United States        Office of Solid Waste and    EPA/68-01-7259
Environmental Protection    Emergency Response     March 1990
Agency          Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid  Waste and
Emergency Response:
Annual Report, Fiscal Year 1989

       Annual  Report for
       Fiscal Year 1989
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

   I am pleased to provide a summary of the many accomplishments of the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for
Fiscal Year 1989.  Across the board, 1989 was a year of significant strengthening in
overall  program management.  For example,  OSWER put in place a national, integrated
matrix for establishing  program priorities and developed a national  system for setting
priorities for site cleanup based explicitly on health and environmental risk.  Building on
a solid  record of achievement in 1988, OSWER made impressive gains over the past year
in both the Superfund and RCRA programs.

   FY  1989 is also  noted  for the completion of the 90-day Superfund Management
Review. With the bulk of the study's fifty recommendations assigned to OSWER and our
Regional counterparts, implementation of the ensuing tasks began immediately over and
above an already abundant workload.

   EPA Headquarters and Regional staff, as well as our State partners, are commended
for their efforts and dedication to the Solid and Hazardous Waste Management programs.
While the workload in front  of us will certainly be challenging, we have in place a solid
infrastructure to build upon.

   The following pages are  not an exhaustive review of the past year; however, they do
provide a good summary of some of the more significant accomplishments for FY 1989.

                     TABLE OF CONTENTS


FOREWORD	."	        i




          Overview of Response Actions  	       1

          Response Accomplishments	       2


          Overview of Enforcement Activities	       8

          Enforcement Accomplishments  	       8


          90-Day Study  	      12

          Strategic Planning Initiative	      13

          Worst-Sites-First Strategy 	      13

          Environmental Indicators	      14


          National Contingency Plan	      15

          Hazard Ranking System	      16

          Reportage Quantity Adjustments for Hazardous Substances	      16

          Extremely Hazardous Substances Designation and
           Reportable Quantity Adjustments	      16

          ROD Guidance  	      17

          Removal Program Guidance	      17

                    TABLE OF CONTENTS

         Enforcement Guidance	      18

         Technical Assistance Grants	      18

         Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program 	      20



         Permitting	      21

         Corrective Action	      23

         Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement	      23

         Data Management	      24


    MEDICAL WASTES	      25



          PROGRAM	      29

      CAPABILITY	      29






                                   - IV -
                     TABLE OF CONTENTS



          Franchising	       35

          Continuous Improvement 	       35


          Technical Standards  	       35

          State Program Approval Standards  	       35

          Financial Responsibility Standards	       36

          Financial Assurance for Municipalities  	       36

          Report to Congress on Exempt Tanks	,	       36


          Building State and Local Programs  	       37

          LUST Trust Fund Activities 	       39

          Outreach Activities	,	•. .       40

          Measuring OUST's Progress	       41

                                      - V -

     During FY 1989, EPA issued A Management Review of the Superfund Program, generally
referred to as the  90-Day Study,  which lays out a strategy for implementing the Superfund
program and procedures for improving program performance. Key components of the strategy
are listed below:

     •     Integrate Superfund priorities to achieve a "one Superfund Program" approach that
           emphasizes enforcement first but that also enables the Agency to initiate clean-
           up actions to induce PRPs to undertake more cleanups;

     •     Use permanent  remedies  where possible and  aggressively  seek innovative
           treatment technologies that reduce the toxicity, mobility, or volume of wastes at
           Superfund sites;

     •     Accelerate response activities by developing prototypes for operable units to narrow
           the range  of remedial alternatives more quickly; and

     •     Promote greater community participation by broadening public outreach programs
           and allowing the public to be more involved in remedy selection.

     Key Superfund managers and staff in EPA Headquarters and the Regional Offices have
developed a comprehensive implementation plan to move forward with the recommendations
made in the 90-Day Study.  EPA expects to complete 90 percent of the tasks outlined in the
implementation plan during FY 1990.


     The Superfund program met  the SARA goal of starting RI/FSs at 275 new  sites  by
October 1989 three months ahead of schedule. By the end of the fiscal year, the program had
initiated over 358 RI/FSs since the enactment of SARA in 1986.  The SARA goal of completing
preliminary assessments on all sites in CERCLIS prior to passage of SARA  was also met by
January 1988.  In addition, the program was on track to meet the SARA requirement to start
remedial action (RA) at 175 new sites and actually surpassed the goal with  178 RA starts by
mid-October.  By the end of the year, there was a backlog of projects  waiting  to enter the
remedial construction  phase. As  a  result, the Agency for the first time has had to  prioritize
construction projects for the funding available.


     FY 1989 was a most successful year for Superfund enforcement.  The total estimated
dollar value of all settlements in  FY 1989 exceeded $1 billion. The total number of settlements
reached was 218, covering removals, RI/FS, remedial design, and remedial actions. Superfund

                                       - vi -
enforcement numbers reflect increased PRP participation through the use of de minimis and
mixed funding settlements as well as conventional settlements. Consequently, the Agency is
on target with the President's goal for responsible parties to undertake remedial projects at 50
percent of the sites by September 1990.


     The  RCRA program  put the Environmental  Priorities Initiative  (EPI)  into practice  in
FY 1989.  Under the EPI, over 550 high priority RCRA facilities received CERCLA preliminary
assessments (PAs) during FY 1989. This number is expected to increase in FY 1990.


     OSW made substantial progress in implementing its Agenda for Action for solid waste
management.  EPA has entered into a partnership with the States to promote integrated waste
management  planning at  the State  and local levels  and  to disseminate technical and
educational materials to encourage recycling and improved waste management practices.


     OSW and OWPE began  implementing the new Medical Waste  Tracking Act (MWTA),
Subpart J  of RCRA, which was enacted on November 1, 1988. OSW promulgated an interim
final rule on March 24, 1989 and prepared several booklets to explain the MWTA and educate
the public that medical waste washups are attributable to individual actions as well as to large
organizations, such as hospitals.  OWPE developed an enforcement strategy and an  inspector
training program.


     The  Federal Facilities Hazardous Waste Compliance Office (FFHWCO) worked with the
EPA Regional Offices to complete 28 lAGs covering 35 sites in FY 1989. Ten other Federal
facility  cleanup and/or compliance agreements were also completed in FY 1989.  Several  of the
agreements were landmarks for the Agency and contributed significantly to the formulation of
Agency policy issues such as State and Federal roles at Federal facilities, the applicability and
integration of RCRA and CERCLA authorities  at these facilities, and  the  development  of
workable enforcement strategies.  Two of the most notable agreements included those for the
Letterkenny Army Depot in  Pennsylvania and the Hanford facility in Washington.


     The  CEPP prevention program  initiated the Chemical Safety Audit Program, which is
designed to make facilities  aware of the need for improved chemical safety practices.  The
program offered three training courses for Regional and  State personnel on how to conduct
chemical safety  audits.

     The  CEPP program continued to build Regional, State and local emergency
preparedness capability by  assisting States and localities to plan for and respond to chemical
emergencies. The program  provided assistance in the form of guidance, training, and technical

                                       -vii -
assistance to the 56 State emergency response commissions (SERCs) and over 3,800 local
emergency planning committees (LEPCs) in FY 1989.

      In the International arena, the CEPP Office has been working with the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in developing programs to define long-term
policies for chemical accident  prevention and emergency  response,  with an emphasis on
international exchange  of  information on measures designed  to  improve industrial  safety
practices and emergency plans throughout the world. The office has also been working  with
the United Nations  Environment Programme (UNEP)  in its effort to implement Awareness  and
Preparedness for Emergencies  at the Local Level  (APELL), which is a program designed to
improve awareness of  hazardous installations and  prepare emergency response plans in
developing countries.


      The UST program  completed putting its national regulatory framework in place in
FY 1989.  OUST supported publication  of the final rules with major outreach  campaigns to
explain the program requirements in simple language. For example, it distributed over 200,000
copies of a booklet entitled  "Musts for  USTs" when the final  technical standards rule  was
published; 200,000 copies of the booklet "Dollars and Sense" were distributed  to explain the
financial responsibility requirements; and  OUST prepared a State Program Approval Handbook
to assist State officials to develop State UST programs in accordance with the State Program
Approval rule.

      By the end of FY 1989,  The Regions had  negotiated LUST Trust  Fund cooperative
agreements with 54 out of 56  States and Territories.   During the fiscal  year, the Regions
awarded approximately  $52.5 million from the LUST  trust fund.  To date, States have begun
more  than 220 corrective actions using trust fund monies. Over  16,000 cleanups  have been
initiated by responsible  parties,  and nearly 5,700 have been completed.

      OUST undertook  a number  of innovative approaches to support Regional and State
implementation activities in FY 1989. For example,  it conducted pilot projects to assist several
States and counties  in  establishing "expedited" enforcement  programs,  designed a  major
outreach campaign to promote  compliance with  the leak detection requirements, served as a
clearinghouse  for transferring technologies and  ideas developed  by other  organizations,
developed a health and safety training program for UST inspectors broadcast via satellite, and
funded several State projects through its  Targeted Improvement Projects (TIPs). FY 1989 TIPs
included supporting Connecticut in analyzing its  UST workload and  projecting future resource
needs;  assisting New Jersey to develop and  implement  its  UST permitting  system;  and
providing an UST inspector training course for fire marshals and building inspectors in Alaska.

                                   CHAPTER 1

      During  FY 1989,  the Superfund program made substantial progress in expanding the
amount of clean-up activity underway.   More sites entered and  progressed through the
incremental stages of the Superfund "pipeline" than in any previous fiscal year. In July, three
months ahead of schedule, EPA met the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986 (SARA)  deadline to start  remedial investigations/feasibility studies (RI/FSs)  at 275 new
sites.  Additionally, at the close of the fiscal year, the Agency was on schedule to meet the
SARA requirement to start remedial action (RA) at 175 new sites and actually surpassed the
goal with 178 RA starts by mid-October.  By year end, there was, in fact, a backlog of projects
waiting to enter the remedial construction phase. As a result, the Agency for the first time has
had to prioritize construction projects for the funding available.

      The Superfund program also made substantial progress during the fiscal year  in terms
of regulatory and guidance efforts.  In FY 1989, EPA issued proposed revisions to the  National
Oil and Hazardous  Substances Contingency  Plan (NCP) and the  Hazard  Ranking System
(HRS), the core regulatory documents of the Superfund program.  As a result, the Agency was
then  able to  issue  the supporting  guidance  materials necessary  to  round   out  the
implementation framework for the  program.  The Agency is in the process of issuing final
guidance  pending the final promulgation of these rules.

      Also during FY 1989, EPA Administrator William Reilly issued the report promised at his
confirmation hearing, A  Management Review of the Superfund Program.  This report (generally
referred to as the 90-Day Study),  is intended to provide realistic strategic direction for the
Superfund program.  As the year drew to a close, the Agency issued a comprehensive plan
to implement the recommendations  of the 90-Day Study.  The Agency also pursued other
management  initiatives to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the program and worked
toward a greater Regional role  in implementing the program's management systems.

      The program is now poised, as funding permits, to increase the rate of program clean-
up activity and demonstrate significant progress in  addressing the problem of uncontrolled
hazardous waste sites.

Overview of Response Actions

      Under the  authority of the Superfund program, two types of response activity may be
taken - removal  and remedial actions.   Removal  actions  are short-term actions taken to
address acute or imminent dangers from the release,  or threat of release,  of hazardous
substances, pollutants,  or contaminants into the environment.  Remedial actions are longer-
term measures taken alone or in addition to removal actions, to prevent, minimize, or remediate
the release of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. These response actions are

carried out as ©ithtr Fund-lead or enforcement-lead activities, depending upon the availability
of responsible parties and other considerations.17

      Once a site is recorded in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA) information system (CERCLIS), it goes through "pre-remedial" steps
that determine if the likelihood of a risk to human health or the environment exists.  As the first
phase of pre-remedial activity, EPA conducts  a preliminary assessment (PA) of existing site
information. The PA provides a site profile used to determine whether the site requires a site
inspection (SI), which includes site sampling. Following the SI, a site is scored using the MRS.
If the  MRS score the site receives is above 28.50, the site moves to the National Priorities List
(NPL) listing stage and into the remedial "pipeline."

      Sites listed on the NPL are candidates for remedial actions. Remedial actions require
extensive  study to select  the  most  effective remedial alternative, and may cost  millions of
dollars to  implement.  Remedial actions consist of several steps.  After a site is listed on the
NPL,  a remedial investigation/feasibility study  (RI/FS) is  conducted on the site.  Alternative
approaches for long-term site remediation are developed and evaluated, and a recommended
approach  is identified. A Record of Decision (ROD) is signed, and the site then passes to the
remedial design (RD) stage.  Once the RD is completed, the remedial action (RA) begins at the
site.   Upon completion of the RA, but before the site  is deleted from the NPL, EPA monitors
the site to ensure that the clean-up standards remain in effect.

      The Agency will generally determine at the PA phase whether a removal action  should
be performed, however, the Agency may also conduct a removal action on a site at any stage
in the remedial pipeline.  Further, removal actions are not limited to  sites listed on the NPL;
they  may  be taken at sites that are  not  listed on the NPL, as well.  SARA Section 104(e)
imposes limits of one year and $2 million upon removal actions, although exemptions may be
granted in some cases.  Removals may be undertaken to temporarily stabilize or clean up an
incident or site until longer-term response actions can be implemented.  In some cases, no
further response action is  necessary.  Removal actions are an integral part of the Superfund
clean-up program.

      In the past, th© success of the Superfund program has generally been determined by the
number of sites that have been deleted from  the  NPL   However, given the complexity and
resulting long-term nature of the problems at most NPL sites, it takes many years before a site
can be deleted from the NPL.  Therefore, the success of the Superfund program  is better
measured by th© rate at which sites pass through the  incremental stages in the Superfund
remedial pipeline.

Response Accomplishments

      Pre-Remediai Actions. Overall, Supertund's pre-rernedia! program substantially increased
its productivity in FY 1989.  A total of 2,755 PAs were conducted  in  FY 1989. There are now
29,714 sites listed in CERCLIS that have completed PAs.  Exhibit 1 illustrates the cumulative
    ^ For  purposes of this  Report, enforcement-lead activities are those carried out by potentially
responsible parties (PRPs).  All federally-financed Superfund activities are referred to as 'Fund-lead.'

                                     Exhibit 1

                     Percent of CERCLIS' Sites With Preliminary
                      Assessments Completed Through FY '89
     Total CERCLIS - 31.904 (estimate)
       inventory of potential Superfund Sites
     SOURCE:  Superfund Progress Report
percentage of PAs completed through FY 1989. The FY 1989 S! target of 1,250 was exceeded
by 39 percent for a total of 1,732 completions. Approximately 34 percent or 10,863 of the
sites entered in CERCLIS through FY 1989 now have completed Sis. Exhibit 2 compares the
numbar of Sis conducted in FY 1989 with tha number completed in previous years.

     An additional 64 sites were proposed for listing on the NPL during  FY 1989,  and 109
were promulgated, bringing the total number of sites on the NPL to 1,226.

     Remedial Actions. As described earlier, selection of a long-term remedy for a Superfund
site is a multi-step process involving many factors.  Remedial alternatives are developed by
carefully examining site conditions and screening all potentially applicable technologies and
process  options (including  innovative   technologies)  on   the  basis  of  effectiveness,
implementability,  and cost.  Technologies  and process options are screened out using site
characterization data from the Rl. The Rl and FS often are conducted concurrently.

                                      Exhibit 2

                       Number of SSte investigations Completed







                                                FY '81 - FY
                          SOURCE:  Superfund Progress Report
      The following SARA-mandated schedule governs RI/FSs at facilities placed on the NPL
prior to October 1986:

      «    RI/FSs must be commenced for at least 275 sites by October 1989; or

      •    RI/FSs must be commenced for at least 450 sites by October 1990 and for an
           additional 200 sites by October 1991 for a total of 650 sites by October 1991.

      By year-end FY 1989, EPA had commenced 358 RI/FSs since SARA and exceeded the
SARA prescribed goal of initiating  RI/FSs at 275 sites by October 1989.  Exhibit 3 illustrates
the RI/FS accomplishments in FY 1989.  These  included  114  "first start" RI/FSs and  43
subsequent RI/FSs.  A  national goal of completing most RI/FSs within 18 months  continues
to be a high priority.

      Each remtdial alternative is evaluated with respect to nine criteria developed by EPA to
address the statutory requirements of CERCLA Section  121.  The criteria include:  (1) overall
protection of human health and the environment; (2) compliance with applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements; (3) long-term effectiveness and permanence; (4) reduction of toxicity,
mobility, or volume through treatment; (5) short-term effectiveness; (6) implementability; (7) cost;
(8) State acceptance; and (9) community acceptance.

      Based on the results  of  th© evaluation, the  Regional  Administrator  or  Assistant
Administrator, in consultation with appropriate State personnel, selects the remedy for the site.
EPA's  proposed plan for remediating the contamination is then  announced to the affected

                                         - 5
community at a public meeting.  After the public has had a chance to comment on the plan,
a  ROD is prepared.  The ROD  formalizes  the selection of a remedy from the alternatives
analyzed in the FS. The ROD also describes the ways in which the selected remedy satisfies
the statutory requirements of CERCLA Section 121. As shown in Exhibit 3, a total of 140 RODs
(100 initial RODs and 40 subsequent RODs) were signed in FY 1989.

      The types of remedies  selected in FY 1989 are summarized  in Exhibit 4, which illustrates
the types of treatment technologies selected and the number of RODs that required pump and
treat or other non-source control  remediation techniques.  Many RODs required a combination
of remediation techniques.

      SARA Section 116(e) required EPA to start remedial actions  at 175 NPL sites by October
1989  and to  initiate such activities at an additional 200 sites within the following two years.
By year end,  the program had initiated a total of 182 remedial actions (178 of these were "first
starts," which count against the goal of 175).  Exhibit 3 shows that  108 RA starts were achieved
in 1989. In addition, 157 remedial designs were initiated during FY 1989. NPL deletions were
accomplished at 10 sites in FY 1989 (see Exhibit 3).

      Removal Actions. Since the inception of the Superfund program, the  removal program
has been highly successful.  As Exhibit 3  illustrates, 322 removal  actions were initiated in
FY 1989. About 236 actions  were completed using CERCLA funds or enforcement authorities.
                                      Exhibit 3

                     Major Superfund Program Accomplishments









                  43 ?!
       First SUrta
HD State   RA State*
                                                               and NPL Dtldtam
      RD antf RA Starts include both first and subsequent starts.
      (NOTE: Only first starts' count towards statutory goal of 175 by October 1989.)
SOURCE:   Superfund Progress Report


                        FY 1989 ROD Technology Summary
                             As of January 18, 1990^
                                                               Total Number of
      Source Control Remediation^

      Treatment Technology                                           90
          Incineration/Thermal Destruction17                              30
          Solidification/Stabilization                                      17
          Vacuum/Vapor Extraction                                      14
          Volatilization/Soil Aeration                                      6
          Soil Washing/Flushing                                         6
          Biodegradation/Land Application                                9
          Solvent Extraction                                             6
          Other Treatment Technologies                                  2

      Containment Only                                               26
          Onsite                                                      20
          Offsite                                                       6

      Other Source Control Remedies                                    5

      Temporary Storage                                               1

      Non-Source Control Remediation
      Technology Selections^

      Pump and Treatment                                            58
      Alternate Water Supply                                            8
      Other                                                           2
      Leachate Treatment                                              3
I/    Numbers represent 133 signed RODs out of a total of 140 RODs signed during FY 1989.
£/    More than one remedy may be associated with a site.
3/    Incineration includes an amended ROD which  replaces Outboard Marine, IL 5/15/84

                                          - 7 -
Exhibit 5 shows that over  1,900  removal actions have  been initiated since the enactment of
CERCLA  Fiscal year 1989 accomplishments contributed to the program's good record.

      Removal actions are characterized according to the urgency of the response required.
Incidents or sites requiring immediate attention are considered emergencies. Those that require
attention within six months are time-critical, and those that can be postponed for more than
six months are non-time-critical.  Classic emergencies, such as fires and explosions, and time-
critical situations that cannot be addressed by other authorities are the removal  program's
highest priorities.  Approximately one-third of the removal actions  carried out each year are
classic  emergencies.  Of  the remaining removals, time-critical removals comprise the vast

                          Number of Removal Actions Initiated*
* Includes PRP
1 —
:•:•: . •:•:•: '•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•.•:•


and fund-lead removals at both NPL and
non-NPL sites

      The Superfund program consists of integrated enforcement and fund-financed activities to achieve
clean-up at hazardous waste sites.  The enforcement program is responsible for identifying potentially
responsible parties (PRPs) that  may be  liable for  response actions and attempting to negotiate
agreements with the PRPs to perform studies or response actions. If negotiations are successful, the
enforcement program is then responsible for entering into settlements with the PRPs, If negotiations
are unsuccessful, the enforcement program has lead responsibility for any follow up action,  such as
issuing Unilateral Administrative Orders or pursuing litigation.

Overvlew of Enforcement Activities

     CERCLA provides a broad range of enforcement authorities that EPA can use to enlist
PRP involvement in cleaning up sites.  These authorities include the ability to order PRPs to
perform response activities if negotiations fail and to secure injunctive relief and receive treble
damages for non-compliance if the PRPs refuse to perform and/or pay for response actions.

     Negotiations are used to reach agreements with PRPs so that the  PRPs will perform or
finance the work and pay for any past  and future costs.   The  outcome  of successful
negotiations is a settlement.   Settlements are either administrative or judicial.  Judicial
settlements must be filed in Federal District court and approved by a judge before they are
considered final.  Administrative settlements are final  when they are  signed by  proper EPA
personnel and  consenting PRPs.   Both types of  settlements are  signed  by the PRP and
enforceable by the Federal District Court.  If negotiations are unsuccessful,  EPA may issue a
unilateral order to compel the PRP to perform  response activities and/or recover EPA's cost.
If PRPs do not comply with a unilateral order, EPA may initiate litigation to compel PRPs to
comply with the order or use Superfund monies to  begin response activities and then pursue
litigation to compel the PRPs to take over the work and/or recover EPA costs.

     EPA can compel  PRPs to  perform the work under  the authority of Section  106 of
CERCLA and the settlement  provisions of Section 122. Section 107 of  CERCLA allows EPA
to assess penalties and treble damages  if a PRP is not in compliance with  a unilateral
administrative order.  Section 107 also allows  EPA to recover from PRPs government costs
incurred while performing response work and costs incurred while overseeing PRP response

Enforcement Accomplishments

     Settlements.  FY  1989 was  an excellent year for Superfund enforcement.  The total
estimated dollar value of all response settlements in FY 1989 exceeded $1 billion, as illustrated
by  Exhibit 6.   Exhibit 7 demonstrates the increase in the number of response settlements
during  the past three fiscal years.  During FY 1989, EPA reached 218 settlements for PRP
response activities  (removal,  RI/FS, remedial design, and  remedial action).  This includes 67
unilateral administrative orders that are in compliance with a value of approximately  $211.7
million.  Forty-nine Consent Decrees were lodged in FY 1989, with an estimated response value
of approximately $620 million.

     Superfund enforcement increased PRP participation during FY 1989 through the use of
conventional settlements as well as de minimis and mixed funding settlements.  In FY 1989,
there were a total of 13  de minimis settlements in the  form of a  consent decree or
administrative order on consent. This represents a 160 percent increase in the number of de
minimis settlements from FY 1988.  During FY  1989 there were 4 mixed funding consent
decrees worth $69  million.

                                 Value of PRP Response Settlements (All Activities)
                                                     (FY '87 - FY '«

«    800
|    750
I    700
S    650
1    600
3    560




1 $83 M
$45 K





$678. 3 M
$248. 6H*
, :< - •€
|3OZ 9 M

$661. 5M
' t "' "'',

$234. 3 M ;

                                                                                    Consent Decreee
                                                                                    for RD/RA
                                                                                     Mixed Finding Consent
                                                                                     Decrees for RD/RA
                                                                                    Urdateral Admfrittrativo
                                                                                    Order* In Compliance
                                                                                    for RD/RA
                                                                                    Othw Reeporae Sstttementa
                                                                                    (Rfifnovaie. Rl/FS)


                                 Number of PRP Response Settlements by Activity
                                                    (FY '87 - FY '89)










                                                                        Coneenl Decree*
                                                                        tor RD/RA
                                                                                       MU«d Fundng Coraont
                                                                                       Decreee for RO/RA
                                                                                       Unletend AtSmWstrative
                                                                                       Orders JnC
                                                                                        for RD/RA
                                                                                        Ottwr Rooponse Setttonwnts
                                                                                        (Retnovato, R1/F8)

                                         10 -
     Three of the significant settlements in FY 1989 are described below:

     •     French Umfted, TX.  EPA and 85 PRPs entered into a consent decree whereby
           the  PRPs will implement and  finance 100 percent  of the selected remedy (bio-
           remediation) for an estimated  value of $50 million.   The  settlement included the
           reimbursement of EPA's recoverable costs, which total $1.28,million and included
           a de minimis agreement.  Major and de minimis  parties agreed to establish a $55
           million  trust fund to finance  the remedial  activity and  provide funds  for the
           reimbursement of oversight  costs.  The settlement  also provides for the  PRP to
           conduct additional remedial measures should the selected  remedy fail.  This is the
           first site where bio-remediation will be used on a large scale.

     »     Operating  Industries,  Inc.,  CA.    EPA  reached  a partial settlement  with
           approximately 113 of the estimated 4,000 PRPs at this site to conduct the remedial
           activities and reimburse the Trust Fund for costs associated with the two discrete
           stages of response activity covered by this settlement. Response activities include
           installation of site control and monitoring systems and construction and operation
           of an on-site treatment  facility to treat the leachate and other hazardous liquids
           collected at the site.  The estimated cost for this project is  $34 million.  The group
           of settling PRPs is divided into two groups:  a group to perform the work and a
           "cash out1 group. The "cash out" group of PRPs has agreed to provide funds for
           the  remedy in this settlement based  on the total waste contributed by this group.
           This value is estimated to  be $25 million. This money will be used to pay for past
           costs and additional site work. Under the consent  decree, EPA has the ability to
           allocate the monies  received between past costs, oversight  costs,  and the "cost
           overrun fund".

     e     Re-Solve Inc., MA.  EPA and 224 PRPs reached an agreement for the remedial
           activity at this waste chemical reclamation facility. The remedy involves excavation
           of contaminated soils  and  ground  water treatment.   EPA has   reached  a
           preauthorization agreement  with settling PRPs for  reimbursement  of  up  to  $7.2
           million or 31.2  percent of the estimated $22 million in remedy costs.  The consent
           decree contains a de minimis settlement that allows  de minimis parties to cash out
           for their Nonbinding Preliminary Allocation of Responsibility  (NBAR) share plus a
           premium.  This was the first site where an NBAR was prepared by EPA to facilitate
           the  settlement  process.  The  settling PRPs will  establish  a trust fund to  provide
           funds for the response work.  In addition, EPA will  be reimbursed for $7.8 million
           in past costs. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts will be reimbursed $500,000,
           which represents all of the Commonwealth's past costs.

           EPA and  the  State  entered  into  a Memorandum of  Agreement  (MOA) that
           establishes formal procedures for resolving conflicts that  may arise between EPA
           and the State.  In addition, the MOA asserts that EPA must consult with the State
           prior to approving work plans and other deliverables.

     Unilateral  Enforcement.  Section  106 of CERCIA  authorizes the  Agency to  issuo
unilateral administrative orders (UAOs) to compel PRP response. EPA views the timely, routine
and predictable use of UAOs as  an  integral part of the CERCLA enforcement process, both to

                                          11 -
help bring settlement negotiations to a successful conclusion and to compel PRP response or
set the stage for further enforcement, such as collection of statutory penalties and/or treble
damages.  UAOs are used primarily for removals and RD/RA, although some UAOs are issued
for RI/FS.

      The 102  UAOs  issued in  FY 1989 represent a  57 percent increase over the number
issued in FY 1988.  Likewise, the  number of UAOs in  compliance  rose to 67 in FY 1989,
representing a 64 percent increase from FY 1988.  Twenty-two of the  UAOs in compliance are
for RD/RA and  have an estimated work value of $175  million. In addition to these numerical
accomplishments, the Agency prepared an FY 1990 strategy for enhancing the use of CERCLA
Section 106 enforcement authorities, focusing on  UAOs for RD/RA.  This strategy will help
ensure the continued  successful use of UAOs in the Superfund enforcement program.

      Cost Recovery.  Cost recovery actions occur when the Fund finances response activities
at a site where  there are financially viable PRPs. Cost  recovery can be pursued for removals,
remedial investigation/feasibility studies, remedial designs, remedial construction, and oversight
of  PRP  responses.   Enforcement actions  used  to  recover  government  costs  include
negotiations, settlements, and litigation.

      Exhibit  8 highlights the key  accomplishments of th© cost recovery program  during
FY 1989 as compared to accomplishments during FY 1988.  In FY 1989, EPA Regional offices
prepared a total of 83 Section 107 referrals greater than $200,000, representing a total value
of $146.6 million for past costs plus  any future Fund financed  expenditures.  Of these 83
referrals, 66 represent pre-construction (i.e., removal, RI/FS, and RD) costs, totalling $99 million,
and 17 represent construction (i.e., RA costs, which may include removals, RI/FSs,  and RD)
costs totalling $47.6 million.  Th© number of Section 107 referrals to  recover costs increased
by 48 percent from FY 1988 to FY 1989.

             Section 107 Cost Recovery Referrals Greater Than $200,000
83($143.8 M)
                       Prw-Conetrustteo ReferrKts
                       (Ramovsto. RI/FS, and RD)
                       (RA taa start*! - may atso
                   ££<] AiRataraJa

                    M  MBcsw
     During FY '88 there was no distinction between pre-construction and construction costs.

                                        - 12 -

      During FY 1989, in an attempt to define a clear cut strategy for the Superfund program
and to assist managers in increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of program activities, the
Agency pursued a number of Superfund management initiatives. The most significant of these
Superfund management initiatives are described below.

90-Day Study

      In FY 1989, the Agency undertook A Management Review of the  Superfund Program
(known as the 90-Day Study) to establish a strategy for the Superfund program and identify
procedures to improve program performance.  The 90-Day Study, completed in May of 1989,
articulates a clear, straightforward vision for the Superfund program that has received broad
acceptance both within and outside the Agency.  It places greater emphasis on ensuring that
the Superfund remedial pipeline is filled to capacity at all times and that the sites in the pipeline
are flowing from one stage to another as quickly as possible.  The strategy set forth in the
Study directs the Superfund program  to attack the worst sites first, removing the sources  of
immediate threat and then, on a priority basis, dealing with the sources of long-term risk.  In
addition, the Study encourages the Agency to take several actions, which are listed below:

      «    Emphasize enforcement to induce PRPs to undertake more cleanups under  EPA

      «    Integrate Superfund priorities of expediting site cleanup and maximizing
           PRP-lead field work, resulting in a  "One Superfund Program" approach
           that emphasizes enforcement first, but that also enables the Agency
           to initiate clean-up actions quickly;

      »    Use  permanent remedies where possible and  aggressively  seek  innovative
           treatment technologies that reduce the toxicity,  mobility, or volume of wastes  at
           Superfund sites;

      •    Accelerate  response  activities by developing  prototypes for operable units  to
           narrow the range of remedial alternatives more quickly;

      •    Promote greater community participation by broadening public outreach programs
           and allowing the public more involvement in remedy selection;  and

      »    Build solid relationships with  States, Natural Resource Trustees, and the Agency
           for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to ensure that the Superfund
           process is working as efficiently and cooperatively as possible.

      Since the publication of the 90-Day Study, key managers and staff in EPA Headquarters
and the Regional offices have developed a  comprehensive implementation plan to move
forward with the recommendations made by the 90-Day Study.  In particular, the Agency has
begun implementing actions to control acute threats immediately, clean up the worst sites first,
and emphasize enforcement in the Superfund program.

                                        - 13 -
Strategic Planning Initiative

      During FY 1989, the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR) continued its
use of a strategic  planning process to establish and articulate its mission, goals, objectives,
and tasks. The overall purpose of the OERR Strategic Planning  Initiative (OSPI) is to lay the
ground work for future Agency action under the Superfund program in FY 1990 and beyond.
OSPI  was particularly important during FY 1989 because the current three-year budget cycle
includes  preparation for Superfund reauthorization in 1991.

      In August of 1989, key OERR managers and staff met to discuss and develop the goals
and objectives for Superfund implementation in the next fiscal year and beyond. Several major
goals for the Superfund program were developed during this OSPI meeting:

      •    Address high priority sites and releases first;

      •    Implement effective  remedies at Superfund sites;

      •    Increase the role of others; and

      »    Achieve a well-managed, efficient Superfund program.

These Superfund  program goals and objectives are consistent with the recommendations
contained in the 90-Day Study.

      Consistent with a greater emphasis on strategic planning during FY 1989, the Agency
began a series of  strategic analyses of Superfund program experience.  These analyses are
intended to assist managers in making mid-course27 corrections (if necessary), and provide an
opportunity to evaluate and revise the strategic directions for the program.

Worst-Srtes-First Strategy

      Projects are  entering the Superfund remediation process at an increasing  rate and, as
the numbers  suggest, the Superfund pipeline is essentially full.  This trend is  expected to
continue and  will  place increasing  pressure  on  the existing  resources of the  Superfund
program.  The 90-Day Study recognized the growing demands on the Superfund pipeline and
consequently recommended that the program attack the worst sites first, removing the sources
of immediate threat and then, on a priority basis, deal with the sources of long^erm risk.

      In response to this recommendation, the Superfund program expanded and formalized
its "worst-sites-first" strategy to include the Superfund  remedial program  during  FY 1989.
Under this strategy, EPA is emphasizing treatment and innovative technology transfer to clean
up sites, while focusing  its resources on those sites at each stage of the pipeline where
conditions pose the greatest risks to human health and the environment.  This strategy is
comprised of three major steps:
      FY '89 marked the midpoint between the enactment of SARA and the 1991 reauthorization.

                                        - 14 -
     •     Immediately control acute threats to human health and the environment at all NPL

     9     After abating immediate threats, address worst sites first; and

     •     Carefully monitor the long-term effectiveness of selected remedies to ensure the
           protection  of human health and the environment.

     During the fiscal year,  the Agency ranked 83 projects in terms of their environmental
priority, and earmarked $1  billion to fund these projects in 1990.

Environmental indicators

     The primary goal of the Superfund program is the protection of public health, welfare,
and the environment by reducing exposure to hazardous substances and reducing the hazards
posed by the toxicity of these substances.  EPA's assessments of Superfund program progress
to date have been concerned primarily with administrative milestones, such as the number of
RI/FSs begun, the number  of RODs signed, or the number of operable units completed.  This
type of evaluation of program progress, however, does not account for the  progress  made
toward human and ecological risk reduction during the clean-up process, but before the entire
task is complete.

     In response to this perceived problem, EPA developed the  Superfund Environmental
Indicators project. The purpose of this project is to develop a flexible system of performance-
based environmental indicators of progress for all Superfund sites, making use of existing data
to reduce cost and burden to the program. In fulfilling  the purpose of this project, the Agency
has  been mindful of the need to have a system of indicators that is  scientifically credible,
understandable by Congress and the public, and applicable to the wide  range of sites and
approaches to cleanup that characterize the Superfund program.

     During FY 1989,  the Agency continued to collect Superfund site data from the Regional
offices in order to evaluate environmental indicators.  OERR  and the Office of Management
Systems and Evaluation (OMSE) used this site data to complete a  study on the feasibility of
implementing  an environmental indicators system for the Superfund program.  This  study
evaluated  eight different environmental indicators.  Based on the results of the study and other
factors, the Agency reduced the overall  number of environmental indicators being considered
from eight to three, with each new indicator comprising elements from the old environmental
indicators.  The three new  indicators being evaluated  are:

     «     Achievement of reduction in concentration of environmental  contaminants, with
           comparison to  public health standards and/or ecological standards;

     •     Achievement of reduction of immediate human exposure to contaminants and/or
           control  of contaminant exposure and migration through interim measures; and

     •     Volume  of waste/contaminated  material treated  or  contained  compared  to
           percentage risk reduction.

                                       - 15-
      In FY 1990, each of the ten Regions will be visited by a data collection team.  This
collection of data will enable OERR and OMSE to analyze and summarize the environmental
results of Superfund clean-up actions completed to date, with the first full report on Superfund
program progress measured by environmental indicators available in FY 1990.  The Agency will
also continue to develop and evaluate additional environmental  indicators of Superfund
program progress in the coming fiscal year.


      Concurrent with a significant amount of site activity, there was substantial regulatory and
guidance development  in the Superfund program during  FY 1989.  Some of these activities
were mandated by SARA, while other efforts stemmed from the need to improve the pace of
the Superfund program.  Proposed  revisions to the NCR and the  HRS were published in
FY 1989. Guidance for  preparing RODs and proposed plans was also issued in FY 1989. The
following sections outline these and other regulatory and guidance activities undertaken by the
Superfund program staff during the past fiscal year.

National Contingency Plan

      In  December of  1988, EPA published proposed  revisions to the National  Oil and
Hazardous Substances  Pollution Contingency Plan (53 FR 51394, December 21, 1988).  The
NCP  contains the regulatory blueprint for  Superfund  response actions.  In addition  to
incorporating the changes mandated by SARA, the NCP was revised to:

      •    More accurately reflect the sequence of response actions taken  pursuant to  the

      •    Clarify existing language on roles, responsibilities, and activities of affected parties;

      •    Incorporate  changes indicated  by program experience.

The proposai also reflects the Agency's bias toward active remedies for Superfund cleanups.

     The publication of the proposed revised NCP commenced a  60-day public comment
period, which was  extended an additional  30 days. During this public comment period, the
Agency also  held  several public  meetings throughout the country  on the  proposal.  EPA
received more  than 150 comment  letters,  which contained more than 2,800 individual
comments from State and local governments, other Federal agencies, industry, environmental
groups, and the general public. During the fiscal year, the Agency undertook and completed
the considerable task  of analyzing  and  responding  to these  comments.   Responses to
comments will  appear  in the  preamble  to the final revised  NCP or an  accompanying
background document.

      Based on analysis of these comments  and other considerations, EPA  made a number
of revisions to the proposed NCP. The final revised NCP began Agency Red Border Review
in September 1989. The  revised  NCP  is expected to be  published as final early in calendar
year 1990.

                                        16 -
Hazard Ranking System

     EPA published the proposed revisions to the  HRS  in  FY  1989 (53  FR 51962,
December 23, 1988).  The HRS is the scoring system Superfund uses to identify sites that
warrant  listing   on the NPL    The proposed  revisions to the HRS  make  it a  more
comprehensive ranking system that is more accurate in assessing contaminant concentration,
contaminant toxicity, and the potential for exposure. The revised HRS takes into consideration
new exposure pathways -  the  human  food chain and direct exposure - and  makes  the
definition of "sensitive environments" more inclusive.  In addition, the revised HRS considers
both acute and chronic health effects.

     The Agency also completed Phase I of a  two-stage field testing  project  to test  the
implementability of the HRS provisions.  The  results  of this field testing  project were  made
available  to the public for review and comment.

     EPA received over 150 comment letters on both the proposed revisions to the HRS and
the results of the field testing project. During FY 1989, EPA began the task of analyzing and
responding to these comments.  The Agency expects to complete the  process of  responding
to comments and publish the revisions to the  HRS as final by early calendar year 1990.

Reportable Quantity Adjustments for Hazardous Substances

     On August 14, 1989 in two final rules (54 FR  33418 and 54 FR 33426), EPA promulgated
reportable quantity (RQ) adjustments for 264 hazardous substances.  Of the 264 hazardous
substances, 260  had RQs proposed for adjustment by EPA in a proposed rule published on
March 16, 1987 (52 FR 8140). The remaining  four hazardous  substances are  waste streams
that were listed as hazardous under Section 3001 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and, therefore, were designated as CERCLA hazardous substances (51 FR 37725,
October 24, 1986). By making these adjustments, EPA relieved the regulated community of
the burden of reporting releases that are unlikely to pose public health threats.

Extremely Hazardous Substance Designation and Reportable Quantity Adjustments

     Pursuant to Title III of SARA, EPA  published a  list of extremely  hazardous  substances
(EHSs) for the purposes of emergency planning activities. Although 134 of the 366 substances
listed as  EHSs ar© already CERCLA hazardous substances, the remaining 232 EHSs are not.
In FY 1989, th© Agency published a proposed rule that would  designate these remaining 232
EHSs as  CERCLA hazardous substances (54 FR 3388, January 23, 1989).  The designation as
a  CERCLA hazardous  substance indicates a level  of  concern about  a  given  substance
sufficient to require a report to the National Response Center (NRC) in the event of a release
in an amount  equal to or greater than the reportable  quantity  (RQ) for that substance.

     Also in FY 1989, the Agency published a proposed rule that would adjust the RQs of the
232 EHSs discussed above (54 FR 35988, August 30,  1989).  Under Section 102 of CERCLA,
an  RQ of one pound is established for releases of CERCLA hazardous  substances.   By
adjusting the  one-pound reporting triggers  for these 232 substances, EPA will  reduce  the
reporting and response burdens on the regulated community and on Federal, State, and local
governments.   The RQ adjustments proposed rule also proposed to adjust the RQs of 19

                                       - 17-
EHSs that are already listed as CERCLA hazardous substances.  To adjust the RQs of these
251 substances, EPA proposed to apply the methodology used to establish threshold planning
quantities for EHSs as part of the RQ adjustment methodology for those CERCLA hazardous
substances meeting the EHS screening criteria.

      The publication of these proposed rules commenced a 60-day public comment period
for each. During the fiscal year, the Agency worked on responding to the comments received
on these two proposals.  EPA expects to respond to all comments and to finalize and publish
both the EHS designation rule and the RQ adjustment rule in late  1990.

ROD Guidance

      In FY 1989, EPA completed revisions to its guidance on preparing RODs and proposed
plans. These revisions reflect the proposed revisions that were made to the NCP.  Among
other changes, the interim final ROD guidance provides more specific direction in three areas:

      •    Implementing remedies organized into several operable units;

      •    Proposing sites for deletion from the NPL; and

      •    Selecting a "no action" alternative.

      The interim final ROD guidance was distributed to  the EPA Regional Offices  for use by
Regional staff to prepare RODs and proposed plans beginning late in FY 1989.

Removal Program Guidance

      In order  to promote the  most efficient  use of limited  removal  program funds and
resources, the  Emergency Response Division (ERD) issued  several guidance documents in
FY 1989. These guidance documents assist the Regions in setting priorities so that the most
serious threats to human  health and the environment can be addressed.  In FY 1989,  ERD
drafted revisions to the Superfund Removal Procedures Manual.  This manual describes all of
the procedural and administrative requirements for removal actions, and provides step-by-step
directions for  preparation and approval  of  documentation.   ERD revised the  conceptual
approach of the manual, making it easier to read and use.  When completed, the Superfund
Removal Procedures  Manual  will consist of 12 separate volumes and a field guide.

      ERD also issued Final Guidance on the Implementation of the Consistency  Exemption
to the Statutory Limits on Removal Actions. SARA contains an exemption that allows removal
actions to exceed the statutory time and money limits of one year and  $2  million where
necessary to achieve consistency with the remedial action to be taken.  This final guidance
discusses the procedures for using the consistency exemption and elaborates on the approach
adopted in the proposed revised NCP.

      Prior to the initiation of removal actions  taken  at non-NPL  sites where the proposed
action  is of national significance or precedent-setting, the concurrence of EPA Headquarters
(i.e.,  AA for OSWER or OERR  Office  Director)  must be obtained.   The purpose of this
concurrence requirement  is to promote national consistency  in the implementation of the

Superfund removal program.  In FY 1989, ERD issued Guidance on Non-NPL Removal Actions
Involving Nationally Significant or Precedent-Setting issues.  This guidance identifies non-NPL
removal  actions that  may  be nationally  significant or precedent-setting  and establishes
procedures for requesting Headquarters concurrence.

Enforcement Guidance

      Superfund enforcement's FY 1989 accomplishments included the issuance of guidance
to help Agency staff implement key  areas  of the enforcement program.  Three  of these
documents are of particular importance to the program and are described below.

      The interim  Guidance on Administrative Records for Selection of CERCLA Response
Actions covers the purpose and scope of the administrative record, the policy and procedures
governing the compilation and maintenance of the administrative record, and the involvement
of those  outside EPA in establishing the record.  Adherence to this guidance will ensure the
Administrative Record meets the necessary legal standards to document the Agency's remedy
selection process.

      EPA issued  guidance on conducting Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) searches for
sites in the Superfund remedial program to supplement the  PRP Search Manual published in
FY 1987.  The supplementary guidance provides assistance in  conducting  complex  PRP
searches and preparing PRP search reports for sites in the  Superfund remedial program.

      In addition to the previously mentioned guidances, the Agency also developed a model
Statement of Work for a Remedial  Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)  conducted by
PRPs.  Generally,  a statement of work is attached to the settlement document for the RI/FS
and describes the tasks and  deliverables  required of  the PRPs.   The  model also  provides
PRPs direction in performing the tasks required for completing an  RI/FS.
Technical Assistance Grants

     Section 117(e) of SARA authorizes EPA to provide technical assistance grants (TAGs) of
up to $50,000 to groups of individuals to obtain assistance in interpreting information related
to activities at Superfund sites.  In March 1988, EPA issued an interim final rule that discussed
the  requirements of the TAG program.  During  FY 1989, the Agency  reviewed and made a
number of changes to the interim final rule. At the close of FY 1989, EPA prepared to issue
amendments to tha interim final rule.

     During FY 1989, EPA awarded 28 grants to  23 different citizen groups associated with
sites listed on the NPL  Many more grant awards are in progress.  Exhibit 9 lists the 26 grants
awarded in FY  1989 by Region.  Both the citizen groups and EPA have benefited from the
independent advisors' input -  the  citizen  groups have  a  greater  understanding  of the
Superfund process, and there is enhanced communication  between EPA and the citizens.

                 Exhibit 9

NPL Sites Where TAGs Were Awarded in FY '89
' ^ *•'•-'•
; .VU .:.&'.
Name of Stte
Central Landfill Site. Rl
Marathon Battery Site. NY
St. Regis Mohawk Reservation, G.M. Massena Site. Hogansburg. NY
Vega ArttWe, Puerto Wco
Ciba Gelgy. Toms River. NJ

Maxey Rats, KY
Butterworth Landfill Site. Ml
Primd! flnart Landfill fltti Huher HataMt OH

Vertac. Rogers Road, and Jacksonville Landfill Sites,
Jacksonville. AR
,.'•.'•••: .•...-.. : _ , . • , - .'.'•.'•..•'.

Cotter Corporation Site. CO
Burlington Northern $ojfi«r*TI*Wan.MT
Rocky Flats, CO
Lawrence LNwmore National Labs Site, CA
IBM San Jose. San Jose. CA
Hewlett-Packard, Palo Alto, CA
Slrlnglellow Site, Riverside. CA
Wycoff Eagle Harbor Site, WA
Grant Recipient
Greater New Bedford Environmental Community Work Group :
Wlnthrop Undflll CWzans Action Group
Citizens Concerned About Removing Toxins
Fulton Safe Drinking Water Action Committee
Akwesone Task Force on the Environment
Committee for the Rescue o» the Health and Environment
Ocean County Citizens for Clean Water
Concerned Citizens for Foster Township
Concerned Citizens for Maxey Flats. Inc.
Munfeport Dump Coalition
John Ball Park Community Association
Miami Valley Landfill Coalition
Jacksonville People with Pride Cleanup Coalition (3 grants)
St. Chart* CpunOans Against Hazardous Wastes
Lincoln Park Area Concerned Citizens
Rathead Lake Protection Association
Citizens Against Lowry Landfill
Trl Valley Care
Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition
Barren Park Association Foundation
Glen Avon Residents Technical Assistance Committee
Association of Balnbrldge Communities
Superfund Innovative Technology EvaSoation Program

     The purpose of the Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program, which
was established pursuant to SARA, is to:  (1) accelerate the development, demonstration, and
use of new or innovative technologies; and  (2) demonstrate and  evaluate new, innovative
measurement and monitoring technologies.  The overall goal of the SITE program is to develop
technologies that provide permanent remedies.

     In January 1989, the  Agency issued its fourth solicitation for innovative technologies
under the SITE Demonstration Program.   To qualify for the  demonstration program,  a new
technology must be at the pilot or full scale stage of development and offer some advantage
over existing technologies.  Also in FY 1989, field demonstrations were completed for two new
treatment technologies:

     9     A technology that destroys organic compounds in water using ultraviolet radiation
           combined with  ozone and/or  hydrogen peroxide  for photo-oxidation of organics;
      •     A process that stabilizes high molecular weight organic and inorganic constituents
           in waste slurries.

      The SITE Emerging Technologies Program  (ETP)  encourages  the  investigation and
development of technologies that may be useful for remediation at Superfund sites, but that
are not yet ready for full-scale demonstration. The goal of ETP is to validate such innovative,
alternative remediation technologies and prepare them for demonstration.

      ETP is interested  in  developing  cutting-edge  technologies for  recycling,  separation,
detoxification, destruction, and stabilization of hazardous wastes. Two year funding is available
to technology developers through competitive cooperative agreements.  An individual developer
may receive up to  $150,000 per year for a maximum of $300,000 over two years to bring a
promising technology from laboratory scale to the pilot stage.

      In FY 1989, seven ETP  projects were underway,  examining  technologies ranging from
freeze crystallization to laser-stimulated photochemical oxidation.  In July 1989,  EPA issued a
request  for proposals.    Forty-seven  preproposals  were  submitted to  the Agency  by
September 7, 1989 and are currently under review.

                                   Chapter 2

                   RESOURCE  CONSERVATION
                        AND  RECOVERY  ACT
     The  Resource Conservation and  Recovery  Act  (RCRA) Program  made  substantial
progress in addressing the priorities outlined for FY 1989. Consistent with national policy and
direction, EPA and the States focused on achieving environmental results by issuing high
quality permits, enforcing to  return handlers to compliance, and initiating corrective action at
facilities which pose significant threats to human health  or the environment. Specifically, the
Regions and States issued 63 incineration permits and denied another 19 in an effort to meet
the November 1989 incinerator deadline established in the 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments  to  RCRA.  Correspondingly, during  FY  1989, EPA and the States initiated
corrective action at 199 facilities.

     Complementing the Agency's accomplishments  in the  Subtitle C  hazardous  waste
program, is  EPA's  progress  in  implementing the "Agenda  for  Action"  for solid  waste
management  under Subtitle  D of RCRA.  The Agency has made great strides over the past
year to facilitate resource recovery and source reduction activities by all sectors of society.
In particular, the Agency has joined  in partnership with the States to improve solid waste
management  planning  and  disseminate technical  and educational materials.   Of  special
importance, is EPA's progress in implementing the new Subpart J of RCRA by promulgating
regulations that establish a demonstration tracking system for medical waste.  Summaries of
key activities are provided below.



     Exhibit 10 compares RCRA permitting activity in FY 1989 with activity  in  FY 1988.  The
exhibit illustrates the change in emphasis away from land disposal permits towards incinerator
permits as the Agency worked to meet the November 1989 deadline for issuing all incinerator
permits. EPA and the  States issued 63 permits for incinerators and  denied another 19 such
permits.  In addition, EPA and the States completed  63 final permit determinations for land
disposal facilities, and 95 final permit determinations for storage and treatment facilities.  The
Agency and States have also increased their efforts in  issuing post-closure permits for land
disposal facilities.  During  FY 1989, EPA and the States issued  47  post-closure permits.
Exhibit 11 shows closure plan approvals for both FY 1988 and FY 1989. The exhibit shows
that  EPA approved 158 closure plans for  land disposal  facilities, 23 closure plans  for
incinerators and 315 closure plans for storage and treatment facilities.

                             Exhibit 1©
                                                                     J  FY'88
                          Lard Disposal
   Storage and
Treataent Fadfttes
                             Exhibit 11
                        (FY '88 and FY '89}
                    56^  FV89

                    111!  FV88
                                           Storage arc*
                                        Treatment Fadttes

                                         - 23 -
Corrective Action

      During FY 1989, the Regions established corrective action priorities across the closing
land disposal universe and storage/treatment universe by implementing the Environmental
Priorities Initiative  (EPI).  FY 1989 was the first year of operation for  EPI.  Getting started
required considerable coordination between the RCRA corrective action  and the CERCLA
preremedial programs.   Over 550  EPI  facilities received CERCLA preliminary assessments
(PAs) in FY 1989.  This number is expected to increase in  FY 1990.   Those facilities  that
appear  to be more environmentally significant based on a preliminary MRS score will receive
screening site investigations (SSIs) as well before they are reassigned to the RCRA  program
for corrective action.   The  PA/SI will provide the RCRA program  with information about the
relative  environmental threat presented by these facilities so that corrective action can be
imposed at the worst sites first.

      In addition,  RCRA Facility  Assessments (RFAs)  were  conducted  at 18 land  disposal
facilities, 16 incinerators, and  84 storage  facilities.  In  addition, RCRA  Facility Investigations
(RFIs) were initiated or in progress at 50 land disposal facilities, 6 incinerators, and 13 storage
facilities. In FY 1989, the Regions issued 119 permit schedules of compliance and 77 Section
3008(h)  orders  imposing corrective action  requirements.   In  addition, three  States were
authorized  for corrective action, and three States submitted their applications for corrective
action in FY 1989.

      A corrective action course for permit writers was offered in FY 1989 to Regional  and
State staff  in Regions IX and X.  The training consists of presentations and interactive case
studies, and focuses on the technical and procedural aspects of the corrective action program.
OSW will provide the training in the other eight Regions in FY 1990, and will also offer it upon

      The OWPE Corrective Action Order Workshop was presented in five Regions in early FY
1989. The workshop includes a description of the Corrective Action process, a review of the
scope and  applicability of Corrective Action authorities, a discussion of the development of CA
orders,  and instruction in the use of the Corrective Action Plan (CAP).

Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement

      In addition  to  corrective  action orders, FY  1989  enforcement  priorities  included:
conducting required high-priority inspections; enforcing land ban disposal restrictions,  and
ensuring the availability of appropriate  Superfund treatment  and  disposal  capacity through
continued implementation of the CERCLA Off-site Policy.

      In FY 1989, EPA proposed a rule, "Amendment to  the NCP; Procedures for Planning and
Implementing Off-site  Response Actions, to codify the Off-site Policy. This rule will ensure that
wastes  from CERCLA  sites are sent  only  to  facilities capable of  handling  them  in an
environmentally sound manner.  The rule also formalizes EPA's commitment to according due
process to facilities that are potential recipients of CERCLA wastes.

                                       - 24 -
     EPA and  the  States conducted  1,330  inspections  at land disposal facilities.  These
inspections wer© comprised of Comprehensive Monitoring  Evaluations (CMEs), Operation and
Maintenance Inspections (O&M), and Compliance Evaluation Inspections (CEIs).  In addition,
EPA and the States performed 1,196 inspections at treatment and storage facilities and 424
inspections at Federal, State, and local facilities, as required by HSWA.

     Emphasis continued to  be placed on assuring enforcement  against SNCs (i.e., land
disposal facilities that have Class I violations of groundwater monitoring, closure, or financial
responsibility requirements). At the beginning of the year,  there were 139 SNCs that required
formal enforcement action. At the end of FY 1989, all but one facility had been addressed by
EPA or the States with enforcement actions or had returned to compliance.

     To enhance the quality of Regional and State inspections, the Office of Waste Programs
Enforcement (OWPE) and the National Enforcement Investigation Center (NEIC)  initiated the
RCRA Inspector Institute.  In FY 1989, three training sessions were conducted in  February,
May, and September 1989. Students included EPA Regional inspectors, State inspectors, and
various Federal agency staff responsible for RCRA compliance at their facilities.

     Beginning in September 1988, Headquarters developed and presented  the Hazardous
Waste Incinerator Inspection (HWII) training workshop in seven EPA Regions from May through
August 1989.  The  workshops presented information on current regulations and the  latest
regulatory developments; provided a general  overview of  equipment designs, functions, and
operational problems; provided step-by-step  inspection  procedures and  preparation; and
offered discussions  on potential enforcement actions.  The workshop was Headquarters' first
effort to train inspectors on procedures for conducting hazardous waste incinerator inspections.

     Other workshops, guidances,  and  training courses focused on  enforcing the land
disposal restrictions rule, and  implementing the §3008(h) case development guidance.

Data Management

     RCRIS,  the Resource  Conservation and  Recovery Information System,  is the new
computerized management information system for providing information about major aspects
of the hazardous waste program mandated by RCRA.

     A  pilot effort was conducted in March  - June 1989 with Region IV and the States of
Kentucky,  Mississippi,  Georgia, and Florida.  The pilot effort tested  the viability of the RCRIS
software, documentation, and  training efforts.

     The  RCRIS staff and Regional and State pilot participants communicated the successful
results of the RCRIS pilot through panel discussions and live question/answer sessions in a
national satellite teleconference.  The teleconference was broadcast to Regions and States and
shown in 44 sites nationally. As a result of the successful pilot efforts, RCRIS began a phased
implementation  of the production software in October 1989.  Region VI,  Region IV and the
States of  Arkansas, Louisiana,  Kentucky, Mississippi, Georgia, and Florida  began national
implementation  in 1989.  By the end of  Federal fiscal year  1991, RCRIS  implementation will be
completed in all Regions and  States.


      During  FY 1989, the  Agency's "Agenda for Action" became operational.   EPA  took
concrete steps to meet each of the six specific objectives discussed in the Agenda.  To
increase available information to all segments of society, EPA awarded numerous grants to
disseminate technical  and educational materials.   For example, in  cooperation with the U.S.
Conference of Mayors, EPA produced a television video for the Learning Channel on integrated
waste management.  Similarly, EPA awarded a grant to GRCDA to operate a municipal  solid
waste information clearinghouse.  EPA also established a peer matching program, thereby
enabling special skills and expertise to be shared nationwide.

      In  support of improved State and local solid waste management planning,  EPA is
working  with  the Council  of State  governments and  the  National Conference  of  State
Legislatures to design workshops for State legislative and executive branches on integrated
waste management planning. The Agency also undertook several  initiatives to foster source
reduction.  In particular, EPA awarded a grant to the Conservation Foundation to convene a
focus group  for interaction with manufacturers on source reduction issues,  with particular
emphasis on  reducing the  amount of waste generated with the  design of products and

      Correspondingly, the  Agency is actively trying to encourage recycling.  An important
component of this effort includes the stimulation  of markets for secondary materials.  During
FY 1989, EPA prepared a series of market development studies on selected commodities in
municipal solid waste, including paper, glass, aluminum, tires,  and compost.   EPA also
instituted a procurement guidelines hotline.  In  addition, EPA conducted numerous public
education and outreach activities designed to encourage recycling.  Specifically, EPA funded
EOF to work with the National Ad Council on a recycling media campaign. This program also
established a recycling hotline,  which provides a brochure on recycling  and  the name and
address of the nearest recycling center.

      The final objectives of the Agenda addressed the need to  improve the design and
operations of municipal solid waste combustors and landfills.  In FY 1989, EPA worked with
the Office of Air to upgrade  combustor performance standards and  is working with GRCDA to
develop training materials for sanitary landfill owners and operators.  Final  rules governing the
disposal of municipal solid waste are scheduled for publication in March  1990.


      The Medical Waste Tracking  Act (MWTA) was signed into law on  November  1,  1988,
amending RCRA. The MWTA was  enacted as a response to the public  health and environ-
mental concerns over the degradation of shoreline areas from washups of medical waste and
sewage. This Act requires EPA to enact a two-year demonstration  program to track medical
waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. New York, New Jersey, and Con-
necticut were required to participate;  the Great  Lake States  were specifically requested to
either opt out or petition in; and any other State  could request to participate in the program.
EPA promulgated the interim final rule and request for comment  on March 24,  1989,  in 54
FR 12326.  The rule  became effective on June 22, 1989 in New York, New Jersey, and
Connecticut and effective July 24, 1989 in Rhode Island and  Puerto Rico.

      In addition, EPA developed several  booklets on  the  medical waste washups for the
general public.  These booklets explain the Medical Waste Tracking Act and are designed to
educate the public that medical waste is attributable to individual actions, as well as to large
organizations, such as hospitals.


      In FY 1989, EPA narrowed the universe of Bevill-exempt mineral processing wastes. The
Agency published three proposed rules and one final rule. The final rule, which was published
in  the Federal  Register  on September 1,  1989, establishes a  mineral  processing  waste
definition, low hazard criteria, and high volume criteria, which are applied to specific processing
waste streams to determine whether they  remain subject to the  Bevill Exclusion.  The rule
removed from the Bevill  Exclusion most mineral processing wastes,  except for 25 specific
waste streams.   Of these 25 waste streams, EPA made  decisions to retain five wastes within
the Bevill Exclusion and to conditionally retain the remaining 20 wastes within the Exclusion,
pending collection  of additional information.   On September  25,  1989, EPA published  a
proposed rule on the status of the  20 conditionally-retained wastes. EPA proposed to remove
seven of the wastes from the  Bevill Exclusion and to retain the other 13 wastes within the
Exclusion.  As part of determining the status of the 20 proposed wastes, a  sampling effort was
conducted  during the summer of 1989, the results of which indicated that some of the wastes
failed the  low hazard and/or high volume criteria.  The final action  on  the rule proposed
September 25 is scheduled for January 15, 1990.

      Those wastes that  remain within the Bevill exclusion as a result of the  September 1,
1989, and January 15,  1990, rulemakings will  be studied in a Report  to Congress, currently
underway.  In FY 1989, ground work was laid for the Report.  EPA conducted a survey of the
industry, and the results of the survey provide a data base on  the  facilities  that generate
mineral processing wastes.  EPA also collected samples during the summer of 1989 in support
of the rulemaking, which will provide  additional data for the Report. In  FY  1990, the focus will
shift from rulemaking to the  Report to  Congress,  which  is due July 31, 1990. By the end of
January 1991, the Agency will make  a final regulatory  determination on those wastes studied
in the Report to  Congress.

                                   CHAPTER  3

                         FEDERAL FACILITIES
     The Federal facilities enforcement and compliance program built a solid foundation in
FY 1989  for implementing an effective  approach to managing and cleaning up  solid  and
hazardous waste at Federal facilities.  The Federal Facilities Hazardous Waste  Compliance
Office  (FFHWCO)  made  significant  progress in  addressing policy issues,  establishing
enforcement  and  compliance  programs  in  EPA Regional  offices,  negotiating cleanup
agreements, and addressing legislative initiatives.

     In August 1989, the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) issued
the Federal Facilities Negotiations Policy  to  institute  new principles and  procedures  for
expediting the negotiation process for Federal facility RCRA compliance and CERCLA cleanup
agreements.  This policy was developed to  strengthen EPA's role as a catalyst and facilitator
for  obtaining three-party  agreements with the  States and  other  Federal  agencies.   It
incorporates the model provisions, negotiated in FY 1988 with both the Department of Energy
(DOE) and the Department of Defense (DOD), and establishes procedures for negotiating time
frames and  elevating  compliance  disputes  to  assist the Agency in negotiating  site-specific
agreements with Federal facilities.

     The policy encourages State participation in all phases of the  clean-up process  and
promotes the integration  of State concerns, as  appropriate, into  the  final  site-specific
agreement.  EPA anticipates that this policy will facilitate and expedite clean-up  negotiations
for CERCLA Interagency Agreements  (lAGs), RCRA Federal  Facility  Compliance  Agreements
(FFCAs), and RCRA Section 3008(h) orders.

     FFHWCO's CERCLA universe expanded as more  Federal facilities were listed on  the
National  Priorities List (NPL).  By the end of FY 1989, a total of 115 Federal facility  sites were
listed or  proposed for listing on the  NPL.  The Federal facilities enforcement program has
established a goal to negotiate CERCLA Interagency Agreements with all of these sites by the
end of FY 1991.

     Twenty-eight lAGs covering 35 sites were completed in FY 1989.  An additional 26 lAGs
are currently being  negotiated.   Ten  other  Federal facility clean-up and/or  compliance
agreements were ateo completed in FY 1989. Negotiating these initial agreements assisted the
Agency in resolving fundamental policy issues, including clarifying State and  Federal roles at
Federal facilities, the applicability and integration  of RCRA and CERCLA authorities at these
facilities,  and development of workable enforcement strategies.

     EPA negotiated several landmark clean-up agreements in FY 1989, including agreements
at the Letterkenny Army Depot facility in Pennsylvania (Region III) and the Hanford facility in
Washington  (Region X).   Both  agreements cover RCRA and  CERCLA units and clean-up
actions.  The Hanford facility is the first  major weapons production complex to have a clean-
up agreement.  The DOE Hanford facility cleanup agreement is significant largely because of
the size  of  the facility,  the complexity  and scope of the  clean-up,  and  the complex

                                         28 -
RCRA/CERCLA jurisdietional issues.  Contamination at the 570 square mile site results from
releases of high  level  radioactive waste as well as mixed radioactive and hazardous waste.
The initial  estimated cost of cleaning up the site ranges from $30 to $50 billion dollars. The
Agreement splits responsibility for overseeing the cleanup between the State and EPA.

      In addition, at five Federal facilities,  FFHWCO supported RCRA  enforcement actions
against the companies (GOCO's) that operate these facilities.  These facilities are: DOE Feed
Materials Production Center (Fernald) in Ohio (Region V); Ravenna Army Ammunition Plant in
Ohio  (Region  V); DOE Rocky Flats Plant in  Colorado  (Region VIII); the Lone Star Army
Ammunitions  Plant in  Texas (Region VI); and the  General  Dynamics  Ft. Worth Air  Force
Plant  #4 in Texas (Region  VI).

      In FY 1990 and FY  1991, the  Federal facilities enforcement program  will continue to
negotiate CERCLA and RCRA enforcement agreements and to ensure that these agreements
work  well.   EPA  Headquarters  will focus more  on  assisting  the  Regions to address
implementation issues as more agreements are  executed and basic legal and policy issues are
resolved.  These implementation issues include:

      9    Obtaining the resources that the Regional offices need to negotiate and oversee

      •    Resolving disputes that are elevated to Headquarters;

      •    Facilitating discussions among Regional Offices  and Headquarters to enhance
           consistency and promote innovative approaches to  Federal facility compliance
           and cleanup;

      •    Addressing remaining policy issues;

      •    Working with DOE and DOD on the development of their priority systems;

      »    Developing training programs; and

      •    Continuing to address  legislative initiatives.

      The  Regions are expected to assume more responsibility for implementation in FY 1990.
Seven Regional Offices have established Federal  facility enforcement and compliance units.
The other three  Regions manage their Federal facility programs as part of their CERCLA
enforcement program.

     The principal  objectives  of  the  Chemical  Emergency  Preparedness and  Prevention
(CEPP)  Office  during  FY  1989  were to  build  Regional,  State,  and  local emergency
preparedness capability, reduce chemical accidents by improving chemical process safety
practices, and  complete rulemakings in  accordance with the  Emergency  Planning  and
Community Right-to-Know Act (Title II! of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
(SARA)).  FY 1989 was the third year of implementation for Title III.


     As  Exhibit 12 illustrates, EPA continues to pursue a "cascading" approach to Title III and
CEPP implementation. This approach assigns lead responsibility for implementation to State
and local agencies  and places EPA Headquarters and the Regions in a support  role.  In
accordance with this approach,  the CEPP Office focused its FY 1989 efforts on assisting States
and  localities to  plan  for and respond to  chemical emergencies.   The Office  provided
assistance to the  56 State emergency response commissions (SERCs)  and over 3,800 local
emergency planning committees (LEPCs) in the  form of guidance,  training,  and technical

     To  assist  the  LEPCs in implementing  Title  III, a guidance document, Its Not  Over  in
October,  was developed and  distributed widely.  Technical  guidance was  developed,  in
cooperation  with  the Federal  Emergency  Management  Agency and  the  Department  of
Transportation,  including the Handbook for Chemical Hazards Analysis  Procedures, which
addresses hazardous substances, flammables, and explosives.  In the training area, the CEPP
Office sponsored hazards analysis training courses throughout the  Regions. Another highlight
was CEPP Office participation in a State hazardous materials training conference held in March
1989.  The Regional Offices provided direct technical assistance to LEPCs and SERCs  in
conducting over 80 emergency exercises and numerous hazards analyses.  Information on
protective actions needed in  responding to chemical accidents (including in-place protection
procedures) was provided to State and local officials in a video teleconference co-sponsored
by EPA, DOT, and FEMA.

     As  part of the CEPP Office's general  preparedness activities, the Office participated in
national simulation exercises involving a catastrophic earthquake and national security incident.
In August 1989, the Response '89 exercise tested EPA's role in a major earthquake in the San
Francisco Bay area.  In June  1989, EPA played  a major role in  the Transbord 111  exercise,
which addressed terrorists hijacking  a barge containing hazardous chemicals  and causing a
release of the chemicals.

                                                                   Exhibit 12

                                                  Major Responsibilities Under Title  ill
Provides support to
  States and local
  agendas by:

Q Issuing regulations and
  maintaining list ol
  regulated chemicals;

Q Maintaining the Toxic
  Chemical Release
  inventory data base
  (Section 313);

a Developing policy and
  guidance; and

a Providing technical
  assistance to States,
  SERCs. and LEPCs.
Provide support to SERCs
  and LEPCs by:

Q Appointing SERCs;

a Receiving and dissemi-
  nating Information; and

Q Under certain circum-
  stances, designating
  additional facilities or
  chemicals as subject to
  Titte Itl requirements.
  State Emergency
Provide support to LEPCs

Q Designating local emer-
  gency planning districts;

(J Appointing LEPCs lor each

U Reviewing local emergency
  plans; and

a Receiving and disseminat-
  ing information.
                                Local Emergency
                                                          Foster emergency prepared-
                                                            ness assistance to local
                                                            communities by:

                                                          Q Developing and maintain-
                                                            ing emergency plans; and

                                                          Q Receiving and disseminat-
                                                            ing Information.
                                                                                                                       Plan for and respond ap-
                                                                                                                        propriately to chemical
                                                                                                                        emergencies by:

                                                                                                                       Q Designating emergency

                                                                                                                       Q Providing inventory Infor-
                                                                                                                        mation to LEPCs and

                                                                                                                       a Notifying LEPCs and
                                                                                                                        SERCs of emergency
                                                                                                                        chemical releases; and

                                                                                                                       aProviding information
                                                                                                                        about chemical releases
                                                                                                                        to the community.

                                        -31 -
     The National Incident Coordination Team (NICT) was established as a mechanism for
coordinating Agency response to incidents and emergency situations of national significance.
In  FY 1989, the NICT provided technical assistance in the response to the Exxon Valdez oil
spill and helped develop the Report to the  President submitted by  EPA and the US Coast
Guard  on recommended actions and lessons learned from the accident.  Also, the NICT
provided limited support in the aftermath of Hurricane Hugo, particularly with respect to water
supply issues.

      Because the Director of the CEPP Office is the chairman of the National Response Team
(NRT), the Office provided ongoing support to the NRT during FY 1989.  This support  included
coordinating the oil spills conference  held in  February  1989 and the CERCLA interagency
budget. The Office provided assistance in developing the NRT annual report in January 1989.


     The CEPP  Office  complemented its preparedness efforts by  seeking ways to foster
industry efforts to prevent chemical accidents.  In FY 1989, the prevention program focused
on developing an understanding of the problem, encouraging facilities that manufacture, use,
or store  hazardous chemicals to improve their safety practices, and identifying the role of
government in addressing prevention  issues.

      One highlight of the prevention  program was the Chemical Safety Audit Program.  The
Office  offered three training courses  for Regional  and State personnel on  how to  conduct
chemical safety audits.  Over 100 persons were trained, and  32  audits were conducted in
FY 1989.  The audits are intended to make facilities aware of the need for improved chemical
safety  practices, to supplement data being collected through other data-gathering efforts, and
to continue the investigation of post-release activities. Work on a training course to provide
LEPCs and SERCs with information  on the audit program  and its benefits was  begun in

      One of the  prevention program's primary information gathering efforts during  FY 1989
was the Accidental Release Information Program (ARIP), a national database on the causes of
chemical accidents and actions taken to prevent recurrences.  ARIP also encourages corporate
attention to chemical hazards and provides information on prevention practices. A technical
assistance bulletin summarizing ARIP was developed and distributed to State and  local officials.

      The Offiot organized a conference to discuss chemical accident prevention issues with
smaller operations In July 1989.  The goal of this conference was to improve the awareness
of hazards  and  encourage prevention practices  among smaller  operations  that handle
hazardous substances.


      In  FY 1989, EPA  developed an  Interim Strategy  for Enforcement of Title III and the
CERCLA Section  103 Notification Requirements.   This strategy sets EPA's focus on cases
involving violations of the emergency notification provisions and violations concerning reporting
of chemical hazards and inventories  of hazardous chemicals stored at facilities. During FY

                                        - 32 -
1989, eleven  administrative cases were filed for violations of the reporting and emergency
notification requirements.  These cases carry potential penalties of over $600,000.

      EPA  also  developed "A Guide to  Chemical Use  in  Industry; Extremely Hazardous
Substance/Standard  Industrial Classification (SIC) Code Crosswalks  for  EPCRA."   This
document identifies chemicals used by  various industries, as identified by their SIC codes.
The information is used to identify companies that are likely to have notification and reporting
obligations under Title III.

      To help State and  local governments ensure that facilities covered by  Title  fli are
complying with the  law, EPA  published  a pamphlet entitled "Enforcement of the Emergency
Planning and Community  Right-to-Know Act."   This  pamphlet  outlines  the  enforcement
authorities granted to citizens, local governments, States, and EPA under Title III.


      The CEPP Office also coordinated  in FY 1989 with emergency response, preparedness,
and prevention organizations around the  world. Together with the U.S./Mexico Joint Response
Team (JRT),  the Office assisted  in developing a  Sister  City plan as well as  a simulation

      The Office has also been working  with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development  (OECD) in developing programs to define long-term policies for chemical accident
prevention  and  emergency  response,  with an  emphasis  on  international  exchange  of
information on measures designed to improve industrial safety practices and emergency plans
throughout the world.  In  May 1989, the Office participated in the OECD meeting in Berlin to
discuss the role of  industry management  practices.  The Office also  participated in another
OECD meeting in Stockholm, Sweden, in September 1989, on the role of labor and the public
in chemical accident prevention.   In addition, the office has been working with the  United
Nations  Environment  Programme  (UNEP)  in  its  effort  to implement Awareness and
Preparedness for Emergencies at the Local Level  (APELL), which is a program designed to
improve  awareness of hazardous installations and prepare emergency response plans in
developing countries.

      In coordination with the International Programs for Chemical Safety, a joint effort of the
World Health  Organization (WHO), the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), and
the International  Labour  Organization  (ILO), the  Office has  assisted  in developing  25
international chemical safety cards (ICSCs). ICSCs  provide standardized safety information on
chemicals to  all  nations, particularly developing nations.  CEPP Office staff participated in a
peer review of the ICSCs in Bologna,  Italy, in September 1989.

      In September 1989, the CEPP  Office  participated in the Fourth International Training
Course  in "Preventive Toxicology: Industrial and Household  Chemicals"  held in Leningrad,
USSR.   The  status of preparedness and  prevention activities  in the  United  States was


     The CEPP Office met all FY 1989 statutory deadlines under Title III. On March 29, 1989,
the office published a proposed rule  revising existing Sections 302-304 regulations and
establishing  permanent thresholds for reporting under Sections 311-312.  In this rulemaking,
EPA proposed to delete  six extremely  hazardous substances (EHSs).  In another effort to
coordinate and  reduce confusion  between the release reporting requirements under  Title III
(Section 304) and under CERCLA, EPA  proposed rules in January 1989 and August 1989 to
designate EHSs as  CERCLA hazardous substances and to adjust their reportable quantities
using the methodology established under CERCLA.


     The outreach  subcommittee of the Title III Workgroup coordinated various publications
in FY 1989  to assist in  educating State and local  officials,  the  public, and the regulated
community concerning Title III provisions.  The subcommittee coordinated development of the
booklet,  Chemicals  in  Your Community. Over 500,000 copies of this booklet have been
distributed to the public.  Two issues of the technical assistance bulletin series on successful
State and local Title III implementation practices were published  in FY 1989.  Another  bulletin
was published that lists all computer software commercially available to assist in emergency
planning and response.

                                 CHAPTER 5
     Over five million underground storage tanks (USTs) containing petroleum products or
hazardous chemicals are in use in the United States. Approximately two million of these tanks
have come under RCRA Subtitle I  regulations; about 15 percent of these  regulated tanks
(300,000) are estimated to be leaking (see Exhibit 13). The Office of Underground Storage
Tanks (OUST) has worked with local and State governments to develop a national program to
address this problem.

     During FY 1989, the major regulatory  framework for the national UST program was
completed:   technical  standards,  State  program approval,  and  financial  responsibility
requirements went into effect.  OUST's primary regulatory activities during FY 1989 consisted
of developing a proposed rule that provides local governments with an assurance mechanism
to comply with financial responsibility requirements.  AJso during 1989, OUST undertook  a
variety of activities to build and implement an effective UST program nationwide. This report
describes OUST's major efforts this fiscal year in the areas of regulatory activity and program
implementation.  The description of these activities focuses on two underlying principles on
which OUST believes that the UST program must be built - "franchising" and "continuous
                                    Exhibit 13

                         Number of Regulated and Leaking
                        Underground Storage Tanks In U.S.
              5 million
                                                40% (2 million)
                                                       15% (300.000)
                        Total USTs in United States • 5 million
              Regulated under RCRA Subtitle I
Regulated USTs estimated to be leaking

                                         - 35 -

      OUST's application of franchising principles to the UST program is based on the belief
 that the work done by State and local governments is the key to improving tank management
 over the next decade.  In the long run, State and local government regulation of UST systems
 will  be more  successful than Federal regulation. This is true for several reasons: the large
 number of facilities to be regulated; the special characteristics of the regulated community; and
 the  nature of the regulatory work to be performed.  Franchising works by using the strengths
 and knowledge of  both the franchisees  - the State and local programs that "run the business"
 day-to-day - and the franchiser - in this case, EPA, who delivers national advertising, policy,
 and crucial support services. The franchising approach differs from most other EPA regulatory
 program  approaches in that  it emphasizes  the States' role in  enforcing regulations and
 developing innovative ways  to further improve the national program, while placing EPA in a
 role that emphasizes support of the State programs.

 Continuous Improvement

      The other cornerstone on which the  OUST  program is  being  built is "Continuous
 Improvement," or, 'Total Quality Management" (TQM).  Continuous Improvement is based on
 several  key  concepts that  OUST  believes will contribute significantly to improving UST
 management. These include focusing on the  customer - those for whom EPA or a State or
 local agency is providing a service or product; relying on the experts - those in the office or
 in the field who actually do the work; analyzing work processes - understanding how the real
 work of tank  regulation and  management gets done; and continuously improving  those work
 processes to eliminate wasteful activities and thereby reduce time spent on the process.


 Technical Standards

      The Federal technical standards rule for  UST systems went into effect on December 23,
 1988.   This  rule  establishes  standards  for  design, construction  and installation;  general
 operating requirements;  release detection  standards; release reporting, investigation, and
 confirmation;  release response and corrective action requirements, and out-of-service UST
 systems  and closure requirements.  The release detection requirements for tanks installed
 before 1965 took effect December 23, 1989; those for tanks installed between 1965 and 1969
 become effective hi December 1990. Publication of the new requirements was accompanied
 by a major outreach campaign that included numerous slide presentations and the  distribution
 of over 200,000 copies  of  a booklet  entitled  "Musts for USTs,"  which  summarized  the
 requirements  In simple language.

 State Program Approval Standards

     The State  Program Approval rule also went  into effect  December 23, 1988. This rule
establishes requirements for the approval of  State UST  programs to operate in  lieu of  the
 Federal requirements. The criteria for approval of State programs are designed to  result in as
little unnecessary  disruption to  ongoing State initiatives  as  possible.  To meet  program
approval requirements under the rule,  States must have  in place requirements that meet

                                        - 36
Federal objectives for each of seven program elements.  The regulation provides flexibility for
evaluating tht stringency of State regulations and the adequacy of enforcement under State
programs.  Through this approach,  OUST is seeking to maintain its flexibility to approve a
variety of  State programs and to encourage States to use innovative as well as traditional
approaches in achieving compliance.

Financial  Responsibility Standards

      The   final financial responsibility rule was published  in  the  Federal  Register on
October 26, 1988,  and  went  into effect in  January  1989.   This  rule requires owners and
operators  to have sufficient resources to pay for the clean up of leaks and spills.  In addition,
the rule requires that funds be available to pay for the costs of third-party damages associated
with petroleum releases.  In January 1989, the requirements were in effect for all petroleum
marketing  firms owning 1000 or more USTs,  and all large ($20 million or more net worth) non-
petroleurn-marketing firms.   In October  1989, the  requirements  became  effective  for all
petroleum marketing firms owning 100-999 USTs; in April 1990, firms owning from 13 to 99
USTs will  be included,  and in October 1990, all remaining facilities.   Publication of these
requirements  was accompanied by a major outreach  campaign that included, among other
activities, the distribution of over 200,000 copies  of the booklet "Dollars and Sense," which
summarized the requirements  in easy to understand language.

Financial  Assurance for Municipalities

      Under the  schedule for phased compliance published in the October 1988 financial
responsibility  rule, local government entities were given 24 months from the promulgation date
to comply. In the rule, the Agency stated its intention to develop a financial test in the interim
that would aliow local governments to demonstrate  that they have  the requisite financial
strength and  ability to pay for the costs associated with UST releases.  The  main regulatory
work this past fiscal year has been the development of such a financial test for municipalities.
The Agency  recognized  that  there  were  important differences between governmental and
private entities:  unlike  private entities, municipalities  have  taxing authority as  an assured
source of  revenue; municipalities are geographically fixed - they cannot leave the State to
avoid an obligation; and furthermore, municipalities have a very low incidence of  bankruptcy.
In developing the rule, the Agency sought to keep the rule as flexible as possible to allow local
governments  a variety of choices in demonstrating financial responsibility, and to keep the
mechanisms as simple as possible to reduce the administrative burden on local governments
as  well as th@ Stfit© or local  agency responsible for implementing the regulation.   OUST
anticipates that the rule will be proposed this winter and hopes to promulgate the final rule
before the end of FY 1990.

Report to Congress on Exempt Tanks

      A large number of heating oil  and motor fuel tank systems are exempt from regulation
under Subtitle I of RCRA.  OUST completed a background document containing information
about heating oil and motor fuel tanks that are  exempt from  regulation under Subtitle I of
RCRA. This report presents information on the technical characteristics of exempt tanks and
the risks these tanks  pose to human health and the  environment.  In addition, OUST has
submitted  a  report to OMB  that summarizes the findings of the background  document,

discusses additional non-technical  considerations, and presents recommendations as to
whether these tanks should also be regulated under Subtitle I.


Building State and Local Programs

      UST program activity has increased substantially in recent years, as reflected by State
legislative and regulatory programs, as well as by State progress in having funding available
for cleanups.  The number of States with enabling legislation  for regulating USTs has grown
from three in 1980 to 42 in 1988. In addition, hundreds of counties and municipalities have
developed local UST ordinances and programs that often operate independently of the State.
Additionally, 54 (of 56)  States and Territories have  entered into Cooperative Agreements that
allow them to take advantage of the LUST Trust Fund, which was established by the 1986
SARA amendments to fund cleanups from leaking USTs under certain conditions.  States may
use the Trust Fund, which is financed by  a 1/10 of a cent per gallon excise tax on motor fuels,
to order cleanups of leaks by owners or operators, conduct cleanups, and to recover costs
of enforcement activities  and  cleanups.  Overall, EPA expects the current high level of  UST
program activity to continue to increase  rapidly.

      OUST,  in its role as franchiser, continues to  work closely with the  Regions and States
to assist them in developing strong UST  programs.  Examples of OUST's  efforts to implement
this approach include:

      •    OUST  developed  a handbook  (State  Program  Approval  Handbook. OSWER
           Directive 9690.8,  March 1989)  to assist  State officials who are building  and
           implementing State UST programs that will be no less stringent than the Federal
           UST requirements and will  operate  in  lieu  of the Federal UST  program.   This
           handbook is designed to increase the States' understanding  of how EPA intends
           to implement the regulations for State program approval that were promulgated last
           year.   This handbook seeks to  encourage State applications  by  making the
           application  process as easy  and straightforward  as possible; describing clearly
           EPA's expectations and criteria for State  program approval;  and encouraging a
           wide range of State UST programs tailored to meet  their specific needs while
           providing for  adequate protection of  human health and the environment.

      •    To supplement the State program approval handbook, OUST prepared another
           document,  Suggested Procedures for Review of State  UST Application. OSWER
           Directive 9650.9, March  1989.  This document proposes a set of procedures for
           EPA Regional review of individual State UST applications.  Although OUST does
           not expect the first State applications to be submitted to the EPA Regional offices
           until  next year, it  is already  directly involved  in assisting  States  with  their
           applications.  OUST has worked with New Mexico and Region VI, for example, to
           assist them in resolving  program approval issues.

                                         38 -
      «     OUST, together with a number of representatives of the regulated community and
           States, developed effective outreach materials that States, trade associations, and
           suppliers are using  to alert owners and operators of the first compliance deadline
           for leak detection.

      OUST provides States with technical assistance and enforcement backup as necessary,
and  supports  them  in the  development of  unique approaches and innovative tools  for
managing their UST programs.  OUST also conducted pilot projects during FY 1989 to assist
several States and counties in  establishing "expedited" enforcement programs.  Expedited
enforcement programs have been demonstrated in UST  and other environmental programs to
enhance  compliance  using a minimum of resources.  Such  programs endeavor to reduce  the
number of costly and time-consuming enforcement efforts by employing a process similar to
issuing traffic tickets at the scene of the violation. OUST has developed the tools needed to
build and implement  expedited  enforcement for dissemination to other interested States and

      One  important  role for   OUST in a  franchise-based  program  is  to  serve as a
clearinghouse for transferring technologies and ideas developed  by other organizations.  In
one  project  established  to assist States in  ensuring  compliance with  leak  detection
requirements,  OUST studied the  methods  States  and localities have used  to achieve
compliance and is providing specific help to three pilot States who will be comprehensively
enforcing the leak detection requirements.  Research on the pilot projects demonstrated that
many States and localities are developing innovative approaches to achieving compliance.

      OUST employs the principles of continuous improvement  in providing technical  and
implementation assistance to Regions, States, and local governments.  For example:

      •     OUST staff worked  with staff of Region  I's  UST program to identify and analyze
           ways to  improve  the Region's process for negotiating its LUST Trust Fund
           Cooperative Agreements; the newly developed process will result in labor savings
           of one full-time employee  over a two-year period.

      •     OUST is working with a number of States to identify obstacles to spending LUST
           Trust  Fund  monies  and reporting  their  activities.    Next  steps  will  include
           improvement projects to overcome these obstacles and to design processes that
           are conducive to effective spending and reporting.

      «     OUST is  working with  States to  study  and improve the process used for  site
           investigations.   OUST  is  seeking to assist States and  responsible parties to
           conduct sit© investigations quicker, faster, cheaper, and better.

      •     In  another project,  OUST  is  studying  how  consideration  of  human  and
           environmental health affects  the  clean-up  process and what OUST can do to
           adequately consider human and environmental health while minimizing disruption
           to the clean-up process.

                                        - 39
      *     The Office also developed a health and safety training program for UST inspectors,
           which was presented in all EPA Regions and  broadcast via satellite to over 100
           additional UST investigators.

      EPA Regional Offices continue to work closely with States to enhance their program
development capabilities and  performance levels.  Again  this year,  the  Regional  Offices
awarded UST grants to  the  States to assist  with  program development.   OUST  has
substantially increased its financial support to the Regions  to address State problem areas
through specific Targeted Improvement Projects  (TIPs).   FY 1989 TIPs included supporting
Connecticut to analyze its UST workload and project future resource needs; assisting New
Jersey to develop  and implement its  UST  permitting system;  assisting  Utah  to analyze
proposed financial responsibility legislation and liability issues; and providing  an UST inspector
training  course for fire marshals and building inspectors  in Alaska.  OUST also  prepared a
compendium covering all the TIPs undertaken to make it easier for States and  Regions to
exchange information and program tools.

      OUST highlighted  its efforts to  foster strong communication  between  States  by
sponsoring  the  second  annual All-States Conference,  entitled  "Making  It Work."   The
conference brought together over  250 UST program staff from local, State, Regional, and
Federal  levels to discuss all aspects of UST program  management. The major focus was to
allow States to share information with each other; most of the sessions at the conference were
moderated by Regional representatives and featured presentations by State  staff.  Discussion
topics ranged  from  the technologies that  influenced  technical  standards  to financial
responsibility requirements to  implementation issues  such as  program costs.  Overall, the
conference was  a great  success,  with participants requesting that this type of information
exchange continue in the future.

LUST Trust Fund Activities

      At the end of FY 1989, the Regions had  negotiated cooperative agreements with 54 out
of 56 States and  Territories.  One additional State is currently working toward a  cooperative
agreement and  EPA anticipates  that it will  be  awarded  during FY  1990.   Cooperative
agreements  between the States and EPA enable the States to spend trust fund resources for
cleanups  and associated program costs.   During  the  fiscal year,  the Regions awarded
approximately $42.5 million from the LUST trust fund.

      To date, 0ver 16,000 cleanups have been  initiated  by responsible parties, and  nearly
5,700 have been completed. In addition, States have begun more than 220 corrective actions
using trust fund monies.  States will continue to encourage owners and operators to conduct
corrective actions, and will take appropriate response and  enforcement actions where owners
and operators are unable or unwilling  to perform  corrective actions.

      This year OUST has worked toward improving  the  cooperative agreement negotiation
and award process. OUST developed a new process for allocating trust fund money designed
to encourage States to work toward program goals.  In addition to the base allocation and
allocations based on need, a third allocation component -"readiness to proceed" - examines
the State's ability to implement a program (e.g., conduct State-lead cleanups and oversee RP-
lead  cleanups).  States therefore have an incentive to develop a strong and active program.

                                        - 40
Several Regions have extended the time frame over which awards are granted to three years,
thereby reducing th© level of effort required to process State applications in subsequent years.
In addition, ensuring consistent levels of funding over several years allows States to  budget
for long-term cleanups.  Currently,  OUST is conducting a study to analyze LUST trust fund
spending and reporting patterns  in five States in three EPA Regions to help States improve
performance under the trust fund.

Outreach Activities

      Because OUST considers "advertising," or making the regulated community aware, to be
one of the major responsibilities of a franchiser, the Office has developed an outreach strategy
that identifies various potential audiences (e.g., owners and operators, State and local officials,
trade  associations, Congress) for UST outreach materials and aggressively provided materials
to these audiences. Consistent with the principle that UST regulatory activities should occur
at the State and local  levels, OUST prepares the  materials  and then, generally, makes them
available to States, trade associations, and other groups who, in turn, deliver the materials to
the audience of concern.   In some  cases, OUST provides  camera-ready copy to  States who
can add State-specific information and then reproduce and distribute the materials.

      During  FY  1989, OUST continued  producing materials to help owners and operators
understand and comply with the new requirements and  help  specific audiences, such as
inspectors,  States, and local officials, to do a better job of implementation. In FY 1989, OUST
developed the following materials about the UST Program:
           Musts  for USTs - A simple, easy  to  understand summary  of  the  technical
           requirements for USTs;

           Dollars and Sense - An easy to understand summary of the financial responsibility
           regulations for USTs;

           Commitment To Cooperation:  Franchising the UST Program - A description of the
           UST program franchise approach for State UST staff; and

           Oh  Noi - A simple, easy to understand summary of  how to respond to UST leaks
           for owners and operators.
      •     Tank Closure Without Tears - Depicting proper closure techniques for inspectors;

      •     Doing It Right - Demonstrating proper tank installation for installers.

                                        . 41 -

      «     Tank Tour - A guide to the Federal UST program;

      «     Financial Assurance Programs - A handbook for State officials;

      «     UST Work-A-Budqet - A worksheet package for State program officials to help in
           estimating program costs;

      •     Petroleum Tank Releases Under Control - a handbook for States and remediation

      «     Detecting Leaks - a handbook for State officials on the leak detection methods
           allowed in the Federal regulations; and

      »     Leak Detection Compliance Tool Kit - a compilation of short, easy to understand
           materials on the Federal leak detection requirements and methods to assist owners
           and operators to come into compliance.

  Bulletin and Newsletter:

      «     LUSTLINE - A quarterly bulletin aimed at State officials that discusses the latest
           UST issues and developments; produced under a grant by the New England Water
           Pollution Control Commission;

      »     Tank Technology Update - A technical newsletter focusing on technical information
           exchange; produced under a grant by the University of Wisconsin; and

      «     Compliance Alliance - enforcement information for State and Regional staff.

Measuring OUSTs Progress

      This year OUST undertook a project to define the baseline of performance, track the
extent of the leaking UST problem, identify areas where performance could be improved, and
measure progress on implementing OUST's  strategic plan for the next four years.  OUST
worked  with Regional program managers  and workgroup members from seven States to
develop meaningful progress  measures that minimized costs and difficulty of data collection
and to define the  measures so that data collection would be consistent across States.  Forty-
seven measures were developed.  Data on  26 of the  measures will  be collected  through
Regional reporting or State reporting  (i.e., notification data, Trust Fund reporting, and grant
reporting).  Information on the remaining 21  measures will be collected through special studies
using data compiled from pilot States and industry.  Although data for some of the reporting
measures were collected during FY 1989, formal data collection for all measures will begin
during FY 1990.  Once collected, the  data will  be compiled into an OUST annual report to
highlight the National UST Program's progress toward meeting the goals of the OUST strategic