Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2013C00288:reg:4:p5
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2013C00288
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 4 (pt 5/6)
Character Range: 1187098–1190032

scientific information and results generated within the Preliminary ERA. Examples include:
    * the size of the site, land value, and cost of remediation (economic)
    * the type of contaminants present, current and potential site land use, surrounding land use (societal)
    * the ecological significance of the values identified in the receptor identification component of the Preliminary ERA that are to be protected (e.g. a rare and endangered species or a species that supports a valued ecological process or a sensitive introduced species of low ecological significance, e.g. a rabbit).
The risk management decision may also be determined or affected by the need to refine the uncertainty of the information gathered and/or to fill data gaps. Where the risk assessor has identified a high level of uncertainty in the risk characterisation (for example, because there was limited data from a site characterisation or because there was limited toxicity information for particular chemicals) then a decision manager may decide to either:
    * develop and implement a site management/remediation program
or
    * undertake further assessment and proceed to a Definitive ERA.
If the Preliminary ERA finds that the decisions on exposure and ecological values that were made in deriving the EILs were appropriate for the site and the risk characterisation suggests that there is unlikely to be an adverse impact on ecological values, the risk manager must decide to either:
    * adopt the 'no action' outcome
or
    * adopt the 'monitoring' outcome.
If however, the Preliminary ERA raises concerns about the suitability of decisions made in applying the EILs to the site and/or the risk characterisation suggests that there may be an adverse impact to ecological values, the risk manager must decide to either:
    * develop and implement a site management/remediation program
or
    * proceed to the Definitive ERA.
The decision that is taken depends on the level of estimated risk and the social, cultural economic and engineering considerations relevant to the site. Proceeding to a Definitive ERA may not be cost-effective where the cost of managing a site is relatively low. Risk reduction measures rather than further investigations can follow a Preliminary ERA if that is considered appropriate—this would be considered in consultation with the decision-maker.

Where there is no suitable EIL[4] for a contaminant of concern and the on-site concentrations of the contaminant are above background concentrations, the risk manager must decide to either proceed to a Definitive ERA or develop and implement a site management/remediation program. The decision should be based on a multiple-lines-of-evidence approach.

The expected output from a Preliminary ERA is a report that highlights the extent and degree of the on-site soil contamination and justifies the use and selection of the most appropriate EILs.  An analysis of