CONSOLIDATED TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT GUIDANCE FOR FY'92

  I.  INTRODUCTION
(V
  II. OFFICE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
A. OTS Enhancement Grants for State Asbestos Programs
      1.   Funding
      2.   Schedule for Submittal of Applications
      3.   Consolidated OTS/OCM Cooperative Agreements
      4.   Activities to be Funded under Cooperative Agreements

B.  OTS AHERA Training Cooperative Agreements
      1.   Funding
      2.   Schedule for Submittal of Applications
      3.   Consolidated OTS/OCM Cooperative Agreements
      4.   Activities to Be Funded Under Cooperative Agreements
                                                                     1
                                                                     1
                                                                     2
                                                                     3
                                                                     3

                                                                    11
                                                                    11
                                                                    11
                                                                    12
                                                                    13
  III. OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE MONITORING ENFORCEMENT COOPERATIVE
      AGREEMENTS
  05
  O)

  o
  CM
A.  Compliance Monitoring Cooperative Agreements
      1.   Funding
      2.   Schedule for Submittal of Applications
      3.   Multi-Year Project Periods

B.  Asbestos Compliance Monitoring Activities
      1.   Asbestos Compliance Monitoring Work Program
      2.   FY 92 National Asbestos Compliance Priority
      3.   FY 92 Asbestos Compliance Activities

C.  PCB Compliance Monitoring Work Program

D.  Work Program Activities Applicable to Both Asbestos and PCB
      Agreements
      1.   Quality Assurance
      2.   Field Investigations and Sampling Procedures
      3.   State Records and Reports
      4.   Inspection and Analytical Reports
      5.   Quarterly Reports
      6.   End-of-Project Reports
      7.   Unresolved Problems
      8.   Accountability Under the Cooperative Agreement
      9.   EPA Support to States
                                 HEADQUARTERS LIBRARY
                                 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCV
                                 WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
                                                                           16
                                                                           16
                                                                           16
                                                                           18

                                                                           18
                                                                           18
                                                                           20
                                                                           20

                                                                           26
                                                                          .2*
                                                                           28
                                                                           32
                                                                           33
                                                                           33
                                                                           34
                                                                           34
                                                                           34
                                                                           35
                                                                           35

-------
      10.   National Guidelines on Costs and Time Factors for
            Conducting Certain Activities                                 36

E.  Hexavalent Chromium (CR+6) Chemicals in Comfort Cooling Towers
      Activities                                                         36

F.  Decentralization Cooperative Agreements                              37
      1.   Funding                                                      37
      2.   Schedule for Submittal of Applications                           38
      3.   Multi-Year Project Periods                                     39
      4.   Enforcement Decentralization                                  40

G.  Multi-Media Compliance Monitoring Cooperative Agreements            48
      1.   Funding                                             ,.         48
      2.   Schedule                                                     48
      3.   Background on OCM Multi-Media State Toxics Projects           48
      4.   Examples of Multi-Media  Projects                              49

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
CQNSQLTDATED TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT GUIDANCE FOR FT92

I. INTRODUCTION

      Section  28 (a) of the Toxic  Substances Control Act (TSCA) authorizes the US
      Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enter into cooperative agreements with
      states for the operation of programs to prevent or eliminate unreasonable risk(s)
      within the states, to health or  the environment which are associated with a chemical
      substance.  All awards to federally recognized Indian tribes will be made under
      Section  10 of TSCA.  All recipients must provide a  25% match of total program
      costs.

      Regulations governing financial assistance to participants in the cooperative toxic
      substances program are found at 40 CFR Part 31.1-31.70 and 40 CFR Part 35.001-
      35.155 and 35.600-35.605. This document, developed by the Office of Compliance
      Monitoring (OCM)  and  the  Office of Toxic Substances (OTS) supplements the
      above regulations by setting forth in  more  detail the required elements  of the
      cooperative agreements which are funded by each office..  The implementation  of
      this guidance document is dependent on Congressional approval of the President's
      FY 92 budget.

      This document is directed to  the EPA  regional offices.  If a region issues "regional
      guidance"  to  the  states, it must contain all the  key  provisions  of the national
      guidance.  However, the national guidance may be modified  or supplemented  to
      reflect   special  environmental  or  managerial conditions  in  each  region.   As
      applicable, the regions should send a copy of the program guidance which they send
      to their states to the Chief of OCM's Grants and Evaluation  Branch and/or the
      Chief of OTS's Assistance Programs Development Branch,  assuming that it is not
      identical to the national guidance. A copy should be sent at the same time as the
      mailing  to the states.   -        ...

II. OFFICE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS -         	
      A.  OTS Enhancement Grants for State Asbestos Programs

            1. Funding

            -OTS is at this time projecting level funding for its state enhancement grants
            during the FY 92 award cycle. In FY 91, a total of $1,260,300 was available
            for this program. The average state project award in FY 91 amounted to
            $70,017 and the average  allocation per participating region was $157,537.
            Should the  adopted FY 92 budget ultimately provide additional sums for this

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

             program, the regional offices will be so advised.  As was done in FY 90 and
             FY 91, OTS will again provide a minimum apportionment of $100,000 per
             region  so long as sufficient sums are available and the regions  receive
             qualified requests for at least this amount.

             Headquarters  funds  which exceed  this  $1  million  threshold  will  be
             apportioned competitively among  the regions based  upon the individual
             merits of their unfunded project requests.

             Pursuant to TSCA section 28, the regions and all prospective state applicants
             are reminded  that  all  awards  under this program (Catalog of Federal
             Domestic Assistance #66.706) are subject to a 25% state matching funds
             requirement. Further, pursuant to Executive Order 12372, states must submit
             their project  proposals for intergovernmental review  where applicable.
             Proposers should  check with their state Single Point of Contact (SPOC) for
             relevant instructions in this regard.
             2.  Schedule for Submittal of Applications

                   a. On or before December 6, 1991, OTS Enhancement Cooperative
                   Agreements  must be  submitted  from  the  states to the Asbestos
                   Coordinator in the applicant's regional office.

                   b. On or before January 3, 1992, the regions must submit copies of
                   the applications with any appropriate comments to EPA headquarters
                   (Office of Toxic Substances, Technical Assistance Section, TS-799).

                   c.   OTS, in consultation with  regional and  other headquarters
                   representatives, will then review and rank project  proposals.  As
                   necessary, regions may be requested  to follow-up on comments or
                   resolve outstanding issues with their applicant states.

                   d. By the end of February, 1992, final allocations will be announced
                   and  the  regional  offices  can  complete  cooperative  agreement
                   negotiations with their recipient states.  Awards must be  made, with
                   all FY 92 funds obligated,  by September 30, 1992.

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                         .                             FY92

             3.  Consolidated OTS/OCM Cooperative Agreements

             With concurrence from the region, it is permissible for states to develop and
             submit consolidated cooperative agreement applications which combine OTS
             enhancement activities with OCM enforcement  decentralization activities.
             If the applicant state and the EPA regional office agree that this approach
             is most appropriate, the submission must be prepared  with separate work
             plans and budgets for  the OTS and OCM portions respectively.  These two
             programs are the only two TSCA programs in this year's guidance which
             can be consolidated in this fashion.  It is possible in this instance because
             of the similar aims of these two programs, and the fact that  both operate
             under the same funding schedule and cycle.


             4.  Activities to be Funded under Cooperative Agreements

             The  OTS Enhancement Grants for State  Asbestos Programs or "state
             enhancement grants" will continue in  FY 92 along the same essential course
             first established in the FY 91 guidance.  Because there  are presently (as of
             3/91)  only  26 EPA-approved state  accreditation programs  and 2 EPA-
             approved  state  waiver programs  nationwide,  the  priority emphasis  for
             financial  assistance will remain  focused  on those  "base" activities which
             achieve or promote state accreditation programs consistent with and no less
             stringent than the EPA Model Accreditation Plan and/or achieve or promote
             state inspection and management programs which will qualify for AHERA
             state waivers.  As in the past, state proposals which do  not directly support
             these  priority objectives  (non-base  activities)  may  still be considered  for
             funding, but only after those project proposals which promote base activities
             have been otherwise satisfied (Note:  regions need not have base proposals
             to qualify for  their respective $100K-apportionment,  but base proposals
             within that regional apportionment,  if any, will  be given priority).  The
             Agency  will continue  to  encourage state efforts  to  develop innovative
             programs which may diverge from (i.e., are more stringent than) the federal
             program  in various ways,  and will support these efforts financially to  the
             extent  feasible.    However,  we  want to  clarify and emphasize. to   all
             prospective  applicants that our  first objective  will be to establish and
             maintain  AHERA-consistent  state programs  which  fulfill   statutory
             requirements and intent.   Also, states  should be  fully aware  of  the
             importance which EPA headquarter's attaches  to regional concurrence and
             recommendations in regards  to  all funding decisions.  Early consultations
             between a state and its Regional Asbestos Coordinator  should occur before

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
             the state submits its formal proposal.  As stated in the Federal Catalog of
             Domestic Assistance (see Program Description under 66.706), eligibility is
             only one of several criteria which EPA will consider before awarding funds
             under this title.  Support from the regional office is considered vital to the
             ultimate  success of any assisted state project.

             Please be aware that the Training Amendments to  the Asbestos School
             Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act of 1990 (ASMARA) mandated that
             EPA revise its Model Accreditation Plan to increase the number of training
             hours required for asbestos  abatement workers  and to make such other
             changes as are necessary to implement the amendments.  EPA is currently
             working on this Model Plan revision and expects  to adopt a modified  Plan
             sometime during FY 92, after appropriate consultations with affected groups
             and  provisions  for public participation.   These changed  accreditation
             standards may adversely affect certain  states which have already adopted
             accreditation  programs based upon the existing Model Plan requirements.
             The Agency  recognizes this  prospective difficulty  and wishes to mitigate
             these effects  to  the extent  practicable.  Consequently,  determining  and
             implementing  those  adjustments  needed   to   keep  an  existing  state
             accreditation  program consistent with and no less stringent than called for
             in EPA's revised  Model Accreditation Plan will be a priority (base) activity
             for the coming year.   Planning and  managing  this  kind  of a  program
             transition might be accommodated through1 either Category One (State Plans)
             or Category Two (State  Accreditation Programs)  funding.  However,  it is
             recommended  that all  states examine their needs relative  to this issue
             regardless of  whether  or not they elect  to seek federal funding for this
             specific activity.

             The six funding categories available in FY 92 are presented below along with
             examples of eligible activities under each. These  are essentially unchanged
             from last year, with only slight modifications.  Where proposed by states, any
             of these  activities should be accompanied by a detailed schedule providing
             both milestones and deliverables.   Please note that within  each category,
             activity examples may be classified as either "base," or "non-base."  In some
             cases,  examples of each  are presented within the same category.   It is
             permissible to apply for a mix of base and non-base  activities in a single
             cooperative  agreement  application, but these  pieces may  be  considered
             separately, and ranked independently,  for purposes  of award selection.
             States  are not limited in their proposals to the specific activities offered as
             examples in this guidance.  Program innovations are eligible and encouraged,

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                       FY92

             so  long  as the  proposed  activities fall  within  the  general  boundaries
             established by these broad categories.
                   a.  Comprehensive State Asbestos Management Plans


                     §61il*11ieIiclrati(Bli^ithin this category, taken as a  whole, are
                     ™lKliwitottW\^x-t:-~:*>X>XXZy-ZfiifXfXX        ,    «-.•.»'             : ;    \, •.
                   States  may  undertake  comprehensive  planning efforts  to
                   address the full  scope of  statewide  asbestos  management
                   issues.  These  efforts are  considered base activities and at a
                   minimum, must include:

                          1) the  identification  of all  asbestos management  agencies
                          within the  state  (e.g.,  LEAs,  state  agencies  involved  in
                          accreditation, worker safety, buildings management, compliance
                          monitoring or enforcement, policy development, etc., plus any
                          local  or regional  entities which  might play either a direct or
                          supporting role within the statewide institutional framework.If
                          a state were planning for only a partial program assumption,
                          federal agencies who would remain players in that state should
                          be included as well);

                          2) a  definition of  roles and responsibilities for all asbestos
                          management agencies within the state which will  provide for
                          a coordinated implementation of the state plan (in states with
                          federally  administered  NESHAPs  or   OSHA  programs,
                          coordination  between  the state  and these  other  federal
                          agencies must also  be addressed).  A principal objective here
                          is to identify conflicts, overlaps and gaps in program coverage
                          so as to  establish  a basis for. coordinated,  non-duplicative
                          activity among the various entities involved;

                          3)  establishing  state program  goals  and objectives which
                          provide a multi-year strategic planning framework  (this should
                          address the state's future vision,  and should be concurred with
                          by all affected parties);

                          4) an assessment of  existing asbestos management practices
                          which defines statewide problems, issues  and needs, and sets

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                          priorities (to the extent practicable, this part should provide for
                          the establishment of interagency priorities from which statewide
                          resource allocation decisions might flow);

                          5) the identification of legal and institutional barriers to state
                          program assumption and the  development of a strategy for
                          overcoming  such  impediments  (this   should  involve   a
                          comparison of the  state's  legal and  institutional  capabilities
                          with both its goals and its problem assessment in an effort to
                          formulate an action agenda);

                          6) provisions  for achieving a  self-supporting state program
                          through  appropriations,  fees  or  other  revenue  sources
                          (although focused on meeting  the  long-term  needs  of the
                          program, this would also necessarily address any special start-
                          up costs as well);

                          7) a multi-year action plan which  establishes a schedule with
                          clearly defined milestones  and  deliverables for purposes of
                          achieving the state program goals  and objectives presented in
                          paragraph 3. above (this should take the form of a work plan);
                          8) an analysis of how and the degree to which implementation
                          of the action plan in paragraph 6. above will achieve, sustain
                          or promote either EPA  approval of the state's accreditation
                          program (i.e., a state program no less stringent than the EPA
                          Model Accreditation Plan)' or EPA's granting of a waiver for
                          the state's inspection and management program (i.e., for either
                          full or partial assumption of responsibility for implementing
                          the EPA Asbestos-in-Schools Program), or both (this should
                          provide both EPA and the state with a much clearer sense of
                          what  their  future roles will be relative to one another);  and

                          9)  consolidation  of the above  steps  and  analyses into  a
                          comprehensive and  published planning document subject to
                          whatever public participation   requirements for approval or
                          adoption may  exist in that particular state.

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
                   b.  Increasing the Number of State Accreditation Programs

                   Note:  Only, elements one and five in this category are considered
                   base activities, elements two through, tour are non-base,

                          1) States could develop full  or partial AHERA accreditation
                          programs for schools and/or public and commercial buildings
                          as required by law.  Those states which have not yet developed
                          AHERA-consistent   state   accreditation   programs   are
                          encouraged to do .so.  Those states which currently have only
                          partial EPA-approval  are encouraged  to seek full  approval.
                          Furthermore, it is strongly  recommended  that those  states
                          which already have either full or partial EPA approval of their
                          existing accreditation  programs under the old Model Plan
                          initiate those steps necessary to upgrade their state  standards
                          in keeping with increased federal requirements under the new,
                          soon-to-be-revised Model Plan.                    ;

                          2) States could develop modified accreditation programs for
                          one or more of the AHERA training disciplines which  are
                          different  in  scope  or  stringency from  the  federal  standards
                          (e.g., requiring the  development of management plans for all
                          public  and  commercial buildings  and  the  use of accredited
                          management planners in their preparation).

                          3) States could develop new accredited  disciplines. In addition
                          to inspectors, management planners, project  designers, workers
                          and supervisors, a  state might require other categories of
                          asbestos professionals, such as asbestos abatement project
                          monitors, to become accredited.   Project monitors serve as
                          third party consultants to building owners observing abatement
                          projects for  compliance with	generally • accepted industry
                          standards  and applicable   federal  and  state  regulations.
                          Alternatively, states might  develop systems whereby  state
                          employees would monitor all the abatement projects that take
                          place  in their state.  Another supplemental discipline being
                          considered  in certain states is that of air sampler  or air
                          sampling technician.


-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
                          4) States might add supplemental work practice standards to
                          the state's accreditation requirements and monitor those work
                          practices at the abatement site.

                          5)  States might  consider adoption/implementation  of
                          accreditation standards and procedures which provide for or
                          promote reciprocity  with  other  states  for  accreditation
                          purposes.  For those states lacking statutory or regulatory
                          authority for interstate reciprocity, new regulations or statutes
                          could   be  drafted  to  overcome  this  legal  constraint.
                          Alternatively,  by  subscribing  to  the  "Model  Plan  for
                          Reciprocity"  developed  by the  National Asbestos Council
                          (NAC),  a state might revise its existing licensing procedures to
                          allow for or prescribe the use of the NAC National Asbestos
                          Examinations and Registration System ("NAERS," or the "blue
                          card/gold card" system). Professional reciprocity between states
                          was  specifically envisioned  in  the  original  EPA  Model
                          Accreditation Plan and is strongly encouraged by the Agency.
                   c. Increasing the Number of States with Inspection and .
                      Management Programs for Schools

                   Note:  Only element one to this ^tegdry wffi be cx>n$Jderexl a base
                   activity, elements two and three are ^ non-base,

                          1) States might seek AHERA state waivers for either complete
                          or  partial  programs  (see 40 CFR Part 763.98).   Full state
                          program waivers  would  include  friable  and  nonfriable
                          asbestos in all schools.   An example  of a  partial program
                          waiver would be a waiver for  a state program that  covered
                          only  public schools or only provided for state enforcement of
                          certain provisions of the EPA Schools Rule while retaining
                          EPA enforcement of other specified provisions of 40 CFR Part
                          763,  Subpart E.
                          2)  States  might extend  AHERA  school  inspection  and
                          management components to public and commercial buildings.
                          Some variations on this enhancement option might include;
                                         8

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                                A.     Mandatory O&M or management plans
                                B.     Inspection only programs
                                C.     Inspection and O&M programs
                                D.     Inspection  and  O&M  and  response  action
                                       programs including TEM clearance requirements.

                          3) States might establish programs that delegated the authority
                          and responsibility for inspection and management programs to
                          the  local level.

                   d. Increasing State Assistance Programs

                   Note: Elements within this category' are riot considered base activities;

                          1) States  might  train or hire technical  experts to address
                          inquiries and advise building owners and asbestos professionals.

                          (2)  States  might encourage the  development of university
                          environmental assistance centers to disseminate materials, hold
                          seminars, and provide state and local government counseling.
                          These  centers would  be  capable  of designing  technical
                          assistance programs tailored to local needs.

                          3) Several  states  have provided direct  state-funded financial
                          assistance to  schools.  States  might evaluate the  need for
                          extending these  state-funded loan and  grant programs  to
                          certain public and commercial buildings, or to day care centers
                          or universities.

                          4) States might translate relevant federal and state regulations
                          into foreign languages which are commonly spoken within their
                          borders.  These translated regulations might then be provided
                          to training entities approved to teach the Worker Course in
                          foreign languages to enhance the effectiveness of this training.

                   e. Enhance Public Accessibility to, and State Tracking of,
                      Asbestos Data

                   Note:  Only element one will be considered a base activity within this
                   category.

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                          1) States might computerize the information contained in their
                          school management plans for the purpose of: (a) serving as a
                          mechanism for community-right-to-know and  allowing public
                          access to the time lines for implementation of activities within
                          individual management plans; (b) serving as a mechanism for
                          the state to target inspections  when activity described in the
                          management plan is occurring; and (c) serving as a mechanism
                          for reminding the school of the following management plan
                          activity:

                          o   Operations & maintenance schedule
                          o   Periodic surveillance
                          o   Inspection/reinspection activities
                          o   Response action activities

                          2) States might undertake outreach activities specifically aimed
                          at improving public accessibility to asbestos data (e.g., making
                          data available through computers at public libraries or other
                          government buildings, through newsletters or other special .
                          publications or through other targeted communications).        j^

                   f. Integration of Existing Programs Within States

                   Note:   Elements within this- category are  not considerecT base
                   activities.

                          1)  States  might  propose  activities   aimed  at  improving
                          coordination  between  their  AHERA  Program  and  their
                          NESHAP Program, regardless of whether these programs are
                          administered by the same state agency.

                          2)  States  might  propose  activities   aimed  at  improving
                        . coordination  between asbestos transport and disposal  and a
                          state's inspection and management program.

                          3)  States  might  integrate  worker  protection  activities with
                          accreditation programs.

                          4)  States might develop  or implement new mechanisms for
                          coordinating all  state  compliance monitoring  activities  for
                          asbestos programs;  including AHERA, ASHAA, NESHAPS,

                                        10

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                         OSHA, accreditation, asbestos worker protection, asbestos ban
                         and phase down, and asbestos-in-buildings, as appropriate.

      B.   OTS AHERA Training Cooperative Agreements

             1.   Funding

             OTS is at this time projecting a $1.2 million appropriation for its AHERA
             training cooperative agreements in FY 92. If the FY 92 funding equals or
             exceeds this amount, each region will receive an allotment of $100,000.
             Recommended amounts of each  award should be approximately $50,000,
             although smaller awards are acceptable. Larger awards may be appropriate
             when merited  or if applications are few.

             Unspent monies from one region  can be transferred to another region with
             fundable projects.  Also, remaining FY 92 funds in excess of $1 million will
             be available  for selective award based  upon  the merits of  individual
             applications.

             2.  Schedule for Submittal of Applications

             Those  states,  colleges, universities, local  governments or  other  non-profit
             organizations applying for the $1.2 M awards must submit a three-to-six
             page pre-application  to the appropriate Regional Asbestos Coordinator by
             January 22, 1992.  The  regional office  will forward a copy of the pre-
             proposal to OTS's Technical Assistance Section by February 22, 1992, along
             with  any comments they have on the proposal(s).  The proposals will  be
             reviewed by an OTS  panel which will include regional representatives. The
             contacts  for the selected projects will be notified and asked  to submit a
             complete cooperative agreement application package.

             The  proposals must  address  at a-minimum:  -4)  statement of need to.
             establish a state model plan with increased hours for worker training or the
             need for continued training or establishing training for asbestos workers or
             contractors; 2) background information on the responsibilities of the state
             or training provider and past experience  in  the asbestos training field;  3)
             description of the proposed action to encourage  states to revise or  adopt
             asbestos model plans, or in the case of training projects, objectives and end-
             products;  4)  the proposed budget; 5) schedule of activities (the proposed
             project to be completed under the grant  must be concluded by the end of
             FY 93 at the latest); and 6)  discussion of how, if at all,  the  project or

                                         11

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

             training program  will continue after the proposed project period of the
             cooperative agreement.

             The application schedule and process is summarized below;

                   a.    On January 22,  1992, pre-proposals of no more than 6 pages
                         are due to the regions.  By February 22,  1992, regions review
                         and  rank the  pre-proposals  and send their recommendations
                         to headquarters for review  and concurrence.  By March 22,
                         1992,  decisions  regarding  applicants  are  made  by  the
                         headquarters  review   panel and prospective applicants are
                         contacted.

                   b.    On  or before April 22,  1992,  the OTS  training  cooperative
                         agreement applications will  be  submitted from the applicants
                         to the  EPA  Regional Toxic  Substances Branches  and the
                         Regional Grants Administration Branch.
                   c.    On or before  May  30, 1992, the regions submit 'copies of the
                         applications with any comments they have to the headquarters
                         review panel.

                   d.    On or before June 30, 1992, OTS, in consultation with a panel
                         including regional representatives, reviews project proposals
                         and  allocates  the available; funds.

                   e.    The  regions  and  applicants  will  then  follow  up  on  any
                         comments provided and  consult with HQ as requested or
                         necessary to resolve any  outstanding issues.

                   f.    Regional awards are then made prior to  the end  of the fiscal
                         year, and work is initiated under the grants.

             3.  Consolidated OTS/OCM Cooperative  Agreements

             Because this program will operate under new and distinct authority, OTS
             will not accept consolidated applications  involving  AHERA  training grant
             support during FY 92.  This  may however, become possible in succeeding
             years.
                                        12

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                       FY92

             4.  Activities to be Funded Under Cooperative Agreements

             The  following FY 92 funding categories are  presented  below along with
             examples of eligible activities.  Applicants are not limited in their proposals
             to  the activities which are specifically identified and  described.   Rather,
             these specific activities are presented as examples of the kinds of projects
             which OTS is  encouraging and willing to consider for funding.   Where
             proposed by applicants, any of these activities  should be  accompanied by a
             detailed schedule of activities providing both milestones and deliverables.

             The  training  Amendments  to the  Asbestos  School  Hazard  Abatement
             Reauthorization Act of  1990  (ASHARA)  mandated that EPA revise its
             Model Accreditation Plan to increase the number of training hours required
             for asbestos abatement workers and to make such other changes as may be
             necessary to implement the amendments. EPA is currently working on this
             Model Plan revision and expects to adopt a modified Plan sometime during
             FY 92.  These changed accreditation standards may adversely affect certain
             states which have adopted accreditation programs based upon  the existing
             Model Plan  requirements.    Additionally,  providers  offering accredited
             asbestos training courses will need to upgrade  their courses in keeping with
             the new federal guidelines.  Consequently, determining the impact of EPA's
             forthcoming Plan and the consequent changes it will have  on both states and
             training providers in  order to  remain consistent with  increased  federal
             standards is an overriding objective of this new financial assistance program.

             Eligible participants may undertake  activities  aimed at addressing the full
             scope of asbestos worker and contractor training issues and needs.   The
             following efforts are considered fundable activities in descending order of
             priority and importance;

                   a.     Upgrading  Existing State Accreditation Programs.

                   States  with existing EPA-approved accreditation programs under the
                   old standards could be funded to upgrade their program to reflect the
                   increased federal training requirements.  In this way, training providers
                   in that state will be required to quickly augment their worker training
                   courses if they plan to  continue offering accredited training in  that
                   state.    An  example   of  an  eligible  activity  would  include  the
                   development and/or  implementation of enabling  state legislation
                   pertaining to upgrading the current state accreditation program.
                                         13

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                       FY92

                   This work could be undertaken by the state, or on behalf of the state,
                   by  an  academic  institution or  other  non-profit  organization  (in
                   cooperation with that state).

                   b. Establishing New State Accreditation Programs.

                   Currently,  approximately half of  the  states  do  not have  EPA-
                   approved accreditation programs.  This funding can help to facilitate
                   the incorporation of the increased federal training requirements from
                   the  start and is  in keeping  with the  aim  of  this  program by
                   establishing and providing  for  the operation of asbestos training
                   programs.  Again, activities include development of legislation, and
                   adoption and implementation of a state model accreditation program.
                   The program  shall be as stringent  or more stringent than the EPA
                   model accreditation plan after the revised plan is adopted. This work
                   could be undertaken by the state, or it could be done on behalf of
                   the state by an academic institution or other non-profit organization
                   (in cooperation with that state).          .
                   c. Upgrading Existing Asbestos Training Programs Run by EPA-or
                   State-Approved Providers.

                   Many of these existing courses are already EPA-approved  but run
                   the  risk of losing  their approval and hence  their ability  to offer
                   accredited courses if they do not supplement the number of hours of
                   training they offer.  Related activities might  include developing a
                   more  elaborate  "hands on" session for existing courses.  Another
                   activity could include revamping refresher  courses.

                   d.  Establishing New Training Programs Either by Using EPA Model
                   Course Materials or by Using EPA-Approved Course Materials and
                   Updating or Altering Them.

                   (These monies  may  not be  used to  develop  new accreditation
                   materials  as model course materials  are already available for each of
                   the accredited disciplines). Those providers offering new courses will
                   need  to  ascertain  that  the  new  training provisions  have been
                   incorporated  into  the curricula.   An example  of a new training
                   program might be  the establishment of a local government  program
                                         14

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                       FY92

                   to set up  a health  and safety  program  to  train state enforcement
                   inspectors.
                                         15

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
                                                        FY92
      OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE MONITORING ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE
      PROGRAMS

      A.    COMPLIANCE MONITORING COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS

            1.  FUNDING

            OCM expects funding levels for FY92 TSCA enforcement programs to be
            equal to FY91 levels.  Availability of funds is contingent on the passage of
            the President's FY92 budget.  For planning purposes, assume FY92 regional
            allocations equal to those quoted in the final FY91 guidance listed below.
      Region
Compliance Monitoring  + Decentralization
Total
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
$478,000
$72,800
$264,400
$112,100
$615,600
$336,700
$569,600
$122,900
$212,900
$112,600
$195,600
$65,200
$163,000
$262,900
$195,600
$163,000
$130,400
$195,600
$130,400
$130,400
$673,600
$138,000
$427,400
$375,000
$811,200
$499,700
$700,000
$318,500
$343,300
$243,000
            Decentralization  funds  can be used  for  core/compliance monitoring
            cooperative agreements if the proposed activities include case development
            or one or more  of the other  decentralization activities discussed in the
            decentralization activity section which follows. (The regions need to be able
            to account for how all of their decentralization funds were  used.)

            2.  SCHEDULE FOR SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATIONS

                  a.  Compliance Monitoring Applications

                  Applications must be submitted 60 days prior to the beginning of the
                  project period under the cooperative agreement. For project periods
                                     16

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
                   which  begin on October  1st,  the  states  should  submit  their
                   applications  to  the  Regional Toxic Substances Branches, and  the
                   Regional Grants Administration  Branch,  in August.   Regions may
                   KaWPSaaitionSIM                               Within two weeks
                   •^vIvtfKvtf:^
                   of the region's receipt of the application, the region should send a
                   copy of the application (with the comments, if any, which they have
                   ready as of that point) to the Chief of OCM's Grants and Evaluation
                   Branch.  HO can provide comments, if they  have any,  within a
                   specific time frame defined up front if a region would like HQ to do
                   so.  Each region should contact HQ individually on this point if they
                   are interested in establishing such a time frame.
                   b.  Consolidated Cooperative Agreements

                         1.    Consolidated   OCM  Compliance  Monitoring
                         Enforcement Decentralization Agreements:
and
                         We encourage "consolidated enforcement applications" to be
                         submitted  addressing  both  compliance  monitoring   and
                         enforcement decentralization activities.  Provided the region
                         supports this approach, consolidated OCM applications should
                         be  submitted  along the same schedule outlined  above for
                         compliance monitoring cooperative agreements.

                         2.    Consolidated OTS/OCM Cooperative Agreements:

                         With concurrence from the region, it is permissible for states
                         to develop and  submit consolidated  cooperative agreement
                         applications which combine OTS enhancement activities with
                         OCM enforcement decentralization activities. However, within
                         this consolidated application, separate standard budget sheets
                         (included  in the cooperative agreement application package
                         and) addressing the proposed  expenditure of program versus
                         enforcement funds need to be submitted by the state.   For
                         the associated schedule, see  page 2 entitled 'Schedule for
                         Submittal  of Applications'.
                                        17

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

             3, MULTItYEAR PROJECT PERIODS (This section only applies to OCM
                                            applicants)

                   The availability of monies contained' within this^ guidance document
                   are contingent' on the annual passage of the President's budget-
                   There is no certainly  that monies will  be ^appropriated beyond the
                   year  in  which they are approved   It 'is  within TSCA*s  statutory
                   authority,to  approve a work plan beyond  the,single fiscal year  for
                   which it is submitted/  However, any state program adopting a multi-
                   year  program plan would be required to^ubniit amended  elements
                   each fiscal year.  These amended elements would discuss ail activities
                   pertaining to that particular year and budget Mormatioii associated
                   with those propose activities, Approval'of a budget beyond a single
                   fiscal year is not possible.  The Application for Federal Assistance
                   Form (OMB Approval No, 0348-0043) must only; relate  to those
                   activities that  are proposed for, that particular^fiscal year,. No
                   application can be approved for funding activities beyond,a single
                   fiscal year.

                   Any  state interested  in  adopting a  multi-year  work plan for a
                   compliance  program  will  need  to  disciiss, .this  option -. with their
                   RegionalSProject Officer to determine if this' is possible based'on\the
                   region's oversight and managerial system,;

             The compliance monitoring cooperative;agreements address:

                   o     Asbestos, including  Asbestos Ban and Phase out
                                                 a
                   o     PCB's

                   o     hexavalent chromium in comfort cooling towers.

      B.     Asbestos Compliance Monitoring Activities

             1.     Asbestos Compliance  Monitoring Work Program

                ^  Each  application  for FY  92  asbestos  compliance  cooperative
                   agreement funds must include a proposed work program. The work
                   program documents the negotiated activities to be performed by the
                   state  and EPA to accomplish both national and state  asbestos
                   compliance  priorities.  Specifically,  the asbestos  compliance work

                                        18

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

                   program must include a description of the work to be conducted, a
                   projection of outputs,  and a schedule for accomplishment  of  the
                   proposed outputs and activities.

                   Related to the asbestos compliance work program is  a requirement
                   in EPA's Compliance Monitoring Strategy for AHERA that all states
                   with Asbestos  Compliance  Cooperative Agreements develop  an
                   AHERA Program Plan.

                   A  number  of the elements  required  in  Program Plans  are  also
                   required in the cooperative agreement work program/applications. In
                   recognition  of this,  the cooperative agreement work  program and
                   application may serve as the state's AHERA Program Plan as long
                   as each of the following items is specifically discussed and addressed:

                   o     Specific priorities and objectives;

                   o     A Neutral Administrative  Inspection Scheme  for  targeting
                         routine inspections;

                   o     Coordination with' the1 State "ageftcy &ai Is responsible "for
                         receiving AHERA management plans to identify the adverse
                         of "Other persons" conducting AHERA activities within  the
                         state;

                   o     A discussion of resources, training of state inspectors, how for-
                         cause  inspections will  be handled,  and  how the  overall
                         AHERA compliance strategy will be implemented;

                   o     A logging system for tracking and ranking tips/complaints and
                         referrals;
                   o     Where  inspections  are  conducted,  a plan for coordinating
                         inspections .and referrals with the NESHAP program and/or
                         worker protection program, as applicable; and

                   o     A schedule/time  frames for accomplishments  of proposed
                         outputs/activities.
                                        19

-------
r
              TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
                           2.  FY 92 National Asbestos Compliance Priority

                           For FY 92, the national priority for asbestos compliance activity will again
                           be  enhancing  state  asbestos  activities in  a  manner which  facilitates
                           coordination  of activities  at the state  level and decentralization of the
                           program to the states. States are strongly encouraged to initiate compliance
                           activities that will expand the scope of state enforcement capability beyond
                           that of conducting federal asbestos compliance inspections.

                           The   regional  offices  have  always  been  instrumental  in  facilitating
                           coordination for EPA at the regional and state level. In continuing with this
                           practice, in the course of initiating and discussing new asbestos enforcement
                           cooperative agreements with new recipients, the  EPA regional offices must
                           first consider the delegated NESHAP  agency within a state.  Conducting all
                           federally funded asbestos compliance  monitoring activities out of one state
                           agency  would  facilitate the  integration  and  coordination  of  asbestos
                           compliance/enforcement activities at the state level.

                           If, after serious consideration,  a determination is made that it is either not
                           appropriate  or not  feasible to fund the  delegated  NESHAP agency to
                           perform asbestos compliance monitoring in FY 92, then the regional office
                           may consider  proposals from  other interested state  agencies.   If the
                           delegated  NESHAP agency is not the proposed recipient of a new asbestos
                           enforcement cooperative agreement, then the regional office should provide
                           information to headquarters to clarify why  it was not  feasible to enter into
                           a  new  asbestos enforcement  cooperative  agreement with the NESHAP
                           agency within the state.

                           3. FY 92 Asbestos Compliance Activities

                           The activities which  can  be funded  under FY  92  Asbestos Compliance
                           Monitoring Cooperative Agreements fall into five categories: a) developing
                           state  enforcement  capability;  b)  conducting coordinated  inspections; c)
                           asbestos ban and phase out;  d) tracking  asbestos compliance data; and
                           e) hexavalent chromium. The specific activities which  may be funded under
                           FY 92 work programs and  which should be accompanied by a schedule for
                           accomplishment are discussed  below.
                                                       20

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

             a.  Developing State Enforcement Capability

             The activities which can be funded under this category are outlined in the
             Asbestos Decentralization section.  These activities may be funded using
             compliance monitoring  cooperative agreement  funds  and/or enforcement
             decentralization funds. These activities can be included under continuing or
             new cooperative agreements,

             b.  Conducting Coordinated Inspections  and Case Development

             States  which  propose  to  conduct  inspections  under  the  cooperative
             agreement must address each of the following items in (1) through (10) in
             their work programs.

                   1.     States   must  conduct  coordinated  asbestos  compliance
                         inspections; that is, in the course of monitoring for compliance
                         with AHERA  and/or  worker  protection  requirements, as
                         applicable, state  inspectors  operating  under  enforcement
                         cooperative agreements should be able to identify violations of
                        . NESHAP  requirements as well.

                         Coordinated inspections which  result in the  observation of
                         violations of NESHAP and/or worker protection requirements
                         should be referred to  EPA and/or the appropriate delegated
                         state NESHAP agency, as applicable.

                   2.     States must develop and implement a Neutral Administrative
                         Inspection Scheme (NAIS) or update their existing inspection
                         scheme  to assist in targeting FY 92 inspections of "other
                         persons" and  LEAs for_compliance with .AHERA and to
                         facilitate coordination of AHERA, NESHAP and/or worker
                         protection inspections.  The NAIS should be submitted to the
                         regional office within the first  month  of the cooperative
                         agreement project period,  or preferably  with the application.

                         States should coordinate with the EPA regional office or the
                         state delegated NESHAP agency, as applicable, to: a) become
                         knowledgeable of and  incorporate, as appropriate, the current
                         NESHAP inspection targeting strategy  into their inspection
                         scheme; b)  access  the  NESHAP data  base to help  ensure
                         maximum coverage of the  regulated  community;  and ||


                                        21

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                        "             FY92

                         incorporate information available in school management plans
                         regarding "other persons" operating in the state, (Each NAIS
                         should incorporate contractor information maintained by the
                         NESHAP  program for targeting inspections  and any; other
                         appropriate available information.)

                         The NAIS must include, as a minimum, a specific method or
                         criteria for selecting inspection targets and comply with EPA's
                         National Compliance Monitoring Strategies for AHERA and
                         worker protection.  The  review of the NESHAP inspection
                         strategy must  be documented  in the NAIS  as well.   Trie
                         purpose of this requirement is 'to ensure Chat  interaction ;and
                         coordination is carried out during the planning stages of both
                         programs. (The regional office must  submit  a copy of the
                         NAIS to OCM, for informational purposes, by the end of the
                         first quarter of the project period.)

                   3.     Statei must, coordinate with  the designated, state, recipient of
                         AHERA management plans,to identify the uWverse: "of "other
                         persons" that cbiidudt ^b^^AHERA^rdated activities within
                         their , state,  ;' Other -'Persbn's/^iiillMe'rany ^entity s ;,that Js
                         responsible ,f(?r^X^Rtracted ^ or -otherwise /hirKed)t,jnsp6ctM|
                         LEAV fpr^sbestos^CDnminfng; building material for AHERA
                         ImpectioX requirements; the 'development of AHERX^asbestos
                         management plans,' development; and ^implementatbri 'of any
                         removal/repair/ -l encapsulation^yor //enclosure ^ operations,
                         laboratories conducting analysis aad£t$ Bother AHERA related
                         function (ie., to l>e the LEA designated oerson, to conduct
                         operations and  maintenance activities, e
                         The Identification  of parties  responsible  fof conducting
                         AHERA activities within a particular state  is intended to
                        . define inspection target areas. This information should be:to
                         a usable form and made readily available for EPA regional use
                         and shared with other states as' well/ ' The' goal of' this effort
                         is to define more precisely who 'is responsible' ifor conducting
                         such activities within each state, develop a compliance history
                         of those 'responsible parties, and share  this; information to
                         more effectively target compliance inspections nationally.
                                        22

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

                   4,     For FY 92, states must establish/update and maintain a logging
                         system for tracking tips,  complaints, and referrals from the
                         NESHAP program and the worker protection program.  The
                         system must involve a ranking mechanism for responding to
                         tips, complaints, and referrals. Inspections in follow-up to tips,
                         complaints, and referrals (also known as for-cause inspections)
                         must be targeted using the ranking mechanism as appropriate.

                         Any installment of  a new tracking  system  should  follow
                         discussions with the  state and regional NESHAP programs
                         and identify what programs are currently available and which
                         may be adopted to suit the needs of the state's programs.

                   5.     States  must include a projection for the number of asbestos
                         compliance inspections to be conducted each quarter.  States
                         may conduct coordinated asbestos inspections,  under their
                         cooperative agreement, in the following areas:

                                Inspections of LEAs and 'other persons' who perform
                                AHERA-related activities
                               implementation of management plans and compliance
                               with AHERA requirements and  any additional state
                               requirements.   (Resources should be directed toward
                               large  contractors   and  situations where  egregious
                               violations are likely to be found.)
                                                            ;
                               Follow-up   inspections    to   ensure   that   the
                               conditions/requirements of settlement agreements are
                               implemented.        -

                               AHERA inspections in response to tips, complaints and
                               referrals.

                               EPA's Asbestos Worker  Protection inspections.  This
                               applies only to those states which  are subject to EPA's
                               Asbestos Abatement Project's Rule found at CFR Part
                               763, Subpart G.

                   6.     Quarterly  inspection  accomplishments  must  be  reported.
                         Specifically, the following must  be reported:  1) the number
                                        23

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                         and type  of coordinated asbestos inspections  (addressing
                         NESHAP and/or worker protection requirements); and 2) the
                         number of inspections which resulted in referral of violations
                         for AHERA, NESHAP and/or worker protection requirements,
                         as applicable, to EPA and/or the appropriate delegated state
                         NESHAP agency.

                   7.    If-up-to-date cross  training  has not been completed by the
                         state's inspectors  recently,  the cross-training  of inspectors
                         should  be   conducted  to  facilitate  coordinated  asbestos
                         compliance inspections.   This  would  address, for example,
                         instructions on the NESHAP requirements and proper use of
                         the modified NESHAP  checklist.  Beyond that, under FY 92
                         enforcement cooperative  agreements,  inspectors  with  state
                         agencies other than the delegated NESHAP agency,  who are
                         monitoring for any NESHAP requirements, will not enter the
                         active removal areas without first receiving the required health
                         and safety training.  Inspectors who intend to enter the active
                         removal area during their coordinated asbestos inspections to
                         conduct  monitoring  of  NESHAP requirements  must  first
                         complete  the appropriate, health and safety  training.   This
                         level  of training must  be  negotiated between  EPA (both
                         headquarters  and  the regional  office) and the state.   The
                         extent of and mechanism for proposed cross training must be
                         addressed in the proposed work program.

                   8.    States must comply  with all EPA Compliance Monitoring
                         Strategies in effect for FY 92 which affect asbestos compliance
                         monitoring activities conducted by the states during the project
                         period.

                   9.    In most cases, it is not  expected  that the inspector will need
                         to  take physical samples.   Schools  are  required  to inspect,
                         sample, and analyze any asbestos containing material  found in
                         their   buildings using  accredited  persons   and  accredited
                         laboratories. However,  if any samples are to be collected by
                         the state, provisions  should be included for the  analysis of
                         samples, by either an accredited state laboratory or a contract
                         laboratory.  Anticipated turn around times for analyses should
                         be  included.
                                        24

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

                   10.   For states that do not have their own enforcement capability
                         for either AHERA or the asbestos worker protection rule, or
                         which currently do not have the experience/ability to complete
                         case development activities, EPA headquarters encourages the
                         states to develop,  update or implement a case development
                         program.  This would include the actual drafting of Notices of
                         Noncompliance, civil  complaints,  and/or litigation reports for
                         submittal  to the regional office for signature, as appropriate.
                         The  extent of the  case development work to be done by the
                         state must be explicitly addressed in the application.

                         [We (EPA regions,  headquarters and states) need to work
                         together  to  assist states  in  moving  beyond  their current
                         enforcement-related   capabilities  as  appropriate.    EPA
                         headquarters would like to see every state which is conducting
                         inspections, also completing case development work. However,
                         based on the comments received on the  draft guidance, we
                         recognize that this  might  not be  possible in every case.
                         Nevertheless, we encourage the regions to work with the states
                         to have the states complete the case development work for the
                         actionable inspections  conducted   under  the  cooperative
                         agreement.   We  recognize that "learning" case development
                         may extend beyond one project period.]

             c.  Asbestos Ban and Phase Out

             Portions of the asbestos ban and phase out rule are enforceable in FY 92.
             The  Compliance  Monitoring   Strategy,  Penalty  Policy,  and  Inspection
             Guidance are  expected to be released in final form during  FY91.  Once
             these documents are released in final form, states should reevaluate their
             targeting priorities and negotiate  with their region on a set number of
             inspections to address the  enforceable  components  of the rule. —This
             negotiation  should  be completed and  activities  begun  to  address  the
             enforceable components within two to three months from the release of the
             final strategy documents.

             d. Tracking Asbestos Compliance Data

             If a state will also be conducting one of the aforementioned activities in FY
             92, a state could computerize information with management plans for the
             purpose of serving as a mechanism for:  1) the state to target inspections

                                        25

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

            when activity described in management plan is occurring; and 2) reminding
            the  school  of the following  management  plan 'activities:  operations &
            maintenance schedule, periodic surveillance, inspection/reinspection activities,
            and response action activities.

      C.    PCB Compliance Monitoring Work Program

      The PCB compliance monitoring programs in FY92 focus on impectional activities
      concentrating on disposal sites, the PCB Notification and Manifesting rule,  new
      application and revised  record keeping  requirements for  commercial  storage
      facilities, and the Transformer Fires rule.

      Each application for FY 92 PCB compliance cooperative agreement funds must
      include  a proposed work program.  The work program documents the negotiated
      activities to be  performed by the state and EPA to accomplish both national and
      state PCB priorities.   Specifically, the  PCB  work program must include  a
      description of the work to be conducted, a projection of  outputs, and a schedule
      for accomplishment of the proposed outputs and activities.

      As a minimum, each  PCB compliance  monitoring  cooperative agreement work
      program must address  the activities listed below in section 1.

            1.     EPA's  National  PCB  Compliance  Monitoring Strategy  refers to
                   submittal of PCB Program Plans. A number of the elements required
                   in Program  Plans are also required in enforcement cooperative
                   agreement work programs/ applications. In recognition of this, the
                   cooperative agreement work program and application  may serve as
                   the state's PCB Program Plan as long as each of the following items
                   are specifically  addressed  in  the  application, or   supplemental
                   information is provided to  ensure that all of the following items are
                   addressed:

                   o     Specific priorities and objectives;

                   o     (For those states where the region does not target the PCB
                         inspections) A Neutral Administrative  Inspection  Scheme
                         (NAIS) which should be updated for FY 92 to include the
                         PCB  Notification and Manifesting (N&M) Rule and other
                         issues identified as of the 5/88 compliance monitoring strategy
                         for targeting routine inspections based on the national strategy,
                         which is in the process of being updated;

                                       26

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92
                   o     A  discussion  of resources,  training,  and  how  for-cause
                         inspections  will  be  handled,  and  how  the overall  PCB
                         compliance  strategy will be implemented;

                   o     A logging system for tracking and ranking tips/complaints and
                         referrals; and

                   o     Schedule/time   frames  for  establishments   of  proposed
                         outputs/activities.

             2.     The state will develop and use for FY 92 a NAIS, which includes a
                   specific method or criteria for selecting FY92 inspection targets and
                   for priority-setting based on: 1) the Agency's revised PCB Compliance
                   Monitoring Strategy which should be completed by June 1991; and 2)
                   the identification of any serious environmental  or human health risks
                   from PCBs in the state.   The regions should  review  the state's
                   inspection scheme  and ensure that it complies with the National PCB
                   Compliance Monitoring Strategy.

                   The region should  ensure that federal facilities, where applicable, are
                   addressed within the state.

                   The NAIS should be submitted to the regional office within the first
                   month of the cooperative agreement project period, preferably with
                   the application.  (This can be submitted  as a separate document or
                   as a distinct section of the application.)

             3.     The state should establish/update for FY 92 and  maintain a logging
                   system for tracking tips and complaints. .The state should develop.a.
                   ranking  mechanism   for  responding  to  tips   and  complaints.
                   Inspections  are  to be targeted using -the  ranking mechanism  as
                   appropriate.

             4.     A projection should be included for the number of PCB compliance
                   inspections  to be  conducted  each quarter in each of  the twelve
                   standard categories of inspections.  Related activities and milestones
                   to  be accomplished  should be identified in narrative  form with
                   projected dates of accomplishment.
                                        27

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

             5.     For  states that currently  do not  have the  experience/ability  to
                   complete case development activities, EPA headquarters encourages
                   the states to  develop, update  or implement  a case development
                   program.   This would  include  the  actual drafting  of Notices  of
                   Noncompliance, civil complaints, and/or litigation reports for signature
                   by the  regional office  as  appropriate.  The  extent  of the case
                   development  work to be  done by  the state  must be explicitly
                   addressed in the application.

                   [We (EPA regions, headquarters and  states) need to work together
                   to assist states in moving beyond their current enforcement-related
                   capabilities as  appropriate.   EPA headquarters would  like to see
                   every state which  is  conducting inspections, also  completing case
                   development  work. However, based on the comments received  on
                   the draft guidance, we recognize that this might not be possible in
                   every case. Nevertheless, we encourage the regions to work with the
                   states to have them complete the case development work for the
                   actionable inspections conducted under  the cooperative agreement.
                   We recognize that "learning"  case development may  extend beyond
                   one project period.]

             6.  Developing State PCB Enforcement Capability

             These activities may  be supported with compliance monitoring cooperative
             agreement funds and/or enforcement decentralization funds. These activities
             can  be  included  under continuing  or  new cooperative  agreements.
             Descriptions of these activities can be found in the activities section  of the
             OCM PCB Enforcement  Decentralization section beginning on page 38.

       D.  Work Program Activities Applicable to Both Asbestos and PCB  Agreements

       Each of  the TSCA cooperative  agreement work programs involving inspections
       and/or sample collections must address the activities under items #1-2. All work
       programs must address items #3-6  in this section, as appropriate.

             1.  Quality Assurance

             Applicants  which  are responsible  for analytical activities  under  their
             compliance cooperative agreements must establish and implement the quality
             assurance practices described below.
                                        28

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

             All cooperative agreements involving environmentally related measurements
             or data generation are required by the EPA regulations (40 CFR Part 31.45)
             to develop and implement quality assurance practices consisting of policies,
             procedures, specifications, standards and documentation sufficient to produce
             data  of quality adequate to meet project objectives and to minimize loss of
             data  due to out-of-control conditions or malfunctions.

                   a.    Quality Assurance Project Plans

                   For  TSCA  Enforcement  Cooperative  Agreements, a  Quality
                   Assurance Plan is required for sampling/analytical activities conducted
                   under the agreement.  Sampling activities are not allowed until an
                   EPA-approved Quality Assurance Plan is in place.  The EPA Quality
                   Assurance  Management  Staff  (QAMS) recommends  that  Quality
                   Assurance (QA) Project  Plans, rather  than QA Program  Plans, be
                   developed   for TSCA  Enforcement  Cooperative  Agreements.
                   Generally, the distinction between these two types of plans is that a
                   QA program  plan  refers to an overall managerial accounting  of
                   responsibilities while  a  QA project plan  specifically details  the
                   protocol of sample handling with regard to a particular program.  A
                   model Project Plan for PCB sampling activities has been included as
                   exhibit I.

                   QAMS  has  issued  a document  titled,  "Interim  Guidelines  and
                   Specifications for preparing Quality Assurance Project Plans" (QAMS
                   -005/80, December 29, 1980) to assist applicants in complying with the
                   quality assurance requirements.  Copies of the document referenced
                   above may be obtained from the regional office which is responsible
                   for approval of the Quality Assurance Plan.  In  addition, NEIC has
                   drafted  a  model project plan  for PCB  analytical sampling  and
                   activities which may also be adapted to address asbestos sampling
                   analyses, if necessary. The states may use these guidelines or develop
                   their own.

                   For  continuing  cooperative  agreements,   applicants conducting
                   sampling/analytical activities under the agreement must  have in place
                   a current approved QA Project Plan. If a  Quality Assurance Project
                   Plan submitted in a previous year continues to reflect  the sampling
                   and analytical activities proposed for the current year, reference to
                   the approved plan on file in the EPA regional office will suffice.  Any
                   significant changes in content (including signatories), however, will

                                        29

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                   require submittal of updated pages or the entire plan, as appropriate,
                   with their cooperative agreement  application.

                   New applicants, which will conduct sampling/analytical activities under
                   their FY 92 enforcement cooperative agreement must submit their
                   Quality Assurance Project Plans for approval by the regional office
                   and  implement these plans prior to conducting sampling activities
                   under the grant.   Sampling activities may not be  allowed until an
                   EPA-approved Quality Assurance Plan is in place.  A schedule for
                   submittal and  implementation of  the QA Plan must be included in
                   the FY  92  cooperative  agreement  as  agreed upon between the
                   applicant  and  EPA.   EPA headquarters  recommends that  new
                   applicants implement their  approved QA Project Plans within three
                   months of the start of the project period.

                   With regard to hexavalent  chromium and the  proposed work to be
                   conducted,  a   separate/distinct  Quality Assurance  Project  Plan
                   addressing this chemical does not need to be submitted as long as the
                   state has an  approved PCB  or asbestos quality assurance project plan
                   in place.               -                                           ^^
                                                                                     9
                   b.   , Analytical Methods

                   Toxic substance related enforcement samples collected for compliance
                   purposes shall be analyzed by the applicant's laboratory, or other
                   laboratory specified in the  agreement, using the EPA  or other
                   standard referenced methodology; to the degree possible.  Available
                   methodology can  be provided by 'NEIC upon request.

                   All routinely used in-house or other non-standard methods will be
                   appropriately validated and documented by the laboratory.  Standard
                   quality control procedures will be used for all official sample analyses
                   as described in the Quality Assurance Project Plan.

                   c.    Standard Operating  Procedures (SOPs)

                   States will develop and document standard  operating procedures
                   (SOPs) to cover day-to-day laboratory and field operations.  These
                   SOPs should  cover at a minimum:  (1) sample collection,  receipt,
                   custody  and  storage;  (2)  sample  analysis;  (3)  data  review  and
                   evaluation; (4) instrumentation; (5) reagents, solvents and glassware;

                                        30

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                   (6) reference standards; (7) routine quality control; and (8) training
                   plans.    States  which  have  fully addressed  standard  operating
                   procedures for all of these elements in their Quality Assurance Plan
                   are not required to submit  these  SOPs  as  a separate document.
                   Guidance is available from NEIC on development of such  SOPs.

                   d.    Check Sample Program

                   Each applicant conducting PCB sampling activities shall participate in
                   the EPA's NEIC PCB Check Sample Program.  Under this  program,
                   NEIC submits toxic substance samples to applicants' laboratories for
                   analysis.

                   The applicant must submit a report indicating the methodology used,
                   the results of the analysis,  the accuracy  of  their analysis and  the
                   reliability  of the methodology selected.  If a state fails to obtain the
                   correct results, EPA will assess the problem, provide assistance to the
                   applicant's laboratory as appropriate and/or conduct other follow-up
                   activities.  NEIC currently notifies each participating laboratory and
                   appropriate regional office of the check sample results.   If  not
                   otherwise provided, the regional office should provide a copy of these
                   results to  each State Lead Agency in their region which utilizes that
                   particular laboratory for PCB sample  analysis.

                   (Check  samples for bulk  asbestos are not  available from  NEIC.
                   Laboratories performing bulk asbestos analyses may make separate
                   arrangements with the regional office to participate in other available
                   asbestos check sample programs.  It is recommended that applicants
                   conducting bulk analysis  for asbestos  participate in the  National
                   Institute   of  Standard  Technology's .(NJST)  National Voluntary
                   Laboratory  Accreditation  Program   (NVLAP).    As previously
  -.           .,. _ discussed, in most  cases, -it-is  not  expected -that  the -inspector .will
                   need to take physical samples.)

                   e.    Back-up Analyses

                   The applicant can request back-up analyses for PCB or bulk asbestos
                   from NEIC or  other NEIC recommended laboratories,  if necessary
                   or requested by the region. Examples where backup analysis may be
                   requested are:
                                        31

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                   o      A  state which  is unsure  of  the  results of an analysis  may
                          request an  impartial  second  analysis  before initiating an
                          enforcement action;

                   o      A  state requests that EPA take the enforcement action and
                          EPA desires to verify the  state's analysis;

                   o      A  reference  analysis is required  due  to  conflicting results
                          between the state and the regulated party.
                          Back-up analyses will be arranged between the EPA Regional
                          PCB Program  Office  and the  NEIC Pesticides  and Toxic
                          Substances Branch Chief.

                   f.      Training of Analytical Chemists

                   EPA will  provide training of the  state inspectors and analytical
                   chemists,  as  necessary.   The  states  must  participate  in  EPA
                   workshops, seminars and  meetings on instrumentation, methodology
                   and quality assurance.

                   g.     On-Site Laboratory Visits

                   Personnel  from EPA will  also be available to review state laboratory
                   sampling capability  and procedures, and to  discuss areas needing
                   improvement.  Requests for these visits, which will usually be made
                   by representatives from NEIC, may be initiated by the state or the
                   EPA regional office, and will be arranged by the regional office.  All
                   on-site visits will be conducted at times that are mutually agreeable
                   to both the  state and EPA.   A  formal  report of  findings  and
                   recommendations will  be prepared by  EPA  for  the state  upon
                   completion of the on-site visit.

             2.    Field Investigations and Sampling Procedures

             Included in the Quality Assurance Project Plan are SOPs for both collection
             of samples in the field as well as the analysis of samples  at the designated
             state or contract  laboratory.  States should include  statements  similar to the
             ones  below, indicating  the  standard  procedures to  be followed when
             conducting  investigations and collecting samples if  these   activities  are
                                         32

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

             conducted under the cooperative agreement.  More detailed SOPs should
             follow such statements.

             All inspections, investigations and sample collections are to be performed
             under the authority of the  TSCA, Inspectors Manual.  To assure sample
             integrity,  EPA's  chain-of-custody  procedures shall be  adopted during
             sampling, handling, shipping, storage and analysis of samples collected under
             federal law.

             During all inspections, investigations and sample collections performed under
             the  authority of State  law,  state procedures and forms  should be used.
             During sampling,  handling,  shipping,  storage and analysis of  samples
             collected  under  state law, proper  chain-of-custody procedures must  be
             adopted to assure sample integrity.  An  accurate written  record  must be
             maintained to trace  the possession of  each sample from  the moment of
             collection through its introduction into evidence.

             3.     State  Records and Reports

             Where applicable, as stated  below, states  must commit  to the following
             reporting requirements.

             4.     Inspection  and Analytical Reports

             Dependent on the extent of the  case development activity conducted by a
             state and agreed upon under the agreement, all state reports for inspections
             conducted under  authority of TSCA shall  be submitted to the Regional
             Program Office within 30 days from the date of inspection.  When samples
             have been collected and analysis  is involved, the inspectional and analytical
             reports shall be submitted within 60 days from the  date of inspection.  If
             case development is done  by the  state,  time  frames for completing case
             development should not exceed 120 days.   ----.--=-=-, ~-	
             All inspectional reports and supporting documents shall be reviewed by a
             designated State Quality Control Officer, to assure that the  report format
             and  content  is consistent  with EPA  standards, and  that  all  suspected
             violations are properly documented, prior to submitting them to the EPA
             regional office for case review and development.
                                        33

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                       FY92

             5.     Quarterly Reports

             States (conducting inspections) must commit to prepare and submit to the
             regional office quarterly reports of completed compliance inspections (per
             type of inspection) within 30 work days after the quarter.  Quarterly reports
             are due to the Regional Program Office by January 30, April 30, July 30
             and  October 30 of each year.  These dates  are based on programs with
             project periods which coincide with the FFY. Those programs that operated
             on a State  FY or other should report on the  same quarterly schedule
             (regardless of  FY designation).

             The  quarterly  reports should also  contain a narrative statement which
             describes any program highlights  and any problem areas encountered during
             the reporting period.  Accomplishments not easily tabulated should also be
             reported in narrative form.  Any  deviation from the reporting schedule must
             be negotiated  and approved  by  the  Regional  Program Office.  Infrequent
             deviations should be  explained  in  the  narrative  portion of the, quarterly
             report. Those deviations, that are anticipated to carry through the program,
             should be submitted for approval within the application.

             Significant problems and quarterly reports  indicating a state is  significantly
             behind schedule should be investigated by the  Regional Project Officer and
             discussed with the State.  OCM  should also be apprised of such situations.

             6.     End-of-Project Reports

             At  the  end of  the project  period, states shall  prepare a report which
             evaluates the performance of the program. The report would normally be
             prepared in conjunction with the fourth quarter report.  This  report shall
             consider: 1) the short-term value to  the state by having participated in the
             program; 2) the primary  contributions which the state feels it has made to
             the overall  cooperative TSCA  enforcement  effort; 3)  the desirability of
             continuing the program in subsequent years; and  4) any suggested changes
             in the grant program which would make it  more valuable to both the state
             and  national effort.  The report should also compare the results with the
             objectives discussed in the work program and  discuss any variations.

             7.     Unresolved Problems

             The cooperative agreement  work program must address  any unresolved
             problem areas identified in mid-year and end-of-year evaluations for current

                                         34

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

             project periods and indicate how the state and/or EPA regional office plans
             to  address the problem areas.  Follow-up is essential  here.

             8.     Accountability Under the Cooperative Agreement

             In  the work program, the states  must commit to  expend and account for
             funds awarded in accordance with state laws and procedures for expending
             and accounting for its own funds.

             State expenditures under the agreement  must follow cost categories (i.e.,
             budget line item or program elements) established in the original agreement.
             Deviations may be made by the state from the proposed budget as long as
             they are in  accordance with federal  regulations  and  the cost principles
             contained in OMB Circular A-87.

             (While the EPA Project  Officer is not responsible for reviewing  state
             accounting procedures, it is  recommended that the  Regional Project Officer
             or  Regional Manager be  aware of the total dollar amount expended on a
             semi-annual basis.   This level of  awareness should not prove  to be time
             consuming, yet  the  information  gained  may help  identify any funding
             problems.

             9.     EPA Support to States

             The cooperative agreement work program should describe the  types of
             support  (training, technical, technical assistance,contractor assistance, etc.)
             that the state expects EPA to provide  to  assist  the state in  meeting its
             commitments.

             Training under  the  TSCA  compliance program will  be conducted by the
             EPA and NEIC.  Training  will consist of instruction  in investigational and
             sample collection techniques; sample analysis'and  case preparation/ -""—~

             The cooperative  agreement  should describe  any negotiated  agreement
             between the state and EPA for the handling of referrals and requests for
             information from the state.  The agreement  should include any time frames
             that are mutually agreeable to the State and EPA.

             Travel  costs  associated  with  training are  eligible for  funding  under the
             cooperative agreement.  All states should include  the cost of attending the
                                        35

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
                                                                 FY92
      E.
             annual EPA/State TSCA Compliance Conference as a budget item in their
             application for a cooperative agreement.

             10.    National Guidelines  on Costs and  Time  Factors  for  Conducting
                   Certain  Activities

             National  guidelines have  been  developed  on  costs and time  factors
             associated with certain activities which may be conducted under enforcement
             agreements.    (The types  of activities which  may  be  funded  under
             enforcement agreements are discussed in preceding sections.  It  was not
             feasible or appropriate to develop national guidelines on every activity which
             may be funded.) These guidelines are to be used  as one tool in evaluating
             a state's proposed activities  and funding request and appears as exhibit II.
HEXAVALENT  CHROMIUM  (Cr+6)  CHEMICALS IN COMFORT
COOLING TOWERS ACTIVITIES
      On January 3, 1990, the EPA published the Final rule which prohibits the use of
      hexavalent chromium  based water treatment chemicals in comfort cooling towers
      (CCTs) and the  distribution in  commerce of such chemicals  for use in CCTs.
      Effective dates of the final rule are summarized below:

      o      Effective February 20, 1990, all persons;are prohibited from distributing in
             commerce hexavalent chromium based water treatment chemical for use in
             CCTs;

      o      Effective May 18, 1990, all persons are prohibited from commercial use of
             hexavalent chromium-based water  treatment chemicals in  comfort cooling
             towers;

      Other requirements include specific  labeling  and record  keeping for hexavalent
      chromium based water treatment chemicals sold for use in all cooling systems, even
      those system not covered by the rule, (i.e., industrial cooling towers and closed
      cooling systems).  The rule also requires hexavalent chromium distributors to report
      (register)  to the Agency and also triggers export notification under section 12 of
      TSCA.

      The  final  compliance monitoring strategy for the  rule prohibiting hexavalent
      chromium use in comfort cooling towers was issued by OCM on February 16, 1990
      and appears as exhibit III.  The final inspecdoa guidance was seat to Regional
                                       36

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                 .   FY92

      Division Directors and Regional Pesticide and Toxic Substances Branch, Chiefs, on
      October  12» 1990.  A region  may elect to  have, their state,recipients adopt a
      negotiated  number of Inspections to assist them, in  completing  their regional
      mspectional commitment

      Release of the final Enforcement Response Policy (ERP) is expected in FFY 92.

      Inspection Activities

      The compliance program for hexavalent chromium will  not be large enough to
      warrant a separate cooperative agreement, but inspections in  this area may.be
      included  in PCB or asbestos compliance monitoring cooperative  agreements as
      appropriate.  Inspection activities may be conducted in conjunction with PCB or
      asbestos inspections or conducted separately.  Inspection activity could include the
      following:

      o     Visiting distributors  of  water  treatment chemicals for cooling towers to
            determine whether hexavalent chromium products are properly labeled  and
            being distributed only in accordance with the rule;

      o     Visiting the owners of Comfort Cooling Towers to ensure that hexavalent
            chromium products are  not being used in violation of the rule.

      Inspections should be conducted taking into account the National Compliance
      Monitoring Strategy issued  in February.  States proposing to conduct inspections
      for hexavalent chromium should include in their application: 1) a proposed number
      of inspections to be conducted; 2) a discussion  of whether compliance monitoring
      for hexavalent chromium is expected to  be conducted  in conjunction with state's
      compliance monitoring activities for  PCBs and/or asbestos requirements,  or as
      separate  inspections; and 3) a commitment  to quarterly reporting on.inspection
      commitments.
      F.    DECENTRALIZATION COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS

            1.  FUNDING

            We are anticipating appropriations for FY92 to remain at FY 91 levels for
            cooperative  agreements.    For  planning  purposes,   assume  FY92
            decentralization  funding levels to be those  quoted in the FY91 guidance.
            These can be found on page 16 of this document.
                                       37

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
                                                                                FY92
             Decentralization  funds  can  be  used  for  core/compliance  monitoring
             cooperative agreements if the proposed activities include case development
             or one  or more  of the other decentralization activities discussed in the
             decentralization activity section which follows. (The regions need to be able
             to account  for  how  all  of their decentralization  funds were used.)
             Compliance monitoring funds  can be used for any of the decentralization
             activities listed below.

             2.  Schedule for Submittal of Applications

                   a.  Separate Enforcement Decentralization Proposals

                   If a state is submitting  a  proposal for enforcement decentralization
                   activities, which are distinct from the compliance monitoring activities,
                   the state has the option to submit a separate application package,
                   and the following dates apply.

                   (For example, if a state conducting inspections proposes to develop
                   a case  development  program, it seems appropriate and reasonable
                   for a state to include  that  proposal, if possible, along  with  their
                   "inspectional application." However, if a state is planning to work on
                   state enabling legislation, for example, they may need additional time
                   to develop their application. The following deadlines apply when it
                   is appropriate for a separate enforcement decentralization application
                   to be submitted.  These are identical to those indicated  in part II.
                   "OTS Assistance Program".)

                          1.     On  or   before  December   6,   1991,  enforcement
                          decentralization  applications will be submitted from the states
                          to the EPA Regional Toxic Substances Branches.

                          2.  On or before  January 3, 1992, the regions submit copies of
                          the  applications with their comments to the Chief of OCM's
                          Grants and Evaluation Branch.

                          3.  On or before January 31, 1992, OCM, in consultation with
                          regional and other HQ representatives provides comments, if
                          any, on the applications submitted.

                          4.  The regions and states follow-up on comments provided
                          and consult with HO as requested or necessary.
                                        38

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92
                         5. By the end of February, 1992, all awards will be made and
                         work initiated under the cooperative agreements. (If a region
                         and state completes steps 1 through 4 prior to the stated time
                         frames, the awards  can be made earlier.  Jf there are delays^
                         awards will be made" at completion "of step 4, but no later tMn
                         April'!)	

                   b. Consolidated OTS/OCM Cooperative  Agreements

                   If  a  state  wishes  to submit  consolidated TSCA  applications
                   faddressing both OTS and OCM funds), they may do so,  as long as
                   the region supports this approach. However, within this consolidated
                   application,  separate   standard  budget  sheets  (included in  the
                   cooperative agreement application package) addressing the proposed
                   expenditure of  program  versus  enforcement funds  need  to  be

                   follow  the schedule  described
                   Decentralization Proposals**  This schedule is identical to the  OTS
                   State Enhancement application submittal schedule found on page 2.

             3.  Multi«Year Project Periods   (This section applied to OCM
                                                  applicants only,)

             The availability of monies contained 'within this  guidance  document are
             contirigerit on the passage of the President's budget-annaaD^  Taere & *M>
             ^itamty that monies will be appropriate^ beyoad ih£ year "fb which fhe;y &re
             approveit It is within TSCA's statutory' authority to approve a^work plan
             beyond Joe single fiscal year for which it is submitted. ;However, any state
             program adopting a multi-year program plan would  be* required to submit
             amended elements each fiscal year.  These amended elements would discuss
             iall activities pertaining to that  partiefcJar' yMr'"atid'Wdget"infor|natitin
             associated with those proposed activities^  Approval of a, budget beyond a
             single fiscal year is not possible. The Application for Federal Assistance
             Form (OMB Approval No* 0348-0043) must only'relate to those activities
             that are proposed for  that particular fiscal year/ No application can,be
             approved for funding activities beyond a single^ fiscal year.

             Any state interested in adopting a multi-year work plan wilFneed/to discuss
             this option with their Regional Project Officer to determine a: this,is possible
             based on the region's oversight and managerial system.;

                                        39

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                   -                  FY92


             4.  Enforcement Decentralization Activities

                   a.     Asbestos Enforcement

                   Broadening  state control of their TSCA  programs is a  national
                   priority, for  FY" 92, >  Given, the range  of state program  status
                   nationally^ those activities offered in FY 9X;will again bfe eligible for
                   funding :m^FY 92,   We feel these'activities offer ktate,programs
                   support that is m  line  With tne direction oCihe overall TSCA
                   program, while also providing enough flejtibi&ytojr states'to design
                   suitable activities to nmtch their own, needs.

                   Examples of  the  types  of  activities which can  be  funded with
                   decentralization or compliance monitoring funds are as follows:

                         1.    Development and submittal of a plan, and schedule for
                               the state's assumption of additional asbestos program
                               and enforcement responsibilities.   The goal and point
                               of the  plan should  be  for the state to assume  the
                               primary  responsibility   for   and   control   of   a
                               comprehensive asbestos  program at the state  level, in
                               terms  of  the management,  enforcement  and financial
                               responsibilities  associated  with the  program.   The
                               proposed   annual  costs  to  the  state  and  federal
                               government associated with different activities in  the
                               schedule  should be included as well, keeping  in mind
                               the goal  of the state  assuming responsibility for  the
                               program.   The benefit of the plan would be that  it
                               would document for  the state,  and  outline for EPA, the
                               state's  goals and  intentions in terms of developing,
                               implementing   and  enforcing  a comprehensive state
                               program.
                        *

                         [If a  state  proposes  to complete  a Comprehensive State
                         Asbestos Management Plan (CSAMP) discussed in the OTS
                         program cooperative  agreement section,  the above would be
                         written as part of the CSAMP.]

                         2.    Planning,  drafting, promotion and/or implementation of
                               state enabling  enforcement legislation and  associated

                                       40

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                                regulations that are at least as stringent as AHERA and
                                which  would  empower  states to  conduct AHERA
                                inspections and issue enforcement actions under state
                                authority.

                                Such an activity would help a state to assume further
                                control  and   direction  of  the  enforcement-related
                                activities being conducted within the state, as opposed
                                to relying solely on federal authorities and actions within
                                their state.  Such an activity might also enhance the
                                public's attitude  toward and  acknowledgement  of  a
                                state's  own  efforts  to  protect  their  citizens  from
                                potential toxics-related hazards.

                                The  aforementioned activity would be given priority
                                attention in terms of funding.

                         3.     Development of a state mechanism that would return
                                penalties obtained through  enforcement actions,  taken
                                under state authority, to the state asbestos program for
                                upgrading its program as it continues to address the
                                needs within that particular  state.

                         4.     Development  of  compliance  monitoring  strategies,
                                enforcement   response  policies  and/or  SOPs  for
                                implementing an administrative or criminal enforcement
                                program in states which are in the process of developing
                                enforcement authority.  (Only states which are in this
                                situation or which already have enforcement authority
                               -would  be  in need of such documents, if  they do not
                                already exist.)

                         5.     Planning,  development and  implementation  of a state
                                coordinated asbestos inspection program.  Here, we're
                                referring to states which have limited or no experience
                                completing inspections and which  need to plan for their
                                own   coordinated   inspection  program  and   gain
                                         41

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                                experience  in implementing it.  The goal is not to
                                simply "buy more inspections" for the short term but to
                                build the capability within the states for the longer term
                                for them to conduct inspections and issue enforcement
                                actions under state authority.

                                A state which decided to develop a program of this sort
                                would need  to take into account, from  the start, the
                                requirement  for   coordinated   asbestos/NESHAP
                                inspections,  and  the  asbestos ban  and phase  out
                                rule. (We encourage the program design to include case
                                development  activities,  that is, if a state develops an
                                inspection  program, it is recommended that they  also
                                build a case development program.)

                                Also, provisions for the transfer of training information
                                to new employees would need to be  included in the
                                development  of new programs.  This requirement  is
                                being included to avoid the situation in the future where
                                a state loses an inspector, and  along with that person,
                                goes  the state's  compliance monitoring  capabilities.
                                There needs to be a mechanism in place for training
                                new  employees which  can be  utilized even  if  an
                                experienced inspector leaves the state program.

                         6.     Development   and   implementation   of  a   case
                                development program
                                                  »

                                For states that do  not have  their own  enforcement
                                capability for either AHERA  or the asbestos worker
                                protection  rule, or which  currently do  not have the
                                experience/ability  to   complete  case   development
                                activities, EPA headquarters encourages  the states to
                                develop, update or implement  a  case  development
                                program.  This would  include the actual drafting of
                                Notices  of Noncompliance, civil complaints, and/or
                                litigation reports for submittal to the regional office for
                                signature, as appropriate.

                         [We (EPA  regions, headquarters  and states) need  to work
                         together to  assist  states in  moving beyond  their current

                                        42

-------
             TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                                      enforcement-related  capabilities  as  appropriate.     EPA
                                      headquarters would like to see every state which is conducting
                                      inspections, also completing case development work. However,
                                      based on comments received for the regions and the states, we
                                      realize that not all state programs are at the point of adopting
                                      -full case development activities.  Nevertheless, we encourage
                                      the regions to  work with the states to have them complete
                                      the case  development  work for the  actionable inspections
                                      conducted under the cooperative agreement.  We recognize
                                      that "learning" case development  may  extend  beyond  one
                                      project  period.]

                                      7.    If the region is supportive of this approach and feels it
                                            would be effective, a State which has been successful in
                                            implementing a  case development program,  issuing
                                            enforcement   actions,    and/or   developing    and
                                            implementing state enabling legislation for enforcement
                                            may propose to  act as  a  "trainer/advisor" for nearby
                                            states. These states would need to be entering into an
                                            enforcement  cooperative  agreement  with EPA  for
                                            development of one of these related activities.

                                      8.    Any other innovative activities which would assist the
                                            States   in   developing   or  enhancing   their  own
                                            enforcement capabilities, authorities and infrastructures.
                                            States are in different phases/stages of developing their
                                            enforcement  capabilities.    Therefore,  state-specific
                                            innovative  activities   can  be   proposed, and  are
                                            encouraged.

                                      9.    Asbestos Ban and Phase Out
                                             Portions of the asbestos ban and phase  out  rule are
                                             enforceable in FY 92.  The Compliance Monitoring
                                             Strategy, Penalty Policy, and Inspection Guidance are
                                             under development. These documents are expected to
                                             be released in final form by late Spring of 1991.  Given
                                             that this  rule  falls under TSCA section  6,  activities
                                             designed to monitor compliance with this rule  may also
                                             be funded under  FY  92  PCB compliance monitoring
                                             cooperative agreements.  Dependent on the  regiohal
                                                     43
.

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                       FY92

                                compliance strategy, once these documents are released
                                in  final form,  states may  wish to  reevaluate  their
                                targeting priorities and negotiate with their region on a
                                set number of inspections to address the enforceable
                                components  of the  rule.  This negotiation  should be
                                completed  and  activities  begun   to  address  the
                                enforceable  components within  two to three months
                                from the release of the  final strategy documents.

                    b.     PCS Enforcement Decentralization

                    Examples of the types  of activities which could be  funded are as
                    follows:

                          1.    Development  of  State enabling  legislation  and/or
                                regulations.

                          The planning,  drafting, promotion  and/or  implementation of
                          state  enabling legislation  and regulations for program and
                          enforcement activities is a priority  activity which the Agency
                          encourages and supports.                       ;..

                          In  the  case of PCBs, the development of state  legislation
                          would need to focus on disposal activities only, including the
                          provisions of the notification and manifesting (N&M) final rule,
                          unless the state were willing to develop legislation identical to
                          EPA's requirements or meet the exemptions in TSCA section
                          18.

                          Such an activity would help a state to assume further control
                          and direction  of  the enforcement-related  activities   being
                          conducted within the state,  as opposed to  relying solely on
                          federal  authorities  and actions within  their state.  Such an
                          activity  might also  enhance  the public's attitude toward and
                          acknowledgement of  a state's own  efforts  to protect their
                          citizens from potential toxics related hazards.

                          The aforementioned activity would be given  priority attention
                          in terms of funding.
                                         44

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                     FY92

                   2.     Development of a comprehensive state PCB N&M program.

                         The next  activity would apply to states which already had a
                         PCB  inspection  program in  place, or  were  preparing  to
                         develop one in FY 92. This activity-is designed to provide new
                         states with  thfe* opportunity to eiiter Into th» ^cooperative
                         agreement  program .All;  PCB  programs'  Should  adopt
                         Notification and Manifesting requirements in their compliance
                         monitoring activities.   In these cases,  the  development of a
                         comprehensive  state PCB N&M program  could be another
                         option for funding.  This would allow the State to take  an
                         active lead in pursuing comprehensive compliance monitoring
                         activities focussing on  the PCB notification and manifesting
                         rule.  The N&M rule requires the identification of new PCB
                         waste  handlers,  new  commercial  storers,  as well as  the
                         requirement that PCB waste  be manifested from  cradle to
                         grave.  The following are the activities  which such a program
                         would include at a minimum:

                         o     Inspector  training to  address  the new requirements
                               under the rule, and completion of a number of training
                               inspections in this new area.  (The state would then be
                               expected to incorporate the provisions of the N&M rule
                               into  their routine  program of comprehensive PCB
                               inspections);

                         o     Creation  of data bases to store and track enforcement
                               information on commercial storers, notifiers, generators
                               of manifest, etc.;
                         o      Statewide  tracking of PCB  users, notifiers, brokers,
                                storers, submitters of manifest discrepancy reports, and
                                unmanifested waste reports.  Much of this information
                                is useful for targeting inspections at new and previously
                                known facilities.

                         We also encourage training in the development of case work
                         and completion of case work for every actionable inspection.

                   3.     Development of compliance monitoring strategies, enforcement
                         response   policies  and/or   SOPs   for  implementing   an


                                        45

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
                         administrative or criminal enforcement program in States which
                         are in the process of developing enforcement authority. (Only
                         states  which are  in  this situation  or  which already have
                         enforcement authority would be in need of such  documents.)
                   4.     Planning and development of a State PCB inspection program.

                   Here, we're referring to states which have limited or no experience
                   completing  inspections  and  which need to  plan  for their  own
                   inspection program and gain experience in implementing it. The goal
                   is not to simply "buy more inspections" for the short term but to build
                   the capability within the states for  the  longer term for them to
                   conduct  inspections and  issue  enforcement  actions  under state
                   authority.

                   A state which decided to develop a program of this sort would need
                   to  take  into account,  from  the start,  the PCB  notification  and
                   manifesting  (N&M) rule.   (We encourage the program design to
                   include case  development activities, that is, if a state  develops an
                   inspection program, it is recommended that they also  build a case
                   development program.)

                   Also,  provisions for the transfer  of training information  to new
                   employees would need to be included in the  development of new
                   programs.

                   This requirement is being included to avoid the situation in the future
                   where a state loses an inspector, and along with that person, goes the
                   state's compliance  monitoring  capabilities. There needs  to be a
                   mechanism in place for training new employees which can be utilized
                   even if an experienced  inspector leaves the state program.
                        •
                   5.     Development and implementation of a case development
                         program.

                   For states  which currently do not have  the experience/ability to
                   complete case development activities, EPA headquarters encourages
                   the states to develop, update  or implement  a case development
                   program.   This would  include  the  actual drafting  of Notices of
                                        46

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                      FY92

                   Noncompliance, civil complaints, and/or litigation reports for submittal
                   to the regional office for signature, as appropriate.

                   [We (EPA regions, headquarters and states) need to work together
                   to assist states in moving beyond their current enforcement-related
                   capabilities  as  appropriate.  EPA headquarters  would like to see
                   every state  which is conducting inspections, also  completing case
                   development work.  However,  based on the comments received  on
                   the draft guidance, we recognize that this might not be possible in
                   every case.  Nevertheless, we encourage the regions to work with the
                   states to have  them  complete  the case development work for the
                   actionable inspections conducted under the cooperative agreement.
                   We recognize that "learning" case development may  extend beyond
                   one project  period.]

                   6.    Development of a state mechanism that would return penalties
                         obtained through  enforcement  actions, taken under  state
                         authority, to the State PCS program for upgrading its program
                         as it continues to address the needs within that particular state.

                   7.    If the region is supportive of this approach and feels it would
                         be effective, a state which has been successful in implementing
                         a case development program, issuing enforcement  actions,
                         and/or developing and implementing state enabling legislation
                         for enforcement may propose to act as a "trainer/advisor" for
                         nearby states.  These states would need to be entering into an
                         enforcement cooperative agreement with EPA for development
                         of one of these or related activities.

                   8.    Any other innovative activities which would assist the states in
                         developing or enhancing their own enforcement capabilities,
                        * authorities and infrastructures. Different states are in different"
                         phases/stages  or  development of  enforcement capabilities.
                         Therefore, state-specific  innovative activities can be proposed.
                                        47

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
      G.    MULTI-MEDIA   COMPLIANCE   MONITORING  COOPERATIVE
            AGREEMENTS

            1.  FUNDING

            Depending on the amount appropriated for FY 92 and the content and
            proposed costs of the proposals received, it may be feasible to fund  more
            than two projects.  The proposed FY 92 federal funding level for a single
            project cannot exceed $200,000.

            2.  SCHEDULE

            Three-to-six page proposals must be submitted to the appropriate Regional
            Toxics Branch £nd  the Regional Grants' Management ,vQfQce by  COB
            October  1, 1991. The regional office will forward a copy of the proposal to
            OCM's Grants and Evaluation Branch by October 15, 1991, along with any
            comments they have  on the proposal(s). The proposals will be reviewed by
            a panel,  made up of regional and headquarter representatives.  The state
            contacts  for the selected projects will be notified and asked to submit a
            complete cooperative   agreement  application package along with any
            additional information requested by  the panel.

            The  proposals  must   address   at  a  minimum:   1) statement  of the
            environmental problem; 2) background information on the responsibilities of
            the state agency and  past experience dealing with toxics issues using a multi-
            media approach;  3) description of the  proposed  multi-media project,
            objectives and end-products; 4) discussion of the enforcement component of
            the project; 5) the proposed budget; 6)  schedule of activities (the proposed
            project to be completed under the agreement must be concluded by the end
            of  FY 93 at the latest); and 7)  discussion of how, if at all, the project will
            continue  within  the state  after  the  proposed  project  period  of the
            cooperative agreement.

            3.  Background on OCM Multi-Media State Toxics Projects

            The projects  to be  funded should  assist states in  developing continuing
            programs which will address toxics issues in a holistic and comprehensive
            manner.  This could include, for example, multi-media  risk assessments
            addressing the impact  of a toxic substance on air,  water, soil and human
            health, and dealing  with a toxic issue across multi-media regulatory lines,
            such  as  TSCA,  NESHAP, Resource  Conservation and Recovery Act
                                       48

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                   .   FY92

             (RCRA) and other pertinent regulatory provisions at the state and federal
             level.

             A commitment to  compliance monitoring or enforcement related activities
             would need to be a part of the  proposed project either as a component of
             the immediate project, or as  the second stage or follow-up to the immediate
             project. This is important given that the funds to support the multi-media
             state toxics projects will be  a part of the enforcement monies included in
             the President's FY 92 budget.

             To illustrate the types  of projects which would be acceptable for funding
             consideration,  it seemed  appropriate  to provide a couple of examples of
             multi-media  state toxics projects.  These are only provided as illustrations,
             and should  not inhibit states  from  proposing other multi-media  toxics
             programs designed to meet the  needs of a particular state.

             4.  Examples of Multi-Media Projects                          ;

             The following  are  three examples of the types of state multi-media  toxics
             projects which would be eligible  for funding. These descriptions were based,
             in part, on projects under development in FY 91 and were used as examples
             in the FY 91 guidance.  Pie two. multimedia application .that were seated
             in  FY91 are in 'final  form and, will be:,drcu1aie4* tcs Regional ^ Division
             pirectors and Toxic Substances and Pesticides Branch. Chiefs.  These  may
             be of  assistance in presenting this farlding option to your states.

                   a.    The focus of one  project would  be  to  obtain  a reduction of
                         risk from toxic chemicals emitted from industrial sources in a
                         particular state, using multi-media risk assessments and multi-
                         media compliance investigations.- -This type  of project would
                         have two components.

                   The first component would include a review of  selected sources
                   identified in the recently released EPA Air Toxics Exposure and Risk
                   Information System   (ATERIS)  to  explore:  1)  the possibility  of
                   reducing toxic emissions; 2) ensuring compliance with all  regulatory
                   provisions; and 3) conducting a complete multi-media risk assessment.

                   Target facilities for this initial group would  be those with a specified
                   individual risk, as  indicated on the  revised ATERIS list, of which
                   there are five  in the state.  A key feature of the project's first phase


                                        49

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
                   would be a  meeting between  the  state officials and CEOs of the
                   target facilities to discuss measures to reduce  the risk identified by
                   the  ATERIS data and  state  analysis  of TRI data.  Multi-media
                   inspections and analyses would also be  conducted to insure facility
                   compliance with  the agreed-upon measures and assess other media
                   risk  problems, if any, at the five target facilities.  Enforcement actions
                   would be drafted as appropriate.

                   The second component direct attention to a specific geographic area
                   known for its high concentration of industrial sources emitting toxic
                   chemicals. This  second  stage of the project would  include a multi-
                   media compliance investigation and  subsequent  multi-media risk
                   assessment of selected  sources in the  target area  to explore the
                   potential for risk  reduction.   The term  multi-media in this case
                   includes   at  a minimum the  state  air,  water,  hazardous  waste,
                   superfund, toxic substances,  wetlands,  groundwater,  underground
                   injection,  underground  storage  tank  and   pesticides  programs.
                   Personnel from  all appropriate offices within the state would be.
                   participating  in this project.

                   In this phase a risk screening would be performed of a larger number
                   of facilities  under SARA section  313.   This would  consider the
                   relative toxicities of the chemical emissions as well as the  quantity of
                   emissions. A number of facilities would be chosen for multi-media
                   investigations based on this screening, compliance history  review and
                   other data available to the state.

                   Both stages  of  the  project would  focus on reductions  of toxic
                   chemical emissions  which  have   exhibited  a  demonstrable   or
                   predictable effect on public health and  the environment  and would
                   seek facility alterations through the following types of mechanisms:

                   o     Formal   Enforcement   Actions  -  multi-media   statutory
                          provisions would be utilized to achieve compliance with existing
                          provisions of regulations and permits. Negotiated settlements
                          could  include reductions in unregulated emissions.

                   o     Review of Existing Permits  - to be considered by all media
                          where results of inspections reveal a need  to revise existing
                          permits to address a problem which would  not result  in an
                          enforcement action.
                                         50

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                       FY92
                   0      Non-traditional Methods to Effect Emissions Reductions - this
                          could include such techniques as a meeting of selected facilities
                          to discuss voluntary plant-wide emission reductions.  Another
                          possible technique would be  to utilize existing authorities such
                          as the RCRA  permit program or the Superfund  program to
                          obtain reductions in unregulated air and water emissions.

                   o      Use of Imminent and Substantial Endangerment Provisions of
                          the  Various Media Regulatory Authorities  ~ this  might be
                          necessary for high risk facilities where there is an urgent need
                          for significant EPA or state action to reduce the risks to public
                          health and  environment.

                   o      Environmental  Awards Program  —  initiate  environmental
                          awards program  for facilities which are in compliance with all
                          environmental  regulations  in an exemplary fashion.  Consider
                          additional criteria for eligibility such as voluntary participation
                          by facilities in  this pilot project to lower total emissions by at
                          least 90%.

                   o      Encouraging Compliance — when facilities agree to voluntarily
                          exceed current regulatory  requirements to lower emissions at
                          facilities, and/or implement  pollution prevention  measures
                          consider incentives  such  as  decreasing  surveillance  and
                          requiring self  auditing  to encourage voluntary  compliance.
                          Consider incentives  for  facilities  to  lower  emissions  of
                          unregulated chemicals that  'may be detected during  multi-
                          media evaluations.
                   Multi-media inspections would be conducted along with multi-media
                   information requests for-data and waste management practices. An
                   important  component  of the pilot project would be to review the
                   potential for pollution prevention.

                   A significant element in support of this project would be integration
                   of  data from  all existing  sources  into  one system, such as the
                   Geographic Information System (GIS).  A GIS database would be
                   developed  to support this project.  The purpose of this GIS would be
                   to:
                                         51

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT                                                       FY92

                   o     Spatially integrate compliance, release, ambient, and population
                          data;

                   o     Conduct geographic analyses of the  proximity of  pollutant
                          sources to human populations and sensitive habitats;

                   o     Provide a  frame work  for  facility specific  and  area  wide
                          characterization, and;

                   o     Track and display the progress and results of the project.

                   The  approach described  above  would  be institutionalized  and
                   expanded within the state.

                   The environmental results expected include reductions in the release
                   of toxic pollutants, resulting in reduced risks to human health and the
                   environment,   and  improved  compliance  with  all environmental
                   regulations applicable  to the facility.
                   b.     Another project involves the development of toxics legislation
                          and regulations within the $tate which would require routine
                          multi-media risk assessments, identification of violations across
                          multi-media regulatory lines, and multi-media inspections and
                          enforcement actions.  Following the development and passage
                          of the legislation  and regulations, the second stage of the
                          project would be the pilot implementation of the regulations
                          prior to their effective date.

                   c.     A third proposal could involve the development of a project
                          to deal  with lead within the state, not  only  reducing further
                          additions of lead to the environment from smelting or mining,
                         , but  also abatement of exposures to lead in  place from past
                          paint  in older housing,  schools  and other public buildings,
                          historical lead deposition in the vicinity of both operating and
                          closed major point source emitters, and lead concentrations in
                          old  landfills and  dumps.   The project would  include: 1)
                          identification and mapping of areas within the state with high
                          lead   concentrations;   2) identification   of   sources   of
                          contamination; 3) activities to encourage and impel the lead
                          smelting and battery manufacturing industries to monitor and
                                         52

-------
TSCA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
FY92
                          report contamination in  air,  drinking and ground water, soil
                          and  human lead contamination.  Multi-media  investigations
                          would be  undertaken in  the  state, with resulting coordinated
                          regulatory proposals and/or enforcement actions using state or
                          federal regulatory tools.
                                                                                               I
                                         53

-------

-------