W-3
11986
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Emergency 3rd Edition
and Remedial Response April 1986
Washington DC 20460 HW-3 ~
EPA's Emergency
Response Program
JGER ,
*TS2 WATER I
I OUT
I ONLY
U.S. Environmental Protection Ageno.y
ReR;on V, LI'JI y-j
23U South Dearborn Street
fr>i-'-o. Illinois 60604
-------
,S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
EPA's Emergency
Response Program
Train derailments can re-
lease hazardous sub-
stances over large areas,
possibly requiring evacua-
tion of nearby residents.
In satisfying the American
public's demand for sophisti-
cated products, modern
technology's response is in-
genious and complex
Sometimes that technology
generates toxic by-products
as well—hazardous wastes
Effective and safe handling
of such wastes has im-
proved tremendously under
rapidly-advancing disposal
technology In 1976, the Re-
source Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) was
enacted, for the first time
establishing controls for the
generation, transportation,
and disposal of hazardous
wastes.
Although it provided the
tools to track and regulate
the handling of such sub-
stances, RCRA did not deal
with existing hazardous sites
that had become trouble-
some as a result of past
improper disposal practices.
These sites, as well as
accidents in handling or
transporting hazardous
substances, can present
emergency situations requir-
ing an immediate cleanup or
removal
Federal authority to respond
to releases of oil and hazard-
ous substances into the na-
tion's navigable waters is
found under Section 311 of
-------
Emergency Response Program
The swollen bottom on this
drum indicates a serious
threat of leakage.
the Clean Water Act This
authority, which is assigned
to the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency and the Coast
Guard, has existed for over a
decade. The Clean Water
Act also established a fund
to finance these responses.
However, it provided only
limited authority and limited
funds to tackle the variety of
problems caused by release
of hazardous substances into
land, ground water, and air.
Superfund
To provide a more effective
and comprehensive re-
sponse to the foregoing
problems, Congress enacted
the Comprehensive Environ-
mental Response, Compen-
sation, and Liability Act of
1980. Popularly referred to
as "Superfund," CERCU\
and Section 311 of the
Clean Water Act permit the
Federal government to work
with State and local govern-
ments to provide an immedi-
ate and comprehensive re-
sponse to accidental release
of hazardous substances.
Superfund cleanups are
financed by a trust fund.
-------
Emergency Response Program
Barges carrying large car-
goes of hazardous materi-
als may break loose and
strike bridges and other
structures. This barge was
secured in time, preventing
potentially serious damage
to the waterway.
The fund can be used to
provide both emergency and
longer-term cleanup of
releases of hazardous
substances and inactive
waste sites.
In 1968 the Federal govern-
ment established the first
National Contingency Plan
to respond to emergencies
caused by oil spills and
releases of hazardous sub-
stances in navigable waters
CERCU\ required EPA to re-
vise and republish the Plan
to cover all of the actions
which can now betaken un-
der both Superfund and the
Clean Water Act The Plan
details the responsibilities of
14 Federal agencies and
State and local governments
-------
Emergency Response Program
When a hazardous sub-
stance ignites, it not only
presents the immediate
dangers of heat and smoke
but it can spread hazardous
particles and vapors over
wide areas.
for cleaning up releases of
hazardous substances to all
media (land, air, surface wa-
ter and ground water) and
discharges of oil into naviga-
ble waters of the U.S.
In general the Plan:
• Encourages coordina-
tion of Federal, State
and local government
involvement in re-
sponse actions;
• Allows State and local
governments to be
reimbursed by the Fed-
eral government for
allowable response
costs; and
• Authorizes the Federal
government to under-
take cleanup when the
responsible party or
the State cannot or
will not do so
Primary responsibility for
dealing with accidental
releases in or near coastal
waters and the Great Lakes
is with the Coast Guard.
The lead responsibility for
other emergencies occurring
inland or in inland waters
belongs to EPA, as specified
by an agreement between
EPA and the Coast Guard.
EPA responses are coordi-
nated by its Emergency Re-
sponse Division with the
assistance of the Hazardous
Response Support Division.
Both are a part of the Of-
fice of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
-------
Emergency Response Program
Emergency
Response
Program
CERCLA and the National
Contingency Plan provide for
two types of response to
hazardous substance in-
cidents: removal actions for
shorter-term responses and
remedial actions for longer-
term cleanup actions. Re-
moval actions are carried out
by EPA under the emergency
Chemical foams are often
used to prevent evapora-
tion of hazardous sub-
stances or to extinguish
fires resulting from acci-
dents. Response personnel
wear protective clothing
while handling these
chemicals.
response program and are in-
itiated in situations where a
hazardous substance is re-
leased or poses a threat to
public health, welfare, or the
environment Such situations
may include:
• fires or explosions;
• direct human contact
with a hazardous sub-
stance;
• human, animal, or food
chain exposure to a
hazardous substance;
• contamination of a
drinking water supply;
or
• high levels of a con-
taminant on the ground
surface that could be
spread.
A removal response generally
includes actions to assess
the threat or extent of re-
lease of hazardous sub-
stances, to stabilize the situa-
tion and to treat or dispose
of removed material, or other
actions that may be neces-
sary to prevent or minimize
danger to the public health,
welfare or environment Spe-
cifically, removal activities
may include:
• installing security fen-
cing;
• collecting and analyzing
samples;
• providing alternate
water supplies;
• controlling the release
or spread of hazardous
substances;
• removing hazardous
substances from the
site and storing, treat-
ing, or disposing of
them at RCRA-
approved facilities, and
• providing temporary
evacuation of and
housing for threatened
individuals
-------
Emergency Response Program
Above: Workers with pro-
tective suits and self-
contained breathing units
extract samples from
drums. Samples are sent
to a chemical laboratory
for analysis.
Removal actions may require
an immediate response to an
emergency, such as a chem-
ical spill or explosion; or re-
movals may be required for a
situation that, while posing a
threat, does not demand im-
mediate attention, and allows
time for more careful plan-
ning of removal activities Su-
perfund does, however, set
time and cost limits for re-
moval actions. Exemptions
from the time and cost limits
may be granted for removal
actions under certain circum-
stances.
-------
Emergency Response Program
Hazardous
Substance
Cleanup: An
Industry-
Government
Partnership
In practice, many emergency
cleanups and removals are
handled by the responsible
party—usually the generator,
transporter, or disposer of
the waste The remainder
are cleaned up by an
industry-government part-
nership. If government
resources are called upon,
a variety of local, State, and
Emergency situations in-
volving hazardous sub-
stances require specific
techniques, equipment and
personal safety protection.
Above: Firefighters respond
to a night emergency.
Federal agencies may be
called into action
Superfund and Section 311
of the Clean Water Act
require that EPA, the Coast
Guard, the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency,
the Department of Health
and Human Services, the
Department of the Interior,
and nine other Federal
agencies cooperate as
members of the National
and Regional Response
Teams to coordinate activi-
ties in cases of emergency
Additional Federal agencies
that may be involved are
the Departments of Agricul-
ture, Commerce, Defense,
Energy, Justice, Labor,
State, and Housing and Ur-
ban Development; and the
Small Business Administra-
tion. In the event Federal
services are called upon:
• The Coast Guard or
EPA assumes primary
responsibility to re-
spond, depending
upon the location of
the emergency;
• The Federal Emergency
Management Agency
is responsible for
evacuations;
• The Fish and Wildlife
Service in the Depart-
ment of the Interior
and the National Ma-
rine Fisheries Service
in the Department of
Commerce conduct re-
search into the effects
of the disaster on ma-
rine, aquatic and ter-
restrial life;
• The Public Health
Service in the Depart-
ment of Health and
Human Services inves-
tigates incidents of
hazardous substance
exposure to humans
and threats to the
public welfare, and
• Other agencies play
roles related to their re-
7
-------
Emergency Response Program
spective authorities if the
emergency requires it
When To Notify the
Government
When release of a hazard-
ous substance creates an
emergency situation, local
police and fire departments
probably will be the first
agencies involved. While
they are taking initial pro-
tective actions, however,
local officials may be calling
upon State and Federal
agencies for assistance
The responsible party—such
as a generator, transporter
or disposer of hazardous
waste—must also notify the
National Response Center
(NRC) as soon as (s)he has
knowledge that a hazardous
substance was released in a
Reportable Quantity (RQ)
into the environment Sec-
tion 102 of CERCLA desig-
nates almost 700 sub-
stances as hazardous and
assigns RQs that trigger
notification requirements
To request Federal assist-
ance under Superfund, a
State or local government
should contact its nearest
EPA Regional Office.
When the National Re-
sponse Center is notified,
the duty officer immediately
relays the release informa-
tion to an EPA or Coast
Guard On-Scene Coordina-
tor (OSC), depending upon
the location and nature of
the emergency. The OSC
coordinates and monitors all
protective and precautionary
activities to ensure that
everything possible is done
to protect public health,
welfare, and the en-
vironment.
The Federal Role
The response process be-
gins with the OSC's deci-
sion to initiate response
measures. This decision
is based on a preliminary
assessment of notification
information and on follow-
up data gathered from the
responsible party or officials
at the release site. The OSC
must decide whether the
Federal government is the
appropriate response
agency Alternatively, State
agencies may take the lead
in cleaning up a release
site, or the party responsible
for the release may have
the capability to provide
mitigation actions In both
cases, however, the Federal
OSC will retain the authority
for oversight or monitoring
of the cleanup operations to
ensure that the threat is
mitigated. At times, the ex-
pertise of other Federal
-------
The grappler's specially-
designed pickup arm helps
remove hazardous waste
drums from an active dis-
posal site.
agencies and other States
can be brought to a re-
sponse action through the
Regional Response Team
(RRT) established by the
National Contingency Plan
The Federal OSC, either in
consultation with other
agencies or on the spot,
must decide what type of
response to make whether
the release should be con-
tained to prevent migration,
whether the release should
be treated in situ, or
whether a federally-funded
removal to a treatment,
storage or disposal (TSD)
facility should be un-
dertaken
The OSC seeks assistance
from the EPA Regional
Emergency Reponse Offices
and the special Environmen-
tal Response Teams based
in Cincinnati, Ohio, and Edi-
son, New Jersey
As part of EPA's policy of
keeping the public accur-
ately informed, the OSC
may also seek assistance
from the Agency in coor-
dinating information for the
media and providing liaison
with citizens organizations
as necessary.
According to CERCLA, an
official Federal removal ac-
tion may be considered in
cases where:
• The discharger is
unknown;
• The discharge is
caused by an act of
God or war; or
• The responsible party
cannot or will not re-
spond adequately
Under Superfund, govern-
mental emergency response
is able to achieve the
highest degree of inter-
agency and inter-govern-
mental teamwork If Federal
authorization is provided,
State and local govern-
ments may conduct the
cleanups and reimburse-
ment will be made by
Superfund The Federal
government itself may con-
duct the removal if the
State or local government
requests assistance.
In either case, the Federal
government retains its im-
portant advisory and coordi-
nation role. EPA's scientific
resources and its specialized
-------
Emergency Response Program
monitoring, sampling and
safety equipment will sup-
port State and local efforts
Superfund will be the key
source of cleanup money.
To help keep the fund sol-
vent, Superfund also pro-
vides that the responsible
party may be liable for
punitive damages of up to
three times the cost of the
Federal removal for failure
to respond properly to the
emergency.
Prevention
The containments
around the storage
tanks are designed to
prevent any leakage of
oil products into adja-
cent waters.
Oil Pollution Prevention
For more than a decade,
EPA has been concerned
about the discharge of oil
into the navigable waters of
the United States To prevent
such oil discharges by non-
transportation-related (NTR)
onshore and offshore facili-
ties, EPA promulgated the oil
pollution prevention regula-
tion in December 1973 The
regulation establishes re-
quirements for the develop-
ment and implementation of
Spill Control and Counter-
measure Plans (SPCC
Plans) This regulation is ap-
plicable to all owner/opera-
tors of NTR onshore and
offshore facilities engaged in
drilling, producing, gather-
ing, storing, processing,
refining, transferring, dis-
tributing, or consuming oil
and oil products and who,
because of their location,
could reasonably be ex-
pected to discharge oil into
or upon the navigable
waters of the United States.
The EPA Regional Offices
implement this regulation by
routinely visiting facilities and
reviewing their SPCC Plan.
All transportation-related fa-
cilities are regulated by the
Department of Transporta-
tion in accordance with an
agreement with EPA
10
-------
Emergency Response Program
Superfund
in Action
The Emergency
Response at Cecil
County, Maryland
Site workers wearing
protective suits placed
leaking drums into over-
packs. In all, more than
1,300 drums and 5 million
pounds of contaminated
soil were removed and
disposed of at authorized
facilities.
In the late 1960s, approxi-
mately 1,300 drums of haz-
ardous wastes were stacked
in a clay quarry and covered
over in the small Cecil
County, Maryland, commu-
nity of North East When the
new owners of the land be-
gan an expansion of a mo-
bile home community into
the former quarry area, they
discovered chemical odors
and several surfacing drums
After receiving complaints in
April 1981, the county and
the Maryland Office of En-
vironmental Programs tested
drinking water wells and sur-
face water in the area The
property owner also con-
ducted geological studies
11
-------
Emergency Response Program
The drums were
stacked up to 15 layers
deep. To speed up the
removal action, EPA
combined compatible
chemicals so they
could be either treated
at the site or bulk
shipped to a disposal
facility.
The analyses showed safe
drinking water, but the sur-
face water and soil samples
contained organic solvents,
including several known and
suspected carcinogens The
State then requested as-
sistance from Superfund
From February to April 1982,
EPA conducted a site investi-
gation, including additional
sampling The on-scene in-
vestigators discovered drums
of hazardous organic wastes
located a few hundred feet
from a 300-unit trailer park
These wastes were contami-
nating soil, two small ponds,
and a creek running through
the trailer park A joint State
and EPA emergency re-
sponse team evaluated the
site in May EPA approved a
removal action under Super-
fund in June 1982
EPA began an immediate
removal action costing
$110,000 on Wednesday,
June 16, 1982 This in-
cluded erecting a fence
around the site to secure the
area, installing filter fences
on the stream, removing
four drums of ignitable
materials found on the sur-
face, overpacking eight leak-
ing drums, conducting mag-
netometer and ground-
penetrating radar surveys to
determine where additional
drums were buried, and
continuing air, water, and
soil sampling
Based on these studies,
EPA estimated that there
were approximately 125
drums at the site Because
of the potential danger
these posed to the
neighboring community,
EPA decided to undertake a
planned removal action In-
stead of the expected 125
drums, however, in
November, 1982, on-scene
personnel discovered that
there were 1,300 drums
stacked up to 15 layers
deep
12
-------
Emergency Response Program
At the completion of the
removal action, the site
was filled, capped with
clay, covered with top soil,
and seeded.
The discovery changed the
scope of the planned re-
moval action EPA, State
and local agencies, and con-
tractors increased personnel
to complete the action with-
in the statutory limit of six
months—a deadline of De-
cember 16, 1982 EPA
changed the removal strat-
egy to combine compatible
chemicals together and dis-
pose of them as bulked li-
quids rather than in drums
This and other innovative
strategies lowered the per
drum cost of cleanup, so
that the planned removal ac-
tion cost $960,000, only
about $300,000 more than
anticipated when the num-
ber of drums was thought to
be a tenth of how many
were found
In all, EPA removed 50,000
gallons of contaminated li-
quids, 5 million pounds of
contaminated soil, and
treated 100,000 gallons of
contaminated water Site
workers refilled the hole with
clean fill material, installed a
clay cap to prevent water
seepage into the former
drum area and the leaching
out of any contaminants
possibly left in the deeper
ground, and covered the
surface with topsoil seeded
with grass to prevent ero-
sion The State pledged to
maintain the air and water
monitoring stations To date,
all environmental samples
have been free of the con-
tamination that prompted
this Superfund removal
action
13
-------
Emergency Response Program
Research
and
Develop-
ment
Controlling and cleaning up
hazardous substances is a
relatively new field. New
equipment and new tech-
niques are required to re-
spond quickly and effec-
tively to emergencies, and
to dispose of the materials
in a way that is environ-
mentally safe. Both industry
and EPA are working dili-
gently to learn more about
controlling such substances
and to develop new
EPA's "Blue Magoo" can cleanup techniques and
be moved quickly to
hazardous waste sites to
remove hazardous sub-
stances from contaminated
water.
equipment.
Much of the development
and testing related to the
Emergency Response Pro-
gram occurs at EPA's
Environmental Emergency
Response Unit (EERU) in
Edison, New Jersey EERU
is a cooperative effort
among emergency response
research personnel at Edi-
son, the Environmental
Response Team, other EPA
operational personnel, and
contractors from private
industry. As new equipment
is developed and tested
satisfactorily, it is utilized by
EERU in actual emergen-
cies, it is also used in train-
ing courses and in develop-
ment of emergency
response assistance man-
uals. Additional R&D sup-
port is provided at other
EPA research installations
Chemical Cleanups
A number of special clean-
up equipment designs are
under development at Edi-
son. One, designed for
cleanup of chemical sub-
stances, is a fully-
operational Physical-
Chemical Treatment Trailer
nicknamed the "Blue Ma-
goo." A combination of
treatment units mounted on
a flatbed trailer truck, the
Blue Magoo is capable of
being transported to an
emergency site
The treatment technology
was adapted from equip-
ment currently used for
conventional water pollution
control treatment. The
physical-chemical treatment
14
-------
Emergency Response Program
Oil is released into the EPA
OHMSETT tank at Edison,
New Jersey, to test spill
cleanup methods and
equipment.
concept for hazardous sub-
stances has now been
adopted by at least two
commercial cleanup equip-
ment manufacturers.
Still in the testing stage is a
mobile hazardous waste in-
cineration system. This unit
will be capable of on-site
thermal detoxification of
many hazardous materials
such as PCBs, kepone,
malathion, and TCDD The
system is mounted on three
over-the-road semi-trailers to
facilitate transportation to
operating sites. Trial burn-
ings of liquid hazardous and
toxic substances have been
completed successfully. This
is to be followed by trial
burnings on contaminated
solids
Oil Cleanups
EPA also conducts a wide-
ranging oil spills research
program under Section 311
of the Clean Water Act
Major research and de-
velopment efforts for oil
spills include:
• Construction and oper-
ation of a Spill Clean-
up Testing Facility at
Leonardo, New Jersey.
The testing facility,
called the Oil and Haz-
ardous Materials Simu-
lated Environmental
Test Tank (OHMSETT),
is a large concrete
tank with a mobile
bridge. It permits
environmentally-safe
testing of spill cleanup
methods and equip-
ment. Oil spill contain-
ment booms, skimmers
and dispersing agents
can be tested repeat-
edly to insure reliability
and efficiency
• Evaluation of chemical
dispersants developed
15
-------
Emergency Response Program
by industry, and tech-
niques for applying
them from ships and
aircraft in rough seas
Techniques for cleaning
up and protecting
shorelines and
beaches. The Edison
facility, for example, is
emergencies involving con-
tamination of ground water,
surface water and drinking
water by spills of hazardous
substances and oils. The
unit also has provided
emergency responses to
uncontrolled waste sites
EERU activities during these
EPA's mobile hazardous
waste incineration system
is mounted on three semi-
trailers to facilitate trans-
portation to hazardous sub-
stance sites.
investigating use of
chemical agents which
could be applied be-
fore an oil slick arrives.
These agents form a
thin film that prevents
the oil from adhering
to the beach
Emergency Assistance
During the past several
years, the EERU has
responded to a variety of
emergencies included:
• Evaluation of the
severity and extent of
contamination,
• On-site analytical
support;
• Recommendation of
safe, effective treat-
ment and disposal
options; and
• Supervision of spill
cleanup operations.
16
-------
Emergency Response Program
Chemical
Countermeasures
Section 311 of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) establishes
a mechanism for prevention,
response, and notification of
oil discharges. Section
311(b)(3) prohibits the dis-
charge of oil in quantities
that may be harmful.
Implementation of the pro-
visions of Section 311 has
been the responsibility of
EPA and the Coast Guard as
specified in Executive Orders
11735 and 12418. For non-
transportation-related
onshore and offshore facili-
ties, EPA is empowered to
establish procedures,
methods, equipment, and
other requirements for the
control, prevention, and
abatement of oil spills. The
Coast Guard has similar re-
sponsibilities for vessels and
transportation-related
onshore and offshore facili-
ties.
Section 311(c) 2(G) of the
Clean Water Act (CWA) re-
quires that EPA prepare a
schedule of dispersants and
other chemicals that may be
used to remove or control oil
discharges into the navigable
waters of the United States.
This requirement is im-
plemented through Subpart
H of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Polu-
tion Contingency Plan (NCP).
The NCP product schedule
includes chemical agents,
dispersants, surface collect-
ing agents, biological addi-
tives, and burmg agents
Sinking agents are prohibited.
While dispersants are one of
the most feasible chemical
countermeasures treatment
for spills on the high seas,
other products and methodo-
logies now available are rec-
ognized under the National
Contingency Plan. These
counter-measures include
surface collecting agents
(herders), biological additives,
which are microbiological cul-
tures, enzymes or nutrient
additives which encourage
biodegradation of the oil;
burning agents, which impr-
ove the combustibility of
the materials to which they
are applied; and new chem-
ical products such as gelling
agents.
Some of these products may
be used in inland waters, but
with the exception of the dis-
persants, none is truly effec-
tive for removal of spilled oil
in non-quiescent waters
EPA firmly believes that the
dispersants on the market to-
day, if properly applied at rec-
ommended rates, should
pose no threat to the marine
17
-------
Emergency Response Program
In November, 1979, the
Burmah Agate spilled
840,000 gallons of oil and
burned for 30 days in an
accident in the Guff of
Mexico off Galveston, TX.
environment in most U.S.
coastal waters. Thus, the
aquatic ecosystem can be
preserved and most of the oil
prevented from reaching the
shoreline.
Oil Spill
Decision Tree
In 1985, EPA developed and
tested an Oil Spill Decision
Tree, a computerized system
which has the potential of
revolutionizing the role of'On-
Scene-Coordinators (OSCs)
who manage oil spill
cleanups and of improving
contingency planning and
training of field personnel
The decision tree is a
straightforward procedure
Observations concerning the
nature and size of a spill are
entered into the program of a
portable computer, along
with information on the con-
dition of the receiving
waters, i.e., water tempera-
ture and salinity, wave
height, current direction and
speed, and other data. The
program takes the OSC
through a series of steps to
arrive at conclusions regard-
ing the types of counter-
measures which should be
employed.
The software for the program
was developed for the IBM
PC in the BASIC program-
ming language In addition to
being easily adaptable to
18
-------
Emergency Response Program
A vessel equipped with
spray booms applies
dispersants on a small
scale oil spill.
most microcomputers, mini-
computers, and mainframes,
it can be set up in a multi-
user environment so that
members of Regional Re-
sponse Teams in different
geographic areas can use the
program interactively over
the phone, saving time that
would otherwise be neces-
sary to assemble the team
members. With veteran
OSCs entering accurate and
complete data into the sys-
tem, decisions which pre-
viously took agonizing hours
to reach can now be made in
a few minutes.
The Oil Spill Decision Tree
identifies specific questions
which must be answered
affirmatively before dis-
persants can be considered
for use. The decision tree
also queries about the size of
the area covered by the spill,
counseling use of helicopters
and/or boat spray for dis-
persant application on small
spills, and use of fixed-wing
aircraft on large spills.
As long as oil spills continue,
countermeasures will be
necessary. Countermeasures
technology has come a long
way, but clearly there is still
a long way to go, particularly
in terms of increased
cooperation between the
maritime industry and gov-
ernments worldwide
Inter-governmental coordina-
tion, together with constantly
improving technology and a
growing environmental
awareness by industries
which produce, transport and
use petroleum products, is
being reflected daily in in-
creased protection of human
health, welfare and the en-
vironment.
19
-------
r*« IP
Emergency Response Program
Manuals
With its developmental test-
ing functions, EPA publishes
an extensive series of man-
uals to assist emergency re-
sponse personnel in planning
and conducting cleanup op-
erations. In an effort to
achieve a uniform and cohe-
sive national response pro-
gram, the Agency develops
manuals in emergency re-
sponse methodology, adapta-
tion of latest cleanup tech-
niques, uniform communica-
tions terminology and ad-
ministrative procedures, guid-
ance on decision-making, and
instructional and reference
manuals for students in the
ERT training courses.
Recently published manuals
deal with pesticide disposal,
contingency planning (in
cooperation with the Federal
Emergency Management
Agency), and control of haz-
ardous materials spills. Cur-
rently available manuals on
emergency response to spills
include:
• Manual of Practice for
Protection and Cleanup
of Shorelines
• Manual for Control of
Hazardous Material
Spills
• Hazardous Materials
Incident Response
Operations
All emergency response
manuals are published and
made available through the
National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield,
Virginia 22161. Further infor-
mation may be obtained
from NTIS, from EPA's
Emergency Response Team
or any EPA Regional Office
20
UB GOVERNMENT PRDJTINQ OFFICE 1986 - 621-160 - 1302/00063
-------
EPA Regional
Emergency
Response
Offices
Region 1
Chief, Oil and Hazardous Materials
Section
Environmental Services Division
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02173
(617) 861-6700
Region 2
Chief, Emergency Response
Branch
Emergency and Remedial
ResponseDivision
Edison, NJ 08837
(201)321-6657
Region 3
Chief, Superfund Branch
341 Chestnut Building (3HW-20)
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215)597-8132
Region 4
Chief, Emergency Remedial and
Response Branch
345 Courtland Street, N E
Atlanta, GA 30365
(404) 347-3931
Region 5
Chief, Superfund Branch
Waste Management Division
5-SEES
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60605
(312)353-2102
Region 6
Chief, Emergency Response
Branch
6ES-E
1201 Elm Street
Interfirst-Two Building
Dallas, TX 75270
(214) 767-2720
Region 7
Chief, Emergency Planning and
Response Branch
Environmental Services Division
25 Funston Road
Kansas City, KS 66115
(913)236-3888
Region 8
Chief, Emergency Response
Branch
Waste Management Division
1 Denver Place
999 18th Street
Suite 1300(8-HWM-ER)
Denver, CO 80202-2413
(303)293-1723
Region 9
Chief Emergency Response
Section
T3-3
Field Operations Branch
Toxic and Waste Management
Division
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(414)974-7511
Region 10
Chief, Environmental Emergency
Response Section
Hazardous Waste Division
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
(206)442-1263
National Response Center
(800) 424-8802
to report oil and
hazardous substance releases
,. U.S. Environmental Protection Agencj
Region V, Library
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
-------
Superfund/RCRA Hotline (800) 424 9346
for information on programs or
(202) 382-3000
National Response Center (800) 424-8802
to report oil and hazardous substance releases
------- |