UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, O.C. 20460
DEC 8 1992
OFFICE OP
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
OERR Directive 9345.0-07
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Standard Document for Remedial Site Assessment
Decisions
FROM:
Henry L. Longest II, Director
Office of Emergency and Remedi
Response
Director, Waste Management Division
Regions I, IV, V, VII •
Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division
Region II
Director, Hazardous Waste Management Division
Regions III, VI, VIII and IX
Director, Hazardous Waste Division, Region X
Director, Environmental Services Division
Regions I, VI, VII, X
PURPOSE
The attached form (EPA #9100-3) provides a standard
documentation format for all remedial site assessment decisions.
The form also may be used to document the review and approval of
all final preliminary assessment (PA) and site inspection (SI)
reports submitted to the site assessment program.
BACKGROUND
The National Contingency Plan (NCP) requires the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to assess all releases and
threatened releases throughout the United States pursuant to the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, compensation and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended. In accordance with the NCP,
EPA conducts PAs and Sis to assess sites where releases or
threatened releases may exist. After evaluating information
collected during a PA or SI, EPA then decides on the need for
further investigative or response action.
35
o>
'EPA Headquarters Library
Printed on Recycled Paoer
-------
All Regions document remedial site assessment decisions, but
procedures vary. To ensure adequate documentation of such
decisions, the site assessment program has developed a standard
site assessment decision sheet.
OBJECTIVE
• •".
Every remedial site assessment decision recorded into the
CERCLA Information System (CERCLIS) should have a corresponding
record in the Regional site file. This record should indicate
the basis for any site assessment decision. When a site
assessment report (e.g. PA, SI, etc.) forms the basis of a
decision, EPA must document its review and approval of that
report.
IMPLEMENTATION
The basis for all remedial site assessment decisions should
be concisely documented. The attached form (EPA #9100-3)
summarizes the information needed to properly document these
decisions. Remedial site assessment decisions can relate to any
plan of action made for a site (e.g. site evaluation
accomplished, reopen a site to evaluate new information, etc.).
Once complete, this documentation should be kept in a site
file as a record of the site assessment decision. A Region may
incorporate this form into a final report (e.g., PA) or reformat
the form for a special database application. Only EPA personnel.
however, may complete this form. The following points explain
other considerations required to accurately complete the form:
* Managing Nonreleasable Information- under the Freedom of
Information Act fFQIA) - Evaluations of projected Hazard
Ranking System (HRS) scores and evaluations of site priority
may reflect the Agency's deliberations and therefore, may be
exempt from mandatory release under FOIA. Other
nonreleasable information includes EPA's deliberations
concerning whether a site is eligible for placement on the
National Priorities List (NPL). This information should not
be set forth in this form. In the event that nonreleasable
information is placed on the form, the Region should redact
that information before releasing a document in accordance
with FOIA.
• Site Deferral - applies to situations where the CERCLA
program refers a site to either the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C program or the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC). Since the CERCLA program
generally will, suspend any further action at these sites,
the site assessment program should ensure that the
-------
i-
responsible authority receives adequate documentation and
references. Only RCRA treatment, storage and disposal
(TSD) facilities for which EPA has corrective action
authority can be deferred to RCRA Subtitle C authorities
(see 54 Fed. Reg. 41000, 41004 (1989)). Only sites
operating under NRC licenses can be deferred to NRC (see 49
Fed.. Reg. 37070, 37074 (-1984)).
HRS Evaluation - indicates when EPA plans to follow up a
site assessment by estimating or evaluating an HRS score.
Applicable situations in which HRS evaluation would be an
appropriate option include conducting PAscore or PRESCORE
evaluations. The attached form should not be used to
indicate EPA's plans for proposing a site to the NPL.
Discussion/Rationale - should briefly highlight the primary
factors (e.g. targets, observed releases, etc.) that form
the basis of EPA's decision. The discussion should also
present the rationale for not accepting recommendations (if
there are any) made in a referenced report.
The discussion may indicate if EPA has identified a need to
involve other authorities in subsequent site actions. For
example, there may be instances where the CERCLA program may
take future action at a site, but will also notify a State
or other authority (e.g. National oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA)) before conducting that action. This
notification may initiate concurrent or coordinated
activities with the State or other Federal authority. -With
the exception of sites regulated under RCRA and by the NRC,
the Agency currently does not defer sites to States or other
authorities. The CERCLA program may notify the RCRA program
and the NRC in cases where it is not readily evident whether
a site should fall under RCRA Subtitle C or NRC authorities.
A Site Evaluation Accomplished (SEA) determination for any
site must meet the standard criteria (e.g., deferral or
projected HRS score clearly less than 28.5 - see 40 CFR
300.420). For sites receiving an SEA determination, EPA may
want to indicate that a state or other authority will be
informed of the determination.
Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model fSACM) - Under SACM,
the Regional decision team (ROT) is the primary decision
making group for assessment and cleanup actions. Site
assessment decisions made by the ROT, like those made by the
SAM, also can be documented on. the attached form (see OSWER
Directive # 9203.1-03, Guidance on Implementation of the
Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model (SACMl under CERCLA and
-------
the NCP). If appropriate, the discussion section can
indicate that a site has been (or will be) brought to the
RDT's attention.
• "Other" CERCLA actions (option 2b) - The activities
specified under 2b (PA, SI, ESI, and HRS Evaluation),
constitute most of the decisions historically delegated to
the site assessment program. This form was designed
primarily to document these standard decisions. The "other"
option should be used for any decision not falling in these
categories. In cases where the RDT decides to conduct a
combined action, the form can refer to this decision under
the "other" option.
The back page of the form provides instructions and general
information. If you have additional questions or comments
regarding this directive, please contact John Hollister of HSED
at FTS (703) 603-8835.
Attachment
cc: Kenneth Konz, Office of the Inspector General
Site Assessment Section Chiefs, Regions 1 - 10 (w diskette)
------- |