completion of a site rehabilitation program task or site rehabilitation program must: (a) Consider the current exposure and potential risk of exposure to humans and the environment, including multiple pathways of exposure. The physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of each contaminant must be considered in order to determine the feasibility of risk-based corrective action assessment. (b) Establish the point of compliance at the source of the contamination. However, the department may temporarily move the point of compliance to the boundary of the property, or to the edge of the plume when the plume is within the property boundary, while cleanup, including cleanup through natural attenuation processes in conjunction with appropriate monitoring, is proceeding. The department may, pursuant to criteria provided for in this section, temporarily extend the point of compliance beyond the property boundary with appropriate monitoring, if such extension is needed to facilitate natural attenuation or to address the current conditions of the plume, provided human health, public safety, and the environment are protected. When temporarily extending the point of compliance beyond the property boundary, it cannot be extended further than the lateral extent of the plume at the time of execution of the brownfield site rehabilitation agreement, if known, or the lateral extent of the plume as defined at the time of site assessment. Temporary extension of the point of compliance beyond the property boundary, as provided in this paragraph, must include actual notice by the person responsible for brownfield site rehabilitation to local governments and the owners of any property into which the point of compliance is allowed to extend and constructive notice to residents and business tenants of the property into which the point of compliance is allowed to extend. Persons receiving notice pursuant to this paragraph shall have the opportunity to comment within 30 days of receipt of the notice. (c) Ensure that the site-specific cleanup goal is that all contaminated brownfield sites and brownfield areas ultimately achieve the applicable cleanup target levels provided in this section. In the circumstances provided below, and after constructive notice and opportunity to comment within 30 days from receipt of the notice to local government, to owners of any property into which the point of compliance is allowed to extend, and to residents on any property into which the point of compliance is allowed to extend, the department may allow concentrations of contaminants to temporarily exceed the applicable cleanup target levels while cleanup, including cleanup through natural attenuation processes in conjunction with appropriate monitoring, is proceeding, if human health, public safety, and the environment are protected. (d) Allow brownfield site and brownfield area rehabilitation programs to include the use of institutional or engineering controls, where appropriate, to eliminate or control the potential exposure to contaminants of humans or the environment. The use of controls must be preapproved by the department and only after constructive notice and opportunity to comment within 30 days from receipt of notice is provided to local governments, to owners of any property into which the point of compliance is allowed to extend, and to residents on any property into which the point of compliance is allowed to extend. When institutional or engineering controls are implemented to control exposure, the removal of the controls must have prior department approval and must be accompanied by the resumption of active cleanup, or other approved controls, unless cleanup target levels under this section have been achieved. (e) Consider the interactive effects of contaminants, including additive, synergistic, and antagonistic effects. (f) Take into consideration individual site characteristics, which shall include, but not be limited to, the current and projected use of the affected groundwater and surface water in the vicinity of the site, current and projected land uses of the area affected by the contamination, the exposed population, the degree and extent of contamination, the rate of contaminant migration, the apparent or potential rate of contaminant degradation through natural attenuation processes, the location of the plume, and the potential for further migration in relation to site property boundaries. (g) Apply state water quality standards as follows: 1. Cleanup target levels for each contaminant found in groundwater shall be the applicable state water quality standards. Where such standards do not exist, the cleanup target levels for groundwater shall be based on the minimum criteria specified in department rule. The department shall apply the following, as appropriate, in establishing the applicable cleanup target levels: calculations using a lifetime cancer risk level of 1.0E-6; a hazard index of 1 or less; the best achievable detection limit; and nuisance, organoleptic, and aesthetic considerations. However, the department may not require site rehabilitation to achieve a cleanup target level for any individual contaminant which is more stringent than the site-specific background concentration for that contaminant. 2. Where surface waters are exposed to contaminated groundwater, the cleanup target levels for the contaminants must be based on the more protective of the groundwater or surface water standards as established by department rule, unless it has been demonstrated that the contaminants do not cause or contribute to the exceedance of applicable surface water quality criteria. In such circumstances, the point of measuring compliance with the surface water standards shall be in the groundwater immediately adjacent to the surface water body. 3. Using risk-based corrective action principles, the department shall approve alternative cleanup target levels in conjunction with institutional and engineering controls, if needed, based upon an applicant’s demonstration, using site-specific or other relevant data and information, risk assessment modeling results, including results from probabilistic risk assessment modeling, risk assessment studies, risk reduction techniques, or a combination thereof, that human health, public safety, and the environment are protected to the same degree as provided in subparagraphs 1. and 2. Where a state water quality standard is applicable, a deviation may not result in the application of cleanup target levels more stringent than the standard. In determining whether it is appropriate to establish alternative cleanup target levels at a site, the department must consider the effectiveness of source removal, if any, which has been completed at the site and the practical likelihood of the use of low yield or poor quality groundwater, the use of groundwater near marine surface water bodies, the current and projected use of the affected groundwater in the vicinity of the site, or the use of groundwater in the immediate vicinity of the contaminated area, where it has been demonstrated that the groundwater contamination is not migrating away from such localized source, provided human health, public safety, and the environment are protected. When using alternative cleanup target levels at a brownfield site, institutional controls are not required if: a. The only cleanup target levels exceeded are the groundwater cleanup target levels derived from nuisance, organoleptic, or aesthetic considerations; b. Concentrations of all contaminants meet the state water quality standards or the minimum criteria, based on the protection of human health, provided in subparagraph 1.; c. All of the groundwater cleanup target levels established pursuant to subparagraph 1. are met at the property boundary; d. The person responsible for brownfield site rehabilitation has demonstrated that the contaminants will not migrate beyond the property boundary at concentrations exceeding the groundwater cleanup target levels established pursuant to subparagraph 1.; e. The property has access to and is using an offsite water supply and no unplugged private wells are used for domestic purposes; and f. The real property owner provides written acceptance of the “no further action” proposal to the department or the local pollution control program. (h) Provide for the department to issue a “no further action order,” with conditions, including, but not limited to, the use of institutional or engineering controls where appropriate, when alternative cleanup target levels established pursuant to subparagraph (g)3. have been achieved, or when the person responsible for brownfield site rehabilitation can demonstrate that the cleanup target level is unachievable within available technologies. Before issuing such an order, the department shall consider the feasibility of an alternative site rehabilitation technology at the brownfield site. (i) Establish appropriate cleanup target levels for soils. 1. In establishing soil cleanup target levels for human exposure to each contaminant found in soils from the land surface to 2 feet below land surface, the department shall apply the following, as appropriate: calculations using a lifetime cancer risk level of 1.0E-6; a hazard index of 1 or less; and the best achievable detection limit. However, the department may not require site rehabilitation to achieve a cleanup target level for an individual contaminant which is more stringent than the site-specific background concentration for that contaminant. Institutional controls or other methods shall be used to prevent human exposure to contaminated soils more than 2 feet below the land surface. Any removal of such institutional controls shall require such contaminated soils to be remediated. 2. Leachability-based soil cleanup target levels shall be based on protection of the groundwater cleanup target levels or the alternate cleanup target levels for groundwater established pursuant to this paragraph, as appropriate. Source removal and other cost-effective alternatives that are technologically feasible shall be considered in achieving the leachability soil cleanup target levels established by the department. The leachability goals are not applicable if the department determines, based upon individual site characteristics, and in conjunction with institutional and engineering controls, if needed, that contaminants will not leach into the groundwater at levels that pose a threat to human health, public safety, and the environment. 3. Using risk-based corrective action principles, the department shall approve alternative cleanup target levels in conjunction with institutional and engineering controls, if needed, based upon an applicant’s demonstration, using site-specific or other relevant data and information, risk assessment modeling results, including results from probabilistic risk assessment modeling, risk assessment studies, risk reduction techniques, or a combination thereof, that human health, public safety, and the environment are protected to the same degree as provided in subparagraphs 1. and 2.
(2) The department shall require source removal, as a risk reduction measure, if warranted and cost-effective. Once source removal at a site is complete, the department shall reevaluate the site to determine the degree of active cleanup needed to continue. Further, the department shall determine if the reevaluated site qualifies for monitoring only or if no further action is required to rehabilitate the site. If additional site rehabilitation is necessary to reach “no further action” status, the department is encouraged to utilize natural attenuation monitoring, including long-term natural attenuation monitoring, where site conditions warrant.
(3)(a) The Legislature finds that rehabilitation and redevelopment of a potential brownfield site that is a portion of a larger contaminated site are significantly complicated when multiple parties may own, lease, or operate different portions of the contaminated site. The Legislature further finds that delaying a person’s ability to achieve a “No Further Action” status for a potential brownfield site until such time as the owners, lessees, or operators of all other portions of the larger historical contaminated site have completed site rehabilitation on their respective portions is not in the public interest, as such delay disincentivizes rehabilitation and redevelopment of the potential brownfield site by imposing unnecessary legal burdens, technical obstacles, and financial costs. (b) Therefore, the Legislature finds that it is in the public interest to remove any such barriers to the rehabilitation and redevelopment of property by providing a clear path to obtaining a “No Further Action” status in cases where a potential brownfield site is only a portion of a larger contaminated site. (c) If the person responsible for a brownfield site rehabilitation demonstrates compliance with the applicable contamination cleanup criteria described in subsection (1), and the brownfield site is only a portion of a larger contaminated site, the department or any delegated local pollution control program under s. 376.80(9) may not: 1. Deny a “No Further Action” status for the brownfield site; or 2. Refuse to issue a site rehabilitation completion order for the brownfield site, regardless of whether it has engineering and institutional controls. This subparagraph applies even where similar contamination exists elsewhere on the contaminated site which was the result of similar or related activities or operations that occurred both on the contaminated site and the brownfield site, provided that all soil and groundwater contamination emanating from the brownfield site is adequately addressed pursuant to chapter 62-780, Florida Administrative Code. (d) This subsection applies to all brownfield sites, irrespective of the effective date of the brownfield site rehabilitation agreement.
(4) The cleanup criteria described in this section govern only site rehabilitation activities occurring at the brownfield site. Removal of contaminated media from a site for offsite relocation or treatment must be in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations.