United
En'« ';)rrr«!r*,il r'. toi-ton
Ayency
Sol d W.I.,Ar-rl
Emerqeri > ¦,(,<,r-:,
(OS J«)l
£PAb-{C K!
0<*cjr~bef *930
Superfund Removal
Procedures
Action Memorandum
Guidance
-------
EPA/540/P-90/004
OSWER Dir. 9360.3-01
December 1990
SUPERFUND REMOVAL PROCEDURES
ACTION MEMORANDUM GUIDANCE
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
This document is part of a ten-volume series of guidance documents collectively titled the
Superfund Removal Procedures. These stand-alone volumes update and replace OSWER
Directive 9360.0-3B, the single-volume Superfund Removal Procedures manual, issued in
February 1988.
Each volume in the series is dedicated to a particular aspect of the removal process and
includes a volume-specific Table of Contents, Reference List, and Key Words Index. The
series comprises the following nine procedural volumes:
The Removal Response Decision: Site Discovery to Response Decision
Action Memorandum Guidance
Response Management: Removal Start-up to Close-out
Removal Enforcement Guidance for On-Scene Coordinators
Public Participation Guidance for On-Scene Coordinators: Community Relations
and the Administrative Record
Removal Response Reporting
Special Requirements
Guidance on the Consideration of ARARs During Removal Actions
State Participation.
In addition, the series includes an Overview volume, containing a comprehensive Table of
Contents, List of Exhibits, Key Words Index, List of Acronyms, and Glossary, for use as
a quick reference.
ii
-------
As the day-to-day managers of removal responses conducted under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), On-Scene Coordinators
(OSCs) are responsible for a variety of activities. Among the most basic, yet highly important
tasks, is the preparation of Action Memoranda, more commonly referred to as Action Memos.
An Action Memo provides a concise written record of the decision selecting a removal
action. It describes the site's history, current activities, and health and environmental threats;
outlines the proposed actions and costs; and documents approval of the proposed action by the
proper Headquarters' or Regional authority. An addendum to the Action Memo, which is not part
of the decision to select a removal action, sets forth the enforcement strategy.
An adequate Action Memo, however, must be more than a summary of past, current, and
proposed activities. It must document consideration of the factors affecting the removal decision.
Specifically, the Action Memo must substantiate the need for a removal action based upon criteria
in the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). Because Action
Memos are the primary decision documents to select and authorize removal actions, they are the
critical component of the administrative record. The importance of a well-prepared Action Memo
cannot be overstated. The following pages outline the minimum requirements for Action Memos,
presenting illustrative exhibits and examples when appropriate.
Preparing Action Memos is an integral part of an OSC's job.
iU
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Exhibits ..w
Key to Symbols vii
Action Memoranda.... ...1
Action Memorandum Purpose 1
The Action Memo as Part of the Administrative Record for Selection of the Removal Action 1
Action Memorandum Roles and Responsibilities 3
Model Action Memorandum 6
Overview...... 6
Model 8
Action Memoranda for Special Circumstances 2 6
Overview 26
Combined Removal and Statutory Exemption Requests 26
Action Memoranda to Continue Response Actions 30
Action Memoranda Supplements 41
Action Memoranda Attachments 41
Role of Headquarters Addenda.. 42
Review and Approval Procedures . 4 4
Need for Review.. 44
Resources for Review 44
Approval and Concurrence Procedures 50
Appendix A. References
Appendix B. Key Words index
v
-------
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit
Number
1 Administrative Record Requirements For Time-Critical Removals 2
2 Administrative Record Requirements For Non-Time-Critical
Removals 3
3 Action Memo Roles and Responsibilities 4
4 Basic Action Memo Outline 7
5 Sample Removal Project Ceiling Estimate 22
6 Information Requirements for Removal and 12-Month or $2 Million
Exemption Request Action Memos 27
7 Information Requirements for Action Memos to Continue Responses 32
8 Sample Project Ceiling Increase Estimate 37
9 Review Checklist 1 45
10 Concurrence for Nationally Significant or Precedent-Setting
Removals 52
Vi
-------
KEY TO SYMBOLS
Three types of symbols appear throughout this document to assist readers with
obtaining additional information on certain topics or focus attention on specific points.
Each of the three symbols is described below. In addition, footnotes and cross-references
are used to provide further clarification.
Bracketed numbers [#] appear in the text and exhibits and correspond to specific
references in Appendix A. This appendix provides a comprehensive list of supporting
guidance documents that may be consulted for more detailed explanations of removid
program procedures or policies affecting the preparation of Action Memos. Appropriate
sections of statutes and regulations are also cited throughout the text, with a full citation of
each statute and regulation appearing in Appendix A.
The remaining two symbols are used in the model Action Memo portion of this
document (see pp. 8-25) to highlight specific information to include in Action Memos.
Information that the OSC must include in all Action Memos is denoted by the symbol
Other information requirements outlined in the-model, but not accompanied by this symbol,
should be discussed as appropriate given the circumstances of the removal. Information
required for Action Memos that is also needed for entry into the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) is
indicated by the symbol ©. This symbol is intended to help OSCs flag items for
CERCLIS, so they can then distribute copies of the Action Memo to data coding staff for
coding onto a CERCLIS Removal Information Form or a Site Information Form.
-------
NOTICE
The procedures set out in this document are intended solely for the guidance of
Government personnel. They are not intended, nor can they be relied upon to create any
rights enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States. EPA officials may
decide to follow the guidance provided in this document, or to act at variance with the
guidance, based on an analysis of site circumstances. The Agency also reserves the right to
change this guidance at any time without public notice.
viii
-------
ACTION MEMORANDA
Action Memorandum Purpose
An Action Memo serves as the primary decision document substantiating the need for a
removal response, identifying the proposed action and explaining the rationale for the removal.
An Action Memo also reserves funds for a removal response, which are then activated by a
signed delivery order. OSCs must prepare an Action Memo for all Fund-financed removal
actions prior to the start of a response, or after the fact for removals initiated under an OSC's
$50,000 authority.
If circumstances change, supplemental Action Memos may be required later in the response to
support the need to continue a removal action beyond 12 months, to increase the total project
ceiling, to increase the total project ceiling beyond $2 million, to change the scope of the
removal action, or combinations thereof. To initiate a removal action where, at the outset, the
project is expected to exceed 12 months in duration or the total cost of the project is expected
to exceed$2 million, the OSC must prepare an Action Memo that justifies the need to undertake
a removal and also meets the statutory exemption criteria from these limits.
Each Action Memo to initiate a removal must follow the standard model discussed in this
guidance to ensure completeness (see p. 6). Instructions on how to cover the special
circumstances noted above are supplied as well.
The Action Memo as Part of the Administrative Record for Selection of the
Removal Action
The Action Memo is the critical component of the administrative record because it is the
primary decision document for a removal response [21]. Section 113(k) of CERCLA, as
amended, requires the establishment of an administrative record for the selection of a CERCLA
response action. The administrative record is the body of information used by the Agency to
select a response action. The administrative record serves two purposes:
First, it is the basis for judicial review of any issues concerning the selection of a response
action. Because a proposed removal action must be supported by the administrative
record, the OSC must ensure the adequacy of the administrative record in the event the
decision is challenged, such as in a subsequent cost recovery case.
Second, EPA, through access to the administrative record, provides for public participa-
tion, whenever practical, in Superfund decisions, with opportunity as appropriate for
comment on the response action selection.
1
-------
OVERVIEW
To meet both of these requirements, the administrative record must contain all documents used
by the Agency in making its decision to undertake a removal action. As the primary decision
document, the Action Memo must demonstrate consideration of the factors affecting the
removal decision. Action Memos that do not adequately substantiate the need for a removal
action or the selected cleanup method can undermine the Agency's case for a cost recovery
action.
Public availability requirements for the administrative record for a removal action as set forth
in section 300.820 of the NCP are affected by the urgency of the situation and the preparation
of decision documents. The administrative record file for time-critical removal actions,
including emergency responses, must be made available for public inspection no later than 60
days after the initiation of on-site activity. Public comment periods should be held in
appropriate situations at the time the record file is made available. Exhibit 1 illustrates this
process for time-critical removals. Although the signing of the Action Memo generally
signifies the completion of the response selection decision making, documents relevant to the
response may be added to the record file later in certain situations as described in the NCP.
EXHIBIT 1. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD REQUIREMENTS
FOR TIME-CRITICAL REMOVALS [211
Begin
On-site
Removal
Activity
Site
Evaluation
Completion
Within
« >
60 Days
30- Day
Comment Period
| (Where Appropnate)
Initiate
PRP Search
Order ssued if
Appropriate
Begin Action ~Nv f Record
Record ) ( Memo J ^ f File Publicly
Compilation^^* v. Signed Available
NOTE: Order of events for illustrative purposes only. Some
events may be concurrent
For non-time-critical removal actions, a 30-day public comment period is required on the
Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) and any supporting documentation at the
time the EE/CA is made available for public comment [1]. The administrative record file
must be made available for public inspection at the same time the EE/CA is made available.
Exhibit 2, on the next page, illustrates this process for non-time-critical removals.
2
-------
OVERVIEW
EXHIBIT 2. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD REQUIREMENTS
FOR NON-TIME-CRITICAL REMOVALS [21]
11
Action
Memo
Signed
\ /"
Begin
On-site
Removal
Activity
Approval
Memo
Publicly
Available
Evaluation
Completion
30- Da
!' ! !'¦ ¦' //'////
Initiate
PRP Search
Order Issued 1
Appropriate
Comment
mSwMMxM
Period
fUlf
Begin
Record
Compilation
Complete
Record
File
Record
File Publicly
Available
AvIvWwM
Action Memorandum Roles and Responsibilities
Regions
OSCs must prepare Action Memos for all Fund-financed actions conducted under removal
authority. OSCs should include the Office of Regional Counsel (ORC) or Regional enforce-
ment coordinators in every decision to initiate a removal. In all situations, OSCs should strive
to ensure the completeness and accuracy of Action Memos and document conclusions with
available information. For instance, OSCs should use attachments to the Action Memo where
appropriate to provide additional supporting information. When possible, OSCs should also
involve appropriate staff from TSCA, RCRA, and other Agency programs in the removal
documentation process. Regional roles and responsibilities are detailed in Exhibit 3, on the
next page.
Generally, draft Action Memos should be routed through Regional management for program-
matic review and to ensure that proposed removal actions are managed within the Regions'
removal advice of allowance as recorded in CERCLIS. Concurrence and/or approval from
various Regional program managers is also required in certain situations. OSCs should arrange
for Regional review of the Action Memo and must alert Headquarters in a timely fashion of all
Action Memos requiring Headquarters' approval. Specific Regional review and approval
responsibilities are discussed later in this document (see p. 44). In addition, OSCs may want
to provide completed Action Memos to personnel in Regional Public Affairs offices to
facilitate public notice efforts.
3
-------
OVERVIEW
EXHIBIT 3.
ACTION MEMO ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
ON-SCENE
COORDINATOR
Prepares all Action Memos
Alerts the ERD Regional Coordinator to Action Memos requiring Headquarters' approval
Provides copies of all Regionally approved Action Memos to ERD Regional Coordinator
Arranges for review of draft Action Memos by other EPA personnel
May approve Action Memos for up to $50,000 for emergency removals
REGIONAL
REMEDIAL
PROJECT
OFFICER
Concurs in writing on the use of the consistency exemption when a site is proposed
for or listed on the NPL
REGIONAL
COUNSEL/
REGIONAL
ENFORCEMENT
PERSONNEL
Reviews all Action Memos
Reviews enforcement section of Action Memos
REGIONAL
ADMINISTRATOR
Approves all Action Memos for removals less than $2 million and subsequent ceiling
increases to $2 million (except for nationally significant or precedent-setting non-NPL
removals)
Approves all Action Memos for removals exceeding 12 months
ERD REGIONAL
COORDINATOR
Coordinates the concurrence process for Action Memos requiring Headquarters'
concurrence/approval
Advises (upon request) on the preparation of all Action Memos
Prepares addenda as necessary and/or advises Regions on preparation of such addenda
DIRECTOR,
ERD
Approves the use of innovative or emerging alternative technologies, and technologies
with uncertain development status
Reviews/concurs on all Action Memos requiring Headquarters' approval/concurrence
DIRECTOR,
OERR
Concurs on nationally significant or precedent-setting actions at non-NPL sites
Reviews/concurs on all Action Memos requiring AA, OSWER approval
AA, OSWER
Approves all $2 million exemption requests and subsequent ceiling increases
OFFICE OF WASTE
PROGRAMS
ENFORCEMENT
Concurs on exemption requests
OFFICE OF
GENERAL
COUNSEL
Concurs on exemption requests, and on nationally significant or precedent-setting actions
Action Memos must also be prepared for removals to be conducted by potentially responsible
parties (PRPs). An Action Memo for an enforcement-lead removal need not include estimated
costs or authorization for funding, but in all other respects it should look the same as a Fund-
lead Action Memo. Because of the difference between the two with regard to costs and funding,
Regions may designate an enforcement-lead memo as "Action Memo/Enforcement."
4
-------
OVERVIEW
Regions may use a Fund-lead Action Memo they have already prepared as documentation for
an enforcement-lead case. Some Regions have found a Fund-lead Action Memo, with
estimated costs and authorization for funding, to be useful in negotiations to indicate EPA's
resolve to go ahead if the PRPdoes not act Regions may initiate negotiations with PRPs prior
to drafting an Action Memo, but a completed Action Memo (or Action Memo/Enforcement)
must be in hand by the time an older is issued to a PRP.
As with Fund-lead removals, the timing for preparing the Action Memo/Enforcement will
depend on the urgency of the action. In time-critical situations, it may be necessary for the PRP
to initiate action prior to the preparation of an Action Memo or enforcement order.
Headquarters
Regional Coordinators in the Emergency Response Division's (ERD) Response Operations
Branch are available to provide assistance in preparation for and/or during a removal action,
including the preparation of Action Memos. ERD personnel also occasionally prepare addenda
to Action Memos to clarify or supersede information contained in the Action Memo (see p. 42).
The Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE) is available to provide assistance in
preparing enforcement addenda for Action Memos (see p. 24). In addition, senior managers
at Headquarters concur on or approve Action Memos under certain circumstances, as described
later in this document (see p. 50). Exhibit 3 provides further detail on Headquarters' roles and
responsibilities.
5
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
MODEL ACTION
MEMORANDUM
Overview
An Action Memo is used to initiate all Fund-financed removals, or is prepared after the fact for
those begun under the OSC's $50,000 authority. Because Action Memos can affect future
policy (e.g., precedent-setting actions, attaining specific cleanup levels), OSCs themselves, not
response action contractors, must prepare all Action Memos, including drafts. Action Memos
for removals initiated under the OSC's $50,000 authority must be prepared and approved by
the OSC within one week after the start of removal actions, depending on the extent of
mitigation efforts. OSCs should send copies of $50,000 Action Memos to their appropriate
Regional management representative and Regional Coordinator, and place a copy in the site
file.
Action Memos to initiate a removal follow a standard format outlined on the following pages.
OSCs must cover all of the topics presented in the outline to demonstrate that the incident meets
statutory, NCP, and delegations requirements for removals. For removal actions determined
at the outset to exceed $2 million or 12 months in duration, the original Action Memo should
also substantiate the need for a statutory exemption, as discussed later in this guidance [8].
Exhibit 4, on the next page, presents the basic oudine for Action Memos. The exhibit is
followed by a model Action Memo that addresses the major statutory, regulatory, policy, and
program requirements affecting removal decisions. Abbreviated examples are provided for
additional guidance; however, more detailed statements are expected in actual Action Memos.
6
-------
ACTION MEMO OUTLINE
EXHIBIT 4. BASIC ACTION MEMO OUTLINE
Heading
I. Purpose
II. Site Conditions and Background
A. Site Description
1. Removal site evaluation
2. Physical location
3. Site characteristics
4. Release or threatened release into the environment of a hazardous
substance, or pollutant or contaminant
5. NPL status
6. Maps, pictures, and other graphic representations
B. Other Actions to Date
1, Previous actions
2. Current actions
C. State and Local Authorities' Role
1. State and local actions to date
2. Potential for continued State/local response
III. Threats to Public Health or Welfare or the Environment,
and Statutory and Regulatory Authorities
A. Threats to Public Health or Welfare
B. Threats to the Environment
IV. Endangerment Determination
V. Proposed Actions and Estimated Costs
A. Proposed Actions
1.
Proposed action description
2.
Contribution to remedial performance
3.
Description of alternative technologies
4.
EE/CA
5.
ARARs
6.
Project schedule
B. Estimated Costs
VI. Expected Change in the Situation Should Action Be Delayed or Not Taken
VII. Outstanding Policy Issues
Vin. Enforcement
IX. Recommendation
Enforcement Addendum
Attachments
7
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
[Regional Letterhead]
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Month, day, year
SUBJECT: Request for a Removal Action at
County, State
Site, City,
FROM:
Name, OSC
TO:
Regional Administrator (RA) or designee (or to the file, through the RA, if
the response is initiated under the OSC's $50,000 authority and will not
exceed that cost)1
THRU:
Regional Division Director, as appropriate
Site ID #: [2 digit number]
I. PURPOSE
I Provide a statement of purpose indicating the type of action being requested (e.g., approval
of a removal action or a ceiling increase), the site's name and location (including exact
street address with zip code if available), the name of the lead respondent if there is an
enforcement order, whether the response was initiated under the OSC's $50,000 authority,
and, for non-NPL sites, if there are any nationally significant or precedent-setting issues
associated with the response (if so, attach the concurrence memo shown in Exhibit 10 on
II. SITE CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND
Identify the 12-digit CERCLIS ID number2 and the category of removal (i.e., emergency,
time-critical, non-time-critical). Provide an overview of the site's history and current
characteristics. Indicate the nature of the contamination and describe the information
obtained in the removal site evaluation. Ensure that the information contained in this
section provides an accurate assessment of current site conditions, using relevant support-
ing data where possible.
1 Regional routing instructions may vary.
2 Some emergencies may not have CERCLIS ID numbers.
p. 52):
Example:
The purpose of this Action Memo is to request and document approval of the proposed
removal action described herein for the site, City, County, State.
8
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
A. Site Description
1. Removal site evaluation
I © Discuss the history of the incident or release, including the time, date and
location of the incident, the type of incident that occurred, and the facts con-
cerning the discovery of the release.
Examples: - Train derailment resulted in tank rupture and vapor release.
A storage lagoon in the south corner of the site overflowed due to heavy
rains.
Drums washed up on the beach and were reported by park rangers.
Indicate that if a preliminary assessment (PA), Superfund site investigation
(SSI), or listing site inspection (LSI) has been conducted for the site, regardless
of the site's status on the National Priorities List (NPL), substantial background
information may already exist.
I List all of the site's key problem areas.
Examples: - Stacked drums
Bulked liquids
Lagoons
Contaminated soils.
2. Physical location
I © Describe the site's physical location in terms of surrounding land use, popula-
tion size, and distances to nearest populations and other reference points.
Examples: - A school is within 1/4 mile of the site.
There are 1,000 residences within 1 mile of the site, 10 of which are
adjacent.
The area is mainly suburban residential with some light industrial areas.
I © Describe adjacent areas in terms of vulnerable or sensitive populations, habitats,
and natural resources [5].
Example: - The site is adjacent to wetlands and a tributary to the Red River flows
nearby.
3. Site characteristics
I © Describe the current use of the site, the nature and type of facility, and business
activities that may have or are currently contributing to the incident.
Examples: - The site was a sanitary landfill that accepted industrial wastes.
The site has been used for a midnight dump of PCB wastes.
There is an operating metal fabrication facility on the site.
Indicate if the site is a Federally-owned facility, identify the operators of the
facility if other than the Federal Agency, and describe the type of facility.
(Note: DOD and DOE have the responsibility to conduct all responses at their
facilities. Fund-lead removals may only be conducted at other Federal facilities
in cases of emergency.)
Example: - The spill occurred on National Park Service land and required an
emergency removal
9
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
~ Indicate if a State or local government body is an owner or operator (Note: this
is particularly important if an NPL site is involved because of the need for cost
sharing by the State or local government.)
^ ~ Indicate whether this is the first removal at the site or a restart. If the removal is
a restart, previous actions should be described in section ELB of the Action
Memo.
4. Release or threatened release into the environment of a hazardous
substance, or pollutant or contaminant
^ © List materials known on-site and whether they are hazardous substances as
defined by section 101(14) of CERCLA, or pollutants or contaminants as
defined by section 101(33) of CERCLA.
I Provide estimates of the quantities involved, identify the source of information,
and refer to sampling and analytical data.
Examples: Site records and conversations with the plant manager indicate that 10
drums of PCB-contaminated sludge are buried on-site.
Preliminary sampling has found drinking water to exceed the removal
action level for toluene at two residences.
~ Highlight substances of critical concern such as PCBs and dioxins (if the infor-
mation is presented in chart form, identify the substance, quantity, location, and
any existing standards for comparison). Explain all data presented.
~ Identify any unique characteristics of the materials involved, such as mixed or
radioactive wastes.
I Describe the mechanism for the past, present, or future release; observable or
probable migration route(s) of contaminants; and the basis for this determina-
tion. Common routes of exposure include fire/explosion and resulting emis-
sions, human contact, and soil contamination that could lead to ingestion or
contamination of ground or surface water. Discuss site features or characteris-
tics, weather conditions, human events, or other conditions that would either
cause, spread, or accelerate the release of materials. Describe the rate of release
and physical properties of the substance that influence or determine the form
and speed at which it travels. Support these descriptions with documentation, as
appropriate.
Examples: - Substantial fire/explosion hazard and fumes would drift into nearby
neighborhood.
Transformer lying on its side has been drained of PCB-contaminated oil;
surrounding surface soil is heavily stained, and is readily accessed by
children.
Vegetation on the north bank of the stream, approximately 50 yards below
the ruptured tank, is dead.
10
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
5. NPL status
> © State whether or not the site is listed on the NPL. If it is an NPL site, indicate
whether or not remedial activities arc in progress or when remedial action is
expected (note that contribution to remedial performance is discussed in the
"Proposed Action" section) [24].
If it is not an NPL site:
Note whether or not the site has been proposed for the NPL.
State whether or not it has received, or is expected to receive, a Hazard
Ranking System (HRS) rating and indicate the score, if available. Also
note whether it is being evaluated by the Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry (ATSDR) for the need to dissociate residents from
threats.
Example: - The site received an HRS of 46.5 in June 1989.
Indicate whether or not the site is being referred to the site assessment
program.
Example: - The site has been referred to the site assessment program for a site
investigation.
6. Maps, pictures and other graphic representations
Refer to attached pictures, diagrams, maps, and/or sketches if they substantiate
the conditions at the site and strengthen the background section of the memo,
and provide them as an attachment.
B. Other Actions to Date
1. Previous actions
Describe any government or private actions (including community relations)
that have been undertaken in the past and not previously discussed. Include
both CERCLA and any other responses conducted previously, such as spill
responses under section 311 of the Clean Water Act or private party cleanup
attempts.
Indicate the dates, costs, and effectiveness of these actions.
2. Current actions
Describe any other government or private activities that currently are being
performed but have not been previously discussed. Indicate the dates, costs, and
effectiveness of these activities.
Discuss how proposed EPA actions will relate to current activities described
above.
11
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
C. State and Local Authorities' Roles
1. State and local actions to date
Indicate whether the State and/or local governments requested EPA assistance^
and the name of specific agencies/officials making the request.
Example: - The Slate Department of Natural Resources sent a letter to the EPA
Regional office describing threats posed by leaking aboveground storage
tanks at ABC site.
Summarize any "first responder" or other actions these or other agencies have
taken to protect public health and the environment. Note the date and effective-
ness of such actions.
Examples: - Local government evacuated a one-square mile area.
Police were posted on February 10 to restrict public access, and no further
vandalism has occurred.
Indicate State/local government cooperation in assessing the release/threat, and
whether State/local personnel remain at the site.
2. Potential for continued State/local response
Describe actions State/local government personnel are taking and their future
roles.
Examples: - Site security provided by State highway patrol
Water main hookups to be installed by local water authority.
Indicate specifically:
Whether the State is able to obtain funds or must delay the response for an
unacceptable period of time to provide funding
Whether the State/locality will fund the removal or require funding
Whether the State will lead the response under a cooperative agreement
[17].
III. THREATS TO PUBLIC HEALTH OR WELFARE OR THE ENVIRONMENT, AND
STATUTORY AND REGULATORY AUTHORITIES
I © Explain how this incident meets the requirement of a threat to public health or welfare
or a threat to the environment3 for initiating a removal. For the two sections below,
3 CERCLA section 104(a) authorizes removal responses "whenever (A) any hazardous substance is released or
there is a substantial threat of such a release into the environment, or (B) there is a release or substantial threat of
release into the environment of any pollutant or contaminant which may present an imminent and substantial
danger to the public health or welfare." Note that removals are not allowed under section 104(a)(3) of CERCLA
when there is a release or threat of release; of a naturally occurring substance in its unaltered form, or altered
solely through naturally occurring processes or phenomena, from a location where it is naturally found; from
products which arc part of the structure of, and result in exposure within, residential buildings or business or
community structures; or into public or private drinking water supplies due to deterioration of the system through
ordinary use. EPA may respond, however, to these situations when an emergency exists and no other authority
can respond in a timely manner.
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
discuss only those threats that will be addressed by the removal action, beginning
with the most serious, and relate the discussion to appropriate statutory and regula-
tory authorities.
A. Threats to Public Health or Welfare
Detail the threats to public health or welfare as they relate to the criteria (provided
below) from section 300.415(b)(2) of the NCP. Attach and refer to or incorporate any
final ATSDR4 health consultations or site-specific health advisories, or other health
risk advice, and explain any deviations from final ATSDR documents.
Actual or potential exposure to hazardous substances or pollutants or contami-
nants by nearby populations or the food chain. Identify substances of concern,
realistic exposure scenarios, and how the levels of hazardous substance(s)
exceed site-specific action level(s), and/or acute, and if appropriate, chronic
toxicological standards. Tailor the description to the concentrations of contami-
nants on the site and receptors. Describe any reports of human health effects
(e.g., illness, injury, or death) that appear linked to the exposure and describe
any effects of human exposure.
Examples: - Volatilization of hazardous substances contained within the deteriorating
building threatens surrounding residents with airborne exposure.
It is estimated that residents within a 2-mile radius may be exposed to
toxic fumes at substantial levels in the event of an explosion/fire.
Studies have identified nausea and respiratory dysfunction as the primary
health effects.
Actual or potential contamination of drinking water supplies. Identify the
substances of concern, realistic exposure scenarios explaining how the water
supply is threatened, and the immediacy and gravity of the threat. Describe the
location of the affected aquifer and its use. Indicate if the numeric removal
action levels for drinking water are exceeded in the aquifer or site-specific
factors otherwise indicate that a significant health threat exists.
Examples: - Degreasers and other solvents dumped on the ground have migrated
through the soil, contaminating 14 wells downgradient of the site.
Samples taken within a 2-block radius showed the removal action level for
barium is exceeded at the tap in four houses.
Hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants in drums, barrels, tanks, or
other bulk storage containers, that may pose a threat of release. Identify the
substances of concent and estimate their quantities; and describe the number,
type, and conditions of containers. Provide realistic exposure scenarios based
upon site conditions and the proximity of sensitive or nearby populations.
Describe the effects of human exposure.
Examples: - The chemicals are contained in 2 leaking 5,000 gallon pressure vessels
located on deteriorating concrete pads. An elementary school is located
114 mile away.
4 ATSDR should be consulted for emergencies and emergency criteria exemptions involving contaminated soil,
and may also be consulted for exempu'on requests involving drinking water and radiation. The OSC should
ensure that EPA's proposed actions and ATSDR findings are consistent
13
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
There are approximately 10 uncovered drums surrounded by a partially
collapsed chain-link fence on the site, which is crossed by a footpath
frequently used by neighboring residents to get to the train station.
High levels of hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants in soils
largely at or near the surface, that may migrate. Identify the substances of
concern, estimated amounts, realistic pathways and exposure scenarios, and
how the levels exceed standards. Describe the soil characteristics, the extent of
the contamination, and factors that may affect migration.
Examples: - The hazardous substances were dumped in a 20-ft. square area and have
penetrated the top soil to a depth of approximately 1 foot. The aquifer is 6
feet below the surface and contamination would create a substantial
plume.
The residue from the lagoon lies on top of a hardpacked clay surface,
with contaminants migrating from the site in stormwater runoff to a
nearby stream used for drinking water.
Weather conditions that may cause hazardous substances or pollutants or con-
taminants to migrate or be released. Describe the conditions of concern and
provide an estimate of the likelihood of their occurrence. Explain how these
conditions would affect exposure scenarios and migration.
Examples: - Spring floods carried an estimated 20 barrels and more than 50 drums of
volatile organics into the Green River, the drinking water source for more
than 5,000 people. Furiher flooding is predicted.
Before containment measures are implemented, heavy summer cloud-
bursts may wash pollutants across the concrete yard and into municipal
storm sewers. This could qffect a nearby watercourse used for swimming.
Threat of fire or explosion. Identify the substances of concern, and realistic
exposure scenarios including the gravity and immediacy of the threat. Be
specific about the number of people exposed, the proximity of sensitive or
nearby populations, and the geographic area affected.
Examples: - The site contains nearly 30 drums of non-compatible volatile organics
stored next to each other. A hospital is less than four blocks away.
Vandals have set two fires at the unsecured site, necessitating evacuation
of five rowhouses adjacent to the drum storage area.
Other situations or factors that may pose threats to public health or welfare.
B. Threats to the Environment
Detail the threats to the environment as they relate to the criteria provided below from
section 300.415(b)(2) of the NCP (discuss only those categories of threats that apply
to existing or potential conditions):
Actual or potential exposure to hazardous substances or pollutants or contami-
nants by nearby animals or the food chain. Identify the substances of concern,
probable exposure pathways, evidence of prior animal exposures (either directly
or through the food chain), and results of any available analyses. Relate the
information to the contaminants of concern and the known or probable recep-
tors. Report any known illness, injury, or death linked to the exposure.
14
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
Examples: - Significant levels of dioxin were found in crayfish and sediment samples
taken in Black Creek downstream of the storm sewer, which carries
contaminated runoff from the site.
Large flshkill (4 million) reported in 1986; potential repeat jf2-million
gallon lagoon overflows again, releasing sludges and supernatant liquid.
Actual or potential contamination of sensitive ecosystems. Identify the sub-
stances of concern, contaminant migration routes, and the immediacy and
severity of the threat to sensitive ecosystems. Describe any ecosystem effects
that appear to be linked to contaminant exposures.
Examples: - Site is partly located in a wetland. Hazardous substances kill algae which
are a critical part of the ecosystem. State has documented ground-water
contamination.
- ' State Department of Natural Resources reports high levels of mercury
and other heavy metals in fish in a nearby recreational lake, which
receives stormwater runoff from this abandoned electroplating facility.
Hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants in drums, barrels, tanks, or
other bulk storage containers, that may pose a threat of release. Describe the
number, type, and condition of containers and identify the substances they
contain. Estimate quantities of hazardous substances. Describe the known
effects of these substances on plant and animal life.
Examples: - ' Approximately 800 drums containing volatile organics, about half of
which are damaged, are strewn across the southwest corner of the
property. Vegetation in the vicinity of the drum site is dead.
Pesticide residues ate present in many open containers on the landfill
surface. Deer have been observed walking through the landfill area and
grazing nearby. These pesticides are toxic at these levels to deer.
High levels of hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants in soils
largely at or near the surface, that may migrate. Identify the substances of
concern and the source(s) of any releases to the soil, estimate the extent of
contamination, and describe probable exposure scenarios. Describe the soil
characteristics and factors that may affect migration.
Examples: - PCB contaminant levels in the soil at the property line exceed 200 ppm. A
neighboring horse farm that has access to trails on-site is adjacent.
Contaminants would be toxic to horses at these levels.
Fugitive dust has been observed escaping the site during periods of high
wind and moving towards the vicinity of a trout hatchery less than 1/4
mile downwind. -
Weather conditions that .may cause hazardous substances or pollutants or con-
taminants to migrate or be released. Describe the conditions of concern and the
likelihood of their occurrence. Explain how these conditions contribute to
contaminant migration or to likely exposures to plant or wildlife populations.
Describe recurring weather patterns that create or aggravate threats to the
environment.
Examples: Snow melt runs through the mine drainage area each spring, depositing
tailings in Rush Creek, which is used for recreational fishing. Record
sno wfalls were reported in January and February.
Heavy rains are expected to continue, which could result in a second
lagoon overflow into the adjacent wetland when migratory bird popula-
tions are at their peak.
15
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
Threat of fire or explosion. Identify the substances of concern and the immedi-
acy and severity of the threat. Describe any illness, injury, or death to flora or
fauna resulting from fires or explosions. Describe the geographic area affected
and any special environmental concerns.
Examples: - Hunters using the grounds of the abandoned chemical reclamation
facility for target practice detonated discarded munitions, creating afire
that devastated more than 4 acres of the wildlife management area and
killed an unknown number of birds and other wildlife.
Reactive chemicals are stored haphazardly throughout the dilapidated
warehouse, and in some instances are exposed to the elements, creating
potential for explosion and fire. The nursery for the county arboretum is
approximately 600 yards from the south wall of the warehouse.
Other situations or factors that may pose threats to the environment.
IV. ENDANGERMENT DETERMINATION
I All Action Memos must contain an endangerment determination. Depending on the types
of substances involved, one of the following two statements must be used.
For removals involving hazardous substances:
Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from this site, if not addressed by imple-
menting the response action selected in this Action Memorandum, may present an imminent and
substantial endangerment to public health, or welfare, or the environment.
For removals involving only pollutants or contaminants:
Actual or threatened releases of pollutants and contaminants from this site, if not addressed by
implementing the response action selected in this Action Memorandum, may present an immi-
nent and substantial endangerment to public health, or welfare, or the environment.
V. PROPOSED ACTIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS
Explain proposed and alternative actions, and estimated costs for both proposed and alter-
native actions, and the project schedule. State how the action addresses the threat. Explain
why obvious alternatives were determined not to be feasible.
Example: - Removal of waste solvents and off-site RCRA disposal is the only feasible solution
for mitigating threats posed by the situation. Site stabilization without disposal
would provide only a temporary solution to the threats posed by the site.
A. Proposed Actions
1. Proposed action description
I © Describe the specific tasks involved in the proposed response to the public
health, welfare, and environmental threats discussed in section III of the Action
Memo. Be sure to describe the full extent of the removal, including ultimate
disposition of contaminants, and explain what will be left at the site when the
16
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
removal is completed. Discuss the rationale for choosing the option and provide
supporting data for the decision; state why the proposed actions are appropriate
for this situation in light of the threats and explain how they achieve timely
response and protection of human health and the environment. Describe the
technical feasibility and probable effectiveness of the proposed action.
Examples: - Installation of an interceptor well will block the migration of contami-
nants and greatly reduce the threat of contaminating the stream border-
ing the site. Contaminated water will be treated on-site and discharged
into the stream.
Excavation of the contaminated soil and disposal in a RCRA-permitted
landfill will mitigate the public health threat posed by direct human
contact and inhalation of airborne particles.
State whether any further information is needed before all response actions can
be decided and the approximate date when a final decision will be reached.
Example: - Further sampling to determine the extent of soil contamination will be
completed within 30 days.
t Ensure that the extent of contamination has been or will be verified by sampling
and properly documented. Refer to the Sampling Quality Assurance/Quality
Control (QA/QC) Plan and summarize the contents if necessary.
Examples: - EPA will use a split sampling technique.
Water samples will be analyzed daily using automated sampling tech-
tuques.
Describe how any vulnerable or sensitive populations, habitats, or natural
resources identified in section II.A might affect removal activities.
Example: - Location in a floodplain might hamper removal activities in spring.
Where known and appropriate, list other uncertainties affecting implementation
of the proposed action.
Examples: - Mobile incinerators will not be available until next quarter.
Steep slope of site may prevent permanent capping.
Discuss the need for and feasibility of relying on institutional controls at the
State or local level, if applicable [23]. (Note: This is most important for remov-
als involving excavation where contaminated soil remains below clean fill
according to specific cleanup plans.)
Examples: - Deed restrictions are needed to prevent incompatible future activities.
Prohibitions on drilling new water wells can be instituted at the County
level.
© Describe available information concerning off-site disposal, such as the esti-
mated quantity or type of waste(s) requiring off-site treatment or disposal, the
facility selected, and the extent to which the substance can be treated.
Examples: Five drums containing an unidentified mixture of solvents will require
off-site disposal.
Arrangements will be made for disposal of the 300 tons of contaminated
soil at the ABC RCRA-approved facility.
I State the intent to comply with the off-site policy when the type or amount of
waste is not known, or indicate that compliance with the policy is not an issue at
17
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
the site. For non-time-critical removals involving off-site disposal, indicate that
the appropriate State environmental officials have been notified [22,6].
Example: - Since the material is being stabilized on-site, off-site disposal is not
required.
Discuss the need for provision of post-removal site control (PRSC) and note
whether the State, local government, or the PRPs have agreed to provide for
PRSC, if applicable. Identify any other agreement that exists to provide PRSC.
(Note: as stated in section 300.415(k) of the NCP, OSCs are strongly encour-
aged to obtain a commitment to provide for PRSC when necessary before
initiating removal activities that will require PRSC.) [16]
Example: - Post-removal site control activities will be managed by the Regional
remedial program.
Indicate if the scope of proposed work has changed as a result of public com-
ment on the EE/CA for non-time-critical removals.
Example: - Further drinking water sampling will be conducted in response to
comments received at the public meeting.
Identify cross-media relationships and potential adverse impacts associated with
intermediate steps.
Examples: - Excavation of soils from highway shoulder will require traffic diversion
and will be coordinated with local police.
Local traffic and noise levels will increase during the response; therefore,
hazardous substances will not be moved off-site during school bus
operating hours.
2. Contribution to remedial performance
^ Discuss how the proposed actions will, to the extent practicable, contribute to
the efficient performance of any long-term remedial action with respect to the
release or threatened release concerned [10]. For this discussion, document the
conclusions resulting from consideration of the following questions:
What is the long-term cleanup plan for the site? For sites with signed
Records of Decisions (RODs), briefly describe the remedial action se-
lected. For proposed and final NPL sites where no remedial action has
been selected, identify a range of feasible alternatives based upon a review
of existing site information and professional judgment. For non-NPL sites
where remedial plans are unknown or not anticipated, state that the pro-
posed action will not impede future responses based upon available infor-
mation.
Which threats will require attention prior to the start of the long-term
cleanup if there is one? For proposed or final NPL sites, where remedial
action is planned or likely, identify specific threats and explain why and
how they must be addressed prior to long-term cleanup. For non-NPL
sites with no long-term cleanup plans, refer to all threats meeting the NCP
section 300.415(b)(2) removal criteria identified in section III of the
Action Memo (see p. 12).
18
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
How far should the removal go to ensure that threats are adequately
abated? For proposed or final NPL sites, where remedial action is planned
or likely, explain (1) which threats must be abated entirely and which must
be stabilized to protect public health, welfare, and the environment until a
permanent remedy can be effected and (2) how abatement or stabilization
is accomplished by the proposed actions in section V of the Action Memo.
For non-NPL sites where there are no plans for long-term remedial action,
the threats that meet the NCP removal criteria should be completely
cleaned up.
Is the proposed removal action consistent with the long-term remedy, if
known? Describe how the removal contributes to, or is at least consistent
with, the permanent remedy. Explain if complying with contribution to
remedial performance provisions conflicts with other program goals such
as pursuit of PRP cleanup.
OR
Note that no further action is required if the proposed removal action
completes the cleanup, or if an emergency existed that precluded an
analysis of how the removal related to long-term actions.
3. Description of alternative technologies
Indicate what, if any, alternatives to land disposal have been considered [18]. If
an alternative technology is selected as the proposed action, provide an in-depth
description in Section V.A(l); "Proposed action description."
Explain how the two objectives of the alternative technology policy - timely
response and protection of human health and the environment - would be
achieved by each alternative technology.
Examples: - Bioremediation techniques in conjunction with site stabilization will
protect the surrounding environment in a timely manner.
PCB incineration will effectively eliminate the threat to adjacent
residences.
Explain how well each alternative technology meets the three alternative tech-
nology selection criteria (effectiveness, implementability, and cost).
Examples: - Bioremediation would be less costly than other technologies, but its
effectiveness on organic and heavy metal mixed contaminants is
questionable.
Recycling of the liquid wastes is the least expensive disposal option.
Indicate ERD Director approval for technologies that are "innovative" or
"emerging" or when the status of the technology is uncertain, and attach the
Alternative Technology Approval Memo (see p. 42).
19
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
4. EE/CA5
Attach and refer to the EE/CA and the EE/CA Approval Memorandum for a
discussion of alternative actions considered for non-time-critical removals (see
p. 41) [1].
Attach and refer to the written response to significant comments on the EE/CA
and supporting documentation in the administrative record.
5. Applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs)
Federal
List Federal ARARs identified for the site that are deemed practicable, if any.
Example: - Federal ARARs determined to be practicable for the site are the Clean
Water Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, and the Endangered
Species Act.
Explain, if necessary, that Federal ARARs were not considered before removal
activities were undertaken during an emergency situation.
I Describe efforts to identify State ARARs and indicate if State response has been
timely.
Example: - Received list of ARARs for XYZ site from State representatives within two
weeks of request
Where there has been time to assess State ARARs, list those which are deemed
practicable.
Example: - Proposed response will attain State water quality criteria.
Explain, if appropriate, that State ARARs were not identified or considered
prior to removal initiation due to emergency circumstances.
6. Project schedule
I © Specify the time needed to perform the preventative, stabilizing, and/or mitiga-
tive (cleanup) response actions to the threats posed by the site, and how quickly
response activities can begin.
Show when the State/local/PRP/remedial program commitment to provide
PRSC takes effect, if applicable [16].
B. Estimated Costs
I © Use the Removal Cost Management System (RCMS) [29] to summarize the estimated
total project ceiling6 with a breakdown of costs highlighting the following categories:
s This section applies only to non-time-critical removals.
6 The total project ceiling is the proposed removal total cost estimate added to the previously approved total
project ceiling; i.e., the total of all approved project ceilings for a site.
20
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
Extramural costs coming out of the Regional allowance:7
Emergency Response Cleanup Services (ERCS), Regional ERCS, sub-
contractors, pre-qualified vendors and other site-specific contracts, letter
contracts, order for services, notices to proceed, and interagency agreements
(IAGs) with other Federal agencies such as the U.S. Coast Guard, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Bureau of Land Management, and Bureau of
Land Reclamation.
Other extramural costs not funded from the Regional allowance:
Technical Assistance Team (TAT), including multiplier costs8
National Contract Laboratory Program (NCLP)
Response Engineering and Analytical Contract (REAC).
EPA intramural costs. (Note: See the Removal Cost Management Manual for the
formula for calculating intramural direct and indirect costs [27]. Contact the Re-
gional Financial Officer for current direct and indirect cost rates to be used in the
formula.)
Exhibit 5 shows a sample project ceiling estimate. (Note: Do not include any
CERCLA section 104(b) investigatory costs in the estimate, because they do not
count against the project ceiling or the $2 million statutory limit.)
~ Include contingencies9 in the cost estimate. Two contingencies should be supplied:
10-20% contingency for Regional removal allowance costs, based on best
engineering judgment.
20% contingency applied to total extramural project costs (all costs but EPA
intramural costs).
Include the cost of previous CERCLA removal actions taken at the site (if applicable)
considering expenditures in all areas described above. For actions approved prior to
1984, contact the appropriate Regional Coordinator at Headquarters to query the
Financial Management System in order to determine costs other than extramural
cleanup contractor expenditures. For more recently discovered sites, CERCLIS data
reflects accurate total project ceilings.
7 Costs formerly referred to as "extramural cleanup contractor costs" are actually Regional removal allowance
costs and should be referred to as such.
8 To cover administrative costs of the TAT program, an administrative multiplier, which includes overhead ex-
penses, is applied towards all TAT expenses. This factor, available through the TAT leader or Zone Program
Management Office, is multiplied by the sum of the personnel and expense amounts listed above, to estimate
total TAT expenses for the removal action.
9 Contingencies allow for unforeseen expenses that may arise during a removal action (e.g., discovery of addi-
tional hazardous materials and delays resulting from poor weather conditions or equipment failure). Contingen-
cies may be applied to either the extramural or intramural portion of the total project ceiling as needed.
21
\
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
EXHIBIT 5. SAMPLE REMOVAL PROJECT CEILING ESTIMATE * [29]
Extramural Costs;
Regional Allowance Costs;
Total Cleanup Contractor Costs
(This cost category includes
OSC estimates for: ERCS,
Regional ERCS, subcontractors,
Letter Contracts, orders for services,
Notices to Proceed, Alternative
Technology Contracts, and IAGs
with other Federal agencies. Also
includes a 10-20% contingency.)
$862,500
Other Extramural Costs Not Funded From the Reeional Allowance:
Total TAT, including multiplier costs $50,000
Total NCLP $100,000
Total ERT/REAC $1QQ,WQ
Subtotal, Extramural Costs
$1,112,500
Extramural Costs Contingency
(20% of Subtotal, Extramural Costs; round to
nearest thousand)
+ $223,000
TOTAL, EXTRAMURAL COSTS
$1,335,500
Intramural Costs;
Intramural Direct Costs
$9,900
Intramural Indirect Costs
$1§,QQG
TOTAL, INTRAMURAL COSTS
$27,900
TOTAL, REMOVAL PROJECT CEILING
$1,363,400
* Format and line items correspond to RCMS output.
22
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
VI. EXPECTED CHANGE IN THE SITUATION SHOULD ACTION BE DELAYED OR
NOT TAKEN
~ ~ Describe any expected changes in the situation should action be delayed or not taken,
such as changes in the scope or nature of contamination, increased threats, or the need
for additional response actions. Include a worst-case scenario.
Examples: - Contamination will most likely spread from the site to a nearby stream which
serves as a municipal water supply.
Delayed action will increase public health risks to the adjacent population
through prolonged exposure to airborne contaminants.
VII. OUTSTANDING POLICY ISSUES
^ Discuss remaining policy issues not previously discussed, if applicable, or state
"None" if no other policy issues are associated with the site.
Examples: - Provisions for cost-sharing for the proposed response are an issue because EPA
has decided to seek State cost-share under CERCLA section 104(c)(3)(H).
The removal involves nationally significant and precedent-setting issues because
it involves releases from consumer products on Indian Tribal lands.
The site comprises two noncontiguous sites located 114 mile apart.
VIII. ENFORCEMENT
The purpose of an original Action Memo is to document the decision to undertake a
removal action. For administrative puiposes, the enforcement strategy is included with the
original Action Memo.
As stated in NCP section 300.415(a)(2), EPA's policy concerning removal enforcement is
that where PRPs are known, an effort shall be made, to the extent practicable, to determine
whether they can and will perform the necessary removal action promptly and properly
[28]. The urgency determination (emergency, time-critical, or non-time-critical), how-
ever, is a deciding factor in determining the amount of time that can be devoted to a PRP
search and negotiations prior to on-site action. OSCs should be prepared to obtain the
necessary approval to conduct a Fund-lead response if no PRPs can be identified. Efforts
to locate PRPs, however, should continue throughout the removal action to support cost
recovery efforts and possible PRP involvement in any future response actions.
I Provide a summary statement indicating the extent to which PRPs are known, and
whether they can and will perform the proposed response promptly and properly.
I Place all remaining information concerning the enforcement strategy in a separate
addendum labelled "enforcement sensitive" and note here that the enforcement
strategy is not part of the Action Memo for purposes of NCP consistency.
IX. RECOMMENDATION
~ The following statement must appear in all Action Memos to document that the
proposed response is in compliance with statutory and regulatory removal provisions:
23
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
This decision document represents the selected removal action for the site, in
(location), developed in accordance with CERCLA as amended, and not inconsistent with the NCP.
This decision is based on the administrative record for the site.
^ Provide an approval statement indicating that NCP removal requirements have been
substantiated and stating the total project ceiling and the Regional removal allowance
costs.
Example: - Conditions at the site meet the NCP section 300.415(b)(2) criteria for a removal
and I recommend your approval of the proposed removal action. The total
project ceiling if approved will be $1^63,400. Of this, an estimated $862£00
comes from the Regional removal allowance.
^ © Include spaces for approval or disapproval signatures and dates.
ENFORCEMENT ADDENDUM:
} Type the site name and date on each enforcement addendum and label clearly "Enforce-
ment Sensitive." The enforcement addendum must be detached from the Action Memo
before placing the Action Memo in the administrative record file. Discuss the following
topics in the addendum using the assistance of Regional enforcement staff to compile
information [2, 3,28]:
A. PRP Segrph
~ Detail PRP search progress to date, including PRPs identified, their financial status,
and how much waste they contributed to the site (volumetric contribution).
Examples: - Title searches and examination of on-site accounting records are being con-
ducted to identify PRPs.
The 104(e) information requests have been issued.
The PRP has failed to take part in removal actions.
~ Describe the PRP search strategy for the future, including the schedule and expedited
components (if applicable).
B. Notification of PRPs of Potential Liability and of the Required Removal
Action
Indicate if notices have been sent, to whom, and the response of PRPs to date. (Note:
notification is not always possible in emergency situations.)
Example: - Fifty notice letters have been sent to identified PRPs.
~ Describe future notice activities planned and their implementation schedule.
C. Decision Whether to Issue an Order
Discuss consideration of the primary factors affecting the decision to issue an order
including the immediacy of the need to respond, evidence indicating PRP liability,
and the financial ability of PRPs to respond.
Example: The agency has identified viable PRPs and has issued a Unilateral Administra-
tive Order under section 106 of CERCLA.
24
-------
MODEL ACTION MEMO
Discuss consideration of the secondary factors affecting the decision to issue an order
including the ability and need to precisely define the removal, willingness of the
PRPs to conduct the removal (this is not dispositive), availability of the Fund, and
technical problems such as the oversight/technical capabilities of the PRP.
Example: - Action is being taken under RCRA section 7003.
Identify any other strategic concerns regarding the issuance of an order.
D. Negotiation and Order Issuance Strategy
Discuss the timeline/deadline for issuance of an Administrative Order on Consent, the
date for issuance of a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) if no settlement is
reached, and the status of order drafting.
Example: - A 2-week timeframe for negotiations has been established starting June I, If
no agreement is reached, a UAO will be immediately issued.
Indicate whether the appropriate State agency has been notified.
Identify any access issues and how they have been addressed.
Example: - The site owner initially refused access to response personnel but has since
relented.
Describe the status of Statement of Work preparation.
Example: - The PRPs have contracted with a national cleanup firm, provided EPA with a
copy of the work plan, and site investigation is underway.
Discuss the availability and thoroughness of the documentation of past costs.
ATTACHMENTS
Append attachments referred to in the body of the Action Memo.
25
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
REMOVAL AND EXEMPTION REQUEST
ACTION MEMORANDA FOR
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
Overview
In addition to requesting approval of an initial removal response, Action Memos are used to
request ceiling increases, statutory exemptions, changes in the scope of response, or combina-
tions of these categories. This section provides instructions on preparing the basic types of
Action Memos used in special circumstances (i.e., combined removal and statutory exemption
requests, 12-month exemption requests, ceiling increase requests, $2 million exemption/
ceiling increase requests, and requests for changes in the scope of response). For removal
actions involving combinations of these scenarios, OSCs should consult the instructions for
each type of request to ensure that all appropriate information is included.
Combined Removal and Statutory Exemption Requests
Overview
For removals of magnitude, an OSC can usually determine at the initiation of a response that
an exemption to the statutory limitations under CERCLA will be needed [8]:
To initiate a removal action where the project is expected at the outset to exceed 12
months10
To initiate a removal action where the total project cost is expected at the outset to exceed
$2 million.
Action Memos that combine exemption requests with requests for initial approval of removal
actions must contain the information discussed below, in addition to the information detailed
in the model Action Memo provided in the preceding section. The new information described
below should be inserted into the appropriate section of the model Action Memo, as indicated
by the shaded portions ofExhibit 6. The section numbers shown below correspond to the basic
Action Memo outline presented in Exhibit 4.
12-Month Exemption
An Action Memo requesting initial approval of a removal combined with a 12-month
exemption request is used when the OSC can determine at the outset of the response that the
removal action will exceed the statutory time limitation of 12 months [8], Like the model
Action Memo described in the preceding section, this Action Memo must be sent to the RA for
approval, and addressed from the OSC through the Regional Division Director (as appropri-
ate). In situations where an extension is sought for a proposed or final NPL site based upon the
10 The 12-month clock starts when on-site removal action response activity begins (not when the contractor is au-
thorized) and runs for 12 consecutive months, including time that passes between restarts, CERCLA section
104(b) investigatory studies are not removal action response activities that count toward the 12-month time limit
when they precede the initial start date.
26
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
REMOVAL AND EXEMPTION REQUEST
-.3: ..^szsrn
EXHIBIT 6.
INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR REMOVAL AND
12-MONTH OR $2 MILLION EXEMPTION REQUEST
ACTION MEMOS
Heading
L
II.
Purpose ; ,v, > *
Site Conditions and Background
in.
Threats to Public Health or Welfare or the Environment
IV.
V.
\ ^ V
Endangerment Determination
i:- ^eiHritloq "^oin'Statator^^lratek^l
' C'.few?\v* «.v.s v. A ^ ' v**.sN X-^S'
VI.
Proposed Actions and Estimated Costs
VII.
Outstanding Policy Issues - « . > . . »
IX.
Enforcement
X. RecofflSnendatfon ^
Enforcement Addendum
Attachments
consistency exemption, the appropriate official in the Region's remedial program must also
concur in writing (RAs are authorized to approve time exemptions based upon the consistency
exemption for both NPL and non-NPL sites) [9].
$2 Million Exemption
Action Memos that combine requests for an initial removal with an exemption from the $2
million limitation are used when the OSC can determine at the outset of the response that the
total cost of the removal action will exceed $2 million [8]. Unlike the model Action Memo
described in the preceding section, this combined Memo must be submitted to Headquarters
for approval. ERD Regional Coordinators at Headquarters should be alerted to the need for
Headquarters' approval as soon as possible. Where an exemption is sought for a proposed or
final NPL site based upon the consistency exemption, the appropriate official in the Region's
remedial program must also concur before the Action Memo is sent to Headquarters, [9].
The Action Memo, signed by the RA, must be addressed to the Assistant Administrator, Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (AA, OSWER) through theDirector, Office of Emer-
gency and Remedial Response (OERR) to the attention of the Director, ERD. The Memo
should be sent to the appropriate Regional Coordinator at least three weeks before the
exemption is needed. The Regional Coordinator will obtain the necessary Headquarters'
concurrences and submit the Action Memo to the AA, OSWER for final approval. If additional
Headquarters assistance is needed, OSCs are encouraged to send Action Memos earlier to avoid
lengthening the three-week Headquarters' processing time. For example, OSCs may submit
draft Action Memos to Headquarters for comment to expedite final processing. In an
emergency situation, the OSC may obtain oral approval of a combined removal and statutory
exemption request from the AA, OSWER, which must be followed by a written Action Memo
within 48 hours.
27
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
REMOVAL AND EXEMPTION REQUEST
ADDITIONS TO MODEL ACTION MEMO
In addition to providing the information described in the model Action Memo, the "Purpose"
and "Recommendation" sections of the removal and exemption request Action Memo should
be modified as discussed below. A new section on the exemption from statutory limits must
also be added.
Purpose
(Section I)
Modify the "Purpose" statement described in the model Action Memo (p. 8) to specify
a combined initial removal and 12-month or $2 million exemption request.
Exemption from Statutory Limits
(Now section V: follows "Endangerment Determination")
Place this section immediately following the "Threats" section and use the threat
information to justify the need for a 12-month or $2 million exemption [8]. Ensure that
the severity of the threats is sufficiently documented to warrant the exemption request.
Demonstrate that the removal meets one of the two CERCLA section 104(c) exemptions
listed below (it is not necessary to justify both exemptions). The two CERCLA section
104(c) exemptions are commonly referred to as the "emergency exemption" and the
"consistency exemption." Note that a higher threshold is used to evaluate emergency
exemption requests than for responses within statutory limits or consistency exemptions.
Therefore, OSCs must ensure that all three components of the emergency exemption are
sufficiently addressed when requesting exemption from statutory limits.
A. Emergency Exemption:
1. There is an immediate risk to public health or welfare or the environment, the
key word being immediate: focus on how soon the public or the environment is at
risk or will be in the immediate future. Describe site conditions that constitute an
immediate risk; indicate all hazardous substances involved, refer to and interpret
tables of data, and define the immediacy of the risk to affected human populations
and environmental resources. Discuss the time needed to address the hazards
involved and adverse weather conditions that may exacerbate the situation. Make
reference to and attach any final ATSDR findings. Refer to and interpret data
contained in any attached tables that support the need for an exemption.
Examples: - The retaining wall for the lagoon is highly unstable and on the verge of
collapse. Frequent rains expected in the next 4-6 weeks may hasten this
collapse, which would cause approximately 20,000 gallons of waste
contaminated with heavy metals to spill into Twining Creek, approxi-
mately 112 mile above the public water supply intake.
Volatile and explosive substances (see Table I for names and estimated
quantities) are contained in 43 rapidly deteriorating drums. Incompatible
substances are stored next to, and on top of, each other, presenting a high
risk offire/explosion and subsequent spread of toxic fumes to the 25
homes within a 114 mile radius of the site.
28
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
REMOVAL AND EXEMPTION REQUEST
And
2, Continued response actions are immediately required to prevent, limit, or
mitigate an emergency, the key words being emergency and continued response
actions are immediately required: describe the emergency by referring to the
release or threat of release of hazardous substances identified in the "Threats"
section, citing specific concentrations, identifying deteriorating site conditions,
and describing the type of threats. Ensure that each element of the response is
justified by the emergency criteria and documented accordingly (be sure to include
ATSDR health consultations/assessments/advisories that support an emergency
finding). Explain the emergency consequences of not granting the exemption.
Examples: - The TCE-contaminated contents of two 5,000 gallon tanks will be drained
and disposed of off-site. Continued actions are necessary, however, to
dismantle and remove the rusting tanks so that toxic residues do not wash
off-site into a neighboring stream.
10 partially buried drums of dioxin-contaminated wastes were discovered
during the emergency removal of 120 drums from the surface of the site.
Some of the contents have already leaked into the surrounding soil,
presenting a serious threat to residents of 18 neighboring homes and
wildlife. Contaminated soil must be excavated and removed to eliminate
risk of ingestion by neighborhood children or migrating wildlife.
And
3. Assistance will not otherwise be provided on a timely basis, the key words being
timely basis: describe why State/local governments cannot address the site within
an appropriate timeframe. If applicable, cite the enforcement addendum for discus-
sion of PRP's role. Discuss the remedial timeframe to address the site if it is listed
on the NPL.
Examples: - A deteriorating storage shed threatens to expose explosive substances to
the atmosphere, and local responders do not have appropriate expertise
for sqfely mitigating the threat
Neither the State nor county government has access to or resources to
acquire the proper incineration equipment and services needed.
B. Consistency Exemption11:
1. Continued response actions are otherwise appropriate and consistent with the
remedial action to be taken: Demonstrate that the proposed removal meets the
criteria for consistency (at a minimum, the removal does not foreclose the remedial
action) and appropriateness the activity is necessary to: avoid a foreseeable threat;
or, prevent further migration "of contaminants; or, use alternatives to land disposal;
or, comply with the off-site policy [9, 18,22]. Describe what Federal, State, or
PRP-lead remedial actions are planned (citing the ROD if available), or anticipate
likely remedial actions if plans are not yet made.
Example: - Excavating and removing the buried drums will not interfere with likely
remedial alternatives to address soil and ground-water contamination.
The removal action is also appropriate because the drums and their
contents will be incinerated, not disposed of in a landfill.
11 This exemption is generally only for use at NPL sites. The limited situations where use of the exemption is
appropriate for non-NPL sites will be determined by the AA, OSWER on a case-by-ease basis [9].
29
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
Recommendation
(Section IX)
Refer to both removal criteria and statutory exemption criteria in a Regional
recommendation statement. For Action Memos requiring Headquarters' approval,
state when funding is planned and the source of funding.
Examples: - Conditions at the site meet the NCP section 300.415(b)(2) criteria for a
removal and the CERCLA section 104(c) consistency exemption from the
12-month limitation, and I recommend your approval of the proposed
removal action and 12-month exemption. The total project ceiling if
approved will be $125,000. Of this, an estimated $100,000 will be from
the Regional removal allowance.
Conditions at the site meet the NCP section 300.415(b)(2) criteria for a
removal and the CERCLA section 104(c) emergency exemption from the
$2 million limitation, and I recommend your approval of the proposed
removal action and $2 million exemption. The total project ceiling if
approved will be $4.5 million, of which an estimated $3.8 million wiU be
funded from FY 89 and FY 90 Regional removal allowances.
Action Memoranda to Continue Response Actions
Overview
Action Memos are also occasionally required to continue work approved by an original
Action Memo, or to restart work at the same site if the statutory limitation on time has been
exceeded. The basic types of requests contained in these additional Action Memos are:
To extend a removal action beyond 12 months
To increase the total project ceiling
To increase the total project ceiling beyond $2 million
To change the scope of response for the removal action.
General instructions for preparing these Action Memos are discussed in the following
paragraph, followed by the specific information requirements for each type of request.
Action Memos combining several types of requests must fulfill all appropriate informa-
tion requirements.
Action Memos to continue response actions must cover each of the sections required in
the basic Action Memo outline (see Exhibit 4), but may refer to the most recently
approved Action Memo (which should be -attached) to avoid duplication. Specific points
to consider in preparing exemption requests, ceiling increases, requests for changes in
the scope of response, or other combinations thereof include the following:
The "Subject" line in the heading should specify the type of request (e.g., ceiling
increase, $2 million exemption, 12-month exemption, or change in the scope of
response request) followed by the words "Action Memorandum" on the next line.
If the Action Memo requires an extension of the 12-month limit or an increase in
the project ceiling that raises costs over $2 million, justification for the exemption
must be presented in a new section, "Exemption from Statutory Limits." If previous
30
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
Action Memos were based upon different exemption criteria (e.g., the consistency
exemption was used instead of the emergency exemption), the OSC must ensure
that the new request contains appropriate and sufficient information. Additionally,
if site conditions have changed from those documented in a previous exemption
request but continue to meet the same exemption criteria, the new request must
demonstrate that current conditions meet the same criteria.
If the Action Memo requires a project ceiling increase or a redirection of funds, a
detailed cost breakdown of previous and requested ceilings should be provided.
For the remaining sections of Action Memos to continue response actions:
If information contained in the previous Action Memo is still current and
correct, the OSC should indicate "Refer to previous Action Memo" for that
section.
If new or additional information is available, the OSC should include it under
the appropriate section number in the Action Memo and indicate that this
supplements or supersedes information in previous Action Memos. Note that
exemption requests based upon the emergency exemption will likely require
expanded sections with updated information.
The discussion below identifies specific information requirements for ceiling increases,
exemption requests, and changes in the scope of response request, as illustrated by the
shaded portions of Exhibit 7. References to the appropriate section numbers in an original
Action Memo, as outlined in Exhibit 4, are included.
12-Month Exemption
A 12-month exemption request Action Memo is required when it becomes necessary to
extend the response time of an already-approved removal beyond the statutory limit of
12 months [8]. The 12-month exemption request, specifying the additional time required
to complete the removal action, must be sent to the RA for approval and addressed from
the OSC through the Regional Division Director (as appropriate). If a subsequent time
exemption or change in scope of response is required, the new request must state that the
removal continues to meet the original exemption criteria or demonstrate that new
exemption criteria are met. Where an extension is sought for a proposed or final NPL site
based upon the consistency exemption, the appropriate official in the Region's remedial
program must also concur before the Action Memo is sent to Headquarters [9].
Additions to Model Action Memo
Where appropriate, the previous Action Memo should be referred to and the "Purpose,"
"Site Conditions and Background," "Threats," "Proposed Actions," and "Recommenda-
tion" sections should be modified as discussed below. Any updated or new information
should be discussed under the appropriate heading. A section on the proposed exemption
from statutory limits must also be included.
Purpose
(Section I)
Modify the "Purpose" statement described in the model Action Memo
(p. 8) to specify that a 12-month exemption request is sought.
31
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
EXHIBIT 7. INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSES
12-Month Exemption
Heading
pL- Purpose
pl Site Conditions mid Background
Threats to Public Health or Welfare
t or the Environment and Statutory
k anc) Regulatory Authorities
IV. Endangcrmcnt Determination
py. Exemption from Statutory Limits -
Proposed Actions and E&timated s
1" CoStS
VII. Expected Change in the Situation
Should Action Be Delayed or Not
Taken
VIII. Outstanding Policy Issues
IX. Enforcement
IK.
Enforcement Addendum
Attachments
Ceiling Increase4'
Heading
1 -¦ Purpose
II, Site Conditions and Background
lit Threats to Public Health or Welfare
, Or the Environment, and Statutory
- %r;and Regulatory Authorities
IV. Endangerment Determination
Y. Proposed Actions and Estimated
Costs'
VI. Expected Change in the Situation
Should Action Be Delayed or Not
Taken
VII. Outstanding Policy Issues
VIII. Enforcement
^ ^ ¦»<; \ "V-- ^ w 1 ^ ¦, "¦ s % *¦ SSS-.-.N s ¦¦ %
rix. R^commendattoiir
Enforcement Addendum
Attachments
$2 Million Exemption/Ceiling Increase
Heading
- L Purpose
{'It Site Coiijiliomf and Background
[ UL Threats to Public Health or Welfare
f or tlie Environment, and Statutory ,
~- and Regulatory Authorities
IV. Endangerment Determination
f V. Exemption from Statutory Limits
i VI Proposed Actions and Estimated
!l_ Costs _
VII. Expected Change in the Situation
Should Action Be Delayed or Not
Taken
VIII. Outstanding Policy Issues
DC. Enforcement
Re&mmendktlon . _ %
Enforcement Addendum
I Attachments
Change in Scope of Response
Heading
JL Purpose
II. Site Conditions and Background
JOT Threats to Public Health or Welfare
or the Environment, and Statutory
r p»d Regulatory Authorities
IV. Endangerment Determination
v y, Proposed Actions and Estimated
VI. Expected Change in the Situation
Should Action Be Delayed or Not
Taken
VII. Outstanding Policy Issues
VIII. Enforcement
1X8, ReeoIl»dat&.n ' ,v;
Enforcement Addendum
Attachments
* All ceiling increase requests for removal actions with total project costs over $2 million must state that
the removal continues to meet previously documented statutory exemption criteria or demonstrate that
the response meets other exemption criteria in a section on "Exemption From Statutory Limits,"
32
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
Site Conditions and Background
(Section II)
Discuss who initiated the action, the date the action was approved in the original
Action Memo, and the date response activities began on site.
Describe the actions initially approved, actions to date, and actions to be completed.
Example: - Of the three actions initially approvedstaging of drums, soil excava-
tion, final disposal at a RCRA-approved facility all but disposal have
been completed.
Describe the problems or conditions at the site that have led to the 12-month limit
exemption request.
Examples: - Severe flooding delayed cleanup work and exposed more drums.
Contract lab delays disrupted scheduled response activities.
Threats to Public Health or Welfare or the Environment, and Statutory and
Regulatory Authorities
(Section III)
A new/revised/updated section is required if the 12-month exemption is needed to
respond to threats that are different from those addressed in previous Action
Memos. Section III of the model Action Memo (seep. 12) describes the information
that should be included.
Exemption From Statutory Limits
(New Section V: follows "Endangerment Determination")
* Demonstrate that the site meets either the emergency or consistency exemption
according to the instructions in the discussion of the combined removal and
exemption request Action Memo (see p. 28). Remember that a higher threshold is
used to evaluate the threats in an emergency exemption request than in an original
Action Memo within statutory limits; therefore, substantiate the request accord-
ingly [8,9]. If a subsequent time extension or change in scope of work is needed,
the new Action Memo must state that the removal continues to meet the original
exemption criteria or demonstrate that new exemption criteria are met.
Proposed Actions and Estimated Costs
(Section V)
* Describe what actions are required to complete the removal action, addressing the
same issues raised in the "Proposed Actions" section of the model Action Memo
(see p. 16).
* Describe any ARARs that will be complied with as a result of the exemption request
and address the same issues outlined in the "Proposed Actions" section of the model
Action Memo (see p. 20).
33
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
Recommendation
(Section IX)
Provide an approval statement that briefly presents the rationale and time schedule
for the removal.
Example; - Conditions at the site meet criteria for the CERCLA section 104(c)
consistency exemption, and I recommend that you approve an exemption
from the 12-month limit to allow a continued removal response. The total
project ceiling is $730,000, of which an estimated $650,000 comes from
the Regional removal allowance.
Include any special conditions or provisions that pertain to this exemption.
Ceiling Increase
A ceiling increase Action Memo is used for approval of all ceiling increase requests. The
RA can approve ceiling increases, addressed from the OSC, that do not result in total
project costs over $2 million. If the ceiling increase will bring the total project ceiling
above $2 million for the first time, the OSC should prepare a combined $2 million
exemption and ceiling increase (see p. 36). Requests for ceiling increases for projects
already totalling over $2 million require approval from Headquarters and must state that
the removal still meets the same exemption criteria (i.e., emergency or consistency)
specified in the original $2 million exemption request/ceiling increase Action Memo or
demonstrate that the response meets other exemption criteria. Therefore, all ceiling
increases for projects totalling over $2 million need to reiterate or demonstrate that
exemption criteria are met.
Additions to Model Action Memo
Where appropriate, the original or most recent Action Memo should be referred to in
order to avoid unnecessary duplication of information. The "Purpose," "Site Conditions
and Background," "Threats," "Proposed Actions," and "Recommendation" sections
should be modified as described below.
Purpose
(Section I)
Modify the "Purpose" statement described in the model Action Memo (p. 8) to
specify that a ceiling increase is requested.
Site Conditions and Background
(Section II)
State the date action was approved in the original Action Memo and the date
response activities began on site.
Example: - The removal was initiated by EPA on December 2,1988.
Discuss the present status of the removal action.
Examples: - Actions already taken are staging and overpacking of drums, and pump-
ing down lagoons.
Drums currently awaiting disposal at a RCRA-appraved disposal site.
34
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
Describe the site conditions and the reasons for a ceiling increase request.
Examples: - Additional drums were discovered buried near the property lines.
Unexpected freezing temperatures required the use of specialized
equipment.
Describe what the ceiling increase will be used for.
Example: - Disposal of additional drums that washed ashore after the removal action
began.
Describe a worst-case scenario should the ceiling increase not be granted.
Include any other information that may help substantiate the need for a ceiling
increase and attach any new enforcement information, ATSDR health advice, or
other useful documents.
Threats to Public Health or Welfare or the Environment, and Statutory and
Regulatory Authorities
(Section III)
A new/revised/updated section is required if the ceiling increase will be used to
respond to threats that are different from those addressed in previous Action
Memos. Section III of the model Action Memo (see p. 12) describes the type of
information that should be included in order to substantiate the request for a funding
increase.
Exemption From Statutory Limits12
(New Section V: follows "Endangerment Determination")
State that site conditions continue to meet the exemption criteria (i.e., emergency
or consistency exemption) specified in the original $2 million exemption/ceiling
increase Action Memo. If site conditions have changed but continue to meet the
same criteria specified in the original exemption request, demonstrate here that the
new conditions meet the exemption criteria. If site conditions do not continue to
meet the same exemption criteria, the Action Memo must demonstrate that criteria
for the other exemption are met according to the instructions for the combined
exemption and removal request Action Memo (see p. 28). Remember that a higher
threshold is used to evaluate the threats in an emergency exemption request than
in an original Action Memo within statutory limits; therefore substantiate the
request accordingly [8, 9].
Proposed Actions and Estimated Costs
(Section V)
Describe what actions are required to complete the response, addressing the same
issues raised in the "Proposed Actions" section of the model Action Memo (see
p. 16).
Example: - Sampling for compatibility remains to be completed before final disposal
may be undertaken.
12 This section is only required if a $2 million exemption has been previously approved. Renumber subsequent
sections as appropriate.
35
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
* Provide a detailed breakdown of costs for both the current and proposed ceiling (see
Exhibit 8) [29].
Recommendation
(Section IX)
* Present the Region's recommendations, rationale, and project costs in an approval
statement. Summarize what the additional funds will be used for and state how
¦ much the approval would increase the total project ceiling. If the ceiling increase
is for a removal with a total project ceiling of more than $2 million, specify the
exemption criteria met, the source of funding, and when funding is planned.
Examples: Site conditions continue to meet the NCP section 300.415(b)(2) criteria
for a removal, and I recommend your approval of the proposed ceiling
increase of $600,000. The total project ceiling if approved will be
$1,774,000, of which an estimated $1,387,000 will be funded from the
Regional removal allowance.
Site conditions continue to meet the NCP section 300.415(b)(2) criteria
for a removal and the CERCLA section 104(c) consistency exemption,
and I recommend your approval of the proposed project ceiling increase
of$400,000. The total project ceiling if approved will be $3.5 million, of
which an estimated $2.9 million will be funded from FY 89 and FY 90
Regional removal allowances.
$2 Million Exemption and Ceiling Increase
The $2 million exemption request and ceiling increase Action Memo is used when a
ceiling increase will bring the total project ceiling above $2 million for the first time or
when addressing new threats in subsequent ceiling increases [8]. This dual request
Action Memo requires approval from Headquarters, and must be addressed to the AA,
OS WEE from the RA, through the Director, OERR to the attention of the Director, ERD.
In situations where an exemption is sought for a proposed or final NPL site based upon
the consistency exemption, the appropriate official from the Regional remedial program
must also concur [9].
Additions to Model Action Memo
Where appropriate, the original or most recent Action Memo should be referred to in
order to avoid unnecessary duplication of material. Additionally, the combined exemp-
tion and ceiling increase Action Memo should contain the information discussed below.
Purpose
(Section I)
* Modify the "Purpose" statement provided in the model Action Memo (p. 8) to
request a combined $2 million exemption and ceiling increase.
Site Conditions and Background
(Section II)
* Provide the same information as detailed for the ceiling increase Action Memo (see
p. 34).
36
-------
SPECIAL CIHUUMSIAIMUfcS*
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
EXHIBIT 8. SAMPLE PROJECT CEILING INCREASE ESTIMATE [27J
Extramural Costs
Current Ceiline
Costs to Date
Proposed Ceiling
Regional Allowance Costs;
(This cost category includes OSC
estimates for; ERCS, Regional
ERCS, subcontractors, Letter
Contracts, order for services. Notices
to Proceed, Alternative Technology
Contracts, and IAGs with other
Federal agencies. Also includes a
10-20% contingency)
$837,000
$825,000
$1,387,000
Other Extramural Costs Not Funded From the Reeional Allowance:
Total TAT, including multiplier
costs
$10,000
$5,000
$10,000
Total NCLP
$20,000
$15,000
$20,000
Total ERT/REAC
$20,000
$15,000
$20,000
Subtotal, Extramural Costs
$887,000
$860,000
$1,437,000
Extramural Costs Contingency (20%
of Subtotal, Extramural Costs; round
to nearest thousand)
$177,000
$172,000
$.2.87. *000
TOTAL, EXTRAMURAL COSTS
AND CONTINGENCY
$1,064,000
$1,032,000
$1,724,000
Intramural Casts:
Intramural Direct Costs (HQ and
Region)
Intramural Indirect Costs
$17,000
$33,000
$16,000
$30,000
$19,000
$34,200
TOTAL PROJECT
CEILING
$1,114,000
$1,078,000
$1,777,200
37
-------
i^fcUIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
Threats to Public Health or Welfare or the Environment, and Statutory and
Regulatory Authorities
(Section III)
* A new/revised/updated section is required if the $2 million exemption and ceiling
increase will be used to respond to threats that are different from those addressed
in previous Action Memos. Section III of the model Action Memo (see p. 12)
describes the information that should be included.
Exemption from Statutory Limits
(New Section V: follows "Endangerment Determination")
Place this section immediately following the "Threats" section and use the threat
information to justify the need for a $2 million exemption. Ensure that the severity
of the threats is sufficiently documented to warrant the exemption request (remem-
ber that a higher threshold is used to evaluate the threats in an emergency
exemption request than in an original Action Memo). Demonstrate that the removal
meets either the emergency or consistency exemption under CERCLA section
104(c). See the exemption section of the combined removal and exemption request
(p. 28) for $2 million exemption documentation requirements [8,9].
Proposed Actions and Estimated Costs
(Section V)
Refer to the "Proposed Actions" section of the ceiling increase Action Memo
discussed previously (see p. 35) and Exhibit 8 for documentation requirements.
Recommendation
(Section IX)
* Present the Region's recommendations, rationale, and project costs in an approval
statement. Identify the source of funding and when funding is planned.
Example: - Conditions at the site meet criteria for a CERCLA section 104(e) emer-
gency exemption, and J recommend your approval of an exemption from
the $2 million limitation and a ceiling increase of $500,000. The total
project ceiling If approved wlU be $4 J million, of which an estimated $3,7
million will be funded from the FY 89 and FY 90 Regional removal
allowances,
Chans? in The Scm QfKemm
The request for a change in the scope of response is used when the proposed actions
and/or removal response goals have changed from those outlined in the "Proposed
Action" section of the current Action Memo. The format provided below is used when
there is a change in the scope of work and redirection of funds at a site, but no change in
total project ceiling. This Action Memo should be sent for approval to the RA from the
OSC through the Regional Division Director (as appropriate), unless the removal was
initially or subsequently (in the case of a $2 million exemption request) approved by
Headquarters. In these two instances, Headquarters' approval is required, and the Action
Memo should be routed in the same way as a $2 million exemption request. When a
38
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
change in the scope of response is required for an approved removal action totalling more
than $2 million, the Action Memo requesting the change must state that the statutory
exemption criteria are still met.
Additions to Model Action Memo
Where appropriate, refer to the original or most recent Action Memo. Additional
modifications to the "Purpose," "Site Conditions and Background," "Threats," "Pro-
posed Actions," and "Recommendation" sections are discussed below.
Purpose
(Section 1)
Modify the "Purpose" statement provided in the model Action Memo (p. 8) to
specify that a change in the scope of response is requested.
Site Conditions and Background
(Section II)
Detail key site characteristics such as location, current conditions, and NPL status.
Attach the original Action Memo and refer to it as appropriate in order to avoid
repeating site description information used to describe the same threats in the
original Action Memo.
Discuss who initiated the action, the date the action was approved in the original
Action Memo, and the date response activities began on site.
Describe the conditions or situations that have led to the proposed change in the
scope of the response.
Example: - initially Incineration was identified as the sole method of treatment and
disposal, but tests have shown that incineration is not feasible for all the
waste, so some of the waste will be solidified on-site.
Include a chronological description of steps taken to address the conditions or
situations leading to this request
Identify any key problems or complications that have developed or are anticipated.
Threats to Public Health or Welfare or the Environment, and Statutory and
Regulatory Authorities
(Section III)
A new/revised/updated section is required if the change in the scope of response is
needed to respond to threats that are different from those addressed in previous
Action Memos. Section HI of the model Action Memo (see p. 12) describes the type
of information that should be included.
Proposed Actions and Estimated Costs
(Section V)
List and describe all the approved project tasks remaining to be accomplished for
completion of the removal action.
39
-------
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ACTION MEMOS TO CONTINUE RESPONSE
Describe any ARARs that will be complied with as a result of die proposed change
in work, addressing the same .issues outlined in the "Proposed Actions" section of
the model Action Memo (see p. 20).
State that the costs will remain within the current approved total project ceiling (no
separate cost summary is required).
Recommendation
(Section IX)
State that the response continues to meet NCP removal criteria and present the
OSC's recommendations for a redirection of approved funds in an approval
statement
Example: - Conditions at the site continue to meet the NCP section 300A15(b)(2)
criteria for a removal, and 1 recommend your approval for redirection of
fttnds as Indicated. Specifically, I recommend that the TAT and CLP
portions of the total project celling be re-established at $25,000 and
$20,000, respectively, with no increase in the total project ceiling.
40
-------
ACTION MEMORANDA
SUPPLEMENTS
Action Memoranda Attachments
The proper use of attachments can save time in preparing Action Memos as well as increase
the effectiveness of the Action Memo as the primary decision document for removal
activities. While certain attachments are required for approval of the Action Memo, the OSC
may utilize other existing material or easily created attachments to enhance the overall clarity
and usefulness of this document. The relevance of and information contained in all scientific
documents must be explained and summarized within the body of every Action Memo.
Required Attachments
The following documents must be attached to the Action Memo and referred to as indicated:
EE/CA Approval Memo and the EE/CA: To avoid repetition of information and for
organizational purposes, OSCs must attach and refer to the EE/CA and its approval
memo. EE/CAs are required for all non-time-critical removals [1],
Written response to significant comments: This document must be attached to the
Action Memo and referred to in the "Proposed Actions" section (see p. 16). If a public
comment period was held pursuant to section 300.820(b) of the NCP (required for all
non-time-critical removals), the Action Memo must document that significant com-
ments were considered. A written response to all significant comments must be
included in the administrative record and may be appended to the Action Metro after
the comment period closes [21].
Final ATSDR Health Advisories and Health Consultation Memos or other health
advice: If the OSC has received such information, it must be attached and refeired to -y
in the 'Threats'* section of the Action Memo (see p. 12).
Enforcement information: This addendum includes information described on p. 24.
The addendum must be attached and referred to, and may be prepared by enforcement
personnel [28].
Concurrence Memo for Nationally Significant or Precedent-Setting Actions: If
necessary, this approval memo must be attached and referred to in the "Outstanding
Policy Issues" section (see p. 23) [14].
Recommended Attachments
In addition to the required attachments, OSCs are encouraged to use other documentation to
substantiate their findings presented in the Action Memo. Suggested attachments include:
Administrative Record Index: The Index may be attached and referred to in the "Site
Conditions and Background" section (see p. 8) [21].
41
-------
ACTION MEMO SUPPLEMENTS
* Previously approved Action Memos: If other Action Memos have been approved for
the site, they should be attached and referred to where appropriate to avoid unnecessary
duplication of information (see the discussions on Action Memos for special circum-
stances, pp. 30 - 40).
* Alternative Technology Approval Memorandum; As with the EE/CA, OSCs may
attach the approval memorandum for the use of alternative technologies to assist the
reviewer. Approval is required for innovative or emerging technologies, or when the
development status of a technology is uncertain [18].
* Documentation of site characteristics: These may be hand-drawn or professionally
produced pictures, photographs, diagrams, maps, or other illustrations of the area
around the site, the site itself, and prominent site features related to the incident or its
response. These documents may be referred to where appropriate in the "Site
Conditions and Background" section of the Action Memo (see p. 8).
* Sampling results; This includes charts, graphs, or other forms of documentation
indicating the extent of contamination based upon sampling results, such as PA, SSI,
or LSI reports. All data presented either in the Action Memo or in an attachment must
be discussed and their relevance to the removal fully explained. If a chart is used,
identify in column format the substance, quantity, location, and existing standards. The
attachment should be referred to in the "Site Conditions and Background" section of
the Action Memo (see p. 8).
* Project schedule: Charts can be used to illustrate various tasks and their anticipated
duration (to avoid potential problems, the OSC might measure the time in terms of
number of days instead of specific dates). The schedule should be referred to in the
"Proposed Actions" section of the Action Memo (see p. 20).
* Soil and debris treatability variances: Generally, a request for a treatability variance for
contaminated soil and debris is a memorandum attached to the Action Memo. When
insufficient information exists about the need for a variance at the time the Action
Memo is signed, the Action Memo should be amended to include the request for the
variance when information becomes available. For non-time-critical actions, the
information to justify a variance should be included in a memorandum attached to the
EE/CA. In all cases, public comment on treatability variances should be solicited
whenever possible, in accordance with NCP requirements.
* Delisting evaluation: If delisting of hazardous wastes is viable at a site, the technical
basis for the delisting should be included in an addendum to the Action Memo. The
evaluation should consider all identified RCRA wastes and discuss the reasons why the
wastes should be disposed of as solid wastes (pursuant to RCRA Subtitle D require-
ments).
If other information is readily available and, based on professional judgment, the OSC
believes the attachments will strengthen or clarify the material presented in die Action Memo,
the use of additional attachments is encouraged.
Role of Headquarters Addenda
Occasionally it is necessary to make minor modifications to Action Memos submitted to
Headquarters that do not require the development of an entirely new original Action Memo,
exemption request, ceiling increase, or a request for a change in the scope of work. Addenda
42
-------
ACTION MEMO SUPPLEMENTS
are succinct documents issued from Headquarters that clarify and supersede certain parts of
the Action Memo by:
Providing supplemental information to clarify or elaborate upon the need for a removal
action
Revising wording to avoid misinterpretation
Incorporating new information to reflect a change in the situation since the submis-
sion of the Action Memo to Headquarters.
Providing partial approval of a proposed removal action (i.e., approval for less than
the requested amount).
Addenda arc addressed from the Director, ERD, to the AA, OSWER, through the Director,
OERR, and conclude with an approval statement similar to that of the Action Memo. The
A A, OSWER, signs the addendum, not the original Action Memo, to signify approval of the
request. These addenda are not intended to serve a quality assuranpe/control function.
Regional staff should ensure that Action Memos are accurate and complete before forward-
ing them to Headquarters.
43
-------
REVIEW AND APPROVAL
PROCEDURES
Need for Review
Because judicial review is limited to the contents of the administrative record, and the Action
Memo is the primary decision document used to initiate removals, the importance of a
thorough review process cannot be overstated. Thorough review procedures are needed to
ensure that the Action Memo sufficiently and accurately justifies the decision to undertake
a removal. Careful reviews can also avert unnecessary delays due to typographical errors,
organizational problems, and other minor errors.
Each Region should allot time for adequate review of the Action Memo (based on the
exigencies of the situation) and adhere to a consistent review process. In addition to a
thorough proofreadingfor typographical errors and other minor problems, OSCs should refer
to the checklist provided in Exhibit 9 to ensure that the Action Memo is sufficient for
administrative record purposes.
State-lead actions
OSCs also need to plan for the additional time required for intergovernmental review (IGR)
of Action Memos for State-lead removals.13 Funds will not be obligated until State repre-
sentatives have had an opportunity to comment on the proposed removal in accordance with
their review process. IGR should be initiated at least one quarter prior to the obligation of
funds for a removal and should take place concurrently with cooperative agreement
application development and review. OSCs should plan accordingly for the additional
review time required for State-lead actions [17].
Resources for Review
When possible, the OSC should have an outside reviewer examine the document from a fresh
perspective. This will help the OSC evaluate the Action Memo as a sufficient decision
document. Two valuable resources an OSC has for review are Regional Counsels and the
ERD Regional Coordinators.
OSCs should have Regional Counsel or enforcement staff review the "Enforcement" section
of all Action Memos as time permits. In particular, Regional enforcement personnel should
review Action Memos requiring Headquarters' concurrence and approval as well as 12-
month exemption requests. With the increasing emphasis on removal enforcement, OSCs
must ensure that each Action Memo contains sufficient detail on enforcement activities to
justify funding a removal [28].
13 Under 40 CFR Part 29, States with established review processes are required to issue formal notice to their desig-
nated State contacts, directly affected governmental entities, and Regional/areawide planning agencies that they
are seeking Federal assistance.
44
-------
REVIEW PROCEDURES
EXHIBIT 9. REVIEW CHECKLIST
The following checklist has been developed to help ensure that all types of Action Memos are
complete. A comprehensive list of topics for inclusion in original Action Memos is provided,
with additional information requirements for Action Memos for special circumstances listed
as well. OSCs should review all Action Memos against the checklist and add their own
procedures if they desire.
Removal Request:
The Acdon Memo has:
Provided a statement of purpose (section I).*
Indicated if the response was initiated under the OSC's $50,000 authority (section I).
Described the site thoroughly and accurately and includes:
Location
NPL status
Past and present uses (section II).*
Identified the proper CERCLA response authority (section II).*
*
Indicated if a Federal facility is involved (section II).
Indicated if a State or local government body is an owner or operator (section II).
Identified the materials on site (section II).*
Stated whether the materials are hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants (section II).*
Described the migration patterns of the substances involved (section II).*
Indicated the State and local authorities' past, current, and likely future
involvement, and funding capabilities (section II).
\
Described any previous or current actions by the Federal Government or
private parties (section II).
* Denotes information required for all Action Memos. Other items should be discussed
as appropriate, given site circumstances.
45
-------
REVIEW PROCEDURES
EXHIBIT 9(2). REVIEW CHECKLIST
Removal Request (continued)
Identified and discussed threats to public health or welfare or the environment in
relation to NCP criteria (section III).
Incoiporated an appropriate endangerment determination based upon the substances
involved (section IV)*
Described tasks involved in the proposed response (section V),*
_ Substantiated the need for a removal by addressing the threats
found at the site (section V).*
Identified the need to defer decisions pending further information
(section V).
Referred to the sampling QA/QC plan for further information concerning site
sampling plans (section V).*
Discussed the need for institutional controls (section V),
Indicated compliance with the off-site disposal policy (section V).*
Discussed commitments to provide post-removal site control (section V).
Stated the contribution to efficient performance of remedial actions (section V).*
Indicated consideration of alternative actions and technologies (section V).
Attached and referred to the EE/CA for an analysis of alternative actions (section V).
Discussed the effort to identify ARARs and listed those deemed practicable
(section V).*
Summarized the estimated total project ceiling with a breakdown of the costs
involved (section V).*
Described the expected change in the situation should action be delayed or not taken
(section ₯1).*
Identified important policy issues (section VII).
* Denotes information required for all Action Memos. Other items should be discussed
as appropriate, given site circumstances.
46
-------
REVIEW PROCEDURES
EXHIBIT 9(3). REVIEW CHECKLIST
Removal Request (continued)
Provided a summary statement indicating the extent of PRP involvement in the
proposed response action (section VIII).*
Provided a recommendation statement and spaces for signatures and date (section IX).*
Identified the strategy for and results of the PRP search and notification process
(Enforcement Addendum).*
Discussed consideration of the factors affecting the decision to issue an order
(Enforcement Addendum).
Described the negotiation and order issuance strategy and schedule (Enforcement
Addendum).
Appended all attachments.
Removal and Exemption Request:
Provided a specific statement of purpose (section I).*
Substantiated the need for 12-month and/or $2 million exemption based upon the
emergency or consistency exemptions (new section V).*
Provided a specific recommendation statement and documented the approval of
appropriate program managers (section X).*
12-Month Exemption Request:
Provided a specific statement of purpose (section I).*
Described previous actions and current problems (section II).*
Discussed any new threats to public health, welfare, or the environment as they relate
to NCP criteria (section III).
Demonstrated that the site meets the emergency or consistency exemption
requirements (section V).*
Described remaining actions (section VI).*
* Denotes information required for all Action Memos. Other items should be discussed
as appropriate, given site circumstances.
47
-------
REVIEW PROCEDURES
EXHIBIT 9(4). REVIEW CHECKLIST
12-Month Exemption Request (continued)
Described any ARARs that will be complied with as a result of the exemption request
(section VI).
Provided a specific recommendation statement and documented approval of
appropriate program managers (section X).*
Ceiling Increase Request:
Provided a specific statement of purpose (section 1).*
Described previous actions and current problems (section II).*
Describe what the ceiling increase will be used for (section II).*
Discussed any new threats to public health, welfare, or the environment as they relate
to NCP criteria (section III).
Demonstrated that the site meets emergency or consistency exemption requirements if a
$2 million exemption has been granted previously (section V, if applicable).
Described remaining actions (section V).*
Summarized costs of the current and proposed ceilings (section V).*
Provided a specific recommendation statement and documented approval of
appropriate program managers (section DC).*
$2 Million Exemption and Ceiling Increase Request:
Provided a specific statement of purpose (section I)*
Described previous actions and current problems (section II).*
Described what the ceiling increase will be used for (section II).*
Discussed new threats to public health, welfare, or the environment as they relate
to NCP criteria (section III).
* Denotes information required for all Action Memos. Other items should be discussed
as appropriate, given site circumstances.
48
-------
REVIEW PROCEDURES
EXHIBIT 9(5). REVIEW CHECKLIST
$2 Million Exemption and Ceiling Increase Request (continued)
Demonstrated that the site meets the emergency or consistency exemption
requirements (section V).*
Described remaining actions (section VI).*
Summarized costs of the current and proposed ceilings (section VI).*
Provided a specific recommendation statement and documented approval of
appropriate program managers (section X).*
Change in the Scope of Response Request:
Provided a specific statement of purpose (section I).*
Described previous actions and current problems (section II).*
Discussed any new threats to public health, welfare, or the environment as they relate
to NCP criteria (section ID).
Described remaining actions (section V).*
Described any ARARs that will be complied with as a result of the proposed change in
work (section V).
Stated that costs will remain within the current project ceiling (section V).*
Provided a specific recommendation statement and documented approval of
appropriate program managers (section IX).*
* Denotes information required for all Action Memos. Other items should be discussed
as appropriate, given site circumstances.
49
-------
REVIEW PROCEDURES
OSCs can also contact their Regional Coordinators in ERD for advice and assistance
throughout the removal process. OSCs are strongly encouraged to submit $2 million
exemption requests for Regional Coordinator review. In addition, the OSC should notify the
Coordinator of forthcoming exemption requests as soon as possible following the determi-
nation that an exemption will be needed.
Approval and Concurrence Procedures
The required approval and concurrence procedures for Action Memos are determined by two
factors:
* The type of action being requested (e.g., an initial removal action, 12-month exemption,
$2 million exemption, or change in the scope of response)
The unique circumstances for each removal (e.g., use of alternative technology,
involvement of nationally significant or precedent-setting issues, use of the consistency
exemption, invoking of the OSCs $50,000 authority).
Exhibit 3 (see p. 4) details approval and concurrence responsibilities at both the Regional and
Headquarters levels.
Regions
The RA or the Division Director, in Regions where authority has been delegated according
to Delegation 14-1-A, must approve the following removal actions by signing all final Action
Memos: initial removals costing up to $2 million, 12-month exemption requests, ceiling
increases up to $2 million, and changes in the scope of response for removals costing up to
$2 million. In addition to RA approval, when the consistency exemption is used and the site
in question is proposed for or listed on the NPL, the appropriate official in the Region's
remedial program must concur in writing [9].
Procedures for obtaining the necessary approvals and concurrences from Regional personnel
vary among Regions. OSCs should check with program managers to determine existing
procedures for obtaining RA concurrence and coordinating with the remedial program (if
necessary).
Headquarters
The AA, OSWER must approve all $2 million exemption requests and subsequent ceiling
increases [8]. The AA, OSWER also determines whether or not the use of the consistency
exemption to exceed the $2 million limit at non-NPL sites is appropriate on a case-by-case
basis [9]. In addition to the AA, OSWER, OWPE and the Office of General Counsel (OGC)
concur on $2 million exemption requests.14 Exemption requests will not be approved if there
has not been adequate enforcement effort to obtain responses from PRPs.
14 OGC concurrence is not required for ceiling increase requests that do not involve a change in the scope of
response.
50
-------
REVIEW PROCEDURES
In addition to exemption requests, two other actions require Headquarters approval or
concurrence. The Director, OERR must concur on nationally significant or precedent-setting
removal actions at non-NPL sites. Exhibit 10 provides a sample of the concurrence memo
that must accompany all Action Memos involving nationally significant or precedent-setting
issues [14]. The Director, ERD must approve the use of innovative or emerging alternative
technologies, or cases where the development status of a proposed technology is uncertain.
Approval of alternative technologies may be required prior to preparing the Action Memo
because treatability studies may be necessary in advance of implementing the response [18].
Action Memos requiring Headquarters' approval should be sent to the appropriate Regional
Coordinator in ERD at least three weeks before the requested action is needed (and after
appropriate Regional signatures have been obtained). OSCs can contact their Regional
Coordinator at 8-382-2188 during regular working hours for assistance with Action Memos.
The Regional Coordinator will obtain the necessary program concurrences and submit the
Action Memo to the AA, OSWER for final approval. If additional Headquarters' assistance
is needed, OSCs are encouraged to send final Action Memos to Regional Coordinators more
than three weeks in advance in order to avoid lengthening Headquarters* processing time.
51
-------
REVIEW PROCEDURES
EXHIBIT 10. CONCURRENCE FOR NATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT OR
PRECEDENT-SETTING REMOVALS
Subject: Request for Concurrence on Proposed Nationally Significant or Precedent-
Setting Removal
From: Regional Administrator
To: Director
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
The purpose of this memorandum is to request your concurrence on the proposed re-
moval action at the non-NPL site in flocationl. Redelegation of
Authority R-14-1-A gives you the authority to concur on nationally significant or
precedent-setting removals at non-NPL sites.
The OSC has discussed this proposed removal with staff of the HQ Emergency Response
Division. ERD has advised the OSC that this removal is considered nationally significant or
precedent-setting because
The action memorandum is attached for your review. My approval awaits your concurrence.
Concur:
Director, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response Date
According to the redelegation, authority to non-concur remains with the Assistant Administrator,
OSWER. If you choose not to concur on this action, please forward this memo to the Assistant
Administrator.
Non-Concun
Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste Date
and Emergency Response
Concur;
Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste Date
and Emergency Response
52
-------
APPENDIX A. REFERENCES18
Guidance
[1] "Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis Guidance Outline," Memorandum from T. Fields to
Superfund Branch Chiefs (March 30, 1988)
[2] "Guidance on Use and Enforcement of CERCLA Information Requests and Administrative
Subpoenas" (August 25,1988)
[3] "Interim Guidance on Notice Letters, Negotiations, and Information Exchange,"
Memorandum from J. Winston Porter to Regional Administrators (October 19,1987)
[4] "New Method for Determination of Indirect Costs in Superfund Removal Project Ceilings,"
Comptroller Policy Announcement No. 87-15 (July 15, 1987)
[5] OSWER Dir. 9280.0-02B, "Policy on Floodplains and Wetlands Assessments for CERCLA
Actions" (August 6, 1988)
[6] OSWER Dir. 9330.2-07, "Notification of Out-of-State Shipment of Superfund Site Wastes"
(September 14,1989)
[7] OSWER Dir. 9360.0-8, "Removal Actions at Methane Release Sites (Release of'Naturally
Occurring' Substances)" (January 23, 1986)
[8] OSWER Dir. 9360.0-12, "Guidance on Implementation of the Revised Statutory Limits on
Removal Actions" (April 6, 1987)
[9] OSWER Dir. 9360.0-12A, "Guidance on Implementation of the 'Consistency' Exemption for
Removals" (June 12,1989)16
[10] OSWER Dir. 9360.0-13, "Guidance on Implementation of the 'Contribute to Remedial
Performance' Provision" (April 6,1987)
[11] OSWER Dir. 9360.0-15, "The Role of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA"
(April 21,1987)
[12] OSWER Dir. 9360.0-16, "Interim Guidance for Conducting Federal-Lead Underground
Storage Tank Corrective Actions" (June 4,1987)
[13] OSWER Dir. 9360.0-18, "Removal Program Priorities" (March 31, 1988)
[14] OSWER Dir. 9360.0-19 (supplement), "Guidance on Non-NPL Removal Actions Involving
Nationally Significant or Precedent-Setting Issues" (March 3,1989)
[15] OSWER Dir. 9360.1-01, "Interim Final Guidance on Removal Action Levels at
Contaminated Drinking Water Sites" (October 6,1987)
15 Bracketed numbers appear throughout the text and correspond to the references listed in this appendix. These
references may be consulted for additional information on specific topics affecting the preparation and content of
Action Memos.
16 Draft document.
A-l
-------
[16] OSWER Dir. 9360.2-02, "Policy on Management of Post-Removal Site Control""
[17] OSWER Dir. 9375.1-4-W, "Guidance for State-Lead Removal Actions" (July 10,1987)
[18] OSWER Dir. 9380.2-1, "Administrative Guidance for Removal Program Use of
Alternatives to Land Disposal" (August 1988)
[19] OSWER Dir. 9832.1, "Cost Recovery Actions Under CERCLA" (August 1983)
[20] OSWER Dir. 9832.13, "The Superfund Cost Recovery Strategy" (July 29,1988)
[21] OSWER Dir. 9833.3A, "Interim Guidance on Administrative Records for Selection of
CERCLA Response Actions" (March 1,1989)
[22] OSWER Dir. 9834.11, "Revised Procedures for Implementing Off-Site Response Actions"
(November 13,1987)
[23] "Policy on Use of Institutional Controls at Hazardous Waste Sites," Memorandum from E,
LaPointe to H. Longest et. al. (October 28, 1988)
[24] "Use of Removal Authority to Completely Clean Up NPL Sites," Memorandum from T.
Fields to Regional Branch Chiefs (January 29,19§8)
Manuals
[25] CERCLIS Applications for the Removal Program. Emergency Response Division, Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response (October 1988)
[26] OSWER Dir. 9234.1-01 and -02, CERCLA Compliance With Other Laws Manual. Parts
I and II, Publications 540/G-89/0G6 and 540/G-89/009 (August 1988 and I989)17
[27] OSWER Dir. 9360.0-02B, Removal Cost Management Manual (April 1988) ,
[28] OSWER Dir. 9837.2, Enforcement Project Management Handbook (July 1989)
[29] Removal Cost Management System User's Guide. Version 3.2 (June 1989)
[30] Superfund Indirect Cost Manual for Cost Recovery Purposes. Office of the Comptroller,
Office of Administration and Resources Management (March 1986; updated 1/5/87 and
12/17/87)
Statutes and Regulations*
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as
amended, 42 USC Sections 9601-9675
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, 55 FR 8666-8865
(March 8,1990)
I? Draft document
A-2
-------
APPENDIX B. KEY WORDS INDEX
Action levels 13
Addenda
Enforcement 5, 7, 23-25, 29, 41, 47
Headquarters 4, 5, 42-43
Administrative Record .1-3, 20, 24, 41
Alternative technologies 4, 19, 42, 46, 50-51
Action Memos
Ceiling increase request 1, 26, 30, 32, 34-37, 48
Change in the scope of response request 1, 26, 30, 32, 38-40, 49
Enforcement 4-5
Removal and exemption request ....1,6, 26-30, 47
Removal request 1, 6-25, 45-47, 50
12-month exemption request 1, 4, 26, 30-34, 44, 47-48, 50
$2 million exemption request 1, 4, 26, 30, 32, 36-38, 48-50
ATSDR 11, 13, 28-29, 35, 41
Approval procedures 3-5, 24, 26-27, 31, 34, 36, 38, 41, 50-51
ARARs 7, 20, 33, 40, 46, 48-49
Attachments 3, 7, 25, 41-42
CERCLIS vii, 3, 8, 21
Concurrence procedures 3-5, 26-27, 31, 36, 41, 50-52
Enforcement
Addenda 5, 7, 23-25, 29, 41, 47
Enforcement-lead response 4-5
EE/CA 2-3, 7, 18, 20, 41-42, 46
Exemption criteria
Consistency exemption 27-31, 33-36, 38, 47-50
Emergency exemption 13, 27-31, 33-35, 38, 47-49
Federal facilities 9, 45
Headquarters' roles 4-5, 42-43, 50-52
Institutional controls 17, 46
National Priorities List 4, 7-8, 10-11, 18-19, 26-27, 31, 36, 39, 45, 50-52
B-l
-------
Nationally significant or precedent-setting issues 4, 6, 8, 23, 41, 51-52
Office of General Counsel 4, 50
Office of Regional Counsel 3-4, 44
Off-site policy 17-18, 29, 46
OSC's $50,000 authority 1. 4, 6, 8, 45, 50
Post-removal site control 18, 20, 46
Project ceiling 16, 20-22, 36-38, 40, 46, 48-49
Project schedule 7, 16, 20, 42
Proposed actions 7, 16-22, 33, 35-40, 46-49
Regional Coordinators 4-5, 27, 44, 50-51
Review procedures 3-4, 44-50
Sampling 10, 17, 42, 46
State/local roles 7, 10, 12, 17-18, 44
Threats to health, welfare, and environment 7, 12-16, 32-33, 35, 38-39, 46-49
oU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE;! 9 9 0 -S 18 -1 s 7/20 S11
B-2
------- |