EPA540-R-93-067
9200.0-14-1
PB93-963294
SUPERFUND ADMINISTRATIVE
IMPROVEMENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
JUNE 23, 1993
-------
June 23, 1993
SUPERFUND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Superfund, the nation's hazardous waste cleanup program, is
now more than 12 years old. After 12 years, we have made
significant progress in reducing the risks posed to human health
and natural ecosystems from releases of hazardous substances into
the environment. As a result of Superfund, the people of the
United States have received many benefits, including the
elimination of the most serious health threats at contaminated
sites, the restoration of sites to productive use, advances in
cleanup technology, and reformation of corporate and government
behavior towards the generation, disposal, and cleanup of
hazardous wastes.
However, EPA recognizes that the Superfund program has also
generated criticism. Specific criticisms focus on the pace and
cost of cleanup, the degree to which sites are cleaned, the
fairness of the liability scheme under CERCLA, the role of States
in the process, and the role of local communities, particularly
disadvantaged communities.
This point in Superfund history presents the Clinton
Administration, Congress, EPA, and the public an opportunity to
evaluate how the program has worked over the last dozen years and
to make changes that will improve Superfund in the future. The
Agency is committed to making such changes, whether they are
administrative changes which can be implemented by EPA on its
own, or legislative changes that must be enacted by Congress.
To explore options for making administrative improvements to
Superfund, an agency-wide task force was established, the
Superfund Administrative Improvements Task Force.
Representatives from the office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER), the Office of Enforcement (OE), the Office of
General Counsel (OGC), the Office of Policy, Planning and
Evaluation (OPPE), the Office of Administration and Resources
Management (OARM), the Office of Congressional and Legislative
Affairs (OCLA), the Office of Research and Development (ORD),
Region 2, Region 5, Region 9, and the Department of Justice (DOJ)
participated in preparing this report. Task Force members met
with many people, both inside and outside the Agency, to develop
options for consideration.
To oversee all Superfund administrative and legislative
issues, the Administrator also established a Superfund Steering
Committee, chaired by the Deputy Administrator, Robert Sussman.
-------
-2- June 23, 1993
The Steering Committee included senior officials from OSWER, OE,
OGC, OPPE, OARM, OCLA, ORD, Region 2, Region 3, Region 6 and DOJ.
The Task Force recommendations were reviewed by this Steering
Committee, which then advised the Task Force on the appropriate
initiatives to adopt. The results of the Steering Committee and
Task Force efforts are reflected in this report.
CRITERIA FOR ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
This report focuses on administrative improvements to the
Superfund program. It considers the issues of most concern to
the Administration, Congress, and the public. The improvements
included in this report can be achieved without changing the
statute. Priority was given to actions which can be implemented
before September 30, 1994, when the current Superfund legislation
must be reauthorized. Within that framework, the Task Force
looked at Superfund administrative improvements which: (a)
enhance enforcement fairness and reduce transaction costs; (b)
enhance cleanup effectiveness and consistency; (c) enhance
meaningful public involvement; and (d) enhance the State role in
the Superfund Program.
MAJOR GOALS
Using the above framework, initiatives were developed. The
various initiatives identified can be categorized as follows:
o Enhance enforcement fairness and reduce transaction
costs
Greater use of allocation tools
Foster more small volume waste contributor
settlements
Greater fairness for owners at Superfund sites
Evaluate mixed funding policy
o Enhance cleanup effectiveness and consistency
Streamline and expedite the cleanup process by
implementing presumptive remedy guidance and a new
dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPL) strategy
Develop soil trigger levels
o Enhance Public Involvement
Implement an environmental justice strategy for
Superfund sites
Early and more effective community involvement
o Enhance State Role
State "deferral" of certain site categories
-------
-3- June 23, 1993
Each initiative is presented, suggestions for short-term and
longer-term actions are discussed, and program implications are
addressed in this report.
This report contains the recommendations of the Task Force
which have been approved by the Superfund Steering Committee.
The Agency will begin the implementation of these initiatives for
program improvements immediately.
REPORT CONTENTS
This report describes Superfund administrative improvements
which the Task Force believes will achieve the above goals.
The Task Force made a concerted effort to identify in detail
those specific EPA Headquarters and Regional actions that can be
taken immediately to implement the new policy directions and
evaluate the effectiveness of the changes. Thus, in addition to
new and revised Headquarters policy and guidance, the report
describes State deferral demonstration projects, new cost
allocation demonstration projects, mixed funding demonstration
projects and de minimis/de micromis demonstration projects,
presumptive remedy demonstration projects and environmental
justice demonstration projects. Our administrative improvements
will have an immediate impact at Headquarters, as well as in the
field at Superfund sites.
In addition to identifying new and enhanced initiatives,
this report discusses other continuing Superfund initiatives
which the Administrator and Deputy Administrator endorse and
agree should continue. Changes to the EPA Superfund removal
effort were not evaluated in the Task Force deliberations. This
effort is one of the. most successful components of the Superfund
program. _,
RELATION TO SUPERFUND REAUTHORIZATION AND THE NATIONAL ADVISORY
COUNCIL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND TECHNOLOGY fNACEPTl
EPA is also continuing its assessment of various options for
improving Superfund through legislative changes. In order to
assure that EPA is fully informed about the views of outside
parties, the Administrator has created a new committee within
NACEPT. NACEPT is an important advisory group to EPA, and its
Superfund Committee will be made up of representatives from a
broad segment of Superfund stakeholders, e.g., State and
municipal governments, private industry, insurers., environmental
groups, minority groups, local community organizations, and
universities. The Superfund Committee, chaired by John Sawhill,
President of the Nature Conservancy, will initiate a broad
public dialogue on how Superfund can be improved, and this
dialogue will involve representatives of all stakeholder groups,
inside and outside government. This committee will hold a series
of meetings this summer and then, as soon as possible, present
-------
-4- June 23, 1993
the Administrator with its assessment of available options —
both administrative and legislative — for improving Superfund.
The EPA staff will work closely with the committee in identifying
options and gathering information. Thus, additional suggestions
for administrative improvements could result from the NACEPT
deliberations.
SUMMARY OF NEW AND ENHANCED ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
Keeping our major goals in mind, the Task Force is
recommending nine administrative improvements to the Superfund
program. These improvements are discussed below. By
implementing these improvements immediately, EPA will be able to
explore its flexibility under the current statute, and thus
determine what legislative changes are necessary or desirable.
A. Enhance Enforcement Fairness and Reduce Transaction Costs
INITIATIVE 1: GREATER USE OF ALLOCATION TOOLS
The Superfund program has been criticized for the high
transaction costs that are incurred by PRPs in reaching
settlements and in litigating where settlement efforts are
unsuccessful. To address these concerns, EPA will, over the next
12 months, at approximately 20 sites with upcoming RO/RA
negotiations, offer alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to
facilitate PRP allocation deliberations. AOR involves a neutral
third party who can be used to organize oarties for negotiations,
facilitate settlement deliberations, and/or provide an opinion to
the parties to the negotiation. EPA believes that at certain
sites, the use of some for? of AOR can assist in reaching an
allocation of responsibility among the PRPs with a savings of
transaction costs. Where possible and appropriate, EPA may also
prepare or adopt Nonbinding Preliminary Allocations of
Responsibility (NBARs) to help promote settlement at the
demonstration project sites. An NBAR is EPA's preliminary
nonbinding allocation among PRPs of percentages of total response
costs at a site.
As part of this initiative, EPA will also pilot the use of a
binding allocation process in approximately three cases, to help
ascertain whether that tool might also be useful. These binding
allocation pilots and the aforementioned AOR demonstration
projects will be initiated during the summer of 1993. In the
fall of 1993, EPA will also perform outreach to the regulated
community on the use of ADR techniques to support the resolution
of Superfund actions.
In addition, the Agency will re-emphasize and reinforce
directives already provided to the Regions on the importance of
sharing information on allocation and liability issues with
identified PRPs early in the Superfund process. Further, where
-------
-5- June 23, 1993
appropriate, EPA will be prepared to assist PRPs1 allocation
efforts by conducting follow-up information gathering activities
and sharing the information with the PRPs. Guidance in these
areas will be issued during July 1993. Finally, EPA will develop
additional guidance regarding how to allocate responsibility
among PRPs in the absence of volumetric data.
INITIATIVE 2: FOSTER MORE SMALL VOLUME WASTE CONTRIBUTOR
SETTLEMENTS
Small volume waste contributors often complain that they are
not able to settle with EPA until very late in the remedial
process or when complete information about all PRPs is available.
Moreover, complete volumetric information used for establishing
eligibility for a de minimis settlement is not available at many
sites. Also, de minimis settlements have often proven to be very
time consuming and resource intensive for the EPA Regions. De
minimis parties also assert that they incur substantial
transaction costs in forming a steering committee group and
distributing information. Finally, at several sites, parties
that have sent extremely small amounts of waste (referred to as
"de micronis parties") are finding themselves subject to
contribution actions commenced by major waste contributors.
To address these issues, EPA will take a number of steps.
EPA will immediately issue an additional directive so as to
streamline the level of information necessary to make the de
miniiis findings under section 122(g) of CERCLA, and provide
greater flexibility and judgement in entering into de minimis
settlements. This streamlining should increase the number of
sites where EPA can enter into de minimis settlements, and also
make it easier for the Agency to settle out de minimis parties
early in the process. EPA will also offer greater assistance to
de. minimis parties to facilitate the formation of the de minimis
group and to disseminate information. In addition, the Agency
will also identify sites where de micromis parties are subject to
contribution actions and will aggressively move to settle with
those parties.
The Agency will perform several actions in FY93 and FY94.
In FY93, we will direct the Regions to implement the new
settlement approach, complete ongoing de minimis settlements,
issue guidance on de micromis settlements, institute negotiations
at sites where PRPs have brought contribution actions against de
micromis parties, and develop a communications strategy to assist
PRPs involved in the de minimis and de micromis process (the
Agency may pilot the use of ADR in this effort). EPA expects to
complete approximately 15 more de minimis settlements for FY93 -
there are already 12 final settlements this year with more than
650 parties. Using the new criteria, we can start negotiations
at several additional sites this fiscal year. In FY94, we
believe that we can target more de minimis sites using the new
-------
-6- June 23, 1993
criteria. We estimate that we can enter irto approximately 35 de
minimis settlements.
INITIATIVE 3: GREATER FAIRNESS FOR OWNERS AT SUPERTUND SITES
Concerns have been raised in the past that in some cases,
EPA may not have given property owners sufficient notice and
opportunity for comment before perfecting liens on their
property. Concerns have also been raised by some that
uncertainty regarding the meaning of "all appropriate inquiry",
for purposes of the CERCLA innocent landowner defense, was
discouraging the purchase and use of previously developed land
and the provision of loans for such purchases. Similarly, some
have expressed a concern that the Agency's policy on settlements
with prospective purchasers was overly narrow in defining the
circumstances under which EPA would be willing to grant a
covenant not to sue to a prospective purchaser. To address these
issues, EPA will: 1) issue supplemental Federal Lien procedures
in FY93 which provide site owners an opportunity to submit
information or meet with EPA before the Agency perfects a lien on
their property; 2) decide, by December 1993, whether to clarify
the requirements of "all appropriate inquiry" under CERCLA; and
3) issue supplemental prospective purchaser guidance during FY94,
as well as a model prospective purchaser agreement.
INITIATIVE 4: EVALUATE MIXED FUNDING POLICY
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs} have objected that
EPA's interpretation of its mixed funding authority is too
conservative. PRPs also believe that the documentation
requirements associated with preauthorization mixed funding are
overly burdensome. EPA has commenced an evaluation of different
mixed funding options, including an analysis of cost implications
to the Trust Fund. As part of the evaluation, the Agency will
also explore options for streamlining the mixed funding decision
making process, and explore options available under the current
regulation for streamlining the documentation requirements
associated with preauthorization. This evaluation will be
completed by August 1993. Further, in order to assist our
evaluation effort and gather additional data on mixed funding,
EPA will be piloting several mixed funding settlements in FY93
and FY94. The Agency will consider the results of its evaluation
and the pilot projects in assessing whether changes to EPA's
mixed funding policy are appropriate during FY94.
«*'
B. Enhance cleanup Effectiveness and consistency
INITIATIVE 5: STREAMLINING AMD EXPEDITING THE CLEANUP PROCESS
The Superfund program is criticized for talcing too long to
decide upon remedies at sites and for the slow pace of achieving
-------
-7- June 23, 1993
cleanup. The program's site-specific decision making process is
often pointed to as a major source of delay and inconsistency.
The Agency has begun efforts to standardize parts of the
process and to take advantage of experience at sites across the
country. Continuing and enhancing these efforts and expanding
into new areas will improve efficiency and accelerate the
program. EPA plans to develop standard specifications for some
design components, clarify our policy on land use, set out
approaches for dealing with lead contamination at sites and
provide a strategy to address the problem of Dense Non-Aqueous
Phase Liquids (DNAPLs) in ground water.
Under this initiative, EPA plans to develop a methodology
for quickly assessing the presence of DNAPLs, characterizing site
contamination problems, and a remedial strategy for addressing
DNAPL contamination. As part of this initiative, the Agency
will complete an evaluation of the pervasiveness of the presence
of DNAPL contamination at NPL sites, present technology transfer
seminars to focus on technical as well as policy issues in each
EPA Region, and issue several technical guidance documents. Many
of these actions will be completed during the summer of 1993.
We also plan to further promote the use of presumptive
remedies. We plan to identify presumptive remedies for municipal
landfills, and volatile organic chemicals in soils during FY93.
We also plan to expand the use of presumptive remedies to other
site categories, i.e., woodtreater sites, groundwatar pump and
treat sites, PCB sites, grain storage sites and coal gasification
sites during FY94. We also plan to conduct demonstration
projects of these various presumptive remedies during FY93 and
FY94.
INITIATIVE 6: DEVELOP SOIL TRIGGER LEVELS
Contamination of soils occurs at virtually all hazardous
waste sites. Levels of concern and cleanup levels have
historically been set site-specifically through the risk
assessment process. In addition, uncertainty about the hazards
and the liability associated with levels of contamination have
dampened property transfers.
EPA is developing soil trigger levels for a variety of
chemicals, and these will be an important screening tool to
identify contaminant levels below which there is no concern and
above which further site-specific evaluation would be warranted.
When exposure pathways at a site correspond to those for which
soil trigger levels have been established (i.e., ingestion,
inhalation and migration to ground water), the trigger level
could also be used as a cleanup level. The soil trigger levels
will accelerate investigation of soil contamination at sites,
streamline the baseline risk assessment, and improve consistency
-------
-8- June 23, 1993
in soil cleanups between the RCRA corrective action program and
Superfund. We plan to issue guidance on soil trigger levels for
about 30 chemicals during FY93 and another 60 chemicals in FY94.
C. Enhan*?^ public
INITIATIVE 7: IMPLEMENT AN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE STRATEGY FOR
SUFERFUND SITES
EPA will undertake a variety of activities to better assess
potential areas of inequity at Superfund sites and identify
appropriate solutions. By the end of this summer, EPA will
complete a preliminary analysis of populations living near 200-
300 listed Superfund sites, linking minority and site variables,
and identifying ethnic populations living near multiple sites.
By the end of FY93, EPA will identify a "demonstration" site in
each Region at which environmental justice is of concern. The
Regions will develop site-specific strategies for addressing
equity issues at each site.
By next winter, EPA will catalog "lessons learned11 from
these demonstration efforts, which, along with the data and
analysis described above, will form the basis of a new Superfund
environmental justice strategy. To improve the flow and quality
of useful information to culturally diverse communities, we will
assign site project managers and community relations staff with
appropriate language skills and cultural sensitivities. EPA will
simplify instructions on applying for Technical Assistance Grants
and publish them in English and Spanish this summer.
INITIATIVE 8: EARLY AND MORE EFFECTIVE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
A critical problem in the Superfund program is the lack of
support for the cleanup among the communities around Superfund
sites. Citizen groups and communities are often dissatisfied
with both the pace and the results of cleanup actions. Specific
community involvement problems include difficulties in obtaining
Technical Assistance Grants (TAGs) , difficulties in obtaining and
interpreting health studies, and inaccessibility of both key
information and site decision makers.
To remedy this situation, EPA will prepare and implement a
new Superfund public participation plan. The plan will be based
on comments received from citizens at past EPA Superfund Public
Forums and from comments received at an upcoming NACEPT meeting
which will focus, in part, on public participation. EPA will
also monitor the progress made by other Federal agencies as they
establish Site-Specific Advisory Boards at their cleanup sites.
EPA expects to be using this new public participation plan at
Superfund sites by December 1993.
-------
-9- June 23, 1993
t
D. Enhance State Role
INITIATIVE »: "STATE DEFERRAL" OF CERTAIN SITE CATEGORIES
EPA and the States have long agreed that the universe of
hazardous substance sites potentially requiring cleanup was
larger than either level of government could address alone. As a
result, EPA will be unable to address the environmental threats
at some sites for years, leaving potentially responsible parties
(PRPs) in doubt about their liability and local communities at
risk for some unremediated sites and without the productive use
of the affected land. Several States have already developed
increasingly sophisticated programs to clean up non-NPL sites,
relying in part on EPA technical assistance and funding. EPA
could encourage more environmental cleanup sooner, by expanding
the State role to address sites that are potentially NPL-caliber,
and enlisting the states' participation in a complementary
cleanup program.
State "deferral" will encourage States to start addressing
the potentially large number of sites now in the NPL listing
queue, thus accelerating cleanup, minimizing the risk of
duplicative State/Federal efforts, and offering PRPs a measure of
confidence that only one agency will address the site. These
"deferrals" will provide a negotiated division of responsibility
for pre-NPL sites, to determine which agency will address any
given site. They will stipulate that States have the initial
responsibility to cleanup certain NPL-caliber sites (low-* and
medium-priority sites that EPA would not be able to address for
several years). EPA will continue to focus Federal efforts on
removal activities, high-priority NPL-caliber sites and on the
NPL. EPA would not propose sites for the NPL that were being
satisfactorily cleaned up by a participating State.
The Agency will begin several State deferral pilots in FY93.
In these pilots, the State will take the lead for low- or medium-
priority NPL-caliber sites that EPA would not be able to propose
for the NPL or otherwise address in the near term. These would
be sites for which the state has identified viable PRPs. EPA
will provide oversight for the pilot programs through FY93 and
94, and develop a policy defining the appropriate scope and
standards for State "deferral" as well as an appropriate Federal
oversight role during March 1994. This initiative may include
public noti-ce-and-comment on the division of sites between EPA
and States.
CONTINUING MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT INITIATIVES
Over the past several years, EPA has implemented a series of
reforms to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of
the Superfund program. These reforms have had a significant
-------
-10- June 23, 1993
impact on the Superfund program. The primary focus of these
initiatives has been in four areas: (a) NPL construction
completions; (b) the enforcement first initiative; (c)
acceleration of cleanup, including the new Superfund Accelerated
Cleanup Model (SACK); and (d) contracts management.
Construction Completions
EPA committed itself in FY92 to more than doubling (from 63
to a cumulative total of 130) the number of National Priorities
List (NPL) construction completions; and tripling this number (to
a cumulative total of 200) by the end of FY93. These specific
program objectives (which we exceeded substantially in FY92)
create momentum toward the completion of additional site
activities. We currently have 169 NPL construction completions
and are confident that we will reach our FY93 goal of 200. EPA
will continue to work with States to identify opportunities for
expediting construction completions and response actions.
Enforcement First
Regions will continue the "enforcement first" initiative to
maximize PRP participation in the removal and remedial programs.
As we test ways to increase fairness and reduce transaction costs
and accelerate and complete cleanup, we will simultaneously
explore ways to encourage PRPs to conduct investigations and
cleanups earlier in the process. The initiatives outlined in this
report are consistent with the "enforcement first" approach and
EPA's commitment to site-specific polluter liability.
Responsible parties have been performing an ever increasing
proportion of response actions at Superfund sites. Creative and
effective use of all relevant enforcement tools is essential to
completing construction and accelerating cleanup. Settlements
with responsible parties to perform response actions are
preferable where they can be achieved, but Regions should be
prepared to utilize unilateral administrative orders (UAOs) and
judicial actions, including a'ccions for temporary and preliminary
injunctive relief, in appropriate situations, to compel PRPs to
undertake response actions. Equally important is effective
monitoring of PRP compliance with existing Consent Decrees,
Unilateral Administrative Orders and Administrative Orders on
Consent, and taking appropriate enforcement action where there is
failure or refusal to comply.
Accelerated Cleanup
The technical complexity of the hazardous waste site problem
coupled with complex Superfund site study and cleanup
requirements have given rise to concern about the slow pace of
Superfund cleanups. For this reason, a Superfund paradigm, the
Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model (SACM), is under field
-------
-11- June 23, 1993
demonstration during FY93. Major components of SACM include:
(1) Integrated Site Assessment Function; (2) Regional Decision
Teams; (3) Increased Number of Early Actions (immediate threats
to public health and safety will be eliminated first); (4) Long-
term Remediation; and (5) Early Enforcement Actions. We are
conducting pilot proposals that test the various facets of SACM.
We intend to fully implement SACM in FY94.
Effective Contracts Management
Scrutiny of Superfund contracts by parties within and
outside the Agency has pointed to the need for an emphasis on
good contract management and made it not only a Superfund
priority but also an Agency-wide priority. We need to continue
to implement the recommendations of the Agency Task Force on
Alternative Remedial Contracting Strategy (ARCS) contracts, and
build a future with reliable cost-effective contracts across the
program through implementation of the Superfund Long-Term
Contracting strategy. Responsible, trained, and reliable
personnel should be used to oversee the procurement and
administration of these contracts. Senior management involvement
is essential for accountability.
Other Reforms
In addition to the above reforms, EPA has also made efforts
to improve the Superfund program in other ways. These other
initiatives include the following:
o Accelerate base closure
o Promote use of innovative technology
o Enforcement compliance monitoring
o Improve the effectiveness of cost recovery
These reforms have resulted in Superfund program improvements and
will continue to have a major impact.
ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT
Virtually all of the initiatives for administrative
improvement also serve to address another issue raised by
Superfund — barriers or disincentives to economic development.
Contamination and the associated potential Superfund liability
have created barriers to economic development at and around
contaminated sites. Even for sites not on the NPL, the
consequences of contaminated property include difficulties to
transfer, lease or develop contaminated sites, even after
cleanup. This problem is more acute in urban areas where the
barriers to development of sites further exacerbates the
distressed economic and social conditions which already exist in
these communities - restricting or eliminating the availability
of capital to provide economic opportunity and employment.
-------
-12- June 23, 1993
However, the disincentives to economic development may be
lessened by many of the initiatives for administrative
improvement, including development of prospective purchaser
agreements, leveraging HUD and DOL resources to achieve greater
development benefits from cleanup, particularly in disadvantaged
and economically distressed areas, and early and more effective
community involvement, including canvassing the public to better
ascertain their needs from Superfund cleanups (e.g., economic
development opportunities).
PROPOSED INITIATIVES NOT ADOPTED
There were other proposed initiatives for administrative
improvement which were considered by the Task Force. However,
they are not being adopted as administrative improvements at this
time. Two of the most notable proposals were the clarification
of Superfund cleanup goals, and a Federal policy regarding State
non-NPL voluntary cleanup programs. A description of these
proposals, and our reasons for not adopting them is provided
below.
1. Clarify Superfund Cleanup Goals
Currently, Superfund cleanup goals are identified site-
specifically on a continuum from exposure prevention to risk
reduction to beneficial use to environmental restoration. The
range of options available at an individual site can lead to
inconsistency and add time to the decision-making process. EPA
believes that we need to set clear objectives for Superfund
cleanups by first defining the overall goals of the program, and
then, specifying "how clean is clean", i.e., targeting a point on
the above continuum.
However, we have concluded that this issue is too complex to
adequately address through an administrative solution.
Therefore, EPA has asked the NACEPT Superfund Committee to
carefully examine this issue. EPA will also seek the views of
Congress, the States and other parties on this very important
issue. This input will be extremely important as the
Administrator and Congress work together to address this issue in
examining future Superfund legislation.
2. state Voluntary Cleanup Programs
Some States have already taken the initiative to develop and
implement voluntary cleanup programs in order to address the
large number of sites which have a low potential for being placed
on the National Priorities List (NPL). EPA does not have the
resources to address the large number of these sites, either
through the current EPA site assessment program or through the
development of a Federally-supervised voluntary cleanup program.
The Superfund program believes our role may be best limited to
-------
-13- June 23, 1993
providing technical assistance to selected States for program
development.
Although EPA is not addressing this area as an
administrative initiative, we support the development of new
state voluntary cleanup programs and the expansion of existing
State programs to address the large number of non-NPL caliber
sites. The longer term benefits of these programs will be to
accelerate risk reduction at a larger number of sites. These
programs will also ease the credit restrictions placed on private
parties associated with these sites and facilitate property
transfer and economic redevelopment.
RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS
It must be kept in mind that the current Superfund workload
is quite demanding, and several Superfund reforms are currently
underway. Now that decisions have been made on which
administrative improvements to implement, EPA will have to
establish priorities for the utilization of available Superfund
resources. Although tradeoffs will be required, we will work
with the Office of Management and Budget and Congress to assure
that sufficient resources are made available to carry out these
very important Superfund administrative improvements and to
maintain the continued effectiveness of the program.
IMPLEMENTATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
EPA is committed to working with the other Federal agencies,
the States, potentially responsible parties, affected citizens,
other stakeholder groups, and the general public in the
implementation of th*sa- initiatives. EPA Headquarters and the
ten EPA Regions will work together to implement these initiatives
during FY93 and FY94.
Immediate interaction between EPA Headquarters and the
Regions will include the following activities:
o A conference call by the Administrator and/or Deputy
Administrator with EPA Regional Administrators to
emphasize the importance of implementation of the
Superfund administrative improvements.
o A directive from the EPA Administrator defining
expectations for Superfund Headquarters and Regional
managers and staff for each of the new initiatives.
o A national meeting of EPA Headquarters and Regional
Superfund managers and senior DOJ officials chaired by
the EPA Deputy Administrator to discuss implementation
issues.
-------
-14- June 23, 1993
o Regular monthly conference calls <~>f senior EPA
Headquarters and Regional managers to discuss
implementation of the administrative improvements.
o EPA Headquarters and Regions will work together to
identify sites where demonstration projects of these
Superfund reforms will be initiated this summer.
o A program of staff details from EPA Headquarters to the
Regions and from the EPA Regions to Headquarters, as
appropriate to implement these reforms.
o Each Regional office will be required to submit a
Regional implementation plan defining specifically how
these Superfund administrative improvements will be
implemented in each Region during FY93 and FY94. Each
plan will be submitted to the EPA Deputy Administrator
by July 30, 1993.
Further, the EPA Task Force will provide assistance to EPA
management in the conduct of the following activities:
o PREPARE A DETAILED NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN,
INCLUDING SCHEDULE AND RESOURCE COMMITMENTS, FOR THE
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS.
o HOLD SENIOR MANAGEMENT DOJ/EPA MEETINGS TO DEFINE
FUTURE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESPECTIVE
AGENCIES.
o DEVELOP PLAN TO MONITOR IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATE
EFFECTIVENESS OF ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING
MONITORING OF RESOURCES INVESTED.
o WORK WITH THE NACEPT SUPERFUND COMMITTEE IN THE
EXAMINATION OF ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ACTION ITEMS ASSOCIATED WITH ADMINISTRATIVE
IMPROVEMENTS
On the next four pages, we provide a brief listing of the
major action items that EPA is committing to conduct as a part of
this effort to make improvements to the Superfund program. We
believe these actions will result in substantial program
improvements.
-------
-15-
June 23, 1993
SUMMARY OF ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
MAJOR ACTION ITEMS
FY93
FY94
1. GREATER USE OF
ALLOCATION TOOLS
* Identify and
Initiate Binding
Allocation Pilots
* Identify and
offer ADR and/or
NBAR at 20 sites
* Issue information
release guidance
* Complete &
Evaluate Pilots
* Issue Guidance
for Allocating
Costs
* Conduct Superfund
ADR Workshop
2. FOSTER SMALL
WASTE CONTRIBUTOR
SETTLEMENTS
* Complete 15
Ongoing De Minimis
Settlements
* Issue new
directive
streamlining level
of information
needed for De
Minimis Settlements
* Complete 35 De
Minimis and De
Micromis
Settlements using
new criteria
* Issue De Micromis
Guidance
* Begin Targeting
De Minimis Sites
Using New Criteria
*Issue
Communication
Strategy for
Assisting De
Minimis and De
Micromis Parties
* Identify Sites
for De Micromis
settlements
-------
-16-
June 23, 1993
PY93
FY94
3. GREATER FAIRNESS
FOR OWNERS AT
SUPERFUND SITES
* Compile Standards
Developed by Other
Organizations
relating to "All
Appropriate
Inquiry"
* Issue Federal
Lien Supplemental
Guidance
* Decide Whether to
Clarify
Requirements for
"All Appropriate
Inquiry"
* Develop Model
Prospective
Purchaser Agreement
and Supplemental
Purchaser Guidance
4. EVALUATE MIXED
FUNDING POLICY
* Identify and
Initiate Mixed
Funding Pilots
* Evaluate Mixed
Funding Options &
Implications
* Explore Options
for Streamlining
Preauthorization
and other Mixed
Funding Procedures
* Complete &
Evaluate Pilots
* Consider Revising
Mixed Funding
Policy and
Procedures
-------
-17-
June 23, 1993
FY93
FY94
5. STREAMLINE AND
EXPEDITE THE
CLEANUP PROCESS
* Issue Presumptive
Remedy Fact Sheets:
Municipal Landfills
& vocs in Soils
* Conduct
Presumptive Pilot
Projects
* Issue DNAPL
Characterization
& Waiver Guidance
* Issue Lead (Pb)
Directive
* Examine Options
for Standardizing
Design Guide
Specifications
* Issue Presumptive
Remedy Fact Sheets:
Woodtreaters, PCBs,
Groundwater Pump &
Treat, Coal
Gasification, Grain
Storage
* Initiate new
Presumptive Remedy
Pilot Projects
* Develop/Adopt
Performance Specs,
as Appropriate
* Issue Land Use
Policy
6. DEVELOP SOIL
TRIGGER LEVELS
* Issue Soil
Trigger Levels for
30 Contaminants
* Establish Trigger
Levels for 60 More
Contaminants
* Pilot Test Use of
Soil Trigger Levels
at Selected Sites
7. IMPLEMENT AN
ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE STRATEGY
* Identify 10
Superfund Sites for
Environmental
Justice Pilot
Initiatives
* Obtain Input on
Environmental
Justice Issues at
NACEPT Forum
* Issue Simplified
TAG Application
Instructions
* Evaluate Lessons
Learned from Pilots
& Prepare
Environmenta1
Justice Strategy
* Implement New
Strategy at Future
Equity Sites
U.S. Environ.':: - ^ '
Region 5, Lih: •
H West Jackso-i,
Chicago, IL
Action Agency
Floor
-------
-18-
June 23, 1993
FY93
FY94
8. EARLY AND MORE
EFFECTIVE COMMUNITY
INVOLVEMENT
* Implement
Community
Involvement
Recommendations
from Past Superfund
Public Forums
* Obtain Community
Involvement Input
from NACEPT Forums
* Develop new
Public Partici-
pation Strategy
* Test New Strategy
at Selected Sites
9. STATE DEFERRAL
OF CERTAIN SITE
CATEGORIES
* Initiate Pilots
in EPA Regions 3, 6
& 7
* Initiate
Development of
State Deferral
Guidance
* Evaluate Pilots
* Finalize Deferral
Guidance
------- |