United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
OSWER9200.1-37FS
EPA540-F-01-004
May 2001
&EPA Operation and Maintenance in the
Superfund Program
Adequately addressing operation and maintenance
(O&M) issues throughout the life of a Superfund
remedy is critical to the successful implementation of
the Superfund program. O&M measures are designed
to maintain the remedy at a site to ensure that the
remedy remains protective of human health and the
environment. This fact sheet provides an overview of
O&M throughout the phases of the Superfund
pipeline and presents guidance for Remedial Project
Managers (RPMs). If the appropriate O&M approach
differs because of site status (Fund-lead, Potentially
Responsible Party (PRP)-lead, etc.), it is noted.
Although many portions of this fact sheet may apply
to Federal Facilities, this fact sheet does not address
specific Federal Facilities procedures. Users of the
Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA)
Handbook are encouraged to place this fact sheet in
the O&M Appendix. Complete citations for all
documents referred to in this fact sheet are listed at
the end under Additional Guidance.
A. OVERVIEW
Operation and maintenance (O&M) is a vital
component of a Superfund remedy, and is receiving
increased attention as more and more Superfund
remedies move into the post-construction phase. This
fact sheet provides guidance to RPMs and others who
have O&M responsibilities. It provides practical
information on the timing of O&M planning, the
transition of a remedy from construction to the O&M
The policies and procedures set forth herein are
intended as guidance to Agency and other government
employees. They do not constitute rule making by the
Agency, and may not be relied on to create a
substantive or procedural right enforceable by any other
person. The Government may take action that is at
variance with the policies and procedures in this fact
sheet.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview 1
Key O&M Definitions & Milestones 1
O&M Considerations during RI/FS 5
O&M Considerations during RD 6
O&M Considerations during RA 8
Transition from RA to O&M 9
EPA Oversight during O&M 10
Termination of O&M 11
Additional Guidance 11
stage, the performance of O&M functions, RPM
oversight responsibilities, record keeping,
troubleshooting, and termination of O&M.
B. KEY O & M DEFINITIONS
What is operation and maintenance (O&M) in the
Superfund program?
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR§300.435(f)(l),
defines O&M as the measures "initiated after the
remedy has achieved the remedial action objectives
and remediation goals in the ROD (Record of
Decision), and is determined to be operational and
functional, except for ground- or surface-water
restoration actions covered under 40
CFR§300.435(f)(4)." A remedy is a remedial action
(RA) described in a ROD. A ROD may contain
several remedies, each with differing O&M
requirements and time frames for completion. O&M
measures are designed to maintain the remedy at a
site to ensure that the remedy remains protective of
human health and the environment.
-------
What is the operational and functional (O&F)
determination?
NCP, 40 CFR§300.435(f)(2), states, "A remedy
becomes 'operational and functional' either one year
after construction is complete, or when the remedy is
determined concurrently by EPA and the State to be
functioning properly and is performing as designed,
whichever is earlier. EPA may grant extensions to
the one-year period, as appropriate." This period is
often referred to as "shakedown," when the
construction contractor makes minor adjustments as
necessary to ensure the remedy is operating as
designed.
Formal O&F determinations are made for Fund-
financed remedies because the O&F milestone
governs when the Regions turn these remedies over to
the States for O&M. For Fund-financed remedies,
EPA and the State conduct a joint inspection at the
conclusion of construction to determine that the
remedy has been constructed properly. The joint
inspection also marks the beginning of the one-year
O&F period described above. At a minimum, the
attainment of O&F is documented in the Interim or
Final Remedial Action Report. It may also be
documented by a letter to the interested parties. A
letter is also suggested to document the joint
inspection and the start of the one-year O&F period.
The term O&F is also sometimes applied to
Potentially Responsible Party (PRP)-lead remedies.
It signifies the end of the shakedown period, when the
remedy is determined to be operating as designed.
Since the PRP will continue to be responsible for and
operate the remedy after the O&F determination is
made, the determination is often not as formal as for
Fund-lead remedies.
How are O&M for ground- and surface-water
restoration remedies defined in the Superfund
program?
Ground- and surface-water restoration remedies,
including monitored natural attenuation, would
logically go directly from remedial action into O&M
upon construction of the treatment plant and
monitoring system and O&F determination. The
operation of treatment plants and monitored natural
attenuation remedies to achieve cleanup goals is
typically termed O&M.
However, the NCP, 40 CFR§300.435(f)(3), makes an
exception for Fund-financed remedies. It states that,
for Fund-financed remedial actions involving
treatment or other measures to restore ground- or
surface-water quality to a level that ensures protection
of human health and the environment, the operation
of such treatment or other measures for a period up to
ten years after the remedy becomes O&F will be
considered part of the remedial action. Activities
required to maintain the effectiveness of such
treatment or measures following the ten-year period,
or after the remedial action is complete, whichever is
earlier, will be considered O&M.
What are long-term response actions (LTRA) and
PRP long-term responses (PRP LR)?
Fund-financed remedies involving treatment or other
measures to restore ground- or surface- water quality
to a level that ensures protection of human health and
the environment, including monitored natural
attenuation, are a special case, as described above.
EPA has established the definition long-term
response action (LTRA) for the period up to ten years
when the Fund continues to operate the remedy. If
cleanup goals have not been achieved upon
completion of the ten years, the remedy transitions
into O&M and operation becomes the responsibility
of the State until cleanup goals are achieved.
A parallel definition has been established for PRP-
lead remedies involving treatment or other measures
to restore ground- or surface-water quality to a level
that ensures protection of human health and the
environment, including monitored natural attenuation.
Operation of the PRP-lead remedy is a PRP long-term
response (PRP LR). For the purposes of this fact
sheet, a remedy in LTRA or PRP LR is considered to
be in O&M, and the concepts described here apply.
What remedies require O&M ?
Remedies requiring O&M include, but are not limited
to, actions that typically require five-year reviews
(e.g., landfill caps; gas collection systems; and
ground-water containment). O&M measures also
may include requirements for maintaining
institutional controls.
-------
Some treatment remedies must be operated for an
extended period to reach RA cleanup goals.
Examples are bio-remediation, soil vapor extraction,
and incineration. Industry often calls this operation
period O&M. In the Superfund program, however,
the remedy remains in RA and never goes into O&M.
Typical O&M activities are shown in Highlight 1 and
include inspection; sampling, monitoring and
analysis; routine operation and maintenance; and
reporting.
Who is responsible for O&M Activities?
For PRP-lead remedies, the PRP continues to operate
and maintain the remedy during O&M. EPA, through
the RPM, is responsible for oversight to ensure that
O&M is being performed adequately. EPA and the
State may require the PRP to submit periodic reports,
maintain certain records, and host site visits from
EPA. These requirements can be included in the
consent decree (CD). An exception is when EPA
conducts O&M using funds from a PRP special
account.
For Fund-financed remedies, CERCLA § 104(c)
requires States to pay for or ensure payment of all
future maintenance. Although States are responsible
for the O&M, EPA retains responsibility for
determining when O&M is complete and conducting
five-year reviews. EPA may require the State to
submit periodic reports, maintain certain records, and
host site visits from EPA. These requirements can be
included in the Superfund State Contract (SSC), or
cooperative agreement (CA).
EPA may use the Fund only for oversight of O&M
activities, not for conducting O&M, except in the
caseofLTRA.
When is O&M completed?
In some cases, the State or PRP may have to perform
O&M indefinitely for remedies that contain wastes
on-site, or include institutional controls. However,
for remedies involving ground-water restoration,
there may be a point where all work is completed,
cleanup goals have been achieved, and no additional
monitoring or institutional controls are necessary. In
those cases, O&M may be terminated. See also
Section H, Termination of O&M.
Highlight 1 - Typical O&M Activities
Performed by the O&M Site Manager or
O&M Contractor
Inspection
Review sampling records for compliance
with discharge permits and deviations;
Observe site conditions such as landscape,
drainage, erosion, and integrity of structures
and fences; and
Inspect wells, piping, treatment facilities, and
other mechanical and electrical systems and
equipment.
(Refer to the Comprehensive Five-Year
Review Guidance for a detailed site
inspection checklist)
Sampling, Monitoring and Analysis
Sample and monitor leachate, groundwater,
and surface water;
Sample gas collection system and air; and
Sample influent/effluent of treatment
systems.
Routine Operation and Maintenance
Operate treatment plant;
Maintain site including maintenance of cap
integrity, drainage systems, roads, and
erosion control;
Maintain institutional controls, fencing, site
access and security measures; and
Maintain treatment plant, wells, pumping
systems, pollution control devices, and other
operating mechanical and electrical
equipment.
Reporting
Provide routine reports; and
Provide special reports.
Highlight 2 shows the various remedy pipelines and
how O&M applies.
-------
Highlight 2
Treatment or Off-site Disposal Remedies Pipeline
Final
RA Report
RA
(no O&M required)
Containment Remedies Pipeline
Final
RA Report
L_ RA - |
O&F
< iyr.
(O&M)
(5-year reviews required)
Ground Water and Surface Water Restoration Pipeline
Interim
RA Report
•>
^ RA ^
™ | O&F ^
, LIRA (Fund)
PRP LR (PRP)
<10yrs.
^ 1 Vr- (5-year
Final RA Report
(Cleanup Goals Achieved)
>
(O&M)
" *
reviews required)
-------
C. O&M CONSIDERATIONS DURING
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AND
FEASIBILITY STUDY (RI/FS)
O&M planning should start in the early stages of the
Superfund remedial pipeline. Early preparation helps
to:
Clarify State and PRP financial and performance
requirements;
Facilitate compliance with five-year review
requirements;
Aid transition to O&M;
Reduce the time needed to finalize SSCs and
CAs;
Ensure that cash-out settlements involving O&M
will be accepted by the State; and
Ensure that the remedy can be operated and
maintained.
Highlight 3 is a checklist of O&M considerations
that an RPM can use to prepare for future O&M.
Highlight 3 - Checklist of O&M Considerations During a Superfund Project
Project Phase
O&M Considerations
Remedial
Investigation/
Feasibility Study
Specify O&M activities for each screened alternative requiring O&M;
Estimate the costs for all O&M activities; and
For Fund-lead remedies, review O&M requirements with State officials.
Remedial Design
Ensure that the RD statement of work addresses O&M;
Consult with the State to develop an O&M Plan for the selected remedy;
Ensure that the design contains specifications for the O&M Manual;
Perform operability review (assistance available from USAGE or contractors);
Ensure SSC/CA (for Fund-lead remedies) or CD (for PRP-lead remedies) includes
language on O&M responsibilities; and
Review RA and O&M cost estimates for completeness and accuracy.
Remedial Action
Ensure that the RA statement of work and design specifications require training of
O&M staff before the remedy is turned over;
Update O&M Plan;
Coordinate review and submission of the O&M Manual by the RA contractor;
Draft the RA Report at the completion of construction, including a section on
required O&M activities;
Coordinate the smooth transition to O&M through good communications with State
officials;
Conduct a joint EPA/State inspection;
Document date of inspection and beginning of O&F period in a letter sent to the
State;
Notify State of impending O&F period deadline; and
Make an O&F determination and document it in the Interim or Final RA Report as
well as a letter to the State.
O&M, LTRA or
PRPLR
Conduct periodic site inspections;
Conduct ongoing monitoring/review of O&M reports;
Conduct optimization studies of selected remedies; and
Conduct five-year reviews.
-------
During the RI/FS phase, a detailed analysis of the
remedial alternatives is conducted using the nine
criteria of the NCP. "Long-term effectiveness and
permanence" is the criterion whereby O&M
requirements are evaluated. The O&M requirements
for each alternative in the detailed analysis should be
as specific as possible.
O&M costs are considered for the first time during
the FS and should be included in the cost estimates
for the remedial alternatives. A combination of
capital and O&M costs are considered when
evaluating alternatives. EPA's^ Guide to
Developing and Documenting Cost Estimates during
the Feasibility Study encourages the use of realistic
O&M time frames rather than assuming O&M
continues for 30 years. For O&M time frames longer
than 30 years, a "no discounting" scenario should be
included.
The expected O&M components, when factored into
the comparison of alternatives, may have a major
effect on the remedy ultimately selected. For
example, the O&M for a certain type of waste
containment cell may be more costly than a treatment
alternative in the long term, although the cost of
constructing the containment cell (capital cost) may
be less expensive than the treatment. The treatment
remedy may be the preferred alternative because it is
more permanent and it would be more cost-effective.
By thoroughly describing O&M requirements in the
remedy selection process, the affected parties will
more likely understand what will be expected of them
in the future (particularly where remedies require
long-term O&M). For a Fund-lead remedy,
understanding the O&M requirements allows the
State and other interested parties to be better prepared
to offer comments on EPA's proposed plan. It also
allows the State an opportunity to begin developing
their own plan for their future commitment to
conducting O&M.
For a cash-out or PRP-lead remedy, adequately
portraying the expected O&M costs is imperative to
ensure that funds are available for the expected
duration of the O&M.
D. O&M CONSIDERATIONS DURING
REMEDIAL DESIGN (RD)
This section lists submittals relevant to O&M and
suggests how the RPM may focus the review.
RD Statement of Work (SOW)
The SOW should address how O&M requirements
are to be planned for in the RD, including
identification of costs. The SOW should spell out
that all design submittals must address O&M.
RD Submittals
When reviewing the design documents for the O&M
portion of the remedy, permanence and durability of
the design configuration, equipment, and materials
should be considered, especially for remedies that
will be operated for a long period of time. Ease and
efficiency of performing O&M is also critical,
particularly for remedies that include equipment or
machinery. A remedy that has equipment in hard to
reach places, inadequate instructions to the O&M
operator, or hard to find replacement parts, may
discourage the party who is responsible for
performing O&M.
For Fund-lead remedies, State review of the RD is
critical since the State will be assuming O&M
responsibilities for the finished remedy. States
should also be given the opportunity to review PRP-
lead designs. The Remedial Design/Remedial Action
Handbook includes a checklist for reviewing the RD.
O&M Cost Estimates for a Fund-Lead Remedy
As part of the design for a Fund-lead action, the RPM
receives an O&M cost estimate. This estimate, which
is refined as the design becomes more complete,
normally includes the costs of the operating labor,
materials, energy, purchased services, administrative
costs, insurance, and contingency. The RPM should
ensure that the estimate is sufficiently detailed with
contingencies clearly noted. The State also should be
encouraged to actively review the estimate to avoid
surprises during SSC/CA negotiations.
-------
O&M Plan
The O&M Plan is a document that is primarily used
for Fund-lead actions. The NCP, 40 CFR
§300.510(c), provides that the State and EPA should
consult on a plan for O&M before the RA begins. To
avoid communications problems, it is recommended
that a written plan be developed and incorporated as
part of the SSC or CA. An O&M Plan will help
ensure the proper transition of responsibility for
O&M of Fund-lead remedies from EPA to the State.
The O&M Plan should define the administrative,
financial, and technical details and requirements for
inspecting, operating, and maintaining the remedial
action. The plan should also detail information on
maintaining, as appropriate, institutional controls.
The designer can be tasked with the more technical
portions of the O&M Plan preparation; however,
input is needed from the State and EPA to complete
the administrative parts of the plan. An O&M Plan
should generally contain the elements of Highlight 4.
Highlight 4 - Typical O&M Plan Elements
Designation of the organizational unit of the
government responsibility for O&M
Identification of the available State funding
mechanisms for O&M activities
Milestone dates for State assumption of
O&M responsibilities
Criteria for determination of O&F
Description and duration of O&M activities
Summary of O&M staffing needs (including
training and certification requirements)
Summary of O&M performance standards
Contingency plan for handling abnormal
occurrences
Safety requirements for O&M activities
Equipment and material requirements
Estimates of annual O&M costs
Reporting requirements
Conditions for O&M termination
Description of site use and disposition of
facilities following completion of O&M
Strategy for modifying existing site health
and safety plan (HASP) and quality
assurance project plan (QAPP)
Access and property issues
The RPM and the State should jointly review and
discuss the O&M Plan. The review should consider
whether the plan provides for reliable, cost-effective
O&M of the remedy from both an administrative and
technical perspective, and ensure that it will be
acceptable to the State. For Fund-lead remedies, the
O&M Plan is an essential step in obtaining State
assurances for assumption of O&M responsibilities.
Of particular importance in the development of the
plan is agreement on the performance measures that
will be used to determine that a remedy is O&F.
At PRP-lead sites, the PRPs are responsible for
constructing, operating, and maintaining the remedy.
In rare circumstances, the PRP may arrange to
transfer O&M responsibilities to another organization
and provide sufficient funds to carry them out. In
these cases, the RPM may request that an O&M Plan
be developed to address funding mechanisms such as
the establishment of an O&M trust fund and describe
what responsibilities the PRPs may have for
oversight. The plan would also address O&M
activities themselves as well as any monitoring and
reporting requirements.
O&M Manual
The design specifications should provide a detailed
description of the O&M components and require that
the construction contractor prepare an O&M manual.
The O&M Manual will serve as a guide to the
purpose and function of the equipment and systems
that make up the remedy.
The O&M Manual prepared by the construction
contractor should provide technical information and
data, manufacturer's information, protocols, process
parameters, operation procedures, staffing, training,
and maintenance schedules. Highlight 5 shows the
typical sections of the O&M Manual. The O&M
Manual should be written in a user-friendly style that
is easily understood by operating personnel. An
O&M Manual should be easy to modify to reflect
operating and maintenance needs.
-------
Highlight 5 - Typical O&M Manual Sections
Remedy description, including design
philosophy and operation and control of the
facilities
»• Operation and managerial responsibility
»• Process system operations and protocols
Personnel
»• Staffing requirements
»• Staffing qualifications and certifications
Permits, standards, and approvals
Records
»• Format and delivery requirements
»• Operation and inspection logs
»• Monthly and annual reports
»• Maintenance records
»• Operating costs and record keeping
»• Personnel records
Community Involvement Notices of
operational status
»• Site tours
»• Response to complaints
Laboratory testing requirements
Maintenance
»• Equipment record system
»• Equipment replacement instructions
»• Planning and scheduling
»• Warranty provisions
»• Contract maintenance
»• Monitoring of institutional controls
Emergency operating and response program
»• Emergency equipment inventory
»• System vulnerabilities
»• Fire, police, and emergency response
Relationship between the O&M Manual and the
O&M Plan
The O&M Manual is an engineering-type submittal
and is purely technical in nature. The manual is
routinely prepared for all remedies requiring O&M.
An O&M Plan, on the other hand, is more of an
administrative description of how the State will
undertake its obligation to conduct O&M at a Fund-
lead remedy. For a Fund-lead remedy, the RPM and
the State may elect to have all of the information
placed in the O&M Manual. In other cases, both
parties may want a plan that contains only the
administrative roles and responsibilities of the State.
E. O&M CONSIDERATIONS DURING
RA
During the RA phase, the O&M Plan should be
updated to reflect actual remedial activities. For a
remedy where the State will assume O&M
responsibilities, the State and EPA should have
frequent discussions about the O&M Plan, the
transition to O&F, the joint EPA/State inspection, the
O&M Manual, and any remedy, cost, or schedule
changes.
As the construction contractor constructs the remedy,
all variations from the design plans and specifications
are noted on the construction plans. These marked-up
plans are called "as-builts." The as-builts are critical
items that are important to proper performance of
O&M, and they should be delivered to the party
responsible for the O&M. The RPM should ensure
that this arrangement is made when EPA transfers
O&M to the State for a Fund-lead action.
The construction contractor is responsible for
preparing the O&M Manual. The contractor should
include equipment and material information as
constructed, manufacturer's information, warranty
information, and any changes made during
construction. The designer and State should be
tasked to review the completed O&M manual before
the O&M period begins.
Although the O&M Manual should be complete at
this stage, it may be revised during the O&M phase to
reflect changes in equipment or procedures.
Significant changes that may affect remedy
implementation, such as frequency of sampling and
monitoring, should be discussed with EPA before the
changes are made. Minor changes, such as a new
pump brand substantially equivalent to the previously
specified brand, generally would not require
discussions with EPA.
-------
F. TRANSITION FROM RA TO O&M
PRP-Lead O&M Transfer
Since the PRPs will continue to be responsible for a
remedy as it transitions into O&M, the transition is
not as formal as it is for Fund-lead remedies. EPA
should meet with the PRP prior to the completion of
the RA to reiterate O&M requirements, reporting
obligations, and future responsibilities. Additionally,
EPA may conduct an inspection at a PRP-lead site
upon completion of the construction, according to the
terms of a CD.
Fund-lead O&M Transfer
EPA initiates discussions with the State regarding the
transition of a remedy from RA to O&M. A schedule
for the transition should be developed as part of the
O&M Plan. This schedule should include adequate
time for a State to arrange for O&M.
EPA/State Joint Inspection
For a Fund-lead RA, the lead and support agencies
should conduct a joint inspection at the conclusion of
RA construction, as provided for in the NCP, 40
CFR§ 3 00.515 (g). A j oint inspection allows EPA and
the State to determine whether the remedy has been
constructed in accordance with the ROD and the RD.
The joint inspection may be conducted independently
of, or concurrently with, the construction contract
inspection.
EPA and the State are strongly encouraged to sign a
memorandum following the joint inspection to
document the date of inspection and the agreement of
all parties that the O&F period has commenced. This
focus on a written agreement will draw attention to
the significance of this determination in terms of
establishing a final date for transferring the remedy to
the State.
O&F
As stated previously, the O&F period is either one
year, or when determined concurrently by EPA and
the State to be functioning properly and performing
as designed, whichever is earlier. During the O&F
period, minor adjustments may be made to the
remedy as it undergoes testing and shakedown.
Additionally, this one-year period allows time for the
State to arrange for O&M services and to receive
training on the remedy. These activities should be
reflected in the schedule contained within the O&M
Plan.
The date that the O&F determination is made is
documented in the final RA Report. For a ground- or
surface-water restoration remedy that will go into
LTRA, (or PRP LR) the date is documented in an
interim RA Report. A letter to the State documenting
the O&F determination also should be prepared.
LTRA
For remedies involving treatment or other measures
to restore ground- or surface-water quality to a level
that ensures protection of human health and the
environment, including monitored natural attenuation,
EPA continues to operate the system for a period of
up to ten years after the O&F determination has been
made. Prior to the transfer to the State at the end of
LTRA, EPA should meet with the State and conduct
an inspection of the treatment system to develop a list
of repairs, replacements, or adjustments that might be
necessary. EPA may need to replace remedy
components nearing the end of their useful life before
transfer to the State.
Change in Ownership Agreements
Initiatives to reuse Superfund sites increase the
likelihood that developers may buy remediated
Superfund property. When this occurs, the PRPs that
have agreed to clean up the site may retain ultimate
responsibility for implementing the O&M program at
the site. It is the responsibility of such PRPs to
ensure that institutional controls will be properly
maintained. It also should be the responsibility of the
PRPs to ensure that all O&M requirements will
continue to be met. These restrictions and
requirements remain in force subsequent to any
property transfer. Agreements transferring ownership
of the property typically describe how the parties will
handle such restrictions and requirements.
There may be situations where PRPs may transfer
properties to the State. Under these circumstances,
arrangements should be made between the PRP and
the State to ensure that the PRP's O&M
responsibilities are met. This can be accomplished
through the establishment of a trust with sufficient
funds to meet O&M requirements for the intended life
-------
of the O&M program, or through other funding
mechanisms and O&M contracts.
G. EPA OVERSIGHT DURING O&M
The RPM is responsible for ensuring that O&M is
performed by the State or PRP for the life of the
expected O&M. RPM responsibilities during O&M
generally include:
Ensuring reports are submitted,
Reviewing reports for required elements,
Reviewing data (sampling, performance,
discharge, etc.),
Performing inspections, and
Fulfilling five-year review requirements.
The level of RPM involvement may vary depending
on the complexity of the site. Further, the level may
decrease over time as the States or PRPs demonstrate
their capabilities to carry out the work.
Reporting Requirements during O&M
The State or PRP should submit reports on O&M
activities to EPA on a routine basis. For a Fund-lead
remedy, the State and EPA should agree on reporting
requirements and incorporate O&M documents that
define those requirements into the SSC or CA. This
includes routine reports and special reports (described
below). Reporting requirements for a PRP-lead
remedy, as described in the O&M Manual and other
O&M documents, should be made part of the CD.
EPA should review the reports on an ongoing basis.
Because the due dates of the deliverables from the
States/PRPs may vary over time (quarterly, yearly, or
even longer), it is suggested that a tracking system be
developed so that the RPM would be notified of an
impending report as well as the action taken as a
result of EPA's review. This is particularly critical
given that RPMs will change over time and the level
of activity at a site during O&M should be much
reduced compared to the construction phase.
Routine Reports
Routine reports summarizing O&M activities should
be prepared by the State or the PRP and submitted to
the RPM. Typically, the frequency of reporting is
greater at the start of O&M (e.g, quarterly) and
reduced (e.g., semi-annually) as the States or PRPs
demonstrate capabilities. Routine reports should
include sections on data collection, summary of
sampling results, discharge and emissions
calculations, results from routine inspections, listing
of major repairs and equipment change outs,
breakdown of actual costs for the reporting period,
budget for the next reporting period, regular updates
of the O&M Manual and as-builts, community
complaints and responses, and verification of the
integrity of institutional controls.
Special Reports
O&M safety, contingency, and emergency plans
should include provisions for responding to and
reporting accidents involving site personnel,
operating emergencies, and other unusual events such
as fires, floods, or weather damage. The terms of the
SSC or CA for a Fund-lead remedy, or the CD for a
PRP-lead remedy, should require that these special
reports be made available to EPA and other interested
parties in a timely manner.
Troubleshooting during O&M
If a constructed remedy experiences problems during
O&M, the level of EPA involvement is dependent
upon the cause. Possible causes include:
Latent design or construction defect;
Insufficient or improper maintenance of the
remedy during the O&M period;
Cleanup levels that cannot be achieved with
existing technology;
Equipment life expectancy that has been
exceeded; and
Acts of nature (e.g., earthquakes, floods,
hurricanes).
For a Fund-lead remedy, if the remedy experiences
problems resulting from the design or construction,
EPA may require the designer or construction
contractor to repair the remedy or provide restitution
in some manner. If the remedy failure is due to
inadequate performance of O&M by the State or
PRP, then they are responsible for the appropriate
corrective action. If the equipment life expectancy
has been exceeded, then the State or PRP should
make the necessary changes as part of their O&M
obligation.
10
-------
There is always a risk that an act of nature could
damage the remedy. In areas prone to earthquakes or
floods, measures should have been taken in the design
and construction process to minimize potential future
damage. If the remedy is damaged by some sort of
natural disaster, then the State or PRP should be
prepared to make the necessary repairs. If the area
has been declared a disaster under the Stafford Act,
then Federal disaster funds may be available.
EPA Inspections during O&M
On-site inspections (both routine and unannounced)
are a part of RPM oversight responsibilities. During
a site inspection, the RPM should observe the general
condition of the remedy and note any signs of
disrepair or improper maintenance. Basic conditions,
such as functioning lights and doors and well-kept
grounds, may reflect a well-maintained and effective
remedy. The RPM should review on-site records and
reports for compliance with other requirements. For
example, the RPM should ensure that operating logs,
as well as discharge (air and water) reports and
sampling reports, are maintained and up to date. The
O&M Manual, O&M Plan and the site-specific health
and safety plan should be examined to ensure that
they are complete and up to date. The
Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance contains
a detailed site inspection checklist.
Five-Year Reviews
For sites undergoing five-year reviews, the routine
and special reports submitted to EPA throughout the
O&M period may be useful information to have in
evaluating the remedy. These reports may assist the
RPM in considering the adequacy of O&M, the
frequency of repairs, trends in monitoring data, costs
at the site, and how these factors relate to determining
protectiveness of the remedy.
The RPM may also find annual O&M budget reports
useful for analyzing O&M activities and costs. For
example, the magnitude of O&M activities performed
may increase unexpectedly over time or may be
significantly lower than had been estimated at the
time of remedy selection. The RPM can consider
whether the increased cost and effort were necessary
to ensure that the remedy is functioning properly,
whether it was in response to deteriorating facilities,
or whether a pattern of decreased activity and cost is
an early indicator of deteriorating care of the site.
Additional information on the five-year review
process can be found in the Comprehensive Five-Year
Review Guidance.
H. TERMINATION OF O&M
For some remedies, the State or PRP should conduct
long-term O&M to preserve the integrity of the
remedy. Under certain circumstances (in cases where
ground-water restoration has been completed or a
Technical Impracticability Waiver is granted), a
remedy may be eligible for O&M termination. Prior
to the termination of the O&M, EPA approval is
required.
I. ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE
Recent documents can be found on
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/pubs.htm. For copies
of older documents, please call the Superfund
Document Center, 703-603-9232.
• Close Out Procedures for National Priorities
List Sites, OSWER Directive 9320.2-09A-P,
January 2000, EPA/540/R-98/016.
• Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance,
OSWER Directive 9355.7-03B-P, June 2001.
• A Guide to Developing and Documenting Cost
Estimates During the Feasibility Study, OSWER
Directive 9355.0-75, July 2000, EPA 540-R-OO-
002.
• Guidance for Conducting Remedial
Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under
CERCLA, OSWER Directive 9355.3-01, October
1988, EPA/540/G-89/004.
• Guidance for Evaluating the Technical
Impracticability of Ground-water Restoration
(Interim Final), OSWER Directive 9234.2-25,
September 1993, EPA/540/R-93/080.
• A Guide to Selecting Superfund Remedial
Actions, OSWER Directive 9355.027FS, April
1990.
• Policy on Management of Post-Removal Site
Control, OSWER Directive 9360.2-02,
Decembers, 1990.
• Remedial Design/Remedial Action Handbook,
OSWER Directive 9355.0-04B, June 1995, EPA
540/R-95/059, PB95-963307.
11
------- |