Changes in regulatory functions that are required when using the Triad approach.
Regardless of whether a Triad or traditional approach is used for a site investigation and remediation, the major components of an environmental remediation project are the same. There will be an investigation phase, an alternatives analysis, a decision, a remediation, and closure. Because of this similarity, it is easy to underestimate the type and magnitude of the changes that are required in order to properly apply the Triad approach.
This section facilitates an understanding of how regulatory functions are different using the Triad approach when compared to traditional approaches. However, this section is not written for regulators only. It is provided so that all stakeholders have an understanding of how the actions of and interactions with regulatory agencies change when the Triad approach is used.
Key topics that are discussed include:
- Life-cycle uncertainty management;
- Regulatory participation in the systematic planning process;
- Real-time data and regulatory participation;
- Quality assurance and quality control;
- Triad compatibility with state and federal guidelines;
- Regulatory concerns related to data management;
- Business process changes and regulatory impacts.
The relative burden of uncertainty management shifts between regulators and responsible parties as the cleanup process proceeds.
The Triad requires significant changes in the way regulatory agencies participate in project planning and data collection activities.
The real-time availability of results increases the potential for informed, interactive regulatory involvement.
The Triad uses focused QA/QC processes to ensure data and decision quality.
In general, the Triad is compatible with most existing state and federal regulations and guidelines.
Data management and analysis is an important component of Triad projects.
The Triad changes the timing of regulatory participation, which in turn requires modifying the way cleanup work typically gets done.