-------
Implementation Steps:

   o    Headquarters should explore the advantages and disadvantages
        of negotiating conduct of the RD together with the RI/FS,
        and separately negotiating conduct of the remedial action
        upon completion of the RD.  Routine Fund-financing of the RD
        prior to PRP conduct of the remedial action is not a varible
        option for the problem.

                     F.  Settlement Authorities

Topics  1. Mixed Funding and de Minimus Settjej^n^

Status and Accomplishments:

   As part of EPA's effort to facilitate the us* of mixed funding,
Headquarters has issued general guidances which establish the basic
framework for the use of mixed funding.   The  Agency has  also worked
with the Regions to identify candidate mixed funding sites and has
completed an extensive training program in each Region on how to
utilize mixed funding.

     As part of EPA's effort to facilitate the use of de minimia
settlements, the Agency has issued two general guidances to the
Regional offices which establish the basic framework for the use of
de minimia settlements and one on de minimia landowner settlements.6
The Agency has also worked with the Regions to identify candidate dg
minimia sites and has completed an extensive training program in
each Region on how to use de minimis settlements.

     In addition, the Settlements Incentives/Disincentives Workgroup
identified disincentives to the use of de minimia settlements and
specifically addressed ways to increase incentives for using
roinimis settlements.  The workgroup provided specific
recommendations for selecting candidate de minimis sites ,s
     5   "Evaluating Nixed Funding Settlements" October 20,  1987,
OSWER Directive number 9834.9, and "Interim Policy on Mixed Funding
Settlements Involving the Pre Authorization of States or Political
Subdivisions," Nay 27, 1988, OSWER Directive number 9834.9a.

     4"Interl* Guidance on Settlements with P« Minimia Waste
Contributors," June 19,  1987, OSWER Directive number 9834.7;
"Interim Model CZRCLA Section 122  (g)(4) Pe Minimis Haste
Contributor Consent Decree and Administrative Order Guidance,1*
October 19, 1987, OSWER  Directive number 9834.7-1A; and "Guidance on
Landowner Liability under Section 107(a)(1) of CERCLA, De Minimia
Settlements under Section 122(g)(l)(B) of CERCLA, and Settlements
with Prospective Purchasers of Contaminated Property," June 6, 1989,
OSWER Directive number 9835.9.

                                 20

-------
determining when to enter into such settlements, developing methods
for achieving de minimis settlements with minimal resources and
without alienating the major PRPs, and removing impediments to de.
ninimis settlements through the development of additional guidance.

Issue:  Some Regions are reluctant to pursue mixed funding or de.
        minimus settlements either because they have little or no
        direct experience in achieving such settlements or because
        they are too resource intensive to use.

Implementation Steps:

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review,  Headquarters
        will explore the possibility of creating incentives for the
        use of de minimus settlements by providing those Regions who
        successfully achieve de minimus settlements with
        supplemental resources.  This will also b« considered for
        mixed funding settlements.

   o    Headquarters should explore whether "trouble-shooters"
        with experience in achieving mixed funding or da minimus
        settlements can be loaned to or among the Regions for
        sites where such settlements are being considered.

   o    Headquarters should explore whether a formal mechanism for
        exchanging information among the Regions on successful mixed
        funding or de minimus settlements should be established and
        how it would work.

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review,  Headquarters
        will explore whether additional Regional training is
        necessary*

Issue:  The FY 89/90 budget process requires the Regions to budget
        for mixed funding needs through the Superfund Comprehensive
        Accomplishment Plan (SCAP).  It is difficult to predict in
        advance which sites may require mixed funding.  Where
        unanticipated mixed funding needs arise, defunding of one
        site to. cover mixed funding needs for another may cause
        delays in cleanup of those defunded sites.  In addition,
        making this information available through the SCAP could
        compromise negotiations where the PRPs may obtain
        information that money has already been set aside to cover a
        shortfall for preauthorization.

Implementation Step:

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review, Headquarters
        will continue to explore whether it is appropriate to set up
        a national reserve that would be available to the Regions
        for mixed funding needs.


                                 21

-------
Issue:  The Preauthorization Decision Document (FDD)  is currently
        drafted by Headquarters.  There have been instances where
        certain provisions of the FDD overlap with or are in
        conflict with provisions of the consent decree.  The overlap
        leaves the PRPs unclear as to what can and cannot be
        negotiated.  Finally, there is no consistency in the manner
        in which PRPs request preauthorization, although the Regions
        have been instructed to provide the Harvey and Knott FDD as
        an example.

Implementation Steps:

   o    Headquarters should explore when it is appropriate to
        delegate the authority to draft the POO to the Regions with
        Headquarters oversight.

   o    Headquarters and the Regions should review the model POD and
        consent decree to identify where overlap exists and make
        revisions accordingly.

   o    Headquarters should publish the Harvey and Knott POD in the
        Federal Register with a notification that the Agency expects
        PRPs use this as a model for their PDOs.
Issue:  Questions continue to be raised about whether Federal
        procurement requirements apply to the procurement of
        contractors for work conducted pursuant to a
        preauthorization agreement (e.g., whether competitive
        bidding of contractors is needed to establish the
        reasonableness of costs to be incurred by the PRPs to ensure
        they can be reimbursed by the Fund for such costs).

Implementation Step:

   o    Headquarters recently issued a memorandum 7 to the Regions
        which clarifies the procurement procedures that aay be used
        to assure that the costs incurred by the PRPs are
        appropriate based on Federal cost principles.  Headquarters
        should explore whether there is the need to provide
        additional support to the Regions in implementing this
        memorandum («.g., site-specific assistance).

Issue:  Region* believe special accounts could be established to
        retain de minimla cash-outs for immediate access of funds to
        support cleanup activities when agreement has been reached.
        Such access will minimize delays in funding cleanup
        activities at sites, provide Regions with an  incentive to
        pursue de minimis settlements, and provide PRPs with an
        incentive to settle.
     7"Procurement Under Preauthorization/Mixed Funding," April 19,
1989, OSWER Directive number 9225.01-01.

                                 22

-------
Implementation step:

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review,  Headquarters
        will continue to pursue the idea of setting up special
        accounts that would be available to the Regions for use at
        sites -where de minimis settlements are reached.

Topic:  2. Non-Binding Allocations of Responsibility fNBARs1

     The Agency has issued guidance to the Regions on the
preparation of NBARs.   The Agency's  policy is  to  generally  allow
the PRPs to determine allocation questions among themselves although
NBARs should be used under appropriate circumstances.   To date, only
one formal NBAR has been completed, although the Regions do become
informally involved in allocations, through the development and
distribution of volumetric ranking lists.  The quality of waste-in
information, which is prepared for special notice, varies by the
availability of information at particular sites.

Issue:  Questions remain on what role the Agency should assume for
        facilitating allocations generally and what mechanisms are
        available for facilitating such allocations in appropriate*
        cases.  In the majority of cases, the PRPs don't want the
        Agency to prepare formal NBARs, but they do want EPA to
        facilitate allocations through the development of volumetric
        ranking or waste-in lists.

Implementation Steps:

   o    Headquarters should take the initiative on promoting more
        Regional involvement in facilitating allocations by:

             Sending a memorandum to the Regions endorsing more
             Regional involvement in allocations  in appropriate
             cases.  This may include a discussion about allocation
             mechanisms that have been used to date as well as
             whether they were successful and why.

             Identifying the appropriate forum for exploring the
             Agency's role and mechanisms  (e.g.,  the CERCLA
             Settlements Lead Region Workgroup).  The  forum should
             explore:

             —   the range of allocation mechanisms,

                  under what circumstances particular  allocation
                  mechanisms may be useful,
     8  "Interim Guidelines on Preparing Nonbinding Preliminary
Allocations of Responsibility," May  16,  1987, OSWER Directive number
9839.1.

                                  23

-------
                  the use of neutral third parties,

                  how to do allocations between owners/generators
                  and generators/generators,  and

                  what has worked and what has not worked in various
                  Regions as well as what mechanisms should be used
                  to transfer this information among the Regions.

                G. Unilateral Section  106 Authorities

Topic: 1. Unilateral Section 106 Orders

Status and Accomplishments:

     The Agency has a high compliance rate for section 106
unilateral orders and is increasing the number of unilateral orders
issued for both removals and remedial actions.

     The Agency's guidance on section 106 unilateral orders is
currently under revision to reflect statutory changes, new program
directions and accumulated Agency experience.  Headquarters is also
developing model section 106 unilateral orders to facilitate
unilateral enforcement actions in the Regional offices.

Issue:  The Agency is perceived as failing to establish a credible
        record of administrative enforcement against recalcitrants.
        Regions have in the past been reluctant to routinely issue
        unilateral orders due to avoidance of delays or
        misconceptions of their role in the program, and resource
        constraints.

Implementation Steps:

   o    Instead of a quota system, Headquarters strategy should
        strongly encourage Regions to issue unilateral orders
        routinely to PRPs at removal and remedial sites who meet the
        criteria set forth in Agency guidance, prior to Fund
        financing and/or judicial referral.  Historically, the
        Agency has been cautious about issuing unilateral orders at
        RI/PS sites, but has done so in a few appropriate
        circumstances.

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review, Headquarters
        strategy should require Regions to issue UAOs before a Fund-
        financed response can proceed.  In exceptional
        circumstances, the Regions should provide justification  for
        their decision not to issue the order.

Issue:  The Agency has been criticized for failing to provide
        settlement incentives and disincentives for nonsettlors  with
        respect to administrative enforcement.

                                 24

-------
Implementation Steps:

   o    For settlements encompassing less than 100% of the
        identified response action, Headquarters guidance will
        encourage Regions to issue unilateral orders to compel
        nonsettlors to perform the remaining portion.

   o    For settlements involving fever than all of the viable PRPs,
        Headquarters guidance will encourage Regions to consider
        carving out separate tasks from the settlement for *
        nonsettlors to perform under unilateral orders/ where the
        work to be performed is readily divisible.

   o    Where a settlement agreement for 100% of the identified
        response action has been reached with fewer than all  liable
        PRPs, Headquarters will consider guidance for Regions to
        explore use of parallel unilateral orders.  Parallel
        unilateral orders may assist settlors to bring contribution
        actions against nonsettlors by directing liable nonsettlors
        to coordinate and cooperate with the settlors' conduct of
        the response action.

   o    Headquarters and DOJ will explore the possibility of
        obtaining costs from nonsettlors through unilateral orders.


Topic: 2. Section 106 Judicial Referrals

Status and Accomplishments:

     Historically, judicial referrals have been resource intensive
and have sometimes not produced satisfactory results in that they
have taken years to resolve and have allowed judicial  re-examination
of remedial decisions.  Statutory amendments to provision*
concerning the administrative record and judicial standard of review
were designed to resolve some of these impediments.

     Headquarters issued a "Guidance on CERCLA Section 106 Judicial
Actions'* in February of 1989.  Headquarters is drafting a strategy
on treble damages to facilitate Agency collection of treble damages.
EPA and DOJ ar* working together to standardize enforcement tools.
They developed a new Model Litigation Report to improve the quality
of judicial referrals.

Issue:  The Agency is perceived as failing to establish a credible
        record of judicial enforcement against recalcitrants and
        PRPs who fail to adequately comply with unilateral orders
        and settlement agreements.  In the past, Regions have been
        reluctant to refer cases to DOJ due to resource
        requirements, time constraints and the ability to fund
        response actions where there were no settlements.

                                 25

-------
©
      H@adqpart@rg will encourag©  Rugions to s@lisetiv aooos^ieno ©f  a
       00suf fieiont eauso10 defense t© ponaltioo asdl ^aaafoo at
       trial o

       g©'©^i candidates for referral fossos'aiiy oh©5a2,^l o©^  ineludo
       bankrupt PRFSo  Bankruptcy eases sh©\sM feo Ofg^oono^,.
       carefully based upon th©  strength ©f ovMosaeo,, the
                  situation , and litifativo riolso»
                                               f©!? !ni©!nioottl©ro with
plonosj'
       sottloaoin\t
       rosoet
                                    naaoo
                      sottlomeinit
                       press  releases in
      investigate
       nd
       t©
        f
,  in their annual
                                        
-------
   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review,  Headquarters
        may pursue establishment of a litigation budget set aside of
        dollars and staff, over and above the Regions' regular
        budget, for use in §106 unilateral order litigation.

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review,  Headquarters
        will investigate the creation-of Headquarters Support Teams
        and Cost Recovery Documentation Teams to provide "hands-on"
        assistance at critical junctures in case preparation.

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review, Headquarters
        may investigate adjusting internal accountability
        commitments for other site activities, to the extent that
        judicial enforcement pulls staff away from other activities.

   o    To assist with DOJ's limited resources, Headquarters will
        investigate deputization from OOJ of qualified EPA Regional
        counsel attorneys and/or office of Enforcement and
        Compliance Monitoring attorneys to represent EPA in court.
        Alternatively, Headquarters should pursue allocating
        resources for greater litigation support.

                      H. ft'flpjpistrative  Records

Topic:   1. Record Compilation

Status and Accomplishments:

     Administrative records for selection of response action are
being compiled in all ten Regions.  Quarterly workshops, tracking
systems, audits, and training are being used to assure the quality
and timeliness of records and public access to those records.  Each
Region now has a remedial administrative records coordinator.

     The records program for removal actions is improving.
Quarterly workshops, tracking systems, and training are being used
to assure the quality and timeliness of records and public access to
these records.  Each Region now has a removal administrative records
coordinator.

     In FY 88, Headquarters published proposed regulations on
administrative) records - Subpart I of the proposed revisions to the
National Contingency Plan  (NCP).  Headquarters also released
"Interim Guidance on Administrative Records for the Selection of
CERCLA Response Actions'1 in March of 1989.  A  "Compendium of
Guidance Documents'1, centralizing guidance documents  frequently used
in selecting response actions was sent on to the Regions for
comment.  The compendium will be used to-save Agency  resources In
compiling administrative records.

Issue:  Several outstanding issues have been  identified which remain
        to be resolved concerning administrative records.

                                 27
-------
        o
     Regions believe that space for these voluminous records
     will be at a premium.

     Inconsistencies exist among Regions in th© timing of
     eempiling and updating the records.

     States are supposed to compile and maintain records for
     State-lead sites.  Many Regions ar© still compiling
     thurn for the States.
©    Deeigiens on what to do with confidential sat©rial
     rnquirog coordination b@tw
-------
Issue:  The Agency has been criticized for failing to track
        compliance with CERCLA consent orders and decrees in a
        comprehensive and accessible manner.

Implementation Steps:

   o    Regions should establish management mechanisms to allow
        appropriate oversight of consent decree and consent order
        compliance.

   o    Headquarters will explore the resource implications
        of such mechanisms and systems upon the Regions.

   o    Headquarters should help Regions establish their own consent
        decree and order tracking systems.  Regions without such
        systems should be encouraged to adopt a system comparable to
        the systems already in place in other Regional offices.

Topic: 2. Penalties for Non-compliance

Status and Accomplishments:

     The Agency may pursue stipulated penalties and statutory
penalties (under section 109) for noncompliance with orders and
decrees.  EPA may pursue penalties  (under section 106)

for non-compj^ance with orders issued under section 106*.   Regions
have the responsibility of entering all penalties received from
PRPs, including stipulated penalties, into CERCLIS.

   The Agency has information that  indicates that it has sought
penalties from PRPs for non-compliance at eight sites.  Three
penalty cases were settled through  consent decrees.  Ons case
resulted in a judgment for the Agency.  The other four referrals are
still pending.  However, although ths data has not yet appeared on
CERCLIS, EPA is collecting penalties at other sites.

Issue:  The Agency has been criticized for failing to collect
        penalties in the event of non-compliance with consent orders
        and decrees.  Regions have  in the past been reluctant to
        pursue, penalties due to resource and time constraints.

Implementation Steps:

   o    To facilitate penalty collection, Headquarters should train
        Regional Project Managers (RPMs) to develop an "enforcement
        trail" by documenting important meetings and decisions.
     9  "Guidance on Use of Stipulated Penalties in Hazardous Waste
Consent Decrees," September 21,  1987, OSWER Directive number
9835.25.

                                  29
-------
   o    Regions should circulate among program and ORC management
        reports generated by Regional management or tracking
        systems.  This will notify management of non-compliance.
   o    Headquarters should explore providing Regions with
        additional workforce or budget supplements for penalty
        colle'ction.

                          J. Cost Recovery

Topic:  1. Recovery of Costs

Status and Accomplishments

     The cost recovery program serves a dual purpose for CERCLA
enforcement:  recovery of revenues for the Fund, and encouragement
of voluntary PRP cleanup action by eliminating incentives for PRPs
to wait for the government to do the work.  It is inevitable that
cost recovery lags behind Fund expenditure.

   EPA has approximately 26 current guidance documents which address
cost recovery indirectly and 13 that address cost recovery directly;
3 more are in draft.  Specifically, the Superfund Cost Recovery
Strategy, guidance on Cost Recovery Actions/Statute of Limitations,
guidance on Direct Referral of cases to DOJ, guidance on Documenting
Decisions not to take Cost Recovery Actions, guidance on Financial
Management of the Superfund Program, and State Super f%nd Financial
Management and Recordkeeping guidance have been issued since the
passage of SARA in October 1986.

Issue:  EPA is criticized for accepting cost recovery settlements
        for less than one hundred percent of total costs.  However,
        not all Fund expenditures are feasible for cost recovery.
        When a settlement has been reached for a large portion of
        costs, it may be prohibitively expensive to negotiate or
        litigate for small remaining costs.  Further, as^discussed
        in the Superfund Management Review, the costs attributable
        to abandoned sites (sites with no PRPs) should not be
        attributed-to other sites for collection; also comparisons
        between revenue returned to the Fund and total amounts
        authorized for the Fund are misleading.

Implementation Steps:

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review, EPA will
        identify realistic expectations for the cost recovery
        program — perhaps in part by clarifying what costs are
        realistically available for recovery and defining 100
        percent.

   o    Headquarters and the Regions will communicate cost recovery
        priorities which stress receiving the highest return  for
        each dollar invested.  To effectively implement this  goal,

                                 30
-------
        these priorities should be promptly communicated to Congress
        and the public.

Topic:  2. Documentation of All Costs

Status and Accomplishments:

     PRPs are increasingly focusing on the documentation supporting
EPA's cost expenditures.  However, documentation of all costs is a
burdensome process.  Enforcement resources can be used more
efficiently if cost documentation questions are litigated less
frequently.  Further, some Federal agencies lack the appropriate
systems to completely document their costs associated with working
on a Superfund site.

     In FY88, EPA convened a cost documentation work group to
address some of these issues impeding cost documentation.  As
required in the Superfund Management Review, EPA is developing a
regulation which identifies the documentation necessary to establish
costs and expenditures in a cost recovery proceeding.

Issua:  To continue its aggressive approach on cost recovery, EPA *
        should clarify or standardize cost documentation procedures.

Implementation steps:

   o    As suggested in the Superfund Management Review, EPA will
        enter into a formal agreement with some federal agencies on
        acceptable cost accounting and documentation standards.

   o    Headquarters should continue implementation of database
        systems (Integrated Financial Managment System, Superfund
        Transactions Automated Retrieval Systems, category reports).

   o    Regional offices should consider establishing individual
        cost documentation/cost recovery support units to
        standardize procedures, conduct record maintenance training,
        and develop necessary expertise.

Topic:  3. Removal Coat Recovery

     As stated in the Superfund Management Review, the three year
statute of limitations under CERCLA/SARA for removal actions has
prompted an increased number of judicial referrals.  The legal
resources required to avoid the possibility of expired claims
competes with legal resources needed for RO/RA negotiations and
enforcement.  Although EPA's top priorities for cost recovery action
are remedial actions and removal actions that are valued at over
$200,000, some litigation of small cost recoveries is essential to
maintain PRP incentives to settle.
                                  31
-------
Issue:   The Agency cost recovery strategy does not precisely
        identify priorities and procedures for addressing removal
        cost recovery actions.

Implementation Steps:

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review,  Headquarters
        will establish a strategy for cost recovery of removal
        actions.  The process should meet the objectives of
        maximizing revenue and maintaining incentives for PRPs to
        settle without diverting resources from other critical
        stages of the enforcement process.  The strategy may
        include:

        —   a minimum number of judicial referrals, to maintain the
             incentive to settle;

             use of arbitration or alternate dispute resolution (for
             cases under $500,000) prior to judicial referral; and

             an improved process for ordering or negotiating and
             overseeing PRP removal actions, to minimize the number
             of cost recovery actions that will be needed in
             subsequent years.
                                 32
-------
                     III. PROGRAM RELATIONSHIPS

     The Superfund program is administered by a number of EPA
offices (e.g. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,  Office
of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring, Office of Administration
and Resource Management), other Federal Agencies and the States.
This Plan recognizes that revisions and/or changes to the current
relationships established between these governmental entities should
be explored.  Critical to a successful Superfund program is
streamlining or improving the present approach.  Identified  below
are major areas where adjustments to the process should assist in
achieving the goal of a more efficient and productive Superfund
enforcement program.

                  A.  FUND/ENFORCEMENT INTEGRATION

     The Superfund Management Review has recommended that the Agency
establish an integrated enforcement and response program.  The
Agency should encourage or compel PRPs to conduct the response
action at all sites where viable PRPs are found before using the
Fund, except in emergencies.  This "One Superfund Program -
Enforcement First" concept should lead to development of proper
skill mixes in Regional offices with staff working on a complete
program approach.  The following recommendations from the Superfund
Management Review are implementable methods of restructuring the
existing two programs' relationship.

o  The Agency should develop an integrated timeline for both
   enforcement and Fund-financed activities.  The timeline should
   include deadlines for completing negotiations and issuing
   administrative orders.  The timeline should also reflect program
   goals for completing phases of the response action, and serve as
   a benchmark for assessing progress at sites.

o  The Agency should encourage a proper skill mix for support of
   cleanup work, specifically including enforcement actions.  The
   Agency should encourage creating specialized units for
   enforcement support activities, such as PRP searches, cost
   recovery efforts and administrative record support in the
   Regions.

   Listed below are additional methods to assist in integrating
response and enforcement activities.

                    1.  Site Classification Svatem

Issue:  Until recently, the Agency classified sites either as Fund
        or enforcement-lead.  This classification served two
        purposes.  First, it identified sites to which enforcement
        activities would be addressed.  Second, it was used  for
        budgeting purposes to estimate the FTE and dollar needs for
        managing the program.  For an integrated program the  first

                                 33
-------
purpose no longer exists.  The second purpose  (budget
estimating) is still necessary, however, but must be
structured to support the notion of enforcement actions
being considered for every site.
Headquarters has eliminated the sit© classification system.
Th© integrated tia©lin© will mak© clear that each site
should und©rg© basic enforcement steps, beginning with early
PRP s©arehes<>  Regions should continue t© ©stiaat© for
budg©ting and planning purposes which sites ar© likely to b®
enforcement or Fund°leads  Increased flexibility in funding
and th® manner in which SPMS eoamitaents ar© formulated will
allow (and in fact eneeurag©) great©? us© of enforcement
tools.  (See itea 3.  Flexible Funding.)



Tho integrated fund and ©nforeeaent prieritios matrix was
originally designed tes identify relative program priorities
by listing major program activities f©r which resources are
presided? and t© provide a framework t© estimate th® funding
levels needed t© support tho activities,,  Tho overall goals
identified in tho priorities matrix o©h© oomo of th© major
th@®QS of the Superfund ManagQaont loviow aitigat©
iaaediat© threats? aovo sites int© eloanup using PRP
resources as a first rQserti and aai^aisi a feasQlin© of
supporting activities«
                Itopo s

        The Agency should adept  for use- in
        management activities the  intograt
                                   andl tho
                                            ,,  budgeting  and
                                                 matrix
     Flexible
funds inifeiailjf
PRPs in
varous
and judicial
or eoapelliini<|7
gain would I°>o ££10
PHPs to participate
              enhances tho  ability ©f  tho ^og ions t© utilize
                  for  Fund activities t© leverage against
                            Tho  throat  t© uoo tho Fund and
                       0^ §1Q@ adai^ioteativo ©^ors (AOs)
                will  achieve diroet roo^lto Iby encouraging
              parties t© conduct tho uosko  Tho additional
                        ©2  a erodlifelo  throat that encourages
               tho  settlement
     fiossifeility  requires early inv©lvoaoin\t ©£ tho
            pg'efg'a® in idonti£ieati©inj ©2 fUS'o aM
dovoI©p®ORt ©2  a  th©rough eaoo stratQ
-------
        enforcement activities.  The presumption should be that the
        Agency will first attempt to pursue a negotiated PRP action.

        If the choice is made to enforce, a defined time period for
        negotiations must be established.  If negotiations fail, one
        of two events should occur: 1) take additional enforcement
        action such as a §106 action or 2) proceed with Fund-
        financed activity without any significant delay.

Implementation Steps:

   o    A multi-million dollar fund will be maintained at
        Headquarters in FY 90 to backup RD/RA negotiations.  This is
        in addition to the lump sum RO account which the Regions can
        adjust between sites.  Headquarters and Regions should
        explore whether more flexibility is needed.

            4.   Headauartera/Reaional  Organization Review

Issue:  The present organizational structure of the Agency,
        especially Headquarters, might benefit from potential    v
        rearrangement or modifications.  Some Regions have already
        reorganized their Superfund offices and successfully
        integrated the Fund and enforcement elements.

Implementation Steps:

   o    As stated in the Superfund Management Review, Headquarters
        will consider the benefits of conducting a review of
        Headquarters and Regional operations for possible
        restructuring of some of the offices and/or functions.

             B.   HEADQUARTERS/REGIONAL/DOJ RELATIONSHIPS

                         1.  Consistent Goals

Issue:  Technical staff and attorneys perceive that each have
        different goals when pursuing settlements.

   Technical staff are tasked with achieving a quick and technically
proper cleanup while attorneys are tasked with developing  legally
defensible and protective documents.

Implementation Steps:

   o    Headquarters, Regions, and the Department  of Justice  (DOJ)
        should identify and commit to shared short and  long-tern
        goals and objectives for the program (e.g., in  the
     10OERR has established  a workgroup  to  review problems  and/or
issues related to flexible  funding.

                                 35
-------
        Int S>lafa (§<£M>)  aM Strategic
        Planning asi^l ^asja^QaoFJt  iysto® (S?S3§)  e©s®ifeaoafes,  and
        devolepaont ©2 ©ase/site manafeaont piano 0
                                                       autherities
              dlgforent  civil  judicial
                             t© tho
                   io n©w dologatod t©
                                 ao^
                             tho
                                                          inistrators
                                                         totaling
                                                             for th©
Offieo ©2 S©lid ^aoto  and  laerfoney losponoo aM tfeio ©22ieo of
Infereeaent and eeaplianeo Monitorinf signed a aoaoiraM^lya waiving
their eeneyrroaeo ©R settlements f©r nyaoreias ea£of©s>iao ©2
aasoo.o
Tho authority t©
                                  eivii jadieiai
                                  36
-------
modified in April 1989.  Under the new procedures,  almost all
classes of cases that may be brought under CERCLA are directly
referred to DOJ (Office of Waste Programs Enforcement/Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring review without concurrence) .

Issue:  There "is concern that situations may have occasionally
        arisen in which EPA Headquarters should have been consulted
        on a particular case but notification is provided late, and
        commitments may have already been made at the negotiations
        table.  Further, the reduction in the level of Headquarters
        review of cases that has occurred, as a result of recent
        delegations, could force DOJ into the role  of ensuring
        national uniformity in settlements.

Implementation Steps:

   o    The role of Headquarters and DOJ should be established as
        early as possible in development of a case involving a
        potential referral or settlement.  Headquarters should
        complete its work on establishing protocols for coordinating
        pre-referral negotiations among the Regions, Headquarters
        and DOJ.  Identification of roles and responsibilities may*
        assist in providing early warning of cases or issues that
        may require Headquarters concurrence/consultation.

Issue:  Regional and DOJ staff have questioned the effectiveness of
        the Settlement Decision Committee  (SDC) , which has no
        provision for reaching final agreement absent consensus
        except by escalating issues to EPA Assistant Administrators
        and the DOJ Assistant Attorney General.

Implementation Steps:

   o    Headquarters should create an enforcement expediter position
        within the Agency with the primary function of facilitations
        prompt resolution of enforcement or settlement issues among
        Regions, DOJ or Headquarters.

   o    Headquarters should revitalize and streamline the SDC
        process to quickly resolve case-specific issues.  For
        example, strive for a goal of a 5-7 working day deadline for
        a meeting.

                          4 .
Issue:  Communication between Regions, Headquarters, and DOJ is
        often difficult.  There is also a need to assure that all
        three parties have access to the same information resources.
        Database systems currently used by OECM, OWPE, and DOJ are
        incompatible.

Implementation Steps:

                                 37
-------
   o
Th© Agency should  assure  that enforcement and settlement
decisions are communicated in a timely fashion, whil©
assuging that enforcement sensitive information is
protected.  Development of a national training and
information exehang®  program for communicating current
enforcement issues will assist in the effort.

H@adquart@r§ and DOJ  sheuld quiekly raaeh agraaaont on and
distributes medal saining0 gossiensj for
                      taff t© sonsitigo thQ® t© tho eoneorns
                         ©thc^s0
   EPA and Stato  g-spgogontativsis fresi tho
       agrQdd that  tho StatQ/fodo^ai E'QlatieHShip sh©ialdl bo
           aftfss1  tho s-oioasQ ©f tho Ad®inist3s>at©5£>l)o jropos't,,  Th©
           al r©lati©nship im a e^itieal parfe ©f tho pg-efg-a® and on©
that needs a eemp^oho^sivo revieHo  Tho festog'inf ©£ a' ©tg'enff
Stata/FadQg'al pasr&inios'olhilp has boon ps'eaetodl in tho last fow
and stridoo feswo  feoosa ©a^o in ispg'evinf both e@®arni
-------
Issue:  Presently, there is no comprehensive framework for
        State/Federal relations in CERCLA enforcement.  Both
        entities have a role to play in the cleanup of National
        Priorities List (NPL) and non-NPL sites.  Limits in the
        number of State/Federal conflicts and resource duplication
        can fee achieved if consistency in approach and guidance can
        be attained.  Additionally, gains in expertise and
        capabilities by the States can only aid EPA in addressing
        the cleanup problems.

Implementation Steps:

   o    EPA should strive to minimize whenever possible its
        oversight of State response actions, and maximize the use of
        qualified States for oversight of PRP cleanups.  State-lead
        enforcement actions can assist the Agency in meeting its
        statutory goals for remedial action.  Regions should be
        willing to commit and provide financial resources, for State
        enforcement activities.

   o    The Superfund Management Review recommends working to
      •  resolve the fundamental policy question of what the long-,
        term role of States will be in the Superfund program.  EPA
        and the States will work to develop short and long-term
        strategies to enhance State program capability, improve
        State performance at State-lead Superfund sites, and foster
        State remedial activity at sites not on EPA's NPL.
        The EPA/State Enforcement Workgroup will be instructed to
        prioritize key issues in th« State/Federal relationship and
        to develop options and recommendations for the EPA
        Management/ State Environmental Commissioners meetings.

            D. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND PUBLIC OUTREACH

   The Superfund Management Review took a close look at the need for
the Agency to be more responsive to citizens' concerns with and
interests in the Superfund program.  The Superfund Management
Review's recommendations endorse increased involvement by citizens
in Superfund decisions at each stage of the Superfund process and
encourage managers to be more responsive to issues raised by the
public.  One critical area for enforcement that the Agency must work
to change im th« belief that PRPs are provided better information
than the public.

   The enforcement program plays a major role in educating the
public regarding the need to work with PRPs to move settlements
                                  39
-------
along and achieve site cleanup12.   The public will need to
understand th© rationale behind the  "enforcement-^irst"  approach.
The public can b© a great ally for th© program  one®  th©  public
understands th© process th® Agency undergoes to bring  a  PRP -to
settlement.'  -

        Currently, EPA lacks a eomplut®  strategy fog- communication
        of th© goals of th@ Supsrfund ©nforeamant program on  a
        national seal©.  Th
-------
                      IV.  RESOURCE  IMPLICATIONS

     This Superfund Enforcement Strategy and Implementation Plan
does not attempt to quantify the resource implications of these
recommendations.  However, the following conclusions can be drawn
from the report.

   o    Enforcement is staff intensive.  Process and management
        reforms can achieve only limited improvements without
        resources.  Thus, the recommendations of this Plan are
        contingent upon adequate resources.

   o    Increased resources for enforcement and oversight of private
        party response is ultimately a worthwhile investment,
        because it allows EPA to leverage private party resources
        for cleanup.  Fund-financed response postpones but does not
        eliminate the need for enforcement through cost recovery.

   o    Increased enforcement activity should help to leverage
        additional private party resources,  but it is
        counterproductive to cut the resources available for Fund-
        financed design and construction.  The threat of Fund use
        for response action is a demonstrated effective incentive
        for private party cleanup.

   o    EPA should establish consistent priorities by identifying
        the appropriate resources and the relative priority of
        specific steps in the process.  EPA must minimize erratic
        and inconsistent signals and competing demands on
        enforcement personnel.

   o    Enforcement activities are critical at all stages of
        response.  It is not possible to run an effective program by
        diverting resources from one stage of the process (e.g., PRP
        searches) to another  (e.g., negotiations for remedial design
        and remedial action).  The enforcement process needs to be
        sustained at each step.

   o    Many sites are reaching the stage of negotiations for
        remedial design and remedial construction with PRPs willing
        and able, to do work and commit resources.  EPA must have
        adequate resources for negotiations and oversight at these
        sitea.

   o    EPA can make the enforcement process more efficient.  For
        example, a cost recovery regulation should make the cost
        recovery process more efficient.

   o    Implementation of the recommendations in this Plan may
        require increases in the enforcement budget  for FY90 and
        FY91.
                                 41
-------
                             APPENDIX  A
                      APPROPRIATIONS  COmiTTBES  REPORT LANGUAGE

                       'SI APPROPRIATIONS LANGUAGE
     HOUS
   In attempting to meat the  statuterily  mandated  schedules  for
remedial investigation/feasibility  studies  (RI/FS)  and  cleanup
starts, EPA has relied primarily  on contractors  paid  with  trust fund
monies instead of aggressively  seeking private party  cleanups <>
Unfortunately, the enforcement  program has  com©  te be viewed by EPA
staff as to© burdensome and timo©°r!7OS'ioo0
                                                     ©5? ineffective
                                                     hao already been
                                                     tho policy of
                                                           has
                                                          tho
   The lnvig'©5iO3ia<
report by
policy, and
positive ineentivos
                                           dieoetod
                        •if,  previdlnf
                                which uiil eroato
                                           t©
                                   •I
-------
settlements and  cost  recoveries,  and 2)  for responsible parties
to sett!© and undertake privately financed RI/FS's and cleanups.  in
undertaking fehiss ©valuation,  the Agency is urged to consult with the
states, thQ environmental  community, responsibla parties and other
experts.  Up t©  $500,000 is authorized to b® r©programm©d for this
purpose in 1988„

                    SIW&TI  &FPSQFRI&TXOMS

   Th@ Suptirfund Inferesmunt Program,
adversarial natur©, of tan  Isads te disagreements and delays,  Th©
Committee is a^as1©  that anfereaaant philosophies and stratsgias may
differ signifieantly  among SPA's Offie® ©f Wagfeo P?©g?aas
inf©?eQ®ont, Offieo ©f  Enfeg-eaaant and Cesaplianed ^©nitog'ing, Offic©
of Ganas-al Ceun^Ql, r©gi©nal offiesg,  and feho Bopas^son^ ©f Jugfeic®.
Hueh bofefe®? dofinsd pr©eola£ed ©ffieoo, feho ps'Qfjg'as ©ggieo and
Dspartaonfe ©f Justiea causa delays „ aisdi
othQg^igo say delay regional ©ffie©s in thois1
®ff©r&o  This offers  gheuld davolep a eenoistonfe f^a'®o«'©g>k ©f
anfe^eoaont p©lieios  and thQ preeodii^os nodded t© aooyjro thoi?
iaploaontatieno   Spoeifie  raeemaQndatieno oh©wldl alo© address' ways
t© 3150^^0 poliey lovol  ravisty ©f ©nfeg'eoaQnfe afg'OQaorafeo in the
&©gi©ns ©n an osspodited basis? p©iiey lovol s-oviouo otoiald bo
ddfinad with @©®o spoeifieity? and pg-evisiens fes1 ^ofog'S'al t©
Haadqyag'to^s ©f  eaoos g'oquis'inf p©liey lovol roviouo in an
basis sheuld bo
-------
      LIST OF ENFORCEMENT ISSUES RAISED BY REPORTS  ON SUPERFUND
   The following is a list of studies of Superfund conducted from
1986 until the present.  The studies are arranged according to the
organization that prepared them.
CONGRESSIONAL
Office of Technology Assessment  (OTA)
1. "Are We Cleaning Up?  Ten Superfund Case Studies," OTA, June
   1988.
   Numerous findings were provided.  No recommendations specific to
   enforcement were included.
2. "Assessing Contractor Use in Superfund," OTA, January 29, 1989.
   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.
General Accounting Office (GAO)
3. "Superfund:  Overview of EPA's Contract Laboratory Program," GAO,
   October 1987.
   Comprised of a fact sheet.  Did not raise issues.
4. "Superfund:  Improvements Needed in Workforce Management," GAO,
   October 1987.
   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.
5. "Superfund:  Extent of Nation's Potential Hazardous Waste Problem
   Still Unknown," GAO, December 1987.                  .
   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.
6. "Superfund:  Cost Growth on Remedial Construction Activities,"
   GAO,  February 1988.
   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.
7. "Superfund Contracts:  EPA Needs to Control Contractor Costs,"
   GAO,  July 1988.
   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.
                                 B-l
-------
8.  "Report on Environmental Protection:   Protecting Human Health  and
   the Environment Through Improved Management," GAO,  1988.

   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.

9.  "Report on Hazardous Waste;  Future Availability of and Need for
   Treatment Capaeity are Uncertain," GAO,  1988.

   No recommendations spaeifie to enforcement were included.

10.     "Superfund:  Missed Statutory Deadlines Slow Progress  in
        Environmental Programs/' GAO, January 26,  1989.

   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.

11.     "Interim Assessment of EPA's Superfund Program," GAO at
        Senator Lautenberg's request, October 1988.

   In October, 1988, the GAO delivered to Senator Frank Lautenberg
   in his capacity as chairman of the Subcommittee on Superfund and
   Environmental Oversight, an interim report on Superfund
   Enforcement.  The purposes of the GAO study were three:
   assessment of the agency's use of its enforcement tools to
   achieve CERCLA goals; analysis of ways to improve the cost
   recovery program; and evaluation of the adequacy of the Agency's
   Superfund planning and management systems.

   The interim report covered the first two areas.  It found that
   the enforcement program could do better in using available tools
   and in recovering costs.  In particular, the study concluded
   that:

        o    the adequacy and timeliness of EPA searches for
             potentially responsible parties liable for site cleanup
             are continuing problems;

        o    the tracking and follow-up of information request
             letters used to further establish the liability of
             potentially responsible parties for a site have been
             inconsistent;

        o    reasons for not using unilateral administrative orders
             to compel responsible party cleanup of sites are not
             fully documented;
                                 B-2
-------
        o    special notice letters used to start negotiations for
             responsible party cleanups are not being issued on a
             timely basis; and

        o    efforts to recover Superfund monies used to clean up
             'sites have been untimely and have been hampered by
             accounting system problems.


Senator Lautenberg

12.     "Sixteen Recommendations for Improving the Superfund
        Program."  Two reports dated December 1987 and October 1988.

   Of the sixteen (actually seventeen) recommendations, the
   following were specific to enforcement:

        o    Training institutes should emphasize contracts
             management, legal training and site management;

        o    EPA should improve site work oversight by assuring that
             site managers receive backup from other Regional staff
             and by keeping caseloads manageable;

        o    EPA should replenish the fund, and push the program
             forward by aggressively using all its enforcement
             tools, and establish enforcement consistency throughout
             the Regions.  Vigorous enforcement will also provide
             incentives for settlements;

        o    EPA should also set aside funds for cleanup in the
             event settlement negotiations fail;
                                                                   *
        o    To move cases along more efficiently, EPA should push
             for more specialization and more thorough case
             development by Regional legal staff; and

        o    EPA should also explore whether creating legal
             expediter positions in the Regions and/or Headquarters
             can streamline the process.

House Appropriations Comitte*
13.     HOUM Appropriations Committee Study of. Superfund, December
        1988.
                                 B-3
-------
Of the ten reports presented, two covered issues specific to
enforcement:

   !• Status of EPA's Superfund Program.  Specifies that getting
   polluters to be responsible for cleanup was a major goal which
   EPA has not recognized.  Accuses EPA of running a public works
   program instead.  Calls for improved performance in both
   enforcement-led initiatives and cost recovery.

   2.  EPA/DOJ Management of Enforcement.  Settlement negotiations
   with PRP's-generally protracted, difficult, and complex.  There
   are problems especially with multiple PRP's and multiple
   Federal/State levels of review.  EPA case development activities
   (relating to cost documentation, administrative record,  PRP
   searches, and evidence supporting liability) could be improved.
   Also, improvements could be made in cost recovery performance.


STATES

Association of State and Territorial Solid Wast* Management
Officials (ASTSWMO)

14.     Letter to Lew Crampton, EPA, ASTSWMO, February 7, 1989.

   The ASTSWMO letter raised the following issues and
   recommendations:

   Finding 1;  Several States and EPA have proven that with adequate
   funding to back up enforcement negotiations, the number of
   enforcement settlements increased dramatically.

        Recommendation 1:  Use available funds to support
        enforcement negotiations first, then  for the remedial
        process.

   Finding 2;  Some lawyers by their training (case-by-case methods)
   are not liktly to be effective leaders in  increasing
   Superfund/RCRA case handling production.

        Recommendation 1:  Allow program personnel to regain control
        of th* program from the lawyers.
                                                                  4
   Finding 3t  EPA has been relying too heavily on Fund-lead
   activities while not placing enough emphasis on getting PRPs  to
   undertake or pay for cleanups.  This  is contrary to Congressional
   intent.
                                 B-4
-------
        Recommendation 1:  ^...cegrate the fund-financed and.
        enforcement efforts so one complements the other under a
        program strategy which seeks PRP commitments in the first
        instance and spends money where PRPs are unwilling or unable
        to do_ the work.

        Recommendation 2:  EPA should work with States to provide
        tools such as funding and standardized enforcement
        approaches and agreements which help build State enforcement
        programs.


National Governor's Association  (NGA)

15.     Recommendations made to  the Bush transition team, NGA,
        January 30, 1989.

   NGA provided the following issues and recommendations:

   Finding l;  EPA should place  greater emphasis on compelling
   cleanup by responsible parties.  While using the Fund at sites
   enables EPA to move faster at many sites, it inevitably threatens
   the long-term solvency of the Trust Fund.

        Recommendation 1:  Help  build State enforcement programs by
        providing States with tools such as funding, flexibility to
        use Fund monies if negotiations fail, and standardized
        documents to execute enforcement agreements.

National Association of Attorneys General  (NAAG)

16.     Recommendations for Environmental Protection in the 1990's,
        NAAG, February 9, 1989.

   The issues and recommendations raised by NAAG are as follows:

        o    Expand funds available for State-lead enforcement
             cases*

        o    Fund States to assist in cost recovery efforts.

        o    Decisions regarding using RCRA or CERCLA authority  at  a
             site should be made jointly by EPA and the State.
                                 B-5
-------
        o    Increase the emphasis on enforcement actions against
             responsible parties.

       . o    Funds should be earmarked for enforcement and States
             should be notified of their availability.


NON-GOVERNMENTAL

17.     "Making Superfund Work," Clean Sites Inc.,  January 1989.

   Clean Sites, Inc.'s major recommendations are as follows:

        Recommendation 1:  Maximize enforcement and settlement to
        increase responsible party cleanups.

        1.    To increase the number of site cleanups while
             conserving Fund monies,  EPA should accelerate
             implementation of a strategic enforcement program:

             a)   EPA should direct a significant number of
                  administrative orders and judicial enforcement
                  actions toward recalcitrant responsible parties  to
                  impel them to undertake or participate in site
                  cleanups;

             b)   EPA should increase the number of cost recovery
                  actions brought against responsible parties, where
                  government funds have been used to conduct cleanup
                  activities, and should file these actions sooner.

        2.    EPA should implement incentives to obtain responsible
             party agreements to undertake site cleanups, such as
             structuring settlements so that viable non-settlors are
             penalized in subsequent litigation by paying more than
             if they had settled.

        3.    EPA should establish realistically high goals for the
             number of responsible party cleanups and hold its
             Regional offices accountable for meeting these goals
             through a combination of enforcement actions and
             settlements.

        4.    EPA should implement incentives to obtain responsible
             party agreements to undertake site cleanups including
             expanding the use of mixed


                                 B-6
-------
     funding and de minings settlements, making non-settlors
     pay more after subsequent litigation, looking to non-
     settlors first to cover subsequent site costs.

Recommendation 2:  Improve the remedy-selection process

1.   EPA should explain r.zw the different selection of
     re-edy criteria -n .. -ction 121 are to be evaluated and
     weighed.

2.   EPA should continue to encourage "early actions"
     including those undertaken by PRPs and develop "model
     reaedies."

3.   An i. ^ropriate array of traatability studies should be
     induced in the RI/FS at any site where there is
     significant uncertainty regarding the remedies being
     considered.

4.   Headquarters and Regions should establish panels to
     review technical issues.

5.   EPA should establish and make easily accessible and
     well publicized the library of Records of Decisions
     (RODs) for Regional use.

6.   EPA should aggressively implement the technical
     assistance grant program.
    t
Recommendation 3:  Manage the Superfund program for optimal
progress

1.   EPA should continue to delegate site-specific decision-
     making authority to the Regions.  Regional
     Administrators should be more accountable to"
     Headquarters.

2.   Regional decisions regarding site cleanup technology
     should be subject to a limited and expedited
     discretionary administrative appeals process to HQ to
     ensure consistency and redress administratively any
     factual errors.

3.   Roles and responsibilities both in the Regions and HQ
     should bo clearly defined.
                         B-7
-------
        4.    Remedial project manager positions should be -upgraded,
             and staff should be provided with training.

        5.    HQ and Regions should not be reorganized at  this time.

        Recommendation 4:   Define new measures of program success

        1.    EPA should track measures of program success that focus
             on achievements (i.e.,  speed of site cleanup,  the
             number of sites financed by PRPs),  rather than focusing
             primarily on inputs (i.e.,  RI starts).

        2.    EPA should provide the public with understandable,
             timely and easily acceptable information regarding
             Superfund progress.

18.      "Blue Print for the Environment," Consortium of
        Environmental Groups, December 1988.

   Of the major recommendations outlined, the one specific to
   enforcement is as follows:

        Recommendation:  The Environmental Protection Agency should
        make greater use of the Superfund statute giving  the Agency
        authority to order potentially responsible parties to
        conduct remedial investigations and feasibility studies and
        sit* remedial actions; this authority includes unilateral
        administrative orders which trigger treble damage penalties
        if  violated and strict joint and several liability.

        Implementation Steps:

        1)    By June 30, 1989, each EPA Regional Office should
             nominate at least twenty percent of the sites at which
             it is presently negotiating with PRPs for a  unilateral
             administrative order to be followed by an enforcement
             suit if the administrative order is not complied with.
             Attorneys from the Regional Offices, the Office of
             Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring and the
             Enforcement Section of the Department of Justice's
             Lands and Natural Resources Division should  work
             together to develop these lawsuits.


                                 B-8
-------
        2)   By October 30, 1989, the Assistant Administrator for
             the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response should
             report to the appropriate Congressional Committees
             (including the Oversight and Investigations
             Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce
            'committee) on EPA's progress towards achieving this
             goal.  By January 1, 1990, each EPA Regional Office
             should designate another twenty percent (or more)  for
             similar treatment; Congress should receive another
             report by April 30, 1990.

19.     "Right Train, Wrong Track:  Failed Leadership in the
        Superfund Program," Environmental Defense Fund, Hazardous
        Waste Treatment Council, National Wildlife Federation,
        Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, U.S. PIRG,
        June 1988.

No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.

20.     "Mandate for Leadership III.  Policy Strategies for the
        1990's," Heritage Foundation, 1989.

   The issues and recommendations specific to enforcement are as
   follows:

        o    PRP's should have the option to seek independent
             arbitration for cleanup responsibility and costs.   EPA
             should be limited to assigning costs proportionate to
             each party's share of responsibility if parties agree
             to binding arbitration.  Once an EPA-supervised cleanup
             is completed/ all firms that complied with the findings
             under arbitration should b« released from future
             private tort liability.  Questions of liability for
             injuries incurred prior to cleanup should be left up to
             the States.  Firms refusing to participate could still
             be sued for the remaining cost of the cleanup.

21.     "Toward A Hore Effective Superfund Enforceaent Program,"
        Environmental Law Institute, March 1989.

   The major issues, findings and recommendations of the ELI Report
   are outlined below:

   A.   ELI evaluated two major aspects of the Superfund enforcement
        prograa:  the legal enforcement structure (including
        policies, procedures, guidance, law and

                                 B-9
-------
     court decisions),  and the institutional arrangements for
     implementing the Superfund enforcement program.

B.    The enforcement analysis provides a theory of enforcement
     from which basic principles are derived,  describes existing
     enforcement in the Superfund program,  and then applies the
     basic principles in an example national enforcement
     strategy.   The main points are:

     1.    EPA needs an integrated national  enforcement strategy
          (jointly with the Department of Justice)  which is
          vigorously implemented because:

          a.   a national strategy is the most effective,
               especially with limited resources;  and

          b.   the reasonable expectation of punishment elicits
               cooperation.

     2.    The national enforcement strategy should be based on
          the principle of creating a reasonable expectation
          among responsible parties that:

          a.   it will be less costly to fulfill their legal
               obligations on the government's terms than to fail
               to meet those obligations; and

          b.   the risks of trying to escape the costs of
               cooperation is outweighed by the risk of incurring
               the cost of government detection and punishment.

     3.    The tasks necessary to implement this principle are:

          a.   create the legal obligation  by identifying the
               site, response action, and responsible party, and
               making the requirement explicit (order* for work
               or demands for payment);

          b.   detect those parties who are responsible for
               cleanup;

          c.   communicate to the responsible parties their
               obligations and the risks and consequences of
               failing to comply;
                             B-10
-------
     d.   punish those who don't comply in a timely fashion.

4.   ELI evaluated the existing Superfund enforcement
     program, and found that it did not have a national
     strategy or conform to their basic principles.

5.   Although ELI provided a detailed, national strategy,
     they stress that it is only and example, and that the
     key is to have a strategy that meets the basic
     principles, is thought through to the details, and is
     vigorously implemented.  Key elements of ELI's example
     enforcement strategy include:

          o    improved information gathering with respect
               to cost documentation, compilation of
               administrative record, PRP searches, and
               information requests to PRPs;

          o    greater use of unilateral administrative
               orders for response actions, creating the
               potential for treble damage recovery for
               noncompliance without sufficient cause; and

          o    communicate the risks of non-compliance,
               through publicizing successful cases and
               through strategies developed with other
               agencies regarding liability under other
               laws.

The institutional analysis covers three areas:  performance
measures, organizational structure, and resources and
resource allocation.  As before, ELI begins with basic
management principles, then covers shortcomings in the
existing program, and finally presents options for
improvement, describing both their pros and cons.r ELI
points out that improvements in the three areas are
complementary and not intended to stand alone.

1.   Performance Measures.  The existing measures  (SPMS &
     SCAP) are not consistently successful  in motivating
     personnel; ignore quality; are not
                        B-ll
-------
sufficiently linked to the ultimate enforcement
objectives; and do not measure or reward multi-year
performance.

a.   Option 1 - replace SPMS targets with enforcement-
     oriented targets (such as successful PRP  '
     searches).

b.   Option 2 - reduce the number of SPMS & SCAP
     targets to a smaller number of performance
     measures such as PRP financing as a percentage of
     total costs).

c.   Option 3 - develop and use multi-year performance
     targets in addition to annual and quarterly
     targets.

Organizational structure.  Under the existing structure
it is unclear who has ultimate responsibility for a
national enforcement strategy; responsibility for an
enforcement strategy is not accompanied by necessary
authority; personnel (staff and contractors) are not v
always appropriately skilled.

a.   Options 1-3 - develop a range of options for
     restructuring haadouartara responsibilities from
     major changes to keeping the current structure.

b.   Options 4-5 - establish separate information
     gathering units and enforcement records units in
     each Region to help ensure that the personnel are
     qualified.

c.   Option 6 - obtain authorization for ORC or OECM
     attorneys to represent EPA in court by having the
     DOJ selectively deputize qualified EPA attorneys.

d.   Options 7-8 - establish DOJ Regional offices to
     facilitate their early involvement, or allocate
     FTE's to U.S. Attorney's offices so that they can
     provide litigation support to EPX Regional
     offices.

•»   Option 9 - redraft and enforce the MOU with DOJ in
     order to exercise greater control over the
     enforcement program.

                     B-12 .
-------
     f.    Option 10 - improve the training of ORC attorneys.

3.  .  The Resource Allocation Process.   There are four
     problems associated with the existing system:
                          *
          o    The existing allocation process creates an
               incentive system that lowers the priority of
               enforcement activities  because of the
               relationship between performance measures and
               resource allocation.

          o    The use of national average pricing factors
               limits the resources available for
               enforcement activities, resulting in
               inadequate resources for some Regions.

          o    Real and perceived restrictions on the use of
               resources by Regions reduces their ability to
               respond to unexpected enforcement needs by
               reallocating resources.

          o    The site classification system artificially
               limits the range of enforcement tools
               available for each site and restricts the use
               of certain tools at crucial times.

     a.    Option 1 - Make specific allocations for
          preparation and maintenance of administrative
          records and cost documentation.

     b.    Option 2 - Encourage Regional pricing of site-
          specific activities instead of using national
          pricing factors.                       s

     c.    Option 3 - Reduce restrictions on the Regions' use
          of resources, allowing reallocations to occur to
          meet contingencies or address priorities.

     d.    Option 4 - Create a central fund for remedial
          actions to create appropriate incentives for
          Regions and PRPs, and provide headquarters with
          greater control.
                        B-13
-------
             e.   Option  5  -  Eliminate the site classification
                  requirement as  fund-lead,  enforcem©nt~lead, or
                  PRP°lead  in order to raaks better us© of
                  enforcement tools.

             fo   Option  6  =  Increase total FTE's for th® Superfund
22.     "Sup©r£und Fros th®  Industry Fargpcsetiv®?  Suggestions to
        Imps-eve and Expedite th® Suptsrfund R©&Gdiati©n
        C©nser&ius Q£ Industries®,  February
   Tho eongortiu® ef industry  groups provided tho following findings
                   and  industry ausfe eoopog-ato in ©g-dog" fe©
                        addrQsssd and fe© &v©id scpandos'ing ®©noy on
                                                         issuoo
is usually n©£ &m ISOMO
          sofefeicsoftfe,
                      feakoo  fe©@ lon
-------
     Recommendation 5:  EPA and industry should establish a
     national clearinghouse on remedies.

     Recommendation 6:  EPA HQ and Regional staff should meet
     with'industry representatives to discuss RI/FS streamlining.

Finding 4:  EPA needs to ensure equitable treatment of all
parties.  Past settlement negotiations have not pursued enough
recalcitrant parties.  As a result settlements have become much
more difficult because cooperative companies are reluctant to
shoulder the costs and burdens of cleaning up the waste of
recalcitrants.

     Recommendation 1:  EPA should use its investigatory powers
     early on in the process to identify and pursue all PRPs at
     each site, and should share this information with PRP groups
     which may also be pursuing a similar effort.

     Recommendation 2:  EPA should consider good faith claims
     that certain PRPs are not liable or that EPA has
     miscalculated their contribution.                        v

     Recommendation 3:  EPA should use available settlement tools
     (da minimia settlements, NBARS, and mixed funding) to
     facilitate settlement, discourage litigation and encourage
     cleanups.

     De minimis settlements should be allowed early using a
     premium that reflects the uncertainties at the site, and the
     money from these settlements should go to an escrow fund for
     cleanup, not to the Superfund or to EPA for past costs.

     NBARS should be provided as a starting point for allocation
     of responsibility, if the PRPs so desire.  Development of
     presumptive liability shares for owner/operator and
     transporters would also facilitate settlement.

     Mixed funding should be approved on an expedited basis to
     provide seed money to start cleanups more quickly.  In order
     to be effective, projects funded this way should not be
     subject to federal procurement regulations which were not
     designed for this type of situation, and which may add
     greatly to the delay and cost of cleanup.
                             B-15
-------
Findina
-------
        Recommendation 2:  EPA staff needs to understand that
        industry and government must work together to clean up
        Superfund sites and that PRPs are willing and eager to work
        constructively with EPA, if given the opportunity.

        Recommendation 3:  Personnel require training to be able to
        negotiate with PRPs, negotiation should be courteous and
        professional, and once trained, personnel should be given
        the authority to strike compromises to promote settlements
        which are fair to all involved and are consistent with
        guidance from HQ.

        Recommendation 4:  EPA should channel resources to oversight
        of PRF contractors rather than hiring additional contractors
        to perform the same work.

        Recommendation 5:  EPA needs to develop incentives for its
        engineers and technical staff to remain with the Agency for
        several years.  EPA might consider requiring multi-year
        contracts, or increasing pay.

INTERNAL;  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY fBPAl

Office of Research and Development (ORD)

23.     "Superfund Outreach," EPA, Office of Research and
        Development (ORD), December 28, 1988.

   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.

Office of Inspector General (OI6)

24.     "Report of Audit:  Review of Region Ill's Management of the
        Technical Assistance Team (TAT) Services," OIG, September
        1988.

   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.

25.     "Report of Audit:  Review of Region IVs Management of
        Significant Superfund Removal Actions," OIG, September 1988.

   The objectiv* of this Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
   report was to evaluate Region IV's effectiveness and efficiency
   in managing significant  (cost over $1 million) Superfund removal
   actions at the Peak Oil site, near Tampa, Florida and the General
   Refining site, near Savannah, Georgia.  The on* principal
   "finding" concerning enforcement was that the EPA did not take
   adequate action to pursue a
                                B-17
-------
   responsible party cleanup for the General Refining site.  Region
   IV disagreed and provided extensive comment.

26.     "Audit of EP&'s Planning, Negotiating, Awarding, and
        Administering of Emergency Response Cleanup Services
        Contracts," OIG, September 1986o

   No recommendation sptseifie t© enforcement were included.

27.     "Report of Audit on EPA's Utilization of the Zone I Field
        Investigation T@am,°9 OIG, July 1988.

   No recommendation specific to enforcement were included.

28.     "Capping Report on State Performance," OIG, 1988.

   The purpose of the report is to inform senior EPA management
   officials of the recurring problems identified in cooperative
   agreement audits, and to recommend actions or policy changes to
   alleviate the problems.  The one major issue concerning
   enforcement is that EPA Regions were not effectively performing
   their oversight responsibilities of the Superfund cooperative  v
   agreements which contributed to delays in performing goals and
   objectives and could adversely affect cost recovery efforts.

29.     "General Report on CERCLIS," OIG, 1987.

   No recommendations specific to enforcement were included.
                                B-18
-------
                             APPENESX C
                              ACRONYMS
AO:          Administrative Order (Either Unilateral or on Consent)
AOC:         Administrative Order on Consent (Consent Administrative
             Order)
CERCLA: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
        Liability Act of 1980
ESD:         Environmental Services Division
FAR:         Federal Acquisition Regulations
FS:          Feasibility Study
TAG:         Inter Agency Agreement
IFMS:   Integrated Financial Management System
NBAR:   Non-binding Allocation of Responsibility
NCP:         National Contingency Plan
NPL:         National Priorities List
OSC:         On-Scene Coordinator
PRP:         Potentially Responsible Party
ROD:         Record of Decision
RA:          Remedial Action
RD:          Remedial Design
RI:          Remedial Investigation
RPM:         Remedial Project Manager
SARA:   Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
SCAP:   Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishments Plan
SPMS:   Strategic Planning Management System
STARS:  Superfund Transactions Automated Retrieval System
                                 c-l
-------
TAG:         Technical Assistance Grants
UAO:         Unilateral Administrative Order
OFFICES OF THE SUPERFUND ENFORCEMENT PROCESS
DOJ:    Department of Justice
OC:     Office of the Comptroller, OARM
OECM:   Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring
OERR:   Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, OSWER
OGC:    Office of General Counsel
ORC:    Office of Regional Counsel, Regions I-X
OWPE:   Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, OSWER
OSWER:  Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
OARM:   Office of Administration and Resources Management
                                 C-2
-------
          UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                     WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                        DEC -3 1990

                                           •OLDWMTEANDBCraBCYI
                                           OSWER Directive I 9833.3A-1
SUBJECT:  Final Guidance on Administrative Records for Selecting
          CERCLA Response Actions

                     GV-
FROM:     Don R. Clay  {T^*
          Assistant Adminis

TO:       Regional Administrators, Regions I-X

     This memorandum transmits to you our "Final Guidance on
Administrative Records for Selecting CERCLA Response Actions."
This document replaces the "Interim Guidance on Administrative
Records for Selection of CERCLA Response Actions," previously
issued on March 1, 1989.

     The guidance sets forth the policy and procedures governing
the compilation and establishment of administrative records for
selecting response actions under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980  (CERCLA), as
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986 (SARA).  This guidance is also consistent with and expands
on Subpart I of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan, 55 Fed. Reg. 8859  (March 8, 1990).

     This guidance reflects input received from the Regions,
Headquarters and the Department of Justice.  There have been
several drafts of this guidance and comments have been
incorporated.  I thank you for your assistance.

Attachment

cc:  Director, Waste Management Division,
          Regions I, IV, V, and VII
     Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division,
          Region II
     Director, Hazardous Waste Management Division,
          Regions III, VI, VIII, and IX
     Director, Hazardous Waste Division, Region X
     Director, Environmental Services Division,
          Regions I, VI, and VII
     Regional Counsel, Regions I-X
     Administrative Record Coordinators, Regions I-X
-------
                           OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1
  FINAL GUIDANCE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS
                    FOR
      SELECTING CERCLA RESPONSE ACTIONS
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
           Washington,  D.C.   20460
-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.  INTRODUCTION  	  1
    A.   Purpose and Scope of the Administrative Record ...  1
    B.   Judicial Review  	  3
    C.   Public Participation  	  4

II. PROCEDURES FOR ESTABLISHING THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD . .  4
    A.   Administrative Record Coordinator  	 ....  4
    B.   Multiple Response Actions  .	6
    C.   Compilation  	  6
    D.   Index	7
    E.   Location	8
         1.   General	8
         2.   Special Documents ..... 	  9
    F.   Public Availability   	 12
         1.   General	.	12
         2.   Remedial Actions  .	13
         3.   Removal Action	14
    G.   Maintaining the Record	17
    H.   Confidential File	19
    I.   Copying	20
    J.   Micrographics	21
    K.   Certification	22

III.CONTENTS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD .......... 22
    A.   Remedial Actions	22
    B.   Removal Actions	26
    C.   Imminent and Substantial Endangerment	29
    D.   Public Comments	30
    E.   Enforcement Actions	31
         1.   Negotiation Documents	31
         2.   PRP-Lead RI/FS	32
         3.   Administrative Orders and Consent Decrees ... 32
    F.   Excluded Documents    	 33
    G.   Draft Documents and Internal Memoranda 	 33
-------
    H. .  Privileged Documents  ......	34
    I.   Guidance Documents	37
    J.   Technical Literature  .	38
    K.   Legal Sources	39
    L.   NPL Rulemaking  Docket Information  	39
    M.   RCRA Documents	39
    N.   Post-Decision Information  	 40

IV. INVOLVEMENT OF OTHER PARTIES	42
    A.   States	 42
         1.  State Involvement in Federal-Lead Sites  .... 42
         2.  Federal Involvement in State-Lead Sites  .... 43
    B.   Federal Facilities	44
    C.   ATSDR	45
    D.   Natural Resources Trustees 	 45

V.  DISCLAIMER	46

VI. FURTHER INFORMATION	46

GLOSSARY	47
APPENDICES
Appendix-A.   Sections 113(j)-(k) of CERCLA 	 50
Appendix B.   Model File Structure  	 52
Appendix C.   Model Index 	 56
Appendix D.   Model Position Description for Administrative
              Record Coordinator  	 .... 57
Appendix E.   Compendium of Response Selection Guidance ... 59
Appendix F.   Model Transmittal Cover Letter	85
Appendix G.   Model Document Transmittal Acknowledgement  . .86
Appendix H.   Model Fact Sheet	87
Appendix I.   Model Notice of Public Availability 	 88
Appendix J.   Microform Approval Memorandum 	 89
Appendix K.   Model Certification 	 90
Appendix L.   Preamble to Subpart I of NCP	91
Appendix M.   Subpart I of the NCP	101
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1


I.   INTRODUCTION

A.   Purpose and Scope of the Administrative Record

     This guidance addresses the establishment of administrative
records under Section 113 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA),  as
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986 (SARA).1  Section 113(k)(l)  of CERCLA requires  the
establishment of administrative records upon which the President
shall base the selection of a response action (see Appendix A for
the complete statutory language).

     Chapter I of this guidance introduces the purpose and scope
of the administrative record.  Chapter II reviews procedures for
compiling and maintaining the administrative record.  Chapter III
examines the various types of documents which should be included
in the administrative record.  Chapter IV discusses how agencies
outside EPA are involved in establishing the record.  Finally,
this guidance includes a glossary of frequently used terms and
acronyms as well as several appendices.

     Although this guidance is written for use by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), it can be adapted
for use by state and federal agencies required to establish
administrative records for the selection of CERCLA response
actions.  As used in this guidance the term "lead agency" means
either EPA, a state or other federal agency, which is responsible
for compiling and maintaining the administrative record.  As used
in this guidance, the term "support agency" means the agency or
agencies which furnish necessary data to the lead agency, reviews
response data and documents and provides other assistance as
requested by the OSC or RPM.  This guidance reflects the
revisions to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP) published on March 8, 1990, 55 Fed. Reg.
8859 (see Appendices L and M).

     The administrative record established under Section 113(k)
of CERCLA serves two primary purposes.  First, the record
contains those documents which form the basis for selection of a
response action and under Section 113(j), judicial review of any
issue concerning the adequacy of any response action is limited
to the record.  Second, Section 113(k) requires that the
administrative record act as a vehicle for public participation
     1  42 U.S.C.  19613.   References made to CERCLA throughout
this memorandum should be interpreted as meaning "CERCLA, as
amended by SARA."
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

in selecting a response action.  This guidance document discusses
procedures developed to ensure that the lead agency's
administrative records meet these twin purposes.

     The administrative record is the body of documents that
"forms the basis" for the selection of a particular response at a
site.  This does not mean that documents which only support a
response decision are placed in the administrative record.
Documents which are included are relevant documents that were
relied upon in selecting the response action, as well as relevant
documents that were considered but ultimately rejected (e.g.,
documents "considered or relied on").

     This document uses the phrase "considered or relied on** in
discussing which documents should be included in the
administrative record to indicate that it is IPA's general policy
to be inclusive for placing documents in the administrative
record.  However, this term does M£ mean that drafts or internal
documents are normally included in the administrative record.
Lead or support agency draft or internal memoranda are generally
not included in the administrative record, except in specific
circumstances (see section XXX.a. at page 33).  Thus, the record
will include final documents generated by the lead and support
agency, as well as technical and site-specifie information.
Information or comments submitted by the public or potentially
responsible parties (FRPs) during a public comment period (even
if the lead agency does not agree with the information or
comments) are also included in the administrative record (see
section XXX.D. at page 30).

     The following principles should be applied in establishing
administrative records:

o    The record should be compiled as documents relating to the
     selection df the response action are generated or received
     by the lead agency;

o    The record should include documents that form the basis for
     the decision, whether or not they support the response
     selection; and

o    The record should be a contemporaneous explanation of the
     basis for the selection of a response action.

     The effort to establish adequate administrative records
encompasses a vast array of people including: Administrate
Record Coordinators, Remedial Project Managers (RPMs), On-Scene
Coordinators (OSCs), enforcement staff, records management staff,
Regional Counsel staff, Community Relations Coordinators (CRCs),
other federal agencies, states, CERCLA contractors, and the
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

public.2  This guidance will discuss the roles and
responsibilities of these people and how they interact with one
another.

B.   Judicial Review

     Section 113(j)(l) of CERCIA provides that judicial review of
any issues concerning the adequacy of any response action shall
be limited to the administrative record.

     Judicial review based on an administrative record provides
numerous benefits.  Under Section 113(j) of CERCIA and general
principles of administrative law, when the trial court reviews
the response action selected, the court is limited to reviewing
the documents in the administrative record.  As a result, facts
or arguments related to the response action that challenging
parties present for the first time in court will not be
considered.

     Record review saves time by limiting the scope of trials,
thereby saving the lead agency's resources for cleanup rather
than litigation.  Courts will not allow a party challenging a
decision to use discovery, hearings, or additional fact finding
to look beyond the lead agency's administrative record, except in
very limited circumstances.  In particular, courts generally will
not permit persons challenging a response decision to depose,
examine, or cross-examine EPA, state or other federal agency
decisionmakers, staff, or contractors concerning the selection of
the response action.

     Furthermore, the administrative record may be cited long
after officials responsible for the response decisions have moved
into different positions or have left the lead or support agency.
Judicial review limited to the record saves time involved in
locating former employees who may not remember the facts and
circumstances underlying decisions made at a much earlier time.

     Moreover, in ruling on challenges to the response action
decision, the court will apply the highly deferential "arbitrary
and capricious* standard of review set forth in Section 113(j)(2)
of CERCIA.  Under this standard, a court does not substitute its
judgment for that of the decisionmaker.  The reviewing court does
not act as an independent decisionmaker, but rather acts as a
reviewing body whose limited task is to check for arbitrary and
capricious action.  Thus, the court will only overturn the
response selection decision if it can be shown on the
     2 As  used hereinafter  in this  guidance the  term "public1*
includes potentially responsible parties (PRPs).
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

administrative record, that the decision vac arbitrary and
capricious or otherwise not in accordance with the law.  However,
the extent to which EPA benefits from having judicial review
limited to the record depends on the quality and completeness of
each record.

C.  Public    ticipation

     Section 113(k)(2) of CERCLA requires that the public have
the opportunity to participate in developing the administrative
record for response selection.  Section 117 of CERCLA also
includes provisions for public participation in the remedial
action selection process.   Both sections reflect a statutory
emphasis on public participation.  Participation by interested
persons will ensure that the lead agency has considered the
concerns of the public, including PRPs, during the response
selection process.  In addition, for purposes of administrative
and judicial review,  the record will contain documents that
reflect the participation of the public and the lead agency's
consideration of the public's concerns.

     If the lead agency does not provide an opportunity for
involvement of interested parties in the development of the
administrative record, persons challenging a response action may
argue that judicial review should not be limited to the record.
The lead agency must, therefore, make the information considered
or relied on in selecting a response action available to the
public, provide an appropriate opportunity for public comment on
this information,  place comments and information received from
the public in the record, and reflect in the record the lead
agency's consideration of this information.

II.  PROCEDURES FOR ESTABLISHING THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

A.   Administrative Record Coordinator

     Each region should have an Administrative Record
Coordinator.  The Record Coordinator generally has the duty of
ensuring that the administrative record files are compiled and
maintained according to Subpart I of the NCP and this guidance.4
       42 U.S.C. 19617.

     * The "administrative record file" should be distinguished
from the  "administrative record."  The administrative record file
refers to the documents as they are being compiled.  Until a
response  action decision has been selected, there is no complete
administrative record  for that decision.  Thus, to avoid creating
the impression that the record is complete at any time prior to
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

The Record Coordinator will not be responsible for deciding which
documents are included in a record file.  Those decisions should
be made by the OSC or RPM, with appropriate consultation of ORC
staff.  The Record Coordinator's duties Ordinarily include:

o    Developing procedures for creating record files;

o    Ensuring that the public is notified that the record files
     are available for inspection;

o    Ensuring that the records are available at or near the site;

o    Ensuring that the records are available at the regional
     office or other central location;

o    Coordinating efforts to obtain the necessary documents;

o    Indexing the record files;

o    Updating the record files and indices on a regular basis
     (e.g., quarterly);

o    Ensuring availability of the record file for copying;

o    Ensuring that sampling and testing data, quality control and
     quality assurance documentation, and chain of custody forms
     are available for public inspection, possibly at a location
     other than that of the record files;

o    Coordinating with ORC staff on questions of relevance and
     confidentiality of documents submitted for the record files;

o    Arranging for production and presentation of the record to
     court when necessary for judicial review;

o    Maintaining the confidential portion of the record files, if
     necessary;

o    Maintaining the "Compendium of CERCIA Response Selection
     Guidance Documents";

o    Coordinating with states and federal agencies on record
     files compiled by them; and
the final selection decision, the set of documents is referred to
as the administrative record file rather than the administrative
record.
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

o    Notifying appropriate personnel of the timing for review of
     state and federal record files.

Appendix D contains a model position description for an
Administrative Record Coordinator.

     The Record Coordinator Bust work closely with RPMs, OSCs,
enforcement staff, records management staff, Regional Counsel
staff, community relations staff, and the Department of Justice
(DOJ) (for cases in litigation).

     If the way the record was compiled and maintained is
questioned in litigation, the Record Coordinator may be called
upon to prepare an affidavit or testify about those procedures.
Therefore, the Record Coordinator should be familiar with the
procedures associated with the record, and be qualified to
fulfill the responsibilities outlined above.

B.   Multiple Response Actions

     In general, every decision document (e.g., Record of
Decision  (ROD) or Action Memorandum) must be supported by an
administrative record.  Under CERCLA, cleanups are often broken
up into distinct response actions.  At a given site this may
include several removal actions, and/or remedial actions known as
operable units.  For every removal action or operable unit, a
separate administrative record must be compiled.

     Information relevant to more than one response decision,
such as a site inspection report or a preliminary assessment
report may be placed in the record file for an initial response
action and incorporated by reference in the indexes of subsequent
record files for that site.

C.   Compilation

     The administrative record file should be compiled as
relevant documents on the response action are generated or
received.  Thus, all documents which are clearly relevant and
non-privileged should be placed in the record file, entered into
the  index, and made available to the public as soon as possible.
For  example, the remedial investigation/feasibility study  (RI/FS)
work plan, summaries of quality assured data, the RI/FS released
for  public comment, the proposed plan, and any public comments
received  on the RI/FS and proposed plan should be placed in the
record file as soon as they are generated or received.

     When there are questions whether particular documents should
be included in the record file, such documents can be segregated
and  reviewed at regular intervals  (e.g., quarterly).  For
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

example, draft documents or documents subject to claims of
privilege should be set aside for review by ORC and other
appropriate staff.  At critical tines, such as prior to the
public comment period, the issues regarding these documents
should be completely resolved and the documents included in the
record file, if appropriate.

     The record file should be updated while it is available for
public inspection.  The additional documents should be placed in
the record file and entered in the index.  Any updates to the
record file should be made to all copies of the record file.

     All documents considered or relied on in selecting the
response action should be in the record file when a decision
document (e.g., a record of decision) is signed.  Documents
relevant to the response selection but generated or received
after the decision document is signed should be placed in a post-
decision document file and nay be added to the administrative
record file in certain circumstances (see section ZZZ.N. at page
40) .

D.   Index

     Each administrative record file nust be indexed.  The index
plays a key role in enabling both lead agency staff and members
of the public to help locate and retrieve documents included in
the record file.  In addition, the index can be used for public
information purposes or identifying documents located elsewhere,
such as those included in the compendium of guidance documents
(see Appendix E).  The index also serves as an overview of the
history of the response action at the site.

     The index also provides the lead agency with a degree of
control over documents located at or near the site.  The creation
of an index will prevent persons fron altering the record simply
by physically adding or removing documents fron the record file.

     The index should include the following information for each
document:

o    Document Number;

o    Document Date - date on the document;

o    Document Title * one or two line identification.  Identify
     the actual document, not a transmittal nemo or other less
     relevant document.  Include sufficient information so the
     document cannot be confused with another (e.g., the title
     "report" may be insufficient);
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

o    Author - Name and affiliation;

o    Recipient - Name and affiliation; and

o    Document Location.

     The index can be organized either by subject or in
chronological order.  If document* are customarily grouped
together, as with sampling data and chain of custody documents,
they may be listed as a group in the index to the administrative
record file.  Appendix C contains a model index organized by
subject.  Computer databases have been helpful in generating and
updating the index.

     The index should be updated when the record file is updated.
It is preferable to update the record file when documents are
received, or at least quarterly.  Such updates should coincide
with the periodic updating of the record file and review of
material for which there are questions about relevance or
privilege (see section II.C. at page 6).  The index should also
be updated before any public comment period commences.  The index
should be labeled "draft index" until all relevant aocuments are
placed in the record file.  When the decision document is signed,
the draft index should be updated and labeled "index."

E.   Location

E.I. General

     Section 113(k)(l) of CERCLA requires that the administrative
record be available to the public "at or near the facility at
issue."   Duplicates of the record file may be kept at any other
location.  A copy of the record file must be located at the
regional office or other central location.  Both copies of the
record file should be available for public inspection at
reasonable times (e.g., 9-4, Monday-Friday).  In the case of an
emergency removal, unless requested, the record file needs to be
available for public inspection only at the- central location (see
section II.F.3. at page 14).

     The record file located at or noar the site should be placed
in one of the information repositories which may already exist
for community relations purposes.  These are typically located in
a library, town hall, or other publicly accessible place.  If
there is no existing information repository, or if the repository
     5 See 40 C.F.R.  1300.805.

     6 40 C.F.R.  §|300.805(a)(5)  and (b).

                                8
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

does not have sufficient space for the record file, any other
publicly accessible place nay be chosen to house the record
file.   When a Superfund site is located at or near an Indian
reservation, the centrally located copy of the record file Bay be
located at the Indian tribal headquarters.  The Community
Relations Coordinator (CRC) should be consulted on the location
of the information repository and record file.

     The record file should be transmitted to the local
repository in coordination with the CRC.  The CRC should make the
initial contact to establish the local repository and request
housing for the record file.  The Record Coordinator should make
arrangements for delivering the record file to the local
repository.

     The record file should include an introductory cover letter
addressed to the librarian or repository manager (see Appendix
F).  In addition, a transmittal acknowledgement form should be
included to ensure receipt of the record file (see Appendix G).
Finally, an administrative record fact sheet should accompany the
record to answer questions from the public (see Appendix H).
Updates to the record file should be handled in a similar fashion
(see section II.C. at page 6).

     In addition to the publicly available record file, if
feasible, a master copy of the record file should be kept at the
regional office or other central location of the lead agency.  To
preserve the integrity of the master copy of the record file, it
should not be accessible to the public.  If not feasible to
establish a master copy, the lead agency will need to establish
an effective security system for the publicly available record
file.  The master copy of the record file may be maintained in
microform to conserve storage space (see section II.J. at page
21).

£.2. Special Documents

     Certain documents which are included in the record file do
not have to be maintained at or near the site or, in some cases,
at the regional office or other central location, because of the
nature of the documents and the burden associated with
maintaining such documents in multiple locations.  These
documents, however, must be incorporated in the record file by
reference (e.g., in the index but not physically in the record
     7 If the site is located at a federal facility which
requires security clearance, the administrative record file for
that site must be located where security clearance is not
required.  The public must have free access to the record file.
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

file), and the index must indicate where the document* are
publicly accessible.  Where a document is listed in the index but
not located at or near the site, the lead agency must, upon
request, include the document in the record file at or near the
site.   This applies to verified sampling data, chain of custody
forms, and guidance and policy documents.  It does not apply to
documents in the confidential file.

     Unless requested, the following types of documents do not
have to be located in multiple locations:

Verified Sampling Data9

     Verified sampling data do not have to be located in either
administrative record file.  The sampling data may be left in its
original storage location (e.g., Environmental Services Division
(LSD) or contract laboratory).  Data summary sheets, however,
must be located in the record file.  The index must list the data
summary sheets, reference the underlying verified sampling data,
and indicate where the sampling data can be found.

Chain of Custody Forms10

     As with verified sampling data, chain of custody forms do
not have to be located in either administrative record file.  The
chain of custody forms may be left in the original storage
location.  The index must reference the chain of custody forms
and indicate their location.
     8 40 C.F.R. |300.805(b).

     9 40 C.F.R.  |300.805(a)(1).  "Verified sampling data" are data
that  have undergone  the quality  assurance and  quality control
process.    "Invalidated  sampling  data"  have been  incorrectly
gathered or analyzed and  will not  be  part of the record file.
"Unvalidated  sampling data" are data which has not yet undergone
the quality assurance and quality control process.  Because it is
superseded by verified data, the unvalidated data are not generally
part of the record files.  However,  such data may  in some cases be
relied on in selecting  a  response action,  such  as an emergency
removal  where there  is  no  time  for verification.   Unvalidated
sampling  data which are  relied on in selecting a response action
should be included in the record file.
     10 40  C.F.R.  |300.805(a) (1) .
                                10
-------
                                   OSHER Directive -No. 9833.3A-1

Confidential and Privileged Documents11

     When a confidential or privileged document is included in
the record file, it should be kept in a confidential portion of
the record file.  The confidential file should be kept in a
locked cabinet at the regional office or other central location.
It should not be located at or near the site.  The index should
identify the title and location of the document, and describe why
the lead agency considers it confidential or privileged.
Furthermore, the lead agency should summarize or redact the
document to make available, to the extent feasible, factual
information (especially if such information is not found
elsewhere in the record file and is not otherwise available to
the public).  This summary or redaction should be performed as
soon as possible after the determination that a document is
privileged or confidential, and inserted in the portion of the
record file available to the public and included in the index.
See also section ZZI.H. at page 34.

Guidance and Policy Documents12

     Guidance and policy documents that are not site specific are
available in a compendium located in the regional office.
("Compendium of CERCIA Response Selection Guidance Documents,11
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, May 1989.)  This eliminates
the need for reproducing copies of frequently used documents for
each site record file.  The documents in the compendium need not
be physically included in the record file, but the guidance and
policy documents considered or relied on in selecting the
response action must be listed in the record file index along
with their location and availability.  See also section III.I. at
page 37 and Appendix E.

Technical Literature13

     Publicly available technical literature that was not
generated for the site at issue (e.g., an engineering textbook),
does not have to be located in the regional office or other
central location or at or near the site.  The document must be
clearly referenced in the index.  However, technical literature
not publicly available must be physically included in the record
file at the regional office or other central location and at or
near the site.  See also section XXI.J. at page 38.
     11 40 C.F.R. |300.805(a)(4).

     12 40 C.F.R. |300.805(a) (2).
     13 40 C.F.R. |300.805(a)(3).
                                11
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1


F.   Public Availability

F.I. General

     Section 113(k) of CERCLA specifies that the administrative
record "shall be available to the public."  In satisfying this
provision, the lead agency Bust comply with all relevant public
participation procedures outlined in Sections 113(k) and 117 of
CERCLA.  The NCP (see Appendices L and M) contains additional
requirements on public availability (see also "Community
Relations in Superfund:  A Handbook," October 1988 - OSWER
Directive No. 9230.0-3A; "Community Relations During Enforcement
Activities," November 3, 1988 - OSWER Directive No. 9836.0-lA).

     The availability of the record file will vary depending upon
the nature of the response action.  Different procedures are
outlined below for remedial and removal response actions.

     In all cases, the lead agency should publish a notice of
availability of the record file when the record file is first
made available for public inspection in the vicinity of the site
at issue.   The notice should explain the purpose of the record
file, its location and availability, and how the public may
participate in its development.

     The notice should be published in a major local newspaper of
general circulation.  The newspaper notices should be distributed
to persons on the community relations mailing list.  These
notices should also be sent to all known PRPs if they are not
already included on the community relations mailing list.  As
PRPs are discovered, the lead agency should add their names to
the community relations mailing list and mail them all the
notices sent to the other PRPs.  Publication of the notice should
be coordinated with the community relations staff.   A copy of the
notice of availability and list of recipients should be included
in the record file.  Appendix I contains a model notice of
availability.

     This public notice may be combined with other notices for
the same site, such as a notice of availability of the community
relations information repository, if they occur at the same time.
In addition to the required newspaper notice, the public can be
informed of the availability of the record file through existing
mechanisms (e.g., general and special notice letters, Section
104(e) information requests, and the community relations mailing
list).  In addition, Headquarters will publish notices in the
     14 See 40 C.F.R. |300.815(a) and 11300.820(a)(1) and  (b).

                                12
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

Federal Register.  They will be published quarterly and will list
sites where remedial activity is planned.

F.2. Remedial Actions

     The administrative record file for a remedial action must be
available for public inspection when the remedial investigation
begins.   For example, when the remedial investigation/
feasibility study  (RI/FS) work plan is approved, the lead agency
must place documents relevant to the selection of the remedy
generated up to that point in the record file.  Documents
generally available at that time include the preliminary
assessment (PA), the site investigation (81), the RI work plan,
inspection reports, sampling data, and the community relations
plan.  The lead agency must continue to add documents to the
record file periodically after they are generated or received
during the RI/FS process.

     The record file must be publicly available both at a
regional office or other central location and at or near the site
(see section II.E. at page 8).   Zn addition, the notice of
availability should be sent to persons on the community relations
mailing list, including all known PRPs.

     With the completion of the RI/FS, the lead agency should
undertake the following public participation procedures:

o    Prepare a proposed plan which briefly analyzes the remedial
     alternatives evaluated in the detailed analysis of the RI/FS
     and proposes a preferred remedial action alternative;

o    Make the RI/FS report and proposed plan available in the
     record files both at a regional office or other central
     location and at or near the site;

o    Publish in a major local newspaper of general circulation a
     notice of availability and brief analysis of the RI/FS
     report and proposed plan.  The notice should include the
     dates for submission of public comments;

o    Nail the notice or copy of the notice to all PRPs on the
     community relations mailing list;

o    Provide a formal comment period of not less than 30 calendar
     days for submission of comments on the proposed plan.  Upon
     15 40 C.F.R. |300.815(a)

     16 40 C.F.R. |300.805(a)
                                13
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

     timely request the lead agency will extend the public
     comment period by a minimum of 30 additional days.   [Note:
     The lead agercy is encouraged to consider and respond to
     significant comments that were submitted before the public
     comment period.  Considering early comments provides
     practical benefits both substantively and procedurally.
     Early comments may provide important information for the
     selection decision, and early consideration provides the
     public (and, particularly, PRPs) with additional informal
     opportunities for participating in the decisionmafcing
     process.];

o    Provide the opportunity for a public meeting(s) in the
     affected area during the public comment period on the RI/FS
     and proposed plan;

o    Keep a transcript of the public meeting(s) on the RI/FS and
     proposed plan held during the comment period and include a
     copy of the transcript in the record file;

o    Prepare a discussion (to accompany or be part of the
     decision document) of any significant changes to the
     proposed plan which occurred after the proposed plan was
     made available for public comment which are reflected in the
     ROD;

o    Prepare a response to each of the significant comments
     submitted during the public comment period to accompany the
     ROD (see section III.D. at page 30); and

o    Publish in a major local newspaper of general circulation a
     notice of the availability of the ROD and make the ROD
     available to the public before beginning any remedial
     action, as required under Section 117(b) of CERCLA.

     Comments received after signing the ROD should be placed in
a post-decision document file and may be added to the record file
in certain situations (see section IZZ.N. at page 40).

F.3. Removal Actions

     Section 113(k)(2)(A) of CERCIA requires that the EPA
establish procedures for the appropriate participation of
interested persons in the development of the administrative
record for the selection of a removal action.  "Appropriate"
participation depends on the nature of the removal, as outlined
below.
     17
       40 C.F.R. |300.430(f)(3)(i)(C).

                                14
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1
Tine-critical Removal Actions
     A tine-critical removal action is a removal action for
which, based on the site evaluation, the lead agency determines
that a period of less than six months exists before on-site
renoval activities nust be initiated.  This category includes
emergency renoval actions which are described in greater detail
below.

     The administrative record file for these actions Bust be
available for public inspection no later than 60 days after the
initiation of on-site renoval activity.  Where possible, the
record file should be made available earlier.  The record file
nust be available both at the regional office or other central
location and at or near the site at issue.

     If, however, on-site cleanup activity is initiated within
hours of the verification of a release or threat of a release and
on-site cleanup activities cease within 30 days (emergency
actions), the record file need only be available at the regional
office or other central location, unless it is requested that a
copy of the record file be placed at or near the site.

     For all tine-critical removals, a notice of the availability
of the record file nust be published in a major local newspaper
and a copy of the notice included in the record file.  This
notice should be published no later than 60 days after initiation
of on-site renoval activity.

     A public comment period of not less than 30 days should be
held in appropriate situations.   Zn general, a public comment
period will be considered appropriate if cleanup activity has not
been completed at the time the record file is made available to
the public and if public comments might have an impact on future
action at the site.   Zf a public comment period is considered
appropriate, it should begin at the time the record file is made
available for public inspection.  Mote, however, that even if an
action is completed before the record file is available, the
record file should be made available to the public.  The notice
for the public comment period may be combined with the notice of
availability of the record file if they occur at the same time.
The notice should be mailed to all PRPs on the community
     18
       40 C.F.R.  |300.805(b).
     19 40 C.F.R.  §300.415(0) (2) (i) .

     20 40 C.F.R.  i300.415(n){2) (ii).
                                15
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

relations nailing list.  The notice should also be sent to all
known PRPs if they are not already on the community relation*
nailing list.

     The lead agency nust respond to all significant connents
received during the public connent period and place the connents
and the responses to then in the record file (see section XXI.D.
at page 30).   Whether or not the lead agency holds a public
connent period, connents received by the lead agency before the
decision document is signed and related to the selection of the
renoval action nust be placed in the record file.  For
information, including connents, generated or received after the
decision document is signed, see section XXI.N. at page 40.

Non-Tine-Critical Renoval Actions

     A non-time-critical renoval action is a renoval action for
which, based on the site evaluation, the lead agency determines
that a planning period of at least six nonths exists before on-
site renoval activities nust be initiated.

     The administrative record file for a non-tine-critical
renoval action nust be nade available for public inspection when
the engineering evaluation/cost analysis (EE/CA) is nade
available for public connent.   The record file nust be
available at the regional office or other central location and at
or near the site.  A notice of the availability of the record
file nust be published in a najor local newspaper and a copy of
the notice included in the record file.  The notice should be
published in a najor local newspaper of general circulation.  In
addition, Headquarters will publish these notices in the Federal
Register.  They will be published quarterly and will list sites
where non-tine critical renoval activity is planned.  The
newspaper notice should be distributed to persons on the
community relations nailing list and placed in the record file.
These notices should also be sent to all known PRPs if they are
not already on the community relations nailing list.  As PRPs are
discovered, the lead agency should add their nanes to the
community relations nailing list and nail then all the notices
sent to the other PRPs.  Publication of the notice should be
coordinated with the connunity relations staff.  A copy of the
notice of availability should be included in the record file.
Appendix X contains a nodel notice of availability.
     21
       40 C.F.R. |300.415(n)(2)(iii).
     22 40 C.F.R. |300.415(n) (4)
                                16
-------
                                   OSWZR Directive No. 9833.3A-1

     A public comment period on the EE/CA of not less than 30
days must be held so that interested persons may submit comments
on the response selection for the record file.  Upon timely
notice, the lead agency will extend the public comment period by
a minimum of 15 days.   A notice of the public comment period
may be combined with the notice of availability of the record
file if they occur at the same time.  The lead agency must
respond to all significant comments received during the public
comment period and place the comments and the responses to them
in the record file (see section ZIZ.D. at page 30).

     The lead agency is encouraged to consider and respond to
significant comments that were submitted before the public
comment period.  Considering early comments provides practical
benefits both substantively and procedurally.  Early comments may
provide important information for the selection decision, and
early consideration provides the public (and, particularly, PRPs)
with additional informal opportunities for participating in the
decision making process.

     Comments generated or received after the decision document
is signed should be kept in a post-decision document file.  They
may be added to the record file in certain situations (see
section III.N. at page 40).

G.   Maintaining the Record

     Document room procedures should be established to ensure
orderly public access to the record files.  In establishing
public access procedures, the security and integrity of the
record files must be maintained at all times.

     Each regional office or other central location should have a
reading area where visitors are able to review the record files.
The record file must be available during reasonable hours (e.g.,
9-4, Monday-Friday).  The public reading area should include,
wherever feasible:

o    Administrative record files;

o    Guidance Compendium (see section ZZZ.Z. at page 37);

o    Access to a copier; and

o    Sign-in book.
     23 40 C.F.R. |300.415(m) (4) (iii) .

     2* 40 C.F.R. 1300.415(11) (4) (iv) .
                                17
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1


     Controlled access to the files is accomplished by use of a
visitor sign-in book.  Sign-in books help minimize instances in
which documents are lost or damaged.  They also provide
documentation of the lead agency's efforts to provide public
access to the record files.  Pertinent information recorded in
the book should include:

o    Date of visit;

o    Name;

o    Affiliation;

o    Address;

o    Phone number;

o    Site documents viewed; and

o    Cost of copied materials (if applicable).

     The lead agency may choose not to use sign-in books if the
books deter the public from reviewing the record files.

     Since documents in the record file should be complete,
properly organized and legible, the integrity of the record file
must be maintained.  If possible, storage and reading areas
should be supervised to maintain proper security.  Documents
should not leave the document room or be left unattended.  To the
extent feasible, the Administrative Record Coordinator should
check the order of the documents after being viewed by the public
to be certain all documents have been returned intact.  The
documents in the record file should be kept secure, either in a
locked room or in locked cabinets.

     The record file located at or near the site should be
handled with similar care.  If possible, the record file should
be treated as a non-circulating reference; it should not leave
the local repository except under supervision.  The phone number
of a record file contact should be provided to record file users
and to the manager of the local repository so that problems can
be identified and resolved.  This information can be included in
an informational fact sheet accompanying the record file (see
Appendix H).  In addition, the Record coordinator should plan
periodic reviews of the local record files.

     Where the site is a fund-lead or PRP-lead, EPA should retain
(in addition to the publicly available record file) a master copy
of the record file at the regional office or other central

                                18
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

location, if feasible.  Where a state or other federal agency is
the lead agency at a site, EPA should assure that the state or
other federal agency maintains (in addition to the publicly
available record file) a master copy of the record file.  The
record files are permanent records that must be retained.

     As to the local repository, the statute and regulations are
silent concerning the duration of public availability of the
record file.  The lead agency's primary concern is public
participation in development of the administrative rec@rd.
Following initiation of the response action, public interest in
background information other than the Record of Decision or RI/FS
may vane.  In any event, the statutory provisions for judicial
review and deadlines for filing cost recovery actions provide
useful references for keeping the record file publicly available.
See Sections 113(g) and (h) of CERCLA.

     Where there is ongoing (or possible) litigation, the record
file in the regional or other central location should be
available at least until the litigation is over.

     The record file continues to serve as a historical record of
the response selection, even after the statute of limitations for
cost recovery action has passed.  Where there is considerable
public interest, the local repository may wish to keep the record
file available for public viewing.

H.   Confidential File

     In certain situations, documents in the record file may be
subject to an applicable privilege (see section III.H. at page
34).  To the extent feasible, information relevant to the
response selection which is contained in a privileged document
should be summarized or redacted as to make the document
disclosable and then included in the publicly accessible portion
of the record file.  The privileged document should be included
in a confidential portion of the record file..

     The Administrative Record Coordinator should maintain a
confidential portion of the record file for privileged documents.
These documents should be listed in the index to the entire
record file and identified as "privileged."  The index should
identify the title and location of the privileged document, and
describe the basis for the asserted privilege.

     The confidential portion of the record file should be stored
in locked files at the regional office or other central location
     25  See 40 C.F.R. |300.810(d).
                                19
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

and should not be located at or near the site.  The confidential
portion of the record file should *»e separate from the publicly
available record file to protect against inadvertent disclosure.
Each privileged document should be stamped "confidential" at the
bottom of each page of the document.  Where the material is not a
written document (such as a computer disk or cassette tape) the
jacket should be stamped "confidential."  A complete list of all
materials contained in the confidential portion of the record
file should be maintained by the Record Coordinator.  The Record
Coordinator should also maintain a log which vill include the
time, date, document name, and vill identify persons checking out
and returning materials to the confidential file.

     As soon as a new record file is established, a routine
access list for the confidential file should be prepared for each
record file.  When EPA is the lead agency, this routine access
list must be approved by the Waste Management Division Director
or the Environmental Services Division Director, and ORC.  Once
approval is given, persons on the list will be able to access the
confidential files through the Record Coordinator.  No one should
have access to the confidential files other than those identified
on the routine access list.  For state or other federal agency-
lead sites, the Regions should take steps to insure that state or
other federal agencies develop routine confidential file access
list procedures.

     This policy and procedure for privileged materials does not
supersede any policy and procedures established under the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 1552, and EPA regulations
implementing FOIA at 40 C.F.R. Part 2. Upon receipt of requests
for the administrative record file pursuant to FOIA, if the
requester is in close proximity to the record file, the lead
agency may respond to FOIA requests by telling a requester the
location and availability of the record file.  Decisions
regarding disclosures of materials under FOIA should be
coordinated among the various lead agency officials with access
to such materials.

I.   copying

     Section 117(d) of CERCLA requires that each document
developed, received, published, or made available to the public
under Section 117 be made available for public inspection and
copying at or near the site.  Under Section 113(k)(2)(B) of
CERCLA, these documents must also be included in the   	
administrative record file.  Under these provisions of CERCLA,
the lead agency must ensure that documents in the record file are
available for copying, but does not bear responsibility for
copying the documents themselves.  Therefore, it is preferable
                                20
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

that the record file should be located in a facility which
contains a copying machine (e.g., a public library).

     When the administrative record file is available at a
facility at or near the site and copying facilities are available
there, the lead agency nay encourage the requester to sake use of
the copying facilities at that location.  If copying of the
record file located at or near the site is difficult for a
requesting party, the lead agency Bay arrange for copying on
behalf of a requester at the regional or other central location.
The lead agency may ask that requesters arrange for copying by
contractors or commercial copy centers who then bill the
requester directly.

     The lead agency should follow the FOIA regulations at 40
C.F.R. Part 2, in determining the appropriate charge for copying.
Copying fees should be waived for other federal agencies, EPA
contractors or grantees, and members of Congress..  The EPA
currently charges $.20 a page for paper copies as provided in 40
C.F.R. Part 2.  Reproduction of photographs, microfilms or
magnetic tapes, and computer printouts should be charged at the
actual cost to the lead agency.

J.   Micrographics

     The lead agency may make the administrative record file
available to the public in microform.   Use of micrographics can
significantly reduce the space required to store administrative
record files.  In addition, micrographics can simplify the tasks
of reproducing copies of the record file and transmission of the
record files to the local repositories.  Any use of micrographics
should be conducted in an orderly manner consistent with records
management procedures.  If using micrographics to maintain the
record files, the lead agency must provide a micrographic reader
at the regional office or other central location to ensure public
access to the record file.  Zf a record file is located at or
near the site and micrographics are used, the lead agency must
ensure that a micrographic reader at that location is available,

     Microform copies of original documents are admissable in
court if created in an organized fashion.  The Business Records
as Evidence Act (28 U.S.C. 11732) specifies that copies of
records, which are made "in the regular course of business" and
copied by any process which accurately reproduces the original,
are "as admissible in evidence as the original itself."  See also
Federal Rules of Evidence 1003.  Since the NCP provides for use
of microform, microform copies of administrative record documents
     26 See 40 C.F.R.  |300.805(c).
                                21
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

that are produced in the regular course of business are likely to
be admissible in courc.

     The Office of Information Resources Management (OIRM) has
granted approval for the use of micrographics in establishing
administrative records (see Appendix J).  Any use of
micrographics should still comply with the remaining provisions
of Chapter 6 of the EPA Records Management Manual (7/13/84).

K.   Certification

     A certification as to the completeness of the administrative
record must be performed when the record is filed in court.
Appendix X contains a model court certification.

     When EPA is the lead agency such certification should be
signed by the Regional Administrator's designee, after
consultation with ORC.  Any certification of the record should be
made by program staff and not legal staff.  The region may also
choose to have the Administrative Record Coordinator certify that
the record was compiled and maintained in accordance with
applicable agency regulations and guidance.  Such certification
would attest that the record was compiled in accordance with
current agency procedures and would not address the completeness
of the record file.

     If a state or other federal agency is the lead agency that
agency must certify that the record was compiled and maintained
in accordance with applicable EPA regulations and guidance.
After the state or federal agency provides this certification,
the Regional Administrator's designee should certify as to the
completeness of the record, as provided in Appendix K.

III. CONTENTS Of THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

A.   Remedial Actions

     The administrative record for selection of a remedial action
should consist of:

o    documents which were considered or relied on to select the
     remedial action; and

o    documents which demonstrate the public's opportunity to
     participate in and comment on the selection of the remedial
     action.27
     27  See 40  C.F.R.  H300.810  and  300.815.

                                22
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

     Below is a list of documents that are usually generated when
a remedial response action is selected.  These documents should
be included in the administrative record file if they are
generated and considered or relied on in selecting the remedial
response action.  Documents that demonstrate the public's
opportunity to participate in and comment on selecting the
remedial response action should also be included in the record
file.  Documents not listed below, but meeting the above
criteria, should be included.

Factual Information/Data

o    Preliminary Assessment (PA) report;

o    Site Investigation (SI) report;

o    Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (Rl/FS) work plan;

o    Amendments to the final work plan;

o    Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP):  consisting of a quality
     assurance project plan (QAPP) and a field sampling plan;

o    Sampling data:  verified data during the RI/FS, or any data
     collected for previous actions such as RCRA or removal
     actions which are considered or relied on in selecting the
     remedial action.  {Invalidated data should be included only
     if relied on in the absence of validated data (see note 9 at
     page 10);

o    Chain of custody forms;

o    Inspection reports;

o    Data summary sheets;

o    Technical studies performed for the sit* (e.g., a grounts-
     water study);

o    Risk evaluation/endangerment assessment and underlying
     documentation (see section XXI.C. at page 29);

o    Fact sheet or summary information regarding remedial action
     alternatives generated if special notice letters are issued
     to PRPs at an early stage of the RX/FS (see "Interim
     Guidance on Notice Letters, Negotiations, and Information
     Exchange," October 19, 1987 - OSWER Directive No. 9834.1);

o    RI/FS (as available for public comment and as final, if
     different); and

                                23
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1


o    Data submitted by the public, including PRPs.

Policy and Guidance

o    Memoranda on site-specific or issue-specific policy
     decisions.  Examples include memoranda on off-site disposal
     availability, special coordination needs (e.g., dioxin),
     applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements  (ARARs)
     (to the extent not in the RI/FS), cost effectiveness and
     utilization of permanent solutions and alternative treatment
     technologies;

o    Guidance documents (see section  III.I. at page 37); and

o    Technical literature, (see section III.J. at page 38).

Public Participation  (Include the documents that show the public
was notified.of site activity and had an opportunity to
participate in and comment on the selection of response action)

o    Community relations plan;

o    Newspaper articles showing general community awareness;

o    Proposed plan;

o    Documents sent to persons on the community relations mailing
     list and associated date when such document was sent;

o    Public notices:  any public notices concerning response
     action selection such as notices of availability of
     information, notices of meetings and notices of
     opportunities to comment;

o    The community relations mailing  list (including all known
     PRPs);M

o    Documentation of informal public meetings:   information
     generated or received during meetings with the public and
     28  Individual  names and addresses of members  of the general
public which  are  on the community relations  mailing list should
not be  included in the public  record file.  Disclosure of such
information may result in a Privacy Act violation (see also section
III.H. at page  34)  or inhibit  the general public from requesting
information about  the site.  The lead agency  should  then place
individual names and addresses in the confidential portion of the
record file.

                                24
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

     memoranda or notes summarizing significant information
     submitted during such meetings;

o    Public comments:  complete text of all written comments
     submitted (see also section ZZZ.D. at page 30);

o    Transcripts of formal public meetings:  including meetings
     held during the public comment period on the RI/FS, proposed
     plan, and any waiver of ARARs under Section 121(d)(4) of
     CERCLA;

o    Responses to significant comments:  responses to significant
     comments received from the public concerning the selection
     of a remedial action; and

o    Responses to comments from the state and other federal
     agencies.

Enforcement Documents  (Include if the document contains
information that was considered or relied on in selecting the
response selection or shows that the public had an opportunity to
participate in and comment on the selection of response action.
Do not include enforcement documents solely pertaining to
liability)

o    Administrative orders;

o    Consent decrees;

o    Affidavits containing relevant factual information not
     contained elsewhere in the record file;

o    Notice letters to PRPs;

o    Responses to notice letters;

o    Section 104(e) information request letters and Section
     122(e) subpoenas; and

o    Responses to Section 104(e) information request letters and
     Section 122(e) subpoenas.

Other Information

o    Index (see section II.D. at page 7);

o    Documentation of state involvement:  documentation of the
     request and response on ARARs, Section 121(f)(l)(G) notices
     and responses, a statement of the state's position on the
     proposed plan (concurrence, nonconcurrence, or no comment at

                                25
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

     the tine of publication), opportunity to concur in the
     •elected remedy and be a party to a settlement (see section
     IV.A. at page 42);

o    health assessments, health studies, and public health
     advisories issued by the Agency for Toxic Substances and
     Disease Registry  (ATSDR)(see section IV.C. at page 45); and

o    Natural Resource Trustee notices and responses, findings of
     fact, final reports and natural resource damage assessments
     (see section IV.D. at page 45)

Decision Documents

o    Record of decision (ROD):  remedial action decision document
     (including responsiveness summary);

o    Explanations of significant differences (under Section
     117(c)) and underlying information; and

o    Amended ROD and underlying information.

     The administrative record serves as an overview of the
history of the site and should be understandable to the reader.
Appendix B provides a model file structure for organizing the
record file.  Appendix C contains a model index.

B.   Removal Actions

     The administrative record for selection of a removal action
should consist of:

o    documents which were considered or relied on to select the
     removal action; and

o    documents which demonstrate the public's opportunity to
     participate in and comment on the selection of the removal
     action, when appropriate.

     Below is a list of documents that are usually generated when
a removal response action is  selected.  These documents should be
included in the administrative record file if they are generated
and considered or relied on when selecting the removal action.
Documents that demonstrate the public's opportunity to
participate in and comment on the removal response action should
also be included in the record file.  Documents not listed below,
but meeting the above criteria, should be included.
     29  See  40  C.F.R.  H300.810  and  300.820.

                                26
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1
Factual Information/Data
o    Preliminary assessment  (PA) report;
o    Site evaluation  (SI) report;
o    EE/CA  (for a non-tine-critical reaoval action);
o    Sampling plan;
o    Sampling data:  verified data obtained for the reaoval
     action, or any data collected for previous actions euch as
     RCRA or other response actions which are considered or
     relied on in selecting the removal action.  (Invalidated data
     should be included only if relied on in the absence of
     validated data (see note 9 at page 10);
o    Chain of custody forms;
o    Inspection reports;
o    Technical studies performed for the site (e.g., a ground
     water study);
o    Risk evaluation/endangerment assessment and underlying
     documentation; and
o.    Data submitted by the public, including PRPs.
Policy and Guidance
o    Memoranda on site-specific or issue-specific policy
     decisions.  Examples include memoranda on off-site disposal
     availability, compliance with other environmental statutes,
     special coordination needs (e.g., dioxin);
o    Guidance documents (see section III.I. at page 37); and
o    Technical literature (see section ZZZ.J. at page 38).
Public Participation  (Include the documents that show the public
was notified of site activity and had an opportunity to
participate in the response selection.)
o    Community relations plan;
o    Newspaper articles showing general community awareness;
o    Documents sent to persons on the community relations mailing
     list and associated date when such documents was sent;
                                27
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1


o    Public notices:  any public notices concerning response
     action selection such as notices of availability of
     information, notices of meetings, and notices of
     opportunities to consent;

o    The community relations Bailing list (including all known
     PRPs);M

o    Documentation of public meetings:  information generated or
     submitted during meetings with the public (including PRPs)
     and memoranda or notes summarizing significant information
     submitted during such meetings;

o    Public comments:  complete text of all written comments
     submitted (see section III.D. at page 30);

o    Responses to significant comments:  responses to significant
     comments received from the public concerning the selection
     of a removal action; and

o    Responses to comments from states and other federal
     agencies.

Enforcement Documents  (Include if the document contains
information that was considered or relied on in selecting the
response selection or shows that the public had an opportunity to
participate in and comment on the selection of response action.
Do not include enforcement documents solely pertaining to
liability)

o    Administrative orders;

o    Consent decrees;

o    Affidavits containing relevant factual information not
     contained elsewhere in the record file;

o    Notice letters to PRPs;
     30  Individual  names and addresses of members  of the general
public  which  are on the community  relations  mailing list should
not be  included in the  public  record file.   Disclosure of such
information may result in a Privacy Act violation (see also section
III.H.  at page  34)  or inhibit the general public from requesting
information about  the site.  The lead agency  should  then place
individual names and addresses in the confidential portion of the
record  file.

                                28
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1
o    Responses to notice letters;
o    Section  104(e)  information request letters and Section
     122(e) subpoenas; and
o    Responses to Section 104(e) information request letters and
     Section  122(e)  subpoenas.
Other Information
o    Index  (see section II.D. at page 7);
o    Documentation of state involvement (see section IV.A. at
     page 42);
o    ATSDR health assessments, health studies, and public health
     advisories  (see section IV.C. at page 45); and
o    Natural  Resource Trustee notices and responses, findings of
     fact, final reports and natural resource damage assessments
     (see IV.D. at page 45).
Decision Documents
o    EE/CA Approval  Memorandum;
o    Action Memorandum;
o    Amended  Action  Memorandum; and
o    Other documents which embody the decision for selection of a
     removal  action.
     The administrative record serves as an overview of the
history of the site  and should be understandable to the reader.
Appendix B provides  a model file structure for organizing the
record file.  Appendix C contains a model index.
C.   Imminent and Substantial Endangerment
     Under Section 106 of CERCLA, the EPA may find the existence
of an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health
or welfare or the environment because of an actual or threatened
release of a  hazardous substance.
     Determining the existence of an imminent and substantial
endangerment  is an important component in selecting the response
action.  Therefore,  all documents considered or relied on in
making that determination, including any risk assessment, and its
supporting documentation, must be included in the administrative
                                29
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

record file.31  If there is proper documentation of the
determination of an imminent and substantial endangerment in the
record file, judicial review of that determination in an action
under Section 106 of CERCLA should be limited to the
administrative record.

D.   Public Comments

   .  The administrative record file should document the public's
opportunity to be involved in selecting a response action.  This
can be accomplished by including in the record file all documents
related to the opportunity to participate (e.g., notices and fact
sheets), and relevant written comments and information submitted
by the public (e.g., reports and data).

     Public requests for information (e.g., Freedom of
Information Act  (FOIA) requests for copies of reports), need not
be included in the record file.

     The lead agency should request that substantive oral
comments (either in person or over the phone) be put in writing
by the commenter and submitted to the record file.  The commenter
should be advised that the obligation to reduce the comment to
writing rests with the commenter.  The lead agency, however, may
reduce it to writing where the lead agency will want to rely on
the comment.

     The lead agency may respond to comments received prior to a
public comment period in various ways, depending on the nature
and relevance of a particular comment.  The lead agency's
consideration of such a comment may be in the form of a written
response, or reflected by documented actions taken after
receiving the comment, or even by changes in subsequent versions
of documents.  It the lead agency prepares a written response to
a comment, the comment and response should be included in the
record file.

     The lead agency may notify commenters that comments
submitted prior to a formal public comment period must be
resubmitted or specifically identified during the public comment
period in order to receive formal response by the lead agency.
Alternatively, the lead agency may notify a commenter that the
lead agency will respond to the comment in a responsiveness
summary prepared at a later date.  The lead agency, however, has
        See "Guidance on  Preparing  Superfund Decision Documents:
The  Proposed  Plan,  The  Record  of  Decision,  Explanation  of
Significant Differences, ROD Amendment,11 OSWER Directive No.
9355.3-02, June 1989.

                                30
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

no duty to respond to any comment* received before the formal
public comment period, or to respond to comments during the
public comment period until the close of the public comment
period.

     The lead agency/ however, is encouraged to consider„ respond
to and include in the record file significant comments that were
submitted before the public comment period.  Considering early
comments provides practical benefits both substantively and
procedurally.  Early comments may provide important information
for the selection decision, and early consideration provides the
public (and, particularly, PRP's) with additional informal
opportunities for participating in the decision making process.

     All comments received by the lead agency during the formal
public comment period are to be included in the record file in
their original form, or if not feasible, an explanation should be
placed in the record file explaining why such comments were not
included.  Comments received during the formal public comment
period must be addressed in the responsiveness summary (included
with the ROD in remedial response actions).  The responses may be
combined by subject or other category in the record file.

     Comments which are received after the formal comment period
closes and before the decision document is signed should be
included in the record file but labeled "late comment."  Such
comments should be handled as post-decision information (see
section III.N. at page 40).

     Comments received after the decision document is signed
should be placed in a post-decision document file.  They may be
added to the record file in limited circumstances (see section
III.N. at page 40).

E.   Enforcement Actions

     The same procedures should be used for .establishing an
administrative record whether or not a response action is
selected in the context of an enforcement action.  The following
additional information, however, may assist the lead agency where
there is enforcement activity.

E.I. Negotiation Documents

     During negotiations with the lead agency, a potentially
responsible party (PRP) may produce documents and claim that they
     32  See 40 C.F.R. H300.815(b), 300.825(a) (2) and (b)(2).

                                31
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

constitute confidential business information  (CBI) or offers of
settlement subject to Rule 408 of the Federal Rules of Evi£«nce.

     Generally, those documents are not part of the
administrative record for response selection unless they are
submitted by PRPs for consideration in selecting a response
action and are considered or relied on in selecting the response
action.  A privileged document which was considered or relied on
in selecting the response action should be placed in the
confidential portion of the record file.  Such a document should
be summarized and the summary included in the publicly accessible
portion of the record file (see section II.H. at page 19).  If
the information cannot be summarized in a disclosable manner, the
information should be placed in the confidential portion of the
record file only and listed in the index to the file.

£.2. PRP-Lead RI/FS

     Where a PRP is conducting the RI/FS, the PRP must submit all
technical information on selection of the remedial action
generated during the RI/FS to the lead agency.  Technical
information includes work plans, sampling data, reports, and
memoranda.  The lead agency, and not the PRP, will establish and
maintain the administrative record file (see "Interim Guidance on
Potentially Responsible Party Participation in Remedial
Investigations and Feasibility Studies," May 16, 1988, OSWER
Directive No. 9835.la and "Model Administrative Order on Consent
for Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study," January 30,
1990, OSWER Directive No. 9835.10.)

     PRPs may be delegated responsibility for some record file
maintenance activities, such as housing the files at or near the
site.  PRPs cannot, however, be responsible for decisions on what
documents comprise the record file, because of, among other
things, the potential for a conflict of interest.

E.3. Administrative Orders and Consent Decrees

     Final administrative orders and consent decrees issued prior
to selection of the response action (e.g., ordering a PRP to
conduct the RI/FS), should be included in the administrative
record file.  Administrative orders or consent decrees issued
after the signing of the ROD or the action memorandum should not
be included in the record file, unless the consent decree or
administrative order meets the criteria for the inclusion of
post-decision documents in the record file (see section III.N. at
page 40).  Drafts of administrative orders and consent decrees
should not be included in the record file, unless the drafts
contain factual information that was considered or relied on and
is not found elsewhere in the record file.

                                32
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

     The issues relating to administrative records for
administrative orders and de minimis settlements are not
addressed by this guidance.

F.   Excluded Documents

     Certain documents should not0 be included in the
administrative record file because they are irrelevant to the
selection of the response action.  Documents should be excluded
from the record file if they were not considered or relied on in
selecting the response action.

     Material beyond the scope of the record file should be kept
in separate files maintained at the regional office or other
central location.  These files need not be made publicly
available, although many of the documents in the files may be
available to the public if requested under FOZA.

     Examples of documents that are irrelevant to the decision on
selecting a response action may include Hazard Ranking System
(HRS) scoring packages, contractor work assignments, cost
documentation (as opposed to cost effectiveness information), and
National Priorities List (NPL) deletion information.  If,
however, these documents contain information that is considered
or relied on in the response action selection and is not
contained elsewhere in the record file, then the documents should
be included in the record file.

     Information regarding PRP liability is generally not
included in the record file for selection of the response action
except to the extent such information (typically substance
specific).is considered or relied on in selecting the response
action.  Documents relating to PRP liability, however, should be
compiled and maintained in the regional office or other central
location so that they are available at the time of notice to PRPs
or referral of any litigation.

G.   Draft Documents and Internal Memoranda

     In general, only final documents should be included in the
administrative record file.  The record file should not include
preliminary documents such as drafts and internal memoranda.
Such documents are excluded from the record file because drafts
and internal memoranda are often revised or superseded by
subsequent drafts and memoranda prior to the selection of the
response action.  The preliminary documents are, therefore, not
considered or relied on in making the response action decision.

     Drafts (or portions of them) and internal memoranda should
be included, however, in three instances.  First, if a draft

                                33
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

document or internal Memorandum is the basis for a response
decision the draft document or internal memorandum should be
placed in the record file.  This may occur if the draft contains
factual information which was relied on but is not included in a
final document, a final document does not exist, or a final
document did not exist when the response decision was made.

     Second, if a draft document or internal memorandum is
circulated by the lead agency to other persons (e.g., the support
agency, PRPs or the general public) who then submit comments
which the decisionmafcer considers or relies on when making a
response action decision, relevant portions of the draft document
or the memorandum and comments on that document should be
included in the record file.

     Third, if a draft document or internal memorandum explains
or conveys decisions on the procedures for selecting the remedy
or the substantive aspects of a proposed or selected remedy
(e.g., the scope of a site investigation or the identification of
potential ARARs), the document should be placed in the record
file, even though the document was signed by a person other than
the Regional Administrator and generated long before the decision
document was signed.

     Examples of internal memoranda and staff notes which should
not be included in the record file are documents that express
tentative opinions or internal documents that evaluate
alternative viewpoints.  Recommendations of staff to other staff
or management should also not be included in the record file,
except for those staff recommendations which ultimately embody a
final decision relevant to response selection.  Drafts and
internal memoranda may also be subject to claims of privilege
(see section XXI.H., below).

H.   Privileged Documents

     Some documents in the administrative record file may be
protected &rom public disclosure on the basis of an applicable
privilege.   Any documents which are considered or relied on in
a response action selection, but withheld from the public portion
of the record file based on privilege, must be placed in a
confidential portion of the record file (*ee section XX.H. at
page 19).

     Xf a document is excluded from the public portion of the
record file based on privilege, the relevant information should,
to the extent feasible, be extracted and included in the public
     33  See 40 C.F.R. |300.810(c)
                                34
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

record file.  This can often b« accomplished by deleting or
redacting the privileged information from the document.

     The privileges discussed below may be asserted with respect
to documents that are considered or relied on in the selection of
a response action.  The head of the office responsible for
developing the document in question should assert the privilege.
In all cases, the official asserting a privilege should consult
with ORC.

     Public disclosure of a privileged document may result in
waiver of the privilege, although the nature and extent of the
waiver will depend on the privilege asserted and the
circumstances of the disclosure.  If the privilege is waived and
the document becomes a public document, it must be disclosed to
any requester.  In light of the potential for waiver, it is
important that personnel not release potentially privileged
documents to any party without consulting with ORC.

Deliberative Process

     The deliberative process privilege applies to pre-
decisional, deliberative communications that express opinions,
advice, and recommendations of staff to other staff or
management.  The privilege functions to encourage the honest and
free expression of opinion, suggestions and ideas among those
formulating policy for government agencies (see "Guidance for
Assertion of Deliberative Process Privilege," 10/3/84).

     In general, if a document contains factual information
forming the basis for the selection of the response action, the
factual portion should be included in the record file.

     Use of the deliberative process privilege should be balanced
with the statutory mandate of including the public in the
response action selection process.  The privilege should be
asserted if disclosure of the document will have an inhibiting
effect on frank and open discussion among government staff and
decisionmakars.  Documents should not be withheld solely because
they would reveal flaws in the case or information embarrassing
to the government.  Specific procedures exist for assertion of
the deliberative process privilege, which include consulting with
ORC.

Confidential Business Information (CBI)

     The EPA must withhold from the public record trad* secrets
and commercial and financial information that is subject to
protection under 40 C.F.R. Part 2.  However, Section 104(e)(7) of
CERCLA greatly restricts the assertions of confidentiality claims

                                35
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

by PRPs at CERCLA sites.  The decisionmaker should attempt to
avoid using CBI in making response action decisions and can do so
in most cases by using other information instead.   Where the
decisionmaker must use CBI in making its decision, 40 C.F.R. Part
2 and Section 104(e)(7) of CERCLA will apply and such information
should be placed in the confidential portion of the
administrative record file.

Attorney Work Product

     This exclusion applies to documents prepared in anticipation
of possible litigation.  The work product privilege covers all
documents prepared by an attorney or under an attorney's
supervision, including reports prepared by a consultant or
program employee.  Litigation need not have commenced but it must
be reasonably contemplated.  These documents generally relate to
enforcement or defensibility of a decision and are not considered
or relied on in selecting a response action.  These documents
should not, therefore, be in the administrative record file.

Attorney-Client Communication

     The attorney-client privilege applies to confidential
communications made in connection with securing or rendering
legal advice.  The privilege is limited to communications where
there was an intention to keep the information confidential.

Personal Privacy

     This exemption covers information about individuals in
personnel, medical, and similar files, the disclosure of which
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy.  The records must pertain to an individual, and not a
business, to be excluded from the public portion of the
administrative record file under this exemption.  Often,
information subject to the protection under the personal privacy
privilege can be redacted from the document and the redacted
version can be placed in the public portion of the record file.

State Secrets

     The lead agency is authorized to exclude from public
scrutiny information which, if released, would harm national
security or interfere with the government's ability to conduct
foreign relations.  This privilege could be particularly
important where the PRP is a federal agency or a contractor for a
federal agency.  In the case of a federal facility cleanup, an
     54  See  40  C.F.R.  |300.810(d).

                                36
-------
                                   OSWER Directive NO. 9833.3A-1

Inter-Agency Agreement should spell out procedures for assarting
this privilege.

Confidential Informant

     Statements obtained from witnesses who have been granted
confidentiality nay be privileged.

Information Exempted by Other Statutes

     Information specifically exempted from disclosure by a
federal statute need not be part of the public record.  The
statute in question must leave no discretion as to the
requirement that matters be withheld from the public, or it must
establish particular criteria for withholding or refer to
particular types of matters to be withheld.

I.   Guidance Documents

     Guidance documents, or portions of guidance documents, that
are considered or relied on in selecting a response action should
be included in the administrative record file for that response
action.  Any guidance documents generated to address issues that
specifically arise at the site for which the record file is being
compiled should be physically included in the record file.
Certain guidance documents, however, do not have to be kept in
the record file.  Guidance documents not generated for the
particular site for which the record is being compiled may be
kept in a compendium of guidance documents maintained at the
regional office or other central location.

     Each Region should maintain a compendium of guidance
documents which are frequently used in selecting response
actions.  As with an administrative record file, the compendium
of guidance documents must be available to the public, but only
at the regional office or other central location.  The record
file located at or near the site should contain an index to the
compendium of guidance documents.  The Administrative Record
Coordinator should maintain and update the compendium of guidance
documents.  If a guidance document maintained in the compendium
is considered or relied on when making a response action
decision, the index to the record file must list the document and
indicate its location and availability.  See also Appendix E.

     If a guidance document is listed in a bibliography to a
document included in the record file (e.g., listed in the
bibliography to the RI/FS), it need not be listed again in the
     35  See 40 C.F.R. |300.805(a)(2)

                                37
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

index to the record file.  In this case, however, the index Bust
state that document* listed as bibliographic sources night not be
listed separately in the index.

     If a guidance document which is not included in the guidance
compendium is considered or relied on in selecting the response
action, the document should be physically included in the record
file.

J.   Technical Literature

     Technical literature generated for the site at issue should
be physically included in the administrative record file for that
site, whether or not it is publicly available.

     Similarly, technical literature not specifically generated
for the site which is not publicly available should also be
included in the site-specific record file.  Such documents
include technical journals and unpublished documents that are not
available through the Library of Congress or not circulated to
technical libraries.

     Publicly available technical literature not generated for
the site, however, need not be located at or near the site or at
the regional office or other central location if the documents
are referenced in the index to the record file.   These
documents do not have to be physically included in the record
file, unless requested, because they are already available to the
public.  Copying such documents creates a significant burden to
the lead agency and copyright laws may pose additional barriers
to such copying.  Examples of publicly available technical
literature include engineering manuals, groundwater monitoring or
hydrogeology textbooks, ATSDR toxicological profiles, and
articles from technical journals.

     If technical literature is listed in a bibliography to a
document included in the record file («.g., listed in the
bibliography to the RI/FS), it need not be listed again in the
index to the record file.  In this ease, however, the index must
state that documents listed as bibliographic sources might not be
listed separately in the index.

     Computer models and technical databases need not be
physically included in the record file but should be referenced
in the index to the record file and made available upon request.
Printouts or other documents produced from the models and
databases should be physically included in the record file if
     36   See  40  C.F.R.  |300.805(b) (3)

                                38
-------
                                   OSWZR Directive No. 9833.3A-1

much documents contain information which was considered or relied
on in selecting the response action.

K.   Legal Sources

     Copies of statutes and regulations cited in documents
included in the record file need not be included in the record
file if they are readily available to the public.  For example,
the NCP and other regulations are easily accessible since they
are published in the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations (C.F.R.).

     Copies of the actual standards (statutes or regulations)
comprising federal and state ARARs should be physically included
in the record file if they are not easily accessible.  Also,
other federal and state criteria, advisories, and guidance
documents pertinent to the site (e.g., what the EPA refers to as
NTBCs,N or standards "to be considered"), may not be easily
accessible.  If such documents are cited in an RX/FS, appendix to
the RI/FS, EE/CA, or ROD, those advisories which are not readily
available should be included in the record file.

L.   NPL Ruleaaking Docket Information

     Generally, information included in the National Priorities
List (NPL) rulemaking docket, such as the Hazard Ranking System
(MRS) scoring package and comments received on the listing, need
not be included in the record file for selection of a response
action.  The NPL docket contains information relevant to the
decision to list a site, which may be irrelevant to the decision
on response action selection.

     Documents in the NPL docket which contain sampling data or
other factual information which was considered or relied on in
selecting a response action should be included in the record file
if the information is not available already in the record file.
Such information may include early sampling data taken by parties
other than the lead agency or its contractors (••g., a State).

M.   RCRA Documents

     If an action is taken under CERCLA at a «ite with a history
of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) activity, much
of the information relating to those RCRA activities may be
considered or relied on in making the CERCLA response action
selection.  Any relevant RCRA information, particularly
information on waste management and RCRA corrective action at the
site, should be included in the administrative record file (e.g.,
RCRA permit applications, inspection reports, RCRA Facility
Assessment (RFA), RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI), Corrective

                                39
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

Measures Studies (CMS), or responses to RCRA information
requests).

     Not all pre-existing RCRA information will be considered or
relied on in selecting a CERCLA response action, but information
on types of wastes, quantity of wastes, and observations of
potential threats gathered during RCRA investigations generally
will be considered and thus should be included in the record
file.

N.   Post-Decision Information

     In all cases, documents generated or received after signing
the decision document should be kept in * post-decision document
file.  This file is not part of the administrative record file
and should be maintained only at the regional office or other
central location.

     In general, post-decision documents should not be added to
the administrative record file.  Since the record file contains
the information which was considered or relied on in selecting
the response action, documents generated or received after
selecting the response action are not relevant to that response
decision and should not be included in the record file.  Such
documents may, however, be relevant to later response selection
decisions and, if so, should be included in the record file
pursuant to Section 300.825 of the NCP.

     Documents kept in the post-decision document file may be
added to the record file in the situations described below:

o    Where a decision document does not address or reserves a
     portion of the decision to be made at a later date.37  For
     example, a decision document that does not resolve the type
     of treatment technology.  In such cases, the lead agency
     should continue to add documents to the record file which
     form the basis for the unaddressed or reserved portion of
     the decision;

o    Where there is a significant change in the selected response
     action.   Changes that result in a significant difference
     to a basic feature of the selected remedial action (e.g.,
     timing, ARARs), with respect to scope, performance, or cost
     37 40 C.F.R. |300.825(a) (1) .

     58 40 C.F.R. |300.825(a)(2) .  See 40 C.F.R. 1300.435(C)(2)(i).

                                40
-------
                              OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

nay be addressed in an explanation of significant
differences. Section 117(c) of CERCLA states:

     [a]fter adoption of a final remedial action plan -
     (1) if any remedial action im taken, (2) if any
     enforcement action under ••ction 106 is taken, or
     (3) if any settlement or consent decree under
     section 106 or section 122 is entered into, and if
     such action, sattlenent, or decree differs in any
     significant respects from the final plan, the
     President or the State shall publish an
     explanation of the significant differences and the
     reasons such changes were made.

The record file should include the explanation of
significant differences, underlying documentation for the
response action changes, any significant comments from the
public, and the lead agency responses to any significant
comments.  A formal public comment period is not required
for an explanation of significant differences;

Where the changes are so significant that they fundamentally
alter the very nature or basis of the overall response
action.  Such changes will require an amended decision
document.   The Region will decide whether a change to a
response action is considered a significant or a fundamental
change for purposes of.addressing the change (see Chapter 8
of "Interim Final Guidance on Preparing Superfund Decision
Documents:  The Proposed Plan and Record of Decision," June
1989, OSWER Directive No. 9355.3-02).

When the decision document is amended, the amended decision
document, the underlying documentation, any significant
comments from the public, and the lead agency's responses to
any significant comments, should be included in the record
file.  ROD amendments will require a formal public comment
period;

Where comments containing significant information are
submitted by interested persons after the close of the
public comment period.  The lead agency must consider such
comments only to the extent that the comments contain
significant information not contained elsewhere in the
record file which could not have been submitted during the
public comment period and which substantially support the
39 40 C.F.R.  |300.825(a) (2).

40 40 C.F.R.  |300.435(C) (2) (ii).
                           41
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

     need to significantly alter the response action.*1
     Documents Meeting this test should be included in the record
     file, along with the lead agency's responses to the
     significant cements, whether or not such information
     results in a change to the selected decision.  In this case,
     the comnents and the lead agency responses to such comments,
     including any supporting documents, should be included in
     the record file; and

o    Where the lead agency holds public comment periods after the
     selection of the response action.   The lead agency may
     hold additional public comment periods or extend the time
     for submission of public comment on any issue concerning
     response selection.  Such comment should be limited to the
     issues for which the lead agency requested additional
     comment.  All comments responsive to the request submitted
     during such comment periods, along with any public notices
     of the comment period, transcripts of public meetings, and
     lead agency responses to the comments, should be placed in
     the record file.

IV.  INVOLVEMENT OF OTHER PARTIES

A.   States

A.I. State Involvement in Federal-Lead Sites

     The administrative record for a federal-lead site must
reflect the state's opportunity to be involved in selecting the
response action.  The record for a remedial action should include
documents that reflect at least the following state participation
or the opportunity for state participation:

o    Letter to state requesting identification of ARARs and the
     final response from state identifying ARARs (and
     certification from the state);

o    Comments, or the opportunity to comment, on a proposed
     finding or decision to select a response action not
     attaining a level or standard of control at least equivalent
     to a state ARAR;
     41 40 C.F.R. |300.825(c).

     *2 40 C.F.R. i300.825(b).

     43 See also Section  121 (f) of CERCLA

                                42
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

o    Comments, or the opportunity to comment, on the final draft
     RI/FS, the proposed plan and EPA responses to the comments;

o    Significant post-decision comments by the state and EPA
     responses to the comments (place in the post-decision
     document file for possible inclusion in the record file -
     see section III.N. at page 40).

     The administrative record for a removal action should
reflect any state participation, especially any state comments
and EPA responses to the comments.

     The record file should only include final state comments,
unless the comments explain or convey decisions on substantive
aspects of a proposed or selected remedy (e.g., the scope of a
proposed action or the identification of potential ARARs).  Any
preliminary deliberations between the state and EPA relevant to
the response selection need not be part of the record file if
superseded by documentation of the state's final position.

     The governing body of an Indian tribe should be afforded the
same treatment as a state in accordance with Section 126 of
CERCLA.

A.2. Federal Involvement in State-Lead Sites

     Where a state has been officially designated the lead agency
for a CERCLA site, the state must compile and maintain the
administrative record for that site in accordance with Section
113(K) of CERCLA and Section 300.800 of the NCP.  Since EPA has
ultimate responsibility for both the selection of a response
action (s.g., EPA signs the ROD) and the record on which that
response action is based, EPA must participate in compiling and
maintaining the record.  In such cases, EPA must assure that the
record file forms a complete basis for the selection of the
response action.

     The state as lead agency must maintain the record file at a
state office («.g., the state's central environmental agency
office) and at or near the site.  At a minimum, the state as lead
agency also must transmit a copy of the index, the RI/FS work
plan, the RI/FS released for public comment, the proposed plan,
and any public comments received on the RI/FS and the proposed
plan to the appropriate EPA Regional office.   These documents
should be transmitted to EPA as they are generated or received.
Transmittal of the index will not suffice.  In addition, other
documents may be requested by EPA on a case-by-case basis.
     u  See 40 C.F.R. |300.800(c).
                                43
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1


     The Superfund Memorandum of Agreement  (SMOA), or Cooperative
Agreement  (CA), Bust address the administrative record
requirements.  The following language should be included in the
SMOA or CA where the state has been officially designated the
lead agency for a CERCLA site:

     The state must compile and maintain the administrative
     record upon which the selection of the [remedial,
     removal] action is based.  The compilation and
     maintenance of the record must follow 40 C.P.R. Part
     300, Subpart I and EPA guidance on the administrative
     record.  The administrative record must be located at
     the state [environmental agency] office, and at or near
     the site.  In addition, the state must submit copies of
     the index, the RI/FS workplan, the RI/FS released for
     public comment, the proposed plan, and any public
     comments received on the RZ/FS and proposed plan to the
     EPA Regional office, as they are added to the
     administrative record file.  Zn addition, the state
     must submit other documents that are requested by EPA.
     The state shall comply with Section 113 of CERCLA and
     any applicable regulations.  EPA may require the
     retention of other documents for cost recovery
     purposes.

     The record file compiled by the state should reflect EPA's
participation, comments, concurrence, and disagreements at the
same stages as are required for state involvement in a federal-
lead site.  The state must place in the record file any documents
submitted by EPA for inclusion in the record file.

B.   Federal Facilities

     Federal agencies have the responsibility, pursuant to.
Executive Order 12580, to establish the administrative record for
federal facilities under their jurisdiction, custody, or control
where using CERCLA authority for a response action.  The record
file for a federal facility must include all documents considered
or relied en in selecting a response action, including documents
submitted by EPA on the selection of the response action.  The
federal agency must comply with all NCP (see Appendix M) and
CERCLA requirements in compiling and maintaining the record,
including the minimum public participation requirements in
Sections 113 and 117 of CERCLA.5
     45  See 40 C.F.R. |300.800(b).
                                44
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

     The federal agency must maintain the record file at or near
the site and ensure easy public access to the record file.  If,
for example, a site is a Department of Defense facility, the
record file should be housed in a location which does not require
military clearance for access.  The federal agency should keep a
complete copy of the record file at a location within the federal
agency office comparable to an EPA Regional office.

     At NPL sites and any other site where EPA is involved in
selecting a response action at a federal facility, EPA must
participate in compiling and maintaining the record.  In such
cases, EPA must assure that the record file forms a complete
basis for the selection of the response action.  At a minimum,
the federal agency must transmit a copy of the index, the RI/FS
workplan, the RI/FS released for public comment, the proposed
plan, and any public comments received on the RI/FS and proposed
plan to the appropriate EPA Regional office.  These documents
should be transmitted to EPA as they are generated.  Transmittal
of the index will not suffice.  In addition, other documents may
be requested by EPA on a case-by-case basis.  Inter-Agency
Agreements  (lAGs) should spell out procedures for compiling and
maintaining the record.

C.   ATSDR

     Participation in the selection of a response action by the
Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry (ATSDR)  should be
reflected in the administrative record.  The record file must
include the initial and subsequent health assessments and any
other information EPA solicits and obtains from ATSDR which EPA
considers or relies on in its selection of a response action.

     Draft versions of the health assessment and other draft
documents upon which ATSDR comments should not be included in the
record file.  If, however, EPA solicits comments from ATSDR on a
draft document such as a draft work plan or RI report, and
receives formal comments from ATSDR which EPA considers or relies
on in selecting a response action, then the document and comments
should b« included in the record file.

     In th« event that the ATSDR health assessment and EPA's risk
assessment appear inconsistent, a document explaining the
difference should b« generated and placed in the record file.

D.   Natural Resources Trustees

     Section 122(j)(l) of CERCLA requires that the EPA give
notice to the Natural Resources Trustee of a release or
threatened release of any hazardous substance which may have
resulted in damages to natural resources.  The administrative

                             .  45
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

record file must include the notice to the Natural Resources
Trustee, and any subsequent final communications (e.g., a release
or final report).   In addition, any factual information provided
by the Natural Resources Trustee which is considered or relied on
in selecting a response action should be included in the record
file.

     In the event that the Natural Resources Trustee's damage
assessment and EPA's risk assessment appear inconsistent, a
document explaining the difference should be generated and placed
in the record file.

V.   DISCLAIMER

     The policies and procedures established in this document are
intended solely for the guidance of employees of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.  They are not intended and
cannot be relied upon to create any rights, substantive or
procedural, enforceable by any party in litigation with the
United States.  EPA reserves the right to act at variance with
these policies and procedures and to change them at any time
without public notice.


VI.  FURTHER INFORMATION

     For further information concerning this memorandum, please
contact Gary Worthman in the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
at FTS  (202) 382-5646.
                                46
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

                             GLOSSARY


Administrative Record;  as used in this guidance, the body of
documents that were considered or relied on which form the basis
for the selection of a response action.

Administrative Record File;  as used in this guidance, the
ongoing collection of documents which are anticipated to
constitute the administrative record when the selection of
response action is made.

ARAR;  applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements  (see
Section 121(d) of CERCLA).

ATSPR;  Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry.

£A.:  cooperative agreement (entered  into with a state or local
government to transfer funds to conduct response activities).

CBI;  confidential business information.

CERCLA;  Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986  (also known as Superfund).

C.F.R.;  Code of Federal Regulations.

CMS;  corrective measure study (RCRA corrective action document,
equivalent to an FS).

CRC;  Community Relations Coordinator.

CRP;  community relations plan.

Document;  as used in this guidance, includes writings, drawings,
graphs, charts, photographs, and data compilation from which
information can be obtained.  It does not, however, include
physical samples.

DOJ;  Department of Justice.

EE/CA;  engineering evaluation/cost analysis (removal document).

EPA;  United States Environmental Protection Agency.

ESP;  Environmental Services Division.

Explanation of Significant Differences;  post-ROD document
described in Section 117(c) of CERCLA.

                               47
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

FQIA;  Freedom of Information Act.
FSP;  field sampling plan.
MRS;  Hazard Ranking System.
IAG;  inter-agency agreement (made with a federal agency).
Lead Aaencv;  the agency that provides the OSC or RPM to plan and
implement a response action under the NCP.
NCP:  National Oil and Hazardous .Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan, as revised on March 8, 1990 (55 FR 8859).
NPL;  National Priorities List.
OE:  EPA Office of Enforcement.
OERR;  EPA Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.
OIRM:  EPA Office of Information Resources Management.
Operable Unit;  a discrete action that comprises an incremental
step toward comprehensively addressing site problems  (see section
300.5 of the NCP).
ORC:  EPA Office of Regional Counsel.
OSC;  On-Scene Coordinator (project manager for a removal action)
OSWER;  EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
OWPE;  EPA Office of Waste Programs Enforcement.
PA;  preliminary assessment.
PRPt  potentially responsible party.
QAPP;  quality assurance project plan.
RA;  remedial action.
RCRA;  the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act.
RD;  remedial design.
RI/FS;  remedial investigation/feasibility study.

                                48
-------
                                   OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A-1

RFA:  RCRA facility assessment  (RCRA document, equivalent to a
PA/SI).

RFI;  RCRA facility investigation (RCRA corrective action
document, equivalent to an RI) .

ROD;  Record of Decision  (documents the selection of a remedial
action).

RPM;  remedial project manager  (project manager for a remedial
action).

SAP:  sampling and analysis plan.

SARA;  Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (see
CERCLA above).

Site File;  the file containing all site documentation.

SI;  site investigation.

SMOA;  Superfund memorandum of agreement (made with a state).

Support Agency;  the agency that provides the support agency
coordinator to furnish necessary data to the lead agency, review
response data and documents, and provide other assistance as
requested by the lead agency.  The support agency may also concur
on decision documents.
                                49
-------
                         APPENDIX  A


               SECTION  113  (J)  OP  CERCLA
ij) JUDICIAL REVIEW.—
    (1) LIMITATION.—In any judicial action under this Act, judi-
  cial review of any  issues concerning the adequacy of any re-
  sponse action taken or ordered by the President shall be limit-
  ed to the administrative record. Otherwise applicable princi-
  ples  of administrative law shall govern  whether any supple-
  mental materials may be considered by the court.
    (2) STANDARD.—In considering objections  raised in any judi-
  cial action under thia Act,  the court shall  uphold the  Presi-
  dent's  decision  in selecting the response  action unless the ob-
  jecting party can demonstrate, on the administrative record.
  that the decision  was arbitrary and capricious or otherwise not
  in accordance with law.

    (3) REMEDY.—If the court finds that the selection of the re-
  sponse action was arbitrary and capricious or otherwise  not in
  accordance with  law, the court shall award (A) only the re-
  sponse costs or damages  that are not inconsistent with the na-
  tional contingency plan,  and (B) such other relief as is consist-
  ent with the National Contingency Plan.
    (4) PROCEDURAL  CRRORS.—In reviewing  alleged procedural
  errors, the court may disallow costs  or damages only  if the
  errors  were so  serious and related to matters of such central
  relevance to the action that the action would have been signifi-
  cantly  changed had such  errors not been made.
                             50
-------
               SECTION  113  (R)  OF CERCIA

(k) ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD AND PARTICIPATION PROCEDURES —
    (1) ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD.— The  President shall  establish
  an administrative record upon which the President shall base
  the selection of a response action. The administrative record
  shall be available to the public at or near the facility at issue.
  The President also may place duplicates of the administrative
  record at any other location.
    (2) PARTICIPATION PROCEDURES.—
        (A)  REMOVAL  ACTION.— The President shall  promulgate
      regulations in accordance with chapter 5 of title 5 of the
      United States Code establishing  procedures for the appro-
      priate  participation of interested persons in the develop-
      ment  of the administrative  record on which the President
      will base the selection of removal actions and on which ju-
      dicial review of removal actions will be based.
        (B)  REMEDIAL ACTION.— The President shall  provide for
      the participation of interested persons, including potential-
      ly responsible parties, in  the development of the
      trative record on which the President will base the selec-
      tion of remedial actions and on which judicial review of re-
      medial actions will be  based. The procedures developed
      under  this  subparagraph shall  include, at a minimum,
      each of the following:
            (i)  Notice to  potentially  affected persons and  the
          public, which shall be accompanied by a brief analysis
          of the plan and alternative plans  that were  consid-
          ered,
            (ii)  A reasonable opportunity to  comment and pro-
          vide information regarding the plan.
            (iii) An opportunity for a public  meeting in  the af-
          fected area, in accordance with section 117(aX2) (relat-
          ing to public participation).
            (iv) A response to each of the significant comments,
          criticisms, and new data submitted in written  or oral
          presentations.
            (v)  A statement of the basis and  purpose of the se-
          lected action.
      For purposes  of  this  subparagraph, the  administrative
      record shall  include  all items developed  and received
      under this  subparagraph and all  items described in  the
      second sentence of section 117(d). The President shall pro-
      mulgate regulations in accordance with chapter 5 of title 5
      of the United States Code to carry out the requirements of
      thi« subparagraph.
        (O IKTBUM MCOID.— Until such regulations under sub-
      paragraphs (A) and (6) are promulgated,  the  administra-
      tive record shall  consist of all items  developed and re-
      ceived pursuant to current procedures  for selection of the
      response  action, inrltMtit|g procedures for the participation
      of interested partiee and the public. The development of aa
      administrative record and the selection of response action
      under this  Act shall not include an adjudkatory hearing.
         (D)  POTKNTIAULT iHPONiMUi PAJtrBs,— The  President
      «h«n m«if« reasonable efforts to identify and notify poten-
      tially responsible  parties as early  as possible  before selec-
      tion of a response action. Nothing in this paragraph shall
      be construed to be a defense to liability.

                               51
-------
                             APPENDIX B

                        MODEL PILE srauemmi


    This model file structure may be used t© eonpile an
administrative record fil« for a remedial action, a removal action,
or a combination of both remedial and removal actions.  If the
record documents a remedial action decision, soetibn 2 of the file
will contain only those removal action documents which (a) predate
the remedial record of decision and (b) are r®l®vant to the
selection of the remedial action.  If the record documents a removal
action decision, sections 3, 4, and 5 of the file will contain only
those remedial action documents which (a) predate the removal action
memorandum and (b) are relevant to the selection of the removal
action.

    Justification is unnecessary for file categories without any
documents.  Those categories should be left out of the index.

    A document should be filed in only one category, even if it
falls into more than one category.  It may be referenced in another
category.  If necessary, additional subcatsges-iass may be developed
to accommodate documents not falling in any of the defined
subcategories.  Avoid adding categories of miscellaneous documents.

    The correspondence subcategory can include comments and
responses specific to the category.  If the comments and responses
are general in nature or address more than one category, they may be
included in the public participation category:
                                   52
-------
INDEX [FIRST DOCUMENT]
1.0 SITE IDENTIFICATION
    1.1  Background - RCRA and other information
    1.2  Notification/Sit* Inspection Reports
    1.3  Preliminary Assessment (PA) Report
    1.4  Site Investigation (SI) Report
    1.5  Previous Operable Unit Information

2.0 REMOVAL RESPONSE
    2.1  Sampling and Analysis Plans
    2.2  Sampling and Analysis Data/Chain of Custody Forms
    2.3  EE/CA Approval Memorandum  (for non-time-critical removals)
    2.4  EE/CA
    2.5  Action Memorandum
    2.6  Amendments to Action Memorandum

3.0 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (RI)
    3.1  Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)
    3.2  Sampling and Analysis Data/Chain of Custody Forms
    3.3  Work Plan
    3.4  RI Reports

4.0 FEASIBILITY STUDY (PS)
    4.1  ARAB Determinations
    4.2  FS Reports
    4.3  Proposed Plan
    4.4  Supplements and Revisions to the Proposed Plan

5.0 RECORD OP DECISION (ROD)
    5.1  ROD
    5.2  AnendBtnt* to ROD
    5.3  Explanations of Significant Differences

6.0 STATE COORDINATION
    6.1  Cooperative Agreements/SMOAs
                                      53
-------
    6.2  State Certification of AKARs

7.0 ENFORCEMENT
    7.l  Enforcement History
    7.2  Endangerment Assessments
    7.3  Administrative Orders
    7.4  Consent Decrees
    7.5  Affidavits
    7.6  Documentation of Technical Discussions with PRPs on
         Response Actions
    7.7  Notice Letters and Responses

8.0 HEALTH ASSESSMENTS
    8.1  ATSDR Health Assessments
    8.2  Toxicological Profiles

9.0 NATURAL RESOURCE TRUSTEES
    9.1  Notices Issued
    9.2  Findings of Fact
    9.3  Reports

10.0     PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
    10.1 Comments and Responses
    10.2 Community Relations Plan
    10.3 Public Notice(s) (Availability of the Administrative Record
         File, Availability the Proposed Plan, Public Meetings)
    10.4 Public Meeting Transcripts
    10.5 Documentation of Other Public Meeting*
    10.6 Fact Sheet* end Press Releases
    10.7 Responsiveness Summary
    10.8 Late Comments

11.0     TECHNICAL SOURCES AND GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
    11.1 EPA Headquarters Guidance
    11.2 EPA Regional Guidance
    11.3 State Guidance
-------
11.4 Technical Sources
                              55
-------
                             APPENDIX C

                            MODEL INDEX


     Attached is an excerpt of the Index of documents included in
the Administrative Record for the Love Canal site.  The Index lists
the documents according to the EPA file structure  (category number).
The Index includes the following information fields:


DOCUMENT NUMBER....     indicates the first and last page numbers of
                        the document.  Both page numbers will be the
                        same for one-page documents.  In this
                        particular index, the document number
                        consists of a three letter site code
                        followed by microfilm reel and frame
                        numbers.

TITLE	     indicates the title or an enhanced
                        description of the document in parentheses.

AUTHOR	     indicates the author or primary originator
                        and the author's corporate affiliation.

RECIPIENT	     indicates the addressee or primary recipient
                        and the addressee's corporate affiliation.

DATE	     indicates document date by month/day/year.
                         / / means no date vas available.

TYPE	     indicates the document type.

CATEGORY	     indicates the EPA file structure number.
                                   56
-------
                             APPENDIX 0

  MODEL POSITION DESCRIPTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD COORDINATOR


INTRODUCTIOM

    The incumbent serves as an Administrative Record Coordinator in
one of the Regional offices of the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).  [Each Region may want to add an  introduction to Superfund
and the Regional office here.]  The incumbent is responsible for
compiling and maintaining administrative record files for CERCLA
(Superfund) response action decisions.

    Section 113(k) of CERCLA requires the establishment of an
administrative  record upon which the selection of a response action
is based.  Such a record is a compilation of all documents which the
Agency considered or relied on in making its response action
decision.  Judicial review of any issues concerning the adequacy of
any response action decision is limited  to the administrative
record.  Public participation in the development of the record is
required by law.

    Establishment of thorough and complete administrative records is
essential to EPA's Superfund program.  Administrative records which
include public participation and withstand judicial scrutiny allow
EPA to meet its goals and objectives.

    The incumbent will be responsible for compiling and maintaining
administrative records for large numbers of Superfund sites.  Each
record requires coordination with many people including:  Federal
staff, state and local officials, private contractors, the general
public and potentially responsible parties.  Further
responsibilities include deliberation* over which materials to
include in each record and requirements  for dealing with privileged
materials.
M&.TOB nrTTTFS Aim BWSPOWSTRTT.TTTKfl
    The incumbent is responsible for compiling and maintaining all
    of the administrative records  for ••lection of CERCLA response
    actions for a Regional office  of the EPA.  The incumbent must
    have complete knowledge of all rules and procedures governing
    development of the administrative record files.

    Receives and reviews all documents submitted by the Remedial
    Project Manager  (RPM), On-Scene Coordinator  (OSC), Office of
    Regional Counsel (ORC) and other appropriate staff for  inclusion
    in the administrative record files.  The incumbent will
    coordinate with staff responsible for deciding what documents
    are included in the record and will arrange  for adding  documents
    to the record file.
                                   57
-------
3.   Compiles the administrative record file for each CERCLA
     response action.  This includes logging the receipt of each
     document, maintaining a central master file of documents,
     redacting information from privileged documents as directed
     by ORC, maintaining any privileged portions of each record
     using Agency security measures, arranging for copying of
     documents in each record and transmitting the documents to
     appropriate repositories.

4.   Coordinates the compilation of the administrative record
     files with state and federal agencies.  This includes
     receiving records maintained by state and federal agencies
     and notifying appropriate personnel of these records for
     their review.

5.   Maintains and updates (monthly) an index of each
     administrative record file in confonnance with Agency
     guidelines.

6.   Ensures public access to administrative record files.  This
     includes notifying the public of the availability of the
     record, making the record available for public inspection,
     coordinating with personnel at the facility where the record
     is located, maintaining an adequate copying facility and
     maintaining a log of persons reviewing documents.  The
     incumbent will have to respond to phone calls and visitors
     wanting information on and from the record.  These functions
     will be coordinated with the Office of Public Affairs and
     Superfund Community Relations Coordinators.

7.   Maintains the Regional Superfund Central Library of guidance
     documents and technical references.
CONTROLS OVER WORK

     The incumbent works under the general supervision of the
[Hazardous Waste. Branch Chief].  An administrative record is
reviewed and certified for litigation by a person designated by
the Regional Administrator.
                              58
-------
             APPENDIX' E
         COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA
          RESPONSE SELECTION
         GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS

            USERS MANUAL
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF WASTE PROGRAMS ENFORCEMENT

               MAY 1989
               59
-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS
 1.0  INTRODUCTION  	

 :.0  OVERVIEW OF COMPENDIUM USE

      M   USE BY EPA PERSONNEL  .
      2.2   USE BY THE PUBLIC	
 3.0  STRUCTURE OF THE COMPENDIUM
      3. 1   FILE STRUCTURE
      3.2   INDEX STRUCTURE
 4.0  UPDATING THE COMPENDIUM ....................................... (5J

      4.1   REGIONAL INPUT  ......... .' ................................ (5}
      4.2   KEEPING THE COMPENDIUM CURRENT  ........................ £6)
                            LIST OF TABLES

 Table                                                             ?JU£


 3-1   COMPENDIUM CATEGORIES AND NUMBER SERIES	 (4)
 Appendix

      Rl
      COORDINATORS
(A*)    REGIONAL COMPENDIUM LOCATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
(*)   COMPENDIUM OFCERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
      INDEX
                                60
-------
                                  1.0   INTRODUCTION

       This manual describes how to use the "Compendium of CERCLA Response Selection
      nce Documents" (Compendium). Each U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
 Regional Office maintains a compendium of guidance documents frequently used during
 development and selection of response actions under the Comprehensive Environmental
 Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).

       EPA Headquarters used several sources to develop the initial Compendium.  These sources
 included a pamphlet titled "Selected Technical Guidance for Superfund Projects* (OSWER
 Directive 9200.7-01); the OSWER Directive System; the Superfund, Resource Conservation and
 Recovery  Act (RCRA), and Enforcement dockets; the Hazardous Waste Collection Database;  and
 any existing regional compendiums.  The documents in the Compendium are referenced in
 administrative records for decisions on selection of response actions.

       The administrative record described here is the body of documents that form the basis for
selection of a CERCLA response action.  Establishment of the administrative record is required
by §113(k) of CERCLA.  An administrative record is the compilation of documents considered or
relied on by EPA in making a decision.  Documents that EPA anticipates will be included in the
administrative record when the decision oo a response action selection is made, are referred to  as
the 'administrative record file." Guidance documents, or portions of guidance documents, that
are considered or relied on in selecting a CERCLA response action should  be part of an
administrative record file.

       Certain frequently used guidance documents may be referenced in  the index to an
administrative record but not physically included in the administrative record file. The reference
should indicate the title and location of any documents included in the administrative record but
maintained in the Compendium, which is kept at a central regional location.  If a guidance
document that is not listed in the Compendium is considered or relied on in selecting  the response
action, the doovMtt must be physically included in the administrative record file. The
Compendium gggpt reduce the burden of copying and storing multiple copies of frequently used
guidance
       Section 2.0 of this manual briefly discusses use of the Compendium by EPA personnel and
the public. Section 3.0 discusses the Compendium's file and index structure.  Documents in the
Compendium are filed in three-ring binders and listed on an index which is generated by and
                                         (1)
                                         61
-------
 maintained on a computer database.  Procedures for updating the Compendium are presented in
 Section 4.0.

                        2.0   OVERVIEW OF COMPENDIUM USE

       The Compendium is intended for use by two groups: EPA personnel, during the process
 of response action selection and administrative  record development, and the public, for review of
 documents referenced in the index to an administrative record.

       The user should note that although the term "guidance" is often used in discussing the
 Compendium, it does not imply that only guidance documents are included.  The documents may
 also be policies, memoranda, clarifications, case studies, manuals, handbooks, reports, and other
 documents used in the selection of CERCLA response actions.

 2.1           USE  BY EPA PERSONNEL

       EPA  personnel use the Compendium primarily to reference frequently used guidance
documents that may be maintained in the Compendium rather than physically included in each
administrative record file. The index must indicate which documents are physically located in
the Compendium and must specify the location and accessibility of the Compendium.  The index
should also reference only the  specific documents in the Compendium that were considered or
relied on for the site for which the record  is  being compiled. The index should not reference the
entire Compendium.

2.2           USE  BY THE PUBLIC

       As with any  unrestricted document included in t record, the  Compendium documents are
accessible for pubtic review.  When EPA publishes a notice of availability of  an administrative
record file, that notice will include the location of the Compendium. The Compendium will be
available for p«Ma  viewing at a central regional establishment (for example, the EPA Regional
Office), and ad»4}or near the site for which the record is being compiled. (See Appendix A for
a list of the tocttta of each rational copy of the Compendium and the names of the Regional
 Administrative Record Coordinators.)
                                         (2)

                                         62
-------
                        3.0   STRUCTURE OF THE COMPENDIUM

       Currently, the Compendium is organized into 10 categories. An overview of the file
 strucrurs is presented below, is well as a discussion of  the index that identifies the documents
 included in the Compendium. This section also discusses the data elements identified in the
 index. The data elements provide vital information on the documents included in the
 Compendium and are contained in a database used to compile the Compendium and generate the
 index.

 3.1           FILE STRUCTURE

       The Compendium is structured according to 10 major categories that generally reflect the
 various components of a response action selection under CERCLA. Table 3-1 lists the current
 Compendium categories.  The documents are further grouped  into subcategories that indicate
 their more specific nature, when applicable.  For example, the remedial investigation/feasibility
 study (RI/FS) section of the Compendium  is broken down into more specific subcategories to
 identify the wide range of RI/FS documents available. When  the documents apply to multiple
categories, secondary references are provided in the Compendium index.

       Each document has been assigned a unique four-digit document number.  The bound
documents contained in each category are arranged numerically.  When a user wants to access a
document, he or  she will find the document filed according to the assigned number.  The  four-
digit number series assigned to each category are also listed in Table 3-1.

3.2           INDEX STRUCTURE

       When an  administrative record index refers to a document contained in the Compendium,
that document is also identified in the Compendium index. The index, contained as the first
document in the Compendium, provides the information necessary to identify and locate the
desired docuoMg* (For a copy of the current Compendium index, see Appendix B.)
       Because ui most case* the user will know the title of the document rather than the number
assigned, the index lists the documents under each category in alphabetical order.  An
alphabetical listing of secondary references follows the primary documents listed under each
category.
                                             (3)

                                             63
-------
                                 TABLE 3-t
               COMPENDIUM CATEGORIES AND NUMBER SERIES
    CATEGORIES                                NUMBER SERIES

    Index                                              0000
    Pre-Remedial                                       0001-0999
    Removal Action                                     1000-1999
    Remedial Investigation/                               2000-2999
    Feasibility Study

          General                                      2000-2099
          RI Data Quality/Site &
          Waste Assessment                              2100-2199
          Land Disposal Facility Technology               2200-2299
          Other Technologies                            2300-2399
          Groundwater Monitoring &
          Protection                                    2400-2499

   ARARx1                                            3000-3999
   Water Quality                                       4000-4999
  . Risk Augment                                     5000-5999
   Cost AMlysis                                       6000-6999
   Community Relattou                                 7000-7999
   EaforceaMat                                        1000-1999
                                                      9000-9999
1 Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
                                  64
-------
        The Compendium index is maintained on a database using dBASE III Plus software.  This
 database contains numerous data elements that store the information distinguishing and grouping
 each document into the appropriate categories.  The database is currently maintained at  EPA
 Headquarters.

        Maintaining the index in a database allows the information to be organized in different
 ways.  For example, should the  Region need an index that is sorted entirely in alphabetical order
 by title, chronologically by document date, numerically by the number assigned each document,
 etc., EPA Headquarters can generate and forward such an index.  The data elements of the
 Compendium database, as identified on the index, are included in Appendix B.

                          4.0   UPDATING THE COMPENDIUM

        The Compendium is designed to allow for the periodic addition of newly developed policy
 or guidance documents.  Updates to the Compendium are necessary in the following cases:  (1)
 EPA releases relevant new guidance, policy, reports, etc.; (2) regional staff find additional
documents that should be included in the Compendium; and (3) existing documents are revised or
superseded. EPA Headquarters  will continue to monitor the information sources used to develop
the initial Compendium for new or revised documents that may qualify for inclusion in the
Compendium.

       Guidance documents identified for addition to the Compendium will be reviewed and
relevant information  will be entered into the existing database. After the database is updated, a
new index will be generated and sent to each Regional Office.  This new index  will replace any
previous indices.  Hard copies of the additional documents will be sent to each region for
inclusion in the Compendium.  The revised index will indicate the category for  each new
document.

4.1            REGIONAL INPUT
                      in the response action selection process, as well as Administrative Record
Coordinator*, SMjr find documents that are frequently included in administrative records but are
not referenced in the Compendium.  In such cases it may be desirable to include the documents
in the Compendium as pan of the updating process.  However, since the Compendium is designed
to be nationally applicable, only documents used frequently in different regions will be included.
Any region-specific document should be maintained in separate regional files and not in the
Compendium.
                                         (5)

                                         65
-------
4.2           KEEPING THE COMPENDIUM CURRENT

       Once a document is included in the Compendium,  it will remain in  the Compendium ;o
maintain the integrity of any record that refers to it.  However, documents contained in the
Compendium may be revised in the future to reflect changes, for example, changes in policy,
technology, or law.  The most current version of these documents will be added to the
Compendium, as appropriate, so that they will be available for the administrative record process.

       Although no document included in the Compendium will ever be replaced or removed
once an administrative record  index refers to it, those documents that are superseded will be
flagged and identified on a separate index (superseded index) attached to the Compendium's main
index.  The superseded  index will also identify the corresponding revised version added to the
Compendium to indicate the new document that should be used.

       Response action selections frequently rely on technical data generated at Superfund sites
across the country. Such data is often maintained on national databases. Depending on their use
and availability, certain of these databases may be included in the Compendium.  For example,
the Public Health Risk Evaluation Database (PHRED) is part of the Compendium.  PHRED is
stored on two floppy diskettes that are regularly updated as additional information becomes
available.  Whenever updated PHRED diskettes are generated, they will be added to the
Compendium.  Those diskettes that  were previously included will also remain in  the Compendium
and will be identified on the superseded index.
                                         (6)

                                         66
-------
                             (APPENDIX A)

REGIONAL COMPENDIUM LOCATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD COORDINATORS
 Region     Address

 I          90  Canal  Street
            Boston, MA 02203
            60  Westview Street  *
            Lexington,  MA 02173

            26  Federal  Plaza
            New York, NY 10278
II
  III
  IV
 VI
          Woodbridge Avenue  *
          Raritan Depot - Bldg 10
          Edison, NJ 08837

          841 Chestnut Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19107
          345 Courtland Street, N.E.
          Atlanta, GA 30365
            230  South Dearborn Street
            Chicago,  IL 60604
          1445 Ross Avenue
          12th Floor, Suite 1200
          Dallas, TX 75270
                                        Coordinator/PH  #
                                        1. Remedial
                                        2. Removal	

                                        1. Brenda Haslett
                                           (617)573-1759
                                           FTS  833-1759

                                        2. Pam  Bruno
                                           (617)860-4309

                                        1. Jenny Delcimento
                                           (212)264-8676
                                           FTS  264-8676

                                        2. Norman Vogelsang
                                           (201)321-6657
                                           FTS  340-6657

                                        1. Margaret Leva
                                           (215)597-3037
                                           FTS  597-3037
                                         2. Joan Henry
                                            (215)597-2711
                                           FTS  597-2711

                                         1. Debbie Jourdan
                                            (404)347-2930
                                           FTS  257-2930

                                         2. Sane

                                         1. Jamie Bell
                                           FTS 353-7446

                                         2. Jan Pfundheller
                                           FTS 353-7626

                                         1. Karen Witten
                                            (214)655-6720
                                           FTS  255-6720

                                         2. Joann Woods
                                            (214)655-2270
                                           FTS  255-2"270

The  Compendium  was  initially   distributed  to   remedial
Administrative  Record  Coordinators  only.    Copies  may  be
located at this address.
                               67
-------
Region

VII
VIII
IX
Address

726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101

25 Funston Road  *
Kansas City, KS 66115
999 18th Street
Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
          1200 Sixth Avenue
          Seattle , WA 98101
Coordinator/PH #
1. Remedial
2. Removal	

1. Barry Thierer
   FTS  276-7052

2. Helen Bennett
   (913)236-3881
   FTS  757-3881

1. Carole Macy
   FTS  330-1281

2. Tina Ardemus
   FTS  330-7039

1. Tom Mix
   FTS  484-1960
   Don Briggs
   FTS  556-6637

2. Holly Hadlock
   (415)768-1354

1. Lynn Williams
   (206)442-2121
   FTS  399-2121

2. Same
     The   Compendium  was  initially   distributed  to  remedial
     Administrative  Record  Coordinators only.   Copies may not be
     located at this address.
                             68
-------
     APPENDIX
COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA
 RESPONSE SELECTION
 GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS

        INDEX
        69
-------
                                 TABLE OF CONTENTS


       '. -  Subcaceaorv                                     v-'ur".'-
Pre- Remedial                                                0001-0002


Removal Action                                              1000-1008


RI. FS - General                                              2000-2012


RI/FS - RI Data Quality/Site it Waste Assessment                2100-2119


RI/FS - Land Disposal Facility Technology                      2200-2212


RI/FS - Other Technologies                                   2300-2320


RI/FS - Ground-Water Monitoring & Protection                 2400-2408


ARARi                                                     3000-3005


Water Quality                                                4000-4003


Risk Assessment                                             ,5000-5015


Cost Analysis                                                6000-6001


Community Relations                                         7000-7000


Enforcement                                                 8000-1001


Selection of ftMdr/Dtcisioo Documents                       9000-9001


Data Element Definitions


List of Organizational Abbreviations and Acronyms Identified in the Index
'The range for each number series identified represents the numbers assigned to those documents
 currently in the Compendium.
                                       70
-------
PAGE NO.    1
02/03/92
                                                        - INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE
                                                               SELECTION  GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Doc
No    Vol  Title/ID Nunfcer
                                                                  Date       Authors
                                                                  ========   ========
                                               Super
                                               No.     Pages
     Index
0000    1  INDEX TO COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION
           GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS

.... pre-Remediat
OS/01/89  OWPE PRC-ENVIRONMENTAL
          MANAGEMENT, INC.
0001    1  EXPANDED SITE INSPECTION (ESI) TRANSITIONAL
           GUIDANCE FOR FY-68;  OSUER #9545.1-02
10/01/87  OERR
000?    1  PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT (PA) GUIDANCE FISCAL YEAR
           1988;  OSUER #9345.0-01
01/01/88  OERR/HSCD
83
     Removal Ac tion
1000    1  CERCLA REMOVAL ACTIONS AT METHANE RELEASE SITES;
           OSUER #9360.0 8
01/23/86  LONGEST, H.L./OERR
1001    1  COSTS OF REMEDIAL RESPONSE ACTIONS AT UNCONTROLLED
           HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES

1002    1  EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROCEDURES FOR CONTROL OF
           HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE RELEASES;  EPA-600/0-84-023

1003    1  ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS FOR REMOVAL
           ACTIONS;  OSUER #9318.0-05

1004    1  GUIDANCE ON  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE "CONTRIBUTE TO
           EFFICIENT REMEDIAL PERFORMANCE" PROVISION;  OSUER
           #9360.0-13
01/01/81  RISHEL, H.L., ET.AL./SCS
          ENGINEERS ALBRECHT,  O.U./MERL

01/01/83  MELVOLD, R.U./ROCKWELL
          INTERNATIONAL MCCARTHY,

04/13/87  OERR/ERD
04/06/87  OSUER
                                                                                                                          164
23
1005
        1  INFORMATION ON DRINKING UATER ACTION LEVELS
04/19/88  FIELDS, JR.,  T./OSUER/ERD
-------
     MO.
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCIA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
No    Vol   Title/ID Nunfcer
"-' ~   -~~   ~~=====================a===3asxeaxaaae============:
••••  Removal  Action
                                                          Date      Authors
                                                              :==  ========  ==========================
                                                                                                                Super
                                                                                                                No.    Pages
1   SUPERFUND REMOVAL PROCEDURES. REVISION #3;  OSWER
   #9360.0-038
                                                                  02/01/88  OSWER/OERR
                                                                                                                         365
101V    1   THE ROLE OF EXPEDITED RESPONSE ACTIONS (EPA) UNDER
           SARA;   OSUER #9360.0 15

1(108    2   GUIDANCE ON NON-NPL REMOVAL ACTIONS INVOLVING
           NATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT OR PRECEDENT SETTING
           ISSUES;  OSWER «9360.0-19

    ***  Secondary References ***

'.(in?   ?6   INTERIM FINAL GUIDANCE ON REMOVAL ACTION LEVELS AT
           CONTAMINATED DRINKING WATER SITES;  OSWER
           #9360.1-01

Mini   33   REMOVAL COST MANAGEMENT MANUAL;  OSWER #9360.0-028

•*•• RI/FS -  General

?000    2   CASE STUDIES 1-23: REMEDIAL RESPONSE AT HAZARDOUS
           WASTE  SITES;  EPA 540/2-84/002B

?001    3   EPA GUIDE FOR MINIMIZING ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL
           EFFECTS OF CLEANUP OF UNCONTROLLED HAZARDOUS-WASTE
           SITES;  EPA/600/8-85/008

2002    3   GUIDANCE FOR CONDUCTING REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS
           AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES UNDER CERCIA;  OSWER
           #9355.3-01
                                                                  04/21/87  LONGEST,  H.L./OERR
                                                                  04/03/89  LONGEST,  H.L./OERR
                                                                  10/06/87  OSWER/OERR
                                                                  04/01/88  OSWER/OERR
                                                                  03/01/84  ORD/OEET/MERL OSWER/OERR
                                                                  06/01/85  ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
                                                                            LABORATORY
                                                                  10/01/88  OSWER/OERR
                                                                                                                          170
                                                                                                                         830
                                                                                                                         250
                                                                                                                         390
-------
  i;i  NO.
                                                        • INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE

MIX-
NO    Vol  Title/ID Number

*•** RI/FS - General

?003    3  JOINT CORPS/EPA  GUIDANCE;  OSWER #9295.2-02
        4  MODEL ING REMEDIAL ACTIONS AT UNCONTROLLED
           HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES  (VOL.  I-IV);  OSUER
           #9355.0-08
 &  POLICY ON FLOOD PLAINS AND WETLAND ASSESSMENTS FOR
    CERCLA ACTIONS;  OSWER 09280.0 02

 <-  REMEDIAL RESPONSE AT HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES:
    SUMMARY REPORT;  EPA 540/2-B4/002A

 4  REVISED PROCEDURES  FOR IMPLEMENTING OFF SITE
    RESPONSE ACTIONS;   OSUER #9834.11

 4  RI/FS  IMPROVEMENTS;  OSUER #9355.0-20

 4  RI/FS  IMPROVEMENTS  FOLLOW-UP;  OSUER #9355.3-05

 4  SUPERFUNO FEDERAL-LEAD REMEDIAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
    HANDBOOK (DRAFT);   OSUER #9355.1  1

 5  SUPER FUND REMEDIAL  DESIGN AND REMEDIAL ACTION
    GUIDANCE;  OSUER #9355. 0-4A

 5  SUPERFUND STATE-LEAD REMEDIAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
    HANDBOOK;  OSUER #9355.2-1

33  GETTING READY  - SCOPING  THE  RI/FS [QUICK REFERENCE
    FACT SHEET);   OSWER #9355.3-01FS1
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
                                                                  Date      Authors
                                                                                                          Super
                                                                                                          No.    Pages
?005



?oo6



?0(V



?008

200V

2010



2011



2012



2013

06/24/83  OERR/PAS                                      42

04/01/85  BOUTWELL. S.H..                               350
          ET.AL./ANDERSON-NICHOLS AND CO.
          OSWER/OERR AMMQN,  D.C.  AND
          BORNUELL. JR., T.O./HUERL


08/01/85  HEDEMAN, JR., W.N./OERR LUCERO,                 9
          G./OWPE


03/01/84  ORD/MERL                                      95
11/13/87  PORTER, J.W./OSWER                            20



07/23/87  LONGEST. H.L./OERR                            11

04/25/88  LONGEST, H.L./OERR    .                        16

12/01/86  OERR                                         179



06/01/86  OERR                                         TOO



12/01/86  OERR                                         '20



11/01/89  OSWER                                          °
-------
     MO.
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCIA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE  DOCUMENTS
      Vot   Title/ID Nunfcer
                                                                  Date      Authors
                                              Super
                                              No.    Pages
     RI/FS   General

?OU   33  GUIDANCE ON REMEDIAL ACTIONS FOR SUPERFUHD SITES
           WITH PCB CONTAMINATION;  OSUER 09355.4-01
       33  GUIDE FOR CONDUCTING TREATABILITY STUDIES UNDER
           CERCLA; INTERIM FINAL;;  EPA/540/2-89/058
2016   33  MODEL STATEMENT OF WORK FOR A REMEDIAL
           INVESTIGATION AND FEASIBILITY STUDY CONDUCTED BY
           POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTIES;  OSUER f9835.8

2017   33  RI/FS IMPROVEMENTS PHASE II, STREAMLINING
           RECOMMENDATIONS;  OSUER 09355. 3-06

?01R   33  !H€  FEASIBILITY STUDY - DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING
           OF  REMEDIAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES (QUICK REFERENCE
           FACT SHEET];  OSUER 09355.3-01FS3

2019   33  THE  FEASIBILITY STUDY:  DETAILED ANALYSIS OF
           REMEDIAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES [QUICK REFERENCE FACT
           SHEET J;  OSWER «9355.3-01FS«

2020   33  TREATABILITY STUDIES UNDER CERCLA:  AN OVERVIEW
           [QUICK REFERENCE FACT SHEET);  OSUER K9380.3-02FS

    •*• Secondary References ***

8001   32  INTERIM GUIDANCE ON POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY
           PARTICIPATION IN REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS AND
           FEASIBILITY STUDIES;  OSUER #9835. la

••** RI/FS •  Rl Data Quality/Site & Uaste Assessment

        %  * COHPfMOIUM OF SUPERFUMD FIELD OPERATIONS
           • I'MiK'l   OSUfR V9JSVO U
08/01/90  OERR
12/01/89  ORD/OERR
06/02/89  OUPE
01/01/89  OERR/OUPE
11/01/89  OSUER
03/01/90  OSUER
12/01/89  OSUER
D5/16/88  PORTER, J.U./OSUER
150
118
                                                        31
                                                         50
                                                         37
 12/01/Bf  OERR/ OUPE
                                                        550
-------
[•AM  NO.
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
NO    Vol   Title/ID Ninber

•*•• RI/FS   Rl  Data Quality/Site t Waste Assessment

2101    6  DATA  QUALITY OBJECTIVES FOR REMEDIAL RESPONSE
           ACTIVITIES: DEVELOPMENT PROCESS;  OSWER #9355.0-78
        6  DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES  FOR REMEDIAL RESPONSE
           ACTIVITIES: EXAMPLE SCENARIO:  RI/FS ACTIVITIES AT
           A SITE U/ CONTAMINATED SOILS AND GROUNDUATER;
           OSUER #9355.0-78
                                                                  Date      Authors
                                                                  03/01/87  COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP.
                                                                            OERR/OUPE

                                                                  03/01/87  CDM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP.
                                                                            OERR/OUPE
                                                                                                                Siper
                                                                                                                No.    Pages
                                                                                                                         150
                                                                                                                         120
2103    6  Of SIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A  HAZARDOUS WASTE
           REACTIVITY TESTING PROTOCOL;  EPA-&00/2-B4-057
                                                                  02/01/84  UOLBACH. C.D.. ET.  AL./ACUREX
                                                                            CORP. BARKLEY, N./MERL
                                                                                                                         150
2105
2106
?107
?108
?109
2110
        6  HUD SCREENING  FOR ORGANIC  CONTAMINANTS IN
           SAMPlfS FROM HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
        6  FIELD SCREENING METHODS  CATALOG:  USER'S GUIDE;
           EPA/540/2-88/005

        6  FIELD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES MANUAL #4-SITE
           ENTRY;  OSUER #9285.2-01

        7  FIELD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES MANUAL #6-UORK
           ZONES;  OSUER #9285.2-04

        7  FIELD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES MANUAL #8 AIR
           SURVEILLANCE;  OSUER #9285.2-03

        7  FIELD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES MANUAL #9-SITE
           SAFETY  PLAN;  OSUER #9285.2-05

        7  GFOPHYSICAL  METHODS FOR  LOCATING  ABANDONED WELLS;
           F.PA  600/4  84 065
                                                                  04/02/86  ROFFMAN. H.K.. ET. AL./NUS CORP.
                                                                            CARTER. A. /MICHIGAN DEPT.  OF
                                                                            NATURAL RESOURCES THOMAS,  T./EPA

                                                                  09/01/88  OERR/HSED
                                                                  01/01/85  OERR/HRSD
                                                                  04/01/85  OERR/HRSD
                                                                  01/01/85  OERR/HSCD
                                                                  04/01/85  OERR/HRSD
                                                                  07/01/84  FRISCHKNECT, L.M., ET. AL./U.S.
                                                                            GEOLOGICAL SURVEY VAMEE,
                                                                                                                          11
                                                                                                                          90
                                                                                                                          29
                                                                                                                          19
                                                                                                                          26
                                                                                                                         211
-------
     NO.
                                                       - INDEX -
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
      Vol   Title/ID Nunfcer
(tor
No
••*• Rl/FS   Rl Data Quality/Site t Waste Assessment

?111    7  GEOPHYSICAL TECHNIQUES FOR SENSING BURIED WASTES
           AND WASTE MIGRATION;  EPA-600/7-84/064

?U?    6  GUIDELINES AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PREPARING
           QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION

?113    8  LABORATORY DATA VALIDATION FUNCTIONAL GUIDELINES
           FOR EVALUATING INORGANICS ANALYSES (DRAFT)
?1K    8  IABORATORY DATA VALIDATION FUNCTIONAL GUIDELINES
           KM EVALUATING ORGANICS ANALYSES (DRAFT)
2115    8  PRACTICAL GUIDE FOR GROUND-WATER SAMPLING;
           EPA/600/2-85/104
2116    8  SEDIMENT SAMPLING QUALITY ASSURANCE USER'S GUIDE;
           EPA/600/4 -85/048
        8  SOIL SAMPLING QUALITY ASSURANCE USER'S GUIDE;  EPA
           600/4-84/043
?118   9*  TEST METHODS  FOR EVALUATING  SOLID WASTE,
           LABORATORY MANUAL PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL METHODS, THIRD
           EDITION  (VOLUMES IA,  IB.  1C, AND  II)
       11  USER'S GUIDE  TO  THE  CONTRACT  LABORATORY PROGRAM;
           OSWER #9240.0-1
                                                  Super
    Date      Authors                              No.    Pages
= =  ========  =============s=======3========r====  =====  =====
    06/01/84  BENSON,  R.C.,  ET. AL./TECHNOS,                236
              INC.  VANEE,  J.J./EMSL

    06/01/87  ORD/QUALITY  ASSURANCE MANAGEMENT               31
              STAFF

    07/01/88  EPA DATA REVIEW WORK GROUP                     20
              BLEYLER, R./VIAR AND CO./SAMPLE
              MGMT. OFFICE/  HSED

    02/01/88  BLEYLER. R./VIAR AND CO./SAMPLE                45
              MGMT. OFFICE EPA DATA REVIEW
              WORKGROUP HSED

    09/01/85  BARCELONA, M.J., ET.AL./ILLINOIS              175
              ST. WATER SURVEY SCALF,
              M.R./ORD/ERL

    07/01/85  BARTH, D.S.  I  STARKS.  T.S./UNIV.              120
              OF NEV,  LAS  VEGAS BROWN.

    05/01/84  BARTH. O.S.  I  MASON. B.J./U. OF               104
              NEVADA,  LAS  VEGAS BROWN.
              K./ORD/EARD

    11/01/86  OSWER                                        5000
    12/01/88  OERR/CLP SAMPLE MANAGEMENT                    220
              OFFICE
-------
CAM  NO.
IWOV9?
                                                       - INDEX -
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
      Vol   Title/ID Nuntoer
•"• Rl/FS   Rl  Data Quality/Site & Waste Assessment

    *** Secondary References •••

Sll?S   37  THE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION - SITE CHARACTERIZATION
           AND TREATABILITY STUDIES (QUICK REFERENCE FACT
           SHEET);  OSUER *9355.3-01FS2

•*** Rl/FS -  Land Disposal Facility Technology

-------
I'Al.f NO.
II.VOJ/92
                                                        -INDEX
                                  COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Poc
No    Vol

*••• RI/FS

2208   15
           Title/ID Hunter

           -  Land Disposal Facility Technology

           RCRA GUIDANCE DOCUMENT: LANDFILL DESIGN LINER
           SYSTEMS AND FINAL COVER (DRAFT)
2209   15  SETTLEMENT AND COVER SUBSIDENCE OF HAZARDOUS UASTE
           LANDFILLS: PROJECT SUMMARY;  EPA-600/S2-85-03S

2210   15  SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDANCE ON DETERMINING
           LINER/LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPATIBILITY;
           OSUER 09480.00-13

2211   15  TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT:  CONSTRUCTION QUALITY
           ASSURANCE FOR HAZARDOUS UASTE LAND DISPOSAL
           FACILITIES;  OSUER 09472.003

2212   15  TREATMENT OF REACTIVE WASTES AT HAZARDOUS UASTE
           LANDFILLS: PROJECT SUMMARY;  EPA/600/S2-83/118
       33  APPLICABILITY OF  LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS TO
           RCRA AND CERCLA GROUND UATER  TREATMENT RE INJECT I ON
           SUPERFUNO MANAGEMENT REVIEU:  RECOMMENDATION
           NO. 26;  OSUER 09234. 1-06
2214   33  SUPER FUND LDR GUIDE  01 OVERVIEW OF RCRA LAND
           DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS  (LDRs);  OSUER 09347. 3-01FS
Date      Authors
                  ===========================  ==
                                                                  07/01/82  EPA
                                                                  05/01/85  MURPHY, U.L. GILBERT, P.A.
                                                                  08/07/86  UEDOIE, B.R./PERMITS AND STATE
                                                                            PROGRAMS DIV.
                                                                   10/01/86  HERRMANN,J.G./HUERL/LAND
                                                                            POLLUTION CONTROL DIV./ OSUER
01/01/84  SHOOTER,D.  ET.AL./ARTHUR D.
          LITTLE,  INC.  LAHORETH. R./MERL

12/27/89  CLAY,  D.R./OWSER
07/01/89  OERR
                                              Super
                                              No.    Pages
2215   33  SUPER FUND LDR GUIDE  02  COMPLYING UITH THE              07/01/89  OERR
           CALIFORNIA  LIST  RESTRICTIONS UNDER LAND DISPOSAL
           RESTRICTIONS  (LDRs);  OSUER 09347.3-02FS

2216   33  SUPERFUND LDR GUIDE  03  TREATMENT STANDARDS AND         07/01/89  OERR
           MINIMUM  TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS UNDER LAND
           DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS (LDRs);  OSWER 09347.3-03FS
                                                        30
                                                                                                                           38
                                                                                                                           88
-------
rti.l  MO.    9
n,'/(H/02
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
(lor
No
Vol  Title/ID Nunber
                                                                  Date      Authors
                                ====SS==*X====B=S=======S===2===  = = = = = = = =  =================2=======
Super
No.    Pages
=====  ss===
•••• RI/FS - Land Disposal Facility Technology

??\7   33  SUPERFUND LDR GUIDE *4 COMPLYING WITH THE HAMMER       07/01/89  OERR
           RESTRICTIONS UNDER LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS
           (LDRs);  OSUER *9347.3-O4FS

<>?18   33  SUPERFUND LDR GUIDE *5 DETERMINING WHEN LAND           07/01/89  OERR
           DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS (LDRs) ARE APPLICABLE TO
           CERCLA RESPONSE ACTIONS;  OSUER 09547. 3-OSFS

??1V   33  SUPERFUND LDR GUIDE *6A OBTAINING A SOIL AND           07/01/89  OERR
           DEBRIS TREATABILITY VARIANCE FOR REMEDIAL ACTIONS;
            OSUER *9347.3-O6FS
       33  SUPER FUMO LDR GUIDE »7 DETERMINING UHEN LAND            12/01/89  OERR
           DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS (LDRs) ARE RELEVANT AND
           APPROPRIATE TO CERCLA RESPONSE ACTIONS;  OSUER
           *9347.3-08FS
    ••• Secondary References **•

3000   25  APPLICABILITY OF THE HSUA MINIMUM TECHNICAL
           REQUIREMENTS RESPECTING LINERS AND LEACHATE
           COLLECTION SYSTEMS;  OSUER 09480.01(85)

•••• RI/FS - Other Technologies

2300   16  A COMPENDIUM OF TECHNOLOGIES USED IN  THE  TREATMENT
           OF HAZARDOUS WASTES;  EPA/625/8 87/0U

2301   16  CARBON ABSORPTION  ISOTHERMS FOR TOXIC ORGANICS;
           EPA/600/8-80-023
                                                            04/01/85   SKINNER, J./OSU
                                                             09/01/87  ORD/CERI
                                                             04/01/80   DOBBS,  R.A./MERL COHEN,
                                                                       J.M./MERL
                                                                                                                    49
                                                                                                                    321
-------
r*i,i NO.  10
02/03/92
                                                        -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Doc
No    Vo(  Title/ID Member
-•=--  ---  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = s
••*• RI/FS   Other Technologies
Date
          Authors
Super
No.    Pages
2302   17  ENGINEERING HANDBOOK FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE
           INCINERATION;  OSWER «9488.00-5

2J03   \7  EPA GUIDE FOR IDENTIFYING CLEANUP ALTERNATIVES AT
           HAZARDOUS-UASTE SITES AND SPILLS: BIOLOGICAL
           TREATMENT;  EPA-600/3-83-063
09/01/81  BONNER. T.A., ET.  AL./MONSANTO
          RESEARCH CORP. OBERACKER,

  /  /    PACIFIC NORTHWEST  LABORATORY
          RANIERE. L.C./CORVALLIS
          ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LAB
         445
         120
?304   17  EPA GUIDE FOR INFECTIOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT;  OSWER
           09410.00-2
05/01/86  OSWER/OSW
?3f5   \7  GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR CLEANUP OF SURFACE
           IMPOUNDMENT SITES;  OSWER 09380.0-06

2306   17  GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR CLEANUP OF SURFACE TANK AND
           DRUM SITES;  OSWER 09380.0-03
2307   18  HANDBOOK FOR EVALUATING REMEDIAL ACTION TECHNOLOGY
           PLANS;  EPA-600/2 83 076

2308   18  HANDBOOK FOR STABILIZATION/SOLIDIFICATION OF
           HAZARDOUS WASTE;  EPA/540/2-86-001

2309   19  HANDBOOK REMEDIAL ACTION AT WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
           (REVISED);  EPA/625/6-85/006

2310   20  LEACHATE PLUME MANAGEMENT;  EPA/540/2-85/004
2311   20  MOBILE  TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGIES  FOR  SUPERFUND
           WASTES;   EPA/540/2-B6-003F
06/01/86  COM/WOODWARD-CLYDE/ROY F. WESTON
          BARTH. E./OERR

05/28/85  COM/WOODWARD-CLYDE/ROY F.
          WESTON/C.C. JOHNSON BARTH. E.
          AND BIXLER, B./OERR

08/01/83  EHRENFELD. J. AND BASS,
          J./ARTHUR D. LITTLE INC. PAHREN.

06/01/86  CULL INANE JR., N.J. ET. AL./U.S.
          COE/WES HOUTHOOFD.

10/01/85  ORD/HWERL/ OSWER/OERR
11/01/85  REPO, E. AND KUFS, C./JRB
          ASSOCIATES BARKLEY, N./EPA

09/01/86  CAMP. DRESSER, AND MCKEE INC.
          GALER, L.D./HRSD
                                                                                                                          39
         135
                                                                                                                         439
         125
         560
                                                       590
                                                                                                                          130
-------
PAGF  NO.  11
(W03/92
Ooc
No    Vol  Title/ID Nunber

•••• RI/FS - Other Technologies
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 CCMPENOIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Date      Authors
2312   21  PRACTICAL GUIDE-TRIAL BURNS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE
           INCINERATORS;  EPA/600/2-86/050
3313   21  PRACTICAL GUIDE-TRIAL BURNS  FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE
           INCINERATORS. PROJECT SUMMARY;  EPA/600/S2-86/050

2314   21  PROHIBITION ON THE PLACEMENT OF BULK LIQUID
           HAZARDOUS WASTE  IN LANDFILLS-STATUTORY
           INTERPRETIVE GUIDANCE;  OSWER H9487.00-2A

251S   21  REVIEW OF IN PLACE TREATMENT TECHNIQUES FOR
           CONTAMINATED SURFACE SOILS-VOL. 2: BACKGROUND
           INFORMAITON FOR  IN-SITU TREATMENT;
           EPA 540/2-84-003b

?316   21  REVIEW OF IN-PLACE TREATMENT TECHNIQUES FOR
           CONTAMINATED SURFACE SOILS-VOL. 1: TECHNICAL
           EVALUATION;  EPA/540/2-84-003a

2317   22  SLURRY TRENCH CONSTRUCTION FOR POLLUTION MIGRATION
           CONTROL;  EPA/540/2-84-001

2318   22  SYSTEMS TO ACCELERATE IN  SITU STABILIZATION OF
           WASTE DEPOSITS;  EPA 540/2-86/002

2319   22  TECHNOIOGV SCREENING GUIDE FOR TREATMENT OF CERCLA
           SOILS AND SLUDGES;  EPA 540/2-88/004

2320   22  TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY BRIEFS: ALTERNATIVES TO
           HAZARDOUS WASTE  LANDFILLS;   EPA/600/8-86/017
Super
No.     Pages
zs=sx  ssase
04/01/86  GORMAN. P.. ET. AL./MIDWEST
          RESEARCH INSTITUTE OBERACKER,
          D.A./HWERL

07/01/86  GORMON. P.. ET.AL./MIDWEST
          RESEARCH INSTITUTE OBERACKER.

06/11/86  OSWER/OSW
11/01/84  SIMS. R.C.. ET.AL./JRB
          ASSOCIATES BARKLEY, N./MERL
09/19/84  OSWER/OERR/ ORO/NERL
02/01/84  OERR/ ORD/MERL
09/01/86  AMDURER, M.. ET.AL./ENVIROSPHERE
          CO. GRUBE. W./HWERL

09/01/88  OSWER/OERR
07/01/86  HWERL
          63
          35
                                                       350
                                                       165
                                                       220
                                                       285
         130
                                                        35
-------
t'AGt NO.  12
02/03/92
                                                       - INDEX -
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE
Doc
No
      Vol  Title/ID Number
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
                                                                  Date      Authors
                          ============SK»«=asa=E=======r==s=====  ========
*•*• RI/FS -  Other Technologies

2521   33
           ADVANCING THE USE OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES FOR
           SUPERFUND REMEDIES;  OSUER 09355.0-26
2322   33  GUIDE TO TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES FOR HAZARDOUS
           WASTES AT SUPERFUNO SITES;  EPA/540/2-89/052

2323   33  INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY - BEST SOLVENT EXTRACTION
           PROCESS (QUICK REFERENCE FACT SHEET);  OSUER
           09200.5-253FS

2324   33  INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY - GLYCOLATE DEHALOGENATION
           (QUICK REFERENCE FACT SHEET];  OSUER 09200.5-254FS

232V   33  INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY - IN-SITU VITRIFICATION
           (QUICK REFERENCE FACT SHEET];  OSUER 09200.5-251FS

2326   33  INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY - SLURRY-PHASE
           BIODEGRADATION {QUICK REFERENCE FACT SHEET};
           OSUER 09200.5-252FS

2327   33  INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY - SOIL HASHING (QUICK
           REFERENCE FACT SHEET];  OSUER 09200.5-250FS

2328   33  TECHNOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THE CLEANUP OF
           RADIOtOGICALLY CONTAMINATED SUPERFUNO SITES;
           EPA/540/2-88/002

**** RI/FS - Ground-Uater Monitoring t Protection

2400   23  CRITERIA FOR  IDENTIFYING AREAS OF VULNERABLE
           HYDROGEOLOGY UNDER RCRA:  STATUTORY INTERPRETIVE
           GUIDANCE;  OSUER 09472.00-2A
02/21/89  OERR/OUPE
03/01/89  RREL
11/01/89  OSUER
11/01/89  OSUER
11/01/89  OSUER
11/01/89  OSUER
11/01/89  OSUER
08/01/88  ORD
07/01/86  OSUER/OSU
                                              Super
                                              No.    Pages
                                              =====  5S=S3
                                                        26
                                                       120
                                                       950
-------
r»i;i  NO.   13
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Mnr
No
?401
?402
      Vol   Title/ID Nunber
      = = =   3= = = = - = = = = = = = = = = = = a = = S3 = n = aSKKcxs« = 3«sc = = s = = = = = = r = =
     RI/FS -  Ground-Water Monitoring I Protection

       24   FINAL RCRA COMPREHENSIVE GROUND-WATER MONITORING
           EVALUATION (CME) GUIDANCE DOCUMENT;  OSWER 09950,2

       24   GROUND-WATER MONITORING AT CLEAN-CLOSING SURFACE
           IMPOUNDMENT AND WASTE PILE UNITS;  OSWER
           #9476.00-14
                                                                  Date      Authors
                                                                  12/19/86  LUCERO, G.A./OUPE
                                                                  03/31/88  PORTER. J.U./OSWER
                                              Super
                                              No.    Pages
                                                        55
?403   24  GROUND-WATER PROTECTION STRATEGY;
           EPA/440/6 84-002
                                                                  08/01/84  OFFICE OF GROUND-WATER
                                                                            PROTECTION
                                                                                                                          65
?404
24M5
A06
7407
2408
2409
       24  GUIDELINES FOR GROUND-WATER CLASSIFICATION UNDER
           THE  EPA GROUND-WATER PROTECTION STRATEGY (DRAFT)

       24  OPERA 1 1 ON AMD MAINTENANCE  INSPECTION GUIDE (RCRA
           GROUND-WATER MONITORING SYSTEMS);  OSWER 09950-3

       24  PROTOCOL FOR GROUND-WATER EVALUATIONS;  OSWER
           09080.0-1

       25  RCRA GROUND-WATER MONITORING TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT
           GUIDANCE DOCUMENT(TEGD);  OSWER 09950.1

       25  RCRA GROUND-WATER MONITORING TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT
           GUIDANCE DOCUMENT, TEGO:  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY;
           OSWER 09950.1 -a

       34  A GUIDE ON REMEDIAL ACTIONS FOR CONTAMINATED
           GROUND WATER [QUICK REFERENCE FACT SHEET];  OSWER
           09283. 1-2FS

       34  CONSIDERATIONS IN GROUND WATER REMEDIATION AT
           SUPERFUND SITES;  OSWER 09355.4-03
12/01/86  OFFICE OF GROUND-WATER
          PROTECTION

03/30/88  OSWER/OWPE/RCRA ENFORCEMENT
          DIVISION

09/01/86  HAZARDOUS WASTE GROUND WATER
          TASK FORCE

09/01/86  EPA
                                                                  07/01/87  LUCERO. G.A./OWPE
                                                                  04/01/89  OSWER
                                                                  10/18/89  OSWER
                                                                                                                         600
                                                                                                                          50
                                                                                                                         200
                                                                                                                         270
-------
I'AI.I  NO.   U
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCIA RESPONSE
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE  DOCUMENTS
Dor
Wo
?i.\2
50K
      Vol   Title/ID Number
     RI/FS -  Ground-Water Monitoring t Protection

       34  DETERMINING SOIL RESPONSE ACTION LEVELS BASED ON
           POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT MIGRATION TO GROUNOUATER: A
           COMPENDIUM OF EXAMPLES;  EPA/540/2 -89/05 7

       34  EVALUATION OF GROUND-WATER EXTRACTION
           REMEDIES-VOLUME 1 SUMMARY REPORT;
           EPA/540/2-89/054

       34  GUIDANCE ON REMEDIAL ACTIONS FOR CONTAMINATED
           GROUND WATER AT SUPER FUND SITES;  OSUER f9283.1-2

    •*• Secondary References *••

       34  COMIROl OF AIR EMISSIONS FROM SUPERFUND AIR
           STRIPPERS AT SUPERFUND GROUNDUATER SITES;  OSWER
           *9533.0-28
                                                                  Date      Authors
                                                                  10/01/89  OERR
                                                                  09/01/89  OERR
                                                                  12/01/88  OERR
                                                                  06/15/89  OSWER/OAOPS
                                                                                                                Super
                                                                                                                No.    Pages
                                                                                                                         144
                                                                                                                          60
                                                                                                                         125
     ARARs
3000   25  APPLICABILITY OF THE HSWA MINIMUM TECHNICAL
           REQUIREMENTS RESPECTING LINERS AND LEACHATE
           COLLECTION SYSTEMS;  OSWER §9480.01(85)

3001   25  CERCLA COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL
           STATUTES;  OSUER 09234.0-2

3002   25  CERCLA COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS MANUAL (DRAFT);
           OSWER f9234.1-01

3003   25  EPA'S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SUPERFUND AMENDMENTS
           AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1986
                                                                  04/01/85  SKINNER.  J./OSW
                                                                  10/02/85  PORTER,  J.W./OSWER
                                                                  08/08/88  OERR
                                                                  05/21/87  THOMAS,  I.  M./EPA
                                                                                                                          19
                                                                                                                         245
-------
r*r,f  NO.   15
0,>/03/92
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM Of CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
(lot
No    Vol  Title/ID Hunter

•••• ARARs

3004   25  GUIDANCE MANUAL ON THE RCRA REGULATION OF RECYCLED
           HAZARDOUS UASTES;  OSUER 09441.00-2

3005   25  INTERIM RCRA/CERCLA GUIDANCE ON NON-CONTIGUOUS
           SITES AND ON-SITE MANAGEMENT OF UASTE AND
           TREATMENT RESIDUE;  OSUER 09347.0-1

3006   34  ARARs O'S t A'S (QUICK REFERENCE  FACT SHEET);
           OSUER 09234.2-01FS.

3007   34  ARARs SHORT GUIDANCE QUARTERLY REPORT  [QUICK
           REFERENCE FACT SHEET);  OSUER 09234.3-001

3008   34  ARARs SHORT GUIDANCE QUARTERLY REPORT  [QUICK
           REFERENCE FACT SHEET);  OSUER 09234.3-001

3009   34  CERCLA COMPLIANCE UITH OTHER LAWS MANUAL - CERCLA
           COMPLIANCE UITH STATE REQUIREMENTS  (QUICK
           REFERENCE FACT SHEET);  OSUER 09234.2-05FS

3010   34  CERCLA COMPLIANCE UITH OTHER LAWS MANUAL - CERCLA
           COMPLIANCE UITH THE CUA AND SOUA  (QUICK REFERENCE
           FACT SHEET);  OSUER 09234.2-06FS

3011   34  CERCLA COMPLIANCE UITH OTHER LAWS MANUAL -
           OVERVIEW OF ARARs - FOCUS ON ARAR WAIVERS (QUICK
           REFERENCE FACT SHEET);  OSUER 09234.2-03FS

3012   34  CERCLA COMPLIANCE UITH OTHER LAWS MANUAL - SUMMARY
           OF PART  II  - CAA. TSCA. AND OTHER STATUTES [QUICK
           REFERENCE FACT SHEET);  OSUER 09234.2 07FS
                                                                  Date
                                                                            Authors
                                                                  03/01/86  INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS.  INC. OSU


                                                                  03/27/86  PORTER.  J.W./OSUER



                                                                  05/01/89  OSUER


                                                                  12/01/89  OSWER


                                                                  03/01/90  OERR/OPM


                                                                  12/01/89  OSUER



                                                                  02/01/90  OSUER



                                                                  12/01/89  OSUER



                                                                  04/01/90  OERR/OPM
Super
No.    Pages
         350
-------
r*r,i  NO.   16
0?/03/92
Doc
No    Vot   Title/ID Nunfcer

•••• ARARs
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 CONPENOIUM OF CERCL* RESPONSE
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE  DOCUMENTS
                                                                  Date      Authors

                                                                                                                 Super
                                                                                                                 No.    Pages
                                                                                                                 = = = E =  33CXS
 5013   34  CERCLA COMPLIANCE UITH  OTHER  LAUS  MANUAL  PART  II:
           CLEAN AIR ACT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL  STATUTES AND
           STATE REQUIREMENTS;   OSUER  #9234.1-02

 3014   34  CONTROL OF AIR  EMISSIONS FROM SUPERFUND AIR
           STRIPPERS AT SUPERFUNO  GROUNDUATER SITES;  OSUER
           #9533.0-28

 3015   34  INTERIM GUIDANCE ON  ESTABLISHING SOIL  LEAD CLEANUP
           LEVELS AT SUPERFUND  SITES;  OSUER  #9355.4-02

 H116   34  LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS  AS RELEVANT AND
           APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS FOR  CERCLA CONTAMINATED
           SOIL AND DEBRIS;  OSUER #9347.2-01

 3017   34  RCRA ARARs:  FOCUS ON CLOSURE REQUIREMENTS  (QUICK
           REFERENCE FACT  SHEET];   OSUER #9234.2  04FS

 3016   34  TREATMENT STANDARDS  AND MINIMUM TECHNOLOGY
           REQUIREMENTS UNDER LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS
           (LDR);  OSUER #9347.3-03FS

    ••• Secondary References *••

2014   33  GUIDANCE ON REMEDIAL ACTIONS  FOR SUPERFUND SITES
           UITH PCS CONTAMINATION;   OSUER #9355.4-01

2208   15  RCRA GUIDANCE DOCUMENT:  LANDFILL DESIGN LINER
           SYSTEMS AND FINAL COVER (DRAFT)

??13   33  APPLICABILITY OF LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS TO
           RCRA AND CERCIA GROUND  WATER  TREATMENT RE INJECT ION
           SUPCRFUNO MANAGEMENT REVIEW:   RECOMMENDATION
           •0 lt>.  OSk*i #9214.1 06
                                                                  08/01/89  OERR
                                                                  06/15/89  OSUER/OAQPS
                                                                  09/01/89  OERR
                                                                  06/05/89  OERR
                                                                  10/01/89  OSUER
                                                                  07/01/89  OSUER
                                                                                                                         175
                                                                  08/01/90  OERR
                                                                  07/01/82  EPA
                                                                  12/27/89  CLAY. D.R./OUSER
                                                                                                                         150
                                                                                                                          30
-------
PAGF NO.  17
02/03/92
                                                       - INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Doc
No    Vol   Title/ID NiMfcer

••** ARARs

    *** Secondary References cont. **•

?218   33  SUPERFUND LDR GUIDE 05 DETERMINING WHEN LAND
           DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS (LDRs) ARE APPLICABLE TO
           CERCLA RESPONSE ACTIONS;  OSUER 09347.3-05FS

2219   33  SUPERFUND LDR GUIDE 06A OBTAINING A SOIL AND
           DEBRIS TREATABILITY VARIANCE FOR REMEDIAL ACTIONS;
            OSUER 09347.3-06FS
                                                                  Date      Authors
                                              Siper
                                              No.    Pages
                                                                  07/01/89  OERR
                                                                  07/01/89  OERR
2220   33  SUPERFUND LDR GUIDE 07 DETERMINING WHEN LAND
           DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS (LDRs) ARE RELEVANT AND
           APPROPRIATE TO CERCLA RESPONSE ACTIONS;  OSUER
           09347. 3-08FS
12/01/89  OERR
2400   23  CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFYING AREAS OF VULNERABLE
           HYOROGEOLOGY UNDER RCRA:  STATUTORY INTERPRETIVE
           GUIDANCE;  OSUER 09472. 00-2A
       24  FINAL RCRA COMPREHENSIVE GROUND-WATER MONITORING
           EVALUATION (CME) GUIDANCE DOCUMENT;  OSUER 09950.2
2405   24  OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE  INSPECTION GUIDE (RCRA
           GROUND-WATER MONITORING SYSTEMS);  OSUER 09950-3

2407   25  RCRA GROUND-WATER MONITORING TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT
           GUIDANCE DOCUMENT (TEGO);  OSUER 09950.1

2408   25  RCRA GROUND -WATER MONITORING TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT
           GUIDANCE DOCUMENT, TEGD:  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY;
           OSUER 09950. 1-a
07/01/86  OSUER/OSU
12/19/86  LUCERO, G.A./OUPE
03/30/88  OSWER/OUPE/RCRA ENFORCEMENT
          DIVISION

09/01/86  EPA
07/01/87  LUCERO, G.A./OUPE
                                                                                                                         950
                                                                                                                          55
                                                                                                                          50
                                                                                                                         270
-------
!•»<,( MO.  18
IWOV92
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Dor
Mo    Vol   Title/ID Nuifcer                                        Date
~ ~ ~ -   ~~~   ===========s=======rs===E==«nB==i»=n===3=============  =s = s =
•***  ARARs
                                                                            Authors
Super
No.    Pages
    **• Secondary References cont. **•

9001   32  RCRA/CERCLA DECISIONS MADE ON REMEDY SELECTION


**•* Uater Duality
                                                                  06/24/85  KILPATRICK.  M./COMPLIANCE
                                                                            BRANCH,  OUPE
4000   26  ALTERNATE CONCENTRATION LIMIT GUIDANCE PART 1, ACL     07/01/87  OSU/UMD
           POLICY AND  INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS;  OSWER
           #9481.00-6C
                                                                  02/01/88  OERR
                                                                  10/06/87  OSUER/OERR
       ?6  GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR PROVIDING ALTERNATE UATER
           SUPPLIES;  OSUER #9355.3-03

4002   26  INTERIM FINAL GUIDANCE ON REMOVAL ACTION LEVELS AT
           CONTAMINATED DRINKING WATER SITES;  OSUER
           #9360.1-01
4003   26  QUALITY CRITERIA FOR UATER  1986;  EPA/440/5-86-001     05/01/87  OFFICE OF UATER REGULATIONS AND
                                                                            STANDARDS
    ••• Secondary References •**

1005    1  INFORMATION ON DRINKING UATER ACTION LEVELS

2301   16  CARBON ABSORPTION ISOTHERMS  FOR  TOXIC ORGAN ICS;
           EPA/600/8-80-023

**•* Risk Assessment

SOOO   27  ATSDR HEALTH  ASSESSMENTS ON  NPL  SITES (DRAFT)
                                                                  04/19/88  FIELDS. JR..  T./OSUER/ERO

                                                                  04/01/80  DOBBS, R.A./MERL COHEN.
                                                                            J.M./MERl
                                                                  06/16/86  DEPT. OF HEALTH AND  HUMAN
                                                                            SERVICES/ATSDR
                                                                                                                          124
                                                                                                                          64
         325




          17

         321




          14
-------
i-M.f  NO.  19
fWlH/92
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
MO    vol   Title/ID Nurtber

*••* Risk  Assessment

5001   27   CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL t BIOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF
           COMPOUNDS PRESENT AT HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES;  OSUER
           «9850.3
Date      Authors
========  S=====r=====*3==r================
                                                                  09/27/85  CLEMENT ASSOCIATES,  INC.
                                                                                                                Super
                                                                                                                No.    Pages
                                                       320
S002   27  FINAL GUIDANCE FOR THE COORDINATION OF ATSDR
           HEALTH ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES WITH THE SUPERFUND
           REMEDIAL PROCESS;  OSUER f92B5.4-02

5003   27  GUIDELINES FOR CARCINOGEN RISK ASSESSMENT (FEDERAL
           REGISTER, SEPTEMBER 24, 1986, p. 33992)

'.004   27  GUIDELINES FOR EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT (FEDERAL
           REGISTER. SEPTEMBER 24, 1986. p. 34042)

5005   27  GUIDELINES FOR HEALTH ASSESSMENT OF SUSPECT
           DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICANTS (FEDERAL REGISTER,
           SEPTEMBER 24. 1986, p. 34028)

5006   27  GUIDELINES FOR MUTAGENICITT RISK ASSESSMENT
           (FEDERAL REGISTER. SEPTEMBER. 24, p. 34006)

5007   27  GUIDELINES FOR THE HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF
           CHEMICAL MIXTURES (FEDERAL REGISTER, SEPTEMBER 24.
           1986, p. 34014)

5008  28*  HEALTH EFFECTS ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTS (58 CHEMICAL
           PROFILES);  EPA/540/1-86/001-058

5009   31  INTEGRATED RISK  INFORMATION SYSTEM (IRIS)  (A
           COMPUTER-BASED HEALTH RISK INFORMATION SYSTEM
           AVAILABLE THROUGH E-MAIL--BROCHURE ON ACCESS IS
           INCLUDED)
05/14/87  PORTER, J.U./OSUER/OERR/ ATSOR
09/24/86  EPA
09/24/86  EPA
09/24/86  EPA
09/24/86  EPA
09/24/86  EPA
09/01/84  ORD/OHEA/ECAO/ OSWER/OERR
          OHEA
                                                                                                                          22
                                                        13
                                                        14
                                                        14
                                                        13
                                                      1750
-------
!•»(,( HO.  ?0
                                                       •INDEX
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Mo    Vol   Title/ID Number

•••• Risk  Assessment
Date      Authors
                                                                                                                 Super
                                                                                                                 No.    Page*
                                                                                                                 c=sax  c*xa«
SMIO   31   INTERIM POLICY FOR ASSESSING RISKS OF »DIOXINS"
           OTHER THAN 2,3,7,8 TCDD

SHU   31   PUBLIC HEALTH RISK EVAIMIION DATABASE (PHRED)
           [USER'S MANUAL AND TWO DISKETTES CONTAINING THE
           DBASEIII PLUS SYSTEM ARE INCLUDED]

SOI?   31   ROLE  OF ACUTE TOXIC ITY BIOASSAYS IN THE REMEDIAL
           ACTION PROCESS AT HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES;
           EPA/600/8-87/044
                                                                  01/07/87  THOMAS, l.M./EPA
                                                                  09/16/88  OERR/TOXICS INTEGRATION BRANCH
                                                                  08/01/87  ATHEY, L.A..  ET.AL./PACIFIC
                                                                            NORTHWEST LABORATORY MILLER.
                                                                            W.E./CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL
                                                                            RESEARCH LAB
                                                        50
                                                        18
                                                       106
Sim   31   SUPERFUNO EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT MANUAL;  OSWER
           H9285.5-1

'.OK   31   SUPERFUND PUBLIC HEALTH EVALUATION MANUAL;  OSWER
           #9285.4-1

S015   31   TOXICOLOGY HANDBOOK;  OSWER 09850.2
5016   35  AIR/SUPERFUND NATIONAL TECHNICAL GUIDANCE STUDY
           SERIES VOLUME I - APPLICATION OF AIR PATHWAY
           ANALYSES FOR SUPERFUND ACTIVITIES

SOU   35  AIR/SUPERFUND NATIONAL TECHNICAL GUIDANCE STUDY
           SERIES VOLUME II  - ESTIMATION OF BASELINE AIR
           EMISSIONS AT SUPERFUND SITES;  EPA/450/1-89/002

S01R   36  AIR/SUPERFUNO NATIONAL TECHNICAL GUIDANCE STUDY
           SERIES VOLUME III  - ESTIMATION OF AIR EMISSIONS
           fBOM CLEANUP ACTIVITIES AT SUPERFUND SITES;
           { PA/450/1 89/003
04/01/88  OERR
10/01/86  OERR OSWER
08/01/85  LIFE SYSTEMS.  INC.  /TYBURSKI.
          T.E./OWPE

12/01/88  EPA REGION III/NUS  CORP.
01/01/89  OAOPS/RADIAN COUP.
01/01/89  OAOPS/RADIAN CORP
                                                                                                                          160
                                                       500
                                                       126
                                                                                                                          90
                                                       235
                                                       230
-------
I'AHf.
NO.
21



OP/03/9?


Doc
Mo
****
5019



5020
5021
5022



Vol
Risk
36



37
37
37



Title/ID



Nurtber
-INDEX-
COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS

Date Authors


Super
No. Pages
Assessment
AIR/SUPERFUND NAT'L TECHNICAL GUIDANCE STUDY 12/01/88 EPA REGION III/NUS CORP.
SERIES -
MODELING
ANALYSES
EXPOSURE
GUIDANCE
OPTIONS
VOLUME
AND AIR
(DRAFT)
FACTORS
IV PROCEDURES FOR DISPERSION
MONITORING FOR AIR PATHWAY

HANDBOOK; EPA/600/8-89/043 07/01/89 OHEA
.FOR SOIL INGEST ION RATES; OSUER 09850.4 01/27/89 OSUER
FOR INTERIM POLICY FOR SOIL INGESTION 10/04/88 EPA
295



285
3
5
           ASSUMPTIONS

5023   37  RISK ASSESSMENT GUIDANCE FOR SUPERFUND, VOLUME I,
           HUMAN HEALTH EVALUATION  MANUAL;  OSUER
           f9285.7-01a

5024   37  RISK ASSESSMENT GUIDANCE FOR SUPERFUND, VOLUME II.
           ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION MANUAL;  EPA/540/1-89/001

5025   37  THE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION - SITE CHARACTERIZATION
           AND TREATABILITY STUDIES [QUICK REFERENCE FACT
           SHEET];  OSUER 09355.3-01FS2

5026   37  TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR 1. 4 - DICHLOROBENZENE

5027   37  TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR 2. 3. 7, 8 -
           TETRACHLORO-DIBENZO-P-DIOXIN

5028   37  TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR ARSENIC

5029   38  TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR BENZENE
09/29/89  OERR



03/01/89  OERR


11/01/89  OSUER



01/01/89  ATSOR

06/01/89  ATSDR


03/01/89  ATSOR

05/01/89  ATSDR
                                                       290
 57
 95

129


125

173
-------
PAHF NO.
OP/03/92
Doc
No Vot
••*• Risk
5030
5031
5032
5033
5034
5035
5036
5037
5038
5039
5040
5041
38
38
38
38
38
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
22
Title/ID Nunfcer
Assessment
TOXICOLOGICAL
TOXICOLOGICAL
TOXICOLOGICAl
TOXICOLOGICAL

PROFILE
PROFILE
PROFILE
PROFILE
- INDEX -
COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE

FOR
FOR
FOR
FOR

BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CHLOROFORM
CHROMIUM
TOXICOtOGICAL PROFILE FOR
DI(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE
IOXICOLOGICAL
E POX IDE
TOXICOLOGICAL
TOXICOLOGICAL
TOXICOLOGICAL
TOXICOLOGICAL
(AROCLOR-1260
AND -1016)
TOXICOLOGICAL
TOXICOLOGICAL
PROFILE
PROFILE
PROFILE
PROFILE
PROFILE
, -125*.
PROFILE
PROFILE
FOR
FOR
FOR
FOR
HEPTACHLOR/HEPTACHLOR
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
N-NITRO SODIPHENYLAMINE
NICKEL
FOR SELECTED PCBs
-1248. -1242. -1232. -1221.
FOR
FOR
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Date Authors

12/01/88
03/01/89
01/01/89
07/01/89
04/01/89
04/01/89
04/01/89
12/01/88
12/01/88
06/01/89
10/01/89
08/01/89

ATSOR
ATSOR
ATSDR
ATSOR
ATSOR
ATSDR
ATSDR
ATSOR
ATSOR
ATSOR
ATSOR
ATSOR
Super
No. Pages

91
107
115
135
119
109
111
65
111
155
139
107
    ••• Secondary References •••

2015   33  GUIDE FOR CONDUCTING TREATABILITY STUDIES UNDER
           CERCLA; INTERIM FINAL;;  EPA/540/2-89/058
12/01/89  ORD/OERR
                                                       118
-------
p»r.t wo.  23
07/03/92
                                                        -INDEX
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE
Ooc
No
      Vol  Title/ 10 Number
                                                               SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
                                                                  Date      Author*
*••• Risk Assessment

    ••• Secondary References cont. ••*

?020   33  TREATA8ILITY STUDIES UNDER CERCLA:  AN OVERVIEW
           [QUICK REFERENCE FACT SHEET];  OSWER *9380.3-02FS

8000   32  ENOANGERMENT ASSESSMENT GUIDANCE;  OSWER 19850.0-1

"•• Cost Analysis

6000   32  REMEDIAL ACTION COSTING PROCEDURES MANUAL


6001   32  REMOVAL COST MANAGEMENT MANUAL;  OSWER «9360.0-02B

    *•* Secondary References •**

1001    1  COSTS OF REMEDIAL RESPONSE ACTIONS AT UNCONTROLLED
           HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES

1003    1  ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS FOR REMOVAL
           ACTIONS;  OSWER *9318.0-05

•••• community Relations

7000   32  COMMUNITY RELATIONS IN SUPERFUND: A HANDBOOK
           (INTERIM VERSION);  OSWER 09230.0-03B

•••• Enforcement

8000   32  ENDANGERMENT ASSESSMENT GUIDANCE;  OSWER *9850.0-1
12/01/89  OSWER
11/22/85  PORTER. J.W./OSWER
10/01/87  JRB ASSOCIATES/CH2M HILL
          ORD/NERL OSWER/OERR

04/01/88  OSWER/OERR
01/01/81  RISHEL. H.L., ET.AL./SCS
          ENGINEERS ALBRECHT.  O.W./MERL

04/13/87  OERR/ERD
06/01/88  OERR
11/22/85  PORTER. J.W./OSWER
                                              Super
                                              No.    Pages
                                                        11
170
                                                       164
                                                       188
                                                        Q
                                                        11
-------
I'ACf  NO.   24
(WOJ/92
                                                       -INDEX-
                                 COMPENDIUM OF CERCLA RESPONSE SELECTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
Doc
No    Vol   Title/ID Nuifcer
-- = =  = = =   = = = = = = = = = = = = £ = = = = = S = S = KBS«aaMC«KBM*BX=C = = = = Z = = = = = = »
•**• Enforcement
                                                                  Date      Authors
                                              Super
                                              No.    Pages
8001   32  INTERIM GUIDANCE ON POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY
           PARTICIPATION IN REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS AND
           FEASIBILITY STUDIES;  OSUER 09835.1*

    *•• Secondary References *••

2016   33  MODEL STATEMENT OF WORK FOR A REMEDIAL
           INVESTIGATION AND FEASIBILITY STUDY CONDUCTED BY
           POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTIES;  OSUER 09835.8

**** Selection of Remedy/Dec is ion Documents

9000   32  INTERIM GUIDANCE ON SUPERFUND SELECTION OF REMEDY;
            OSUER 09355.0-19

9001   32  RCRA/CERCLA DECISIONS MADE ON REMEDY SELECTION
900?   39  A GUIDE TO SELECTING SUPERFUND REMEDIAL ACTIONS;
           OSUER 09355.0-27FS
                                                                  05/16/88  PORTER, J.U./OSUER
                                                        37
                                                                  06/02/89  OUPE
                                                                  12/24/86  PORTER. J.U./OSUER
06/24/85  KILPATRICK, M./CONPLIANCE
          BRANCH, OUPE

04/01/90  OERR/NSCD
                                                                                                                           31
                                                                                                                           10
-------
                             DATA ELEMENT DEFINTTTOVg
       The data elements of the Compendium database, as identified on the index, are sho-*n
       teiow:
DATA ELEMENT


Doc No


Vol


Titlt




Datt


Author*



Sums


Pages


Tier
Attachaeitt

OSWER/IW
DEFINITION
Unique four-digit number assigned to a document included
in the Compendium according to category.

Volume number of the binder in which  the hard copy of
the document is contained.

Title of the document. Secondary Reference is identified
following the title when a document relates to more than
one category. The document itself is filed under the
number series assigned to its primary category.

The date the document was published by or released from
the issuing office or entity.

Authorfs) and affiliation(s).  Also includes identification of
the EPA Project Officer and issuing office, where
applicable.

Indicates the status of a document, either draft or f;nai
venion.

Total number of printed pages of the document,  including
any attachments.

Tier 1 or Tier 2.  Tier 1 documents are the core documents
of the Compendium as listed in  the pamphlet titled
•Selected Technical Guidance for Superfund Projects.'
compiled by OERR. Tier 2 documents are all other
documents included ia the Compendium.

Attachments to a document by complete or abbreviated
title.
EPA report or OSWER Directive System numben. "here
applicable.
                                        83
-------
    LIST OF ORGANIZATIONAL ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS IDENTIFIED IN THF
 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
 Center for Environmental Research Information
 Contract Laboratory Program
 U.S. Corps of Engineers
 Exposure Assessment Research Division
 Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office
 Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
 Emergency Response Division
 Environmental Research Laboratory
 Hazardous Response Support Division
 Hazardous Site Control Division
 Hazardous Site Evaluation Division
 Hazardous Waste  Engineering Research Laboratory
 Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Environmental Engineering and Technology
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Office of Health Effects Assessment
Office of Research and Development
Off ice of SoliftltaM
Office of SoUfWtoa and Emergency Response
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
Policy Analysis Staff
Waterways Experiment Station
Waste Management Division
Acronvm

ATSDR
CERI
CLP
COE
EARD
ECAO
EMSL
ERD
ERL
HRSD
HSCD
HSED
HWERL
MERL
OEET
OERR
OHEA
ORD
OSW
OSWER
OWPE
PAS
WES
WMD
                                      84
-------
                             APPENDIX P


                   MODEL TRANSMITTAL COVER LETTER
 [Name of Contact]
 [Address]

 Dear [Name of Contact]:

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is required by lav to
 establish administrative records "at or near a facility at issue."
 This administrative record consists of information upon which the
 Agency bases its selection of response action for a particular
 Superfund site.

    By providing the public with greater access to thes® records, it
 is our hope that they will be better equipped to comment
 constructively on site activities and to understand the issues
 relating to the selection of the response action at the site.

    We appreciate having the [Name of local repository] as the
designated administrative record facility for the [Name of site]
Superfund site.  The enclosed record files, along with any future
documents relating to technical activities at the site should be
placed in the [Name of local repository] and be available for public
review.   The record files should be treated as a non-circulating
reference - it should not be removed from your facility.

    Also enclosed is a fact sheet to assist you and your staff in
answering questions posed by the public concerning administrative
records for selection of response actions at Superfund sites.
Please feel free to distribute this guide to the public.

    To ensure the receipt of the adainistrative record file, I would
appreciate your completion of the attached Document Transmittal
Acknowledgment form.  Please return this form in the enclosed self-
addressed, stamped envelope.

    Again, I would like to thank you for your cooperation with the
U.S. EPA in serving as a Field Repository.  If you have any
questions or comments, please contact [Name of EPA contact] at
 [Phone No.].

                               Sincerely,

                                 [Name]
                                Administrative Record Coordinator
                                   85
-------
                             APPENDIX G

              MODEL DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Proa:   [Regional Office Address]


To:         [Field Repository Address]
I acknowledge that I have received the following documents from the
U.S. EPA Region 	 Office, pertaining to [Site Name] Superfund
site.


    Administrative Record Name -                 rsite Name!

    Administrative Record Document Numbers -	
Signed

Date
Please return this fora to:   [Regional Office Address]
                                   86
-------
                             APPENDIX  H

                             PACT SHEET


                       :ivc Records  in  Local Repositories.


    The "administrative  record"  is  the collection of documents which
form the basis for the selection of a  response action at a Superfund
site.  Under section  113(k) of the  Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation,  and Liability  Act, as amended by the
Superfund Amendments  and Reauthorization Act  (CERCLA), EPA is
required to establish an administrative record for every Superfund
response action and to make a copy  of  the administrative record
available at or near  the site.

    The administrative record file  must be reasonably available  for
public review during  normal business hours.  The record file should
be treated as a non-circulating  reference document.  This will allow
the public greater access to the volumes and also minimize the risk
of loss or damage.  Individuals  may photocopy any documents
contained in the record  file, according to the photocopying
procedures at the local  repository.

    The documents in  the administrative record file may become
damaged or lost during use.  If  this occurs, the local repository
manager should contact the EPA Regional Office for replacements.
Documents may be added to the record file as the site work
progresses.  Periodically, EPA may  send supplemental volumes and
indexes directly to the  local repository.  These supplements should
be placed with the initial record file.

    The administrative record file  vill b« maintained at the local
repository until further notice.  Questions regarding the
maintenance of the record file should  be directed to the EPA
Regional Office.

    The Agency welcomes comments at any time on documents contained
in the administrative record file.  Please send any such comments to
[name and address].   The Agency  may hold formal public comment
periods at certain stage* of response  process.  Tha public is urged
to use these formal raviav periods  to  submit their comments.

    For furthar information on the  administrative record file,
contact [nama afmt phona no. of Administrative Record Coordinator].
                                   87
-------
                             APPENDIX I

                 MODEL NOTICE OP PUBLIC  AVAILABILITY
         THE UNITED  STATES  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                  ANNOUNCES  THE AVAILABILITY OF THE
                        ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
                     XY2 SITE,  [Locality,  State]

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announces the
availability for public review of file* comprising the
administrative record for the selection of the [remedial, removal]
action at the XYZ site, [Locality, State].  EPA seeks to inform the
public of the availability of the record file at this repository and
to encourage the public to comment on documents as they are placed
in the record file.

    The administrative record file includes documents which form the
basis for the selection of a [remedial, removal] action at this
site.  Documents now in the record files include  [preliminary
assessment and site investigation reports, validated sampling data,
RI/FS work plan, and the community relations plan].  Other documents
will be added to the record files as site work progresses.  These
additional documents may include, but are not limited to, the RI/FS
report, other technical reports, additional validated sampling data,
comments and new data submitted by interested persons, and EPA
responses to significant comments.

    The administrative record file is available for review during
normal business hours at:

         [Repository Name]      and    U.S.EPA - Region Z
         [Address and Phone I]         [Address and Phone I]

Additional information is available at the following locations:

         Verified sampling data   -    Contract laboratory,
           and documentation           [Address and Phone I]
         GuidsjsM documents and   -    EPA-Region z
            tftsftaical literature       [Address and Phone I]

Written comments on the administrative record should be sent to:

                  [Name], Office of Public Affairs
                         U.S.  EPA - Region Z
                         [Address and Phone I]
                                   88
-------
                              APPENDIX J

                     MICROFORM APPROVAL MEMORANDUM
  •to t'«v
   •^ f.
       i        UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
       •-                   WASHINGTON. O.C.  20460
      'y

                                            OCT 2 I
                                                   SQL'O AAS'E ANO iMC
-------
                             APPENDIX K


                         MODEL CERTIFICATION
                       IN THE  [NAME OF COURT]

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                   Plaintiff,

              v.

[NAMES OF DEFENDANTS]

                   Defendants,
'number
              v.
[NAMES OF THIRD PARTY
              DEFENDANTS]

         Third Party Defendants
CIVIL ACTION NO,
                     CERTIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS
                COMPRISING THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
    The United States Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA) hereby
certifies that the attached documents constitute the administrative
record for selection of response actions under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act  or 1980, as
amended,  for the [name of site] site in [City or County],  [State].

    By the United States Environmental Protection Agency:

                             In witness whereof I have subscribed my
                             name this 	 day of 	, 19	
                             in      reitvl

                                        rsignature!	
                                         rtyped name
-------
          APPENDIX  L


P!(EAMBLE  TO  SUBPART  I  OF  NCP
     Subvert /—Administrative Record for
     Selection of Response Action
       Subpart I of the NCP is entirely new.
     II implements CERCLA requirements
     concerning  the establishment of an
     administrative record for selection of a
     response action. Section 113(k)(l) of
     CERCLA requires the establishment of
     "an administrative record upon which
     the President shall base the selection of
     a response action." Thus, today's rule
     requires die establishment of an
     administrative record that  contains
     documents  that form the basu for the
     selection of a CERCLA response action.
     la addition, section 113(k)(2) requires
     the promulgation of regulations
     establishing procedures for the
     participation of interested  persons la the
     development of the administrative
     record.
       These regulations regarding the
     administrative record include
     procedures for public participation.
     Because one purpose of the
     administrative record is to facilitate
     public involvement procedures for
                   91
-------
 establishing anc maini
-------
             reoerai
     d. These should b«
from unvaiidated data—data thai have
not been through the quality control
process-—which may in limited
circumstances b« considered by the
agency in selecting the response action.
It is EPA'* policy to avoid using
(invalidated data whenever possible.
Nonetheless, there  are times when the
need for action aod the lack of validated
data requires the consideration of such
data in selecting an emergency removal
action. IT such data are used, they will
be included in the record.
  In general, only final documents are
included in the administrative record
Hies. Draft documents are not part of the
record for a decision because they
generally are revised or superseded by
subsequent drafts and thus are not the
actual documents upon which the
decision-maker relies. However, drafts
for portiona of them) generally will be
included in the administrative record for
response selection  if there is no final
document generated at the time the
response ia selected and the draft is the
document relied on. In addition, a draft
which has been released to the public
for the purpoM of receiving comments is
also part of the record, along with any
comments received.
  Similarly, predacisional and
deliberative documents, such as staff
notes or staff policy recommendations
or options pa pen. do not generally
belong ia the administrative record
because they merely reflect internal
deliberations rather than final decisions
or factual information upon which the
response selection  is based. However.
pertinent factual Information or
documents  stating final decisions on
response selection  issues for a site
generally would be included in the
record.
  Technical studies are also part of the
record, again, if considered by the lead
agency in selecting the response action.
The commenter seems to have
misinterpreted EPA's intent by assuming
that only factual portions of a technical
study art part of the record Th« entire
study, or relevant part of the stady.
should be part of the record.
  Another comment stated the* the
ttdministrative record should Inerede
any studies on cost cost-effectiveaeaa,
permanence, and treatment that underlie
the record of derision. These studies are
already part of the remedial
investigation and feasibility study.
which ia always) included la the) record.
Another party stated that sampling
protocols should be in the
administrative record. Sampling
protocols are part of the RI/FS work
plan, which ia also part of die
administrative) record. And because
sarnoun? protocols, like chain of custody
documents, are generally grouped
together. EPA has provided in this
rulereskmg that such grouped or serial
documents may be listed as a group in
the index to the administrative record
file.
  A related comment requested that all
documents generated by contractors
should be induced in the record, la
response, any document that forms the
basis of a response selection decision
will be included in the administrative
record. It is immaterial who develops
the document—*t can be a contractor.
the public (including a PRP). a state or
EPA.
  One commenter asked that ARAR
disputes involving a disagreement over
whether s requirement is substantive or
administrative be documented in the
record. Other comments stated that EPA
must ensure that complete ARAR
documentation and documentation of all
remedial options, not just the selected
remedy, be placed in the record. Where
ARAR issues are relevant to response
selection, lead and support agency-
generated documents and public
information submitted to the lead
agency oo this issue would be part of
the record. The record will include
documentation of each alternative
remedy and ARAR studied during the
RI/FS process, and the criteria used to
select the preferred remedy during the
remedy selection process.
  EPA also received several comments
stating that every document contributing
to decision-making should be part of the
administrative record. EPA cannot
concur ia this formulation of the
administrative record since it ia unclear
what "contributing to" means aad that
phrase may be overly broad. For
instance, the term "contributing to"
could ba> interpreted to iaduda aU draft
document* leading up to a final product
These) draft documents)  do not generally
fora OH) basis of the response setccttoa.
However, because) the enrriiiiistfatiie
record iacittdes documents which form
the basis for dM decision to select the
response action. EPA beUeves that moat
"contributing" documents wiO be
included.
   One comment stated that the haxard
raaktaf system (HRS) iafonnatioa
should bo mchdad la the administrative
record fix selection of me reapoaae
action. Specifically, they seajiited that
internal memoranda, daily aoiae, and
the original HRS score should be made
available. The National Prioritiee Ust
(NPL) docket ia a public docket, aad
already contains the retevaat ranldnf
information. The information generally
relevant to die listing of a site- oa the
NPL is preliminary aad not necessarily
relevant to the selection of t^e -esoonse
action. If. however, there is mfoma.'.on
in the NPL docket that is relied on m
selecting the response action, it will be
included in the administrative recora.
  Another commenter stated that ail
materials developed and received dunng
the remedy selection process should be
made a part of the record, and stated
that the  NCP currently omits inclusion of
transcripts. As noted above, certain
documents simply will not be relevant to
the selection of response actions. EPA
will, as required by the statute, include
in the record all those materials.
including transcripts, that form the basis
for the selection of a response action.
whether or not the materials support the
decision.
  Several commenten asked that the
lead agency be required to mail them
individual copies of documents kept m
the administrative record. These
requests included copies of sampling
data, a copy of any preliminary
assessment petitions, potential
remedies, the risk assessment a list of
ARAR** and notification of all future
work to be done. Commenters also
asked to be notified by mail when a lead

pling at a site and
aaaacy begi
whea a contractor ia chosen for a
response nfl****- In addition, many
asked for the opportunity to comment on
the docameats mentioned above. A
related comment suggested that EPA
maintain a mailing list for each site and
mail copies of key documents in the
record to every party on the list
  EPA believes that maintaining an
administrative record (lie in two places.
in addition to a more general
information repository, with provisions
for copying facilities reflects EPA's
strong commitment to keeping the
affected public, including PRP*.
informed and providing the opportunity
for public iavohrement ia response
dacisioa-making. Requiring EPA to mail
individual copies of documents
available ia the record file is beyond
any statutory requirements, unnecessary
due to dM ready  availability of the
documents ia the file; aad a severe
burdaa on Agency staff and resources.
Moat of the documents requested above
will generally be available  in the
administrative record for public review
aad copying. Additionally,  die lead
agency should TH »•"*'** a mailing list of
lasareatad panoaa to whom key site
information aad  nottee of site activities
can be mailed as part of their
commeaity relations plae for a site.
  One oomawnter asked that all PRP
comments and comments by other
Interested parties be included (a the
record. rsfardleea of their
                                                               93
-------
  Sig-.fi&arce." EPA will include all
 corr.ments received durirvg the comment
 period in the administrative record.
 regardless of their significance. When
 the lead agency consider* comments
 submitted after the decision document
 has been signed, the "significance" of a
 comment has a bearing on whether it
 will be included in the administrative
 record, as specified in | 300.82S(c). In
 addition, while EPA ia under no legal
 obligation tc place in the  record or
 consider comments submitted prior to
 the comment period. EPA will generally,
 as a matter of policy, consider
 significant comments submitted prior to
 the comment period, place them into the
 record, and respond to them at an
 appropriate  time. However, persona who
 wish to ensure that the comments they
 submitted prior to the comment period
 ere included in the record must resubmit
 such comments during the comment
 penod
  Final rule: Section 300.6GO(a) is
 promulgated as proposed.
  Name: Section 300.800(b).
 Administrative record for federal
 facilities.
  Pnpoted rule: Section 300.800(b)
 states that the lead agency for a federal
 facility, whether EPA. the U.S. Coast
 Guard, or any other federal agency,
 shall compile and maintain an
 administrative record for that facility.
 When federal agencies other than EPA
 are the lead at a federal facility site,
 they must furnish EPA with copies of the
 record index, in addition to other
 specified document! included in the
 record The preamble to the proposed
 NCP discussion of I 300.800(b) (53 FR
 51464) states that EPA will establish
 procedures for interested parties to
 participate in the administrative record
 development and that EPA may furnish
 documents which the federal agency is
 required to place in the record
  Response to comments: One comment
 stated that EPA should be the custodian
 for administrative records for federal
 facilities, especially where the federal
 facility is a PRP. to avoid any conflict of
 interest in questions of liability or
 litigation. Another comment stated that
 the requirements in | 300JOO(b) of the
 proposed rule would be burdensome to
 federal agencies in compiling and
 maintaining the record
  Executive Order 12580 grants federal
agencies the authority to "establish tot
administrative record for selection of
response actions for federal facilities
 under their jurisdiction, custody or
 control" To avoid the potential for
conflicts of interest by federal agendas
 who are PRPs and in charge of compiling
 and maintaining the record, EPA retains
 control over the development of the
 record by specifying what goes into the
 record, by supplementing the record and
 by requiring an accounting of what is in
 the record through a report of the
 indexed contents. EPA believes that
 these requirements represent sufficient
 Agency oversight to avoid potential
 conflicts of interest at federal facilities
 while ensuring that federal lead
 agencies remain responsible for
 compiling and maintaining their own
 administrative record
   EPA is making a minor editorial
 change in } 300.800(b)(l) to reflect that
 the federal agency compiles and
 maintains an administrative record for a
 facility, and not or a facility, since
 { 300.800(a) already provides that the
 record will be  located at or near that
 facility.
  Final rule: EPA is promulgating the
 rule as proposed, except for the
 following minor editorial change in the
 Tint sentence of I 300.800(b)(l): "If a
 federal agency other than EPA is the
 lead agency for a federal facility, the
 federal agency shall compile and
 maintain the administrative record for
 the selection of the response action for
 that facility in  accordance with this
 subpart"
  Name: Section 300400(c).
 Administrative record for state-lead
 sites.
  Proposed rule: Section 113(k) of
 CERCLA states that the President "shall
 establish an administrative record upon
 which the President shall base the
 selection of a response action." Section
 300.800(c), entitled "Administrative
 record for state-lead sites," requires that
 states compile administrative records.
 for state-lead sites  in accordance with
 the NCP.
  Response to comments: Several
 commenters believe that the new
 administrative record procedures place
 an onerous burden on the state, and
request that state requirements such as
 Open Record*  Acts should be allowed
 aa a substitute for compliance with
 subpart L Another commenter
 recommended  that states be allowed to
 determine whether a complete
 administrative record is needed at or
 near the site when  a site is state-lead
 Where a response is taken under
 CERCLA at a state-lead site. EPA ia
 ultimately responsible for the selection
 of a response action. Therefore, under
 section ll3(k). EPA must establish an
 administrative record for the CERCLA
 response action at  the site, and must at
 a minimum, comply with subpart L
 There may be many different ways of
 compilinf administrative records and
 involving the public in the development
 of ihe recorc. Sub par: I s'.a'.es ir.e
 mm;mum requirements for section
 U3(k). Lead agencies, inducing states.
 may provide additional public
 involvement opportunities at a site. In
 response to whether or not states should
 maintain a complete administrative
 record at or near the site. .EPA believes
 that states must have such a record in
 order to meet CERCLA section 113(k)
 requirements.                    .
  EPA has included a minor editorial
 change in § 300.800(c) to reflect that a
 state compiles and  maintains an
 administrative record for rather than at
 a given site.
  Final rule: EPA is promulgating
 $ 300.800(c) as proposed, except fur a
 minor editorial change in the first
 sentence as follows: "If a state is the
 lead agency for a site, the state shall
 compile and maintain the administrative
 record for the selection of the response
 action for that site in accordance with
 this subpart"
  Name: Sections 300.800(d) and
 300.800(e). Applicability.
  Proposed rule: Section 300.800(d)
 states that the provisions of subpart I
 apply to all remedial actions where the
 remedial investigation began after the
 promulgation of these rules, and for all
 removals where the action
 memorandum is signed after the
 promulgation of these rules. Section
 300.800(d) also proposes that "(T]his
 subpart applies to all  response actions
 taken under section 104 of CERCLA or
 sought secured or ordered
 administratively or judicially under
 section 106 of CERCLA." Section
300.800(8) states that the lead agency
will apply subpart I to all response
actions not included in I 300JOO(d) "to
 the extent practicable."
  Response to comments: One
commenter argued that the applicable
provisions of subpart  I should be
amended to require agencies to comply
with the subpart for all sites where the
remedy selection decision was made
more than 90 days after proposal of the
revised NCP for comment Another
comment stated that | 300JOO(e) be
 revised to state that lead agencies must
comply with subpart I in any future
 actions they take, and that all lead
 agency actions must comply with
 subpart I "to the maximum extent
 practicable."
  In response. EPA will adhere as
 closely aa possible to  subpart I for sites
 where the remedial investigation begcn
 before these regulations an
 promulgated EPA will not however.
 require that these sites comply with
 requirements which, because of the
                                                    94
-------
 :,m:r.q of the respor.se action reUnvc '.o
 the promulgation of these rules, cannot
 be adhered to. For example, under the
 final rule the administrative record file
 must be available al the beginning of the
 remedial investigation phase. U these
 regulations arc promulgated when a site
 is in the middle of the remedial
 investigation process, and th*
 administrative record is not yet
 available, the lead agency cannot at this
 point comply with these regulations.
 Additionally. EPA believes that adding
 language to proposed NCP } 300.800(e)
 to state that lead agencies will  comply
 with provisions of subpart 1 in  any
 future action after promulgation of the
 new rule it unnecessary and redundant:
 compliance will be legally required, and
 applicability to all future response
 actions it implicit in the rule. Likewise.
 insertion of the word "maximum" before
 the phrase "extent practicable" ia
 unnecessary »mc* it woeldgive
 additional emphasis but would not
 lubsiantiveiy change the requirement or
 UN meaning of lha rule.
  One commant agreed with EPA's
 interpretation that subpart 1 applies to
 all response actions 'toughU secured or
 ordered administratively or judicially."
 but other* disagreed. Several staled that
 the  term "judicially" should be  deleted
 from I 300.400(4) because they  argue
 that response actions ordered judicially
would receive dfaovo adjudication.
instead of administrative record review.
CERCLA section 113(j)U) »tates: "In any
 judicial action under this Act judicial
 review of any issues concerning the
 adequacy of any response action taken
 or ordered by the President shall be
 limited to the administrative record."
 Commenten contend that this section
 does not apply to injunctive actions
 under CERCLA section 108 because
 these are not actions "taken or  ordered
 by the President"To the contrary, the
 •election of a response action is a
 "response action taken * * * by the
 President" Accordingly, section 113(13(1)
 requires that judicial review of the
 response action selected by the agency
 is "limited to the administrative record."
 Further, section 113(j](2] stipulate* that
 "in  any judicial action under this
 chapter"—whether for injunctlve relief.
 enforcement of an administrative order
 or recovery of response costs or
 damages—« party objecting to  "the
 President's decision in selecting the
 response action" must demonstrate, "on
 the  administrative record, that  the
 decision was arbitrary or capricious or
 otherwise not in accordance with law."
  EPA received several comments
 objecting to EPA's determination that
       review of an endangerment
assessment be limited to Jie
administrative record. They stated thai
as a matter of administrative and
constitutional law. a finding of imminent
and substantial endangerment is not an
issue concerning "the adequacy of the
response action." as stated in CERCLA
section 113(j). and therefore must
receive de nova review by a court. A
second comment requested that EPA
state in the regulation that review of
EPA's expenditures in the
implementation of a remedy is de nova.
  An assessment of endangerment at a
site is a factor highly relevant to the
selection of a response action, and is in
fact part of the remedial investigation
(RH process central to the decision to
select a response action. Therefore, the
determination of endangerment (which
mil generally be included in the
decision document) will be included in
the administrartve record for selection
of a response action and should be
reviewed as part of that record (EPA
notes thet the term "endangerment
assessment" document has been
superseded by the term "risk
assessment" document and while
assessments of endangerment at a site
are still conducted during the RL it Is the
"risk assessment" document that
becomes pert of the record.) In response
to the comment  that Agency
expenditures  on a response action
should receive d* noro review. EPA
notes that this Issue was not raised in
the proposed  NCP. and is therefore not
addressed to the final rale.
  /Trm/ra/ar EPA is promulpring the
rule es proposed.
  Abate? Section 30O80S. Location of the
administrative record file.
  ftopoeerfni/ev Section U3(k)(l) of
CERCLA states  that "the administrative
record  shall be available to the public at
or Bear the facility at issue. The
rteeirlenl also may place duplicates of
tne administrative record al any other
location." Section 300JOS of the
propoeed NCP provides five exemptions
for information  which need not be
placed at or near the facility at iseua:
Sampling •*"* >M>ir>f, data, guidance
/<«w^m^fltf publicly available technical
literature, documents in (h* ^fMifHintlil
portion of the file, aad emergency
removal actions lasting leaa than 30
days.
  Seaports* to comments; One
"*nnirT*i>tT supported H""Hng the
amount of information which must be
bated at or near the site, but many
oommeatan stated that every document
contributing to decision-making,
in..itn4
-------
 li;jh probability that the information
 will be in demand or tbe information ii
 central to tht response selection
 decision.
   The confidential portion of the file
 need not be located at or near the site.
 and will not be available upon request
 either at the site or at the central
 location, since the information is not
 available for public review.
   EPA believes that requiring that the
 record be located in two places is
 necessary to ensure both adequate
 public access to the record files and
 better lead-agency control over the
 rscord documents. The statutory
 requirement in CERCLA section
 113(k)(l) states that the President may
 also place duplicates of the
 administrative record at any other
 location. This section clearly provides
 authonty to maintain a second
 administrative record at a central
 location. Section 300.805 of the proposed
 NCP (53 FR 51515) reflect* EPA's
 decision to make this statutory option a
 regulatory requirement. A centrally
 located record may offer easier access
 to interested parties located far from the
 response site.
  EPA agrees with the coounenter that
 housing the centrally located copy of the
 record at Indian tribal headquarters may
 be appropriate when a Superfund site ia
 located at or near an Indian reservation.
 In the 1986 amendments to CERCLA.
 Indian tribes are accorded status
 equivalent to states, and can be
 designated lead agencies for response
 actions, in which case they would alto
 be required to compile and maintain the
 administrative record at or near the site.
  Finally, at EPA stated in the preamble
 to the proposed NCP. maintaining the
 administrative record on microfiche ia
 already recognized as a legally valid
 and effective  practice: "EPA may make
 the administrative record available to
 the public in microform. EPA may'
 microform-copy document* that form lht
 basis for the selection of a CERCLA
 response action in the regular course of
 business" (53 FR 51468). EPA agrees that
 this should be specified la the rale and
 has added I 300.805(c) accordingly.
 providing that the lead agency may
 make the record available lo microform.
  Final rult: Section 300J08 if modified
 as follows:

  1. Section 300.805(b) ia added to the
rule as follows; "Where documents are
placed in the central location but not in
the file located at or near the site, such
documents shall be added to the file
located at or near the site upon request.
except for documents included in
 paragraph (a)(4) of this section."
   C. Section 3C0.805(c) is added tc the
 rule as follows: 'The lead agency may
 make the administrative record file
 available to the public in microform."
   3. The section hat been renumbered
 accordingly.
   Name: Sections 300.810(aHd).
 Documents not included in the
 administrative record file.
   Proposed rule: Section 300.810(b)
 discusses which documents may be
 excluded from the administrative record.
 Section (c) discusses privileged
 information that is not included in the
 administrative record. Section 300.810(d)
 discusses confidential information that
 is placed in the confidential portion of
 the administrative record.
   Response to comments; One
 commenter argued that | 300.810 should
 specifically include an exemption for
•classified document* related to national
 security. While the NCP currently does
 not address the potential conflict
 between national security concerns and
 the requirement to establish a publicly
 accessible administrative record, it is
 not clear that such an exemption could
 be adequately specified by rule or that
 an exemption  would appropriately
 resolve this conflict Section 121(j)
 provides a national security waiver by
 Presidential order of any requirement*
 under CERCLA. which can be invoked
 in certain circumstances. Under this
 provision, protection of national security
 interests requires case-by-case review
 under section I21(j) and not a blanket
 exemption in the NCP. Nothing in tbe
 NCP limit* the availability of tht*
 waiver.
   Another comment received by EPA
 stated that the treatment of privileged
 and confidential document* in the
 record* i* unfair, because it denies
 access to documents that may be critical
 to the selection of a remedy. EPA baa
 provided for a confidential portion of
 the administrative record where
 documents containing, for example.
 trade secrets of companies that have
 developed patented cleanup
 technologic* being considered a* a
 response -selection alternative can be)
 kept confidential To maintain • fair
 balance between  the need for
 confidentiality and the public's right of
 review of the record, the lead agency
 must  summarize or redact a document
 containing confidential information to
 make available to the greatest extent
 possible critical factual information
 relevant to the selection of a response
 action in the nonconfidential portion of
 the record.
   A final comment proposed that an
 index to the privileged documents
 should be included in the
 nonconfidentia! portion of the
 administrative record. EPA agrees.
 believing that an index will let
 interested parties know in general terms
 what document* are included in the
 record without compromising *.h«
 confidential nature of the information
 contained in those documents.
  Finally. EPA is adding a sentence to
 § 300.810(a)(8) to clarify that  the index
 can include a reference to a group of
 document*, if documents are
 customarily grouped. This will simplify
 EPA's task  without compromising the
 integrity of the record.

  Final rule: 1. EPA is promulgating
 Si 300410fb). (c) and (d) as proposed
 with a minor editorial change to clanfy
 the first sentence of { 300.810(d).
  2. The following language is added to
 I 300.810(aK6) to provide for  listing
grouped documents in the
 administrative record file index: "If
document*  are customarily grouped
 together, a* with sampling data chain of
custody documents, they may be listed
a* a group in the index to the
administrative record file."
  Name: Section 300.815. Administrative
record file for a  remedial action.
  Proposed rule: The term
"administrative record file" is used
 throughout  the proposed NCP. Section
300.815(a) proposes that the
administrative record file be made
available for public inspection at the
beginning of the remedial investigation
phase.
  Response to comments: EPA received
several comments objecting to the
concept of an administrative record file.
They objected because there is no
statutory authority for establishing a
file, and because they were concerned
that the lead agency could edit the file.
specifically by deleting public and PRP
comments and information that do not
support the response action ultimately
chosen by EPA.  and that these
comments and information would not
remain a part of the final administrative
record.
  The statute requires the President to
establish an administrative record.
Under subpart I of the NCP. the
administrative record Qle is the
mechanism for compiling, and will
contain, the administrative record
required by section 113(k). One reason
EPA adopted the concept of an
administrative record file is that EPA
felt that it may be confusing or
misleading  to refer to an ongoing
compilation of document* as an
"administrative  record" until  the
compilation is complete. Until the
response action  has been selected, there
                                                     96
-------
Federal  Register  /  Vol.  55. No. 46 / Thursd-v  March  8. 1990
                                                                                      and Resulav.cr.s
                                                                                                             83C-
 is no complete administrative record for
 that decision. Thus, to avoid creating the
 impression that the record is complete at
 any time pnor to the firtal selection
 decision, the set of documents is
 referred to as the administrative record
 file rather than the administrative
 record.
   However, this does not mean, as the
 comments appear to suggest, that the
 lead agency may "edit" the
 administrative record file in a manner
 that removes comments and technical
 data simply  because they are not
 supportive of the final selection
 decision. Any comments and technical
 information  placed in the record file for
 a proposed response action and relevant
 to the selection of that response action.
 whether in support of. or in opposition
 to. the selected response action, become
 part of the administrative record for the
 final response selection decision. Such
 materials will remain in the
 administrative record file, and will
 become part of the final administrative
 record However. EPA believes that as a
 matter of law documents that are
 erroneously  placed in the administrative
 record file (e.g.. documents that have no
 relevance to the response selection or
 that pertain to an entirely different site)
would not necessarily become part of
 the final administrative record
  EPA received additional comments
stating that the administrative record
file should be available before the
beginning of the remedial investigation
phase. These comments suggested that
the file be available: When a sitt is
entered into the CERCUS data base;
when the HRS score ia calculated: when
proposed for inclusion on the NPL after
 the preliminary assessment report and
 after the remedial sitt investigation.
  EPA believes that the point at which a
 site is entered into the CERQJS data
 base is too early to put any information
 which would be relevant to a selection
of a response action into a record file
 because at this point then has been no
 site evaluation and therefore little
 factual information about the site upon
 which to base a response decision
 Interested parties can already find any
 information on a site that would be
 included at the point of the HRS scoring
 and placement on the NPL in the NPL
 docket which is publicly available. The
 preliminary assessment and remedial
 investigation stages of a response are
 premature for making the administrative
 record available: at these points there is
 little information relevant to response
 selection on which to comment or to
 review. Once the RI/FS work plan is
 approved and the RI/FS study begins—
 including such activities as project
                           scoping, data collection, r.sk assessment
                           and analysis of alternatives—there is a
                           coherent body of site-specific
                           information with relevance to the
                           response selection upon which to
                           comment. EPA believes that the
                           beginning of the RI/FS phase is the point
                           in the process when it makes sense to
                           start a publicly available record of
                           information relevant to the response
                           selection.
                            One comment suggested that
                           interested persons would have no
                           chance to comment on the formation of
                           the RI/FS work plan. The comment
                           suggested that the record file should be
                           available before the RI/FS work plan is
                           approved e.g.. with a draft work plan or
                           statement of work. EPA disagrees.
                           Approved work plans are often
                           amended An interested person may
                           comment on the scope or formation of
                           the work plan, and such comments can
                           be taken into account by the lead
                           agency and incorporated into a final or
                           amended work plan. Such comments
                           must be considered if submitted during
                           the comment period on the proposed
                           action.
                            Final rule: EPA is promulgating
                           130O81S(a) as proposed
                            Name: Section 300J1S. Administrative
                           record file for a remedial action. Section
                           300.820(a). Administrative record file for
                           a removal action.
                            Propoted ni/tr Subpart I requires that
                           the administrative record for a remedial
                           action be available for public review
                           when the remedial investigation begins.
                           Thereafter, relevant documents are
                           placed in the record as generated or
                           received The proposed regulations also
                           require that the lead agency publish a
                           newspaper notice announcing the
                           availability of the record files, and a
                           second notice •»«mm*^*»e that the
                           piepoead plan has been  Issued A public
                           comment period of at least 30 days is
                           required on the proposed plan. Section
                           30OaO(a) outlines the steps for the
                           availability of the record and public
                           comment for a non-time-critical removal-
                           action, EPA solicited comments on a
                           proposal currently under, consideration
                           to require quarterly or semi-annual
                           notification of record availability and
                           tfa initiation of public «*««•»tn««jt JQ the
                            JtecpeRse to comments.- Some
                          commenten suggested that the use of
                          the Federal Register to announce the
                          availability of the administrative record
                          is too costly, or of little or no benefit
                          Several commenten requested
                          clarification on how and when the lead
                          agency should respond to comments.
                          Another stated that lead agencies
                          should be encouraged—though not
required—to respond to early corr..~er.:s
before the formal comment period
begins.
  EPA chose not to require a notice of
availability of the administrative record
in the Federal Register  in this
rulemaking  because it is still unclear
whether the benefits of this additional
notice outweigh its costs. EPA may
dectde in the fuftre to require this
additional notice if it determines that
such notice  would improve notification.
  EPA agrees with commenters that
clarification is needed  as to when the
lead agency should respond to
comments. We also agree that the lead
agency should be encouraged to respond
to comments submitted before the public
comment period EPA generally will
consider any timely comments
containing significant information, even
if they are not received during the
formal comment period, and  encourages
other lead agencies to do so.  EPA will
strive to respond to comments it
receives as  early as possible, and to
encourage other lead agencies to follow
suit However, any lead agency is
required to consider and respond to only
those comments submitted during a
formal comment period Any other
comments are considered at  the lead
agency's discretion. EPA has revised the
language of these sections to reflect the
policy on consideration of public
comments submitted prior to public
comment periods.
  One comment recommended that the
regulations  should provide how long the
administrative record must be available.
and suggested EPA coordinate efforts
with the National Archives about
retaining the record as  a historical
record Another felt that materials were
not always placed into  the record in a
timely manner, and that the record was
not always available to the working
public during evenings  and weekends or
accompanied by a copying machine.
Similarly, one commenter felt that
documents should be placed in the
record when they are generated or in a
prescribed **•»•£•'"• of two weeks.
Another asked that free copies of key
documents be included in the record.
  EPA believes that the length of time a
record must be available at or near the
site will be  dependent on site-specific
considerations such as ongoing activity.
pending litigation and community
interest EPA also believes that
difficulties sometimes encountered  by
the working public require resolution on
a site-by-site basis and do not merit a
change in the proposed NCP language.
Special provisions may have to be made
by the records coordinator, with the aid
of other site team members, including
                                                       97
-------
 (He community relations coordinator or
 regional i.te manager, to ensure that the
 record location chosen it convenient to
 the public and that copying facilities are
 made available. Using public libraries to
 houM the record should promote better
 availability of the record during non-
 working hours and on weekends. In
 response,to mandating deadlines fox
 lead agencies to place document* into
 the administrative record file. Agency
 guidance already directs record
 compilers to place documents into th«
 record file as toon as they are received,
 Agency policy additionally prescribes a
 suggested timeframe for placing
 document* in the record file. EPA
 believes that mandatory deadline* in
 the NCP would do little to increase the
 rate at which records are already
 compiled. The decision to place free
 copies of key document* in the  record at
 or near the site will be a  site-specific
 decision baaed on the level of
 community interest in these documents.
 Those who wish to make copies of key
 documents or any document contained
 in the administrative record file aboold
 already have access to copying
 facilities.
  EPA received • comment requesting
 that it publish a joint notice of
 availability of the administrative record
 with • notice of availability of Technical
 Assistance Grants. Another «""•"*•«
 stated that the removal site evaluation
 and engineering evaluation/cost
 analysis (EE/CA) must be included in
 the record for a non-time-crincal
 removal action.
  Publishing notice of the availability of
 the record m tandem with
 announcements of the availability of
Technical Assistance Grants (TAG*) to
 a good idea where TAG* art available
 for a removal action. The TAG*,
 however, are generally designed to
 support citizen involvement in technical
 isiuei for lite* undergoing remedial
 actions. The one-year. S2 million
 limitation* on removals and the Umjted
 number of alternative* usually reviewed
 make further expense on a *•«•*•««••»
 advisor let* beneficial than tt might be
 for a long-term remedial action. Aa for
 placing the removal site evaluation and
 EE/CA in the *dmini*trative record.
 EPA egrees th*t generally such
 document* would be pan of the
 administrative record for the removal
 action.
  Finally. EPA is making a minor change
 to the language of I 300 J20(a)(4). EPA Is
 substituting the term "decision
 document" in place of action
 memorandum to allow for lituition*
 where the agency's decision document
for a removaj action is not named an
action memorandum.
  Final rule: 1. The second sentences of
ii 30a815(b). 500.820(a)(2) and
300.&20(b)(2) are revised to reflect the
new language on responding to
comments as follows: The lead agency
ia encouraged to consider and respond.
as appropriate, to significant comment*
that were submitted pnor to the public
comment period.**
  2. In i 300.820(*)(4). the term "deciaion
document" i* substituted for "action
memorandum."
  3. The remainder of | 300-820(a) i*
promulgated as proposed,
  Man*.- Section 300.820(b)~
Administrative record file for a removal
action— time-critical and emergency.
  Proposed ntim: Section 300£20(b)
outline* step* for public participation
end administrative record availability
for time-critical and emergency removal
response* (53 FR 51516): "Documents
included in the administrative record
file shall be made available for public
inspection DO later than 90 days after
initiation of on-eite removal activity," at
which point notification of the
availability of the record must be
published The lead agency then, aa
appropriate,  will provide a public
comment period of not less than 36 day*
on the selection of the response action.
  Rtsponu to coaunwtx Several
comment* suggested that public
comment requirement* under
| 300.620(b) were unnecessary and
burdensome, especially, the requirement
to publish a notice of the availability of
the record. One comment argued that
requiring public notification of both
record availability and of a site'*
inclusion on the NPL wa* unnecessary
and duplicative. Another «""""••«»
•tated that the requirement* for public
notification and public comment are not
appropriate for all time critical removal
actions. nn*^ r^ffa^**utr\^f^ that fat
adjnioUtntivt record be available Ear
review only for those time-critical
removal actions that do require public
notice and comment A related comment
•tated that the requirement to publish a
notice of availability of the
administrative record for aD time-critical
removal action* be eliminated in favor
of making the record available but not
requiring an adverti*ement or comment
period, tine* tome tine-critical removal
actions are completed before a public
comment period could be held. Other*
a*ked that the public comment period
become mandatory, or at least
mandatory for removal activities not
already completed at the time the record
i* made available. Another comment
requested that the record become
available sooner — at lets; 30 days af'.er
initiation of on-site removal activity —
became the current 80-day penod
prevented the consideration of any pre-
work comments. A second comment
supported the 60-day period Finally, a
commenter argued that it made little
sense to make the record available after
60 days for an emergency response
because the on-scene coordinator (OSC)
report containing most of the response
information ian't required to be
completed until one year following the
response action.
  In general, the public participation
requirements under i 300AZO(b) are
designed to preserve both the flexibility
and discretion required by the lesd
agency in time-critical removal action
situations as well ss EPA's commitment
to encouraging public participation and
to keeping an affected community well-
informed EPA believes the notification
and comment periods required in
i 30p.820(b) provide for both Agency
flexibility and meaningful public
involvement. The regulatory language
stating that 'The lead agency shall as
appropriate, provide a public comment
period of not less than 30 days"
provides the lead agency needed
flexibility when the emergency nature of
                 es holding a
comment period inf easibl
  While EPA believes that it is
necessary to announce the availability
of the adminutrative record for tims-
critical and emergency removal actions
as well as ooa-baia-critical actions, EPA
believes that requiring establishment of
the administrative record and publishing
a notice of it* availability 30 day* after
initiating a removal action in all cases.
instead of "no later than 60 day* after
initiating a removal action," a*
proposed, would be •omewhat
premature. It ha* been EPA'* experience
that it often take* 60 day* to stabilize •
•it* (La, those activities that help to
reduce, retard or prevent the spread of a
haxardou* •ubatanc* release and help to
eliminate an immediate threat). EPA
believes that the overriding task of
emergency response teams during this
critical period must be the undertaking
of necessary stabilization, rather dun
edministrative duties. Compiling and
advertising the record before a site has
become stabilized would divert
emergency response teams from
devoting their fuD attention to a
response. EPA believes that such
sdminiitrative procedure* an better left
for after sit* stabilization.
  Public notice requirements for
        ing the availability of the
idministrative record and for a site's
inclusion on the NPL are not duplicative.
                                                        98
-------
                                                                                                            oou
 but notify the public of two very
 different decisions. Removal actions do
 not always take place at sites on the
 NPL therefore, the notice requirements
 are obviously not duplicative for these
 removal actions. For remedial sites that
 are on the NPL the administrative
 record need not be established for some
 time after listing on the NPL so
 publishing a notice of the availability of
 the record would be essential to make
 the affected public cognizant of site
 progress and their opportunity for
 review of documents included in the
 record.
   Lastly, the procedures specified in
 § 300.820(b) are applicable to an
 emergency removal that starts and
 finishes within 60 days. However, as
 provided in ] 300.820(b)(2). a comment
 period is held only where the lead
 agency deems it appropriate. But
 because the administrative record is an
 avenue for public information as well as
 for public comment. EPA also believes
 that even if the action is completed
 before the record file is made available.
 it is still appropriate to make the record
 available to the public. There is also no
 inherent contradiction in the OSC report
 being available one year after
 completion of the response action while
 the administrative record becomes
 available 60 days after initiation of on-
 site activities. Since the OSC report is •
 summary of the site events and is not a
 document which ia considered in the
 selection of response action, it is not
generally included in the administrative
 record.
  Final rule: EPA is promulgating
 f 300.820(b) as proposed, except that
  1. The second sentence of
 } 300.820(b}(2) is revised on responding
 to public comments as described above.
  2. Section 300a20(bH3) is revised
 consistent with I 300J20(a)(4); the term
 "action memorandum" is changed to
 "decision document"
  Name: Section 300.823. Record
 requirements after decision document Is
 signed
  Propottd rule: Section MAMS
 describes situations whan documents
 may be added to the administrative
 record after the decision document is
 signed. Documents may bit added to a
 record in the following circumstances:
 When the document addresses a portion
 of tilt decision which the decision
 document dots not address or reserves
 for later when the response action
changes and an explanation of
 significant differences or an amended
decision document is issued: when the
agency holds additional public comment
periods after the decision is signed: and
when the agency receives comments
 containing "significant information not
 contained elsewhere in the record which
 could not have been submitted during
 the public comment period which
 substantially support the need to
 significantly alter the response action"
 (53 FR 51516). In addition, subpart E of
 the proposed NCP discusses ROD'
 amendments and Explanations of
 Significant Differences. Explanations of
 Significant Differences may be used for
 significant changes which do not
 fundamentally change  the remedy, and
 do not require public comment. ROD
 amendments must be used for
 fundamental changes, and require a
 public comment period.
  Response to comments: One
 commenter asked that  subpart I reflect
 the factors consistently applied by
 courts when determining whether the
 record should be supplemented.
 including such criteria  as Agency
 reliance on factors not  included in the
 record, an incomplete record, and strong
 evidence that EPA engaged in improper
 behavior or acted in bad  faith. A related
 comment stated that since general
 principles of administrative law apply to
 administrative record restrictions and
 supplementing the record, language
 limiting supplementing the record should
 be deleted from the NCP. EPA believes
 that including specific tenets of
administrative law governing
supplementing of the record in the NCP
itself is unnecessary. These tenets apply
to record review of response actions
whether or not they an included in the
NCP. The requirements of | 300.825(c)
do not supplant principles on
supplementing administrative records.
  Another comment recommended that
EPA permit the record to bo
supplemented with any issue contested
by a PRP. while granting an objective
third party the ability to accept or reject
record supplements. EPA already
requires that any documents concerning
remedy selection submittad by PRPs
within the public comment period be
included m the record.  All significant
evidence submitted after the decision
document is complete is already
included in the record,  so long as it
meets the requirements of 130Oa25(c).
is not included elsewhere ia the record,
could not have been submitted during
the public comment period, and supports
the need to significantly alter die
response action. EPA believes these
criteria an reasonable and do not
require the use of a-diird-party
arbitrator.
  One comment stated that all PRP
 submissions must be placed in the
record in order to protect a party's due-
process right to be heard. EPA disagrees
that all PRP submissions  to the lead
 agcr.cy must be pUced m tl-.e record i-
 order to protect the party s due process
 nghts. The process provided in the
 rules—including the notice of
 availability of the proposed plan and the
 administrative record for review, the
 availability of all documents underlying
 the response selection decision for
 review throughout the decision-making
 process, the opportunity to comment on
 the proposed plan and all documents tn
 the administrative record file,  the
 requirement that the lead agency
 consider and respond to all significant
 PRP comments raised during the
 comment period, the notice of significant
 changes to the response selection, and
 the opportunity to submit, and
 requirement that the lead agency
 consider, any new significant
 information that may substantially
 support the need to significantly alter
 the response selection even after the
 selection decision—is sufficient to
 satisfy due process. Moreover, the
 opportunity provided for PRP and public
 involvement in response selection
 exceeds the minimum public
 participation requirements set forth by
 the statute. Placing a reasonable limit o<\
 the length of time in which comments
 must be submitted, snd providing for
 case-by-case acceptance of late
 comments through | 300.82S(c). does no.
 infringe upon procedural rights of PRPs.
  One commenter asked that the
 permissive "may" in | 300.823(a) be
 changed so there Is no lead-agency
 discretion over whether to add to the
 administrative record documents
 submitted after the remedy selection.
 and stated that additional public
 comment periods aa outlined in
 I 300.423(b) should not be only at EPA's
 option. A related comment stated that
 the multiple qualifiers in I 300J2S(c).
 including the phrases "substantially
 support the need" and "significantly
 alter the response action" (S3 FR 51516).
grant EPA overly broad discretionary
 powers over whet documents may be
 added to die record. The commenter
 suggests deleting the word
 "substantially." aa well as stating that
 all comments, even those disregarded by
 EPA. should be included in the record
 for the purpose of judicial review. EPA
 disagrees that the word "may" in either
 130O«23(a) or 130O«2S(b).is too
 permissive. Section 30O«2S(b) of the
 proposal was simply intended to clarify
 the lead agency's implicit authority to
 hold additional public comment periods.
 in addition to those required under
 subpart E for ROD amendments.
 whenever the lead agency decides it
 would be appropriate. Because these
 additional comment period* are not
                                                       99
-------
 required by statute or regulation, the
 1 permissive" language limply reflects
 the lead agency s discretion with respect
 to these additional public involvement
 opportunities. Similarly, lead-agency
 discretion to add to the administrative
 record documents submitted after •
 decision document has been signed
 provides the lead agency the option to
 go beyond the minimum requirements
 for public participation outlined in the
 statute. In response to requests to delete
 the qualifiers m § 300.a25(c). this
 language is intentionally designed to
 define carefully the circumstances in
 which EPA must consider comments
 submitted aher the response action has
 been selected. This standard recognizes
 CERCLVs nt«nJae basis. The u*e
of sinking agents is prohibited.
  Section 300.84 explicitly encourages
advance planning for the use of
dispersants and other chemicals. The
OSC is authorised to approve the us« of
dispersants and other chemicals without
the concurrence of the EPA
representative to the RRT and the
affected states if these parties have
previously approved a plan identifying
the products that may be used and the
particular circumstances under which
their use is preauthohzed.
  Section 300.85 details the data that
must be submitted before a dispenant.
surface collecting agent, or biological
additive may be placed on the NCP
Product Schedule. Section 300.80
describes the procedures for placing a
product on the Product Schedule and
also sets forth requiremsnts designed to
avoid possible misrepresentation or
misinterpretation of the meaning of the
placement of a product on the Schedule.
including the wording of a disclaimer to
be used in product advertisements or
technical literature referring to
placement on the Product Schedule.
  Appendix C details the methods and
types of apparatus to be used in carrying
out the revised standard dispenant
effectiveness and aquatic toxidty tests.
Appendix C also sets  forth the format
required for summary presentation of
product test data.
  Proposed rule: Proposed subpart J is
very similar to subpart H and contains
only minor revisions. Section numbers
and references to other sections and
subparts have been changed where
appropriate. Technical changes and
minor wording changes to improve
clarity have also been made.
  Definitions formerly presented in
subpart H have been moved to subpart
A. and a new definition has been sdded
for miscellaneous oil spill control
egents. Accordingly, e list of data
requirements for miscellaneous spill
control egents is proposed to be sdded
to | 30&915. The definition for navigable
waters is as defined in 40 CFR 110.1.
  Section 300*10, which addressed
-Authorization of ase," was modified
slightly in the proposed regulation to
emphasize the importance of obtaining
concurrence for the use of dispersants
end other chemicals from the
appropriate state representatives to the
Regional Response Team (RRT) and the
DOC/DOI natural resource trustees "as
sppropriete.
  Response to oommentf.<—1.
Invotwneat of DOC/DOI trustees.
Many commenters opposed the
inclusion of the DOC/DOI trustees in
                                                     100
-------
                          APPENDIX  M
                       SUBPART I OF  NCP
Subpart I—AdmirMtratrve Record for
Seaecaon of neaponae Acton
} 30OMO
adnwuatraave record
  (a) GetHrnJ reqmreaietiL The bud
agency snail establish aa administrative
record that coacaine the docuoMnu (hat
fora the beats (or the seJeetioa of a
response action. "The tad agency snail
compile and «ft***"M"> (he adounistraave
record ia accordance w«m dusjubpart,
  (b) Adamntraav* records forftdmrai
faatitM. (1) If a fitdenl agency other
than SPA. is the lead agency for a
federal faatity. the federal agency shall
compile and maintain die ****""*««" •*'••
record for the selection of the reepome
action for thai facility n Accordance
with dais sabpart EPA may naouh
docuanaus winch die federal agency
shall place ia die adaaaiftratrve record
file to eaeon dut taa admmistratrre
record includes all docnmente dut farm
the bui> for the saladon of the
  (2) EPA. or die UJL Coast Guard shall
  tjnlo cad saaiataia the adauaietfmchr*
record wnan it is die lead agency for a
federal faediry.
  (31 If EPA is involved at the telarrlnH
of the raeponee aetioo « • fadenl
faoliry oa d» NPL the federal agency*
acting a» OM had agency «hall pravida
EPA with a copy of dsi aadex of
                  ia tbe
                    10* the W/F8
workaiaa, the U/PS reteaaed for peblie
comment, the pmyussil piaa. any puoUc
comments received oa oSe RI/FS aad
prepoeed pian. and any other'
EPA may reqweet oa •
btUia.
  (c) .•IrfwwfSffoOrprwcOTtf for sntf-
Jeadfttvs. IT a state is the l«sd agency
for a site, the xete ihafl compile and
maintain the tdministncw recnrd for
the selection of the response action for
that site in accordance' wrm this
subpart EPA may require the state to
place additional documents in the
administrative record file to ensure rhat
the administrative record inchides all
documents which focm ths basis for 'Jie
selection of the reepenoo action. The
state shall provide E? A with a copy of
the index of documents included ia the
administrative record ffle. me Rl/TS
workplan. the RI/FS released for public
comment the proposed plan, any public
comments received on the RI/FS and
proposed plea, and any other documents
EPA may request on t ca*e-by•» +dt*T
                                                  coatroi and qaatity sjsaserisfie
                                                  documentation, and chaia of caasady
                                                  forma, need aoi be located at or aeer the
                                                  •tta te iaeae or at the ocatnl loceeoe.
                                                  provided that taa iadex te me
                                                                   rd Blc asdteataa the
                                                  locatsaa aad availability of this
                                                  iafornatioa»
                                 101
-------
            Federal Register / Vol. 55.  No. 46  /Thursday.  March 8. 1990 / Rules and  Regulations
   (2) Guidance documents not generated
specifically for the site at issue need not
be located at or near the site at issue.
provided that they are maintained at the
central location and the index to the
administrative record file indicates the
location and availability of these
guidance documents.
   (3) Publicly available technical
literature not generated for the site at
issue, such as engineering textbooks,
articles from technical journals, and
lexicological profiles, need not be
located at or near the site at issue or at
the central location,  provided that the
literature is listed in the index to the
administrative record file or the
literature is cited in a document in the
record.
   (4j Documents included in the
confidential portion of the
administrative record file shall be
located only in the central location.
   (5) The administrative record for •
removal action where the release or
threat of release requires that on-site
removal activities be initiated within
hours of the lead agency's determination
that  a removal ia appropriate and on-
site removal activities ceas« within 30
days of initiation, need be available for
public inspection only at the central
location.
  (b) Where documents an placed in
the central location but not m the file
located at or near the site, such
documents shall be added to the file
located at or near the site upon request
except for documents included in
paragraph (t)(4) of this Motion,
  (c) The lead agency nay make the
Administrative record file available to
the public in microform.

IMOJ10 Contents of me
  (a) Content*. The administrative
record file for selection of e response
action typically, but not in all cases, wffl
contain the following type* of
documents:
  (1) Documents containing factual
information, data and anaryaia el the
factual information, and date that may
form a basis for the selection of a
response action. Such documents may
include verified sampling data, qualify
control and quality assurance
documentation, chain of custody forma,
site inspection reports, preliminary
assessment and site evaluation reports,
ATSDR health assessments, documents
supporting the lead agency's
determination of famnhM
substantial endangerment public health
evaluations, and technical and
engineering evaluations. In addition, for
remedial actions, such documents may
include approved workplans for the
remedial investigation/feasibility study,
state documentation of applicable or
relevant and appropriate requirements.
and the RI/FS:
  (2) Guidance documents, technical
literature, and site-specific policy
memoranda that may form a basis for
the selection of the response action.
Such documents may include guidance
on conducting remedial investigations
and feasibility studies, guidance on
determining applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements, guidance on
risk/exposure assessments, engineering
handbooks, articles from technical
journals, memoranda on the application
of a specific regulation to a site, and
memoranda on off-site disposal
capacity,
  (3) Documents received, published, or
made available to the public under
I 300.813 for remedial actions, or
I 300.620 for removal actions. Such
documents may include notice of
availability of the administrative record
file, community relations plan, proposed
plan for remedial action, notices of
public comment periods, public
comments and information received by
the lead agency,  and responses to
significant comments;
  (4) Decision documents. Such
documents may include action
memoranda and  records of decision;
  (5) Enforcement orders. Such
documents may include administrative
orders and consent decrees; and
  (0) An index of the documents
included in the administrative record
file. If documents are customarily
grouped together, aa with sampling data
chain of custody documents, they may
be listed as a group in the index to the
administrative record file.
  (D) Documents not inctwMin thf
adauni»tntiv9 ncordfil*. The lead
agency is not required to include
documents in the administrative record
file which do not form a basis for the
selection of the response action. Such
documents include but are not limited to

and day-to-day notes of staff unless
such documents  contain information
that fonts the basis of selection of the
response action and the information is
not included in any other document in
the administrative record file.
  (c) Pnviltgtd documents. Privileged
documents shall not be included to the
record file except as provided in
paragraph (d) of this section or where
such privilege is  waived. Privileged
documents include bat are not limited to
documents subject to the attorney-client.
attorney work product deliberative
process, or other applicable privilege.
  (d) ConfidfntJd fih. If Information
which forms the  basis for the selection
of a response action is included only !n
a document containing confidential or
privileged information and is not
otherwise available to the public, the
information, to the extent feasible, shall
be summarized in such a way as to
make it disclosable and the summary
shall be placed in the publicly available
portion of the administrative record Tile.
The confidential or privileged document
itself shall be placed in the confidential
portion of the administrative record Tile.
If information, such as confidential
business information, cannot be
summarized in a disclosable manner.
the information shall be placed only  in
the confidential portion of the
administrative record file. All
documents contained in the confidential
portion of the administrative record file
shall be listed in the index to the file.

fMOJIS   Administrative record Me for s
  (a) The administrative record Hie for
the selection of a remedial action shall
be made available for public inspection
at the commencement of the remedial
investigation phase. At such time, the
lead agency shall publish in a major
local newspaper of general circulation a
notice of the availability of the
administrative record file.
  (b) The lead agency shall provide a
public comment period as specified in
1 300.430(013) so that interested persons
may submit comments on the selection
of the remedial action for inclusion in
the administrative record file. The lead
agency is encouraged to consider and
respond M appropriate to significant
comments that were submitted prior to
the public comment period. A written
response to significant comments
submitted daring the public comment
period shall be included in the
administrative record file.
  (c) The lead agency shall comply with
the public participation procedures
required in 1 300.430(0(3) and shall
•hniMMin such compliance in the
administrative record.
  (d) Documents generated or received
after the record of decision is signed
shall be added to the administrative
record file only as provided in f 30042
I
recant Me for i
  (a) If. based on the site evaluation.
leed agency determines that a removi
action is appropriate and that a planr
period of et least six months exists
before on-site removal activities mus
initiated:
  (1) The administrative record file s
be made available for public inspect
when the engineering tvaluation/co
                                                 102
-------
             Federal  Register /  Vol. 55.  No. 46  /  Thursday.  March  8. 1990  /  Rales and  A
                                                                                                              836 i
 analysis (EE/CA) is made available for
 public comment. At such time, the lead
 agency shall publish in a major local
 newspaper of general circulation a
 notice of the availability of tht
 administrative record file.
   (2) The lead agency shall provide a
 public comment period as specified ;n
 5 300.415 so that interested persons may
 submit comments on the selection of the
 removal action for inclusion in the
 administrative record Tile. The lead
 agency is encouraged to consider and
 respond as appropnate. to significant
 comments that were submitted prior to
 the public comment period. A written
 response to significant comments
 submitted during the public comment
 period shall be included in the
 administrative record file.
  (3) The lead agency shall comply with
 the public participation procedures of
 S 300.41S(m) and shall document
 compliance with } 300.415(m)(3)(i)
 through (iii) in the administrative record
 file.
  (4) Document! generated or received
 after the decision document is signed
 shall be added to the administrative  .
 record file only as provided in { 300.625.
  (b) For all removal actions not
 included in paragraph (a) of this section:
  (1) Documents included in the
 administrative recorc file shall be made
 available for public inspection no later
 than 60 days after initiation of on-site
 removal activity. At such time, the lead
 agency shall publish in a major local
 newspaper of general circulation  a
 notice of availability of the
 administrative record Hie.
  (2) The lead agency shall as
 appropriate, provide a public comment
 period of not lest than 30 day* beginning
 at the time the administrative record file
 is made available to the public. The lead
 agency is encouraged to consider and
 respond as appropriate, to significant
 comments that were submitted prior to
 the public comment period. A written
 response to significant comoMBts
 submitted during the public «<•••«••»*
 period shall be included in dkt
 administrative record file.
  (3) Documents generated or received
after the decision document is signed
shall be added to the administrative
record file only as provided in | 300625.

fMOJ2S Recordrequtremenuafter»e
dectton document to signed.
  (a) The lead agency may add
 documents to the administrative record
 file after the decision document
 selecting the response action has been
 signed if:
  (1) The documents concern a portion
 of a response action decision that the
decision document does not address or
reserves to be decided at a later date: or
  (2) An explanation of significant
differences required by $ 300.435(c). or
an amended decision document is
issued, in which case, the explanation of
significant differences or amended
decision document and all documents
that form the basis for the decision  to
modify the response action shall be
added to the administrative record file.
  (b) The lead agency may hold
additional public comment periods or
extend the time for the submission of
public comment after a decision
document has been signed on any issues
concerning selection of the response
action. Such comment shall be limited to
the issues for which the lead agency has
requested additional comment. All
additional comments submitted during
such comment periods that are
responsive to the request, and any
response to these comments, along with
documents supporting the request and
any final decision with respect to the
issue, shall be placed in the
administrative record file.
  (c) The lead agency is required to
consider comments submitted by
interested persons after the dose of the
public comment period only to the
extent that the comments contain
significant information not contained
elsewhere in the administrative record
file which could not have been
submitted during the public comment
period and which substantially support
the need to significantly alter the
response action. Ail such comment* and
any responses thereto shall be placed in
the administrative record file.

Subpart J—Us* of OtspcrMnts and
Other Crwrrtfcais


  (a) Section 311(c)(2)(C) of the dean
Water Act requires that EPA prepare a
schedule of dlapenants and other
chemicals, if any. that may be used in
carrying oat the NCP. This subpert
makes previsions for such a schedule.
  (b) This subpart applies to the
navigable waters of the United States
and adjoining shorelines, the waters of
the contiguous zone, and the high seas
beyond the contiguous zone in
connection with activities under the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
activities under the Deepwater Port Act
of 1874. or activities that may affect
natural resources belonging to.
appertaining to. or under the exclusive
management authority of the United
States, including resources under the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act of 1978.

                 103
  (c| This subpart applies to the use of
any chemical agents or other additives
as defined in subpart A of this par; that.
may be used to remove or control oil
discharges.
$300.90$  NCP Product
  (a) Oil Discharges. (1) EPA shall
maintain a schedule of dispersants and
other chemical or biological products
that may be authorized for use on oil
discharges in accordance with the
procedures set forth in § 300.910. This
schedule, called the NCP Product
Schedule, may be obtained from the
Emergency Response Division [OS-210].
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Washington. DC 20460. The telephone
number is 1-202-382-2190.
  (2) Products may be added to the NCP
Product Schedule by the process
specified in | 300.920.
  (b) Hazardous Substance Releases
(Reserved).

f 300410  Automation of use.
  (a) The OSC with the concurrence of
the EPA representative to the RRT and.
as appropriate, the concurrence of the
RRT representatives from the states
with jurisdiction over the navigable
waters threatened by the release or
discharge, and in consultation with the
DOC and DO1 natural resource trustees.
when practicable, may authorize the use
of dispersants. surface collecting agents.
biological additives, or miscellaneous oil
spill control agents on the oil discharge.
provided that the dispersants. surface
collecting agents, biological additives, or
miscellaneous oil spill control agents are
listed on the NCP Product Schedule. .
  (b) The OSC with the concurrence of
the EPA representative to the RRT and
as appropriate, the concurrence of the
RRT representatives from the states
with jurisdiction over the navigable
waters threatened by the release or
discharge, and in consultation with the
DOC and DOI natural resource trustees.
when practicable, may authorize the use
of burning agents on a case-by-case
basis.
  (c) The OSC may authorize the use of
any dispersant surface collecting sgent.
other chemical agent burning agent
biological additive, or miscellaneous oil
spill control agent including products
not listed on the NCP Product Schedule.
without obtaining the concurrence of the
EPA representative- to the RRT. the RRT
representatives from the states with
jurisdiction over the navigable waters
threatened by the release or discharge.
when, in the judgment of the OSC the
use of the product is necessary to
prevent or substantially reduce a hazard
to human Ufa.  The OSC is to inform the
-------
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                    WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                                   OFFICE OF
                                           SOLO WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:  Final Guidance on Preparing Waste-in Lists and Volumetric
          Rankings  for Release  to Potentially Responsible Parties
          (PRPs) Under CERCLA ("Waste-in" Guidance)
FROM:     Bruce M. Diamond,  Director.
          Office of Waste  Programs Enforcement

TO:       Director, Waste  Management Division,
               Regions  I,  IV,  V,  and VII
          Director, Emergency  and Remedial Response Division,
               Region II
          Director, Hazardous  Waste Management Division,
               Regions  III,  VI, VIII,  and IX
          Director, Hazardous  Waste Division,
               Region X

     This  memorandum  transmits  to you  our  "Final Guidance  on
Preparing Waste-in Lists  and  Volumetric Rankings  for  Release  to
Potentially  Responsible Parties  (PRPs)  Under CERCLA," which has
been referred to as the "waste-in" guidance.

     If EPA invokes special notice procedures under CERCLA section
122(e)(l),  the  Agency  must  provide  PRPs with   the  names  and
addresses of all PRPs, the volumes and types of substances sent to
the site by each PRP, and the volumes of all substances present at
the site.  To the extent such information is available, it must be
released with the  special  notice  letter.

     This document provides guidance on the  compilation and release
of waste-in lists  and volumetric  rankings to help you comply with
the information release requirements of CERCLA section 122(e) and
the  information  release and exchange policies outlined  in  OSWER
Directives 9835.12 and  9834.10.

     Based on Regional  input,  we  made several  significant changes
to the guidance relating to information release with RI/FS special
notice, commonly contributed volumes, and  the status  of  "mom and
pop" gas station waste  oil generators on waste-in lists.   I  thank
you for your assistance.

Attachment

cc:  Superfund Branch Chiefs,  Regions I - X
     "Waste-in" Guidance Contacts,  Regions  I - X
                                                       Primed on Rtcycled Paper
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
               GUIDANCE ON PREPARING WASTE-IN LISTS

               AND VOLUMETRIC RANKINGS FOR RELEASE

      TO  POTENTIALLY  RESPONSIBLE PARTIES  (PRPs)  UNDER CERCLA
                              FINAL
                        February 20, 1991
This  guidance  and  any  internal  procedures  adopted  for  its
implementation are intended solely as guidance for employees of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Such guidance and procedures
do not constitute  rulemaking by  the  Agency and may not be relied
upon to  create a  right or  benefit, substantive  or procedural,
enforceable at  law or  in equity, by any  person.   The Agency may
take  action at variance with  this guidance  and  its  internal
implementing procedures.
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
               GUIDANCE ON PREPARING WASTE-IN LISTS
               AND VOLUMETRIC RANKINGS FOR RELEASE
      TO POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTIES  (PRPs) UNDER CERCLA
I.   INTRODUCTION
     	                           4

     This document provides guidance on the compilation and
release of waste-in lists and volumetric rankings."  A waste-in
list gives the volume and nature of substances contributed by
each PRP identified at a facility.  A volumetric ranking is a
ranking by volume of the hazardous substances at a facility.

     If EPA invokes special notice procedures under CERCLA
section 122(e)(l), the Agency must provide PRPs with waste-in
lists, volumetric rankings and a list of PRP names and addresses
"to the extent that such information is available."   This
information facilitates the information exchange process with
PRPs that can expedite a settlement agreement.  Where available,
waste-in information is sent to PRPs before formal negotiations
begin.  For more information on the Agency's policy on releasing
information to PRPs at CERCLA sites, see Releasing Information to
Potentially Responsible Parties at CERCLA Sites. OSWER, March 1,
1990, OSWER Directive 9835.12, and references cited there.
II.  BACKGROUND

     Experience has demonstrated that waste-in lists and
volumetric rankings are a valuable tool in bringing about
settlements at Superfund sites.  When presented with an estimate
of the nature and volume of hazardous substances contributed to a
site, PRPs are more able to coalesce into committees and
determine allocations among themselves, and often are more
willing to participate in settlement negotiations with EPA.
While not all sites are logical candidates for waste-in lists or
volumetric rankings, production of waste-in lists and rankings is
generally beneficial, whenever practicable.

     In the Management Review of Superfund (June, 1989) the
Administrator called for guidance to "ensure effective
information collection, information exchange, and enforcement of
information requests to encourage Potentially Responsible Party
(PRP) participation in the settlement process."  The
recommendation emphasized the importance of a consistent approach
when releasing information to PRPs about the identity and
relative contributions of PRPs and the type and quantity of
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
wastes at a site, the latter of which is referred to in this
guidance as "waste-in information."

     Because waste-in lists have proven a valuable tool in
initiating PRP negotiations and bringing about settlements, the
Agency is providing guidance to improve the process of
information gathering, waste-in compilation, and information
release to PRPs.  Production of waste-in lists will vary widely,
depending upon the classes of PRPs (e.g., owner/operator vs.
multigenerator) and available information.  Where sufficient
information is available, Regions should provide waste-in lists
to PRPs.

     Increasingly, and particularly at large, complex Superfund
sites with multiple contributors, PRPs have been requesting EPA
to furnish them with waste-in information in order to reach a
settlement among themselves and with the Agency.  This represents
a shift from past experience, where PRPs often preferred to
compile waste-in lists themselves.  Whether EPA produces waste-in
information on a site, or chooses to use or adopt waste-in
information developed, at least in part, by PRPs must be a site-
specific determination reflecting the Region's or PRPs'
respective resources, willingness, familiarity with the site and
experience with transactional databases.  Where PRPs compile
waste-in information, Regions must ensure that the information
meets the qualitative standards articulated in this guidance
before releasing it to other PRPs.

     Often, Regions must rely heavily on information provided by
the PRPs through 104(e)  responses in order to compile a waste-in
list or volumetric ranking.  While Regions have broad discretion
in providing PRPs with supporting documentation, waste-in
information — when developed — should be sent to all identified
PRPs at a site, consistent with OSWER Directive 9835.12.
III. DEFINITIONS

     The following "waste-in" terms are defined solely for
purposes of this guidance and are intended to assist Regions in
its implementation:

     Waste-in Information - Information on the type and quantity
     of hazardous substances at a facility.  Waste-in information
     includes waste-in lists and volumetric rankings.
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
     Waste-in List - A listing of the volume and nature of
     substances contributed by each PRP identified at a facility.
     A waste-in list satisfies the information-release
     requirements of CERCLA section 122(e)(1)(B).

     Volumetric Ranking - A ranking of the hazardous substances
     at a facility in descending volumetric order.  A volumetric
     ranking satisfies the information-release requirements of
     CERCLA section 122(e)(1)(C).

     Volumetric Ranking of PRPs - A ranking of PRPs on the waste-
     in list in descending order of the total volume of hazardous
     substances that they contributed to a facility.  PRP
     volumetric contribution is usually expressed as a percentage
     of the total volume of hazardous substances at the facility.
     These rankings are sometimes referred to as "generator
     rankings."

     Non-Binding Allocation of Responsibility (NEAR) - A non-
     binding preliminary allocation of responsibility prepared
     pursuant to CERCLA section 122(e)(3)  which allocates
     percentages of the total cost of response among potentially
     responsible parties at a facility.

     Information Release - Distribution of waste-in and other
     site information to the PRPs identified at a facility in
     order to facilitate settlement between PRPs and the Agency.
IV.  WASTE-IN LIST DEVELOPMENT AND INFORMATION RELEASE PROCESS

     Waste-in list development and information release can be
viewed as a five-part process.  Part one is the PRP search.  PRP
search activities focus on the development of evidence for 106
and 107 actions and on waste-in information for waste-in lists
and volumetric rankings.  Part two is waste-in information
assessment, conversion, and compilation.  This is the process
where waste-in information is converted into waste-in lists and
volumetric rankings.  Parts three, four, and five concern the
dynamics of information release and exchange.

     A)   PRP Search

     PRP search procedures include developing evidence for 106
and 107 actions as well as developing waste-in information for
waste-in lists and volumetric rankings  (PRP Search Supplemental
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
Guidance for Sites in the Superfund Remedial Program. OWPE, June,
1989, OSWER Directive No. 9834.3-2a).  The supplemental guidance
describes a two-phased  process for conducting PRP searches and
outlines the format and content for remedial PRP search reports.
Although the following sections refer to remedial PRP searches,
the waste-in information development process described in this
guidance applies to both remedial and removal searches.

          1)   Baseline PRP Search

     Phase one of a PRP search is called the baseline phase.  Its
focus is primarily on establishing owner/operator liability and
identifying generators and transporters associated with the site.
Baseline-phase activities usually include collecting records from
federal, state, and local government agencies; interviewing
current and past government officials; conducting a title search;
and issuing section 104(e) information request letters to site
owners and operators.  Typically, owner/operator transactional
records will be the only waste-in information that is developed
during the baseline phase.  Although these may not provide a
complete waste-in picture, they will certainly provide a
significant number of leads that can be pursued during the
follow-up PRP search.

          2)   Follow-up PRP Search

     The second phase of a PRP search is called the follow-up
phase.  Its focus is on establishing generator and transporter
liability and developing waste-in information for waste-Tin lists
and volumetric rankings.   Activities for the follow-up phase can
vary considerably from site-to-site depending on site complexity,
the number of generators and transporters associated with the
site, and the difficulties encountered with waste-in information
development.  Follow-up PRP search activities usually include
issuing section 104(e) information request letters to generators
and transporters, interviewing PRPs and current and past PRP
employees, and conducting specialized tasks,  as needed, which are
described in the PRP Search Manual. OWPE, November,  1987,  OSWER
Directive No. 9834.6.

     In addition to the development of evidence for 106 and 107
actions, activities conducted during the follow-up PRP search
should focus on waste-in information for waste-in lists and
volumetric rankings.   Often, the.person who can provide
information on a PRP's liability can provide information on the
wastes that were sent to the site.
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
          3)   Waste-in Lists and PRP Search Planning

     Regions should plan an information release strategy and
schedule when they are doing PRP search planning.  The plan
should include a schedule for waste-in list preparation,
revision, and release.  Important milestones for scheduling
include assessment of waste-in information, when to issue general
notice letters, a cut-off date for refining waste-in lists, and
whether to send out lists before or with special notice letters.
Where special notice is not invoked but Regions choose to produce
waste-in lists, a schedule detailing list compilation, revision,
and release is equally important to ensure that the information
gets to PRPs in a timely manner.

     B)   Assessment, Conversion, and Compilation of Waste-in
          Information

          1)   Assessment

     At some point during the follow-up PRP search, the PRP
search team (i.e., the work assignment manager or RPM, civil
investigator, program management, and ORC attorney) should assess
the quality and completeness of the waste-in information and
determine whether waste-in lists and volumetric rankings will be
developed.  The statute gives EPA considerable discretion to
decide whether to do a list or ranking.  Whether the records at a
site constitute sufficient evidence to produce waste-in lists and
volumetric rankings will be a highly site-specific determination
by each Region.

     Regions should develop an approach for assessing waste-in
information that is internally consistent and based on a common
set of considerations.  Attachment 1 is provided to assist
Regions in assessing waste-in information.  When special notice
procedures are invoked, Regions should prepare waste-in lists and
rankings for release to PRPs as provided in section 122(e)(l) of
CERCLA.  In general, Regions should prepare waste-in lists and
volumetric rankings whenever practicable, especially where it
would facilitate settlement.

          2)   Conversion

     Waste-in information should be converted to a common unit of
measurement.  In general, most sites will be receiving hazardous
substances in drums or tankers, making gallons the preferable
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
unit in which to express volume.  However, some sites such as
landfills may have large amounts of solid waste, trash, and other
hazardous substances coming in by weight, in which case pounds or
tons may be more appropriate.  Where transactional records are
divided among liquid volumes and weights, Regions should convert
all volumes to a single standard using the equation 1 gallon =
8.33 pounds, unless more specific density information is
provided.  Attachment 2 is a list of standard conversion factors
that can be used to convert volumes and weights to a ce--~r> unit
of measurement.

          3)   Compilation

               a)   Making Assumptions About Waste-in Inforaac_;n

     In order to compile waste-in lists and volumetric rankings,
Regional staff may have to interpret ambiguous data and make
assumptions regarding waste-in information.  When making
assumptions about waste-in information, Regions should generally
follow three broad rules:

     o    Assumptions should be defensible. Regions should use
          established conversion standards and base assumptions
          on patterns established in the data in order to avoid
          charges of being arbitrary or capricious.

     o    State assumptions openly.  When interpreting illegible
          numbers on a manifest, or assuming a disposal
          destination from an unclear hauling ticket,  it is
          preferable to let PRPs know where EPA made assumptions
          and to identify where ambiguity still exists.  The lists
          are thus more credible and PRPs have the opportunity to
          make their own corrections.  Assumptions should be
          reviewed by Regional counsel to ensure that they do not
          jeopardize a cost recovery case or other enforcement
          action.

     o    Be consistent.  PRPs involved at more than one site
          within a single Region will be aware of any
          discrepancies in the kinds of assumptions made for
          waste-in lists at these sites, and disputes over
          inconsistent assumptions only slow down the settlement
          process.  Regions should ensure that everyone compiling
          waste-in information is using the same Region-wide set
          of assumptions and compilation methodology.   Some
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
          inconsistencies may be unavoidable, however, where
          facts in separate cases differ significantly.

Based on Regional experience in preparing waste-in lists and
volumetric rankings, a list of generally accepted assumptions for
waste-in lists and volumetric rankings has been compiled in
Attachment 3.

     In many cases, Regions will have to make additional site-
specific assumptions about waste-in information to improve the
comprehensiveness of waste-in information and the willingness of
PRPs to negotiate.  However, Regions should bear in mind that
assumptions that are not easily supported may have the effect of
slowing down or thwarting the formation of a PRP negotiating
group while PRPs dispute EPA's numbers.

               b)   Who to Include on Waste-in Lists

     Pursuant to CERCLA section 107(a), PRPs include generators
of a hazardous substance, transporters of a hazardous substance,
and owners or operators of sites where hazardous substances were
treated or disposed of.  In general, generators are always
included in a waste-in list where evidence indicates they
contributed hazardous substances to a Superfund site.

     Transporters should be included on waste-in lists when the
transporter - and not the generator - determined where the
hazardous substances were to be taken for treatment or disposal.
EPA interprets CERCLA sections 107(a)(4), 101(20)(B), and
101(20)(C) to exempt transporters from notice as PRPs where they
did not select the site or facility to which hazardous substances
were delivered (Policy for Enforcement Actions Against
Transporters Under CERCLA. OSWER, December 23, 1985, OSWER
Directive No. 9829.0).  The policy states that while all
transporters should be sent 104(e) information request letters,
only those transporters who appear to have selected the site for
hazardous substance disposal should be sent notice letters and
waste-in information.

     While owner/operators may be PRPs and consequently may be
jointly and severally liable under CERCLA section 107, in most
cases they are not included on waste-in lists.  Owner/operators
should be included on waste-in lists, however, where there is
evidence to suggest they also acted as a transporter or generated
waste at the site.
-------
                                          OSWER Directive  9835.16
     C)   Information Release with General Notice

     To provide PRPs ample time to organize and develop a
reasonable offer to conduct or finance a response action, Regions
should issue a general notice letter  (GNL) prior to issuing a
special notice letter (SNL) under section 122(e) for an RI/FS or
RD/RA.  General notice letters should be sent to all persons
where there is sufficient evidence to make a preliminary
determination of potential liability under section 107.  For more
information on general and special notice letters, see Interim
Guidance on Notice Letters. Negotiations, and Information
Exchange. OSWER, October, 1987, OSWER Directive 9834.10.

     In most cases, Regions should not expect to release waste-in
lists and rankings to PRPs with general notice letters issued
before an RI/FS.  This is due to the fact that follow-up PRP
search activities are being conducted and complete waste-in
information has not yet been developed.  General notice letters,
however, may include the names and addresses of PRPs to the
extent this information is available.

     D)   Refining and Revising Waste-in Lists and Volumetric
          Rankings

     If waste-in lists and volumetric rankings are released
before issuance of special notice letters, Regions should revise
and update this information prior to its release with special
notice letters to ensure that the information provided to the
PRPs is based on currently available data.  The following
guidelines pertain to list and ranking revisions prior to
issuance of special notice letters,  or prior to information
release where no special notice letter is sent for RI/FS or RD/RA
work:

     o    Regions should not spend an unreasonable amount of time
          on waste allocation.  Waste-in lists and volumetric
          rankings are intended to provide PRPs with contribution
          information, but do not constitute EPA's final position
          on PRP contributions or allocations.

     o    Regions should not spend unreasonable amounts of time
          on waste characterization.   Where records give detailed
          information on chemical compounds and hazardous
          constituents,  Regions should provide as much detail as
          available in the waste-in list to help convince PRPs of
          the strength of EPA's evidence and encourage them to

                                8
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
          begin negotiating.  However, where more detailed waste
          information is not easily available, general waste
          characterization should be sufficient at this stage in
          the process.

     o    General terms, such as "waste oil" or "solvent", can be
          descriptive enough for the purposes of demonstrating
          PRP contribution to a site, and for volumetric
          rankings.  The primary distinction in the information
          release process is whether or not a substance is
          hazardous, and, therefore, should be counted in the
          ranking and waste-in attribution.

The Regions should bear in mind that the time available for
waste-in information revisions will be restricted by the target
special notice date and PRP requests for waste-in information
under section 122(e)(l).

     E)   Information Release with RI/FS or RD/RA Special Notice

     Special notice letters are used to initiate a formal period
of negotiations with PRPs and to invoke the statutory moratorium
on section 104 and 106 actions.  Special notice can be given
prior to the conduct of the RI/FS or RD/RA, in which case PRPs
are encouraged to conduct or finance these response activities.
Along with the special notice letter, the Agency releases to the
PRPs the names and addresses of all PRPs, the volumes and types
of substances sent to the site by each PRP, and the volumes of
all substances present at the site.  To the extent such,
information is available, it must be released with the special
notice letter.

     If waste-in information is not available for RI/FS special
notice, the information-release requirements of section 122(e)
can be met by releasing the names and addresses of PRPs and other
information in our possession relating to the volume and nature
of substances.  RD/RA special notice must be accompanied by
waste-in information, to the extent it is available.  (Interim
Guidance on Notice Letters. Negotiations, and Information
Exchange. OSWER, October, 1987, OSWER Directive 9834.10, and
Releasing Information to Potentially Responsible Parties at
CERCLA Sites. OSWER, March, 1990, OSWER Directive 9835.12).
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
V.   GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR RELEASING WASTE-IN INFORMATION

     The following are general guidelines on what to consider
when releasing waste-in information to PRPs:

1.   Always include a disclaimer when releasing waste-in
     information to PRPs.  Waste-in information is not equivalent
     to a nonbinding preliminary allocation of responsibility
     (NBAR) or cost allocation; emphasize this in the disclaimer.
     Similarly, it is important to emphasize the preliminary (and
     hence incomplete) nature of waste-in information.  Regions
     should include the following disclaimer when releasing
     waste-in information to PRPs:

     "This information does not constitute a non-binding
     preliminary allocation of responsibility under CERCLA
     section 122(e)(3).  This information should not be construed
     as an allocation of responsibility or liability by EPA.
     This waste-in list and volumetric ranking is provided solely
     for your information.  This list is preliminary and subject
     to revisions based upon new information as, and if, it
     becomes available."

2.   When releasing waste-in information to PRPs. Regions should
     openly state assumptions made when compiling the lists and
     rankings.  Where records are less than complete, assumptions
     typically must be made about volumes and weights, conversion
     factors, waste characterization and shipment and disposal
     destinations.  By stating assumptions openly, and by
     identifying uncertainties in a list or ranking, PRPs will
     have better information upon which to judge the accuracy of
     waste-in information, to revise lists themselves, and to
     base allocation among themselves — all of which can
     facilitate settlement.  Assumptions should not, however,
     jeopardize a cost recovery case or other enforcement
     actions.

          Because the lists are not binding and do not serve as
     preliminary allocations of responsibility or liability, PRPs
     should not be able to successfully challenge waste-in
     information, although many will undoubtedly dispute EPA's
     rankings and volumetric attributions.  Additionally. EPA
     should always state that the burden is on the PRPs to
     demonstrate where EPA's assumptions are incorrect.
                                10
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
3.    There are some limits on information release.  Any
     information, such as supporting documentation, that Regions
     release to PRPs beyond what is statutorily required under
     section 122(e)(l) is at the discretion of the Region.  When
     available, however, waste-in information that falls outside
     the scope of 122(e)(l) may be subject to certain
     limitations.  For example, information that is identified in
     a section 104(e)  information request response as
     Confidential Business Information (CBI) should not be
     released with special notice unless permitted by 40 CFR Part
     2 and/or required by section 104(e)(7).  Information release
     may also be governed by FOIA, which includes a number of
     exemptions and privileges such as the attorney-client
     privilege.  (See OSWER Directive 9835.12).

4.    Where hundreds of PRPs are identified at a Superfund site.
     Regions may prefer to distribute waste-in lists and rankings
     to PRPs through an information meeting.  Experience has
     shown that meetings are useful for bringing large numbers of
     PRPs together where they can meet and form a bargaining
     committee.  Presenting waste-in information to PRPs at a
     meeting also may encourage reluctant PRPs to begin
     negotiations.

5.    Correcting inaccuracies and producing new lists.   In
     general, if PRPs are willing to make corrections and
     incorporate new information themselves, and settlement will
     not be delayed by this work,  it is preferable to let PRPs
     rework the lists themselves.   However,  where substantial new
     numbers of PRPs or new site-related waste information comes
     to light through information request responses or other
     channels,  Regions may wish to revise waste-in lists
     themselves where such revision would expedite settlement and
     limit internal debate among negotiating PRPs.   In general,
     Regions should only issue a revised list once between the
     RI/FS and RD/RA stages.

6.    Regions should avoid playing the role of referee in PRP
     disputes over waste-in information and respective
     allocations.  PRPs will often ask EPA to moderate disputes
     over contributions and allocations,  preferring EPA as a
     "neutral" voice over that of the PRP steering committee or
     rival PRP factions.  In many cases pressure will be put on
     EPA to step in and moderate disputes between large and small
     PRPs, or where small PRPs are trying to assert de minimis
     status.

                                11
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
          Due to resource implications, Regions should not become
     overly concerned with internal PRP allocation issues, even
     when smaller contributors may claim coercion from larger
     contributors.  Regions might consider involvement in
     allocation questions, however, when they appear to
     jeopardize the likelihood of settlement.  Small contributors
     may be eligible for a de minimis settlement.  (Guidance on
     Landowner Liability Under Section 107 fa)m of CERCLA. De
     Minimis Settlements Under Section 122fcnmfBl of CERCLA.
     and Settlements with Prospective Purchasers of Contaminated
     Property.  OSWER, June 6, 1989, OSWER Directive 9835.9).

7.   EPA should inform PRP groups that viable PRPs will have to
     absorb orphan shares.  Many waste-in lists are characterized
     by unattributable volumes and hazardous substances.  Where
     lists and rankings contain these "orphan" shares, Regions
     should encourage PRP negotiating groups to absorb these
     shares and apportion the shares as part of the internal
     allocation process.


VI.  FORMAT AND CONTENT OF WASTE-IN INFORMATION

     For the sake of illustration, waste-in lists and volumetric
rankings are discussed in this section as separate documents,
even though the information could very easily be combined into a
single document that also includes the names and addresses of
PRPs.

     A)   Waste-in Lists [CERCLA section 122(e)(1)(B)]

     Waste-in lists contain the volume and nature of substances
contributed by each PRP identified at a facility.  At a minimum,
the lists should contain columns for the names and addresses of
PRPs as well as the types and volumes of hazardous substances.
Although EPA is under no statutory obligation to release
information beyond this in a waste-in list,  Regions should
release supplemental waste-in list information unless there are
countervailing legal, policy, or strategy reasons not to do so.
(See OSWER Directive 9835.12).  Supplemental waste-in information
can include, but is not limited to, the dates of shipments, the
names of transporters, the types of evidence from which waste-in
lists were derived, and comments to clarify assumptions,
ambiguities, and double-counts.  Attachment 4 is a waste-in list
that contains supplemental waste-in information.

                                12
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
     In some situations, it may be advantageous to prepare
separate waste-in lists for generators and transporters.  Where
most PRPs at a site are generators, waste-in lists should be
organized by generator, with a column provided for listing the
transporter of each shipment in order to link the generator to
the site.  Where there are multiple transporter PRPs, it may be
advisable to prepare separate waste-in lists for generators and
transporters.  [See discussion under paragraph D) below].

     B)   Volumetric Rankings of Substances at a Facility [CERCLA
          section 122(e)(l)(C)]

     CERCLA also requires that special notice recipients be
provided with a volumetric ranking of hazardous substances at the
facility, to the extent such information is available.  This
ranking lists hazardous substances and their respective volumes
in descending volumetric order.  It can be developed from waste-
in list information.

     C)   Volumetric Rankings of PRPs

     The statute does not require the release of "volumetric PRP
rankings", sometimes referred to as generator rankings, with
special notice; however, several Regions release information to
PRPs in this format because they feel it provides a logical
starting point for negotiations.  Volumetric rankings of PRPs
rank the PRPs on the waste-in list in descending order of volume
and express their contributions as a percentage of the total
volume of hazardous substances at the facility.  Regions should
bear in mind and convey to the PRPs that waste-in information
provided with special notice is intended as an estimate of
individual PRP contributions, and is neither definitive nor
binding in any way.  It is intended solely as information to
facilitate settlement agreements between PRPs and the Agency.

     Where there is insufficient information to convert volumes
into a single unit of measurement, Regions may provide a
volumetric ranking using raw data from records in unconverted
form.  PRPs can then choose to clarify ambiguities concerning
volumes or substances themselves in order to produce a better
list upon which to negotiate.
                                13
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
     D)   Accounting for Commonly Contributed Volumes

     Where hazardous substances are contributed both by the
generator and the transporter who designated the treatment or
disposal site, Regions should attribute the volumes to both
parties when compiling waste-in information.  EPA should not try
to apportion responsibility for a hazardous substance shipment
generated by one PRP and transported by another among the two
PRPs in a volumetric ranking or waste-in list, but should let the
PRPs themselves allocate,their respective responsibilities for
commonly contributed volumes.

     Commonly contributed volumes can be accounted for on
volumetric rankings of PRPs by attributing the volume of each
shipment to both generator and transporter.  This is the
preferred approach when separate generator and transporter
volumetric rankings have been prepared; however, it creates a
situation where some shipments can be counted twice, which may
cause PRPs to question the validity of methodologies used to
compile waste-in information unless double-counted shipments are
clearly identified and their impact on total volumes is
explained.  Accordingly, when volumetric rankings of PRPs contain
double-counted shipment volumes, Regions should provide PRPs with
an explanation of why shipments have been double-counted and
clearly identify, by means of a comment field or other notation,
which shipment volumes have been attributed to both generators
and transporters.

     Another way of accounting for commonly contributed.volumes
is to identify the transporter linked to each shipment on a
generator waste-in list and indicate whether the transporter
designated the treatment or disposal facility.  This is the
preferred approach when separate generator and transporter
volumetric rankings cannot be prepared due to insufficient
information or information management system limitations.
Further, it is recommended that waste-in lists be prepared in
this way even when commonly contributed volumes are accounted for
on volumetric rankings of PRPs to ensure that these volumes are
consistently identified on all waste-in information that EPA
releases to PRPs.
VII. SITE-SPECIFIC VOLUMETRIC INFORMATION GUIDANCE

     This section offers guidance specific to the following types
of Superfund sites:  municipal landfills, removal actions,  sites

                                14
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
with little or no documentation, solvent recycling/ transshipment
sites and, briefly, lead-battery sites and mining sites.

     A)   Municipal Landfills

     Landfills are notoriously difficult sites for producing
waste-in information, both because of poor record-keeping
practices and because of the mixture of different wastes disposed
there.  Many Regions do not even attempt compiling waste-in
information for landfills.  However, because of the importance of
waste-in information in bringing about negotiations, Regions
should at least assess whether waste-in lists and volumetric
rankings could be developed, particularly where records exist and
where interviews can provide good supplemental information on
truck routes, generators and shipment volumes.

     In many instances, most of the wastes in a municipal
landfill are not hazardous substances and do not belong in a
waste-in list or volumetric ranking.  The Interim Policy on
CERCLA Settlements Involving Municipalities and Municipal Wastes
(OSWER Directive 9834.13) provides that generators and
transporters of municipal solid waste or sewage sludge generally
will not be notified as PRPs unless evidence shows that the waste
or sludge contains a hazardous substance, and that hazardous
substance came from a commercial, industrial or institutional
process or activity.  Generators and transporters of commercial
trash, however, generally are notified as PRPs unless they can
demonstrate that none of the hazardous substances contained in
the trash are derived from a commercial, institutional or
industrial process or activity, and that the amount and toxicity
of the hazardous substances do not exceed the amount normally
found in common household trash.  From this policy, Regions
generally should not include municipal solid wastes in waste-in
lists or volumetric rankings except where evidence suggests that
the waste or sludge contains a hazardous substance, and that
hazardous substance came from a commercial, industrial or
institutional process or activity.  Further, unless PRPs can
demonstrate otherwise, Regions generally should include trash
from commercial, institutional and industrial entities in waste-
in calculations.

     All generators, transporters and owner/operators involved at
a municipal landfill site usually should still be sent Section
104(e) request letters to provide Regions with as much
information and documentation on the site as possible.  Regions
                                15
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
should only send notice letters, waste-in lists, and volumetric
rankings to those identified as PRPs.

     Regions should also compare information they have gathered
at a landfill site with information on PRPs and hazardous
substances at other Superfund sites in the area.  In some
instances, the same transporters who shipped hazardous substances
to nearby facilities or Superfund sites may have also shipped
substances to the municipal landfill.  Interviews and civil
investigations of nearby industries and commercial entities may
provide information that can link hazardous substance shipments
from these entities to a municipal landfill, particularly where
transactional records show that hazardous substance shipments did
not reach a designated RCRA facility for disposal.

     B)   Removals

     Most removal sites are not good candidates for compiling
waste-in information since they require clean-up action sooner
than the time it would take to produce waste-in lists.  Non-time-
critical removal sites, with a planning process of six months or
more, are the only sites for which waste-in lists and rankings
should be considered.  Where adequate transaction documentation
exists and settlement seems possible, Regions should prepare
waste-in lists and rankings as described in section 122(e)(l)  for
release to PRPs.

     As with remedial sites, Regions should begin preparing a
schedule for waste-in list and ranking compilation,  revision and
release during the early stages of the PRP search.  Because
removals proceed at an accelerated rate, it is important to start
waste-in preparation early, spend less time fine-tuning lists and
rankings, and release the information to PRPs as early as
possible.  Regions should notify PRPs of their potential
liability orally, followed by a confirming written notice, or
through a general notice letter.  Information on the identity of
other PRPs at a site, and evidence on individual contribution,
should be sent out with this written notice.  Where a special
notice letter is sent, waste-in lists and rankings should be sent
out with or before the special notice letter.  Where no special
notice letter is sent, Regions can either send waste-in lists and
rankings through a separate mailing between the general notice
and the beginning of the removal action, or distribute the
information at a meeting of PRPs during that time.  Where a
removal site involves large numbers of PRPs, Regions may prefer
to distribute waste-in information at a central meeting as they

                                16
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
might for a remedial site.  For more information on notifying
PRPs at a removal site, see Chapter V of the Superfund Removal
Procedures Manual, and Interim Guidance on Notice Letters.
Negotiations, and Information Exchange. OSWER, October, 1987,
OSWER Directive 9834.10.

     Regions should initiate information gathering and document
retrieval very early, and move quickly to retrieve site documents
that might otherwise be destroyed during removal activities.
Regions should make special arrangements to gather evidence at
sites where documents are contaminated and cannot be collected in
a normal information-gathering operation.  These special
arrangements could include photographing contaminated documents.

     C)   Sites with no Records or Poor Records

     Where preliminary baseline records collection during the PRP
search fails to yield good site or transactional records, Regions
should not abandon the idea of compiling volumetric rankings or
waste-in lists.  A number of Regions have succeeded in locating
missing records or new PRPs, and in supplementing weak
documentation by persisting in their information gathering
through alternate sources, or using civil investigators and eye-
witness accounts.  In general, where site records are inadequate
to produce waste-in lists and rankings but where such information
would enhance the possibility of reaching a settlement, Regions
should consider using other avenues to gather information on a
site.  These include:

     o    Civil Investigators, who can be used for tracking down
          withheld records, identifying new PRPs who may have
          documentation, interviewing witnesses whose accounts
          can lead to new information and new PRPs,  and
          clarifying incomplete documentation;

     o    Supplemental 104(e)  Information Request Letters, which
          can be used to request further information, clarify
          existing information, or be sent to new PRPs discovered
          through prior 104(e) letter responses (see Guidance on
          Use and Enforcement of CERCLA Information Requests and
          Administrative Subpoenas. OECM, August,  1988, OSWER
          Directive 9834.4-A).  Supplemental request letters can
          be sent out at any time during the remedial or removal
          process, but are most useful for the purpose of
          compiling waste-in information if sent before the
          special notice letter and moratorium; and,

                                17
-------
                                          OSWER Directive  9835.16
     o    Administrative Subpoenas, as provided in CERCLA section
          122(e)(3)(B), which are available to Regions "to
          collect information necessary or appropriate" for
          performing a preliminary non-binding allocation of
          responsibility or "for otherwise implementing this
          section," including preparation of waste-in information
          under section 122(e)(l).  Administrative subpoenas,
          whose use is encouraged in the Administrator's
          Management Review of Superfund. June, 1989, provide
          Regions with an additional enforcement tool for
          deposing witnesses and collecting "reports, papers,
          documents, answers to questions, and other information
          that the President deems necessary."  (Guidance on Use
          and Enforcement of CERCLA Information Requests and
          Administrative Subpoenas. OECM, August, 1988, OSWER
          Directive 9834.4-A).

     D)   Solvent Recycling and other Transshipment Sites

     Solvent recycling and other transshipment sites are often
characterized by operations that make it difficult to compile
accurate waste-in information, even though good transactional
records may exist.  Transshipment activities usually involve the
temporary storage of hazardous substances prior to off-site
shipment for treatment or disposal.  Recycling activities
typically involve the recovery and sale of "pure" products from
spent solvents and waste oils.

     Regions may encounter difficulties when compiling waste-in
list volumes for solvent recycling and transshipment sites.
Unless records indicate clearly what percentage of incoming
substances were shipped off-site as pure product or as
temporarily stored substances, Regions should include all
incoming wastes in both volumetric rankings and waste-in lists,
and put the burden on PRPs to demonstrate that hazardous
substances left the facility and in what quantities.

     Where all hazardous substances were brought to a central
site and then shipped to subsequent disposal sites,  Regions may
find it easier to create a main transactional database for the
central site and subcategories for each disposal site within -he
main database, or create separate lists for each site.   Again,
the purpose of waste-in information is not to produce an exact
allocation of substances contributed by each PRP,  but an
                                18
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
approximate ranking by volume that PRPs can use to determine an
appropriate allocation among themselves.

     Hauler records will often provide good information on which
hazardous substances were brought to a facility; they are not
always as clear, however, on what substances left that facility,
particularly when different transporters are involved.  Hauler
records used in conjunction with a site log provide a good means
to chart the inflow and outflow of hazardous substances from a
site.  Where transporter records indicate hazardous substances
were shipped to a certain site, Regions should assume the
documentation is correct unless PRPs can demonstrate otherwise.
Similarly, where generators' shipments were known to have been
sent to different sites, Regions should assume on a preliminary
basis that the destination recorded on the transporter ticket is
correct.

     Hazardous waste recycling facilities operated after 1980
should have RCRA manifest documentation, although manifests are
not always reliable and not always kept for three years (or
longer) as required under RCRA 40 CFR section 263.20.  Recycling
sites operated prior to 1950 are less likely to have good site or
transactional records.  Where a recycling facility has been in
operation before and after 1980, recent RCRA manifests may
provide clues to pre-1980 site operations, including end
products, incoming shipment volumes and substances,  and disposal
patterns on site.

     E)   Lead Battery Sites

     Sites run as lead-recycling operations where automotive
batteries are cracked open to capture reusable lead electrodes
often produce hazardous substance contamination through
improperly disposed sulfuric acid.   These sites, along with
transformer recycling sites contaminated by PCBs, are notoriously
difficult for producing waste-in information.   Documentation is
often poor to nonexistent, and volumes are extremely difficult to
determine.  Regions face difficult questions about how far up the
waste-stream to go after PRPs.  Where site records and
transactional records are reliable and available, Regions should
try to produce waste-in information.   In most cases,  Regions
probably will not have such documentation.
                                19
-------
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
     F)   Mining Sites

     Abandoned mining sites or sites contaminated by mining
overburden also frequently may pose difficulties for producing
waste-in information.  This is due to the fact that documentation
is rarely available; PRPs are often no longer in business,
insolvent or untraceable; calculating volumes can be extremely
difficult due to.the large volume of wastes; and under RCRA [40
CFR 261.4(b)(3)],  certain mining wastes are exempt as RCRA
hazardous wastes and therefore may not be CERCLA hazardous
substances  (unless some other basis exists for defining the
material as a hazardous substance under CERCLA section 101(14)).
Municipalities may keep records on land ownership or mining
leases, and occasionally record annual tonnage and profit figures
for individual mines.  Even these records, however, may require
major assumptions on the amounts of waste produced per ton of
mined product.  In general, unless documentation is good and
viable PRPs can be found, Regions should not attempt compiling
waste-in information for mining sites.
                                20
-------
                     WASTE-IN LIST
                DECISION GUIDELINE
                                                     Attachment
        fere hazardous substances
       brought in to the site (as
        jposed to generated on-site)?
Don't do lists
              NO
                             YES
Was there more than one
generator or transporter?
                                             YES
Consider expanding sources:

o Supplemental 104(e) Letters
o PRP/Private party interviews
o Administrative subpoenas
      NO
               Are there good transactional
               records or site records
               available?
                                                            YES
             Are alternative sources sufficient
             to produce waste-in list?
                                           YES
                             Do Lists Now
                            NO
     Release what information is available; limited
     rankings or waste-in information, names and
     addresses of PRPs only.
     or,
     Accept that sufficient information isn't available and
     stop.
-------
                                                     Attachment 2
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
                 STANDARD CONVERSION FACTORS FOR
              WASTE-IN  LISTS  AND VOLUMETRIC RANKINGS1
                    I truckload =74 drums
                    1 drum = 55 gallons
                    1 barrel = 55 gallons
                    1 gallon = 8.33 pounds
                    1 pail = 5 gallons
                    1 ton - 2,000 pounds
                    1 metric ton = 2,204 pounds
                    1 ton = 250 gallons
                    1 liter. = 0.264 gallons
                    1 cubic foot = 7.482 gallons
                    1 cubic yard = 202.018 gallons
                    1 box = 1 gallon
                    1 tank truck = 4,500 gallons
                    1 pound = 1 pint = 0.125 gallons
     In addition, asbestos ceiling tile is assumed to be 1 inch
thick.  One square foot is therefore assumed to = 0.6233 gallons.
     Where volumes indicated on transactional records are
unclear, such as "pallet," "wheelbarrow," "box car," Regions
should try to corroborate assumptions or estimates of volumes
through interviews, alternate sources of records, or site-log
information.  Where there is no corroborating evidence, Regions
should include their best estimate of the volume and indicate it
is an estimate.
     1TanK trucks and drums  come  in several different  sizes  and
Regions should check waste-in documents  carefully  to ensure that
the correct conversion factor is used.
-------
                                                     Attachment 3
                                          OSWER Directive 9835.16
                 GENERALLY ACCEPTED WASTE-IN LIST
                AND VOLUMETRIC RANKING ASSUMPTIONS
       The following is a partial list of reasonable assumptions
which may be appropriate when preparing waste-in information:


     o    A 55-qallon drum or- any other container of hazardous
          substances for disposal was full when it was shipped
          and when it was disposed.  Unless a shipping or
          disposal record unambiguously indicates otherwise,
          either because the recorded volume is less than that of
          the full container volume, or the price is less than
          that normally charged for a full container, the burden
          of proof is on the PRP to show that a container was
          less than completely full.


     o    Anything labeled a "corrosive* without additional
          explanation or identification is hazardous and should
          be included in volumetric and waste-in lists.
          "Corrosives" are regulated as hazardous waste under 40
          CFR 261.22 of RCRA.   The burden is on the PRP to
          demonstrate why a substance labeled "corrosive" did not
          meet the definition in CERCLA of a hazardous substance.
          The destination listed on a manifest or other
          transactional record is correct. The burden is on the
          PRP to show that a shipment of hazardous substances
          recorded as sent to one destination was not in fact
          sent there.  Regions may want to scrutinize
          transshipment site records particularly closely, since
          hazardous substances are shipped to, as well as from,
          these sites.  Where records clearly indicate that
          hazardous substances were removed from a site, Regions
          can factor this information into waste-in lists and
          volumetric rankings.  Where records are less clear,
          Region should include all wastes as sent to the site
          and put the burden of proof on PRPs to demonstrate that
          hazardous substances left the site.  Where Regions make
          assumptions about destinations, they may want to state
          them openly in appropriate circumstances.
-------
                                           Attachment 3
                                OSWER Directive 9835.16

Commercial. industrial or institutional trash is
hazardous and should be included in waste-in lists and
volumetric rankings unless PRPs can demonstrate
otherwise.  The Interim CERCLA Municipal Settlement
Policy (OSWER Dir. 9834.13)  provides that generators
and transporters of trash from a commercial, industrial
or institutional entity generally will be notified as
PRPs unless they can demonstrate that none of the
hazardous substances contained in the trash are derived
from commercial, industrial or institutional processes
or activities, and where the amount and toxicity of
those hazardous substances are not above the level
commonly found in household trash.  Where EPA is
compiling the lists, it is better to include industrial
trash as hazardous, and let PRPs make necessary
revisions afterwards.  On the other hand, the Interim
CERCLA Municipal Settlement Policy indicates that
generators and transporters of household trash
generally will not be notified as PRPs.
Anything labeled "solvent" is hazardous, and should be
included in waste-in and volumetric lists. In many
cases, labels on drums will describe hazardous
substances generi-cally and not include information on
specific compounds.  Regions should make reasonable
efforts to find other evidence to corroborate the
hazardous nature of a substance, where possible.
Where hazardous and nonhazardous substances are mixed
together, the mixture is considered hazardous and
should be included in its entirety on waste-in and
volumetric lists.   Solid wastes, when mixed with one
or more hazardous wastes, are considered a RCRA
hazardous waste as described in 40 CFR sections
261.3(a)(2)(iii) and (iv), except where the waste was a
characteristic waste and no longer exhibits any of the
characteristics of a hazardous waste or where it has
been excluded as a hazardous waste in 40 CFR 261.3.
Under CERCLA, where there is mixing of hazardous and
nonhazardous substances during transport or disposal,
the combination would be subject to CERCLA if it still
contains a hazardous substance.
-------
PIIC NO.  I7X,
                                                                                                                                                                                                Ditr:
                                                                                           i  isi u  UDSIE
                                                                                              tlrtCMfc SIM MIORDS
                                                                                             CUMMIHl Oil 2RVICES
RECORD INVOICE IRflNS.
MMER NUNMR MIE UASIE OESCRIPIIHN
it ftfXUt ROROWr SERVICES, INC.
i (RPCUPE ROMMI
187% llJJt 12/01/62 UASIE Oil
IB«3 II Mi I2/03/83 OIL, WRIER. AND SLUDGE

IB/% k<55» 01/18/83 BSU

18797 l<"»'.j iX?/ 15/83 BSU


IB718 L-tll i)]/m/a) UflSI[ Oil
i«/n k'eit u3/.>/s3 URSIE on
I8»»i \M1 iM/Ot/aj UASIE Oil


I8»)l L-8U IX/I5/8J UASIE Oil
iaa<)i UK* iM/aB/aj UASIE oil
19803 IAW i«/Ot/8J BSU


ia»H I^IU i)5/lfc/BJ URSIE Oil
IBM IH.W i»/27/U BSU


IBfH lAtt i*/03/83 UftSIf1 Oil
i
lBAOt> l>iJ1 <%/u7/(J URSIE Oil.
I8»J) IJu«« i)fc/<-3/a3 aiDGE
URSIE URIER

I8(V^ lilt.8 'i7/ilfc/83 WSIE dli
IBIV) .'.!", i'7'iS(Hj Ufh1! lilt iM) Mil Iff


inn
UmHII'r <,l/l IMII NIIKN! in


fS'.KMi l.im Git RECflPI
iu*». IMW I.IKI Gfli REl'MPI
CliCK SIIMi
lS>«i.o<>ii LIU. i>H .. MCIII'I
CKU Sll*H
£.>... »»»> i.m, ii»«. ma IPI
INVOICE
CHECK SlUBt
45ii .IM» l.<>inftl RTCEIPI
»iw.i>W) I.'«)C» RECEIPI
UMl.DiiX) 1. Do CM. RECEIPI
INVOICE
riccK siuee
4A.Oii<*> l.ijuGft RECEIPI
V».I>V» l.iHj Gft RECEIPI
^XM.IXXJI) l.imGA UCEIPI
INVOICE
CHECK SlUbb
«u).i)i«>i l.OiiuflL MCEII'I
JOD.mkXi |..« Gfll DEO IPI
INVOICE
CIICK SlUMl
7i«M>XVi \.i»W RUE IPI

«Vi.i»mi l.ixinn KClll'l
>,.„„. 1 •». (A RJCIICI
IHMIlLi
hdCK 'jlubh
!,>•. 	 • Crt RHIII-I
.-,..* ,.M,. | ... |4< Mil II '
IV/"li 1
MI • r ' 'iihli
                                                                                                                              IfidNSIWltD
 SHU'     RECEIVE
 PAIE     Ofllf    CIMMNIS
                                                                                                                                       nu stuvius

                                                                                                                             COHNCM:IRI on SEHVICIS


                                                                                                                             aMMKllHL Oil SERVICES


                                                                                                                             COMERTIHl OIL SERVICES



                                                                                                                             COWRCIRi Oil SERVICES

                                                                                                                             LOfCRLIA OK SERVIUS

                                                                                                                             cotCRcim nu SERVICES



                                                                                                                             OMCRCIft (III SERViaS

                                                                                                                             cowcRrim an SERVICES

                                                                                                                             OMCRCIRl Oil SERVICES


                                                                                                                             CMCKIRI Oil SERVICES

                                                                                                                             CtMCRCin Oil SERVICES


                                                                                                                             CIMCRCIfll Ull SERVICES

                                                                                                                             iimftcin on SIHVICTS

                                                                                                                             CUWdtllM'Oll SERVICES


                                                                                                                             covroi in on  SERVICES

                                                                                                                             .imw 11 on  stRvin j
 "1/16/81 ul'18/82
 I'j/UWHJ
(H/it/8J
K/lt/83 •


OS/i7/8J (6/J7/8J



'*/03/83 (ii/iij/a3
It/jJ/flj (K./^j/B3
>
n
fT
D)
0


fD
-------
            UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                       WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                            OSWER // 9832.18
                          MAR 2 I 1991
                                                      OFFICE OF
                                            SOUP WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT




FROM:
Written Demand for Recovery of  Costs  Incurred Under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response,  Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA)
TO:
Bruce Diamond, Director
Office of Waste Programs^Snforcement.

William A. White        \L^^  UJ A^eWf/fai
Acting Associate Enforcement Counsel
  for Superfund

Regional Administrators, Regions  I  - X
     To   maximize   cost   recovery   under   the   Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation,  and Liability Act (CERCLA),
Regions  are responsible  for documenting  costs,   issuing  written
demands1  for those  costs,  and  pursuing  parties  that  do  not
reimburse the Environmental  Protection Agency (EPA).
     1/  The term "written demand" is used throughout this document
in reference to CERCLA § 107(a).  A "demand letter" is the form of
written demand which  is issued  where response  costs have  been
incurred under CERCLA but are  not  contained in a  special  notice
letter.  Thus, demand letters as referenced in the "Superfund Cost
Recovery Strategy"  (July 29,  1988,  OSWER Directive No.  9832.13),
or any other  CERCLA policy or guidance, are  considered  a type of
written demand.  Although EPA is not required by  CERCLA  to issue
written demands to  accrue  interest, use of  these  written demands,
in  accordance with this guidance,  will help  maximize  interest
recovery.  See U.S.  v. Bell Petroleum  Services.  Inc..  MO-88-CA-05
(W.D. Texas March 8, 1990) where prior written demand was held not
to be strictly required for recovery of prejudgment interest.  The
court stated that the  language  in CERCLA 107(a)  regarding written
demands  essentially  is   a  guideline  for  courts  to  follow  for
determining the date  from  which prejudgment interest begins  to
accrue.
                                                         Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
                                             OSWER # 9832.18

     The primary purposes of written demands  are:  (1) to formalize
the demand for payment of incurred costs plus future expenditures,
(2) to infora potential  defendants  of  the dollar amount of those
costs, and  (3)  to  establish that  interest  begins to  accrue on
expenditures.   This  guidance is  intended  to  help assure that
written demand  is made  early  to maximize recovery  of interest,
without creating an unduly burdensome process.

     This, guidance updates  those portions of the directive "Cost
Recovery Actions  under the  Comprehensive  Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability  Act of 1980 (CERCLA)" (August 26, 1983,
OSWER Directive  No.  9832.1), which  address  use  and  issuance of
written  demand.     Additional  information  about cost  recovery
activities may be found  in  the  documents listed  in Appendix C,
Index of Existing Relevant Guidances.

Attachment

cc:  Directors, Waste Management Division,
          Regions I, IV,  V,  and VII
     Directors, Hazardous Waste Management Division,
          Regions III, VI, VIII,  and IX
     Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division,
          Region II
     Director, Hazardous Waste Division,
          Region X
     Regional Counsel, Regions I-X
-------
                                             OSWER # 9832.18

          Written Demand for Recovery of Costs  Incurred
         Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response
            .Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)

I.   Authority to Incur Interest

II.  Types of Written Demand
     A.  Special Notice Letters Containing Demand for Payment
     B.  Demand Letters
          1. Following Removal or Remedial Activities
          2. Oversight Reimbursement
          3. Partial Settlement
          4. Prior to Referral to DOJ

III. Content of Written Demand

IV.  Roles and Responsibilities of Regions
     A.  Pre-Demand Activities
     B.  Documentation/Interest Calculation
          1.  Documentation
          2.  Interest
     C.  Preparing and Issuing the Demand
     D.  Use of Recipient List
     E.  States and State-lead Sites
     F.  Payment
     G.  Negotiation and Settlement
     H.  Procedure in Event of No Response or No Settlement

V.   Disclaimer and Further Information

Appendix A  Model Demand Letters
Appendix B  Sample Summary of Costs
Appendix C  Index of Existing Relevant Guidance
-------
                                             OSWER t  9832.18

I.  AUTHORITY TO INCUR INTEREST

     CERCLA § 107(a) provides, among other things, that specified
classes of responsible parties  are liable for all costs  incurred
by the United States government in response to  a  release or threat
of release of hazardous substances.  In addition, PRPs are liable
for damages  for  injury  to,  destruction of  or  loss  of  natural
resources, including the costs of assessing such injury,  loss, or
destruction,  and  for costs  of any  health assessment  or health
effects study carried out under CERCLA S 104(i).

     The  Superfund Amendments  and Reauthorization  Act  of  1986
(SARA) extends responsible party liability under  CERCLA to include
interest on recoverable costs.  CERCLA § 107(a) states:

     [t]he amounts  recoverable in  an  action  under  this  section
     shall include  interest  on  the amounts recoverable... .   Such
     interest shall accrue from the later of (i)  the date payment
     of a specified amount  is demanded in writing, or  (ii)  the date
     of the expenditure  concerned.   The rate  of interest on the
     outstanding unpaid balance of  the amounts recoverable under
     this  section  shall  be  the  same  rate as is specified  for
     interest on investments of the Hazardous  Substance Superfund
     established under subchapter A of  chapter  98, of Title 26 [of
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as modified in 1986].

EPA3 intends to use this authority and demand interest  on all costs
as appropriate.

II. TYPES OF WRITTEN DEMAND

A. Special Notice Letter Containing Demand for Payment

     Special notice letters  should contain  written demand  for
reimbursement of past and future costs.   For example, if a special
notice letter includes a  demand for payment, interest may  begin to
     2/  For pre-SARA expenditures, various  courts  have held that
EPA may collect preju--fment  interest  on recoverable costs.   U.S.
v. Northernaire Platin? Co.  685  F. Supp.  1410 (W.D. Mich. 1988),
aff'd.  889  F.2d   1497  (6th  Cir. 1989);   U.S.  v.  Northeastern
Pharmaceutical & Chemical Co.. 579 F.  Supp.  823  (W.D.  Mo. 1984),
aff'd in part, rev'd in part,  and remanded.  810 F.2d 726 (8th Cir.
1986), cert, denied. 108 S.  Ct. 146 (1987).

     3/   This document refers to  "EPA" rather than "lead-agency."
As discussed in part IV E  of  this guidance,  EPA is responsible for
issuing a written demand in situations where a state has the lead
for enforcement actions.
-------
                                             OSWER # 9832.18

accrue from the date of the special notice letter for those costs
already expended.  The  special notice is not the only or  first time
EPA may issue a demand  for costs incurred.  Therefore, interest may
begin accruing at an earlier date than  the issuance of the Special
notice with  demand.   Interest  begins to accrue  for   subsequent
expenditures upon  the  date  of expenditure.4   Once written demand
has been  sent with the  special notice  letter,  record  of demand
should be entered into  CERCLIS and Regional tracking  systems as an
issued demand.   If a reasonable estimate of  past costs cannot be
developed  prior  to issuance  of the special  notice  letter,  that
information may be provided at a later point.5
     General notice letters, also, may contain written  demand for
reimbursement  of past  and future costs if sufficient evidence of
PRP liability  is available at the time of issuance and  past costs
are known.

B.   Demand Letters

     Demand letters should be issued:

          o    following completion of individual response actions.
               If  response  actions are taken  at operable units,
               demand letters should be issued following  completion
               of actions at each unit,

          o    for oversight costs,
     4/   However,  see the discussion in footnote 1 concerning U.S.
v. Bell Petroleum Products. Inc.

     '/   As stated in the  October  19,  1987,  "Interim Guidance on
Notice  Letters,  Negotiations,  and Information Exchange"  (OSWER
Directive number 9834.10):

     The [special notice]  letter should include a demand that PRPs
     reimburse  EPA for  the  costs the  Agency has  incurred  in
     conducting  response  activities  at  the  site  pursuant  to
     §107(a).  The letter should identify the action EPA undertook
     and the cost of conducting the action.  The letter should also
     indicate  that the Agency  anticipates expending additional
     funds on activities covered by this notice and other specified
     future activities.  Finally, the letter should demand payment
     of interest for past and future response costs incurred by EPA
     pursuant to $107(a).

The model notice letters in OSWER directive number 9834.10 contain
a sample paragraph for demand in special notice letters, which is
included in Appendix A of this guidance.
-------
                                             OSWER # 9832.18

          o    to non-settlers when less than 100% of EPA's costs
               are, or will be, obtained under a settlement, and

          o    prior  to referral  to the  Department  of Justice
               (DOJ).

Depending on  how a PRP responds  to  a demand  letter,   including
whether it settles and how it complies with settlement terms, a PRP
may receive more than one demand letter for the same costs.

     To promote cost  recovery  and  maximize recovery of  interest,
EPA will transmit written demand as early as practicable  following
expenditures associated with a  response  action.  The  letter should
also indicate  that the Agency anticipates that additional  funds may
be  expended  on   activities  covered  by  this  notice  and  other
specified future actions.

     1. Following Removal or Remedial Activities:  Demand letters
should be issued after:

     o    completion of a removal action,

     o    completion of a Remedial  Investigation/Feasibility Study
          (RI/FS) (i.e., at issuance  of  a  ROD)  for  a site or,  if
          applicable,  an individual operable unit, and

     o    an award of a contract for a Remedial Action (RA) for a
          site or,  if  applicable,  an individual operable unit.
          (The demand  should include Remedial Design  (RD)  costs and
          estimated RA costs).

     To expedite cost  recovery,  demand letters should be  issued as
soon as  possible following an  appropriate response action,  but
generally no  later than twelve months  after completion of  each
distinct phase of a response action.  For example, for a non-CERCLA
104(b)  removal,  when  removal activities  are done;   for  a funded
RI/FS,  at the time the Region issues a § 122(a)  letter related to
RD/RA  negotiations.   (If the  Region does  not  issue a  S 122 (a)
letter, but  issues a special  notice  letter, the special notice
should contain  a demand for  RI/FS costs  and  a  separate demand
letter is not necessary.)  In accordance with the "Superfund Cost
Recovery Strategy"  (OSWER Directive No.  9832.13), written demand
for RD and RA  should be made  no later  than  the  initiation  of
physical on-site construction of the remedial action.

     Regions should periodically review disbursements of  costs and
estimates of future costs and issue a subsequent demand for payment
of costs to PRPs when these costs or estimates  have  significantly
accumulated or  increased.   Demand letters  should always reflect
EPA's  most  current  costs.   An  updated  accounting of costs  in  a
-------
                                             OSWER # 9832.18

demand letter will  help  avoid possible delays in negotiations by
minimizing lag  time while PRPs negotiate allocation issues among
themselves.

     2.  Oversight  Reimbursement;    EPA  seeks  reimbursement  of
oversight costs pursuant to either administrative consent orders,
judicial consent  decrees,  or  demand letters issued independently
of a  consent order or decree  (for  example,  for oversight  of a
unilateral administrative order).  Typical administrative consent
orders provide that EPA will seek reimbursement from PRPs by a bill
or accounting,  rather  than a  "demand letter,"  at the end of each
one-year  period  throughout   the  period  of  the order for  all
oversight costs incurred during that year.

     Where there  is a settlement embodied in  a  consent order or
decree, bills should specifically  reference  the  provision in the
order or decree  which provides for oversight reimbursement, and the
section which specifies the schedule for reimbursement.  Bills for
reimbursement  of  negotiated  oversight  costs should   include  a
statement that:

          "[t]he cost of EPA's oversight of the PRP's cleanup for
          the period of [insert time period] at the [insert name]
          facility,  including related administrative expenses, is
          $       .  In accordance with Tinsert consent decree or
          administrative order on consent provision number] demand
          is hereby made upon  [insert  name]  for payment of  the
          above stated sum."

     If  PRPs are  operating  under  an administrative  order  or
judicial decree which  does not  include  a  provision  for oversight
reimbursement,  a  demand letter should  normally  be  issued  which
demands reimbursement for costs related to oversight.  An oversight
reimbursement demand is covered by the reservation of rights clause
in an order or decree.

     Demand  letters for  oversight reimbursement, where  the  work
was performed outside the framework of a settlement for such costs,
should include a statement that:

          "[t]he cost of EPA's oversight of the PRP's cleanup for
          the period of [insert time period]  at the [insert  name]
          facility,  including related administrative expenses, is
          $	.   In  accordance with CERCLA  $ 107,  demand is
          hereby made upon [insert name] for payment of the  above
          stated sum."

     Oversight costs should be accurately recorded as an oversight
activity in CERCLIS to ensure proper tracking and  follow-up of this
cost recovery category.
-------
                                             OSWER #9832.18


     3. Partial Settlement;  If a settlement  has been reached with
fewer than 100% of  the  PRPs  for only a portion of costs incurred
by EPA, a demand letter may be issued to the remaining non-settling
responsible parties, if sufficient liability  evidence is available
to the  Region.   This may be  followed by appropriate enforcement
action  seeking  recovery of remaining costs.  The  demand letter
should  request  reimbursement of  the total  cost  of remediation,
oversight, and operation and maintenance,  less the amount settled,
plus interest.  If appropriate, the demand letter should indicate
that a  portion of  the response  and/or costs have  already  been
settled and note the settled amount.   For purposes of negotiations
and subsequent litigation with non-settling PRPs, when pursued, the
Region  may  wish  to  attribute  specific costs to  the appropriate
operable unit.  If there are no  remaining PRPs, the remaining PRPs
are not financially viable, or the evidence of their liability is
too weak,  the Region should  close-out costs in  accordance  with
OSWER Directive No. 9832.11.

     4.  Prior to Referral to DOJ;  Demand letters should be issued
to all defendants prior to  referral of a cost recovery case to the
Department of Justice  (DOJ).   In limited instances,  however,  EPA
may choose to issue the demand letter concurrently with referring
the cost recovery case to DOJ.   This  latter approach may be taken,
for example, where the statute of limitations deadline is rapidly
approaching  and  when  negotiations  have broken  off  and  it  is
apparent to the Region that the PRP  will  not reimburse EPA after
follow-up  contact  has  been  attempted.     Regions  should  take
particular care that demand  letters  issued  prior to  CERCLA  §107
cost recovery referral should reflect EPA's most current costs.

III. CONTENT OF WRITTEN DEMAND

     Many of the following items (except numbers 7-10) are included
in  a  special  notice  letter  regardless  of whether  the  letter
includes a written demand.   However, when a special notice letter
includes a written demand, numbers  7-10 will need  to be included
in the  special  notice letter.   In addition  to the items  on  the
following  list,  Regions  may  also  choose  to  include S  104(e)
information request  letters  with  the special  notice  and  demand
letters.  Model written demands are provided in Appendix A.  At  a
minimum, demand letters should include:

1.   The  name,  location  and   spill  identification  number,   if
     appropriate,  of the site.

2.   Reference to  EPA's authority to administer CERCLA and the fund
     established under CERCLA  (or reference to authority to recover
     costs where the response activities  for which  reimbursement
     is sought occurred prior to CERCLA).

                                8
-------
                                             OSWER # 9832.18
3.   Statement describing the  release  or threatened release of a
     hazardous  substance   from   a   facility  which  causes  the
     incurrence of response costs.

4.   A specification  of  the dates and types of response actions
     undertaken by EPA at the site.

5.   A  statement  that  EPA believes  that  the  recipient   is  a
    •responsible party as defined  in CERCLA § 107(a)  and liable for
     the sum set forth in the demand letter.

6.   Reference to  any notice  given  to the  recipient  prior  to or
     during the  response action  which allowed the  recipient an
     opportunity  to  undertake  the  work  or  pay  the expense  of
     response.

7.   The total  cost  of  the  response  action.   When the  Region
     expects that future  costs will be  incurred, the demand letter
     should  clearly  state  that  in   addition  to  sums  already
     expended, EPA plans  to  expend additional sums on the site for
     which  the  responsible party is  liable.   Costs  previously
     demanded, but not paid, should again be  demanded.  Previously
     demanded,  unpaid  costs  should  also  reflect  appropriate
     interest which   has  accrued.   [This   is  also included  in
     special notice demand].

8.   A demand for  payment  which  includes the  Superfund  lock box
     address.   [This is also included in special notice demand.]

9.   A statement that,  pursuant to CERCLA § 107(a), "interest shall
     accrue from the later of (i)  the date payment of a specified
     amount is demanded in writing, or  (ii)  the date of the actual
     expenditure  concerned.    The  rate   of  interest   on  the
     outstanding unpaid balance of the amounts recoverable  under
     [CERCLA §  107]  shall  be the same rate as is  specified for
     interest on investments of the  Hazardous Substance Superfund
     established under subchapter  A of  chapter 98, Title 26 of the
     Internal Revenue  Code  of  1954," [as modified in  1986].   The
     demand letter should specify the current interest rate.  Also,
     the demand should note that EPA is not required by CERCLA to
     issue a written demand for recovery of prejudgment interest.
     The written demand serves as a  guideline for determining the
     date from which prejudgement  interest begins to accrue.  [This
     is also included in special notice demand.]

10.  A statement that  specifies in the event the  recipient  files
     for protection in the Bankruptcy Court,  EPA reserves its right
     to file a Proof of Claim or Application for Reimbursement of
-------
                                             OSWER f 9832.18

     Administrative Expenses against the bankrupt's estate.   [This
     is also included in special notice demand.]

11.  A general statement giving  the names of other PRPs to which
     the written demand is sent.  If a PRP steering committee has
     been  formed  by  previously  identified  PRPs,  the  steering
     committee's contact  should be provided.   [This information
     will already be in special notice letters but will be needed
     in demand letters that follow special notice.]

12.  A statement that  the recipient of the  demand letter should
     contact EPA within a specified period (normally thirty days)
     to discuss the recipient's liability.

13.  The name, address, and  telephone  number of a representative
     of EPA whom the recipient should contact.

14.  A warning that if the recipient  fails to contact EPA within
     the specified time,  a  suit may be filed  in the appropriate
     U.S. District Court for recovery of the costs incurred.

15.  For small administrative  cost recovery actions, a  draft of
     EPA's  proposed  consent order  for the  cost  recovery  claim
     should be enclosed with the demand for payment.

IV.  ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF REGIONS

A.   Pre-Demand Activities

     When Regions  are  planning enforcement work at a  site,  full
consideration  should  be  given   to   ensuring  that  activities
supporting  the  cost   recovery  action be  incorporated  in  the
litigation strategy.  This includes consideration  of sufficiency
of  resources,   timing  of  written  demands,  compilation   of
documentation and cost summaries on a periodic basis, etc.  Regions
are expected to incorporate issuance of written demand into CERCLIS
or other case  tracking systems  a  Region uses for cost  recovery
purposes.  For  timing of issuance of demand, Regional Branch Chiefs
should track the sites for which they are responsible.

B.    Documentation/Interest Calculation

     1. Documentation;  EPA  Headquarters,  the Region,  DOJ,  other
federal agencies, and states  each have certain responsibilities in
organizing  cost  documentation  information.    Cost  documentation
responsibilities have  been  delegated  to  the  Regions such  that
Regions now document all costs for sites in their respective areas.
The "Procedures for Documenting Costs for CERCLA  $  107  Actions"
(January 30, 1985,  OSWER Directive No. 9832.4) describes the roles
and responsibilities of each office in preparing cost documentation

                                10
-------
                                             OSWER t 9832.18

for  litigation  (this  guidance  is  being updated).    Roles  and
responsibilities  for developing  demand  letters  are  inter-  and
intra-office and as such need to be coordinated.

     For  most demands,  a  current automated  transaction report
(e.g., Software Package of Unique  Reports  (SPUR) or COMS reports)
will  adequately   document  direct   costs,   including  pre-1986
contractor expenditures.  CDMS reports may also  calculate interest.
As discussed below, amounts in  automated reports should  be checked
for completeness and supplemented by indirect costs, interest, and
other Agency costs.

     The  following  information  should  be  available  prior  to
issuance of a demand:

     o    A current automated transaction report for the site,

     o    An indirect cost calculation, and

     o    An interest calculation (if not in the automated report) .

This information forms the  basis of a good faith cost estimate that
can be used to begin settlement negotiations for costs.  Accuracy
of the estimates should be  verified before good faith negotiations
commence.   The specified  amount  for  written  demand  in  special
notice  letters may  be  based  on  a reasonable  estimate  at  the
Region's discretion.  Estimates  may include  the following items:
intramural  costs,  extramural  costs,  indirect cost  calculation,
historic  and  annual  cost  allocations,  oversight  costs,  and
interest.  The Regional  Financial  Management  Office  may be  of
assistance in answering questions  about billing.

     Demands based on automated  transaction  reports  mu«?t  be made
with recognition that there may be delays  in  billings and payments
which  therefore are  not  posted   in  the system,  and  that  only
expenditures incurred through the  last day of the preceding month
are included.  In addition, costs  incurred by other Agencies such
as DOJ and ATSDR (for health studies)  are  not included.  To ensure
the accuracy of automated transaction reports, OSCs and RPMs should
review the automated transaction report data prior to issuance of
demand.  For viable cases6 where the Region has reason to believe
that the report does not contain all data,  the Region should locate
and  review all  cost recovery  documents.   Thus,  care must  be
exercised  not to  forego  potential  reimbursement by  submitting
incomplete  demands  for  payment.    Demands are the Agency's  best
     61    Viability  of  cases  and factors  for determination  of
viability are discussed in the "Cost Recovery Strategy" (July 29,
1988 OSWER Directive number 9832.13).

                                11
-------
                                             OSWER # 9832.18

approximation  of  costs incurred  by  EPA to  date,  and therefore,
should not be assumed to be the final statement of incurred costs
for reasons explained above.

     If an Administrative Record7  file is available to the public,
the location of the file may be included in the demand.  PRPs may
be  interested in  the  specific  breakout  of costs  that may be
available in the file.  Quick and  easy access to the file may help
expedite negotiations.

     2.   Interest;   The  interest rate  is tied to  52-week U.S.
Treasury MK-Bills (MK-bills) that mature in early September of each
year.  Like the securities from which the interest rate is derived,
interest will be compounded annually.  On October 1 of each year,
outstanding receivables, which include interest accrued during the
previous fiscal year,  will begin accruing interest at the new rate.
For additional  information  about interest  rates and calculating
interest, see:

     o    "Interest Rates for Debts Recoverable Under the Super fund
          Amendments and Reauthorization Act of  1986" (September
          30, 1987, Comptroller Policy Announcement 87-17)  or

     o    Comptroller  Directive  "Financial  Management  of  the
          Superfund Program" (July 25, 1988, Directive No. 2550.D);

or contact your Financial Management Office.

C.  Preparing and Issuing the Demand

     Roles and responsibilities  for developing  demand  letters
involve  full  coordination  among   all  Regional   offices   with
responsibilities for cost recovery, including the Waste Management
Division,  Financial Management Office,  and  Office  of  Regional
Counsel.   Regions  may  develop an internal written agreement to
assure  implementation  of  roles  and responsibilities  for  cost
recovery, including issuance of demands.

     The demand  should be  sent  certified mail,  return  receipt
requested.   The return  receipt should be included with  a  copy of
the demand in the site file.
     71   The Administrative Record is the body  of  documents upon
which the Agency  based  its selection of a response  action.   For
additional  information  about administrative  records,  see  the
"Guidance on Administrative Records for Selecting CERCLA Response
Actions," December 3, 1990, OSWER Directive No.  9833.3A-1.

                               12
-------
                                             OSWER * 9832.18

D.  Use of Recipient List

     Written demand  should be issued to  all  known,  viable PRPs.
When the list of recipients of special notice letters as provided
in  the "Interim  Guidance  on Notice  Letters,   Negotiations  and
Information  Exchange"   (February  23,  1988,  OSWER Directive  No.
9834.10) is up-to-date, the special notice list may be used.  When
not complete, it should be updated.  At sites where special notice
letters are  not sent,  prior to referral  to  DOJ, separate demand
letters should be sent to PRPs.  Before issuing a demand letter to
a PRP who has received only a general notice (without a demand),
the Region should determine whether it has sufficient evidence of
liability to make a demand.

E.  States and State-lead Sites

     EPA will be responsible for issuing written demand at state-
lead sites where Fund money was expended.  Where EPA spends money
at  a  site,  EPA will  pursue cost recovery  for  that money.   EPA
intends to coordinate all cost recovery action with states to avoid
split claims.

F.  Payment

     When payment  is rendered in  response to a written  demand,
remittance should be made payable to the "EPA Hazardous Substance
Super fund"  and  sent  to the  Regional  Superfund  Lock  Box,  in
accordance  with the  EPA  Office  of  the Comptroller  Directive
"Financial Management  of the Superfund Program"  (July  25,  1988,
Directive No. 2550.D).

     Inclusion in a formal legal document  (e.g., an administrative
consent order issued by the Agency or a consent decree entered by
a court) of a requirement for payment  of costs to EPA requires the
establishment  of  an   "Accounts   Receivable"   in   the  Agency's
Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS), pursuant to Office
of  the  Comptroller Directive  No.  2540,   October 24,  1990.   If,
however,  a  payment is  received  on demand,  and no  formal  legal
document  has   been  issued,   an   accounts  receivable  will  be
established upon receipt of payment and entered as received.

G.  Negotiation and Settlement

     When a PRP responds to a written demand by expressing a desire
to negotiate EPA's claim, negotiations pursuant to CERCLA S 122(h)
may be appropriate and settlement discussions should be initiated
and carried out within a limited period of time.  For negotiation
purposes  only,  Regions may wish to develop  a breakout of  costs
incurred  (see Appendix B for an example).  Additional information
on development  of a  negotiation team  and redelegation issues  may

                               13
-------
                                             OSWER 2? 9832.18

be  found on pages  22-25,  33=35,  and 38=41,  in  "Superfund Cost
Recovery Strategy" (July 29,  1988, OSWER Directive No. 9832.13)  and
pages  23=27  in "Cost Recovery Actions  Under CERCLA"  (August  26,
1983, OSWER Directive No. 9832. 1).

Ho  Procedure  in Event of No Response or No  Settlement

     When settlement  negotiations  fail,  Regional management must
decide which sites to refer for judicial action under CERCLA § 107.
The  ""Superfund Cost  Recovery  Strategy"0   (July  29,  1988, OSWER
Directive No. 9832.13) lists the relevant factors  to be considered
in determining whether to refer a case for cost recovery.   If  the
Region decides not to pursue a cost recovery action,  the decision
must be documented in a cost recovery close-out memorandum.8

     If no response  is  received to a demand letter,  a follow-up
phone  call  or  letter  should  be  sent.    If  there  is  still  no
response, a determination  must be made whether the  facts of  the
case justify EPA's taking further steps to pursue the cost recovery
claim.   As  stated  in  the  "Superfund  Cost Recovery  Strategy,"
Regions should generally anticipate developing cases for litigation
for all sites in which total costs of response exceeded two hundred
thousand dollars and negotiations for settlement were unsuccessful.
Sites in which total  costs  of  response  do  not  exceed two hundred
thousand dollars are also candidates for referral consistent with
the  case  selection  criteria.    The  mSuperfund  Cost  Recovery
Strategy" and  the  "Guidance  on  Documenting Decisions not to Take
Cost Recovery Actions" (June 7,  1988, OSWER Directive No. 9832.11)
further describe th© ease selection criteria.

     When reimbursement of  oversight costs  is not made upon demand
or  issuance  of a  bill  (under  a consent  order  or decree) ,  the
enforcement approach is dependent upon the underlying enforcement
document,  if  one  exists.    If  a  consent  decree  pro/ides  for
reimbursement, a demand for stipulated penalties should be made in
accordance with  th© terms  of  the  consent decree„  and  a motion
should be  filed  to  enforce  the decree.   If work was  performed
pursuant to a decree that did not provide for and did not release
defendants from oversight and other  costs (past, for example), the
original action should be amended or a new  action should be filed.
Stipulated! penalties and, if  necessary, a judicial referral should
be pursued  in the case  of  non-payment  for  EPA costs,  including
those for oversight activities, under  an administrative order.
     8/    ""Guidance en  Documenting  Decisions  not  to Tak©  Cost
Recovery Actions/0 (June 1,  1988, OSWER Directive number 9832oll)0
-------
                                             OSWER # 9832.18

V.  DISCLAIMER AND FURTHER INFORMATION

     The policies and procedures established in this document are
intended  solely  for  the  guidance   of  employees  of  the  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.  They are not intended, and cannot
be relied upon, to create any rights,  substantive or procedural,
enforceable by any party  in litigation against the United States.
EPA reserves the right to act at variance with these policies and
procedures and to change  them at any time without public notice.

     For  further  information concerning  this guidance,  please
contact the Guidance and  Evaluation Branch in the Office of Waste
Programs Enforcement at FTS (202) 475-6770.
                                15
-------
                                                OSWER #  9832.18
                              APPENDIX A

                         MODEL DEMAND LETTER
[Date]
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Addressee Name
Addressee Title and Corporation
Address
Address

Re:     [Insert site name and mailing address]

Dear    [Insert name]:

   Pursuant  to  authority contained  in §  104 of  the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation,  and  Liability Act of 1980, as
amended by the Superfund  Amendments  and Reauthorization Act of 1986
("CERCLA"),  42  U.S.C.  S  9604,  [insert "in  cooperation  with" State
agency  if  appropriate] the  United States  Environmental Protection
Agency  ("EPA") determined on  [insert  date/  if available] that there
was  a  release  or  substantial  threat of  a  release of  hazardous
substances (as defined by § 101(14) of CERCLA) from a facility known
as: [insert facility name and address]  ("facility").

   Beginning on  [insert date], EPA undertook response actions pursuant
to §  104  of  CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.  § 9604.  The  response actions taken
include the following:  [Insert brief description including dates of
activities as lettered items below.]

   a.
   b.

   [If notice has not been previously provided, insert the following
two paragraphs.]   Under §  107(a)  of  CERCLA,  42  U.S.C. S  9607(a),
responsible parties may be held liable for all costs incurred by the
Government  (including interest)  in  responding  to  any release  or
threatened release  of hazardous  substances  at the facility.   Such
costs  may  include,  but  are  not  limited  to,  expenditures  for
investigation, planning,  response, enforcement activities,  oversight
of response actions that are  performed by  parties  other than EPA or
its contractors,  and operation and maintenance of monitoring systems.

   Responsible parties under CERCLA include current  and former owners
or operators  of the  facility,  persons who arranged  for  treatment
and/or disposal of any hazardous substances found  at  the facility, and

                                 16
-------
                                                OSWER / 9832.18

persons who accepted hazardous substances for transport and selected
the site or facility to which the hazardous substances were delivered.
EPA has evaluated evidence in connection with its investigation of the
[insert  naae] facility  and  determined that   you,  as  a   [insert
addressee's relationship to the site], are a potentially responsible
party.

   [If notice has been previously provided,  insert all or part of the
following paragraph, consistent with the operative facts].  On  [insert
date] EPA  provided  [insert  either "oral  notice followed  by written
confirmation dated 	"  or  "written  notice"] to  you that
[insert name  of  addressee]  is a  party  who  may  be  liable  for money
expended by  EPA  to  take response  action at the facility.   At that
time,  EPA  also  offered  [insert  name  of  addressee]  and  other
potentially responsible parties  the opportunity to  voluntarily take
the action necessary to abate  any releases  or threats  of  release of
hazardous substances from the facility or to  reimburse EPA for actions
taken.   Because you  did  not  undertake  the necessary  actions,  EPA
expended funds provided under the authority  of CERCLA to clean up the
facility.

   The  cost  to  date  of the  response actions  related  to  the  site
through EPA  funding  is approximately  $  [state  direct  and  indirect
costs as specifically as possible].   This statement of expenditures
is preliminary, and does not limit EPA from providing a revised figure
if additional costs are identified.

   [Note: In a judicial proceeding for cost recovery, the Agency will
be required  to prove  the  actual amounts expended.   It a  previous
demand letter was issued,  or  if a request for payment was included in
the notice letter, costs  previously demanded,  but  not  paid,  should
again be demanded.  These  costs should also reflect interest that has
accrued.]

   In accordance with $ 107(a) of CERCLA, demand is hereby  made for
payment of the above  amount plus any and all  interest recoverable
under S 107 or any other provisions of law.

   EPA anticipates that additional funds may be  expended on the site.
Whether EPA  funds the  entire response action  or simply  incurs costs
by overseeing the parties  conducting the  response activities, you are
potentially liable for the expenditures plus interest.

   Interest on past costs  incurred shall  accrue  from the date of this
demand  for payment or any  earlier  demand,  whichever  is  earlier;
interest  on  future costs shall  accrue  from  date  of  expenditure,
pursuant to CERCLA S 107(a),  42 U.S.C S 9607(a).  Interest rates are
variable.  The rate applicable on any unpaid  amounts  for  any fiscal
year  is the  same as is specified for  interest on investments of the


                                 17
-------
                                                OSWER / 9832.18

Hazardous Substance  Superfund  which is determined by the Department
of the Treasury.  The current annual rate of interest on unpaid costs
is [z.xx%].

   EPA  is not  required by  CERCLA  to issue  a written  demand  for
recovery of prejudgment interest.  However,  the date  a written demand
is made  may  be used by  a  court in  determining the  date  from which
prejudgment interest begins to accrue.

   For your information, we  have enclosed a list of persons who are
receiving  a  letter  seeking  reimbursement  of the  costs  identified
herein.   While your liability  is  joint and  several, you and other
parties may allocate among yourselves the costs to be paid to EPA.

   Remittance  must  be  made  payable  to  the  "U.S.  EPA Hazardous
Substance  Superfund" established  pursuant  to  CERCLA  in Title  26,
Chapter  98  of  the Internal Revenue Code,  and must reference  the
[insert name] facility.  Please send your remittance to:

        EPA - Region 	
        Attn: Superfund Accounting
        P.O.  Box [insert Superfund Lock Box]
        Pittsburgh, PA 15251
        [Mote: for Region 4 and 5 the mailing address is slightly
   different.]

   If you desire to discuss your liability9 with EPA, please contact
[insert  name  and  title]  in  writing,  not  later  than  thirty  (30)
calendar days  after  the date  of  this letter.  [Insert name]  may  be
contacted at [insert phone number].

   In the event that you file for protection in the Bankruptcy Court,
EPA reserves its right to  file a proof  of  Claim  or application  for
Reimbursement  of  Administrative  Expenses  against  the  bankrupt's
estate.

   If you fail to respond to this demand within thirty (30)  calendar
days,  EPA will  conclude that  you have  declined  to reimburse  the
Hazardous Substance  Superfund  for  site expenditures.  Consequently,
EPA may pursue civil litigation against you, pursuant to CERCLA
§§ 106(a) and 107(a), 42 U.S.C. SS 9606(a) and 9607(a).
           For small administrative cost recovery actions, a draft of
   the proposed  settlement document should be enclosed with the demand
   for payment.

                                 18
-------
                                                OSWER # 9832.18

Sincerely,
[insert title]
United States Environmental Protection Agency
                                 19
-------
                                                OSWER # 9832.18


                             Attachment
List of Other Potentially Responsible Parties

1.      Steering Committee Chairman
        Name of the Committee
        Corporation
        Address

2.      Name
        Address

3.      Name
        Address

4.      Name
        Address
                                 20
-------
                                                OSWER # 9832.18

    DEMAND PARAGRAPHS FOR INCLUSION IN SPECIAL NOTICE LETTERS FOR
    REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY  (RI/FS) OR REMEDIAL
                  DESIGN/REMEDIAL ACTION  (RD/RA).*


                         DEMAND FOR PAYMENT

With this  letter,  EPA demands that you reimburse  EPA for its costs
incurred  to date,  and  encourages  you to  voluntarily negotiate  a
[consent order  (not  available for  RD/RA)] [consent decree] in which
you and other PRPs agree to perform the [RI/FS] [RD/RA].

In accordance with CERCLA,  EPA already has undertaken certain actions
and incurred certain costs  in  response to conditions at the site.  The
cost to date of the response  actions related to the site through EPA
funding is  approximately $  [state  direct  and indirect costs to date
as specifically as possible].   In accordance  with § 107(a)  of CERCLA,
demand is hereby made for payment of the above amount  plus  any and all
interest recoverable under  § 107 or under any  other provisions of law.

As  indicated  above,  EPA anticipates  expending  additional funds for
the [RI/FS]  [RD/RA].   Whether EPA  funds  the  entire [RI/FS] [RD/RA],
or  simply  incurs  costs by  overseeing the  parties  conducting  the
response activities, you are potentially  liable for all expenditures
plus interest.

Interest on  past  costs incurred shall accrue from the  date of this
demand  for  payment  or  any  earlier  demand,  whatever is  earlier;
interest  on future  costs  shall  accrue  from  date  of  expenditure,
pursuant to CERCLA § 107(a),  42 U.S.C § 9607(a).  Interest rates are
variable.  The  rate  applicable on  any unpaid amounts for  any fiscal
year is the  same  as  is specified for  interest on  investments of the
Hazardous Substance  Superfund which is  determined  by the  Department
of the Treasury.  The current  annual rate  of  interest on unpaid costs
is  [x.xx%].

EPA is not required by CERCLA to issue a written demand for recovery
of prejudgment  interest.  However,  the date a written demand is made
may be used by a court in determining  the  date from which prejudgment
interest begins to accrue.

In  the  event that you file for protection in  the  Bankruptcy Court,
EPA reserves  its  right to  file a Proof of Claim or  Application for
Reimbursement  of  Administrative   Expenses   against  the  bankrupt's
estate.

Remittance must be made payable to the "U.S.  EPA Hazardous Substance
Superfund" established pursuant to CERCLA in Title 26, Chapter 98 of
                                 21
-------
                                                OSWER I 9832.18

the  Internal  Revenue  Code,  and  must reference  the  [insert  name]
facility.  Please send your remittance to:

        EPA - Region 	
        Attn:  Superfund Accounting
        P.O. Box [insert Superfund Lock Box]
        Pittsburgh, PA 15251
        [Note: for Region 4 and 5 tbe nailing address is slightly
   different.]
*  Excerpted with  modifications  from  "Interim  Guidance on  Notice
Letters, Negotiations,  and Information Exchange," Appendix C (October
17, 1987, OSWER Directive No. 9834.10)
                                 22
-------
                                                OSWER # 9832.18

  DEMAND PARAGRAPHS FOR INCLUSION IN NOTICE OF POTENTIAL LIABILITY
                 AND EPA CONDUCT OF  REMOVAL ACTION.*
                         DEMAND FOR PAYMENT

In accordance with CERCLA,  EPA already has undertaken certain actions
and  incurred  certain costs  in  response to conditions  at  the site.
These  response actions  include [describe  response actions  at  the
site].  The cost to date of the response actions related to the site
through EPA  funding is  approximately $ [state direct  and indirect
costs to date as specifically as possible].  In accordance with
§ 107 (a) of  CERCLA,  demand is hereby made  for  payment  of  the above
amount plus any and all interest recoverable under  § 107 or under any
other provisions of  law.   You are  potentially liable for additional
costs plus interest if EPA conducts additional  activities at the site.
                                                 »
Interest on past  costs incurred shall accrue from the  date  of this
demand  for payment  or  any  earlier  demand,  whatever  is  earlier;
interest  on  future  costs   shall  accrue from  date of  expenditure,
pursuant to CERCLA § 107(a), 42 U.S.C § 9607(a).  Interest rates are
variable.   The rate  applicable  on  any unpaid  amounts  for  any fiscal
year is the same as  is  specified for  interest on  investments of the
Hazardous Substance  Superfund which is determined  by  the  Department
of the Treasury.   The current annual rate of interest on unpaid costs
is [x.xx%].

EPA is not required by CERCLA to issue a written demand for recovery
of prejudgment interest.  However,  the date a written demand is made
may be used by a  court in determining  the date from which prejudgment
interest begins to accrue.

In the event  that  you file for protection  in the  Bankruptcy Court,
EPA reserves  its right  to  file a Proof of  Claim or Application for
Reimbursement  of  Administrative  Expenses  against  the  bankrupt's
estate.

Remittance must be made payable to the "U.S. EPA Hazardous Substance
Superfund" established pursuant to CERCLA in Title  26,  Chapter 98 of
the  Internal  Revenue  Code, and must reference the  [insert  name]
facility.   Please send your remittance to:

        EPA - Region 	
        Attn: Superfund Accounting
        P.O.  Box [insert Superfund Lock Box]
        Pittsburgh, PA 15251
        [Note: for Region 4 and 5 the nailing address is slightly
   different.]
                                 23
-------
                                                OSWER # 9832.18

*  Excerpted with  modifications  from  "Interim  Guidance on  Notice
Letters, Negotiations,  and Information Exchange," Appendix C (October
17, 1987, OSWER Directive No. 9834.10).
                                 24
-------
                                                OSWER # 9832.18

  DEMAND PARAGRAPHS FOR INCLUSION IN NOTICE OF POTENTIAL LIABILITY
  AND OFFER TO NEGOTIATE FOR REMOVAL ACTION OR NOTICE OF POTENTIAL
     LIABILITY FOR REMOVAL AND USE OF SPECIAL  NOTICE NEGOTIATION
                            PROCEDURES.*

                         DEMAND FOR PAYMENT

With this  letter,  EPA demands that you reimburse  EPA for its costs
incurred  to date,  and encourages  you to  voluntarily negotiate  a
consent order or decree in which you and other PRPs agree to perform
the response action.

In accordance with CERCLA,  EPA already has undertaken certain actions
and  incurred  certain costs in  response  to conditions  at  the site.
These  response actions  include [describe  response actions  at the
site].  The cost to date of the response actions related to the site
through EPA funding is approximately $[state direct  or indirect costs
to date as specifically as possible].   In accordance with § 107(a) of
CERCLA, demand is hereby made for payment of the above  amount plus any
and all interest recoverable under § 107 or under any other provisions
of law. You are potentially liable for additional costs plus interest
if EPA conducts additional activities at the site.

Interest on past  costs incurred shall accrue  from  the  date  of  this
demand  for payment  or any  earlier  demand,  whichever is  earlier;
interest  on future  costs shall  accrue from  date of  expenditure,
pursuant to CERCLA § 107(a),  42 U.S.C § 9607(a).  Interest rates are
variable.   The rate  applicable  on  any unpaid  amounts for  any fiscal
year is the same  as  is specified  for interest on  investments of the
Hazardous  Substance  Superfund which  is determined  by the  Department
of the Treasury.  The current  annual  rate of interest on unpaid costs
is [x.xx%].

EPA is not required by CERCLA to issue a written demand for recovery
of prejudgment interest.  However, the date a written demand is made
may be used by a court in determining  the date from which prejudgment
interest begins to accrue.

In the  event  that you file for protection  in  the  Bankruptcy Court,
EPA reserves  its  right to file a Proof of  Claim or Application for
Reimbursement  of  Administrative   Expenses  against the  bankrupt's
estate.

Remittance must be made payable to the "U.S. EPA Hazardous Substance
Superfund" established pursuant to CERCLA in Title 26, Chapter 98 of
                                 25
-------
                                                OSWER # 9832.18

the  Internal  Revenue  Code,  and  must reference  the  [insert  name]
facility.  Please send your remittance to:

        EPA - Region 	
        Attn:  Superfund Accounting
        P.O. Box [insert Superfund Lock Box]
        Pittsburgh, PA 15251
        [Note: for Region 4 and 5 the mailing address is slightly
   different.]
*   Excerpted with  modifications from  "Interim Guidance on  Notice
Letters, Negotiations,  and Information Exchange, "Appendix C (October
17, 1987, OSWER Directive No. 9834.10).
                                 26
-------
                                                OSWER # 9832.18

                             APPENDIX B

                       SAMPLE SUMMARY OF  COSTS
U.S. EPA Headquarters
     Payroll                                    $ZX.Z1
     Travel                                     $ZX.ZZ

U.S. EPA Region
     Payroll (CDMS)                             $ZI.ZZ
     Travel                                     $ZZ.ZZ

Indirect Costs                                  $ZZ.ZZ

Cooperative Agreement
   (letter of credit documentation) [state]*    $ZZ.ZZ

EPA Contracts
     Field Investigation Team                   $ZZ.ZZ
     Technical Assistance Team                  $ZZ.ZZ
     Enforcement Support                        $ZZ.ZZ
     CLP                                        $ZZ.ZZ

interest as of (date)                           $ZZ.ZZ
*Be sure to reconcile differences with states before issuance.
                                 27
-------
                                                OSWER # 9832.18

                             APPENDIX C
                 INDEX OF EXISTING RELEVANT GUIDANCE

Guidance  en Administrative  Records  for  Selecting  CERCLA Response
Actions.  December 3,  1990,  OSWER Directive  No.  9833.3A-1.   This
guidance addresses the procedures to ensure that EPA's administrative
records meet the following purposes:  1) to  ensure that the basis for
the response selection  is  set  forth in the record and that judicial
review concerning the adequacy of  a response selection is limited to
the record; and 2) to serve as a vehicle for public participation in
the selection of the response action.

Superfund Cost Recovery  Strategy.  July 29,  1988, OSWER Directive No.
9832.13.  This document  sets forth EPA's case selection guidelines and
priorities; it emphasizes the advance planning necessary to initiate
cost recovery  actions and describes  the cost recovery  process for
removal and remedial actions.

Financial Management of  the  Superfund Program. July 25,  1988.   This
document  establishes financial  management  policies  unique to the
Superfund  program which require  accounting for  costs  by  site and
activity for purposes of cost recovery and  external reporting.

Revision  of CERCLA  Civil  Judicial   Settlement  Authorities  under
Delegations 14-13-B  and  14-13-E.  June 17,  1988,  OSWER Directive No.
9012.10-A.   Delegation  14-13-B  allows a Regional  Administrator  to
exercise  EPA's  concurrence  authority  in  settlement  of  certain
Regionally initiated CERCLA civil judicial  actions and to request the
Attorney General to amend a consent decree.   Delegation 14-14-E allows
Regional Administrators  to exercise EPA's  concurrence  on de minimis
settlements under CERCLA § 122(g) with advance concurrence.

Guidance on Documenting  Decisions  Not to  TaXe  Cost  Recovery Action.
June 7, 1988, OSWER Directive No.  9832.11.   EPA has the discretion to
decide  whether  or  not  to pursue  an  action  for  recovery of  any
unreimbursed Superfund  monies;  if  the  decision  is  not to  pursue  a
case,   EPA  must prepare a  close-out  memorandum.    This  guidance
discusses the contents of this close-out memorandum.

Removal  Cost  Management Manual.  April  1988,  OSWER Directive  No.
9360.0-02B.  EPA has developed this manual to  provide comprehensive
cost management procedures  for  use by the  On-Scene  Coordinator and
other on-site personnel at Superfund removal actions.

Superfund Removal Procedures  (Revision  No.  3), February 1988,  OSWER
Directive  No 9360.0-03B.  Revision Number Three contains  detailed
explanations of cost control, cost documentation,  use of the Removal
Cost Management  Manual,  and further guidance on  the importance of cost
documentation as it relates to Superfund removal  procedures.


                                 28
-------
                                                OSWER f 9832.18

Expansion of Direct Referral  of  Cases to the Department of Justice.
January 14,  1988,  OSWER  Directive  No. 9891.  5A.   In  an  effort to
streamline the  enforcement  of CERCLA  and  non-CERCLA  cases,  EPA has
prepared this guidance of updated policy  and procedures expanding its
direct referral of cases to the Department of Justice.

State  Buperfund Financial  Management  and RecordXeeping  Guidance.
November  1987,   Office  of  the   Comptroller,  Financial  Management
Division.

Guidance  on Federal  Superfund  Liens.  September  22,  1987,  OSWER
Directive No. 9832.12.  This guidance provides analysis of statutory
issues regarding the nature  and scope of  federal liens under S 107(1)
of CERCLA,  EPA  policy on filing a  federal  lien  to support  a cost
recovery action, and  procedures  for filing a  notice  of lien, which
includes an example of a notice of a Superfund lien.

Potentially Responsible Party  Search Manual.  August 27, 1987, OSWER
Directive No. 9834.3-1A.  This manual provides guidance to  EPA and
state personnel  in identifying potentially responsible parties  (PRPs) ,
recognizing the  elements of  a  completed PRP search, and describing in
detail 28 tasks  which may be completed during a PRP search.

PRP Search Supplemental Guidance for Sites in the Superfund Remedial
yyograjfl f  June  16,  1989,  OSWER  Directive  No.   9834.3 2a.    This
supplemental guidance  describes  PRP search planning  and  management
and the content  of PRP search reports.

Cost Recovery Actions/Statute  of Limitations. June 12, 1987,  OSWER
Directive No. 9832.9   This memorandum updates EPA's policy  on the
timely filing of cost recovery  actions  and clarifies  the Agency's
position on priorities for removal cost recovery referrals.

Financial  Management  Procedures  for  Documenting Superfund  Costs.
September  1986.    This  handbook   establishes   EPA's Agency-wide
procedures to ensure  that accurate and adequate  controls  exist for
documenting EPA's Superfund cleanup costs so that they fully reconcile
with EPA's Financial Management System.

Policy on Recovering Indirect Costs in CERCLA Cost Recovery Actions.
June 27, 1986, OSWER Directive  No. 9832.5.  This memorandum clarifies
EPA's policy on  the recovery of indirect costs  in CERCLA cost recovery
actions and  provides guidance on deciding whether or not to  seek
indirect costs.
                                 29
-------
               UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                          WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                                            OSWER Directive 9842.2
                                                           OFFICE OF
                                                   SOLID WASTE AND EMESGENC' 'ESPCNSc
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  CERCLA Implementation of Inspector Training Requirements
          for  OSCs/RPMs at  the  Intermediate  Level  in  STEP  and
          First-line Supervisors

FROM:     Bruce M. Diamond, Director.
          Office of Waste Programs Enforcement

          Timothy Fields, Jr., Acting  Director
          Office of Emergency and Remedial  Respbnse

TO:       Waste Management Division  Directors
          Regions I - X
          Environmental Services  Division Directors
          Regions I - X
I.
PURPOSE
      The purpose of this memorandum is to provide guidance on how
two  groups of  CERCLA staff  can  meet or  be  excepted  from  the
training requirements  of EPA  Order 3500.1 on  Inspector  Training.
These two groups are:   1) OSCs/RPMs who were grandfathered into the
Structured  Training   and  Evaluation   Program  (STEP)    at   the
Intermediate  level  and  2)  First-line  supervisors of OSCs/RPMs.
Previous guidances  addressed  the other groups  of CERCLA staff to
whom the Order applied.
II.
BACKGROUND
      EPA Order  3500.1,  Training  and Development  for  Compliance
Inspectors/Field Investigators (June 29,  1988), established a Basic
Curriculum and requirements for the development of Program-Specific
Minimum  Curriculum for  Inspectors  before  they  lead or  conduct
inspections independently.  This  Order applies to all EPA personnel
who  lead  or oversee the  conduct of  compliance  inspections/field
investigations on  a full  or part-time  basis  under any of  EPA's
statutes, including CERCLA.  The Order also applies to  the first-
line supervisors of those staff who meet the Order's definition of
an Inspector.
-------
                               -2-

      In November  1988,  OSWER  issued guidance  (OSWER Directive
9842.0) on the applicability of  the  Order to CERCLA staff in the
Regions and provided a definition for determining the CERCLA staff
who are subject to the Order's requirements.

      Additional guidance  was  provided  in  October 1989  (OSWER
Directive  9842.1)   on CERCLA's   implementation  of  the  Order's
training requirements for  most On-Scene  Coordinators  (OSCs)  and
Remedial Project Managers (RPMs).  It was stated in that memorandum
that guidance on the one group of OSCs/RPMs  for which a policy had
not been formulated and first-line supervisors of OSCs/RPMs would
be forthcoming.


III.  TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR INTERMEDIATE OSCs/RPMs

      CERCLA tied fulfillment of  the  Order's  requirements into its
own program-specific initiative,  the  OSC/RPM Support Program.  One
component of this program is the Structured Training and Evaluation
Program  (STEP).    STEP established   four  levels of  experience,
knowledge and skills required to  manage progressively more complex
Superfund  sites/incidents.   These  levels are:   (1)  Basic,  (2)
Intermediate,  (3) Advanced,  and  (4)  Master.   As  stated in OSWER
Directive  9842.1,  OSCs  and RPMS  grandfathered into STEP  at the
Advanced  and  Master  level  were  formally  excepted  from  the
requirements of the Order,  and staff  at the  Basic level would have
completed  the  OSC/RPM Basic Training Academy  which  fulfills the
Order's  training requirements.   It  is  the remaining group  of
oscs/RPMs grandfathered in  at the Intermediate  level which will be
addressed by this guidance.

      Staff  grandfathered  in at the Intermediate  level  had  to
demonstrate  training  and experience  in  specific  CERCLA areas  in
order to attain Intermediate status.  However, these training and
experience requirements did not meet  all  of  the legal fundamentals
training requirements in EPA Order 3500.1.  Therefore, the OSC/RPM
staff designated at the Intermediate level should attend one of the
following three courses which have been identified as meeting the
legal  fundamentals  requirements  in  the Order.   They  are:   (1)
"Fundamentals  of Environmental  Compliance  Inspections",  or (2)
"Introduction to Superfund  Enforcement"  (or  Region I's equivalent,
"Enforcement  and  Remedial  Activities   Under  CERCLA"),   or  the
Superfund University Training Institute's "Legal Issues" course.
-------
IV.   TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRST-LINE SUPERVISORS

      The Order provides  that  experienced first-line supervisors
and experienced OSCs/RPMs  who were appointed to positions as First-
line supervisors after June 29, 1988, when  the Order was signed,
may  be  formally  excepted from  the  requirements  in  the  Order.
However, new first-line supervisors  of  OSCs/RPMs are required to
meet the training requirements within one year of appointment to
the supervisory  position.

      CERCLA is  recommending  that new  first-line  supervisors of
OSCs/RPMs attend one of the three courses identified below in order
to satisfy the Order's requirements.   They are:   (1) "Fundamentals
of Environmental Compliance Inspections" or,  (2) "Fundamentals of
Environmental  Compliance  Inspections for  Supervisors"  or,  (3)
"Introduction to Superfund Enforcement".

V.    CONTACTS

      For additional information on this guidance or the training
courses identified in this guidance, please contact Debby Thomas in
OWPE at FTS  398-8656.   A summary of  the exceptions and training
courses  for all  OSCs/RPMs  and  for  first-line  supervisors is
provided as an attachment.

Attachment

cc:   Elaine Stanley, OWPE (OS-500)
      Sally Mansbach, OWPE (OS-510)
      Margaret Kelly, TIO (OS-110)
      Marlene Suit,   TIO (OS-110)
      Becky Barclay,  OE  (LE-133)
      Inspector Training Advisory Board
      OSWER Regional Training Contacts
-------
SUMMARY OF GUIDANCE FOR CERCLA STAFF MEETING OR BEING EXCEPTED FROM
THE REQUIREMENTS OF EPA ORDER 3500.1
STAFF

New OSCs/RPMs
TIMEFRAME FOR
MEETING
REQUIREMENTS

Beginning  10/1/89,
any new OSC/RPM
hired
TRAINING OR
EXCEPTION POLICY

Must attend OSC/RPM
Basic Training
Academy
Experienced
OSCs/RPMs who have
attained the
ADVANCED or MASTER
level via the
Structured Training
and Evaluation
Program (STEP)
By 10/1/91
EXCEPTED from
requirement^
Experienced
OSCs/RPMs who have
attained
INTERMEDIATE level
via STEP
By 10/1/91
Must complete  1
the following  3
courses:
of
                        "Fundamentals  of
                        Environmental
                        Compliance
                        Inspections"
                        developed by OE
                             OR
                        "Introduction  to
                        Superfund
                        Enforcement"
                        developed  by  OWPE
                        (or  Region  I's
                        equivalent,
                        "Enforcement and
                        Remedial Activities
                        Under CERCLA"
                             OR
                        "Legal Issues",  a
                        Superfund
                        University Training
                        Institute  (SUTI)
                        course.
-------
New first line
supervisors of
OSCs/RPMs who have
not previously been
OSCs/RPMs
themselves
Beginning 10/1/89,
within  1 year  of
assuming
supervisory
position
Must complete 1 of
the following 3
courses:

"Fundamentals of
Environmental
Compliance
Inspection"
    OR
"Fundamentals of
Environmental
Compliance
Inspections for
Supervisors"
    OR
"Introduction to
Superfund
Enforcement"
Experienced 1st
line   supervisors
(including those
who had been
experienced
OSCs/RPMs and were
then  appointed to
positions as 1st
line   supervisors
after 6/29/88)
By 10/1/91
EXCEPTED from
Requirements
-------
           UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                         WASHINGTON  DC 20460
                           APR  10 1991
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Interim Agency Policy on Contribution Protection
          Clauses in CERCLA Settlements
FROM:     William A. White
          Acting Associate Enforcement
          Bruce Diamond, Director
          Office of Waste Program Enforcement

TO:       Regional Counsel, Regions I-X
          Waste Management Division Directors
            Regions I-X

     In recent years, the negotiation of contribution protection
clauses has become a sticking point in settlement discussions
under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA) .  To avoid any problems that may result
from inconsistent application of CERCLA 's contribution protection
provisions, this memorandum delineates interim Agency policy on
the content of contribution protection clauses in administrative
and judicial settlements.

     Section 113 (f) (2) of CERCLA provides that:

     A person who has resolved its liability to the United
     States or a State in an administrative or judicially
     approved settlement shall not be liable for claims for
     contribution regarding matters addressed in the
     settlement, (emphasis added) .

CERCLA Sections 122 (g) (5) and 122 (h) (4), which respectively
address de minimis and administrative cost recovery settlements,
have very similar contribution protection language.

     In some settlement agreements, the phrase "matters
addressed," which delimits the scope of contribution protection
afforded by the statute to settling parties, has been equated
with the phrase "covered matters," which typically defines the
reach of the United States' covenants not to sue.  Use of these
similar phrases has the potential of confusing the scope of
contribution protection that will be afforded settling parties.
-------
In certain circumstances, the scope of the "matters addressed"
may not be the same as "covered matters."1

     Keeping these concepts distinct is particularly important in
cases where sequential settlements are contemplated.  Hence, in
the future, these two phrases should not be used interchangeably
in CERCLA administrative or judicial settlements, whether they
are embodied in orders or consent decrees.  All administrative
and judicial CERCLA settlements that include contribution
protection language must distinguish these terms.  Until a final
contribution protection policy is issued by the agency, whether
and how contribution protection relates to a covenant not to sue
will largely be a question of law to be determined by the courts.

     The Agency may at its discretion choose to include language
in settlements restating the right as provided in CERCLA.
Standard contribution protection settlement language to be used
in such circumstances is attached.2   Except as provided above,
under no circumstances should government personnel provide, any
oral or written statements to potentially responsible parties
regarding the scope of contribution protection.  If you have any
questions regarding this matter, please contact James Handley
(FTS 382-3060), or Leonard Shen (FTS 382-3107).

cc:  Regional Counsel Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X
     Superfund Program Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X
     John C. Cruden, Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,
          Environment and Natural Resources Division, U.S.
          Department of Justice
     1  The draft CERCLA Model RD/RA Consent Decree (forthcoming)
does not use the concept of "covered matters" so as to avoid any
confusion between these two concepts.

     2  Given the underlying intent of Congress in enacting
Section 122(g), it is possible that different language may be
appropriate for de minimis parties.
-------
                                             OSWER Directive = 9824.1"


     Standard Settlement Language - November, 1990


                Contribution Protection

With regard to claims for contribution against
[Settling Defendants] for matters addressed  in this
[Order on Consent or Consent Decree]/ the Parties
hereto agree that the [Settling Defendants]  are
entitled, as of the effective date of this  [Order on
Consent or Consent Decree], to such protection from
contribution actions or claims as is provided in CERCLA
section [ "Standard" AO or Consent Decree — 113(f)(2),
42 U.S.C. § 9613(f)(2)].  [De Minimis AO or  Consent
Decree — I22(g)(5)/ 42 D.S.C. § 9622(g)(5)].
[Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement —  122(h)(4),
42 D.S.C. § 9622(h)(4)].
-------
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                   WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                          OSVER Directive -  9831 .9
                                                  OFFICE OF
                                           SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Questions  and Answers  About the  State  Role  in  Remedy
          Selection  at  Non-Fund-Financed  EnforcemenJ

              R. Clay,  Assistant  Administra'tor  .
                                          ~nM'
          Regional Administrator           /r   /
          Regions I  - X                       /

I.   PURPOSE

     This memorandum1 describes  circumstances under  which  States
may select and implement a remedy  at National Priorities List (NPL)
sites without first obtaining EPA concurrence.  Section 300.515(e)
of  the National  Contingency  Plan  (NCP),   State  involvement  in
selection  of remedy,  specifically  addresses the  State role  in
remedy  selection.    The NCP provides  that a  State may select  a
remedy  (and publish  the proposed  plan)  without EPA concurrence at
non-Fund-financed State-lead enforcement NPL sites.  This directive
defines "non-Fund-financed" in terms of State-lead enforcement NPL
sites2.   Additionally,  this  directive explains when  a  State must
obtain EPA concurrence  on a  CERCLA remedy at an NPL site.

     Certain   States  have  requested  guidance  regarding  the
situations under which  a State may select and implement a  remedy
without EPA  concurrence.  Generally,  States and EPA Regions  are
knowledgeable about  the reciprocal concurrence process  for  Fund-
financed NPL sites,  where EPA  and States  have corresponding roles
in  recommending  and   implementing   remedies.    However,   there
generally appears to be less awareness of situations where a state
may select and implement a remedy without EPA concurrence.
     V  The  policies set  out in this  memorandum are  not  final
agency action, but are intended  solely as guidance.   They are not
intended,  nor can  they  be  relied  upon,  to  create any  rights
enforceable,  by  any party  in litigation with  the United States.
The Agency reserves the right to change  this guidance at any time
without public notice.

     2/  Enforcement sites are sites where responsible parties are
compelled, by order or decree, to perform response actions.
                                                      PrMUd on Rtcycltd Paptr
-------
                                        OSWER Directive =

     This memorandum explains certain sections of the NCP that are
pertinent to the  State  role  in remedy selection.   Regional staff
may help resolve questions about remedy selection requirements by
discussing information  in  this memorandum with  appropriate State
staff.   Open and  direct  communication between the  Regional  and
State offices on topics  such as this greatly benefits the EPA/State
relationship and ultimately the success of site cleanups.

II.  BACKGROUND

     Subpart F  of the  NCP  (40 CFR    300.500 et  seq. )  discusses
requirements for  State  participation  and  involvement  in CERCLA-
authorized  response  actions.    It  also  includes  the  minimum
requirements  for  ensuring  that  all • States  are  provided  an
opportunity  for "substantial and meaningful", involvement  in  the
initiation,  development,  and  selection  of remedial  actions,  as
mandated by CERCLA   121(f)(l).

     As discussed in the preamble to the  NCP (55 FR 8783, March 8,
1990),  EPA believes  that  to  ensure  consistency  among remedies
implemented at  sites, EPA retains final responsibility for remedy
selection at sites where Fund money or EPA enforcement authority is
used.  However, to provide a "significant and meaningful role for
State involvement in the cleanup process," EPA adopted in the NCP
the reciprocal concurrence  process for  Fund-financed NPL sites.  In
this  process,   a  State prepares  a  ROD  and  must  obtain  EPA
concurrence and adoption of the remedy, or EPA prepares  the ROD and
seeks State concurrence. However, for non-Fund-financed State-lead
enforcement sites, when a State proceeds  under its own enforcement
authority and sources of funding other  than the CERCLA Trust Fund3,
a State may select a remedy  (and publish a proposed plan) without
EPA concurrence.   Section  300.515(e)(2)   of  the  NCP specifically
addresses EPA and State involvement in the preparatic  of a ROD.

III.    QUESTIONS  AND  ANSWERS  ABOUT  THE  STATE ROLE   IN  REMEDY
SELECTION

QUESTION 1:  Under what circumstances  can a State select a remedy
without EPA concurrence at an NPL site?

ANSWER:   States may  select  the  remedy  (and publish  a proposed
plan) , without  EPA concurrence,  at NPL sites when  the State  has
been assigned the  lead  role  for  response action  at the site,  the
State is taking an enforcement action  acting under State law,  and
the State is not receiving funds from  the Trust Fund for response
activities at the site.  According to the  NCP, "response as defined
     V    Trust  Fund  means  the Hazardous  Substance  Superfund
established by section 9507 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
-------
                                        OSWER Directive = 9331.5

by   101(25)  of CERCLA,  means remove,  removal, remedy, or remedial
action,  including  enforcement activities related  thereto."   The
diagram  in Attachment I  summarizes the circumstances under which a
State r.ay select a  remedy without EPA concurrence.   These sites are
referred to as  "non-Fund-financed State-lead enforcement sites."
QUESTION 2:   When may a State  proceed  under its own enforcement
authority at an NPL site?

ANSWER:  During annual  EPA/State  consultations,  EPA may agree to
designate a State the lead at an NPL site for a non-Fund-financed
enforcement action.  This means that EPA and the State agree that
response actions will  be conducted pursuant to State law and funded
by  PRPs  and,  if  necessary  (for enforcement  activities) ,  by the
State  itself.  More specifically,    300.505(d)(3)  states "(i)f a
State  is  designated as the  lead agency  for a non-Fund-f inanced
action at an NPL site,  the Superfund Memorandum of Agreement shall
be supplemented by site-specific enforcement agreements between EPA
and the State which specify  schedules  and EPA involvement."   EPA
may take back the lead  from  a  State  if the State does not comply
with the EPA/State agreement.

     Where EPA and a State do not  agree  that  a site  is a non-Fund-
financed State-lead site, the  State may still attempt to proceed
with response actions  under  its own authority without  funding from
the Trust Fund.   However, there is  a  potential for conflict  with
EPA response  actions where  no lead  designation has been  made,
especially  at NPL  sites.    Further,  EPA is  not bound  by  State
response actions  and may decide to  take a CERCLA response action
after the State has acted.  Additionally, under CERCLA   122(e)(6),
once a Federally-approved RI/FS has been  initiated at a site,  no
PRP may  undertake  any remedial  action at  the  site unless the
remedial action has been authorized by EPA.   Thus, State-ordered
PRP remedial actions may not  proceed post-Federally-approved RI/FS
without EPA authorization.   If  EPA decided to designate a State as
lead  for  post-RI/FS remedial  actions,  the  lead  designation may
include a CERCLA  122(e)(6) authorization for PRPs to  proceed with
remedial action at the site as prescribed by the lead agency.

QUESTION 3:  For a State enforcement-lead NPL site to be "non-Fund-
financed" does it mean that EPA has not spent Trust Fund money at
the site?

ANSWER:  No.  There are probably few, if any, NPL sites where EPA
has not  spent Trust Fund money.   For  example,  EPA has probably
funded, through the Trust Fund, PA/SIs at  NPL sites.   Previous EPA
funding at  a  site,  regardless of the  amount,  does not determine
whether a site is "non-Fund-financed."
-------
                                        CSWER Directive = 3321.3

QUESTION 4:  For a State enforcement-lead NPL site  to be "non-Fund-
financed," does  it  mean  that  there  will  be no future EPA funding
through the Trust Fund at the site?

ANSWER:  Yes.   If  an- NPL site is "non-Fund-financed, " EPA has no
plans  or expectations of providing funds  via the Trust  Fund for
site-specific enforcement actions and other response actions (i.e.,
cooperative agreement money)  to the State.   The  term "non-Fund-
financed" as it pertains to  State enforcement-lead sites and State
remedy selection refers  to  site-specific  money.   Receipt of Core
Program money,  which is  for  non-site-specific  activities (e.g.,
training) ,   does  not  preclude   the  site  from  being  "non-Fund-
financed."  All non-site-specific activities that  are necessary to
support a State's Superfund program are eligible  for Core Program
money.

QUESTION 5:  How is a site designated as a State  enforcement-lead
NPL site by EPA?

ANSWER:   EPA,  during annual  consultations with  the  States,  may
designate  a  State  as enforcement-lead  if  the  Agency deems  it
appropriate (and if  the  State agrees).   However,  a State may not
designate  itself  as lead  agency   at  an  NPL  site  without  EPA
approval.

     In considering whether  a  site should be designated as  a State-
lead enforcement site, EPA will  take into account whether EPA has
invested substantial  resources  at  the site  beyond the PA/SI and
listing process  (e.g.,  whether EPA  has  completed  the  RI/FS).
Significant investment of EPA  resources at a site may argue against
reassigning a lead designation from EPA to a State.  EPA plans to
develop detailed guidance to assist Regions in determining when a
State may be enforcement-lead.

QUESTION  6:     May  the  State   select  the  remedy  without  EPA
concurrence at Fund-financed State-lead sites (where the Trust Fund
is paying for response actions)?

ANSWER:  No.   Remedies selected  (and proposed plans drafted)  by a
State at a  Fund-financed  site  (e.g., where the Trust Fund is paying
for enforcement support or other response actions)  must be approved
and adopted by  EPA before the remedy can  be implemented  (or the
proposed plan can be published).  Similarly,  EPA must obtain State
assurances under   104 before  EPA can proceed with a Fund-financed
remedy.

IV.  CONCLUSION

     There are  circumstances  where  the  State may  select a remedy
(and publish the proposed plan)  without EPA concurrence.  In some
-------
                                        OSWER Directive t 9331.9

situations, the State may be acting independently of EPA.  However,
when one governmental entity  (EPA .or State) acts independently of
the other, conflicts can arise which adversely affect the quality
and timing of  response  actions at a site.   In addition,  without
EPA/State  coordination   and  cooperation at  a  site,  unnecessary
conflict and duplication of effort may  occur.  Therefore, pursuant
to § 300.505(d)(1) of the  NCP,  EPA and States should meet in the
early  stages  of  response actions  at  a  site to  determine  site
priorities and make lead and support agency designations.

     If you have questions regarding this directive,  please contact
Lynda Priddy of the  Office of Waste Programs Enforcement at FTS
(202)  475-8727 or mail code OS-510.

Attachment

cc:  Directors, Waste Management Division
     Regions I, IV, V, VII
     Directors, Hazardous Waste Management Division
     Regions III, VI, VIII, IX
     Director,  Emergency and Remedial Response Division
     Region II
     Director,  Hazardous Waste Division
     Region X
     CERCLA Enforcement Branch Chiefs,  Regions I - X
     CERCLA Enforcement Section Chiefs, Regions I - X
     Regional Counsels,  Regions I - X
-------
 State Selection of Remedy at NPL Sites
site-specific
 Superfund
 money be
spent at the
   site?
      State
   designated
 lead (with PRPs
uthorized to procee
   under State
     order)?
      Yes
                             EPA selects remedy or must
                             approve the state recommendation.
                          State may select a remedy under
                          State law, but a potential conflict
                          with an EPA remedy exists
                          (especially at NPL sites); further, if
                          section 122(e)(6) applies, PRP may
                          not undertake remediation without
                          EPA authorization.
                          State may select remedy, under
                          State law, without EPA
                          concurrence.
-------
              UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                          MAY   7 1991
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Model Information

FROM:  \U/Don R. Clay
       Av  Assistant Adirfihist]
                                                       OFFICE OF
                                              SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE

                                              OSWER Directive No. 9834.16
           ter to Local Governments
'ator
TO:     \ Regional Administrators
        \ Regions I-X
     This memorandum transmits to you a model letter that provides
information  to municipalities and  other local governments  about
EPA's activities  at a Superfund site.   The purpose of  the  model
letter is to inform these parties about potential Superfund actions
in  which they  might have  an interest and  to provide  relevant
information about the site.  The model letter can be used now,  but
we ask that you review it and provide us with your suggestions  for
improvement, particularly in assuring that it is informational  and
not  intimidating.   If  there are any  provisions  which  you  think
present serious problems, please contact us  immediately.

     On  December  12,  1989,  EPA  published the  "interim  municipal
settlement" policy  in the Federal Register.  54  FR 51071, Dec.  12,
1989.   The  policy  clarifies  how EPA will address  municipalities
and municipal wastes in  the Superfund settlement process.  Although
the  policy  addresses  many   issues  concerning  a  municipality's
involvement in the CERCLA enforcement process, the policy does  not
discuss how  to provide  information to municipalities that do  not
receive general or special notice letters.  Municipalities in these
situations  may  not  receive important  information  about  EPA's
enforcement activities  at  the site.  Other  govenrmental entities
who have no  potential liability  may also have an interest  in  the
activities being undertaken at a site.  This letter may be used to
inform these parties  of EPA's activities at  a Superfund site.

     In comments  on the Interim Municipal  Settlement  Policy  and
elsewhere, the  International City Management Association  and  the
National League  of Cities have  requested that municipalities  be
provided with  the  information contained in the model letter.   In
addition, the Administrator, William  Reilly,  recently assured  the
National League of Cities that such information would be provided.

     Therefore,  I  strongly  urge  you  to  use  this   letter   in
appropriate  circumstances.    I  also  urge you  to  share,  to  the
                                                           Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
maximum extent practicable, EPA's information about the site with
any municipality or other local government that may be associated
with or otherwise have an interest in the site.

     I hope you find the model letter useful.  For more information
about the model letter or to provide us with your comments, please
call me or have your staff call Natalie Eades at (Mail Code - OS-
510) FTS 245-3655.  Thank you  for your  attention  to this matter.


Attachment
cc:  Waste Management Division Directors
     CERCLA Branch Chiefs
     Bill White, Office of Enforcement
-------
[Model  Informational  Notice to  Local  Governments  of  Response
Actions]
          UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                            Region [  ]

                             [Address]


   NOTICE OF EPA ACTIONS UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL
        RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT  (CERCLA)

[Date]

[Name and address of Municipality or other local government]


RE:   [name and location of the site]


Dear  [Send to the mayor and/or city manager; cc: city attorney or
     other appropriate official]:

     This letter informs you that the United States Environmental
Protection Agency ("EPA")  is conducting  response actions under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) at the  [name  of the site]  in [county], [State] (the
"Site").   CERCLA, commonly known as  "Superfund",  gives  EPA the
authority to take actions  to protect public health, welfare, and
the environment,  and to abate or minimize the impacts of a release
or threat of release of a hazardous substance at a  Superfund site.
In addition, it gives EPA the authority  to sue for  recovery of any
funds spent to clean up a Superfund site.

     Because of the potential impact  on  your community, the [City,
Town,  County] of [	] (the "City",  "Town"  or "County") is
encouraged to stay  informed about the activities  relating to the
Site.   This letter provides you with information to assist you in
following these activities.

     This  letter  is  not  a  notice  of  potential  liability under
section 107(a) of CERCLA.    However,  EPA's information indicates
that the City may  have an interest in the Site.   [Insert a sentence
indicating  what  type  of  interest  the  city  has  in the  site.]
Optional  language  (To  the  Regions:   If you  have  information
indicating that the City might be liable include this language, if
-------
not use your  best judgment as to whether  or  not to include this
language):     [If,  in  the  future,  EPA  obtains  site-specific
information indicating that you are a potentially responsible party
(PRP),  you may receive notice to  that effect by  a separate letter.
This letter is simply  to inform the City of EPA's activities at the
Site and to provide the City with certain background information
about the Site.]

     Optional  language  (To   the Regions:  Please  include  this
language if you believe that the City  might  not be aware of this
possibility) :   [Although   EPA might not name  you as a  PRP,  you
should be aware that other  PRPs may take the position that the City
is  responsible for  costs  associated  with  clean-up  activities
undertaken at the site and may pursue the City  for a share of the
costs.]

     Given the City's potential interest in activities at the Site,
EPA encourages the City to  remain fully aware of the actions to be
implemented at the site.  In particular, we encourage the City to
review  all documents  produced  and to  comment  on them,  where
appropriate.

     To assist  the  City in  following  the  activities  relating to
the Site,  we  are  providing you with some background information.
EPA [will perform] [has performed] the following activities at [the
site]:   [note to the Regions:  This letter should be sent as soon
as  possible  after  you  learn«  of  the municipality's  interest.
Depending on when this letter is  sent out,  it might be appropriate
to send subsequent  letters advising of the progress  of  response
actions.]     [Briefly  describe  EPA's  involvement  at  the  site,
including for example]:

     1.   On or about 	,  19 	, EPA  completed  a
          preliminary assessment/site investigation (PA/SI).  The
          PA/SI  revealed   a   release  or   threat of  release  of
          hazardous substances from the site.

     2.   On 	, 19	,  (	 Fed.  Rea.  	),
          pursuant to section 105 of CERCLA, 42  U.S.C. § 9605, EPA
          placed  [proposed to place]  the site on the  National
          Priorities List,  set forth at 40 C.F.R.  Part 300,
          Appendix B.

     3.   From about 	,  19	,  to  about 	,
          19	,   EPA   [or   the   PRPs]   undertook  a   Remedial
          Investigation and Feasibility Study  (RI/FS) for the Site
          pursuant to CERCLA  and  the National Contingency Plan, 40
          C.F.R. Part 300.  The purpose of  the RI/FS was to define
          the nature and extent  of  contamination at the  site and
          to identify alternatives for remediating the site.
-------
     4.   Pursuant to section 117 of CERCLA,  42 U.S.C. § 9617, EPA
          published  notice  of the  completion  of  the feasibility
          study and  of the proposed plan  for  remedial  action on
          	, 19	, and provided an opportunity  for public
          comment on the proposed remedial action.

     5.   EPA's final  decision on  the  remedial  action  to be
          implemented at the  site  is embodied  in  a "record of
          decision"  (ROD) that was executed on	, 19	.
          [modify as appropriate to  account for multiple  ROD'S, ROD
          amendments, ESD's]

     6.   On or about	,  19	,  EPA began a Remedial
          Design/Remedial Action(RD/RA)  to design and implement
          the remedy selected in the Record of Decision.


     EPA  also  has  prepared  [or  is   preparing]  the  following
information about the site and potentially responsible parties:

     1.   A preliminary list of names and addresses of those PRPs
          who  have received  notice letters.   Inclusion  on,  or
          exclusion  from,  the list does  not constitute  a final
          determination  by  EPA concerning the liability  of any
          party for the release or  threat of release of hazardous
          substances at the Site.

     2.   To the extent  such  information  is available,  a list of
          the volume and nature of  substances contributed by each
          PRP.  This list is preliminary and subject to revisions
          based upon new information as,  and if,  it  becomes
          available.

     3.   A ranking  by volume of  the substances at the facility,
          to the extent such information is available.

     4.   A fact sheet describing the Site.

     Pursuant  to  section 113(k)  of CERCLA and Subpart  I  of the
National Contingency Plan,  EPA will establish an administrative
record that contains the documents  which  form the basis of EPA's
decision for the selection of a response action at the Site.  The
administrative record  files,  which contain the documents related
to  the response action  selected for  the Site,  [will  be]   [are]
available  to  the  public  for  inspection  and  comment.    The
administrative record  file is located  in both the  EPA Regional
Office or other central location  and is  also available at [name of
site].  [Include an approximate date when it will be available, and
the location of the  files.]

     The matters contained in this  letter are intended solely for
notification and information  purposes.  They are not intended to
be and can not be relied upon as final  EPA positions.
-------
     If you have any questions  about  this letter,  please contact
(    ).  You may also obtain general background information about
Superfund by calling the Superfund hot line at 1-800-424-9346.


                              Sincerely,
                              [Division Director]
-------
    sr<^
              UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENO

                            WASHINGTON DC  2046G
                  JUN 20 1991
                              OSWER Directive No. 9833.2c
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Evaluation of, and  Additional  Guidance on,  Issuance of
          Unilateral Administrative Orders (UAOs) for RD/RA

FROM:
TO:
          Bruce M. Diamond, Director ^/^  -
          Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
          William A. White
          Associate Enforcement Counse
          Office of Enforcement/Superfund

          Director, Waste Management Division
               Regions I, IV, V, VII, and VIII
          Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division
               Region II
          Director, Hazardous Waste Management Division
               Regions III and VI
          Director, Toxic and Waste Management Division
               Region IX
          Director, Hazardous Waste Division
               Region X
          Regional Counsel, Regions I-X
     The  purpose of this  directive is  to present you  with the
results of  a  recent evaluation conducted  by  the Office of Waste
Programs  Enforcement  (OWPE)  of  the selection process EPA uses in
issuing UAOs  to  Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) for RD/RA
under  CERCLA; and,  based  on  the evaluation,  to give  further
guidance on the process we should use to select recipients of UAOs.

     The evaluation was requested by the Deputy Administrator, who
was concerned about criticisms expressed by some PRP groups about
which PRPs at  a site receive UAOs.  There have been  complaints, for
example, that EPA unfairly singles out  "deep pockets" when issuing
UAOs.

     The  evaluation  consisted  both  of  interviewing  Regional
managers  to determine their  approach  to  issuing  orders,  and of
examining each order issued in FY 1990  to determine the numbers of
PRPs  issued general notice,  special  notice,  and  UAOs,  and the
reasons for any discrepancies among these  numbers.
-------
Findings

     Overall, the process Regions are using to select PRPs for UAO
issuance  appears  to  be reasonable  and  fair.    Not  all  PRPs
identified at a site are routinely included when UAOs  are issued,
but  the reasons  for  selection  appear ,->to,.Delate  to  legitimate
matters of enforceability and sound enforcement discretion.

     The evaluation found that in the majority of cases,  UAOs were
issued to fewer than all the PRPs given general or special notice
at a site.   UAOs were  issued  to  all  PRPs  identified for the site
at 10 out of the 44 sites for which UAOs for RD/RA were  issued in
FY 1990.  For these  10  sites, the number of PRPs is low  (fewer than
10 PRPs).

     At the  other 34 sites, where UAOs  were issued  to fewer PRPs
than were given either general or special notice,  the difference
between the  number  of  PRPs given notice  and  those  issued orders
varies considerably.  In some  cases the discrepancy is  very small;
for example,  at one  site all but one of the ten PRPs issued special
notice received UAOs.   In other cases the difference  is  very large:
as few as a dozen PRPs may be given orders out of several hundred
PRPs given general notice.

     The results of both the survey of FY  1990  UAOs and the survey
of  Branch Chiefs  are  consistent regarding  the most  important
factors in determining which  PRPs receive UAOs.   Strength of the
liability case and financial viability were given as the two most
important factors by the Branch Chiefs, and the individual surveys
of each site  revealed that these were the two most frequent reasons
given for PRP selection.  Also consistent between the  surveys is
the relative significance  of  these two factors: strength  of the
liability case  is the foremost consideration for Branch  Chiefs, and
it is given as a factor at over twice as many sites  as viability.
Overall, strength of the liability case is a determinative factor
in selecting among PRPs to receive orders in three-fourths of the
cases in which fewer than all PRPs received orders.1

     Other important   factors identified  both  in  the  survey  of
Branch  Chiefs  and in  individual orders  include contribution  by
volume,  administrative  practicality,  and separate  settlements.
Volumetric contribution was the third most frequently given factor
in explaining selection at sites.  Clearly, there is a connection
between this factor and administrative practicality, and both are
     1  This does not mean that liability was not considered in the
remaining one-fourth of the cases.  Liability is always considered
in issuing UAOs,  but in a quarter of the cases other factors (e.g.,
viability or administrative practicality) were responsible for the
decision not to issue an order to a given PRP.
-------
consistent with EPA guidance on use of UAOs,  which suggests issuing
orders to the largest manageable number of PRPs.  In addition, in
several cases fewer PRPs were issued orders  than were given notice
because the remaining PRPs settled separately for a portion of the
cleanup or costs involved.

     The  evaluation  also  revealed  that  recipients  of  orders
generally are responsible for a large majority of the waste covered
by  the  orders.   Although  not required under  CERCLA's  scheme of
joint and several liability,  EPA generally strives to include those
PRPs to whom the bulk of the waste at issue may be attributed.

Conclusions and Follov-up

     Our evaluation indicates that there  is not a serious problem
with the way Regions are using UAOs for RD/RA work.  Consideration
of  such  factors  as liability, viability, and,  in certain cases,
volumetric contribution makes sense before we commit to the serious
action of issuing unilateral orders.

     We have  initiated  some follow-up work  to determine whether
bias toward large, financially solvent responsible parties may be
built into the system earlier in the PRP search process.  There may
be  good  reasons  to consider  such  PRPs,  who  tend  to  be  large
contributors and for whom there are usually good records of waste
transactions.  We  want  to be sure,  however,  that during the PRP
search large, solvent parties are  not arbitrarily singled out to
the exclusion of  other contributors or liable parties.  Preliminary
results of an examination of the PRP  search process have indicated
that such a bias does not exist.

Additional Guidance

     Based  on  the  findings  of  the  evaluation,   we  are  not
recommending any essential changes to the  current  process by which
PRPs are  selected for  receiving  orders.   Regions  appear  to be
selecting recipients of UAOs appropriately and in accordance with
the "Guidance on CERCLA Section  106(a)  Unilateral Administrative
Orders for Remedial Designs and Remedial Actions," OSWER Directive
No. 9833.0-la.

     We encourage you,  however, to ensure that you  avoid a bias,
or  even the  appearance  of a bias, toward issuing orders only to
large,  "deep pocket" PRPs.   Although many such PRPs  may be large
contributors and may be able to pay for response,  we must continue
to  make  reasonable efforts  to  identify all parties with CERCLA
liability at a site and to arrange for  or compel cleanup from as
many of them  as  practicable.  On  the other  hand, we  must ensure
that we have  adequate evidence against all parties to whom we issue
orders, and we should consider the economic viability of order
-------
recipients.  Where it is necessary to select among liable, viable
PRPs, volumetric  contribution  is a legitimate factor in reducing
the  named parties to  a practicable  number.   Other  factors,  of
course, may also  enter  into a decision to select among PRPs.

     It is important to note that questions have also been raised
about issuing orders to parties  at the  other end of the spectrum
    clearly  non-viable  parties,  such   as  destitute  or  nearly
destitute  individuals,  who may be getting  orders  that  in formal
terms require  them to  perform  cleanup  work costing  millions of
dollars.   Please be  aware that  the  above-referenced  guidance
suggests  that  orders  involving  expenditures  of  money  should
generally  not  be  issued  to  PRPs   that   lack  any  substantial
resources.

     Again, this  is general advice, and site-specific factors may
make inclusion of  persons of little means appropriate in individual
cases.   In particular, it may be useful  to issue UAOs  to site
owners regardless of their financial  circumstances.   However, in
such cases it may  sometimes be preferable to issue separate orders
for  access or  cooperation to  indigent parties  rather  than  to
include them in an overall response order.

     Similar  caution   is   advisable  when   dealing  with  other
distressed or  disadvantaged individuals who,  from an  equitable
point of view, may not  be  appropriate recipients of a unilateral
order.

Further Information

     If you have any questions about the evaluation and follow-up
or about the guidance presented here,  please call us or have your
staff contact  Arthur Weissman  in the  Office  of  Waste  Programs
Enforcement at  FTS  382-4826  or  Leonard Shen in  the Office  of
Enforcement at FTS 382-3107.  We  thank you for your cooperation in
this matter,  and for  your sensitivity  to  the  important issues
involved.

Disclaimer

     The policies and procedures established in this document are
intended  solely  for  the   guidance   of  employees  of  the  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.   They are not intended and cannot
be relied  upon  to create  any rights, substantive  or  procedural,
enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States.  EPA
reserves the  right to  act at variance  with these policies  and
procedures and to change them at any time without public notice.

cc:  Regional Enforcement  Branch Chiefs
     Regional Counsel Branch Chiefs
-------
                UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
 *.
                               JUN 2 I  1991
 MEMORANDUM
 SUBJECT:   Model CERCLA RD/RA Consent Decr.ee
 FROM:
Raymond B.
Acting Assistant Administrator f,

Don R. Clay  \^/^ / [
Assistant Administrator
   Response
                                              Enforcement
                                       Solid  Waste  and Emergency
TO:
Richard B. Stewart     .  .   _ ^ 	
Assistant Attorney General for'the Environment and
   Natural Resources, U.S. Department of Justice

Regional Administrators
Regions I-X
     Attached is the interim final Model CERCLA RD/RA Consent
Decree.   As  discussed below,  this document should be used as the
basis  for fashioning remedial design/remedial action settlements
with potentially responsible parties under Sections 106, 107 and
122 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act,  as amended.   The Model Consent Decree provides
boiler-plate language for most provisions in order to standardize
CERCLA consent  decrees as much as possible and expedite
settlements.  The United States will commence negotiations with a
document  which,  for  most provisions, is the same document the
government will insist on in a settlement because it reflects  legal
and procedural  terms that have been found acceptable to both the
Agency and the  PRPs  in a large number of situations.

     The  philosophy  underlying the Model Consent Decree is
consistent with that espoused in the CERCLA Timeline prepared  as a
result of  the Superfund Management Review and in the Pre-Referral
Negotiations Procedures for  Superfund Enforcement Cases.  That
philosophy is to initiate and conclude RD/RA settlement
negotiations as expeditiously as possible and, ideally, within the
statutory  120-day special notice moratorium.  See CERCLA Section
122(e)(2).   The goal is to achieve a greater.number of settlements
in a more  expeditious manner,  on terms acceptable to the United
States and consistent with the intent of CERCLA, thereby permitting
more remedial work to proceed.  Use of the Model Consent Decree is
designed  to  reduce the time  and resources consumed during extensive
RD/RA settlement discussions  by reducing across the board the
-------
 number of issues the United States will negotiate with the PRPs.
 In addition, use of the Model will reduce the amount of time spent
 on internal government reviews of the document and will promote
 national consistency.

      In future RD/RA negotiations, EPA Regional Offices should
 provide the PRPs with a proposed consent decree,  based on the
 Model,  that reflects site-specif ic considerations . 1  The Office of
 Enforcement (OE) and the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
 Response (OSWER) will support efforts by Regional Offices and the
 Department of Justice (DOJ)  to draft and negotiate settlement terms
 that go beyond the Model's provisions in terms of protecting the
 interests of the United States.   The Regions  should work with the
 Department of Justice and, as appropriate,  EPA Headquarters to
 craft site-specif ic language before sending the draft  to the PRPs.2
 When the United States sends the consent decree to the PRPs,  the
 negotiation team should inform the PRPs that  many provisions of the
 consent decree are nationally consistent boiler-plate  provisions
 that the United States dees  not  plan to negotiate.

      The Model Consent Decree does not  inelud© thoss provisions
 that may be necessary to  handle  the wid©°rang@ of special
 situations  which may arise in the context of  structuring CERCLA
 settlements .   For example,  some  settlements may require the
 inclusion of  a covenant not  to sue by this United  States to  de
         defendants.   In addition,  a trust fund or othor PRP funding
muchanism  may be  appropriate  in  cases  involving large numbers  of
PRPs.  The negotiation  team members should work with their
respective managements  to develop  language for such provisions.   if
the provision raises  issues of national or pnseeddntial
significance  or if  th®  settlement  would othdrwis© require
concurrence by EPA  Huadquarttrs , thd Htgisn should consult with OE
before offering it  to or agreeing  to it with th
     1  For examples of previsions that must b® modified in each
case, we dir©ct your  attention to the definition of '"Site" and
Section VI  (?©rfer®ane
-------
      In addition, as previously noted,  while  the  presumptions  are
 that the Regions will use the Model as  the  basis  for  fashioning
 settlements and that much of the document is  considered  to  be
 boiler-plate,  Regions have the flexibility  to adopt a baseline
 approach to certain provisions that is  more stringent than  the
 Model.   Moreover, except as provided below  and consistent with
 current Agency delegations, the Regions may,  in conjunction with
 the Department of Justice,  modify provisions  of the Model in
 developing the proposed consent decree  in a particular case.

      With respect to those provisions of the  Model Consent  Decree
 that embody issues of national significance,  the  Regions must
 consult with Headquarters before offering or  agreeing to any
 changes that would result in a significant  deviation  from national
 policy.   The following provisions fall  into this  category:  Access,
 Contribution Protection,  Covenants,  Dispute Resolution,  Force
 Majeure,  Additional Response Actions (Section VII of  the Model
 Consent Decree),  Certification of Completion,  Stipulated Penalties
 (structure of  the provision,  not the amount of penalties),  and
 Indemnification.   The Department of  Justice and EPA Headquarters
 will respond to  the Region  as expeditiously as possible  in  order to
 insure  that negotiations  are not delayed.

      The  U.S.  EPA Periodic  Review provision also  involves issues of
 national  significance.  However,  in  recognition of the case-
 specific  evaluation that  must be performed  with respect to  the role
 and  importance of this  provision in  a given settlement, the Regions
 are  not required  to consult with Headquarters  with respect  to
 changes in this provision.   Among the factors  to be considered in
 determining whether to  include this  provision  are the  completeness
 and  reliability of the  remedy,  the strengths and weaknesses of the
 liability  case against  the  defendants,  and  the  scope  of the
 covenant  not to sue that  is given to the defendants in the
 settlement.  The  Regions  should work closely with the  Department of
 Justice in evaluating these factors  and determining the
 government's final position in this  provision  in a given
 settlement.

     The  attached Model Consent Decree does not include a paragraph
 identifying the performance standards for the  remedy.   However,
 these standards must be identified in the ROD  and the  SOW and  those
documents  will be attached  to  the consent decree and  incorporated
 therein.   The  attorneys and technical staff on  the negotiation team
 both must  focus on those  documents to ensure that the  standards are
clearly stated and enforceable.

     Of course, processing  of  any final settlements shall be in
accordance  with current Agency delegations.   Nothing  in this
memorandum  should be interpreted  as modifying the existing waivers
of Headquarters'  settlement concurrence authorities that are
embodied  in  the June 17,  1988  memorandum from the Assistant
-------
                               - 4 -


Administrators  for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Monitoring and  the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
Moreover, EPA Headquarters will continue its general policy of
referring any inquiries to Headquarters from PRPs or their counsel
regarding site-specific issues or negotiations back to the
appropriate Regional Office or the Department of Justice.

     The attached Model Consent Decree and the procedures for its
use outlined in this memo shall be applicable to all sites for
which special notice letters are issued or a proposed consent
decree is sent  to the PRPs beginning 60 days after the date of this
memorandum.  For all other sites, the attached Model Consent Decree
is not applicable, and current negotiation positions and schedules
will not be affected by this Model.  In particular, the Agency will
not re-negotiate provisions in on-going or concluded negotiations
which were previously agreed to with PRPs or in decrees lodged but
not yet entered.

     If you have any questions regarding the Model Consent Decree,
please contact  Sandra Connors in OE (382-3110) or Paul Connor in
OWPE (245-3656).

Attachment

cc:   Donald Elliot, General Counsel
      David Ryan, Comptroller
      Henry Longest, Director, Office of Emergency and Remedial
        Response
      Bruce M.  Diamond, Director, Office of Waste Programs
        Enforcement
      Regional  Counsel, Regions I-X
      Waste Management Division Directors, Regions I-X
-------
                                     OSWER Directive Number 9835.17
           UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                 MODEL CERCLA RD/RA CONSENT DECREE
This model and any internal procedures adopted for its implementation
and use  are  intended solely as guidance  for  employees  of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.  They do not constitute rulemaking
by  the  Agency  and may  not  be relied  upon to  create  a  right or
benefit, substantive or procedural,  enforceable at law or in equity,
by  any  person.    The Agency  may take action at  variance  with this
model or its internal implementing procedures.
-------
                i   OSWER Directive Number 9835.17



        TABLE OF CONTENTS




MODEL CERCLA RD/RA CONSENT DECREE
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
XII.
XIII.
XIV.
XV.
XVI.
XVII.
XVIII.
XIX.
XX.
XXI.
XXII.
XXIII.
XXIV.
BACKGROUND 	 	 	 . 	
JURISDICTION 	
EARTIgS JJQUNP 	 	 	
DJEFimUQNS 	 	
GENERAL PROVISIONS 	
PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK BY SETTLING DEFENDANTS . . .
ADDITIONAL RESPONSE ACTIONS 	
EJL" ^ERIOPIC REVIEW 	
OU; .TY ASSURANCE, SAMPLING, and DATA ANALYSIS . . .

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 	
SUBMISSIONS REQUIRING AGENCY APPROVAL 	
PROJECT COORDINATORS 	
ASSURANCE OF ABILITY TO COMPLETE WORK 	
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLETION 	
EMERGENCY RESPONSE 	 . 	
REIMBURSEMENT OF RESPONSE COSTS .... 	
INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE „ 	
FORCE MAJEURE 	 	 	
PISPUTE RESQLUT.ION 	 	 	
STIPULATED PENALTIES ..... 	 	
COVENANTS NOT TO SUE BY PLAINTIFFS 	
COVENANTS BY SETTLING DEFENDANTS .... . .
EFFECT OF SETTLEMENT: CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION ....
1
4
5
6
11
14
?1
23
24
26
28
31
33
35
36
39
41
44
47
50
54
58
63
64
-------
                                 ii  OSWER Directive Number 9835.17




XXV.  ACCESS TO INFQRMATjQN	65




XXVI.  RETENTION OF RECORDS	67




XXVII.  NOTICES AND SUBMISSIONS 	  69




XXVIII.  EFFECTIVE DATE .....  	  70




XXIX.  RETENTION OF JURISDICTION	70




XXX.  APPENDICES	71




XXXI.  COMMUNITY RELATIONS	71




XXXII.  MODIFICATION  	  71




XXXIII.  LODGING AND OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT	  72




XXXIV.  SIGNATORIES/SERVICE 	  73
-------
MODEL CERCLA RD/RA CONSENT DECREE    OSWER Directive Number 9835.17
                IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                   FOR THE DISTRICT OF
                                   DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA  [and )
STATE OF 	]     )

          Plaintiffs,         )
                              )          CIVIL ACTION NO.
          v.                  )

	, INC.,   )
          Defendants.
                           CONSENT DECREE

                           I.   BACKGROUND

     A.  The United States of America ("United States"), on behalf

of the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection

Agency ("EPA"), filed a complaint in this matter pursuant to

Sections 106 and 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act  ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. SS 9606,

9607.

     B.  The United States in its complaint seeks, inter alia:

(1) reimbursement of costs incurred by EPA and the Department of

Justice for response actions at the 	 Superfund Site in

	, 	, together with accrued interest;

and (2) performance of studies and response work by the Defendants

at the Site consistent with the National Contingency Plan, 40

C.F.R. Part 300 (as amended)  ("NCP").
-------
                               - 2 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
     C.   In accordance with the NCP and Section l21(f)(l)(F) of
CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. $ 9621(f)(1)(F), EPA notified the State of
	 (the "State") on 	, 19	 of
negotiations with potentially responsible parties regarding the
implementation of the remedial design and remedial action for the
Site, and EPA has provided the State with an opportunity to
participate in such negotiations and be a party to this Consent
Decree.
     [D.  The State of 	 (the "State") has also
filed a complaint against the defendants in this Court alleging
that the defendants are liable to the State under Section 107 of
CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. $ 9607,  and [list state laws cited in the State's
complaint], for:  	;	.]
     E.  In accordance with Section 122(j)(l) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.
S 9622(j)(l), EPA notified the [relevant Federal natural resource
trustee(s)] on 	,  19	 of negotiations with potentially
responsible parties regarding the release of hazardous substances
that may have resulted in injury to the natural resources under
Federal trusteeship and encouraged the trustee(s) to participate in
the negotiation of this Consent Decree.
     F.  The Defendants that have entered into this Consent Decree
("Settling Defendants") do not admit any liability to the
Plaintiff[s] arising out of the transactions or occurrences alleged
in the complaint[s].
     G.  Pursuant to Section 105 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9605, EPA
placed the Site on the National Priorities List, set forth at 40
-------
                               - 3 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
C.FiR. Part 300, Appendix B, by publication in the Federal Register
on 	, 19	, 	 Fed. Reg. 	;
     H.  In response to a release or a substantial threat of a
release of a hazardous substance(s) at or from the Site, EPA [or
the Settling Defendants, other PRPs at the Site, or the State]
commenced on 	, 19	,  a Remedial Investigation and
Feasibility Study  ("RI/FS") for the Site pursuant to 40 C.F.R.
S 300.430;
     I.  EPA [or the Settling Defendants, other PRPs at the Site,
or the State] completed a Remedial Investigation ("RI") Report on
	, 	, 19	, and EPA [or the Settling Defendants, other
PRPs at the Site, or the State] completed [issued] a Feasibility
Study ("FS") Report on 	, 19	;
     J.  Pursuant to Section 117 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S 9617, EPA
published notice of the completion of the FS and of the proposed
plan for remedial action on 	, 19	,  in a major
local newspaper of general circulation.  EPA provided an
opportunity for written and oral comments from the public on the
proposed plan for remedial action.  A copy of the transcript of the
public meeting is available to the public as part of the
administrative record upon which the Regional Administrator based
the selection of the response action.
     K.  The decision by EPA on the remedial action to be
implemented at the Site is embodied in a final Record of Decision
("ROD"), executed on 	, 19	, [on which the State had a
reasonable opportunity to review and comment/on which the State has
-------
                               - 4 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
given its concurrence.]  The ROD includes  [EPA's explanation for
any significant differences between the final plan and the proposed
plan as well as ]a responsiveness summary to the public comments.
Notice of the final plan was published in accordance with Section
117(b) of CERCLA.
     L.  Based on the information presently available to EPA [and
the State], EPA [and the State] believe[s] that the Work will be
properly and promptly conducted by the Settling Defendants if
conducted in accordance with the requirements of this Consent
Decree and its appendices.
     M.  Solely for the purposes of Section 113(j)  of CERCLA,  the
Remedial Action selected by the ROD and the Work to be performed by
the Settling Defendants shall constitute a response action taken or
ordered by the President.
     N.  The Parties recognize, and the Court by entering this
Consent Decree finds, that this Consent Decree has been negotiated
by the Parties in good faith and implementation of this Consent
Decree will expedite the cleanup of the Site and will avoid
prolonged and complicated litigation between the Parties,  and that
this Consent Decree is fair, reasonable,  and in the public
interest.
     NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby Ordered, Adjudged,  and Decreed:
                         II.  JURISDICTION
     1.  This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of
this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §5 1331 and 1345, and 42 U.S.C.
$S 9606, 9607,  and 9613(b).  This Court also has personal
-------
                               - 5 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
jurisdiction over the Settling Defendants.  Solely for the purposes
of this Consent Decree and the underlying complaint[s],  Settling
Defendants waive all objections and defenses that they may have to
jurisdiction of the Court or to venue in this District.   Settling
Defendants shall not challenge the terns of this Consent Decree or
this Court's jurisdiction to enter and enforce this Consent Decree.
                        III.  PARTIES BOUND
     2.  This Consent Decree applies to and is binding upon the
United States [and the State] and upon Settling Defendants and
their  [heirs,] successors and assigns.  Any change in ownership or
corporate status of a Settling Defendant including, but not limited
to, any transfer of assets or real or personal property shall in no
way alter such Settling Defendant's responsibilities under this
Consent Decree.
     3.  Settling Defendants shall provide a copy of this Consent
Decree to each contractor hired to perform the Work (as defined
below) required by this Consent Decree and to each person
representing any Settling Defendant with respect to the Site or the
Work and shall condition all contracts entered into hereunder upon
performance of the Work in conformity with the terms of this
Consent Decree.  Settling Defendants or their contractors shall
provide written notice of the Consent Decree to all subcontractors
hired to perform any portion of the Work required by this Consent
Decree.  Settling Defendants shall nonetheless be responsible for
ensuring that their contractors and subcontractors perform the Work
contemplated herein in accordance with this Consent Decree.  With
-------
                               - 6 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
regard to the activities undertaken pursuant to this Consent
Decree, each contractor and subcontractor shall be deemed to be in
a contractual relationship with the Settling Defendants within the
meaning of Section 107(b)(3) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S 9607(b)(3).
                          IV.   DEFINITIONS
     4.  Unless otherwise expressly provided herein, terms used in
this Consent Decree which are defined in CERCLA or in regulations
promulgated under CERCLA shall have the meaning assigned to them in
CERCLA or in such regulations.  Whenever terms listed below are
used in this Consent Decree or in the appendices attached hereto
and incorporated hereunder, the following definitions shall apply:
     "CERCLA11 shall mean the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
SS 9601 £t sea.
     "Consent Decree" shall mean this Decree and all appendices
attached hereto (listed in Section XXX).  In the event of conflict
between this Decree and any appendix, this Decree shall control.
     "Day" shall mean a calendar day unless expressly stated to be
a working day.  "Working day" shall mean a day other than a
Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday.  In computing any period of
time under this Consent Decree, where the last day would fall on a
Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the period shall run until
the close of business of the next working day.
     "EPA" shall mean the United States Environmental Protection
Agency and any successor departments or agencies of the United
States.
-------
                               - 7 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17



                         11 shall mean the (State Pollution Control
Agency or Environmental Protection Agency) and any successor



departments or agencies of the State.



     "Future Response Costs" shall mean all costs, including, but


not limited to, direct and indirect costs, that the United States



[and the State] incur(s) in reviewing or developing plans, reports


and other items pursuant to this Consent Decree, verifying the


Work, or otherwise implementing, overseeing, or enforcing this



Consent Decree, including, but not limited to, payroll costs,


contractor costs, travel costs, laboratory costs, the costs


incurred pursuant to Sections VII, VIII, X (including, but not



limited to, attorneys fees and the amount of just compensation),



XVI, and Paragraph 84 of Section XXII.  Future Response Costs shall


also include all costs, including direct and indirect costs, paid



by the United States [and the State] in connection with the Site



between [insert the date identified in the Past Response Costs


definition] and the effective date of this Consent Decree and all


interest on the Past Response Costs from [insert the date


identified in the Past Response Costs definition] to [the date of


payment of the Past Response Costs].


     "National Contingency Plan" or "NCP" shall mean the National


Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan promulgated


pursuant to Section 105 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S 9605, codified at 40
                                                                t
                                                                (

C.F.R. Part 300, including, but not limited to, any amendments



thereto.
-------
                               - 8 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
     "Operation and Maintenance" or "0 & M" shall mean all
activities required to maintain the effectiveness of the Remedial
Action as required under the Operation and Maintenance Plan
approved or developed by EPA pursuant to this Consent Decree and
the Statement of Work (SOW) .
     "Owner Settling Defendants" shall mean the Settling Defendants
listed in Appendix E.
     "Paragraph" shall mean a portion of this Consent Decree
identified by an arabic numeral or an upper case letter.
     "Parties" shall mean the United States [, the State of
_ ,] and the Settling Defendants.
     "Past Response Costs" shall mean all costs, including, but not
limited to, direct and indirect costs and interest, that the United
States [and the State] incurred and paid with regard to the Site
prior to [the date of the most recent cost update] .
     "Performance Standards" shall mean those cleanup standards,
standards of control, and other substantive requirements,  criteria
or limitations set forth in the ROD or Section _ of the SOW.
     "Plaintiff [s]" shall mean the United States [and the State of
     "RCRA" shall mean the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 42
U.S.C. SS 6901 ££ sea, (also known as the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act) .
     "Record of Decision" or "ROD" shall mean the EPA Record of
Decision relating to the [Site or _ Operable Unit at the Site]
-------
                               - 9 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
signed on	, 19	,  by the Regional Administrator,
EPA Region 	, and all attachments thereto.
     "Remedial Action" shall mean those activities, except for
Operation and Maintenance, to he undertaken by the Settling
Defendants to implement the final plans and specifications
submitted by the Settling Defendants pursuant to the Remedial
Design Work Plan and approved by EPA.
     "Remedial Action Work Plan" shall mean the document submitted
by the Settling Defendants pursuant to Paragraph 12.a of this
Consent Decree and described more fully in Paragraph 12.b.
     "Remedial Design" shall mean those activities to be undertaken
by the Settling Defendants to develop the final plans and
specifications for the Remedial Action pursuant to the Remedial
Design Work Plan.
     "Remedial Design Work Plan" shall mean the document submitted
by the Settling Defendants pursuant to Paragraph 11.a of this
Consent Decree and described more fully in Paragraph 11.b.
     "Section" shall mean a portion of this Consent Decree
identified by a roman numeral.
     "Settling Defendants" shall mean those Parties identified in
Appendices D (Non-Owner Settling Defendants) and E (Owner Settling
Defendants).
     ["Site" shall mean the	 Superfund site,
encompassing approximately 	 acres,  located at [address or
description of location] in [name of city]. 	 County,
-------
                               - 10 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
 fname of state! and depicted generally on the map attached as
Appendix C.]
     "State"  [or  "Commonwealth"] shall mean the State
 [Commonwealthj of 	.
     "Statement of Work" or "SOW" shall mean the statement of work
for implementation of the Remedial Design, Remedial Action, and
Operation and Maintenance at the Site, as set forth in Appendix B
to this Consent Decree anc any modifications made in accordance
with this Consent Decree.
     "Supervising Contractor" shall mean the principal contractor
retained by the Settling Defendants to supervise and direct the
implementation of the Work under this Consent Decree.
     "United States" shall mean the United States of America.
     "Waste Material" shall mean (1) any "hazardous substance"
under Section 101(14) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S 9601(14); (2) any
pollutant or contaminant under Section 101(33),  42 U.S.C.
S 9601(33); [(3) any "solid waste" under Section 1004(27)  of RCRA,
42 U.S.C. S 6903(27); and (4)  any "hazardous material" under [State
statutory citation]].
     "Work" shall mean all activities Settling Defendants are
required to perform under this Consent Decree, except those
required by Section XXVI (Retention of Records).
-------
                               - 11 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
                       V.   GENERAL PROVISIONS
     5.  Objectives of the Parties
     The objectives of the Parties in entering into this Consent
Decree are to protect public health or welfare or the environment
at the Site by the design and implementation of response actions at
the Site by the Settling Defendants and to reimburse response costs
of the Plaintiffs.
     6.  Commitments by Settling Defendants
          a.  Settling Defendants shall finance and perform the
Work in accordance with this Consent Decree and all plans,
standards, specifications, and schedules set forth in or developed
and approved by EPA pursuant to this Consent Decree.  Settling
Defendants shall also reimburse the United States [and the State]
for Past Response Costs and Future Response Costs as provided in
this Consent Decree.
          b.  The obligations of Settling Defendants to finance and
perform the Work and to pay amounts owed the United States [and the
State] under this Consent Decree are joint and several.  In the
event of the insolvency or other failure of any one or more
        0
Settling Defendants to implement the requirements of this Consent
Decree, the remaining Settling Defendants shall complete all such
requirements.
     7.  Compliance With Applicable Law
     All activities undertaken by Settling Defendants pursuant to
this Consent Decree shall be performed in accordance with the
requirements of all applicable federal and state laws and
-------
                               - 12 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
regulations.  Settling Defendants must also comply with all
applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements of all Federal
and state environmental laws as set forth in the ROD and the SOW.
The activities conducted pursuant to this Consent Decree, if
approved by EPA, shall be considered to be consistent with the NCP.
     8.  Permits
          a.  As provided in Section 121(e)  of CERCLA and $300.5 of
the NCP, no permit shall be required for any portion of the Work
conducted entirely on-site.  Where any portion of the Work requires
a federal or state permit or approval, Settling Defendants shall
submit timely and complete applications and take all other actions
necessary to obtain all such permits or approvals.
          b.  The Settling Defendants may seek relief under the
provisions of Section XIX (Force Majeure)  of this Consent Decree
for any delay in the performance of the Work resulting from a
failure to obtain, or a delay in obtaining,  any permit required for
the Work.
          c.  This Consent Decree is not,  and shall not be
construed to be, a permit issued pursuant to any federal or state
                                                           •
statute or regulation.
     [9.  Notice of Obligations to Successors-in-Title
          a.  Within 15 days after the entry of this Consent
Decree, the Owner Settling Defendant(s) shall record a certified
copy of this Consent Decree with the Recorder's Office [or Registry
of Deeds or other appropriate office],	 County,
State of 	.  Thereafter, each deed, title, or other
-------
                               - 13 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
instrument conveying an  interest in  the property included in the
Site shall contain a notice stating  that the property is subject to
this Consent Decree  [and any lien  retained by th
-------
                               - 14  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
grantee.  In the event of any such conveyance, the Settling
Defendants' obligations under this Consent Decree, including their
obligations to provide or secure access pursuant to Section X,
shall continue to be met by the Settling Defendants.  In addition,
if the United States [and the State] approve[s], the grantee nay
perform some or all of the Work under this Consent Decree.  In no
event shall the conveyance of an interest in property that
includes, or is a portion of, the Site release or otherwise affect
the liability of the Settling Defendants to comply with the Consent
Decree.]
        VI.  PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK BY SETTLING DEFENDANTS
     [10.  Selection of Supervising Contractor.
          a.  All aspects of the Work to be performed by Settling
Defendants pursuant to Sections VI (Performance of the Work by
Settling Defendants),  VII (Additional Response Actions),  VIII
(U.S. EPA Periodic Review),  and IX (Quality Assurance, Sampling and
Data Analysis)  of this Consent Decree shall be under the direction
and supervision of the Supervising Contractor, the selection of
which shall be subject to disapproval by EPA[  after a reasonable
opportunity for review and comment by the State.]  within 10 days
after the lodging of this Consent Decree, Settling Defendants shall
notify EPA [and the State] in writing of the name, title, and
qualifications of any contractor proposed to be the Supervising
Contractor.  EPA will issue a notice of disapproval or an
authorization to proceed.  If at any time thereafter, Settling
Defendants propose to change a Supervising Contractor, Settling
-------
                               - 15 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
Defendants shall give such notice  to EPA [and the State] and must
obtain an authorization to proceed from EPA[, after a reasonable
opportunity for review and comment by the State,] before the new
Supervising Contractor performs, directs, or supervises any Work
under this Consent Decree.
          b.  If EPA disapproves a proposed Supervising Contractor,
EPA will notify Settling Defendants in writing.  Settling
Defendants shall submit to EPA  [and the State] a list of
contractors, including the qualifications of each contractor, that
would be acceptable to them within 30 days of receipt of EPA's
disapproval of the contractor previously proposed.  EPA will
provide written notice of the names of any contractor(s) that it
disapproves and an authorization to proceed with respect to any of
the other contractors.  Settling Defendants may select any
contractor from that list that  is not disapproved and shall notify
EPA [and the State] of the name of the contractor selected within
21 days of EPA's authorization  to proceed.
     c.  If EPA fails to provide written notice of its
authorization to proceed or disapproval as provided in this
Paragraph and this failure prevents the Settling Defendants from
meeting one or more deadlines in a plan approved by the EPA
pursuant to this Consent Decree, Settling Defendants may seek
relief under the provisions of  Section XIX (Force Majeure) hereof.]
-------
                               -  16  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
     [11.  Remedial Design.
          a.  Within 	 days after EPA's issuance of an
authorization to proceed pursuant to Paragraph 10, Settling
Defendants shall submit to EPA and the State a work plan for the
design of the Remedial Action at the Site ("Remedial Design Work
Plan").  The Remedial Design Work Plan shall provide for design of
the remedy set forth in the **OD in accordance with the SOW and,
upon its approval by EPA, shall be incorporated into and become
enforceable under this Consent Decree.  Within 	 days after EPA's
issuance of an authorization to proceed, the Settling Defendants
shall submit to EPA and the State a Health and Safety Plan for
field design activities which conforms to the applicable
Occupational Safety and Health Administration and EPA requirements
including, but not limited to, 29 C.F.R. S 1910.120.
          b.  The Remedial Design Work Plan shall include plans and
schedules for implementation of all remedial design and pre-design
tasks identified in the SOW, including, but not limited to, plans
and schedules for the completion of: [List all items which should
be included in*the Remedial Design Work Plan.  This list will be
based on site specific factors and may include the following items:
(1) design sampling and analysis plan  (including, but not limited
to, a Remedial Design Quality Assurance Project Plan (RD QAPP) in
accordance with Section IX (Quality Assurance, Sampling and Data
Analysis)); (2)  a treatability study;  (3) a Pre-design Work Plan;
(4) a preliminary design submittal; (5) an intermediate design
submittal;  (6) a pre-final/final design submittal; and (7) a
-------
                               - 17 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
Construction Quality Assurance  Plan.]  In addition, the Remedial
Design Work Plan shall include  a schedule for completion of the
Remedial Action Work Plan.
          c.  Upon approval of  the Remedial Design Work Plan by
EPA, after a reasonable opportunity for review and comment by the
State, and submittal of the Health and Safety Plan for all field
activities to EPA and the State, Settling Defendants shall
implement the Remedial Design Work Plan.  The Settling Defendants
shall submit to EPA and the State all plans, submittals and other
deliverables required under the approved Remedial Design Work Plan
in accordance with the approved schedule for review and approval
pursuant to Section XII (Submissions Requiring Agency Approval).
Unless otherwise directed by EPA, Settling Defendants shall not
commence further Remedial Design activities at the Site prior to
approval of the Remedial Design Work Plan.
          d.  The preliminary design submittal shall include, at a
minimum, the following: (1) design criteria; (2) results of
treatability studies; (3) results of additional field sampling and
pre-design work; (4) project delivery strategy; (5) preliminary
plans, drawings and sketches; (6) required specifications in
outline form; and (7) preliminary construction schedule.
          e.  The intermediate  design submittal, if required by EPA
or if independently submitted by the Settling Defendants, shall be
a continuation and expansion of the preliminary design.  Any value
engineering proposals must be identified and evaluated during this
review.
-------
                               - 18  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
          f.  The pre-final/final design submittal shall include,
at a minimum, the following:   (1) final plans and specifications;
(2) Operation and Maintenance Plan;  (3) Construction Quality
Assurance Project Plan (CQAPP);  (4) Field Sampling Plan (directed
at measuring progress towards meeting Performance Standards); and
(5) Contingency Plan.  The CQAPP, which shall detail the approach
to quality assurance during construction activities at the site,
shall specify a quality assurance official ("QA Official"),
independent of the Supervising Contractor, to conduct a quality
assurance program during the construction phase of the project.]
     [12.  Remedial Action.
          a.  Within 	 days after the approval of the final design
submittal, Settling Defendants shall submit to EPA and the State, a
work plan for the performance of the Remedial Action at the Site
("Remedial Action Work Plan").  The Remedial Action Work Plan shall
provide for construction of the remedy, in accordance with the SOW,
as set forth in the design plans and specifications in the approved
final design submittal.  Upon its approval by EPA, the Remedial
Action Work Plan shall be incorporated into and become enforceable
under this Consent Decree.  At the same time as they submit the
Remedial Action Work Plan, Settling Defendants shall submit to EPA
and the State a Health and Safety Plan for field activities
required by the Remedial Action Work Plan which conforms to the
applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration and EPA
requirements including, but not limited to, 29 C.F.R. $ 1910.120.
-------
                               - 19 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
          b.  The Remedial Action Work Plan shall include the
following:   [List all activities for which methodologies, plans and
schedules should be  included  in the Remedial Action Work Plan.
This list will be based on site specific factors and .may include
the following: (1) the schedule for completion of the Remedial
Action;  (2) method for selection of the contractor;  (3) schedule
for developing and submitting other required Remedial Action plans;
(4) methodology for  implementation of the Construction Quality
Assurance Plan; (5)  a groundwater monitoring plan; (6) methods for
satisfying permitting requirements;  (7) methodology for
implementation of the Operation and Maintenance Plan;  (8)
methodology for implementation of the Contingency Plan;
(9) tentative formulation of the Remedial Action team; (10)
construction quality control plan  (by constructor); and (11)
procedures and plans for the decontamination of equipment and the
disposal of contaminated materials.]  The Remedial Action Work Plan
also shall include a schedule for implementation of all Remedial
Action tasks identified in the final design submittal and shall
identify the initial formulation of the Settling Defendants'
Remedial Action Project Team  (including, but not limited to, the
Supervising Contractor).
          c.  Upon approval of the Remedial Action Work Plan by
EPA, after a reasonable opportunity for review and comment by the
State, Settling Defendants shall implement the activities required
under the Remedial Action Work Plan.  The Settling Defendants shall
submit to EPA and the State all plans, submittals, or other
-------
                               - 20 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE  NO.  9835.17
 del'iverables  required under the  approved Remedial  Action Work  Plan
 in accordance with the approved  schedule for  review  and  approval
 pursuant  to Section XII (Submissions  Requiring Agency  Approval).
 Unless  otherwise directed by EPA,  Settling  Defendants  shall  not
'commence  physical on-site activities  at  the Site prior to approval
 of the  Remedial  Action Work Plan.]
     13.   The Work performed by  the Settling  Defendants  pursuant  to
 this Consent  Decree shall include  the obligation to  achieve  the
 Performance Standards.
     14.   Settling Defendants acknowledge and agree  that nothing  in
 this Consent  Decree,  the  SOW,  or the  Remedial Design or  Remedial
 Action  Work Plans constitutes a  warranty or representation of  any
 kind by Plaintiff[s]  that compliance  with the work requirements set
 forth in  the  SOW and the  Work Plans will achieve the Performance
 Standards.  Settling Defendants' compliance with the work
 requirements  shall not foreclose Plaintiff[s]  from seeking
 compliance with  all terms and conditions of this Consent Decree,
 including,  but not limited to, the applicable Performance
 Standards.
     15.   Settling Defendants shall,  prior  to any  off-Site
 shipment  of Waste Material from  the Site to an out-of-state  waste
 management facility,  provide written  notification  to the
 appropriate state environmental  official in the receiving
 facility's state and to the EPA  Project  Coordinator  of such
 shipment  of Waste Material.   However,  this  notification  requirement
-------
                               - 21 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17



shall not apply to any off-Site shipments when the total volume of



all such shipments will not exceed 10 cubic yards.



          a.  The Settling Defendants shall include in the written



notification -che following information, where available: (1) the



name and location of the facility to which the Waste Material are



to be shipped; (2) the type and quantity of the Waste Material to



be shipped; (3) the expected schedule for the shipment of the Waste



Material; and  (4) the method of transportation.  The Settling



Defendants shall notify the state in which the planned receiving



facility is located of major changes in the shipment plan,  such as



a decision to ship the_Waste Material to another facility within



the same state, or to a facility in another state.



          b.  The identity of the receiving facility and state will



be determined by the Settling Defendants following the award of the



contract for Remedial Action construction.  The Settling Defendants



shall provide the information required by Paragraph 15.a as soon as



practicable after the award of the contract and before the Waste



Material is actually shipped.
       '•V


                 VII.  ADDITIONAL RESPONSE ACTIONS



     16.  In the event that EPA determines or the Settling



Defendants propose that additional response actions are necessary



to meet the Performance Standards or to carry out the remedy



selected in the ROD, notification of such additional response



actions shall be provided to the Project Coordinator for the other



party(ies).
-------
                               - 22  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
     17.  Within 30 days of receipt of notice from EPA or Settling
Defendants pursuant to Paragraph 16 that additional response
actions are necessary  (or such longer time as may be specified by
EPA), Settling Defendants shall submit for approval by EPA, after
reasonable opportunity for review and comment by the State, a work
plan for the additional response actions.  The plan shall conform
to the applicable requirements of Paragraphs 11 and 12.  Upon
approval of the plan pursuant to Section XII (Submissions Requiring
Agency Approval), Settling Defendants shall implement the plan for
additional response actions in accordance with the schedule
contained therein.
     18.  Any additional response actions that Settling Defendants
propose are necessary to meet the Performance Standards or to carry
out the remedy selected in the ROD shall be subject to approval by
EPA, after reasonable opportunity for review and comment by the
State, and, if authorized by EPA, shall be completed by Settling
Defendants in accordance with plans, specifications, and schedules
approved or established by EPA pursuant to Section XII (Submissions
Requiring Agency Approval).
     19.  Settling Defendants may invoke the procedures set forth
in Section XX (Dispute Resolution)  to dispute EPA's determination
that additional response actions are necessary to meet the
Performance Standards or to carry out the remedy selected in the
ROD.  Such a dispute shall be resolved pursuant to Paragraphs 62-
65 of this Consent Decree.
-------
                               - 23 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
                     VIII.   EPA PERIODIC REVIEW
     20.  Settling Defendants shall conduct any studies and
investigations as requested by  EPA in order to permit EPA to
conduct reviews at least every  five years as required by Section
121(c) of CERCLA and any applicable regulations.
     21.  If required by Sections  113(k)(2) or 117 of CERCLA,
Settling Defendants and the public will be provided with an
opportunity to comment on any further response actions proposed by
EPA as a result of the review conducted pursuant to Section 121(c)
of CERCLA and to submit written comments for the record during the
public comment period.  After the period for submission of written
comments is closed, the Regional Administrator,  EPA Region 	, or
his/her delegate will determine in writing whether further response
actions are appropriate.
     22.  If the Regional Administrator, EPA Region 	, or his/her
delegate determines that information received, in whole or in part,
during the review conducted pursuant to Section 121(c) of CERCLA,
indicates that the Remedial Action is not protective of human
health and the environment, the Settling Defendants shall undertake
any further response actions EPA has determined are appropriate,
unless their liability for such further response actions is barred
by the Covenant Not to Sue set  forth in Section XXII.  Settling
Defendants shall submit a plan  for such work to EPA for approval in
                                                  o
accordance with the procedures  set forth in Section VI (Performance
of the Work by Settling Defendants) and shall implement the plan
approved by EPA.  The Settling  Defendants may invoke the procedures
-------
                               - 24 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
set forth in Section XX  (Dispute Resolution) to dispute (1) EPA's
determination that the remedial action is not protective of human
health and the environment,  (2) EPA's selection of the further
response actions ordered as  arbitrary and capricious or otherwise
not in accordance with law,  or  (3) EPA's determination that the
Settling Defendant's liability for the further response actions
requested is reserved in Paragraphs 80, 81, or 83 or otherwise not
barred by the Covenant Not to Sue set forth in Section XXII.
        IX.  QUALITY ASSURANCE. SAMPLING, and DATA ANALYSIS
     23.  Settling Defendants shall use quality assurance, quality
control, and chain of custody procedures for all [treatability,
design, compliance and monitoring] samples in accordance with EPA's
"Interim Guidelines and Specifications For Preparing Quality
Assurance Project Plans," December 1980, (QAMS-005/80); "Data
Quality Objective Guidance," (EPA/540/G87/003 and 004); "EPA NEIC
Policies and Procedures Manual," May 1978,  revised November 1984,
(EPA 330/9-78-001-R); and subsequent amendments to such guidelines
upon notification by EPA to  Settling Defendants of such amendment.
Amended guidelines shall apply only to procedures conducted after
such notification.  Prior to the commencement of any monitoring
project under this Consent Decree, Settling Defendants shall submit
to EPA for approval, after a reasonable opportunity for review and
comment by the State, a Quality Assurance Project Plan ("QAPP") to
                 «
EPA and the State that is consistent with the SOW,  the NCP and
[applicable guidance documents.]  If relevant to the proceeding,
the Parties agree that validated sampling data generated in
-------
                               - 25 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
accordance with the QAPP(s) and reviewed and approved by EPA shall
be admissible as evidence, without objection, in any proceeding
under this Decree.  Settling Defendants shall ensure that EPA [and
State] personnel and its  [their] authorized representatives are
allowed access at reasonable times to all laboratories utilized by
Settling Defendants in implementing this Consent Decree.  In
addition, Settling Defendants shall ensure that such laboratories
shall analyze all samples submitted by EPA pursuant to the QAPP for
quality assurance monitoring.  Settling Defendants shall ensure
that the laboratories they utilize for the analysis of samples
taken pursuant to this Decree perform all analyses according to
accepted EPA methods.  Accepted EPA methods consist of those
methods which are documented in the  ["Contract Lab Program
Statement of Work for Inorganic Analysis" and the "Contract Lab
Program Statement of Work for Organic Analysis," dated February
1988], and any amendments made thereto during the course of the
implementation of this Decree.  Settling Defendants shall ensure
that all laboratories they use for analysis of samples taken
pursuant to this Consent Decree participate in an EPA or EPA-
equivalent QA/QC program.
     24.  Upon request, the Settling Defendants shall allow split
or duplicate samples to be taken by EPA [and the state] or their
authorized representatives.  Settling Defendants shall notify EPA
[and the State] not less than [28] days in advance of any sample
collection activity unless shorter notice is agreed to by EPA.  In
addition, EPA [and the State] shall have the right to take any
-------
                               - 26 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
additional samples that EPA  [or the State] deem necessary.  Upon
request, EPA  [and the State] shall allow the Settling Defendants to
take split or duplicate samples of any samples it takes as part of
the Plaintiff's['] oversight of the Settling Defendant's
implementation of the Work.
     25.  Settling Defendants shall submit to EPA [and the State]
	 copies of the results of all sampling and/or tests or other data
obtained or generated by or on behalf of Settling Defendants with
respect to the Site and/or the implementation of this Consent
Decree unless EPA agrees otherwise.
     26.  Notwithstanding any provision of this Consent Decree, the
United States [and the State] hereby retains all of its information
gathering and inspection authorities and rights, including
enforcement actions related thereto, under CERCLA, RCRA and any
other applicable statutes or regulations.
                             X.   ACCESS
     27.  Commencing upon the date of lodging of this Consent
Decree, the Settling Defendants agree to provide the United
States[, the State,] and their representatives, including EPA and
its contractors, access at all reasonable times to the Site and any
other property to which access is required for the implementation
of this Consent Decree, to the extent access to the property is
controlled by Settling Defendants, for the purposes of conducting
any activity related to this Consent Decree including, but not
limited to:
          a.  Monitoring the Work;
-------
                               - 27  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
          b.  Verifying any data or  information submitted to the
United States;
          c.  Conducting investigations relating to contamination
at or near the Site;
          d.  Obtaining samples;
          e.  Assessing the need for, planning, or implementing
additional response actions at or near the Site;
          f.  Inspecting and copying records, operating logs,
contracts, or other documents maintained or generated by Settling
Defendants or their agents, consistent with Section XXV; and
          g.   Assessing Settling Defendants' compliance with this
Consent Decree.
     28.  To the extent that the Site or any other property to
which access is required for the implementation of this Consent
Decree is owned or controlled by persons other than Settling
Defendants, Settling Defendants shall use best efforts to secure
from such persons access for Settling Defendants,  as well as for
the United States and the State and their representatives,
including, but not limited to, their contractors,  as necessary to
effectuate this Consent Decree.  For purposes of this Paragraph
"best efforts" includes the payment of reasonable sums of money in
consideration of access.  If any access required to complete the
Work is not obtained within 45 days of the date of lodging of this
Consent Decree, or within 45 days of the date EPA notifies the
Settling Defendants in writing that additional access beyond that
previously secured is necessary, Settling Defendants shall promptly
-------
                               - 28 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
notify the United States, and shall  include in that notification a
summary of the steps Settling Defendants have taken to attempt to
obtain access.  The United States  [or the State] may, as it deems
appropriate, assist Settling Defendants in obtaining access.
Settling Defendants shall reimburse  the United States [or the
State], in accordance with the procedures in Section XVII
(Reimbursement of Response Costs), for all costs incurred by the
United States in obtaining access.
     29.  Notwithstanding any provision of this Consent Decree, the
United States [and the State] retain[s] all of its access
authorities and rights, including enforcement authorities related
thereto, under CERCLA, RCRA and any  other applicable statute or
regulations.
                    XI.  REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
     30.  In addition to any other requirement of this Consent
Decree, Settling Defendants shall submit to EPA and the State
	 copies of written [monthly] progress reports that: (a)  describe
the actions which have been taken toward achieving compliance with
this Consent Decree during the previous [month]; (b) include a
summary of all results of sampling and tests and all other data
received or generated by Settling Defendants or their contractors
or agents in the previous [month]; (c) identify all work plans,
plans and other deliverables required by this Consent Decree
completed and submitted during the previous [month]; (d) describe
all actions, including, but not limited to, data collection and
implementation of work plans, which  are scheduled for the next [six
-------
                               - 29 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
weeks] and provide other information relating to the progress of
construction, including, but not limited to, critical path
diagrams, Gantt charts and Pert charts; (e) include information
regarding percentage of completion, unresolved delays encountered
or anticipated that may affect the future schedule fof
implementation of the Work, and a description of efforts made to
mitigate those delays or anticipated delays; (f) include any
modifications to the work plans or other schedules that Settling
Defendants have proposed to EPA or that have been approved by EPA;
and (g) describe all activities undertaken in support of the
Community Relations Plan during the previous [month] and those to
be undertaken in the next [six weeks].  Settling Defendants shall
submit these progress reports to EPA and the State by the [tenth
day of every month] following the lodging of this Consent Decree
until  [EPA notifies the Settling Defendants pursuant to Paragraph
48.b of Section XV (Certification of Completion).]  If requested by
EPA [or the State], Settling Defendants shall also provide
briefings for EPA [and the State] to discuss the progress of the
Work.
     31.  The Settling Defendants shall notify EPA of any change in
the schedule described in the monthly progress report for the
performance of any activity, including, but not limited to, data
collection and implementation of work plans, no later than seven
days prior to the performance of the activity.
     32.  Upon the occurrence of any event during performance of
the Work that Settling Defendants are required to report pursuant
-------
                              -  30 -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
to Section 103 of CERCLA or Section 304 of the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-know Act (EPCRA),  Settling Defendants shall.
within 24 hours of the on-set of such event orally notify the EPA
Project Coordinator or the Alternate EPA Project Coordinator (in
the event of the unavailability of the EPA Project Coordinator),
or, in the event that neither the EPA Project Coordinator or
Alternate EPA Project Coordinator is available, the Emergency
Response Section, Region 	, United States Environmental Protection
Agency.  These reporting requirements are in addition to the
reporting required by CERCLA Section 103 or EPCRA Section 304.
     33.  Within 20 days of the onset of such an event, Settling
Defendants shall furnish to Plaintiffs a written report, signed by
the Settling Defendant's Project Coordinator, setting forth the
events which occurred and the measures taken, and to be taken,  in
response thereto.  Within 30 days of the conclusion of such an
event, Settling Defendants shall submit a report setting forth all
actions taken in response thereto.
     34.  Settling Defendants shall submit 	 copies of all plans,
reports, and data required by the SOW, the Remedial Design Work
Plan, the Remedial Action Work Plan,  or any other approved plans to
EPA in accordance with the schedules set forth in such plans.
Settling Defendants shall simultaneously submit 	 copies of all
such plans, reports and data to the State.
     35.  All reports and other documents submitted by Settling
Defendants to EPA  (other than the [monthly] progress reports
referred to above) which purport to document Settling Defendants'
-------
                               - 31 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
compliance with the terms of this  Consent Decree shall be signed by
an authorized representative of the  Settling Defendants.
            XII.  SUBMISSIONS REQUIRING AGENCY APPROVAL
     36.  After review of any plan,  report or other item which is
required to be submitted for approval pursuant to this Consent
Decree, EPA, after reasonable opportunity for review and comment by
the State, shall: (a) approve, in  whole or in part, the submission;
(b) approve the submission upon specified conditions; (c) modify
the submission to cure the deficiencies; (d) disapprove, in whole
or in part, the submission, directing that the Settling Defendants
modify the submission; or (e) any  combination of the above.
     37.  In the event of approval,  approval upon conditions, or
modification by EPA, pursuant to Paragraph 36(a),  (b), or (c),
Settling Defendants shall proceed  to take any action required by
the plan, report, or other item, as  approved or modified by EPA
subject only to their right to invoke the Dispute Resolution
procedures set forth in Section XX (Dispute Resolution)  with
respect to the modifications or conditions made by EPA.   In the
event that EPA modifies the submission to cure the deficiencies
pursuant to Paragraph 36(c) and the  submission has a material
defect, EPA retains its right to seek stipulated penalties, as
provided in Section XXI.
     38.  a.  Upon receipt of a notice of disapproval pursuant to
Paragraph 36(d), Settling Defendants shall, within 14 days or such
other time as specified by EPA in  such notice, correct the
deficiencies and resubmit the plan,  report, or other item for
-------
                               - 32  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
approval.  Any stipulated penalties applicable to the submission,
as provided in Section XXI, shall accrue during the 14-day period
or otherwise specified period but shall not be payable unless the
resubmission is disapproved or modified due to a material defect as
provided in Paragraph 39.
     -b.  Notwithstanding the receipt of a notice of disapproval
pursuant to Paragraph 36(d), Settling Defendants shall proceed, at
the direction of EPA, to take any action required by any non-
deficient portion of the submission.  Implementation of any non-
deficient portion of a submission shall not relieve Settling
Defendants of any liability for stipulated penalties under Section
                        "\
XXI (Stipulated Penalties).
     39.  In the event that a resubmitted plan, report or other
item, or portion thereof, is disapproved by EPA, EPA may again
require the Settling Defendants to correct the deficiencies, in
accordance with the preceding Paragraphs.  EPA also retains the
right to amend or develop the plan,  report or other item. Settling
Defendants shall implement any such plan, report, or item as
amended or developed by EPA, subject only to their right to invoke
the procedures set forth in Section XX (Dispute Resolution).
     40.  If upon resubmission, a plan, report, or item is
disapproved or modified by EPA due to a material defect, Settling
Defendants shall be deemed to have failed to submit such plan,
report, or item timely and adequately unless the Settling
Defendants invoke the dispute resolution procedures set forth in
Section XX (Dispute Resolution) and EPA's action is overturned
-------
                               - 33  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
pursuant to that Section.  The provisions of Section XX (Dispute
Resolution) and Section XXI  (Stipulated Penalties) shall govern the
implementation of the Work and accrual and payment of any
stipulated penalties during Dispute Resolution.  If EPA's
disapproval or modification is upheld, stipulated penalties shall
accrue for such violation from the date on which the initial
submission was originally required,  as provided in Section XXI.
     41.  All plans, reports, and other items required to be
submitted to EPA under this Consent Decree shall, upon approval or
modification by EPA, be enforceable under this Consent Decree.  In
the event EPA approves or modifies a portion of a plan, report, or
other item required to be submitted to EPA under this Consent
Decree, the approved or modified portion shall be enforceable under
this Consent Decree.
                    XIII.  PROJECT COORDINATORS
     42.  Within 20 days of lodging this Consent Decree, Settling
Defendants[, the State] and EPA will notify each other, in writing,
of the name, address and telephone number of their respective
designated Project Coordinators and Alternate Project Coordinators.
If a Project Coordinator or Alternate Project Coordinator initially
designated is changed, the identity of the successor will be given
to the other parties at least 5 working days before the changes
occur, unless impracticable, but in no event later than the actual
day the change is made.  The Settling Defendants' Project
Coordinator shall be subject to disapproval by EPA and shall have
the technical expertise sufficient to adequately oversee all
-------
                               -  34  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17


aspects of the Work.  The Settling Defendants' Project Coordinator


shall not be an attorney for any of the Settling Defendants in this


matter.  He or sh-i may assign other representatives, including


other contractors, to serve as a Site representative for oversight


of performance of daily operations during remedial activities.


     43.  Plaintiff[s] may designate other representatives,


including, but not limited to, EPA [and State] employees,  and


federal [and State] contractors and consultants, to observe and


monitor the progress of any activity undertaken pursuant to this


Consent Decree.  EPA's Project Coordinator and Alternate Project


Coordinator shall have the authority lawfully vested in a Remedial


Project Manager (RPM) and an On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) by the


National Contingency Plan, 40 C.F.R. Part 300.  In addition, EPA's


Project Coordinator or Alternate Project Coordinator shall have


authority, consistent with the National Contingency Plan,  to halt
            o

any Work required by this Consent Decree and to take any necessary



response action when s/he determines that conditions at the Site



constitute an emergency situation or may present an immediate


threat to public health or welfare or the environment due to



release or threatened release of Waste Material.



     [44. EPA's Project Coordinator and the Settling Defendants'


Project Coordinator will meet, at a minimum, on a monthly basis.]
-------
                               - 35 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
           • XIV.  ASSURANCE OF  ABILITY TO COMPLETE WORK
     45.  Within  30 days  of entry  of this consent Decree, Settling
Defendants shall  establish and  maintain financial security in the
amount of $	  in one of  the following forms:
           (a) A surety bond guaranteeing performance of the Work;
           (b) One or  more irrevocable letters of credit equalling
the total estimated cost  of the Work;
           (c) A trust fund;
           (d) A guarantee to perform the Work by one or more parent
corporations or subsidiaries, or by one or more unrelated
corporations that have a  substantial business relationship with at
least one of the  Settling Defendants; or
           (.e) A demonstration that one or more of the Settling
Defendants satisfy the requirements'of 40 C.F.R. Part 264.143(f).
     46.  If the  Settling Defendants seek to demonstrate the
ability to complete the Work through a guarantee by a third party
pursuant to Paragraph 45(d) of  this Consent Decree, Settling
Defendants shall  demonstrate that  the guarantor satisfies the
requirements of 40 C.F.R. Part  264.143(f).  If Settling Defendants
seek to demonstrate their ability  to complete the Work by means of
the financial test or the corporate guarantee pursuant to Paragraph
45(d) or (e), they shall  resubmit  sworn statements conveying the
information required  by 40 C.F.R.  Part 264.143(f) annually, on the
anniversary of the effective date  of this Consent Decree.  In the
event that EPA[,  after a  reasonable opportunity for review and
comment by the State,] determines  at any time that the financial
-------
                               -  36  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
assurances provided pursuant to this Section are inadequate,
Settling Defendants shall, within 30 days of receipt of notice of
EPA's determination, obtain and present to EPA for approval one of
the other forms of financial assurance listed in Paragraph 45 of
this Consent Decree.  Settling Defendants' inability to demonstrate
financial ability to complete the Work shall not excuse performance
of any activities required under this Consent Decree.
                  XV.   CERTIFICATION OF  COMPLETION
     47.  Completion of the Remedial Action
          a.  Within 90 days after Settling Defendants conclude
that the Remedial Action has been fully performed and the
Performance Standards have been attained, Settling Defendants shall
schedule and conduct a pre-certification inspection to be attended
by Settling Defendantsf,] [and] EPA [and the State].  If, after the
pre-certification inspection, the Settling Defendants still believe
that the Remedial Action has been fully performed and the
Performance Standards have been attained, they shall submit a
written report requesting certification to EPA for approval, with a
copy to the State, pursuant to Section XII (Submissions Requiring
Agency Approval) within 30 days of the inspection.   In the report,
a registered professional engineer and the Settling Defendants'
Project Coordinator shall state that the Remedial Action has been
completed in full 'satisfaction of the requirements of this Consent
Decree.  The written report shall include as-built drawings signed
and stamped by a professional engineer.   The report shall contain
the following statement, signed by a responsible corporate official
-------
                               - 37 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
of a Settling Defendant or the  Settling Defendants' Project
Coordinator:
     "To the best of ay knowledge, after thorough
     investigation, I certify that the information contained
     in or accompanying this submission is true, accurate and
     complete.  I am aware that there are significant
     penalties for submitting false information, including the
     possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing
     violations."
If, after completion of the pre-certification inspection and
receipt and review of the written report, EPA, after reasonable
opportunity to review and comment by the State,  determines that the
Remedial Action or any portion thereof has not been completed in
accordance with this Consent Decree or that the Performance
Standards have not been achieved, EPA will notify Settling
Defendants in writing of the activities that must be undertaken to
complete the Remedial Action and achieve the Performance Standards.
EPA will set forth in the notice a schedule for performance of such
activities consistent with the Consent Decree and the SOW or
require the Settling Defendants to submit a schedule to EPA for
approval pursuant to Section XII (Submissions Requiring Agency
Approval).  Settling Defendants shall perform all activities
described in the notice in accordance with the specifications and
schedules established pursuant to this Paragraph, subject to their
right to invoke the dispute resolution procedures set forth in
Section XX (Dispute Resolution).
          b.  If EPA concludes, based on the initial or any
subsequent report requesting Certification of Completion and after
a reasonable opportunity for review and comment by the State,  that
-------
                               - 38 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
the Remedial Action has been fully performed in accordance with
this Consent Decree and that the Performance Standards have been
achieved, EPA will so certify in writing to Settling Defendants.
This certification shall constitute the Certification of Completion
of the Remedial Action for purposes of this Consent Decree,
including, but not limited to, Section XXII (Covenants Not to Sue
by Plaintiffs).  Certification of Completion of the Remedial Action
shall not affect Settling Defendants' obligations under this
Consent Decree.
     48.  Completion of the Work
          a. Within 90 days after Settling Defendants conclude that
all phases of the Work (including O & M),  have been fully
performed, Settling Defendants shall schedule and conduct a pre-
certification inspection to be attended by Settling Defendants[,]
[and] EPA [and the State].  If, after the pre-certification
inspection,  the Settling Defendants still believe that the Work has
been fully performed, Settling Defendants shall submit a written
report by a registered professional engineer stating that the Work
has been completed in full satisfaction of the requirements of this
Consent Decree.  The report shall contain the following statement,
signed by a responsible corporate official of a Settling Defendant
or the Settling Defendants' Project Coordinator:
     "To the best of my knowledge,  after thorough
     investigation, I certify that the information contained
     in or accompanying this submission is true,  accurate and
     complete.  I am aware that there are significant
     penalties for submitting false information,  including the
     possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing
     violations."
-------
                               - 39  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
If, after review of the written report, EPA, after reasonable
opportunity to review and comment by the State, determines that any
portion of the Work has not been completed in accordance with this
Consent Decree, EPA will notify Settling Defendants in writing of
the activities that must be undertaken to complete the Work.  EPA
will set forth in the notice a schedule for performance of such
activities consistent with the Consent Decree and the SOW or
require the Settling Defendants to submit a schedule to EPA for
approval pursuant to Section XII (Submissions Requiring Agency
Approval).  Settling Defendants shall perform all activities
described in the notice in accordance with the specifications and
schedules established therein, subject to their right to invoke the
dispute resolution procedures set forth in Section XX (Dispute
Resolution).
          b.   If EPA concludes, based on the initial or any
subsequent request for Certification of Completion by Settling
Defendants and after a reasonable opportunity for review and
comment by the State, that the Work has been fully performed in
accordance with this Consent Decree, EPA will so notify the
Settling Defendants in writing.
                      XVI.   EMERGENCY RESPONSE
     49.  In the event of any action or occurrence during the
performance of the Work which causes or threatens a release of
Waste Material from the Site that constitutes an emergency
situation or may present an immediate threat to public health or
welfare or the environment, Settling Defendants shall, subject to
-------
                               - 40 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
Paragraph 50, immediately take all appropriate action to prevent,
abate, or minimize such release or threat of release, and shall
immediately notify the EPA's Project Coordinator, or, if the
Project Coordinator is unavailable, EPA's Alternate Project
Coordinator.  If neither of these persons is available, the
Settling Defendants shall notify the EPA [Emergency Response Unit],
Region 	.   Settling Defendants shall take such actions in
consultation with EPA's Project Coordinator or other available
authorized EPA officer and in accordance with all applicable
provisions of the Health and Safety Plans,  the Contingency Plans,
and any other applicable plans or documents developed pursuant to
the SOW.  In the event that Settling Defendants fail to take
appropriate response action as required by this Section, and EPA
[or, as appropriate, the State] take[s] such action instead,
Settling Defendants shall reimburse EPA [and the State] all costs
of the response action not inconsistent with the NCP pursuant to
Section XVII (Reimbursement of Response Costs).
     50.  Nothing in the preceding Paragraph or in this Consent
Decree shall be deemed to limit any authority of the United
States[, or the State,] to take, direct, or order all appropriate
action or to seek an order from the Court to protect human health
and the environment or to prevent, abate,  respond to, or minimize
an actual or threatened release of Waste Material on, at,  or from
the Site.
-------
                               - 41  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
               XVII.   REIMBURSEMENT  OF RESPONSE  COSTS
     51.  Within 30 days of the effective date of this Consent
Decree, Settling Defendants shall:
          a.  Pay to the United States $ _    ,  in the form of
a certified check or checks made payable to "EPA Hazardous
Substance Superfund," and referencing CERCLA Number rsite/Spill ID
Number ] and DOJ Case Number _ in reimbursement of Past
Response Costs.  The Settling Defendants shall forward the
certified check (s) to [Insert appropriate Regional Superfund
Lockbox number and address] and shall send copies of the check to
the United States as specified  in Section XXVII (Notices and
Submissions) and [names of any other receiving officials at EPA and
their mailing addresses].
          [b.  Pay to the State $ _ in the form of a
certified check or checks made payable to _ , in
reimbursement of Past Response Costs incurred by the State.  The
Settling Defendants shall send the certified check (s)  to
     52.  Settling Defendants shall reimburse the United States
[and the State] for all Future Response Costs not inconsistent with
the National Contingency Plan incurred by the United States [and
the State].  The United States [and the State] will [each] send
Settling Defendants a bill requiring payment that includes a [name
standard Regionally-prepared cost summary, which includes direct
and indirect costs incurred by EPA, DOJ and the State and their
contractors] on a [periodic] basis.  Settling Defendants shall make
-------
                               - 42 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
all payments within 30 days of  Settling Defendants' receipt of each
bill requiring payment, except  as  otherwise provided in Paragraph
53.  The Settling Defendants shall make all payments required by
this Paragraph in the manner described in Paragraph 51.
     53.  Settling Defendants may  contest payment of any Future
Response Costs under Paragraph  52  if they determine that the United
States  [or the State] has made  an  accounting error or if they
allege that a cost item that is included represents costs that are
inconsistent with the NCP.  Such objection shall be made in writing
within 30 days of receipt of the bill and must be sent to the
United States [(if the United States' accounting is being disputed)
or the State (if the State's accounting is being disputed)]
pursuant to Section XXVII (Notices and Submissions).   Any such
objection shall specifically identify the contested Future Response
Costs and the basis for objection.  In the event of an objection,
the Settling Defendants shall within the 30 day period pay all
uncontested Future Response Costs to the United States [or the
State] in the manner described  in Paragraph 51.   Simultaneously,
the Settling Defendants shall establish an interest bearing escrow
account in a federally-insured  bank duly chartered in the State of
  •	 and remit to that escrow account funds equivalent to the
amount of the contested Future  Response Costs.  The Settling
Defendants shall send to the United States, as provided in Section
XXVII (Notices and Submissions), [and the State] a copy of the
transmittal letter and check paying the uncontested Future Response
Costs, and a copy of the correspondence that establishes and funds
-------
                               - 43  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
the escrow account, including, but not limited to, information
containing the identity of the bank and bank account under which
the escrow account is established as well as a bank statement
showing the initial balance of the escrow account!  Simultaneously
with establishment of the escrow account, the Settling Defendants
shall initiate the Dispute Resolution procedures in Section XX
(Dispute Resolution).  If tne United States [or the State] prevails
in the dispute, within 5 days of the resolution of the dispute, the
Settling Defendants shall pay the sums due (with accrued interest)
to the United States [or the State,  if State costs are disputed,]
in the manner described in Paragraph 51.   If the Settling
Defendants prevail concerning any aspect of the contested costs,
the Settling Defendants shall pay that portion of the costs (plus
associated accrued interest) for which they did not prevail to the
United States [or the State, if State costs are disputed] in the
manner described in Paragraph 51; Settling Defendants shall be
disbursed any balance of the escrow account.   The dispute
resolution procedures set forth in this Paragraph in conjunction
with the procedures set forth in Section XX (Dispute Resolution)
shall be the exclusive mechanisms for resolving disputes regarding
the Settling Defendants' obligation to reimburse the United States
[and the State] for its [their] Future Response Costs.
     54.  In the event that the payments required by Paragraph 51
are not made within 30 days of the effective date of this Consent
Decree or the payments required by Paragraph 52 are not made within
   o
30 days of the Settling Defendants'  receipt of the bill, Settling
-------
                               - 44 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
Defendants shall pay interest on the unpaid balance at the rate
established pursuant to Section 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9607.
The interest to be paid on Past Response Costs shall begin to
accrue on the effective date of the Consent Decree.  The interest
on Future Response Costs shall begin to accrue on the date of the
Settling Defendants' receipt of the bill.  Interest shall accrue at
the rate specified through the date of the Settling Defendant's
payment.  Payments of interest made under this Paragraph shall be
in addition to such other remedies or sanctions available to
Plaintiffs by virtue of Settling Defendants' failure to make timely
payments under this Section.
               XVIII.  INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE
     55.  The United States [and the State] do[es] not assume any
liability by.entering into this agreement or by virtue of any
designation of Settling Defendants as EPA's authorized
representatives under Section 104(e) of CERCLA.  Settling
Defendants shall indemnify, save and hold harmless the United
States[, the State,] and its [their] officials, agents, employees,
contractors, subcontractors, or representatives for or from any and
all claims or causes of action arising from, or on account of, acts
or omissions of Settling Defendants, their officers, directors,
employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors, and any persons
acting on their behalf or under their control, in carrying out
activities pursuant to this Consent Decree, including, but not
limited to, any claims arising from any designation of Settling
                                                                •
Defendants as EPA's authorized representatives under Section 104(e)
-------
                               - 45 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
of CERCLA.  Further, the Settling  Defendants agree to pay the
United States  [and the State] all  costs it [they] incurs including,
but not limited to, attorneys fees and other expenses of litigation
and settlement arising from, or on account of, claims made against
the United States based on acts or omissions of Settling
Defendants, their officers, directors, employees, agents,
contractors, subcontractors, and any persons acting on their behalf
or under their control, in carrying out activities pursuant to this
Consent Decree.  [Neither] the United States [nor the State] shall
[not] be held out as a party to any contract entered into by or on
behalf of Settling Defendants in carrying out activities pursuant
to this Consent Decree.  Neither the Settling Defendants nor any
such contractor shall be considered an agent of the United States
[or the State].
     56.  Settling Defendants waive all claims against the United
States[ and the State] for damages or reimbursement or for set-off
of any payments made or to be made to the United States [or the
State], arising from or on account of any contract, agreement,  or
arrangement between any one or more of Settling Defendants and any
person for performance of Work on or relating to the Site,
including, but not limited to, claims on account of construction
delays.  In addition, Settling Defendants shall indemnify and hold
harmless the United States [and the State] with respect to any and
all claims for damages or reimbursement arising from or on account
of any contract, agreement, or arrangement between any one or more
of Settling Defendants and any person for performance of Work on or
-------
                               - 46  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
relating to the Site, including, but not limited to, claims on
account of construction delays.
     57.  No later than 15 days before commencing any on-site Work,
Settling Defendants shall secure, and shall maintain [until the
first anniversary of EPA's Certification of Completion of the
Remedial Action pursuant to Paragraph 47.b. of Section XV
(Certification of Completion)] comprehensive general liability
insurance and automobile insurance with limits of 	 million
dollars, combined single limit naming as additional insured the
United States [and the State].  In addition, for the duration of
this Consent Decree, Settling Defendants shall satisfy, or shall
ensure that their contractors or subcontractors satisfy, all
applicable laws and regulations regarding the provision of worker's
compensation insurance for all persons performing the Work on
behalf of Settling Defendants in furtherance of this Consent
Decree.  Prior to commencement of the Work under this Consent
Decree, Settling Defendants shall provide to EPA [and the State]
certificates of such insurance and a copy of each insurance policy.
Settling Defendants shall resubmit such certificates and copies of
policies each year on the anniversary of the effective date of this
Consent Decree.  If Settling Defendants demonstrate by evidence
satisfactory to EPA [and the State]  that any contractor or
subcontractor maintains insurance equivalent to that described
above, or insurance covering the same risks but in a lesser amount,
then, with respect to that contractor or subcontractor, Settling
Defendants need provide only that portion of the insurance
-------
                               - 47 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
described above which  is not maintained by the contractor or
subcontractor.
                        XIX.  FORCE MAJEURE
     58.  "Force majeure," for purposes of this Consent Decree, is
defined as any event arising from causes beyond the control of the
Settling Defendants or of any entity controlled by Settling
Defendants, including, but not limited to, their contractors and
subcontractors, that delays or prevents the performance of any
obligation under this Consent Decree despite Settling Defendants'
best efforts to fulfill the obligation.  The requirement that the
Settling Defendants exercise "best efforts to fulfill the
obligation" includes using best efforts to anticipate any potential
force majeure event and best efforts to address the effects of any
potential force majeure event (l) as it is occurring and (2)
following the potential force majeure event,  such that the delay is
minimized to the greatest extent possible.  "Force Majeure" does
not include financial inability to complete the Work or a failure
to attain the Performance Standards.
     59.  If any event occurs or has occurred that may delay the
performance of any obligation under this Consent Decree, whether or
not caused by a force majeure event, the Settling Defendants shall
notify orally EPA's Project Coordinator or, in his or her absence,
EPA's Alternate Project Coordinator or, in the event both of EPA's
designated representatives are unavailable, [the Director of the
Hazardous Waste Management Division, EPA Region 	], within [48]
hours of when Settling Defendants first knew or should have known
-------
                               -  48  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
that the event might cause a delay,   within [5] days thereafter,
Settling Defendants shall provide in writing to EPA [and the state]"
an explanation and description of the reasons for the delay; the
anticipated duration of the delay; all actions taken or to be taken
to prevent or minimize the delay; a schedule for implementation of
any measures to be taken to prevent or mitigate the delay or the
effect of the delay; the Settling Defendants' rationale for
attributing such delay to a force majeure event if they intend to
assert such a claim; and a statement as to whether, in the opinion
of the Settling Defendants, such event may cause or contribute to
an endangerment to public health, welfare or the environment.  The
Settling Defendants shall include with any notice all available
documentation supporting their claim that the delay was
attributable to a force majeure.   Failure to comply with the above
requirements shall preclude Settling Defendants from asserting any
claim of force majeure for that event.  Settling Defendants shall
be deemed to have notice of any circumstance of which their
contractors or subcontractors had or should have had notice.
     60.  If EPA[, after a reasonable opportunity for review and
comment by the State,] agrees that the delay or anticipated delay
is attributable to a force majeure event, the time for performance
of the obligations under this Consent Decree that are affected by
the force majeure event will be extended by EPA[, after a
reasonable opportunity for review and comment by the State,] for
such time as is necessary to complete those obligations.  An
extension of the time for performance of the obligations affected
-------
                               - 49 -   OSW-ER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
by the force majeure event shall not, of itself, extend the time
for performance of any other obligation.  If EPA[, after a
reasonable opportunity for review  and comment by the State,] does
not agree that the delay or anticipated delay has been or will be
caused by a force majeure event, EPA will notify the Settling
Defendants in writing of its decision.  If EPA[, after a reasonable
opportunity for review and comment by the State,] agrees that the
delay is attributable to a force majeure event, EPA will notify the
Settling Defendants in writing of the length of the extension, if
any, for performance of the obligations affected by the force
majeure event.
     61.  If the Settling Defendants elect to invoke the dispute
resolution procedures set forth in Section XX (Dispute Resolution),
they shall do so no later than 15 days after receipt of EPA's
notice.  In any such proceeding, Settling Defendants shall have the
burden of demonstrating by a preponderance of the evidence that the
delay or anticipated delay has been or will be caused by a force
majeure event, that the duration of the delay or the extension
sought was or will be warranted under the circumstances, that best
efforts were exercised to avoid and mitigate the effects of the
delay, and that Settling Defendants complied with the requirements
of Paragraphs 58 and 59, above.  If Settling Defendants carry this
burden, the delay at issue shall be deemed not to be a violation by
Settling Defendants of the affected obligation of this Consent
Decree identified to EPA and the Court.
-------
                               - 50 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
                      XX.  DISPUTE RESOLUTION
     62.  Unless otherwise expressly provided for in this Consent
Decree, the dispute resolution procedures of this Section shall be
the exclusive mechanism to resolve disputes arising under or with
respect to this Consent Decree.  However, the procedures set forth
in this Section shall not apply to actions by the United States to
enforce obligations of the Settling Defendants that have not been
disputed in accordance with this Section.
     63.  Any dispute which arises under or with respect to this
Consent Decree shall in the first instance be the subject of
informal negotiations between the parties to the dispute.  The
period for informal negotiations shall not exceed 20 days from the
time the dispute arises, unless it is modified by written agreement
of the parties to the dispute.  The dispute shall be considered to
have arisen when one party sends the other parties a written Notice
of Dispute.
     64.  a.  In the event that the parties cannot resolve a
dispute by informal negotiations under the preceding Paragraph,
then the position advanced by EPA shall be considered binding
unless, within 10 days after the conclusion of the informal
negotiation period, Settling Defendants invoke the formal dispute
resolution procedures of this Section by serving on the United
States  [and the State] a written Statement of Position on the
matter  in dispute, including, but not limited to, any factual data,
analysis or opinion supporting that position and any supporting
documentation relied upon by the Settling Defendants.  The
-------
                               - 51 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
Statement of Position shall specify the Settling Defendants'
position as to whether formal dispute resolution should proceed
under paragraph 65 or 66.
     b.  Within fourteen  (14) days after receipt of Settling
Defendants' Statement of  Position, EPA will serve on Settling
Defendants its Statement  of Position, including, but not limited
to, any factual data, analysis, or opinion supporting that position
and all supporting documentation relied upon by EPA.  EPA's
Statement of Position shall include a statement as to whether
formal dispute resolution should proceed under Paragraph 65 or 66.
     c.  If there is disagreement between EPA and the Settling
Defendants as to whether dispute resolution should proceed under
Paragraph 65 or 66, the parties to the dispute shall follow the
procedures set forth in the paragraph determined by EPA to be
applicable.  However, if the Settling Defendants ultimately appeal
to the court to resolve the dispute, the Court shall determine
which paragraph is applicable in accordance with the standards of
applicability set forth in Paragraphs 65 and 66.
     65.  Formal dispute resolution for disputes pertaining to the
selection or adequacy of any response action and all other disputes
that are accorded review on the administrative record under
applicable principles of administrative law shall be conducted
pursuant to the procedures set forth in this Paragraph.  For
purposes of this Paragraph, the adequacy of any response action
includes, without limitation: (1) the adequacy or appropriateness
of plans, procedures to implement plans, or any other items
-------
                               - 52  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
requiring approval by EPA under this Consent Decree; and (2) the
adequacy of the performance of response actions taken pursuant to
this Consent Decree.  Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be
construed to allow any dispute by Settling Defendants regarding the
validity of the ROD'S provisions.
          a.  An administrative record of the dispute shall be
maintained by EPA and shall contain all statements of position,
including supporting documentation,  submitted pursuant to this
Paragraph.  Where appropriate, EPA may allow submission of
supplemental statements of position by the parties to the dispute.
          b.  The Director of the Waste Management Division, EPA
Region 	, will issue a final administrative decision resolving the
                               s
dispute based on the administrative record described in Paragraph
65.a.  This decision shall be binding upon the Settling Defendants,
subject only to the right to seek judicial review pursuant to
Paragraph 65.c. and d.
          c.  Any administrative decision made by EPA pursuant to
Paragraph 65.b. shall be reviewable by this Court, provided that a
notice of judicial appeal is filed by the Settling Defendants with
the Court and served on all Parties within 10 days of receipt of
EPA's decision.  The notice of judicial appeal shall include a
description of the matter in dispute,  the efforts made by the
parties to resolve it, the relief requested, and the schedule, if
any, within which the dispute must be resolved to ensure orderly
implementation of this Consent Decree.  The United States may f le
a response to Settling Defendants' notice of judicial appeal.
-------
                               - 53  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
          d.  In proceedings on any dispute governed by this
Paragraph, Settling Defendants shall have the burden of
demonstrating that the decision of the Waste Management Division
Director is arbitrary and capricious or otherwise not in accordance
with law.  Judicial review of EPA's decision shall be on the
administrative record compiled pursuant to Paragraphs 65.a.
     66.  Formal dispute resolution for disputes that neither
pertain to the selection or adequacy of any response action nor are
otherwise accorded review on the administrative record under
applicable principles of administrative law, shall be governed by
this Paragraph.
          a.   Following receipt of Settling Defendants' Statement
of Position submitted pursuant to Paragraph 64, the Director of the
Waste Management Division, EPA Region 	,  will issue a final
decision resolving the dispute.  The Waste Management Division
Director's decision shall be binding on the Settling Defendants
unless, within 10 days of receipt of the decision, the Settling
Defendants file with the Court and serve on the parties a notice of
judicial appeal setting forth the matter in dispute, the efforts
made by the parties to resolve it, the relief requested, and the
schedule, if any, within which the dispute must be resolved to
ensure orderly implementation of the Consent Decree.  The United
States may file a response to Settling Defendants' notice of
judicial appeal.
          b.   Notwithstanding Paragraph M of Section I
(Background) of this Consent Decree, judicial review of any dispute
-------
                               - 54  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
governed by this Paragraph shall be governed by applicable
provisions of law.
     67.  The invocation of formal dispute resolution procedures
under this Section shall not extend, postpone or affect in any way
any obligation of the Settling Defendants under this Consent Decree
not directly in dispute, unless EPA or the Court agrees otherwise.
Stipulated penalties with respect to the disputed matter shall
continue to accrue but payment shall be stayed pending resolution
of the dispute as provided in Paragraph 76.  Notwithstanding the
stay of payment, stipulated penalties shall accrue from the first
day of noncompliance with any applicable provision of this Consent
Decree.  In the event that the Settling Defendant does not prevail
on the disputed issue, stipulated penalties shall be assessed and
paid as provided in Section XXI (Stipulated Penalties).
                     XXI.   STIPULATED PENALTIES
     68.  Settling Defendants shall be liable for stipulated
penalties in the amounts set forth in Paragraphs 69 and 70 to the
United States [and the State] for failure to comply with the
requirements of this Consent Decree specified below, unless excused
under Section XIX (Force Majeure).  "Compliance" by Settling
Defendants shall include completion of the activities under this
Consent Decree or any work plan or other plan approved under this
Consent Decree identified below in accordance with all applicable
requirements of law, this Consent Decree, the SOW, and any plans or
other documents approved by EPA pursuant to this Consent Decree and
-------
                               - 55  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO.  9835.17
within the specified time schedules established by and approved
under this Consent Decree.
     [69. a.  The following stipulated penalties shall be payable
per violation per day to the United States [and the State] for any
noncompliance identified in Subparagraph b:
     Penalty Per Violation         Period of Noncompliance
     Per Day	
          b.  [List violations or compliance milestones]

     70.  The following stipulated penalties shall be payable per
violation per day to the United States [and the State] for failure
to submit timely or adequate reports [or other written documents]
pursuant to Paragraphs 	:
     Penalty Per Violation         Period of Noncompliance
     Per Day	

     71.  In the event that EPA assumes performance of a portion or
all of the Work pursuant to Paragraph 84 of Section XXII (Covenants
Not to Sue by Plaintiffs), Settling Defendants shall be liable for
a stipulated penalty in the amount of 	. •]
     72.  All penalties shall begin to accrue on the day after the
complete performance is due or the day a violation occurs, and
shall continue to accrue through the final day of the correction of
the noncompliance or completion'of the activity.   Nothing herein
shall prevent the simultaneous accrual of separate penalties for
separate violations of this Consent Decree.
-------
                               - 56 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
     73.  Following EPA's determination that Settling Defendants
have failed to comply with a requirement of this Consent Decree,
EPA may give Settling Defendants written notification of the same
and describe the noncompliance.  EPA [and the state] may send the
Settling Defendants a written demand for the payment of the
penalties.  However, penalties shall accrue as provided in the
prece'ding Paragraph regardless of whether EPA has notified the
Settling Defendants of a violation.
     74.  All penalties owed to the United States [and the State]
under this section shall be due and payable within 30 days of the
Settling Defendants' receipt from EPA of a demand for payment of
the penalties, unless Settling Defendants invoke the Dispute
Resolution procedures under Section XX (Dispute Resolution).  All
payments under this Section shall be paid by certified check made
payable to "EPA Hazardous Substances Superfund," shall be mailed to
[Regional Lockbox number and address],  and shall reference CERCLA
Number [Site/Spill ID Number] and DOJ Case Number 	.
Copies of check(s) paid pursuant to this Section, and any
accompanying transmittal letter(s), shall be sent to the United
States as provided in Section XXVII (Notices and Submissions).
     75.  The payment of penalties shall not alter in any way
Settling Defendants' obligation to complete the performance of the
Work required under this Consent Decree.
     76.  Penalties shall continue to accrue as provided in
Paragraph 72 during any dispute resolution period,  but need not be
paid until the following:
-------
                               - 57  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
          a.  If the dispute is resolved by agreement or by a
decision of EPA that is not appealed to this Court, accrued
penalties determined to be owing shall be paid.to EPA [and the
State] within 15 days of the agreement or the receipt of EPA's
decision or order;
          b.  If the dispute is appealed to this Court and the
United States prevails in whole or in part, Settling Defendants
shall pay all accrued penalties determined by the Court to be owed
to EPA [and the State] within 60 days of receipt of the Court's
decision or order, except as provided in Subparagraph c below;
          c.  If the District Court's decision is appealed by any
Party, Settling Defendants shall pay all accrued penalties
determined by the District Court to be owing to the United States
[or the State] into an interest-bearing escrow account within 60
days of receipt of the Court's decision or order.  Penalties shall
be paid into this account as they continue to accrue,  at least
every 60 days.  Within 15 days of receipt of the final appellate
court decision, the escrow agent shall pay the balance of the
account to EPA [and the State] or to Settling Defendants to the
extent that they prevail.
     77.  a.  If Settling Defendants fail to pay stipulated
penalties when due, the United States [or the State] may institute
proceedings to collect the penalties,  as well as interest.
Settling Defendants shall pay interest on the unpaid balance, which
shall begin to accrue on the date of demand made pursuant to
-------
                               - 58 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
Paragraph 74 at the rate established pursuant to Section 107(a) of
CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S 9607.
     b.  Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed as
prohibiting, altering, or in any way limiting the ability of the
United States  [or the State] to seek any other remedies or
sanctions available by virtue of Settling Defendants' violation of
this Decree or of the statutes and regulations upon which it is
based, including, but not limited to, penalties pursuant to Section
122(1) of CERCLA.
     78.  No payments made under this Section shall be tax
deductible for Federal [or State] tax purposes.
             XXII.  COVENANTS NOT TO SUE BY PLAINTIFFS
[FOR OPERABLE UNIT CONSENT DECREES OR OTHER SITUATIONS IN WHICH THE
UNITED STATES HAS DECIDED NOT TO GRANT A FULL COVENANT NOT TO SUE:]
     79.  In consideration of the actions that will be performed
and the payments that will be made by the Settling Defendants under
the terms of the Consent Decree, and except as specifically
provided in Paragraphs 80, 81, and 83 of this Section, the United
States covenants not to sue or to take administrative action
against Settling Defendants pursuant to Sections 106 and 107(a) of
CERCLA [and Section 7003 of RCRA] for performance of the Work [and
for recovery of Past Response Costs and Future Response Costs].
These covenants not to sue shall take effect upon the receipt by
EPA of the payments required by Paragraph 51 of Section XVII
(Reimbursement of Response Costs).  These covenants not to sue are
conditioned upon the complete and satisfactory performance by
Settling Defendants of their obligations under this Consent Decree.
-------
                               - 59 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
These covenants not to sue extend  only to the Settling Defendants
and do not extend to any other person.
[FOR CONSENT DECREES IN WHICH THE  UNITED STATES HAS DECIDED TO
GRANT A FULL COVENANT NOT TO SUE: ]
     79.  In consideration of the  actions that will be performed
and the payments that will be made by the Settling Defendants under
the terms of the Consent Decree, and except as specifically
provided in Paragraphs 80, 8.'., and 83 of this Section, the United
States covenants not to sue or to  take administrative action
against Settling Defendants pursuant to Sections 106 and 107(a) of
CERCLA [and Section 7003 of RCRA]  relating to the Site.  Except
with respect to future liability,  these covenants not to sue shall
take effect upon the receipt by EPA of the payments required by
Paragraph 51 of Section XVII (Reimbursement of Response Costs).
With respect to future liability,  these covenants not to sue shall
take effect upon Certification of  Completion of Remedial Action by
EPA pursuant to Paragraph 47.b of  Section XV (Certification of
Completion).  These covenants not  to sue are conditioned upon the
complete and satisfactory performance by Settling Defendants of
their obligations under this Consent Decree.  These covenants not
to sue extend only to the Settling Defendants and do not extend to
any other person.
     80.  United States* Pre-certification reservations.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Consent Decree, the
United States reserves, and this Consent Decree is without
prejudice to, the right to institute proceedings in this action or
in a new action, or to issue an administrative order seeking to
-------
                               - 60 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
compel Settling Defendants  (1)  to perform further response actions
relating to the Site or  (2) to  reimburse the United States for
additional costs of response if, prior to certification of
completion of the Remedial Action:
          (i)  conditions at the Site, previously unknown to EPA,
               are discovered,  or
          (ii) information, previously unknown to EPA, is received,
               in whole or in part,
and these previously unknown conditions or information together
with any other relevant information indicates that the Remedial
Action is not protective of human health or the environment.
     81.  United States* Post-certification reservations.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Consent Decree, the
United States reserves, and this Consent Decree is without
prejudice to, the right to institute proceedings in this action or
in a new action, or to issue an administrative order seeking to
compel Settling Defendants  (1)  to perform further response actions
relating to the Site or  (2) to  reimburse the United States for
additional costs of response if, subsequent to certification of
completion of the Remedial Action:
          (i)  conditions at the Site, previously unknown to EPA,
               are discovered,  or
          (ii) information, previously unknown to EPA, is received,
               in whole or in part,
-------
                               - 61 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
and these previously unknown conditions or this information
together with other relevant information indicate that the Remedial '
Action is not protective of human health or the environment.
     82.  For purposes of Paragraph 80, the information and the
conditions known to EPA shall include only that information and
those^ conditions set forth in the Record of Decision for the Site
and the administrative record supporting the Record of Decision.
For purposes of Paragraph 81, the information and the conditions
known to EPA shall include only that information and those
conditions set forth in the Record of Decision, the administrative
record supporting the Record of Decision, and any information
received by EPA pursuant to the requirements of this Consent Decree
prior to Certification of Completion of the Remedial Action.
     83.  General reservations of rights.  The covenants not to sue
set forth above do not pertain to any matters other than those
expressly specified in Paragraph 79.  The United States [and the
State] reserve[s], and this Consent Decree is without prejudice to,
all rights against Settling Defendants with respect to all other
matters, including but not limited to, the following:
          (1)  claims based on a failure by Settling Defendants
     to meet a requirement of this Consent Decree;
          (2)  liability arising from the past, present, or future
     disposal, release, or threat of release of Waste Materials
     outside of the Site;
          (3)  liability for damages for injury to, destruction
     of, or loss of natural resources;
-------
                               -  62  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
          (4)  liability for response costs that have been or may
     be incurred by [insert the name of all federal agencies which
     are trustees for natural resources and which have, or may in
     the future, spend funds relating to the Site];
          (5)  criminal liability;
          (6)  liability for violations of federal or state law
     which occur during or after implementation of the Remedial
     Action; and
          [(7) previously incurred costs of response above the
     amounts reimbursed pursuant to Paragraph 51;]
          [(8) liability for additional operable units at the Site
     or the final response action;]
          [(9) liability for costs that the United States will
     incur related to the Site but are not within the definition of
     Future Response Costs.]
     84.  In the event EPA determines that Settling Defendants have
failed to implement any provisions of the Work in an adequate or
timely manner, EPA may perform any and all portions of the Work as
EPA determines necessary.  Settling Defendants may invoke the
procedures set forth in Section XX  (Dispute Resolution) to dispute
EPA's determination that the Settling Defendants failed to
implement a provision of the Work in an adequate or timely manner
as arbitrary and capricious or otherwise not in accordance with
law.  Such dispute shall be resolved on the administrative record.
Costs incurred by the United States in performing the Work pursuant
to this Paragraph shall be considered Future Response Costs that
-------
                               - 63  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
Settling Defendants shall pay pursuant to  Section XVII
(Reimbursement of Response Costs).
     85.  Notwithstanding any other provision of this Consent
Decree, the United States [and the State] retain[s] all authority
and reserve[s] all rights to take any and all response actions
authorized by law.
[If the State is a Co-plairtiff, insert the State's Covenant not to
Sue the Settling Defendants and reservation of rights.]
              XXIII.   COVENANTS  BY SETTLING  DEFENDANTS
     86.  Settling Defendants hereby covenant not to sue and agree
not to assert any claims or causes of action against the United
States [or the State] with respect to the Site or this Consent
Decree, including, but not limited to, any direct or indirect claim
for reimbursement from the Hazardous Substance Superfund
(established pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.
5 9507) through CERCLA Sections 106(b)(2), 111, 112, 113 or any
other provision of law, [any claim against the United States,
including any department, agency or instrumentality of the United
States under CERCLA Sections 107 or 113 related to the Site,] or
any claims arising out of response activities at the Site.
However, the Settling Defendants reserve, and this Consent Decree
is without prejudice to, actions against the United States based on
negligent actions taken directly by the United States  (not
including oversight or approval of the Settling Defendants plans or
activities) that are brought pursuant to any statute other than
CERCLA and for which the waiver of sovereign immunity is found in a
-------
                               -  64  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
statute other than CERCLA.   Nothing in this Consent Decree shall
be deemed to constitute preauthorization of a claim within the
meaning of Section 111 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S 9611, or 40 C.F.R.
§ 300.700(d).
        XXIV.   EFFECT  OF  SETTLEMENT; CONTRIBUTION  PROTECTION
     87.  Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to
create any rights in,  or grant any cause of action to, any person
not a party to this Consent Decree.   The preceding sentence shall
not be construed to waive or nullify any rights that any person not
a signatory to this decree may have under applicable law.  Each of
the Parties expressly reserves any and all rights (including, but
not limited to, any right to contribution), defenses, claims,
demands, and causes of action which each party may have with
respect to any matter, transaction,  or occurrence relating in any
way to the Site against any person not a party hereto.
     [88.  With regard to claims for contribution against Settling
Defendants for matters addressed in this Consent Decree,  the
Parties hereto agree that the Settling Defendants are entitled to
such protection from contribution actions or claims as is provided
by CERCLA Section 113(f)(2), 42 U.S.C. S 9613(f)(2).)
     89.  The Settling Defendants agree that with respect to any
suit or claim for contribution brought by them for matters related
to this Consent Decree they will notify the United States [and the
State] in writing no later than 60 days prior to the initiation of
such suit or claim.
-------
                               -  65  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
     90.  The Settling Defendants also agree that with respect to
any suit or claim for contribution brought against them for matters
related to this Consent Decree they will notify in writing the
United States [and the State] within 10 days of service of the
complaint on them.  In addition, Settling Defendants shall notify
the United States [and the State] within 10 days of service or
receipt of any Motion for Summary Judgment and within 10 days of
receipt of any order from a court setting a case for trial.
     91.  In any subsequent administrative or judicial proceeding
initiated by the United States [or the State] for injunctive
relief, recovery of response costs,  or other appropriate relief
relating to the Site, Settling Defendant[s] shall not assert, and
may not maintain, any defense or claim based upon the principles of
waiver, res ludicata. collateral estoppel, issue preclusion, claim-
splitting, or other defenses based upon any contention that the
claims raised by the United States [or the State] in the subsequent
proceeding were or should have been brought in the instant case;
provided, however, that nothing in this Paragraph affects the
enforceability of the covenants not to sue set forth in Section
XXII (Covenants Not to Sue by Plaintiffs).
                    XXV.  ACCESS TO INFORMATION
     92.  Settling Defendants shall provide to EPA [and the State],
upon request, copies of all documents and information within their
possession or control or that of their contractors or agents
relating to activities at the Site or to the implementation of this
Consent Decree, including, but not limited to, sampling, analysis,
-------
                               -  66  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
chain of custody records, manifests, trucking logs, receipts,
reports, sample traffic routing,  correspondence, or other documents
or information related to the Work.   Settling Defendants shall also
make available to EPA [and the State], for purposes of
investigation, information gathering,  or testimony, their
employees, agents, or representatives with knowledge of relevant
facts concerning the performance of the Work.
     93.  a.  Settling Defendants may assert business
confidentiality claims covering part or all of the documents or
information submitted to Plaintiffs under this Consent Decree to
the extent permitted by and in accordance with Section 104(e)(7) of
CERCLA,  42 U.S.C. 5 9604(e)(7), and 40 C.F.R. $ 2.203(b).
Documents or information determined to be confidential by EPA will
be afforded the protection specified in 40 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart
B.  If no claim of confidentiality accompanies documents or
information when they are submitted to EPA [and the State], or if
EPA has notified Settling Defendants that the documents or
information are not confidential under the standards of Section
104(e)(7) of CERCLA, the public may be given access to such
documents or information without further notice to Settling
Defendants.
     b.   The Settling Defendants may assert that certain documents,
records and other information are privileged under the attorney-
client privilege or any other privilege recognized by federal law.
If the Settling Defendants assert such a privilege in lieu of
providing documents, they shall provide the Plaintiffs with the
-------
                               - 67 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
following:   (1) the title of the document, record, or information;
(2) the date of the document, record, or  information; (3) the name
and title of the author of the  document,  record, or information;
(4) the name and title of each  addressee  and recipient;  (5) a
description of the contents of  the document, record, or
information: and (6) the privilege asserted by Settling Defendants.
However, no documents, reports  or other information created or
generated pursuant to the requirements of the Consent Decree shall
be withheld on the grounds that they are privileged.
     94.  No claim of confidentiality shall be made with respect to
any data, including, but not limited to, all sampling, analytical,
monitoring, hydrogeologic, scientific, chemical, or engineering
data, or any other documents or information evidencing conditions
at or around the Site.
                    XXVI.  RETENTION OF RECORDS
     95.  Until 10 years after  the Settling Defendants' receipt of
EPA's notification pursuant to  Paragraph  48.b of Section XV
(Certification of Completion of the Work), each Settling Defendant
shall preserve and retain all records and documents now in its
possession or control or which  come into  its possession or control
that relate in any manner to the performance of the Work or
liability of any person for response actions conducted and to be
conducted at the Site, regardless of any corporate retention policy
to the contrary.  Until 10 years after the Settling Defendants'
receipt of EPA's notification pursuant to Paragraph 48.b of Section
XV (Certification of Completion), Settling Defendants shall also
-------
                               - 68 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
instruct their contractors and agents to preserve all documents,
records, and 'information of whatever kind, nature or description
relating to the performance of the Work.
     96.  At the conclusion of this document retention period,
Settling Defendants shall notify the United States [and the State]
at least 90 days prior to the destruction of any such records or
documents, and, upon request by the United States [or the State],
Settling Defendants shall deliver any such records or documents to
EPA [or the State].  The Settling Defendants may assert that
certain documents, records and other information are privileged
under the attorney-client privilege or any other privilege
recognized by federal law.  If the Settling Defendants assert such
a privilege, they shall provide the Plaintiffs with the following:
(1) the title of the document, record, or information; (2) the date
of the document, record, or information; (3)  the name and title of
the author of the document, record, or information; (4)  the name
and title of each addressee and recipient; (5) a description of the
subject of the document, record, or information: and (6)  the
privilege asserted by Settling Defendants.  However,  no documents,
reports or other information created or generated pursuant to the
requirements of the Consent Decree shall be withheld on the grounds
that they are privileged.
     97.  Each Settling Defendant hereby certifies, individually,
that it has not altered, mutilated, discarded, destroyed or
otherwise disposed of any records, documents or other information
relating to its potential liability regarding the site since
-------
                               - 69 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
notification of potential liability by the United States or the
State or the filing of suit against it regarding the Site and that
it has fully complied with any and all EPA requests for information
pursuant to Section 104(e) and 122(e) of CERCLA and Section 3007 of
RCRA.
                  XXVII.  NOTICES AND SUBMISSIONS
     98.  Whenever, under the terms of this Consent Decree, written
notice is required to be given or a report or other document is
required to be sent by one party to another, it shall be directed
to the individuals at the addresses specified below, unless those
individuals or their successors give notice of a change to the
other parties in writing.  All notices and submissions shall be
considered effective upon receipt, unless otherwise provided.
Written notice as specified herein shall constitute complete
satisfaction of any written notice requirement of the Consent
Decree with respect to the United States, EPA, [the State,] and the
Settling Defendants, respectively.
As to the United States:
Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section
Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 7611
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, D.C.  20044
     Re: DJ t 	
          and
Director, Waste Management Division
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region 	
-------
                               - 70 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
As to EPA;
[Name]
EPA Project Coordinator
United states Environmental Protection Agency
Region
TAs to the Statet

[Name]
State Project Coordinator
[Address]

As to the Settling Defendants;

[Name]
Settling Defendants' Project Coordinator
[Address]

                      XXVIII.  EFFECTIVE DATE

     99.  The effective date of this Consent Decree shall be the

date upon which this Consent Decree is entered by the Court, except

as otherwise provided herein.

                  XXIX.   RETENTION  OF  JURISDICTION

     100.  This Court retains jurisdiction over both the subject

matter of this Consent Decree and the Settling Defendants for the

duration of the performance of the terms and provisions of this

Consent Decree for the purpose of enabling any of the Parties to

apply to the Court at any time for such further order, direction,

and relief as nay be necessary or appropriate for the construction

or modification of this Consent Decree, or to effectuate or enforce

compliance with its terms, or to resolve disputes in accordance

with Section XX (Dispute Resolution) hereof.
-------
                               - 71 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
                          xxx.   APPENDICES
     101.  The following appendices are attached to and
incorporated into this Consent Decree:
     "Appendix A" is the ROD.
     "Appendix B" is the SOW.
     "Appendix C" is the description and/or map of the Site.
     "Appendix D" is the complete  list of the Settling Defendants.
     ["Appendix E" is the complete list of the Owner Settling
Defendants.]
                     XXXI.   COMMUNITY RELATIONS
     102.  Settling Defendants shall propose to EPA [and the State]
their participation in the community relations plan to be developed
by EPA. EPA will determine the appropriate role for the Settling
Defendants under the Plan.  Settling Defendants shall also
cooperate with EPA [and the State] in providing information
regarding the Work to the public.  As requested by EPA [or the
State], Settling Defendants shall participate in the preparation of
such information for dissemination to the public and in public
meetings which may be held or sponsored by EPA [or the State] to
explain activities at or relating to the Site.
                        XXXII.   MODIFICATION
     103.  Schedules specified in this Consent Decree for
completion of the Work may be modified by agreement of EPA and the
Settling Defendants.  All such modifications shall be made in
writing.
-------
                               - 72  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
     104.  No material modifications shall be made to the SOW
without written notification to and written approval of the United
States, Settling Defendants, and the Court.  Prior to providing its
approval to any modification, the United States will provide the
State with a reasonable opportunity to review and comment on the
proposed modification.  Modifications to the SOW that do not
materially alter that document may be made by written agreement
between EPA, after providing the State with a reasonable
opportunity to review and comment on the proposed modification, and
the Settling Defendants.
     105.  Nothing in this Decree shall be deemed to alter the
Court's power to enforce, supervise or approve modifications to
this Consent Decree.
        XXXIII.  LODGING AND OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
     106.  This Consent Decree shall be lodged with the Court for a
period of not less than thirty  (30)  days for public notice and
comment in accordance with Section 122(d)(2) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.
S 9622(d)(2), and 28 C.F.R. § 50.7.   The United States reserves the
right to withdraw or withhold its consent if the comments regarding
the Consent Decree disclose facts or considerations which indicate
that the Consent Decree is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.
Settling Defendants consent to the entry of this Consent Decree
without further notice.
     107.  If for any reason the Court should decline to approve
this Consent Decree in the form presented, this agreement is
voidable at the sole discretion of any party and the terms of the
-------
                               - 73  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
agreement may not be used as evidence in any litigation between the
Parties.
                    XXXIV.  SIGNATORIES/SERVICE
     108.  Each undersigned representative of a Settling Defendant
to this Consent Decree and the Assistant Attorney General for
Environment and Natural Resources of the Department of Justice
certifies that he or she is fully authorized to enter into the
terms and conditions of this Consent Decree and to execute and
legally bind such party to this document.
     109.  Each Settling Defendant hereby agrees not to oppose
entry of this Consent Decree by this Court or to challenge any
provision of this Consent Decree unless the United States has
notified the Settling Defendants in writing that it no longer
supports entry of the Consent Decree.
     110.  Each Settling Defendant shall identify, on the attached
signature page, the name, address and telephone number of an agent
who is authorized to accept service of process by mail on behalf of
that party with respect to all matters arising under or relating to
this Consent Decree.  Settling Defendants hereby agree to accept
service in that manner and to waive the formal service requirements
set forth in Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and any
applicable local rules of this Court, including, but not limited
to, service of a summons.
          SO ORDERED THIS 	 DAY OF 	,  19	.
                              United States District Judge
-------
                               - 74  -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17

THE UNDERSIGNED PARTIES enter into this Consent Decree in the

natter of United States v. 	, relating

to the 	 Superfund Site.


                              FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Date:
                              [Name]
                              Assistant Attorney General
                              Environment and Natural Resources
                                   Division
                              U.S. Department of Justice
                              Washington, D.C.  20530
                              [Name]
                              Environmental Enforcement Section
                              Environment and Natural Resources
                                   Division
                              U.S. Department of Justice
                              Washington, D.C.  20530
                              [Name]
                              Assistant United States Attorney
                              	District of     _
                              U.S. Department of Justice
                              [Address]
                              t	
                              [Name]
                              Assistant Administrator for
                                   Enforcement
                              U.S. Environmental Protection
                                   Agency
                              401 M Street, S.w.
                              Washington, D.C.  20460
-------
 -  75  -    OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
[Name]
Office of Enforcement
U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
[Name]
Regional Administrator, Region
U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency
[Address]
[Name]
Assistant Regional Counsel
U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency
Region 	
[Address]
-------
                               - 76 -   OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. 9835.17
United States v. 	
Consent Decree Signature Page


                         FOR THE STATE OF
Date:
                               [Name]
                               [Title]
                               [Address]
-------
                               - 77 - -  OSWER DIRECTIVE NO. '9835. 17


THE UNDERSIGNED PARTY enters into  this Consent Decree in the

matter of United States v.	, relating

to the 	 Superfund Site.



                         FOR 	 COMPANY, INC. */
Date:
                               [Name -- Please Type]
                               [Title — Please Type]
                               [Address — Please Type]
     Agent Authorized to Accept Service on Behalf of Above-signed
Party:

          Name:         FPlease Type]	
          Title:    	
          Address:
          Tel. Number:
*,/   A separate signature page must be signed by each corporation,
     individual or other legal entity that is settling with the
     United States.
-------
              UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                         WASHINGTON. D.C.  20460
                            JUL  2 199!
                                                       OFFICE OF

                                              SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
                                              OSWER Directive No.
                                              9835.15a
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT
FROM:
TO:
Purpose
          Supplemental Guidance  on  Perf orming/iRisk Assessments in
          Remedial Investigation/Feas/bilityVstudies (RI/FSs)
          Conducted by Pofeentiallyl Responsible Parties (PRPs)
                        inlstratoi
              R. Clay
          Assistant Ac
          Regional Administrators, Regions  I  -  X
     The purpose of this memorandum  is  to  provide additional
guidance on implementing the policy  that EPA  will not  enter into
settlement agreements under which PRPs  perform the risk
assessment components of the RI/FS,  as  discussed  by the Agency  in
OSWER Directive No. 9835.15  (August  28, 1990).  This memorandum
provides guidance on coordinating the site characterization tasks
and feasibility study prepared by the. PRP  with the baseline risk
assessment performed by EPA.

     Included with this directive are revised and annotated
versions of the Model Administrative Order on Consent  for
Remedial Investigation Feasibility Study  (Model AOC, Directive
No. 9835. 3-1A issued on February 5,  1990)  and the Model Statement
of Work for a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
Conducted by Potentially Responsible Parties  (Model SOW,
Directive No. 9835.8 issued on June  2,  1989).   Changes were made
only in those sections dealing with  risk assessment.   Regions
should use these Models as guides when  drafting site-specific
AOCs and SOWs.

Early Public Involvement

     Although EPA is preparing the baseline risk  assessment, it
is important that all interested rarties,  including the public
and PRPs, be given an opportunity to have  early input  into  the
direction of the risk assessment.  This can best  be achieved by
RPMs actively soliciting input from  all interested parties  during
                                                          Printed on
-------
the RI/FS scoping process.  At many sites, public scoping
meetings may b@ th® appropriate means to accomplish this.

EPA Responsibilities

     In order to complete th© RI/FS and th® baseline risk
assessment and select a remedy without undue delay, it  is
imperative that there be a timely exchange of  information  between
the PRPs and EPA throughout th® entire process.  Timely
submission of high quality sit® characterization deliverables  by
the PRP will allow SPA to develop th® baseline risk assessment,
but the PRP also needs information from EPA to develop  an
acceptable FS,

     In order to develop a list of potential remedial
alternatives, th© PRP must know th© chemicals of concern and the
media of concern that are to be treated (or contained where
appropriate).  As soon as EPA has evaluated th© sit©
characterization data submitted by th© PRP,, EPA should  develop
and release two or mor® risk assessment memoranda to all
interested parties.  On© should list th© eh®®ieals of concern  for
human health and ecological effects and their toxieity  values;
th© other should list th© potential exposure scenarios, exposure
assumptions, and exposure point concentrations that EPA plans  to
us© in the baselin® risk assessment,  Th© purpos© of releasing
this information is thr@@=folds 1) to k@®p th© public informed
about progress at the sit®, 2) to allow public input at this
stag©, and 3) to give th© PRP sufficient information to continue
developing remedial alternatives that ar© appropriate for  the
     After considering all submitted comments, SPA will prepare
the baseline risk assessmant report„  EPA sheuld rdltai© this
report to th© public at th©      tim© it r<§i©as©g th® final RI
report prepared by th© PRF»  Th© PRP n©eds this information to
continue work on th® FS report1 and on treatability studies«
Although EPA will eoRsideE' any comment© submitted on th© baseline
risk ass@gg©©nt ®®®©E>andla in drafting th® bag@lin© rjlsk
assessment„ IFA its R©t obligated to respond t© eem®©nts at that
point in fefeo pg-©e©sOo  If, after th© baselines risk assessment
report is i^oiQassd, any eommenters feel that SPA did not address
their coReoj?^g5 in th© bag©lin© risk assessment report, they
should notify IFA of th©ir continued concerns during th© formal
public comment period,, i,©., aftar th© Proposed Plan is released.
This notification should clearly identify th© previous comments
that were not addressed to ensures that EPA addresses all that are
considered significant in the responsiveness summary of the ROD.
Re°submission of th© comments is not necessary.
-------
RI/FS Schedule

     Implementing these new procedures should not  lengthen the
time it takes to complete an RI/FS and select a remedy at most
sites.  To minimize delays, frequent discussions should be held
with PRPs and the public to keep them informed of  site progress
and current EPA guidances and policies.

     EPA seeks to make clear that it will not repeatedly review
PRPs' RI/FS deliverables.  If PRPs do not revise their
deliverables and the draft RI and FS to reflect EPA comments in a
timely way, EPA should consider either taking over the RI and/or
FS or writing its own supplements to these documents.

Revisions to the Model AOC

     All PRP risk assessment deliverables have been eliminated
from the AOC.  A change has also been made in Task III: Site
Characterization.  PRPs are now required to submit all sampling
results in a computerized format in order to allow EPA to rapidly
evaluate the collected data and develop the baseline risk
assessment.

     A new section has also been added in the AOC  in order to
emphasize EPA's oversight role in evaluating the PRPs1 estimates
of residual risks associated with various remedial alternatives
in the feasibility study.

     The section on dispute resolution in the AOC  has also been
modified by excluding the baseline risk assessment from dispute
resolution.  The baseline risk assessment is not a PRP
deliverable required under an AOC but an EPA document.  All
interested parties have an opportunity to review and comment on
two baseline risk assessment memoranda prepared by EPA during the
RI phase.  EPA will respond to significant comments on the final
baseline risk assessment, the final RI, the final  FS, and the
Proposed Plan during the formal comment period.

Model SOW

     All PRP baseline risk assessment deliverables have been
removed.  In addition, EPA will now review and approve the PRPs'
Technical Memorandum Documenting Revised Remedial  Action
Objectives and the Technical Memorandum on Remedial Technologies,
Alternatives and Screening in order to 'ensure that the PRPs have
properly incorporated the findings from EPA's baseline risk
assessment.  Language was also ad-Ud recommending  an additional
point of EPA management review before EPA finalizes the baseline
risk assessment.

     After initial issues are worked out, EPA expects that this
revised process will help reduce the time it takes to complete an
-------
acceptable RI/FS.  We will re-evaluate this process as we gain
more experience.

     If you have any questions about this policy, please contact
Stephen Ells, Chief, Technical Oversight Section, Office of Waste
Programs Enforcement, at FTS 475-9803.


cc:  Waste Management Division Directors, Regions I-X
     Regional Counsel, Regions I-X
     Regional CERCLA Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X
     Regional CERCLA Section Chiefs, Regions I-X


Attachments
-------
                  MODEL STATEMENT OF WORK FOR A
           REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AND FEASIBILITY  STUDY
           CONDUCTED BY POTENTIALLY  RESPONSIBLE PARTIES

INSTRUCTIONS

     This model statement of work (SOW) was developed to provide
potentially responsible parties  (PRPs) direction in performing
the tasks that are required to successfully complete a remedial
investigation/feasibility study  (RI/FS).  A SOW for a PRP-lead
RI/FS must be used in conjunction with the Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response's October  1988 Guidance for Conducting
Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA
(hereafter referred to as the RI/FS Guidance) and [should be
used] with the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement's
[forthcoming] Guidance on Oversight of Potentially Responsible
Party Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies.  The
organization of this model SOW is according to the tasks that
must be performed during a PRP-conducted RI/FS.  These tasks
include:

        Task 1    Scoping;
        Task 2    Community Relations;
        Task 3    Site Characteristics;
        [Task 4    Baseline Risk Assessment;]
        Task 4    Treatability Studies;
        Task 5    Development & Screening of Remedial
                  Alternatives;
        Task 6    Detailed Analysis of Remedial Alternatives.

     This model SOW is written on the general approach that a PRP
RI/FS is commenced pursuant to an Administrative Order on Consent
(AOC) with an attached SOW, and that the PRPs perform work and
submit deliverables to EPA.  Depending on site circumstances and
the relationship to PRPs, it may be necessary to modify this
management approach.  Moreover, because the work required to
perform a RI/FS is dependent on a site's complexity and the
amount of available information, it may be necessary to modify
the components of this model SOW in order to tailor the tasks to
the specific conditions at a site.  Similarly, the level of
detail within the model SOW will vary according to the site.  The
Regions have discretion to develop a site-specific SOW that
follows this model SOW, including portions of the work to be
performed by EPA, technical provisions, deliverables and
approvals.  [An example of an alteration to this model SOW may
include the PRP's responsibilities concerning the baseline risk
assessment. Because the baseline risk assessment serves as a
primary means for supporting enforcement decisions at most
sites,] EPA, however, will perform the baseline risk assessment,
and no baseline risk assessment deliverables will be required of
PRPs.  While not preferred as a general approach, at some sites
EPA may develop itself, or in negotiations, a work plan rather
than a SOW and then enter into an AOC.
-------
                                ii          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

     When special notice for a RI/FS is issued, at most sites a
draft SOW should be attached as an addendum to a draft AOC.
Prior to the issuance of special notice, EPA, generally with
contractor assistance, will determine both the objectives of the
RI/FS and a general approach for managing the site.  Determining
the site objectives and a general site strategy will be required
regardless of whether an administrative order is signed with the
PRPs or the RI/FS is Fund-financed.

     The site objectives should specify the purpose of any
activities to be conducted at the site, including any interim
actions that may be necessary, as well as the objectives of the
required remedial actions (e.g., the preliminary s@®®fiiatioa
goals, PUG®) .  These objectives should specify the potmatiai
contaminants and media of concern,  the Iils©iy exposure pathways
and receptors, and an acceptable contaminant level or range of
levels for each exposure route.  The site objectives are
developed and based on existing site information, contaminant-
specific ARARs, when available, and risk related factors.

     The site management strategy is developed once the
objectives have been established and identifies the study
boundary areas and the optimal sequence of site activities,
including whether th© sit® may best be remedied as separate
operable units.  Th© general management approach should include:
identifying the types of actions that may b© required to address
site problems, identifying any interim actions that are necessary
to mitigate potential threats or prevent further environmental
degradation, and determining the optimal sequence of activities
to be conducted at th© sits.  Also included in the site
management strategy should b© th© decision as to whether the RI
will serv© as a continuation of th© PRP search„  This would be
appropriate at sites such as ar©a wide groundwater contamination
or stream contamination wh©r© all of th© sources of contamination
are not yet well defined,,

     The deliverables described in this model SOW fall under one
of three aanagememit categories,,  Under th@ first category,
deliverable® must, bd approved by EPA befor© work can ©ither begin
or continue„  Thi^ includes th@ work plan and th© site sampling
and analysis plan,,  Similarly, EPA approval of th© [final risk
assessment] „ RI report, testability studies and FS is th©
general approach.  Und©ir th© second category, SPA may exercise an
option, in drafting th® site-specific SOW,, to ©ither comment on
OS review and approv© th@ d@liv@rabl@s,,  Review and approval of
deliverable^ under fcfai© second category will b© based on th©
particular circumstances of th® sit© or practices of the Regional
office.  This category will includ© most of the deliverables that
are described in this model SOW, such as technical memoranda and
reports.  A middl© ground is to allow work in these areas to
proceed without resubmittal and approval so long as the changes
required by EPA 'ar© fully reflected in subsequent d©liv©rables.
-------
                               iii         Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

This approach of commenting strikes a balance between excessive
approval and dispute resolution of numerous interim activities by
PRPs, which cumulatively results in a lengthy RI/FS, and review
at the end of the six major components of the RI/FS, which could
result in months of unacceptable work not detected until late in
the process.  It also assures focus on the major deliverables.
In addition, consistent with the RI/FS guidance, some work is
simultaneously done.  Under the third category, deliverables do
not require comment from EPA.  This category includes PRP
progress reports.  A summary of the major deliverables under
categories one and two, as outlined in this model SOW, is
included in the document.

     Interim deliverables in addition to those required by the
RI/FS Guidance are described in this model SOW.  These
deliverables are appropriate because of the different
relationships and interactions between a Fund-lead and PRP-lead
RI/FS.  Review of these deliverables will help to assure EPA that
the work being performed meets the terms and conditions of the
AOC.  Those deliverables other than what are required by the
RI/FS Guidance that are described within this model SOW may not
be necessary or appropriate for all sites.  Similarly,
deliverables other than what are described in this model SOW may
be more appropriate for a particular site.  The deliverables
determined to be appropriate for a particular site should be
approved by EPA management and must be specified in the AOC.  The
timing of the RI/FS and available oversight resources should be
considered prior to determining the appropriate deliverables.
Offices within the Region other than Superfund which will concur
or comment on PRP deliverables should be consulted during the
scoping process.

     The Remedial Project Manager (RPM) should assure good
communications with the PRPs.  This includes meetings to discuss
EPA's expectations before major phases of work are begun and to
review the conclusions of major components of the RI/FS.  In
addition, the RPM should assure that EPA management is informed
and has input on major components of the RI/FS.  While this
varies from site to site, management review usually is
appropriate at scoping, final review of the work plan, before
final comments are submitted on the RI, before EPA finalises the
baseline risk assessment, and as the FS is finally developed.
-------
                                IV
   Annotated SOW (9835.8A)
                  SUMMARY OF MAJOR DELIVERABLES
      (AS OUTLINED IN THIS MODEL SOW FOR PRP-CONDUCTED RI/FS)
TASK/DELIVERABLE

TASK 1    SCOPING
               RI/FS Work Plan
               Sampling and
               Analysis Plan  (SAP)
               Site Health and
               Safety Plan
MANAGEMENT CATEGORY
 (1)  Review and Approve
 (1)  Review and Approve

 (2)  Review and Comment
TASK 3    SITE CHARACTERIZATION

               Technical Memorandum
               on Modeling of Site
               Characteristics (where
               appropriate)
               Preliminary Site
               Characterization
               Summary
               Draft Remedial
               Investigation  (RI)
               Report

[Task 4 - Baseline Risk Assessment]

TASK 4    TREATABILITY STUDIES

               Technical Memorandum
               Identifying
               Candidate
               Technologies
               Treatability Testing
               Statement of Work
               Treatability Testing
               Work Plan (or amendment
               to original)
 (2)  Review and Approve
 (2)  Review and Comment
 (1)  Review and Approve
 (2)  Review and Approve


 (2)  Review and Comment

 (1)  Review and Approve
          See the Model RI/FS Administrative Order on Consent
          (AOC) for additional reporting requirements, and
          further instructions on submittal and dispositions of
          deliverables.
-------
               Treatability Study
               SAP (or amendment to
               original)
               Treatability Study
               Site Health and
               Safety Plan (or
               amendment to original)
               Treatability Study
               Evaluation Report
                                 Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

                               (1)  Review and Approve


                               (2)  Review and Comment



                               (1)  Review and Approve
TASK 5
DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES
TASK 6
                                          (2)  Review and Approve
                                          (2)  Review and Approve
     Technical Memorandum
     Documenting Revised
     Remedial Action
     Objectives
     Technical Memorandum
     on Remedial
     Technologies,
     Alternatives and
     Screening

DETAILED ANALYSIS OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

                               (2)  Review and Approve
               Technical Memorandum
               Summarizing Results of
               Comparative Analysis of
               Alternatives
               Draft Feasibility
               Study (FS) Report
                               (1)  Review and Approve
-------
            MODEL STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PRP-CONDUCTED
         REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES

INTRODUCTION

     The purpose of this remedial investigation/feasibility study
(RI/FS) is to investigate the nature and extent of contamination
at a site, [assess the potential risk to human health and the
environment,] and develop and evaluate potential remedial
alternatives.  The RI and FS are interactive and may be conducted
concurrently so that the data collected in the RI influences the
development of remedial alternatives in the FS, which in turn
affects the data needs and the scope of treatability studies.

     The respondent will conduct this RI/FS (except for the
baseline risk assessment component) and will produce a draft RI
and FS report that are in accordance with this statement of work,
the Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and
Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA (U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response, October 1988) , and any other guidances
that EPA uses in conducting a RI/FS (a list of the primary
guidances is attached), as well as any additional requirements in
the administrative order.  The RI/FS Guidance describes the
report format and the required report content.  The respondent
will furnish all necessary personnel, materials, and services
heeded, or incidental to, performing the RI/FS, except as
otherwise specified in the administrative order.

     At the completion of the RI/FS, EPA will be responsible for
the selection of a site remedy and will document this selection
in a Record of Decision (ROD).  The remedial action alternative
selected by EPA will meet the cleanup standards specified in
CERCLA Section 121.  That is, the selected remedial action will
be protective of human health and the environment, will be in
compliance with, or include a waiver of, applicable or relevant
and appropriate requirements of other laws, will be cost-
effective, will utilize permanent solutions and alternative
treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies, to the
maximum extent practicable, and will address the statutory
preference for treatment as a principal element.  The final RI/FS
report, as adopted by EPA, and EPA'a baseline risk assessment
will,  with the administrative record, form the basis for the
selection of the site's remedy and will provide the information
necessary to support the development of the ROD.

     As specified in CERCLA Section 104(a)(1), as amended by
SARA,  EPA will provide oversight of the respondent's activities
throughout the RI/FS.  The respondent will support EPA's
initiation and conduct of activities related to the
implementation of oversight activities.
-------
                                2          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

     TASK 1 - SCOPING  (RI/FS Guidance, Chapter 2)

     Scoping is the initial planning process of the RI/FS and is
initiated by EPA prior to issuing special notice.  During this
time, the site-specific objectives of the RI/FS, including the
preliminary remediation goals  (PRGs), are determined by EPA.
Scoping is therefore initiated prior to negotiations
between the PRPs and EPA, and is continued, repeated as
necessary, and refined throughout the RI/FS process.  In addition
to developing the site specific objectives of the RI/FS, EPA will
determine a general management approach for the site.  Consistent
with the general management approach, the specific project scope
will be planned by the respondent and EPA.  The respondent will
document the specific project scope in a work plan.  Because the
work required to perform a RI/FS is not fully known at the onset,
and is phased in accordance with a site's complexity and the
amount of available information, it may be necessary to modify
the work plan during the RI/FS to satisfy the objectives of the
study.

     The site objectives for the 	 site
located in the State of 	 have been determined
preliminarily, based on available information, to be the
following:
     The strategy for the general management of the_
     	 site will include the following:
     When scoping the specific aspects of a project, the
respondent must meet with EPA to discuss all project planning
decisions and special concerns associated with the site.  The
following activities shall be performed by the respondent as a
function of the project planning process.
-------
                                3          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

a.   Site Background  (2.2)

     The respondent will gather and analyze the existing site
background information  and will conduct a site visit to assist in
planning the scope of the RI/FS.

     Collect and analyze existing data and document the need for
     additional data  (2.2.2; 2.2.6; 2.2.7)

     Before planning RI/FS activities, all existing site data
     will be thoroughly compiled and reviewed by the respondent.
     Specifically, this will include presently available data
     relating to the varieties and quantities of hazardous
     substances at the  site, and past disposal practices.  This
     will also include  results from any previous sampling events
     that may have been conducted.  The respondent will refer to
     Table 2-1 of the RI/FS Guidance for a comprehensive list of
     data collection information sources.  This information will
     be utilized in determining additional data needed to
     characterize the site, better define potential applicable or
     relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs), and develop a
     range of preliminarily identified remedial alternatives.
     Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) will be established subject
     to EPA approval which specify the usefulness of existing
     data.  Decisions on the necessary data and DQOs will be made
     by EPA.

     Conduct Site Visit

     The respondent will conduct a site visit during the project
     scoping phase to assist in developing a conceptual
     understanding of sources and areas of contamination as well
     as potential exposure pathways and receptors at the site.
     During the site visit the respondent should observe the
     site's physiography, hydrology, geology, and demographics,
     as well as natural resource, ecological and cultural
     features. This information will be utilized to better scope
     the project and to determine the extent of additional data
     necessary to characterize the site, better define potential
     ARARs, and narrow the range of preliminarily identified
     remedial alternatives.

D.   Project Planning (2.2)

     Once the respondent has collected and analyzed existing data
and conducted a site visit, the specific project scope will be
planned.  Project planning activities include those tasks
described below as well as identifying data needs, developing  a
work plan, designing a data collection program, and identifying
health and safety protocols.  The respondent will meet with EPA
regarding the following activities and before the drafting of  the
-------
                                 4          Annotated SOW  (9835.8A)

 scoping deiiverables  below.  These tasks are described  in Section
 c,  of this task  since they result in the development of specific
 required deliverables.

     Refine and  document preliminary remedial action objectives
     and alternatives (2.2.3)

     Once existing site information has been analyzed and an
     understanding of the potential site risks h&m lb©©ja
     <30fe®s«i3
-------
                           5          Annotated SOW  (9835.8A)

RI/FS Work Plan  (2.3.1)

A work plan documenting the decisions and evaluations
completed during the scoping process will be submitted to
EPA for review and approval.  The work plan should be
developed in conjunction with the sampling and analysis plan
and the site health and safety plan, although each plan may
be delivered under separate cover.  The work plan -will
include a comprehensive description of the work to be
performed, including the methodologies to be utilized, as
well as a corresponding schedule for completion.  In
addition, the work plan must include the rationale for
performing the required activities.  Specifically, the work
plan will present a statement of the problem(s) and
potential problem(s) posed by the site and the objectives of
the RI/FS.  Furthermore, the plan will include a site
background summary setting forth the site description
including the geographic location of the site, and to the
extent possible, a description of the site's physiography,
hydrology, geology, demographics, ecological, cultural and
natural resource features; a synopsis of the site history
and a description of previous responses that have been
conducted at the site by local, state, federal, or private
parties; a summary of the existing data in terms of physical
and chemical characteristics of the contaminants identified,
and their distribution among the environmental media at the
site.  The plan will recognise EPA's preparation of the
baseline risk assessment.  In addition, the plan will
include a description of the site management strategy
developed by EPA during scoping; a preliminary
identification of remedial alternatives and data needs for
evaluation of remedial alternatives.  The plan will reflect
coordination with treatability study requirements (see Tasks
1 and 4).  It will include a process for and manner of
identifying Federal and state ARARs (chemical-specific,
location-specific and action-specific).

Finally, the major part of the work plan is a detailed
description of the tasks to be performed, information needed
for each task and for EPA's baseline risk assessment,
information to be produced during and at the conclusion of
each task, and a description of the work products that will
be submitted to EPA.  This includes the deliverables set
forth in the remainder of this statement of work; a schedule
for each of the required activities which is consistent with
the RI/FS guidance; and a project management plan, including
a data management plan (e.g., requirements for project
management systems and software, minimum data requirements,
data format and backup data management), monthly reports to
EPA and meetings and presentations to EPA at the conclusion
of each major phase of the RI/FS.  The respondent will refer
to Appendix B of the RI/FS Guidance for a comprehensive
-------
                           6           Annotated SOW (9835 ,8 A)

description of the contents of the  required work plan,,
Becaus© of the unknown nature of  the  site and iterative
natur® of the RI/FS, additional data  requirements and
analyses may be identified throughout the process .   The
respondent will submit a technical  memorandum documenting
the need for additional data, and identifying the DQOs
whenever such requirements are identified.   In any event,
the respondent is responsible for fulfilling additional data
and analysis needs identified by  EPA  consistent with the
general scope and objectives of this  RI/FS.

Sampling and Analysis Plan  (2.3.2)

The respondent will prepare a sampling and analysis plan
(SAP) to ensure that sample collection and analytical
activities are conducted in accordance with technically
acceptable protocols and that the data meet DQOSo  The SAP
provides a mechanism for planning field activities and
consists of a field sampling plan (FSP)  and a quality
assurance project plan (QAPP) .

Th© FSP will define in detail th® sampling and data-
gathering method© that will b® us@d on the project.  It will
include sampling objectives, sampl© location and frequency,
sampling equipment and procedures,  and sample handling and
analysis.  The QAPP will describe the project objectives and
organization, functional activities,  and quality assurance
and quality control (Q&/QC) protocols that will be used to
achieve the desired DQOs.  Th® DQO® will at a minimum
reflect use of analytic methods to  identifying contamination
         liiitincji c©Rtii®iiMiti©R sengistdnt with th© l@v®ls for
         action ©lbj©etiv@g id nas® ©f m®thods
and! ©ffjaivtiesl p^et©©©!© £©3? th®  shdaiGnis ©f s©nc@3?in! in th®
M©di© ©f int(S2"®st witnin d®t®Gti©n  and! quantification limits
e©ngigt@nt with toth Qfa/QG pE'©s®dliyis'csi5 and DQO© apps"©v®dl in
th® Q&P! f©E- th© git® by 1FA0  Th®  lalboratory must hav© and
fellow an apps"©wsdl Q^ p2-@gE'a®o  If  a  lalberatery not in th®
e©nsist©nt with CLP ®©th©d® that  wemiidl b® us©d at this sit©
£©£• th® purpos®© p3£'©p©g©dl and Qh/QC pE-©c®dur®s approved by
EPA will b® us©d.  If th© iabQE-atos-y im not in th® CLP
program, a laboratory Q& program  must b@ submitted for EPA
r©vi@w and appreval.  EPA may sreepair© that th® r®spond@nt
-------
                                7          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

     submit detailed  information to demonstrate that the
     laboratory  is qualified to conduct the work, including
     information on personnel qualifications, equipment and
     material specifications.  The respondent will provide
     assurances that  EPA has access, to laboratory personnel,
     equipment and records for sample collection, transportation
     and analysis.

     Site Health and  Safety Plan (2.3.3)

     A health and safety plan will be prepared in conformance
     with the respondent's health and safety program, and in
     compliance with  OSHA regulations and protocols.  The health
     and safety plan  will include the 11 elements described in
     the RI/FS Guidance, such as a health and safety risk
     analysis, a description of monitoring and personal
     protective equipment, medical monitoring, and site control.
     It should be noted that EPA does not "approve" the
     respondent's health and safety plan, but rather EPA reviews
     it to ensure that all necessary elements are included, and
     that the plan provides for the protection of human health
     and the environment.

TASK 2 - COMMUNITY RELATIONS

     The development  and implementation of community relations
activities are the responsibility of EPA.  The critical community
relations planning steps performed by EPA include conducting
community interviews  and developing a community relations plan.
Although implementation of the community relations plan is the
responsibility of EPA, the respondent may assist by providing
information regarding the site's history, participating in public
meetings, or by preparing fact sheets for distribution to the
general public.  Two  or more baseline risk assessment memoranda
will be prepared by EPA which will summarize the toxicity
assessment and exposure assessment components of the baseline
risk assessment.  EPA will make these memoranda available to all
interested parties for comment and place them in the
Administrative Record. (EPA is not required, however, to formally
respond to significant comments except during the formal public
comment period on the proposed plan.)   In addition, the
respondent may establish a community information repository, at
or near the site, to house one copy of the administrative record.
The extent of PRP involvement in community relations activities
is left to the discretion of EPA.  The respondents9 community
relations responsibilities, if any, are specified in the
community relations plan.  All PRP-conducted community relations
activities will be subject to oversight by EPA.
-------
                                8          Annotated SOW (9835 «,8A)

TASK 3 = SITE CHARACTERIZATION (RI/FS Guidance, Chapter 3)

     As part of the Rl, the respondent will perform the
activities described in this task, including the preparation of a
site characterization summary and a RI report.  The overall
objective of site characterization is to describe areas of a site
that may pos® a threat to human health or the environment«  This
is accomplished by first determining a sit®°s physiography,
geology, and hydrology„  Surface and subsurface pathways of
migration will be defined.,  The respondent will identify the
sources of contamination and define the nature, extent, and
volume of the sources of contamination, including their physical
and chemical constituents as well as their concentrations at
incremental locations to background in the affected media„  The
respondent will also investigate the extent of migration of this
contamination as well as its volume and any changes in its
physical or chemical characteristics, to provide for a
comprehensive understanding of the nature and extent of
contamination at th@ site.  Using this information, contaminant.
fate and transport is then determined and projected,,

     During this phase of the.RI/FS, the work plan, SAP, and
health and safety plan ar© implemented.  Field data are collected
and analyzed to provid® the information required to accomplish
th© objectives of th® study.  The respondent will notify EPA at
least two weeks in advance of th© field work regarding the
planned dates for. field activities, including ©©©3,©fi@al g&olfi
tnsgWDfSp field lay out of th© sampling grid, excavation,
installation of wells, initiating sampling, installation and
calibration of equipment, pump tests, and initiation of analysis
and other field investigation aetivitias,,  Th® respondent will
demonstrat© that th® laboratory and typ<§ of laboratory analyses
that will b© utilised during sit© characterisation meets th©
specific Q&/QC requirements and th® DQOs of th® sit®
investigation as specified in th® S&P»  In view of th® unknown
site conditions, activities ar© often iterative, and to satisfy
th© objectives of th® RI/FS it may be necessary for th©
respondent to suppicsadnt th© work specified in th© initial work
plan»  In addition t© th© d@liv©rabl©s b©low, th© respondent will
provid© a ®@nthiy progress report and participate in meetings at
major pointo lira th© MI/FSo

a»   Field Xirwsgtigation (3.2)

     Th© field imrngtigatioE iiaclud©© th® gathering of data to
define sit© physical cua<£l M©2,©fi©a3L characteristics, sources of
contamination, and th® natur® arad assteot of contamination at the
sit©o  Th©@© activities will to© performed by th© respondent in
accordance with th© work plan and S&Po  &t a minimum, this shall
-------
                           9          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

Implement and document field support activities (3.2.1)

The respondent will initiate field support activities
following approval of the work plan and SAP.  Field support
activities may include obtaining access to the site,
scheduling, and procuring equipment, office space,
laboratory services, and/or contractors.  The respondent
will notify EPA at least two weeks prior to initiating field
support activities so that EPA may adequately schedule
oversight tasks.  The respondent will also notify EPA in
writing upon completion of field support activities.

Investigate and define site physical and biological
characteristics (3.2.2)

The respondent will collect data on the physical and
biological characteristics of the site and its surrounding
areas including the physiography, geology, and hydrology,
and specific physical characteristics identified in the work
plan.  This information will be ascertained through a
combination of physical measurements, observations, and
sampling efforts and will be utilized to define potential
transport pathways and human and ecological receptor
populations.  In defining the site's physical
characteristics the respondent will also obtain sufficient
engineering data (such as pumping characteristics) for the
projection of contaminant fate and transport, and
development and screening of remedial action alternatives,
including information to assess treatment technologies.

Define sources of contamination (3.2.3)

The respondent will locate each source of contamination.
For each location, the areal extent and depth of
contamination will be determined by sampling at incremental
depths on a sampling grid.  The physical characteristics and
chemical constituents and their concentrations will be
determined for all known and discovered sources of
contamination.  The respondent shall conduct sufficient
sampling to define the boundaries of the contaminant sources
to the level established in the QA/QC plan and DQOs.

Defining the source of contamination will include analyzing
the potential for contaminant release  (e.g., long term
leaching from soil), contaminant mobility and persistence,
and characteristics important for evaluating remedial
actions, including information to assess treatment
technologies.
-------
                               10          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

     Describe the nature and extent of contamination (3.2.4)

     The respondent will gather information to describe the
     nature and extent of contamination as a final step during
     the field investigation.  To describe the nature and extent
     of contamination, the respondent will utilize the
     information on site physical and biological characteristics
     and sources of contamination to give a preliminary estimate
     of the contaminants that may have migrated.  The respondent
     will then implement an iterative monitoring program and any
     study program identified in the work plan or SAP such that
     by using analytical techniques sufficient to detect and
     quantify the concentration of contaminants, the migration of
     contaminants through the various media at the site can be
     determined. In addition, the respondent will gather data for
     calculations of contaminant fate and transport.  This
     process is continued until the area and depth of
     contamination are known to the level of contamination
     established in the QA/QC plan and DQOs.  EPA will use the
     information on the nature and extent of contamination to
     determine the level of risk presented by the site.
     Respondents will use this information to help to determine
     aspects of the appropriate remedial action alternatives to
     be evaluated.

b.    Data Analyses (3.4)

     Evaluate site characteristics (3.4.1)

     The respondent will analyze and evaluate the data to
     describe:  (1) site physical and biological characteristics,
     (2)  contaminant source characteristics, (3) nature and
     extent of contamination and (4)  contaminant fate and
     transport.  Results of the site physical characteristics,
     source characteristics, and extent of contamination analyses
     are utilized in the analysis of contaminant fate and
     transport.  The evaluation will include the actual and
     potential magnitude of releases from the sources, and
     horizontal and vertical spread of contamination as well as
     mobility and persistence of contaminants.  Where modeling is
     appropriate,  such models shall be identified to EPA in a
     technical memorandum prior to their use.  All data and
     programming,  including any proprietary programs, shall be
     made available to EPA together with a sensitivity analysis.
     The Rl data shall be presented in a format (i.e., computer
     disc or equivalent) to facilitate EPA's preparation of the
     baseline risk assessment.  The Respondent shall agree to
     discuss and then collect any data gaps identified by the EPA
     that is needed to complete the baseline risk assessment.
     (See "Guidance for Data Useability in Risk Assessment -
     OSWER Directive # 9285.7-05 - October 1990.)  Also, this
     evaluation shall provide any information relevant to site
-------
                                11         Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

     characteristics necessary for evaluation of the need for
     remedial action in the baseline risk assessment and for the
     development and evaluation of remedial alternatives.
     Analyses of data collected for site characterization will
     meet the DQOs developed in the QA/QC plan stated in the SAP
     (or revised during the RI).

 c.  Data Management Procedures (3.5)

     The respondent will consistently document the quality and
validity of field and laboratory data compiled during the RI.

     Document field activities (3.5.1)

     Information gathered during site characterization will be
     consistently documented and adequately recorded by the
     respondent in well maintained field logs and laboratory
     reports.  The method(s) of documentation must be specified
     in the work plan and/or the SAP.  Field logs must be
     utilized to document.observations, measurements, and
     significant events that have occurred during field
     activities.  Laboratory reports must document sample
     custody, analytical responsibility, analytical results,
     adherence to prescribed protocols, nonconformity events,
     corrective measures, and/or data deficiencies.

     Maintain sample management and tracking (3.5.2; 3.5.3)

     The respondent will maintain field reports, sample shipment
     records, analytical results, and QA/QC reports to ensure
     that only validated analytical data are reported and
     utilized in the development and evaluation of remedial
     alternatives.  Analytical results developed under the work
     plan will not be included in any site characterization
     reports unless accompanied by or cross-referenced to a
     corresponding QA/QC report.  In addition, the respondent
     will establish a data security system to safeguard chain-of
     custody forms and other project records to prevent loss,
     damage, or alteration of project documentation.

d.   Site Characterization Deliverables (3.7)

     The respondent will prepare the preliminary site
characterization summary and [once the baseline risk assessment
(Task 4) is complete,] the remedial investigation report.

     Preliminary Site Characterization Summary (3.7.2)

     After completing field sampling and analysis, the respondent
     will prepare a concise site characterization summary.  This
     summary will review the investigative activities that have
     taken place, and describe and display site data documenting
-------
                                12          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

     the location and characteristics of surface and subsurface
     features and contamination at the site including the
     affected medium, location, types, physical state,
     concentration of contaminants and quantity.  In addition,
     the location, dimensions, physical condition and varying
     concentrations of each contaminant throughout each source
     and the extent of contaminant migration through each of the
     affected media will be documented.  The site
     characterization summary will provide EPA with a preliminary
     reference for developing the risk assessment, and evaluating
     the development and screening of remedial alternatives and
     the refinement and identification of ARARs.

     Remedial Investigation (RI) Report (3.7.3)

     The respondent will prepare and submit a draft RI report to
     EPA for review and approval.[ after completion of the
     baseline risk assessment (see Task 4).]  This report shall
     summarize results of field activities to characterize the
     site,  sources of contamination, nature and extent of
     contamination and the fate and transport of contaminants.
     The respondent will refer to the RI/FS Guidance for an
     outline of the report format and contents.  Following
     comment by EPA, the respondent will prepare a final RI
     report which satisfactorily addresses EPA's comments.

TASK 4 - TREATABILITY STUDIES (Rl/FS Manual, Chapter 5)

     Treatability testing will be performed by the respondent to
assist in the detailed analysis of alternatives.  In addition, if
applicable, testing results and operating conditions will be used
in the detailed design of the selected remedial technology.  The
following activities will be performed by the respondent.

a.   Determination of Candidate Technologies and of the Need for
     Testing (5.2; 5.4)

     The respondent will identify in a technical memorandum,
subject to EPA review and approval, candidate technologies for a
treatability studies program during project planning  (Task 1).
The listing of candidate technologies will cover the range of
technologies required for alternatives analysis (Task 6 a.) The
specific data requirements for the testing program will be
determined and refined during site characterization and the
development and screening of remedial alternatives (Tasks 2 and
6, respectively).

     Conduct literature survey and determine the need for
     treatabilitv testing (5.2)

     The respondent will conduct a literature survey to gather
     information on performance, relative costs, applicability,
-------
                                13          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

     removal efficiencies, operation and maintenance (O&M)
     requirements, and implementability of candidate
     technologies.  If practical candidate technologies have not
     been sufficiently demonstrated, or cannot be adequately
     evaluated for this site on the basis of available
     information, treatability testing will be conducted.  Where
     it is determined by EPA that treatability testing is
     required, and unless the respondent can demonstrate to EPA's
     satisfaction that they are not needed, the respondent will
     submit a statement of work to EPA outlining the steps and
     data necessary to evaluate and initiate the treatability
     testing program.

     Evaluate treatability studies (5.4)

     Once a decision has been made to perform treatability
     studies, the respondent and EPA will decide on the type of
     treatability testing to use (e.g., bench versus pilot).
     Because of the time required to design, fabricate, and
     install pilot scale equipment as well as perform testing for
     various operating conditions,  the decision to perform pilot
     testing should be made as early in the process as possible
     to minimize potential delays of the FS.  To assure that a
     treatability testing program is completed on time, and with
     accurate results, the respondent will either submit a
     separate treatability testing work plan or an amendment to
     the original site work plan for EPA review and approval.

b.   Treatability Testing and Deliverables (5.5; 5.6; 5.8)

     The deliverables that are required, in addition to the
memorandum identifying candidate technologies, where treatability
testing is conducted include a work plan, a sampling and analysis
plan, and a final treatability evaluation report.  EPA may also
require a treatability study health and safety plan, where
appropriate.

     Treatability testing work plan (5.5)

     The respondent will prepare a treatability testing work plan
     or amendment to the original site work plan for EPA review
     and approval describing the site background, remedial
     technology(ies)  to be tested,  test objectives, experimental
     procedures,  treatability conditions to be tested,
     measurements of performance, analytical methods, data
     management and analysis, health and safety, and residual
     waste management.  The DQOs for treatability testing should
     be documented as well.  If pilot scale treatability testing
     is to be performed,  the pilot-scale work plan will describe
     pilot plant installation and start-up, pilot plant operation
     and maintenance procedures, operating conditions to be
     tested, a sampling plan to determine pilot plant
-------
                                14          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

     performance, and a detailed health and safety plan.  If
     testing is to be performed off-site, permitting requirements
     will be addressed.

     Treatabilitv study SAP  (5.5)

     If the original QAPP or FSP is not adequate for defining the
     activities to be performed during the treatability tests, a
     separate treatability study SAP or amendment to the original
     site SAP will be prepared by the respondent for EPA review
     and approval.  Task 1, Item c. of this statement of work
     provides additional information on the requirements of the
     SAP.

     Treatabilitv study health and safety plan (5.5)

     If the original health and safety plan is not adequate for
     defining the activities to be performed during the treatment
     tests, a separate or amended health and safety plan will be
     developed by the respondent.  Task 1, Item c. of this
     statement of work provides additional information on the
     requirements of the health and safety plan.  EPA does not
     "approve" the treatability study health and safety plan.

     Treatability study evaluation report (5.6)

     Following completion of treatability testing, the respondent
     will analyze and interpret the testing results in a
     technical report to EPA.  Depending on the sequence of
     activities, this report may be a part of the RI/FS report or
     a separate deliverable.  The report will evaluate each
     technology's effectiveness, implementability, cost and
     actual results as compared with predicted results.  The
     report will also evaluate full scale application of the
     technology, including a sensitivity analysis identifying the
     key parameters affecting full-scale operation.

TASK 5 - DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF Remedial Alternatives
         (Rl/FS Manual, Chapter 4)

     The development and screening of remedial alternatives is
performed to develop an appropriate range of waste management
options that will be evaluated.  This range of alternatives
should include as appropriate, options in which treatment is used
to reduce the toxicity, mobility, or volume of wastes, but
varying in the types of treatment,  the amount treated, and the
manner in which long-term residuals or untreated wastes are
managed; options involving containment with little or no
treatment; options involving both treatment and containment; and
a no-action alternative.  The following activities will be
performed by the respondent as a function of the development and
screening of remedial alternatives.
-------
                                15          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

a.   Development and Screening of Remedial Alternatives (4.2)

     The respondent will begin to develop and evaluate a range of
appropriate waste management options that at a minimum ensure
protection of human health and the environment, concurrent with
the RI site characterization task.

     Refine and document remedial action objectives (4.2.1)

     Based on EPA's baseline risk assessment, the respondent will
     review and if necessary modify the site-specific remedial
     action objectives, specifically the PRGs, that were
     established by EPA prior to or during negotiations between
     EPA and the respondent.  The revised PRGs will be documented
     in a technical memorandum that will be reviewed and approved
     by EPA.  These modified PRGs will specify the contaminants
     and media of interest, exposure pathways and receptors, and
     an acceptable contaminant level or range of levels (at
     particular locations for each exposure route).

     Develop general response actions (4.2.2)

     The respondent will develop general response actions for
     each medium of interest defining containment, treatment,
     excavation, pumping, or other actions, singly or in
     combination, to satisfy the remedial action objectives.

     Identify areas or volumes of media (4.2.3)

     The respondent will identify areas or volumes of media to
     which general response actions may apply, taking into
     account requirements for protectiveness as identified in the
     remedial action objectives.  The chemical and physical
     characterization of the site will also be taken into
     account.

     Identify, screen, and document remedial technologies  (4.2.4;
     4.2.5)

     The respondent will identify and evaluate technologies
     applicable to each general response action to eliminate
     those that cannot be implemented at the site.  General
     response actions will be refined to specify remedial
     technology types.  Technology process options for each of
     the technology types will be identified either concurrent
     with the identification of technology types, or following
     the screening of the considered technology types.  Process
     options will be evaluated on the basis of effectiveness,
     implementability, and cost factors to select and retain one
     or,  if necessary, more representative processes for each
     technology type.  The technology types and process options
-------
                           16         Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

will be summarized for inclusion in a technical memorandum.
The reasons for eliminating alternatives must be specified.

Assemble and document alternatives (4.2.6)

The respondent will assemble selected representative
technologies into alternatives for each affected medium or
operable unit.  Together, all of the alternatives will
represent a range of treatment and containment combinations
that will address either the site or the operable unit as a
whole.  A summary of the assembled alternatives and their
related action-specific ARARs will be prepared by the
respondent for inclusion in a technical memorandum.  The
reasons for eliminating alternatives during the preliminary
screening process must be specified.

Refine alternatives

The respondent will refine the remedial alternatives to
identify contaminant volume addressed by the proposed
process and sizing of critical unit operations as necessary.
Sufficient information will be collected for an adequate
comparison of alternatives.  PRQs for each chemical in each
medium will also be modified as necessary to incorporate any
new risk assessment information presented in EPA1a baseline
risk assessment report.  Additionally, action-specific ARARs
will be updated as the remedial alternatives are refined.

Conduct and document screening evaluation of each
alternative (4.3)

The respondent may perform a final screening process based
on short and long term aspects of effectiveness,
implementability, and relative cost.   Generally, this
screening process is only necessary when there are many
feasible alternatives available for detailed analysis.  If
necessary, the screening of alternatives will be conducted
to assure that only the alternatives with the most favorable
composite evaluation of all factors are retained for further
analysis.  As appropriate, the screening will preserve the
range of treatment and containment alternatives that was
initially developed.  The range of remaining alternatives
will include options that use treatment technologies and
permanent solutions to the maximum extent practicable.  The
respondent will prepare a technical memorandum summarizing
the results and reasoning employed in screening, arraying
alternatives that remain after screening, and identifying
the action-specific ARARs for the alternatives that remain
after screening.
-------
                                17          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

b.    Alternatives Development and Screening Deliverables (4.5)

     The respondent will prepare a technical memorandum
summarizing the work performed in and the results of each task
above, including an alternatives array summary.  These will be
modified by the respondent if required by EPA's comments to
assure identification of a complete and appropriate range of
viable alternatives to be considered in the detailed analysis.
This deliverable will document the methods, rationale, and
results of the alternatives screening process.

TASK 6 - DETAILED ANALYSIS OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES (RI/FS
         Guidance, Chapter 6)

     The detailed analysis will be conducted by the respondent to
provide EPA with the information needed to allow for the
selection of a site remedy.  This analysis is the final task to
be performed by the respondent during the FS.

a.   Detailed Analysis of Alternatives (6.2)

     The respondent will conduct a detailed analysis of
alternatives which will consist of an analysis of each option
against a set of nine evaluation criteria and a comparative
analysis of all options using the same evaluation criteria as a
basis for comparison.

     Apply nine criteria and document analysis (6.2.1 - 6.2.4)

     The respondent will apply nine evaluation criteria to the
     assembled remedial alternatives to ensure that the selected
     remedial alternative will be protective of human health and
     the environment; will be in compliance with, or include a
     waiver of, ARARs; will be cost-effective; will utilize
     permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies,
     or resource recovery technologies, to the maximum extent
     practicable; and will address the statutory preference for
     treatment as a principal element.  The evaluation criteria
     include:  (1) overall protection of human health and the
     environment; (2) compliance with ARARs; (3)  long-term
     effectiveness and permanence; (4) reduction of toxicity,
     mobility, or volume; (5) short-term effectiveness; (6)
     implementability; (7) cost; (8)  state (or support agency)
     acceptance; and (9)  community acceptance.  (Note: criteria 8
     and 9 are considered after the RI/FS report has been
     released to the general public.) For each alternative the
     respondent should provide: (1) a description of the
     alternative that outlines the waste management strategy
     involved and identifies the key ARARs associated with each
     alternative, and (2) a discussion of the individual
     criterion assessment.  If the respondent does not have
     direct input on criteria (8)  state (or support agency)
-------
                                18          Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

     acceptance and  (9) community acceptance, these will be
     addressed by EPA.

     Compare alternatives against each other and document the
     comparison of alternatives (6.2.5; 6.2.6)

     The respondent will perform a comparative analysis between
     the remedial alternatives.  That is, each alternative will
     be compared against the others using the evaluation criteria
     as a basis of comparison.  Identification and selection of
     the preferred alternative are reserved by EPA.  The
     respondent will prepare a technical memorandum summarizing
     the results of the comparative analysis.

b.   Detailed Analysis Deliverables (6.5)

     In addition to the technical memorandum summarizing the
results of the comparative analysis, the respondent will submit a
draft FS report to EPA for review and approval.  Once EPA's
comments have been addressed by the respondent to EPA's
satisfaction, the final FS report may be bound with the final RI
report.

Feasibility study report (6.5)

The respondent will prepare a draft FS report for EPA review and
comment.  This report, as ultimately adopted or amended by EPA,
provides a basis for remedy selection by EPA and documents the
development and analysis of remedial alternatives.  The
respondent will refer to the RI/FS Guidance for an outline of the
report format and the required report content.  The respondent
will prepare a final FS report which satisfactorily addresses
EPA's comments.
-------
                                19         Annotated SOW (9835.8A)

                     REFERENCES FOR CITATION

     The following list, although not comprehensive, comprises
many of the regulations and guidance documents that apply to the
RI/FS process:

The (revised) National Contingency Plan

"Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility
Studies Under CERCLA,H U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, October 1988, OSWER Directive No. 9355.3-01.

"Interim Guidance on Potentially Responsible Party Participation
in Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Studies," U.S. EPA,
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, Appendix A to OSWER
Directive No. 9355.3-01.

"Guidance on Oversight of Potentially Responsible Party Remedial
Investigations and Feasibility Studies," U.S. EPA, Office of
Waste Programs Enforcement, OSWER Directive No. 9835.3

"A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations Methods," Two
Volumes, U.S. EPA,.Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
EPA/540/P-87/001a, August 1987, OSWER Directive No. 9355.0-14.

"EPA NEIC Policies and Procedures Manual," May 1978, revised
November 1984, EPA-330/9-78-001-R.

"Data Quality Objectives for Remedial Response Activities," U.S.
EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response and Office of
Waste Programs Enforcement, EPA/540/G-87/003, March 1987, OSWER
Directive No. 9335.0-7B.

"Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance
Project Plans," U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development,
Cincinnati, OH, QAMS-004/80, December 29, 1980.

"Interim Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality
Assurance Project Plans," U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response, QAMS-005/80, December 1980.

"Users Guide to the EPA Contract Laboratory Program," U.S. EPA,
Sample Management Office, August 1982.

"Interim Guidance on Compliance with Applicable or Relevant and
Appropriate Requirements," U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response, July 9, 1987, OSWER Directive No. 9234.0-05.

"CERCLA Compliance with Other Laws Manual," Two Volumes, U.S.
EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, August 1988
(draft), OSWER Directive No. 9234.1-01 and -02.
-------
                                20         Annotated SOW  (9835.8A)

 "Guidance on Remedial Actions for Contaminated Ground Water at
 Superfund Sites,H U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial
 Response, (draft), OSWER Directive No. 9283.1-2.

 "Draft Guidance on Preparing Superfund Decision Documents," U.S.
 EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, March 1988, OSWER
 Directive No. 9355.3-02

 "Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund - Volume I  Human Health
 Evaluation Manual (Part A),11 December 1989,  EPA/540/1-89/002

 "Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund - Volume II
 Environmental Evaluation Manual," March 1989,  EPA/540/1-89/001

 "Guidance for Data Useability in Risk Assessment," October, 1990,
 EPA/540/G-90/008

 "Performance of Risk Assessments in Remedial Investigation
 /Feasibility Studies (RI/FSs) Conducted by Potentially  „
Responsible Parties (PRPs)," August 28, 1990, OSWER Directive No.
 9835.15.

"Role of the Baseline Risk Assessment in Superfund Remedy
Selection Decisions," April 22, 1991, OSWER Directive No. 9355.0-
 30.

 "Health and Safety Requirements of Employees Employed in Field
Activities," U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
July 12, 1981, EPA Order No. 1440.2.

OSHA Regulations in 29 CFR 1910.120 (Federal Register 45654,
December 19, 1986).

"Interim Guidance on Administrative Records for Selection of
CERCLA Response Actions," U.S. EPA, Office of Waste Programs
Enforcement, March 1,  1989, OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A.

"Community Relations in Superfund:  A Handbook," U.S. EPA, office
of Emergency and Remedial Response, June 1988, OSWER Directive
No. 9230.0*38.
                            •
"Community Relations During Enforcement Activities And
Development of the Administrative Record,H U.S. EPA, Office of
Programs Enforcement,  November 1988, OSWER Directive No.
9836.0-1A.
-------
                  MODEL STATEMENT OF WORK FOR A
           REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AND FEASIBILITY  STUDY
           CONDUCTED BY POTENTIALLY  RESPONSIBLE PARTIES

INSTRUCTIONS

     This model statement of work (SOW) was developed to provide
potentially responsible parties  (PRPs) direction in performing
the tasks that are required to successfully complete a remedial
investigation/feasibility study  (RI/FS).  A SOW for a PRP-lead
RI/FS must be used in conjunction with the Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response's October  1988 Guidance for Conducting
Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA
(hereafter referred to as the RI/FS Guidance) and with the Office
of Waste Programs Enforcement's  Guidance on Oversight of
Potentially Responsible Party Remedial Investigations and
Feasibility Studies.  The organization of this model SOW is
according to the tasks that must be performed during a PRP-
conducted RI/FS.  These tasks include:

        Task 1    Scoping;
        Task 2    Community Relations;
        Task 3    Site Characteristics;
        Task 4    Treatability Studies;
        Task 5    Development &  Screening of Remedial
                  Alternatives;
        Task 6    Detailed Analysis of Remedial Alternatives.

     This model SOW is written on the general approach that a PRP
RI/FS is commenced pursuant to an Administrative Order on Consent
(AOC) with an attached SOW, and  that the PRPs perform work and
submit deliverables to EPA.  Depending on site circumstances and
the relationship to PRPs, it may be necessary to modify this
management approach.  Moreover,  because the work required to
perform a RI/FS is dependent on  a site's complexity and the
amount of available information, it may be necessary to modify
the components of this model SOW in order to tailor the tasks to
the specific conditions at a site.  Similarly, the level of
detail within the model SOW will vary according to the site.  The
Regions have discretion to develop a site-specific SOW that
follows this model SOW, including portions of the work to be
performed by EPA, technical provisions, deliverables and
approvals.  EPA, however, will perform the baseline risk
assessment, and no baseline risk assessment deliverables will be
required of PRPs.  While not preferred as a general approach, at
some sites EPA may develop itself, or in negotiations, a work
plan rather than a SOW and then  enter into an AOC.

     When special notice for a RI/FS is issued, at most sites a
draft SOW should be attached as  an addendum to a draft AOC.
Prior to the issuance of special notice, EPA, generally with
contractor assistance, will determine both the objectives of the
RI/FS and a general approach for managing the site.  Determining
-------
                                ii                         9835.8A

the site objectives and a general site strategy will be required
regardless of whether an administrative order is signed with the
PRPs or the RI/FS is Fund-financed.

     The site objectives should specify the purpose of any
activities to be conducted at the site, including any interim
actions that may be necessary, as well as the objectives of the
required remedial actions (e.g., the preliminary remediation
goals, PRGs)=  These objectives should specify the potential
contaminants and media of concern,  the likely exposure pathways
and receptors, and an acceptable contaminant level or range of
levels for each exposure route„  The site objectives are
developed and based on existing site information, contaminant-
specific ARARs, when available, and risk related factors.

     The site management strategy is developed once the
objectives have been established and identifies the study
boundary areas and the optimal sequence of site activities,
including whether the site may best be remedied as separate
operable units.  The general management approach should include;
identifying the types of actions that may be required to address
site problems, identifying any interim actions that are necessary
to mitigate potential threats or prevent further environmental
degradation, and determining the optimal sequence of activities
to be conducted at the site.  Also included in the site
management strategy should be the decision as to whether the RI
will serve as a continuation of the PRP search<>  This would be
appropriate at sites such as area wide groundwater contamination
or stream contamination where all of the sources of contamination
are not yet well defined.

     The deliverables described in this model SOW fall under one
of three management categories.  Under the first category,
deliverables must be approved by SPA before work can either begin
or continue.  This includes the work plan and the site sampling
and analysis plan.  Similarly, SPA approval of the RI report,
treatability studies and FS is the general approach.  Under the
second category, EPA may exercise an option, in drafting the
§ite~specifie SOW, to either comment on or review and approve the
deliverables.  Review and approval of deliverables under this
                           & &
second category will be based on the particular circumstances of
the site or practices of the Regional office.  This category will
include most of the deliverables that are described in this model
SOW, such as technical memoranda and reports.  A middle ground is
to allow work in these areas to proceed without resubmittal and
approval so long as the changes required by EPA are fully
reflected in subsequent deliverables.  This approach of
commenting strikes a balance between excessive approval and
dispute resolution of numerous interim activities by PRPs, which
cumulatively results in a lengthy RI/FS, and review at the end of
the six major components of the RI/FS, which could result in
months of unacceptable work not detected until late in the
-------
                               iii                        9835.8A

process.  It also assures focus on the major deliverables.  In
addition, consistent with the RI/FS guidance, some work is
simultaneously done.  Under the third category, deliverables do
not require comment from EPA.  This category includes PRP
progress reports.  A summary of the. major deliverables under
categories one and two, as outlined in this model SOW, is
included in the document.

     Interim deliverables in addition to those required by the
RI/FS Guidance are described in this model SOW.  These
deliverables are appropriate because of the different
relationships and interactions between a Fund-lead and PRP-lead
RI/FS.  Review of these deliverables will help to assure EPA that
the work being performed meets the terms and conditions of the
AOC.  Those deliverables other than what are required by the
RI/FS Guidance that are described within this model SOW may not
be necessary or appropriate for all sites.  Similarly,
deliverables other than what are described in this model SOW may
be more appropriate for a particular site.  The deliverables
determined to be appropriate for a particular site should be
approved by EPA management and must be specified in the AOC.  The
timing of the RI/FS and available oversight resources should be
considered prior to determining the appropriate deliverables.
Offices within the Region other than Superfund which will concur
or comment on PRP deliverables should be consulted during the
scoping process.

     The Remedial Project Manager (RPM) should assure good
communications with the PRPs.»  This includes meetings to discuss
EPA's expectations before major phases of work are begun and to
review the conclusions of major components of the RI/FS.   In
addition, the RPM should assure that EPA management is informed
and has input on major components of the RI/FS.  While this
varies from site to site, management review usually is
appropriate at scoping, final review of the work plan, before
final comments are submitted on the RI, before EPA finalizes the
baseline risk assessment, and as the FS is finally developed.
-------
                                IV
                  9835.8A
                  SUMMARY OF MAJOR DELIVERABLES
     (AS OUTLINED IN THIS MODEL SOW FOR PRP-CONDUCTED RI/FS)
TASK/DELIVERABLE

TASK 1    SCOPING
               RI/FS Work Plan
               Sampling and
               Analysis Plan (SAP)
               Site Health and
               Safety Plan
MANAGEMENT CATEGORY
 (1)  Review and Approve
 (1)  Review and Approve

 (2)  Review and Comment
TASK 3    SITE CHARACTERIZATION

               Technical Memorandum
               on Modeling of Site
               Characteristics (where
               appropriate)
               Preliminary Site
               Characterization
               Summary
               Draft Remedial
               Investigation (RI)
               Report

[Task 4 - Baseline Risk Assessment]

TASK 4    TREATABILITY STUDIES

               Technical Memorandum
               Identifying
               Candidate
               Technologies
               Treatability Testing
               Statement of Work
               Treatability Testing
               Work Plan (or amendment
               to original)
 (2)  Review and Approve
 (2)  Review and Comment
 (I)  Review and Approve
 (2)  Review and Approve


 (2)  Review and Comment

 (1)  Review and Approve
          See the Model RI/FS Administrative Order on Consent
          (AOC) for additional reporting requirements, and
          further instructions on submittal and dispositions of
          deliverables.
-------
                                v                         9835.8A

               Treatability Study         (l)  Review and Approve
               SAP  (or amendment to
               original)
               Treatability Study         (2)  Review and Comment
               Site Health and
               Safety Plan (or
               amendment to original)
               Treatability Study         (1)  Review and Approve
               Evaluation Report


TASK 5    DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

               Technical Memorandum       (2)  Review and Approve
               Documenting Revised
               Remedial Action
               Objectives
               Technical Memorandum       (2)  Review and Approve
               on Remedial
               Technologies,
               Alternatives and
               Screening

TASK 6    DETAILED ANALYSIS OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES

               Technical Memorandum       (2)  Review and Approve
               Summarizing Results of
               Comparative Analysis of
               Alternatives
               Draft Feasibility          (1)  Review and Approve
               Study (FS) Report
-------
            MODEL STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PRP-CONDUCTED
         REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES

INTRODUCTION

     The purpose of this remedial investigation/feasibility study
(RI/FS) is to investigate the nature and extent of contamination
at a site and develop and evaluate potential remedial
alternatives.  The RI and FS are interactive and may be conducted
concurrently so that the data collected in the RI influences the
development of remedial alternatives in the FS, which in turn
affects the data needs and the scope of treatability studies.

     The respondent will conduct this RI/FS (except for the
baseline risk assessment component) and will produce a draft RI
and FS report that are in accordance with this statement of work,
the Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and
Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA (U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response, October 1988),  and any other guidances
that EPA uses in conducting a RI/FS (a list of the primary
guidances is attached), as well as any additional requirements in
the administrative order<.  The RI/FS Guidance describes the
report format and the required report content.  The respondent
will furnish all necessary personnel,  materials, and services
needed, or incidental to, performing the RI/FS, except as
otherwise specified in the administrative order.

     At the completion of the RI/FS, EPA will be responsible for
the selection of a site remedy and will document this selection
in a Record of Decision (ROD).  The remedial action alternative
selected by EPA will meet the cleanup standards specified in
CERCLA Section 121.  That is, the selected remedial action will
be protective of human health and the environment, will be in
compliance with, or include a waiver of, applicable or relevant
and appropriate requirements of other laws, will be cost-
effective, will utilize permanent solutions and alternative
treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies, to the
maximum extent practicable, and will address the statutory
preference for treatment as a principal element.  The final RI/FS
report, as adopted by EPA, and EPA's baseline risk assessment
will, with the administrative record,  form the basis for the
selection of the site's remedy and will provide the information
necessary to support the development of the ROD.

     As specified in CERCLA Section 104(a)(1), as amended by
SARA, EPA will provide oversight of the respondent's activities
throughout the RI/FS.  The respondent will support EPA's
initiation and conduct of activities related to the
implementation of oversight activities.
-------
                                2                         9835.8A

     TASK 1 - SCOPING (RI/FS Guidance, Chapter 2)

     Scoping is the initial planning process of the RI/FS and is
initiated by EPA prior to issuing special notice.  During this
time, the site-specific objectives of the RI/FS, including the
preliminary remediation goals (PRGs), are determined by EPA.
Scoping is therefore initiated prior to negotiations between the
PRPs and EPA, and is continued,  repeated as necessary, and
refined throughout the RI/FS process.  In addition to developing
the site specific objectives of the RI/FS, EPA will determine a
general management approach for the site.  Consistent with the
general management approach, the specific project scope will be
planned by the respondent and EPA.  The respondent will document
the specific project scope in a work plan.  Because the work
required to perform a RI/FS is not fully known at the onset, and
is phased in accordance with a site's complexity and the amount
of available information, it may be necessary to modify the work
plan during the RI/FS to satisfy the objectives of the study.

     The site objectives for the 	 site
located in the State of 	 have been determined
preliminarily, based on available information, to be the
following:
     The strategy for the general management of the_
    	 site will include the following:
     When scoping the specific aspects of a project, the
respondent must meet with EPA to discuss all project planning
decisions and special concerns associated with the site.  The
following activities shall be performed by the respondent as a
function of the project planning process.
-------
                                3                         9835.8A

a.   Site Background (2.2)

     The respondent will gather and analyze the existing site
background information and will conduct a site visit to assist in
planning the scope of the RI/FS.

     Collect and analyze existing data and document the need for
     additional data (2.2.2; 2.2.6; 2.2.7)

     Before planning RI/FS activities, all existing site data
     will be thoroughly compiled and reviewed by the respondent.
     Specifically, this will include presently available data
     relating to the varieties and quantities of hazardous
     substances at the site, and past disposal practices.  This
     will also include results from any previous sampling events
     that may have been conducted.  The respondent will refer to
     Table 2-1 of the RI/FS Guidance for a comprehensive list of
     data collection information sources.  This information will
     be utilized in determining additional data needed to
     characterize the site, better define potential applicable or
     relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs), and develop a
     range of preliminarily identified remedial alternatives.
     Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) will be established subject
     to EPA approval which specify the usefulness of existing
     data.  Decisions on the necessary data and DQOs will be made
     by EPA.

     Conduct Site Visit

     The respondent will conduct a site visit during the project
     scoping phase to assist in developing a conceptual
     understanding of sources and areas of contamination as well
     as potential exposure pathways and receptors at the site.
     During the site visit the respondent should observe the
     site's physiography, hydrology, geology, and demographics,
     as well as natural resource, ecological and cultural
     features. This information will be utilized to better scope
     the project and to determine the extent of additional data
     necessary to characterize the site, better define potential
     ARARs, and narrow the range of preliminarily identified
     remedial alternatives.

b.   Project Planning (2.2)

     Once the respondent has collected and analyzed existing data
and conducted a site visit, the specific project scope will be
planned.  Project planning activities include those tasks
described below as well as identifying data needs, developing a
work plan, designing a data collection program, and identifying
health and safety protocols.  The respondent will meet with EPA
regarding the following activities and before the drafting of the
-------
                                4                         9835.8A

scoping deliverables below.  These tasks are described in Section
c. of this task since they result in the development of specific
required deliverables.

     Refine and document preliminary remedial action objectives
     and alternatives (2.2.3)

     Once existing site information has been analyzed and an
     understanding of the potential site risks has been
     determined by EPA,  the respondent will review and, if
     necessary, refine the remedial action objectives that have
     been identified by EPA for each actually or potentially
     contaminated medium.  The revised remedial action objectives
     will be documented in a technical memorandum and subject to
     EPA approval.  The respondent will then identify a
     preliminary range of broadly defined potential remedial
     action alternatives and associated technologies.  The range
     of potential alternatives should encompass where
     appropriate, alternatives in which treatment significantly
     reduces the toxicity, mobility, or volume of the waste;
     alternatives that involve containment with little or no
     treatment; and a no-action alternative.

     Document the need for treatability studies (2.2.4)

     If remedial actions involving treatment have been identified
     by the respondent or EPA, treatability studies will be
     required except where the respondent can demonstrate to
     EPA's satisfaction that they are not needed.   Where
     treatability studies are needed, initial treatability
     testing activities (such as research and study design)  will
     be planned to occur concurrently with site characterization
     activities (see Tasks 3 and 5).

     Begin preliminary identification of Potential ARARs (2.2.5)

     The respondent will conduct a preliminary identification of
     potential state and federal ARARs (chemieal°specific,
     location-specific and action-specific) to assist in the
     refinement of remedial action objectives, and the initial
     identification of remedial alternatives and ARARs associated
     with particular actions.  ARAR identification will continue
     as site conditions, contaminants, and remedial action
     alternatives are better defined.

Co   Scoping Deliverables (2.3)

     At the conclusion of the project planning phase, the
respondent uill submit a RI/FS work plan, a sampling and analysis
plan, and a site health and safety plan.  The RI/FS work plan and
sampling and analysis plan must be reviewed and approved by EPA
prior to the initiation of field activities.
-------
                                                     9835.8A
RI/FS Work Plan  (2.3.1)

A work plan documenting the decisions and evaluations
completed during the scoping process will be submitted to
EPA for review and approval.  The work plan should be
developed in conjunction with the sampling and analysis plan
and the site health and safety plan, although each plan may
be delivered under separate cover.  The work plan will
include a comprehensive description of the work to be
performed, including the methodologies to be utilized, as
well as a corresponding schedule for completion.  In
addition, the work plan must include the rationale for
performing the required activities.  Specifically, the work
plan will present a statement of the problem(s) and
potential problem(s) posed by the site and the objectives of
the RI/FS.  Furthermore, the plan will include a site
background summary setting forth the site description
including the geographic location of the site, and to the
extent possible, a description of the site's physiography,
hydrology, geology, demographics, ecological,  cultural and
natural resource features; a synopsis of the site history
and a description of previous responses that have been
conducted at the site by local, state, federal, or private
parties; a summary of the existing data in terms of physical
and chemical characteristics of the contaminants identified,
and their distribution among the environmental media at the
site.  The plan will recognize EPA's preparation of the
baseline risk assessment.  In addition, the plan will
include a description of the site management strategy
developed by EPA during scoping; a preliminary
identification of remedial alternatives and data needs for
evaluation of remedial alternatives.  The plan will reflect
coordination with treatability study requirements (see Tasks
1 and 4).  It will include a process for and manner of
identifying Federal and state ARARs (chemical-specific,
location-specific and action-specific).

Finally, the major part of the work plan is a detailed
description of the tasks to be performed, information needed
for each task and for EPA's baseline risk assessment,
information to be produced during and at the conclusion of
each task, and a description of the work products that will
be submitted to EPA.  This includes the deliverables set
forth in the remainder of this statement of work; a schedule
for each of the required activities which is consistent with
the RI/FS guidance; and a project management plan, including
a data management plan (e.g., requirements for project
management systems and software, minimum data requirements,
data format and backup data management), monthly reports to
EPA and meetings and presentations to EPA at the conclusion
of each major phase of the RI/FS.  The respondent will refer
-------
                           6                         9835.8A

to Appendix B of the RI/FS Guidance for a comprehensive
description of the contents of the required work plan.
Because of the unknown nature of the site and iterative
nature of the RI/FS, additional data requirements and
analyses may be identified throughout the process.  The
respondent will submit a technical memorandum documenting
the need for additional data, and identifying the DQOs
whenever such requirements are identified.  In any event,
the respondent is responsible for fulfilling additional data
and analysis needs identified by EPA consistent with the
general scope and objectives of this RI/FS.

Sampling and Analysis Plan  (2.3.2)

The respondent will prepare a sampling and analysis plan
(SAP) to ensure that sample collection and analytical
activities are conducted in accordance with technically
acceptable protocols and that the data meet DQOs.  The SAP
provides a mechanism for planning field activities and
consists of a field sampling plan (FSP) and a quality
assurance project plan (QAPP).

The FSP will define in detail the sampling and data-
gathering methods that will be used on the project.  It will
include sampling objectives,  sample location and frequency,
sampling equipment and procedures,  and sample handling and
analysis.  The QAPP will describe the project objectives and
organization, functional activities, and quality assurance
and quality control (QA/QC) protocols that will be used to
achieve the desired DQOs.  The DQOs will at a minimum
reflect use of analytic methods to identifying contamination
and remediating contamination consistent with the levels for
remedial action objectives identified in the proposed
National Contingency Plan, pages 51425=26 and 51433
(December 21, 1988).  In addition,  the QAPP will address
sampling procedures, sample custody, analytical procedures,
and data reduction, validation,  reporting and personnel
qualifications.  Field personnel should be available for SPA
QA/QC training and orientation where applicable.  The
respondent will demonstrate,  in advance to EPA°s
satisfaction, that each laboratory it may use is qualified
to conduct the proposed work.  This includes use of methods
and analytical protocols for the chemicals of concern in the
media of interest within detection and quantification limits
consistent with both QA/QC procedures and DQOs approved in
the QAPP for the site by SPA.  The laboratory must have and
follow an approved QA program.   If a laboratory not in the
Contract Laboratory Program (CLP)  is selected, methods
consistent with CLP methods that would be used at this site
for the purposes proposed and QA/QC procedures approved by
EPA will be used.   If the laboratory is not in the CLP
program, a laboratory QA program must be submitted for EPA
-------
                                7                         9835.8A

     review and approval.  EPA may require that the respondent
     submit detailed information to demonstrate that the
     laboratory is qualified to conduct the work, including
     information on personnel qualifications, equipment and
     material specifications.  The respondent will provide
     assurances that EPA has access to laboratory personnel,
     equipment and records for sample collection, transportation
     and analysis.

     Site Health and Safety Plan (2.3.3)

     A health and safety plan will, be prepared in conformance
     with the respondent's health and safety program, and in
     compliance with OSHA regulations and protocols.  The health
     and safety plan will include the 11 elements described in
     the RI/FS Guidance, such as a health and safety risk
     analysis, a description of monitoring and personal
     protective equipment, medical monitoring, and site control.
     It should be noted that EPA does not "approve" the
     respondent's health and safety plan, but rather EPA reviews
     it to ensure that all necessary elements are included, and
     that the plan provides for the protection of human health
     and the environment.

TASK 2 - COMMUNITY RELATIONS

     The development and implementation of community relations
activities are the responsibility of EPA.  The critical community
relations planning steps performed by EPA include conducting
community interviews and developing a community relations plan.
Although implementation of the community relations plan is the
responsibility of EPA, the respondent may assist by providing
information regarding the site's history, participating in public
meetings, or by preparing fact sheets for distribution to the
general public.  EPA will prepare two or more baseline risk
assessment memoranda which will summarize the toxicity assessment
and exposure assessment components of the baseline risk
assessment.  EPA will make these memoranda available to all
interested parties for comment and place them in the
Administrative Record.  (EPA is not required, however, to
formally respond to significant comments except during the formal
public comment period on the proposed plan.)   In addition, the
respondent may establish a community information repository, at
or near the site, to house one copy of the administrative record.
The extent of PRP involvement in community relations activities
is left to the discretion of EPA.  The respondents' community
relations responsibilities, if any,  are specified in the
community relations plan.  All PRP-conducted community relations
activities will be subject to oversight by EPA.
-------
                                8                         9835.8A

TASK 3 - SITE CHARACTERIZATION  (RI/FS Guidance, Chapter 3)

     As part of the RI, the respondent will perform the
activities described in this task, including the preparation of a
site characterization summary and a RI report.  The overall
objective of site characterization is to describe areas of a site
that may pose a threat to human health or the environment.  This
is accomplished by first determining a site's physiography,
geology, and hydrology.  Surface and subsurface pathways of
migration will be defined.  The respondent will identify the
sources of contamination and define the nature, extent, and
volume of the sources of contamination, including their physical
and chemical constituents as well as their concentrations at
incremental locations to background in the affected media.  The
respondent will also investigate the extent of migration of this
contamination as well as its volume and any changes in its
physical or chemical characteristics, to provide for a
comprehensive understanding of the nature and extent of
contamination at the site.  Using this information, contaminant
fate and transport is then determined and projected.

     During this phase of the RI/FS, the work plan, SAP, and
health and safety plan are implemented.  Field data are collected
and analyzed to provide the information required to accomplish
the objectives of the study.  The respondent will notify EPA at
least two weeks in advance of the field work regarding the
planned dates for field activities, including ecological field
surveys, field lay out of the sampling grid, excavation,
installation of wells, initiating sampling, installation and
calibration of equipment, pump tests, and initiation of analysis
and other field investigation activities.  The respondent will
demonstrate that the laboratory and type of laboratory analyses
that will be utilized during site characterization meets the
specific QA/QC requirements and the DQOs of the site
investigation as specified in the SAP.  In view of the unknown
site conditions, activities are often iterative, and to satisfy
the objectives of the RI/FS it may be necessary for the
respondent to supplement the work specified in the initial work
plan.  In addition to the deliverables below, the respondent will
provide a monthly progress report and participate in meetings at
major points in the RI/FS.

a.   Field Investigation (3.2)

     The field investigation includes the gathering of data to
define site physical and biological characteristics, sources of
contamination, and the nature and extent of contamination at the
site.  These activities will be performed by the respondent in
accordance with the work plan and SAP.  At a minimum,  this shall
address the following:
-------
                           9                         9835.8A

Implement and document field support activities (3.2.1)

The respondent will initiate field support activities
following approval of the work plan and SAP.  Field support
activities may include obtaining access to the site,
scheduling, and procuring equipment, office space,
laboratory services, and/or contractors.  The respondent
will notify EPA at least two weeks prior to initiating field
support activities so that EPA may adequately schedule
oversight tasks.  The respondent will also notify EPA in
writing upon completion of field support activities.

Investigate and define site physical and biological
characteristics (3.2.2)

The respondent will collect data on the physical and
biological characteristics of the site and its surrounding
areas including the physiography, geology, and hydrology,
and specific physical characteristics identified in the work
plan.  This information will be ascertained through a
combination of physical measurements, observations, and
sampling efforts and will be utilized to define potential
transport pathways and human and ecological receptor
populations.  In defining the site's physical
characteristics the respondent will also obtain sufficient
engineering data (such as pumping characteristics) for the
projection of contaminant fate and transport, and
development and screening of remedial action alternatives,
including information to assess treatment technologies.

Define sources of contamination (3.2.3)

The respondent will locate each source of contamination.
For each location, the areal extent and depth of
contamination will be determined by sampling at incremental
depths on a sampling grid.  The physical characteristics and
chemical constituents and their concentrations will be
determined for all known and discovered sources of
contamination.  The respondent shall conduct sufficient
sampling to define the boundaries of the contaminant sources
to the level established in the QA/QC plan and DQOs.

Defining the source of contamination will include analyzing
the potential for contaminant release (e.g., long term
leaching from soil), contaminant mobility and persistence,
and characteristics important for evaluating remedial
actions, including information to assess treatment
technologies.
-------
                                10                         9835.8A

     Describe the nature and extent of contamination (3.2.4)

     The respondent will gather information to describe the
     nature and extent of contamination as a final step during
     the field investigation. .  To describe the nature and extent
     of contamination, the respondent will utilize the
     information on site physical and biological characteristics
     and sources of contamination to give a preliminary estimate
     of the contaminants that may have migrated.  The respondent
     will then implement an iterative monitoring program and any
     study program identified in the work plan or SAP such that
     by using analytical techniques sufficient to detect and
     quantify the concentration of contaminants, the migration of
     contaminants through the various media at the site can be
     determined. In addition,  the respondent will gather data for
     calculations of contaminant fate and transport.  This
     process is continued until the area and depth of
     contamination are known to the level of contamination
     established in the QA/QC plan and DQOs.  EPA will use the
     information on the nature and extent of contamination to
     determine the level of risk presented by the site.
     Respondents will use this information to help to determine
     aspects of the appropriate remedial action alternatives to
     be evaluated.

bo   Data Analyses (3.4)

     Evaluate site characteristics (3.4.1)

     The respondent will analyze and evaluate the data to
     describe;  (1) site physical and biological characteristics,
     (2) contaminant source characteristics, (3) nature and
     extent of contamination and (4)  contaminant fate and
     transport.  Results of the site physical characteristics,
     source characteristics, and extent of contamination analyses
     are utilized in the analysis of contaminant fate and
     transport.  The evaluation will include the actual and
     potential magnitude of releases from the sources,  and
     horizontal and vertical spread of contamination as well as
     mobility and persistence of contaminants.  Where modeling is
     appropriate, such models shall be identified to EPA in a
     technical memorandum prior to their use.  All data and
     programming, including any proprietary programs, shall be
     made available to EPA together with a sensitivity analysis.
     The RI data shall be presented in a format (i.e.,  computer
     disc or equivalent) to facilitate EPA"s preparation of the
     baseline risk assessment.   The Respondent shall agree to
     discuss and then collect any data gaps identified by the EPA
     that is needed to complete the baseline risk assessment.
     (See ""Guidance for Data Useability in Risk Assessment -
     OSWER Directive # 9285.7=05 - October 1990.)   Also, this
     evaluation shall provide any information relevant to site
-------
                                11                        9835.8A

     characteristics necessary for evaluation of the need for
     remedial action in the baseline risk assessment and for the
     development and evaluation of remedial alternatives.
     Analyses of data collected for site characterization will
     meet the DQOs developed in the QA/QC plan stated in the SAP
     (or revised during the RI).

 c.  Data Management Procedures (3.5)

     The respondent will consistently document the quality and
validity of field and laboratory data compiled during the RI.

     Document field activities (3.5.1)

     Information gathered during site characterization will be
     consistently documented and adequately recorded by the
     respondent in well maintained field logs and laboratory
     reports.  The method(s) of documentation must be specified
     in the work plan and/or the SAP.  Field logs must be
     utilized to document observations, measurements, and
     significant events that have occurred during field
     activities.  Laboratory reports must document sample
     custody, analytical responsibility, analytical results,
     adherence to prescribed protocols, nonconformity events,
     corrective measures, and/or data deficiencies.

     Maintain sample management and tracking (3.5.2; 3.5.3)

     The respondent will maintain field reports, sample shipment
     records, analytical results,  and QA/QC reports to ensure
     that only validated analytical data are reported and
     utilized in the development and evaluation of remedial
     alternatives.  Analytical results developed under the work
     plan will not be included in any site characterization
     reports unless accompanied by or cross-referenced to a
     corresponding QA/QC report.  In addition,  the respondent
     will establish a data security system to safeguard chain-of
     custody forms and other project records to prevent loss,
     damage, or alteration of project documentation.

d.   Site Characterization Deliverables (3.7)

     The respondent will prepare the preliminary site
characterization summary and the remedial investigation report.

     Preliminary Site Characterization Summary (3.7.2)

     After completing field sampling and analysis, the respondent
     will prepare a concise site characterization summary.   This
     summary will review the investigative activities that have
     taken place, and describe and display site data documenting
     the location and characteristics of surface and subsurface
-------
                                12                         9835.8A

     features and contamination at the site including the
     affected medium,  location, types, physical state,
     concentration of contaminants and quantity-  In addition,
     the location, dimensions, physical condition and varying
     concentrations of each contaminant throughout each source
     and the extent of contaminant migration through each of the
     affected media will be documented.  The site
     characterization summary will provide EPA with a preliminary
     reference for developing the risk assessment, and evaluating
     the development and screening of remedial alternatives and
     the refinement and identification of ARARs.

     Remedial Investigation (RI) Report (3.7.3)

     The respondent will prepare and submit a draft RI report to
     EPA for review and approval.  This report shall summarize
     results of field activities to characterize the site,
     sources of contamination, nature and extent of contamination
     and the fate and transport of contaminants.  The respondent
     will refer to the RI/FS Guidance for an outline of the
     report format and contents.  Following comment by EPA, the
     respondent will prepare a final RI report which
     satisfactorily addresses EPA's comments.

TASK 4 - TREATABILITY STUDIES (Rl/FS Manual, Chapter 5)

     Treatability testing will be performed by the respondent to
assist in the detailed analysis of alternatives.  In addition, if
applicable, testing results and operating conditions will be used
in the detailed design of the selected remedial technology.  The
following activities will be performed by the respondent.

a»   Determination of Candidate Technologies and of the Need for
     Testing (5.2; 5.4)

     The respondent will identify in a technical memorandum,
subject to EPA review and approval, candidate technologies for a
treatability studies program during project planning (Task 1).
The listing of candidate technologies will cover the,range of
technologies required for alternatives analysis (Task 6 a.) The
specific data requirements for the testing program will be
determined and refined during sit® characterization and the
development and screening of remedial alternatives (Tasks 2 and
6,
     Conduct literature survey and determine the need for
     treatabilitv testing (5»2)

     The respondent will conduct a literature survey to gather
     information on performance, relative costs, applicability,
     removal efficiencies, operation and maintenance (OSM)
     requirements, and implementability of candidate
-------
                                13                         9835.8A

     technologies.  If practical candidate technologies have not
     been sufficiently demonstrated, or cannot be adequately
     evaluated for this site on the basis of available
     information, treatability testing will be conducted.  Where
     it is determined by EPA that treatability testing is
     required, and unless the respondent can demonstrate to EPA's
     satisfaction that they are not needed, the respondent will
     submit a statement of work to EPA outlining the steps and
     data necessary to evaluate and initiate the treatability
     testing program.

     Evaluate treatability studies (5.4)

     Once a decision has been made to perform treatability
     studies, the respondent and EPA will decide on the type of
     treatability testing to use (e.g., bench versus pilot).
     Because of the time required to design, fabricate, and
     install pilot scale equipment as well as perform testing for
     various operating conditions,  the decision to perform pilot
     testing should be made as early in the process as possible
     to minimize potential delays of the FS.  To assure that a
     treatability testing program is completed on time, and with
     accurate results, the respondent will either submit a
     separate treatability testing work plan or an amendment to
     the original site work plan for EPA review and approval.

b.   Treatability Testing and Deliverables (5.5; 5.6; 5.8)

     The deliverables that are required, in addition to the
memorandum identifying candidate technologies, where treatability
testing is conducted include a work plan, a sampling and analysis
plan, and a final treatability evaluation report.  EPA may also
require a treatability study health and safety plan, where
appropriate.

     Treatability testing work plan (5.5)

     The respondent will prepare a treatability testing work plan
     or amendment to the original site work plan for EPA review
     and approval describing the site background, remedial
     technology(ies) to be tested,  test objectives, experimental
     procedures,  treatability conditions to be tested,
     measurements of performance, analytical methods, data
     management and analysis, health and safety, and residual
     waste management.  The DQOs for treatability testing should
     be documented as well.  If pilot scale treatability testing
     is to be performed, the pilot-scale work plan will describe
     pilot plant installation and start-up, pilot plant operation
     and maintenance procedures, operating conditions to be
     tested, a sampling plan to determine pilot plant
     performance, and a detailed health and safety plan.   If
-------
                                14                         9835.8A

     testing is to be performed off-site, permitting requirements
     will be addressed.

     Treatabilitv study SAP (5.5)

     If the ordinal QAPP or FSP is not adequate for defining the
     activities to be performed during the treatability tests, a
     separate treatability study SAP or amendment to the original
     site SAP will be prepared by the respondent for EPA review
     and approval.  Task 1, Item c. of this statement of work
     provides additional information on the requirements of the
     Treatabilitv study health and safety plan (5.5)

     If the original health and safety plan is not adequate for
     defining the activities to be performed during the treatment
     tests, a separate or amended health and safety plan will be
     developed by the respondent.  Task 1, Item c. of this
     statement of work provides additional information on the
     requirements of the health and safety plan.   EPA does not
     ""approve" the treatability study health and safety plan.

     Treatabilitv study evaluation report (5.6)

     Following completion of treatability testing, the respondent
     will analyze and interpret the testing results in a
     technical report to EPA.  Depending on the sequence of
     activities,  this report may be a part of the RI/FS report or
     a separate deliverable.  The report will evaluate each
     technology's effectiveness, implementability, cost and
     actual results as compared with predicted results.  The
     report will also evaluate full scale application of the
     technology,  including a sensitivity analysis identifying the
     key parameters affecting full-scale operation„

TASK 5 =• DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF Remedial Alternatives
         (Rl/FS Manual, Chapter 4)

     The development and screening of remedial alternatives is
performed to develop an appropriate range of waste management
options that will be evaluated.  This range of alternatives
should include as appropriate, options in which treatment is used
to reduce the toxicity, mobility, or volume of wastes, but
varying in the types of treatment, the ©mount treated, and the
manner in which long°term residuals or untreated wastes are
managed,0 options involving containment with little or no
treatment,0 options involving both treatment and containment; and
a no-action alternative.  The following activities will be
performed by the respondent as a function of the development and
screening of remedial alternatives.
-------
                                15                         9835.8A

a.   Development and Screening of Remedial Alternatives (4.2)

     The respondent will begin to develop and evaluate a range of
appropriate waste management options that at a minimum ensure
protection of human health and the environment, concurrent with
the RI site characterization task.

     Refine and document remedial action objectives (4.2.1)

     Based on EPA's baseline risk assessment, the respondent will
     review and if necessary modify the site-specific remedial
     action objectives, specifically the PRGs, that were
     established by EPA prior to or during negotiations between
     EPA and the respondent.  The revised PRGs will be documented
     in a technical memorandum that will be reviewed and approved
     by EPA.  These modified PRGs will specify the contaminants
     and media of interest, exposure pathways and receptors, and
     an acceptable contaminant level or range of levels (at
     particular locations for each exposure route).

     Develop general response actions (4.2.2)

     The respondent will develop general response actions for
     each medium of interest defining containment, treatment,
     excavation, pumping, or other actions, singly or in
     combination, to satisfy the remedial action objectives.

     Identify areas or volumes of media (4.2.3)

     The respondent will identify areas or volumes of media to
     which general response actions may apply, taking into
     account requirements for protectiveness as identified in the
     remedial action objectives.  The chemical and physical
     characterization of the site will also be taken into
     account.

     Identify, screen, and document remedial technologies (4.2.4;
     4.2.5)

     The respondent will identify and evaluate technologies
     applicable to each general response action to eliminate
     those that cannot be implemented at the site.  General
     response actions will be refined to specify remedial
     technology types.  Technology process options for each of
     the technology types will be identified either concurrent
     with the identification of technology types, or following
     the screening of the considered technology types.  Process
     options will be evaluated on the basis of effectiveness,
     implementability, and cost factors to select and retain one
     or, if necessary, more representative processes for each
     technology type.  The technology types and process options
-------
                           16                         9835.8A

will be summarized for inclusion in a technical memorandum.
The reasons for eliminating alternatives must be specified.

Assemble and document alternatives (4.2.6)

The respondent will assemble selected representative
technologies into alternatives for each affected medium or
operable unit.  Together, all of the alternatives will
represent a range of treatment and containment combinations
that will address either the site or the operable unit as a
whole.  A summary of the assembled alternatives and their
related action-specific ARARs will be prepared by the
respondent for inclusion in a technical memorandum.  The
reasons for eliminating alternatives during the preliminary
screening process must be specified.

Refine alternatives

The respondent will refine the remedial alternatives to
identify contaminant volume addressed by the proposed
process and sizing of critical unit operations as necessary.
Sufficient information will be collected for an adequate
comparison of alternatives.  PRGs for each chemical in each
medium will also be modified as necessary to incorporate any
new risk assessment information presented in EPA's baseline
risk assessment report.  Additionally, action-specific ARARs
will be updated as the remedial alternatives are refined.

Conduct and document screening evaluation of each
alternative (4.3)

The respondent may perform a final screening process based
on short and long term aspects of effectiveness,
implementability, and relative cost.  Generally, this
screening process is only necessary when there are many
feasible alternatives available for detailed analysis.  If
necessary, the screening of alternatives will be conducted
to assure that only the alternatives with the most favorable
composite evaluation of all factors are retained for further
analysis.  As appropriate, the screening will preserve the
range of treatment and containment alternatives that was
initially developed.  The range of remaining alternatives
will include options that use treatment technologies and
permanent solutions to the maximum extent practicable.  The
respondent will prepare a technical memorandum summarizing
the results and reasoning employed in screening, arraying
alternatives that remain after screening, and identifying
the action-specific ARARs for the alternatives that remain
after screening.
-------
                                17                         9835.8A

b.    Alternatives Development and Screening Deliverables (4.5)

     The respondent will prepare a technical memorandum
summarizing the work performed in and the results of each task
above, including an alternatives array summary.  These will be
modified by the respondent if required by EPA's comments to
assure identification of a complete and appropriate range of
viable alternatives to be considered in the detailed analysis.
This deliverable will document the methods, rationale, and
results of the alternatives screening process.

TASK 6 - DETAILED ANALYSIS OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES (RI/FS
         Guidance, Chapter 6)

     The detailed analysis will be conducted by the respondent to
provide EPA with the information needed to allow for the
selection of a site remedy.  This analysis is the final task to
be performed by the respondent during the FS.

a.   Detailed Analysis of Alternatives (6.2)

     The respondent will conduct a detailed analysis of
alternatives which will consist of an analysis of each option
against a set of nine evaluation criteria and a comparative
analysis of all options using the same evaluation criteria as a
basis for comparison.

     Apply nine criteria and document analysis (6.2.1 - 6.2.4)

     The respondent will apply nine evaluation criteria to the
     assembled remedial alternatives to ensure that the selected
     remedial alternative will be protective of human health and
     the environment; will be in compliance with, or include a
     waiver of, ARARs; will be cost-effective; will utilize
     permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies,
     or resource recovery technologies, to the maximum extent
     practicable; and will address the statutory preference for
     treatment as a principal element.  The evaluation criteria
     include:  (1) overall protection of human health and the
     environment; (2) compliance with ARARs; (3)  long-term
     effectiveness and permanence; (4) reduction of toxicity,
     mobility, or volume; (5) short-term effectiveness; (6)
     implementability; (7) cost; (8)  state (or support agency)
     acceptance; and (9)  community acceptance.  (Note: criteria 8
     and 9 are considered after the RI/FS report has been
     released to the general public.) For each alternative the
     respondent should provide: (1) a description of the
     alternative that outlines the waste management strategy
     involved and identifies the key ARARs associated with each
     alternative, and (2) a discussion of the individual
     criterion assessment.  If the respondent does not have
     direct input on criteria (8)  state (or support agency)
-------
                                18                         9835.8A

     acceptance and (9)  community acceptance,  these will be
     addressed by EPA.

     Compare alternatives against each other and document the
     comparison of alternatives (6.2.5; 6.2.6)

     The respondent will perform a comparative analysis between
     the remedial alternatives.  That is, each alternative will
     be compared against the others using the evaluation criteria
     as a basis of comparison.  Identification and selection of
     the preferred alternative are reserved by EPA.  The
     respondent will prepare a technical memorandum summarizing
     the results of the comparative analysis.

b.   Detailed Analysis Deliverables (6.5)

     In addition to the technical memorandum summarizing the
results of the comparative analysis, the respondent will submit a
draft FS report to EPA for review and approval.  Once EPA's
comments have been addressed by the respondent to EPA's
satisfaction, the final FS report may be bound with the final RI
report.

Feasibility study report (6.5)

The respondent will prepare a draft FS report for EPA review and
comment.  This report,  as ultimately adopted or amended by EPA,
provides a basis for remedy selection by EPA and documents the
development and analysis of remedial alternatives.  The
respondent will refer to the RI/FS Guidance for an outline of the
report format and the required report content.   The respondent
will prepare a final FS report which satisfactorily addresses
EPA's comments.
-------
                                19                         9835.8A

                     REFERENCES FOR CITATION

     The following list, although not comprehensive, comprises
many of the regulations and guidance documents that apply to the
RI/FS process:

The (revised) National Contingency Plan

"Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility
Studies Under CERCLA," U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, October 1988, OSWER Directive No. 9355.3-01.

"Interim Guidance on Potentially Responsible Party Participation
in Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Studies," U.S. EPA,
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, Appendix A to OSWER
Directive No. 9355.3-01.

"Guidance on Oversight of Potentially Responsible Party Remedial
Investigations and Feasibility Studies," U.S. EPA, Office of
Waste Programs Enforcement, OSWER Directive No. 9835.3

"A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations Methods," Two
Volumes, U.S. EPA,.Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
EPA/540/P-87/001a, August 1987, OSWER Directive No. 9355.0-14.

"EPA NEIC Policies and Procedures Manual," May 1978, revised
November 1984, EPA-330/9-78-001-R.

"Data Quality Objectives for Remedial Response Activities," U.S.
EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response and Office of
Waste Programs Enforcement, EPA/540/G-87/003, March 1987, OSWER
Directive No. 9335.0-7B.

"Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance
Project Plans," U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development,
Cincinnati, OH, QAMS-004/80, December 29, 1980.

"Interim Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality
Assurance Project Plans," U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response, QAMS-005/80, December 1980.

"Users Guide to the EPA Contract Laboratory Program," U.S. EPA,
Sample Management Office, August 1982.

"Interim Guidance on Compliance with Applicable or Relevant and
Appropriate Requirements," U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response, July 9, 1987, OSWER Directive No. 9234.0-05.

"CERCLA Compliance with Other Laws Manual," Two Volumes, U.S.
EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, August 1988
(draft), OSWER Directive No. 9234.1-01 and -02.
-------
                                20                        9835.8A

"Guidance on Remedial Actions for Contaminated Ground Water at
Superfund Sites," U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, (draft), OSWER Directive No. 9283.1-2.

"Draft Guidance on Preparing Superfund Decision Documents," U.S.
EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, March 1988, OSWER
Directive No. 9355.3-02

"Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund - Volume I  Human Health
Evaluation Manual (Part A)," December 1989,  EPA/540/1-89/002

"Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund - Volume II
Environmental Evaluation Manual," March 1989,  EPA/540/1-89/001

"Guidance for Data Useability in Risk Assessment," October, 1990,
EPA/540/G-90/008

"Performance of Risk Assessments in Remedial Investigation
/Feasibility Studies (RI/FSs) Conducted by Potentially
Responsible Parties (PRPs)," August 28, 1990, OSWER Directive No.
9835.15.

"Role of the Baseline Risk Assessment in Superfund Remedy
Selection Decisions," April 22, 1991, OSWER Directive No. 9355.0-
30.

"Health and Safety Requirements of Employees Employed in Field
Activities," U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
July 12, 1981, EPA Order No. 1440.2.

OSHA Regulations in 29 CFR 1910.120 (Federal Register 45654,
December 19, 1986).

"Interim Guidance on Administrative Records for Selection of
CERCLA Response Actions," U.S. EPA, Office of Waste Programs
Enforcement, March 1,  1989, OSWER Directive No. 9833.3A.

"Community Relations in Superfund:  A Handbook," U.S. EPA, Office
of Emergency and Remedial Response, June 1988, OSWER Directive
NO. 9230.0#3B.

"Community Relations During Enforcement Activities And
Development of the Administrative Record," U.S. EPA, Office of
Programs Enforcement,  November 1988, OSWER Directive No.
9836.0-1A.
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A
             UNITED  STATES  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                            REGION
IN THE MATTER OF:                        )
                                         )
[SITE NAME]  [SITE NUMBER]                )
                                         )
[COMPANY NAME                            )
 Address]                                )
                                         )
RESPONDENT^]                            )
                                         )
                                         )
Proceeding Under Sections  104,  122(a),   ) U.S. EPA Docket No,
and 122 (d) (3) of the Comprehensive       )
Environmental Response, Compensation,    )
and Liability Act as amended             )
(42 U.S.C SS 9604, 9622(a),              )
9622(d)(3)).                             )
                 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER ON CONSENT
          FOR REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY
                      Operable Unit No.

                         I.   INTRODUCTION

     1.  This Administrative Order on Consent  (Consent Order)  is
entered into voluntarily by the United States  Environmental
Protection Agency  (EPA) and [name of Respondent(s)]
(Respondent(s)).  The Consent Order concerns the preparation of,
performance of, and reimbursement for all costs incurred by EPA
in connection with a remedial investigation and feasibility study
(RI/FS) for the [operable unit consisting of]  at the  [site name]
located in [site location] ("site") [as well as past  response
costs].

                        II.  JURISDICTION

     2.  This Consent Order is issued under the authority vested
in the President of the United States by sections  104,  122(a)  and
122(d)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C.  SS 9604,
9622(a), 9622(d)(3) (CERCLA).  This authority  was  delegated to
the Administrator of EPA on January 23,  1987,  by Executive Order
12580, 52 Fed. Reg. 2926 (1987), and further delegated  to
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

Regional Administrators on September 13, 1987, by EPA Delegation
No. 14-14-C.   [This authority has been redelegated by the
Regional Administrator to 	.]

     3.  The Respondent(s) agrees to undertake all actions
required by the terms and conditions of this Consent Order.  In
any action by  EPA or the United States to enforce the terms of
this Consent Order, Respondent(s) consents to and agrees not to
contest the authority or jurisdiction of the Regional
Administrator  to issue or enforce this Consent Order, and agrees
not to contest the validity of this Order or its terms.

                       III.  PARTIES BOUND

     4.  This  Consent Order shall apply to and be binding upon
EPA.and shall  be binding upon the Respondent(s), its agents,
successors, assigns, officers, directors and principals.
Respondent(s)  is jointly and severally responsible for carrying
out all actions required of it by this Consent Order.  The
signatories to this Consent Order certify that they are
authorized to  execute and legally bind the parties they represent
to this Consent Order.  No change in the ownership or corporate
status of the  Respondent(s) or of the facility or site shall
alter Respondent(s)' responsibilities under this Consent Order.

     5.  The Respondent(s) shall provide a copy of this Consent
Order to any subsequent owners or successors before ownership
rights or stock or assets in a corporate acquisition are
transferred.   Respondent(s) shall provide a copy of this Consent
Order to all contractors, subcontractors, laboratories, and
consultants which are retained to conduct any work performed
under this Consent Order, within 14 days after the effective date
of this Consent Order or the date of retaining their services,
whichever is later.  Respondent(s) shall condition any such
contracts upon satisfactory compliance with this Consent Order.
Notwithstanding the terms of any contract, Respondent(s) is
responsible for compliance with this Consent Order and for
ensuring that  its subsidiaries, employees, contractors,
consultants, subcontractors, agents and attorneys comply with
this Consent Order.

                    IV.  STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

     6.  In entering into this Consent Order, the objectives of
EPA and the Respondent(s) are:   (a) to determine the nature and
extent of contamination and any threat to the public health,
welfare, or the environment caused by the release or threatened
release of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants at or
from the site  or facility, by conducting a remedial
investigation; (b) to determine and evaluate  alternatives  for
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

 remedial  action  (if  any) to prevent, mitigate or  otherwise
 respond to  or  remedy any release or threatened release of
 hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants at or from the
 site  or facility,  by conducting a feasibility study; and  (c) to
 recover response and oversight costs incurred by  EPA with respect
 to this Consent Order.

      7.   The activities conducted under this Consent Order are
 subject to  approval  by EPA and shall provide all  appropriate
 necessary information for the RI/FS, with the exception of the
 baseline  risk  assessment performed by EPA, and for a record of
 decision  that  is consistent with CERCLA and the National
 Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 C.F.R. Part 300.  The  activities
 conducted under this Consent Order shall be conducted in
 compliance  with all  applicable EPA guidances, policies, and
 procedures.

                       V.   FINDINGS  OF  FACT

      [Note: Provide  enough information in this section for the
      Order  to  stand  on its own.  The findings of  fact need to
      establish and justify the conclusions of law set forth in
      the  Order.]   .

      8.   [Identify  the site with the name, location, and
 description, including geography, description of  aquatic and
 terrestrial communities, and brief site history.]

      9.   [Provide information that there are hazardous
 substances  at  the  site by listing the specific chemicals found at
 the site, and  their  locations, concentrations and quantities
 where known, including description of studies conducted to find
 the hazardous  substances.]

      10.  [Describe  actual and/or potential release and
 contaminant migration pathways, making clear that these are not
 exclusive.]

      11.  [Briefly note some health/environmental effects of some
 ma j or contaminants.]

      12.  [State that the site is on the  [proposed] National
 Priorities  List.   Reference section 105 of CERCLA and Federal
 Register  in which  notice of listing appeared.]

      13.  [Identify  each Respondent, i.e., name/business.]

      14.  [For each  Respondent, state the connection between the
Respondent  and the site, e.g., owner or operator  of a hazardous
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

 waste  site,  or person who arranged for disposal or treatment of,
 or  transporter of hazardous substances found at the site.]

     15.   [Identify prior response and enforcement actions,  if
 any, taken at the site.]

            VI.   CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DETERMINATIONS

     16.  The site is a "facility" as defined in  section  101(9)
 of  CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S9601(9).

     17.  Wastes and constituents thereof  [at the site, sent to
 the site, disposed of at the site, and/or  transported to  the
 site]  identified in paragraph 9 are "hazardous substances" as
 defined in section 101(14) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §9601(14), or
 constitute "any pollutant or contaminant"  that may present an
 imminent and substantial danger to public  health  or welfare under
 section 104(a)(1) of CERCLA.

     18.  The presence of hazardous substances at the site or the
 past,  present or potential migration of hazardous substances
 currently located at or emanating from the site,  constitute
 actual and/or threatened "releases" as defined in section 101(22)
 of  CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. $9601(22).

     19.  Respondent(s) is a "person" as defined  in section
 101(21) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. $9601(21).

     20.  Respondent(s) is a responsible party under sections
 104, 107 and 122 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. SS 9604, 9607 and 9622.

     21.  The actions required by this Consent Order are
necessary to protect the public health or  welfare or the
environment, are in the public interest, 42 U.S.C. §9622(a), are
consistent with CERCLA and the NCP, 42 U.S.C. SS  9604(a)(l),
9622(a), and will expedite effective remedial action and  minimize
litigation, 42 U.S.C. $9622(a).

                           VII.   NOTICE

     22.  By providing a copy of this Consent Order to the state,
EPA is notifying the state of [name of state] that this Order is
being  issued and that EPA in the lead agency for  coordinating,
overseeing, and enforcing the response action required by the
Order.
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

                    VIII. WORK TO BE PERFORMED

      23.  All work performed under this Consent Order shall be
under the direction and  supervision of qualified personnel.
Within  30 days of the effective date of this Order, and before
the work outlined below  begins, the Respondent(s) shall notify
EPA in  writing of the names, titles, and qualifications of the
personnel,  including contractors, subcontractors, consultants and
laboratories to be used  in carrying out such work.  The
qualifications of the persons under-taking the work for
Respondent(s) shall be subject to EPA's review, for verification
that  such persons meet minimum technical background and
experience  requirements.  This Order is contingent on
Respondent(s)' demonstration to EPA's satisfaction that
Respondent(s) is qualified to perform properly and promptly the
actions set forth in this Consent Order.  If EPA disapproves in
writing of  any person(s)' technical qualifications, Respondent(s)
shall notify EPA of the  identity and qualifications of the
replacement(s) within 30 days of the written notice.  If EPA
subsequently disapproves of the replacement(s), EPA reserves the
right to terminate this  Order and to conduct a complete RI/FS,
and to  seek reimbursement for costs and penalties from
Respondent(s).  During the course of the RI/FS, Respondent(s)
shall notify EPA in writing of any changes or additions in the
personnel used to carry  out such work, providing their names,
titles, and qualifications.  EPA shall have the same right to
approve changes and additions to personnel as it has hereunder
regarding the initial notification.

      24.  Respondent(s)  shall conduct activities and submit
deliverables as provided by the attached RI/FS Statement of Work,
which is incorporated by reference, for the development of the
RI/FS.  All such work shall be conducted in accordance with
CERCLA, the NCP, and EPA guidance including, but not limited to,
the "Interim Final Guidance for Conducting Remedial
Investigations and Feasibility Studies under CERCLAH (OSWER
Directive / 9355.3-01),  "Guidance for Data Useability in Risk
Assessment" (OSWER Directive #9285.7-05) and guidances referenced
therein, and guidances referenced in the Statement of Work,  as
may be  amended or modified by EPA.  The general activities that
Respondent(•) is required to perform are identified below,
followed by a list of deliverables.  The tasks that Respondent(s)
must perform are described more fully in the Statement of Work
and guidances.  The activities and deliverables identified below
shall be developed as provisions in the work plan and sampling
and analysis plan, and shall be submitted to EPA as provided.
All work performed under this Consent Order shall be in
accordance with the schedules herein, and in full accordance with
the standards, specifications, and other requirements of the work
plan and sampling and analysis plan, as initially approved or
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

modified by  EPA, and as may be amended or modified by EPA from
time to time.  For the purposes of this Order, day means calendar
day unless otherwise noted in the Order.

A. Task I; Scoping.  EPA determines the site-specific objectives
of the RI/FS and devises a general management approach for the
site, as stated in the attached Statement of Work.  Respondent(s)
shall conduct the remainder of scoping activities as described in
the attached Statement of Work and referenced guidances.  At the
conclusion of the project planning phase, Respondent(s) shall
provide EPA with the following deliverables:


     1. RI/FS Work Plan.  Within 	 days of the effective date
     of this Order, Respondent(s) shall submit to EPA a complete
     RI/FS work plan.  If EPA disapproves of or requires
     revisions to the RI/FS work plan, in whole or in part,
     Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a revised work
     plan which is responsive to the directions in all EPA
     comments, within 	 days of receiving EPA's comments.

     2. Sampling and Analysis Plan.  Within 	 days of the
     effective date of this Order, Respondent(s) shall submit to
     EPA the sampling and analysis plan.  This plan shall consist
     of a field sampling plan (FSP) and a quality assurance
     project plan (QAPjP), as described in the Statement of Work
     and guidances.  If EPA disapproves of or requires revisions
     to the sampling and analysis plan, in whole or in part,
     Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a revised
     sampling and analysis plan which is responsive to the
     directions in all EPA comments, within	 days of receiving
     EPA's comments.

     3. Site Health and Safety Plan.  Within 	 days of the
     effective date of this Order, Respondent(s) shall submit to
     EPA the site health and safety plan.

     Following approval or modification by EPA, the RI/FS work
     plan and the sampling and analysis plan are incorporated by
     reference herein.

B. Task II; Community Relations Plan.  EPA will prepare a
community relations plan, in accordance with EPA guidance and the
NCP.  Respondent(s) shall provide information supporting EPA's
community relations programs.

C. Task III; Site Characterization.  Following EPA approval  or
modification of the work plan and sampling and analysis plan,
Respondent(s) shall implement the provisions of  these  plans  to
characterize the site.  Respondent(s) shall complete site
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

characterization within 	 months of EPA approval or
modification of the work plan and sampling and analysis plan.
Respondent(s) shall provide EPA with analytical data within 	
days of each sampling activity, in a electronic format (i.e.,
computer disk) showing the location, medium and results.  Within
7 days of completion of field activities, Respondent(s) shall
notify EPA in writing.  During site characterization,
Respondent(s) shall provide EPA with the following deliverables,
as described in the Statement of Work and work plan:

          1.  Technical Memorandum on Modeling of Site
          Characteristics.  Where Respondent(s) proposes that
          modeling is appropriate, within  	 days of the
          initiation of site characterization, Respondent(s)
          shall submit a technical memorandum on modeling of site
          characteristics, as described in the Statement of Work.
          If EPA disapproves of or requires revisions to the
          technical memorandum on modeling of site
          characteristics, in whole or in part, Respondent(s)
          shall amend and submit to EPA a revised technical
          memorandum on modeling of site characteristics which  is
          responsive to the directions in all EPA comments,
          within 	 days of receiving EPA's comments.

          2.  Preliminary Site Characterization Summary,  within
          	 days of completion of the field sampling and
          analysis, as specified in the work plan, Respondent(s)
          shall submit a site characterization summary to EPA.

D.  Draft Remedial Investigation Report  [See Task III of the
attached Statement of Work.]  Within 	 days of  receipt,
respondent(s) shall submit a draft remedial investigation report
consistent with the Statement of Work, work plan, sampling  and
analysis plan.  If EPA disapproves of or requires revisions to
the remedial investigation report, in whole or in part,
Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a revised remedial
investigation report which is responsive to the directions  in all
EPA comments, within 	 days of receiving EPA's  comments.

E.  Task IV;  Treatabilitv Studies.  Respondent(s) shall conduct
treatability studies, except where Respondent(s)  can demonstrate
to EPA's satisfaction that they are not needed.   Major components
of the treatability studies include determination of the need for
and scope of studies, the design of the studies,  and the
completion of the studies, as described in the Statement of Work.
During treatability studies, Respondent(s) shall  provide
EPA with the following deliverables:

          1. Identification of Candidate Technologies Memorandum.
          This memorandum shall be submitted within  	 days of
-------
                        OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

the effective date of this Order.  If EPA disapproves
of or requires revisions to the technical memorandum
identifying candidate technologies, in whole or in
part, Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a
revised technical memorandum identifying candidate
technologies which is responsive to the directions in
all EPA comments, within 	 days  of receiving EPA's
comments.

2. Treatability Testing Statement of Work.  If EPA
determines that treatability testing is required,
within 	 days thereafter [or as specified by EPA],
Respondent(s) shall submit a treatability testing
statement of work.

3. Treatabilitv Testing Work Plan.  Within 	 days
of submission of the treatability testing statement of
work, Respondent(s) shall submit a treatability testing
work plan, including a schedule.  If EPA disapproves of
or requires revisions to the treatability testing work
plan, in whole or in part, Respondent(s) shall amend
and submit to EPA a revised treatability testing work
plan which is responsive to the directions in all EPA
comments, within 	days of receiving EPA's comments.

4. Treatability Study Sampling and Analysis Plan.
Within 	 days of the identification of the need for a
separate or revised QAPP or FSP,  Respondent(s) shall
submit a treatability study sampling and analysis plan.
If EPA disapproves of or requires revisions to the
treatability study sampling and analysis plan, in whole
or in part, Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA
a revised treatability study sampling and analysis plan
which is responsive to the directions in all EPA
comments, within 	 days of receiving EPA's comments.

5. Treatabilitv Study Site Health and Safety Plan.
Within 	 days of the identification of the need for a
revised health and safety plan, Respondent(s) shall
submit a treatability study site health and safety
plan.

6. Treatability Study Evaluation Report.  Within 	
days of completion of any treatability testing,
Respondent(s) shall submit a treatability study
evaluation report as provided in the Statement of Work
and work plan.  If EPA disapproves of or requires
revisions to the treatability study report, in whole  or
in part, Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA  a
revised treatability study report which is responsive

                      8
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

          to the directions in all EPA comments, within 	 days
          of receiving EPA's comments.

F.  Task Vt  Development and Screening of Alternatives.
Respondent(s) shall develop an appropriate range of waste
management options that will be evaluated through the development
and screening of alternatives, as provided in the Statement of
Work and work plan.  During the development and screening of
alternatives, Respondent(s) shall provide EPA with the following
deliverables:

     1. Memorandum on Remedial Action Objectives.  Within 	
     days of receipt of EPA's baseline risk assessment,
     Respondent(s) shall submit a memorandum on remedial action
     objectives.

     2. Memorandum on Development and Preliminary Screening of
     Alternatives. Assembled Alternatives Screening Results and
     Final Screening.  Within   	 days of submittal of the
     memorandum on remedial action objectives, Respondent(s)
     shall submit a memorandum summarizing the development and
     screening of remedial alternatives, including an
     alternatives array document as described in the Statement of
     Work.

G.  Task VI;  Detailed Analysis of Alternatives.  Respondent(s)
shall conduct a detailed analysis of remedial alternatives, as
described in the Statement of Work and work plan.  During the
detailed analysis of alternatives, Respondent(s) shall provide
EPA with the following deliverables and presentation:

     1. Report on Comparative Analysis and Presentation to EPA.
     Within 	 days of submission of a memorandum on the
     development and screening of remedial alternatives,
     Respondent(s) shall submit a report on comparative analysis
     to EPA summarizing the results of the comparative analysis
     performed between the remedial alternatives.  If EPA
     disapproves of or requires revisions to the report on
     comparative analysis, Respondent(s) shall amend and submit
     to EPA a revised report on comparative analysis which  is
     responsive to the directions in all EPA comments, within 	
     days of receiving EPA's comments.  Within two weeks of
     submitting the original report on comparative analysis,
     Respondent(•) shall make a presentation to EPA during which
     Respondent(s) shall summarize the findings of the remedial
     investigation and remedial action objectives, and present
     the results of the nine criteria evaluation and comparative
     analysis, as described in the Statement  of Work.
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

          2. Draft Feasibility Study Report.  Within 	 days of
          the presentation to EPA, Respondent(s)  shall submit a
          draft feasibility study report which reflects the
          findings in EPA's baseline risk assessment.
          Respondent(s)  shall refer to Table 6-5 of the RI/FS
          Guidance for report content and format.   If EPA
          disapproves of or requires revisions to the draft
          feasibility study report in whole or in part,
          Respondent(s)  shall amend and submit to EPA a revised
          feasibility study report which is responsive to the
          directions in all EPA comments, within 	 days of
          receiving EPA's comments.  The report as amended, and
          the administrative record, shall provide the basis for
          the proposed plan under CERCLA SS 113(k) and 117(a) by
          EPA, and shall document the development and analysis of
          remedial alternatives.

     25.  EPA reserves the right to comment on, modify and direct
changes for all deliverables.  At EPA's discretion, Respondent(s)
must fully correct all deficiencies and incorporate and integrate
all information and comments supplied by EPA either in subsequent
or resubmitted deliverables.

     26.  Respondent(s)  shall not proceed further with any
subsequent activities or tasks until receiving EPA approval for
the following deliverables: RI/FS work plan and sampling and
analysis plan, draft remedial investigation report, treatability
testing work plan and sampling and analysis plan,  [delete  any of
the foregoing not required as a deliverable] and draft
feasibility study report.  While awaiting EPA approval on  these
deliverables, Respondent(s) shall proceed with all other tasks
and activities which may be conducted independently of these
deliverables, in accordance with the schedule set  forth in this
Consent Order.

     27.  Upon receipt of the draft FS report, EPA will evaluate,
as necessary, the estimates of the risk to the public  and
environment that are expected to remain after a particular
remedial alternative has been completed.

     28.  For all remaining deliverables not enumerated above  in
paragraph 26, Respondent(s) shall proceed with all subsequent
tasks, activities and deliverables without awaiting  EPA approval
on the submitted deliverable.  EPA reserves the right  to stop
Respondent(s) from proceeding further, either temporarily  or
permanently, on any task, activity or deliverable  at any point
during the RI/FS.

     29.  In the event that Respondent(s) amends  or  revises  a
report, plan or other submittal upon receipt of EPA  comments,  if

                                10
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

 EPA  subsequently  disapproves of the revised submittal, or if
 subsequent  submittals do not fully reflect EPA's  directions for
 changes,  EPA retains the right to seek stipulated or statutory
 penalties;  perform  its own studies, complete the  RI/FS (or any
 portion of  the RI/FS) under CERCLA and the NCP, and seek
 reimbursement from  the Respondent(s) for its costs; and/or seek
 any  other appropriate relief.

     30.  In the  event that EPA takes over some of the tasks, but
 not  the preparation of the RI/FS, Respondent(s) shall incorporate
 and  integrate information supplied by EPA into the final RI/FS
 report.

     31.  Neither failure of EPA to expressly approve or
 disapprove  of Respondent(s)' submissions within a specified time
 period(s),  nor the  absence of comments, shall be  construed as
 approval  by EPA.  Whether or not EPA gives express approval for
 Respondent(s)' deliverables, Respondent(s) is responsible for
 preparing deliverables acceptable to EPA.

     32.  Respondent(s) shall, prior to any off-site shipment of
 hazardous substances from the site to an out-of-state waste
 management  facility, provide written notification to the
 appropriate state environmental official in the receiving state
 and  to EPA's Designated Project Coordinator of such shipment of
 hazardous substances.  However, the notification  of shipments
 shall not apply to  any such off-site shipments when the total
 volume of such shipments will not exceed 10 cubic yards.

     (a)  The notification shall be in writing, and shall include
 the  following information, where available:  (1)  the name and
 location  of the facility to which the hazardous substances are to
 be shipped; (2) the type and quantity of the hazardous substances
 to be shipped; (3)  the expected schedule for the  shipment of the
 hazardous substances; and (4) the method of transportation.
Respondent(s) shall notify the receiving state of major changes
 in the shipment plan, such as a decision to ship  the hazardous
 substances  to another facility within the same state, or to  a
 facility  in another state.

     (b)  The identity of the receiving facility  and state will
be determined by  Respondent(s) following the award of the
contract  for the  remedial investigation and feasibility study.
Respondent(s) shall provide all relevant information, including
 information under the categories noted in paragraph 31(a) above,
on the off-site shipments, as soon as practical after the award
of the contract and before the hazardous substances are actually
shipped.
                                11
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

                IX.  EPA'S  BASELINE RISK  ASSESSMENT

     33.  EPA will perform the baseline risk assessment.
Respondent(s) shall support EPA in the effort by providing
various information to EPA as outlined above.  The major
components of the baseline risk assessment include contaminant
identification,  exposure assessment, toxicity assessment,  and
human health and ecological risk characterization.

EPA will provide, after review of the respondent's site char-
acterization summary, sufficient information concerning the
baseline risks such that the respondent(s) can begin drafting the
feasibility study report and the Memorandum on Remedial Action
Objectives.   This information will normally be in the form of two
or more baseline risk assessment memoranda prepared by EPA.  One
memorandum will generally include a list of the chemicals of
concern for human health and ecological effects and the
corresponding toxicity values.  Another should list the current
and potential future exposure scenarios, exposure assumptions,
and exposure point concentrations that EPA plans to use in the
baseline risk assessment.  The public, including the
Respondent(s), may comment on these memoranda.  However, the
Agency is obligated to respond only to significant comments that
are submitted during the formal public comment period.

After considering any significant comments received, EPA will
prepare a baseline risk assessment report based on the data
collected by the respondents during the site character-
ization.  EPA will release this report to the public at the same
time it releases the final RI report.  Both reports will be put
into the administrative record for the site.

EPA will respond to all significant comments on the memoranda or
the baseline risk assessment that are resubmitted during the
formal comment period in the Responsiveness Summary of the Record
of Decision.

                X.  MODIFICATION OF THE WORK PLAN

     34.  If at any time during the RI/FS process, Respondent(s)
identifies a need for additional data,  a memorandum documenting
the need for additional data shall be submitted to the  EPA
Project Coordinator within 20 days of identification.   EPA  in its
discretion will determine whether the additional data will  be
collected by Respondent(s) and whether  it will be incorporated
into reports and deliverables.

     35.  In the event of conditions posing  an immediate  threat
to human health or welfare or the environment, Respondent(s)
shall notify EPA and the state immediately.   In the event of

                                12
-------
                                   OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

 unanticipated or changed circumstances  at  the  site, Respondent(s)
 shall notify the EPA Project Coordinator by  telephone within 24
 hours of discovery of the unanticipated or changed circumstances.
 In addition to the authorities in the NCP, in  the event that EPA
 determines  that the immediate threat or the  unanticipated or
 changed circumstances warrant changes in the work plan, EPA shall
 modify or amend the work plan in writing accordingly.
 Respondent(s)  shall perform the work plan  as modified or amended.

      36.  EPA may determine that in  addition to tasks defined in
 the initially approved work plan,  other additional work may be
 necessary to accomplish the objectives  of  the  RI/FS as  set forth
 in the Statement of Work for this RI/FS.   EPA  may require that
 the Respondent(s)  perform these response actions in addition to
 those required by the initially approved work  plan, including any
 approved  modifications,  if it determines that  such actions are
 necessary for a complete RI/FS.   Respondent(s)  shall confirm its
 willingness to perform the additional work in  writing to EPA
 within 7  days of receipt of the EPA  request  or Respondent(s)
 shall invoke dispute resolution.   Subject  to EPA resolution of
 any dispute,  Respondent(s)  shall implement the additional tasks
 which EPA determines are necessary.  The additional work shall be
 completed according to the standards, specifications, and
 schedule  set forth or approved by EPA in a written modification
 to  the work plan or written work plan supplement.  EPA  reserves
 the right to conduct the work itself at any  point, to seek
 reimbursement from Respondent(s),  and/or to  seek any other
 appropriate relief.

                       XI.  QUALITY ASSURANCE

      37.  Respondent(s)  shall assure that  work performed, samples
 taken and analyses conducted conform to the  requirements of the
 Statement of  Work,  the QAPP and guidances  identified therein.
 Respondent(s)  will assure that field personnel used by
 Respondent(s)  are  properly trained in the  use  of field  equipment
 and  in  chain  of  custody procedures.

          XII.   FINAL RI/FS.  PROPOSED PLAN.  PUBLIC COMMENT.
               RECORD OF DECISION. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

      38.  EPA retains the responsibility for the release to the
public  of the  RI/FS report.   EPA retains responsibility for the
preparation and  release to the public of the proposed plan and
record  of decision in accordance with CERCLA and the NCP.

      39.  EPA  shall provide Respondent(s)  with the final RI/FS
report, proposed plan and record of  decision.
                                13
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

      40.  EPA will determine the contents of the administrative
 record file for selection of the remedial action.  Respondent(s)
 must  submit to EPA documents developed during the course of the
 RI/FS upon which selection of the response action may be based.
 Respondent(s) shall provide copies of plans, task memoranda
 including documentation of field modifications, recommendations
 for further action, quality assurance memoranda and audits, raw
 data, field notes, laboratory analytical reports and other
 reports.  Respondent(s) must additionally submit any previous
 studies conducted under state, local or other federal authorities
 relating to selection of the response action, and all
 communications between Respondent(s) and state, local or other
 federal authorities concerning selection of the response action.
 At EPA's discretion, Respondent(s) may establish a community
 information repository at or near the site, to house one copy of
 the administrative record.

               XIII.   PROGRESS REPORTS  AND MEETINGS

     41.  Respondent(s) shall make presentations at, and
 participate in, meetings at the request of EPA during the
 initiation,  conduct, and completion of the RI/FS.  In addition to
 discussion of the technical aspects of the RI/FS, topics will
 include anticipated problems or new issues.  Meetings will be
 scheduled at EPA's discretion.

     42.  In addition to the deliverables set forth in this
 Order, Respondent(s) shall provide to EPA monthly progress
 reports by the 10th day of the following month.  At a minimum,
 with respect to the preceding month, these progress reports shall
 (1) describe the actions which have been taken to comply with
 this Consent Order during that month,  (2) include all results of
 sampling and tests and all other data received by the
 Respondent(s), (3) describe work planned for the next two months
 with schedules relating such work to the overall project schedule
 for RI/FS completion and (4) describe all problems encountered
 and any anticipated problems, any actual or anticipated delays,
 and solutions developed and implemented to address any actual or
 anticipated problems or delays.

   XIV.  SAMPLING.  ACCESS.  AND DATA AVAILABILITY/ADMISSIBILITY

     43.  All results of sampling, tests, modeling or other data
 (including raw data) generated by Respondent(s), or on
 Respondent(s)' behalf, during implementation of this Consent
 Drder, shall be submitted to EPA in the subsequent monthly
progress report as described in Section XII of this Order.   EPA
will make available to the Respondent(s) validated data generated
by EPA unless it is exempt from disclosure by any  federal or
state law or regulation.

                                14
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

      44.   Respondent(s) will verbally notify EPA  at least 15 days
 prior to  conducting significant  field events as described in the
 Statement of  Work,  work plan or  sampling and analysis plan.  At
 EPA's verbal  or  written request, or the request of EPA's
 oversight assistant,  Respondent(s) shall allow split or duplicate
 samples to be taken by EPA  (and  its authorized representatives)
 of  any samples collected  by the  Respondent(s) in  implementing
 this  Consent  Order.   All  split samples of Respondent(s) shall be
 analyzed  by the  methods identified in the QAPP.

      45.   At  all reasonable times, EPA and its authorized
 representatives  shall have  the authority to enter and freely move
 about all property  at the site and off-site areas where work, if
 any,  is being performed,  for the purposes of inspecting
 conditions, activities, the results of activities, records,
 operating logs,  and contracts related to the site or
 Respondent(s)  and its contractor pursuant to this Order;
 reviewing the progress of the Respondent(s) in carrying out the
 terms of  this Consent Order; conducting tests as  EPA or its
 authorized representatives  deem  necessary; using  a camera, sound
 recording device or other documentary type equipment; and
 verifying the data  submitted to  EPA by the Respondent(s).  The
 Respondent(s)  shall allow these  persons to inspect and copy all
 records,  files,  photographs, documents, sampling  and monitoring
 data,  and other  writings  related to work undertaken in carrying
 out this  Consent Order.   Nothing herein shall be  interpreted as
 limiting  or affecting EPA's right of entry or inspection
 authority under  federal law.  All parties with access to the site
 under this paragraph  shall  comply with all approved health and
 safety plans.

      46.   The Respondent(s) may  assert a claim of business
 confidentiality  covering  part or all of the information submitted
 to EPA pursuant  to  the terms of  this Consent Order under 40
 C.F.R. S2.203, provided such claim is allowed by  section
 104(e)(7)  of  CERCLA,  42 U.S.C. S9604(e)(7).  This claim shall be
 asserted  in the  manner described by 40 C.F.R. S2.203(b) and
 substantiated at the  time the claim is made.  Information
 determined to be confidential by EPA will be given the protection
 specified in  40  C.F.R. Part 2.   If no such claim  accompanies the
 information when it is submitted to EPA, it may be made available
 to the public by EPA  or the state without further notice to  the
 Respondent(s).   Respondent(s) agrees not to assert
 confidentiality  claims with respect to any data related to site
 conditions, sampling, or  monitoring.

      47.   In  entering into  this  Order, Respondent(s) waives  any
 objections to any data gathered, generated, or evaluated by  EPA,
 the state  or  Respondent(s)  in the performance or  oversight of the
work  that  has been  verified according to the quality

                                15
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

 assurance/quality control  (QA/QC) procedures required by the
 Consent  Order  or  any  EPA-approved work plans or sampling and
 analysis plans.   If Respondent(s) objects to any  other data
 relating to  the RI/FS, Respondent(s) shall submit to EPA a report
 that  identifies and explains  its objections, describes the
 acceptable uses of the data,  if any, and identifies any
 limitations  to the use of  the data.  The report must be submitted
 to  EPA within  15  days of the  monthly progress report containing
 the data.

      48.  If the  site, or  the off-site area that  is to be used
 for access or  is  within the scope of the RI/FS, is owned in whole
 or  in part by  parties other than those bound by this Consent
 Order, Respondent(s)  will  obtain, or use its best efforts to
 obtain,  site access agreements from the present owner(s) within
 	days of  the effective date of this Consent  Order.  Such
 agreements shall  provide access for EPA, its contractors and
 oversight officials,  the state and its contractors, and the
 Respondent(s)  or  its  authorized representatives,  and such
 agreements shall  specify that Respondent(s) is not EPA's
 representative with respect to liability associated with site
 activities.  Copies of such agreements shall be provided to EPA
 prior to Respondent(s)' initiation of field activities.
 Respondent(s)' best efforts shall include providing reasonable
 compensation to any off-site  property owner.  If  access
 agreements are not obtained within the time referenced above,
 Respondent(s)  shall immediately notify EPA of its failure to
 obtain access.  EPA may obtain access for the Respondent(s),
 perform  those  tasks or activities with EPA contractors, or
 terminate the  Consent Order in the event that Respondent(s)
 cannot obtain  access  agreements.  In the event that EPA performs
 those tasks  or activities  with EPA contractors and does not
 terminate the  Consent Order,  Respondent(s) shall  perform all
 other activities  not  requiring access to that site, and shall
 reimburse EPA  for all costs incurred in performing such
 activities.  Respondent(s) additionally shall integrate the
 results of any such tasks  undertaken by EPA into  its reports and
 deliverables.  Furthermore, the Respondent(s) agrees to  indemnify
 the U.S. Government as specified in Section XXV of this Order.
 Respondent(•)  also shall reimburse EPA for all costs and attorney
 fees  incurred  by  the  United States to obtain access for the
 Respondent(•)  pursuant to  paragraph 70.

               XV. DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS

      49.  Documents including reports, approvals, disapprovals,
 and other correspondence which must be submitted  under this
 Consent Order, shall  be sent  by certified mail, return receipt
 requested, to  the following addressees or to any  other addressees
which the Respondent(s) and EPA designate in writing:

                                16
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

      (a)  Documents to be submitted to EPA should be sent to
          [indicate number of copies]:

                [EPA Project Coordinator,
                CERCLA Branch]
                US EPA, Region [#],
                [Street, City, State, Zip Code].

      (b)  Documents to be submitted to the Respondent(s) should
          be sent to [include number of copies]:

                [Name, Title,
                Organization,
                Street, City, State, Zip Code].

      50.  On or before the effective date of this Consent Order,
EPA and the Respondent(s) shall each designate their own Project
Coordinator.  Each Project Coordinator shall be responsible  for
overseeing the  implementation of this Consent Order.  To the
maximum extent  possible, communications between the Respondent(s)
and EPA shall be directed to the Project Coordinator by mail,
with  copies to  such other persons as EPA, the state, and
Respondent(s) may respectively designate.  Communications
include, but are not limited to, all documents, reports,
approvals, and  other correspondence submitted under this Consent
Order.

      51.  EPA and the Respondent(s) each have the right to change
their respective Project Coordinator.  The other party must  be
notified in writing at least 10 days prior to the change.

      52.  EPA's Project Coordinator shall have the authority
lawfully vested in a Remedial Project Manager  (RPM) and On-Scene
Coordinator (OSC) by the NCP.  In addition, EPA's Project
Coordinator shall have the authority consistent with the National
Contingency Plan, to halt any work required by this Consent
Order, and to take any necessary response action when s/he
determines that conditions at the site may present an immediate
endangerment to public health or welfare or the environment.   The
absence of the  EPA Project Coordinator from the area under study
pursuant to this Consent Order shall not be cause for the
stoppage or delay of work.

      53.  EPA shall arrange for a qualified person to assist in
its oversight and review of the conduct of the RI/FS, as required
by section 104(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S9604(a).  The oversight
assistant may observe work and make inquiries  in the absence of
EPA, but is not authorized to modify the work plan.
                                17
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

                    XVI.  OTHER APPLICABLE  LAWS

     54.  Respondent(s) shall comply with all laws that are
applicable when performing the RI/FS.  No local, state, or
federal permit shall be required for any portion of any action
conducted entirely on-site, including studies,  where such action
is selected and carried out in compliance with section 121 of
CERCLA.

                    XVII.   RECORD PRESERVATION

     55.  All records and documents in EPA's and Respondent's
possession that relate in any way to the site shall be preserved
during the conduct of this Consent Order and for a minimum of 10
years after commencement of construction of any remedial action.
The Respondent(s) shall acquire and retain copies of all
documents that relate to the site and are in the possession of
its employees, agents, accountants, contractors, or attorneys.
After this 10 year period, the Respondent(s) shall notify EPA at
least 90 days before the documents are scheduled to be destroyed.
If EPA requests that the documents be saved, the Respondent(s)
shall, at no cost to EPA, give EPA the documents or copies of the
documents.

                    XVIII.   DISPUTE RESOLUTION

     56.  Any disputes concerning activities or deliverables
required under this Order, excluding the baseline risk.
assessment, for which dispute resolution has been expressly
provided for, shall be resolved as follows:  If the Respondent(s)
objects to any EPA notice of disapproval or requirement made
pursuant to this Consent Order, Respondent(s) shall notify EPA's
Project Coordinator in writing of its objections within 14 days
of receipt of the disapproval notice or requirement.
Respondent(s)' written objections shall define the dispute, state
the basis of Respondent(s)' objections, and be sent certified
mail, return receipt requested.  EPA and the Respondent(s) then
have an additional 14 days to reach agreement.  If an  agreement
is not reached within 14 days, Respondent may request  a
determination by EPA's [Branch Chief/Division Director].  The
[Branch Chief's/Division Director's] determination is  EPA's final
decision.  Respondent(s) shall proceed  in accordance with EPA's
final decision regarding the matter in  dispute, regardless of
whether Respondent(s) agrees with the decision.  If the
Respondent(s) does not agree to perform or does not actually
perform the work in accordance with EPA's final decision, EPA
reserves the right in its sole discretion to conduct the work
itself, to seek reimbursement  from the  Respondent(s),  to seek
enforcement of the decision, to  seek stipulated penalties, and/or
to seek any other appropriate  relief.

                                18
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

      57.  Respondent(s)  is not relieved of its obligations to
perform and conduct activities and submit deliverables on the
schedule set forth in the work plan, whil© a matter is pending in
dispute resolution.  The invocation of dispute resolution does
not stay stipulated penalties under this Order.

         XIX.  DELAY IN PERFORMANCE/STIPULATED PENALTIES

      58.  For each day that the Respondent(s) fails to complete a
deliverable in a timely manner or fails to. produce a deliverable
of acceptable quality, or otherwise fails to perform in
accordance with the requirements of this Order, Respondent(s)
shall be liable for stipulated penalties.  Penalties begin to
accrue on the day that performance is due or a violation occurs,
and extend through the period of correction.  Where a revised
submission by Respondent(s) is required, stipulated penalties
shall continue to accrue until a satisfactory deliverable is
produced.  EPA will provide written notice for violations that
are not based on timeliness; nevertheless, penalties shall accrue
from the day a violation commences.  Payment shall be due within
30 days of receipt of a demand letter from EPA.

     59.  Respondents shall pay interest on the unpaid balance,
which shall begin to accrue at the end of the 30-day period, at
the rate established by the Department of Treasury pursuant to 30
U.S.C. S3717.  Respondents shall further pay a handling charge of
1 percent, to be assessed at the end of each 31 day period, and a
6 percent per annum penalty charge, to be assessed if the penalty
is not paid in full within 90 days after it is due.

     60.  Respondent(s) shall make all payments by forwarding a
check to:

               U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
                       Superfund Accounting
                    [insert Regional  Lock Box]

     Checks should identify the name of the site, the site
identification number, the account number, and the title of  this
Order.  A copy of the check and/or transmittal letter shall  be
forwarded to the EPA Project Coordinator.

     61.  For the following major deliverables,  stipulated
penalties shall accrue, in the amount of	 per day, per
violation, for the first seven days of noncompliance; 	 per
day,  per violation, for the 8th through 14th day of
noncompliance; 	 per day, per violation, for  the 15th day
through the 30th day; and 	 per day per violation for all
violations lasting beyond 30 days.


                                19
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

      1)   An  original  and any revised work plan.

      2)   An  original  and any revised sampling and analysis plan.

      3)   An  original  and any revised remedial investigation
          report.

      4)   An  original  and any revised treatability testing work
          plan.

      5)   An  original  and any revised treatability study sampling
          and analysis plan.

      6)   An  original  and any revised feasibility study report.

      62.  For the following interim deliverables, stipulated
penalties shall accrue in the amount of   	 per day, per
violation, for the first week of noncomp1iance; 	  per day, per
violation, for the 8th through 14th day of noncomp1iance; 	
per day, per  violation, for the 15th day through the 30th day of
noncompliance; and 	 per day per violation for all violations
lasting beyond 30 days.

      1)   Technical memorandum on modeling of site
          characteristics.

      2)   Preliminary  site characterization summary.

      3)   Summary of RI data,

      4)   Identification of candidate technologies memorandum.

      5)   Treatability testing statement of work.

      6)   Treatability study evaluation report.

      7)   Memorandum on remedial action objectives.

      8)   Memoranda on development and preliminary screening of
          alternatives, assembled alternatives screening
          results, and final screening.

      9)   Comparative  analysis report.

      63.  For the monthly progress reports, stipulated penalties
shall accrue  in the amount of 	 per day, per violation,  for
the first week of noncompliance; 	 per day, per violation, for
the 8th through 14th day of noncompliance;  	  per day, per
violation, for the 15th day through the 30th day; and 	 per
day, per violation, for all violations lasting beyond 30 days.

                                20
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

      64.  Respondent(s) may dispute EPA's right to the stated
 amount of penalties by  invoking the dispute resolution procedures
 under Section XVII herein.  Penalties shall accrue but need not
 be paid during the dispute resolution period.  If Respondent(s)
 do not prevail upon resolution, all penalties shall be due to EPA
 within 30 days of resolution of the dispute.  If Respondent(s)
 prevails upon resolution, no penalties shall be paid.

      65.  In the event  that EPA provides for corrections to be
 reflected in the next deliverable and does not require
 resubmission of that deliverable, stipulated penalties for that
 interim deliverable shall cease to accrue on the date of such
 decision by EPA.

      66.  The stipulated penalties provisions do not preclude EPA
 from  pursuing any other remedies or sanctions which are available
 to EPA because of the Respondent(s)' failure to comply with this
 Consent Order, including but not limited to conduct of all or
 part  of the RI/FS by EPA.  Payment of stipulated penalties does
 not alter Respondent(s)' obligation to complete performance under
 this  Consent Order.

                        XX.   FORCE MAJEURE

      67.  "Force majeure", for purposes of this Consent Order, is
 defined as any event arising from causes entirely beyond the
 control of the Respondent(s) and of any entity controlled by
 Respondent(s), including their contractors and subcontractors,
 that  delays the timely  performance of any obligation under this
 Consent Order notwithstanding Respondent(s)' best efforts to
 avoid the delay.  The requirement that the Respondent(s) exercise
 "best efforts to avoid  the delay" includes using best efforts to
 anticipate any potential force majeure event and best efforts to
 address the effects of  any potential force majeure event  (1) as
 it is occurring and  (2) following the potential force majeure
 event, such that the delay is minimized to the greatest extent
 practicable.  Examples  of events that are not force majeure
 events include, but are not limited to, increased costs or
 expenses of any work to be performed under this Order or the
 financial difficulty of Respondent(s) to perform such work.

      68.  If any event  occurs or has occurred that may delay the
 performance of any obligation under this Order, whether or not
 caused by a force majeure event, Respondent(s) shall notify by
 telephone the Remedial  Project Manager or,  in his or her absence,
 the Director of the Hazardous Waste Management Division, EPA
 Region 	, within 48 hours of when the Respondent(s) knew or
 should have known that  the event might cause a delay.  Within
 five business days thereafter, Respondent(s) shall provide in
writing the reasons for the delay; the anticipated duration of

                                21
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

the delay; all actions taJcen or to be taken to prevent or
minimize the delay; a schedule for implementation of any measures
to be taken to mitigate the effect of the delay; and a statement
as to whether, in the opinion of Respondent(s), such event may
cause or contribute to an endangerment to public health, welfare
or the environment.  Respondent(s) shall exercise best efforts to
avoid or minimize any delay and any effects of a delay.  Failure
to comply with the above requirements shall preclude
Respondent(s) from asserting any claim of force majeure.

     69.  If EPA agrees that the delay or anticipated delay is
attributable to force majeure, the time for performance of the
obligations under this Order that are directly affected by the
force majeure event shall be extended by agreement of the
parties, pursuant to section XXVI of this Order, for a period of
time not to exceed the actual duration of the delay caused by the
force majeure event.  An extension of the time for performance of
the obligation directly affected by the force majeure event shall
not, of itself, extend the time for performance of any subsequent
obligation.

     70.  If EPA does not agree that the delay or anticipated
delay has been or will be caused by a force majeure event, or
does not agree with Respondent(s) on the length of the extension,
the issue shall be subject to the dispute resolution procedures
set forth in section XVII of this Order.  In any such proceeding,
to qualify for a force majeure defense, Respondent(s) shall have
the burden of demonstrating by a preponderance of the evidence
that the delay or anticipated delay has been or will be caused by
a force majeure event, that the duration of the delay was or will
be warranted under the circumstances, that Respondent(s) did
exercise or is exercising due diligence by using its best efforts
to avoid and mitigate the effects of the delay, and that
Respondent(s) complied with the requirements of paragraph 66.

     71.  Should Respondent(s) carry the burden set forth in
paragraph 65, the delay at issue shall be deemed not to be a
violation of the affected obligation of this Consent Order.

               XXI. REIMBURSEMENT OF PAST COSTS

[Note that the Agency cannot compromise past costs unless the
consent order is also issued under $122(h)(l), and the
requirements of $122(h)(l) are also met, i.e., prior written
approval of the Attorney General is obtained  if the total past
and projected response costs exceed $500,000, excluding
interest.]

     72.  Within 15 days of the effective date of this  Order,
Respondent(s) shall remit a certified or cashiers check to EPA  in

                                22
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

 the amount of  $	,  as  previously demanded in the RI/FS Special
 Notice  Letter  dated  	,  together with  interest that has
 accrued thereon  at the rate  of  interest specified for the
 Hazardous  Substances Superfund  under CERCLA section 107(3),  for
 all past response .costs incurred by the United States in its
 [e.g.,  conduct of the removal action] at the site from
 	[date]  to 	[date].

      73.   Checks should be made payable to the Hazardous
 Substances Superfund and  should include the name of the site, the
 site identification  number,  the operable unit, if any, the
 Regional Lock:  Box Number  account number and the title of this
 Order.   Checks should be  forwarded to:

               U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
                       Superfund Accounting
                  [insert Regional Lock Box]

      74.   A copy of  the check should be sent simultaneously  to
 the EPA Project  Coordinator.

        XXII. REIMBURSEMENT OF RESPONSE AND OVERSIGHT COSTS

      75.   Following  the issuance of this Consent Order, EPA  shall
 submit  to  the  Respondent(s)  on  a periodic  basis, an accounting of
 all response costs including oversight costs incurred by the U.S.
 Government with  respect to this RI/FS.  Response costs may
 include, but are not limited to, costs incurred by the U.S.
 Government in  overseeing  Respondent(s)' implementation of the
 requirements of  this Order and  activities  performed by the
 government as  part of  the RI/FS and community relations,
 including  any  costs  incurred while obtaining access.  Costs  shall
 include all direct and indirect costs, including, but not limited
 to,  time and travel  costs of EPA personnel and associated
 indirect costs,  contractor costs, cooperative agreement costs,
 compliance monitoring,  including the collection and analysis of
 split samples, inspection of RI/FS activities, site visits,
 discussions regarding disputes  that may arise as a result of this
 Consent Order, review and approval or disapproval of reports,
 costs of performing  the baseline risk assessment, and costs  of
 redoing any of Respondent(s)' tasks.  Any  necessary summaries,
 including,   but not limited to EPA's certified Agency Financial
Management System summary data  (SPUR Reports), or such other
 summary as certified by EPA, shall serve as basis for payment
demands.

     76.   Respondent(s) shall,  within 30 days of  receipt of  each
accounting, remit a  certified or cashier's check  for the amount
of  those costs.  Interest shall accrue from the  later of: the
date payment of  a specified  amount is demanded in writing; or the

                                23
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

date of the expenditure. The interest rate is the rate of
interest on investments for the Hazardous Substances Superfund in
section 107(a) of CERCLA.

     77.  Checks should be made payable to the Hazardous
Substances Superfund and should include the name of the site, the
site identification number, the account number and the title of
this Order.  Checks should be forwarded to:

              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                      Superfund Accounting
                    [insert Regional  Lock  Box]

     78.  Copies of the transmittal letter and check should be
sent simultaneously to the EPA Project Coordinator.

     79.  Respondent(s) agrees to limit any disputes concerning
costs to accounting errors and the inclusion of costs outside the
scope of this Consent Order.  Respondent(s) shall identify any
contested costs and the basis of its objection.  All undisputed
costs shall be remitted by Respondent(s) in accordance with the
schedule set forth above.  Disputed costs shall be paid by
Respondent(s) into an escrow account while the dispute is
pending.  Respondent(s) bears the burden of establishing an EPA
accounting error or the inclusion of costs outside the scope of
this Consent Order.

  XXIII. RESERVATIONS OF RIGHTS  AND REIMBURSEMENT OF OTHER COSTS

     80.  EPA reserves the right to bring an action against the
Respondent(s) under section 107 of CERCLA for recovery of all
response costs including oversight costs, incurred by the United
States at the site that are not reimbursed by the Respondent(s),
any costs incurred in the event that EPA performs the RI/FS or
any part thereof, and any future costs incurred by the United
states in connection with response activities conducted under
CERCLA at this site.

     81.  EPA reserves the right to bring an action against
Respondent(•) to enforce the past costs and response and
oversight cost reimbursement requirements of this Consent Order,
to collect stipulated penalties assessed pursuant to section
XVIII of this Consent Order, and to seek penalties pursuant to
section 109 of CERCLA,  42 U.S.C. §9609.

     82.  Except as expressly provided in this Order, each party
reserves all rights and defenses it may have.  Nothing in this
Consent Order shall affect EPA's removal authority or EPA's
response or enforcement authorities including, but not limited
                                24
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

 to,  the  right  to  seek  injunctive relief, stipulated penalties,
 statutory penalties, and/or punitive damages.

      83.  Following satisfaction of the requirements of this
 Consent  Order, Respondent(s) shall have resolved  its liability to
 EPA  for  the work  performed by Respondent(s) pursuant to this
 Consent  Order.  Respondent(s) is not released from liability, if
 any,  for any response  actions taken beyond the scope of this
 Order regarding removals, other operable units, remedial
 design/remedial action of this operable unit, or  activities
 arising  pursuant  to section 121(c) of CERCLA.

                        XXIV.  DISCLAIMER

      84.  By signing this Consent Order and taking actions under
 this  Order, the Respondent(s) does not necessarily agree with
 EPA's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.  Furthermore, the
 participation of  the Respondent(s) in this Order  shall not be
 considered an admission of liability and is not admissible in
 evidence against  the Respondent(s) in any judicial or
 administrative proceeding other than a proceeding by the United
 States,  including EPA, to enforce this Consent Order or a
 judgment relating to it.  Respondent(s) retains its rights to
 assert claims against  other potentially responsible parties at
 the site.  However, the Respondent(s) agrees not  to contest the
 validity or terms of this Order, or the procedures underlying or
 relating to it in any  action'brought by the United States,
 including EPA, to enforce its terms.

                        XXV. OTHER CLAIMS

      85.  In entering  into this Order, Respondent(s) waives any
 right to seek reimbursement under section 106(b)  of CERCLA.
Respondent also waives any right to present a claim under section
 111 or 112 of CERCLA.  This Order does not constitute any
decision on preauthorization of funds under section lll(a)(2) of
CERCLA.  Respondent(s) further waives all other statutory and
common law claims against EPA, including, but not limited to,
contribution and  counterclaims, relating to or arising out of
conduct  of the RI/FS.

      86.  Nothing in this Order shall constitute  or be construed
as a  release from any  claim, cause of action or demand in  law or
equity against any person, firm, partnership, subsidiary or
corporation not a signatory to this Consent Order for any
 liability it may  have  arising out of or relating  in any way  to
the generation, storage, treatment, handling, transportation,
release, or disposal of any hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants found at, taken to, or taken from the site.
                                25
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

     87.  Respondent(s) shall bear its own costs and attorneys
fees.

    XXVI. FINANCIAL ASSURANCE. INSURANCE. AND INDEMNIFICATION

     88.  Respondent(s) shall establish and maintain a financial
instrument or trust account or other financial mechanism
acceptable to EPA, funded sufficiently to perform the work and
any other obligations required under this Consent Order,
including a margin for cost overruns.  Within 15 days after the
effective date of this Consent Order, Respondent(s) shall fund
the financial instrument or trust account sufficiently to perform
the work required under this Consent Order projected for the
period beginning with the effective date of the Order through
	.  Beginning 	, and on or before the 15th calendar
day of each calendar year quarter thereafter, Respondent(s) shall
fund the financial instrument or trust account sufficiently to
perform the work and other activities required under this Order
projected for the succeeding calendar year quarter.

     89.  If at any time the net worth of the financial
instrument or trust account is insufficient to perform the work
and other obligations under the Order for the upcoming quarter,
Respondent(s) shall provide written notice to EPA within 7 days
after the net worth of the financial instrument.or trust account
becomes insufficient.   The written notice shall describe why the
financial instrument or trust account is funded insufficiently
and explain what actions have been or will be taken to fund the
financial instrument or trust account adequately.

     90.  (a)  Prior to commencement of any work under this
Order,  Respondent(s) shall secure, and shall maintain in force
for the duration of this Order, and for two years after the
completion of all activities required by this Consent Order,
Comprehensive General Liability ("CGL") and automobile insurance,
with limits of $	 million dollars, combined single limit,
naming as insured the United States.  The CGL insurance shall
include Contractual Liability Insurance in the amount of $	
per occurrence, and Umbrella Liability Insurance in the amount of
$2 million per occurrence.

          (b)  Respondent(s) shall also secure, and maintain in
force for the duration of this Order and for two years after the
completion of all activities required by this Consent Order  the
following:

               i.  Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance in
               the .amount of $1,000,000.00 per occurrence.
                                26
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

                ii. Pollution Liability Insurance  in the amount of
                $1,000,000.00 per occurrence, covering as
                appropriate both general liability and
                professional liability arising from pollution
                conditions.

           (c)   For the duration of this Order, Respondent(s)
shall satisfy,  or shall ensure that their contractors or
subcontractors  satisfy, all applicable laws and regulations
regarding  the provision of employer's liability insurance and
workmen's  compensation insurance for all persons  performing work
on behalf  of the Respondent(s), in furtherance of this Order.

           (d)   If Respondent(s) demonstrates by evidence
satisfactory to EPA that any contractor or subcontractor
maintains  insurance equivalent to that described  above, or
insurance  covering the same risks but in a lesser amount, then
with respect to that contractor or subcontractor  Respondent(s)
need provide only that portion of the insurance described above
which is not maintained by the contractor or subcontractor.

            (e)  Prior to commencement of any work under this
Order, and  annually thereafter on the anniversary of the
effective  date  of this Order, Respondent(s) shall provide to EPA
certificates of such insurance and a copy of each insurance
policy.

     91.   At least 7 days prior to commencing any work under this
Consent Order,  Respondent(s) shall certify to EPA that the
required insurance has been obtained by that contractor.

     92.  The Respondent(s) agrees to indemnify and hold the
United States Government, its agencies, departments, agents, and
employees  harmless from any and all claims or causes of action
arising from or on account of acts or omissions of Respondent(s),
its employees,  agents, servants, receivers, successors, or
assignees,  or any persons including, but not limited to, firms,
corporations, subsidiaries and contractors, in carrying out
activities  under this Consent Order.  The United  States
Government  or any agency or authorized representative thereof
shall not  b« held as a party to any contract entered into by
Respondent(s) in carrying out activities under this Consent
Order.

        XXVII.  EFFECTIVE DATE AND SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATION

     93.  The effective date of this Consent Order shall be the
date it is  signed by EPA.
                                27
-------
                                  OSWER Directive Number 9835. 3-2A

     94.  This Consent Order may be amended by mutual agreement
of EPA and Respondent(s).   Amendments shall be in writing and
shall be effective when signed by EPA.  EPA Project Coordinators
do not have the authority to sign amendments to the Consent
Order.

     95.  No informal advice, guidance, suggestions, or comments
by EPA regarding reports,  plans, specifications, schedules, and
any other writing submitted by the Respondent(s) will be
construed as relieving the Respondent(s) of its obligation to
obtain such formal approval as may be required by this Order.
Any deliverables, plans, technical memoranda, reports (other than
progress reports), specifications, schedules and attachments
required by this Consent Order are, upon approval by EPA,
incorporated into this Order.

              XXVIII.    TERMINATION AND SATISFACTION

     96.  This Consent Order shall terminate when the
Respondent(s)  demonstrates in writing and certifies to the
satisfaction of EPA that all activities required under this
Consent Order, including any additional work, payment of past
costs, response and oversight costs,  and any stipulated penalties
demanded by EPA, have been performed and EPA has approved the
certification.  This notice shall not, however, terminate
Respondent(s)' obligation to comply with Sections XVI, XXI, and
XXII of this Consent Order.

     97.  The certification shall be signed by a responsible
official representing each Respondent.  Each representative shall
make the following attestation: "I certify that the information
contained in or accompanying this certification is true,
accurate, and complete."  For purposes of this Consent Order,  a
responsible official is a corporate official who is in charge  of
a principal business function.

BY:	  DATE:	
(Respondent(s))Title


BY:                                          DATE:
   Regional Administrator [or Delegatee]
   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                28
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                            REGION  #
IN THE MATTER OF:                        )
                                         )
[SITE NAME] [SITE NUMBER]                )
                                         )
[COMPANY NAME                            )
 Address]                                )
                                         )
RESPONDENT[S]                            )
                                         )
                                         )
Proceeding Under Sections 104, 122(a),   ) U.S. EPA Docket No.
and 122(d)(3) of the Comprehensive       )
Environmental Response, Compensation,    )
and Liability Act as amended             )
(42 U.S.C §§ 9604, 9622(a),              )
9622(d)(3)).                             )
                 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER ON CONSENT
          FOR REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY
                      Operable Unit No.	

                         I.   INTRODUCTION

     1.  This Administrative Order on Consent  (Consent Order) is
entered into voluntarily by the United States  Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and [name of Respondent(s)]
(Respondent(s)).  The Consent Order concerns the preparation of,
performance of, and reimbursement for all costs incurred by EPA
in connection with a remedial investigation and feasibility study
(RI/FS) for the [operable unit consisting of]  at the  [site name]
located in [site location]  ("site") [as well as past  response
costs].

                        II.  JURISDICTION

     2.  This Consent Order is issued under the authority vested
in the President of the United States by sections  104, 122(a) and
122(d)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9604,
9622(a), 9622(d)(3) (CERCLA).  This authority  was  delegated to
the Administrator of EPA on January 23, 1987,  by Executive Order
12580, 52 Fed. Reg. 2926 (1987), and further delegated to
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

Regional Administrators on September 13,  1987, by EPA Delegation
No. 14-14-C.  [This authority has been redelegated by the
Regional Administrator to 	.]

     3.  The Respondent(s) agrees to undertake all actions
required by the terms and conditions of this Consent Order.  In
any action by EPA or the United States to enforce the terms of
this Consent Order, Respondent(s) consents to and agrees not to
contest the authority or jurisdiction of the Regional
Administrator to issue or enforce this Consent Order, and agrees
not to contest the validity of this Order or its terms.

                       III.  PARTIES BOUND

     4.  This Consent Order shall apply to and be binding upon
EPA and shall be binding upon the Respondent(s), its agents,
successors, assigns, officers, directors and principals.
Respondent(s) is jointly and severally responsible for carrying
out all actions required of it by this Consent Order.  The
signatories to this Consent Order certify that they are
authorized to execute and legally bind the parties they represent
to this Consent Order.  No change in the ownership or corporate
status of the Respondent(s) or of the facility or site shall
alter Respondent(s)' responsibilities under this Consent Order.

     5.  The Respondent(s) shall provide a copy of this Consent
Order to any subsequent owners or successors before ownership
rights or stock or assets in a corporate acquisition are
transferred.  Respondent(s) shall provide a copy of this Consent
Order to all contractors, subcontractors, laboratories, and
consultants which are retained to conduct any work performed
under this Consent Order, within 14 days after the effective date
of this Consent Order or the date of retaining their services,
whichever is later.  Respondent(s) shall condition any such
contracts upon satisfactory compliance with this Consent Order.
Notwithstanding the terms of any contract, Respondent(s) is
responsible for compliance with this Consent Order and for
ensuring that its subsidiaries,  employees, contractors,
consultants, subcontractors, agents and attorneys comply with
this Consent Order.

                    IV.  STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

     6.  In entering into this Consent Order, the objectives of
EPA and the Respondent(s) are:  (a) to determine the nature and
extent of contamination and any threat to the public health,
welfare, or the environment caused by the release or threatened
release of hazardous substances,  pollutants or contaminants at or
from the site or facility, by conducting a remedial
investigation; (b) to determine and evaluate alternatives for
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

remedial action  (if any) to prevent, mitigate or otherwise
respond to or remedy any release or threatened release of
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants at or from the
site or facility, by conducting a feasibility study; and (c) to
recover response and oversight costs incurred by EPA with respect
to this Consent Order.

     7.  The activities conducted under this Consent Order are
subject to approval by EPA and shall provide all appropriate
necessary information for the RI/FS, with the exception of the
baseline risk assessment performed by EPA, and for a record of
decision that is consistent with CERCLA and the National
Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 C.F.R. Part 300.  The activities
conducted under this Consent Order shall be conducted in
compliance with all applicable EPA guidances, policies, and
procedures.

                      V.   FINDINGS  OF  FACT

     [Note: Provide enough information in this section for the
     Order to stand on its own.  The findings of fact need to
     establish and justify the conclusions of law set forth in
     the Order.]

     8.   [Identify the site with the name, location, and
description, including geography, description of aquatic and
terrestrial communities, and brief site history.]

     9.   [Provide information that there are hazardous
substances at the site by listing the specific chemicals found at
the site, and their locations, concentrations and quantities
where known, including description of studies conducted to find
the hazardous substances.]

     10.  [Describe actual and/or potential release and
contaminant migration pathways, making clear that these are not
exclusive.]

     11.  [Briefly note some health/environmental effects of some
major contaminants.]

     12.  [State that the site is on the [proposed] National
Priorities List.  Reference section 105 of CERCLA and Federal
Register in which notice of listing appeared.]

     13.  [Identify each Respondent, i.e., name/business.]

     14.  [For each Respondent, state the connection between the
Respondent and the site, e.g., owner or operator of a hazardous
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

waste site, or person who arranged for disposal or treatment of,
or transporter of hazardous substances found at the site.]

     15.  [Identify prior response and enforcement actions, if
any, taken at the site.]

           VI.   CONCLUSIONS  OF  LAW AND DETERMINATIONS

     16.  The site is a "facility" as defined in section 101(9)
Of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §9601(9).

     17.  Wastes and constituents thereof [at the site, sent to
the site, disposed of at the site, and/or transported to the
site] identified in paragraph 9 are "hazardous substances" as
defined in section 101(14) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §9601(14), or
constitute "any pollutant or contaminant" that may present an
imminent and substantial danger to public health or welfare under
section 104(a)(1) of CERCLA.

     18.  The presence of hazardous substances at the site or the
past, present or potential migration of hazardous substances
currently located at or emanating from the site, constitute
actual and/or threatened "releases" as defined in section 101(22)
Of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §9601(22).

     19.  Respondent(s) is a "person" as defined in section
101(21)  of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.  §9601(21).

     20.  Respondent(s) is a responsible party under sections
104, 107 and 122 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9604, 9607 and 9622.

     21.  The actions required by this Consent Order are
necessary to protect the public health or welfare or the
environment,  are in the public interest, 42 U.S.C.  §9622(a), are
consistent with CERCLA and the NCP, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9604(a)(l),
9622(a), and will expedite effective remedial action and minimize
litigation, 42 U.S.C. §9622(a).

                           VII.   NOTICE

     22.  By providing a copy of this Consent Order to the state,
EPA is notifying the state of [name of state] that this Order is
being issued and that EPA is the lead agency for coordinating,
overseeing, and enforcing the response action required by the
Order.
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

                    VIII. WORK TO BE PERFORMED

     23.  All work performed under this Consent Order shall be
under the direction and supervision of qualified personnel.
Within 30 days of the effective date of this Order, and before
the work outlined below begins, the Respondent(s) shall notify
EPA in writing of the names, titles, and qualifications of the
personnel, including contractors, subcontractors, consultants and
laboratories to be used in carrying out such work.  The
qualifications of the persons undertaking the work for
Respondent(s) shall be subject to EPA's review,  for verification
that such persons meet minimum technical background and
experience requirements.  This Order is contingent on
Respondent(s)'  demonstration to EPA's satisfaction that
Respondent(s) is qualified to perform properly and promptly the
actions set forth in this Consent Order.  If EPA disapproves in
writing of any person(s)' technical qualifications, Respondent(s)
shall notify EPA of the identity and qualifications of the
replacement(s)  within 30 days of the written notice.  If EPA
subsequently disapproves of the replacement(s),  EPA reserves the
right to terminate this Order and to conduct a complete RI/FS,
and to seek reimbursement for costs and penalties from
Respondent(s).   During the course of the RI/FS,  Respondent(s)
shall notify EPA in writing of any changes or additions in the
personnel used to carry out such work, providing their names,
titles, and qualifications.  EPA shall have the same right to
approve changes and additions to personnel as it has hereunder
regarding the initial notification.

     24.  Respondent(s) shall conduct activities and submit
deliverables as provided by the attached RI/FS Statement of Work,
which is incorporated by reference, for the development of the
RI/FS.  All such work shall be conducted in accordance with
CERCLA, the NCP, and EPA guidance including,  but not limited to,
the "Interim Final Guidance for Conducting Remedial
Investigations and Feasibility Studies under CERCLA" (OSWER
Directive # 9355.3-01), "Guidance for Data Useability in Risk
Assessment" (OSWER Directive #9285.7-05) and guidances referenced
therein, and guidances referenced in the Statement of Work, as
may be amended or modified by EPA.  The general activities that
Respondent(s) is required to perform are identified below,
followed by a list of deliverables.  The tasks that Respondent(s)
must perform are described more fully in the Statement of Work
and guidances.   The activities and deliverables identified below
shall be developed as provisions in the work plan and sampling
and analysis plan, and shall be submitted to EPA as provided.
All work performed under this Consent Order shall be in
accordance with the schedules herein, and in full accordance with
the standards,  specifications, and other requirements of the work
plan and sampling and analysis plan, as initially approved or
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

modified by EPA, and as may be amended or modified by EPA from
time to time.  For the purposes of this Order, day means calendar
day unless otherwise noted in the Order.

A. Task I; Scoping.  EPA determines the site-specific objectives
of the RI/FS and devises a general management approach for the
site, as stated in the attached Statement of Work.  Respondent(s)
shall conduct the remainder of scoping activities as described in
the attached Statement of Work and referenced guidances.  At the
conclusion of the project planning phase, Respondent(s) shall
provide EPA with the following deliverabless


     1. RI/FS Work Plan.  Within	 days of the effective date
     of this Order, Respondent(s) shall submit to EPA a complete
     RI/FS work plan.  If EPA disapproves of or requires
     revisions to the RI/FS work plan, in whole or in part,
     Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a revised work
     plan which is responsive to the directions in all EPA
     comments, within 	 days of receiving EPA's comments.

     2. Sampling and Analysis Plan.  Within 	 days of the
     effective date of this Order, Respondent(s) shall submit to
     EPA the sampling and analysis plan.  This plan shall consist
     of a field sampling plan (FSP) and a quality assurance
     project plan (QAPjP), as described in the Statement of Work
     and guidances.  If EPA disapproves of or requires revisions
     to the sampling and analysis plan, in whole or in part,
     Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a revised
     sampling and analysis plan which is responsive to the
     directions in all EPA comments,  within 	 days of receiving
     EPA"s commentso

     3. Site Health and Safety Plan.   Within 	 days of the
     effective date of this Order, Respondent(s) shall submit to
     EPA the site health and safety plan.

     Following approval or modification by EPA,  the RI/FS work
     plan and the sampling and analysis plan are incorporated by
     reference herein.

B. Task II; Community Relations Plan.   EPA will prepare a
community relations plan,  in accordance with EPA guidance and the
NCPo  Respondent(s) shall provide information supporting EPA's
community relations programs.

C. Task Ills  Site Characterization.  Following EPA approval or
modification of the work plan and sampling and analysis plan,
Respondent(s)  shall implement the provisions of these plans to
characterize the site.  Respondent(s)  shall complete site

                                6
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

characterization within 	 months of EPA approval or
modification of the work plan and sampling and analysis plan.
Respondent(s) shall provide EPA with analytical data within
days of each sampling activity, in a electronic format (i.e.,
computer disk) showing the location, medium and results.   Within
7 days of completion of field activities, Respondent(s) shall
notify EPA in writing.  During site characterization,
Respondent(s) shall provide EPA with the following deliverables,
as described in the Statement of Work and work plan:

          1.  Technical Memorandum on Modeling of Site
          Characteristics.  Where Respondent(s) proposes that
          modeling is appropriate, within  	 days of the
          initiation of site characterization, Respondent(s)
          shall submit a technical memorandum on modeling of site
          characteristics, as described in the Statement of Work.
          If EPA disapproves of or requires revisions to the
          technical memorandum on modeling of site
          characteristics, in whole or in part, Respondent(s)
          shall amend and submit to EPA a revised technical
          memorandum on modeling of site characteristics which is
          responsive to the directions in all EPA comments,
          within 	 days of receiving EPA's comments.

          2.  Preliminary Site Characterization Summary.   Within
          	 days of completion of the field sampling and
          analysis, as specified in the work plan, Respondent(s)
          shall submit a site characterization summary to EPA.

D.  Draft Remedial Investigation Report  [See Task III of the
attached Statement of Work.]  Within 	 days of receipt,
respondent(s) shall submit a draft remedial investigation report
consistent with the Statement of Work, work plan, sampling and
analysis plan.  If EPA disapproves of or requires revisions to
the remedial investigation report, in whole or in part,
Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a revised remedial
investigation report which is responsive to the directions in all
EPA comments, within 	 days of receiving EPA's comments.

E.  Task IV;  Treatability Studies.  Respondent(s) shall conduct
treatability studies, except where Respondent(s)  can demonstrate
to EPA's satisfaction that they are not needed.  Major components
of the treatability studies include determination of the need for
and scope of studies, the design of the studies,  and the
completion of the studies, as described in the Statement of Work.
During treatability studies, Respondent(s)  shall provide
EPA with the following deliverables:

          1.Identification of Candidate Technologies Memorandum.
          This memorandum shall be submitted within 	 days of
-------
              Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

the effective date of this Order.  If EPA disapproves
of or requires revisions to the technical memorandum
identifying candidate technologies, in whole or in
part, Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a
revised technical memorandum identifying candidate
technologies which is responsive to the directions in
all EPA comments, within 	 days  of receiving EPA's
comments.

2. Treatability Testing Statement of Work.  If EPA
determines that treatability testing is required,
within 	 days thereafter [or as specified by EPA],
Respondent(s) shall submit a treatability testing
statement of work.

3. Treatability Testing Work Plan.  Within 	 days
of submission of the treatability testing statement of
work, Respondent(s) shall submit a treatability testing
work plan, including a schedule.  If EPA disapproves of
or requires revisions to the treatability testing work
plan, in whole or in part, Respondent(s)  shall amend
and submit to EPA a revised treatability testing work
plan which is responsive to the directions in all EPA
comments, within 	 days of receiving EPA's comments.

4.  Treatability Study Sampling and Analysis Plan.
Within 	 days of the identification of the need for a
separate or revised QAPP or FSP,  Respondent(s) shall
submit a treatability study sampling and analysis plan.
If EPA disapproves of or requires revisions to the
treatability study sampling and analysis plan, in whole
or in part,  Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA
a revised treatability study sampling and analysis plan
which is responsive to the directions in all EPA
comments, within 	 days of receiving EPA's comments.

5.  Treatabilitv Study Site Health and Safety Plan.
Within 	 days of the identification of the need for a
revised health and safety plan, Respondent(s)  shall
submit a treatability study site health and safety
plan.

6.  Treatabilitv Study Evaluation Report.  Within 	
days of completion of any treatability testing,
Respondent(s) shall submit a treatability study
evaluation report as provided in the Statement of Work
and work plan.  If EPA disapproves of or requires
revisions to the treatability study report, in whole or
in part, Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a
revised treatab.ility study report which is responsive

                      8
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

          to the directions in all EPA comments, within 	 days
          of receiving EPA's comments.

P.  Task V;  Development and Screening of Alternatives.
Respondent(s) shall develop an appropriate range of waste
management options that will be evaluated through the development
and screening of alternatives, as provided in the Statement of
Work and work plan.  During the development and screening of
alternatives, Respondent(s) shall provide EPA with the following
deliverables:

     1. Memorandum on Remedial Action Objectives.   Within 	
     days of receipt of EPA's baseline risk assessment,
     Respondent(s) shall submit a memorandum on remedial action
     objectives.

     2. Memorandum on Development and Preliminary Screening of
     Alternatives. Assembled Alternatives Screening Results and
     Final Screening.  Within   	 days of submittal of the
     memorandum on remedial action objectives, Respondent(s)
     shall submit a memorandum summarizing the development and
     screening of remedial alternatives, including an
     alternatives array document as described in the Statement of
     Work.

G. Task VI;  Detailed Analysis of Alternatives.  Respondent(s)
shall conduct a detailed analysis of remedial alternatives, as
described in the Statement of Work and work plan.   During the
detailed analysis of alternatives, Respondent(s) shall provide
EPA with the following deliverables and presentation:

     1. Report on Comparative Analysis and Presentation to EPA.
     Within 	 days of submission of a memorandum on the
     development and screening of remedial alternatives,
     Respondent(s) shall submit a report on comparative analysis
     to EPA summarizing the results of the comparative analysis
     performed between the remedial alternatives.   If EPA
     disapproves of or requires revisions to the report on
     comparative analysis, Respondent(s) shall amend and submit
     to EPA a revised report on comparative analysis which is
     responsive to the directions in all EPA comments, within 	
     days of receiving EPA's comments.  Within two weeks of
     submitting the original report on comparative analysis,
     Respondent(s) shall make a presentation to EPA during which
     Respondent(s) shall summarize the findings of the remedial
     investigation and remedial action objectives,  and present
     the results of the nine criteria evaluation and comparative
     analysis, as described in the Statement of Work.
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

          2. Draft Feasibility Study Report.  Within 	 days of
          the presentation to EPA, Respondent(s) shall submit a
          draft feasibility study report which reflects the
          findings in EPA's baseline risk assessment.
          Respondent(s) shall refer to Table 6-5 of the RI/FS
          Guidance for report content and format.   If EPA
          disapproves of or requires revisions to the draft
          feasibility study report in whole or in part,
          Respondent(s) shall amend and submit to EPA a revised
          feasibility study report which is responsive to the
          directions in all EPA comments, within 	 days of
          receiving EPA's comments.  The report as amended, and
          the administrative record, shall provide the basis for
          the proposed plan under CERCLA §§ 113(k)  and 117(a) by
          EPA, and shall document the development and analysis of
          remedial alternatives.

     25.  EPA reserves the right to comment on, modify and direct
changes for all deliverables.  At EPA's discretion, Respondent(s)
must fully correct all deficiencies and incorporate and integrate
all information and comments supplied by EPA either in subsequent
or resubmitted deliverables.

     26.  Respondent(s) shall not proceed further with any
subsequent activities or tasks until receiving EPA approval for
the following deliverables: RI/FS work plan and sampling and
analysis plan, draft remedial investigation report, treatability
testing work plan and sampling and analysis plan,  [delete any of
the foregoing not required as a deliverable] and draft
feasibility study report.  While awaiting EPA approval on these
deliverables, Respondent(s) shall proceed with all other tasks
and activities which may be conducted independently of these
deliverables, in accordance with the schedule set forth in this
Consent Order.

     27.  Upon receipt of the draft F8 report,  EPA will evaluate,
as necessary, the estimates of the risk to the public and
environment that are expected to remain after a particular
remedial alternative has been completed.

     28.  For all remaining deliverables not enumerated above in
paragraph 26, Respondent(s) shall proceed with all subsequent
tasks, activities and deliverables without awaiting EPA approval
on the submitted deliverable.  EPA reserves the right to stop
Respondent(s) from proceeding further, either temporarily or
permanently, on any task, activity or deliverable at any point
during the RI/FS.

     29.  In the event that Respondent(s) amends or revises a
report, plan or other submittal upon receipt of EPA comments, if

                                10
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

EPA subsequently disapproves of the revised submittal, or if
subsequent submittals do not fully reflect EPA's directions for
changes, EPA retains the right to seek stipulated or statutory
penalties; perform its own studies, complete the RI/FS (or any
portion of the RI/FS) under CERCLA and the NCP, and seek
reimbursement from the Respondent(s) for its costs; and/or seek
any other appropriate relief.

     30.  In the event that EPA takes over some of the tasks, but
not the preparation of the RI/FS, Respondent(s) shall incorporate
and integrate information supplied by EPA into the final RI/FS
report.

     31.  Neither failure of EPA to expressly approve or
disapprove of Respondent(s)' submissions within a specified time
period(s), nor the absence of comments, shall be construed as
approval by EPA.  Whether or not EPA gives express approval for
Respondent(s)' deliverables, Respondent(s) is responsible for
preparing deliverables acceptable to EPA.

     32.  Respondent(s) shall, prior to any off-site shipment of
hazardous substances from the site to an out-of-state waste
management facility, provide written notification to the
appropriate state environmental official in the receiving state
and to EPA's Designated Project Coordinator of such shipment of
hazardous substances.  However, the notification of shipments
shall not apply to any such off-site shipments when the total
volume of such shipments will not exceed 10 cubic yards.

     (a)  The notification shall be in writing, and shall include
the following information, where available:  (1) the name and
location of the facility to which the hazardous substances are to
be shipped; (2) the type and quantity of the hazardous substances
to be shipped; (3) the expected schedule for the shipment of the
hazardous substances; and (4) the method of transportation.
Respondent(s) shall notify the receiving state of major changes
in the shipment plan, such as a decision to ship the hazardous
substances to another facility within the same state, or to a
facility in another state.

     (b)  The identity of the receiving facility and state will
be determined by Respondent(s) following the award of the
contract for the remedial investigation and feasibility study.
Respondent(s) shall provide all relevant information, including
information under the categories noted in paragraph 31(a) above,
on the off-site shipments, as soon as practical after the award
of the contract and before the hazardous substances are actually
shipped.
                                11
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

                 IX. EPA'S BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT

     33.  EPA will perform the baseline risk assessment.
Respondent shall support EPA in the effort by providing various
information to EPA as outlined above.  The major components of
the baseline risk assessment include contaminant identification/
exposure assessment, toxicity assessment, and human health and
ecological risk characterization.

EPA will provide, after review of the respondent's site char-
acterization summary, sufficient information concerning the
baseline risks such that the respondents can begin drafting the
feasibility study report and the Memorandum on Remedial Action
Objectives.  This information will normally be in the form of two
or more baseline risk assessment memoranda prepared by EPA.  One
memorandum will generally include a list of the chemicals of
concern for human health and ecological effects and the
corresponding toxicity values.  Another should list the current
and potential future exposure scenarios,  exposure assumptions,
and exposure point concentrations that EPA plans to use in the
baseline risk assessment.  The public, including the potentially
responsible parties, may comment on these memoranda.  However,
the Agency is obligated to respond only to significant comments
that are submitted during the formal public comment period.

After considering any significant comments received, EPA will
prepare a baseline risk assessment report based on the data
collected by the respondents during the site character-
ization.  EPA will release this report to the public at the same
time it releases the final RI report.  Both reports will be put
into the Administrative Record for the site.

EPA will respond to all significant comments on the memoranda or
the baseline risk assessment that are resubmitted during the
formal comment period in the Responsiveness Summary of the Record
of Decision.

                X.  MODIFICATION OF THE WORK PLAN

     34.  If at any time during the RI/FS process, Respondent(s)
identifies a need for additional data, a memorandum documenting
the need for additional data shall be submitted to the EPA
Project Coordinator within 20 days of identification.  EPA in its
discretion will determine whether the additional data will be
collected by Respondent(s) and whether it will be incorporated
into reports and deliverables.

     35.  In the event of conditions posing an immediate threat
to human health or welfare or the environment, Respondent(s)
shall notify EPA and the state immediately.  In the event of

                                12
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

unanticipated or changed circumstances at the site, Respondent(s)
shall notify the EPA Project Coordinator by telephone within 24
hours of discovery of the unanticipated or changed circumstances.
In addition to the authorities in the NCP, in the event that EPA
determines that the immediate threat or the unanticipated or
changed circumstances warrant changes in the work plan, EPA shall
modify or amend the work plan in writing accordingly.
Respondent(s) shall perform the work plan as modified or amended.

     36.  EPA may determine that in addition to tasks defined in
the initially approved work plan, other additional work may be
necessary to accomplish the objectives of the RI/FS as set forth
in the Statement of Work for this RI/FS.  EPA may require that
the Respondent(s) perform these response actions in addition to
those required by the initially approved work plan, including any
approved modifications, if it determines that such actions are
necessary for a complete RI/FS.  Respondent(s) shall confirm its
willingness to perform the additional work in writing to EPA
within 7 days of receipt of the EPA request or Respondent(s)
shall invoke dispute resolution.  Subject to EPA resolution of
any dispute, Respondent(s) shall implement the additional tasks
which EPA determines are necessary.  The additional work shall be
completed according to the standards, specifications, and
schedule set forth or approved by EPA in a written modification
to the work plan or written work plan supplement.  EPA reserves
the right to conduct the work,itself at any point, to seek
reimbursement from Respondent(s), and/or to seek any other
appropriate relief.

                      XI. QUALITY ASSURANCE

     37.  Respondent(s) shall assure that work performed, samples
taken and analyses conducted conform to the requirements of the
Statement of Work, the QAPP and guidances identified therein.
Respondent(s) will assure that field personnel used by
Respondent(s) are properly trained in the use of field equipment
and in chain of custody procedures.

          XII.  FINAL RI/FS. PROPOSED PLAN. PUBLIC COMMENT.
               RECORD OF DECISION. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

     38.  EPA retains the responsibility for the release to the
public of the RI/FS report.  EPA retains responsibility for the
preparation and release to the public of the proposed plan and
record of decision in accordance with CERCLA and the NCP.

     39.  EPA shall provide Respondent(s) with the final RI/FS
report, proposed plan and record of decision.
                                13
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

     
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

     44.  Respondent(s) will verbally notify EPA  at least 15 days
prior to conducting significant field events as described in the
Statement of Work, work plan or sampling and analysis plan.  At
EPA's verbal or written request, or the request of EPA's
oversight assistant, Respondent(s) shall allow split or duplicate
samples to be taken by EPA  (and its authorized representatives)
of any samples collected by the Respondent(s) in  implementing
this Consent Order.  All split samples of Respondent(s) shall be
analyzed by the methods identified in the QAPP.

     45.  At all reasonable times, EPA and its authorized
representatives shall have the authority to enter and freely move
about all property at the site and off-site areas where work, if
any, is being performed, for the purposes of inspecting
conditions, activities, the results of activities, records,
operating logs, and contracts related to the site or
Respondent(s) and its contractor pursuant to this Order;
reviewing the progress of the Respondent(s) in carrying out the
terms of this Consent Order; conducting tests as EPA or its
authorized representatives deem necessary; using a camera, sound
recording device or other documentary type equipment; and
verifying the data submitted to EPA by the Respondent(s) .  The
Respondent(s) shall allow these persons to inspect and copy all
records, files, photographs, documents, sampling and monitoring
data, and other writings related to work undertaken in carrying
out this Consent Order.  Nothing herein shall be  interpreted as
limiting or affecting EPA's right of entry or inspection
authority under federal law.  All parties with access to the site
under this paragraph shall comply with all approved health and
safety plans.

     46.  The Respondent(s) may assert a claim of business
confidentiality covering part or all of the information submitted
to EPA pursuant to the terms of this Consent Order under 40
C.F.R. §2.203, provided such claim is allowed by section
104(e)(7) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §9604(e)(7).  This claim shall be
asserted in the manner described by 40 C.F.R. §2.203(b) and
substantiated at the time the claim is made.  Information
determined to be confidential by EPA will be given the protection
specified in 40 C.F.R. Part 2.  If no such claim accompanies the
information when it is submitted to EPA, it may be made available
to the public by EPA or the state without further notice to the
Respondent(s).  Respondent(s) agrees not to assert
confidentiality claims with respect to any data related to site
conditions, sampling, or monitoring.

     47.  In entering into this Order, Respondent(s) waives any
objections to any data gathered, generated, or evaluated by EPA,
the state or Respondent(s) in the performance or oversight of the
work that has been verified according to the quality

                                15
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures required by the
Consent Order or any EPA~approved work plans or sampling and
analysis plans„   If Respondent(s) objects to any other data
relating to the RI/FS, Respondent(s) shall submit to EPA a report
that identifies and explains its objections, describes the
acceptable uses of the data, if any, and identifies any
limitations to the use of the data.  The report must be submitted
to EPA within 15 days of the monthly progress report containing
the data,

     48.  If the site, or the off-site area that is to be used
for access or is within the scope of the RI/FS, is owned in whole
or in part by parties other than those bound by this Consent
Order, Respondent(s) will obtain, or use its best efforts to
obtain, site access agreements from the present owner(s) within
	days of the effective date of this Consent Order*  Such
agreements shall provide access for EPA, its contractors and
oversight officials, the state and its contractors, and the
Respondent(s) or its authorized representatives, and such
agreements shall specify that Respondent(s) is not EPA's
representative with respect to liability associated with site
activitieso  Copies of such agreements shall be provided to EPA
prior to Respondent(s)°  initiation of field activitieso
Respondent(s)' best efforts shall include providing reasonable
compensation to any off°site property owner.  If access
agreements are not obtained within the time referenced above,
Respondent(s) shall immediately notify EPA of its failure to
obtain access,  EPA may obtain access for the Respondent(s),
perform those tasks or activities with EPA contractors, or
terminate the Consent Order in the event that Respondent(s)
cannot obtain access agreements.  In the event that EPA performs
those tasks or activities with EPA contractors and does not
terminate the Consent Order, Respondent(s) shall perform all
other activities not requiring access to that site, and shall
reimburse EPA for all costs incurred in performing such
activities.  Respondent(s) additionally shall integrate the
results of any such tasks undertaken by EPA into its reports and
deliverables.  Furthermore, the Respondent(s) agrees to indemnify
the U,S, Government as specified in Section XXV of this Order,
Respondent(s) also shall reimburse EPA for all costs and attorney
fees incurred by the United States to obtain access for the
Respondent(s) pursuant to paragraph 70.

              X¥,   DESIGNATED PROJECT  COORDINATORS

     4f>.  Documents including reports,  approvals,  disapprovals,
and other correspondence which must be submitted under this
Consent Order, shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt
requested, to the following addressees or to any other addressees
which the Respondent(s)  and EPA designate in writing;

                                16
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

      (a)  Documents to be submitted to EPA should be sent to
          [indicate number of copies]:

                [EPA Project Coordinator,
                CERCLA Branch]
                US EPA, Region [#],
                [Street, City, State, Zip Code].

      (b)  Documents to be submitted to the Respondent(s) should
          be sent to [include number of copies]:

                [Name, Title,
                Organization,
                Street, City, State, Zip Code].

     50.  On or before the effective date of this Consent Order,
EPA and the Respondent(s) shall each designate their own Project
Coordinator.  Each Project Coordinator shall be responsible for
overseeing the  implementation of this Consent Order.  To the
maximum extent  possible, communications between the Respondent(s)
and EPA shall be directed to the Project Coordinator by mail,
with copies to  such other persons as EPA, the state, and
Respondent(s) may respectively designate.  Communications
include, but are not limited to, all documents, reports,
approvals, and  other correspondence submitted under this Consent
Order.

     51.  EPA and the Respondent(s) each have the right to change
their respective Project Coordinator.  The other party must be
notified in writing at least 10 days prior to the change.

     52.  EPA's Project Coordinator shall have the authority
lawfully vested in a Remedial Project Manager (RPM) and On-Scene
Coordinator  (OSC) by the NCP.  In addition, EPA's Project
Coordinator shall have the authority consistent with the National
Contingency Plan, to halt any work required by this Consent
Order, and to take any necessary response action when s/he
determines that conditions at the site may present an immediate
endangerment to public health or welfare or the environment.  The
absence of the  EPA Project Coordinator from the area under study
pursuant to this Consent Order shall not be cause for the
stoppage or delay of work.

     53.  EPA shall arrange for a qualified person to assist in
its oversight and review of the conduct of the RI/FS, as required
by section 104(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §9604(a).  The oversight
assistant may observe work and make inquiries in the absence of
EPA, but is not authorized to modify the work plan.
                                17
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

                    XVI. OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS

     54.  Respondent(s) shall comply with all laws that are
applicable when performing the RI/FS.  No local, state, or
federal permit shall be required for any portion of any action
conducted entirely on-site, including studies, where such action
is selected and carried out in compliance with section 121 of
CERCLA.

                    XVII.   RECORD  PRESERVATION

     55.  All records and documents in EPA's and Respondent's
possession that relate in any way to the site shall be preserved
during the conduct of this Consent Order and for a minimum of 10
years after commencement of construction of any remedial action.
The Respondent(s)  shall acquire and retain copies of all
documents that relate to the site and are in the possession of
its employees, agents, accountants, contractors, or attorneys.
After this 10 year period, the Respondent(s) shall notify EPA at
least 90 days before the documents are scheduled to be destroyed.
If EPA requests that the documents be saved, the Respondent(s)
shall, at no cost to EPA, give EPA the documents or copies of the
documents.

                    XVIII.  DISPUTE RESOLUTION

     56.  Any disputes concerning activities or deliverables
required under this Order, excluding the baseline risk
assessment, for which dispute resolution has been expressly
provided for, shall be resolved as follows:  If the Respondent(s)
objects to any EPA notice of disapproval or requirement made
pursuant to this Consent Order, Respondent(s) shall notify EPA's
Project Coordinator in writing of its objections within 14 days
of receipt of the disapproval notice or requirement.
Respondent(s)' written objections shall define the dispute, state
the basis of Respondent(s)' objections, and be sent certified
mail, return receipt requested.  EPA and the Respondent(s) then
have an additional 14 days to reach agreement.  If an agreement
is not reached within 14 days, Respondent may request a
determination by EPA's [Branch Chief/Division Director].   The
[Branch Chief's/Division Director's] determination is EPA's final
decision.  Respondent(s) shall proceed in accordance with EPA's
final decision regarding the matter in dispute, regardless of
whether Respondent(s)  agrees with the decision.  If the
Respondent(s) does not agree to perform or does not actually
perform the work in accordance with EPA's final decision, EPA
reserves the right in its sole discretion to conduct the work
itself, to seek reimbursement from the Respondent(s), to seek
enforcement of the decision, to seek stipulated penalties, and/or
to seek any other appropriate relief.

                                18
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

     57.  Respondent(s) is not relieved of its obligations to
perform and conduct activities and submit deliverables on the
schedule set forth in the work plan, while a matter is pending in
dispute resolution.  The invocation of dispute resolution does
not stay stipulated penalties under this Order-

         XIX.  DELAY IN PERFORMANCE/STIPULATED PENALTIES

     58.  For each day that the Respondent(s) fails to complete a
deliverable in a timely manner or fails to produce a deliverable
of acceptable quality, or otherwise fails to perform in
accordance with the requirements of this Order, Respondent(s)
shall be liable for stipulated penalties.  Penalties begin to
accrue on the day that performance is due or a violation occurs,
and extend through the period of correction.  Where a revised
submission by Respondent(s) is required, stipulated penalties
shall continue to accrue until a satisfactory deliverable is
produced.  EPA will provide written notice for violations that
are not based on timeliness; nevertheless, penalties shall accrue
from the day a violation commences.  Payment shall be due within
30 days of receipt of a demand letter from EPA.

     59.  Respondents shall pay interest on the unpaid balance,
which shall begin to accrue at the end of the 30-day period, at
the rate established by the Department of Treasury pursuant to 30
U.S.C. §3717.  Respondents shall further pay a handling charge of
1 percent, to be assessed at the end of each 31 day period,  and a
6 percent per annum penalty charge, to be assessed if the penalty
is not paid in full within 90 days after it is due.

     60.  Respondent(s) shall make all payments by forwarding a
check to:

              U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency
                       Superfund Accounting
                    [insert Regional Lock Box]

     Checks should identify the name of the site,  the site
identification number, the account number, and the title of this
Order.  A copy of the check and/or transmittal letter shall be
forwarded to the EPA Project Coordinator.

     61.  For the following major deliverables, stipulated
penalties shall accrue in the amount of 	 per day, per
violation, for the first seven days of noncompliance; 	 per
day, per violation, for the 8th through 14th day of
noncompliance; 	 per day, per violation,  for the 15th day
through the 30th day; and 	 per day per violation for all
violations lasting beyond 30 days.


                               19
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

     1)   An original and any revised work plan.

     2)   An original and any revised sampling and analysis plan.

     3).   An original and any revised remedial investigation
          report.

     4)   An original and any revised treatability testing work
          plan.

     5)   An original and any revised treatability study sampling
          and analysis plan.

     6)   An original and any revised feasibility study report.

     62.   For the following interim deliverables,  stipulated
penalties shall accrue in the amount of   	 per day, per
violation, for the first week of noncompliance; 	  per day, per
violation, for the 8th through 14th day of noncompliance; 	
per day,  per violation, for the 15th day through the 30th day of
noncompliance; and 	 per day per violation for all violations
lasting beyond 30 days.

     1)   Technical memorandum on modeling of site
          characteristics.

     2)   Preliminary site characterization summary.

     3)   Summary of RI data (electronically formatted),

     4)   Identification of candidate technologies memorandum.

     5)   Treatability testing statement of work.

     6)   Treatability study evaluation report.

     7)   Memorandum on remedial action objectives.

     8)   Memoranda on development and preliminary screening of
          alternatives, assembled alternatives screening
          results, and final screening.

     9)   Comparative analysis report.

     63.   For the monthly progress reports, stipulated penalties
shall accrue in the amount of 	 per day, per violation, for
the first week of noncompliance; 	per day, per violation, for
the 8th through 14th day of noncompliance;  	 per day, per
violation, for the 15th day through the 30th day;  and 	 per
day, per violation, for all violations lasting beyond 30 days.

                                20
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

     64.  Respondent(s) may dispute EPA's right to the stated
amount of penalties by invoking the dispute resolution procedures
under Section XVII herein.  Penalties shall accrue but need not
be paid during the dispute resolution period.  If Respondent(s)
do not prevail upon resolution, all penalties shall be due to EPA
within 30 days of resolution of the dispute.  If Respondent(s)
prevails upon resolution, no penalties shall be paid.

     65.  In the event that EPA provides for corrections to be
reflected in the next deliverable and does not require
resubmission of that deliverable, stipulated penalties for that
interim deliverable shall cease to accrue on the date of such
decision by EPA.

     66.  The stipulated penalties provisions do not preclude EPA
from pursuing any other remedies or sanctions which are available
to EPA because of the Respondent(s)'  failure to comply with this
Consent Order, including but not limited to conduct of all or
part of the RI/FS by EPA.  Payment of stipulated penalties does
not alter Respondent(s)' obligation to complete performance under
this Consent Order.

                        XX.   FORCE  MAJEURE

     67.  "Force majeure", for purposes of this Consent Order,  is
defined as any event arising from causes entirely beyond the
control of the Respondent(s) and of any entity controlled by
Respondent(s), including their contractors and subcontractprs,
that delays the timely performance of any obligation under this
Consent Order notwithstanding Respondent(s)' best efforts to
avoid the delay.  The requirement that the Respondent(s) exercise
"best efforts to avoid the delay" includes using best efforts to
anticipate any potential force majeure event and best efforts to
address the effects of any potential force majeure event (1) as
it is occurring and (2) following the potential force majeure
event, such that the delay is minimized to the greatest extent
practicable.  Examples of events that are not force majeure
events include, but are not limited to, increased costs or
expenses of any work to be performed under this Order or the
financial difficulty of Respondent(s) to perform such work.

     68.  If any event occurs or has occurred that may delay the
performance of any obligation under this Order, whether or not
caused by a force majeure event, Respondent(s) shall notify by
telephone the Remedial Project Manager or,  in his or her absence,
the Director of the Hazardous Waste Management Division, EPA
Region 	, within 48 hours of when the Respondent(s) knew or
should have known that the event might cause a delay.  Within
five business days thereafter, Respondent(s) shall provide in
writing the reasons for the delay; the anticipated duration of

                                21
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

the delay; all actions taken or to be taken to prevent or
minimize the delay; a schedule for implementation of any measures
to be taken to mitigate the effect of the delay; and a statement
as to whether, in the opinion of Respondent(s), such event may
cause or contribute to an endangerment to public health, welfare
or the environment.  Respondent(s) shall exercise best efforts to
avoid or minimize any delay and any effects of a delay.  Failure
to comply with the above requirements shall preclude
Respondent(s) from asserting any claim of force majeure.

     6f>.  If EPA agrees that the delay or anticipated delay is
attributable to force majeure, the time for performance of the
obligations under this Order that are directly affected by the
force majeure event shall be extended by agreement of the
parties, pursuant to section XXVI of this Order, for a period of
time not to exceed the actual duration of the delay caused by the
force majeure event.  An extension of the time for performance of
the obligation directly affected by the force majeure event shall
not, of itself, extend the time for performance of any subsequent
obligation.

     7@.  If EPA does not agree that the delay or anticipated
delay has been ..or will be caused by a force majeure event, or
does not agree with Respondent(s) on the length of the extension,
the issue shall be subject to the dispute resolution procedures
set forth in section XVII of this Order.  In any such proceeding,
to qualify for a force majeure defense, Respondent(s) shall have
the burden of demonstrating by a preponderance of the evidence
that the delay or anticipated delay has been or will be caused by
a force majeure event, that the duration of the delay was or will
be warranted under the circumstances, that Respondent(s) did
exercise or is exercising due diligence by using its best efforts
to avoid and mitigate the effects of the delay, and that
Respondent(s) complied with the requirements of paragraph 66.

     72U  Should Respondent (s) carry the burden set forth in
paragraph 65, the delay at issue shall be deemed not to be a
violation of the affected obligation of this Consent Order.

               XXX. REIMBURSEMENT OF PAST COSTS

[Note that the Agency cannot compromise past costs unless the
consent order is also issued under §122(h)(l), and the
requirements of §122(h)(l) are also met, i.e., prior written
approval of the Attorney General is obtained if the total past
and projected response costs exceed $500,000, excluding
interest.]

     7§»  Within 15 days of the effective date of this Order,
Respondent(s) shall remit a certified or cashiers check to EPA in

                               22
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

the amount of $     , as previously demanded in the RI/FS Special
Notice Letter dated 	, together with interest that has
accrued thereon at the rate of interest specified for the
Hazardous Substances Superfund under CERCLA section 107(a), for
all past response costs incurred by the United States in its
[e.g., conduct of the removal action] at the site from
	[date] to 	[date].

     73.  Checks should be made payable to the Hazardous
Substances Superfund and should include the name of the site, the
site identification number, the operable unit, if any, the
Regional Lock Box Number account number and the title of this
Order.  Checks should be forwarded to:

               U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
                       Superfund Accounting
                  [insert Regional Lock Box]

     74.  A copy of the check should be sent simultaneously to
the EPA Project Coordinator.

       XXII. REIMBURSEMENT OF RESPONSE AND OVERSIGHT COSTS

     75.  Following the issuance of this Consent Order, EPA shall
submit to the Respondent(s) on a periodic basis an accounting of
all response costs including oversight costs incurred by the U.S.
Government with respect to this RI/FS.  Response costs may
include, but are not limited to,  costs incurred by the U.S.
Government in overseeing Respondent(s)' implementation of the
requirements of this Order and activities performed by the
government as part of the RI/FS and community relations,
including any costs incurred while obtaining access.  Costs shall
include all direct and indirect costs, including,  but not limited
to, time and travel costs of EPA personnel and associated
indirect costs, contractor costs,  cooperative agreement costs,
compliance monitoring, including the collection and analysis of
split samples, inspection of RI/FS activities, site visits,
discussions regarding disputes that may arise as a result of this
Consent Order, review and approval or disapproval of reports,
costs of performing the baseline risk assessment,  and costs of
redoing any of Respondent(s)' tasks.  Any necessary summaries,
including, but not limited to EPA's certified Agency Financial
Management System summary data (SPUR Reports), or such other
summary as certified by EPA, shall serve as basis for payment
demands.

     76.  Respondent(s) shall, within 30 days of receipt of each
accounting, remit a certified or cashier's check for the amount
of those costs.  Interest shall accrue from the later of: the
date payment of a specified amount is demanded in writing; or the

                               23
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

date of the expenditure. The interest rate is the rate of
interest on investments for the Hazardous Substances Superfund in
section 107(a) of CERCLA.

     77.  Checks should be made payable to the Hazardous
Substances Superfund and should include the name of the site, the
site identification number, the account number and the title of
this Order.  Checks should be forwarded to:

              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                      Superfund Accounting
                    [insert Regional  Lock  Box]

     78.  Copies of the transmittal letter and check should be
sent simultaneously to the EPA Project Coordinator.

     79.  Respondent(s) agrees to limit any disputes concerning
costs to accounting errors and the inclusion of costs outside the
scope of this Consent Order.   Respondent(s) shall identify any
contested costs and the basis of its objection.  All undisputed
costs shall be remitted by Respondent(s) in accordance with the
schedule set forth above.  Disputed costs shall be paid by
Respondent(s) into an escrow account while the dispute is
pending.  Respondent(s) bears the burden of establishing an EPA
accounting error or the inclusion of costs outside the scope of
this Consent Order.

  XXIII. RESERVATIONS OF RIGHTS  AND REIMBURSEMENT OF  OTHER  COSTS

     80.  EPA reserves the right to bring an action against the
Respondent(s) under section 107 of CERCLA for recovery of all
response costs including oversight costs,  incurred by the United
States at the site that are not reimbursed by the Respondent(s),
any costs incurred in the event that EPA performs the RI/FS or
any part thereof, and any future costs incurred by the United
States in connection with response activities conducted under
CERCLA at this site.

     81.  EPA reserves the right to bring an action against
Respondent(s) to enforce the past costs and response and
oversight cost reimbursement requirements of this Consent Order,
to collect stipulated.penalties assessed pursuant to section
XVIII of this Consent Order,  and to seek penalties pursuant to
section 109 of CERCLA,  42 U.S.C. §9609.

     82.  Except as expressly provided in this Order, each party
reserves all rights and defenses it may have.  Nothing in this
Consent Order shall affect EPA's removal authority or EPA's
response or enforcement authorities including, but not limited
                                24
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

to, the right to seek injunctive relief, stipulated penalties,
statutory penalties, and/or punitive damages.

     83.  Following satisfaction of the requirements of this
Consent Order, Respondent(s) shall have resolved its liability to
EPA for the work performed by Respondent(s) pursuant to this
Consent Order.  Respondent(s) is not released from liability, if
any, for any response actions taken beyond the scope of this
Order regarding removals, other operable units, remedial
design/remedial action of this operable unit, or activities
arising pursuant to section 121(c) of CERCLA.

                        XXIV.  DISCLAIMER

     84.  By signing this Consent Order and taking actions under
this Order, the Respondent(s) does not necessarily agree with
EPA's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.  Furthermore, the
participation of the Respondent(s) in this Order shall not be
considered an admission of liability and is not admissible in
evidence against the Respondent(s) in any judicial or
administrative proceeding other than a proceeding by the United
States, including EPA, to enforce this Consent Order or a
judgment relating to it.  Respondent(s) retains its rights to
assert claims against other potentially responsible parties at
the site.  However, the Respondent(s)  agrees not to contest the
validity or terms of this Order, or the procedures underlying or
relating to it in any action brought by the United States,
including EPA, to enforce its terms.

                        XXV. OTHER CLAIMS

     85.  In entering into this Order, Respondent(s) waives any
right to seek reimbursement under section 106(b) of CERCLA.
Respondent also waives any right to present a claim under section
111 or 112 of CERCLA.  This Order does not constitute any
decision on preauthorization of funds under section lll(a)(2) of
CERCLA.  Respondent(s) further waives all other statutory and
common law claims against EPA, including,  but not limited to,
contribution and counterclaims, relating to or arising out of
conduct of the RI/FS.

     86.  Nothing in this Order shall constitute or be construed
as a release from any claim, cause of action or demand in law or
equity against any person,  firm, partnership, subsidiary or
corporation not a signatory to this Consent Order for any
liability it may have arising out of or relating in any way to
the generation, storage, treatment,  handling, transportation,
release, or disposal of any hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants found at, taken to, or taken from the site.
                                25
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

     87.  Respondent(s) shall bear its own costs and attorneys
fees.

    XXVI. FINANCIAL ASSURANCE. INSURANCE. AND INDEMNIFICATION

     88.  Respondent(s) shall establish and maintain a financial
instrument or trust account or other financial mechanism
acceptable to EPA, funded sufficiently to perform the work and
any other obligations required under this Consent Order,
including a margin for cost overruns.  Within 15 days after the
effective date of this Consent Order, Respondent(s) shall fund
the financial instrument or trust account sufficiently to perform
the work required under this Consent Order projected for the
period beginning with the effective date of the Order through
	.  Beginning 	, and on or before the 15th calendar
day of each calendar year quarter thereafter, Respondent(s) shall
fund the financial instrument or trust account sufficiently to
perform the work and other activities required under this Order
projected for the succeeding calendar year quarter.

     89.  If at any time the net worth of the financial
instrument or trust account is insufficient to perform the work
and other obligations under the Order for the upcoming quarter,
Respondent(s) shall provide written notice to EPA within 7 days
after the net worth of the financial instrument or trust account
becomes insufficient.   The written notice shall describe why the
financial instrument or trust account is funded insufficiently
and explain what actions have been or will be taken to fund the
financial instrument or trust account adequately.

     90.  (a)  Prior to commencement of any work under this
Order, Respondent(s) shall secure, and shall maintain in force
for the duration of this Order, and for two years after the
completion of all activities required by this Consent Order,
Comprehensive General Liability ("CGL") and automobile insurance,
with limits of $	 million dollars, combined single limit,
naming as insured the United States.  The CGL insurance shall
include Contractual Liability Insurance in the amount of $	
per occurrence, and Umbrella Liability Insurance in the amount of
$2 million per occurrence.

          (b)  Respondent(s) shall also secure, and maintain in
force for the duration of this Order and for two years after the
completion of all activities required by this Consent Order the
following:

               i.  Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance in
               the amount of $1,000,000.00 per occurrence.
                                26
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

               ii. Pollution Liability Insurance in the amount of
               $1,000,000.00 per occurrence, covering as
               appropriate both general liability and
               professional liability arising from pollution
               conditions.

          (c)  For the duration of this Order, Respondent(s)
shall satisfy, or shall ensure that their contractors or
subcontractors satisfy, all applicable laws and regulations
regarding the provision of employer's liability insurance and
workmen's compensation insurance for all persons performing work
on behalf of the Respondent(s), in furtherance of this Order.

          (d)  If Respondent(s) demonstrates by evidence
satisfactory to EPA that any contractor or subcontractor
maintains insurance equivalent to that described above, or
insurance covering the same risks but in a lesser amount, then
with respect to that contractor or subcontractor Respondent(s)
need provide only that portion of the insurance described above
which is not maintained by the contractor or subcontractor.

           (e)  Prior to commencement of any work under this
Order, and annually thereafter on the anniversary of the
effective date of this Order,  Respondent(s) shall provide to EPA
certificates of such insurance and a copy of each insurance
policy.

     91.  At least 7 days prior to commencing any work under this
Consent Order, Respondent(s)  shall certify to EPA that the
required insurance has been obtained by that contractor.

     92.  The Respondent(s) agrees to indemnify and hold the
United States Government,  its agencies, departments, agents, and
employees harmless from any and all claims or causes of action
arising from or on account of acts or omissions of Respondent(s),
its employees, agents, servants, receivers, successors, or
assignees, or any persons including, but not limited to, firms,
corporations, subsidiaries and contractors, in carrying out
activities under this Consent Order.  The United States
Government or any agency or authorized representative thereof
shall not be held as a party to any contract entered into by
Respondent(s) in carrying out activities under this Consent
Order.

        XXVII.  EFFECTIVE DATE  AND  SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATION

     93.  The effective date of this Consent Order shall be the
date it is signed by EPA.
                                27
-------
                        Annotated OSWER Directive Number 9835.3-2A

     94.  This Consent Order may be amended by mutual agreement
of EPA and Respondent(s).   Amendments shall be in writing and
shall be effective when signed by EPA.  EPA Project Coordinators
do not have the authority to sign amendments to the Consent
Order.

     95.  No informal advice, guidance, suggestions, or comments
by EPA regarding reports,  plans, specifications, schedules, and
any other writing submitted by the Respondent(s) will be
construed as relieving the Respondent(s) of its obligation to
obtain such formal approval as may be required by this Order.
Any deliverables, plans, technical memoranda, reports (other than
progress reports), specifications, schedules and attachments
required by this Consent Order are, upon approval by EPA,
incorporated into this Order.

             XXVIII.    TERMINATION AND SATISFACTION

     96.  This Consent Order shall terminate when the
Respondent(s) demonstrates in writing and certifies to the
satisfaction of EPA that all activities required under this
Consent Order,  including any additional work, payment of past
costs, response and oversight costs,  and any stipulated penalties
demanded by EPA, have been .performed and EPA has approved the
certification.   This notice shall not, however, terminate
Respondent(s)'  obligation to comply with Sections XVI, XXI, and
XXII of this Consent Order.

     97.  The certification shall be signed by a responsible
official representing each Respondent.  Each representative shall
make the following attestation: "I certify that the information
contained in or accompanying this certification is true,
accurate, and complete."  For purposes of this Consent Order, a
responsible official is a corporate official who is in charge of
a principal business function.

BY:	  DATE:	
(Respondent(s))Title
BY;    	   	  DATE:
   Regional Administrator [or Delegatee]
   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                28
-------
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                           AA5nl*,GTCN  0 C  21-160
                                 3 1991
                                   OSWER  Directive  #9834.6
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
FROM:
Policy Towards Owners of Residential Property at
Superfund Sites
Don R. Clay      	
Assistant Administrate
Office of Solid Waste
                                        gency Response
TO:
Raymond B. Ludwisfrewski X.	*M
Acting Assistant''Administrator
Office of Enforcement        I

Regional Administrators, Regions I - X
     This memorandum transmits to you the Agency's  "Policy
Towards Owners of Residential Property at Superfund Sites."

     The guidance sets forth the Agency's enforcement policy
towards owners of residential property located on a Superfund
site under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980  (CERCLA), as amended by
the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986  (SARA).

     This guidance has been developed jointly by the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response and Office of Enforcement.
The guidance reflects input from the Regions, Office of General
Counsel and the Department of Justice.   There have  been several
drafts of this guidance and changes based on comments have been
incorporated.  We thank you for your assistance.

Attachment

cc:  Director, Waste Management Division,
          Regions I, IV, V, and VII
     Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division,
          Region II
     Director, Hazardous Waste Management Division,
          Regions III, VI, VIII, and IX
     Director, Hazardous Waste Division, Region X
     Director, Environmental Services Division,
          Regions I, VI, and VII
     Regional Counsel, Regions I-X
-------
                              OSWER Directive #9834.6
POLICY TOWARDS OWNERS OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
             AT SUPERFUND SITES
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
            Office  of  Enforcement
           Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
                                        OSWER Directive #9834.6

 I.    INTRODUCTION

      A.   Purpose and summary

      This guidance describes EPA's policy for enforcement actions
 to recover response costs or to require response actions under
 the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
 Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Superfund) as amended by the
 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986  (SARA), with
 respect to owners of residential property located on  a Superfund
 site.

      Under this policy, EPA, in the exercise of its enforcement
 discretion, will not take enforcement actions against an owner of
 residential property to require such owner to undertake response
 actions or pay response costs, unless the residential homeowner's
 activities lead to a release or threat of release of  hazardous
 substances, resulting in the taking of a response action at the
 site.   This policy does not apply when an owner of residential
 property fails to cooperate with the Agency's response actions or
 with  a state that is taking a response action under a cooperative
 agreement with EPA pursuant to section 104(d)(l) of CERCLA.  This
 policy also does not apply where the owner of residential
 property fails to meet other CERCLA obligations, or uses the
 residential property in any manner inconsistent with  residential
 use.

      EPA is issuing this policy to address concerns raised by
 owners of residential property, and to provide a nationally
 consistent approach on this issue.

      B.   Background

      Several sites that are the subject of a response action
 (removal or remedial activities) under CERCLA include properties
 that  are used exclusively as single family residences (one-to-
 four  dwelling units).   At several larger sites, soil or ground
water contamination may be so extensive that there are several
hundred of these residential properties located on a  Superfund
 site.

      Some owners of residential property located on a Superfund
 site  are concerned about potential liability for performance of a
response action or payment of cleanup costs because they may come
     1   This policy does not provide an exemption from potential
CERCLA liability for any party;  it  is a statement of the Agency's
enforcement discretion.  Liability  is governed by Section 107 of
CERCLA.
-------
                                2       OSWER Directive #9834.6

within the definition of "owner" under the statute.2  Owners  of
residential property located on a Superfund site have expressed
the concern that they may be unable to sell these properties
because the buyer and the lending institution may also be
concerned about potential liability.

     C.   Past Agency Practice and Basis for Policy

     In the past, the Agency has not required owners of
residential property located on a Superfund site to perform
response actions or pay response costs except where the
residential homeowners' activities lead to a release or threat of
a release of hazardous substances, resulting in the taking of a
response action at the site.3  Despite this general practice,
some owners of residential property have asked EPA for individual
assurances that the Agency not take an enforcement action against
them for performance of the response action or payment of
response costs.  The Agency has not been able to provide
individual owners of residential property with assurances of no
enforcement action outside the framework of a legal settlement,
and this policy does not alter EPA's policy of not providing no
action assurances.4

     This guidance instead constitutes a general statement of
policy regarding the Agency's exercise of enforcement discretion
with respect to owners of residential property located on a
Superfund site.  The purpose of this policy is to continue the
Agency's past practice and to provide guidance for Agency
enforcement staff.

II.  DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS

     The following definitions are applicable for the limited
purposes of this policy, and do not represent the Agency's
interpretation of these or any similar or related statutory terms
in any context other than this policy:
        Under  section  107(a)(1)  of  CERCLA,  a person is liable if
it is the owner or operator of a facility.  42 U.S.C. Section
9607(a)(1).  Under section 101(9)(B) of CERCLA, a facility is
defined to include "any site or area where a hazardous
substance...has...come to be located."  42 U.S.C. Section
9601(9)(B).

     3   The Agency  has required  owners of  residential property to
provide access to the residential property in order to assess the
need for a response action or implement a response action, and to
otherwise cooperate with cleanup activities.

     4   See "Policy Against No Action Assurances." (November 15,
1984) .
-------
                                3       OSWER Directive #9834.6


     o    The term "owner of residential property," means a
          person, as defined under section 101(21) of CERCLA, who
          owns residential property located on a Superfund site,
          and who uses or allows the use of the residential
          property exclusively for residential purposes.  The
          term also includes owners who make improvements that
          are consistent with residential use.  Such term does
          not include 1) any owner who has conducted or permitted
          the generation, transportation, storage, treatment or
          handling of hazardous substances on the residential
          property other than in quantities and uses typical of
          residential uses; 2) any owner who disposes of
          hazardous substances on the residential property
          resulting in the taking of a response action; and 3)
          any owner who acquires or develops the residential
          property for commercial use, or for any other use
          inconsistent with residential use.

     o    The term "residential property," refers to single
          family residences of one-to-four dwelling units,
          including accessory land, buildings or improvements
          incidental to such dwellings which are exclusively for
          residential use.

     o    The phrase "located on a Superfund site" means
          properties that are within an area designated for
          investigation or study under CERCLA, listed as a
          Superfund site on the National Priorities List,
          identified as the subject of planned or current removal
          or remedial activities, where hazardous substances have
          come to be located, or which are subject to or affected
          by a removal or remedial action.

III. STATEMENT OF POLICY

     In implementing CERCLA, EPA may use enforcement discretion
in pursuing potentially responsible parties (PRPs) for
enforcement actions.  It is within the Agency's enforcement
discretion to identify appropriate PRPs to perform response
actions or pay response costs.6

     In the exercise of its enforcement discretion, the Agency
     5  EPA notes that this definition of "residential property"
is consistent with the designation for single family residences
under the National Housing Act, 12 U.S.C. Section 1701.

     6  See generally. Heckler v.  Chanev. 470 U.S.  821 (1985);
U.S. v. Helen Kramer, et al. No. 89-4340  (D.N.J. February 8,
1991).
-------
                                4       OSWER Directive #9834.6

has determined that it will not require owners of residential
property located on a Superfund site to perform a response action
or pay response costs if the owner's activities are consistent
with this policy.   Under this policy,  EPA's exercise of
enforcement discretion will extend to lessees of residential
property provided that the lessees' activities are consistent
with this policy.  This policy also applies to persons who
acquire residential property through purchase, foreclosure, gift,
inheritance or other form of acquisition, as long as those
persons' activities after acquisition are consistent with this
policy.8

     This policy does not apply to an owner of residential
property who has undertaken activities leading to a release or
threat of release of hazardous substances, resulting in the
taking of a response action at the site.9  In such situations,
the Agency would contemplate bringing an enforcement action
against the owner of the residential property to perform a
response action or to pay response costs.  In addition, if an
owner of residential property located on a Superfund site
develops or improves the property in a manner inconsistent with
residential use, or the development of the residential property
leads to a release or threat of release of hazardous substances
resulting in the taking of a response action at the site, then
the owner would not be within the scope of this policy.  Also, if
an owner of residential property fails to provide the Agency with
access to the residential property located on a Superfund site to
evaluate the need for a response action or to implement a
response action, or fails to comply with any other CERCLA
obligations, this policy would not apply.

     This exercise of enforcement discretion applies to owners of
residential property located on a Superfund site who purchased or
     7  Consistent with the Agency's no action assurance policy
(see footnote 4), this policy does not require the Agency to make
prospective determinations of whether particular owners of
residential property meet the requirements of this policy.

     8  If the Agency has perfected a federal lien on the
residential property prior to the acquisition by the new owner,
this policy does not affect the status of that lien.

     9  The Agency's experience has been that in general,
activities which are undertaken consistent with single family
residential use do not lead to a release or threat of a release
of hazardous substances, resulting in a response action being
taken at a site.

     10  See Section  IV of this policy  for a  further  discussion
of other CERCLA obligations.
-------
                                 5       OSWER-Directive #9834.6

 sold  the  residential property  in the past or who purchase or sell
 the residential property  after the  issuance of this policy.
 Whether an  owner  of residential  property has or had knowledge or
 reason to know that contamination was present on the site at the
 time  of purchase  or sale  of the  residential property will not
 affect EPA's exercise of  enforcement discretion under this
 policy.

      This policy  is not based  on, and has no effect on, the
 defenses  to liability available  to  an owner of residential
 property, or any  other person, under section 107(b) of CERCLA.
 This  policy is not related to  the "innocent landowner defense"
 described in sections 107(b)(3)  and 101(35) of CERCLA; it is
 based entirely on EPA's enforcement discretion.  Thus, the
 ability of  an owner of residential  property to assert any defense
 to liability is unaffected by  this  policy.

 IV.   OTHER  CERCLA OBLIGATIONS

      Although the Agency, in the exercise of its enforcement
 discretion, will  not require owners of residential property to
 undertake or pay  for response  actions if the owners' activities
 are consistent with this  policy, to benefit from this policy an
 owner of  residential property  must  comply with other CERCLA
 obligations.

      To come within the scope  of this policy, owners of
 residential property must provide access to the residential
 property  when requested by EPA, or  report information requested
 by the Agency. 1   In addition,  owners of residential property
 must  cooperate with EPA and not  interfere with any of the
 Agency's  activities on the residential property taken to respond
 to the release or threat  of release.  Similarly, owners of
 residential property must cooperate with and not interfere with
 the activities of a state that is taking a response action under
 a cooperative agreement with EPA pursuant to section 104(d)(l) of
 CERCLA.   Moreover, owners of residential property must comply
with  institutional controls placed  on their residential property
 in order  to facilitate performance  of a response action and to
protect human health and  the environment.
     11  The Agency has developed guidance which explains the
authorities and procedures by which EPA obtains access or
information.  See OSWER Directive #9829.2, Entry and Continued
Access under CERCLA (June 5, 1987).  See also OSWER Directive
#9834.4-A, Guidance on Use and Enforcement of CERCLA Information
Requests and Administrative Subpoenas (August 25, 1988).

     12  Institutional controls are conditions or limitations
commonly placed on property by local or state authorities to
ensure that activities (e.g., excavation, construction or other
-------
                                 6       OSWER Directive #9834.6


     Nothing  in  this policy  is  intended to affect any other
obligations required of owners  of residential property or any
other person  under CERCLA or other federal, state and local
laws.    EPA reserves  its authority to  obtain access  and to
enjoin owners of residential property  from interfering with
response actions, and to seek recovery of response costs if
bringing such actions becomes necessary.

     This policy does not change the opportunities available to
owners of residential property  located on a Superfund sit® to
participate in the response  selection  process.  To the extent
such parties  wish to receive individual notice of response
activities, EPA  will provide individual notice of public
meetings, public comment periods or other public participation
activities to owners of residential property which are on the
Agency's community relations mailing list.14  The eligibility of
owners of residential property  for Technical Assistance Grants
under CERCLA  is  also unaffected by this policy.

V.   PURPOSE  AND USE OF THIS GUIDANCE

     This policy and any internal procedures adopted for its
implementation ar@ intended  exclusively as guidance for employees
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  This guidance does
not constitute rulemaking by the Agency and may not be relied
upon to create a right or a  benefit, substantive or procedural,
enforceable at law or in equity, by any person„  The Agency may
take action at variance with this guidance or its internal
implementing  procedures.

VI.  FURTHER  INFORMATION

     For further information concerning this peliey, pl@ag<§
contact Gary  Worttaan in th® Offie® of Wastes Progress Enforcement
at FTS (202)   382=5646, or Patricia Mott in th® Offie® of
Enforceiient at FTS (202) 245=3733„
similar activity) undertaken by th© owner of residential property
do not ©KiieerMt© th© eonditions at th© git©, in      uay
diminish th© effectiveness of a reaedy which has b@®n or is being
implemented, or otherwise present a threat to human health or the
     03                .                   •
        For example,  if th® otmor of  residential
knowledge that a release has t-alson plae® on the residential
property, th© earner swat notify appropriate authorities,,

     16  For ®ach site th© Community Relations  Coordinator  in
each Region Maintain© a community relations mailing list.
-------
             UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                        WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                 1992
                                   OSWER Directive  #  9835.4-2b

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Accelerating Potentially Responsible  Party  Remedial
          Design Starts:   Implementingthe~30-Day Study
FROM:     Bruce M. Diamond, Directc   	
          Office of Waste Programs EnT&r'cement

          William A. ^tt^BT^nTorwraent Counsel  for  Superfund
          Office of Enforcement

TO:       Waste Management Division Directors, Regions  I-X
          Regional Counsel, Regions I-X

     This memorandum implements a recommendation of  the 30-day
study concerning accelerating Remedial Design starts.

SUMMARY OF POLICY

     Regions should use all available opportunities  to  gain
potentially responsible party (PRP) commitment to  start the
Remedial Design (RD) as soon as possible after signature of  a
Record of Decision (ROD).

     At a minimum, when a Region negotiates a Remedial
Design/Remedial Action  (RD/RA) consent decree with a PRP, the
Region should make every effort to secure PRP performance of the
RD no later than upon lodging of a consent decree  in federal
district court.  Regions should use the model language  for this
provision, as set forth in Section VI of the Model Consent Decree
for RD/RA.

     Regions are strongly encouraged  to use other  strategies to
start PRP-lead Rds prior to consent decree lodging.  Examples
include:  amendment of a remedial investigation/feasibility  study
(RI/FS) consent order, negotiation of an RD consent  order, and
stipulation in pending litigation.

BACKGROUND

     In June 1991, the Administrator  requested that  the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response create a task force  to
identify methods for accelerating the pace of Superfund cleanups.
One identified source of cleanup delay is the lapse  of  time
                                                        Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
                                   OSWER Directive #9835.4=2b

                              ~ 2 -

between ROD signature and start of a PRP~lead RD.  A factor in
this delay is the time taken to lodge and enter a consent decree
memorializing PRP commitment to do both RD and RAo  The task
force recommended, in a document informally known as the "30-day
study," that Regions seek and use ways to obtain RD start prior
to the entry of the consent decree,

     Th© current timeframe from signature of a ROD to RD start at
PRP~lead sites can b® significant.  Major events in that period
(ROD~to~RD start) include negotiation with PRPs, preparation and
signature of a consent decree, and lodging and entry of that
decree.  The period after negotiations (successfully) conclude
can be extensive, depending on public comment on the decree,
court calendars, etc.  From the public's perspective, the result
is site cleanup time unnecessarily lost.

     Numerous options are available, depending on the
circumstances of the Region's relationship with PRPs at a
particular site and the complexity or uncertainty of the remedy,
to accelerate RD start substantially in advance of court entry of
a consent decree.
     In 1988, the Agency issued guidance describing several
mechanisms by which a PRP could initiate the RD prior to the
entry of a consent decree, '"Initiation of PRP~financed Remedial
Design in Advance of Consent Deere© Entry,'0 OSWER Directive
#9835.402A (November 18, 1988).  Included in that Directive was
model consent order language.

     In 1991, a Regional-Headquarters workgroup outlined several
innovative ideas for accelerating RD starts where PRPs will b©
performing the response action.  Th© methods identified include
greater us© of administrative orders to start RD shortly after
ROD signature, as well as consent deer©© negotiation strategies
seeking RD start no later than at consent decree lodging.
Headquart©rs discussed these administrative options with th©
Hazardous Wast© Management Branch Chiefs in April 1991 and at the
Section Chiefs meeting in June 1991.

     In June 1991, th© Agency issued th© '"Model CSRCLA RD/RA
Consent Decree," OSWER Directive £983517 (Jun© 21, 1991) (Mod©!
Consent Decree).  The Model Consent Decree provides that
performance of the RD will commence upon lodging of the
agreement.
-------
                                   OSWER Directive #9835.4-2b
STATEMENT OP POLICY

     In negotiating for PRP conduct of site remediation, Regions
should seek PRP commitment to perform RD start as soon after ROD
signature as possible; at a minimum, this should be no later than
upon lodging of a consent decree for RD/RA.

1.   Model Consent Decree RD Language

     If a PRP will be performing the RD/RA through a consent
decree, the Regions should employ the Model Consent Decree
language for performance of RD.  As discussed above, the Model
Consent Decree, Section VI., paragraph 11 (Remedial Design),
provides that RD activities will begin upon lodging of the
consent decree in district court.

     While Regions should include this provision in the great
majority of cases, there may be situations where it may not be
appropriate at a particular site.  For example, if the remedy is
highly controversial and the initiation of RD at lodging of the
consent decree could be seen as inconsistent with full public
participation, the Region may decide not to use the procedures in
this guidance.1 (See section 5  below.)

2.   Administrative Alternatives for Early RD Start.

     Where appropriate, Regions are strongly encouraged to secure
PRP commitment to RD start in advance of consent decree lodging
(i.e., as soon as possible after ROD signature).  For example, if
a PRP performed the RI/FS through an administrative order on
consent and indicates it will perform the RD/RA, it may be
appropriate to amend the completed RI/FS order, to have some or
all of the RD started while overall negotiations for the RD/RA
consent decree continue.2
     1   Please note that  the performance of Remedial Design is not
subject to the public participation procedures under Section 122 (d)
of CERCLA.  The Agency considers  Remedial Design to be a removal
action,  outside  the  scope of  Section  122(d)(l), which  covers
proposed agreements concerning remedial action under Section 106 of
CERCLA.  Thus, while the Agency may voluntarily agree to subject
the terms of the Remedial Design portion of a proposed Section 106
Remedial Design/Remedial  Action  consent decree to the procedures of
section 122(d), there is no legal requirement to do so.

     2   This  administrative  alternative  is  most likely to  be  a
viable option where the PRPs who performed the RI/FS are the same
parties which agree to implement the RD/RA.
-------
                                   OSWER Directive #9835.4=2b
     If a Region receives a good faith offer for the RD/RA during
the special notice process, the Region should consider asking the
PRPs to complete the RD through an administrative order on
consento  This option necessitates issuance of two settlement
documentss an administrative order and consent decree.  Under
this administrative option a Region could negotiate separately
the consent order from th© consent decree or negotiate both
simultaneouslyo  To reduce resources when negotiating the
agreements simultaneously, th© Region could use the consent
decree language agreed upon by th© PRPs as th© basis for several
of the provisions in the administrative order (incorporate these
provisions by reference) .

     A Region may also consider an administrative option if,
after the ROD is issued, a Region continues searching for
additional PRPs to perform the RA=  Settling with several PRPs to
only perform the RD in this situation is appropriate if it would
help to facilitate performance of the RA by other PRPs and would
not delay initiation of the RA.

3 o   Stipulation in Pending Litigation

     When there is pending litigation involving the Agency and
PRPs, and the PRPs agree to perform th© RD/RA through a consent
decree, the PRPs and th© Agency could ©nt©r into a stipulation
filed with the court, whereby the PRPs agree to perform the RD
without waiting for lodging of the consent decree.3

4.   Relationship of Administrative Action to RD/RA Consent
     Decree

     If a Region initially uses an administrative option for the
RD, but then lodges a RD/RA consent decree in court, th© Region
could hav© th© administrative agreement subsumed into th© overall
consent decree upon entry in court.   Another option is to have
the administrative agreement terminate upon court entry of the
consent decree.   Wh©r® performance of th© RD is through an
administrative order, the Region should conduct any unr©solved
RD/RA or RA settlement negotiations and tak© all other steps
possible to ensure minimum delay between completion of the RD and
performance of the RA.  In all cases, the Regions should
implement the administrative action in a manner that avoids delay
of the initiation of
     3  There  is model  language  for the stipulation to perform the
RD.  See "Initiation of PRP~financed  Remedial D©sign in Advanc© of
Consent Decree  Entry/11 OSWER Directive  #9835,,402A  (November 18,
1988).
-------
                                   OSWER Directive #9835. 4~2b
5.   Notification to Headquarters

     In order to maintain national, consistency, if a Region plans
to execute an RD/RA consent decree which does not provide for RD
start, at a minimum, upon lodging of the consent decree, the
Region should verbally notify the Branch Chief, Compliance
Branch, CERCLA Enforcement Division.  In this notification a
Region should delineate any attempts made to secure PRP RD start
prior to entry of the consent decree, and explain why such
efforts were not successful or appropriate at a given site.

PURPOSE AMD USE OF THIS GUIDANCE

     This policy and any internal procedures adopt'ed for its
implementation are intended exclusively as guidance for employees
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  This guidance does
not constitute rulemaking by the Agency and may not be relied
upon to create a right or a benefit, substantive or procedural,
enforceable at law or in equity, by any person.  The Agency may
take action at variance with this guidance or its internal
implementing procedures.

FURTHER INFORMATION

     For further information concerning this memorandum, please
contact Gary Worthman in the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
at FTS (202)  260-5646.

cc:  Henry L. Longest
     Lisa K.  Friedman
     Waste Management Branch Chiefs, Regions l~x
     Regional Counsel Superfund Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X
-------
                                    EPA/540/G-91/0108
                                  Directive No. 9635.1 (c)
   GUIDANCE ON OVERSIGHT OF
POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY
  REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS AND
       FEASIBILITY STUDIES
               Final
   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
        Washington, D,C. 20460
            VOLUME 1
-------
                           ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document was developed by the Guidance and Evaluation Branch of the CERCLA
Enforcement Division in EPA's Office of Waste Programs Enforcement  Matthew
Charsky served as EPA's Project Coordinator. The project was directed by Sally
Mansbach, Acting Director CERCLA Enforcement Division, with the assistance of
Arthur Weissman, Guidance and Evaluation Branch Chief.

The following Regional, State, and Headquarters individuals provided significant input in
the development and review of this document:

      Susan Cange                  EPA, OERR

      Perry Katz                   EPA, Region U
      Patricia Tan                  EPA, Region HI
      Donald Guinyard              EPA, Region IV
      Rick Karl                    EPA, Region V
      Pauletta France-Isetts           EPA, Region VH
      Jeff Rosenbloom              EPA, Region IX
      Wayne Grother               EPA, Region X
      Kevin Cabbie                 EMSL-LV
      John Rotert                  EMSL-LV

      Tony Diecidue                EPA, OWPE
      Carrie Capuco                EPA, OWPE
      Patty Bubar                  EPA, OWPE
      Rashalee Levine              EPA, OWPE
      Steve Hooper                 EPA, OWPE
      Steve Golian                 EPA, OERR
      Phil King                    EPA, OERR/AZ State
      Sandra Conners               EPA, OECM
This handbook was produced by PRC Environmental Management, Inc., under EPA
Contract No. 68-01-7331. Paul Dean served as Project Manager for PRC Environmental
Management, Inc.
-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter                                                             Page

1      OVERSIGHT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES  	   1-1

      INTRODUCTION	   1-1

      1.1    PURPOSE OF OVERSIGHT	   1-2

      1.2    OVERSIGHT PERSONNEL AND RESPONSIBILITIES AT
           ENFORCEMENT-LEAD SITES	   1-3

      1.3    OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES AT STATE-LEAD SITES	  1-13

      1.4    OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES AT FEDERAL FACILITIES	  1-15

      1.5    STANDARDS OF CONDUCT, NONCOMPLIANCE, AND DISPUTE
           RESOLUTION	  1-17

      1.6    SCHEDULE FOR OVERSIGHT	  1-20

      1.7    TOOLS FOR OVERSIGHT	  1-21

2     PRE-RI/FS NEGOTIATION SCOPING	   2-1

      2.1    INTRODUCTION 	   2-1

      2.2    PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM	   2-1

      2.3    TIMEFRAME  	   2-2

      2.4    HOW THE RPM PERFORMS "PRE-SCOPING"	   2-2

      2.5    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 	  2-12

      2.6    RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO RPMS	  2-13

      2.7    HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM	  2-13

3     POST-AOC SCOPING	   3-1

      3.1    INTRODUCTION	   3-1

      3.2    PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM  	   3-1

      3.3    TIMEFRAME	  3-1

      3.4    HOW THE RPM OVERSEES POST-AOC SCOPING 	   3-1

      3.5    DELIVERABLES DURING POST-AOC SCOPING	   3-8

      3.6    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 	  3-11

      3.7    RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM  	  3-12

      3.8    HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM	  3-13
                                   111
-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter                                                              Page

4    SITE CHARACTERIZATION	   4-1

     4.1    INTRODUCTION 	   4-1

     4.2    PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM	   4-1

     4.3    TIMEFRAME 	   4-1

     4.4    HOW THE RPM OVERSEES SITE CHARACTERIZATION  	   4-2

     4.5    DELIVERABLES DURING SITE CHARACTERIZATION  	   4-5

     4.6    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 	   4-7

     4.7    RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM		   4-7

     4.8    HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM	   4-8

5    BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT	   5-1

     5.1    INTRODUCTION	   5-1

     5.2    PURPOSE AND GOAL OF THE BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT 	   5-1

     5.3    TIMEFRAME 	   5-2

     5.4    HOW THE RPM OVERSEES A PRP RISK ASSESSMENT	   5-2

     5.5    DELIVERABLES DURING OVERSIGHT OF A PRP BASELINE RISK
           ASSESSMENT	   5-5

     5.6    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 	   5-6

     5.7    RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO RPMS	   5-7

     5.8    HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM	   5-7

6    TREATABILITY STUDIES	   6-1

     6.1    INTRODUCTION	   6-1

     6.2    PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM	   6-1

     6.3    TIMEFRAME 	   6-2

     6.4    HOW THE RPM OVERSEES TREATABILITY STUDIES 	   6-2

     6.5    DELIVERABLES DURING TREATABILITY STUDIES		   6-5

     6.6    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 	   6-8

     6.7    RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM	 .   6-9

     6.8    HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM	  6-10

                                  iv
-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chanter                                                           Page

7     DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES	  7-1

      7.1    INTRODUCTION  	  7-1

      7.2    PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM	  7-1

      7.3    TIMEFRAME 	  7-2

      7.4    HOW TO OVERSEE THE DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF
           ALTERNATIVES  	  7-3

      7.5    DELIVERABLES DURING DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF
           ALTERNATIVES  	  7-5

      7.6    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 	  7-6

      7.7    RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM	  7-6

      7.8    HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM	  7-7

8     DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES	  8-1

      8.1    INTRODUCTION  	  8-1

      8.2    PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM	  8-1

      8.3    TIMEFRAME 	  8-1

      8.4    HOW TO OVERSEE THE DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES  .  8-1

      8.5    DELIVERABLES DURING THE DETAILED ANALYSIS OF
           ALTERNATIVES  	  8-3

      8.6    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 	  8-4

      8.7    RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM	  8-4

      8.8    HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM	  8-5
-------
                                   LIST OF TABLES
                                                                                    Page
1-1    Capabilities and Specialties of Various Oversight Resources	   1-5

                                   LIST OF FIGURES
Figure                                                                              Page
1-1.    Phased RI/FS Process	   1-4
1-2.    Limits of the Oversight Assistant's Roles  	  1-12
1-3.    Types and Uses of CERCLA Cooperative Agreements	  1-14
1-4.    Usual Dispute Resolution Process	  1-19
1-5.    Recommended RI/FS Process:  Ideal Scenario	  1-22
1-6.    Categories of RI/FS Deliverables  	  1-29
1-7.    Types and Uses of QC Samples       	  1-31
1-8.    Overview of the Process	  1-33
2-1.    Useful Sources of Existing Data	   2-3
2-2.    Overview of the Site File	   2-5
2-3.    General  Physical Conditions	   2-7
2-4.    Basic Description of Contamination  	   2-9
2-5.    Program Overview	  2-11
3-1.    Summary of a Kickoff Meeting 	   3-3
3-2.    Summary of Cost Recovery Documentation	   3-6
3-1    Summary of Administrative Record File	   3-8
3-4.    Elements of Project Plans	   3-9
4-1.    Summary of Tools	   4-4
6-1.    Kinds of Treatability Studies	   6-4
6-2.    Predicted Treatment Effectiveness for Contaminated Soil 	   6-7
8-1.    Summary of Nine Evaluation Criteria	   8-2
                                           VI
-------
                                 LIST OF ACRONYMS
AA
AD
AERIS
AOC
ARARs
ARCS
ATSDR
ATTIC
BBS
BTAG
CA
CD
CDC
CEAM
CEPP
CERCLA

CERCLIS

CLP
COLIS
CORA
CRP
DOC
DOD
DOE
DOI
DOJ
DOL
DOT
DQO
EA
ECAO
EECA
EEM
EIS
E-MAIL
EMSL
EPA or "the Agency"
ERCS
ERIS
ERL
ERT
ESD
EST
FEMA
FIT
FFA
FMO
FSP
HSCD
HEAST
Assistant Administrator
Air Division
Aid for Evaluating the Redevelopment of Industrial Sites
Administrative Order on Consent
Applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements
Alternative Remedial Contract Strategy
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Alternate Treatment Technology Information Center
Bulletin  Board System
Biological Technical Assistance Group
Cooperative Agreement
Consent  Decree
Center for Disease Control
Center for Exposure Assessment Modeling
Chemical Emergency Preparedness Program
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Information System
Contract laboratory program
Computerized On-Line Information Systems
Cost of Remedial Action
Community relations plan
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Energy
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor
Department of Transportation
Data quality objectives
Ecological/environmental assessment
Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office
Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis
Environmental Evaluation Manual
Environmental impact statement
Electronic mail system
Environmental Monitoring System Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Emergency Response Contracting Strategy
Expert Resources Inventory System
Environmental Research Laboratory
Environmental Response Team
Environmental Services Division
Eastern Standard Time
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Field Investigation Team
Federal facility agreement
Financial management office
Field sampling plan
Hazardous Site Control Division
Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables
                                          Vll
-------
HHEM
HHS
HRS
HSP
HWCD
IAG
IFMS
IMC
IRIS
LDR
MCL
MCLG
NCC
NCP
NEIC
NOAA
NPDES
NPL
NPTN
NRC
OE
O&M
OECM
OERR
OFFE
OGC
OHEA
ORC
ORD
OSHA
OSWER
OWPE
PA
PC
PRGs
PRP
PWS
QA/QC
QAPjP
RAGS
RAS
RCRA
RD/RA
REM
RFD
RI/FS
RME
ROD
RPM
RREL
RSKERL
SAP
SAS
       LIST OF ACRONYMS
            (continued)

Human Health Evaluation Manual
Health and Human Services
Hazard Ranking System
Health and safety plan
Hazardous Waste Collection Database
Interagency agreement
Information Management Systems
Information Management Coordinator
Integrated Risk Information System
Land Disposal Restriction
Maximum contaminant level
Maximum contaminant level goal
National Computer Center
National Contingency Plan
National Enforcement Investigations Center
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
National pollutant discharge elimination system
National Priorities List
National Pesticides Telecommunications Network
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Enforcement
Operation and maintenance
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement
Office of General Counsel
Office of Health and Environmental Assessment
Office of Regional Counsel
Office of Research and Development
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
Preliminary assessment
Personal computer
Preliminary remediation goals
Potentially responsible party
Public Water Supply
Quality assurance/quality control
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
Routine analytical sampling
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Remedial design/remedial action
Remedial Engineering Management
Reference dosage
Remedial investigation/feasibility study
Reasonable maximum exposure
Record of decision
Remedial Project Manager
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Sampling and analysis plan
Special analytical sampling
                                          via
-------
                                 LIST OF ACRONYMS
                                      (continued)
SCAP
SCEES
SEAM
SFWS
SGS
SHPO
SI
SIF
SITE
SMOA
SNL
SOP
sow
SPO
SRI
START
TAP
TAT
TSCA
TES
TIX
TRIS
TS
TST
UAO
UIC
USCOE
USDA
USFWS
USGS
WD
WMD
WP
Superfund Comprehensive Action Plan
Site Cost Estimate and Evaluation Study
Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual
State Fish and Wildlife Service
State Geological Survey
State Historic Preservation Office
Site inspection
Site Information Form (CERCLIS)
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program
Superfund Memorandum of Agreement
Special notice letter
Standard operating procedures
Statement of Work
State Project Officer
Superfund Remediation  Information
Superfund Technical Assistance Response Team
Treatability Assistance Program
Technical Assistance Team
Toxic Substances Control Act
Technical Enforcement Support
Technical Information Exchange
Toxic Release Inventory System
Treatability Study
Technical Support Team
Unilateral  Administrative Order
Underground Injection Control
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
United States Department of Agriculture
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
United States Geological Service
Water Division
Waste Management Division
Work Plan
                                           IX
-------
Purpose
                      CHAPTER 1

     OVERSIGHT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES


                   INTRODUCTION

Volume 1 of this document addresses oversight of remedial investigations and
feasibility studies (RI/FSs) conducted by potentially responsible parties (PRPs)
at enforcement-lead sites addressed under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, .Compensation and Liability Act, as amended (CERCLA). It
parallels activities described in the "Guidance for Conducting Remedial
Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA" (OSWER Directive
No. 9355.3-01,  October, 1988, referred to here as the "RI/FS Guidance") and
the "Model Statement of Work for a  Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study Conducted by Potentially Responsible Parties" (OSWER Directive
No. 9835.8, June 2, 1989, referred to here as the "Model SOW for PRP-lead
RI/FSs").  It provides project managers with the  procedures required to
organize and perform appropriate oversight duties and responsibilities. This
document is guidance only; it is not a binding set of requirements and  does not
create rights for any party.

Volume 2 describes the oversight of  sampling and analysis activities (Appendix
Bl) and of well drilling installation activity (Appendix Cl) conducted during a
PRP RI.  Checklists to assist in the documentation of sampling and  analysis
activities and well drilling and  installation activities are also found,
respectively, in Appendices B and C.

For a more in-depth discussion of the entire Superfund Enforcement Program
including removal and remedial actions, refer to the "Enforcement Project
Management Handbook" (OSWER Directive No.  9837.2-A, January 1991).
The handbook addresses the remedial planning and implementation process
from the point of the baseline PRP search (generally conducted after the site is
placed on the National  Priorities List (NPL)), to  the point of completion  of
remedial activity and the site's deletion from the NPL.
Intended
Audience
The intended audience for this document is remedial project managers
(RPMs), although it can be adapted for use by other parties such as States,
PRPs, contractors and other persons involved in the RI/FS process.
Summary of
Chapters and
Appendices
Volume 1
Chapter 1, "Oversight of PRP RI/FS Activities" gives an overview of the
oversight process and the roles and responsibilities of the different
participants.  This chapter also discusses standards of conduct, a schedule for
oversight, and tools available to assist the RPM in performing good oversight.
This chapter is intended for those in the audience with little or no background
in the oversight process.
                                            1-1
-------
                 Chapter 2, "Pre-RI/FS Negotiation Scoping" discusses how an RPM performs
                 site planning with Regional personnel and technical experts prior to
                 negotiations with the PRP.

                 Chapter 3, "Post-AOC  Scoping0 discusses the RPM's detailed site-specific
                 planning of activities during the RI/FS and the PRP's development of Project
                 Plans (for example, Work  Plan, Sampling and Analysis Plan, and Health and
                 Safety Plan) prior to the initiation of field activities.

                 Chapter 4, "Site Characterization" discusses how the RPM oversees PRP-
                 conducted. field activities, with the help of an oversight assistant, in order to
                 gather data that characterizes the site, defines the site risks, and helps to
                 evaluate potential alternatives.

                 Chapter 5, "Baseline Risk  Assessment" discusses the RPM's oversight of PRP-
                 conducted Baseline Risk Assessments begun before June 21, 1990 and provides
                 assistance to the RPM and oversight assistant for all EPA-conducted Baseline
                 Risk Assessments begun after June 21, 1990.

                 Chapter 6, "Treatability Study Task" discusses how the RPM determines the
                 need for treatability studies and oversees the conduct of treatability studies
                 during the RI, which should assist in developing viable alternatives in the FS.

                 Chapter 7, "Development and Screening of Alternatives" discusses the process
                 of using preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) and the data generated during
                 the R! to establish performance standards and then develop alternatives that
                 can satisfy those standards and EPA's nine evaluation criteria.

                 Chapter 8, "Detailed Analysis of Alternatives" discusses the comparison and
                 relative performance of the alternatives against EPA's nine evaluation criteria
                 in order to select am appropriate remedy.

                 Appendix A, Technical Resources Available to RPMs and Oversight
                 Assistants" is a mini-bibliography of technical resources at the Federal, State,
                 and local government levels available to RPMs and oversight assistants.

                 In addition to Volume  1, & companion guidance document containing two
                 appendices is being issued to address the identification and resolution of
                 specific site problems encountered by the RPM during the site characterization
                 task of the RI.
                 Appendix B, "Oversight aad Documentation of Field Activities Including
                 Sampling and Analysis Procedures" describes the activities that the oversight
                 team should conduct during field activities.

                 Appendix C, "Oversight and Documentation of Well Drilling and Installation
                 Activities" describes the activities that the oversight team should conduct
                 during well drilling and construction activities.
LI            PURPOSE OF OVERSIGHT
                 The purpose of oversight is to ensure that an RI/FS prepared by a PRP in an
                 Enforcement-lead response action is equivalent to the RI/FS that EPA would
                 have prepared if the site were Fund-Head. The RI/FS must conform to the


                                            1-2
-------
                 requirements of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
                 Contingency Plan (NCP), applicable Agency guidance, and any existing
                 Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), Consent Decree (CD), or Unilateral
                 Administrative Order (UAO). Through oversight, EPA provides direction,
                 assures quality, and avoids and solves problems in the conduct of the RI/FS
                 (see Figure  1-1, Phased RI/FS Process).

                 Note:   The terms and conditions governing RI/FS activities may be specified
                        in one of three types of settlement documents, an AOC, CD, or UAO.
                        The AOC, however, is the  preferred settlement document.  This
                        guidance will use "AOC" exclusively when referencing a settlement
                        document with the understanding that the term encompasses AOCs,
                        CDs, and UAOs for purposes of this guidance.

                 Under CERCLA Sections 104(a) and 122(a), EPA has the discretion to allow
                 PRPs to perform an RI/FS and to  conduct other response actions.  A recent
                 change in policy for the PRP RI/FS process is that EPA  will not enter into
                 AOCs under which the PRPs  perform the risk assessment component of the
                 RI/FS for new risk assessments as of June 21, 1990 (see Chapter 5.) The
                 RI/FS, even though conducted by the PRP, must still be conducted to EPA's
                 standards.  EPA determines whether the RI/FS is acceptable, not the PRP.
                 Based primarily upon and supported by the RI/FS, EPA  determines if the site
                 warrants remediation and, if so, selects  the remedy.  Overall, EPA is
                 ultimately responsible for ensuring that the response  actions taken at a site
                 protect human health and the environment and meet  statutory requirements for
                 response actions.

                 EPA or an authorized State oversees the conduct of a PRP-lead RI/FS.  A
                 PRP-lead RI/FS must be as comprehensive as a Federally funded RI/FS and
                 must be of comparable quality.  However, because  PRPs do not work  directly
                 for EPA, the way EPA oversees a PRP-lead RI/FS must, in some ways, differ
                 from the RI/FS process at Federally funded NPL sites.  EPA's  oversight
                 authority over PRP-lead RI/FSs includes the ability to enforce the AOC, seek
                 penalties, and ultimately take over the project followed by cost recovery.

                 Good oversight minimizes EPA's need for using judicial enforcement to obtain
                 the quality RI/FS that EPA and the PRPs agreed to in the AOC.  Good
                 planning, continuing review of PRP site activity and deliverables, and regular
                 and effective communications between  EPA and PRPs are key  items for
                 oversight.


1.2          OVERSIGHT PERSONNEL AND RESPONSIBILITIES  AT ENFORCEMENT-
             LEAD SITES

Introduction      The RPM, with support from a contractor (usually Technical Enforcement
                 Support (TES) or Alternative  Remedial  Contract Strategy (ARCS)) that is
                 designated the oversight assistant,  oversees  the RI/FS. RPMs can get further
                 assistance from within EPA, other Federal agencies, and individual State
                 agencies. Together, the RPM, oversight assistant, and additional qualified
                 personnel in EPA or other Federal and State agencies form the oversight team.
                 Table 1 -1 lists sources of assistance available to the RPM and the oversight
                 assistant during specific tasks of the RI/FS process.  Appendix A expands on
                 this table, describes area(s) of expertise, and explains how to access these
                 resources.  For additional information, refer to the "Enforcement Project
                                           1-3
-------
Figure 1-1. Phased RI/FS Process
    FROM:

    • Preliminary Site
     Assessment

    • Site Inspection

    • NPL Listing
                                                                                    REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
          PRE-WF8
     NEGOTIATION SCOPHM
    • Obtain General Under-
     standing of the Site

    • Cotect Existing Data

    • Utilize Technical Support
     Team

    •Visit Site to Identify
     Potential Areas of
     Concern

    • Generate Statement of
     Work

1 •
HOOF
RI/FS
xistingData

SITE
CHARACTERIZATION
• Conduct Field Investigation
• Define Nature and Extent of
Contamination (Waste
Types, Concentrations,
Distributions)
• Identify Federal/State
Chemical and Location-
Specific ARARs
BASELINE
RISK ASSESSMENT
• Collect and Evaluate Data
• Perform Exposure
Assessment
• Perform Toxioity
Assessment
• Characterize Risk
TREATABIUTY
INVESTIGATIONS
• Perform Bench or Pilot
Treatability Tests (As
Necessary)
• Identify Project Needs/
  Operable Unit. Ukely
  Scenario*,and
  Remedial Action
  Objectives

• Initiate Federal/State
   ARAB Identification

• Prepare Project Plans
                                  FEASIBILITY STUDY
  DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING
        OF ALTERNATIVES
• Develop Preliminary Remediation Goals

• Identify Federal/State Action-Specific
 ARARs

• Identify Potential Treatment Technologies,
 Containment/Disposal Requirements for
 Residuals or Untreated Waste

• Screen Technologies

• Assemble Technologies into Alternatives
        DETAILED ANALYSIS
         OF ALTERNATIVES
• Modify Preliminary Remediation Goals

• Further Refine Alternatives (As Necessary)

• Analyze Alternatives Against the Nine
 Criteria

• Compare Alternatives Against Each Other
                                                                                                                           TO:

                                                                                                                           • Remedy Selection

                                                                                                                           • Record of Decision

                                                                                                                           • Remedial Design

                                                                                                                           • Remedial Action
-------
Table 1-1.  Capabilities and Specialities of Various Oversight Resources (Page 1 of 4)
OVERSIGHT
RESOURCES
/F/s/*ys/ww.
EPA Regional Offices and Divisions
Technical Support Team
(TST) or Regional
Equivalent
Environmental Services
Division (ESD)
Peer Review Group
Office of Regional Counsel
Pesticides and Toxics
Division
Water Division
Air Division
Office of Public Affairs
Health Assessment Officer
Risk Advisory Committee
EPA HQ
Office of Waste Programs
Enforcement (OWPE)
Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response
(OERR)
Office of Enforcement -
Superfund Division
Office of General
Counsel
•
•
•
•
o
o
o
*
*
*

o
b
*
.0
•
•
•
*
*
*
«
*
*
*

*
*
*
*
•
•
•

*
*
*
*
*
*

*
*


•
•
•

*
*
*
*
•
•

*
*


•
•
•

*
*
*
*




*


•
•
•
*
*
•
*
*
*



*
*
*

•
•
•
*







*
*
*

                                                                                           Can Provide Direct
                                                                                           Aia stance and
                                                                                           Reviewi;
                                                                                           Comment* on and
                                                                                           Prepaid
                                                                                           Reporu; and Perform!
                                                                                           Held AcJivitiej
                                                                                           Can Provide
                                                                                           Consultation and
                                                                                           Answer Question*
                                                                                        O Can Provide
                                                                                           Additional Data and
                                                                                           Previous Studies
1 As of June 21.1990, EPA's policy is not to enter into AOCs under which PRPs perform the risk assessment component of
 the RI/FS as documented in a memorandum of August 28,1990.
                                                1-5
-------
Table 1-1. Capabilities and Specialities of Various Oversight Resources (Page 2 of 4)
                                                                   PRP-Lead RI/FS Tasks
OVERSIGHT 1
RESOURCES 1
EPA HQ (cont.)
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Assistant Administrator's
Office (OSWER AA)
Other EPA Offices
Office of Research and
Development (ORD)
National Enforcement
Investigations Center (NEIC)
Environmental Response
Team(ERT)
EPA Contracts
Alternative Remedial
Contracting Strategy (ARCS)
Technical Enforcement
Support (TES)
Field Investigation Team
(FIT)
Emergency Response
Contracting Strategy (ERCS)
Other Federal Agencies
Department of
Defense (DOD)
• U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers
Department of Interior
(DOI)
• U.S. Geological Survey
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
• Bureau of Reclamation
X>



o
•
•

•


•
•

o
o
o
o
y/J
/v



0
•
•

•


•
•

o
o
0
0
^ /
/*



•
•
•

•


•
•

o
•
•
•
c/4
/v



•
•
•

•





o
•
•
0
*/*
/<&

*

•

•

•





o
•
r&
/
-------
Table 1-1.  Capabilities and Specialities of Various Oversight Resources (Page 3 of 4)
                                                                   PRP-Lead RI/FS Tasks
OVERSIGHT
RESOURCES
/y/f/.4r/f/jr/^t
r ^ / ^ / *^ / ^ / ** /^ */ ^ „
Other Federal Agencies (cont.)
Department of Interior (cont.)
• Bureau of Mines
• Natural Resources
Trustee
Department of Agriculture
(USDA)
• Soil Conservation
Service
• Forest Service
• Agriculture Stabilization
and Conservation Services
Department of Commerce
• National Oceanic and At-
mospheric Administration
Department of Energy (DOE)
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRQ
Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS)/
Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry
(ATSDR)
Department of Justice (DO J)
Department of Labor
• Occupational Safety and
Health Administration
(OSHA)
Federal Emergency Manage-
ment Agency (FEMA)
Department of
Transportation (DOT)
• U.S. Coast Guard

0
o



o

o
0


o

0
o

o


•

o


u


o


o
o



o

0
o


o

o
o

0


0

o


u


o


%
0



•

•
9


%

o.
o












%


9
0



•

•
9




o
o

•










%


0







o




•
•









•


0


*
*



*

*





*
*




*







0















*
*




*







%

                                                                                           Ltgtnd

                                                                                        l Cm Provide Direct
                                                                                         Assistance and
                                                                                         Reviews;
                                                                                         Comment! on md
                                                                                         Prepares
                                                                                         Reports; and Perform!
                                                                                         Field Activities
                                                                                         Can Provide
                                                                                         Consultation and
                                                                                         Answer Questions
                                                                                      O Can Provide Additional
                                                                                         Data and Previous
                                                                                         Studies
1 As of June 21,1990, EPA's policy is not to enter into AOCs under which PRPs perform the risk assessment component of
 the RI/FS as documented in a memorandum of August 28,1990.
                                              1-7
-------
Table 1-1. Capabilities and Specialities of Various Oversight Resources (Page 4 of 4)
                                                                  PHP-Lead RI/FS Tasks
OVERSIGHT
RESOURCES
State Assistance
State Agency for
Environmental Protection
Public Health Agency
State Attorney General Office
Court Records of Legal Action
State Fish and Wildlife Service
State Soil Conservation Service
State Geological Survey
State Historic Preservation Office
State Highway Department
State/Private Academic
Institutions
Local Assistance
County or City Health
Departments
Local Planning Boards
Chamber of Commerce
Town Engineer
Local Library
Local Well Drilling Companies
Local Airports
Residential and Municipal
Well Logs
//



o
•
o
o
o
0
o
o
o

o
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
* /#
/*



o


o
0
o
*
*
o

o
o

o

•

o
* / <•
/+.



*


•
•
•
*
*
•




•

•
•
o
y / .
/y



•


•
•
•


•

•
•

*




w











•




•




*A
/&<






*
*
*
*











p?





















                                                                                           Ltgtiid

                                                                                         Can Provide Direct
                                                                                         Airiiunce and
                                                                                         Reviewi;
                                                                                         Commenu on and
                                                                                         Prepares
                                                                                         Reports; and Performs
                                                                                         Field Activities
                                                                                         Can Provide
                                                                                         Consultation and
                                                                                         Answer Questions
                                                                                     O Can Provide
                                                                                        Additional Data and
                                                                                        Previous Studies
1 As of June 21,1990, EPA's policy is not to enter into AOCs under which PRPs perform the risk assessment component of
 the RI/FS as documented in a memorandum of August 28,1990.
                                             1-8
-------
                 Management Handbook" (OSWER Directive No. 9837.2-A, January 1991), and
                 Technical Support Services for Superfund Site Remediation - Interim
                 Directory" (Winter 1989).

                 Prospects for a quality PRP RI/FS are greatly enhanced when a PRP fully
                 understands what EPA expects, frequently communicates with EPA, and
                 submits periodic deliverables on a pre-determined schedule.  PRPs need to:

                 •   Maintain records and other project documentation;

                 •   Keep the RPM informed of progress and problems encountered during the
                     required activities through progress reports and meetings; and

                 •   Submit acceptable deliverables within the timetable agreed upon with the
                     lead agency.

                 The extent of oversight responsibilities should be discussed during
                 negotiations, defined in the AOC and its attached Statement of Work (SOW),
                 and implemented as site-specific conditions require.  To further understand
                 oversight responsibilities in their entirety, all  parties involved should
                 thoroughly review, both this chapter as well as Chapters 2 through  8, Appendix
                 A in this  volume and Appendices B and C in  Volume 2,  and the RI/FS
                 Guidance (October 1988).
Remedial
Project
Manager
(RPM)
The RPM is the EPA official with primary responsibility for overseeing all
remedial response actions undertaken by PRPs.  The specific duties of the
RPM may vary from site to site and will generally depend upon the PRP's
commitment to the project and the complexity of the site. The RPM's duties
are discussed, in detail, in Chapter 2 of this manual.

During oversight of a PRP RI/FS, RPMs perform both Regional and other
activities throughout the process, including:

Regional Activities

•  Approve an oversight assistant and manage his/her activities;

•  Identify persons/agencies/extramural resources  with particular expertise
   that will provide technical review of activities and deliverables and agree
   to the scheduled timeframes;

•  Identify the preliminary scope of RI/FS activity;

•  Identify the site-specific activities and deliverables required  from the PRP;

•  Prepare a project schedule for the AOC and monitor PRP adherence;

•  Budget intramural and extramural resources to support the project and
   associated paperwork;

•  Verify that the planned activities will meet NCP requirements, satisfy the
   RI/FS objectives, and satisfy the provisions of relevant guidances;

•  Consult with counsel;
                                            1-9
-------
•  Review all PRP and oversight assistant deliverables to assure quality and
   provide related technical comments;

•  Obtain internal EPA input on specialized matters (for example,
   groundwater contamination, fractured bedrock, contaminants without
   toxicity values);

•  Adhere to EPA schedule for reviewing deliverables or meeting other
   deadlines;

•  Assure that any aspects of the RI/FS performed by EPA are done
   promptly (for example, the risk assessment or, applicable or relevant and
   appropriate requirements (ARAR) analysis);

•  Assure EPA management and legal review at major stages (for example,
   Work Plan, draft RI, proposed plan, and record of decision (ROD));

•  Finalize any supplements to the RI/FS and write the  proposed plan and
   ROD; and

•  Provide monthly updates of budget and project schedule data in the
   CERCLA Information System (CERCLIS) in coordination with Regional
   Information Management Coordinator (IMC).

Other Activities

•  Coordinate with the State and, as appropriate, other agencies (for example,
   Department of Interior (DOI), National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
   Administration (NOAA), Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
   Registry (ATSDR)) on scoping;

•  Conduct scheduled and unscheduled site inspections in conjunction with
   the oversight assistant;

•  Meet with PRPs periodically to communicate EPA's requirements and
   discuss work progress;

•  Maintain communication with the State throughout the RI/FS process with
   an emphasis on understanding State perspective, the State identification of
   ARARs, and the coordination of community relations;

•  Conduct community relations activities, with assistance of the community
   relations coordinator;

•  Maintain the site file, including cost  recovery documentation; and

•  Establish and update periodically the Administrative Record File in
   conjunction with the Office of Regional Counsel (ORC).

Both the RPM's scope of responsibility and authority and the extent of
oversight that will be required during the RI/FS will be addressed in the AOC.
The AOC must include specific provisions for oversight, such as the need  to
address  the reimbursement of Agency oversight costs.
                          1-10
-------
Oversight
Assistant
The oversight assistant is the qualified person, usually a contractor, required
by CERCLA Section 104(a)(l) to assist EPA with oversight.  Qualified persons
have the professional qualifications, expertise, and experience necessary to
provide EPA with the assurance that it can provide effective oversight. EPA
selects the oversight assistant, and services performed by the oversight assistant
are paid for by the lead agency, which receives reimbursement through the
AOC from the PRP.  The oversight assistant typically will be a contractor
(TES or ARCS).  In some cases, the oversight assistant may be provided by a
State through a Cooperative Agreement or by another Federal agency, such as
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USCOE), through an Interagency
Agreement; in both of these cases the oversight assistant can be a State or
Federal contractor.

The RPM has flexibility in defining the oversight assistant's  responsibilities at
the site.  The oversight assistant may be responsible for.

•  Assisting in planning of project scope and schedule (see Chapter 2 and 3);

•  Reviewing existing site information;

•  Monitoring PRP field activities to verify PRP performance in accordance
   with the AOC, consistency  with standard protocols, and use of generally
   accepted scientific and  engineering methods;

•  Reviewing deliverables submitted by the PRPs;

•  Conducting quality assurance tasks;

•  Conducting EPA's  risk  assessment;

•  Drafting any  necessary supplements to the RI/FS;

•  Conducting contingency planning to protect human health and the
   environment in the event of an emergency;

•  Assisting in reproducing documents for the Administrative Record File in
   the Regional office and at the site (decisions on what documents to include
   are made by the RPM in conjunction with ORC);

•  Preparing and assisting in implementing community relations deliverables
   and tasks; and

•  Providing site-specific  information to the Regional IMCs for input into
   CERCLIS.
Limits of the      Figure 1-2 summarizes the limits of the oversight assistant's role. The
Oversight         oversight assistant may be allowed to approve minor deviations in field acti-
Assistant's        vities due to situations beyond the control of the contractor for which there is
Role and          an obvious solution.  For example, these situations may include a change in a
Responsi-         surface water sample location due to an unanticipated decrease in the water
bilities            elevation, flooding of a sample or well location, or the presence of some  other
                  physical obstruction (such as subsurface refusal).  The oversight assistant
                  should contact and obtain the advice of the RPM if the oversight assistant
                  believes there is any question of his or her authority to approve a deviation.
                  The oversight assistant mav not approve deviations from the Work Plans. Only
                  the RPM may approve these changes.
                                            1-11
-------
Figure 1-2.  Limits of the Oversight Assistant's Roles
       The oversight assistant may be authorized to:

          •   Monitor and document activities specified in the AOC, SOW, and
              Work Plan;

          •   Conduct quality assurance activities;

          •   Develop contingency plans for field activities; and

          •   Approve minor deviations that do not affect the site agreement or
              Work Plan.


       The oversight assistant is NOT authorized to:

          •   Approve modifications in the AOC, SOW, or Work Plan;

          •   Undertake any responsibility of the PRP;

          •   Advise or issue directions to any PRP contractor; or

          •   Assume control of any aspect of the RI/FS.
Management      The RPM or oversight assistant may be required to manage a staff of quality
of Site            assurance personnel at sites where several activities are being performed
Activities         concurrently. These personnel generally will be specialists in the activities
                  being performed and will conduct quality assurance tasks, including
                  documenting procedures, obtaining split or duplicate samples, and providing
                  quality assurance tests of materials or workmanship.  The staff may also be
                  responsible for providing health and safety monitoring for the community.
                  Management of the staff will include coordination and designation of each
                  staff member's responsibilities and daily compilation of activity logs and field
                  notes (see Section 1.7).


Contingency      The RPM or oversight assistant is also responsible for contingency planning.
Planning          If there is an unexpected event or emergency, the RPM or oversight assistant
                  should  be prepared to instruct their staffs and take the precautions necessary
                  to protect human health and the environment.  Unexpected events might
                  include accidents, temporarily denied site access, a force majeure event, etc.
                  PRP events that lead to modifications to the Work Plan and disputes are the
                  responsibility of the RPM, not the oversight assistant.
RPM's Review
of Oversight
Assistant's
Responsi-
bilities
Prior to the initiation of site work, and periodically through the RI/FS pro-
cess, the RPM must review with the oversight assistant their respective roles
and responsibilities for the project.  To help ensure continued proper
performance by the oversight assistant, project responsibilities should be
documented in writing. Key areas to cover include:
                                            1-12
-------
1.3
       •  Review of Work Plans and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
          plans;

       •  Review of existing site information;

       •  The frequency of site inspections;

       •  The method of documenting field activities;

       •  The extent of QA/QC (including the number of split, duplicate, and blank
          samples, and review of PRP laboratory work (see Section 1.7.2, and
          Volume 2, Appendix B));

       •  Reporting requirements to the RPM;

       •  Continuing communication between the RPM and oversight assistant; and

       •  Monitoring expenditures.


OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES AT STATE-LEAD SITES
Introduction      CERCLA Section 121(f) and NCP Sections 300.500 to 300.525 require EPA to
                 provide opportunities for meaningful and substantial State involvement in the
                 long-term planning process for all CERCLA remedial actions within a State,
                 and in negotiations with PRPs at CERCLA facilities in that State.  Federal
                 funding may be provided to States to support a broad range of Superfund
                 response activities.  The State's role in overseeing PRP-conducted remedial
                 activities is determined largely during an annual planning process that takes
                 place between EPA and the State. A primary function of this planning process
                 is to determine who will take  the lead responsibility for actions at the NPL
                 sites within the State.
State
Agreements
and Oversight
Activities
       Designation of the State as lead may be embodied in a Superfund
       Memorandum of Agreement (SMOA), a Cooperative Agreement (CA), or some
       other document entered into by EPA and the State.  EPA may designate a State
       the lead responsibility for an enforcement response at any site within its
       jurisdiction, other than a Federal facility. While CAs are legally binding and
       often site specific, SMOAs represent a non-binding, general agreement
       between the State and EPA that establishes their respective  roles at NPL sites
       within that State.  Provided it has demonstrated to EPA the capability to do so,
       the State can have responsibility for the lead role in notifying, negotiating, and
       developing an enforceable  settlement agreement with PRPs  (under State law)
       and overseeing site activities.

       The SMOA, generally, is program-wide, rather than requiring spec if ic- State -
       involvement activities. The nature  of overall EPA/State roles in oversight
       should be outlined in the SMOA and is based on an assessment of the State's
       technical and legal capabilities as well as on its experience in hazardous waste
       management practices.

       Under CERCLA Section 104(dXO,  the CA is the assistance vehicle that
       transfers funds to a State and  documents both EPA's and the State's
       responsibilities for a site.  There are six different kinds of CAs  that
       correspond to the phases of cleanup responses and support.  (See Figure 1-3.)
       EPA will only enter into a CA with the State agency for Superfund response
       (usually the State's pollution control agency) as designated by the State's
       Governor or comparable representative of a political subdivision or Federally
                                           1-13
-------
Figure 1-3.  Types and Uses of CERCLA Cooperative Agreements
       Removal - These CAs are available to fund short-term actions taken to prevent,
       minimize, or mitigate damage and to stabilize a site prior to further response
       actions. Removals can include emergency activities, time-critical activities
       (actions with planning periods of less than 6 months) and actions with planning
       periods of more than 6 months.  Under current Agency policy, the only removal
       actions for which States may have the lead are removals with a planning period of
       more than 6 months. .

       Pre-remedial - These CAs are available to fund Preliminary Assessments (PA) to
       identify a site  and the seriousness of a hazardous substance release, and Site
       Inspections (SI) to eliminate from consideration those releases that pose no threat
       to human health or the environment.

       Remedial - These CAs are available to fund long-term actions taken to prevent,
       minimize, or eliminate exposure and damage to human health and  the
       environment.

       Enforcement - These CAs are available to fund activities to recover costs for
       cleanup from PRPs, to oversee cleanup of a site by PRPs, or to compel a PRP to
       clean up a site (under State law).

       Support Agency - These CAs are available to States, political subdivisions, and
       Federally recognized Indian Tribes to fund management activities that support a
       site-specific non-State-lead response.

       Core Program  - These CAs are available to fund CERCLA program activities that
       are  not assignable to specific sites but are necessary to support participation by a
       State or Federally recognized Indian Tribe in CERCLA response.
                  recognized Indian Tribe.  Enforcement CAs may authorize States with lead
                  responsibilities to undertake such activities as PRP searches, notifications,
                  negotiations, and PRP oversight.  (See 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart O for a listing
                  of all activities eligible for funding under enforcement CAs.)  States, political
                  subdivisions thereof, and Federally recognized Indian Tribes may apply for
                  enforcement CAs and  in doing so must demonstrate that they have the
                  necessary authority, jurisdiction, and administrative capabilities to undertake
                  enforcement actions. States (or political subdivisions or Indian Tribes) must
                  also demonstrate,  prior to receiving any Fund money through a CA for PRP
                  oversight, that they have attempted to obtain this funding from the PRPs
                  themselves.

                  Even if the State does not take the lead in entering into and overseeing an
                  RI/FS settlement agreement, the State may, under certain circumstances,
                  undertake various, mutually agreed upon oversight activities at PRP-lead sites.
                  For example,  States might participate in reviewing Project Plans or draft  and
                  final reports,  overseeing field-related activities, or conducting community
                  relations activities.  The State may receive support agency funding under a
                  CERCLA Section 104(d) CA for performing these activities.  The State's  and
                  EPA's respective roles and responsibilities should be clearly defined in a CA.


                                            1-14
-------
                 Additional information on the States1 role in PRP oversight can be obtained
                 from the NCP (40 CFR Part 300, Subpart F), and 40 CFR  Part 35, Subpart O
                 as promulgated on June 5, 1990.
State
Responsibility
for Oversight
When a State assumes responsibility as the lead agency for overseeing an
Enforcement-lead remedial project, the project is managed by a State Project
Officer (SPO).  The site-specific responsibilities of the SPO are generally the
same as those previously described for the RPM. The RPM, as the
representative of the support agency, may review, comment, and or approve
project deliverables (depending on the terms of the AOC, SMOA, CA, or other
agreements). The RPM may  provide additional assistance such as applicable
guidance or training if the SPO requests it.
Further          For further information regarding CAs (including site-specific, support, and
Information      Core Program), contact EPA's State and Local Coordination Branch in the
                 Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR) at (FTS) 308-8380.  For
                 more information on State roles in enforcement, contact EPA's Guidance and
                 Evaluation Branch in the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE) at
                 (FTS) 475-6771. References for State involvement include the following:

                 •   Subpart F of the NCP (40 CFR 300.500 through 300.525);

                 •   The Agency's administrative rule for Cooperative Agreements and
                     Superfund State Contracts for Superfund Response Actions (40 CFR Part
                     35, Subpart 0); and

                 •   OSWER directives in the 9375.5 series, which pertain to State, political
                     subdivision, and Federally recognized Indian Tribal involvement in  the
                     Superfund program.


1.4        OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES AT FEDERAL FACILITIES

                 Federal facilities are a significant, and unique,  portion of the universe of
                 facilities affected by CERCLA. Federal facilities include military bases,
                 Department of Defense and Department of Energy (DOD and DOE) facilities,
                 DOI facilities, and other government-owned or -operated facilities.  They
                 constitute almost 10 percent of the NPL sites.  Executive Order  12580
                 delegates CERCLA authorities to EPA and other Federal agencies.  Among the
                 delegations contained in this order are CERCLA Section 104 responsibilities.
                 Federal agencies are, in general, authorized to conduct response actions where
                 the release is on, or where the sole source of the release is from,  the Federal
                 facility.

                 At Federal facilities on the NPL, EPA has a statutory consultative role and
                 must both be a party to the interagency agreement under Section 120(e)(2),
                 and approve the final remedy selection that will be contained in the Federal
                 facility's ROD to ensure consistency with EPA's policies and regulations.
                 CERCLA response  actions at all Federal facilities must comply with the
                 standards and  procedures contained in CERCLA and the NCP.  At  Federal
                 facilities not on the NPL, EPA has a more limited role.  EPA has authority to
                 consult with the other Federal agency and to  participate in the final remedy
                 selection if requested by the other agency.  While oversight of Federal
                 facilities should be  to the same degree as oversight of non-Federal PRPs, it is
                                           1-15
-------
                 important to note certain distinctions that may affect the RI/FS.  These
                 distinctions are based on the unique characteristics of Federal facilities:

                 •   The RI/FS will, generally, be conducted under Interagency Agreements
                     (lAGs), also known as Federal Facility Agreements (FFAs), (including as
                     parties Federal facilities, EPA, and where possible, the State — if it
                     chooses to join) rather than under AOCs;

                 •   The RI/FS will usually be conducted by the other Federal agency; EPA, in
                     general, would not conduct the  RI/FS (unless requested to do so, and
                     reimbursed  for doing so, by the other Federal Agency);

                 •   Security clearances may be needed to gain access to parts of the facility for
                     oversight  purposes;

                 •   Exemptions from statutory requirements are  possible  with site-specific
                     Presidential orders for national security concerns;

                 •   Federal facility cleanups are sometimes very  complex and may involve
                     more than one release and concurrent multiple  tenant activities may exist
                     at each site;

                 •   Federal funding for most remedial actions by a Federal facility does not
                     come from the Superfund appropriation to EPA, but out of an
                     appropriation from Congress directly to the Federal agency; and

                 •   Qualifying Federal facilities with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
                     (RCRA) regulated units routinely are listed on  the NPL (at private sites
                     these facilities generally are not listed).


CERCLA         CERCLA Section 120 addresses the application of  CERCLA to both NPL and
Section 120      non-NPL Federal facilities.  EPA has developed, in conjunction with the
                 affected agencies, model language for key provisions of CERCLA FFAs (or
                 lAGs) for DOE (memorandum dated May 27, 1988) and for DOD
                 (memorandum dated June 17, 1988). Other Federal agencies should also be
                 using the model language as  the basis for any IAG.


Further          In response to the unique considerations of Federal facility oversight, EPA
Information      created  the Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement (OFFE). OFFE assists
                 the Regional  media programs in overseeing the Federal agency implementation
                 of CERCLA Section 120 and other statutes.  For further  information regarding
                 Federal agency response programs,  contact the appropriate Regional
                 coordinator in OFFE at (FTS) 475-9801.

                 References concerning Federal facilities  include  the following:

                 •   Federal Facilities Hazardous Waste Compliance Manual, OSWER Directive
                     9992.4, January 18, 1990;

                 •   Executive Order 12580, Superfund Implementation, January 23, 1987;

                 •   Executive Order 12088, Federal Compliance  with Pollution Control
                     Standards, October  13, 1978;
                                           1-16
-------
1.5
                 •  NPL Listing Policy for Federal Facilities, 40 CFR Part 300, 54 Federal
                    Register. March 13, 1989, p. 10520;

                 •  Federal Facilities Negotiations Policy, OSWER Directive No. 9992.3,
                    August 10, 1989;

                 •  Enforcement Actions Under RCRA and CERCLA at Federal Facilities,
                    OSWER Directive No. 9992.0, January 25, 1988;

                 •  Agreement with the Department of Defense --  Model Provisions for
                    CERCLA Federal Facility Agreements, OSWER Directive No. 9992.1,
                    June 7, 1988;

                 •  Elevation Process for Achieving Federal  Facilities Compliance Under
                    RCRA, OSWER Directive No. 9992.la, March 24, 1988;

                 •  Agreement with the Department of Energy -- Model Provisions for
                    CERCLA Federal Facility Agreements, OSWER Directive No. 9992.2,
                    May 27, 1988; and

                 •  Subpart K of the NCP (pending proposal in FY91).
STANDARDS OF CONDUCT, NONCOMPLIANCE, AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Standards of      The individual(s) performing oversight should be aware of certain standards of
Conduct          conduct in addition to their specific responsibilities for the project. Oversight
                 personnel should perform their duties in a professional, responsible, and non-
                 confrontational manner.

                 Differences of opinion between the RPM or oversight assistant and the PRPs
                 or their contractor should be avoided. Any observations or suggestions
                 pertaining to field activities, which the oversight assistant or his/her staff may
                 have, generally should be discussed with the PRP field supervisor before
                 talking to the RPM. It should be noted, however, that there may be
                 circumstances that warrant checking with the RPM first.  In discussions with
                 the field supervisor, the oversight assistant should avoid the appearance of
                 directing or approving work. Discussions with the PRP field supervisor should
                 be documented and reported to the RPM.  For a State-lead site, the oversight
                 personnel should consult the SMOA, CA, or other agreement on the role of the
                 State at the time.


Non-            If, after discussions with the field supervisor, the PRPs or their contractors are
compliance       found not to be in compliance with the site plans, then  the RPM should orally
                 contact the PRPs' project manager. Documentation of the conversation
                 between the RPM and the project manager should be in the form of either a
                 telephone log or meeting notes, whichever is appropriate.  Formal notification
                 of noncompliance follows this final attempt at informal resolution.

                 Disputes do not affect the PRPs' obligations to perform. PRPs must continue
                 to meet their obligations under the AOC while the dispute is pending or risk
                 the imposition of penalties if the  resolution is unfavorable to the PRP.
                                           1-17
-------
                  Formal notification of noncompliance occurs when a written notice of
                  disapproval is sent by the appropriate EPA official (usually a Branch Chief or
                  Division Director) to the appropriate PRP representative.  Procedures for such
                  notification should be spelled out in the AOC.


Dispute           Dispute resolution procedures are negotiated items for each AOC.  If the PRPs
Resolution        object to  EPA's notice of disapproval, they submit their written objections to
                  the designated EPA official (usually a Regional manager)  within the period
                  provided  in the AOC (usually 14 days) requesting formal dispute resolution.
                  Typically,.the parties have 14 days  from EPA's receipt of the PRPs' objections
                  to reach agreement through negotiations.  If an agreement cannot be reached
                  through negotiations, the  RPM must ensure  that a written decision is prepared
                  for signature by the appropriate EPA official (usually a Division Director).
                  This decision is generally final, without the  ability to appeal. Figure  1 -4
                  summarizes the process for resolving disputes.


Settlement        EPA has begun to use consensus-building techniques or settlement facilitation
Facilitation       mechanisms in its dispute resolution processes.  Due to its informal and
                  impartial  nature, settlement facilitation  may help resolve disputes in a manner
                  which restores the parties' ability to work together. This is of particular
                  importance in PRP oversight, since the parties have already reached a
                  settlement agreement and presumably wish to preserve it.  The  use of
                  settlement facilitation is left to the  discretion of the Region and does not have
                  to be specifically provided for in the AOC (although it may be). For  more
                  information, see the "Interim Guidance  on Potentially Responsible Party
                  Participation in Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies" (OSWER
                  Directive No. 9835.la, May 16,  1988).
Remedies
for Non-
compliance
EPA may impose sanctions in the event that dispute resolution is unsuccessful
or if EPA takes over the site. It is advisable that EPA attorneys in the ORC
and OE- Superfund Division be alerted in each instance.  EPA counsel should
be consulted to help determine  the appropriate response to noncompliance.
Types of sanctions available to  the Agency include:

•  Injunctive relief (court order to comply)

•  Stipulated  penalties

•  Statutory penalties

•  Project takeover and subsequent recovery of costs.
Injunctive         If EPA desires PRP performance of the terms of the settlement agreement
Relief            instead of, or in addition to, monetary penalties, EPA may seek a court order
                  compelling performance. Subjecting a PRP to a court order may lead to
                  further sanctions against the PRP for failure to comply with the order.
                                            1-18
-------
Figure 1-4.  Usual Dispute Resolution Process
       Informal Discussion

           •   If work involved is field work, the oversight assistant discusses
              apparent deviation from site agreement or Project Plans with PRP
              field supervisor. If work involved is other than field work, RPM
              discusses deviation with a PRP coordinator.  Where concerns are
              lengthy and very specific (for example, review of a Project Plan),
              initial communication may be in writing.

           •   If in the field, the oversight assistant documents decisions of the
              PRP field supervisor and reports it to the RPM.  The RPM calls the
              PRP project manager regarding the apparent deviation.
              Conversations are documented in telephone log or memorandum.
       Notice of Noncompiiance

           •   EPA provides formal notice of noncompliance in writing.


       Dispute Resolution

           •   PRPs request formal dispute resolution with the Division Director
              with support by the RPM.  (Usually PRPs have  14 days to make the
              request.)

           •   Parties negotiate (usually for up to 14 days).  Region, usually
              Division Director or Branch Chief, issues written decision.


       Remedies for Noocompliance with the Decision

           •   If PRPs fail to comply with EPA's decision, EPA may take action,
              including but not limited to the following: seek stipulated or
              statutory penalties, enforce the decision, or take over the project
              and recover costs incurred in assuming responsibility for the
              response action and for past costs not otherwise recovered.
Stipulated         PRPs may be subject to monetary penalties, in the form of stipulated and
Penalties          statutory penalties, for failure to perform an activity or complete a deliverable
                  of acceptable quality in accordance with the requirements of the AOC. The
                  amount and schedule of stipulated penalties is agreed upon by the parties in
                  the AOC.  The obligations to which stipulated penalties adhere, such as
                  schedule deadlines and deliverables, also are specified in  the order or decree.

                  Additional information on the use of stipulated penalties may be found in the
                  "Model Administrative Order on Consent for RI/FS" (OSWER Directive No.
                  9835.10, January 30, 1990) and the "Guidance on Use of  Stipulated Penalties in
                  Hazardous Waste Cases" (OSWER Directive No. 9835.2b,  September 9, 1987).
                                            1-19
-------
Stototoiry         EPA may seek statutory civil penalties for PRP noncompliance with the AOC.
PenaaBtks          CERCLA Section  106 provides for penalties and Section 107 provides for
                  treble damages for certain violations of AOCs.  In CERCLA Section 109, civil
                  penalties range from $25,000 per violation, to §25,000 per day for each
                  violation, to $75,000 per day for second or subsequent violations.  These
                  penalties may be assessed administratively, after a hearing, or judicially.
                  Depending on the  settlement terms, EPA can seek statutory penalties for any
                  violation of the  AOC, whether or not covered by stipulated penalties.
                  EPA can move to take over all or a portion of the RI/FS by replacing the PRP
Takeover          activities with Fund-financed actions.  To take over the RI/FS, EPA must
                  notify the PRPs that it will undertake the response action, generally citing the
                  applicable provision of the AOC, and issuing a stop-work  order to the PRPs
                  with a notification to the EPA remedial contractors.

                  In issuing stop-work orders, RPMs should be aware that Fund resources may
                  not be immediately available.  But, in the case of PRP actions that
                  immediately threaten human health or the environment, there may be no other
                  course of action than to issue a stop-work order. Once the stop-work order is
                  issued, a Fund-financed RI/FS will be undertaken consistent with EPA
                  funding procedures.

                  In the notice to PRPs and EPA remedial contractors, the effective date of
                  project takeover should be specified and the reason for the takeover provided.
                  In addition, EPA's reservation of rights to seek reimbursement for costs
                  incurred by the United States (or the applicable State) should be reiterated in
                  the notice.  EPA counsei in ORC and OE-Superfund Division should be
                  provided copies of all notices and can assist in determining whether further
                  legal action should result from PRP aoncomplianee.


1.6        SCHEDULE FOE OVERSIGHT

                  RI/FS activities are typically complex and require a significant degree of
                  organization, coordination, and integration to ensure  the development of a
                  product sufficient to determine an appropriate remedial action. Prior to
                  negotiations, EPA, with support from a contractor, will  determine the project
                  scops. After th@ project is scoped. Work Plans will be developed  by PRPs and
                  reviewed ia detail and approved by EPA. At the onset of an RI/FS, greater
                  oversiglht of plaaikg sad proposed fidd work h ascgssary. Th© RPM should
                  identify the oversight activities that must be performed  as well as the
                  individuals who will coaduct them. Th© RPM must ensure ttot these
                  individuals are fully Qualified to oversee th® necessary activities.

                  The specific level of oversight will vary from sits to  site and will  depend on
                  factors such as the complexity of the site or particular components of the
                  RI/FS.  It will also depend 00 the level  of confidence in the technical expertise
                  of the PRPs (or their coatractors) to perform th© work, and performance of
                  PRPs oa prior deliverabtes. Additionally, the level of oversight will vary with
                  the specific activity or task. For example,  the RPM should be oa site to
                  observe sampling activities, particularly coatamiaaat sampliag (as opposed to
                  stratigraphic sampling), well construction, and drilling operations  for at  least
                  th© first several wells. The oversight assistant, however, is responsible for
                  overseeing all site and sample collection activities.  RPM oversight for the
                  initial wells is particularly important to assure that any specified equipment is


                                           1-20
-------
                 used and decontaminated before use and to observe the diligence of the PRPs'
                 geologist and driller. On the basis of the initial well installation, less RPM
                 oversight might be necessary for subsequent drilling operations.

                 In determining the appropriate level of oversight, the RPM also should
                 examine the Work Plan and the SAP, paying particular attention to the PRPs'
                 work schedule. This work schedule should be converted to a timeline (see
                 Figure 1-5 and the "Enforcement Project Management Handbook" (OSWER
                 Directive No. 9837.2-A, January 1991 for  examples of timelines)) so that the
                 critical activities can be identified.  In addition, the AOC should require the
                 PRPs to provide advance notice of sampling events.  Examples of critical
                 activities that occur during the RI/FS include:

                 •   The installation of sampling and monitoring devices (including the
                     establishment of sampling grids);

                 •   Sampling events;

                 •   The use of on-site field analytical techniques; and

                 •   The submittal of draft and final reports and any other major deliverables.

                 In addition to scheduled site visits, some unannounced inspections should be
                 made periodically, particularly during and after adverse weather conditions
                 when site characteristics may change (for example, drainage patterns, wind
                 damage, temperature effects on equipment).

                 Day-to-day interaction between the RPM  and PRPs may be needed,
                 depending on factors such as site complexity, PRP recalcitrance, and quality of
                 performance.  Day-to-day interaction between the RPM and oversight
                 assistant, on the  other hand, may not be required but is strongly suggested.
1.7       TOOLS FOR OVERSIGHT
                 Good PRP oversight throughout the RI/FS process involves the use of a
                 variety of tools available to the RPM. Some of the more important tools
                 include the following:

                 •   Knowing the location of and how to access various kinds of technical
                     assistance in an efficient manner;

                 •   Requiring the amount of PRP documentation necessary to justify (even
                     before a court) why a decision was made, how to approve or disapprove a
                     deliverable, why an activity should be conducted or not, and how the
                     activity performed will generate quality data that can be used to select a
                     remedy;

                 •   Conducting regular meetings'with the PRP (and  their contractors) and, as
                     necessary, with Regional managers, technical experts, the oversight
                     assistant, States, Natural Resource Trustees, and the community to address
                     site-specific concerns;

                 •   Requiring PRPs to submit deliverables,  in a timely manner, that are
                     complete, accurate, and representative of the data obtained; and

                 •   Assuring that the PRP activities satisfy the QA/QC requirements of EPA
                     and the Regional standard operating procedures.

                                           1-21
-------
   Figure 1.5a. Recommended RI/FS Process: Ideal Scenario
   Months
-5
                          -3
                               -2
-1
                 Form
               Committee
                Compile
             Documentation
              RPM
             IS,*    |
             ' Inspection
                      Prepare for Scoping Meeting
    EPA
  General
  Notice/
  Section
  104(e)
                          Document Review
Draft PrelimS>i»y~
    Budget
                         Prepare Draft SOW
                             Prepare Draft SOW
                                  &AOC
                                                            Prepare Special
                                                                Notice
                                                          Send Special Notice
                         [Assess Technotogtee] A schedule Scoping Meeting
                         Determine Potential
                         Treatabmty Studies
                              Develop
                                   ARARs
            Preliminary
                             Preliminary
                          Remediation Goals
 Notify EPA and State Participants

I RPM Site Inspection
                                                   Scoping Meeting
                                                                  RI/FS Negotiation
                                                                   and Moratorium
                                                                                     Moratorium
                                                                                Extension
                                                                              (discretionary)
                                                                                                         Obtain Access
                                                                             Prepare CRP
                                                                                                                                              WP Review
                                                                                                                                                       Accept
                                                                                                                                                        WP
                                                                                                                           Review
                                                                                                                             TS
                                                                                                                            Memo
                                                                                                                                      Notify Natural
                                                                                                                                      Resource Trustees
                                                                                                           Administrative Order on Consent
                 PRPs From Steering Committee Based on General Notice Letter
                                                                                                                         Draft HSP
   PRP
                                                                                                                               | Revise WP
                                                                             RI/FS Negotiation
                                                                              and Moratorium
                                                                                                         Procure Lab
                                                                                   Prepare Draft WP. SAP. QAPjP
                                                                               Procure
                                                                              Contractor
                                                                                                            Extension
                                                                                                          (Discretionary)
   Model
   Order
Dellverables
       Procure Support
       Contractor
                                                                                                          Procure Oversight      Memo
                                                                                                          Contractor (If not       on TS
                                                                                                          Support Contractor)
                                                                                                                                                'tain Draft WP, SAP 4 QAP)P
                             •Pre-RI/FS Negotiation Scoping-
                                                                                          .Post-AOC Scoping.
-------
Figure 1.5b. Recommended RI/FS Process: Ideal Scenario (Continued)
Months
EPA


PRP
Modal
Order
Oellverables
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Conduct On-ate Oversight
I Hold Public Meeting
v Dtvtlop Cost F
1 I I 1 1
1 Data Validation/Review PRP Reports

m lte*n A.4mlnl*tr****» o»*-«*j ciiw


Mobilize


| Son Screening
| Drill Borings
Backgr
Sarra

ound
lies
| Review TS WorKplan | | Accept TS




| Inslal and Develop Weds





Workplan |
i

y
•
Compile/Request ARARs \


GW Screening |

i i
Conduct TS Oversight \


| PRP Data Validation
1 1
Prepare Site Characterization Summary

I


Draft PRP TS WP


I


\


Review Site Characterization



•
Compile ARARs \


| Dratt Exposure Scenario |

Revise TS WP

Procure TS Contractor





•
| Conduct TS \


liil'L. ^TSSOW ^TSWP/SAP JUrtolCh.mte.1, ^
1 NotMlM ^ ^ ^o, con,,.,,,
PRPolTS JlSHSP ,
1 . Site '
i Uinrnon A cr»«r«c»»riiatlon ,
^SlUHoiM "sunumry *


tion (Including Baseline Risk Assessment &


Memo on Expocur* «
Fate and Transport
Environmental
Evaluation PUn
' Continued

-------
Figure 1.5c. Recommended RI/FS Process: Ideal Scenario (Continued)
Months
*
EPA
*
*
^
*
PRP
* <
Model
Order
Dellverables
9 10 11 12 13 14 15








On-sito Oversight
Data Validation



CompHe/RequesI ARARs



Conduct TS Oversight |


Review Draft Exposure Scenario








| Review TS Report




Compile ARARs




Additional Sampling |



| Data Validation







| Prepare Draft Rl |



Conduct TS |




Prepare TS Report








A TS Evaluation Report
          ' Continued
                         . Site Characterization (Including Baseline Risk Assessment & Treatability Sudies).
-------
Figure 1.5d. Recommended RI/FS Process: Ideal Scenario (Continued)
Months
EPA
A
PRP
Model
Order
Dellverablea
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22


Re view Rl

Finalize ARARs

Screening Memo


4 Hold Put


| Accept Rl |
4lc Meeting

Revise Rl |


| Draft FS

Develop Alternative
Screening Memo

Revise TS Report




Review Draft FS |



Draft Proposed Plan |

Accept FS |


Revise FS



Stale Comments


| Hold Public Meeting
Public Comment


\
Respond to
Comments
'

ROD

A Baseline Risk A Draft Rl ^ Comparative Evaluation A Draft FS*
] Assessment* " 'of Alternative* "
A Environmental
i Evaluation Report
A Remedial i
1 Objectives Memo 1 Screening Memo
1 Development and • Detailed .
Alternative* 1 of Alternatives |

-------
Technical        Technical assistance available to the RPM throughout the major tasks of the
Assistance        RI/FS was presented in Table 1-1 of this guidance.  Additional sources may
                 also be found in Appendix A and throughout Chapters 2 through 8, especially
                 in the "Resources Available to the RPM" section of each chapter.
Oversight Records
and Documentation
Preservation of
Records
Under most AOCs, PRPs must preserve all records, documents, and
information of any kind relating to the performance of work at the site for a
minimum of 10 years after commencement of construction of any remedial
action. After the 10-year period, the PRPs should offer the records to the
lead agency before destroying them. This matter is covered in the Model
AOC.
Decision
Records
Records of particular interest include PRP administrative orders, technical and
analytical documentation, and actions or communications either between PRPs
or between PRPs and a lead agency that involved or lead to a decision.
Document control through consistent maintenance of accurate and complete
records, field logs, and laboratory reports should be a key element of all
recordkeeping practices.
Documentation
Accurate documentation is important for use in cost recovery actions and in
remedy challenges to maintain consistency with NCP requirements. EPA's
oversight responsibilities include maintaining records and other project
documentation. The major repositories for maintaining project records are the
site file and the Administrative Record File. The following terminology is
useful in discussing the documentation activities associated with CERCLA
sites:

•   Site File - EPA's master filing system, which contains all documents
    relating to a site. A summary of information about the site file is
    contained in Figure 2-2 of this guidance.

•   Administrative Record File - A subset of the site file, which contains
    those records  that may form the basis of the selected response action. A
    summary of information about  the Administrative  Record File is contained
    in Figure 3-3 of this guidance.

•   Cost Recovery Documentation - The process of accounting for costs
    incurred by EPA that PRPs agree to reimburse under or in connection with
    an oversight contract or AOC.  A summary of information about costs and
    categories of expenditures is contained in Figure 3-2 of this guidance.

•   Activity Reports - The tools that are used by the oversight team to
    document PRP field activities may include all or some of the following
    activity reports:

    -   Field activity report  - assists in identifying the critical field activities
       while also providing  a convenient means to document these activities
       (see checklists in Volume 2, Appendices B and C, on the documenta-
       tion of sampling and well drilling procedures to assist the RPM);
                                           1-26
-------
                         Field logbook - either records facts that are not necessarily included in
                         the field activity report (such as pertinent conversations, explanations
                         of changes, etc.) or substitutes for the field activity report; and,

                         Photographic or video log - illustrates the critical field activities (such
                         as sampling and well construction).

                  Additional information on activity reports is contained in Chapter 4 of this
                  guidance.

                  •   Laboratory Reports - For all fixed, mobile, and local laboratories (used by
                      either EPA or PRPs), specific reporting  requirements should be maintained
                      including chain-of-custody forms and analytical results. These reports
                      should specify the QA procedures and QC parameters (e.g., precision,
                      accuracy, representativeness, completeness, and comparability) that will be
                      met during the testing analysis.  Additional information on the use of
                      laboratories is contained in Chapter 4 of this guidance.

                  •   Progress Reports - The oversight assistant and PRP may be required to
                      submit reports (usually monthly) to the RPM describing all field activities
                      conducted since the ilast report, deliverables submitted since the last report
                      and their review progress, and all QA/QC checks or audits conducted since
                      the last report. Additional information on project status reports is
                      contained in Chapter 3 of this guidance.
Meetings
The oversight team should meet regularly with the PRPs and their field
supervisory personnel to discuss performance, status, problems, and new
discoveries that may develop during the required activities.  Some meetings
between the PRPs and the lead agency should be mandatory and required in
the AOC. However, other meetings may be requested by either the PRPs or
the lead agency at any time.  Generally, meetings are held before the initiation
of work, periodically during field and other activities, prior to each major
task, and following PRP submittal of draft deliverables. Meetings should be
held to  provide direction, informally resolve problems, discuss changes in the
scheduling of activities, or identify deficiencies.  The frequency of meetings is
subject  to Regional discretion in response to PRPs' performance and work.
Examples of some of the types of meetings that the RPM should conduct are
provided in the following sections.
Internal
Scoping
Meeting
A meeting with members of the oversight team, prior to negotiations with the
PRP, to discuss the understanding of the site and identify any specific
concerns of EPA, State, and technical experts.  (See Chapter 2 of this
guidance.)
Kickoff           A meeting of the RPM, oversight assistant, and members of the Technical
Meeting with      Support Team (TST) with the PRPs' project manager and supervisory
PRPs             personnel (including contractors) to discuss respective roles, responsibilities,
                  schedules, and procedures. (See Chapter 3 of this guidance.)
                                            1-27
-------
EPA             A series of meetings to discuss specific concerns during project scoping,
Management      review of the PRP Work Plan, review of the draft RI (and documents
and State         produced during the RI such as EPA's Baseline Risk Assessment, treatability
Review           studies, and identification of ARARs), and review of the FS. (See Chapters 2
Meetings         through 8 of this guidance.)
Project Status
Meetings
Regular meetings with the oversight assistant and members of the Technical
Support Team (TST) to discuss the performance, status, and problems that
develop during each task of the RI/FS.  (See Chapters 2 through 8 of this
guidance.)
Submittal and
Review of
Deliverables
PRPs submit three categories of deliverables. The first are those that need
EPA approval before work can either begin or continue.  The second category
includes interim deliverables that the lead agency has the option to review.
These deliverables allow EPA to receive ongoing reports throughout the
oversight process and assure EPA that the work being performed meets the
terms and conditions of the AOC.  These interim deliverables are generally the
components of a larger draft or final report and allow EPA to identify
potential problems regarding the collection or interpretation of data before
submission of the entire report.  The third category of deliverables involves
review but no approval from the lead agency. These include PRP progress
reports. The purpose of these deliverables is to keep the  project on schedule
within  predetermined timeframes. Figure  1-6 gives examples for each  of the
three categories of RI/FS deliverables as recommended by the Model SOW in
PRP-lead RI/FSs.

Deliverables (including reporting requirements) beyond those required by
EPA's  RI/FS Guidance are appropriate [because of the difference in the
relationship between EPA and the entity conducting the work in a  Fund-
yersus  PRP-lead RI/FS.]  RPMs should point out to PRPs that different
deliverables are required  in the Model SOWs for Fund- and PRP-lead RI/FS.
The deliverables for a given PRP-lead site are specified in the AOC and its
attached SOW.
Project Plans,
Draft and
Final Reports,
and Interim
Deliverables
The Model AOC provides that PRPs submit all Project Plans (Work Plan, SAP,
and HSP), draft and final reports, and interim deliverables to both the lead
and support agency for review. The reports should meet the requirements
described in EPA's RI/FS Guidance and Risk Assessment Guidance.
Specifically, these  reports must conform to the format and content
requirements.  Deficiencies in  the report format or content must be noted so
the PRP can make the appropriate revisions.  In general, the RPM should
contact the PRPs' project manager, rather than the PRPs' contractor, in the
event that the RPM disagrees with any aspect of the report(s).

Note:  EPA should encourage  PRPs to select a single point of contact when
       dealing with EPA on matters concerning oversight of technical
       concerns.  This contact point can be mandated in the AOC and might
       be a PRP or an independent PRP representative.  The use of a single
       contact has proven significantly to reduce communication problems
       between EPA and PRP groups.
                                           1-28
-------
Figure 1-6.  Categories of RI/FS Deliverable**
   Examples of PRP Deliverable; for EPA Review and Approval
   •   Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)
   •   Technical Memorandum on Modeling of Site Characteristics
   •   Technical Memorandum Listing Hazardous Substances and Chemicals of Concern
   •   Technical Memorandum Describing Exposure Scenarios and Fate and Transport Models
   •   Technical Memorandum Listing Toxicological and Epidemiological Studies
   •   Plan for Evaluating Environmental Risk
   •   Ecological/Environmental Assessment
   •   Baseline Risk Assessment (if begun by  PRPs prior to June 21, 1990)
   •   Draft Remedial Investigation (RI) Report
   •   Technical Memorandum Identifying Candidate Technologies
   •   Treatability Testing Work Plan and SAP
   •   Treatability Study Evaluation Report
   •   Technical Memorandum Summarizing Results of Comparative Analysis of Alternatives
   •   Draft Feasibility Study (FS) Report
   •   Final RI Report
   •   Final FS Report
   Examples of Deliverables for EPA Review  and Comment
   •   Site Health and Safety Plan (HSP)
   •   Preliminary Site Characterization Summary
   •   Treatability Testing Statement of Work
   •   Treatability Study Site HSP
   •   Technical Memorandum Documenting  Revised Remedial Action Objectives**
   •   Technical Memorandum on Remedial Technologies, Alternatives and Screening
   Examples of Deliverables for EPA Review
   •   Progress Reports
       Extracted from OWPE's 'Model Statement of Work Conducted by PRPs,' OSWER Directive No. 9835.8, June 2, 1989
       Note: If EPA conducts the Baseline Risk Assessment, this memorandum should be reviewed and approved by EPA.
                                           1-29
-------
                 PRPs may bs requested to submit revisions of draft Project Plans and reports
                 if they do not meet the criteria in the RI/FS Guidance, AOC, or Work Plan.
                 Poor quality reports are a primary cause for delay in the RI/FS and often
                 result in increased oversight costs.  To avoid delays and unnecessary oversight
                 costs, the RPM should meet with the PRPs prior to their submittal of any draft
                 Project Plan or final report to ensure that the report will not  be considered
                 incomplete or of unacceptable  quality.  The RPM must also verify that the
                 draft and final reports are submitted in a timely manner consistent with the
                 schedule of deadlines for deliverables included in the AOC.
                 Performing oversight of QA/QC activities assures the lead agency that the
                 work conducted by PRPs is done properly and that the data collected are of
                 sufficient quality, both to support decisions regarding the method of cleanup
                 and to stand up in court. The purpose of the QA program is to provide
                 detailed plans to guide the work and a mechanism to monitor the quality of
                 that work. The purpose of QC  is to take samples and introduce them into a
                 measurement system at any time during  the site analysis phase of the RI/FS.
Goals of         The goals of QA/QC are:
                  o   Precision - A measurement of the reproducibility of measurements
                     compared to their average  value.  Precision is measured by the use of
                     splits, replicate samples, or co-located samples and field audit samples.

                  o   Accuracy - This measures  the bias in a measurement system by comparing
                     a measured value to a true or standard value. Accuracy is measured by the
                     use of standards, spiked samples, and field audit samples.

                  o   Representativeness - This is the degree to which a sample represents the
                     characteristic of the population being measured. Representativeness is
                     controlled by defining sample protocols and adhering to them throughout
                     the study.

                  o   Completeness -  This is  the ratio of validated data points to the total
                     samples collected.  Comp8©t©raess is achieved through duplicate sampling
                     Comparability - TIiss is th® confidence that one data set can be compared
                     to aaotter. Comparability is achieved through th© us© of standard methods
                     to control the precision sad accuracy of the data sets to be compared by
                     use of field audit samples.
                 The types of QC samples available to assist the RPM are included ira
                 Figure 1-7. The types of QC audits that should b© used by RPMs to document
                 the implementation of adequate QA measures include:

                 o   Performaace Audit - This audit is based on samples with known
                     concentrations and determines whether the analytical measurements system
                     is operating  within established control  limits.

                 o   Technical System Audit - This audit evaluates field operations against the
                                           1-30
-------
Figure 1-7.  Types and Uses of QC Samples
   Field Blank
   Field Rinsate Blank
   Field Rinsate
   Reagent Blank
   Calibration Check
   Standard

   Spiked Extract
    Spiked Sample



    Total Recoverable


    Laboratory Control




    Reextraction


    Split Extract


    Field Splits





    Field Duplicate
    Field Audit
    (Trip Blank)
Exposed  during  sampling  to  detect  accidental  or  incidental
contamination.

Sample  collected after  passing  distilled water  over  the  sampling
preparation   apparatus  after cleaning,  to  check  for  residual
contamination.

Sample  collected after  passing  distilled water  over  the  sampling
preparation   apparatus  after cleaning,  to  check  for  residual
contamination.

Organic-free water sample analyzed as a routine sample to check for
reagent contamination.

A standard material to check instrument calibration.


A separate aliquot of extract to which a known amount of analyte is
added to check for extract  matrix effects on the recovery of added
analyte.

A separate aliquot of sample having an appropriate standard reference
material added to check for sample and extract matrix effects on
recovery. (It is not recommended to spike samples in the field.)

A second aliquot of the sample which is analyzed by a more rigorous
method to check the efficiency of the protocol method.

A sample of known  concentration  (and known to the laboratory)
carried through the analytical procedure to determine overall method
bias. (These samples are also known as internal laboratory audits or
control audits).

A reextraction of the  residue from the first extraction to determine
extraction efficiency.

An additional aliquot of  the extract  which is  analyzed  to  check
injection and instrument reproducibility.

The prepared sample is split into two or more portions to provide blind
duplicates for the analytical laboratory to indicate within-batch error.
(A  third may  be sent  to  a  referee  laboratory to  determine
interlaboratory precision. Such samples are often called replicates).

An additional sample  taken near the field sample to determine total
within-batch measurement  variability.  (Sometimes  called  a  co-
located sample).

A sample of known concentration that  is taken to the field with the
sampling crew, and sent through the sample preparation facility to the
laboratory with  the  field  samples  to detect bias in the  entire
measurement.
    External Laboratory  A sample of known concentration sent directly to the laboratory for
                         analysis.

    Audit                The analyte concentrations are unknown to the laboratory. This type
                         of sample is used to estimate laboratory bias and, external QC of, the
                         laboratory.
    Internal Laboratory
    Audit

    Split Sample
A sample of well-characterized media whose analyte concentrations
are known to the laboratory to be used for internal laboratory QC.

An additional sample analyzed by Environmental Services Division
(BSD) to provide an independent check of the PRP chosen laboratory.
                                            1-31
-------
                  •   Data Quality Audit - This audit evaluates the documentation of data quality
                     indicators  and  determines whether  methods  and  Standard  Operating
                     Procedures (SOPs) in the QA plan were followed and satisfied the data quality
                     objectives.

                  •   Management System Audit - This audit evaluates the laboratory certification
                     program,  QA in field operations, QC  in  the certified  laboratory,  and
                     corrective actions of the entire program.

                  QC of sampling activities should ensure that:

                  •   A sampling protocol on the sampling  objectives, sampling  procedures, and
                     analytical strategies is used;

                  •   Sampling devices must not alter the sample in any way;

                  •   Field QC samples are collected, stored, transported, and  analyzed  in an
                     identical manner to those for site samples;

                  •   Standard collection  procedures surrounding  the location of the sample are
                     used; and

                  •   Samples are preserved between collection and analysis.
Summary   of
the  Oversight
Process
This chapter describes the professionals and resources available to an RPM in
order to perform oversight of an RI/FS conducted by a PRP. The RI/FS should
take place in accordance with all EPA regulations, guidance, and policy regardless
of who conducts the RI/FS. The data are collected to identify site risks, develop
alternatives, select  a preferred remedial alternative,  and  write  a ROD,  as
summarized in Figure 1-8, whether EPA, the State, or the PRP assumes the lead.

The major tasks in performing RPM oversight include the following:

•   Obtain   needed  technical,  administrative,  and  legal  assistance before
    negotiations with a PRP;

•   Document all remedial decisions and keep complete records for all field and
    non-field activities;

•   Contact, as  often as needed, all involved parties;

•   Develop and keep to a workable schedule for activities and deliverables;

•   Ensure that all remedial activities satisfy EPA's QA/QC concerns; and

•   Notify PRPs and, if necessary, EPA counsel of noncompliance.
                                            1-32
-------
     Figure 1-8.  Overview of the Process
 FROM:
  •  Preliminary
    Assessment
  •  Site Inspection
  •  NPL Listing
                                              SITE       '   BASELINE RISK
                                         CHARACTERIZATION  I    ASSESSMENT
                                                        I
 TREATABILITY
INVESTIGATIONS
     PRE-RI/FS
NEGOTIATION SCOPING
      Chapter 2
1

SCOPING OF THE Rl/FS
| Ch*Mor3

1


i
1

i
1
i i
\
\
i
DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING I DETAILED ANALYSIS
OF ALTERNATIVES | QF ALTERNATIVES
1
                                                                                                        TO:
                                                                                                          Remedy Section
                                                                                                          Record of Decmon |
                                                                                                          Remedial Oe»ign
                                                                                                          RemedU Action
                         Specifically, how the RPM uses the available personnel and resources to perform
                         a good oversight during each major task of the RI/FS is the focus of Chapters 2
                         through 8.
                                                       1-33
-------
                                      CHAPTER 2

                          PRE-RI/FS NEGOTIATION SCOPING


2.1            INTRODUCTION

                 Pre-RI/FS negotiation scoping (or "pre-scoping")  is the initial task performed
                 by the RPM with the help of a support contractor.  Although usually there is no
                 enforceable  agreement with the PRP at this time, the  RPM needs to begin
                 developing a site-specific Statement of Work (SOW) that will be attached to the
                 Administrative Order on Consent (AOC). This pre-scoping usually begins several
                 months before a Special Notice Letter (SNL) for an RI/FS has been sent out to
                 the PRP. Pre-scoping usually  is completed when the RPM:

                 •  Visits  the site  to identify  the conditions  of the site, the  effects of
                    contaminants, and the potential areas of concern;

                 •  Obtains a general understanding of the site using the existing information,
                    and determines the general types of data needed to make a remedy selection
                    decision

                 •  Utilizes  a Technical  Support Team (TST) to  assist  on the RI/FS and in
                    executing the tasks of future PRP oversight; and

                 •  Generates a preliminary site-specific SOW to be included in the AOC.

                 Note:  As a reminder, the terms and conditions governing RI/FS activities may
                        also be specified in a CD or a UAO; however, the AOC is the preferred
                        settlement document. In this guidance, AOC, CD, and UAO are treated
                        as synonymous.


2.2            PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM

                 During pre-scoping, the RPM needs to gain a general, not detailed, understanding
                 of the site  conditions using  existing  information.   This understanding will
                 facilitate later negotiations  with the PRPs.  The RPM should determine what
                 additional general and site-specific information will be needed in order to make
                 a remedy selection decision. The RPM must ensure that this information will be
                 obtained during the RI/FS process. The RPM needs to know what the site looks
                 like, what data exist for the site, what is the extent of the contamination, what
                 kind of expertise is needed  on the TST, and what specific data requests should
                 be included  in the SOW and AOC.

                 As a guide  for developing  the site-specific SOW, the RPM should apply the
                 "Model Statement of Work  for a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
                 Conducted by Potentially Responsible  Parties" (OSWER Directive No. 9835.8,
                 June 2,1989), and any Regional Model SOW or Model Work Plan.  In some cases,
                 Regions may prefer to use a Model Work Plan instead of a SOW. By conducting
                 meetings with the support contractor and members of the TST, the RPM should
                 gain the knowledge needed to determine if the SOW satisfies the known needs of
                 the site, including  any concerns specific to the site, and if the SOW addresses
                 items not appropriate to the site.
                                           2-1
-------
                 The site-specific SOW will be included in the negotiated AOC.  As a guide for
                 developing an AOC, the RPM should reference the "Model Administrative Order
                 on Consent for CERCLA Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study"  (OSWER
                 Directive No. 9835.3-1 A, January 30,1990), and any Regional Model Order. The
                 AOC  establishes what is  expected of the PRP throughout  the RI/FS process.
                 Under a revised policy, EPA  will  not enter into AOCs under which  the PRPs
                 perform the risk assessment component of the RI/FS for new risk assessments
                 effective June 21,  1990.  (See "Performance of Risk Assessments in Remedial
                 Investigation/Feasibility Studies (RI/FSs) Conducted by Potentially Responsible
                 Parties (PRPs)" (OSWER Directive No. 9835.15, August 28, 1990.))  The AOC
                 should reflect this development.

                 The goal of pre-scoping is for the  RPM to develop a site-specific SOW, and to
                 use the information gathered to determine the RI/FS scope  and  to plan for the
                 entire RI/FS.  The RPM  should avoid  dealing with  specific details of the site;
                 they will be addressed in the post-AOC scoping task and beyond.  By performing
                 pre-scoping, the RPM will have a better understanding of the  site character-
                 istics.  The RPM should gain a general idea of what information is needed, what
                 activities should be performed, and, therefore, what is expected of the  PRP
                 throughout the RI/FS process.


2.3           TIMEFRAME

                 Once  the support contractor has been procured, the remaining activities in pre-
                 scoping should take a short period of time (for  example,  one  quarter).  The
                 timeframe for pre-scoping will be dependent on the timeframe for  activities
                 among  members of  the  oversight team  that must be coordinated,  the  site
                 complexity, and the availability of existing information.


2.4           HOW THE RPM PERFORMS "PRE-SCOPING"

                 The Model SOW and Model AOC contain specific tasks that need to be performed
                 throughout the RI/FS process.  In order  to gather the background data for
                 overseeing these tasks, the RPM should, at a minimum, perform the following
                 activities.  These activities can reduce the time spent to prepare for settlement
                 negotiations, improve the likelihood of developing a usable site-specific SOW,
                 and help to negotiate an AOC:

                 •  Hire a support contractor;

                 •  Begin coordination with State,  Trustees and other Regional EPA divisions;

                 •  Visit the site;

                 •  Develop a general site management strategy;

                 •  Incorporate EPA's program goal for the remedy selection process;

                 •  Review the PRP's SOW; and

                 •  Provide assistance to ORC in negotiating an AOC.

                 In addition, the RPM should assess the need for several ongoing activities. Each
                 of the RPM's activities are discussed in the following sections.


                                           2-2
-------
Support           Hire a support contractor for technical assistance that includes the following:
Contractor
                  •   Start the procurement process early.  First, the RPM should consider TES
                     contractors, then ARCS contractors, State representatives, or designees
                     from another Federal agency.- The RPM should assure that the contractor
                     period of performance covers the entire RI/FS process and allows for
                     unexpected delays that can occur throughout the RI/FS.

                  Note:  The contractor used for technical support should be checked for any
                        conflict of intent, given a detailed work assignment, and, if acceptable,
                        be the contractor secured for oversight of the entire RI/FS process.

                  •   Review the prior  work of the various support contractors available  to the
                     RPM.  Check with other RPMs who have worked with  these contractors.

                  •   Request that the contractor gather existing site data. See Figure 2-1 for a
                     list of some of the more important data sources that the support contractor
                     should check; see  Figure 2-2 for a.site file — established after the site's
                     NPL placement and in which existing site data should be available --
                     overview. Typical existing data include the following:

                        Aerial and historical photographs;
                     -  Geophysical surveys;
                     -  USGS Topographic Maps;
                     -  Test cores;
                     -  USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Maps;
                     -  Well logs;
                     -  Soil Conservation Service soil surveys; and
                     -  Newspaper  clippings.

                  •   Have  the support  contractor develop  a general conceptual model for the
                     site.  This model should contain a diagram and an explanation of site
                     surface and any geological (hydrogeological) information, source  areas, and
                     potential exposures.  (See "Getting Ready, Scoping the RI/FS" (OSWER
                     Directive No. 9355.3-01 FS1, November 1989), for an example of a
                     conceptual model.)


Coordination      Begin coordination with State, Trustees, other Regional EPA divisions and
                  request assistance from a TST to:

                  •   Assure that the PRPs gather all necessary information pursuant to the
                     Work Plan, as directed by the SOW; contact other EPA divisions (including
                     Regional Counsel), the State, and Natural Resource Trustee and ascertain
                     whether, in addition to the general requirements of the Model SOW,
                     requirements associated with the site particulars need to be added.
                                            2-3
-------
        Figure 2-1. Useful Sources of Existing Data
        Federal Sources of Existing Data*
                                        State Sources of Existing Data
 Local Sources of Existing Data
K>
I
  Preliminary Assessment/Site
  Inspection (PA/SI)
  Hazardous Ranking Scoring (HRS)
  documentation
  Agency for Toxic Substances and
  Disease Registry (ATSDR) health
  assessment
  PRP search — Section 104(e)
  letters — waste-in list — data requests
  to the PRP
  Records on removals and disposal
  practices
• Permits for discharges — Toxic
  Release Inventory System (TRIS)
  National Pollutant Discharge
  Elimination System (NPDES)
  Prior Contract Laboratory Program
  (CLP) work
  RCRA manifests, notifications, and
  permit applications and Sectioti 3007
  information requests
  EPA  databases (see Appendix A)
                                              • EPA-equivalent agency
                                              • Public health agency
                                              • Planning board
                                              • Geological Survey
                                              • Fish and Wildlife Service
                                              • Historic Preservation Office
                                              • Natural Resource Department
• Public library
• Chamber of Commerce
• Public health department
• Planning board
• Town/city hall or court house
• Water authority
• Sewage treatment facility
• Previous site employees/management
• Well drillers
• Residents near site
• Universities (information on local
  areas)
• Historical societies
• Newspaper files
         * Other Federal agencies may also be able to provide data. These are noted on page 2-5.
-------
Figure 2-2.  Overview of the Site File
       Purpose:



       Location:


       Contents:


       Access:
The site file contains an accurate and complete documentation of all site
activities, including records  pertaining to the administration  of the
projects, reports, decision documents, and recoverable costs.
The site file is maintained in the Regions. For State-lead sites, the site
file is kept in the State file location.

PRP reports, oversight reports, oversight assistant reports, field activity
reports, progress reports, and laboratory reports.

Each Region has procedures for opening, compiling, maintaining, closing,
and storing the site file.
                  •   Determine which characteristics of the site will require technical expertise
                     to evaluate.  This may include risk and exposure to human health and
                     environment; soil contamination, leaching, and remediation; complex
                     groundwater systems; topographic limitations; air emissions; mixtures of
                     contaminants; sensitive or protective land use; preservation of natural
                     resources and threatened or endangered species; State concerns more
                     protective than Federal levels; and adverse impacts to the local economy.

                  •   Choose appropriate TST members to address  those areas of concern. These
                     may include personnel from the following resources:

                     -   EPA Regional offices

                         --  Environmental Services Division (ESD)
                         --  Environmental Response Team (ERT)
                         --  Waste Management Division (WMD)
                         r-  Water Division (WD)
                         —  Air Division (AD)
                         —  Public Affairs
                         —  Office of Regional Counsel (ORC)

                         EPA National offices

                         —  Office of Research and Development (ORD)
                         —  National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC)
                         --  Office of Enforcement, Superfund Division

                     -   Other Federal agencies

                         -  ATSDR
                         —  USCOE
                         --  United States Geological Survey (USGS)
                         —  United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
                         --  U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
                         —  NOAA
                         —  DOD
                         --  DOE
                                            2-5
-------
                        ~  Health and Human Services (HHS)
                        --  Department of Justice (DOJ)

                     -   States

                        --  EPA-equivalent agency
                        --  State Geological Survey (SGS)
                        --  State Fish and Wildlife Service (SFWS)
                        --  State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)

                     -   Contractors

                        --  TES Contractors
                        --  Lead-agency approved contractors.

                 Note:  The TST will, at a minimum, require expertise in the following
                        disciplines:  engineering, geology, hydrogeology, toxicology, ecology,
                        and meteorology. The TST also may require legal counsel from EPA
                        (ORC and OE - Superfund Division) or DOJ. After choosing the
                        experts, the  RPM should have them identify any specific requirements
                        needed in the SOW.

                 •   Discuss the site  in meetings with Regional managers and staff and with
                     members of the TST to gain a general site understanding, including
                     specific concerns of the Region/State and TST, which should be addressed
                     in the site-specific SOW.  The participants at these meetings will develop a
                     general site management strategy to be used as a guide for planning future
                     RI/FS activities.


Site Visit        Visit the site and nearby area with the support contractor and necessary
                 members of the TST to accomplish the following:

                 •   Observe the physical conditions and kinds of contamination  that exist at
                     the site. See Figure  2-3 for a checklist of physical conditions on which the
                     RPM should focus.  See Figure 2-4 for examples of site contamination.
                     General factors  that are critical  to planning future RI/FS activities include:

                     -   Size of contaminated area (acres);
                     -   Present land use;
                     -   Surrounding area/spurces/pathways;
                     -   Prior activities at site;
                     -   Number of known PRPs;
                     -   Proximity to populations both human and environmental; and
                     -   Proximity to sensitive areas.

                        Also, if information is available:

                     -   Owner(s) and operators of site (existing/prior);
                     -   Generators of waste; and
                     -   Transporters of waste.

                 •   Modify the SOW to address specific site needs.  The RPM, with contractor
                     support, must identify general information needs, areas where additional
                     information will be needed (and how these areas will  be covered in .the
                     site-specific SOW), and areas where additional data will not be needed.


                                           2-6
-------
       Figure 2-3. Checklist of General Site Conditions (Page 1 of 2)
                                                      Examine
                                                                            Identify
          Geology
Soil deposits (types, uses, contamination effects), bedrock
(types, alterations, contamination effects), any remaining
surface material (piles or mounds)
Surface contamination
(subsurface contamination will likely be identified
based upon existing data; a site visit will probably
not provide evidence of subsurface contamination)
Hot spots of contamination
Limitations on site access
Contaminant pathways
          Topography
Landforms
Erosion patterns
Natural resources
Media contaminated
Limitations on site access
Locations for institutional controls
Location of natural barriers to migration of contami-
nants
Migration pathways off site
I
-J
          Meteorology
Effects of current weather
Prior weather conditions (from existing data)
Extreme weather conditions (hurricane, tornado)
Flooding
Aridness
Hot or cold periods
Wind direction, if necessary
          Land Use
Residential
Industrial
Agricultural
Recreational
Floodplain/wetland
Lands administered by Federal, Slate, or local governments
Media contaminated
Exposure routes
Locations for institutional controls
Limitations on site access
Location of natural and manmade barriers
Migration pathways off site
           Vegetation
Plant communities (types, use, contamination effects)
Threatened or endangered species
Protected areas and sensitive ecosystems
Effects of contamination (on vegetative strata, floral
diversity, and food production)
Threatened or endangered species
Hot spots of contamination
Placement of institutional controls or
natural barriers
Migration pathway off site
-------
        Figure 2-3. Checklist of General Site Conditions (Page 2 of 2)
                                                 Examine
                                                                  Identify
          Wildlife
Terrestrial and aquatic habitats, including bird
refuges or protected areas
Effects of contamination (on wildlife habitats
or migratory areas)
Threatened or endangered wildlife
Transport of contamination off site by wildlife
Locations for institutional controls
Limitations on certain remedial actions
          Water Resources
K>
I
Water collection areas
Surface waters (including wetlands)
Floodplain
Location of all potable water supplies (drinking
and industrial usage)
Availability of alternate water supplies
Location of septic tanks
Effects of contamination on standing and
flowing water (i.e., fresh water, salt water, or
brackish water)
Users of the water resources
Limits on locations of institutional controls
          Air Quality
                                  Areas with unusual or foul odors
                                                Prevailing wind direction
                                                Precautions for site workers
                                                Receptors when wind direction changes
                                                Contamination transport through air
          Manmade
          Features1
Road access
Railroads
Power lines
Pipelines
Water wells
Bridges
Prior environmental assessment (EA) or
environmental impact statement (EIS)
Effects of contamination on manmade features
Limitations on site access
Limits on locations for institutional controls
Precautions for site workers
Physical limitations on certain remedial
actions
        1 After the site visit, the RPM should contact the appropriate agency responsible for regulating the construction or maintenance of this feature.
-------
        Figure 2-4. Basic Description of Contamination
         Media of Concern
Common Types of
 Site Categories
  Common Sources
 Common Pathways
  Basic Receptors
K»
          Ambient air
          Containerized waste
        • Ground water*
          Sludge and slurry
          Soils (surface and
          subsurface, water and
          vapor)**
        • Surface water
 Asbestos
 Battery/lead recyclers
 Dioxins
 Landfills
 - Industrial
 - Municipal
 Metals
 Metals/organics
 Mining wastes
 Mixed waste /
 radioactive
 Multi-source ground
 water
 Munitions/explosives
 Organics
 PCBs
 Pesticide manufacturing
 Plating metals
 Solvents
 Wood preservatives
• Buildings/storage
  areas
• Containers/drums
• Dry wells
• Holding tanks
• Industrial/chemical
  manufacturing
  processes
• Waste pits/pools
• Landfills
Human
• Ingestion of soils
• Ingestion of
  groundwater
• Ingestion of fruits and
  vegetables
• Ingestion of fish and
  meat
• Inhalation of vapors
• Inhalation of
  particulates

Terrestrial
• Contact with surface
  water, vegetation, air,
  and soil

Aquatic
• Contact with surface
  water and sediments
• Industrial workers
• Recreational users
• Residents
• Vegetation
• Wildlife
        * Without prior knowledge or well data, this will not be determined at this time.
        ** Cannot be determined by site visit only.
-------
Site              After performing these activities, the RPM (with contractor support) should
Management      devise a general site management strategy to be used for planning purposes.
Strategy          Devising this strategy should not be time consuming, but should include a
                 preliminary list of site objectives. The site strategy may define the following
                 elements:

                 •   Surface and subsurface (if known) extent of contamination and
                     contaminants of concern affecting soil, surface water, sediment, air, and
                     groundwater and subsurface structures (if known), plus the amount of
                     solid wastes, liquid wastes, and sludges.

                 •   Exposure routes and receptors that may result in exposure concentrations
                     greater than the ARARs, greater than 10*6 excess cancer risk, or a hazard
                     quotient greater than 1.

                 •   Site remediation goals based on ARARs (including maximum contaminant
                     levels (MCLs)), risk-based concentrations, or nonpromulgated Federal or
                     State criteria, and advisories (i.e., guidance to-be-considered (TBCs).

                 •   Initial site data needs and potential areas of concern, such as site
                     characteristics; media affected; conditions of contaminants (that is, source,
                     type, pathways for transport, and receptors) posing present and potential
                     risks; and number of operable units, if necessary.

                 Note:  The oversight team (RPM, Regional experts, TST, States, and Trustees)
                        should identify any data gaps in the existing site data. Some of the
                        data gaps will be filled during site characterization.  Other data gaps,
                        however, may be so large that the PRP will need to perform a limited
                        field investigation even before beginning to develop a Work Plan.  The
                        results of this field investigation should be included in post-AOC
                        scoping during  the development of the PRP's Work Plan and SAP.
Program Goal
Consider EPA's program goal, management principles, and expectations from
the NCP in the site management strategy, and during future RI/FS and
selection of remedy activities.  (See Figure 2-5.)
PRP SOW        After providing a Model SOW to the PRP for use as a guide, review the PRP's
                 SOW or Work Plan for accuracy, completeness, and site-specific information,
                 if available, regarding the proposed activities.

                 Note:  The availability of site information at the time of pre-scoping will
                        determine the level of detail in the SOW. At sites where little
                        information exists, site specifics will not be included until the post-
                        AOC Work Plan.  (See Chapter 3.)
The AOC
Assist ORC attorney to negotiate and sign an AOC with the PRP.  The Model
AOC (OSWER Directive No. 9835.3-1 A, January 30,  1990) should be used as a
guide to ensure completeness of the negotiated AOC.  The AOC should
describe: general and site-specific activities to be performed, to the extent
known; roles and responsibilities of those who will perform these activities; a
schedule the PRP and EPA will follow during the RI/FS;  and deliverables the
PRP is expected to submit to EPA; and procedures for notifying PRPs and, if
                                           2-10
-------
Figure 2-5. Program Overview
                                     Program Goal
     The national goal of the remedy selection process is to select remedies that will be protective of
     human health and the environment, maintain protection over time, and minimize untreated waste.
                           Program Management Principles
     Sites should be remediated in operable units when early action is necessary, or phased analysis
     or response is necessary to expedite cleanup.

     Operable units should be consistent with, and not preclude, implementation of the final remedy.

     The scope and complexity of the site should be reflected in the data needs, evaluation of
     alternatives, and documentation of the selected remedy.
                                 Program Expectations
 •   Principal threats posed by a site will be treated, if practicable, with priority placed on treating
     waste that is highly toxic, highly mobile, or liquid.

 •   Engineering controls will be utilized for wastes posing relatively low long-term threat, or where
     treatment is impracticable.

 •   Institutional controls will be utilized to supplement engineering controls, as appropriate, and
     should not substitute for active response measures as the sole remedy.

 •   Contaminated ground waters will be returned to beneficial uses whenever practical, within a
     reasonable time, given the particular circumstances of the site.

 •   A combination of treatment, engineering, and institutional controls will be used, as appropriate,
     to protect human health and the environment.

 •   Innovative technologies will be considered when such technologies offer the potential for
     superior treatment performance, fewer or less adverse impacts than other approaches, or lower
     costs for performance similar to that of demonstrated technologies.
Note: Source — The National Contingency Plan, 40 CFR 300.430(a) (1)
                                         2-11
-------
                 necessary, EPA counsel of noncompliance and for dispute resolution.  (See the
                 Enforcement Project Management Handbook for details on RI/FS
                 negotiations/settlements.)


Ongoing          Throughout the pre-scoping process, the  following ongoing activities could be
Activities         performed:

                 •  Conduct PRP search activities. The RPM should coordinate the conduct of
                    PRP searches into the planning of future RI/FS activities. Since additional
                    PRPs can be identified at any time during the RI/FS process, the activity
                    plans should be flexible enough to allow activities to be changed with only
                    a minimum amount of advance warning.  (See the Enforcement Project
                    Management Handbook for details on RPM activities during the conduct
                    of a PRP Search.)

                 •  Consider the need for performing interim remedial or removal actions to
                    stabilize the site or address a short-term threat while a final remedial
                    solution is  being developed.  The RPM  must be able to review  the existing
                    site information and look for clues to suggest that an interim or removal
                    action will be required. Such actions may be needed to prevent
                    contaminants from migrating off site. Communications with other
                    Regional technical experts, States, local  governments, and the public will
                    help the RPM locate these clues.

                 •  Consider dividing the site  into operable units. The RPM may determine
                    that acquiring specific information on one operable unit (that is, one
                    particular media or source) may be helpful in planning activities for the
                    entire site.  Although  the breakup of  a site into operable  units  may extend
                    the time to conduct an RI/FS,  it may be necessary to focus the
                    investigation on one operable unit in  order to  gather the information
                    necessary to address all future  media  of concern.

                 Note:  The process of dividing a site into operable units is determined by each
                        Region.  The RPM should consult their Regional managers for
                        assistance on designating operable units for a site.


2.5           FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

Current          •  National Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300.430(a).
References
                 •  Guidance for Conducting  RI/FS Under CERCLA, OSWER Directive No.
                    93SS.3-01, October 1988, (See  Appendix A).

                 •  Getting Ready, Scoping the RI/FS, OSWER Directive No. 9355.3-01FS1,
                    November 1989.

                 •  Interim Guidance on PRP Participation in RI/FS, OSWER Directive No.
                    9835. la, May 16, 1988.

                 •  Enforcement Project Management Handbook, OSWER Directive No.
                    9837.2-A,  January  1991.

                 •  Model Statement of Work  for RI/FS Conducted  by PRPs, OSWER
                    Directive No. 9835.8, June 2, 1989.


                                          2-12
-------
                 •  Model Administrative Order on Consent for RI/FS, OSWER Directive No.
                    9835.10, January 30, 1990.

                 •  Interim Guidance on Notice Letters, Negotiations, and Information
                    Exchange, OSWER Directive No. 9834.10, October 19, 1987.

                 •  Potentially Responsible Party Search Manual, OSWER Directive No.
                    9834.6, August 1987.
Future
Resource
   •   Annotated Technical Reference for Hazardous Waste Sites (OWPE)
       (Projected for Publication in 1991).
2.6           RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO RPMS

Personnel        •  Support contractor.

                 •  Regional staff (TST, ORC, ESD).

                 •  States (Environmental Agency, Health Department, SGS, SFWS, SHPO).

                 •  Experts (ORD, other Federal agencies, counties and local sources,
                    universities).
Documents
    •   Model SOW.

    •   Model AOC.
Data
    •   Existing site data.

    •   Region's reference library for similar sites.

    •   RODs database.

    •   Chronological logbook of meetings and site visit.
2.7
HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM

   During pre-scoping, the RPM should anticipate causes for potential project
   delays, including the following:

   •   The quality of the support contractor's work, which will determine if this
       contractor is to be used as the oversight assistant for the entire RI/FS;

   •   Areas where limited information exists, but for which data will be needed
       before performing future tasks of the RI/FS;

   •   Areas of expertise lacking in the TST; and

   •   Site-specific concerns presented by the TST that have not been included in
       the SOW.
                                          2-13
-------
To help minimize the time spent on pre-scoping, the RPM can take the
following actions:

•  Use general conceptual models and save specific details for the Project
   Plans during post-AOC scoping;

•  Tailor the SOW with specific concerns to the extent known (additions or
   deletions) from the Regional/State experts and the TST;

•  Establish PRP financial and technical qualifications prior to the AOC;

•  Provide the support contractor with a well-defined work assignment to
   assure good performance of the pre-scoping activities; and

•  Record the support contractor's activities and all RPM decisions in a
   chronological logbook to prevent duplication of effort and to provide
   adequate documentation of activities.
                          2-14
-------
                                      CHAPTER 3

                                  POST-AOC SCOPING


3.1            INTRODUCTION

                 Post-AOC scoping is the detailed, site-specific activity planning phase of the
                 RI/FS during which Project Plans are developed.  It occurs after negotiations
                 are completed and an AOC, with a SOW, has been signed by EPA and the
                 PRP.  During post-AOC scoping, the RPM refines the oversight team's site
                 conceptual model, preliminary site objectives and remediation goals, and
                 preliminary data needs.  This  information is used to assist the PRP to develop
                 a set of usable Project Plans.  Based on the evaluation of existing site data, the
                 RPM  reviews, comments on, and approves the Project Plans submitted by the
                 PRP,  with support from TST members and an oversight assistant (probably the
                 support contractor used during pre-scoping).


3.2            PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM

                 The RPM establishes the foundation during post-AOC scoping for oversight of
                 the entire RI/FS process. During post-AOC scoping, the RPM, with support
                 from  the oversight assistant and  TST members, works with the PRP to develop
                 the PRP's Project Plans, which include the specific data  needs for the site.
                 The Project Plans establish procedures for PRP performance of field activities,
                 laboratory testing, and data analysis, in order to characterize the site. Post-
                 AOC  scoping is designed to develop PRP Project Plans - Work Plan, Sampling
                 and Analysis Plan (SAP), and  Health and Safety Plan (HSP)  - which  must be
                 approved prior to initiation of field activities. During post-AOC scoping, the
                 RPM  is responsible for developing community relation activities and for
                 drafting a Community Relations Plan (CRP).


3.3            TIMEFRAME

                 The PRP Project Plans should be developed within three to  six months after
                 signature of the AOC.  Gaps in the existing data and resubmittals may extend
                 this period. The timeframe for post-AOC scoping will be determined by
                 extent of existing site data, complexity of site characteristics, kinds of
                 contaminants, coordination within EPA and with State and Natural Resource
                 Trustees, completeness of EPA instructions to PRPs, and the ability and
                 willingness of the PRP to develop acceptable  Project Plans.


3.4            HOW THE RPM OVERSEES POST-AOC SCOPING

                 The PRP Project Plans contain detailed information that summarizes the
                 existing data. In addition, the plans identify  the work to be performed,
                 including methods, rationale,  schedules, data  reporting requirements,
                 equipment verification, and QA/QC concerns.

                 The PRP Work Plan and SAP  expands on the activities identified in  the SOW
                 and includes a site conceptual model, preliminary site objectives (including
                 preliminary remediaiton goals (PRGs) identified by  EPA) and preliminary data
                 needs. (Each of these items will be compared to its  counterpart prepared by


                                           3-1
-------
                 the oversight team and appropriate revisions to the PRP Work Plan will be
                 made.)  The PRP Work Plan and SAP also includes a documented and detailed
                 sampling plan, a preliminary list of alternatives, documentation of the need for
                 treatability studies, whether the PRP satisfies/or will need to obtain a waiver
                 of ARARs, and procedures to acquire additional data when unknown
                 contaminants are  discovered. (See RI/FS Guidance Appendix B.)

                 An efficient way to develop an acceptable PRP Work Plan and SAP is to have
                 a set of Regional  Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) in place before the
                 scoping phase. These SOPs should describe the types of activities that may be
                 required, identify the party  responsible for performing these activities,
                 determine the format to document the results of these activities, and assure
                 that the data collected satisfy EPA's standards for quality data.  SOPs may be
                 modified by site-specific circumstances.  At a minimum, SOPs need to address
                 the following:

                 •   Handling and disposition of RI/FS wastes (that is, soil cuttings, drilling
                     muds, extracted groundwater, decontamination or cleaning liquids, and
                     protective clothing);

                 •   Drilling method and sampling method;

                 •   Method for sampling an aquifer;

                 •   Well screen intervals;

                 •   Frequency of sampling intervals during drilling;

                 •   Method of surface water sampling, if necessary; and

                 •   QA/QC protocols for non-contract laboratory program (non-CLP) labs
                     (local or mobile labs).

                 The RPM (with appropriate support from the oversight assistant and TST
                 members) must assure that the PRP develops acceptable Project Plans. The
                 RPM's activities are specified below.

                 Note:  These  activities are based on the assumption that the oversight assistant
                        during post-AOC scoping is the same as the support contractor used in
                        pre-scoping.  If a new contractor must be procured to assist in
                        oversight, the RPM needs to issue a separate Oversight Work
                        Assignment, and receive and approve a separate Oversight Work Plan.


Kickoff          Conduct a kickoff meeting with the PRP (including oversight assistant and
Meeting          TST members) and, if necessary, conduct a site visit.  Prior to the meeting, the
                 RPM will provide guidance  documents to the PRP on the RI/FS process
                 including roles and responsibilities, activities to be performed, and schedule
                 for deliverables and activities.  (See the references listed in Section 2.5 and in
                 each RI/FS discussion task of this manual.)  During the site visit, the RPM
                 and PRP representative evaluate the present site condition and discuss conduct
                 of the future RI/FS activities.  A summary of the kickoff meeting  is provided
                 in Figure 3-1.
                                            3-2
-------
Figure 3-1.  Summary of a Kickoff Meeting
       PURPOSE:
       TIMEFRAME:
       PARTICIPANTS:
       TOPICS:
       PREPARATION:
         This planning meeting is primarily for ensuring that all parties
         are familiar with the full scope of site activities and with EPA
         expectations.
         The kickoff meeting is conducted soon after the AOC is signed
         and prior to the development of the Work Plan or other plans.
         The RPM, oversight assistant, and TST members should meet
         with the PRP's project manager and other project supervisory
         personnel  (including appropriate contractors).   Regional
         management, and State and local officials may also attend.
         The  kickoff  meeting   should  discuss   the  following:
         administrative matters, such as point of contact; EPA and PRP
         roles and responsibilities;  project schedule  for meetings and
         activities;  preliminary  field   procedures,  such  as  site
         requirements, locations of work areas, decontamination areas,
         clean areas;  potential  need for emergency equipment; and
         deliverables expected of the PRP.
          Prior to the kickoff meeting,  the  RPM should review  the
          procedures for sampling and well drilling activities for different
          types of media.  See Appendices B and C in Volume 2 of this
          guidance.
Regional
Management
Meeting
Conduct a Regional management meeting to review the following:

•        Schedule of activities identifying what will be done, who will do it,
         and when will it be done;

•        Ways to attain EPA's objectives and goals through PRP performance
         of the planned activities;

•        Budget for activities, personnel, and resources to be used during the
         RI/FS;

•        Data  to be included in PRP Project Plans - content and
         requirements, specific data needs, data accuracy, and data
         completeness; and

•        Status and level of communication with State representative,
         ATSDR, Natural  Resource Trustee, and  the public.
                                           3-3
-------
State AKAKs     Request, in writing, that the State prepare and submit a list of State ARARs to
                 the lead agency for review. The RPM should ask for advance notice of State
                 ARARs that may be more stringent than the comparable Federal ARARs.


Laboratory       Notify the PRPs' chosen CLP facility of how the CLP will be used during
Facility          field sampling (either primary testing or oversight of split samples).  Verify
                 the capability of the PRPs' chosen non-CLP facility (qualified mobile or local
                 laboratory), which must adhere to CLP protocols for sampling.  The RPM
                 should review each laboratory's procedures - personnel, equipment, detection
                 levels, routine analytical sampling (RAS), and special analytical sampling
                 (SAS) - to satisfy EPA's QA/QC concerns.
                 After the PRP has submitted any portion of the draft Work Plan for review
KevSew           (for example, site background summary and history of the site; comprehensive
                 description of activities including methods, schedule, and rationale; a site
                 conceptual  model; and the PRPs' plan to identify the need for additional data
                 when data gaps or site unknowns exist), meet with the oversight assistant and
                 TST, to review  and verify the following items in the PRP's submittal:

                 o  Remedial action objectives and preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) and
                    the methods and rationale for meeting these objectives and goals;

                 o  Initial list of remedial alternatives - a range of alternatives, as appropriate,
                    that includes a no-action alternative, treatment alternatives to reduce the
                    toxicity, mobility, or volume of waste (see Section 2.5), containment
                    alternatives which include engineering and institutional controls (see
                    Section 2.6), or a combination of treatment and containment options; and

                 Note:  A full range of alternatives may not be appropriate for each site. (See
                        the  NCP, 40 CFR 300.430(d).)  Screening the initial list of alternatives
                        for  grossly excessive cost, effectiveness, and implementability may
                        reduce the number of potential alternatives to be considered  by the
                        RPM throughout the  RI/FS process.

                 o  Preliminary list of Federal ARARs. (See the preamble to the final NCP,
                    40 CFR 300.430
-------
                     Innovative Technology Evaluation Program  (SITE) to review the
                     demonstrated and emerging technologies that may be currently available
                     for certain remedial actions (see Section 2.5) and the  Alternate Treatment
                     Technology Information Center (ATTIC) Database System (see
                     Appendix A).


PRP Project      Review the draft and final PRP Project Plans (Work Plan, SAP, and HSP).
Plans            Verify that these PRP deliverables meet EPA's requirements for the Work Plan
                 and SAP, address site-specific concerns, contain accurate analyses  and
                 conclusions, and include justifications for performing all future field
                 activities.

                 Note:  The RPM has three choices after reviewing the PRPs' Work Plan and
                        SAP  approval, disapproval, and approval on condition. Reasons for
                        disapproval and  conditions for approval should be explicitly explained
                        by the RPM to the PRP.
Cost Recovery
Documentation
Develop an ongoing cost recovery documentation program that contains at a
minimum:

•  RPM costs including personnel hours and travel;

•  Contractor costs charged to the site;

•  Any other direct costs charged to the site (for example, TST activities);
   and

•  A complete set of detailed records (written documentation) that describe
   the oversight activities.

A summary of the cost recovery documentation process is provided in
Figure 3-2.
Natural
Resource
Trustee
Notify the appropriate Natural Resource Trustee by letter to determine the
need for performing a preliminary Natural Resource Survey.  This may
include a Federal Trustee - DOI, NOAA, USDA, DOD, or DOE;-State
Trustee designated by the Governor; or both Federal and State Trustees.

Note:  It is the Trustee's responsibility, not the RPM's, to decide if and when
       to conduct a Natural Resource Survey during site characterization.
Community      Determine the necessary community relations activities and develop a CRP
Relations        with the Regional Community Relations Coordinator.  Even though EPA is
                 responsible for community relations activities, the PRP may participate in such
                 activities.  The RPM (or designee) should inform the public of the content of
                 the approved PRP Project Plans and proposed site activities.
Administrative
Record File
Open the Administrative Record File when the Project Plans are approved. A
summary of the Administrative Record is provided in Figure 3-3.
                                            3-5
-------
Figure 3-2. Summary of Cost Recovery Documentation
   PURPOSE:
Accurate and  complete documentation  describing oversight  site
activities and costs incurred is essential to ensure recovery of EPA's
oversight costs.
   LOCATION OF      Records and documentation are filed in the EPA active site file that
   DOCUMENTATION: is maintained in the Region's Record Center or in State  active files
                       in the case of State-lead sites.
   CATEGORIES OF
   EXPENDITURES:
CERCLA § 104(a) provides that PRPs conducting an RI/FS must agree
to reimburse the Fund for any  costs  incurred by EPA under, or in
connection with, an oversight contract or arrangement. Recoverable
oversight costs include but are not limited to:

•  EPA personnel (salaries and benefits), administrative,  and site
   travel costs, including associated indirect costs.

•  Direct and associated contractor and  EPA indirect  costs of
   contracts or other arrangements for oversight assistance.

•  Costs of compiling cost documentation to support the demand for
   reimbursement.

•  Accrued interest on the above costs.

The  AOC  must address  oversight  reimbursement and provide a
schedule of payments. The billing and reporting of these costs can
be facilitated through use of the oversight Site Information Form
(SIF) which is on the CERCLIS menu. Information concerning the
incurrence and reimbursement  of oversight costs should be entered
into CERCLIS in a timely manner along with related site information
as it develops.
    RESPONSIBILITIES: With  regard  to  the  documentation  of  such  costs,  the  Cost
                        Documentation Management System (CDMS) is the primary tool for
                        summarizing costs. This system draws on the Integrated Financial
                        Management System (IFMS) and presents costs in summary form
                        which can be used to document costs for billing purposes pursuant
                        to the AOC.  The CDMS summaries are also useful in cost recovery
                        negotiations and litigation.

                        The use of this system is the  joint responsibility of the Financial
                        Management Office (FMO) and the Cost Recovery Program staff in
                        the Waste management Division (WMD) of the Region. The ORC uses
                        the CDMS outputs in negotiations and litigation.

                        EPA Financial Management Offices (FMOs) in Headquarters, Regions,
                        and other field offices (e.g.,  RTP) are  primarily responsible for
                        compilation of cost documentation.  The Regional Cost Recovery
                                           3-6
-------
Figure 3-2.  Summary of Cost Recovery Documentation (continued)
   RESPONSIBILITIES Program staff is responsible for preparing a cost recovery checklist
   (continued)
   ASSISTANCE:
       that identifies the site, status, period for which documents are
       needed, types of documents, and appropriate ORC and Program
       contacts to assist the FMOs in this compilation.  The Program
       staff is also responsible for ensuring the completeness and technical
       accuracy  of the cost documentation packages  produced by the
       FMO.   The ORC  is  responsible  for  identifying documents
       protected by the Privacy Act and by EPA's Public Information
       regulations (40 CFR Part 2), as well as documents that may be
       enforcement confidential or otherwise privileged. The ORC may
       prepare affidavits for the FMOs to attest as fact witnesses as to the
       authority and content of EPA documents.
       For further information relating to documentation of oversight
       activities or related recoverable costs, contact your Regional Cost
       Recovery  Program Chief, your Regional  FMO  or  Superfund
       Financial Officer (SFO), or the Chief,  Cost  Recovery Branch,
       CED, OWPE, OS-510W, (703) 308-8454 or FTS 398-8454.
Ongoing
Activities
Throughout the post-AOC process, the following ongoing activities need to be
performed:

•  Amend Project Plans. Each element of the Work Plan and SAP may not be
   known  at  post-AOC scoping.  Field activities, such  as  Baseline  Risk
   Assessment and treatability study requirements, may need to have separate
   Work Plans to be incorporated into the existing, flexible  Work Plan.  Non-
   field activities, such as identifying action-specific ARARs, may also change
   the scope of the Work Plan and SAP.

•  Conduct project status meetings. The RPM, oversight assistant, and TST
   members should meet with the PRPs and their field supervisory personnel
   regularly to discuss the  content of the Project Plans, make  changes to the
   schedule, as needed,  and identify problem areas early. Some problems may
   be avoided by acquiring the needed access to the site, mobilizing necessary
   field equipment, looking out for unexpected  site  conditions,  discussing
   proposed  activities  with  the community,  reviewing the  capabilities of
   personnel and equipment of the PRP proposed laboratory, verifying that the
   sampling data and monitoring well placement will acquire quality data, and
   committing the PRPs to a workable schedule of draft and final deliverables.

•  Decision to divide project  into phases. The RPM, oversight assistant, and
   TST members may  agree  in post-AOC scoping that the PRP  perform a
   sampling event on one operable unit with hopes that the  data obtained will
   help provide a better understanding  for future sampling events or other
   operable units. The number of phases, however, may be amended at any
   time as additional data on the site become known.
                                           3-7
-------
Figure 3-3. Summary of Administrative Record File
       PURPOSE:
       MAINTENANCE:
       CONTENT:
       FOR FURTHER
       INFORMATION
The Administrative  Record File contains  documents that
may form the basis for EPA's selection of response actions.
This File provides documentation of the basis for Agency
action if EPA decisions are challenged, and provides the
public  an opportunity  to  review and comment on  site
activities and plans.
The  Administration  Record File is  maintained by  the
Regional (or State) office.
The  Administrative Record  File  should  include factual
information and data that may form the basis for the selection
of a response action; including reports on the site response
activities; policy and guidance documents relevant to the site,
(as contained in  the OSWER "Compendium of CERCLA
Guidance  Documents  Used  for Selection of  CERCLA
Response  Actions") public participation  documentation;
information from parties outside EPA, such as documentation
of State involvement, ATSDR health assessment or reports
by Trustees;  enforcement documents pertaining to response
selection; public comments; and decision documents.

See "Final Guidance on Administrative Records for Selecting
CERCLA Response Actions" (OSWER Directive No. 9833.3 A -
1, December 3, 1990).
3.5    DELIVERABLES DURING POST-AOC SCOPING

                 The Project Plans are the first deliverables submitted by the PRP to the lead
                 agency.  The lead agency will review and approve the PRPs' Work Plan and
                 SAP, and only review and comment on the PRPs' HSP.  The minimum
                 requirements for each of these deliverables are contained in Figure 3-4.
                                                                        >

Work Plan        A PRP RI/FS Work Plan should at a minimum contain a comprehensive
Content          description of the five areas (see RI/FS Guidance, Chapter 2  and Appendix B
                 in Volume 2) discussed in the following sections.


Introduction      The introduction to the Work Plan should provide a general explanation of the
                 objectives for performing the RI and FS and the goals to be achieved during
                 each portion of the process.  The PRPs should discuss the activities to be
                 performed, the deliverables to be submitted, and the schedules for performing
                 activities and submitting deliverables.
                                          3-8
-------
Figure 3-4.  Elements of Project Plans
 Elements of a Work Plan
 • A comprehensive description of the work to be performed, the information
   needed for each task, the information to be produced during and after each task,
   and a description of work products submitted to the RPM (see RHFS Guidance,
   Chapter 2 and Appendix B, and the Enforcement Project Management Hand-
   book, RHFS Implementation Chapter);

 • The methods that will be used during each activity (see Rl/FS Guidance
   Appendix B, and Section 1.7 of this manual on QAIQC);

 • A schedule for completing activities (see timeline in Figure 15 and activities
   checklist in the Enforcement Project Management Handbook, RHFS Implementa-
   tion Chapter);

 • The rationale for performing or not performing an activity (see RHFS Guidance
   Appendix B, and the Enforcement Project Management Handbook, RHFS
   Implementation Chapter);

 • A site background summary and history of site (see the Pre-PRP Negotiation
   Task in Chapter 2);

 • A site conceptual model (see the Pre-PRP Negotiation Task in Chapter 2);

 • An identification of preliminary site objectives which includes preliminary
   remediation goals (see Chapter 2 of this manual);

 • The need for additional data when future site unknowns are identified (see Model
   SOW, Task 1, and the Enforcement Project Management Handbook, RHFS
   Implementation Chapter);

 • The manner of identifying Federal and State ARARs (see the Post-AOC Scoping
   Task in Section 22 and the Development and Screening of Alternative Task in
   ChapterS);

 • An identification of preliminary alternatives (see Chapter 3 of this manual) and
   Rl/FS guidance; and

 • A plan for meeting treatability study requirements (see Chapter 6 of this
   manual).
Elements of the Health and Safety Plan (Continued)

• Employee training assignments;

• A description of personal protective equipment and an identification of those
  operations when it will be used;

• Medical surveillance requirements;

• The frequency and types of monitoring, personnel monitoring, and environ-
  mental sampling techniques and instrumentation;

• Site control measures;

• Decontamination procedures;

• Standard operating procedures for the site;

• A contingency plan that meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.120(1)(1)
  and (1X2); and

• Entry procedures for confined spaces.


Elements of the Sampling and Analysis Plan

Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPjP)

• Sampling procedures, sample custody procedures, analytical procedures, data
  reduction, data validation, data reporting, and personnel qualifications (see
  Chapters I and 3 in Volume I, and Appendices B and C in Volume 2 of this
  manual);

• The qualifications of each laboratory to conduct work (Note:  If a laboratory
  selected is not in the Contract Laboratory Program (CLP), the non-CLP lab's
  methods must be consistent with CLP methods in order to satisfy EPA's QAI
  QC procedures) (see Chapter I of this manual); and

• The use of internal controls, such as unannounced site, performance, and
  system audits (see Section 1.7 of this manual).
 Elements of the Health and Safety Plan (Lead Agency Supplies < umments Only)    Fkld Sampling Plan (FSP)
 • Identification of the site health and safety officer, key personnel, and alternates,
   for site health and safety;

 • The risk analysis for existing site conditions, each site task, and operation;
• The sampling objectives, sample locations and frequency, sampling equip-
  ment and procedures, and the program for sample handling and analysis (see
  Section 1.7 in Volume I, and Appendices B and C in Volume 2 of this
  manual).
-------
Site
Background
and Physical
Setting
The site background and physical setting section should describe current site
conditions, site history, and available existing site  information.
Initial           The initial evaluation should provide a site conceptual model, which contains
Evaluation        EPA's assessment of the site's current and potential risks to human health and
                 the environment, exposure pathways, and current and potential routes of
                 migration of the contaminants of concern.


Work Plan        The Work Plan rationale should provide an explanation and illustration of how
Rationale        the data needs will satisfy the oversight team's preliminary site objectives,
                 especially an EPA-conducted risk assessment, and the preliminary list of
                 alternatives.  This Section will incorporate the site-specific concerns that are
                 included in both parts of the SAP - the Field Sampling Plan (FSP) and the
                 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPjP).

                 Note:        Regions that have devised SOPs and  generic QAPjPs can  save
                              substantial time during Project Plan development.
RI/FS Tasks
The RI/FS task discussions should describe the activities to be performed
during scoping, site characterization (including EPA's (or PRPs', if an AOC
was signed before June 21, 1990) Baseline Risk Assessment and treatability
studies), and the development and analysis of potential alternatives.  The site-
specific items identified in the SAP (both FSP and QAPjP) should also be
included in the discussion of the activities for each task (see RI/FS Guidance
Appendix B).
SAP Content      A PRP SAP should contain a QAPjP and an FSP to ensure that the proposed
                  sampling data collection activities are compatible with previous data collection
                  activities and serve as a mechanism for the PRP to acquire EPA quality data.
                  (See RI/FS Guidance, Chapter 2 and the "Compendium of Superf und Field
                  Operations Methods" (OSWER Directive No. 9355.0-14, August 1987).)
Project Plans
and the
Baseline Risk
Assessment
Depending upon the existing site data and the complexity of the site, the PRP
Work Plan and SAP may not fully address EPA's Baseline Risk Assessment (or
PRP assessments started prior to June 21, 1990) and treatability studies. When
the RPM determines that these activities will be needed, an amended or
separate Work Plan and SAP will have to be developed by the PRP and
approved  by EPA.  (For further information see Baseline Risk Assessment in
Chapter 5 and treatability studies  in Chapter 6 of this guidance.)
Project Plan      The progress of the RI/FS study should be compared to the anticipated
Progress          progress as presented in the Work Plan, and reported monthly.  At a minimum,
Reporting         progress reports should:  (1) describe the actions that have been taken to
                  comply with the AOC; (2) include all results of sampling and tests and all
                  other data received from PRPs; (3) describe the work planned, specific work
                  schedules, and relationship to the overall project schedule for completing the
                  RI/FS; and (4) describe all problems encountered, any anticipated problems or
                  delays, and any solutions to address these problems or delays.
                                            3-10
-------
Questions for     The RPM, with help from the oversight assistant and members of the TST,
Project Plan      should make sure that the Project Plan data and analyses answer the following
Review           questions:

                 •  Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)

                             Are the plans consistent with the NCP, EPA guidances, and the
                             activities, schedules, and procedures listed in the AOC and SOW?

                             Has the RPM supplied the PRP with appropriate EPA  guidance
                             documents and, if available, SOPs?

                             Do the plans contain the minimum required data to meet the
                             activities checklist in the Enforcement Project Management
                             Handbook or Figure 3-4 of this manual?

                             Do the plans address and provide resolution of site-specific
                             concerns of the oversight team (RPM, oversight assistant, TST,
                             and States) especially regarding EPA's risk assessment?

                             Do the plans include activities and objectives that are sufficiently
                             broad to include the need for future data and activities, fill in the
                             existing data gaps, and handle all types of delays due to natural
                             and physical events?

                             Is it clear who will perform each activity, how the activity will be
                             performed, what information will be needed prior to each
                             activity, and what information will be produced at the conclusion
                             of each activity?

                             Will the planned activities meet technically accepted engineering
                             procedures, CLP protocols, and QA/QC concerns?

                 •  Health and Safety Plan (HSP)

                             Does the plan meet the Occupational Safety and Health
                             Administration (OSHA) requirements  for worker safety?

                             Does the plan contain each of the required elements, as shown in
                             Figure 3-4?

                 •  Other Deliverables:  Progress/Status Reports

                             Will the PRP and oversight assistant submit biweekly or monthly
                             status reports on the portions of the Project  Plans that will
                             involve potential areas of disagreement regarding the site
                             characteristics or contaminants?


3.6           FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

                 •   National Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300.430(a).

                 •   Guidance  for Conducting RI/FS Under CERCLA, OSWER Directive No.
                     93SS.3-01, October 1988, (Chapter 2 and Appendix B).

                 •   Interim Guidance on PRP Participation in RI/FS,  OSWER Directive No.
                     9835.U, May 16, 1988.
                                           3-11
-------
                •  Getting Ready, Scoping the RI/FS, OSWER Directive No. 9355.3-01FS1,
                   November 1989.

                •  Scoper's Notes, An RI/FS Costing Guide, EPA/540/G-90/002, February
                   1990.

                •  Enforcement Project Management Handbook, OSWER Directive No.
                   9837.2-A, January 1991.

                •  Data Quality Objectives for Remedial Response Activities, OSWER
                   Directive No. 9335.0-7B, March 1987.

                •  CERCLA Compliance With Other Laws Manual (ARARs): Interim Final
                   OSWER Directive No. 9234.1-01, August 8, 1988.

                •  CERCLA Compliance With Other Laws Manual: Part II.  Clean Air Act
                   and Other Environmental Statutes and State Requirements, OSWER
                   Directive No. 9234.1-02, August 1989.

                •  Interim Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance
                   Project Plans, U.S. EPA, Office of Exploratory Research, QAMS - 005/80,
                   December 1980.

                •  A Compendium of Technologies Used in the Treatment of Hazardous
                   Wastes, EPA/625/8-87/014, September 1, 1987.

                •  A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations Methods, OSWER  Directive
                   No. 9355.0-14, August 1987.

                •  Occupational Safety and Health Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Site
                   Activities, NIOSH/OSHA/USCG/USEPA, 1985.


3.7           RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM

Personnel        •  Oversight Assistant.

                •  Technical Support Team (TST).

                •  Regional Staff (Peer Review, Management Review, BSD, ORC, and  ORD).

                •  Headquarters Staff (OWPE, OGC, OE - Superfund Division).

                •  Other Federal Agencies (ATSDR, USCOE, Natural Resource Trustees).

                •  State Representatives.

                •  CLP and non-CLP Laboratories.
Documents
•  PRP Site Conceptual Model.

•  PRP List of Data Quality Objectives (DQOs).

•  PRP List of Federal and State ARARs.
                                        3-12
-------
                 •   PRP List of Treatment Technologies.

                 •   PRP List of Potential Remedial Alternatives.

                 •   PRP Draft and Final Project Plans (Work Plan, SAP, HSP).
                                                                           i

Data             •   Existing data from PRP Search, PA/SI, other Federal, State, and local
                     sources.

                 •   Site visit notes.

                 •   Comments on the contents of Project Plans from members of the TST,
                     other Federal agencies, and States .

                 •   Estimate of site costs using the Cost of Remedial Action (CORA) Model or
                     the Site Cost Estimation and Evaluation Study (SCEES)  Database, which
                     are available in each Region.

                 •   Results of any limited field investigation.


3.8           HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM

                 To avoid project delays during post-AOC scoping, the RPM should:

                 •   Set up a network to communicate regularly with the oversight assistant and
                     with members of the TST;

                 •   Determine the ability of the PRPs (and PRPs' contractor) to perform the
                     post-AOC scoping activities and verify the capability of the PRP to
                     perform future RI/FS tasks;

                 •   Discuss special site concerns and peculiarities  with the oversight assistant
                     and the TST (including State);

                 •   Check the format, activity schedules, data documentation, and data
                     completeness and accuracy of the Project Plans;

                 •   Verify  that the Project Plans will describe the site characteristics, the site
                     contaminants, the risks to human health and the environment and the
                     nature and extent of contamination (unless EPA is performing the Baseline
                     Risk Assessment); and

                 •   Identify areas where additional data will be required as  well as areas which
                     will not need to be addressed because of site type, contaminant type, or
                     nature of the operable unit.

                 To help minimize the time spent on  post-AOC scoping, the RPM can:

                 •   Provide guidance documents to the PRP'early in post-AOC scoping
                     regarding all phases of the RI/FS process;  .

                 •   Allow time in the schedule for review and comment (by RPM, oversight
                     assistant, and TST) and  PRP resubmittal of deliverables;
                                           3-13
-------
Document information obtained from the oversight assistant, from the
PRPs, and from site visits;
Specify level of detail and content of PRP Project Plans early, preferably
during kickoff meeting;
Alert Natural Resource Trustees;
Open the Administrative Record File at the end of post-AOC scoping; and
Notify- the public via meeting or fact sheet of the planned field activities.
                       3-14
-------
                                        CHAPTER 4

                                SITE CHARACTERIZATION


4.1           INTRODUCTION

                  The site characterization task seeks to gather sufficient data to define the site
                  risks, to evaluate alternatives, and to assess the physical and biological
                  characteristics of the site including contamination source, nature, extent,
                  transport and fate of the contamination.  The RPM and oversight assistant will
                  oversee the field activities  performed by the PRP, including field sampling
                  and laboratory analysis activities (see Appendices B and C in Volume 2), to
                  ensure that the PRP activities conducted during site characterization conform
                  to the Project Plans previously approved by EPA.  Data are gathered for other
                  analyses conducted during  Site Characterization (for example, EPA's Risk
                  Assessment, Treatability Study Evaluation, and the Natural Resource Trustee
                  Survey), so that the FS can be conducted and completed without the need for
                  additional information gathering.


4.2           PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM

                  During site characterization, the RPM approves the PRPs' sampling and well
                  drilling activities, verifies  the PRPs1 documentation of the field activities, and
                  verifies that the PRPs meet ARARs (to the extent practicable) for actions
                  conducting during the RI (e.g., during well drilling at a historic site). In
                  addition, the RPM should  ensure that any wastes generated during the RI
                  which are taken off-site for treatment or disposal are managed in accordance
                  with applicable Federal and State requirements. Information obtained through
                  this process will serve as the basis for determining the remedial action to be
                  taken. The RPM can  identify areas where additional  data will be needed to
                  characterize the site, ensure that this information is obtained to meet QA/QC
                  concerns, and attempt to avoid unnecessary sampling activities. The RPM also
                  should review the PRPs* definition of site characteristics, and the source(s),
                  nature and extent, volumes/levels, and the potential transport and fate of the
                  known contaminants.  These activities should be described in the draft and
                  final RI Reports.


4.3           TIMEFRAME

                  Due to the iterative nature of sampling phases and resampling events, one
                  cycle of the site characterization task can take up to 12 months to complete.
                  The timeframe for site characterization, however,  will depend on the
                  following:

                  •  Potential extent and number of site problem areas (for example, with
                     respect to soils, surface water, groundwater, air emissions, etc.);

                  •  Potential for multiple sampling events and drilling phases (for example, for
                     source control, soils, groundwater, surface water,  etc.);

                  •  Turnaround time for laboratory analysis;
                                            4-1
-------
                  •  Need for resampling if initial data are unacceptable or for additional
                     sampling to fill data gaps and determine the extent of contamination;

                  •  Time needed for EPA to perform the Baseline Risk Assessment and for
                     EPA or the State to support the need for Treatability Studies;

                  •  Seasonal variations and adverse climatic conditions that affect collecting
                     accurate and  representative samples;

                  •  Time for EPA to review deliverables; and

                  •  Unexpected discoveries of new sources.


4.4           HOW THE RPM OVERSEES SITE CHARACTERIZATION

                  The RPM and/or oversight  assistant perform the following oversight activities,
                  focusing on the PRPs' sampling and analysis tasks, to acquire accurate and
                  complete data, as described in the following sections:

                  •  Meet with  the oversight team;

                  •  Review proposed field activities;

                  •  Visit the site;

                  •  Document  and track field activities;

                  •  Assess changes in original data needs;

                  •  Conduct meetings;

                  •  Review progress and interim  reports;

                  •  Conduct management review; and

                  •  Update the files.

                  Each of these is discussed below.
                                                      i*


Oversight         Meet with the  oversight team (including, as appropriate, oversight assistant,
Team Meeting     TST, States, ATSDR, Natural Resource Trustees) prior to initiating the
                  planned field activities to determine:

                  •  Qualifications of any additional  subcontractors not previously evaluated
                     that are needed to perform the various field procedures;

                  •  The technical resources and remedial equipment available to the PRP or its
                     contractor;

                  •  How the field activities will characterize the site, define the types and
                     sources of  contaminants, and describe the nature and extent of
                     contamination;

                  •  How to ensure that the planned activities will correspond to the Work Plan
                     and SAP;
                                            4-2
-------
                  •  Procedures for notifying PRPs and, if necessary, EPA counsel if PRPs'
                     field procedures deviate from the Work Plan and SAP,

                  •  The appropriate sampling and drilling procedures, especially the number of
                     samples and wells drilled, types of sampling to conduct (splits, spikes, and
                     blanks), specific location of the sampling equipment, procedures to
                     transport samples, and validation of samples for completeness.  (Use
                     Appendices B and C of this manual in  Volume 2 to oversee and document
                     sampling and well drilling activities.);

                  •  The status of contacts with ATSDR, States, and Natural Resource Trustees;
                     and

                  •  The use of a personal computer (PC)-based tracking system to monitor the
                     progress of the field activities and keep down-time to a minimum.
Proposed Field
Activities and
Sampling and
Analysis
Review proposed field activities and sampling and analysis activities. (See
Appendices B and C of Volume 2. A checklist to document sampling and
analysis activities is contained in Appendix B; a checklist to document well
drilling and analysis activities is contained in Appendix C.)

Note:       The RPM will need to schedule into the sampling and analysis
            tasks other activities, including providing RI data for an ATSDR
            Health Assessment, the Natural Resource Trustee Survey, EPA's
            Baseline Risk Assessment, and the PRPs' Treatability Studies
            Evaluation.  Therefore,  it is important for the RPM to verify,
            even if only by spot checking, the qualifications  of all personnel
            and the quality of the equipment used and data generated before
            the initiation of field activities.
Site Visit
In addition to the oversight assistant, the RPM or another qualified EPA
representative such as a person from the Region's ESD should visit the site
during the initial phase of site characterization to observe the PRPs' initial
sampling and well drilling activities. The RPM should review the PRPs'
capability to satisfy the Regional SOPs, perform the required field activities,
and review the oversight assistant's capability to perform field oversight of the
PRPs.
Field
Activities
Document and track field activities using checklists (for example, those
presented in Appendices B and C of Volume 2), or Regional checklists or a
field logbook. Figure 4-1 summarizes four useful tools to document field
activities. Also, review PRP and oversight assistant monthly progress  reports,
PRP special activity reports, and laboratory reports.  Field activities should be
performed if the activity aids in obtaining a site objective, helps to refine  the
site conceptual model, or identifies an area that will require additional data.
Meeting
ARARs
Verify that PRPs are meeting location- and chemical-specific ARARs (and
other ARARs if known at this time) to handle the management of
investigation-identified waste to be taken off-site for treatment or disposal,
and to mitigate or avoid impacts to historic resources and endangered species
even during routine field activities.
                                            4-3
-------
Figure 4-1.  Summary of Tools to Document Field Activities
Field Activity Reports
Purpose:
Uses:
Specifics:
Assistance:
These reports help the RPM and the oversight assistant to be consistent regarding the need to document
field activities.
These reports are a way to check that the conducted field activities are consistent with procedures agreed
to in the Work Plan and SAP, and are available to assist EPA if the field activity leads to future litigation.
Use water-resistant ink, draw through all errors, initial all corrections, and date and sign all reports.
See checklists for documenting the conduct of sampling and well drilling activities in Volume 2,
Appendices B and C.
Field Logbook
Purpose:
Uses:
Specifics:
Assistance:
This logbook supplements the field activity report to record additional site incidents and activities.
This logbook contains information supplemental to decision making, such as conversations with key
personnel, potential or actual problems encountered, explanations for changes in project plans, and other
oversight discussions or observations.
Use water-resistant ink, draw through all errors, initial all corrections, number and bind the log, and date
and sign all entries.
The RPM, as needed, determines the content of this logbook.
Photographic or Videotape Log
Purpose:
Uses:
Specifics:
Assistance:
This log gives a visual presentation of the physical conditions of the site and can be used to show how
field activities were conducted and verify what equipment was used.
This log is a way to check that the conducted field activities are consistent with procedures agreed to in
the Work Plan and SAP, when the field activity pertains to remedy selection, and is available to assist
EPA if the field activity leads to future litigation.
Include date, time, and location on each entry, an orientation of the photographs or video, a description of
the activity on the back of the photograph or orally on the videotape, and the person(s) responsible for the
photographs or video.
Contents and maintenance of the log are the decision of the RPM.
Laboratory Reports
Purpose:
Uses:
Specifics:
Assistance;
These reports document that the sampling procedures were conducted to satisfy EPA collection
protocols, were performed to the agreed upon chain-of-custody procedures, and were analyzed
according to EPA's CLP protocols.
These reports verify that the conducted field activities are consistent with procedures agreed to in the
Work Plan and SAP, consistent with CLP protocols, verifiable using QA/QC parameters - important
when the field activity pertains to remedy selection, and are available to assist EPA if the field activity
leads to future litigation.
Label samples with time, date, location, and type; properly store and transport samples; follow
appropriate chain-of-custody procedures; regularly calibrate the sampling equipment; perform QC of
sample types; and conduct field and laboratory audits as needed.
References for documenting sampling and well drilling activities are listed in Appendices B and C in
Volume 2 of this guidance.
                                                4-4
-------
Data Needs       Ensure that the PRP satisfies the data needs or activities of the Natural
                 Resource Trustee's Preliminary Survey, EPA's Baseline Risk Assessment, and
                 the Treatability Study Evaluation Report during site characterization.  Get
                 input from these parties on their specific concerns before performing
                 unnecessary field activities.
Progress
Meetings
   Conduct meetings with the PRP, oversight assistant, and members of the TST
   (including State representative) on the content of monthly progress reports, the
   Preliminary Site Characterization Summary, and the direction of future field
   activities. .
Review
Summary and
Report
   With assistance of the TST and State, when appropriate, review and comment
   on the Preliminary Site Characterization Summary and the draft RI Report.
Management     Conduct a Regional management review meeting to discuss the Preliminary
Review           Site Characterization Summary, EPA's Baseline Risk Assessment (if already
Meeting          conducted), and the RI Report.


File Updates     Continually update the site file, Administrative Record File, and cost recovery
                 documentation.


Fact Sheet       If appropriate,, develop a fact sheet from the generated data, the Site
                 Characterization Summary, and the final RI Report to present to the public.
                 Send a copy of the RI Report to ATSDR.

                 Note:       The community may need to be notified before conducting
                             apparent or intrusive field activities (for example, forewarn the
                             community of drilling activities in streets or a school yard).
4.5
DELIVERABLES DURING SITE CHARACTERIZATION

   The PRP will submit a Preliminary Site Characterization Summary and a
   Technical Memorandum on Modeling the Site Characteristics (if necessary) for
   review and comment, and a draft RI Report for review and approval.
   Additional deliverables requiring review and comment or approval will be
   associated with the Treatability Study Evaluation Report (see Chapter 6) and a
   final RI Report.  The PRP deliverables during site characterization should
   answer  the following types of questions:

   •   Site Characterization Summary

               Does the summary provide a brief description (a few pages or set
               of tables) on  the site characteristics to satisfy the requirements of
               this summary in the RI/FS Guidance, Chapter 3?

               Does the summary assure that EPA gets data for the Baseline Risk
               Assessment as soon as possible?

               Does the summary satisfy the checklist of items in the
               Enforcement Project Management Handbook, RI/FS
               Implementation Chapter, Section 6?
                                            4-5
-------
                             Does this summary contain information to help the RPM or State
                             identify ARARs?

                  •   Technical Memorandum on Modeling Site Characteristics (if necessary)

                             Does the site complexity require this model?

                             Does this memorandum identify and describe any special site
                             features that would be addressed by modeling?

                             Can the modeling assumptions be identified clearly?

                  •   Draft/Final RI Report

                             Does this report follow the format in the RI/FS Guidance,
                             Chapter 3, Table 3-13, and  the Enforcement Project Management
                             Handbook, RI/FS Implementation Chapter?

                             Does this report include deliverables on the need to conduct
                             Treatability Studies, if necessary?

                             Does this report reflect specific concerns from EPA, State,
                             ATSDR, and Natural Resource Trustees raised during review of
                             the RI/FS Work Plan and SAP?

                             Does this report identify and justify additional activities needed?


Other             •   Monthly Progress Reports
Deliverables
                             Do these reports contain useful, accurate, and timely data?

                  •   Laboratory Reports

                             Do these reports satisfy our QA/QC concerns for a data analysis
                             that is legally defensible?

                  •   Field Activity Reports

                             Do these reports describe the site activities in detail to justify the
                             activities in progress and support the need for future field
                             activities?

                  •   Photographic Logs/Aerial Photographs

                             Do these photographs help to justify performing the present
                             activities and support the need for future activities?

                  •   Shipment  Records

                             Do these records identify owners, generators, transporters, types,
                             volumes, concentrations, and dates of disposal of site
                             contaminants?
                                            4-6
-------
4.6
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

   •  National Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300.430(a).

   •  Guidance for Conducting RI/FS Under CERCLA, OSWER Directive No.
      9355.3-01, October 1988, (Chapter 3).

   •  The Remedial Investigation - Site Characterization and Treatability
      Studies, OSWER Directive No. 9355.3-01FS2, November 1989.

   •  Interim Guidance on PRP Participation in RI/FS, OSWER Directive No.
      9835.1a, May 16, 1988.

   •  Model Statement of Work for RI/FS Conducted by PRPs, OSWER
      Directive No. 9835.8, June 2, 1989.

   •  Enforcement Project Management Handbook, OSWER Directive No.
      9837.2-A, January 1991.

   •  Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Human Health Evaluation
      Manual (HHEM) Part A,  OSWER Directive No. 9285.701 A, July 1989.

   •  Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume II, Environmental
      Evaluation Manual (EEM), EPA/540/1-89/001, March 1989.

   •  Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual, OSWER Directive No. 9285.5-1,
      April 1, 1988.

   •  Compendium of Superfund Field Operation Methods, OSWER Directive
      No. 9355.0-14, August  1987.

   •  Chemical, Physical, and Biological Properties of Compounds Present at
      Hazardous Waste Sites,  OSWER Directive No. 9850.3, September 27, 1985.
4.7          RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM

Personnel        •  Oversight Assistant.

                •  Technical Support Team (TST).

                •  Regional Staff (Peer Review, Management Review, ESD, ORC and ORD).

                •  Headquarters Staff (OWPE, OGC, OE - Superfund Division).

                •  Other Federal Agencies (ATSDR, USCOE, USDA-SCS, Natural Resource
                   Trustee, U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)-USFWS).

                •  States (EPA-equivalent, SFWS, SGS, State Trustee).

                •  Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) and non-CLP Laboratories.
Documents
       Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP).

       ATSDR Health Assessment.

       Site Characterization Summary.
                                         4-7
-------
                 •   Draft RI (with or without Baseline Risk Assessment).
                 •   Checklists on sampling and well drilling (Appendices B and C).
                 •   EPA's Baseline Risk Assessment (if available).

Data             •   Sampling Activities Summary
                     -  Collection.
                        Analysis.
                        Evaluation.
                 •   Well  Drilling Activities
                     -  Number/Location.
                     -  Cores.
                     -  Analysis.
                     -  Evaluation.
                        Monitoring.

4.8           HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM
                 During Site Characterization, the RPM should:
                 •   Ensure that field activities are consistent with the Work Plan and SAP;
                 •   Oversee the oversight assistant's performance and its timely reporting of
                     site characterization activities;
                 •   Determine the ability of PRP (and PRP contractors) to conduct field
                     activities, for example, drill the needed exploratory, development, or
                     monitoring wells and collect  quality samples, consistent with site
                     complexity;
                 •   Identify previously unknown contaminants;
                 •   Review the major PRP deliverables (Preliminary Site Characterization
                     Summary, Treatability Study Evaluation Report, and draft and final RI
                     Reports) and interim deliverables;
                 •   Notify PRPs and, if necessary, EPA counsel of any AOC noncompliance;
                 •   Keep the public informed of upcoming field activities* especially highly
                     visible or intrusive field work; and
                 •   Ensure location-specific ARARs (and other known ARARs) have been
                     considered (for example, critical habitat, historic property).
                 To help minimize the time spent on site characterization, the RPM should:
                 •   Visit the site during initial sampling and well drilling activities;
                 •   Take QC samples and audit the PRPs' laboratory to meet QA/QC concerns;
                 •   Ensure documentation of field activities and all generated findings;
                                            4-8
-------
•  Incorporate EPA's Baseline Risk Assessment, where available (see
   Chapter 5), and the Treatability Study Evaluation (see Chapter 6) activities
   into site characterization;

•  Coordinate with the Natural Resource Trustee, ATSDR, and State;

•  Update the site file, Administrative Record File, and cost recovery
   documentation and information; and

•  When PRP deliverables are reviewed, impose deadlines and followup with
   tardy reviewers, and notify PRPs and, if necessary, EPA counsel of
   noncompliance.
                          4-9
-------
                                       CHAPTER 5

                              BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT


5.1           INTRODUCTION

                 The Baseline Risk Assessment is conducted during the RI.  It is an iterative
                 process that begins at post-AOC scoping and ends with preparation of a
                 document that usually is included  as a chapter in the RI Report. Beginning
                 with all AOCs signed after June 21,  1990, it is EPA's policy that the Agency
                 will prepare the Baseline Risk Assessment at  Enforcement-lead sites (see
                 "Performance of Risk Assessments in Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
                 Studies (RI/FSs) Conducted by Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs)"
                 (OSWER Directive No. 9835.15, August 28, 1990)). For those sites with an
                 ongoing PRP risk assessment, careful oversight is critical in order to ensure the
                 timely development of an acceptable Baseline Risk Assessment. The above-
                 referenced directive also states that EPA should certify that each PRP risk
                 assessment is acceptable.

                 Note:   EPA is preparing a guidance document on how to conduct the Baseline
                         Risk Assessment at PRP-lead sites. The guidance will include language
                         changes to the Model AOC and Model SOW.


5.2           PURPOSE AND GOAL OF THE BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT

                 The Baseline Risk Assessment has two major purposes. The first purpose is to
                 help determine if a site poses a current or potential risk to human health
                 (through a human health evaluation) or the environment (through an ecological
                 assessment) in the absence of any  remedial action. The risk assessment may
                 form  the basis for finding that the site may present an imminent and
                 substantial endangerment. The risk assessment also may show that the baseline
                 risks are acceptable and that remediation is not needed in spite of the site's
                 Hazard Ranking System (HRS) scoring. The  second major  purpose of the
                 Baseline Risk Assessment is to help determine remediation  goals for the site
                 contaminants. Remediation goals  are chemical concentrations set at risk-
                 based levels that are  protective of human health and the environment (or at
                 chemical-specific ARAR levels, where available).

                 The RPM needs to involve Regional staff and TST members early in post-
                 AOC scoping to ensure that PRPs are given adequate direction to perform the
                 site characterization activities.  The quality of the Baseline  Risk Assessment is
                 based upon the accuracy of the activities performed, data collected, and data
                 evaluated during site characterization. If the proper number of samples is not
                 taken in the proper location and appropriate  media of concern, the risk
                 assessment will not accurately reflect the risks presented by releases from the
                 site.

                 The RPM also should ensure that  when preliminary remediation goals (PRGs),
                 developed in post-AOC scoping, are modified based on the risk assessment   ,
                 results, these modified remediation goals are  then used in the FS to establish
                 refined remedial action objectives and to develop, screen, and perform a
                 detailed analysis of the potential alternatives.
                                            5-1
-------
5.3
5.4
TIMEFRAME

   Baseline Risk Assessment is performed concurrently with site characterization
   and may take up to 12 months to complete.  It should be noted, however, that
   data for the Baseline Risk Assessment usually lags behind fieldwork data.  The
   risk assessment report cannot be written until all sampling data have been
   verified. The timeframe for the Baseline Risk Assessment,  however, will be
   influenced by many factors, including amount of existing site data, complexity
   of the site, contaminants (type, concentration, media affected, pathways, etc.),
   turnaround time for laboratory analysis, number of resampling events, and
   choice of risk models and assumptions used to generate the  remediation goals.


HOW THE RPM OVERSEES A PRP RISK ASSESSMENT

   Procedures for performing a PRP Baseline Risk Assessment are in Volumes 1
   and 2 of the Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (RAGS):

   •   Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume 1, Human Health
       Evaluation  Manual (OSWER Directive No. 9285.701 A, EPA/540/1-89/002,
       December 1989); and

   •   Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume II, Environmental
       Evaluation  Manual, EPA/540/1-89/001, March 1989.

   The RPM must ensure that the PRP and its contractor follow Volume 1 for
   developing a human health evaluation. Volume 2 for developing the
   environmental evaluation or ecological assessment, other guidances listed in
   Section 5.6, and any subsequent guidance on risk assessment. The RPM must
   ensure that there are frequent discussions between EPA Regional risk assessors
   and the PRP and its contractor.

   The RPM, with the assistance of the Regional risk assessors and/or the
   oversight assistant, performs the tasks described in the following sections
   during a PRP Baseline Risk Assessment.
Risk Assessor
Meetings
    During post-AOC scoping, meet with Regional risk assessors (usually one
    assessor for human health and one for the environment) or oversight assistant
    to discuss existing site information (PA/SI or other data); EPA's preliminary
    site conceptual model (chemicals of concern, potential sources of
    contamination, exposure pathways, existing  risks to human health and the
    environment); and the preliminary site objectives and remediation goals.
PRP Work
Plan Contents
for the
Baseline Risk
Assessment
    Ensure that the PRPs' Work Plan is amended and contains a preliminary
    analysis of the following:

    •  Chemicals of concern;

    •  Site objectives including remediation goals;

    •  Potential ARARs affected by the site;

    •  Risk-based levels to be achieved, (PRGs are set at 10"* if the site has no
       chemical-specific ARARs that are deemed to be protective);
                                           5-2
-------
                  •  Populations at risk; and

                  •  The need for interim actions.


PRP Staff and    Verify the technical quality of PRP staff and contractor to perform the risk
Contractor        assessment before the initiation of field activities.

                  During site characterization, verify that for the Baseline Risk Assessment, the
                  following occurs:

                  •  Data Collection

                     -   All key site characteristics including soil/sediment, hydrological,
                         hydrogeological, and meteorological parameters are documented;

                     -   All appropriate media are sampled for existing and potential
                         contamination;

                         All potential "hot spots" as well as appropriate background locations are
                         to be sampled, if necessary;

                     -   The  sampling  maps are sufficiently detailed for locating sampling
                         locations and, if necessary, for assuring that fieldwork space is
                         available for performing sampling activities; and

                     -   The  data reflect EPA's preference to accurately represent contaminant
                         levels, by using unfiltered groundwater/surface water sampling results.

                  •  Data Evaluation

                     -   No site-related chemicals  are eliminated from the risk assessment
                         unless  a valid  explanation is supplied  by the PRP;

                         Sample concentrations are compared to concentrations in the blanks;

                     -   Sample concentrations are compared to background samples;

                         All chemicals  found at the site are listed by the PRP in the  risk
                         assessment; and

                     -   Contaminants of concern are identified for use in the risk assessment.

                  •  Exposure Assessment

                     -   All current and potential future land  uses are  identified;

                     -   All populations of concern, especially any sensitive groups and aquatic
                         and  terrestrial populations, are identified;

                     -   All exposure pathways for each  medium of concern are evaluated;

                         Exposure concentrations reported for each medium represent the 95
                         percent upperbound estimate of the mean;
                                             5-3
-------
                     -   Exposure intakes for each chemical for each exposure scenario are
                        based on reasonable maximum exposure (RME) assumptions;

                     -   The appropriateness of the exposure assumptions used, if different
                        from the standard EPA default values, is evaluated;

                        Appropriate chemical  intakes across pathways within the same media
                        are combined; and

                        Uncertainties in the exposure assumptions are identified by the PRP.

                     Toxicity Assessment

                     -   For noncarcinogenic effects, EPA-verified chronic and subchronic
                        reference dosages (RFDs) for each route of exposure (oral, inhalation,
                        dermal) are used when available;

                     -   For carcinogenic effects, EPA-verified cancer potency factors are used
                        when available;

                        PRPs' selection of toxicity values for all chemicals for which there are
                        no EPA-verified toxicity values must be approved by EPA; and

                     -   Uncertainties in the toxicity information are evaluated by the oversight
                        team.

                     Risk Characterization

                     -   PRPs calculate a cancer risk and/or a hazard  index for each chemical
                        of concern;

                        Aggregate risks or hazard indices for multiple chemicals are presented;

                     -   Total cancer risk and hazard index are estimated;

                     -   Uncertainties in the Baseline Risk Assessment results are evaluated;
                        and

                     -   Results of the Baseline Risk Assessment are compared to the ATSDR
                        Health Assessment for consistency.
Oversight
Team Meeting
Meet, as needed, with members of the oversight team, especially risk assessors,
State, ATSDR, and Natural Resource Trustee representative to review the
PRPs' preparation of the Baseline Risk Assessment. (See the Reviewer
Checklist in Exhibit 9-2 and the Checklist for Manager  Involvement in
Exhibit 9-3 of the Human Health Evaluation Manual (HHEM)).
Technical        Review and comment on PRP technical memoranda (regarding chemicals of
Memoranda      concern, amendments to the Work Plans for performing Baseline Risk
                 Assessment activities, use of exposure scenarios and assumptions, and
                 verification of toxicity values used), included in the draft and final Baseline
                 Risk Assessment (human health evaluation and ecological assessment). See
                 suggested Outline for a Baseline Risk Assessment Report in Exhibit 9-1  of the
                 HHEM.
                                           5-4
-------
Administrative
Record
   Continually update the Administrative Record File and cost recovery
   documentation.
Fact Sheet       If appropriate, the RPM or oversight assistant should develop a fact sheet
                 explaining existing and potential risks to human health and the environment
                 and present it to the public.
5.5
DELIVERABLES DURING OVERSIGHT OF A PRP BASELINE RISK
ASSESSMENT

   The PRP submits, at a minimum, the documents listed below during a PRP
   Baseline Risk Assessment. They should be reviewed by Regional risk
   assessors, other Regional, scientists, and appropriate members of the TST
   (including States) to answer the following questions for each document

   •   Memorandum listing all hazardous substances found at the site and those
       selected as chemicals of potential concern:

       -   Is there a complete list of chemicals  of concern?

   •   Work Plan for evaluating environmental risks to aquatic and terrestrial
       organisms:

           Are  appropriate  media covered by the sampling plan?

       -   Will the sampling locations identify potential routes of migration and
           "hot spots" of contamination?

   •   Memorandum describing all appropriate exposure scenarios and all
       assumptions and exposure factors used to calculate the reasonable
       maximum exposure (RME). This includes a description of any fate and
       transport models:

       -   Are  RMEs identified using exposure concentrations, standard default
           values, and spatial relationships?

       -   Are  current and future land uses addressed?

       -   Are  residential risk and risk to sensitive subpopulations presented
           accurately?

           Are  contaminant pathways for all affected media presented?

       -   Are  there any cross-media transfer effects that need to be considered?

   •   Memorandum listing any toxicity values used and not verified by EPA
       (that is,  not in the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) or the Health
       Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST) databases):

       -   Are  the toxicity values developed according to EPA guidance for
           documentation?

       -   Are  the appropriate toxicity values based on "nature of exposure"?
                                           5-5
-------
                    -   Are the appropriate "route-to-route" extrapolations identified in cases
                        where a toxicity value is applied across "differing" routes of exposure?

                        Are any carcinogens excluded?  Why?

                    Draft and final Baseline Risk Assessment reports (including the human
                    health evaluation and the ecological assessment):

                    -   Is the format consistent with the suggested outline in Exhibit 9-1 of
                        the HHEM?

                    -   Are the necessary items of the Reviewer's Checklist (Exhibit 9-2 of the
                        HHEM) included in the Baseline Risk Assessment?

                        Are the necessary items of the Checklist for Manager Involvement
                        (Exhibit 9-3) included in the Baseline Risk  Assessment?

                    -   Does the Baseline Risk Assessment address all Regional, State and local
                        concerns?
5.6

General
References
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

   •   National Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300.430(d).

   •   Roles of the Baseline Risk Assessment in Superfund Remedy Selection
       Decisions, OSWER Directive No. 9355.0-30, March 1991.

   •   Performance of Risk Assessments in Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
       Studies (RI/FSs) Conducted by Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs),
       OSWER Directive No. 9835.15, August 28, 1990.

   •   Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume 1, HHEM, OSWER
       Directive No. 9285.701 A, EPA/540/1-89/002, December 1989.

   •   Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume II, EEM, EPA/540/
       1-89/001, March 1989.

   •   Ecological Assessment of Hazardous Waste Sites:  A Field and Laboratory
       Reference, EPA/600/3-89/013, March 1989.

   •   Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual (SEAM), OSWER Directive No.
       9285.5-1, April 1,  1988.
Databases
    •   Risk Assistant (ORD database for risk assessments).

    •   IRIS.

    •   HEAST.

    •   AQUIRE (ORD's aquatic toxicity database).
                                          5-6
-------
5.7          RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO RPMS
Personnel        •  Oversight Assistant.
                 •  Regional staff (risk assessors, health and ecological scientists in BSD, ORC,
                    and ATSDR representative).
                 •  Technical Support Team (TST).
                 •  Biological Technical Assistance Group (BTAG).
                 •  Headquarters Staff (OWPE, OGC, OE - Superfund Division).
                 •  Other Federal Agencies - USCOE, USGS, USFWS, Center for Disease
                    Control  (CDC).
                 •  States -  EPA-equivalent Agency, SGS, SFWS, SHPO.

Documents       •  Memorandum listing all hazardous substances found and those selected as
                    chemicals of concern.
                 •  Work Plan for evaluating environmental risk.
                 •  Memorandum describing all appropriate exposure scenarios (based on RME
                    assumptions) and fate and transport  models.
                 •  Memorandum listing any toxicological and epidemiological studies used
                    (supplementing EPA values).
                 •  Draft and final Baseline Risk Assessment report (includes the human
                    health evaluation and the ecological  assessment).
Data
   •   ATSDR Health Assessment and Toxicological Profiles.
   •   Results from all Technical Memoranda.
   •   EPA Standard Values for Exposure and Toxicity.
5.8
HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM
   To avoid project delays during a PRP Baseline Risk Assessment, the RPM
   should look for the following:
   •   Inappropriate elimination of chemicals from the risk assessment by the
       PRP;
   •   Failure of PRP to consider all exposure pathways;
   •   Failure to sum the appropriate hazard indices and cancer risks;
   •   Failure to sample all appropriate media of concern;
   •   Failure to properly estimate the RME concentration for each medium;
                                          5-7
-------
•   Inappropriate exposure scenarios;
•   Failure to address non-cancer effects of carcinogens; and
•   Failure to use non-residential exposure  scenarios when future exposures
    outside of those to residents is likely to  occur.
To  help minimize the time spent on performing and evaluating a PRP Baseline
Risk Assessment, the RPM should:
•   Present PRPs (or PRP contractors) with examples of acceptable Baseline
    Risk Assessments;
•   Have Regional risk assessors meet with  PRP contractors to clarify any
    ambiguity;
•   Check PRP progress on technical memoranda (interim deliverables) before
    final Baseline Risk Assessment report;
•   Check the standard exposure scenarios for similar sites;
•   Establish early the contaminants to be evaluated;
•   Establish early the exposure scenarios to be used; and
•   Notify PRPs and, if necessary, EPA counsel of any noncompliance.
                           5-8
-------
                                       CHAPTER 6

                                TREATABILITY STUDIES


6.1           INTRODUCTION

                 Treatability studies are laboratory or field tests designed to provide the data
                 needed to evaluate and select one or more treatment technologies.  Treatability
                 studies performed during the RI/FS to provide information to support the
                 detailed analysis and remedy selection tasks and to determine whether the
                 potential technology can be expected to achieve the remediation goals set in
                 the FS. Treatability studies  are' performed when a technology cannot be
                 adequately evaluated on the  basis of the existing information.  This may be
                 due to the level of development of the potential technology, the composition
                 of waste, and the nature and representativeness  of the required data.

                 Treatability study activities occur throughout the RI/FS; a literature survey is
                 performed during post-AOC scoping, field studies are performed during the
                 RI, and an analysis of the treatability studies will support the treatment  "
                 alternatives developed and screened during the FS.  The time needed to
                 perform and evaluate treatability studies may be extensive so that beginning
                 treatability studies in post-AOC scoping can help to prevent project delays in
                 the FS and later in the  remedial design/remedial action (RD/RA).  Therefore,
                 treatability studies should be conducted and completed during the  RI.


6.2           PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM

                 During the treatability study task, PRPs identify a general list of treatment
                 technologies, in which  treatment is used to the maximum extent practicable
                 and only where it is practicable. These technologies should address
                 groundwater contamination and the principal threats of contamination. The
                 technologies also  should meet the following capabilities (as stated in NCP
                 Section 300.430(d)):

                 •   Protect human health and the environment;

                 •   Maintain protection over time;

                 •   Minimize the amount of untreated waste;

                 •   Return contaminated ground water to  its previous beneficial uses, if
                     appropriate;

                 •   Reduce the mobility or concentration of contamination by 90 to 99
                     percent, either individually or by treatment trains; and

                 •   Identify, to the extent available,  the use of innovative technologies for
                     treatment of the toxic/mobile contaminants.

                 The goal of the RPM is to determine, with support from the members of the
                 TST, ORD, or  other approved contractor with expertise in treatment
                 technologies, the need for treatability studies early in the RI/FS process (for
                 example, in post-AOC scoping).  The RPM should emphasize  the importance
                 of the following:


                                            6-1
-------
                  •   How acquiring the additional treatability data will satisfy the preliminary
                     remedial objectives and alternatives; and

                  •   How the PRP will use the treatability study data to evaluate alternatives
                     and aid in remedy selection.

                  If the treatability studies are conducted after the RI (during either FS or RA),
                  the time needed to conduct treatability studies can lead to a major project
                  delay.  After treatability studies  have been completed, the RPM, with
                  technical support, should verify  and document the quality of the treatment
                  data generated by each proposed study.


6.3           TIMEFRAME

                  The time necessary for the treatability studies task is directly related  to the
                  number and kind of studies required.  Treatability studies can and should be
                  completed  during site characterization; therefore, these studies can take up to
                  12 months. The completion of treatability studies, however, is dependent on
                  the following:

                  •   Size or complexity of the site;

                  •   Specific site limitations that  would preclude the use of certain treatment
                     technologies;

                  •   Type of treatment data needed: laboratory, bench-scale, and pilot-scale;

                  •   Treatment and residual levels to be attained; and

                  •   Content and quality of the treatability study evaluation report.


6.4           HOW THE RPM OVERSEES TREATABILITY STUDIES

                  During post-AOC scoping, the PRP conducts  a literature survey to determine
                  the need for treatability studies.  The resulting PRP memorandum describes
                  the need (or lack of need) for performing treatability studies,  identifies the
                  treatment and residual levels (for example, MCLs, maximum contaminant level
                  goals (MCLGs), ARARs, PRGs,  etc.) to be attained by performing treatability
                  studies, and lists the potential treatment technologies that may be able to meet
                  these treatment and residual levels.

                  The need for treatability studies  can depend on activities performed after
                  approval of the PRPs' Work Plan (for example, ATSDR's Health Assessment,
                  Site Characterization Summary, Baseline Risk Assessment (EPA or PRP), and
                  the Preliminary  Natural Resource Trustee Survey). Therefore, the PRPs may
                  need to revise or amend the existing PRP Work Plan, SAP, and HSP to include
                  treatability studies.  The RPM, with support from the oversight assistant and
                  TST, should review the PRPs' memorandum and approve the revisions or
                  amendments to the  Project Plans.

                  The RPM  and oversight assistant should perform the activities described in the
                  following sections to oversee the PRPs, either during post-AOC scoping when
                  determining the need for treatability studies, or during site characterization
                                            6-2
-------
                 when determining the applicability and feasibility of using the identified
                 treatment technologies.


Relevant         Supply the PRPs with relevant guidance documents (for example, references
Guidance        listed in Section 2.5). The RPM can contact ORD's SITE Program, Superfund
Documents       Technical Assistance Response Team (START), Treatability Assistance
                 Program (TAP), ATTIC, and other approved contractors with expertise in
                 treatment technologies for assistance.  See Appendix A to access these
                 resources.
Technical
Memorandum
Review and approve the PRPs1 Technical Memorandum that identifies the
candidate technologies and describes how the literature survey was performed
by the PRPs during post-AOC scoping.
Treatment         Meet with the oversight assistant, TST, State, and ORD to comment on the
Technology       adequacy of the list of treatment technologies. Treatment technologies
List               decisions and treatability study type decisions should be performed for each
                  technology (for example, laboratory, bench-scale, or pilot-scale).  (See
                  Figure 6-1.) The PRPs, with support from experts on treatment programs,
                  should devise a schedule for preliminary study to be performed during site
                  characterization.  The RPM should approve the schedule of treatability
                  activities.


PRP Project       If necessary, review the original PRP Project Plans (Work Plan, SAP, HSP) and
Plans             revise or amend the  Project Plans to include a detailed description and
Amended for      explanation of the need for and kind(s)  of treatability studies to be performed,
Treatability       or reason(s) not to perform, a particular study.  The RPM should make sure
Studies           that the  amended Project Plans adequately consider innovative technologies.

                  Note:  These last two steps correspond to the first step during site
                        characterization.  Plans  to describe which activities need to be
                        performed, who will perform  these activities, and what will be gained
                        from performing these activities must be in place prior to  the initiation
                        of field activity.


Treatability       Prior to  PRP initiation of activities relating to treatability studies, the RPM or
Studies           oversight assistant should verify the following:

                  •  Qualifications of the PRPs, PRP contractors, and laboratory to perform
                     each study;

                  •  Proper protocols that conform to CLP protocols will be used by the PRP
                     laboratory;

                  •  Reasons for,  or expectations of, each study (for example, identify
                     remediation goals to be met that protect human health and the
                     environment; comply with ARARs (Federal or State),  including land
                     disposal restrictions (LDRs); reduce waste toxicity,  mobility, or volume,
                     for delisting a RCRA waste);
                                            6-3
-------
Figure 6-1. Kinds of Treatability Studies
                  Laboratory Screening
                         Studies
                                Bench-Scale Testing
                                  Pilot-Scale Testing
 Purpose
To determine whether a tech-
nology is potentially viable to
treat a waste.
To identify a technology's
performance on a waste-
specific basis for an operable
unit.
To provide quantitative perfor-
mance and cost data and to
optimize design parameters on
an operable unit.
 Approximate
 Cost
$10Kto$50K
$50K to $250K
$250Kto$l,OOOK
Timeframe
Hours or days to complete.
Days or weeks to complete.
Months to complete.
 Result
To decide whether to proceed
with bench- or pilot-scale
testing.
To decide whether to pro-
ceed to pilot-scale or
whether the technology can
meet expected remediation
goals and can support the
nine evaluation criteria in
the detailed analysis portion
oftheFS.
To determine whether the
technology can meet expected
remediation goals and support
the use of innovative technolo-
gies.
 Data Needed
 for Decision
Qualitative with less "statisti-
cal significance" needed;
fewer process parameters are
included in the evaluation.
(Note: Generally not used as
a sole basis for selecting a
remedy.)
Quantitative performance
estimate and rough cost data.
Quantitative performance and
cost data, data on operational
parameters, and data on side
streams and residuals.  (Note:
The data should provide proof
that the technology can meet
remediation goals.)
-------
                 •   Equipment to be used in each study; and

                 •   Validation of the data that will be generated from performing each study.

                 Note:  There is a presumption that response actions involving the placement
                        of treated soil and debris contaminated with RCRA-regulated wastes
                        will utilize a Treatability Variance to comply with LDRs and that,
                        under these variances, the treatment levels outlined in Superfund
                        Guide *6A (OSWER Directive No. 9347.3-06FS, July 1989 and revised
                        March 1990) will serve as alternative "treatment standards."


Site Visit         Conduct a site visit during an initial stage of a treatability study, especially if
                 the potential treatment technology will involve the use of an in  situ  process or
                 will include how to  ascertain the emissions resulting from any excavation.  The
                 RPM also can oversee the feasibility of  using a treatment process as well as
                 verifying  the data generated by  the treatment study.


Treatability      Review and approve the draft PRP Treatability Study Evaluation Report with
Study            input and comments from the TST, ORD, other support staff, and State to
Evaluatioa       ensure that:
Report
                 •   The performed work satisfies Federal and State requirements to  conduct
                     the test;

                 •   Technologies for treatment include innovative technologies where possible;

                 •   The type and volume of waste to be treated, media of contamination, and
                     area required for treatment process are identified;

                 •   Treatment levels (for example, land ban, percentage or order of  magnitude
                     reduction expected, MCLs (or MCLGs greater  than zero) satisfied) are
                     discussed;

                 •   Residual levels (e.g. RCRA clean closure, National Pollutant Discharge
                     Elimination System (NPDES) limits, and RCRA delisting, as appropriate)
                     are discussed; and

                 •   The assumptions, implementation requirements, specific  limitations, and
                     uncertainties used at the site are explained.


Administrative    Continually update the Administrative Record File and cost  recovery
Record File      documentation.


6.5           DELIVERABLES DURING TREATABILITY STUDIES
                                                                     >>
                 The deliverables relating to treatability  studies will be submitted by the PRPs
                 during the post-AOC scoping and the site characterization tasks. During post-
                 AOC scoping, the RPM will review  and approve the PRPs' Technical
                 Memorandum Identifying Candidate Technologies and review and approve or
                 comment  on revisions or amendments to the PRP Project Plans  (Work Plan,
                 SAP, HSP). During site characterization, the RPM will review and approve
                 the draft and final PRP Treatability Study Evaluation Report.


                                           6-5
-------
As a guide for reviewing the PRP treatability study deliverables, the RPM
should use the "effectiveness of treatment technology for contaminated soils"
matrix presented in Figure 6-2 (taken from the "Summary of Treatment
Technology Effectiveness for Contaminated Soils," EPA/540/2-89/053,
February  1989).  This figure identifies which treatment technology is effective
or ineffective on a particular type of soil contaminant until EPA develops
standard soil cleanup levels.  The RPM can obtain additional, up-to-date
information by contacting ORD's SITE Program and ATTIC database.

The PRP deliverables during treatability studies should answer questions in the
following  categories:

•  Technical Memorandum Identifying Candidate Technologies

       Does this memorandum address innovative technologies, as appropriate,
       such as those  developed in ORD's SITE Program?

       Is  it clear which treatability studies will be needed and why, or which
       studies will not  be needed and why not?

       Do experts from ORD or TST concur on the kinds and number of
       treatability studies that the PRPs should perform?  What about
       qualifications of all parties to conduct the treatability studies?

   -   Will the samples collected for treatabifity studies be representative of
       the contaminated media even when multiple kinds of hazardous
       substances are present?

   -   Does the memorandum contain a discussion of treatment and residual
       levels  that can be attained by each treatability study?

   -   Do the proposed technologies correspond to the predicted treatment
       effectiveness  for contaminated soil (see Figure 6-2), if applicable?

•  Revised or Amended PRP Project Plans

   -   Do the original  or amended Work Plan, SAP, and HSP address  the need
       for treatability studies?

   -   Does the PRP treatment process meet EPA protocols?
                                                           %
   -   Have the TST, ORD, State, or other experts agreed on the revisions or
       amendments to  the PRP Project Plans?

•  Interim and Final Treatability Study Evaluation Report

   -   Did the report document a complete description of the following:

       -- Name  and type of treatability study;
       — Reason for and usefulness of conducting study;
       -- Treatment and residual levels to be attained, if known;
       ~ Personnel that conducted study;
       — Name  of laboratory evaluating data; and
       -- Results of study - What worked?  What didn't work and why?
                          6-6
-------
Figure 6.2  Potential Treatment Effectiveness For Contaminated Soil
Example
Contaminant
DDT.
DDE
Vinyl Chloride
Trichloioethylene
Toxaphsne, Lindane
TNT.RDX
Benene, Toluene
TCH.PCE

Chromium, Copper,
Aluminum, Zinc
Arsenic, Cadmium, Lead,
Mercury, Silver
~~~"""--- — .^"Technology
Treatablllty Group" 	 ^_
Non-polar Halogenated
Aromalici
(WO1)
PCBt. Halogenated Dioxins,
Furans, and their Precursors
(W02)
Halogenated Phenols, Cresols,
Amines . Thiob, and Other Polar
Aromalici (WO3)
Halogenated
Aliphatic Compound*
(WO4)
Halogenated Cyclic Aliphatic*.
Elben. Esters, and Ketonet
(W05)
Niiraled Compoundi
(WO6)
Heterocyclici and Simple
Non-halogenaled Aromatici
(WOT)
'Potynuctear
Aromalici
(WO8)
Other Polar Non-halogenMed
Organic Compounds
(W09)
Non- volatile
Metals
(W1Q)
Volatile
Metals
(Wll)
Thermal
Destruction
•
•
•3
•
•
•
•
•
•
o1
xl
Dechlorlnatlon
Q
0
Q
«2
e1
o1
o2
o2
o2
o1
o1
Bloremedlatlon
Q3
Q
Q
c2
Q1
e
Q2
e
Q2
OX1
ox1
Low Temperature
Thermal Desorptlon
• 0
o1
e
•
o1
o1
•
o
Q
o1
o1
Chemical Extraction
and Soil Washing
O
Q
e
Q
Q1
Q
Q
O
Q
e
Q
ImmobiUzatlon
9
Q1
Q3
Q2
Q1
Q1
O2
d
Q2
•3
•
  9   Demonstrated Effectiveness (>90% average removal efficiency)

  Q   Potenlial Effectiveness (>70% average removal efficiency)

  Q   No Expected Effectiveness (no expected interference to process)
                                (<70% average removal efficiency)

  X    No Expected Effectiveness (potential adverse effects to environment or process)
1  Data were not available for this treaubility group. Conclusions are drawn from data for compounds
  with similar physical and chemical characteristics.

  High removal efficiencies implied by the data may be due to volatilization or soil washing.

1  The predicted effectiveness may be different than the data imply, due to limitations in the test
  conditions.

  These technologies may have limited applicability to high levels of organics and should not be used for
  volatile organics.
                                              Source: Summary of Treatment Technology Effectiveness for Contaminated Soil EPA/54(V2-89/053
-------
                    -   Did the treatment technology data generated satisfy QA/QC concerns?

                       Have the treatability study results been reviewed by experts on the
                       TST, ORD, ESD, and State?

                    -   Are the treatability study results documented in the draft and final RI
                       Report?
6.6

General
References
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

   •   National Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300.430(d).

   •   Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies Under CERCLA, EPA/540/2-
       89/058, ORD, December 1989.

   •   Treatability Studies Under CERCLA: An Overview OSWER Directive No.
       9380.3-02FS, December 1989.

   •   Guidance for Conducting RI/FS Under CERCLA, OSWER Directive No.
       9355.3-01, Chapter 5, October 1988.

   •   The Remedial Investigation - Site Characterization and Treatability
       Studies, OSWER Directive No. 9355,3-01FS2, November  1989.

   •   Enforcement Project Management Handbook, OSWER Directive No.
       9837.2-A, January 1991.

   •   Guide to Treatment Technologies for Hazardous Wastes at Superfund Sites,
       EPA/540/2-89/052, March 1989.

   •   Model Statement of Work for RI/FS Conducted by PRPs, OSWER
       Directive No. 9835.8, June 2, 1989.
Treatability
References
       Compendium of Technologies Used in Treatment of Hazardous Wastes,
       EPA/625/8-87/014, ORD/CERI, September 1, 1987.

       Inventory of Treatability Study Vendors Vol. 1 and Vol. 2, Draft Interim
       Final, Pre-publication version, December 1989.
                                                      •v
       Treatment Technologies for Hazardous Wastes at Superfund Sites - A
       guide, EPA/540/2-89/052, OERR, February 1989.

       Technology Screening Guide for Treatment of CERCLA Soils and Sludges,
       EPA/540/2-88/004, OERR, September 1,  1988.

       Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Strategy and Program
       Plan, OSWER Directive No. 9380.2-3, December 1986.

       Analysis of Treatability Data for Soil and Debris: Evaluation of Land Ban
       Impact on Use of Superfund Treatment Technologies, OSWER Directive
       No. 9380.3-04,  November 30, 1989.
                                         6-8
-------
Present and
Future
References
6.7

Personnel
   Treatment Technology Bulletins, which are being developed by OERR and
   ORD. The initial bulletins will address the following:

   •  Soil Washing Treatment (EPA/540/2-90/017, September 1990).

   •  Slurry Biodegration (EPA/540/2-90/016, September 1990).

   •  Chemical Dehalogenation Treatment  APEG Treatment (EPA/540/2-
      90/015, September 1990).

   •  Solvent Extraction Treatment (EPA/540/2-90/013, September 1990).

   •  Mobile/Transportable Incineration Treatment (EPA/540/2-90/014,
      September 1990).

   •  Soil Washing and Solvent Extraction.

   •  APEG Treatment.

   •  Slurry Biodegradation and Incineration.

   •  Low Temperature Thermal Desorption.

   •  In Situ Biodegradation.

   •  In Situ Vitrification.

   •  In Situ Steam Extraction.

   •  In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction.

   Due  in FY91:

   •  Granular Activated Carbon Treatment.

   •  EPA Technology Preselection Data Requirements.

   •  In Situ Soil Flushing.

   •  Chemical Oxidation Treatment.

   •  Control of Air Emissions from Material Handling.

   •  Air Stripping of Liquids.

   More information on  these bulletins can be obtained by contacting the ORD
   office in Cincinnati, OH (FTS) 398-8444.


RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM

   •  Regional Staff (Peer Review, TST, ORC, Management Review Team,
      ESD).

   •  Oversight Assistant.
                                          6-9
-------
                 •   ORD (Technology Support Centers, SITE, START, TAP, ATTIC,
                     Technology Forums).
                 •   Headquarters Staff (OWPE, OGC, OE - Superfund Division).
                 •   Other Federal Agencies (USCOE, USDA-SCS).
                 •   States.
                 •   CLP or non-CLP Laboratories.

Documents       •   Original or amended Project Plans (Work Plan, SAP, HSP).
                 •   List of Candidate Technologies.
                 •   ORD Publications and Databases.
Data             •   Site characterization data.
                 •   Sampling analysis and well drilling core data.
                 •   Literature search.
                 •   Kinds of Studies - laboratory, bench-scale, or pilot-scale.
                 •   Treatment and residual levels to be attained.

6.8           HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM
                 During the treatability study task, the RPM should ensure that:
                 •   PRP Project Plans address treatability studies;
                 •   Treatment technologies focus on ground water and on the principal threats
                     to  protect human health and the environment, maintain this protection
                     over time, and minimize the amount of untreated waste;
                 •   Treatment technologies address concerns  relating to emissions during
                     excavations;
                 •   Treatment and residual levels are identified for each treatability study;
                 •   Only technologies that are not cost prohibitive and that are potentially
                     effective in treating the waste should be considered;
                 •   Advice can be obtained from members of the TST, ORD, State, or other
                     expert support staff on the number and type of treatability studies to be
                     performed;
                 •   Innovative technologies have been considered to  the extent practicable; and
                                           6-10
-------
•   PRPs obtain representative samples, properly ship hazardous materials,
    properly dispose of test residuals, and identify the risks to communities
    and workers during each test.

To help minimize the time spent on treatability studies, the RPM should:

•   Verify, in post-AOC scoping, the need for treatability studies and the list
    of candidate technologies;

•   Contact a representative from ORD to obtain latest information on
    conducting  treatability studies and obtain the most current list of
    demonstrated and innovative treatment technologies;

•   Include a representative from one of ORD's programs on the  TST, or
    ensure that  one is present during one of the post-AOC scoping meeting;

•   Determine early in post-AOC scoping the type of treatability studies
    needed -  laboratory, bench-scale, pilot-scale;

•   Verify the qualifications of the participants, the laboratory, and the
    equipment that will perform the studies;

•   Notify PRPs and, if necessary, EPA counsel of any noncompliance;

•   Review content of draft and final Treatability Study Evaluation Report
    deliverable  and request comments from TST, ORD, and State; and

•   Make sure that sufficient information on the treatment technologies is
    collected  to determine whether the technology can achieve remediation
    goals and support the FS analysis based on  the nine  evaluation criteria.
                          6-11
-------
                                       CHAPTER 7

                  DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES


7.1           INTRODUCTION

                 The process of developing and analyzing an appropriate list of RA alternatives
                 (usually no more than four to five for a site of average complexity) is one of
                 the initial tasks of the FS. This list of RA alternatives uses the PRGs
                 generated in post-AOC scoping, modified when appropriate (using the RI and
                 ARARs) to  refine remediation goals and establish the performance standards
                 to be attained at each particular site. After the performance standards are
                 refined, remedial action alternatives should be  compared to the expectations
                 (stated in the NCP Section 300.430), which include:

                 •   Treatment controls to address principal threats of contamination;

                 •   Engineering (or containment) controls to address low-level threats or
                     where treatment is impracticable;

                 •   A combination of treatment, engineering, and institutional controls where
                     appropriate;

                 •   Institutional controls (such as water use and deed restrictions) as
                     supplements to engineering controls;

                 •   Innovative technologies which offer the potential for comparable or
                     superior treatement performance when compared to the performance of
                     demonstrated technologies; and

                 •   Return usable ground waters to their beneficial uses wherever practicable
                     in a reasonable timeframe.

                 Note:  Development of a range of alternatives  may not be  necessary in all
                        situations (for example, sites with large volumes of  low level
                        contamination, sites where treatment is  impracticable, and sites where
                        treatment of the entire site is cost prohibitive). In these situations, the
                        formal screening process may not be necessary due  to the limited
                        number of alternatives.

                 The aim of this task is to devise a complete and concise list of remedial
                 alternatives  and screen this list, if necessary, according to cost, effectiveness,
                 and implementability.  Screening may not be needed if only a small number of
                 alternatives  are developed by the PRP (see note above). In either case, the
                 PRP must generate  a comprehensive list that covers the range of reasonable
                 alternatives  from which the RPM  will be able to select a proposed remedy.


7.2           PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM

                 During the development and screening of alternatives, the  PRP should develop
                 a reasonable range of preliminary alternatives to  meet the preliminary remedial
                 action goals and then screen the alternatives that are not effective, or
                 implementable, or that are grossly excessive in  cost.
                                            7-1
-------
                 When developing a preliminary list of the alternatives, the RPM should review
                 the alternatives for completeness and accuracy, and for technologies which
                 have shown potential success at other sites, or which are innovative and offer
                 the potential for comparable or superior treatment performance.

                 When screening alternatives, the RPM should ensure that only those
                 alternatives that are unnecessary, duplicative, or impracticable or  eliminated.

                 The most efficient way for the PRP to present the range of alternatives is as
                 an alternatives array document, which usually contains the following:

                 •   Media of concern;

                 •   Remedial action objectives;

                 •   General response actions;

                 •   Remedial technology and type;

                 •   Process options based on technical practicability;

                 •   An evaluation of the options based on effectiveness, implementability, and
                     cost; and

                 •   An alternative based on the control or combination of controls to
                     remediate the affected media.

                 An example of an alternatives array document is provided in the RI/FS
                 Guidance, Figure  4-6.  The alternatives array document should be part of the
                 final FS Report.
7.3           TIMEFRAME
                  The development and screening of alternatives begins while site
                  characterization activities are underway and field information is gathered on
                  the alternatives. The initial task of the FS, development and  analysis of the
                  alternatives, should take up to three months.  The completion of this task is
                  dependent on the following factors:
                  •  Size or complexity of the site;

                  •  Number of operable units, if necessary;

                  •  Number of location- and action-specific ARARs triggered (particularly
                     land disposal restriction (LDR));

                  •  Number of alternatives that  need to be developed; and

                  •  Content and quality of the alternatives array document to be included in
                     the FS Report.
                                            7-2
-------
7.4
HOW TO OVERSEE THE DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF
ALTERNATIVES

   During pre-RI/FS negotiation scoping, the RPM and oversight assistant should
   have developed a nondetailed conceptual model  and identified preliminary site
   objectives, including site remediation goals.  During post-AOC scoping, the
   conceptual model and site objectives, and remediation goals may have been
   modified by EPA, or in limited cases by the PRPs and approved by EPA.
   Modifications may have been included in the PRP Project Plans and used to
   help determine the need to perform field activities. During the development
   and screening process, PRPs use existing data from all of the planning and
   field activities, and the site performance standards established by the oversight
   team, to devise a list of alternatives that address how to treat or control all
   hazardous substances at the site, including any residuals.

   The RPM and the oversight assistant can oversee the PRPs' development and
   screening of alternatives by performing the activities described in the
   following sections.
Oversight
Team Meeting
    Meet with the oversight team to establish site performance standards and
    review the PRPs' refined conceptual model and site objectives, including
    remediation goals, for consistency with performance standards.
Relevant
Guidance
   Supply the PRPs (and subcontractors) with relevant guidance.  Give the PRPs
   an example of an alternative array document and the contents  of an alternative
   description. The description of each alternative should address the following:

   •   Approximate volumes of material to be remediated;

   •   Implementation of requirements and timetables;

   •   Method of remediation and general response actions for each medium;

   •   Remedial technologies (treatment or containment) and process options;

   •   Monitoring procedures;

   •   Capital, operation and maintenance (O & M) costs;

   •   Need for 5-year review; and

   •   ARARs triggered (particularly LDRs).
Focus the FS     Use the NCP expectations (see Figure 2-5, Program Overview) to focus the FS
                 on only those alternatives that are appropriate to the site circumstances,
                 including the following:

                 •   The site is straightforward and it would be inappropriate to develop a full
                     range of alternatives;

                 •   The need for prompt action outweighs the need to examine all appropriate
                     alternatives (in this case, an interim or removal action would be the
                                           7-3
-------
                    appropriate avenue and an Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA)
                    may be necessary); and

                 •  ARARs, relevant guidance, or precedents at other sites indicate that there
                    are only a limited number of alternative.

                 Note:   The EE/CA is an analysis of removal alternatives conducted for a site
                        when a removal action is  appropriate.


ARARs and       Have the PRPs develop a list of action-specific ARARs and draft a technical
Technical        memorandum documenting the revised remedial action objectives based on
Memoranda       EPA's Baseline Risk Assessment. (Remember that chemical- and location-
                 specific ARARs were developed  in post-AOC scoping.) This technical
                 memorandum needs  to address source control actions and groundwater
                 response actions.
                   •
                 Sources of ARAR guidance include:

                 •  NCP Preamble, 55  Federal Register 8740-66 (March 8, 1990).

                 •  CERCLA Compliance With Other Laws Manual, EPA/540/G-89/006,
                    August 1988.

                 •  CERCLA Compliance With Other Laws Manual, Part II. Clean Air Act and
                    Other Environmental Statutes and State Requirements,  EPA/540/G-
                    89/009, August 1989.
Meeting
Conduct a meeting with oversight assistant and TST (including State), to
discuss the ARARs identified for the site and how the PRPs can meet these
ARARs (or obtain a waiver).
Range of         Review the PRPs1 range of alternatives against the program goals and
Alternatives      expectations (see the preamble to the final NCP, 55 Federal Register 8666, pp.
                 8702-8707, or Section 300.430(aXlX"i)) to see if the PRPs' proposed
                 technologies can help guide the development of alternatives, as well as satisfy
                 the individual site objectives so that the PRPs fully consider the most
                 promising alternatives. (See the RI/FS Guidance for an example of a generic
                 alternative development process. Also see Figure 4-2.)


Screened         Review the PRPs' screened alternatives (if the number of alternatives requires
Alternatives      screening) to ensure that alternatives satisfy the NCP's cost, effectiveness and
                 implementability criteria. Examine how the alternatives will meet Federal and
                 State ARARs or whether a waiver of ARARs will be necessary. (See the
                 RI/FS Guidance for an example of the screening process.)


Technical        Review, with the oversight assistant and members of the TST, the content of
Memoranda      the technical memorandum summarizing the work performed and the results of
Review           each activity, including the alternative array document.
                                           7-4
-------
Administrative
Record File
   Document the development and screening process in the Administrative
   Record File and compile information for cost recovery documentation.
Fact Sheet        If appropriate, have the oversight assistant or PRP create a fact sheet to release
                 to the public on the results of the development and screening process.
7.5
DELIVERABLES DURING DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF
ALTERNATIVES

   The RPM approves and comments on the PRPs' Technical Memorandum
   Documenting the Revised Remedial Action Objectives and the Technical
   Memorandum on Remedial Technologies, Alternatives, and Screening. The
   RPM will verify that these deliverables answer the following types of
   questions:

   •   Memorandum Documenting the Revised Remedial Action Objectives

       -  Does this memorandum specify each contaminant and media of
          concern?

          Does this memorandum identify each exposure route and receptor?

       -  Does this memorandum identify EPA's remediation goals for each
          exposure route?

   •   Memorandum on Remedial Technologies,  Alternatives, and Screening

       -  Does this memorandum identify which media are affected and how the
          response actions, remedial technologies (including innovative
          technologies), and representative process options are developed for
          each medium?

       -  Did the PRPs consider NCP expectations to develop the alternatives?

       -  Does the PRP range of alternatives address, as needed, the appropriate
          site controls - treatment, engineering (or containment), institutional, or
          a combination of treatment, engineering, or institutional - and a no-
          action alternative?

       -  Did the PRPs screen the alternatives using grossly excessive cost,
          effectiveness, and implementability in accordance with the NCP
          Section  300.430(eX7)?

       -  Does a preliminary review suggest that each alternative will meet
          identified ARARs or that a waiver of ARARs will  be appropriate?

       -  Does this memorandum contain complete descriptions of each
          alternative and an alternatives array document?

       -  Was there noncompliance which warrants notification to the PRPs and,
          if necessary, to EPA counsel?
                                           7-5
-------
7.6
7.7

Personnel
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

   •  National Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300.430

   •  Guidance for Conducting RI/FS Under CERCLA, OSWER Directive No.
      9355.3-01, Chapter 4, October 1988.

   •  The Feasibility Study - Development and Screening of Remedial Action
      Alternatives, OSWER Directive No. 9355.3-01FS3, November 1989.

   •  Enforcement Project Management Handbook, OSWER Directive No.
      9837.2-A, January 1991.

   •  Model Statement of Work for RI/FS Conducted by PRPs, OSWER
      Directive No. 9835.8, June 2, 1989.

   •  CERCLA Compliance With Other Laws, OSWER Directive No. 9234.1-
      010, August 8,  1988.

   •  CERCLA Compliance With Other Laws Manual: Part II. Clean Air Act
      and Other Environmental Statutes and State Requirements, OSWER
      Directive No. 9234.1-02, August 1989.

   •  Compendium of Technologies Used in Treatment of Hazardous Wastes,
      EPA/625/8-87/014, September 1, 1987.


RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM

   •  Regional Staff (Peer Review, TST, ORC, ESD).

   •  Oversight Assistant.

   •  ORD  (Technology Support Centers, START and SITE Programs,
      Technology Forum Representatives).

 *  •  Headquarters Staff (OWPE, OGC, OE - Superfund Division).

   •  Other Federal Agencies (ERT, USCOE).

   •  States.
Documents       •  Project Plans (Work Plan, SAP, HSP).

                •  Site Characterization Summary.

                •  Baseline Risk Assessment Report.

                •  Treatability Study Evaluation Report.

                •  Draft RI Report.
                                         7-6
-------
Data              •   List of remedial action objectives.
                  •   List of remedial technologies.
                  •   List of Federal and State ARARs.
                  •   Site Characterization Data.
                  •   Baseline Risk Assessment Data.
                  •   Treatability Study Data.,

7.8           HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM
                  During the alternatives development and screening task, the RPM should
                  address the following:
                  •   Alternatives that address worst problems first;
                  •   Alternatives that follow the NCP expectations;
                  •   Alternatives that are not grossly  excessive in cost, are effective and
                     implementable, and practicable; and
                  •   Alternatives that satisfy site objectives.
                  To help minimize the time spent on  developing and screening of alternatives,
                  the RPM should:
                  •   Focus, during post-AOC scoping, on the PRPs' preliminary list of
                     alternatives in its Project Plans;
                  •   Supply the PRPs with an alternative array document and an outline for
                     each alternative's description;
                  •   Verify the PRPs1 action-specific and location-specific ARARs with the
                     oversight assistant and TST (including State and other Federal agencies);
                  •   Review the PRPs' screening process to identify alternatives that satisfy
                     cost, effectiveness, and implementability criteria in NCP Section
                     300.430(eX7);
                  •   Realize that in certain site situations, the  PRPs will not need to develop a
                     full range of alternatives for each contaminant or medium of concern; and
                  •   Notify PRPs and, if necessary, EPA counsel of any noncompliance in
                     performing this task.
                                            7-7
-------
                                       CHAPTER 8

                        DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES


8.1           INTRODUCTION

                 Detailed analysis of developed and screened alternatives is the final task of the
                 FS prior to issuance of the draft and final FS Report.  Detailed analysis
                 involves evaluating each screened alternative against EPA's set of nine
                 evaluation criteria and then comparing the relative performance of the
                 alternatives against the criteria.  The nine evaluation criteria should serve as a
                 tool for selecting the  appropriate remedy. The aim of the RPM is to document
                 the detailed analysis through review and approval of a PRP-generated
                 memorandum, which summarizes the results of the comparative analysis. The
                 PRPs develop a draft and final FS Report, which also requires EPA review
                 and approval.


8.2           PURPOSE AND GOAL FOR THE RPM

                 During the detailed analysis of alternatives, the PRPs evaluate how the
                 screened alternatives  compare with EPA's nine evaluation criteria. The PRP
                 also should compare each of the screened alternatives against eachother to
                 identify the key tradeoffs between the potential remedies.  A viable remedy
                 will be an alternative that is protective of human health and the environment,
                 complies with or justifies a waiver of ARARs, is cost-effective, and utilizes
                 permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies to the maximum
                 extent practicable.


8.3           TIMEFRAME

                 The detailed analysis  of alternatives, like the development and screening
                 phases, is a non-field activity that can take up to two months.  The completion
                 of the detailed analysis, however, is dependent on the following:

                 •  Size or complexity of the site;

                 •  Number and range of alternatives; and

                 •  Content and quality of the detailed analysis study in a PRP memorandum
                    and a draft  and final FS Report.


8.4           HOW TO OVERSEE THE DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES

                 During the previous task of developing and screening  alternatives, alternatives
                 were identified that satisfy the cost, effectiveness, and  implementability
                 criteria. The PRPs now evaluate each screened alternative against EPA's nine
                 evaluation criteria (see Figure 8-1) where each criterion is given equal weight.
                 As part of this evaluation, the PRPs compare each screened alternative against
                 each other and  identifies any key tradeoffs that may be helpful to consider
                 during the selection of remedy phase.
                                           8-1
-------
Figure 8-1. Summary of Nine Evaluation Criteria
            For additional information on the Nine Evaluation Criteria, see the
            NCP,40CFR300.430(d)
  1.
  2.
  3.
  4.
  5.
  6.
  7.
  8.
  9.
Overall protection of human health and the environment — describes how
existing and potential risks from pathways of concern are eliminated, reduced, or
controlled through treatment, engineering controls, institutional controls or by a
combination of controls.

Compliance with ARARs — addresses whether an alternative meets its
respective chemical-, location-, and action-specific requirements or can invoke a
waiver for an ARAR.

Long-term effectiveness and permanence — evaluates performance alternatives
in protecting human health and the environment after response objectives have
been met and includes:

~  Magnitude of residual risk (untreated waste and treatment residuals)
~  Adequacy and reliability of controls (engineering and institutional) used
   to manage untreated waste and treatment residuals over time.


Reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume through treatment — assesses
performance of alternatives in terms of reducing toxicity, mobility, or volume
through treatment and whether or not statutory preference for treatment as a
principal element is satisfied.

Short-term effectiveness — addresses the impacts of alternatives on human
health and the environment during construction and implementation until
response objectives are met and the length of time until protection is achieved.

Implementability — assesses degree of difficulty and uncertainties with
undertaking specific technical and administrative steps and the availability of
various service and materials.

Cost — addresses costs of construction (capital) and necessary costs of
operation and maintenance (present worth analysis assumes 10 percent discount
rate, and the period of performance for costing purposes should not exceed 30
years).

State (support agency)  acceptance — evaluates technical and administrative
issues and concerns the support agency may have regarding each of the
alternatives.

Community acceptance — evaluates issues and concerns the community may
have for each alternative.
                                     8-2
-------
                 The RPM and oversight assistant can oversee the detailed analysis of
                 alternatives by performing the activities described in the following sections.
Relevant
Guidance
   Supply the PRPs (and subcontractors) with relevant guidance. Give the PRPs
   a good example of a detailed analysis memorandum and an FS Report.
Screened         Review the PRPs' analysis of each screened alternative against each of EPA's
Alternatives      nine evaluation criteria with the oversight contractor and TST.

                 Note:  This is a qualitative evaluation where each criterion is evaluated on a
                        relative basis.

                 Note:  The oversight team should scrutinize any containment-only remedies
                        and determine if there are any "hot spots" of contamination that should
                        be addressed through treatment.


Comparative      Review the PRPs' comparative analysis of alternatives against each other and
Analysis         identify key tradeoffs (strengths and weaknesses) among the alternatives.


Management      Conduct a management review meeting with Regional managers, oversight
Review           assistant, TST, and State to review the comparative study in the detailed
                 analysis memorandum and FS Report.
Administrative
Record File
   Document the FS report in the Administrative Record File and update
   expenses for cost recovery documentation purposes.
Fact Sheet       If appropriate, develop a fact sheet or assign it to the oversight assistant to
                 allow public input and/or conduct a public meeting on the FS Report.
                 (Alternatively, public input on the FS Report can be obtained in conjunction
                 with the Proposed Plan.)
Final FS
Report
   Consider comments on the FS Report from the State and incorporate these
   comments, if applicable, into the final FS Report.
8.5
DELIVERABLES DURING THE DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES

   During the detailed analysis task, the RPM reviews and approves the following
   PRP deliverables: the Technical Memorandum Summarizing the Results of the
   Individual and Comparative Analyses of Alternatives and the draft and final
   FS Report. The RPM should verify that these deliverables answer questions in
   the following areas:

   •   Memorandum Summarizing the Results of the Comparative Analysis of
       Alternatives

          Does this memorandum address each of the nine evaluation criteria?
                                           8-3
-------
8.6
8.7
Personnel
       -   Does this memorandum include a comparison of alternatives against
          each other to identify tradeoffs?
   •   Draft FS Report
       -   Similar questions as above.
       -   Are the strengths and weaknesses of the different alternatives clearly
          described between each other?

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
   •   National Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300.430(d).
   •   Guidance for Conducting RI/FS Under CERCLA, OSWER Directive No.
       9355.3-01, Chapter 6, October 1988.
   •   Enforcement Project Management Handbook, OSWER Directive No.
       9837.2-A, January 1991.
   •   Model Statement Work for RI/FS Conducted by PRPs, OSWER Directive
       No. 983S.8, June 2, 1989.
   •   CERCLA Compliance With Other Laws, OSWER Directive No. 9234.1-
       010, August 8, 1988.
   •   CERCLA Compliance With Other Laws Manual: Part II. Clean Air Act
       and Other Environmental Statutes and State Requirements, OSWER
       Directive No. 9234.1-02, August 1989.
   •   Compendium of Technologies Used in Treatment of Hazardous Wastes,
       EPA/625/8-87/014, September 1, 1987.

RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE RPM
   •   Regional Staff (Peer Review, TST, ORC, ESD).
   •   Oversight Assistant.
   •   ORD (Technology  Support Centers, START and SITE Programs,
       Technology Forum Representatives).
   •   Headquarters Staff (OWPE, OGC, OE - Superfund Division).
   •   Other Federal Agencies (ERT, USCOE).
   •   States.
Documents       •  Project Plans (Work Plan, SAP, HSP).
                •  Site Characterization Summary.
                •  Baseline Risk Assessment Report.
                                        8-4
-------
                  •   Treatability Study Evaluation Report.
                  •   Draft RI Report.
                  •   Revised Remedial Action Objectives Memorandum.
                  •   Remedial Technologies, Alternatives, and Screening Memorandum.

Data              •   List of revised remedial action  objectives.
                  •   List of revised remedial technologies.
                  •   List of Federal and State ARARs.
                  t   Site Characterization Data.
                  •   Baseline Risk Assessment Data.
                  •   Treatability Study Data.
                  •   List of Screened Alternatives, if applicable.

8.8           HELPFUL HINTS FOR THE RPM
                  During the detailed analysis of alternatives task, the RPM should ensure that:
                  •   PRPs addresses all nine criteria in its detailed analysis;
                  •   PRPs compares each screened alternative against each other,
                  •   RPM receives input from the oversight assistant, TST (including State),
                     and the Regional management  review team on the completeness of the
                     detailed analysis;
                  •   PRPs are not slanting analysis of alternatives, without the appropriate
                     justification, towards no or little action;
                  •   PRPs are not slanting analysis of alternatives, without the appropriate
                     justification, towards the least  costly remedy; and
                  •   Alternatives are protective of human health and the environment and meet
                     ARAR(s) or can qualify for a waiver of ARARs.
                  The RPM can help minimize the time spent on the detailed analysis of
                  alternatives by:
                  •   Supplying the PRPs with sample documents of a detailed analysis technical
                     memorandum and an FS Report;
                  •   Ensuring that the PRP analyzes each screened alternative against each of
                     the nine evaluation criteria without assigning greater weight to any
                     criterion;
                                            8-5
-------
Ensuring that the PRPs perform the comparative analysis of screened
alternatives against each other to identify individual advantages and
disadvantages and tradeoffs; and

Reviewing, with the oversight assistant, TST (including State), and the
Regional management review team, the quality and content of the detailed
analysis memorandum and the draft and final FS Report; and

Notifying PRPs and, if necessary, EPA counsel of any noncompliance in
performing this task.
                       8-6
-------
                                     APPENDIX A

           TECHNICAL RESOURCES AVAILABLE THROUGHOUT THE RI/FS

                 Although the EPA remedial project manager (RPM) is ultimately responsible
                 for overseeing a remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) led by
                 potentially responsible parties (PRPs), the RPM has many different technical
                 resources available to assist with or carry out the RI/FS oversight. These
                 include resources  from within the EPA Regional office, EPA Headquarters
                 offices, EPA contractors and consultants, other Federal agencies and
                 departments, and  State and local governments.

                 Chapter 1.1 of this guidance addresses the role  of the RPM and his or her
                 designated oversight assistant. This appendix helps to identify further
                 resources that can assist the RPM and oversight assistant during the different
                 phases of the RI/FS.  Obtaining access to a resource for oversight activities
                 may require the RPM to have funds available to transfer to the selected
                 resource. The RPM may also be required to complete work-initiation forms
                 and attach a Statement of Work (SOW) or work assignment.  In all cases, it is
                 important for thp  RPM to identify during the pre-RI/FS negotiation scoping
                 phase the oversight resources that will be most  appropriate and the
                 requirements for obtaining access to them.


A.I          HEADQUARTERS ASSISTANCE

                 Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE) -  The CERCLA
                 Enforcement Division can assist in the review of legal or technical documents
                 or respond to questions about oversight implementation or procedures. OWPE
                 Regional Coordinators should be the prime point of contact.

                    •      CERCLA Enforcement Division              (FTS)  398-8404
                                                                     or (703) 308-8404

                    •      Guidance and Evaluation Branch             (FTS)  475-6770

                    •      Compliance Branch (Regional Coordinators)    (FTS)  398-8484
                                                                     or (703) 308-8484

                 Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR)  - The Hazardous Site
                 Control Division (HSCD) can assist in the review of technical documents or
                 respond to questions on implementing procedures for Fund-lead sites.  HSCD
                 publishes the "Superfund Records of Decision (ROD) Update* to  aid RPMs in
                 developing RODs by providing useful information and a means for RPMs with
                 similar site issues to interact. OERR Regional  Coordinators should be the
                 prime point of contact.


                    •      Hazardous Site Control Division              (FTS) 398-8313
                                                                     or (703) 308-8813

                    •      Remedial Operations and Guidance           (FTS) 398-8444
                             Branch                                   or (703) 308-8444

                    •      Design and Construction                     (FTS) 475-6707
                             Management Branch                       or (703) 308-8393


                                          A-l
-------
    •      State and Local Coordination                 (FTS) 398-8380
           Branch                                   or (703) 308-8380

Office of General Counsel (OGC) - OGC can provide assistance in reviewing
legal or technical documents or respond to questions about oversight
implementation, NCP procedures, or legal questions under CERCLA.
Generally, contact with OGC is made through the Office of Regional Counsel
(ORC) or OWPE/OERR Regional Coordinators.

Office of Enforcement (OE) - OE can provide additional assistance in
reviewing legal documents responding to  legal questions about CERCLA, NCP
procedures, and oversight implementation, and taking enforcement actions.  In
addition, the Regional Coordinators for Federal facilities are now in OE.
Generally, contact with OE is made through each Region's ORC.

Office of Research and Development (ORD) - Contact with ORD can be made
through the ORD Regional liaison in each Regional office.  ORD is located in
Headquarters or in one of the following Technical Support Centers:

    •      Risk Reduction  Engineering Laboratory (RREL) Center for
          Engineering Programs and Treatability Studies in
          Cincinnati, OH. The  center can assist in planning and
          researching for Engineering and Treatment Support,
          Treatability Assistance Program (TAP), and the Superfund
          Technical Assistance Remedial Technology (START) team,
          (FTS) 684-7406.

    •      Environmental Research Laboratory (ERL), Center for
          Exposure Assessment  and Ecological Risk Technology
          Support in Athens, GA.  This includes the Center for
          Exposure Assessment  Modeling (CEAM), (FTS) 250-3134.

    •      Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
          (RSKERL) Center for Groundwater Fate and Transport in
          Ada, OK. The laboratory includes the Subsurface
          Remediator Information Clearinghouse in Ada and the
          International Groundwater Modeling Center at the Holcomb
          Research Institute in Indianapolis, IN, (FTS) 743-2224.

    •      Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory (EMSL)
          Center for Monitoring and Site Characterization in Las
          Vegas, NV, (FTS) 545-2523.

    •      Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office (ECAO),
          Center for Health and Risk Assessment in Cincinnati, OH,
          (FTS) 629-4173.

    •      Other environmental research laboratories are located in
          Narragansett,  RI; (FTS) 838-6001; Gulf Breeze,  FL;  (FTS)
          686-9011; Duluth, MN; (FTS) 780-5549; and Corvallis, OR,
          (FTS) 420-4601.
                         A-2
-------
                 Technical assistance is also available through the following programs:

                     •      The RREL Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
                           program can assist in conducting or reviewing treatability studies,
                           screening/analyzing remedial alternatives, and bench/pilot/full-
                           scale testing of remediation technologies. Access to SITE is
                           obtained by contacting the ORD Regional liaison (ORD employees)
                           located in each Region.

                     •      Groundwater and Engineering Technical Support Forums.
                           Representatives from Groundwater Fate and Transport and
                           Engineering and Treatment Forums transfer information
                           between the Technical Support Centers and the Regions.
                           Most forums are informal sessions  organized by Regional
                           Section Chiefs.

                 National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC) - serves as the principal
                 source of expertise for civil and criminal litigation, and technical support.
                 NEIC access usually requires an oral request from a Superfund Branch Chief.
                 The center, located in Denver, can  be reached at (FTS) 776-5100.


A.2           REGIONAL AND NON-EPA ASSISTANCE

                 RPMs  have a wide variety of resources available in the Regional offices.
                 Initial  access to these resources usually requires informal contact (phone call or
                 visit) between the RPM and staff members in the desired office or division.

                 Peer Review - Regional in-house peer review can help in responding to
                 specific technical questions or reviewing technical memoranda and reports
                 (sometimes exists as a technical support section).

                 Environmental Services Division (ESD)  - Regional ESDs can review site
                 project plans,  oversee field activities, provide blank and spiked samples for
                 quality assurance, and conduct laboratory and field audits.  ESD  can oversee
                 activities up to and including performance of  the RI.

                 Environmental Response Team (ERT) in Edison,  NJ -  ERT can provide
                 assistance in conducting and overseeing removal and remedial actions.  ERTs
                 capabilities include review of site project plans and reports, oversight of field
                 activities, review of conceptual designs, and provision of expert testimony.

                 Office of Regional Counsel (ORC) - ORC provides primary assistance to the
                 RPM in reviewing legal documents negotiating orders and decrees, making
                 referrals to the Department of Justice (DOJ), and taking enforcement actions.

                 Water  Division - Regional Water Division provides information on surface
                 water and drinking water concerns from the following  areas:  Office of
                 Groundwater Protection, Water Quality Planning and Standards Section, Water
                 Supply Section, Toxicology, and Wetlands.

                 Air Division - Regional Air Division provides information on air emission and
                 ambient air standards from the following areas: Toxic Substances Control
                 Act-PCBs, Modeling, and  Air Toxics.
                                           A-3
-------
                 Waste Management Division - Regional Waste Management Division provides
                 information on Resource Conservation and Recovery Act waste management
                 requirements.

                 Public Affairs - Regional Public Affairs is helpful in disseminating
                 information to States, local  governments, and the community.  For example,
                 the Community Relations Coordinator (usually not in Public Affairs Office)
                 can assist in implementing a community relations plan (CRP).
A.3           REGIONAL CONTRACTS
                 EPA maintains several contracts with architectural and engineering firms to
                 assist EPA Headquarters and Regions in implementing the Comprehensive
                 Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). These
                 level-of-effort (LOE) contracts allow specific tasks to be assigned to the
                 contractor on an as-needed basis, within the restrictions of the overall contract
                 SOW and  within the technical labor hours and dollar ceilings established by the
                 contract.

                 Technical Enforcement Support (TES)  Contracts - These are the primary
                 contracts  for overseeing PRPs during CERCLA response activities.  These
                 LOE contracts allow specific tasks to be assigned to the contractor on an as-
                 needed basis, within the restrictions of  the overall contract and within the
                 technical  labor hours and dollar ceilings established by the contract.  Oversight
                 tasks assigned to TES  contractors include the following:

                     •      Financial assessments;

                     •      Expert witness/consultant;

                     •      Technical review of documents;

                     •      Records compilation;

                     •      Risk assessment;

                     •      Oversight of field activities, including compliance monitoring;

                     •      Sampling analysis;

                     •      Evidence storage/preservation;

                     •      Special studies;

                     •      Design development, placement, and data evaluation for ground-
                           water monitoring wells;

                     •      Design and implementation of surface and subsurface site
                           investigations;

                     •      Collection  and evaluation of evidence on PRP waste activity;

                     •      Development of negotiation and litigation strategies;

                     •      Evaluation of PRP settlement offers;


                                           A-4
-------
    •      Development of mechanisms for financing PRP settlements; and

    •      Design and preparation of technical assistance training programs on
          oversight for RPMs.

These tasks are assigned to the contractor through individual written work
assignments that contain SOWs, delivery schedules, and other performance
schedules. Questions regarding access to TES contractors should be directed to
the appropriate regional contact.  Additional information on TES contracts can
be obtained from the "TES User Guide," June  1987 and the forthcoming
updated TES User Guide" (planned for early 1992).

Alternative Remedial Contracts Strategy (ARCS) - This program also is used
for overseeing PRPs during CERCLA response actions.  The ARCS contracts
are also LOE based. The contracts under this program provide remedial
planning, design, and implementation, as well as site-specific project
management and other technical and management assistance. The ARCS
program incorporated the contracts previously  covered by the Remedial
Engineering Management (REM) program.  The types of oversight tasks that
may be assigned to an ARCS contractor include the following:

    •      Project planning;

    t      Remedial oversight;

    •      Risk assessment;

    •      Sample analysis and validation;

    •      Enforcement support;

    •      Community  relations; and

    •      Data management.

Questions regarding access to ARCS contractors should  be directed to the
appropriate Regional contact. •

Field Investigation Team (FIT) Contracts - Contractors in this program can
assist in collecting and reviewing preliminary assessment/site investigation
(PA/SI) data, scoping and planning schedules, field oversight of site
characterization, and  report review.  FIT is accessed by issuing a work
assignment through developing a SOW, and working with the Regional FIT
contracting officer.

Technical Assistance Team (TAT) Contracts - This program can assist in
removal actions, oversight of removal actions, and planning and scoping for
interim measures. TAT is accessed by issuing  a work assignment through
developing a SOW, and  working with the Regional TAT contracting officer.

Emergency Response  Cleanup Services (ERCS) Contracts - This program can
assist in emergency response, spill response, oversight of removal actions, and
planning and scoping activities.  ERCS is accessed by issuing a work
assignment through developing a SOW, and working with the Regional ERCS
contracting officer.


                         A-5
-------
                 Contracting Laboratory Program (CLP) - This program is a major source of
                 analytical data for use in the RI and Baseline Risk Assessments. CLP is a
                 nationwide network of contractor laboratories and a major vehicle for
                 Superfund analysis, especially to provide routine analytical services (RAS) and
                 special analytical services (SAS).  When a non-CLP laboratory is chosen at
                 PRP-lead sites, CLP is responsible for using split samples as quality assurance
                 (QA) and quality control (QC) procedures to verify the accountability and
                 accuracy of the sampling procedures employed at the site.  At a minimum, for
                 enforcement considerations, 10 percent of the samples should be split and sent
                 to a CLP lab.

                 For information regarding the CLP, contact the Analytical Operations Branch
                 of OERR at FTS 382-7906 or the Sample Management Office at (703) 684-
                 5678.  Additional contacts can be obtained from the fact sheet, Contract
                 Laboratory Program (OSWER Directive No. 9200.5-320 F/S, September 1990).
A.4          OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES
                 RPMs also can obtain oversight assistance from other Federal agencies.  This
                 generally requires RPMs to reallocate funds to the appropriate agency through
                 an interagency agreement (IAG). These lAGs usually are executed in
                 coordination with a Regional contact in the Region's Superfund Contracts and
                 Administration Section.

                 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) - A part of the
                 Centers for Disease Control, ATSDR can assist in determining current or
                 potential  risk to human health that exists at a site. The regional ATSDR
                 representative should be contacted during pre-PRP negotiation and, if
                 possible, should be a member of the Technical Support Team (TST).

                 Department of Defense (DOD) - The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                 (USCOE) - can provide the following:

                    •      Expert witness during RI/FS negotiation and litigation;

                    •      Oversight of field activities;

                    •      Hydrogeologic studies;

                    •      Treatability Studies; and

                    •      Other special studies.

                 Department of Interior (DOI) - Tbe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                 (USFWS) - can provide the following:

                    •      Expert witness during RI/FS negotiation and litigation;

                    •      Natural resource endangerment studies; and

                    •      Preliminary Natural Resource Surveys (for migratory birds,
                           federally listed threatened and endangered species, anadromous
                           fish, Federal minerals, National Park land, and Tribal Trust
                           resources).


                                           A-6
-------
                 DOI - The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - can provide the following:

                     •      Expert witness during RI/FS negotiation and litigation;

                     •      Oversight of field activities during RI;

                     •      Hydrogeologic studies; and

                     •      Other special studies.

                 U.S. Department of Agriculture-(USDA) - USD A can provide expertise in
                 managing agricultural, forest, and wilderness areas.  In addition, the Soil
                 Conservation Service (SCS) can help predict fate and transport of pollutants in
                 soil, and can provide expertise for the TST when soils are contaminated.

                 Department of Commerce (DOC) - National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                 Administration (NOAA) - NOAA can provide information on meteorologic,
                 hydrologic, ice, and oceanographic conditions for marine, coastal, and inland
                 waters and can provide expertise on certain living marine resources and their
                 habitats.

                 Department of Energy (DOE) -  DOE can assist in identifying, removing, and
                 disposing of radioactive contamination.

                 Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) - HHS can assist in
                 assessing site health hazards and protecting site personnel and public health.

                 Department of Justice (DOJ) - DOJ represents the Federal government in
                 litigation.  The Land and Natural Resources  division commonly is involved in
                 environmental litigation.

                 Department of Labor (DOL) - DOL can  assist in identifying Occupational
                 Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements for hazardous waste
                 sites.

                 Department of Transportation (DOT) - DOT can assist in identifying
                 requirements for the manifesting and transport of hazardous waste and
                 materials (see Appendix B in Volume 2 of this manual).
A.5           DATABASES
                 There are a number of databases available to RPMs through the Regional
                 libraries or through personal computer (PC)-modem (phone-line) connections
                 from PCs in their sections.  These include commercial, EPA, and other Federal
                 and State databases.  Described below are several of the primary databases that
                 can assist RPMs with PRP oversight.  They generally can be divided into three
                 types:
                            Those that track similar components of response actions or case
                            histories at other sites;

                            Those that provide detailed sources of data to support the many
                            types of analyses associated with an RI/FS; and


                                           A-7  '
-------
Tracking Case
History
Databases
Technical
Analysis
Databases
    •      Those that serve as bulletin boards and provide technology transfer
          and information on other resources.

Enforcement Document Retrieval System (EDRS) - EDRS is menu-driven and
allows the user to search through EPA enforcement documents by document
category, specified time period, or specified law, or by any word or set of
words within the document text.  Three  types of documents are routinely
updated:  policies and procedures, administrative enforcement, and judicial
action. The system can be accessed by terminals that are direct-wired to
EPA's National Computer Center (NCC) in Research Triangle Park. For
additional information, check the EDRS User's Manual, the Regional EDRS
Contact in ORC, or call OE at (FTS) 382-2614.

Hazardous Waste Casefinder System (Caceflnder) - The Casefinder includes
the hazardous waste cases found or cited in the Federal Reporter system, the
Hazardous Waste Litigation Reporter, the Toxics Law Reporter,  the Chemical
Waste Litigation Reporter, the Environmental Law Reporter, and a
considerable number  of important unreported cases. As of October 1987, 700
Federal court opinions had been categorized and entered into the Casefinder.
New cases are added  monthly. In order  to use Casefinder, the user must have
a valid user ID to access the NCC in Research Triangle Park. For additional
information concerning Casefinder, contact the OE at EPA Headquarters.

RODS Database - RODS contains Superf und Records of Decision (ROD),
which describe the planned course of action to clean up a  site. The database,
installed on a mainframe at EPA's NCC  in Research Triangle Park, allows
searching for selected information from  ROD documents or National Technical
Information System (NTIS) Abstracts. Access is via modem from a PC.
Register through the  RODS Hotline at (202) 252-0056.

Expert Resources Inventory System (ERIS) - ERIS is a searchable database
that contains resumes in summary form and information on qualifications, area
of expertise, and previous experience of specialists available as expert
witnesses or consultants to support hazardous waste enforcement actions. The
database had been classified as "enforcement confidential" and is protected
under the Privacy Act of 1974. The database may be accessed by EPA and
DOJ staff upon request.  Users should contact the EPA OWPE  for information
on accessing the database.

Hazardous Waste Collection Database (HWCD)  - HWCD  is a bibliographic
database containing abstracts of EPA and other government agency reports,
commercial books, policy and guidance directives, legislation, and regulations
concerning hazardous waste, is searchable by subject; and  has a database
thesaurus to aid users in designing efficient searches.  The database is available
through the EPA library system.

Alternative Treatment Technology Information  Center (ATTIC) - The ATTIC
system is designed to provide technical information on alternative methods of
hazardous waste treatment.  ATTIC is available  through any modem-equipped
IBM-compatible PC using standard communications software.  The core  of the
ATTIC system is the  ATTIC database, a keyword-driven system that contains
technical information in the form of abstracts or report summaries from a
variety of sources including the SITE program. States, industry,  DOD/DOE,
RODS Database, and  treatability studies. Other databases  contained in the
ATTIC system that can be directly accessed include:
                                           A-8
-------
    •      RREL (Water) Treatability Database.

    •      RSKERL Soil Transport and Fate Database.

    •      EPA Library Hazardous Waste Collection Database.

    •      Cost of Remedial Action (CORA) Model.

    •      Geophysics Advisor Expert System.

Also available through ATTIC is the Computerized On-Line Information
System (COLIS) and its three databases: Case File History, Library Search
System, and SITE Application  Analysis Report File. To access ATTIC, contact
the ORD Regional liaison in your Region or the ATTIC system operator at
(301)816-9153.

Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) - IRIS contains health risk data,
bibliographic and textual information on risk management, water quality
criteria, and drinking water standards. It is available on-line through EPA's
electronic mail system (E-MAIL).  To access IRIS through E-MAIL, after
signing on, type "IRIS" at the ">" prompt.

ORD Superfund Remediation Information (SRI) Database - SRI contains
information pertaining to fate, transport,  and in-place treatability of
contaminants in subsurface environments.  SRI can be used to locate other
information sources pertinent to reclamation  of contaminated soils and ground
waters, including planned, active, and completed subsurface remediations.
Users need to contact the ORD RSKERL in Ada, OK,  to access the system.

ORD Aid for Evaluating the Redevelopment of Industrial Sites (AERIS) -
AERIS helps make risk-based  cleanup calculations at industrial sites.  AERIS
evaluates on-site costs for one chemical, one receptor, one land use, and one
environmental setting. It relies on data from past soil contamination.  Users
need to contact the ORD RSKERL in Ada, OK, to access the system.

Technical Information Exchange (TIX) - TIX is a compiled database available
on diskettes to EPA Regional and contracts personnel and State personnel.
TIX provides a complete file of each applications analysis for technologies
evaluated under the Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
program. Diskettes are available from Hugh Masters of EPA ORD at FTS
340-6678.

RISK*ASSISTANT - RISK*ASSISTANT  is a microcomputer software system
designed to help assess health risks posed  by  hazardous waste.
RISK*ASSISTANT is not a substitute for expert evaluation,  but provides easy-
to-use databases and analytical tools that screen potential hazards, exposures,
and risks at hazardous waste sites.  RISK*ASSISTANT  was developed by the
Hampshire Research Institute, (703) 683-6695, in conjunction with the Office
of Health and Environmental Assessment  (OHEA).

CERCLA Scheduling and Cost Estimating Expert System (SCEES) - SCEES is
an expert system under development to provide site-specific Superfund
Comprehensive  Action Plan (SCAP) quality schedule and cost estimates for the
RI/FS process.  SCEES is a tool for determining timely resource and
                         A-9
-------
                 scheduling estimates.  For more information on SCEES, contact the CERCLA
                 program office.

                 Commercial Databases - DIALOG, Chemical Information System, and BRS
                 Search Services are examples of commercial databases that abstract information
                 relevant to EPA's hazardous and solid waste programs and are searchable free
                 of charge via EPA Headquarters and Regional librarians. For more
                 information, contact your Regional librarian.


A.6           COMPUTER-BASED BULLETIN BOARD

                 OSWER Electronic Bulletin Board System (BBS) - OSWER BBS facilitates
                 communication and the dissemination of information among EPA staff in
                 Regional offices, Headquarters, and research laboratories. To use the OSWER
                 BBS, the user needs a PC or terminal, a modem, and a communications
                 program. To access the OSWER BBS, dial (202) 589-8366 or (301) 589-8366
                 after setting CrossTalk parameters to 8 data bits, 1 stop bit, and no parity.
                 Choose a password, complete an on-line registration questionnaire, and within
                 24 hours you will be a registered user with full access to all features of the
                 system.  The BBS is available to EPA staff and current contractors and State
                 and Federal agency personnel.

                 Major features of the OSWER  BBS include the following:

                     •      Information bulletins.

                     •      Message exchange.

                     •      File exchange.

                     •      Technical publications ordering.

                     •      On-line databases and directories.


A.7           HOTLINES

                 EPA Headquarters has established several national telephone hotlines that can
                 be used by anyone in need of technical  assistance or wishing to report
                 findings.  Additional Regional, State, or commercial hotlines may also be
                 available.

                 RCRA/Superfund Hotline
                 National Toll-Free 800-424-9346

                 EPA's largest and busiest toll-free number, the RCRA/Superfund Hotline
                 answers nearly 100,000 questions and document requests each  year.  Hotline
                 specialists answer regulatory and technical questions and provide documents on
                 virtually all aspects of  the RCRA and Superfund programs. Because of the
                 complexity and changing nature of these programs, the hotline is used widely
                 by the regulated community, people involved in managing and cleaning up
                 hazardous waste. Federal, State, and local governments, and the general public.
                 The RCRA/Superfund Hotline can be reached Monday through Friday from
                 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST).
                                          A-10
-------
Federal Facilities Docket Hotline
National Toil-Free 800-548-1016
Washington, D.C., Metro 703-883*8577

Operated by the EPA Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement (OFFE), the
hotline has been in service since 1988. The hotline responds to specific
questions about Federal facility compliance with the docket requirements
outlined in Section 120 of CERCLA, as amended.  The hotline can be accessed
Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. EST.

National Response  Center Hotline
National Toll-Free 800-424-8802
Washington, D.C., Metro 202-426-2675

Operated by the U.S. Coast Guard, the National Response Center Hotline
responds to all kinds of accidental releases of oil and hazardous substances.
This hotline is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, every day of the year.

Chemical Emergency Preparedness Program (CEPP) Hotline
National Toll-Free 800-535-0202
Washington, D.C., Metro and Alaska 202-479-2449

The CEPP Hotline  has been in operation since late 1985, responding to
questions concerning community preparedness for chemical accidents.  The
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) increased the CEPP
Hotline's responsibilities, which  now also include Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know and SARA Title III questions and requests. The
CEPP Hotline, which complements the RCRA/Superfund Hotline, is
maintained as an information resource rather than an emergency number.
Calls are answered  Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m.  to 4:30 p.m. EST.

National Pesticides Telecommunications Network (NPTN)
National Toll-Free 800-858-7378
(858 -P-E-S-T)
Texas 806-743-3091

Operating 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, every day of the  year,  the NPTN
provides information about pesticides to the medical, veterinary, and
professional communities as well as to Federal agencies and the general public.
Originally a service for physicians wanting information on pesticide toxicology
and on recognition and management of pesticide poisoning, the NPTN has
expanded to serve the public and Federal agencies by providing impartial
information on pesticide products, basic safety practices, health and
environmental effects, and cleanup and disposal procedures.  Staffed by
pesticide specialists at Texas Technical University's Health Sciences Center
School of Medicine, this hotline  handles about 18,000 calls each year.

Small Business Hotline
National Toil-Free 800-368-5888
Washington, D.C., Metro 703-557-1938

Sponsored by the EPA Small Business Ombudsman's Program, this hotline
assists small business in complying with environmental laws and  EPA
regulations. The Small Business Hotline gives companies easy access to EPA,
and investigates and resolves problems and disputes with EPA. Acting as a


                         A-ll
-------
                 liaison with Agency program offices, the hotline ensures that EPA considers
                 small business issues during its normal regulatory activities. The Small
                 Business Hotline operates Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
                 EST, handling over 7,000 inquiries each year.

                 Safe Drinking Water Hotline
                 National Toil-Free 800-426-4791
                 Washington, D.C., Metro 202-382-5533

                 The EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline began operating in July 1987.  Its
                 primary function is to assist the public and the regulated community,
                 including Federal facilities, in understanding EPA's regulations and programs
                 developed in response to the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986.
                 The hotline service provides information on EPA's drinking water programs,
                 including the Public Water Supply (PWS1 and Underground Injection Control
                 (UIC) programs. The hotline operates Monday through Friday (except Federal
                 holidays) from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., EST.

                 Inspector General's Whistle Blower Hotline
                 National Toll-Free 800-424-4000
                 Washington, D.C., Metro 202-382-4977

                 The EPA Inspector General's Office maintains the Whistle-Blower Hotline to
                 receive reports of EPA-related waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement from
                 the public and from EPA and other government employees. EPA employees
                 may make complaints or give information to the Inspector General's Office
                 confidentially and without fear of reprisal.  The Whistle-Blower Hotline is
                 staffed to answer calls in person from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. EST, Monday through
                 Friday.  At other times, callers may leave a message to be answered during the
                 next work day.  The hotline handles about 1,500 calls each year.

                 TSCA Assistance Information Service
                 Washington, D.C., Metro
                 202-554-1404

                 The TSCA Assistance Information Service provides information  on TSCA
                 regulations to the chemical industry, labor and trade organizations,
                 environmental groups. Federal facilities, and the general public. Technical
                 and general information is available. To help facilities comply with TSCA, a
                 variety of services are offered, including regulatory advice and aid,
                 publications, and audio-visual materials. The TSCA Assistance Information
                 Service now handles about 2,500 calls a  month and can be  reached from 8:30
                 a.m. to 5 p.m. EST, Monday through Friday.
A.8           PUBLICATIONS
                 There are several compendium* and catalogs of Superfund and hazardous
                 waste reference materials, guidances, and other publications.  RPMs should
                 check with the Regional or Headquarters librarian for these publications or
                 sources indicated below.

                 Catalog of  Superfund Program Publications - OSWER Directive No. 9200.7-
                 02A, October 1990 (85 pages).  This catalog provides a reference to policy,
                 procedural, and technical directives and publications governing the Superfund
                 program. Regular supplements are planned. Publications abstracted must be


                                          A-12
-------
have copies. Copies of the catalog may be obtained from the Superfund
Document Center by writing the Superfund Documents Coordinator (OS-
240), U.S. EPA, 401 M St. S.W., Washington, DC 20460.

OSWER Directives - System Catalog - OSWER Directive No. 9013.15-3D (30
pages). Provides a list of OSWER Directives published through June 1988.
Each Region also has an  OSWER Directive Coordinator.

Superfund Risk Assessment Information Directory - OSWER Directive No.
9285.6-1  (202 pages).  Publication Number EPA/540/1-86/061.  The directory
identifies and describes sources of information useful in conducting risk
assessments. The directory covers sources of information to aid in hazard
identification, dose-response assessments, exposure assessments, and risk
characterization. Available from the Superfund Document Center.

Annotated Technical Reference for Hazardous Waste Sites

   Contact  OWPE CERCLA Guidance and Evaluation Branch, at (FTS)
             475-6770.

This reference, though still in  draft, provides information on 14 common site
types: asbestos, battery recycling/lead, dioxins, landfills, metals, mining
wastes, mixed waste, multi-source  ground water, munitions, PCBs, pesticides,
plating, solvents, and wood preserving. Other information is directed at
ARARs, risk assessments, and summaries of typical site characterizations.
This reference provides access to technical expertise through lists of Regional
technical experts and technical references.

   CERCLA Administrative Records: Compendium of Frequently Used
   Guidance Documents in Selecting Response Actions

   Contact  OWPE, CERCLA Guidance and Evaluation Branch, FTS 475-
             6770, or Regional Administrative Records Coordinator

This reference serves as a central library of guidance documents  in each
Region.  It saves resources by  avoiding the need to copy such documents for
each administrative record.

Accessing Superfund Guidance Documents

   U.S. EPA staff can obtain  reports, fact sheets, or directives
   (OERR/OWPE) from the Superfund Document Center by calling FTS 382-
   5628.  Rule making and Federal Register listings can be obtained from the
   Superfund Docket by calling FTS 382-3046.  Information on innovative
   technologies can be obtained from the Treatment Innovation Office (TIO)
   by calling (703) 308-8800.  Many documents can be ordered from the
   Center for Environmental  Research Information  (CERI) by calling FTS
   684-7562.  State personnel may order documents from NTIS by calling
   (703) 487-4650.
                         A-13
-------
                                    EPA/540/G-91/010b
                                  Directive No. 9635.1 (d)
   GUIDANCE ON OVERSIGHT OF
POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY
  REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS AND
       FEASIBILITY STUDIES
              Final
   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
        Washington, D.C. 20460
            VOLUME 2
            Appendices
-------
                               ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document was developed by the Guidance and Evaluation Branch of the CERCLA
Enforcement Division in EPA's Office of Waste Programs Enforcement.  Matthew Charsky served
as EPA's Project Coordinator. The project was directed by Sally Mansbach, Acting Director
CERCLA Enforcement Division, with the assistance of Arthur Weissman, Guidance and
Evaluation Branch Chief. This handbook was produced by PRC Environmental Management,
Inc., under EPA Contract No. 68-01-7331. Paul Dean served as Project Manager for PRC
Environmental Management, Inc.

The following Regional, State, and Headquarters individuals provided significant input in the
development and review of this document:
       Sheila Eckman
       Frederick Luckey
       Laura Janson
       Donald Guinyard
       David Weeks
       James Hanley
       Michael Strieby
       Alexis Strauss

       Gary Eddy

       Stephen Ells
       Rick Colbert
       Hans Waetjen
       Patricia Gowland
       Frank Biros
       Debby Thomas
       Susan Cange
       Robin Anderson
       Charles Openchowski
       Larry Starfield
       George Wyeth
       Caroline Wehling
       Patricia L. Sims
EPA, Region I
EPA, Region II
EPA, Region III
EPA, Region IV
EPA, Region VI
EPA, Region VIII
EPA, Region VIII
EPA, Region IX

State of Minnesota
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
OWPE
OWPE
OWPE
OWPE
OWPE
OWPE
OERR
OERR
OGC
OGC
OGC
OGC
OE
                                       NOTICE
This guidance document was developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
has been subjected to the Agency's review process and approved for publication as an EPA
document.
                                           It
The guidance and procedures set out in this document are intended solely for the guidance of
EPA Superfund remediation personnel. They are not intended, nor can they be relied upon, to
create any rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any party in litigation with the
United States.  The Agency reserves the right to act at variance with these policies and
procedures and to change them at any time without public notice.
                                          11
-------
                                TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section                                                                          Pane

B     OVERSIGHT OF SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES  	   B-1

      B.I    INITIAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES	   B-1

             B.I.I  Preparation	   B-l
             B.I.2  Preliminary On-site Activities  	   B-4

      B.2    MEDIA  SPECIFIC SAMPLING ACTIVITIES  	   B-6

             B.2.1  Surface Water	   B-6
             B.2.2  Ground Water	  B-17
             B.2.3  Soil Water	  B-23
             B.2.4  Surface Soil	  B-31
             B.2.5  Subsurface Soil  	  B-35
             B.2.6  Soil Vapor	  B-37
             B.2.7  Sludge and Slurry  	  B-41
             B.2.8  Containerized -Waste (Drums, Tanks, Hoppers, Bags, Waste Piles) . . .  B-48
             B.2.9  Ambient  Air	B-52

      B.3    COMMON SAMPLING ACTIVITIES  	B-56

             B.3.1  Containers	  B-57
             B.3.2  Labels/Tags  	B-59
             B.3.3  Preservation/Handling	  B-60
             B.3.4  Chain-of-Custody Information	B-64

      B.4    POST-SAMPLING ACTIVITIES	  B-66

             B.4.1  Packaging	B-66
             B.4.2  Shipping	  B-69
             B.4.3  Decontamination	  B-72

      B.5    QUALITY REVIEW ACTIVITIES  	B-74

             B.5.1  Quality Review Samples	B-74

      B.6    DOCUMENTATION OF SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES  	B-78

             B.6.1  Oversight Team Field Activity Report/Logbook	  B-78
             B.6.2  Oversight Team Photographic/Video Log	  B-80

C     OVERSIGHT OF WELL DRILLING AND INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES  	   C-l

      C.I    INITIAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES	   C-l

      C.2    BOREHOLE ADVANCEMENT	   C-3

             C.2.1  Drilling Activities	   C-3
             C.2.2  Soil Sample Collection	   C-13
             C.2.3  Decontamination	   C-16
                                          111
-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Section                                                                        Page

      C.3    WELL DESIGN AND INSTALLATION	   C-19

             C.3.1  Well Design	   C-19
             C.3.2  Well Installation	   C-23
             C.3.3  Well Completion		   C-24

      C.4    POST INSTALLATION 	   C-25

             C.4.1  Well Development	   C-25
             C.4.2  Ground-Water Sampling  	   C-27

      C.5    DOCUMENTATION OF WELL DRILLING AND INSTALLATION
             ACTIVITIES  	   C-28

             C.5.1  Oversight Team Field Activity Report/Logbook	   C-28
             C.5.2  Oversight Team Photographic/Video Log	   C-29
                                         IV
-------
                             LIST OF TABLES



Table                                                                Page



B-l.   SAMPLE BOTTLES RECOMMENDED BY SAMPLE TYPE	 B-58



B-2.   SAMPLE PRESERVATION PROCEDURES	 B-63



C-l.   DRILLING METHODS SUMMARY	  C-6



C-2.   SOIL DENSITY/CONSISTENCY  	  C-17



C-3.   WELL DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES 	  C-26







                             LIST OF FIGURES



Figure                                                               Page



B-l.   COMMON SURFACE WATER SAMPLERS	 B-10



B-2.   COMMON SURFACE WATER SAMPLERS	 B-l 1



B-3.   COMMON SEDIMENT SAMPLERS	 B-13



B-4.   GROUND-WATER SAMPLERS  	 B-20



B-5.   DIVISIONS OF SUBSURFACE WATER	 B-25



B-6.   LYSIMETERS	 B-27



B-7.   SUCTION SAMPLERS 	 B-29



B-8.   COMMON SOIL SAMPLES . .	 B-33



B-9.   SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER	,	 B-36



B-10.  SLUDGE AND SLURRY SAMPLERS		B-44



B-l 1.  TYPICAL SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION TAG  	 B-61



B-12.  CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD	 B-65



B-13.  CUSTODY SEALS AND BILL OF LADING  	 B-71



C-l.   AUGERS	  C-8



C-2.   MUD AND WATER ROTARY DRILLING	  C-9



C-3.   CABLE TOOL STRING ASSEMBLY COMPONENTS	;  C-l 1



C-4.   SOIL BORING LOG	  C-14



C-5.   SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART 	  C-15



C-6.   TYPICAL GROUND-WATER MONITORING WELL CROSS-SECTION  	  C-20
-------
                                 LIST OF ACRONYMS
AA
AD
AERIS
AOC
ARARs
ARCS
ATSDR
ATTIC
BBS
BTAG
CA
CD
CDC
CEAM
CEPP
CERCLA

CERCLIS

CLP
COLIS
CORA
CRP
DOC
DOD
DOE
DOI
DOJ
DOL
DOT
DQO
EA
ECAO
EECA
EEM
EIS
E-MAIL
EMSL
EPA or "the Agency"
ERCS
ERIS
ERL
ERT
ESD
EST
FEMA
FIT
FFA
FMO
FSP
HSCD
HEAST
Assistant Administrator
Air Division
Aid for Evaluating the Redevelopment of Industrial Sites
Administrative Order on Consent
Applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements
Alternative  Remedial Contract Strategy
Agency for  Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Alternate Treatment  Technology Information Center
Bulletin  Board System
Biological Technical  Assistance Group
Cooperative Agreement
Consent  Decree
Center for Disease Control
Center for Exposure  Assessment Modeling
Chemical Emergency Preparedness Program
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Information System
Contract laboratory program
Computerized On-Line Information Systems
Cost of Remedial Action
Community relations plan
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Energy
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor
Department of Transportation
Data quality objectives
Ecological/environmental assessment
Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office
Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis
Environmental Evaluation Manual
Environmental impact statement
Electronic mail system
Environmental Monitoring System Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Emergency  Response Contracting Strategy
Expert Resources Inventory System
Environmental Research Laboratory
Environmental Response Team
Environmental Services Division
Eastern Standard Time
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Field Investigation Team
Federal facility agreement
Financial management office
Field sampling plan
Hazardous Site Control Division
Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables
                                          VI
-------
                                 LIST OF ACRONYMS
                                      (continued)
HHEM
HHS
MRS
HSP
HWCD
IAG
IFMS
IMC
IRIS
LDR
MCL
MCLG
NCC
NCP
NEIC
NOAA
NPDES
NPL
NPTN
NRC
OE
O&M
OECM
OERR
OFFE
OGC
OHEA
ORC
ORD
OSHA
OSWER
OWPE
PA
PC
PRGs
PRP
PWS
QA/QC
QAPjP
RAGS
RAS
RCRA
RD/RA
REM
RFD
RI/FS
RME
ROD
RPM
RREL
RSKERL
SAP
SAS
Human Health Evaluation Manual
Health and Human Services
Hazard Ranking System
Health and safety plan
Hazardous Waste Collection Database
Interagency agreement
Information Management Systems
Information Management Coordinator
Integrated Risk Information System
Land Disposal Restriction
Maximum contaminant level
Maximum contaminant level goal
National Computer Center
National Contingency Plan
National Enforcement Investigations Center
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
National pollutant discharge elimination system
National Priorities List
National Pesticides Telecommunications Network
Nuclear Regulatory  Commission
Office of Enforcement
Operation and maintenance
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement
Office of General Counsel
Office of Health and Environmental Assessment
Office of Regional Counsel
Office of Research and Development
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
Preliminary assessment
Personal computer
Preliminary remediation goals
Potentially responsible party
Public Water Supply
Quality assurance/quality control
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
Routine analytical sampling
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Remedial design/remedial action
Remedial Engineering Management
Reference dosage
Remedial investigation/feasibility study
Reasonable maximum exposure
Record of decision
Remedial Project Manager
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Sampling and analysis plan
Special analytical sampling
                                          vu
-------
                                 LIST OF ACRONYMS
                                      (continued)
SCAP
SCEES
SEAM
SFWS
SGS
SHPO
SI
SIF
SITE
SMOA
SNL
SOP
SOW
SPO
SRI
START
TAP
TAT
TSCA
TES
TIX
TRIS
TS
TST
UAO
UIC
USCOE
USDA
USFWS
USGS
WD
WMD
WP
 Superfund Comprehensive Action Plan
 Site Cost Estimate and Evaluation Study
 Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual
 State Fish and Wildlife Service
 State Geological Survey
 State Historic Preservation Office
 Site inspection
•Site Information Form (CERCLIS)
 Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program
 Superfund Memorandum of Agreement
 Special notice letter
 Standard operating procedures
 Statement of Work
 State Project Officer
 Superfund Remediation Information
 Superfund Technical Assistance Response Team
 Treatability Assistance Program
 Technical Assistance Team
 Toxic Substances Control  Act
 Technical Enforcement Support
 Technical Information Exchange
 Toxic Release Inventory System
 Treatability Study
 Technical Support Team
 Unilateral Administrative Order
 Underground Injection Control
 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
 United States Department of Agriculture
 United States Fish and Wildlife Service
 United States Geological Service
 Water Division
 Waste Management Division
 Work Plan
                                          via
-------
                                       VOLUME 2
                                    INTRODUCTION
Purpose
Intended
Audience
Volume 2 of this document describes the oversight of sampling and analysis
activities (Appendix Bl) and of well drilling and installation activity
(Appendix Cl) conducted during a Remedial Investigation (RI) by potentially
responsible parties (PRPs) at Enforcement-lead sites addressed under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as
amended (CERCLA).  Checklists to assist in the documentation of sampling
and analysis activities are contained in Appendix B2 while documentation of
well drilling and installation activities are contained in Appendix C2.  The
information presented in Volume 2 is  consistent with the references listed at
the end of Appendices B and C.

Volume 1 parallels activities described in the "Guidance for Conducting
Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA" (OSWER
Directive No. 9355.3-01, October, 1988, referred to here as the "RI/FS
Guidance") and the "Model Statement  of Work for a Remedial Investigation
and Feasibility Study Conducted by Potentially Responsible Parties" (OSWER
Directive No. 9835.8, June 2, 1989,  referred to here as the "Model SOW for
PRP-lead RI/FSs").  It provides project managers with the procedures required
to organize and perform appropriate oversight duties and responsibilities. This
document is guidance only; it is not a binding  set of requirements and does not
create rights for any party.

For a more in-depth discussion of the entire Superfund Enforcement Program
including removal and remedial actions, refer to  the "Enforcement Project
Management Handbook" (OSWER Directive No. 9837.2-A, January 1991).
The handbook addresses the remedial  planning and implementation process
from the point of the baseline PRP search (generally conducted after the site is
placed  on the National Priorities List (NPL)), to the point of completion of
remedial activity and the site's deletion from the NPL.

The intended audience for this document is remedial project managers
(RPMs), although it can be adapted for use by other parties such as States,
PRPs, contractors and other persons involved in the RI/FS process.
                                            IX
-------
Summary of
Appendices

Appendix B       Appendix B, "Oversight of Sampling and Analysis Activities" describes the
                  activities that the oversight team should conduct during field activities. The
                  appendix discusses initial oversight activities such as plan reviews and
                  preliminary on-site activities as well as specific sampling oversight activities
                  for the following nine media:
                            Surface Water
                            Ground Water
                            Soil Water
                            Surface Soil
                            Sub-surface Soil
                            Soil Vapor
                            Sludge and Slurry
                            Containerized Waste (Drums, Tanks, Hoppers, Bags, and Waste
                            Piles)
                            Ambient Air
                  The appendix describes sampling locations, equipment, and techniques as well
                  as field analytical techniques for each media.  The appendix also discusses
                  sample containers, labels, preservation, chain-of-custody, packaging shipping,
                  and quality review.
Appendix C       Appendix C, "Oversight of Well Drilling and Installation Activities" describes
                  the activities that the oversight team should conduct during well drilling and
                  installation activities such as well location, geologic units, type of drilling,
                  drilling fluids, drilling waste, and decontamination as well as soil sample
                  collection and logging. The appendix also describes  well design,  installation,
                  completion and development.
-------
                                       APPENDIX B

                OVERSIGHT OF SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES

                 In accordance with CERCLA Section 104(b), sampling and analysis activities
                 may be conducted by the potentially responsible parties (PRPs).  This appendix
                 describes the activities that an oversight assistant should conduct and the
                 factors to be considered during oversight of PRP sampling and analysis
                 activities.

                 This appendix is based on other, more complete sampling and analysis
                 guidance documents  and should not be considered a substitute for them.
                 Specifically, this appendix includes information on:

                 •   Initial oversight activities;

                 •   Media-specific sampling activities;

                 •   Common sampling activities;

                 •   Post-sampling activities; and

                 •   Quality  review activities.

                 The organization  of this chapter corresponds to the Field  Activity Report for
                 oversight of sampling and analysis (see Section B.6.1 in this Appendix).


B.I           INITIAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES

                 There are a number of activities that the oversight assistant should perform
                 before beginning the sampling and analysis plan (SAP). These activities will
                 help the oversight assistant to: become familiar with the planned site activities,
                 including the health and safety requirements; organize and plan the resources
                 for oversight; coordinate with other parties involved at the site; and make the
                 necessary preliminary observations at the site.


B.I.I         Preparation

                 Preparation for conducting oversight involves reviewing the site Work Plan,
                 the SAP, and the health and safety plan; securing the necessary oversight tools;
                 and coordinating with the appropriate parties before arriving at the site.


Review           The SAP consists of  the field sampling plan (FSP) and the quality assurance
Sampling and    project plan (QAPjP). The content and  purpose of these  plans are discussed in
Analysis Plan    greater detail in Volume 1, Chapter 3 and in EPA's  "Guidance for Conducting
                 Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA" (U.S. EPA,
                 1988 Chapter 2 and Appendix B).

                 The RPM and oversight assistant should review the SAP to become familiar
                 with the media that will be sampled; the location, number and type of samples
                 that will be collected; the equipment, techniques, and  procedures that are
                 planned for collecting, labeling, preserving, packaging, and shipping samples;
                 the procedures for recordkeeping and documentation;  and the quality


                                            B-l
-------
                  assurance built into the plan to achieve project data quality objectives.  The
                  oversight assistant should review the names and backgrounds of field personnel
                  as well.  Familiarity with the details of the SAP will allow the oversight
                  assistant to focus on observing the activities at the site.

                  To determine the objective of the planned sampling activities, the RPM and
                  oversight assistant should focus on the following information when reviewing
                  the SAP:

                  •   The site background and the  history of previous activities at or concerning
                     the site;

                  •   The suspected contaminants,  the types of contaminated media, and the
                     reason for concern (for example, health effects, surrounding population,
                     and migration of contamination); and

                  •   The quality and types of data needed  to characterize the site.
Review Health
and Safety
Requirements
The RPM and oversight assistant should review the PRP's health and safety
plan (HSP) to become familiar with the health and safety procedures and
protocols that will be used by the contractors at the site.  The RPM and
oversight assistant should pay particular attention to the following sections:
the known or suspected contaminants at the site; and the suspected location
and concentration of contaminants -- including the hazards associated with
each contaminant (such as toxicity and  health effects) and the action levels
that would require upgrading personal protective equipment or abandoning the
site.  The oversight assistant should become familiar with the site emergency
procedures, the type of protective equipment to be worn by field personnel
during each activity, the location of the designated work areas and clean areas,
the location of the nearest medical facility, and the procedures and equipment
for monitoring the work area for potentially hazardous materials.

Detailed information on health and safety requirements for hazardous waste
sites is found in  EPA Order No. 1440.2, "Health and Safety Requirements  of
Employees Engaged in Field Activities" (U.S. EPA, 1981), and OSHA
regulations in 29 CFR 1910.120 (see Federal Register 45654, December 19,
1986).  More detailed guidance directed specifically at health and safety
activities is described under the media-specific sampling technique sections of
this manual.
Secure
Oversight
Tools
The tools needed to ensure effective oversight include both the equipment for
collecting oversight samples and providing health and safety protection for
field personnel, and the equipment for documenting site activities.

The equipment and materials needed to collect, contain, label, preserve,
package, and ship the oversight samples is discussed in greater detail in the
following sections:

•  Sampling equipment for each medium to be sampled (Section B.2);

•  Sample containers (Section B.3.1);

•  Labels and tags (Section B.3.2);
                                            B-2
-------
Coordinate
with
Personnel
•   Preservative materials (Section B.3.3);

•   Packaging and shipping materials (Sections B.4.1 and B.4.2);

•   Quality review (Section B.5).  -

The oversight assistant should refer to the PRP's Work Plan schedule and the
SAP to determine the specific equipment that will be needed for each day's
activities. The required equipment is supplied by the oversight team itself,
except for decontamination equipment (usually, the oversight team uses the
PRP's equipment).  The oversight assistant should contact the PRP to confirm
this arrangement before going to the site.  If the PRP is not willing to share
decontamination equipment, the equipment should be secured by the oversight
team.

The tools used for documenting the sampling and  analysis field activities
include the following (see Section  B.6):

•   Field Activity  Report -- for assisting  the oversight assistant in focusing on
    the key aspects of the sampling and analysis activities in  terms of
    oversight, and  for recording details of these activities;

•   Field logbook -- for the RPM to record facts regarding the site conditions,
    field measurements, location and type of samples collected, and dates and
    times of sampling activities; and

•   Photographic or video camera  -- for obtaining a visual record of the site
    and sampling activities.


Preparing for field oversight of sampling and analysis activities requires
extensive coordination with all of  the parties involved.  These parties usually
include:

•   The PRP's primary representative to EPA;

•   The PRP's field supervisor;

•   The Federal, State, and local assistants (as identified by the RPM); and

•   The oversight team's laboratory representative.

In many cases, other parties are involved, including the following:

•   The PRP's contractor if other than field supervisor;

•   The oversight team's contractor;

•   The EPA coordinator for the Contract Laboratory Program (CLP);  and

•   The PRP's facility representative (if other than the PRP's primary
    representative).

The RPM or oversight assistant should communicate with the relevant  parties
(usually  by telephone) on a regular basis regarding the planned activities at the
site. It is especially important for the oversight assistant to obtain a
                                             B-3
-------
                  commitment from the laboratory that will analyze the split, duplicate, and
                  blank samples (see Section B.5) several weeks in advance of the scheduled site
                  activities.  Laboratory scheduling is the most common obstacle in coordinating
                  oversight activities.  If the laboratory analysis is arranged through the CLP,
                  the oversight assistant should contact the CLP coordinator at least 4 to 6 weeks
                  before the planned sampling date.  Arranging private laboratory services
                  generally requires less notice, but still requires adequate planning.
B.I.2

Review
Personnel
Qualifica-
tions/Respon-
sibilities
Preliminary On-site Activities

   The RPM and oversight assistant should acquaint themselves with the names,
   responsibilities, and general qualifications of the personnel designated in the
   SAP. They should realize, however, that frequently the PRP's staffing plans
   change; personnel substitutions are routine and should not alarm the RPM or
   oversight assistant.  If staffing changes are made, the oversight assistant should
   make a note in the field activity report and determine informally if the
   substitution seems reasonable (either by observing the individual's activities or
   by communicating with him/her).  In making this determination, the  oversight
   assistant should use his/her professional judgment, keeping  in mind that the
   PRP has no incentive to send an unqualified individual to the field. The
   oversight assistant should not delay the PRP's activities to verify  personnel
   substitutions. If the PRP has substituted an unqualified individual to perform
   field work, the oversight assistant should be able to tell by observing  that
   individual  as sampling activities proceed*. In this case, the oversight assistant
   should notify the RPM.
Review           The oversight assistant should be familiar with the planned location and
Location and      number of samples designated in the SAP and should compare the plan with
Number of        the actual number and location of samples collected in the field.  The oversight
Samples           assistant should not delay the PRP's activities to check compliance with the
                  SAP; rather, the assistant should gather information by observing or
                  conversing with the PRP briefly at the beginning of each day. If the field
                  supervisor holds a briefing or safety meeting at the start of each day, this is a
                  good time for the oversight assistant to gather information.

                  Frequently, sampling locations will be modified in the field, usually when
                  access to  a planned sampling location is obstructed by an unforeseen physical
                  barrier. The oversight assistant should make a note in the field activity report
                  of any  changes  in the  sampling location and should use his/her judgment to
                  evaluate whether the change is reasonable (see  Section B.I.I). To make this
                  evaluation,  the  oversight assistant should consider the objectives of the
                  sampling and analysis  activities, as described in the SAP. A change in
                  sampling location that the oversight assistant feels might adversely affect the
                  outcome of the  sampling effort should first be  discussed with the PRPs' field
                  supervisor.  If the disagreement cannot be resolved, inquiry should be made to
                  the RPM at the first available moment.


Review           The oversight assistant should be familiar with the media and types of
Sampling         sampling equipment designated in the SAP and should compare the equipment
Equipment        at the site and the equipment that was designated  in the SAP for each medium
                  to be sampled.  The oversight assistant should focus his/her attention on the
                  major types of  equipment, such as split spoon samplers for collecting
                  undisturbed soil samples, bailers for collecting groundwater samples, or pumps
                                            B-4
-------
                  for purging monitoring wells before sampling.  Details such as the size of
                  bailers, the type of bailer wire, or the type of pump tubing during the
                  preliminary on-site activities are generally of minor concern.  The oversight
                  assistant should refer to Section B.2 of this manual if there are any questions
                  concerning the application and use of sampling equipment for each medium.

                  If the major equipment the PRP  has at the site is different than designated in
                  the SAP, the oversight assistant should refer  to the detailed information for the
                  media-specific sampling activities (Section B.2) to evaluate the validity of the
                  equipment substitution.  The oversight assistant should pay special attention to
                  the sampling activities when the  equipment is used. The oversight assistant
                  should not delay the PRP's activities to determine if the equipment is
                  acceptable. A discussion should  be held with the field supervisor if the
                  oversight assistant feels that the equipment is not acceptable for some reason.
                  If the disagreement cannot be resolved, an inquiry should be made to the RPM
                  at the first available moment.
Check            Layout of the decontamination and clean areas at the site should be one of the
Decontamina-     first activities that the PRP's contractors should perform before beginning
tion Area/        sampling and analysis.  Locations for these areas should be designated in the
Clean Area        SAP.  The oversight assistant should be familiar with the  general location and
                  configuration planned for these areas, and should check to see that the areas
                  are placed according to the  SAP.


Tour of Site       Before sample collection begins, the oversight assistant and his/her team
                  should conduct a walking tour of the site.  The walking tour serves two
                  functions: 1) to familiarize oversight personnel with the site and the
                  surrounding area (the oversight team should be sufficiently familiar  with the
                  site to find their way in the event of an emergency), and 2) to identify general
                  background site conditions  that might affect sampling activities or sample
                  results.

                  The effect of background site conditions on the sampling activities and sample
                  results varies with each sample medium and type of sample.  Detailed
                  information on the effects of background site conditions on sampling activities
                  and sample results is provided for each sample medium in Sections B.2.1
                  through B.2.9.  The oversight assistant should note any background site
                  conditions that he/she observes during the walking tour and should pay special
                  attention to these conditions affecting a particular area of sampling.
Calibration of
Equipment
Field analytical equipment must be calibrated regularly in order to provide
reliable measurements. The method and frequency of calibration vary with
different instruments, but the sampling team should, at a minimum, calibrate
equipment daily either upon arriving at the site or prior to its use. A
calibration check after use or at day's end will determine any drift in
instrument measurement.  The oversight assistant should know what type of
field analytical equipment will be used at the site and how often the
equipment should be calibrated, as designated in the SAP.
                                            B-5
-------
 B.2
MEDIA SPECIFIC SAMPLING ACTIVITIES

   One of the primary functions of oversight is to verify that the PRPs' sampling
   team is complying with the requirements of the SAP, and that the samples are
   representative of the contaminated media.  Collecting representative samples
   depends on proper sampling locations, equipment, and techniques as well as
   proper handling, preservation, labeling, and shipping.

   This section discusses the sampling procedures that apply to specific sample
   media. The nine sample media discussed are: (1)  surface water, (2)  ground
   water, (3) .soil water, (4) surface soil, (5) subsurface soil, (6) soil vapor, (7)
   sludge and slurry, (8) containerized wastes, and (9) ambient air.  Each of these
   media are discussed in a separate subsection.
 B.2.1
Surface Water

   Surface water is generally characterized by one of four types of environments:
   (1) rivers, streams, and creeks; (2) lakes and ponds; (3) impoundments and
   lagoons; and (4) estuaries.  Sediments are often sampled in conjunction with
   surface water, and are considered an integral part of the surface water
   environment since each type of surface water is in contact with sediments.
   Because surface waters can exhibit a wide range of general characteristics,
   such as size or flow, the collection technique must be adapted to site-specific
   conditions.
 Sampling
 Locations
    The oversight assistant should verify that the actual surface water sampling
    locations are consistent with those specified in the SAP.  Surface water
    sampling locations will  vary with the size of the water body and the amount of
    mixing (turbulence).  For example, the number and location of samples needed
    to characterize river or stream contamination will differ greatly from  the
    number and location of samples needed to characterize a lake.  Best
    professional judgment should be utilized to  evaluate whether changes  in
    sampling locations are reasonable and consistent with the objectives of the
    sampling and analysis activities (see Section B.I.I).  The oversight assistant
    should record sampling locations on a site map or drawing and  compare actual
    sampling points and those specified in the SAP.
• Rivers,           To ensure representativeness, samples should be collected immediately
 Streams, and     downstream of a turbulent area, or downstream of any marked physical change
 Creeks           in the stream channel (U.S. EPA, 1986c).  In the absence of turbulent areas,
                  the oversight assistant should verify that the sample location is clear of
                  immediate point sources of pollution such as tributaries or industrial  and
                  municipal effluents. Samples should also be located roughly proportional to
                  flow -- that is, closer together toward mid-channel, where most of the flow
                  travels, than toward the banks, where the  proportion of total flow is  smaller.

                  Unless a stream is extremely turbulent, it  is nearly impossible to measure the
                  effect of an immediately upstream waste discharge or tributary. This is"
                  because the inflow of a liquid from an upstream waste frequently remains near
                  the bank with little initial lateral mixing.  Therefore, the oversight assistant
                  should note if at least three locations between any two points of major change
                  in a stream (such as waste discharge or tributary) are sampled to adequately
                  represent the stream.
                                             B-6
-------
                 If the effect of a waste discharge or tributary on a water body is to be
                 quantified,  the oversight assistant should check that the samples are collected
                 both upstream and downstream from the discharge or tributary. The sample
                 location on  a tributary should be as near its mouth as possible without
                 collecting water from the main stream that may flow into the mouth of the
                 tributary on either the surface or bottom (because of density differences due
                 to temperature, dissolved salts, or turbidity).

                 When the sampling team collects several samples along a stream, the samples
                 should be located  at time-of-water-travel intervals; that is, the distance that
                 the water travels in a given time period. A general rule of thumb is to collect
                 a total of six samples at successive intervals that are one-half water-travel day
                 apart (U.S.  EPA, 1986c).

                 Typically, sediment deposits in streams collect most heavily in river bends,
                 downstream of islands, and downstream of obstructions in the water.
                 Generally, the oversight assistant should check if sediment samples are
                 collected along a cross-section of a river or stream bed. A common practice is
                 to sample at quarter points along the cross-section of the site. The sampling
                 team should not take sediment samples immediately upstream or downstream
                 from the confluence of two streams or rivers because of possible backflow and
                 inadequate  mixing.


Lakes and        Because of  reduced (or no) flow, lakes and ponds have a much greater
Ponds            tendency to stratify than rivers and streams. The relative lack of mixing
                 requires the sampling team to obtain more samples to represent present water
                 conditions.  For example, if stratification is caused by water temperature
                 differences (such as cooler, heavier river water entering warmer lake water)
                 the sampling team should sample each layer of the stratified water column
                 separately.  If a lake is in spring or fall overturn, vertical composites may not
                 be necessary.  Stratification can be determined with temperature, specific
                 conductance,  pH, and dissolved oxygen vertical profiles.  The oversight
                 assistant should check if the sampling  team has made a vertical profile of the
                 water column or used visual observation to detect different layers.

                 The number of water sampling locations on a lake or pond will vary with the
                 size and shape of  the basin as well  as other  factors such as discharges,
                 tributaries, and land use characteristics that could affect water quality. In
                 ponds,  a single vertical composite  at the deepest point may be representative.
                 In naturally formed ponds, the deepest point is usually near the center.  In
                 lakes, the sampling team should take several vertical composite along a transect
                 or grid to ensure the samples are representative (U.S. EPA, 1986c). However,
                 vertical composites samples should not be collected for volatile;; separate grab
                 samples at each composite point should be collected.

                 The oversight assistant should check if sediment samples in lakes, ponds, or
                 reservoirs are collected approximately at the center of water mass where
                 contaminated fines are most likely to collect.  Generally, coarser-grained
                 sediments are deposited near the headwaters of a reservoir, while bed
                 sediments near the center of the water mass will be composed of fine-grained
                 materials.
                                            B-7
-------
Impoundments
and
Lagoons
Impoundments and lagoons generally will contain more concentrated wastes
than lakes and ponds, and thus be a source (as well as a sink) of
contamination. In addition, impoundments and lagoons are more likely to
contain sludges as opposed to sediments (for information on sludge sampling,
see Section B.2.7).

As with lakes and ponds, the number of water sampling locations for
impoundments and lagoons will vary with the size and shape of the
impoundment  or lagoon as well as other factors such as the location and flow
characteristics of inlets and discharges. In small impoundments, a single
vertical composite at the deepest point may be representative; the deepest
point is usually near the dam. In larger impoundments, the sampling team
should take several vertical composites along a transect or grid to ensure
samples are representative (U.S. EPA, 1986c).
Estuaries
Due to the dynamics of estuaries, preplanned sampling locations typically must
be changed after initial sampling.  (Initial sampling may only test assumptions
regarding sample locations). In addition, because estuary dynamics cannot
normally be determined by a single-season study, estuary sampling is usually
two-phased, conducted during wet and dry seasons..

The oversight assistant should note if samples in estuaries are collected at mid-
depth where depths are less than 10 feet, unless the salinity profile indicates
the presence of a halocline (salinity stratification). In that case, the sampling
team should collect samples from each stratum. For depths greater than 10
feet, the sampling  team may collect water samples at 1-foot depth, mid-
depth, or 1 foot from the bottom.  Sampling in estuaries is normally based on
tidal phases, with sampling on successive slack (low flow) tides.
Biota
Biota sampling may occur when questions exist about the presence or absence
of measurable impacts both onsite and offsite or to assist in preparing an
ecological assessment.  In surface  waters, biota are often sampled incidentally
to water or sediment sampling. In other media, or for bioassays, specific
equipment and detailed project plans are employed.  Biota sampling can help
better determine the effect of contaminants on natural systems, either directly
or through food-chain accumulation.
General
Surface Water
Conditions
The oversight assistant should note the general conditions of the water body
(and sediments).  Water turbidity and turbulence are of particular interest for
obtaining representative surface water samples. (Turbulence affects mixing,
while turbidity is an indication of sediment/water mixing). In addition, the
oversight assistant should observe the water to detect the presence of any
stratification (layers) or the presence of petroleum products or surface sheen.

The oversight assistant should also document other conditions which could
affect sampling activities or sample quality. These conditions include the
presence and relative locations of any discharges or tributaries,  any
obstructions or islands,  and any change in channel width or direction as well as
weather conditions.  Refer to  the general site conditions paragraphs of Section
B.2 for more detail and additional considerations.
                                            B-8
-------
Sampling         Generally, any sampling equipment that preserves the integrity of the sample,
Equipment       and produces a sample that is representative of the sample location, is
                 acceptable.  The oversight assistant, however, should note if the sampling
                 team's equipment is consistent with the equipment listed  in the SAP.  To
                 reduce the possibility of cross-contamination, the sampling team should collect
                 samples with glass, plastic, or Teflon-coated  samplers for trace metals analysis.
                 Likewise, stainless steel, glass, or Teflon samplers are used  to collect  samples
                 for trace organic compounds analysis.


Water            For sampling at  a specific depth, the sampling team may use a standard
Sampling         Kemmerer or Van Dorn sampler (U.S. EPA,  1987a).  The Kemmerer sampler
Equipment       (Figure B-l) is a brass cylinder  with rubber stoppers that leave the ends open
                 while the cylinder is being lowered in  a vertical position  to allow free passage
                 of water through the cylinder. The Van Dorn sampler (Figure B-l) is similar
                 to the Kemmerer, but is plastic  and is  lowered in a horizontal position. The
                 oversight assistant should check whether the  sampling team uses  the Kemmerer
                 metallic sampler for trace organic compounds or the  plastic Van  Dorn sampler
                 for trace metals  (some Van Dorn samplers are Teflon-coated and therefore can
                 be used for  both organic  compounds and metals).

                 When using  a Kemmerer or Van Dorn sampler, the sampling team sends a
                 5-ounce messenger (weight) down the  rope, or activates an electrical  solenoid
                 when the sampler reaches the designated depth, causing the stoppers  to close
                 the cylinder.  The sample is raised and removed through  a valve  to fill sample
                 bottles.

                 The sampling team may also use modifications of the basic Kemmerer and Van
                 Dorn samplers.  Two of these are  the Nansen Bottle and the Niskin Bottle.
                 The Nansen Bottle, available in  a  1.5-liter size, consists of a brass tube with
                 rotary valves at each end. The Niskin Bottle sampler is available in sizes
                 ranging from  1.7 to 30 liters and is designed  primarily for deep-water
                 sampling.

                 As with the Kemmerer, the Nansen bottle is  lowered with the valves open.  A
                 messenger weight releases a catch mechanism, allowing the bottle to invert,
                 and closing  the valves. The Niskin Bottle, unlike the Kemmerer, can be
                 opened and  closed at any depth. This  allows the  bottle to penetrate surface
                 contamination (such as oil slicks) with minimal risk of contaminating the
                 internal sample area.

                 Another type of sampler (U.S. EPA, 1987a) is the weighted-bottle sampler
                 (Figure B-2). When using the weighted-bottle sampler, the sampling team
                 lowers the samples to the desired depth and pulls the stopper, allowing the
                 bottle to fill.  Unlike the Kemmerer, the bottle is raised  uncapped, allowing
                 the sample to mix with water from other depths.

                 The sampling team may also use small peristaltic pumps to  sample surface
                 water (Figure B-2).  With peristaltic pumps,  the sample is drawn through
                 heavy-wall  Teflon tubing and pumped directly into the sample container (U.S.
                 EPA, 1987a). This method permits sampling from a specific depth or
                 sweeping the width of narrow streams. These pumps should not be used for
                 sampling volatile organics or oil and grease; volatile stripping can occur and oil
                 and grease can adhere to the tubing.
                                           B-9
-------
     Figure B-l. Common Surface Water Samplers
Kemmerer Sampler
Van Dorn Sampler
                                 B-10
-------
Figure B-2. Common Surface Water Samplers
                                                   Washer
                                                     Pin
                                                      Nut
                               Weighted Bottle Sampler
  1000-ml(l-quart) weighted-
  bottle catcher
                                                                   Washer
                                   Peristaltic Pump
                                        B-ll
-------
                 The sampling team may use a sampling device resembling a dust pan to sample
                 an immiscible floating phase (for example, petroleum).  The device has a large,
                 shallow surface area that skims the water surface more readily than a cup with
                 a smaller, deeper surface area.  Alternatively, the sampling  team can use an
                 absorbent boom or roll to gather the floating material into a deeper pool for
                 sampling directly, or absorb the material to be wrung into sample containers.
Sediment
Sampling
Equipment
To collect a sediment sample, the sampling team will generally use one of
three methods:  dredging, coring, or scooping.
Dredging
For routine analyses, the Peterson dredge is preferable when the surface water
bed is rocky, very deep, or when the stream velocity is high (U.S. EPA,
1986c).  The Eckman dredge has only limited usefulness.  It performs well
where bottom material is unusually soft, as  when covered with organic sludge
or light mud. It is unsuitable, however, for sandy, rocky, and hard bottoms
and is too light  for use in streams with  high velocities.

The Ponar dredge is one of the most effective samplers for general use on all
types of substrate.  The Ponar dredge (Figure B-3) is a modification of the
Peterson dredge and is similar in size and weight.  It has  been modified by the
addition of side plates and a screen on the top of the sample compartment.
The screen over the sample compartment permits water to pass through the
sampler as it descends, thus reducing the "shock wave" created by the descent
of the dredge into the sediment.
Coring
If a historical analysis of sediment deposition is desired, the sampling team
may use core samplers to sample vertical columns of sediment.  Core samplers
are  better than dredges for this type of analysis because they preserve the
sequential layering of the deposit. The sampling team may use different types
of coring devices depending oil  the depth of water from which the sample is to
be obtained, the nature of the bottom material, and the length of core to be
collected.  These coring  devices vary from hand push tubes (Figure B-3) to
weight- or gravity-driven  devices.  To  reduce sample contamination, the
sampling team should use glass or Teflon core liners.  With core liners, the
samples are easily delivered to the lab for analysis in the tube in which they
were collected.  The disadvantage of coring devices is that a relatively small
surface area and sample size is obtained, therefore requiring additional
sampling by the sampling team to obtain the required amount for analysis.

The oversight assistant should check if  the coring tube is long enough and has
the  proper diameter to ensure a representative sample. The sampling team
should use a coring tube that is  approximately  12 inches long if recently
deposited sediments (8 inches or less) are needed.  Longer tubes should be used
when the sediments exceed 8 inches in  thickness (U.S. EPA, I986c). Because
coarse or unconsolidated sediments such as sands and gravel tend to fall out of
the  tube, the sampling team should use a tube with a small diameter (a tube
about 2 inches in diameter is usually the best size). Since soft or semi-
consolidated sediments adhere more readily to the inside of the tube, the
sampling team may use  larger diameter tubes for mud or clay.  The wall
thickness of the tube should be  about 1/3 inch for either Teflon or glass. The
inside wall may be filed down at the bottom of the tube to more easily pierce
the  substrate.
                                           B-12
-------
Figure B-3. Common Sediment Samplers
                                     Ponar Dredge
                   • HOUFitCf
                                                          61 • 100 cm.
                                                          (24 - 40 in.) "
                                                                i
                                                               1.27-2.54 cm (1/3 in.-1 to.)
      Hand Push Tube
Grain Sampler
                                          B-13
-------
Scooping
If the stream has a significant flow and is too deep to wade, the sampling team
may scoop some sediment with a BMH-60 sampler (U.S. EPA, 1986c). The
BMH-60 is not particularly efficient in mud or other soft substrates because
its weight will cause penetration to deeper sediments, which may not be
desired. The sampling team may use the BMH-60 for sampling if subsamples
that have not been in contact with the  metal walls of the sampler are taken.
Sample Type     There are two types of surface water samples that may be collected: a grab
                 sample and a composite sample. Grab samples are taken at a single location.
                 It may be necessary to collect material from a location in successive "grabs" to
                 accumulate the required amount of sample; the sample is still, however, a grab
                 sample. Composite samples are combined from different locations, or from
                 different times.  A continuous sample would also be a composite sample.  For
                 example, grab samples combined from 1  foot below the water surface, at mid-
                 depth, and 1  foot above the bottom would constitute a vertical composite.  A
                 peristaltic pump collecting water from mid-depth at the center of a stream
                 channel over a period of time would yield a time composite sample.
                 Generally, water samples with different temperatures or conductivities, may
                 be composited (U.S. EPA, 1986c) as these properties (as opposed to
                 composition) are subject to change once the sample has been collected.
                 Sediment samples of dissimilar composition or samples collected for volatile
                 organic analysis should not be composited, but instead stored for separate
                 analysis.

                 The size of the sample collected is determined by the  requirements for
                 analysis, and is specified in the SAP. For example, water samples analyzed for
                 purgeable organic compounds should be stored in 40 mL septum vials with no
                 head space (air) remaining. Sediment samples for purgeable organic
                 compounds analysis should completely fill a 4-ounce (120 mL) sample
                 container; again, no head space should remain in the sample containers. For
                 trace organic compounds and metals, 4 to 8 ounces (120-240 mL) of sample
                 are usually collected.

                 The SAP should specify the order in which samples should be collected.
                 Generally, samples should be collected in the order of decreasing volatility;
                 volatile contaminants should be sampled  before nonvolatile contaminants (U.S.
                 EPA, 1986a).  A preferred collection order would be:

                 •  Volatile organics;

                 •  Purgeable organics  (generally not volatile at ambient conditions);

                 •  Total organics;

                 •  Metals;

                 •  Phenols;

                 •  Cyanide; and

                 •  Metal anions (for example, sulfate, chloride, nitrate).
                                           B-14
-------
Sampling
Technique
Field
Analytical
Techniques
The oversight assistant should be aware of other factors, such as water velocity
and accessibility, that may affect sampler selection and technique.  For
example, the sampling team should collect surface water samples from the
shore of the water body (possibly with an extension pole), a small boat, a pier,
or by wading in streams. Wading, however can cause bottom deposits to rise
and bias the sample.  For this reason wading  is not acceptable for lakes and
streams without a noticeable current.  When wading, sampling personnel
should face upstream and collect the sample with the container  pointing
upstream. Likewise, when sampling beneath the water surface, care should be
taken not to stir up the bottom sediment and thus bias the sample.

The sampling team can collect water samples from shallow depths by
submerging  the sample container directly into the water.  Alternatively, they
can use a bucket or dedicated collection vessel (bailer, beaker, or other
sampler)  to transfer the  water sample to a container.  However, when a
transfer vessel is used, the sampling team should avoid aeration and loss of
volatile organic compounds.  The team should also not disturb the bottom
sediment and should  decontaminate the transfer  vessel between  sample
locations.

For deeper samples, the sampling team  should attach a rope to the dedicated
sampler.  The oversight  assistant should note if the sampling team uses either a
nylon rope or Teflon-coated wire to lower all samplers into the water; other
rope/cable materials  may introduce contaminants.  The rope should be
properly  discarded or decontaminated between sampling locations.

When sampling from highly contaminated surface water (for example, from a
surface impoundment) the sampling team should take care  to minimize splash
hazards which could  spread contamination as well as result in unintended
exposure. Similarly,  if the sampling team will be collecting extremely
contaminated sediment,  preliminary decontamination  may be necessary before
leaving the sampling location.  Typically, this will involve placing
contaminated boots and  sampling equipment  into plastic bags for transfer to
the decontamination  area.  This will prevent  spread of contamination.  As
noted in Section B.4.3, full decontamination is not done in locations adjacent
to surface water where runoff to the water can occur.


Field analytical techniques for screening surface water (and ground water) can
be broadly outlined in six categories:

•   pH meters;

•   Conductivity meters;

•   Thermometers;

•   Dissolved oxygen meters;

•   Inorganic compounds kits/instruments; and

•   Organic compounds  instruments.

Except for self-purging instruments (for example, gas chromatographs), the
oversight assistant should note whether the sampling team decontaminates the
analytical equipment between samples to avoid cross contamination.
                                           B-15
-------
pH Meters       The sampling team can obtain the pH of a water sample from either a pH
                 meter or calorimetric pH paper (U.S. EPA, 1986c, 1976b).  The oversight
                 assistant should verify that the pH meter is calibrated, at a minimum, on a
                 daily basis to standard solutions and to  temperature (if the  pH meter does not
                 have temperature compensation capability).  If calorimetric pH paper is used,
                 the oversight assistant should note the shelf-life expiration.

                 The sampling team obtains the pH of a sample by immersing the (clean)  pH
                 meter electrode in the water sample and reading the instrument display.  The
                 oversight assistant should note the presence of oily material or paniculate
                 matter, since this material or matter can impair electrode response.  If the
                 sampling team uses pH paper, a drop of water should be put  on the paper
                 since immersing pH  paper will contaminate the sample.


Conductivity      Conductivity is a function of the number of ions in solution, and is therefore a
Meters           relative indication of water contamination.  The sampling team should
                 calibrate a conductivity meter against a test solution of known conductivity
                 before use.  Because  surface waters contain many natural salts, the sampling
                 team should compare field measurements  to an upgradient  or uncontaminated
                 baseline.  Because conductivity is also a function of temperature, the sampling
                 team should measure samples at the same  temperature, or should use a
                 temperature-compensating instrument.
Thermometers
The sampling team can measure water temperature with any high-quality
mercury-filled thermometer or thermistor with an analog or digital readout
device (U.S. EPA, 1986c). Although  it is not necessary to calibrate on a daily
basis, thermometers should be periodically calibrated against a National
Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) traceable standard thermometer.
The sampling team should insert the (clean) thermometer in situ when
possible, or into a collected  sample.  The oversight assistant should check that
the sampling team allows the temperature to equilibrate before taking the
reading.
Dissolved
Oxygen Meters
The sampling team can measure dissolved oxygen content in water samples
with a dissolved oxygen meter or with the Winkler method (U.S. EPA, 1986c).
The meter measures dissolved oxygen content directly upon immersion of the
probe, whereas the Winkler method is a titration involving five reagents.  The
sampling team should calibrate the dissolved oxygen meter against the Winkler
method  before use on samples free of interferences, or otherwise according to
manufacturer's instructions.  Since temperature affects dissolved oxygen
readings, the oversight  assistant should check if the sampling team's meter is
equipped with a temperature compensator. Dissolved oxygen probe
performance is also affected by dissolved inorganic salts and by reactive gases
such as chlorine and  hydrogen sulfide.
Inorganic         Various field test kits and instrumentation exist for field analysis of inorganic
Compound        compounds (U.S. EPA, 1987a).  The kits are calorimetric tests that require the
Kits/Instru-       sampling team to add reagents to a portion of the sample. To obtain the
ments             results, the sampling team compares the sample with a color chart or uses a
                  spectrophotometer, colorimeter, or other instrument that will measure color
                                           B-16
-------
                  intensity.  If the sampling team uses a field atomic absorption spectrometer,
                  the oversight assistant should check if the operator has been trained to avoid
                  interference and contamination problems.


Organic           Although there are many organic compound instruments that the sampling and
Compound        analysis team may operate in a van, trailer, or building, the oversight assistant
Instruments       will generally encounter portable instruments (U.S. EPA, 1987a, 1987b).  The
                  most easily portable units are battery-powered gas chromatographs (GCs).
                  There are also mass spectrometers (MS) and combination GC/MS units which
                  require 120 volts of AC power, either from regular utility lines or from
                  generators.

                  Generally, the battery-powered GCs are suitable only for detecting volatile
                  compounds. The AC-powered units can detect semi-volatiles, and can be
                  temperature programmed or can have capillary column capability, both of
                  which considerably enhance GC selectivity. The oversight assistant should be
                  aware that effective use of these  analytical instruments requires a high level of
                  operator experience and expertise.  The oversight assistant should note the type
                  of equipment that the sampling team uses and the experience of the
                  operator(s).


B.2.2         Ground Water

                  Ground water is usually defined as the water present in the saturated soil
                  zone -- that is,  the subsurface soil zone in which the pore space between the
                  soil grains (or rock fractures) is filled with water.  Although  water is present
                  in the unsaturated zone in the form of films and vapors, it is often referred to
                  as soil water in  this case and is distinct from saturated ground water (U.S.
                  EPA, 1987a).  This is an important distinction because the techniques for well
                  installation and  sampling differ significantly between ground water and soil
                  water.


Well Location/    The sampling team will typically sample ground water through an in-place
Condition         well  that is either temporarily (if approved) or permanently  installed.
                  However,  the team may also sample ground water anywhere it is present, such
                  as in a pit or hole dug to the water table (U.S. EPA,  1986c).

                  The oversight assistant  should check if the actual sampling locations are
                  consistent with  those specified in the SAP. However, site-specific conditions
                  may require modifications in well location. The oversight assistant should rely
                  on best professional judgment to evaluate whether changes in well locations
                  are reasonable and consistent with the objectives of the SAP  (see Section
                  B.I.I). The oversight assistant should note the location  of all wells in the field
                  log and on a map.  A comparison of the actual well locations and the intended
                  locations should be noted.

                  The oversight assistant  should also check that the well is covered by a locked
                  protective casing.  The  protective casing should  be set in grout or concrete to
                  prevent its movement.  The well  casing should be capped to prevent foreign
                  matter from entering the well.
                                            B-17
-------
Well Design       Monitoring well casings are available in a wide range of sizes and are made of
                  various materials. Both the size of casing and the type of casing material are
                  critical factors for sampling and analysis.

                  The oversight assistant should note the diameter of the casing (well diameter)
                  because of its effect on measurement of immiscible fluids in the well.  The
                  measured thickness of immiscible  hydrocarbons in a well is  greater than the
                  actual thickness of the immiscible lens floating on the water table.  The lens in
                  a small diameter well (for example, 2-inch diameter) will be approximately 4
                  times thicker than on the water table (U.S. EPA, 1987b).

                  The oversight assistant should also note the type of casing material because of
                  its effect on the quality of the  water samples. The casing material may both
                  release and absorb water contaminants.  Some organic compounds and acids
                  react aggressively with casing materials and actually destroy well integrity.
                  When selecting an appropriate casing material, the sampling team should
                  consider the type of contaminant being investigated.  Polyvinylchloride (PVC)
                  pipe is acceptable for samples for  trace metals analysis, but  may not be
                  acceptable for trace  organic analysis because it has  been shown to release and
                  absorb trace amounts of various organic constituents. Stainless steel is
                  acceptable for trace  organics but may not be acceptable for  trace metals.
                  Fiberglass-reinforced plastic has recently  been used for trace organics  because
                  it does not absorb or release contaminants as much  as PVC does.
General
Ground Water
Conditions
The general conditions of the ground water are important for sample quality.
The oversight assistant should note if the sampling team checks the depth to
standing water, the depth to the bottom of the well, the presence of an
immiscible layer, and the turbidity of the water (although turbidity cannot be
detected until the water is sampled).  Measuring the water depth in a well is
important to characterize the aquifer and to determine  the volume of water
that should be purged (removed) from the well before sampling.
Measurements to determine the depths should  be made with respect  to a
surveyed reference point(s) instead of the top of the casing.  Measuring the
depths in this manner, however, is more important for  characterizing the
aquifer than  purging the well.  The sampling team may measure depth to
standing water and depth to the bottom of the well with any of several
measuring devices.  The oversight assistant should note if the sampling team
uses chalked steel tape, electric sounders, poppers, or some  other method.
Chalked steel tape with a weight attached to the lower  end is  one of the  most
accurate procedures for measuring water levels. The line where the chalk
color changes on the tape indicates the length of tape that was immersed in
water.   Electric sounders may also be used to  measure the depth to water in
wells.  Most sounders are powered with flashlight batteries, and immersing the
sounder in water closes the circuit and registers on a meter  or sounds a buzzer.
A popper -- a metal cylinder with a concave undersurface attached  to a steel
tape -- is another method for measuring the depth to the water. When the
popper is dropped to hit  the water surface, it makes a distinctive "pop."
Poppers are not  effective if the water surface is in contact with the well
screen, or if  there is significant background noise (such as pump operation).

The sampling team may determine the presence of a nonaqueous-phase
hydrocarbon lens floating on the water table or pooled  at the  bottom of the
aquifer by using hydrocarbon-detection pastes, bailers, or interface  probes.
Hydrocarbon-detection pastes change color when contacted by hydrocarbons,
but do not change in water.  The paste is applied to a rod or tape and lowered
                                            B-18
-------
                  into the well until it comes into contact with the water.  The rod or tape is
                  then withdrawn from the well. A color change indicates that a body of
                  nonaqueous-phase hydrocarbon is present.  Although this method can detect a
                  layer of hydrocarbon less than 1-mm thick, it does not permit direct
                  measurement of the thickness of the layer.  The sampling team can use a bailer
                  to measure the thickness of the layer.


Sampling          Generally, any sampling equipment that preserves the integrity of the sample
Equipment        and produces a sample that is representative of the sample location is
                  acceptable-  The most common methods involve either bailing or pumping.
                  The oversight assistant should note if the sampling team's equipment is
                  consistent with the equipment listed  in the  SAP.
Bailers
Bailers are divided into three groups:  (1) top-filling, (2) bottom-filling, and
(3) thief.  The sampling team may use a thief bailer to collect a sample from a
particular zone.  The thief bailer (for example, a Kemmerer bottle; see Figure
B-l) has check valves or mechanical stops on each end.

Because the  top-filling bailer is open only at the top, the oversight assistant
should check that it is completely submerged  to permit filling. The oversight
assistant should also note if the sampling team is trying to determine the
presence of a nonaqueous-phase liquid.  It may  be difficult to identify
nonaqueous-phase liquids with a top-filling bailer because the bubbling action
caused by the water filling the bailer may  emulsify the two liquid phases (U.S.
EPA, 1987b).

The bottom-filling bailer (Figure B-4) has a one-way check valve at the
bottom and an open top.  As the bailer is lowered, it fills from the bottom.
The oversight assistant should make sure the bailer is lowered slowly for
nonaqueous-phase layers, so that they can be  easily identified and separated
for analysis.

As a thief bailer is lowered,  water and nonaqueous-phase liquids can flow
completely through the bailer. When the desired collection level is reached,
the stops can be closed, or the check valves will be activated when the bailer is
drawn up.

In general, the sampling team should use plastic or Teflon-coated  bailers to
collect samples for trace metals analysis, and stainless steel or teflon-coated
bailers to collect samples for trace organic compounds analysis.  (Contaminant
leaching from the bailer is generally infinitesimal except under aggressive and
extremely contaminated conditions, such as nonaqueous-phase layers for
plastic and low pH combined with nitrates for stainless steel.  Thus, either
material may be acceptable for collecting for  both organic  compounds and
metals analysis depending on concentraction and constituents of concern.)
Pumps
The sampling team may use a variety of pumps for sampling ground water.
Pumps are classified as (1) suction-lift, (2) submersible, (3) air-lift, (4)
bladder, or (5) gas-driven piston. These pumps are discussed below.
Regardless of the type, the oversight assistant should check that the pumps
used for purging the well are not used for sampling without decontamination
(U.S. EPA, 1987a).
                                            B-19
-------
Figure B-4. Ground-Water Samplers
A
           SuinUM StMl Wlrt CcMt
           or Monoi
i
i
i
• i
i
i
.••"\i
w
'ill
., Top Mey Be Closed
f or Open
1-1/4" O.D. x 1" 1.0. Teflon
^""^ Extruded Tubing,
18" to 38" long
^
^
^^— 3/4" DiamttM
GltHMUrMe
 I  II \~—

     \ •!«•«
            Extruded Rod
                                                                                         Outek tit h«M
                                                                                            coupler
                                                                                             around
       8/18" Otomew
  Bottom-fillinf Bttor
                                                              Air-lift Pump
                                      B-20
-------
Suction-lift      Suction-lift pumps include centrifugal pumps, hand-operated diaphragm
                 pumps, and peristaltic pumps.  The sample is drawn into and up the pump
                 discharge line by the repeated creation of a partial vacuum in the pump.  The
                 oversight assistant should be aware that suction pumps generally are not
                 practical at surface depths greater than 25 feet and suction pumps are not
                 suitable for sampling for purgeabl.e organic compounds since suction can strip
                 volatile compounds.


Submersible      The sampling team may use submersible pumps to depths of several hundred
                 feet.  The.sample is brought into the pump by a series of impellers or blades,
                 and is forced to  the surface as more fluid is brought into the pump. The
                 oversight assistant should be aware that submersible pumps are difficult to
                 transport and decontaminate, and may emulsify any nonaqueous-phase  liquids
                 and volatilize dissolved organic compounds. They are therefore generally
                 better suited for purging than for sampling.
Airlift
The sampling team will rarely use air-lift pumps since significant oxidation,
emulsification, and degassing may occur. Air-lift pumps also are not suitable
for pH-sensitive parameters such as metals.  Air-lift pumps (Figure B.-4) use
air pressure to force samples into and up the discharge tube. The air pressure
can be generated by hand, but a small air compressor is more commonly used
for this purpose.
Bladder
Bladder pumps may be used in wells as small as 2 inches in diameter and are
acceptable for the sampling of all contaminants (although they are difficult to
properly decontaminate).  Bladder pumps consist of a collapsible membrane
inside a rigid housing.  Compressed gas (which does not come in contact with
the sample) is used to inflate or deflate the collapsible membrane (bladder)
from the outside.  This draws the sample into the bladder and forces it to  the
surface.
Gas-driven       In small-diameter wells, the sampling team may also use recently developed
piston            piston pumps. Compressed gas is used to activate the pistons to bring the
                 sample into the pump.  The sample is pumped without coming in contact with
                 the gas.  Although these devices can pump to depths in excess of 500 meters,
                 pumping rates are low.


Sample Type     As with surface water, there are two types of samples that may be collected: a
                 grab sample or a composite sample (see Section B.2.1).

                 Generally, ground water samples are grab samples, although separate samples
                 could be composited.  Alternatively, ground water may be sampled
                 continuously as in a ground water recovery or treatment system.  The size of
                 the sample collected is determined by the requirements for analysis, and is
                 specified in the SAP.  For example,  water samples analyzed for purgeable
                 organic compounds should be stored in 40 mL septum vials with no  head space
                 (air) remaining.  Water samples for metals or cyanide analysis may fill a 16-
                 ounce or 1-liter bottle. Larger amounts of water (up to 4 liters) may be
                 collected for low-concentration water samples that are analyzed for  extractable
                 organics.
                                           B-21
-------
The SAP should specify the order in which samples should be collected.
Generally, samples should be collected in the order of decreasing volatility;
volatile contaminants should be sampled before nonvolatile contaminants (U.S.
EPA, 1986a). See Section B.2.1 for a preferred collection order of
contaminants.

When sampling with bailers, the bailer is lowered into the well on a clean
nylon rope or Teflon-coated cable and permitted to fill with ground water.  If
the sampling team is collecting organic samples, the bailer should be lowered
so that it does not enter the water with a splash. Splashing or agitating the
water can .strip volatile compounds and stir up collected sediment.

Before taking samples, the sampling team must purge  wells to remove stagnant
water which has been  standing in the well casing and  may not be
representative of aquifer conditions.  The sampling  team may purge wells with
either an appropriate pump (depending on well depth) or a bailer. The
equipment used to purge the well should be  inert and  compatible with the
study objectives. The specific purging procedures should be described in the
SAP.

The standard method of purging  is to pump the well until three to five times
the volume of standing water  in the  well has been removed.  The sampling
team may also pump the well  until the specific conductance, temperature, and
pH of the ground water stabilizes (U.S. EPA, I987a).  Alternatively, a
combination of the two methods  can be used.  The oversight assistant should
be aware that pumping a well dry also constitutes an adequate purge and the
well can be sampled following well recovery (U.S. EPA, 1986c), although the
purge rate should be reduced, if  possible, to remove the necessary volume of
water.

The sampling team must know the volume of the water in the well before the
team can properly purge the well. (The volume of water in the well may
fluctuate with the season and  the weather.)  The oversight assistant should note
the volume that is purged from each well; the purged  volume should
correspond to the observed  well water volume.

The oversight assistant should check that the sampling team lowers the
pump/hose assembly or bailer into the top of the standing water column (not
deep into the column). This is done so that  the purging will draw water from
the ground-water formation into the screened area of the well and up  through
the casing so that the entire static volume can be removed (U.S. EPA,  I986c).
If the sampling team places the pump or bailer deep into the water column,
the water above the pump or bailer may not be removed, and the"subsequent
samples collected may not be  representative  of the ground water.

Regardless of which method is used for purging, the sampling team should
place new aluminum foil or plastic sheeting  on the ground surface beside the
well  to prevent additional contamination.  The sampling team should keep any
hoses that come into contact with the ground water on a spool to further
minimize contamination during transport (U.S. EPA, 1986c).

The oversight assistant should note  the time between the well purging  and
sample collection.  The sampling team should collect samples as soon as a
volume of water sufficient for the intended  analytical purpose reenters the
well.  Exposing the water entering the well for periods longer than 2 to 3
hours may result in unrepresentative samples.


                          B-22
-------
                  When sampling from a ground-water well, the sampling team should exercise
                  caution when first uncapping the well -- particularly if the well is unvented.
                  This  is because contaminant gases may have collected in the well. Moreover,
                  if the water table has risen since capping an unvented well, the air space above
                  the well will be pressurized.

                  Once the well is uncapped, the sampling team should check the ambient air
                  around the well for  the presence of hazardous vapors with an air monitoring
                  instrument before purging or sampling. The sampling team should approach
                  the well from the upwind side. Based on this initial hazard assessment, it may
                  be necessary to don  more/better protective equipment, or even evacuate.  The
                  oversight assistant should consult the site health and safety plan(s) for the
                  appropriate action levels before arriving at the  site.  In addition, if hazardous
                  atmospheres are encountered, the sampling team should try to identify the
                  gases/vapors, and verify that the site health and safety plan has specified
                  applicable and appropriate contingencies.
Field
Analytical
Techniques
B.2.3
   Field analytical techniques for screening ground water (and surface water) can
   be broadly outlined in six categories:

   •   pH meters;

   •   Conductivity meters;

   •   Thermometers;

   •   Dissolved oxygen meters;

   •   Inorganic compounds kits/instruments; and

   •   Organic compounds instruments.

   These instruments are discussed in detail in Section B.2.1, Surface Water
   Sampling.  Except for self-purging instruments (for example, gas
   chromatographs), the oversight assistant should check that the sampling team
   decontaminates the analytical equipment between samples to avoid cross -
   contamination.


Soil Water

   Water present in the unsaturated (vadose) zone in the form of films and vapors
   is often referred to as soil water (U.S. EPA, 1987a). Most hydrogeology texts
   distinguish between water near the surface and water in deeper unsaturated
   zones by the fact that water near the surface (so-called soil water) is subject to
   evaporation and plant transpiration, as well as to climatic effects.  However,
   for the purposes of oversight, this guidance will refer to  all water in the
   unsaturated/vadose zone as soil  water because the sampling equipment and
   techniques for the entire vadose zone are essentially the same.
                                            B-23
-------
                  Figure B-5 shows a hypothetical cross section of the subsurface, illustrating
                  the vadose and saturated zones. The term vadose zone (or zone of aeration) is
                  preferred  to the  term unsaturated zone because saturated conditions are
                  frequently encountered above the saturated zone in response to surface
                  flooding (Everett, et.al.,  1984).  The principal transport mechanisms of soil
                  water in the vadose zone are  infiltration, percolation, redistribution, and
                  evaporation.
Sampling
Locations
As water in the vadose zone does not exist in a saturated state, wells and open
cavities (such as test pits) cannot be used to collect soil-water samples.  The
sampling team samples soil water from either a temporarily (if approved) or
permanently installed emplacement hole.  An emplacement hole is distinct
from a well and is a hole for installation of a soil-water sampler. The
oversight assistant should be aware that in addition to sampling soil water
directly, there are a number of indirect methods, such as electrical resistance
blocks, for detecting fluid flow  in the vadose zone.  However, these methods
provide only qualitative evidence of contamination, producing no actual
sample for analysis. These methods therefore will not be examined in this
guidance.

The  oversight assistant should note the location of all emplacement holes in the
field log and on a map, comparing actual  locations with intended locations.
The  oversight assistant should also check to see if the actual sampling locations
are consistent with those specified in the SAP.  The oversight assistant should
be aware, however, that site-specific conditions may require modifications in
sampling locations.  For example, an obstruction  may necessitate moving a
sampling location.  The oversight assistant's best  professional judgment should
be used in  evaluating whether changes in  emplacement location are "reasonable
and  consistent" with the objectives of the  SAP (see Section B.I.I).
General Soil      General soil conditions are important for obtaining representative soil-water
Conditions        samples.  Soil texture (or particle size) affects operation of soil-water samplers.
                  For example, when divisions of subsurface water soils are very coarse, such as
                  when gravels are present, good contact between the finer pores and the
                  sampler may be  difficult to produce (for this reason, the space between the
                  soil-water sampler and the surrounding soil is usually filled with silica flour -
                  - a transmissive  material). Thus, particle size distribution  may affect sample
                  representativeness.

                  Soil structure (referring to the arrangement of textural units) affects the flow
                  of soil water (Everett, 1984).  Well-structured soil, or soil containing fractures
                  or cavities, allows soil water to flow rapidly through interconnected soU pores
                  or conducting channels.  Because soil-water samplers  collect water from the
                  finer (smaller) soil pores, the resultant samples may not be representative of
                  bulk flow.  Consequently, soil-water samplers may be inappropriate in well-
                  structured soil for determining the quality  of water flowing to the water table.

                  If determined by a sampling team geologist, the oversight assistant should
                  record soil type  and particle size. The oversight assistant should also record
                  visible stains, dark residues, or dead or stressed vegetation, indicating possible
                  soil contamination.
                                            B-24
-------
Figure B-5. Divisions of Subsurface Water
                                       Ground surface
       0§
       0.1
1
Soil-water
zone
i
i
Interm

i
•diata
vadoat
IOI
i
i
Cap
20
1
le
i
llary
«e
If

/////////////////////////A






Water table

                                       Impermeable rock
                                                                |
I*
I «
7 **
§i
                                                                a
                                       B-23
-------
Sampling         Soil-water samplers that collect soil-water flows in the vadose zone under
Equipment       suction (negative pressures) are called suction samplers (Wilson, 1980). The
                 most common of these suction soil-water samplers involve either ceramic-
                 type samplers, such as lysimeters or filter candles, or cellulose-acetate filters.
                 These  are described in more detail below.  The oversight assistant should note
                 whether the sampling team equipment is consistent with the equipment listed
                 in the  SAP.

                 Sampling  units employing filter candles (also described  as "vacuum extractors")
                 are installed in troughs below plant roots to sample irrigation return flow.
                 They are generally of little use at hazardous waste sites.  In addition, cellulose-
                 acetate hollow fibers are  likewise generally not useful for hazardous waste
                 field studies, but are more suited to laboratory studies (Wilson, 1980). Porous
                 cup lysimeters and membrane filter samples are the most common soil-water
                 samplers at hazardous waste sites.


Lysimeters       Lysimeters uses  a porous ceramic cup to collect soil water. When in contact
                 with the soil, soil water in the pore space is free to move into and equilibrate
                 with the pores in the ceramic cup.  By drawing a vacuum on the inside of the
                 porous cup, soil  water flows into the cup for collection.

                 There  are three  types of lysimeters: (1) vacuum-operated, (2) vacuum-
                 pressure, and (3) vacuum-pressure with check valves.  Each type essentially
                 consists of a ceramic cup mounted on the end of a small-diameter PVC tube.
                 A rubber  stopper is mounted on the other end of the PVC tube. Tubing  is
                 inserted through the stopper to apply a vacuum to the cup and to remove
                 collected soil water.

                 The upper end of a vacuum-operated lysimeter (Figure B-6) projects above
                 the soil surface and contains a single outlet tube through which vacuum
                 pressure or suction is applied to draw water into the porous cup.  To collect
                 the sample, a small-diameter tube is inserted through the outlet tube and a
                 hand pump draws the sample to a collection flask.  Vacuum-operated
                 lysimeters are generally used to sample to depths of 6 feet.

                 Vacuum-pressure lysimeters (Figure B-6) are used to collect samples from
                 depths greater than the suction lift of water (roughly 25 feet). The body tube
                 of the  sampler is generally about 2-feet long and can hold I liter of sample.
                 The vacuum-pressure lysimeter contains two tubes extending through a two-
                 hole rubber stopper.  One tube (the discharge tube) extends to the  base of the
                 ceramic cup and connects to a sample bottle; the other tube  extends a short
                 distance below the rubber stopper and connects to a vacuum-pressure pump.

                 The vacuum-pressure lysimeter operates by drawing a vacuum with the
                 discharge tube clamped.  The sample is collected by opening the discharge
                 tube and applying air pressure, which forces the sample into the sample bottle.
                 One limitation  to vacuum-pressure lysimeters is that the pressure  that lifts the
                 sample to the surface also forces some sample back through the porous cup
                 into the formation.  In addition, more pressure is required as sample depth
                 increases. Consequently,  vacuum-pressure lysimeters are suitable for depths
                 of no  more than 50 feet.
                                           B-26
-------
   Figure B-6. Lysimeters
PLASTIC TUBE
                        VACUUM
VACUUM TEST HAND PUMP
                    2-WAY PUMP
                                  VACUUM PORT
                                  AND GAUGE .
PLAST'C TUBE
AND CLAMP
                   COLLECTED SOIL WATER SAMPLE
                                               PLASTIC TUBE
                                               AND  CLAMP
                           V16-INCH
                         COPPER TUBE
                         PLASTIC PIPE
                      24 INCHES LONG
                                                        SAMPLE 80TTLE
                                                                               DISCHARGE TUBE
                                                       6-INCH HOLE
                                                       WITH TAMPED
                                                        SILICA SANO1
                                                         BACKFILL
                                                        POROUS CUP-


                                                         BENTONITE.
       Vacuum Operated Lysimeter
                                       Vacuum Pressure Lysimeter
                                             B-27
-------
                 Modifying the vacuum-pressure lysimeter with check valves (Figure B-7)
                 prevents the device from forcing a portion of the sample back into the
                 formation. The modified vacuum-pressure lysimeter is divided  into two
                 chambers connected by tubing containing a check valve. Both check valves
                 open upwards.  When a vacuum  is applied, the lower check valve opens while
                 the upper check valve closes, and soil water is drawn through the porous cup
                 and into the upper chamber.  When air pressure is applied, the lower check
                 valve closes, and the sample is forced to the surface.  Generally, nitrogen gas
                 is used to lift the sample  to the surface, although using compressed air will not
                 significantly change sample chemistry (Peters and Healy, 1988).

                 An additional advantage of the modified vacuum-pressure lysimeter is that the
                 check valves allow high pressures to be applied without damaging the ceramic
                 cup.  Also, this sampler can be used to a depth of 150 feet.

                 One major limitation of lysimeters is that samples cannot be obtained over the
                 entire range of soil-water pressures.  Lysimeters will nofcollect samples once
                 the soil-water suction is great enough (about 0.8 bar) to cause an air bubble to
                 enter the cup instead of soil water.  However, although lysimeters are effective
                 only over a small part of the  range of suctions encountered in the subsurface
                 environment, lysimeter suctions  of 0 to 0.8 bar include most of the soil-water
                 range (Everett, 1984).


Membrane        Membrane filter samplers (Figure B-7) use polycarbonate or cellulose-acetate
Filter            filters in conjunction with glass  fiber "wicks" and collectors. In operation,
Samplers         capillary action draws soil water through the glass wick and membrane filter
                 for collection.  Advantages of the membrane filter sampler are that the
                 collector sheets can contact a large area of soil and maintain a favorable
                 collection rate when the collector becomes blocked with fine soil.  Membrane
                 filter samplers can be used to a depth of about 12 feet. There are two types of
                 soil-water samples that may be collected:   a grab sample or a composite sample
                 (see Section B.2.1).  Generally, soil-water samples are grab samples, although
                 separate samples from different  depths, locations, or times could be
                 composited.

                 The size of the sample collected is  determined by the requirements for
                 analysis, and is specified in the SAP.  For example, water samples analyzed for
                 purgeable organic compounds should be stored in 40 mL septum vials with no
                 head space (air) remaining.  Water  samples for metals or cyanide analysis may
                 fill a 16-ounce or 1-liter bottle.  The size  of the sample collected, however,
                 may be limited by the amount of soil water present in the  porous cup.
                 Provisions for compositing successive samples to obtain a sufficient volume of
                 soil water to perform the required  analysis should be specified in the SAP.

                 The SAP should also specify  the order in which samples should be collected.
                 Generally, samples  should be collected in the order of decreasing volatility;
                 volatile contaminants should  be sampled before nonvolatile contaminants (U.S.
                 EPA, 1986a).  See Section B.2.1  for a preferred collection order  of
                 contaminants.
                                           B-28
-------
 Figure B-7. Suction Samplers
                      .VACUUM-AIR PRESSURE LINE
                      •UPPER CHECK \*LVE

                           E DISCHARGE LINE
                      ,UPPER CHAMBER
                                          SO
-------
Sampling         The amount of vacuum applied to a lysimeter and the corresponding intake
Technique        rate have a significant effect on sample quality (Wilson, 1980). Specifically,
                  fast-rate samplers collect most of the sample at the beginning of the sampling
                  interval.  Consequently,  unless the soil-water quality is not changing with
                  time, the collected sample may not be representative. Therefore, in order to
                  collect a sample that is representative of the soil water draining to the water
                  table, the rate of sample collection should correspond to the pore water
                  drainage rate.

                  The oversight assistant should be aware that soil-water techniques are not
                  appropriate for sampling for polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, alkanes with
                  greater than 10 carbons, pentachlorophenol, and other chemicals with an
                  octanol water partition coefficient (log K  ) of 4 or larger (Brown, 1986).
                  Such compounds preferentially adsorb to the soil and will generally not be
                  found in soil water; soil  core samples should be used to detect these
                  compounds. Chemicals having log KOH values of 3 or less will generally be
                  found in soil-water samples, while chemicals with octanol water partition
                  coefficients between 3 and 4 may  be detected by either soil-core or soil-
                  water techniques.

                  The oversight assistant should also be aware that  trace-metal concentrations
                  can be significantly affected by soil-water collection techniques if the total
                  dissolved solids concentration of the soil-water is less than 500 ppm (Peters
                  and Healy, 1988). In such dilute soil-water solutions, the sample may not be
                  representative of the trace-metals  concentration.  In addition, although the use
                  of nitrogen as the pressurant in lysimeters is prudent and will preclude
                  oxidation of chemical constituents, the use of air causes little difference in
                  soil-water chemistry (Peters and Healy,  1988).
Field
Analytical
Techniques
Field analytical techniques for screening soil water (and ground and surface
water)  can be broadly outlined in six categories:

•   pH meters;

•   Conductivity meters;

•   Thermometers;

•   Dissolved oxygen meters;

•   Inorganic compounds kits/instruments; and

•   Organic compounds instruments.

These instruments are discussed in detail in Section B.2.1, Surface Water
Sampling. Except for self-purging  instruments (for example, gas
chromatographs), the oversight assistant should check that the sampling team
decontaminates the analytical equipment between samples to avoid cross-
contamination.
                                            B-30
-------
B.2.4
Surface Soil

   This section discusses methods for sampling surface soil. Although the
   distinction between surface soil and subsurface soil is variable and site-
   specific, surface soil is generally considered to be soil that can be sampled
   using hand tools (that is, less than  about 3-feet deep).
Sampling
Locations
   Sampling locations for soil should be specified in the SAP.  While the oversight
   assistant should check if the actual sampling locations are consistent with those
   listed in the SAP, the oversight assistant should also be aware that site-specific
   conditions may dictate a modification in sampling location.  Sampling locations
   will vary with  surface features such as rock outcrops, drainage patterns, fill
   areas, and depositional areas.  The guidelines outlined in Section B.I.I should
   be followed to determine if a  new sampling location is "reasonable and
   consistent" with the sampling  objectives, and is therefore acceptable or not.
   Sampling locations should be recorded on  a site map or drawing; a comparison
   should be made between the actual sampling locations and those  specified in
   the SAP. The  oversight assistant should also note the general soil sample
   location, such as soil taken from a field, a drainage ditch, or beside an
   impoundment.

   The oversight assistant should note if the  sampling team takes any  samples
   from depositional areas such as outwashes or previously flooded  areas.  For
   screening purposes, the sampling team usually samples in depositional areas on
   the periphery of the study area, and primarily at the downstream or
   downgradient portion(s).  This is not appropriate for investigative purposes
   because  it will bias the results toward elevated concentrations.
General Soil      The general conditions of the soil and vegetation are important to surface soil
and               sampling as they may  provide information on potential contamination. The
Vegetation        oversight assistant should be particularly interested in stains, dark residues,
Conditions        and dead or stressed vegetation that may indicate soil contamination.  The
                  oversight assistant should record  the general conditions of the soil being
                  sampled at each location if determined by a sampling team geologist.  Of
                  particular interest are  soil moisture, soil type, particle size, and color.


Sampling         Generally, any sampling equipment that preserves the integrity of the sample
Equipment        and produces a sample that  is representative of the sample location is
                  acceptable.  The oversight assistant should note if the actual sampling
                  equipment is consistent with the  sampling equipment listed in the SAP.

                  The sampling team should collect surface soil samples using clean trowels,
                  scoops or spoons, grain samplers, sampling triers or hand augers, or corers.
                  Soil sampling equipment used for sampling for trace contaminants should be
                  constructed of stainless steel.  For sampling trace organic compounds, brass or
                  carbon steel is acceptable in addition to stainless steel. The sampling team
                  should never use chromium, cadmium, or galvanized-plated or -coated
                  equipment for soil sampling operations.  Similarly, the sampling team should
                  not use painted  equipment unless all paint and primer is removed from the
                  equipment by sandblasting or other means before the equipment is used for
                  collecting soil samples. If the sampling team uses gasoline-powered
                  equipment, the oversight assistant should  note if the equipment  is downwind
                                            B-31
-------
                 to avoid cross-contaminating the surface soil samples with volatile organic
                 compounds.

                 For samples that are less than 5  inches below the surface, the sampling team
                 may use trowels or spoons.  Garden-type trowel blades are usually about 3 by
                 5 inches long with a sharp tip.  A laboratory scoop is similar, but the blade is
                 usually more curved and has a closed upper end to contain materials.  Scoops
                 come in different sizes and are made of various materials. Trowel size should
                 be selected depending upon the  volume and depth of the sample to be taken;
                 the material should be selected based on the type  of contaminant.  (Remember:
                 galvanized-plated trowels should never be used).

                 A grain sampler (Figure  B-8) consists of two slotted telescoping tubes, usually
                 made of brass or stainless steel.  The outer tube has a conical, pointed tip that
                 permits the sampler to penetrate the soils.  Grain  samplers are 24 to 40 inches
                 long by 0.5 to 1.5 inches in diameter, and are best for collecting dry, granular,
                 or loose soils with particles no greater than 0.25 inches in diameter (soils
                 classified by the Unified Soil Classification System as coarse sands or  finer).
                 Grain samplers are of limited use for moist, compressed, and large-particle
                 soils.

                 A typical sampling trier  is a stainless steel tube about 24 to 40 inches long and
                 0.5 to 1 inch in diameter, with a wooden handle and a slot that extends  its
                 entire length (see Figure B-8).  The tip and edges of the tube slot are
                 sharpened to enable the trier to  cut a core when rotated in the soil. Sampling
                 triers (as well as hand augers) are used to sample moist, compressed soils,
                 although the sampler often has difficulty removing the sample that has been
                 cut with the trier.

                 The sampling team may  use corers to obtain a relatively undisturbed surface
                 soil sample, and to obtain a quantitative measurement of soil contamination.
                 Thin-walled corers (known as push tubes or Shelby tubes) can be used
                 manually or with power  equipment. Manual push tubes are straight tubes
                 generally 2 inches in diameter or less and are of varying length. Larger
                 diameter push tubes require power  equipment.  A tapered nosepiece acts as the
                 cutting edge of the tube.  They  are generally constructed of chrome-plated
                 steel or stainless steel and can usually be adapted  to hold brass or
                 polycarbonate plastic liners.

                 The Shelby tube is a stainless steel tube approximately 12 inches long  and 2
                 inches  in diameter.  The edges are beveled into a  cutting edge at one end of
                 the tube. The other end can be mounted on an adapter that allows attachment
                 to the end of the hand auger. The Shelby tube is particularly useful for
                 undisturbed samples, since the sample may be shipped intact within the tube
                 directly to the laboratory for analysis. A split-spoon sampler may also be used
                 to collect undisturbed samples, but  is more typically used in subsurface soil
                 applications.

                 One method of obtaining a disturbed-surface sample is  by using an ordinary
                 post hole digger. The sampling team may use the post hole digger to obtain a
                 sample of surface soils to approximately 3  feet below grade.

Sample Type     Surface soil samples may be either grab or composite samples.  Grab samples
                 are samples taken at a single location (see Section B.2.1).
                                           B-32
-------
 Figure B-8. Common Soil Samplers
61 -100cm.
(24-40 in.) '
                V
       1.27 - 2.54 cm (1/2 in. • 1 to.)
61-100 cm
(24 - 40 to.)
                                                                  1.27 - 234 cm (1/2 to.-1 to.)
        Grain Sampler
        Sampling Trier
-------
                 The size of the sample collected is determined by the requirements for
                 analysis, and is specified in the SAP.  For example, soil samples for purgeable
                 organic compounds analysis should completely fill a 4-ounce (120 mL) sample
                 container; no head space should remain in the sample containers.  For trace
                 organic compounds and metals, 4 to.8 ounces (120-240 mL) of sample are
                 usually collected.

                 The SAP should specify the order in which samples should be collected.
                 Generally, samples should be collected in the order of decreasing  volatility
                 (U.S. EPA,  1986a). See Section  B.2.1  for a preferred contaminant collection
                 order.
Sampling          The oversight assistant should be aware that many of the techniques used to
Technique        collect soil samples disturb the sample, and therefore provide only semi-
                  quantitative or qualitative results. Before sampling,  the sampling team should
                  remove leaves, grass, and surface debris from the sampling location by
                  brushing or scraping it aside.  Samples are obtained using any of the
                  equipment described in Section B.2.4.

                  Composite samples should be thoroughly mixed. The SAP should describe the
                  specific mixing procedures. Except for volatile organic samples, the sampling
                  team generally removes the soil from  the sampling device and places it in a
                  cooking-glass pan or a stainless steel pan. The soil in the pan should be
                  scraped from  the sides, corners, and bottom of the pan, rolled to the middle of
                  the pan, and mixed (a Teflon-coated or stainless steel spoon should be used).
                  The sample should then be quartered  and moved to the four corners of the
                  container.  Each quarter of the sample should be mixed individually.  Each
                  quarter is then rolled to the center of the  pan and  the entire sample is mixed
                  again (U.S. EPA, 1986c).  To assist compositing, dry soil may also  be sieved
                  prior to or during mixing.

                  Volatile organic soil samples should never be mixed  in  the field since this
                  results in significant loss of volatile constituents.  Rather, volatile organic
                  samples should be composited by the analytical laboratory.  If subsamples or
                  samples from  different locations are to be composited,  aliquots should be
                  collected into the same container with compositing subsequently performed in
                  the laboratory.

                  Dust control is of primary concern when sampling soils -- particularly at
                  highly contaminated sites.  Dust generated by heavy construction equipment or
                  dry conditions can spread the  contamination  and create off-site health  hazards.
                  The site HSP  may require the  sampling team to cover spoils piles or institute
                  other dust control measures such as spraying water or constructing perimeter
                  barriers. The oversight assistant should consult the site HSP and note
                  conditions (such as high winds) that might spread contamination from the
                  sampling locations.


Field             Field analytical techniques are generally limited to ground water, soil water, or
Analytical        soil vapor. For detailed information on ground-water field analytical
Techniques        techniques, see Section  B.2.1.  For detailed information on soil vapor field
                  analytical techniques, see Section B.2.6.
                                           B-34
-------
B.2.5
Subsurface Soil

   This section discusses methods for sampling subsurface soils.  Although the
   depth of subsurface soils is variable and site-specific, subsurface soil may
   generally be considered soil that is more than 3-feet deep.
Sampling
Locations
   Sampling locations for subsurface soil samples should be specified in the SAP
   (see Section B.2.1 for considerations in sampling locations). The sampling
   locations should be recorded on a site map or drawing by the oversight
   assistant. The agreement between the actual sampling locations and those
   specified in the  SAP should be noted.
General Soil      Subsurface stains or residues should be noted as they could result from
and              underground leaks or leachate migration.  As with surface soil, if a sampling
Vegetation       team geologist determines the subsurface soil type, particle size,  and other
Conditions       characteristics, the oversight assistant should record such information.


Sampling         Generally, any sampling equipment that preserves the integrity of the sample
Equipment       and produces a sample that is representative of the sample location is
                 acceptable.  The oversight assistant should check that the actual sampling
                 equipment is the same as the equipment listed in the SAP.

                 The oversight assistant should verify that all soil sampling equipment used for
                 sampling for trace contaminants is consistent with the parameters set forth in
                 Section B.2.4.
Disturbed Soil
Samples
    Many of the techniques used to collect soil samples disturb the sample,
    providing only semi-quantitative or qualitative results. When disturbed soil
    samples are satisfactory, the sampling team may use soil augers to collect a
    subsurface sample. There are three general types of machine-driven augers:
    (1) helical augers from 3 to  16 inches in diameter, (2) disc augers up to 42
    inches in diameter, and (3) bucket augers  up to 48 inches in diameter. Soil
    augers work best in loose, moderately cohesive, moist soils, but are generally
    limited to sampling soils above the water table and must be sized according  to
    the amount and maximum size of gravel, cobbles, and boulders present.
Undisturbed       The sampling team will use a split spoon sampler most often to obtain
Soil Samples      undisturbed soil samples (U.S. EPA, 1987a).  A split spoon sampler is made of
                  heavy steel tubing that can be split into two equal halves to reveal the soil
                  sample (Figure B-9).


Sample Type      Sample types for surface and subsurface soil are the same.  Refer to Section
                  B.2.4 for a detailed discussion on soil sample types.


Sampling         Before sampling, the sampling team should remove  leaves, grass, and surface
Technique        debris from the sampling location by brushing or scraping it aside. Composite
                  samples should be thoroughly mixed, as outlined in Section B.2.4.
                                           B-35
-------
Figure B-9. Split Spoon Sampler

                                                Drive Cap
                                                  Barrel
                                                   Shoe
                                       B-36
-------
                 Generally, the sampling team will collect subsurface samples through two
                 procedures: (1) subsurface soils are exposed and are then sampled using
                 surface sampling equipment, or (2) samples are taken directly from the
                 subsurface using  augers or split spoons. A split spoon sampler is attached to a
                 drill rod and advanced into the so-il at the bottom of the borehole. The split
                 spoon is removed from the hole and opened, revealing the sample.  The
                 sampling team should discard the top 2 or 3  inches of sample because it is
                 usually disturbed by the process.

                 The sampling team may expose the subsurface soil by using either an ordinary
                 post hole digger or by constructing test pits. Whenever these methods are
                 used, the oversight assistant and the sampling team should monitor the exposed
                 soil with an explosimeter or organic vapor analyzer (OVA) to avoid the danger
                 of explosion or fire (see Sections B.2.9  and B.2.6, respectively).

                 The sampling team may construct a test pit or  trench to provide a continuous
                 exposure of the ground along a given line or section. The sampling team will
                 usually excavate a pit as a continuous line, or as a series of short pits spaced at
                 appropriate intervals. Test pits may be hand-dug with shovels or may be dug
                 with equipment such as backhoes.  Test pits  are generally no deeper than a few
                 feet below the water table. The minimum recommended cross-section for a
                 hand-dug pit is 3 by 5 feet. All hand-dug pits should be cribbed, normally
                 with 3-  to 6-inch lumber.  Dragline, backhoe, clamshell, caisson drilling or
                 auger equipment, and bulldozer pits are usually more economical than hand-
                 dug pits, but are  not practicable where a depth of more than  15 feet is desired.

                 Dust control is of primary concern when sampling soils -- particularly at
                 highly contaminated sites.  Dust generated by heavy construction equipment or
                 dry conditions can spread the contamination as well as create off-site health
                 hazards. The site HSP may require the sampling team to cover spoils piles or
                 institute other dust control measures such as water spraying or perimeter
                 barriers. The oversight assistant should consult the site HSP and note
                 conditions which might spread  contamination from the sampling locations.


Field            Field analytical techniques are generally limited to ground water, soil water, or
Analytical        soil vapor.  For detailed information on ground-water field analytical
Techniques       techniques, see Section B.2.1.  For detailed information on soil vapor field
                 analytical techniques, see  Section B.2.6.


B.2.6         Soil Vapor

                 Soil vapors are gases contained in the soil pore spaces in the vadose or
                 unsaturated zone of the earth's upper surface.  Nitrogen, oxygen, carbon
                 dioxide, water vapor, and smaller amounts of other chemical vapors naturally
                 occur in the soil.  Due to  contamination, other chemical vapors may also have
                 been introduced  to the soil. These soil vapors may arise from chemicals spilled
                 on the surface of the ground or poured in wells or bore  holes; from chemicals
                 in leaking  impoundments or other basins; from chemicals in leaking
                 underground tanks and associated plumbing or pipes; or from volatilization of
                 chemicals in contaminated ground water.  The concentrations of these
                 chemicals in the  soil vapor will depend upon a number of parameters such as
                 the quantity and concentration of the source of contamination, the proximity
                 of the contamination to the location being monitored, the vapor pressure, the
                 solubility and vapor density of the contaminant, and the  mobility of the


                                           B-37
-------
                  contaminant through the soil. Volatile organic compounds and occasionally
                  mercury and radon are normally the only constituents analyzed in soil vapor
                  samples.
Sampling
Locations
Sampling locations and depths for soil vapor samples should be specified in the
SAP.  The oversight assistant should note whether the actual locations are.
consistent with the  locations that are listed in the SAP, but should also be
aware that site specific conditions, such as obstructions or lack of access to the
sampling location, may dictate a modification in the sampling  locations. The
oversight assistant should use his/her best judgment to evaluate whether
changes in sampling locations are reasonable and consistent with the objectives
of the sampling and analysis activities (see Section  B.I.I).

The oversight assistant should record all information pertinent to the location
and depth of each soil vapor sampling point on a site map or drawing. The
agreement between  the actual sampling points and  those specified in the SAP
should also be noted.
General Soil      If determined by a sampling team geologist, the oversight assistant should
and               record the general conditions of the soil being sampled in each soil vapor
Vegetation        sampling location.  Items of particular interest include the amount of soil
Conditions        moisture and the soil type,  particle size, and color. The approximate organic
                  content of surface soil samples may also'be noted.  If the sample is being
                  collected from a borehole, the oversight assistant should verify that the
                  sampling team geologist is maintaining  a well  log, copies of which should be
                  made available to  the oversight assistant.

                  The oversight assistant should also note soil background conditions. It is
                  important to know whether the sample  is being collected under an industrial
                  area or in an area where waste material is or was stored or disposed.  Any
                  conditions which could affect sampling activities or sample quality should  be
                  documented.

                  In addition,  the general nature and condition  of the vegetation in the vicinity
                  of each soil vapor sampling location should be documented.  Special attention
                  should be paid to stressed or dead vegetation  which may be an indication of
                  environmental contamination of the soil.


Sampling         Soil vapor sampling equipment should be chosen to preserve the  integrity of
Equipment        the sample and thus to yield a sample which is representative of  soil vapor
                  found at the sample location. Various types of soil vapor collection and
                  storage methods are available. Glass, Teflon,  or stainless steel samplers,
                  including gas sample lines or containers, should be used to collect and store
                  soil vapor samples.


Sample           Soil vapor samples may be collected by a variety of methods. These methods
Collection        include  the direct collection of a soil sample or soil core using soil or
Methods    .      subsurface soil collection methods listed in Sections B.2.4 and B.2.S,
                  respectively, with subsequent vapor analysis,  or the direct collection of soil
                  vapor by the use of soil vapor collection probes.
                                            B-38
-------
                  The technique used to collect the soil sample should keep the sample intact to
                  prevent loss of soil vapors to the air. Samples collected with a split spoon
                  sampler are ideal (see Section B.2.5). The use of augers (see Section B.2.5) .
                  should be avoided as this technique does not keep the soil sample intact.
                  Although the use of split spoons is easy to perform in the field, it allows for
                  the loss of some soil vapor before the sample is sealed in the sample bottle.
                  Alternatively, soil vapors may be collected directly by the use of a soil gas
                  probe. Soil gas probes consist of a long tubular probe containing holes that is
                  driven into the undisturbed, or minimally disturbed,  soil to be sampled.  The
                  major advantages of this type of sampling system are that it is quick and that
                  the sampled soil is  undisturbed.
Sample
Storage or
Analysis
Methods
Some soil vapor sample analysis methods require that the soil or soil vapor
sample be stored for analysis, while other methods allow direct analysis of the
sample with no storage required.

Three types of storage are available when sample storage is required prior to
analysis.  The first of these involves the collection of the entire soil sample.
Once collected, an entire soil sample may be placed in an appropriate
container (Section  B.3.1)  for shipment to a laboratory for analysis of the soil
vapors.  Alternatively, soil vapors may be collected directly into a suitable
container (gas collection  bag) using one of the probes discussed above.  The
soil vapor may then be analyzed in the field by the use of calorimetric tubes,
by the use of field analytical instrumentation described  for subsurface
sampling (Section B.2.5), or  by the use of other, more sophisticated
instrumentation such as a gas chromatograph.  The third storage technique
involves  the sorption of the  soil vapors onto an adsorbent material such as
activated carbon or commercially available adsorbent resins.  The activated
carbon or resins are then sent to an analytical laboratory for extraction and
analysis.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these techniques. Direct
collection and analysis of the soil vapor using sophisticated instrumentation  is
the most representative method, but requires the use of delicate equipment in
the field. The use of calorimetric tubes, on the other hand, is simple but not
considered qualitative. The soil vapor is passed through the appropriate
calorimetric tube or tubes and the concentration of the chemicals estimated  by
the change in color of the material in the tube(s).  The reading of the color
change in the tubes is subjective and subject to interferences.

The collection of samples in a Teflon bag is a relatively uncomplicated  method
to determine the chemicals that are present in the  soil as vapor. The bags,
however, may leak.  In addition, certain compounds are  known to penetrate
Teflon and, if the bags are exposed to light, photochemical reactions may
occur, causing the sample to be somewhat less representative.

Direct collection of soil into a bottle for laboratory analysis of the soil vapors
is also relatively uncomplicated.  Unfortunately, the soil vapors collected in
this manner may not be representative of soil vapors occurring in the
environment.  For example, a contaminated soil sample could be collected
from the capillary zone where soil vapors would be minimal.  But once that
sample was placed in a bottle and allowed to equilibrate  with air  head-space,
the contaminants would begin to partition into the air — a slow process in the
saturated zone. Thus, samples collected in this manner  may provide good
information about what contamination is actually present in the soil but may
                                            B-39
-------
                 not be representative of the ambient soil vapor. Also, the method of collecting
                 and transferring the sample to the sample bottle for this method may result in
                 the loss of some of the soil vapor.

                 Adsorption of the soil vapors onto an adsorbent material during collection is
                 the most complicated detection method. The soil gas must be passed through
                 an adsorbent material, allowing any gases to be adsorbed. The adsorbent must
                 be sealed and shipped to a laboratory where the gases are removed either by
                 heat or a solvent and then analyzed. Some chemical reactions may occur on
                 the adsorbent or when the  material is heated or treated with solvent. Also,
                 some of the adsorbed materials are much harder to remove from the adsorbent
                 than others.  The adsorbent tube is, however, easier to package, ship, and
                 preserve than the collection containers  for the  other two methods.


Sample Type     Soil vapor samples are gas samples collected from locations below  the surface
                 of the earth. They are usually collected as grab samples for the relative ease
                 of the analysis of these samples and also the location-specific information
                 which is desired from the samples.


Sampling         If the sampling team uses soil sampling equipment, the oversight assistant
Technique       should ensure that the soil  sample is kept intact; if  the sample breaks apart, the
                 soil vapor will escape.  The sampling team will usually use a split spoon
                 sampler to collect the sample. To collect the sample for soil gas analyses, the
                 sampling team should open the split spoon sampler as soon as possible after
                 sample collection. The sampling team  should remove a sample of soil from the
                 center section of the core of the split spoon sampler using a stainless steel or
                 Teflon-coated spatula, and immediately place it in  a sample vial.  The
                 sampling team should fill the container to minimize head space.

                 If the sampling team uses a soil gas probe, the team should drive the probe
                 into undisturbed or minimally disturbed soil. When the probe is in place at the
                 desired location and depth, the sampling team  uses an air pump to draw gases
                 from the ground and into the sampler through a sample  tube and pump, and   .
                 then directly to an analytical instrument, the appropriate calorimetric tube, or
                 a sampler storage container.  The oversight assistant should check that the
                 sampling team operates  the system for  sufficient time to allow the standing air
                 to purge from the system before sampling.  This length of time depends upon
                 the internal volume of the soil gas probe, the length and inside diameter of the
                 sample tube, and the pumping rate of the pump. An adequate length of time
                 can be determined by continuous sampling  of contaminated soil. The gas
                 exiting from the sample  pump should be monitored with a suitable instrument,
                 such  as a photoionizatipn detector, until its reading reaches a steady value,
                 after which the  pump is allowed to  run for several more minutes. At that
                 time, the sample may be collected.  A purging time of approximately 10
                 minutes with a pumping rate of 4 liters per minute is usually adequate to
                 purge most systems.
Field
Analytical
Techniques
Field analytical techniques appropriate for screening soil vapor include:

•  Organic vapor detectors, and

•  Colorimetric tubes.
                                           B-40
-------
Organic Vapor
Detector
   Several types of organic vapor detectors are available for use in the field. The
   most common of these are referred to as the Flame lonization Detector (FID)
   of which the Foxboro organic vapor analyzer (OVA) is an example, and the
   photoionization detector (PID) of which the HNu is an example.  The FID uses
   a hydrogen-oxygen flame to ionize organics; the PID uses an ultraviolet light
   source. Both offer real-time readout in parts per million based upon the
   calibration gas.  Both detectors, as commonly used, are capable of determining
   that organic compounds are present but not of specifically identifying the
   organic compounds. FID attachments are available that allow organics to be
   separated and tentatively identified.  The PID is more simple than the FID to
   use but both are capable of detecting organic compounds in the low ppm
   range.  Neither instrument works well at temperatures below 5 degrees Celsius.
   The PID should not be used in very humid environments (such as rain,
   although some specially modified instruments are designed to remove water
   vapor  before the sample reaches the detector). The PID can, by changing its
   photoionization source, be made to respond to most organic compounds (except
   methane and hydrogen cyanide) and some halogenated  hydrocarbons. The FID
   is sensitive to methane but relatively insensitive to many  halogenated organics.
Colorimetric       Colorimetric tubes, commonly known as Drager or MSA tubes, are used in
Tubes             conjunction with an air pump to draw a known amount of gas through an
                  indicator tube. These tubes are usually specific to a certain chemical over a
                  certain concentration range.  The detector tubes may also be sensitive  to other,
                  similar chemicals; thus, their specific instructions should be carefully read.
                  After  the tube is opened and an appropriate amount of gas is drawn through
                  the sample tube,  the length of material in  the tube which has changed color is
                  read from a scale etched into the  side of the tube to determine the
                  approximate concentration of the vapor in the air.  Tubes are available that are
                  sensitive to  a variety of chemicals at various concentrations;  however, because
                  a subjective judgment about the length of the color change in the tube is
                  required, their accuracy is low; in addition, some tubes are sensitive to more
                  than one chemical.  If  the upper range of  the tube is exceeded, it is usually
                  possible  to repeat the experiment using a smaller air sample.  Tubes should be
                  read immediately after sampling.  High humidity and sensitivity  to chemicals
                  other than that for which the tube was intended may cause interferences.
B.2.7
Sludge and Slurry

   Sludges and slurries are part solid and part liquid.  They range in consistency
   from dewatered solids to watery, low-viscosity liquids. A slurry is typically a
   liquid containing relatively small amounts of suspended solids which tend to
   settle out of the solution rather slowly.  A sludge is also a  mixture of solids
   and liquids which generally has  larger amounts of solids or more viscous
   (thicker) liquids. While slurries  are typically uniform in consistency, sludges
   tend to separate with a low density or liquid layer forming on top and more
   dense  material, usually including solids, settling to the bottom.  Sludges and
   slurries may be present in impoundments, lagoons, or ponds; in storage tanks,
   drums, or other containers; in settling or drying/dewatering beds; or directly
   on the ground as in a landfarm.
Sampling
Locations
    Sampling locations for sludges or slurries should be specified in the SAP. The
    oversight assistant should rely on best professional judgment to evaluate
                                           B-41
-------
                  whether any changed sampling locations are reasonable and consistent with the
                  sampling objectives (see Section B.I.I). Sampling locations should be recorded
                  on a site map or drawing and compared to actual locations listed in the SAP.

                  If the sludge or slurry to be sampled is contained in a tank, drum, or other
                  container, a single grab or a composite sample (see  Section B.2.7) that is
                  representative of the contents of the container is adequate. If a thin layer of
                  overlying liquid is present, the sampling team should include a portion of this
                  with the sample because it is representative of the actual material and will
                  prevent drying or oxidation of the sample  before analysis.

                  If the sludge or slurry is contained in an impoundment, pond, or lagoon
                  (collectively referred to as lagoons),  the number of samples to be taken will
                  vary with the size and shape of the lagoon as well as other factors such as the
                  depth of the sludge or slurry, the location  of inlets  or discharges, and the rate
                  of accumulation or addition of the sludge or slurry to the lagoon.  If the sludge
                  or slurry is deep, grab (discrete) samples may be collected at several depths
                  and at various locations  throughout the lagoon.  If the  sludge or slurry is less
                  the 8 inches  deep, a single sample at each sampling location is usually
                  adequate. In cases  where the lagoon is unlined, sampling of the underlying
                  soil and ground water may also be required to determine the extent of
                  contamination.

                  Sludges or slurries may also be placed  in drying beds, landfarms, or directly on
                  the ground for disposal (if it complies with land disposal restrictions (LDRs)).
                  In these cases the sampling locations for the sludge or slurry should be
                  determined by the size and depth of the area covered.  Again, if the depth of
                  the material  is less  than  8 inches, usually one sample representative of the
                  sludge or slurry is collected at  each of the  sampling locations. For deeper
                  beds, grab samples should  be collected at several depths and at various
                  locations throughout the body of material.


General           The oversight assistant should document the manner in which the  sludge or
Sludge and        slurry is stored (containers, lagoons, or directly on  the ground).  The general
Vegetation        conditions of the containers, lagoons, or areas where the sludge or slurry is
Conditions        contained or deposited should also be described.  This  description should
                  contain an estimation of the  areal extent covered by the sludge or slurry as
                  well as the approximate  depth  of the actual sludge  or slurry and the depth of
                  any water or liquid covering the sludge or slurry. Any sources to  or outfalls
                  from the area containing the sludge  or slurry should be recorded.  Background
                  conditions including abnormal vegetative conditions should also be noted.


Sampling         The sampling equipment must be chosen to preserve the integrity  of the
Equipment        sample to yield a sample that is representative of the sludge or slurry found at
                  the sampling location. The condition of the sludge or  slurry, the viscosity of
                  the sample, and depth at which the sample will be collected will affect the
                  choice  of sampling equipment.  Stainless steel, glass, or Teflon-coated samplers
                  should  be used to collect samples for trace organic  compound analysis, while
                  plastic, glass, or Teflon-coated samplers should be  used to collect  samples for
                  trace metals  analysis.  The oversight assistant should check the sampling
                  equipment to verify that it is equivalent to that listed in the SAP and that it is
                  suitable to fulfill the sampling requirements of the project.
                                            B-42
-------
                 For the purposes of this discussion, sampling equipment for sludges and
                 slurries has been divided into: (1) sampling equipment for solid or nearly solid
                 sludges, and'(2) sampling equipment for nonviscous sludges and slurries.
Sampling
Equipment for
Solid or
Nearly Solid
Sludge
Solid or semi-solid sludges can be considered materials that are nonliquid.
This category would include, solid or dried sludge, thick sludge, and tar or
gelled liquids.  When the sludge to be sampled is solid or nearly solid, it should
be sampled using either soil sampling equipment or modifications of soil
sampling equipment.

Appropriate soil or sediment sampling equipment includes: trowels, scoops,
and spoons; corers; and dredges. The use of trowels, scoops, and spoons and
corers is discussed in Section B.2.4, surface soil sampling.  The use of dredges
is discussed in Section B.2.1, surface water and sediment sampling.
Sampling
Equipment for
Non-Viscous
Sludge or
Slurry
Nonviscous sludges or slurries may have a consistency ranging from that of
water to that of thick mud.  This material may contain suspended materials,
some of which may have settled to the bottom of the container.  Liquid sludge
or slurry may be sampled by the use of:

•   Glass tube samplers;

•   Composite liquid  waste samplers;

•   Bacon bomb samplers;

•   Pumps;

•   Weighted bottle samplers; and

•   Kemmerer or Van Dorn samplers.

Samples may be collected from drums, other containers, or lagoons that do not
contain more than approximately a  1-meter depth of liquid material by the use
of glass sampling  tubes, composite liquid waste samplers, or peristaltic pumps.
Deeper containers, containers that are hard to reach due to location or
obstructions, or lagoons will  probably be sampled by pumps, weighted bottle
samplers, bacon bomb samplers, or Kemmerer samplers.

A glass tube sampler  (also known as a drum thief) may be used to collect
samples from drums or other shallow containers or lagoons. Glass tube
samplers collect a grab sample that, when collected over the entire depth of
the container or lagoon being sampled, may be representative of the material
in the container or lagoon. The length of the tube is generally determined by
the depth of the container or lagoon to be sampled. Tubes of 48-inch length
and 0.25- to 0.63-inch inside diameter are commonly used to sample drums.
Samplers of this type may also be constructed of Teflon or PVC tubing.  The
disadvantage of this type of sampler is that it is easy to lose some sample
material when the tube is withdrawn from the medium being sampled.

Alternatively, a composite liquid waste sampler (COLIWASA, Figure  B-10)
may be used to sample sludges or slurries in drums, oth/r containers,  or
lagoons.  A composite liquid waste sampler is a glass tube sampler with a rod
running through the tube's center that can be used to open or close a  stopper
                                           B-43
-------
Figure B-10. Sludge and Slurry Samplers
                                             T lundlt
                                                            HH— I.It em (1
                                                               17.1 em <7">


                                                                .10.1« c» (VI
                           132
                                 160")
                                                                      .P1pt(trans1uctnt WC or  91*11)
                                                                        4.13 cm (1 5/8-) 1.0.
                                                                        4.26 C» (1 7/8') 0.0.

                                                                       Steootr redlWC or T«noi»)
                                                                        0.9S e» (3/8-) 0.0.
                 SAWLINB
                                        COLIWASA
                                                      oat wrmoi
                                                                       Stooo»r(«»oortnt).
                                                                       Lock nut and *«h«r(PVC or T*f1o*0,
                                                                        O.M
                                           V
                                   Bacon Bomb Sampler
                                           B-44
-------
                 on the bottom of the tube.  The composite liquid waste sampler is superior to
                 the glass tube sampler because it traps the sample in the tube so that none is
                 lost when the sampler is withdrawn from the sludge or slurry. The length of
                 the tube is determined by the size of the container  to be sampled.  For drum
                 sampling, a 60-inch tube length is  standard.  Tube  diameters of about 1.5
                 inches are commonly used.  Samplers of this type may also be constructed of
                 Teflon, PVC tubing, or stainless steel.

                 Tanks or lagoons may be sampled at discrete depths (usually at the top,
                 middle, and bottom) by using a weighted bottle sampler, a bacon bomb
                 sampler, or a Kemmerer sampler.  If desired, samples  from various depths can
                 be composited.

                 A bacon bomb sampler (Figure B-10) consists of a  cylindrical container with a
                 valve at the bottom to allow the sample to enter when  opened, and attachment
                 points for the trip line and  sample  line at the top.  The container can be  made
                 of various  materials and is available in various sizes. This sampler also works
                 best with low viscosity-liquids but will also work with viscous liquids. This
                 sampler collects  grab samples and may be used at any  depth (NUS,  1987).

                 Sampling techniques are described  below for both solid or nearly solid sludges
                 and slurries'and liquid sludges and slurries. These  techniques relate to the
                 sampling equipment described in Section B.2.7.  If  the sludge  or slurry is
                 contained in a drum or container which  must be opened, the sampling team,
                 including the oversight assistant, should ensure that all health and safety
                 procedures are strictly enforced. (See Section B.2.8 for additional information
                 on drum opening procedures.)


Sample Type     Sludge and slurry samples may be composited or may be collected as discrete
                 grab samples. Generally, grab samples are collected and analyzed from drums
                 or small containers. Grab samples  may also be collected from larger containers
                 or lagoons  and may or may not be  composited prior to analysis.  The types of
                 samples to be collected will be specified in the SAP.


Sampling        Sludges and slurries are generally concentrated by nature.  When sampling
Technique       sludges and slurries, the sampling team should avoid spreading contamination
                 such as by splashing, overspilling,  or transporting sample  material away from
                 the sample location.  For example,  contaminated sampling equipment should
                 not be placed or dragged on the ground.  The sampling team should place all
                 contaminated equipment into plastic bags for transfer  to the decontamination
                 area.   If the sampling team is decontaminating sampling equipment between
                 sampling locations, care should be  taken to ensure the  proper  handling and
                 disposal of all contaminated materials (see Section B.4.3).

                 Sampling techniques are described  below for both solid or nearly solid sludges
                 and slurries and liquid sludges and slurries. These  techniques relate to the
                 sampling equipment described in Section B.2.7.  If  the sludge  or slurry is
                 contained in a drum or container which must be opened, the sampling team,
                 including the oversight assistant, should ensure that all health and safety
                 procedures are strictly enforced. (See Section B.2.8 for additional information
                 on drum opening procedures.)
                                           B-45
-------
Sampling        Solid or nearly solid sludges and slurries may be sampled with a trowel, scoop,
Solid or          or spoon to a depth of approximately 20 inches. This method may also be used
Nearly Solid      if a thin water layer (less than several centimeters) is present above the sludge.
Sludges and      To use  this technique, simply collect the desired amount of sample at the
Slurries          desired depth, and transfer it to the appropriate sample bottle. The oversight
                 assistant should note, however, whether the sampling team performing
                 sampling causes disturbances at the interface  of the water and material.  If no
                 water layer is present, it is acceptable to remove the top several centimeters of
                 material before collecting the sample (NUS Corporation,  1987).

                 A corer (Figure B-3) may be used to sample a solid or nearly solid material.
                 Corers  have an advantage over scoops because they can collect a sample  that is
                 equally representative of all depths of the material being sampled as they
                 "punch" through the material.  A sample should be collected with  a
                 decontaminated corer by pushing it evenly into the sludge to the desired depth.
                 The sample is then  retracted with a smooth, continuous motion.  If the corer
                 has a removable nosepiece, it should be removed after collecting the sample.
                 The samples are then transferred directly to the sample bottles.

                 A gravity corer may be used to sample solid or nearly solid samples that are
                 located at the bottom of a pond, lagoon, or impoundment or in a tank or other
                 container.  Gravity corers are similar to other corers except that they are
                 designed for use under the surface of liquids  at depths where a regular corer
                 may not reach. They penetrate the sludge because of their weight rather than
                 being physically pushed into the material. Gravity corers are fitted with a
                 check valve at the top to allow the release of  liquid while the corer is passing
                 through the liquid layer. Plastic or brass inserts should be used to avoid
                 contact between the sample and  potentially incompatible material in the corer
                 walls. The oversight assistant should also  note the depth to which the corer is
                 lowered and whether the corer is withdrawn smoothly to prevent sample loss.

                 A ppnar dredge (Figure B-3) may also be  used  to sample under a  layer of
                 liquid.  The sampler should be lowered, especially the last 1/2 meter above the
                 surface, at a very slow rate to prevent disturbance of the surface.  Once the
                 surface is touched,  the sampling team should  release several more centimeters
                 of sample line to allow the mechanism to release and close the clamshell.  The
                 sampler should be slowly raised  to the surface and the sample transferred to
                 sample bottles.
Sampling
Liquid Sludges
and Slurries
Liquid sludges and slurries in drums, other containers, or lagoons may be
sampled by the use of a length of glass tubing. To collect a sample, the glass
tube is slowly lowered into the drum or container, allowing the levels of liquid
inside and outside of the tube to remain equal, until the tube just touches the
bottom. The tube is then capped with safety-gloved thumb or stopper and
removed from the drum or container. The lower end of the tube is placed in
the sample container and the thumb or stopper is carefully and slowly removed
to allow the material to flow into the sample bottle.  The glass tube, with the
permission of the RPM, may then be carefully broken and placed in the drum
which it sampled.  If lined  tanks or  lagoons were sampled using this technique,
the glass tubing should be disposed of with other potentially hazardous
materials.  Glass samplers should  be used with great care in lagoons with liners
as the tube could damage the lining.
                                           B-46
-------
Open drums, other containers, or lagoons may also be sampled by the use of a
composite liquid waste sampler (Figure B-10). To collect a sample, the
sampler slowly lowers a decontaminated composite liquid waste sampler, in the
open position, into the drum or container, allowing the levels of liquid inside
and outside of the tube to remain equal, until the sampler just touches the
bottom. The sampler tube is then pushed down to insert a stopper and close
the tube. The entire sampler can then be slowly removed from the material
being sampled; excess material should be wiped off as the tube is removed.
The lower end of the sampler is placed in the sample container and the
sampler is slowly opened, allowing the sample to flow into the sample bottle.
Disposal options for the glass outer tube of the sampler are  the same as for the
glass tube sampler described above.

Containers or lagoons deeper than approximately 3 feet may be sampled by
lowering, at a predetermined rate, a vacuum line from a peristaltic pump
(Figure B-2). Without priming, this technique is limited to surface depths of
10 to 20 feet from the pump, and is not suitable for sampling for purgeable
organic compounds since suction can strip volatile  compounds.  Alternatively,
a submersible pump may be used to perform this sampling if it has been
determined that the contents of the container will not react with the pump.
To use these techniques, the sampler turns on the pump; then, the
decontaminated Teflon sampling tube or, alternatively, the submersible pump,
is  lowered into the container or lagoon at a constant rate which will produce
sufficient volume of sample. When the bottom  of  the container is reached, the
pump is turned  off, and the apparatus is withdrawn.  If samples are desired
only at certain depths, the sample tube or the submersible pump is lowered to
that depth and turned on.  The sample line is allowed to purge  for a short time
and then the sample is collected.

A  weighted bottle sampler (Figure B-2) may also be used to sample large
containers or lagoons. This sampler is used to obtain samples at discrete
depths (usually at the top,  middle, and bottom).  This apparatus consists of a
weighted glass bottle, a bottle stopper, and  a sampling line for opening the
bottle and for lowering and retrieving the sample bottle.  The sampler should
slowly  lower the weighted bottle sampler into the material being sampled.
Care must be taken not to  tug on the sample line until the sampler is at the
desired location. At that point,  the sample line should  be given a  quick tug to
unseat  the cork  and allow sample to enter the bottle.  After several minutes,
when the sample bottle is full, it should slowly  be  pulled to the surface. The
outside of the sampler should be wiped or rinsed and allowed to drain to
prevent contamination of the sample with materials collected at other depths.
The sample may then be poured directly from the  sampler to the sample
bottles.

Like a weighted bottle sampler, the bacon bomb sampler is used to collect
nonpurgeable samples at discrete depths. To  use the sampler, both a sample
line and a trip line must be attached to a previously decontaminated bomb.
The bomb is then slowly lowered to the desired depth by the use of the sample
line. At the desired depth, the trip line is pulled, allowing  the bomb to open.
After a few minutes, the trip line is released  to seal the bomb.  The bomb is
then retrieved using the sample  line.  The outside of the bomb should be
wiped  or allowed to drain  to prevent contamination of  the sample with
materials collected at other depths.  The sample may then be transferred
directly to the sample bottles.
                          B-47
-------
                 A Kemmerer sampler or Van Dorn sampler (Figure B-l) is also useful in the
                 collection of grab samples at discrete depths. To use a decontaminated
                 Kemmerer or Van Dorn sampler, the mechanism is opened and the sample
                 drain closed. The sampler is slowly lowered to the desired depth. The
                 messenger weight is then placed on the sample  line and released.  Once the
                 messenger weight falls and causes the sampler to close, the sampler should be
                 slowly withdrawn. The outside of the sampler  should be wiped or rinsed and
                 allowed to drain to prevent contamination of the sample.  The drain valve may
                 then be opened and the sample transferred directly to the sample  bottles. If
                 the sampler has no drain valve, the top stopper should be lifted up and the
                 sample poured directly into the sample bottle.


Field             Field analytical techniques for screening sludge and slurry samples include:
Analytical
Techniques       •   Organic vapor detector;

                 •   Calorimetric tubes;  ,

                 •   Combustible gas meter or explosimeter;

                 •   Oxygen meter;

                 •   Radiation survey meter;

                 •   pH meter or pH paper;

                 •   Thermometer;

                 •   Inorganic compound detection kit/instrument; and

                 •   Organic compound detection instruments.

                 Organic vapor detectors and calorimetric tubes may be used to detect volatile
                 compounds  emanating from the samples, and are discussed in detail in Section
                 B.2.6 on soil vapor sampling.  Combustible gas  indicators, oxygen meters, and
                 radiation  survey meters are discussed in Section B.2.9 on ambient air sampling.
                 The pH meters and pH paper, thermometers, inorganic compound detection
                 kits/instruments, and  organic compound detection instruments are discussed in
                 detail in Section B.2.1 on surface water sampling.


B.2.8         Containerized Waste (Drums, Tanks, Hoppers,  Bags, Waste  Piles)

                 Containerized wastes are usually contained in drums,  tanks, hoppers, bags,  or
                 other containers (metal, plastic, fiber, or cardboard) but may also be placed
                 directly on the ground as in solid waste piles.  Due to chemical degradation,
                 chemical  reactions with the atmosphere (including moisture), and gravitational
                 settling and separation, the composition of the  containerized waste may  have
                 changed over time and may vary within the body to be sampled.  For this
                 reason, the waste material may not be homogenous.


General Site     The oversight assistant should document and, if possible, photograph the
and Waste        condition of the containerized waste at the site.  Items of concern include the
Description       presence of any identification markings on  the containers; the number of tiers


                                           B-48
-------
                  of drums or other containers and approximate amount of material present; the
                  general condition of the containers including the presence of openings, rust,
                  leaks, overpacking; the presence of any protection from  the environment (rain,
                  wind, and runon/runoff); whether the containers are stored outdoors; public
                  accessibility to the site; the presence of other waste materials at the site; and
                  the presence of potential hazards to workers at the site.

                  The oversight assistant should note any abnormal vegetation conditions. Such
                  conditions would include dead or  stressed vegetation.  These conditions are an
                  indication of chemical contamination that might be due  to leaking containers
                  or previous waste handling practices.
Sampling
Locations
The oversight assistant should verify that the locations for containerized waste
sampling are those specified in the SAP or, if changed, are reasonable and
consistent with the objectives of the sampling and analysis activities (see
Section B.I.I).  Sampling locations (approximate depth the sample was taken
from, location within a waste pile) should be recorded.

If the containerized waste is in a drum, tank, bag, or waste pile, a single grab
sample (or a composite sample that is representative of the contents of the
containerized waste) is usually adequate (see Section B.2.8).  If a thin layer of
overlying liquid is present at the top of any containers, it is  preferable to
include a portion of this liquid with  the container contents because it is
representative of the actual sample and also will prevent drying or oxidation of
the sample before analysis.

If the containerized waste is in a large tank or hopper, the number of samples
to be  taken will vary with the size and shape of the tank or hopper, as well as
other factors such as the depth and homogeneity of the waste material.  If the
waste material is deep, grab samples may be collected at several depths and at
various locations.

Waste may also be contained in piles directly on the ground.  In this case,  the
sampling locations for the waste should be  determined by the quantity and
homogeneity of the waste material.  For deeper deposits, grab samples should
be collected at several depths and at various locations throughout the body of
material.  When the waste material has been placed directly upon the ground,
sampling of the underlying soil and ground water may also be required to
determine  the extent of contamination.
Sampling         The sampling equipment must be chosen to preserve the integrity of the
Equipment        sample to yield a sample that is representative of the containerized waste
                  found at the sampling location. The condition of the containerized waste, the
                  viscosity of the sample, and the depth at which the sample will be collected
                  will affect the sampling team's choice of sampling equipment. The sampling
                  team should use stainless steel, glass, or Teflon-coated samplers to collect
                  samples for trace organic compound analysis. Plastic,  glass, or Teflon-coated
                  samplers should be used to collect samples for trace metals analysis. The
                  oversight assistant should verify that the sampling equipment is equivalent to
                  that listed in the SAP and is suitable to fulfill the sampling requirements of
                  the project.
                                            B-49
-------
                 For the purposes of this discussion, sampling equipment for containerized
                 waste has been divided into: (1) sampling equipment for solid or nearly solid
                 waste materials, and (2) sampling equipment for waste liquids.
Sampling
Equipment for
Solid or
Nearly Solid
Containerized
Waste
Solid or semi-solid containerized waste materials includes materials such as dry
powdered or granular material, hard materials such as solids, ores or slag, thick
sludge, or tar or gelled  liquids.  When the containerized waste material to be
sampled is solid or nearly solid, it should be sampled using soil sampling
equipment or modifications of soil sampling equipment. If the sampling team
intends to sample  solid  or nearly solid material, the team may use soil sampling
equipment. This equipment includes: trowels, scoops, and spoons; corers;
triers; and grain samplers.  The use of this sampling equipment is discussed in
Section B.2.4 on surface soil sampling.
Sampling
Equipment for
Containerized
Waste
Liquids
Containerized waste liquids may have a consistency ranging from that of water
to that of thick mud.  This waste material may contain suspended materials,
some of which may have settled to the bottom of the container.  The sampling
team may collect waste liquids by using:

•   Glass tube samplers;

•   Composite liquid waste samplers;

•   Bacon bomb samplers;

•   Pumps;

•   Weighted bottle samplers; and

•   Kemmerer or  Van Dorn samplers.

The use of  glass tube samplers, composite liquid waste samplers, and bacon
bomb samplers  is  discussed  in Section B.2.7 on sludge and slurry sampling; the
use of pumps is discussed in Section B.2.2 on groundwater sampling; and the
use of peristaltic pumps, weighted bomb samplers, and Kemmerer or Van
Dorn samplers is discussed in Section B.2.1 on surface water sampling.
Sample Type     Samples collected from containerized storage may range from liquids to solids
                 with any combination of these present. Sealed drums may also contain trapped
                 gases.  Both grab and composite samples may be taken from containerized
                 waste.  However, due to possible suspended or settled materials in
                 containerized waste and the typically high concentrations  of chemicals present
                 in the  material, vertical composite samples are  usually collected within each
                 container or storage unit.  In the cases of glass  tube samplers or composite
                 liquid  waste samplers, a single grab sample is actually collected but it, in
                 reality, is a composite of material represented at all depths in the container.


Sampling        When sampling containerized waste, the sampling team should avoid spreading
Technique       contamination (such as by minimizing splashing), overspilling, or transporting
                 sample material away from the sample location. For example, contaminated
                 sampling equipment should not be placed or dragged on the ground. The
                 sampling team should place all contaminated equipment into plastic bags  for
                                           B-50
-------
                 transfer to the decontamination area.  If the sampling team is decontaminating
                 sampling equipment between sampling locations, the team should take care to
                 ensure the proper handling and disposal of all contaminated materials (see
                 Section B.4.3).

                 If the containerized waste is in a drum or container that must be opened, the
                 oversight assistant should ensure that all health and safety procedures are
                 strictly enforced.  Dermal or inhalation exposure to vapors, dermal exposure to
                 splashed or spilled chemicals, and explosions or flash fires from drums that are
                 not electrically grounded are all possible dangers.  The contents of a  sealed
                 drum may.also be under pressure.  When dealing with unknown or extremely
                 hazardous chemicals, the sampling team should use remote drum-opening
                 equipment. For a detailed  description  of drum-opening equipment and
                 techniques the oversight assistant should consult one of the following
                 references:

                 •   U.S. EPA, n.d., Drum Opening Techniques and Equipment, in Sampling at
                     Hazardous Materials Incidents. U.S. EPA Training  Manual, U.S.  EPA,
                     Cincinnati, Ohio.

                 •   NUS Corporation, n.d., Drum Opening and Sampling. NUS Operating
                     Guidelines Manual, Procedure No. 4.28.

                 Once opened, the sampling team should use an air monitoring instrument (such
                 as explosimeter or a PID or FID) to determine the presence and nature  of
                 potentially hazardous atmospheres.  The sampling team should approach the
                 container from the upwind side.  Based on this initial hazard assessment, it
                 may be necessary to don more/better protective equipment,  or even evacuate.
                 The oversight assistant should consult the site HSP(s) for the appropriate action
                 levels before arriving at the site.  In addition, if hazardous atmospheres are
                 encountered,  the sampling  team should try to identify  the gases/vapors, and
                 verify that the site health and safety plan has specified applicable and
                 appropriate contingencies.

                 Sampling techniques are described below for both solid or nearly solid
                 containerized waste materials and containerized liquids. These techniques
                 relate to the sampling equipment listed in Section B.2.8.
Sampling
Solid or
Nearly
Solid
Containerized
Wastes
The use of trowels, scoops, and spoons, and corers for sampling similar waste
materials is discussed in.Section B.2.7 and should be referred to by the
oversight assistant.

The sampling team may also sample solid or semi-solid (nonliquid) material
with a trier (Figure B-8).  A sample is collected with a decontaminated trier
by inserting it into the waste material and rotating it for several rotations.  If
the material to be sampled is dry and free flowing, the trier should be used in
a horizontal or nearly horizontal position.  If the material is moist and sticky,
the trier may be used at any angle as long as the sample is not lost when the
sampler attempts to retrieve it.  The trier should then be slowly withdrawn
with the slot facing upward.

The sampling team may use a grain sampler or grain thief (Figure B-8) to
sample dry powdered or granular waste materials. A grain thief consists of
two concentric tubes that can be rotated to  align openings in both tubes,
allowing sample to be collected or further rotation to close the openings. The
                                            B-51
-------
                 sampling team member performing sampling should close the outer tube and
                 insert a decontaminated sampler into the material to be sampled.  The grain
                 thief works best if inserted at an angle but it may also be inserted vertically.
                 The team member should rotate the inner tube of the sampler to the  open
                 position and wiggle or shake the grain thief several times to help material
                 enter the device.  The sampler should then be closed and withdrawn.  The
                 sampling team member should then carefully remove  the outer tube and
                 transfer the sample directly to the sample bottles.
Sampling
Containerized
Liquid
Materials
   Techniques for the use of glass sampling tubes, composite liquid waste
   samplers, pumps, weighted  bottle samplers, bacon bomb samplers, and
   Kemmerer and Van Dorn samplers for sampling similar liquid waste materials
   are discussed in Section B.2.7, to which the oversight assistant should refer.
Field
Analytical
Techniques
B.2.9
   Field analytical techniques appropriate for screening containerized materials
   include:

   •   Organic vapor detectors;

   •   Colorimetric tubes;

   •   Combustible gas indicator or explosimeter;
                                        \

   •   Oxygen meter;

   •   Radiation survey meter;

   •   pH meter or pH paper;

   •   Conductivity meter;

   •   Thermometer;

   •   Inorganic compound detection kit/instrument; and

   •   Organic compound detection instruments.

   Organic vapor detectors and colorimetric tubes may be used to detect volatile
   compounds emanating from  the samples, and are discussed in detail in Section
   B.2.6 on soil vapor sampling. Combustible gas indicators, oxygen meters, and
   radiation survey meters are discussed in Section B.2.9 on ambient air sampling;
   pH meters and pH paper, conductivity meters, thermometers,  inorganic
   compound detection kits/instruments, and organic compound detection
   instruments are discussed in detail in Section B.2.1 on surface  water sampling.


Ambient Air

   There are two similar but distinct types of collection activities for ambient air.
   The first of these is air monitoring;  the second is air sampling. Both air
   monitoring and air sampling are used to detect the presence of volatile organic
   chemicals that have high vapor pressures and thus exist as a vapor or gas in the
   atmosphere. These techniques may  also be used to detect other organic
                                           B-52
-------
                  chemicals, radiation, or radioactive chemicals such as radon, mercury and
                  other volatile inorganics,  metals, and airborne paniculate matter.

                  Air monitoring can be defined as the "real time" or immediate collection and
                  analysis of air samples. Air monitoring is typically used to alert workers or
                  others of immediate dangers from unexpected chemicals, chemical releases, or
                  high dust/particulate levels.  Air monitoring usually yields qualitative results.

                  Air sampling is the collection of air samples, usually for analysis at a later
                  time, and usually yields quantitative results.  The type of information obtained
                  from air sampling (as opposed to air monitoring) is usually used to identify
                  and quantify the normal releases from the site. The results of air sampling
                  may be used to perform exposure and risk assessments or to quantify actual
                  releases.
Sampling
Locations
Air monitoring may be performed at predetermined geographic locations.
More commonly, however, air monitoring is performed at activity-related
locations such as at a well head, in the breathing zone of the workers, near a
split spoon sampler as it is opened, in the vicinity of drum-opening activities,
or in the vicinity of excavation of potentially contaminated areas.  Areas of
potential exposure are usually determined in the field and may not be
specified in the SAP.  The SAP, however, should indicate the types of
activities that require air monitoring and the chemicals or hazards that should
be monitored. This monitoring is used to alert workers, as well as  residents in
the immediate area, of possible dangers that may result in an evacuation.

Air sampling is usually designed to sample emissions from an entire site or a
specified area of a site.  The sampling team will typically establish sampling
locations both upwind (background air) and downwind of this area. Samples
are usually collected at 1.5 or 2 meters above ground, which is approximately
the human breathing zone (U.S. EPA, 1987a).

Sampling locations for air sampling should be specified in the SAP. The
oversight assistant should note the actual locations and check to see if they are
consistent with the locations  listed in the SAP.  The oversight assistant should
evaluate whether changes in sampling locations are "reasonable and consistent"
with the sampling objectives. All information pertinent to the location of each
monitoring or sampling location should be recorded.  The agreement between
the actual monitoring locations and those specified in the SAP should also  be
noted.
General           Knowledge of background conditions is critical for air monitoring and air
Background       sampling.  Background conditions include meteorological conditions (such as
Conditions        wind speed, wind direction, temperature, or rain fall) for the area.  It is
                  important to know the direction of prevailing winds in the area to be sampled
                  or monitored to be able to determine which direction is upwind and which is
                  downwind. This information can usually be obtained for a variety of
                  reporting periods from the nearest airport with a Federal weather station.

                  It is also necessary to  be able to separate any concentrations of pollutants in
                  the background air from those arising from the site or activities at the site.  If
                  air is being monitored in an area where drums are being opened and this area
                  is surrounded by chemical plants, it is important to know which pollutants are
                                            B-53
-------
                  coming from which source. In this case, additional background monitoring
                  would be necessary.


Sampling         The sampling team should use air sampling and monitoring equipment that will
Equipment        preserve the integrity of the sample and thus yield a sample that is
                  representative of air found at the sampling or monitoring location. The
                  oversight assistant should verify that the actual monitoring and the sampling
                  equipment is consistent with the  equipment listed in the SAP. To  minimize
                  reactions or  contamination, the sampling team should use clean glass, Teflon,
                  or stainless steel equipment for air sample collection and storage.  Although air
                  monitoring equipment is usually constructed of these materials,  the
                  requirements for air monitoring are less rigid as the  sample is usually analyzed
                  immediately.
Air Monitoring
Equipment
The choice of monitoring instruments depends upon the potential hazards
encountered at the site.  When monitoring volatile organics in the air, the
sampling team will usually use a self-contained, battery-powered organic
vapor detector such as an FID or PID (see Section B.2.6).  Combustible  gas
indicators or explosimeters will be used to detect levels of organics that are
potentially explosive.  Oxygen meters will detect dangerously low oxygen
levels.  Radiation survey meters  detect high levels of radiation.

The sampling team may also use colorimetric  tubes for air monitoring (see
Section B.2,9). Colorimetric tubes are frequently referred to as MSA or
Draeger tubes. Colorimetric tubes are available that are sensitive to a variety
of chemicals at various concentrations (NUS Corporation, 1987; U.S. EPA,
1987a).

Results obtained from air monitoring equipment can  usually be characterized
as qualitative or  useful for screening purposes only.  If potential hazards are
detected, the sampling team may need to perform more quantitative air
sampling to determine actual levels of contamination.
Air Sampling
Collection
Equipment for
Organic
Vapors
Air samples are usually collected by pumping air into a sample container such
as a Teflon bag, by drawing it through a sampling tube containing an
adsorbent, or by introducing it directly to an analytical instrument. Probes, air
lines, pumps, and any storage containers or equipment should, whenever
possible, be constructed of glass, Teflon, or stainless steel tQ minimize possible
reactions or contamination (U.S. EPA, 1987a).

When sample storage or preservation is required prior to analysis, several types
of storage are available.  One of these involves the collection of air in a
portable container for analysis later in a laboratory.  Alternatively, the air
sample may be collected  and analyzed in the field by analytical
instrumentation.  Another type of storage technique involves the sorption of
the chemicals in the air sample onto an adsorbent material such as activated
carbon or commercially available adsorbent resins such as Tenax. The
activated carbon or resins are then sent to the analytical laboratory for
extraction and analysis.

Air sampling equipment  is also available for chemicals other than volatile
organic compounds. As  it is less common to sample  for other chemicals or
                                            B-54
-------
                 materials such as particulate matter or radiation, the appropriate manuals for
                 this equipment should be reviewed.


Sample Type     There are two types of air samples which may be collected.  These include
                 grab samples, and composite or continuous samples. Grab samples are samples
                 taken at a single location at a single  time. Samples collected over a short time
                 period, such as several minutes, are  still considered grab samples.  A sample
                 collected during the opening of a drum would be considered a grab sample.
                 Composite samples may be either combined grab samples from different
                 locations o.r samples collected at different times and then composited.
                 Continuous samples are a type of composite air sample that is collected
                 continuously over a predetermined period. A particulate sample collected over
                 a work day would be considered a composite or continuous sample. Both air
                 monitoring and air sampling activities may be performed as either grab  or
                 continuous sampling.


Sampling         The sampling techniques for both air monitoring and air sampling are
Technique        discussed  in the following sections.
Air Monitoring
The sampling team may perform air monitoring with dedicated instruments or
by the use of colorimetric tubes. Dedicated monitoring instruments contain a
sampling probe or sampling system, an analysis system, and a direct readout.
Some also contain a warning system that sounds an alarm to signify dangerous
levels. The battery  in the unit must be charged and most instruments must be
calibrated before use. As calibration and use are  fairly complex, the oversight
assistant should refer to the manuals supplied with this equipment. Typically,
a calibrated instrument is turned on and  continually carried by one or more
workers on each sampling team while work is being performed. Background
as well as all monitoring readings should be recorded.  The use of colorimetric
tubes is described in Section B.2.6.
Air Sampling      Air samples are usually collected at the established sampling location by
                  pumping air either into a sample'container such as a Teflon bag, by drawing it
                  through a sampling tube containing an adsorbent, by drawing it through a
                  filter, or by introducing it directly to  an analytical instrument. Probes, air
                  lines, internal pump surfaces, and any storage containers or equipment should,
                  whenever possible, be constructed of glass, Teflon, or stainless steel. If
                  samples are collected and must be preserved  for subsequent analysis, they
                  should be appropriately labelled and stored (see Sections B.3 and B.4) (U.S.
                  EPA, 1987a).

                  The oversight assistant should check that the sampling team runs the system
                  for sufficient time to allow standing air to purge from the system before
                  sampling.  This length of time depends upon the internal volume of the
                  system, including the probe, sample line, and pump, as well as the pumping
                  rate of the pump.  Once the system is adequately purged, the sample may be
                  collected.  A purging time of approximately  5 minutes with a pumping rate of
                  4 liters per minute is usually adequate to purge most systems.
                                           B-55
-------
Field
Analytical
Techniques
   Field analytical techniques for screening ambient air include:

   •   Organic vapor detectors;

   •   Colorimetric tubes;

   •   Combustible gas indicators or explosimeters;

   •   Oxygen meters; and

   •   Radiation survey meters.

   Organic vapor detectors and colorimetric tubes are described in detail in
   Section B.2.6 on soil vapor sampling.
Combustible      A combustible gas indicator, also known as an explosimeter, determines the
Gas              concentration of organic vapors present in the air as a percentage of the lower
Indicator or      explosive limit of the gas used for calibration of the instrument.  The lower
Explosimeter     explosive limit is the lowest concentration of an organic vapor that will burn
                 or explode at room temperature in air that contains a normal amount of
                 oxygen (OJ  when an ignition source is introduced.  This instrument must be
                 calibrated frequently.  The combustible gas meter works only when the air
                 being sampled contains 19.5 percent to 25 percent oxygen. Many chemicals,
                 such as those containing silicon,  acids, and leaded gasoline, cause
                 interferences. Combustible fcas indicators are usually used with oxygen
                 detectors and some manufacturers offer both in the  same instrument. This
                 instrument may be  calibrated and then allowed to continuously monitor the
                 environment where work is being performed.  Some models contain an alarm
                 that sounds when adverse conditions arise.
Oxygen
Detector
   An oxygen detector measures the percent of oxygen in the air by means of a
   galvanic cell.  Oxygen detectors are frequently combined with explosive gas
   meters and referred to as LEL/O2 meters. Acid mists will ruin the probe.
   When used at elevations significantly above sea level the meter will read low,
   relative to sea level calibration, due to atmospheric pressures of less than 1
   atmosphere.  When used in the presence of strong oxidizers, the meter may
   read high. This instrument may be calibrated and then allowed to
   continuously monitor the environment where work is being performed.  Some
   models contain an alarm that sounds when adverse conditions arise.
Radiation         Radiation survey meters are available to monitor for alpha, beta, and gamma
Survey Meter      radiation.  A meter which measures all three of these types of radiation is
                  desirable, as is a model which contains an alarm which sounds when dangerous
                  levels of radiation are encountered.
B.3
COMMON SAMPLING ACTIVITIES

    Regardless of the medium sampled, a number of activities and considerations
    are important for proper handling and preservation of the sample until it is
    shipped for analysis.  The sample should be placed in a suitable container, in
    sufficient volume, and if necessary, filtered or mixed with preservatives so
    that when analyzed, the sample is representative of the medium sampled.  In
                                           B-56
-------
                  addition, sample labels, sampling records, and chain-of-custody
                  documentation should be adequately, completely, and correctly maintained, as
                  they could be used as evidence during litigation.  Failure to take steps to
                  ensure sample representativeness and accountability can render sample
                  collection and subsequent analysis meaningless.


B.3.1         Containers

                  Sample containers should be of a suitable material that is chemically
                  compatible with the sample; that is,  they should not contaminate or degrade
                  the sample. The container should also hold a volume of sample sufficient to
                  perform all required analyses.  Thus, the choice of containers depends upon
                  the analysis required.  In addition, containers should be free of contaminants
                  before use.


Container         The most important factors in container selection are chemical compatibility
Type             and volume. Containers should not degrade, react, leach, or leak as a result of
                  contact with the sample. It is therefore important to have some idea  of the
                  composition of  the sample.  The SAP should refer to the specific analytical
                  method in "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste-Physical/Chemical
                  Methods" (SW-846) (U.S. EPA, 1986) that designates an acceptable container
                  for the specific type of analysis.  The selection of containers, lids, and linings
                  should be coordinated with the laboratory, which may specify a particular
                  container for certain analyses.

                  Plastic and glass containers are generally used for sample collection.  Glass
                  containers are relatively inert to most chemicals and can be used to collect
                  almost all hazardous material samples. (Two exceptions are strong alkali
                  solutions and hydrofluoric acid.)  When organics are the analytes of interest,
                  glass bottles with fluorocarbon resin-lined (Teflon-lined) screw-on caps should
                  be used (U.S. EPA, 1986a).

                  When metals are the analytes of interest, fluorocarbon resin (Teflon)
                  containers, glass containers with Teflon-lined screw-on lids, or polyethylene
                  containers with polypropylene screw-on lids should be used (U.S. EPA, 1986a).
                  Fluorocarbon resin containers are the most inert and thus have the widest
                  range of application.  Polypropylene, polycarbonate, and polyvinyl  chloride are
                  also commonly  available plastic containers, and should be used only when the
                  constituents of  the sample  are known not to react with plastic. Plastic bottles
                  are usually provided with screw caps made of the same material as  the bottles;
                  liners are usually not required.  Table B-l summarizes the types (and sizes) of
                  bottles  recommended for each type of sample (U.S. EPA, 1987a). The choice
                  of container size depends upon the required analyses.  The volume  of sample
                  collected should be sufficient to perform all required analyses with an
                  additional amount  collected (if required by the lab or the sampling  plan) to
                  provide for quality control needs, split samples, or repeat examinations.
                  (Usually, 40 mL, VOA vial samples are collected in replicate pairs to provide
                  additional sample material for the laboratory in case one sample is not properly
                  extracted.)  The sample  volume required for each analysis is the volume of the
                  appropriate container less the ullage (head space) required for sample mixing
                  by the lab.  Generally, at least 10 percent ullage should be allowed  in every
                  sample container, except for samples containing.volatile organics or dissolved
                  gases, which should have no head space (U.S. EPA, 1986c).
                                            B-57
-------
Table B-1. Sample Bottles Recommended by Sample Type
        CONTAINER DESCRIPTION
 8-oz amber glass bottle with Teflon-lined
 black phenolic cap

 40-mL glass vial with Teflo"n-lined silicon
 septum and black phenolic cap

 1-liter high-density polyethylene bottle with
 white poly cap

 120-mL wide-mouth glass vial with white
 poly cap

 16-oz wide-mouth glass jar with Teflon-
 lined black phenolic cap

 8-oz wide-mouth glass jar with Teflon-lined
 black phenolic cap
              SAMPLE TYPE
 4-oz wide-mouth glass jar with Teflon-lined
 black phenolic cap
  1-liter amber glass.bottle with Teflon-lined
  black phenolic cap

  32-oz wide-mouth glass jar with Teflon-
  lined black phenolic cap

  4-liter amber glass bottle with Teflon-lined
  black phenolic cap
Extractable organics--Low-concentration
water samples

Volatile organics--Low- and medium-
concentration water samples

Metals, cyanide--Low-concentration water
samples

Volatile organics--Low- and medium-
concentration soil samples

Metals, cyanide--Medium-concentration
water samples

Extractable organics--Low- and medium-
concentration soil samples

Metals, cyanide--Low- and medium-
concentration soil samples

Dioxin--Soil samples
Organics and inorganics--High-
concentration liquid and solid samples

Extractable organics--Low- and medium-
concentration soil samples

Metals, cyanide--Low- and medium-
concentration soil samples

Dioxin--Soil samples

Organic and inorganic--High-concentration
liquid and solid samples

Extractable organics--Low-concentration
water samples

Extractable organics--Medium concentration
water samples

Extractable organics--Low-concentration
water samples
                                            B-5S
-------
Container         Besides specifying the container type, the SAP should specify the procedures
Condition         used to ensure that sample containers are free of contaminants prior to use.
                  Sample containers obtained from reputable vendors (such as I-Chem, Eagle-
                  Picher, or Environmental Sampling Supply) have been specially precleaned and
                  are generally suitable for use without further cleaning.  For sample containers
                  not certified clean by the vendor (or optionally for trace contaminant
                  sampling) the containers, lids, and liners should be washed with a
                  nonphosphate detergent, rinsed in tap water, and rinsed in distilled water (i.e.,
                  water having a conductivity of less than 1 /imho/cm at 25°C). In addition, if
                  the containers are to be used for organic analysis,  they should have a final
                  rinse of spectrographic grade solvent, such as hexane or methanol (U.S. EPA,
                  1986a; IT, 1987).  Alternatively, for sample containers for metals analysis, a
                  1:1 (acid:water) nitric acid rinse and 1:1 hydrochloric acid rinse may precede
                  the tap water and distilled water rinses, respectively. The cleanliness of
                  sample containers, pre-cleaned or cleaned, may be verified by bottle blanks.
B.3.2
Labels/Tags

   Sample container labels and tags are documents that identify and inventory
   samples.  Labeling procedures and information are not only important for
   preventing misidentification of samples, but also are accountability documents,
   forming part of the sampling records.  As such, sample labels and tags may be
   used as evidence in litigation. Therefore, it is essential that sample labels and
   tags are adequately, completely, and correctly filled out and affixed to the
   proper sample container.
Labeling
Procedure
    Labels or tags should be firmly affixed to the sample container.  Labels are
    gummed and may be preattached (as for sample bottles from the Superfund
    repository) or affixed in the field.  The container should be dry enough to
    securely attach the label.  Alternatively, sample tags may be attached to the
    sample container if gummed labels are not available or applicable. Tags are
    often preferred for handling extremely contaminated samples because the
    sample container must often be decontaminated before packing and shipping.
    Use of tags obviates container contamination/ decontamination problems.

    Labels and tags should be filled out using waterproof ink (no felt tip pens) so
    they remain legible even when wet. To minimize the handling of sample
    containers, labels and tags may be filled out prior to sample collection.  If
    filled out prior to sampling, care should be taken to affix the correct label or
    tag to  the proper sample container. If possible, one member of the sampling
    team should fill out the tags or labels while another member does the sampling
    (U.S. EPA,  I986c).

    Sample tags or labels are distributed as needed to field personnel  by the field
    supervisor (or designated representative).  Personnel are accountable for each
    tag assigned to them until it has been filled out, attached to a sample, and
    transferred to another individual, along with the corresponding chain-of-
    custody.  Tags (or labels) bearing  EPA serial numbers should not  be discarded
    as they are accountable documents.  Lost, voided, or damaged tags should be
    noted  in the field logbook.
                                            B-59
-------
Labeling         Sample labels or tags should, at a minimum, include the following information:
Nomenclature/
Information      •   Serial number -- The first digit (or digits) of the serial number should
                     correspond to the EPA  Region where the site is located (see Figure B-8);

                 •   Sample identification number or station number -- A unique identifying
                     number assigned to a specific sampling point and listed in the SAP.  (The
                     number for a blind duplicate should not infer that the sample is a
                     duplicate);

                 •   Name of Collector -- Including his/her signature;

                 •   Date and time of collection -- The date is a  six-digit number indicating
                     month/date/year; time  is a four-digit number using the 24-hour clock
                     notation;

                 •   Place of collection or station location -- The location or station description
                     (for example, well No.  5) as  specified in the  SAP (more than one sample,
                     each with a unique identification number, may be collected from the same
                     location);

                 •   Analysis -- The type of analysis requested; and

                 •   Preservative --  Whether a preservative is used and  the type of
                     preservative.

                 Additional information that should be included,  but is  not required, are the
                 contractor project code number, a lab sample number (reserved for lab use),
                 and any information such as split samples, special analytical procedures, and
                 CLP case or sample numbers (if appropriate).  Figure B-l 1 illustrates an
                 example of a sample tag.


B.3.3         Preservation/Handling

                 Once the sample has been collected, chemical and biological changes can
                 occur, altering the composition and thus the representativeness of the sample.
                 For example, the pH may change significantly in a matter of minutes, sulfides
                 and cyanides may be oxidized or evolve as gases, and hexavalent chromium
                 may slowly be reduced to the trivalent state.  In  addition, certain cations, such
                 as iron and lead,  may be lost to adsorption on the walls of the sample
                 containers, microorganisms may grow in certain  constituents, or volatile
                 compounds may be lost.  For best analytical results, samples should therefore
                 be  analyzed as soon as possible after collection.  If samples are not
                 immediately taken to a laboratory they should be filtered or preserved and
                 stored such that these changes are retarded or prevented until the sample
                 reaches the laboratory.


Sample          Filtering may be  recommended for the inorganic analysis of samples because
Filtering         acid, used either as a preservative or during analysis, can release inorganic
                 constituents held on suspended solids (thereby changing the constituent
                 chemistry of the solution).  However, filtered samples may not be acceptable
                 for risk assessment  purposes since total metal analysis requires unfiltered
                 samples.  Thus, collected samples for metal (inorganic) analysis should either
                 be  acid-preserved without filtering, or split into two portions:  one portion


                                            B-60
-------
Figure B-11. Typical Sample Identification Tag
                              .  e
                              w  ^^
                             I

                                          Vn

                                      I
                                                  PrtMrvative:
                                                 Ym£   NoO
                                                   ANALYSES
                                              BOD
                                              SolidS
             Anions
              (T»S) (IDS) (SS)
                                              COO. TOC. Nutrients
                                              Phenolics
                                              Mercury
                                              Metals
                                              Cyanide
                                              Oil and Grease
                                              Organics GC/MS
                                              Priority Pollutants
       Volatile Organics
                                              Pesticides
                                              Mutagenicity
                                              Bacteriology
       Remarks;
4-18851
                                     Region 4 Sample Tag
Note: The obverse side of the sample tag bears and EPA logo and the appropriate
      regional address.
                                             B-61
-------
                  acid preserved without filtering, the second portion filtered before the
                  addition of acid preservative (resulting in a sample that contains only the
                  dissolved constituents).

                  Filtration through a 0.45-micron membrane filter is the most common field
                  method to remove suspended solids. For extremely turbid samples, large
                  particles can be removed with a coarse filter before the 0.45 micron  filter is
                  used (U.S. EPA,  1987a).  Samples for analysis of organic compounds should
                  never be filtered as  many organic constituents adhere to suspended solids (U.S.
                  EPA, 1986a,c).


Sample           Methods of sample preservation are relatively limited and are intended
Preservatives      generally to: (1) retard biological action, (2) retard hydrolysis of chemical
                  compounds and constituents, (3) reduce constituent volatility, and (4) reduce
                  sorption effects.  Preservation methods are generally limited to pH control,
                  chemical addition, refrigeration, and protection from light.  The oversight
                  assistant should refer to "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste -- Physical
                  Chemical Methods" (SW-846) (U.S. EPA,  1986) for the specific preservation
                  method that should be used for the constituent in the sample.

                  Samples requiring analysis for volatile, semivolatile, and nonvolatile  organics
                  (including pesticides) should be refrigerated or iced (4°C).  Low-concentration
                  or environmental water samples (contaminants less then 10 ppm) should be
                  acidified until the pH is less than 2 with 2 mL (1+1) of nitric acid.  Cyanide
                  samples should be preserved with sodium hydroxide to a pH greater  than 12,
                  iced, and if oxidizing agents are present (as indicated with potassium iodide-
                  starch test paper) mixed with 0.6 g of ascorbic acid per liter of sample.
                  Table B-2 summarizes sample preservative techniques used for some common
                  analyses (U.S. EPA, 1986a).

                  [In addition, it has recently been demonstrated that a 1:1 methanol to soil ratio
                  (volume to weight) significantly decreases volatile  loss for soil samples (U.S.
                  EPA, 1991). Methanol may soon become a  required preservative for soil
                  volatile samples.]

                  Oversight assistants  should note that region-specific variances in sample
                  preservation exist.  For example, Region IV requires that samples collected for
                  volatile analysis be preserved with hydrochloric acid. Specifically, four drops
                  of concentrated HC1 are added to each VOA vial before it is filled with sample
                  (U.S. EPA, 1987a).  Region-specific variances may become dated; the
                  sampling team should contact the EPA or the RPM regarding regional
                  practices or requirements  before writing the SAP.

                  Not all samples require preservation, including soil or sediment samples and
                  medium-and-high concentration water samples (10 ppm to 150,000 ppm
                  contaminant and greater than 150,000 ppm, respectively), although in practice,
                  all samples are usually iced -- particularly volatile soil samples.  The addition
                  of preservative to samples whose constituents are unknown should generally
                  not be practiced because of the possibility of an adverse chemical reaction
                  between the preservative and the sample.  Preservatives may not only alter the
                  physical and chemical composition  of a sample, but also may be highly
                  reactive and hence  unsafe.
                                            B-62
-------
Table B-2. Sample Preservation Procedures
Anilysb
TOC
TOX
Chloride
Phenols
Sulfite
Nhnte
Pestkides/Herbicides
Cotifon Bacteria
Cyanide
Oil tnd Grease
VoUtik, Semi-Volatile, and Non-Volatile
Organ ics
Iron
Manganese
Sodium
Total Meuls
Dissolved Metals
Radium
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
CooMto4
D(«. C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X








FWd
Acidified to
pH <2
With Nitric
Acid











X \
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
FMd
Acidified to
pH <2with
Sntfnrie
Add



X





X









FUtf
Addffiedto
pH <2with
SoJforfc Acid
or
Hydrochloric
Acid
X


















PrCMTTtd
wkh Imlof
1.1 M
Sodium
Sulfte

X

















I* , »
riCMiitu
with Sodium
Hydroxide
topH >I2








X










pH
Adjastnient to
be Between 6
aad8 wkh
Sodinm
Hjdtondc or
Sdtfaric Acid






X










D

                                          B-63
-------
Sample
Storage
    Metals samples and samples not requiring preservation, such as soil samples, do
    not require special handling or storage.  However, such samples should be
    stored in a safe and secure manner to prevent disturbance and contamination.
    Samples requiring cooling to 4°C should be refrigerated or kept on ice in a
    cooler.  For information on storage requirements for sample shipment, see
    Section B.4.1.
B.3.4
Chain-of-Custody Information

    Chain-of-custody records and sample traffic reports allow sample tracking and
    provide a permanent record for each sample collected.  Proper completion of
    chain-of-custody information is important to help ensure sample quality
    during collection, transportation, and storage for analysis.          '
Chain-of-
Custody
Record
    An adequate chain-of-custody record allows tracing of possession and
    handling of individual samples from the time of field collection through
    laboratory analysis. The chain-of-custody record should be included in the
    shipment of each sample and should contain the following information:

    •   Sample number;

    •   Signature of collector;

    •   Date and time of collection;

    •   Sample station location;

    •   Number of containers;

    •   Signatures of people involved in the chain of possession; and

    •   Inclusive dates of possession.

    Figure B-12 shows a sample chain-of-custody record.  The original chain-
    of-custody form accompanies the sample shipment, while the copies are
    retained by the sampling team.  When samples are split, the event should be
    noted in the "Remarks" section of the chain-of-custody record.  The oversight
    team should complete a separate chain-of-custody record for  custody and
    shipment of the split samples.

    Generally, as few people as possible should handle the  samples to minimize the
    possibility of disputed or unclear custody. Frequently, one'person is
    designated to be responsible for sample custody. Field personnel in possession
    of the samples are personally responsible for the care and custody of the
    samples until the sample is transferred or dispatched properly. A sample is in
    someone's "custody" if:

    •   It is in one's actual possession;

    •   It is in one's view, after being  in one's physical possession;

    •   It is in one's physical possession and then locked up so that no one can
       tamper with it; and
                                           B-64
-------
Figure B-12. Chain-of-Custody Record

ENVIRONMENTAL MOTECTION AGENCY
OHta ot Entoamni
PHOJ NO r
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
•BOJiCT NAME
SAMflEAS. flvwOTf
IT* NO















OATt















TUM















s















I















^.•Mmd by: (Minn.)
MMIQUIIIMO 9f' ffi0IM)*VJ
IMnwitfMd BT i*r*~nl
OWMXMO

STATION LOCATION















Om
Dm
Dm
0


Tin*
Tim
Tim



NO.
o»
COM-
TAIMM















••anodby OVUM**
RxaiMdbv »»r»mii)
Ntaixd la> Ljfeofiiwy by:
B»ni*«»»<


//////,



























































































7/

f
MOKM)
CtinkM».Mili«WiMlii.
giAttttHLlmntBttJlUI.
MIMAMU















MiiKMaHM by d» 	
fldinWMlMd by: n.««ii»'ri
DM
l/TMH) I
a. r*uHn

lOTWtt


OM
OM
rim
Tim




Mcntwd bv* AVHMW!
Huindby: fl»n. il

3-23022

                                     B-65
-------
                  •   It is kept in a secured area, restricted to authorized personnel only.

                  When transferring samples, the individuals relinquishing and receiving them
                  should sign, date, and note the time on the form.
Traffic
Reports
   If a CLP laboratory is used for sample analysis, sample traffic reports are
   required to provide a permanent record for each sample collected (US EPA,
   1987a). Sample traffic reports are four-part carbonless forms printed with a
   unique sample identification number.  The sampling team should complete a
   traffic report for each sample. The report should include the following
   information: site name and location, type of laboratory analysis requested, date
   of sample collection, and shipment and classification of sample concentration.
   The number of containers and the total volume of each container should also
   be entered for each analytical parameter. The oversight assistant should refer
   to the CLP guidance (EPA, 1986b) for detailed guidance on traffic reports.
B.4
POST-SAMPLING ACTIVITIES

   Post-sampling activities include packaging and shipping samples and
   decontaminating them after they are collected in the field. The procedures,
   methods, and requirements for these activities are described in the following
   sections.
B.4.1
Packaging

    Following collection and preservation of samples in the field, the samples are
    packaged for shipment to the laboratory.  Packaging the samples involves
    following standard procedures to ensure that the samples arrive at the
    laboratory intact; that is, without breakage, leakage, or spoiling. The oversight
    assistant should follow the procedures described in this section for packaging
    oversight samples (see Section B.5) and  should also observe the sampling  team
    members to check their packaging  methods.  The following section describes
    the methods and materials recommended by EPA's Sample Management Office
    for packaging samples.
Methods
   EPA's Sample Management Office recommends specific packaging methods
   based on classification of the samples as either: 1) low-concentration samples,
   2) medium-concentration samples, or 3) high-concentration samples.  This
   classification is based on the expected or estimated contaminant concentration
   of the sample as determined by the field supervisor. The following definitions
   should be used to aid in sample classification (U.S. EPA, 1987):

   •   Low-concentration sample -- The contaminant of highest concentration is
       present at less than 10 ppm;

   •   Medium-concentration sample -- The contaminant of highest
       concentration is present at a  level greater than 10 ppm and less than 15
       percent (150,000 ppm); and

   •   High-concentration sample --At least one contaminant is present at a
       level greater than 15 percent. Samples from drums and  tanks are assumed
       to be high-concentration unless available information indicates otherwise.
                                           B-66
-------
If the expected contaminant concentration is unknown, the sample should be
handled as a high-concentration sample.

The packaging requirements for the medium- and high-concentration sample
classifications build on the  requirements for packaging low-concentration
samples.  Therefore, this document first describes the packaging methods
common  to all classifications and then describes the remaining methods
specific to medium- and high-concentration samples.  The following
packaging method should be used for all sample classifications:

•  A sample tag should be attached to each sample container;

•  All bottles except volatile organic analysis (VOA) vials should be taped
   closed;

•  VOA vials should be wrapped with paper and sealed in plastic bags.  One
   pair of VOAs should be placed in each bag. (Generally,  VOA samples are
   collected in pairs to provide an extra sample for the laboratory in case one
   is not extracted properly).  The plastic bags should be packed and sealed in
   another sample container such as a  clean paint can, marked with
   directional arrows indicating which way is  "up;"

•  Each sample container (except for paint cans for VOA samples) should be
   sealed in a plastic bag, squeezing as much air as possible  from the bag;

•  The sample containers should be placed in  a lined, insulated shipping
   container (such as an ice chest) and surrounded  with packing material (at
   least  1 inch of packing  material in the bottom).  See Section B.4.1 for a
   description  of  acceptable packaging materials;

•  The appropriate refrigeration agents should be placed in  the shipping
   container (see Section B.3.3);

•  The lining of the shipping container should be sealed shut;

•  The paperwork for the  laboratory, such as  chain-of-custody forms and
   traffic reports  (see Section B.4), should be  sealed in a plastic bag and taped
   to the inside lid of the shipping container;

•  The shipping container should be locked or taped  shut;

•  At least two signed custody seals (see Section B.4.2) should be placed on
   the shipping container,  one on the front and one on the back.  Additional
   seals  may be used if necessary; and

•  The shipping container should be personally handed over to the carrier
   (usually an overnight carrier).

For packaging medium and high-concentration samples, the  following steps
should be followed instead  of, or in addition to, those mentioned above.

•  Each sample container should be sealed in  a plastic bag and packed in a
   clean paint  can or similar container before being placed in the shipping
   container;
                          B-67
-------
                 •   Even though sample containers should be individually wrapped in plastic
                     bags when packaged, samples of high contaminant concentration should be
                     shipped in a dedicated cooler to prevent the possibility of contaminating
                     samples with low contaminant concentration;

                 •   Each paint can or similar container should be marked with the appropriate
                     Department of Transportation (DOT) shipping information (see Section
                     B.4.2) and packed in the shipping  container;

                 •   Each shipping container should be marked with the appropriate DOT
                     shipping information (see Section  B.4.2); and

                 •   Each shipping container should be sent with  a restricted-article airbill (see
                     Section B.4.2).


Materials         EPA's Sample Management Office recommends specific materials for
                 packaging samples for shipment to the laboratory.  The primary function of
                 the packaging materials is to protect the sample containers from leakage,
                 breakage, and spoiling. EPA recommends the following materials for
                 packaging samples:

                 •   Shipping containers -- EPA recommends using hard plastic or metal picnic
                     coolers. The cooler provides a sturdy container for shipment to prevent
                     breakage of sample containers and provides an  insulated vessel for keeping
                     samples refrigerated with ice (to prevent spoiling).  The coolers can be any
                     size, although the sampling team should beware of very large coolers, as
                     they are heavy when filled  with samples, ice, and packing materials.  Aside
                     from the obvious problem in moving the heavy container, most commercial
                     carriers will  not accept a package  heavier than  100 pounds for standard
                     delivery. As a guideline, a 15-gallon cooler filled with samples, ice, and
                     packing material will probably weigh close to 100 pounds;

                 •   Shipping container liners -- EPA  recommends  using a plastic bag such as a
                     trash bag.  Plastic bags can be sealed easily with electrical tape and will
                     contain leaks and spills from sample containers if they occur inside the
                     bag. Otherwise, a  leak or spill could seep out of the cooler. Similarly, ice
                     (used as a preservative) can be contained in a plastic bag to prevent
                     leakage as ice melts;

                 •   Packing material -- EPA recommends using  asbestos-free vermiculite to
                     protect sample containers from breakage. Perlite, styrjofoarn beads, or
                     bubble-wrap for individual samples may also be used but are not water-
                     absorbent. These materials are used for absorbing any impacts and
                     keeping sample containers from jostling during shipment;

                 •   Paint cans -- EPA recommends using clean paint cans for storing medium-
                      and high-concentration samples to keep samples isolated from each other.
                     In case of leakage or breakage, this would prevent contaminants from
                     mixing and reacting with each other in the shipping container; and

                 •   Paperwork packaging -- EPA recommends placing the chain-of-custody
                     and traffic reports in plastic bags  to keep the papers dry in case of
                     breakage or  leakage from sample containers or  melting ice.
                                           B-68
-------
Other            Other prescribed specifications may apply to sample packaging, depending on
Prescribed        the specific types of samples collected.  The sampling team should investigate
Specifications    special packaging requirements by discussing suspected contaminants with the
                 laboratory that will do the analysis as well as with the sample carrier.  For
                 example, dioxin samples or samples suspected of containing dioxin
                 contamination should be labeled as such and packaged as if they were high-
                 concentration samples (including DOT shipping requirements).  Laboratory
                 personnel should be notified in advance that a dioxin sample is being shipped
                 so they can make arrangements for receiving and analyzing the sample.  In
                 addition, it is important to notify laboratories of suspected contamination
                 because some laboratories are not equipped to handle the analysis of certain
                 samples (such as dioxin).


B.4.2         Shipping

                 Once the sample containers have been packaged, they are ready for shipment
                 to the  laboratory.  Standard procedures for shipping samples should be
                 followed to: ensure timely shipment to  the laboratory, document possession of
                 the samples, ensure that the laboratory  is prepared to receive the samples, and
                 comply with DOT regulations. The oversight assistant should follow these
                 procedures for shipping oversight samples and should also check the sampling
                 team's shipping procedures for all samples.


Timely           Timely shipping is critical to  maintaining the integrity (original volume and
Shipping         composition) of the samples collected in the field. Samples should be analyzed
                 as soon as possible after sampling.  If samples are analyzed in the laboratory
                 (rather than in the field), they must be analyzed within designated holding
                 times for the specific sample  media and contaminants of concern, or the
                 composition of the samples can change. EPA's Sample Management Office
                 mandates the following laboratory holding times for some common samples:

                                      Water             Soil         Sediment

                 VGA               14 days             10 days        10 days

                 Base Neutrals/       5 days             10 days        10 days
                 Acids

                 Pesticides            5 days             10 days        10 days

                 Cyanides           14 days             14 days        14 days

                 The holding time is measured from the time  the sample is received  by the
                 laboratory (not shipped) until the time  the sample is extracted for analysis.
                 Additionally, the samples must meet technical holding times as specified in the
                 Federal Register.  The technical  holding times (which  include the laboratory
                 holding times)  are longer than the laboratory  holding times to allow time for
                 shipping.  Detailed information regarding holding times for other samples is
                 described in the "User's Guide to the Contract Laboratory Program" (U.S.
                 EPA,  1986b).

                 In order to allow the laboratory adequate time to analyze the samples within
                 the designated  technical holding times, the samples must be shipped promptly.
                 Samples  should be shipped the same day as collected, usually for next-day


                                           B-69
-------
                 delivery.  Even if the holding time is not likely to be exceeded, samples should
                 not be collected on a Friday or Saturday unless special arrangements have been
                 made with the laboratory to receive the sample on Saturday or Sunday.
                 Additionally, the sampling team should check with the carrier before
                 collecting samples on a Friday or Saturday to ensure that the carrier provides
                 overnight delivery on weekends.  This step is important for ensuring that
                 custody of the samples is maintained and that samples are kept refrigerated
                 until they are received by authorized personnel at the lab (ice  will not last
                 more than a few days, even in a cooler).  Similarly, samples should not be
                 collected the day before  a holiday unless special arrangements have been made
                 with the carrier and the  lab.


                 The chain-of-custody record allows  tracing of the possession and handling of
                 samples from the time of collection through laboratory analysis.  All sample
                 shipments to the laboratory should be accompanied by a chain-of-custody
                 form identifying their contents. The original form should accompany the
                 sample shipment, and the copies should be retained by the sampling team.
                 The chain-of-custody form should be placed in a plastic bag to keep it dry
                 and taped to the inside cover of the shipping container (cooler).  Detailed
                 information regarding the information contained on the chain-of-custody
                 form is described in Section B.3.4.


                 Custody seals are adhesive  strips that the sampling team fastens across the
                 opening of the  shipping  container to demonstrate that the container has not
                 been opened before arriving at the laboratory. Usually, the sampling team
                 places at least two custody  seals on the shipping container.  The custody seals
                 should be signed and dated by the sampling  team when applied to the shipping
                 container.  An example of  a custody seal is shown in Figure B-13.


EM off Lading-    A bill of lading (or airbill) is the form that accompanies the sample shipping
                 container to provide the  shipping information for  the carrier.  The information
                 contained on the bill of lading includes the destination (recipient's name,
                 company, address), the origin of the shipment (sender's name, company,
                 address), the airbill number (for tracing the  shipment), the sender's billing
                 information, and the delivery and special handling service required (such as
                 Saturday delivery or restricted article service for high-concentration samples).
                 An example of a bill of lading is shown in Figure  B-13.  The sampling team
                 should retain a copy of the bill of lading as part of the chain-of-custody
                 record (see Section B.3.4) for tracing possession and handling of the shipment.
                                                                       >


NoftlOcafttom off   A few days before samples are collected, the sampling team should notify the
                 laboratory of all sample shipments and the type of analysis required in order to
                 confirm the arrangements made during the initial activities (see Section B.I.I).
                 Confirmation will ensure that an authorized individual is available to receive
                 the samples, and allow the  laboratory time to arrange for analysis of the
                 samples before holding times are exceeded.  The laboratory should be apprised
                 of the number  of samples and the type of analysis required for each, especially
                 if there are any changes  in the original requirements.  As discussed in Section
                 B.4.2, the sampling team should make special arrangements with the laboratory
                 before collecting samples on a Friday, Saturday, or the day before a holiday.
                 Many laboratories are willing to accept Saturday deliveries if notified in
                 advance, although most laboratories  do not accept Sunday or holiday deliveries
                 in addition, most carriers will not deliver on Sundays or holidays).
                 Laboratories should also  be notified  in advance of any shipments requiring
                 special handling, such as dioxin samples.


                                           B-70
-------
Figure B-13. Custody Seals and Bill of Lading
                                      WWUk^ Mvinur (^^^.*^**^^^^~
                                        jot >m*U -  U *
                Tvas xaoisno
                                                 CUSTODY SEAL
                                   Custody Seals
        j
     t
5

I
                                   Bill of Lading
                                       B-71
-------
DOT             DOT requirements apply to shipment of medium- and high-concentration
Requirements     samples, for both the interior sample containers (paint cans or similar
                 containers -- see Section B.4.1) and  the shipping containers (usually coolers -
                 - see Section B.4.1) (U.S. EPA, 1987).

                 The interior containers should be marked  with the proper DOT shipping name
                 and identification number designated in 49 CFR Part 171-177  for specific
                 sample types.  If the sample is a liquid of uncertain nature, it should be
                 marked with the name  "FLAMMABLE LIQUID, N.O.S." and identification
                 .number UN1993.  If the sample is a solid  of uncertain nature,  it should be
                 marked with the name  "FLAMMABLE SOLID, N.O.S." and identification
                 number UN1325.

                 The shipping containers (coolers) should be marked with the DOT shipping
                 name and identification number, the shipper's or consignee's name and
                 address, an arrow or label indicating "this end up" for liquid hazardous
                 materials, and the  DOT Hazard Class. These requirements are contained in the
                 following Title 49  CFR citations:

                 •   Parts 100-177 -- Shipper Requirements and Hazardous Material Table;

                 •   Parts 178-199 -- Packaging Specifications; and

                 •   Section 262.20 -- Hazardous Waste Manifest.

                 The sampling team should refer to these regulations for more detailed
                 information on DOT shipping requirements.
B.4.3
Decontamination

   Site control and decontamination are essential for maintaining health and
   safety as well as for preventing cross-contamination.  Two general methods of
   contamination control are: (1) establishing site work zones (site control), and
   (2) removing contaminants from people and equipment (decontamination).
   Decontamination  consists of either physically removing contaminants or
   changing their chemical nature to innocuous substances.  The level of
   decontamination depends on a number of factors, the most important being the
   type of contaminants involved. The more harmful the contaminant, the more
   extensive and thorough decontamination must be.
Equipment        A variety of equipment and materials are suitable for decontamination of
                  sampling and personnel protection equipment.  Decontamination equipment is
                  generally selected based on availability, ease of equipment decontamination,
                  and disposability.  Typical decontamination equipment includes: soft-bristle
                  scrub brushes or long-handle brushes to remove contaminants; water in
                  buckets or garden sprayers for rinsing;  large galvanized wash tubs, stock
                  tanks, or plastic basins to hold wash and rinse solutions; large plastic garbage
                  cans or other similar containers lined with plastic bags to store contaminated
                  clothing and equipment; metal or plastic cans or drums to temporarily store
                  contaminated liquids; and other miscellaneous gear such as paper or cloth
                  towels for drying protective clothing and equipment.
                                           B-72
-------
Method
Personnel protective equipment, sampling tools, and other equipment are
usually decontaminated by scrubbing with detergent water such as Alconox,
using a soft-bristle  brush, followed by rinsing with copious amounts of water.
Alternatively, equipment (especially large equipment) can be cleaned using a
pressure  hose or pressurized water or steam sprayer. Adhered organics may be
removed with clean tissue or rinsed with solvents, which should be collected
for disposal.  Sampling equipment is further decontaminated analogous to
cleaning  sampling containers (see  Section B.3.1). That is, sampling equipment
used for  organic samples should be rinsed with spectrographic-grade acetone,
then with spectrographic-grade methylene chloride or hexane.  The solvent
should be retained for safe disposal (IT, 1987).  Sampling equipment  used for
metal-containing samples should be rinsed with dilute nitric or hydrochloric
acid, followed by distilled water.
Location
Location of decontamination areas depends on site-specific establishment of
zones of decreasing contamination and site access control points. Essentially,
the site is divided into three zones to reduce the  migration of contaminants
from the sampling area: 1) the exclusion zone, which is the area of the site
where contamination does or could occur (including the sampling area); 2) the
contamination reduction zone, which provides a transition between
contaminated and clean zones; and 3)  the clean zone. Decontamination areas
are located at the boundary between the exclusion and contamination reduction
zones.

The size and shape of each zone (and  thus the distance  from the sampling area)
are based on site-specific conditions.  Considerable  professional judgment is
needed to assure that the distances between zone boundaries are large enough
to allow room for the necessary operations, provide  adequate distance to
prevent the spread of contaminants, and eliminate the possibility of injury due
to explosion or fire.  The criteria used for establishing area dimensions and
boundaries include (but are not limited to):
                  •  Physical and topographical site features;

                  •  Weather conditions;

                  •  Air dispersion calculations;

                  •  Contaminant toxicological characteristics; and

                  •  Dimensions of the contaminated area.
Frequency        Sampling and analysis equipment should be free of contamination before
                  reuse, either at separate sample locations or sample points within the same
                  sample location, depending on the sampling objective.  Typically, dedicated
                  sampling equipment is used on either a daily or even a project basis, reducing
                  the need for frequent decontamination.  Equipment may be disposable (such as
                  gloves) and, therefore, not require decontamination.  Some sampling teams
                  even find disposal of the sampling equipment itself (such as trowels) to be cost
                  competitive compared to adequate decontamination.
                                            B-73
-------
Cross-
Contamination
Prevention
   The most effective means of preventing cross-contamination during sampling
   and analysis activities is use of dedicated equipment for each sample location.
   If dedicated sampling equipment is not available for each sampling location, it
   should be thoroughly decontaminated between locations.  Ideally, equipment
   blanks should be taken using the decontaminated equipment after each day's
   work to verify that cross-contamination has not occurred (see Section B.5.3).
   In any case, equipment rinse blanks should be collected at least once a week.
   The QAPjP dictates the frequency of equipment blanks.  Another method of
   preventing cross contamination, if dedicated sampling equipment is not used,
   is to sample regions of lower contamination first, proceeding to progressively
   more contaminated locations.

   Still another consideration in preventing cross-contamination is the exterior
   contamination of sample containers from handling with contaminated gloves.
   As mentioned in Section B.3.2, capped  containers with samples of high
   contaminant concentration may require decontamination before packing. This
   may involve successive washes of the sample containers in detergent solution
   and deionized water.  In addition, high-concentration samples should be
   packaged as described in Section B.4.1  to lessen the chance  of cross-
   contamination.
Off-site
Disposal
   Generally, decontamination solutions and contaminated equipment must be
   manifested for disposal, and taken to a licensed hazardous waste disposer.
   Policy differs from region to region, however; off-site disposal should be
   detailed in the sampling team's SAP or HSP and approved by the RPM.

   All equipment that cannot be decontaminated and any spent decontamination
   solutions must be disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations.
   Clothing, tools, brushes, and other sampling equipment that cannot be
   decontaminated should be secured in drums or other containers, and either
   labeled and shipped offsite for disposal or held for disposal of as a part of the
   planned remedial activity.  Likewise, spent decontamination solutions should
   be transferred to drums that are labeled prior to disposal.  Clothing and other
   equipment that will be decontaminated offsite should be secured in plastic
   bags before removal from the site.
B.5
QUALITY REVIEW ACTIVITIES

    In addition to monitoring the progress of site activities, the oversight assistant
    and his/her team members are responsible for reviewing the PRP's sampling
    activities and QA/QC program.  The oversight assistant should conduct quality
    review activities distinct from the PRP's QA/QC activities. That is, the
    oversight assistant may observe the PRP's QA/QC program, including the
    collection of samples.
B.5.1
Quality Review Samples

    The samples that may be collected by the oversight assistant include blank,
    split, and replicate samples. The following sections explain the nature of each
    of these samples are, including their purpose, and discuss the general
    procedures for collecting them.
                                           B-74
-------
Trip Blanks       A trip blank consists of one or more sample bottles filled with pure,
                  uncontaminated material similar to that which is being collected for the field
                  samples.  The purpose of the trip blank is to check for the presence of sample
                  bottle or sample contamination over the course of an entire sampling event.
                  The presence of any contamination in the trip blank upon analysis may
                  invalidate the presence of the same contaminants at similar concentrations in
                  the field samples. (All available information should be considered when
                  evaluating the QA samples.)  For water sampling, the trip blank must be
                  prepared from distilled deionized water. A minimum of one set of trip blanks
                  should be collected over the time period of each sampling event.

                  The trip blank should be  prepared before commencing field activities.  The
                  oversight assistant does not collect the set of trip blanks  in the field, but
                  prepares the trip blanks prior to sampling and analysis, or, alternatively, may
                  obtain these samples from the RPM or the laboratory performing the chemical
                  analyses for the U.S. EPA.  The trip blank samples should be  brought into the
                  field with the empty sample bottles that will be used for the collection of other
                  samples.  The trip blanks are subsequently placed in a sample  cooler and
                  shipped  to the analytical laboratory with the field samples when all sampling is
                  completed. One  trip blank (two vials for volatile organics) should be prepared
                  in each of the appropriate sample containers for each analytical parameter that
                  will be analyzed.  Trip blanks do not have to be treated as blind samples
                  (samples that are not identified to the laboratory as blanks).  But there is  no
                  reason that the analytical laboratory must know which samples are or are  not
                  trip blanks.

                  As an example, a trip blank for a ground-water or surface water sample is a
                  sample bottle (or set of sample bottles) of distilled and deionized,
                  contaminant-free water, which is prepared in the laboratory and  sent out to
                  the field.  The bottle(s) stays in the field during sample collection activities
                  without  ever being opened. When sample collection is completed, the bottles
                  are returned to the laboratory for analysis as if  they were field samples. If
                  acetone is detected in the trip blank that corresponds to  the samples being
                  analyzed for volatile compounds, this would  indicate trip blank contamination
                  and possible field sample contamination.  If acetone contamination is also
                  found in the field samples at similar concentrations, the acetone results for the
                  field samples would not be used, as the presence of acetone may be due to
                  contamination either from the laboratory or from the sample container  itself
                  (U.S. EPA, 1985c).

                  Trip blanks are not  commonly used for soil, sludge, or sediment samples due
                  to the difficulties of obtaining clean material that is nearly identical in
                  composition to the sampled soil, sludge, or sediment. Sometimes a distilled,
                  deionized water sample is used as a trip blank for these media. Other times a
                  background sample  (see Section B.5.1), previously shown to be contaminant-
                  free, may be relied on for information on possible field  or laboratory
                  contamination (NUS Corporation, 1987; U.S. EPA, 1986a).


Field Blanks      A field blank is similar to a trip blank except that it is prepared in the  field
                  during the course of field activities, rather than in the laboratory prior to field
                  activities. The number of field blanks prepared will depend upon the
                  conditions at the site. Typically, a field blank is collected on each day of
                  sampling activity. Field blanks are used to assess whether contamination  has
                  been introduced  to the samples during the field sample collection and handling
                  activities. Like trip blanks, the presence of any contamination in the field
                                            B-75
-------
                 blank invalidates the presence of the same contaminants at similar
                 concentrations in the associated field samples.

                 To prepare a field  blank, the oversight assistant should carry a container of
                 contaminant-free material similar to that being sampled to one of the sampling
                 locations being used on that specific day, and transfer this material into sample
                 bottles of the same  types and from the same lot numbers as those being used to
                 collect field samples.  Once prepared, the sample should be placed in one of
                 the sample coolers  and treated the same as the field samples. One set of field
                 blanks should be prepared in the appropriate sample containers for  each
                 analytical parameter that will be analyzed.

                 Like trip blanks, field blanks are not commonly used for soil, sludge, or
                 sediment samples due to the difficulties of obtaining clean material that  is
                 nearly identical  in  composition. In some cases, a distilled, deionized water
                 sample is used for  a field blank for these media. In other cases, a background
                 sample, previously shown to be contaminant-free, may be  relied on for
                 information on possible field or laboratory contamination (NUS Corporation,
                 1987; U.S.  EPA, 1986a).


Equipment       An equipment blank is similar to a field blank except that the material
Blank            collected in the blank bottles is transferred with decontaminated sampling
                 equipment of the type to be used to collect the field samples.  The number of
                 equipment blanks to be collected depends on the types of field equipment and
                 decontamination procedures being used. Typically, one equipment  blank is
                 collected for each batch of decontaminated equipment.  Equipment blanks are
                 used to determine  whether  contamination has been introduced to the field
                 samples during their contact with the sampling equipment, which may have
                 been inadequately  decontaminated.  The presence of any contamination in the
                 equipment blank may invalidate the presence of the same contaminants at
                 similar concentrations in the associated field samples. (All information should
                 be considered when evaluating QA samples.)

                 The oversight assistant usually collects equipment blanks at the equipment
                 staging area or field trailer/operations center, but these samples  may also be
                 collected in the  field.  An equipment blank for water samples is collected by
                 running distilled, deionized, contaminant-free water over or through pumps,
                 samplers, or other  equipment that is used in the field and which may come in
                 direct contact with the field samples.  An equipment blank for soil  samples
                 may consist of a sample of contaminant-free soil, introduced to  the sample
                 bottle with the appropriate sampling equipment. More commonly, distilled,
                 deionized water is  used as the sample media for solid as well as liquid samples.
                 Like trip and field  blanks,  one set of equipment blanks should be prepared in
                 the appropriate sample containers for each analytical parameter to be analyzed.
                 Once collected,  the equipment blank(s) should  be  treated as field samples (U.S.
                 EPA, 1986a).


Background      The oversight assistant may collect background samples to characterize the
Sample          innate level of suspected contaminants at the site (the level of contaminants
                 not directly associated with the site and its contamination). The oversight
                 assistant should  collect (or split with the PRP)  background samples  in an
                 uncontaminated area upstream, upgradient, or upwind at a sufficient distance
                 from the area being sampled so that contamination from the same source is
                 unlikely.  Background samples may be collected prior or during  the collection
                                           B-76
-------
                  of other field samples.  The oversight assistant should collect the background
                  samples using the same media-specific and general techniques and equipment
                  as used to collect other field samples (see Section B.2).  Once collected, the
                  background samples should be treated as field samples.

                  If the background sample also will serve as a  source for blank material, the
                  background material should be as nearly identical in  physical characteristics to
                  the material to be sampled as is possible.  In this case, the background sample
                  material must also be analyzed prior to use as a source of blank material to
                  determine whether it is contaminant-free.


Split Samples     The sampling team, along with the oversight assistant, may collect split
                  samples to compare the analytical results from the PRP's  laboratory with those
                  from the EPA laboratory.  Split samples are identical samples that are collected
                  at a single place and time, and, as necessary, divided into two or more
                  portions. Split samples may be collected for one analyte, for a group of
                  analytes, or for all analytes that are being quantified.  The number of split
                  samples to be collected is determined by the RPM, and usually is a percentage
                  of all samples collected by the PRPs (see Section B.5.3).

                  Most samples collected by the oversight assistant/sampling team will be split
                  samples because field samples collected by the oversight assistant/sampling
                  team (with the exception of those discussed in Section B.5.1) are primarily
                  used to check or verify the results of the PRP- analyzed samples. Samples
                  may also be split to compare the analytical  results of different laboratory
                  techniques or methods to determine whether the different techniques or
                  methods are generally equivalent.

                  Typically, split samples are collected by the sampling team, at the request of
                  the oversight  assistant.  The sample for the oversight assistant is collected into
                  an appropriate container or containers provided by the oversight assistant, and
                  then relinquished to the oversight assistant. Split samples are not always
                  placed in identical sample containers for use by both the  oversight assistant
                  and the PRP due to the possibility of differing quantity requirements of the
                  analytical laboratories or different sources of bottles.

                  It is difficult  to accurately split a heterogeneous sample such as a soil sample.
                  Ideally, the sampling team or oversight assistant should distribute the sample as
                  it is collected from the sampler equally between the split sample bottles, filling
                  the sample container for one  analyte at a time.  If the sample collection device
                  contains only sufficient sample to fill one sample bottle for one analyte, an
                  equal portion of the sample should be placed  in each of the split sample
                  bottles.  Additional sample should then be collected to fill the bottles.


Replicate         The sampling team along with the oversight assistant may collect replicate
Samples          samples to compare the analytical precision or variability of the analytical
                  laboratory. Replicate samples are two or more samples collected at the same
                  time, in the same location, with  the same equipment, and deposited in
                  identical sample  bottles. These samples  will then be  analyzed by the same
                  laboratory to  determine the laboratory's precision.  Like split samples, replicate
                  samples may be collected for one analyte, a group of analytes, or for all
                  analytes that are being quantified at the site.  The number of replicate samples
                  to be collected is determined by  the RPM (see Section B.5.3).  For the same
                                            B-77
-------
                  reasons that replicate field samples are collected, a percentage of blank
                  samples may also be collected in replicate.

                  The oversight assistant should collect the samples with the same media-specific
                  techniques described in Section B.2.  Replicate samples should  be collected in
                  the appropriate quantities and in appropriate sample containers for each
                  analytical parameter to be evaluated.

                  The sampling team or oversight assistant should distribute the replicate sample
                  in the same manner as that described above for split samples.

                  Replicate samples,  due to their use as an evaluation of laboratory precision,
                  must be provided to the  laboratory as blind samples.  That is, the laboratory
                  must not know that they are replicates (NUS Corporation, 1987,  U.S. EPA,
                  1986a, 1987a).


Field Samples     Field samples may  be collected by the oversight assistant  in addition to those
                  collected by the PRP sampling team. These samples may be collected  in
                  locations other than those sampled by the PRP sampling team.  One reason for
                  collecting these field samples would be to provide information  about suspected
                  contamination at a  location  other than where the PRPs are sampling.  The
                  oversight assistant should collect the samples with the same media-specific
                  techniques described in Section B.2.


B.6           DOCUMENTATION OF SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES

                  The oversight assistant is responsible for the documentation of field activities.
                  Recordkeeping practices should include documenting the day's activities in  a
                  field logbook or on the field activity report as  well as maintaining a
                  photographic  or video record of events.  In addition,  documentation»may be
                  used during litigation to verify the quality of the data collected.  Therefore, it
                  is essential that the oversight team keep detailed  records of field activities, and
                  thoroughly review  all notes to verify that they  are accurate before leaving the
                  site.


B.6.1          Oversight Team Field Activity Report/Logbook

                  The oversight team field activity report and logbook  provide daily  records of
                  significant events,  observations, and  measurements during field oversight.  The
                  field activity  report and field logbook should provide sufficient data and
                  observations to enable the oversight team to reconstruct events that occurred
                  during sampling and analysis and to refresh the memory of oversight assistants
                  if called upon to give testimony during legal proceedings. Because oversight
                  field records (if referred to and admitted as evidence in a legal proceeding) are
                  subject to cross examination, checklist and logbook entries should be factual,
                  detailed, and  objective.

                  Field activities may be recorded in either a field logbook or on the field
                  activity report. The advantage of the field activity report is a  consistent
                  method of documentation for all sampling and analysis activities. If the
                  oversight assistant chooses,  the field activity report may be used to augment or
                  complement the field logbook.
                                            B-78
-------
The field activity report is a tool that has been developed specifically to assist
the oversight assistant in the field.  This report is in a checklist format, which
is structured to remind the oversight assistant of the critical elements of the
sampling and analysis activities while also providing a convenient means for
documenting the field activities.  The field activity report is used in
conjunction with the SAP as a tool for reminding the oversight assistant of the
specific planned activities, and for keeping a record of any activities that are
not conducted according to  the plans or that the oversight assistant considers
noteworthy.

The field activity report consists of six sections including:

•   Cover sheet;

•   Initial activities;

•   Media-specific sampling activities;

•   Common sampling activities;

•   Post-sampling activities; and

•   Sampling QA/QC.

The field activity report cover sheet provides a format for documenting facts
concerning the general types of  activities planned for the day, the personnel
present onsite, the general conditions at the site (such as weather) and any
changes in the plans for that particular day.  A separate cover sheet is filled
out for each day.

The initial activities section of the  report provides a checklist of activities that
the oversight assistant can use before arriving at the site to prepare for field
oversight.  This section also outlines preliminary activities that the oversight
assistant should conduct at the site before sample collection. The media-
specific sampling activities section is divided  into nine different sampling
media, so the oversight assistant can use only  the specific subsection(s) that
he/she is interested  in. Each subsection provides the oversight assistant with
an outline of the key elements of that medium.  The section on common
sampling activities describes those activities that occur during sample
collection, including: sample containers, labels and tags, preservation and
handling methods, and recordkeeping requirements. The section on post-
sampling activities  includes sample packaging and shipping, and
decontamination procedures.  The final section included in the checklist
outlines  the key elements of QA/QC sampling, which includes collecting the
oversight quality review samples as well as observing the  PRP's QA/QC
program. Appendix B has been developed to correspond  to the field activity
report and discusses the elements of the checklist in a manner that will assist
personnel in conducting oversight activities.

The field activity report is structured so that individual sections can stand
alone and the oversight assistant can select the sections he is concerned with
for a  particular trip or day onsite.  For  example, if the only sampling planned
for a  trip is ground-water and surface water sampling, the oversight assistant
can obtain the relevant information on ground water and surface water from
the SAP, remove the ground-water and surface water sampling sections from
the field activity report, and bring only those sections to  the field. The


                           B-79
-------
                 sections on common sampling activities and post sampling activities are needed
                 in the field most of the time since they cover a broad range of daily sampling
                 and post-sampling activities.

                 The oversight assistant may choose to use separate copies of some of the
                 individual media checklists (perhaps one for each sampling source) depending
                 on the nature of the sampling.  For example, if surface water sampling is
                 planned for two different bodies of water (i.e., a lake and a stream), the
                 oversight assistant might use a separate checklist for each  body of water.
                 Similarly, the oversight assistant may use a separate copy of the sludge/slurry
                 checklist for sampling different lagoons or impoundments, and a separate copy
                 of the soil checklist for sampling gardens and yards at private residences.  It
                 probably is not practical, however, to use a separate ground-water checklist
                 for each monitoring well, as  the number of wells sampled in 1 day is probably
                 not more  than five to eight (which should not be too cumbersome for  the space
                 on the checklist).  The checklists are designed to be a flexible  tool for the
                 oversight assistant allowing for as much or as little use as required to best
                 serve the  site-specific situation.

                 The oversight assistant should transfer important information from  the SAP to
                 the field activity report form (using  the "comments" space) before leaving for
                 the site.  The assistant should then use the  form to compare the planned
                 activities or expected conditions with the actual events in  the field (using the
                 "Consistent With Plan" space) while at the site.  Activity reports should
                 subsequently be summarized into a progress report for RPM review (see
                 Section B.I.3). In addition, copies of the logbook or the field activity report
                 should be made available for RPM review.
B.6.2         Oversight Team Photographic/Video Log
                  The oversight team should document some of the more critical field activities
                  with a photographic or video camera.  If a Polaroid camera is used for this
                  purpose, the photographed activity, location, date, and time should be
                  recorded directly on the photograph.  If film must be sent out for development
                  (or if videotape is used), the pertinent information should be recorded in the
                  field logbook by exposure number, preferably in the order the pictures were
                  taken. Because a camera exposure number may not exactly correspond with
                  the film exposure, maintaining a separate sequential  photograph log as part of
                  the field logbook may help prevent confusion when matching the photograph
                  to the appropriate activity.  Developed photographs should be maintained  in an
                  album to prevent damage and  preserve photographic quality. In addition,
                  photographs should be arranged in sequential order, or grouped by sampling or
                  analysis activity.
                                           B-80
-------
FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT

COVER SHEET

Site Name:                                                                Date:


Location:


Oversight Personnel:
PRP Field
Personnel:
Weather Conditions:
Planned Activities:
Approved Changes in Work Plan:




Important Communications:




Hours Oversight Official and Staff On-site:


Oversight Official's Initials:
                                         B-81
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:
                                                               Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
                               B.I  INITIAL ACTIVITIES

B.I.I PREPARATION


1.  Review Field Sampling Plan for:

  a. Sample media

  b. Location and number of samples

  c. Sampling methods and equipment

  d. Field personnel responsibilities/
     qualifications


2. Health and Safety Requirements

  a. Review health and safety plans
     (PRPs and oversight officials)

  b. Review health and safety
     standard operating procedures
   c.  Review exposure limits/
      action levels

   d.  Protective gear

   e.  Other considerations
NOTES:
                                          B-82
-------
NOTES:
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials: _
                                                                 Page #
           of
                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)
Comments
3. Oversight Equipment

(Bring the following)

  a.  Oversight checklists

  b.  Field logbook

  c.  Camera

  d.  Sampling equipment (for
      splits/duplicates)

  e.  Protective gear

  f.  Other


4. Coordination with:

  a.  PRPs

  b.  Sampling contractors

  c.  State or local environmental
      authorities (if appropriate)

  d.  Laboratory (if appropriate)

  e.  EPA (if appropriate)
                                           B-83
-------
                                                              Date: 	
                                                              Site Name:
                                                              Initials:
                                                              Page #	of

                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                           (Y/N)                  Comments
B.I.2    PRELIMINARY ON-SITE ACTIVITIES


1. Review Personnel Qualifications

  a.  Field personnel qualifications             _
2. Record Location and Number
  of Samples

  a. Sampling locations

  b. Number of samples

  c. Other considerations


3. Record Sample Equipment

  a. Sample Equipment

  b. Appropriate equipment

  c. Other considerations


4. Record Decontamination Area/
  Clean Area

  a. Decontamination area

     Physical location

     Proximity to sampling
     locations

NOTES:
                                         B-84
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:
                                                               Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
     Number of
     decontamination areas

  b. Clean area

     Physical location

     Proximity to sampling
     locations

     Number of clean areas


5. Tour of Site


6. Equipment Calibration

Field analytical  equipment
calibrated (see Appendix A3
Field Analytical Techniques


7. Other
NOTES:
                                          B-85
-------
NOTES:
                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                                             Date:  	
                                                             Site Name:
                                                             Initials: _
                                                             Page #	
of
                                                                 Comments
                                   B.2 SAMPLING
B.2.1    SURFACE WATER
1. General Site Conditions
2. General Surface Water
     Conditions
3. Sampling Locations

  a. Water (depths)

  b. Sediment

  c. Biota


4. Sample Equipment


5. Sample Type

  a. Grab

  b. Composite or continuous


6. Sample Technique
                                         B-86
-------
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials: _
                                                                 Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                  Comments
7. Field Analytical Techniques

   a.  Equipment

   b.  Calibration of equipment

      Standardized calibration
      procedures

      Calibrated before use

      Label/log certifying
      calibration

   c.  Operation

   d.  Decontamination

   e.  Recording/reporting

      Instrument hard-copy output

      Logbook

      Duplicate verification

   f.  Action level  response
NOTES:
                                           B-87
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                   Comments
8. Containers

  a. Container type (clear glass,
     amber glass, plastic)

  b. Container size (volume)

  c. Container condition
     (new, decontaminated before use)
9. Labels/Tags

   a.  Labeling procedure

   b.  Labeling information


10.Decontamination

   a.  Equipment

   b.  Method

   c.  Location

      Proximity to surface water

      Proximity to population
NOTES:
                                           B-88
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:
                                                               Page #	of

                                         Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                           (Y/N)                  Comments
  d. Frequency

     Sampling team

     -  Sampling equipment

     -  Protective clothing

     Oversight team

     -  Sampling equipment

     -  Protective clothing

  e. Cross contamination prevention

  f. On-site waste storage

     Sampling team

     Oversight team

  g. Off-site disposal

     RCRA/State requirements

     DOT requirements
NOTES:
                                          B-89
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of
                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                  Comments
11.   Preservation/Handing
  a. Sample filtering
  b. Sample preservation
  c. Sample storage
     Refrigeration/ice
     Protection from light

12.   Recordkeeping
  a. Chain-of-Custody information
     (see Post-sampling Activities)
  b. Sampling team field record
     Method
     Photographs
  c. Oversight team checklist/logbook
     Checklists
     Logbook
     Possession
NOTES:
                                           B-90
-------
                                                                Date:  	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  d. Oversight team photographs

     Subject/activity

     Labeling

     Possession
     (photographs and negatives)


13. Other considerations
NOTES:
                                           B-91
-------
                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                           (Y/N)
                                                              Date:  	
                                                              Site Name:
                                                              Initials:  	
                                                              Page #	
           of
Comments
                                   B.2  SAMPLING
B.2.2    GROUND WATER


1. General Site Conditions


2. General Ground-water
     Conditions

  a. Depth to water table

  b. Direction/velocity of flow


3. Well Location/Condition


4. Sampling Equipment

  a. Ground water

  b. Vapor


5. Sample Type

  a. Grab

  b. Composite or continuous
NOTES:
                                         B-92
-------
                                                                 Date: 	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials:  _
                                                                 Page *
           of
                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)
Comments
6. Sampling Technique

  a. Purge volume/well volumes

  b. Purge disposal

  c. Collection technique


7. Field Analytical Techniques

  a. Equipment

  b. Calibration of equipment

     Standardized calibration
     procedures

     Calibrated before use

     Label/log certifying
     calibration

  c. Operation

     Duplicate verification

  d. Decontamination

  e. Recording/reporting

     Instrument hard-copy output

     Logbook

  f. Action level response

NOTES:
                                           B-93
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page *	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                   Comments
8. Containers

  a. Container type (clear glass,
         amber glass,  plastic)

  b. Container size (volume)

  c. Container condition
     (new, decontaminated before use)
9. Label/Tags

   a. Labeling procedure

   b. Labeling information


10. Decontamination

   a. Equipment

   b. Method

   c. Location

     Proximity to surface water

     Proximity to population
NOTES:
                                           B-94
-------
                                                              Date:  	
                                                              Site Name:
                                                              Initials: _
                                                              Page #	of
                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                           (Y/N)                  Comments
  d. Frequency
     Sampling team
     -  Sampling equipment
        Protective clothing
     Oversight team
     - , Sampling equipment
     -  Protective clothing
  e. Cross contamination prevention
  f. On-site waste storage
     Sampling team
     Oversight team
  g. Off-site disposal
     RCRA/State requirement
     DOT requirements
NOTES:
                                         B-95
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:  _
                                                                Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                  Comments
11. Preservation/Handling

   a.  Sample filtering

   b.  Sample preservation

   c.  Sample storage

     Refrigeration/ice

     Protection from light


12. Recordkeeping

   a.  Chain-of-custody information
     (see Post-sampling Activities)

   b. Sampling team field record

     Method

     Photographs

   c.  Oversight team field record

     Checklists

     Logbook

     Possession
NOTES:
                                           B-96
-------
                                                                Date:  	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials: _
                                                                Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  d. Oversight team photographs

     Subject/activity

     Labeling

     Possession
     (photographs and negatives)


13.  Other Considerations
NOTES:
                                           B-97
-------
                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                           (Y/N)
                                                              Date:  	
                                                              Site Name:
                                                              Initials:  	
                                                              Page #	
           of
Comments
                                   B.2  SAMPLING
B.2.3 SOIL WATER


1. General Site Conditions


2. General Soil Conditions & Types


3. Sampling Locations


4. Sampling Equipment


5. Sample Type

  a. Grab

  b. Composite


6. Sampling Technique


7. Field Analytical Techniques

  a. Equipment

  b. Calibration of equipment

     Standard calibration
     procedures

NOTES:
                                         B-98
-------
                                                                 Date: 	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials:  _
                                                                 Page*
           of
                                            Consistent
                                            with Plan
                                             (Y/N)
Comments
      Calibrated before use

      Label/log certifying
      calibration

   c.  Operation

   d.  Decontamination

   e.  Recording/reporting

      Instrument hard-copy output

      Logbook

      Duplicate verification

   f.  Action level response


8. Containers

   a.  Container type (clear glass,
      amber glass, plastic)

   b.  Container size (volume)

   c.  Container condition
      (new, decontaminated before use)


9. Labels/Tags

   a.  Labeling procedure

   b.  Labeling information

NOTES:
                                           B-99
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:  _
                                                               Page *	
           of
                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)
Comments
10. Decontamination
   a. Equipment
   b. Method
(   c. Location
     Proximity to surface water
     Proximity to population
   d. Frequency
     Sampling team
     -   Sampling equipment
     -   Protective clothing
     Oversight team
     -   Sampling equipment
         Protective clothing
   e. Cross contamination prevention
   f. On-site waste storage
     Sampling team
     Oversight team
NOTES:
                                          B-100
-------
                                                                Date:  	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  g. Off-site disposal

     RCRA/State requirements

     DOT requirements


11.  Preservation/Handling

  a. Sample filtering

  b. Sample preservation

  c. Sample storage

     Refrigeration/ice

     Protection from light


12.  Recordkeeping

  a. Chain-of-custody information
     (see Post-sampling Activities)

  b. Sampling team field record

     Method

     Photographs

  c. Oversight team field record

     Checklists

     Logbook

NOTES:
                                          B-101
-------
                                                                Date:  	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
     Possession

  d. Oversight team photographs

     Subject/activity

     Labeling

     Possession
     (photographs and negatives)

     Maintenance of negatives


13.  Other Considerations
NOTES:
                                          B-102
-------
                                                             Date: 	
                                                             Site Name:
                                                             Initials: _
                                                             Page #	of

                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                           (Y/N)                 Comments
                                   B.2 SAMPLING
               o

B.2.4 SURFACE SOIL


1. General Site Conditions


2. General Vegetation Conditions


3. General Soil Conditions & Types


4. Sampling Locations


5. Sampling Equipment


6. Sample Type

  a. Grab

  b. Composite


7. Sampling Technique
NOTES:
                                        B-103
-------
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials:
                                                                 Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                  Comments
8. Field Analytical Techniques

   a.  Equipment

   b.  Calibration of equipment

      Standardized calibration
      procedures

      Calibrated before use

      Label/log certifying
      calibration

   c.  Operation

   d.  Decontamination

   e.  Recording/reporting

      Instrument hard-copy output

      Logbook

      Duplicate verification

   f.  Action level response
 NOTES:
                                           B-104
-------
                                                                Date:  	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page *	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
9. Containers

  a. Container type (clear glass,
     amber glass, plastic)

  b. Container size (volume)

  c. Container condition
     (new, decontaminated before use)
10. Labels/Tags

   a. Labeling procedure

   b. Labeling information


11. Decontamination

   a. Equipment

   b. Method

   c. Location

     Proximity to surface water

     Proximity to population

   d. Frequency

     Sampling team

     -   Sampling equipment



NOTES:
                                          B-10S
-------
                                                                Date:  	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of
                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
     -  Protective clothing
     Oversight team
     -  Sampling equipment
     -  Protective clothing
  e.  Cross contamination prevention
  f.  On-site waste storage
     Sampling team
     Oversight team
  g.  Off-site disposal
     RCRA/State requirements
     DOT requirements

12. Preservation/Handling
  a.  Sample  filtering
  b.  Sample  preservation
  c.  Sample  storage
     Refrigeration/ice
     Protection from light

NOTES:
                                          B-106
-------
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials:
                                                                 Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                   Comments
13. Recordkeeping

   a.  Chain-of-custody information
     (see Post-sampling Activities)

   b. Sampling team field record

     Method

     Photographs

   c.  Oversight team field record

     Checklists

     Logbook

     Possession

   d. Oversight team photographs

     Subject/activity

     Labeling

     Possession
     (photographs and negatives)

     Maintenance of negatives


14. Other Considerations
NOTES:
                                          B-107
-------
                                        Consistent
                                        with Plan
                                          (Y/N)
                                                            Date: 	
                                                            Site Name:
                                                            Initials: _
                                                            Page #	
          of
Comments
                                   B.2  SAMPLING
B.2.5 SUBSURFACE SOIL


1. General Site Conditions


2. General Vegetation Conditions


3. General Soil Conditions & Types


4. Sampling Locations


5. Sampling Equipment


6. Sample Type

  a. Grab

  b. Composite


7. Sampling Technique
NOTES:
                                        B-108
-------
                                                                 Date: 	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials:  _
                                                                 Page #	
           of
                                           Consistent
                                            with Plan
                                             (Y/N)
Comments
8. Field Analytical Techniques

   a.  Equipment

   b.  Calibration of equipment

      Standardized calibration
      procedures

      Calibrated before use

      Label/log certifying
      calibration

   c.  Operation

   d.  Decontamination

   e.  Recording/reporting

      Instrument hard-copy output

      Logbook

      Duplicate verification

   f.  Action level response


9. Containers

   a.  Container type (clear glass,
      amber glass, plastic)

   b.  Container size (volume)


NOTES:
                                           B-109
-------
                                                               Date:  	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:
                                                               Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  c. Container condition
     (new, decontaminated before use)
10. Labels/Tags

  a.  Labeling procedure

  b.  Labeling information


11. Decontamination

  a.  Equipment

  b.  Method

  c.  Location

     Proximity to surface water

     Proximity to population

  d.  Frequency

     Sampling team

     -   Sampling equipment

         Protective clothing
NOTES:
                                         B-110
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials: _
                                                               Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  e. Cross contamination prevention

  f. On-site waste storage

     Sampling team

     Oversight team

  g. Off-site disposal

     RCRA/State requirements

     DOT requirements


12.  Preservation/Handling

  a. Sample filtering

  b. Sample preservation

  c. Sample storage

     Refrigeration/ice

     Protection from light
NOTES:
                                          B-lll
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                   Comments
13. Recordkeeping

   a.  Chain-of-custody information
     (see Post-sampling Activities)

   b. Sampling team field record

     Method

     Photographs

   c.  Oversight team field record

     Checklists

     Logbook

     Possession

   d. Oversight team photographs

     Subject/activity

     Labeling

     Possession
     (photographs and negatives)

     Maintenance of negatives


14. Other Considerations
NOTES:
                                          B-112
-------
                                         Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                           (Y/N)
                                                              Date: 	
                                                              Site Name:
                                                              Initials: _
                                                              Page #	
           of
Comments
                                    B.2 SAMPLING
B.2.6 SOIL VAPOR


1. General Site Conditions


2. General Soil Conditions & Types


3. Sampling Locations


4. Sampling Equipment


5. Sample Type

  a. Grab


6. Sampling Technique


7. Field Analytical Techniques

  a. Equipment

  b. Calibration of equipment

     Standardized calibration
     procedures

     Calibrated before use

NOTES:
                                         B-113
-------
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials: _
                                                                 Page *
           of
                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)
Comments
     Label/log certifying
     calibration

  c. Operation

  d. Decontamination

  e. Recording/reporting

     Instrument hard-copy output

     Logbook

     Duplicate verification

  f. Action level response


8. Containers

  a. Container type (clear glass,
     amber glass, plastic)

  b. Container size (volume)

  c. Container condition
     (new, decontaminated before use)


9. Labels/Tags

  a. Labeling procedure

  b. Labeling information
NOTES:
                                           B-114
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials: 	
                                                               Page #	of
                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
10. Decontamination
   a.  Equipment
   b. Method
   c.  Location
     Proximity to surface water
     Proximity to population
   d. Frequency
     Sampling team
     -   Sampling equipment
     -   Protective clothing
   e.  Cross contamination prevention
   f.  On-site waste storage
     Sampling team
     Oversight team
NOTES:
                                         B-115
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of
                                          Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  g. Off-site disposal
     RCRA/State requirements
     DOT requirements

11.  Preservation/Handling
  a. Sample filtering
     Refrigeration/ice
     Protection from light

12.  Recordkeeping
  a. Chain-of-custody information
     (see Post-sampling Activities)
  b. Sampling team field record
     Method
     Photographs
  c. Oversight team field record
     Checklists
     Logbook
     Possession

NOTES:
                                          B-116
-------
                                                                Date:  	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials: _
                                                                Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  d. Oversight team photographs

     Subject/activity

     Labeling

     Possession
     (photographs and negatives)


13.  Other Considerations
NOTES:
                                          B-117
-------
NOTES:
                                                              Date:  	
                                                              Site Name:
                                                              Initials:  _
                                                              Page #	
           of
                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                           (Y/N)
Comments
B.2.7 SLUDGE/SLURRY
                                   B.2  SAMPLING
1. General Site Conditions
2. General Soil Conditions
     & Types

3. Sampling Locations
4. Sampling Equipment
5. Sample Type

  a. Grab
6. Sampling Technique


7. Field Analytical Techniques

   a. Equipment

   b. Calibration of equipment

     Standardized calibration
     procedures
                                         B-118
-------
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials:  _
                                                                 Page #	
           of
                                           Consistent
                                            with Plan
                                             (Y/N)
Comments
     Calibrated before use

     Label/log certifying
     calibration

  c. Operation

  d. Decontamination

  e. Recording/reporting

     Instrument hard-copy output

     Logbook

     Duplicate verification

  f. Action level response


8. Containers

  a. Container type (clear glass,
     amber glass, plastic)

  b. Container size (volume)

  c. Container condition
     (new, decontaminated before use)
NOTES:
                                           B-119
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials: _
                                                               Page #	
           of
                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)
Comments
9. Labels/Tags
  a. Labeling procedure
  b. Labeling information

10.  Decontamination
  a. Equipment
  b. Method
  c. Location
     Proximity to surface water
     Proximity to population
  d. Frequency
     Sampling team
     -   Sampling equipment
     -   Protective  clothing
  e. Cross contamination prevention
 NOTES:
                                          B-120
-------
                                                                Date:  	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:  _
                                                                Page #	of
                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  f.  On-site waste storage
     Sampling team
     Oversight team
  g.  Off-site disposal
     RCRA/State requirements
     DOT requirements
11. Preservation/Handling
  a.  Sample filtering
  b.  Sample preservation
  c.  Sample storage
     Refrigeration/ice
     Protection from
     light
12. Recordkeeping
  a.  Chain-of-custody information
     (see Post-sampling Activities)
  b. Sampling team field record
     Method

NOTES:
                                          B-121
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                   Comments
     Photographs

  c. Oversight team field record

     Checklists

     Bound logbook

     Possession

  d. Oversight team photographs

     Subject/activity

     Labeling

     Possession

     (photographs and negatives)


13.  Other Considerations
NOTES:
                                          B-122
-------
                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                           (Y/N)
                                                             Date: 	
                                                             Site Name:
                                                             Initials: _
                                                             Page #	
           of
Comments
                                   B.2  SAMPLING
B.2.8 CONTAINERIZED WASTE


1. General Site Conditions


2. General Description of Containers


3. Sampling Equipment


4. Sample Type

  a. Grab

  b. Composite


5. Sampling Technique


6. Field Analytical Techniques

  a. Equipment

  b. Calibration of equipment

     Standardized calibration
     procedures

     Calibrated before use
NOTES:
                                        B-123
-------
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials: _
                                                                 Page *
           of
                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)
Comments
     Label/log certifying
     calibration

  c. Operation

  d. Decontamination

  e. Recording/reporting

     Instrument hard-copy output

     Logbook

     Duplicate verification

  f. Action level response


7. Containers

  a. Container type (clear glass,
     amber glass, plastic)

  b. Container size (volume)

  c. Container condition
     (new, decontaminated before use)


8. Labels/Tags

  a. Labeling procedure

  b. Labeling information
NOTES:
                                           B-124
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials: _
                                                               Page *	of
                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
9. Decontamination
  a. Equipment
  b. Method
  c. Location
     Proximity to surface water
     Proximity to population
  d. Frequency
     Sampling team
     -   Sampling equipment
     -   Protective clothing
  e. Cross contamination prevention
  f. On-site waste storage
     Sampling team
     Oversight team
NOTES:
                                         B-125
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  g. Off-site disposal

     RCRA/State requirements

     DOT requirements


10.  Preservation/Handling

  a. Sample filtering

  b. Sample preservation

  c. Sample storage

     Refrigeration/ice

     Protection from light


11.  Recordkeeping

  a. Chain-of-custody information
     (see Post-sampling Activities)

  b. Sampling team field record

     Method

     Photographs

  c. Oversight team field record

     Checklists

     Logbook

NOTES:
                                          B-126
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                  Comments
     Possession

  d. Oversight team photographs

     Subject/activity

     Labeling

     Possession
     (photographs and negatives)


12. Other Considerations
NOTES:
                                          B-127
-------
                                         Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                           (Y/N)
                                                              Date: 	
                                                              Site Name:
                                                              Initials: _
                                                              Page #	
           of
Comments
                                    B.2 SAMPLING
B.2.9 AMBIENT AIR


1. General Site Conditions


2. General Background Conditions


3. Sampling Locations


4. Sampling Equipment


5. Sample Type

  a. Grab

  b. Composite or continuous


6. Sampling Technique


7. Field Analytical Techniques

  a. Equipment

  b. Calibration of equipment

     Standardized calibration
     procedures

NOTES:
                                         B-128
-------
                                                                 Date: 	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials: _
                                                                 Page #	
           of
                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)
Comments
     Calibrated before use

     Label/log certifying
     calibration

  c. Operation

  d. Decontamination

  e. Recording/reporting

     Instrument hard-copy output

     Logbook

     Duplicate verification

  f. Action level response


8. Containers

  a. Container type (clear glass,
     amber glass, plastic)

  b. Container size (volume)

  c. Container condition
     (new, decontaminated before use)
NOTES:
                                           B-129
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:  _
                                                               Page *	
           of
                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)
Comments
9. Labels/Tags

  a. Labeling procedure

  b. Labeling information


10.  Decontamination

  a. Equipment

  b. Method

  c. Location

     Proximity to surface water

     Proximity to population

  d. Frequency

     Sampling team

     -   Sampling equipment

         Protective  clothing

     Oversight team

     -   Sampling equipment

         Protective  clothing

  e. Cross contamination prevention
NOTES:
                                          B-130
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:  _
                                                                Page *
           of
                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)
Comments
  f. On-site waste storage

     Sampling team

     Oversight team

  g. Off-site disposal

     RCRA/State requirements

     DOT requirements


11.  Preservation/Handling

  a. Sample filtering

  b. Sample preservation

  c. Sample storage

     Refrigeration/ice

     Protection from light


12.  Recordkeeping

  a. Chain-of-custody information
     (see Post-sampling Activities)

  b. Sampling team field record

     Method

     Photographs

NOTES:
                                          B-131
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of
                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  c.  Oversight team field record
     Checklists
     Logbook
     Possession
  d. Oversight team photographs
     Subject/activity
     Labeling
     Possession
     (photographs and negatives)

13. Other Considerations
NOTES:
                                           B-132
-------
                                                             Date: 	
                                                             Site Name:
                                                             Initials: _
                                                             Page #	of

                                        Consistent
                                        with Plan
                                          (Y/N)                  Comments
                          B.3  POST-SAMPLING ACTIVITIES


B.3.1    PACKAGING


1. Methods


2. Materials


3. Other Prescribed Specifications
B.3.2    SHIPPING/CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY

  a. Timely shipping

  b. Number of copies of
     chain-of-custody form to
     laboratory

  c. Custody seals

     Sample containers

     Shipping container

  d. Bill of lading

  e. Notification of shipment to
     laboratory

  f. DOT requirements


NOTES:
                                        B-133
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:
                                                               Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                   Comments
                                      B.4  QA/QC


B.4.1    SAMPLING QUALITY REVIEW
1. Calibration (see Appendix A3,
  Field Analytical Technique)
2. Trip Blanks

  a. Location

  b. Sampling procedure (see
     appropriate sampling section)


3. Field Blanks

  a. Location

  b. Sampling procedure (see
     appropriate sampling section)


4. Background Sample

  a. Location

  b. Sampling procedure (see
     appropriate sampling section)
NOTES:
                                          B-134
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:  _
                                                                Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                   Comments
5. Split Samples

  a. Location

  b. Sampling procedure (see
     appropriate sampling section)


6. Duplicate Samples

  a. Location

  b. Sampling procedure (see
     appropriate sampling section)
NOTES:
                                          B-135
-------
                                     APPENDIX B

                                     REFERENCES


Camp, Dresser, and McK.ee, undated, Basic Health and Safety Training Course Manual,
      CDM150.4

Federal Register, 1984, 40CFR Part 136 Vol 49, No. 209, October 26.

IT Corporation, 1987, Manual of Sampling and Analytical Methods  for Petroleum Hydrocarbons
      in Groundwater and Soil.

NUS Corporation, 1987, Hazardous Materials Handling Training Manual, NUS Corporation,
      Waste Management Services Group.

Planning Research Corporation, 1986, Protocol for Groundwater Inspecting at Hazardous Waste
      Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities.  Planning Research Corporation, Chicago, IL.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (May 1978) Revised November 1984:  NEIC Policies and
      Procedures. EPA-33-/9-78-001R.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1980a, Samplers and Sampling Procedures for Hazardous
      Waste Streams.  EPA-600/2-80-018.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1980b, "Total Organic Halide, Interim Method 450.1."
      ORDEMSL, Cincinnati, OH

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1981, NEIC Manual for Groundwater/Subsurface
      Investigations at Hazardous Waste Sites.  EPA-600/2-85/104.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1986a, RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring Technical
      Enforcement Guidance Document. OSWER-9950.1

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1986b, User's Guide to the  Contract Laboratory Program.
      Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1986c, Engineering Support Branch, Standard Operating
      Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual.  Region  IV, Environmental Services Division.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1986d, REM II  Health and  Safety Assurance Manual.
      999-HSI-RT-CGSY-l.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1987a, A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations
      Methods, two volumes.  EPA-540/P-87/001, OWSER Directive 9355.0-1

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1987b, DRAFT Site Sampling and Field Measurements
      Handbook for Underground Storage Tank Releases.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  1991, Soil Sampling and Analysis for Volatile Organic
      Compounds, T. Lewis, et al.
-------
                                        APPENDIX C

           OVERSIGHT OF WELL DRILLING AND INSTALLATION ACTIVITIES

                  Drilling and installation of groundwater monitoring wells at suspected and
                  known hazardous waste sites, is generally done to characterize the sites in terms
                  of the presence and types  of ground water contaminants, their concentrations
                  and corresponding locations, their fate and transport, and ultimately the risk to
                  the surrounding environment and human health. In accordance with CERCLA
                  Section  104(a),  well drilling and installation activities may be conducted by
                  potentially responsible parties (PRPs).  This chapter describes the activities
                  that an oversight assistant  should conduct and the factors to be considered
                  during oversight of PRP well drilling  and installation activities.

                  This chapter is  not intended to provide a comprehensive description on how to
                  drill and install ground-water monitoring wells, but is a limited discussion of
                  specific activities and considerations that are  important from an  oversight
                  perspective.  This chapter  is based on  other, more complete well drilling and
                  installation technical documents and should not be considered a substitute for
                  such documents.  Specifically, this chapter includes information  on:

                  •  Initial oversight;

                  •  Borehole advancement;

                  •  Well installation and design; and

                  •  Post-installation.

                  The organization of this chapter corresponds  to the field activity report for
                  oversight of well drilling and installation activities (see Section C.S  in this
                  Appendix).  This chapter discusses the elements of the checklist  in a manner
                  that will support oversight assistants with varying experience in conducting
                  effective field oversight.


C.I           INITIAL OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES

                  There are a number of activities that the oversight assistant should perform
                  before well installation  begins.  These activities will help the oversight
                  assistant become familiar with the  planned drilling activities as well as the
                  health and safety requirements. In addition,  initial oversight activities will
                  help the oversight assistant to organize and plan the resources for oversight,
                  coordinate with other parties involved at the  site, and make the necessary
                  preliminary observations at the site.

                  The initial oversight activities for well drilling and installation are generally
                  the same as those described for sampling and analysis activities.  These
                  activities include preparing for oversight by reviewing the  appropriate
                  documents such as the work plan, the sampling and analysis plan (SAP), and
                  the health and safety plan (HSP); securing the necessary oversight tools;
                  coordinating plans and schedules with key personnel; and conducting
                  preliminary on-site activities such as identifying the location, number, and
                  type of wells that will be drilled; the equipment, techniques, and procedures
                  that are planned for well drilling and  installation; and the procedures for
                  recordkeeping and documentation.  Additional preliminary on-site activities


                                            C-l
-------
include touring the site, checking the decontamination area/clean area, and
calibrating field analytical equipment.

Detailed guidance on conducting most of these activities is presented in
Appendix B, Oversight of Sampling and Analysis Activities.  For well drilling,
the oversight assistant should focus attention on the objectives of the drilling
program and, when conducting oversight activities, follow the same general
approach for making judgments in  the field as detailed in Appendix B.  As an
example, if a characterization objective is to determine the horizontal extent
of ground-water contamination downgradient of a manufacturing facility, the
oversight assistant should not allow a well location to be moved upgradient of
the facility regardless of the reason. To make this decision, the oversight
assistant should also be familiar  with the site conditions, such as the general
direction of ground-water flow. To determine the objectives of the drilling
program, the oversight assistant  should refer to the work plan, SAP, and
drilling specifications and should consider the following:

•   Site background and  the history of previous activities at or concerning the
    site;

•   Suspected contaminants and  the reason for concern (for example, health
    effects, surrounding  population, or migration of contamination);

•   Delineation of contamination and possible pathways of migration; and

•   Physical characteristics of the soil or bedrock such as grain-size
    distribution, permeability, and  cohesiveness.

Other initial  oversight activities  specific to well drilling and therefore not
described in  Appendix B include reviewing the location and number of
boreholes and the type of drilling equipment specified.

The oversight assistant should be familiar with the planned location and
number of boreholes designated in  the work plan and should compare the  plan
with the actual number and location of boreholes drilled in the field.  A site
visit by all parties to select boring locations is strongly  suggested.  The
oversight assistant should not delay the PRP's activities to check compliance
with the work plan, but  rather should gather information by observing the
PRP or by conversing with the field supervisor at the beginning of each day.
If the field supervisor gives a briefing and safety meeting at the start of each
day, this is a good time for the oversight assistant to  gather information.

Frequently, borehole locations will  be modified in the field, usually when
access to a planned well  location is  obstructed by an unforseen physical
barrier.  For example, unexpected utilities or refusal may be encountered
during drilling.  Also, changes in weather conditions may make a planned
drilling location inaccessible to a drill rig.  The oversight assistant should make
a note in the field activity report of any changes in the drilling location and
should use his/her judgment to evaluate whether the change is reasonable.  To
make this evaluation, the oversight assistant should consider the objectives of
the well drilling and installation activities as described  in the  work plan and
the SAP. PRP suggestions for changes in borehole locations may require
additional wells if the PRP changes result in inadequate data.

If the oversight  assistant feels that  a change in borehole location might
adversely affect the integrity or usefulness of the  well, a discussion should be


                           C-2
-------
                  held with the field supervisor and the outcome reported to the RPM at a
                  reasonable time thereafter.  If the dispute cannot be resolved, the oversight
                  assistant should follow up with the RPM at the first available moment.
                  Conversely, preliminary data gathered from previous boreholes might suggest
                  better locations for determining the extent of contamination.

                  Before arriving onsite, the oversight assistant should be familiar with  the types
                  of well drilling and installation equipment designated  in the work plan and
                  should compare this equipment to the equipment being used at the site. The
                  oversight assistant should focus attention on the major types of equipment,
                  such as the type of drill rig, casing diameter, type and length of well screen
                  and risers,'and filter pack and annular sealant materials.  The size of the drill
                  bit or the type of drill rod coupling should be compatible with the well design
                  criteria and specification in the work plan, but are of minor concern during
                  preliminary on-site activities.

                  If the major type .of equipment the  PRP has at the site is different from what
                  was expected, the oversight assistant should refer to the detailed information
                  on well drilling and installation sampling activities (Section C.2) to evaluate the
                  validity of the equipment substitution, and should notify the RPM. The
                  assistant should also pay attention to the use of the equipment during  drilling
                  and installation activities. If the oversight assistant feels that  the equipment is
                  not acceptable, a discussion should be held with the field supervisor and the
                  outcome reported to the RPM at a reasonable time thereafter,  If the dispute
                  cannot be  resolved, the oversight assistant  should follow up with the RPM at
                  the first available moment.
C.2           BOREHOLE ADVANCEMENT
                  Installation and placement of a ground-water monitoring well is preceded by
                  drilling a borehole. Advancing the borehole consists of drilling.the borehole,
                  and includes sampling subsurface formations to define site stratigraphy (and
                  soil contamination) as well as taking steps to prevent contaminated soil zones
                  from contaminating other zones.  To help ensure that the objectives of a
                  ground-water monitoring well program are met, the essential elements
                  involved in borehole advancement should be performed effectively.
                  Specifically, unless site conditions require changes, the drilling  activities
                  should be conducted in accordance with the approved work plan, SAP, and
                  drilling specifications.  In addition, as with any contaminated site, drilling and
                  sampling equipment must be properly decontaminated to prevent cross-
                  contamination, and drilling waste must be properly managed.


C.2.1         Drilling Activities

                  Drilling activities include finalizing borehole location, selecting the
                  appropriate drilling method, mobilizing the necessary equipment, and
                  conducting the drilling.   In addition, drilling activities include properly
                  managing drilling wastes such as drill cuttings or drilling muds, as well as
                  reducing the potential for spread of contamination between stratigraphic
                  layers.


Well Location     The planned location and number of wells designated in the work plan, SAP,
                  or drilling specifications are usually the result of a geological reconnaissance or


                                             C-3
-------
                  a preliminary borehole program.  A geological reconnaissance program is a
                  general exploratory survey of the main features of a region, conducted to
                  define the geology beneath the site area as well as identify ground-water flow
                  paths. This study is usually preliminary to a more detailed survey and thus
                  determines potential pathways of contaminant migration.

                  Geological reconnaissances depend on the existing database for a particular site
                  and involve direct field methods such as boring programs as well as indirect
                  methods of geologic investigation such as geophysical surveys.  Sites having
                  little existing information concerning site setting  and relevant geologic features
                  may require more detailed work than sites with a considerable database.  Thus,
                  the  PRP's work plan, SAP, or drilling specifications may rely heavily on
                  existing reports, maps, and available literature to  characterize the
                  hydrogeology of the site.  If more information is  necessary to determine
                  suitable groundwater monitoring well locations, boring programs or
                  geophysical surveys will be conducted prior to the initiation of drilling
                  activities (however, it is not unusual for geophysical surveys  to be conducted
                  in conjunction with drilling  activities).  Thus, preliminary well locations are
                  determined before oversight of well drilling and construction activities,
                  although they may be modified on the  basis of geophysical surveys after the
                  oversight assistant has arrived at the site.

                  Geophysical surveys employ such indirect (instrument) methods as resistivity,
                  electromagnetic conductivity, gradiometers and magnetometers, seismic
                  reflection, and ground penetrating radar.  Geophysical methods are used
                  primarily to supplement direct information such as  continuity of stratigraphy
                  between boreholes, and to locate buried metallic objects such as drums or
                  reinforced concrete. Magnetic methods detect metallic interference whereas
                  seismic and radar devices detect strata structural discontinuities such as
                  boulders or clay layers.  Geophysical surveys can  also detect contaminant
                  plumes if resistivity or surface- soil- gas probes are used (although soil- gas
                  monitoring, defining vertical and horizontal plume  dimensions,  may be
                  regarded as a direct field method).

                  Geophysical surveys may be conducted  in conjunction with a geological
                  reconnaissance, or just prior to drilling. In either case, geophysical surveys
                  may help to ensure that the preliminary well locations are suitable for drilling
                  activities. If refusal is encountered (that is, a buried object stops drilling), or
                  if the survey indicates that the well could be better placed, the well may
                  generally be moved 5 to 10 feet (preferably downgradient) without
                  constituting a change in well location (although the relocation of the well
                  should be reported to the RPM).  Beyond a  10-foot move, however, the well
                  location should be respotted, with RPM approval, in accordance with the well
                  program objectives.


Geologic Units    The oversight assistant should observe that as a borehole is drilled, the PRP's
                  driller or qualified scientist maintain a detailed and sequential record of the
                  progress of drilling through  the geologic units encountered. The depths and
                  thicknesses of the earth materials penetrated, soil description and
                  classification, and unusual or significant conditions should be recorded in a
                  boring log. (See Section C 1.2.2 for  information on  field screening and
                  logging.)

                  The geologic units encountered are  important for determining the potential
                  pathways and retention of contamination. Geologic units are also important


                                             C-4
-------
                  for well construction and operation. And, although documenting the depths
                  and thicknesses of geologic units is generally more  important for the PRP or
                  its drillers, the oversight assistant should note the geologic units encountered
                  during borehole advancement as a check on the information recorded in the
                  site  drilling log.
Depth of
Borehole
The borehole depth is generally specified in the work plan, SAP, or drilling
specifications and is determined by the geological reconnaissance or other
ground-water elevation data so that the screened interval (or intake) of the
well reaches the desired water-bearing unit. However, it may be necessary to
deepen the borehole if the aquifer of interest is deeper than expected due to
pumping from nearby production or treatment wells, temporal variations in
recharge patterns from tidal effects or river stages, or drought.

Generally, the borehole should be deep enough so that the screened interval of
the monitoring  well is within the water-bearing unit of interest, regardless of
periodic changes in water-level elevation. Exceptions to this  are shallow or
perched aquifers, and cases when it is desirable to have an immiscible layer in
contact with the well screen for sampling or recovery. The oversight assistant
should record borehole depth and any reasonable changes in borehole depth
from the work plan. Significant deviations from the work plan (such as a
borehole that stops short of the aquifer of interest) should be  brought to the
attention of the  PRP field supervisor, and if not corrected, to the attention of
the RPM.
Type of
Drilling
The oversight assistant should be aware that a variety of well-drilling methods
can be used in the installation of ground-water monitoring wells; the following
are the most common methods:  auger, rotary, and cable tool.  Depending on
the purpose of the well drilling program, one or more drilling methods may be
employed for  installing the same well.  For example, if soil sampling is not
required, rotary drilling may be preferred because it rapidly advances the
borehole; however, cuttings lifted to the surface by a drilling fluid are
generally sampled only for stratigraphy, and not for contamination. Sampling
ahead of the borehole requires removing the drill string, and  may be
complicated by the presence of drilling fluid.  By comparison, hollow-stem
augers remain in place during sampling. Alternatively, cable tool drilling
allows the collection of excellent formation samples, but is relatively slow.
Table C-l summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of the common
drilling methods.

The selection and implementation of the actual drilling method(s) is a function
of site-specific geologic conditions and sampling and analysis objectives. The
drilling contractor will best know his/her own capability for successfully
completing a well to the design depth.  The drilling contractor, however, is
generally not the best one to assess the associated sample representativeness.
Regardless of the drilling method selected, it should minimize disturbance of
subsurface materials and not contaminate the subsurface or ground water.
(U.S.  EPA,  1986a)  For example, lubricant should not be used on drill rods.
Hollow-stem      Hollow-stem augers are among the most frequently used tools when advancing
Augers            a borehole in unconsolidated materials -- especially when soil sampling is
                  required. The hollow-stem auger consists of a section of seamless steel tube
                  with a spiral flight, an attached finger-type cutter head, and a center drill
                                            C-5
-------
       TABLE C-l. DRILLING METHODS SUMMARY1
           Drilling Technique
Depth Limitation (ft.)
                Advantages
              Disadvantages
         Auger

             Hollow Stem
             Solid Stem
      150-300
      100-150
Ease of soil sampling.  Drilling fluids
normally not used.
Well can be constructed inside auger; acts as
casing.

Good in moist, mainly cohesion-less soils,
and medium-soft to stiff cohesive soils.
Not suitable for drilling through upper or
perched aquifers.
Not suitable for consolidated formations.
Transports contamination downward.
Not suitable for undisturbed soil samples or
Not suitable for undisturbed soil
determining stratigraphy.
Not suitable in caving formations without
casing,, nor in very hard or cemented soils
(e.g., containing boulders).	
         Mud Rotary
       5000+
O
i
Rapid drilling.
Can leave boring open during drilling.
Good cutting samples.
Mud may plug or be lost to permeable zone.
Slow or difficult for formations containing
coarse gravel, or numerous stones and
boulders. Mud can affect chemistry or
borehole and grouhdwater samples, and
operation of well without proper
development.		
         Air Rotary
       5000+
No drilling fluid contamination of ground
water.
Fast in hard rock and other consolidated
formations.
Containment of drilling returns difficult;
potential health and safety concern
Strips volatiles.
Not suitable for drilling through
unconsolidated soils.
         Cable Tool
       1000+
Only small amounts of water added and
removed from borehole.
Suitable for caving,, and gravel or boulder
formations.
Good for sampling.
Slow.
Casing must be used (does not seal off
upper aquifers).
Cable tool rigs may not be readily available.
            U.S. EPA, 1986a, 1987a
-------
                  stem composed of drill rods with an attached center plug at the bottom (see
                  Figure C-l).  The hollow-stem auger is configured with adapters at the top of
                  the drill stem and auger flight, allowing the auger to advance with the plug in
                  place.  This arrangement forces cuttings to the surface around the exterior of
                  the auger during drilling, leaving the interior  of the auger free of soil.

                  To obtain a soil sample, the center stem and plug are  removed, and the
                  appropriate sampler (for example, a split spoon) is driven ahead of the auger.
                  Samples taken in this way are essentially undisturbed, since the disturbance
                  caused by advancing the auger is less than that caused by driving casing (U.S.
                  EPA, 1987a). Cuttings brought to the surface by the  auger may also be
                  sampled, although as disturbed samples, cuttings only provide an
                  approximation of subsurface stratigraphy.

                  Auger drilling is usually limited to depths of approximately 150 feet (U.S.
                  EPA, 1986a) in  unconsolidated sands, and can "bind up" at shallower depths in
                  clays.  Hollow-stem augers are generally not used in formations with large
                  boulders; however, small obstructions can often be  moved or broken by hitting
                  with a split spoon.  Hollow-stem  augers are also useful in drilling below the
                  water table; the auger  flights act  as a casing in which the well may be placed.
                  In heaving or flowing  sand conditions, a fluid of known chemical quality
                  (usually water) may be pumped down the inside of the hollow-stem auger, the
                  weight of which produces a positive pressure  head  that may be sufficient to
                  displace unconsolidated material  from the auger.  Hollow-stem augers should
                  not, however, be used to drill through a confining layer unless the overlying
                  aquifer is known to be uncontaminated.  Unless a confined aquifer can be
                .  properly cased off (see Section C 1.2.1), contaminated aquifers may
                  communicate with (contaminate)  lower stratigraphic units.


Solid-stem        The use of solid-stem  augers (Figure C-l) for monitoring well installation is
Augers            generally limited to unconsolidated materials that will maintain an open
                  borehole or consolidated sediments (unless casing is used to prevent caving in
                  unstable soil when the auger is removed).  The method is similar to hollow-
                  stem augers except that the augers must be removed from the ground to
                  sample,  or to insert  the well casing and screen. Solid-stem augers may be
                  advanced to a depth of 100 to  150 feet, depending  on soil conditions.  As with
                  hollow-stem augers, solid-stem augers transport disturbed soil samples to the
                  surface with the auger blade, and should not be  used  to drill through confining
                  layers without first casing off the overlying aquifer.
Mud and Water
Rotary
In rotary drilling, the borehole is advanced by rapid rotation of the drilling bit
which cuts, chips, and grinds the material at the bottom of the hole.  The
cuttings are removed by pumping drilling fluid (mud or water) down through
the drill rods, out vents in the bit,  and up the annular space between the
borehole wall and drill rods (see Figure C-2).  The drilling fluid also cools and
lubricates the drilling bit, and serves to stabilize the borehole.  Drilling fluid is
pumped from a pit or tank, through a mud pump and the  drill rods.  The fluid
returns to a settling pit, where the  cuttings settle out from the slowed drilling
fluid. The settling pit may contain several gates or divisions to enhance
separation. The cuttings are periodically removed from the settling pit for
disposal, and to lessen cross contamination from reintroduction of drilling
fluids into the borehole.  (In addition, efficient removal of cuttings also
extends the service life of the drill rig  mud pump.)
                                            C-7
-------
Figure C-l. Augers
                                                     Double-Flight Earth Rock Auger
      Hollow Stem Auger Assembly
High-Spiral Auger
                                       C-8
-------
Figure C-2. Mud and Water Rotary Drilling
      Swivel
      Kelly
      Power unit
      Controls
      Rotary table
                                       Sheave
                                       Crown  block
                                         Mast
Hoisting drum

Mud pump
                       Hose


'
.;
•
1 	 *( )& 	 	 Drilling lluid
Return ditch V •> 1*,
Stttling pit I
Mud pit
Drill itrinn
_
p

                                          C-9
-------
Air Rotary        Air rotary drilling operates in the same manner as mud or water rotary
                  drilling, except air is the drilling fluid.  Air rotary drilling is best suited for
                  use in hard rock formations; casing is required to keep the borehole open when
                  drilling in soft, unconsolidated formations.  Because air is used as the drilling
                  fluid, an important advantage of using air rotary drilling with proper well
                  development is that it is less likely to affect the long-term quality of the
                  ground water.  In addition, since formation  water is blown out of the hole
                  along with cuttings, it is possible to determine when the first water-bearing
                  zone is encountered.  Where significant water inflow is encountered,
                  noncontaminating foaming agents (such as nonphosphate detergents) may be
                  added to help remove cuttings from the borehole (U.S. EPA, 1987a).

                  Formation sampling may be accomplished by collecting cuttings blown to the
                  surface, or by  removing the drill string and  sampling the hole directly.  One
                  problem with air rotary drilling is  that the forced air will  strip volatiles and
                  many semi-volatiles.  Indeed, air rotary drilling can present significant health
                  and safety problems because contaminated air and cuttings blown out of the
                  hole can be difficult to contain.  Therefore, when air  rotary is used, shrouds,
                  canopies, or directional pipes should be used to contain and direct drill
                  cuttings (U.S. EPA, 1986a). In addition, cuttings should not be sampled for
                  chemical analysis, and the well should be properly developed before sampling.
                  (As with other types of drilling, generally a  confined aquifer should be  cased
                  off; see Section C.2.1.)


Cable Tool        Cable tool drilling (or percussion or churn drilling) uses a heavy, solid steel,
                  chisel-type drill bit suspended on a steel cable that, when raised and dropped
                  repeatedly, chisels or pounds a hole through soil and rock (see Figure C-3).
                  Although relatively slow, cable tool drilling  is satisfactory for all formations,
                  but is best suited for large, caving, gravel-type formations with cobbles or
                  boulders such as glacial till, or for formations with large cavities above  the
                  water table such as karst (weathered limestone) terrain.  Casing following the
                  drill bit is needed when advancing a borehole through these formations  and
                  other unconsolidated materials to prevent cave-in.

                  Small amounts of water must be added to the hole as drilling progresses until
                  ground water is encountered. The added water creates a slurry, which is
                  periodically removed with a sand bailer or mud pump. Because only small
                  amounts of water are required for cuttings removal (and no drilling muds are
                  used), the cable  tool  method generates only  modest amounts of drilling waste.

                  Cable tool drilling also permits the collection of excellent  (undisturbed)
                  formation and chemical samples.  Sampling  is accomplished by removing the
                  drill string, bailing the cuttings, and using the appropriate downhole sampler.
                  (See Section B.2.S on subsurface sampling techniques).
Drilling Fluid
Drilling fluids are used for a variety of drilling methods and for a variety of
purposes.  These fluids are used to cool the drill bit in rotary drilling, help
carry away drill cuttings in rotary and cable tool drilling, and keep the
borehole open in certain mud or water rotary drilling and hollow-stem auger
conditions.  Drilling fluids for ground-water monitoring installation include
water, drilling mud additives, air, and foaming solutions. The exact drilling
fluid selection and proportioning will depend on the particular drilling method
and site stratigraphy.  For example, in mud  rotary drilling, a satisfactory
drilling fluid may be made by mixing water with suitable native clays (for
                                            C-10
-------
Figure C-3. Cable Tool String Assembly Components
                     Crown
                     sheave   ?
                     Shock
                     absorber  i
 Casing and sand
. line sheaves
                                                            Casing reelJ   L Crank shaft
                                               C-ll
-------
                  example, downhole) or commercial mud-forming products, consisting
                  primarily of bentonite and various chemicals added to control dispersion,
                  thixotropy, viscosity, and gel strength.

                  Regardless of the type of drilling fluid used, it is important that the drilling
                  fluid does not affect the chemistry of ground-water samples, samples from the
                  borehole, or the operation of the well.  Only those drilling fluids approved in
                  the Work Plan should be used. For air  rotary drilling, the air from  the
                  compressor on the drill rig should be filtered to prevent oil from the
                  compressor from entering the borehole. Drilling water or mud should be
                  uncontaminated.  (For instance, "city" water is preferable to surface waters of
                  uncertain purity). If there is any doubt about  its purity, drilling water or mud
                  should be collected at the plumbing connection on the back of the drill rig and
                  analyzed to eliminate the possibility of introducing contamination into the
                  borehole. In addition, drilling muds may be lost to permeable or cavernous
                  formations, potentially reducing  effective porosity (and thereby well yield), as
                  well as affecting local ground-water pH. Judicious selection of drilling mud
                  additives and proper well completion and development can significantly lessen
                  adverse effects of mud invasion into a  formation.
Drilling Waste
One important aspect of oversight of drilling activities is management of
drilling waste.  Drilling waste consists of drill cuttings and materials removed
from a borehole, including drilling fluids and well development water.
Whether the drilling waste is known to be contaminated or not, native soils and
waters should not be returned to the borehole (see Section C.3.1  for proper
well completion procedures).  In addition, if drilling fluids were used to
advance a borehole through a contaminated horizon, the drilling fluid should
be disposed appropriately as waste and replaced with clean drilling fluid
before proceeding through cleaner zones (see Section C.2.1, Reducing Spread
of Contamination).

Unless otherwise specified in  the Work Plan, waste from drilling activities
should be containerized (drummed) for proper disposal.  Depending on  the
methods specified in the Work Plan, drilling waste may be stored onsite,
pending the results of waste material sampling, surveyed using field analytical
methods as described in Section B.2.8, or disposed as hazardous. Alternatively,
if the drilling waste material is from a stratigraphic zone subject to removal
and treatment, the waste may be stored pending the remedial action, subject to
RPM approval.
Reducing
Spread of
Contamination
It is important during drilling activities to reduce the spread of contamination
both at the well head and between stratigraphic layers.  Reducing the spread
of contamination at the well head involves properly managing contaminated
drilling wastes; that is, containerizing for disposal drilling wastes suspected of
contamination.  In addition, drilling wastes can be directed and contained with
directional pipes, and dedicated open tanks or lined pits can be used for
drilling mud/cuttings to further reduce the spread of contamination.

Reducing subsurface spread of contamination requires good drilling practices
to keep contaminated horizons (particularly aquifers) from contaminating
lower stratigraphic layers.  Specifically, this may involve casing off a borehole
before continuing to drill through a confining layer, and disposing and
replacing drilling fluids that have been used to advance the borehole through a
contaminated horizon. Casing off a borehole consists of grouting the annular
                                            C-12
-------
                  space between the casing and the borehole sidewalls (see Section C.3.1).
                  Casing off upper aquifers before further drilling is good drilling practice, even
                  if the upper aquifer is known to be uncontaminated. (An exception is non-
                  discrete aquifers or water-bearing zones of similar or compatible chemistry.)
C.2.2
Soil Sample Collection

   Soil samples are collected in conjunction with borehole advancement for
   iithologic description, chemical analysis, or physical testing. While a number
   of physical and chemical samples must be sent for laboratory analysis, most
   can be screened and logged in the field.
Collection         During borehole advancement, formation samples are typically collected every
Interval           5 feet or when a change in stratigraphy is observed.  (PRPs may be required to
                  submit continuous samples, however.)  Each geologic unit encountered should
                  be sampled for lithology because of the effect a unit may have on contaminant
                  fate and transport.  Soil samples for chemical analysis should be  collected in
                  accordance with the objectives of the Work Plan and SAP.
Sample Field
Screening and
Logging
    Geological logging includes keeping a detailed record of drilling and a
    geological description of the materials encountered on a prepared form.
    Although field screening and logging in conjunction with well drilling
    activities is the responsibility of the PRP or its drillers,  the oversight assistant
    should note the salient information regarding screening  and logging, such as
    soil color, moisture, and consistency, as a check on the PRP's drilling log.

    When drilling in soils or unconsolidated deposits, the  PRP will usually record
    soil screening information  on a standard soil boring log  form (see Figure C-4).
    The soil boring log form to be used by the PRP should be submitted with the
    Work Plan and approved prior to conducting field work. In addition to basic
    information such as boring number and location, drilling equipment and
    method, and time and date, the PRP should record the following technical
    information for samples collected for physical testing or chemical analysis:

    •  Depth of sample below surface;

    •  Sample interval;

    •  Sample type and number;

    •  Length of sample recovered;

    •  Standard penetration test (ASTM-D1586) results,  if applicable; and

    •  Soil  description and classification.

    In addition, all pertinent observations about drilling rate, equipment operation,
    or unusual conditions should be noted (U.S. EPA, 1987a).

    Soil description and classification is normally done in accordance with the
    United Soil Classification System (USCS), as described in ASTM D2487 (see
    Figure C-5), the Visual-Manual  identification procedure (ASTM D2488), or
                                            C-13
-------
Figure C-4. Soil Boring Log
                                                                         SHUT
                                                SOIL BORING LOG
 PROJECT _
 ELEVATION
, LOCATION
                                 , DRILLING CONTRACTOR .
RILLING MITMOO ANO EQUIPMENT
ill
-
SAMPII
INTERVAL

IlVPt ANO
NUMKR

RECOVERY



H*tTRATlOK
TE»T
RtlULTI
INI

•OIL OEiCRIPTION
NAME. GRADATION OR PLASTICITY.
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION COLOR.
MOISTURE CONTENT. RELATIVE DENSITY
OR CONSISTENCY SOIL STRUCTURE.
MINERALOGY USCS GROUP SYMBOL
-

h

COMMENTS
DEPTH O' CASING
DRILLING DATE
DRILLING FLUID LOSS.
TESTS AND
INSTRUMENTATION
-
                                        C-14
-------
                                                                            Sod Claaemcatton Chart
O
 i
Criteria lor Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests'
Coarse-Gralned Sols
More than 50 X related on No.
200 sieve
Fte-Orated Sots
50 X or more pasaai the No.
200 sieve
MgMy organic aoas
Gravels
More than 50 X of coarse
fraction retained on No. 4
sieve
Sands
50 X or more of coarse
fraction paaaaa No. 4 slave
Sits and Clays
Liquid Ml baa than 50
SMs and days
Liquid am* 50 or more
Pjbiker
Clean Gravels
Less than 5 X fines0
Gravels with Fines More
than 12 X Ones c
Clean Sands
Less than 5 X Unas0
Sands with Fines
Mora than 12 X anas"
Inorganic
organic
Inorganic
organic


Cu 2 4 and 1 s Cc < 3£
Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc> 3r
Fines classify as ML or MH
Fines classify as CL or CH
Cu;>6and1sCcs3£
Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc> 3£
Fines classify as ML or MH
Fines classify as CL or CH
PI > 7 and ptots on or above 'A' «nej
Pl< 4 or ptols below 'A' ana-'
Liquid amH- oven dried
Liquid ImH- not dried
PI ptots on or above 'A' ane
PI ptots betow 'A' ane
Liquid amH - oven dried
Liquid smtt - not dried
lor. and organic odor

So* Classification
££. <*•*"«•
GW
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
SM
SC
CL
ML
OL
CH
MH
OH
PT
Wei-graded gravel'
Poorly graded gravaf
Stly gravel' °"
Clayey gravel'-0-"
Wetgraded sand
Poorly graded sand'
arty sand0"-'
Clayey sand0"-'
Lean day*1 •"
sn"LM
Organic day"-*"
Organic sir* ' M °
Fat day" •«• •*•
Elastic sin*' "
Organic day* l "'
OrQaVilc sJt*-1"**-0
Peal
               1 Baaed on the malarial passing Me Mn. (75-mm)
                                                                 Cu -
              • M Held sample contained cobbles or boulders, or
           «.  ^  m f^f *uJM*  AM^^^^A f»f ftMM^e^MA »^
           DOv). MO  WIVI  OOMNM Or DOUOBrw, Of
                                                                                 do
6  to  12 X anaa  raquha dual
           group name.
              c Gravels  wMh
                symbols:
                GW-GM wet-graded gravel wHh s«
                GW-OC wet-graded gravel wMh day
                GP-GM poorly graded gravel with sH
                GP-GC poorly graded gravel w«h day
              "Sands  w«h   5  to 12X taee  require  dual
                symbols:
                SW-SM wetgraded sand  wtth sit
                SW-SC wet-graded sand wNh day
                SP SM poor* graded sand wHh sM
                SP-SC poorly graded sand wMh day
   ' If aol contains x 15 X sand, add "wtth sand- to
group nwiM.
   °H  anaa dasatfy as  CL-ML. us* dual symbol
GC-GM. or SC-SM.
   MN Ines are organic, add 'wtth Organic anas' to
group name.                     : ,"•
   'H aol oonuarw 2 15X gravel, add -with gravel-
to group narna.
   •*« Atlerbarg trnH* plot m hatched  area, aol to a
CL-ML. aMy day.
   *N aol contains 15 to 29 X phis  No. 200. add
•wtth  sand* or 'with  gravel.'  whichever  to  pre-
                                          pra-
                                                   MII soil contains z 30 X phis No  200. |
                                                domlnanlly gravel, add 'gravely' to group name.
                                                   w PI z 4 and plots on or above 'A' ane.
                                                   0 Pl< 4 or ptots betow 'A' ana.
                                                   ' PI ptots on or above 'A' ane.
                                                   0 PI ptots betow'A'line
   ^N  sol  contains 2  30 X plus No.  200.
dmiananay sand, add 'sandy' to group name.
                                                                                                                                                                  oo
                                                                                                                                                                  c
                                                                                                                                                                  o
                                                                                                                                                                  D
                                                                                                                                                                  w
                                                                                                                                                                  3.
-------
                  by the Burmeister system.  Although it is not necessary for the oversight
                  assistant to be thoroughly familiar with these soil description methods, the
                  oversight assistant should nevertheless note major soil differences (such as
                  clays, sands, and gravels) during formation sampling. The oversight assistant
                  should also note the basic color, moisture content (described as dry, moist, or
                  wet), and relative density or consistency of the soil as determined by standard
                  penetration tests (see Table G-2).

                  The purpose of noting basic soil properties, from an oversight perspective, is
                  not to duplicate the PRP's drilling log.  Rather, basic soil properties can
                  provide direct evidence of contamination, unanticipated or perched aquifers,
                  and confining layers. For example, soil discoloration may indicate
                  contamination, whereas wet soil may indicate the presence of an aquifer.
                  Additionally, clay encountered beneath an aquifer, as determined by visual
                  inspection, would suggest the  presence of a confining layer. As indicated in
                  Section C.2.1, it is generally good practice to case off the borehole before
                  drilling through a confining layer.


C.2.3         Decontamination

                  Two general methods of contamination control are: (1) establishing site work
                  zones (site control), and  (2) removal and decontamination. These methods are
                  essential for maintaining health and safety  as well as for preventing cross-
                  contamination.  Decontamination consists of either physically removing
                  contaminants or changing their chemical nature to innocuous substances.  The
                  level of decontamination depends on a number of factors, the most important
                  being the type of contaminants involved and the use of the equipment being
                  cleaned.  The more harmful the contaminant and the more directly the
                  equipment contacts the sample, the more extensive and thorough
                  decontamination must be.


Equipment        A variety of equipment and materials are suitable for decontamination of
                  drilling and personnel protection equipment. Decontamination equipment is
                  generally selected based  on availability, ease of equipment decontamination,
                  and disposability. Typical decontamination equipment includes high-pressure
                  steam generators ("steam jenny"); soft-bristle scrub brushes or long-handle
                  brushes to remove contaminants; water in buckets or garden sprayers, for
                  rinsing; large galvanized wash tubs, stock tanks, or children's wading pools to
                  hold wash and rinse solutions; large plastic garbage cans or other similar
                  containers lined with plastic bags to store contaminated clothing and
                  equipment; metal or plastic cans or drums to temporarily store contaminated
                  liquids; and other miscellaneous gear such as paper or cloth towels for drying
                  protective clothing and equipment.


Method           Personnel protective equipment, sampling tools, and other equipment are
                  usually decontaminated by spraying with high-pressure steam, or scrubbing
                  with detergent-water such as  Alconox, using a soft-bristle brush, followed by
                  rinsing with copious amounts  of water.   Drilling equipment (particularly the
                  back and undercarriage of the drill rig and all downhole equipment) can be
                  cleaned using a pressure hose  or pressurized water or stream sprayer. Steam
                  jennies are very effective at removing dirt and oils while generating minimal
                  waste water. Special attention should be paid to the wheel wells and
                  undercarriage of drilling rigs  and other equipment, where large amounts of


                                            C-16
-------
Table C-2a. Soil Density\Consistency
Relative Density of Noncohesive Soil
Blows/Ft
0-4
5-10
11-30
31-50
>50
Relative
Density
Very loose
Loose
Medium
Dense
Very dense

Easily penetrated with
Easily penetrated with
Easily penetrated with
hammer
Penetrated a foot with
hammer
Penetrated only a few
with 5-lb hammer
Field Test
1/2-inch steel rod pushed
1/2-inch steel rod pushed
1/2-inch steel rod driven
1/2-inch steel rod driven
inches with 1/2-inch steel

by hand
by hand
with 5-lb
with 5-lb
rod driven
Table C-2b. Consistency of Cohesive Soil
Blows/Ft Consistency
<2 Very soft
2-4 Soft
5-8 Firm
Pocket
Penetrometer
(TSF)*
<0.25
0.25-0.6
0.50-1.0
Torvane
(TSF)
<0.12
0.12-0.25
0.25-0.5
Field Test
Easily penetrated several
inches by fist
Easily penetrated several
inches by thumb
Can be penetrated several
     9-15      Stiff
1.0-2.0
0.5-1.0
inches by thumb with
moderate effort

Readily indented by
thumb but penetrated
only with great effort
16-30 Very stiff
>30 Hard
2.0-4.0
>4.0
1.0-2.0
>2.0
Readily indented by
thumbnail
Indented with difficulty
by thumbnail
  * TSF--Tons per square foot.
                                           C-17
-------
                  mud tend to accumulate.  Sampling equipment used for organic contaminant
                  samples should be rinsed with methanol or other suitable solvent, followed by
                  distilled water.  (Hexane is often used for PCB contamination.) The solvent
                  should be saved for safe disposal (IT, 1987).  Sampling equipment used for
                  metal-containing samples should be rinsed with dilute nitric or hydrochloric
                  acid, followed by distilled water.


Location          Location of decontamination areas depends on site-specific establishment of
                  zones of decreasing contamination and site access control points. Essentially,
                  the site is divided into three zones to reduce the migration of contaminants
                  from the sampling area: (1) the exclusion zone,  which is the area of the site
                  where  contamination does or could occur (including the borehole); (2) the
                  contamination reduction zone, which provides a transition between
                  contaminated  and clean zones; and (3) the clean zone. Decontamination areas
                  are located at  the boundary between the exclusion and contamination reduction
                  zones.

                  The size and shape of each zone (and thus the distance from drilling activities)
                  is based on site-specific conditions.  The oversight assistant should recognize
                  that considerable judgment is needed to assure that the distances between zone
                  boundaries are large enough to allow room for the necessary operations,
                  provide adequate distance to  prevent the spread of contaminants, and eliminate
                  the possibility of injury due to explosion or fire outside the exclusion zone.
                  The criteria used for establishing area dimensions and boundaries include but
                  are not limited to, the following:

                  •  Physical and topographical site features;

                  •  Weather conditions;

                  •  Air dispersion calculations;

                  •  Contaminant toxicological characteristics; and

                  •  Dimensions  of the contaminated area.


Frequency         Downhole drilling equipment should be decontaminated between each borehole
                  location, while sampling equipment should be decontaminated before each use.
                  In the  case where drilling fluid used to advance a borehole through a very
                  contaminated  horizon is disposed, the mud tank or pit, mud pump, and all
                  downhole equipment should be decontaminated before the addition of fresh
                  drilling fluid. Some equipment (such as gloves) may be disposable and,
                  therefore, will not require decontamination.
Cross
Contamination
Prevention
The most effective method of preventing cross-contamination is to thoroughly
decontaminate drilling and formation sampling equipment before each use.
For downhole drilling equipment, this consists of decontamination between
borehole locations, whereas sampling equipment should be decontaminated
between sampling locations. Another method of preventing cross-
contamination,  if practical, is to drill the boreholes in formations of low
contamination first (such as upgradient locations), proceeding to progressively
more contaminated locations. (To prevent contamination due to borehole
                                           C-18
-------
                  sidewall sloughing and contamination between stratigraphic layers, see Section
                  C.2.1.)


Off-site          Generally, decontamination solutions and contaminated drill cuttings, drilling
Disposal          fluids, and material classified as a hazardous waste must be manifested for
                  disposal and taken to a licensed hazardous waste disposer.  Since this policy
                  differs from region  to region (U.S. EPA, 1986d), the oversight assistants
                  should be familiar with the applicable requirements.  However, offsite disposal
                  methods should be detailed in the drilling team's Work Plan and HSP and
                  should be approved  by the RPM.

                  All equipment that cannot be decontaminated, and any spent decontamination
                  solutions, must be disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations.
                  Clothing, tools, brushes, and other sampling equipment that cannot be
                  decontaminated should be secured in drums or other  containers, and either
                  labeled and shipped offsite for disposal, or disposed of as a part of any
                  planned remedial activity. Likewise, spent decontamination solutions should
                  be transferred to drums that are labeled prior to disposal.  Clothing and other
                  equipment that will  be decontaminated offsite should be secured in plastic
                  bags before removal from the site.


C.3           WELL DESIGN AND INSTALLATION

                  Once the well borehole has been advanced to  the appropriate depth, as
                  specified in the Work Plan, SAP, or drilling specifications, the ground-water
                  monitoring well is installed.  Well design and  installation consists of selecting
                  and installing construction materials that are durable enough to resist chemical
                  and physical degradation and do not interfere with the quality of groundwater
                  sampling. In addition, well design and installation must prevent contaminant
                  migration between strata.

                  Specific well  components involved in well design and installation include well
                  casings, well screens, filter packs, and annular seals or backfills.  Figure C-6
                  illustrates the design of a typical groundwater monitoring well. Competent
                  well  design, materials selection, and well installation  and completion are
                  essential to achieving the goals of a ground-water monitoring program.


C.3.1         Well Design

                  Well design consists of selecting suitable materials for well construction,
                  including well screens, well risers, and annular space sealants.  The well
                  materials must not degrade, absorb contaminants, or  otherwise interfere with
                  ground-water quality while in service.  In addition, the specified materials
                  must be designed to seal the borehole such that contaminated soil horizons
                  cannot communicate with other horizons.


Well Screen       Well screen selection is important for collecting representative  ground-water
                  samples.  A well screen allows water to enter  a well,  and also acts in
                  conjunction with the sand or filter pack as a filtering device to keep sediment
                  out of a well.  (Sediment-laden  water can lengthen filtering times and create
                  chemical interferences with collected samples.) Normally, the open area of the
                  screen should approximate the natural porosity of the formation.


                                            C-19
-------
Figure C-6. Typical ground-water monitoring well cross-section
          GAS VENT TUBE
            V GAS VENT
WELL CAP

STEEL PROTECTOR CAP WITH LOCKS


  SURVEYOR'S PIN (FLUSH MOUNT)

     CONCRETE WELL APRON
     (MINIMUM RADIUS OF 3 FEET
         ^ ANO 4 INCHES TH|CK)


CONTINUOUS POUR CONCRETE CAP
ANO WELL APRON (EXPANDING CEMENT)
                                                   BOREHOLE DIAMETER • 10" TO 12"
                                                   (NOMINAL DIMENSION)
                                                   CEMENT ANO SODIUM
                                                   BENTONITE MIXTURE
                                                   WELL DIAMETER-4"
                                                   ANNULAR SEALANT
                                                   FILTER PACK (2 FEET OR
                                                   LESS ABOVE SCREEN)
                                                   POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE
                                                   SCREENED INTERVAL
                                        " '.ivr, SUMP/SEDIMENT
                           ZONE OF LESSER PRMEABILITY
                                        C-20
-------
                 Screen slot openings should retain a high percentage of the sand or filter pack
                 and be uniformly distributed around the circumference of the screen for
                 effective development of the well.  Ideally, slot openings should widen inward
                 so that finer formation materials are pulled through the screen during
                 development. Slots that are cut straight through the casing, or those of the
                 gauze type, will tend to plug with fine material during development,
                 significantly reducing the open area of the screen.

                 Commercially manufactured well screens typically work best provided the
                 proper slot size is chosen.  Generally, customized screens should not be used
                 because  these screens limit reproducibility of ground-water data.  In addition,
                 the oversight assistant should be aware that most EPA regions prohibit the use
                 of screens containing slot openings sawed or torch-cut by the driller.

                 The oversight assistant should recognize that well screen length is a function of
                 both the transmissivity (yield) of the aquifer and the objective of the
                 monitoring  program. Low-yield aquifers may  require greater screen lengths to
                 permit the collection of adequate sample volumes in a timely manner. Screens
                 used for sampling discrete intervals are typically 2  to 5 feet in length. Screens
                 that monitor to the top of the water table are typically 5 to 10 feet in length.
                 Depending on the anticipated long-term changes in ground-water elevation,
                 some of the screen is always above the water table.  Thus, the screen will allow
                 hydrocarbons or  other low-density substances that float on the surface of the
                 water ("floaters") to enter the well.

                 The oversight assistant may also observe the installation of a sump at the
                 bottom of a monitoring well.  A sump aids in collecting fine-grain sediments
                 and results in prolonging the operating life of the screen. An additional
                 benefit of using a sump is for collection of intermittent dense-phase
                 contaminants ("sinkers"). A sump may also be  used as a sampling cup in low-
                 yield aquifers.


Well Riser       Well risers are lengths of well casing that are joined together rising from the
                 well screen to the surface. The oversight assistant should note that the method
                 of joining screens to casing and of assembling  the well string (screens and
                 casing) is done so as to prevent contamination of the samples. That is, glue,
                 solvents, or lubricant are not to be used. Clean screens and casing should be
                 joined mechanically by threads and couplings,  or flush threads.  Joints may be
                 made water-tight by wrapping with Teflon tape or by placing an O-ring in the
                 joint.

                 A gas vent at the top of the well string is generally specified in the Work Plan,
                 SAP, or drilling specifications.  Typically, a vent is installed by drilling a hole
                 or cutting a slit with a hacksaw in  the uppermost well riser.  The vent
                 equalizes pressure in the well when the ground-water level changes.  For
                 example, a drop  in the water table would create a partial vacuum in a well
                 without a vent, making the removal of a slip cap very difficult.  Conversely,
                 as a rise in  the ground-water level could produce a puff of well vapors upon
                 removal of the well cap, well vent  installation represents a good safety
                 practice.
Annular Space
Once the well string has been installed, the annular space should be a
minimum of 2 inches completely around  the inner casing.  The space is then
backfilled with: (1) filter pack over the screened interval, (2) annular sealant to
                                            C-21
-------
prevent migration of contaminants to the sampling zone, and (3) cement or
bentonite grout to the frost line.  Before installation of the well string, filter
pack may be added to the borehole to adjust the final elevation of the well and
the screened interval. Drill cuttings  should not be used to backfill the annular
space.  As the annular space is backfilled a few feet at a time, any temporary
drilling casing is removed, allowing the backfill to completely occupy the
annular space.

Generally, filter pack is selected to roughly match the grain-size distribution
of the screened interval formation.  (The grain-size distribution curve for the
filter pack is obtained by multiplying the 70-percent retained size of the finest
formation sample by three or four.)  Selection of too fine a pack reduces the
yield of the  well, causing longer sampling times, whereas selection of too
coarse a pack allows fine silts, sands, and clays to enter the well.  Coarse
gravel and coarse sand are common filter pack materials. The oversight
assistant should note that the pack material is chemically inert (non-
carbonate), and has been obtained from reputable suppliers who have properly
cleaned and  bagged the material.  Fabric filters should not be used as filter
pack materials. Generally, filter pack is not washed or decontaminated before
placement, although some investigators may require it.  (The PRP may wish to
collect and chemically analyze a sample of the filter pack in the event
questions are raised regarding possible contamination from the pack.)

Filter pack is added to the annulus a few feet at a time. If the screened
interval is entirely beneath the water table, the use of a tremie tube in placing
the filter pack is recommended.  If temporary drilling casing has  been used to
keep the borehole open, it is  removed with each addition of filter pack,
permitting the pack to completely fill the borehole. Failure to remove casing
in a timely manner may bury it in place, rendering the well useless without
subsequent removal of the well string and filter pack.  Filter pack should
generally be added  until it is 2 feet or less above the screen (U.S. EPA, 1986a).

The filter pack must cover the entire screen, even if substantial amounts of
pack are lost to cracks or voids in the formation.  Thus, the actual amount of
filter pack required may exceed the amount calculated to cover the screen.
Conversely,  if substantially less than the calculated amount of pack appears to
cover the screen, bridging or borehole cave-in has probably occurred.  Unless
specified in  the Work Plan and screened as such, the filter pack should
generally not extend into a different overlying layer in the formation because
this would permit seepage (and sampling) of different horizons.  Each backfill
horizon should be confirmed in the field with a tape measure.

The oversight assistant should observe the placement of approximately 2  feet
of annular sealant above the filter pack.  The annular sealant should prevent
migration of contaminants to the sampling zone. The sealant should be
chemically inert and have a permeability 10 to  100 times less than the
surrounding formation.  Generally, sodium bentonite pellets are placed
immediately over the filter pack -- especially in the saturated zone.  Pellets
are most effective  in the saturated zone because they will penetrate the water
column; coarse grit sodium bentonite may hydrate and bridge before reaching
the filter pack.

Although either bentonite or cement grout may be used to seal the annular
space just below the frost line, cement grout should generally be used in the
unsaturated  zone above the annular sealant because the grout is less subject to
cracking. Often, bentonite is added  in the amount of 2 to 5 percent by weight


                          C-22
-------
                  to the cement grout to help reduce shrinkage and to control the time of setting.
                  The oversight assistant should ensure that the grout is prepared using clean
                  water and, if necessary,  placed in the borehole using a tremie pipe.  Use of a
                  tremie pipe minimizes particle separation and bridging, and ensures good
                  sealing of the borehole from the  bottom.
C.3.2
Well Installation

    The major elements of well installation consist of:

    •  Well screen and casing installation;

    •  Filter pack placement; and

    •  Annular sealant placement.

    To prevent contamination of ground-water samples, suitable well materials
    must be selected.  In addition, all materials placed in the borehole must be
    clean and free of contamination.
Method of        Ground-water monitoring wells may be installed in open boreholes in
Well              consolidated formations, or inside casing or hollow-stem augers in
Completion       unconsolidated formations. In either case, the oversight assistant should note a
                  spacing differential of 2 to 5 inches between the outer diameter of the well
                  casing and the inner diameter of the auger/casing or the surface of the
                  borehole. This annular space is necessary to ensure an adequate volume and
                  proper placement of filter pack and annular sealants. A smaller annular space
                  may result in a filter pack volume insufficient to prevent turbid and
                  unacceptable ground-water samples, or may lead to bridging of filter pack and
                  annular sealants, resulting in open spaces in the borehole that could allow
                  migration of contaminants between  strata. See Section C.3.2 for information
                  on the calculated (and actual) volume of filter pack and sealant required.
Well Material
    A variety of materials may be used for well screens and risers (well casing),
    including polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polypropylene, mild or galvanized steel,
    stainless steel, cast iron, teflon, other fluorocarbons (such as fluorinated
    ethylene propylene (FEP)), epoxy biphenyl, and polyethylene.  The oversight
    assistant should make sure that the well screens and casing used are consistent
    with those specified the Work Plan. The oversight assistant should also be
    aware, however, that the type of material used for monitoring well casing may
    significantly affect the quality of ground-water samples.  Steel casing may
    corrode, leaching iron, manganese, chromium, cadmium, or zinc.  PVC,
    polyethylene, and polypropylene may release and absorb trace amounts of
    various organic constituents. In addition, solvent cement should not be used to
    attach sections of plastic casing because it has been shown to release
    significant quantities of organic compounds.

    In general, the following factors  should be considered when selecting screen
    and casing materials:

    •  Contaminants to be sampled;

    •  Chemical reactivity/inertness;
                                            C-23
-------
                  •  Strength of material; and

                  •  Ease of installation.

                  Generally, in the saturated zone, only inert (or noninterfering) materials
                  should be used; in the unsaturated zone noninert materials may be used (U.S.
                  EPA, 1986a).  Teflon and  glass are among the most inert materials for
                  monitoring well installation. (However, glass is very difficult and expensive to
                  use under most field conditions, and non-stick teflon may not form a water-
                  tight seal with grout and annular sealants.)  When monitoring for volatile
                  organics, Teflon (fluorocarbons), stainless steel, or fiberglass-reinforced plastic
                  generally are recommended. If trace metals or nonvolatile organics are the
                  contaminants anticipated,  PVC or plastic well casing and screens may be used.
                  Site-specific conditions, however, may affect well material selection.  For
                  example, low pH may degrade metallic wells. The oversight assistant should
                  refer to the  Work Plan to note if the specified well material is being used.

                  Regardless of the  material used for  well construction, the material should be
                  kept  covered and clean.  In addition, all well casing and screens should be
                  clean before construction and placement in the borehole. Material selection
                  may determine method of decontamination. For example, fluorocarbon casing
                  should never be steam cleaned (see Section  C.2.3 for more information
                  regarding decontamination).
C.3.3
Well Completion

    Once the annular space has been grouted to just below the frost line, the well
    is completed by constructing a surface seal and installing a protective surface
    casing.
Surface Seal      To minimize damage caused by frost heaving, the oversight assistant should
                  observe that the remaining annular space is sealed with an expanding cement
                  (grout) cap or surface seal. Frost heaving can be a major problem for wells
                  installed in cold climates (particularly for plastic wells). As the soil freezes
                  during the winter, it expands upward, occasionally pulling  the casing apart.
                  The surface seal should extend from below the frost line to the ground surface.
                  If there is no frost line, or the frost line is essentially at the ground surface,
                  the cement grout may be poured to  the surface in lieu of a surface seal.
Surface
Casing
    Before the surface seal has set, a protective metal surface casing should be
    placed in the surface seal around the monitoring well.  A concrete well apron
    should then be poured around the surface casing. The  apron should have a
    minimum radius of 3 feet and be at least 4 inches thick.  In addition, the
    apron should be  inclined away from the well and surface casing to divert
    rainwater. The oversight assistant should note that the concrete well apron is
    poured using the same expanding cement as used for the concrete cap.  In fact,
    with the exception of surface casing placement, the concrete cap and well
    apron should be  poured continuously.
                                            C-24
-------
C.4           POST INSTALLATION
                 Post-installation activities consist of well development and ground-water
                 monitoring. Well development is especially important for ground-water
                 monitoring wells, because drilling fluid residues remaining in the borehole will
                 affect the chemistry of the water samples.  Well development also removes
                 sediments and increases the well yield so that representative samples can be
                 collected quickly.  Adequate development must be verified before ground-
                 water samples may be collected.  (Collecting samples from a ground-water well
                 and measuring ground-water parameters are discussed in Section B.2.2).


C.4.1         Well Development

                 After the ground-water monitoring well has been constructed, the well must
                 be developed before sampling to restore the natural hydraulic conductivity of
                 the formation, and to remove sediments as well as all traces  of drilling fluids
                 from  the formation.  Well development is accomplished by applying some form
                 of energy (such as water surging/to the screen and formation.  Well
                 development is confined mainly to the zone immediately adjacent to the well,
                 where the formation materials have been disturbed by well construction
                 procedures or affected by the drilling fluid.  Noting and managing the volume
                 of development water is as important as noting the method of well
                 development.


Method of       The oversight assistant should be aware that a variety of techniques are
Development     available for well development.  Table C-3 lists some common development
                 procedures. For example, the well may be overpumped (or pumped at a
                 higher rate than when purged and sampled). However, because overpumping
                 produces water flow in only one direction, sediments or fines may bridge (or
                 clog)  in the filter pack,  restricting flow into the screen.  In addition, if
                 bridging subsequently becomes unstable and collapses, sediment may enter the
                 well and affect sample quality.  Effective well development procedures should
                 cause reversals of water flow through the screen that will agitate the sediment
                 and remove the finer fraction.

                . One widely used method of well development is to force water to flow into
                 and out of the well screen by operating a plunger up and down in the casing,
                 similar to a piston in a cylinder.  The tool  normally used is called a surge
                 block. Before starting to surge, the oversight assistant should note that the
                 well has been bailed to make sure water will flow into it.

                 The surge block is normally  lowered  beneath the water table, above or at the
                 top of the screen.  The initial surging motion should be gentle, allowing any
                 material blocking the screen to break up, go into suspension, and then move
                 into the well.  As water begins to move easily both into and out of the screen,
                 the surge  block is lowered in steps, -with the force of the surging  increasing as
                 the block is lowered.  Development should begin above or at the top of the
                 screen and move progressively downward to prevent the surge block from
                 becoming sand-locked.  The surge block should periodically be removed from
                 the well during development, to remove (bail or pump) silt and fines from the
                 well.  Surging and cleaning should continue until little or no sediment can be
                 pulled into the well (see Section C.4.1, Volume of Development Water).
                                           C-25
-------
Table C-3. Well Development Techniques
   Technique
                Use
             Comments
  Surge Block
Block moved up and down, imparting
a surging action to screen and
formation.
Good, non-contaminating technique.
May clog formation, screen, or filter
pack if used when clay streaks, mica,
or angular particles are present.
  Air lift
Compressed-air injected into well,
lifting water to surface.
Strips volatiles; must wait 48 hours to
sample. Can induce metallic oxide
formation/precipitation, clogging
formation/pack.
  Hydraulic
  jetting
High pressure water sprayed inside
screen through jet nozzle.
Normally restricted to production.
For very low yielding wells; water
added to formation must be removed
prior to sampling.
  Pumping
Well is pumped until water clears,
then turned off. Repeated with
higher discharge until only clear water
appears.
May lead to bridging, particularly if
done without a swab, or at high
discharge.  Usually a finishing
procedure following  another
development technique.
  Acid1
Hydrochloric acid added to open
borehole in limestone or dolomite
formations to increase formation
porosity (hydrofluoric and may be
used in silicate formations.)
Must return to ambient aquifer pH
before sampling; normally followed
by another development method.
  Explosives1
Detonation of explosives in boreholes
in rock formations.
Enlarges borehole. Increases rock
fractures.
    Not common for monitoring wells.
                                           C-26
-------
                 The oversight assistant should be aware that surge blocks sometimes produce
                 unsatisfactory results in certain formations, especially when the aquifer
                 contains many clay streaks: surging can cause the clay to plug the formation,
                 reducing well yield. Surge blocks are also less useful if large amounts of mica
                 or angular particles are present because they can align themselves
                 perpendicular to the direction of flow, clogging the well screen or filter pack.
                 Clogging can be minimized by gentle surging and  avoiding overdevelopment
                 when mica is present in the aquifer (Driscoll, 1987).

                 Another common method of well development is air lifting or air surging,
                 although there is considerable controversy as to its appropriateness.  In  air
                 surging, air is injected into the well to lift the water to the surface.  After  the
                 water reaches the top of  the casing, the air supply is shut off, allowing  the
                 water column to fall. The well is periodically pumped (usually by air-lift
                 pumping) to remove sediment from the well. Air surging is controversial from
                 an oversight perspective, because it strips volatiles.  Samples for volatile
                 organics should not be  collected for at least 48 hours after developing wells by
                 air surging.


Volume of       In addition  to developing the well until little or no sediment can be pulled  into
Development     the well, a sufficient volume of development water should be removed.
Water            Specifically, the oversight assistant should note that at least 3 to 5 well
                 volumes plus the volume of water lost to the formation during drilling are
                 removed; some regions require the removal of five well volumes.  In addition,
                 if water or acid has been used to develop the well, the well must be developed
                 until ground-water parameters have returned to ambient conditions.  That  is,
                 pH, conductivity, and temperature should be measured.  When the parameters
                 have stabilized (and no sediment enters the well),  a sufficient volume of
                 development water has been removed from the well (it is also good practice to
                 monitor ground-water  parameters as  a check on the sufficiency of three to
                 five well volumes plus water lost to the formation). When developing a well
                 by air surging, an eductor and discharge pipe may be  used to direct and
                 contain development water.  If a discharge pipe is not used or if the aquifer
                 has an.extremely low yield, ground-water parameters  may be monitored in lieu
                 of removing three to five well volumes during development.


Management     Management of development water should be detailed in the Work Plan, SAP,
of Develop-      or drilling specifications. Generally, development water should be
ment Water      containerized  for analysis and disposal if classified as  a hazardous waste. If
                 large volumes of contaminated development water are anticipated, the water
                 may be treated onsite, depending on  the nature and expected concentration of
                 the contaminants.  For example, a granulated-activated charcoal filter may be
                 used to strip development water of organics, allowing development water to be
                 discharged (assuming organics are the only type of contamination).  Such
                 treatment would require  laboratory support to monitor effectiveness and
                 proper filter disposal.  Alternatively,.contaminated development water may be
                 pumped to a treatment plant, or to the ground for percolation/recharge with
                 RPM approval.  The oversight assistant should consult Section C.2.1, Drilling
                 Waste, for more information  regarding management of development water.
C.4.2
Ground-Water Sampling

   Once the well has been properly developed, samples may be collected.
                                           C-27
-------
                  parameters are discussed in Section 11.2.2.  If, after development of the well is
                  complete, it continues to yield turbid ground water (that is, greater than 5
                  nephelometrie turbidity units), the well should be redeveloped. If after
                  redevelopment, the well still  yields turbid ground water containing no
                  organics, and the turbidity is due primarily to silt and clay, the well may tove
                  been improperly constructed  (or developed), sad may be unsuitable for
                  ground-water monitoring (U.S. EPA, 1986b).  Alternatively, the silt or clay
                  unit may be tow yielding.


C.5   '        ExOxCUMENTATnON ©IF WELL CELLING AND INSTALLATION AOWHTHES

                  The oversight assistant is responsible for the documentation of field activities,
                  including but not limited to well drilling and installation.  Recordkeeping
                  practices should include documenting the day's activities in a field logbook or
                  on the field activity report as well as maintaining a photographic/video record
                  of events.  In addition, documentation may be used during litigation to verify
                  the quality of the data collected.  Therefore, it is essential that the oversight
                  team keep detailed records of field activities, and thoroughly review all notes
                  to verify that they are accurate before leaving the site.


C.S.I         ©veirsBsM Teara IFTteOdl AcflSvfifly ISei?xn)irfi/L®glb(!D(0>b

                  The oversight team field activity-report" and logbook  provide daily records of
                  significant events, observations, and measurements during field oversight.  The
                  field activity report and field logbook should provide sufficient data and
                  observations to enable the oversight team to reconstruct events that occurred
                  during well drilling and installation and to refresh the memory of oversight
                  assistants if called upon to give testimony during legal proceedings4. Because
                  oversight field records (if referred to and admitted as evidence in a legal
                  proceeding) are subject to cross examination, checklist and logbook entries
                  should be factual, detailed, and objective.

                  The field activity report may bs used in conjunction with the  field logbook,  or
                  not at all.  The advantage of  the field activity report is a consistent method of
                  documentation  for  all well drilling and installation activities.  The field
                  activity report may b® used to augment or complement the field logbook.

                  The field activity report is a  tool that has been developed specifically to assist
                  the oversight assistant in the  field. This report is in a checklist format, which
                  is structured to remind the oversight assistant of the critical elements of the
                  well drilling and installation activities while also providing a convenient means
                  for documenting the field activities.  The field activity report  is used in
                  conjunction with the SAP as  a tool for reminding the oversight assistant of the
                  specific planned activities, and for keeping a record of any activities that are
                  not conducted according to the plans or that the oversight assistant considers
                  The well drilling and installation field activity report consists of five sections,
                  including:

                      o      Cover sheet;

                      o      Initial activities;


                                            C-28
-------
                      •       Method of borehole advancement;

                      •       Monitoring well construction and design; and

                      •       Post-installation activities.

                  The field activity report cover sheet provides a format for documenting facts
                  concerning the general types of activities planned for the day, the personnel
                  present onsite, the general conditions at the site (such as weather), and any
                  changes ia the plans  for that particular day. A separate cover sheet is filled
                  out for each day.

                  The initial activities  section of the report provides a checklist of activities that
                  the oversight assistant can use before arriving  at the site to prepare for field
                  oversight.  This section also outlines preliminary activities that the oversight
                  assistant should conduct at the site before well drilling. The method of
                  borehole advancement section includes drilling activities as well as soil sample
                  collection and decontamination methods. The section on monitoring well
                  construction and design details the materials used for well construction and
                  completion. The final section outlines well development and ground-water
                  monitoring.

                  The field activity report is structured so that individual sections can stand
                  alone and the oversight assistant can select the sections he is concerned with
                  for a particular trip or day onsite. For example, if the only activity planned
                  for a trip is drilling,  the oversight assistant can remove the borehole
                  advancement section from the field activity report and bring only the drilling
                  section to the field.

                  The oversight assistant should transfer important information from the SAP or
                  drilling specifications to the field activity report form (using the "comments"
                  space) before leaving for the  site.  The assistant should then use the form to
                  compare  the planned activities or expected conditions with the actual events in
                  the field (using the "Consistent With Plan" space) while at the site. Activity
                  reports should subsequently be summarized into a progress report for RPM
                  review.  In addition, copies of the logbook or  the field activity report should
                  be made available for RPM review.


C.5.2         Oversight Team Photographic/Video Log

                  The oversight team should document some of  the more critical field activities
                  with a photographic  or video camera.  If a Polaroid camera is used for this
                  purpose, the photographed activity, location, date, and time should be
                  recorded directly on  the photograph.  If film must be sent out for
                  development, the pertinent information should be recorded in the field
                  logbook by exposure number, preferably in the order the pictures were taken.
                  Because a camera exposure number may not exactly correspond with the film
                  exposure, maintaining a separate sequential photograph log as part of the field
                  logbook may help prevent confusion when matching the photograph to the
                  appropriate activity.   Developed photographs should be maintained in an
                  album to prevent damage and preserve photographic quality. In addition,
                  photographs should be arranged  in sequential order, or grouped by well
                  drilling or  installation activity.
                                            C-29 .
-------
FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT

COVER SHEET

Site Name:                               Date:


Location:


Oversight Personnel:
PRP Field
Personnel:
Weather Conditions:
Planned Activities:
Approved Changes in Sampling Plan:
Important Communications:
 Hours Oversight Assistant and Staff On-site:


 Oversight Assistant Initials:
                                         C-30
-------
NOTES:
                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials: _
                                                                 Page*
Comments
           of
C.1.1    PREPARATION

1. Workplan

Review

  a. Location and number of wells

  b. Specified equipment

  c. Field personnel qualifications/
     responsibilities


2. Health and Safety Requirements

Review

  a. Health & safety plans
     (PRP's & oversight
     assistant's)

  b. Health & safety standard
     operating procedures

  c. Exposure limits/action
     levels

  d. Protective Gear

  e. Other considerations
                                          C-31
-------
                                                                 Date: 	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials:
                                                                 Page #	of
                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                  Comments
3. Oversight/Equipment
Bring equipment
  a.  Oversight checklists
  b.  Field logbook
  c.  Camera
  d.  Protective gear
  e.  Other

4. Coordination
Confirm schedules with:
  a.  PRPs
  b.  Drilling contractors
  c.  State or local environmental
      authorities (if appropriate)
  d.  EPA (if appropriate)
  e.  Other
NOTES:
                                           C-32
-------
                                                               Date:  	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:  _
                                                               Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
C.I.2    PRELIMINARY ON-SITE ACTIVITIES


1. Review Personnel Qualifications
2. Record location and number of
   boreholes
3. Decontamination Area/Clean Area

   a. Decontamination area

     Number of
     decontamination areas

     Physical location

     Proximity to drilling/well
     locations

   b. Clean area

     Number of clean areas

     Physical location

     Proximity to drilling/well
     locations

   c. Check decontamination
     protocol
NOTES:
                                          C-33
-------
                                                                Date: 	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials:
                                                                Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
4. Tour of Site
5. Equipment Calibration

Field analytical equipment
calibrated (if appropriate)
6. Other
NOTES:
                                           C-34
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:
                                                               Page *	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
                     C.2  METHOD OF BOREHOLE ADVANCEMENT
1. Drilling Activities

  a. Name of drilling company

  b. Borehole number

  c. Type of drilling

  d. Well location

  e. Elevation of location

  f. Diameter of borehole

  g. Type of drilling fluid

  h. Amount of drilling fluid lost
     to formation

  i.  Management of drilling waste

     Drilling fluids

     Cuttings

  j. Well construction or boring log
NOTES:
                                          C-35
-------
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials:
                                                                 Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                  Comments
  k. Methods to reduce spread of
     contamination at well head

  1.  Anticipated geologic units
     (composition and thickness)

  m. Anticipated depth to ground
     water

  n. Total depth of borehole
2. Soil Sample Collection
     (See checklist on subsurface soil sampling for specific handling and shipping requirements.)

  a. Sample retrieval method
   b. Collection interval/depth for
     physical sample

   c. Collection interval/depth for
     chemical sample

   d. Field screening samples for
     analysis

         Organic vapors
         (OVA, HNu, etc.)

         Discoloration (heavy metals)

         Geiger - Muehler (radiation)

         Other
NOTES:
                                           C-36
-------
                                                                 Date:  	
                                                                 Site Name:
                                                                 Initials: _
                                                                 Page #	of

                                           Consistent
                                           with Plan
                                             (Y/N)                   Comments
  e. Physical parameters measured in
     the field

         Moisture content

         Plasticity (approximate)

         Consistency

         Grain size

         Sorting

         Other

  f. Borehole logging method


3. Decontamination

  a. Equipment

  b. Method

  c. Location

         Proximity to surface
         water or drilling
         activities

         Proximity to population
NOTES:
                                           C-37
-------
                                                              Date:  	
                                                              Site Name:
                                                              Initials:  _
                                                              Page *
           of
                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                           (Y/N)
Comments
  d. Frequency

        Rig and downhole equipment

        Sampling equipment

  e. Cross contamination prevention

        Well risers, screens, casings

  f. Decontaminated fluids management

        On-site storage

        Off-site disposal (meets
        RCRA/DOT/State requirements)
NOTES:
                                         C-38
-------
                                                              Date:  	
                                                              Site Name:
                                                              Initials: _
                                                              Page #	of

                                         Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                           (Y/N)                  Comments
               C.3  MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGN
1. Well Construction

  a. Method of well completion

  b. Well material kept covered and
     clean


2. Well Design

  a. Well screen

         Material/size (ID)

         Slot size

         Screen length

         Sump length

         Depth of screened interval
         (bottom/top)

         Geologic unit over screened
         interval

  b. Well riser

         Material/size (ID)

         Method of joining sections

         Length of well riser


NOTES:
                                         C-39
-------
                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)
                                                                Date:  	
                                                                Site Name:
                                                                Initials: _
                                                                Page *
Comments
           of
         Elevation of top of riser
  c. Annular space completion
         Filter pack material
         Method of implacement
         Depth of filter pack
         (bottom/top)
         Volume of filter pack
         Thickness of bentonite seal
         Volume of bentonite
         Type of annular sealant above
         bentonite
         Volume of annular sealant
3. Well Completion
  a. Type of surface seal
         Three-foot diameter surface
         pad
  b. Depth of surface seal
         Below frost line
NOTES:
                                          C-40
-------
                                                               Date: 	
                                                               Site Name:
                                                               Initials:
                                                               Page #	of

                                          Consistent
                                          with Plan
                                            (Y/N)                  Comments
  c. Surface casing

     Material/size (ID)

     Method of implacement

     Depth of surface casing

     Half length of surface casing

     Number of guard posts
NOTES:
                                          C-41
-------
                                                             Date:  	
                                                             Site Name:
                                                             Initials:
                                                             Page # _^	of

                                        Consistent
                                         with Plan
                                          (Y/N)                 Comments
                             C.4  POST INSTALLATION
1. Well Development

  a. Method of development

  b. Amount of water retrieved
     from well

  c. Management of development
     water


2. Ground-water Monitoring
     (see also sampling & analysis
     checklist)

     Turbidity

     PH

     Specific conductance

     Temperature

     Other
NOTES:
                                        C-42
-------
                              APPENDIX C REFERENCES


Camp, Dresser, and McKee, undated, Basic Health and Safety Training Course Manual,
      COM 150.4

Driscoll, Fletcher, G., Groundwater and Wells. 2nd ed., Johnson Division, (St. Paul 1986).

IT Corporation, 1987, Manual of Sampling and Analytical Methods for Petroleum Hydrocarbons
      in Groundwater and Soil.

NUS Corporation, 1987, Hazardous Materials Handling Training Manual, NUS Corporation,
      Waste Management Services Group.

Planning Research Corporation, 1986, Protocol for Groundwater Inspecting at Hazardous Waste
Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities. Planning Research Corporation, Chicago, II.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (May 1978) Revised November 1984: NEIC Policies and
      Procedures. EPA-33-/9-78-001R.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980a, Samplers and Sampling Procedures for Hazardous
      Waste Streams.  EPA-600/2-80-018.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1981, NEIC Manual for Groundwater/Subsurface
      Investigations at Hazardous Waste Sites.  EPA-600/2-85/104.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986a, RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring Technical
      Enforcement Guidance Document. OSWER-9950.1

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986c, Engineering Support Branch, Standard Operating
      Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual. Region IV, Environmental Services Division.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986d, REM II Health and Safety Assurance Manual.
      999-HSI-RT-CGSY-l.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987a, A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations
      Methods, two volumes.  EPA-540/P-87/001, OWSER Directive 9355.0-1

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987b, Site Sampling and Field Measurements  Handbook
      for Underground Storage Tank Releases.  DRAFT

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989, Handbook  of Suggested Practices for the Design
      and Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Wells, EPA 600/4-89/034.
-------
KEY WORDS
                                 PAGES
Administrative Order (AO)
Administrative Record
Airbill
Alternative Remedial Contracts Strategy (ARCS)
Ambient air
Analytical techniques, ambient air
       -  Colorimetric tube
       -  Explosimeter
       -  Organic vapor analyzer (OV A)
       -  Oxygen detector
       -  Radiation survey meter
Analytical techniques, ground/soil/surface water
       -  Conductivity meter
       -  Dissolved oxygen (DO) meter
       -  Inorganic compounds detection
       -  Organic compounds instruments
       -  pH meter
Analytical techniques, soil vapor
       -  Colorimetric tube
       -  OVA
Annular space
ARARs
                1-3, 1-19, 1-26, 2-1, 2-10
                                    3-5
                                   B-70
                               1-11,2-3
                             B-52, B-55
                                   B-56
                                   B-41
                        B-37, B-52, B-56
                                   B-41
                                   B-56
                        B-48, B-52, B-56
                        B-15, B-23, B-30
                                   B-16
                                   B-16
                                   B-16
                                   B-17
                                   B-16
                                   B-40
                                   B-41
                                   B-41
                        C-12.C-21.C-22
                                4-3, 7-4
Baseline Risk Assessment
       -  Exposure assessment
       -  Toxicity assessment
       -  Risk characterization
Bench-scale tests
Bill of lading
Borehole advancement
Borehold depth
1-2, 3-10, 3-13, 4-7, 4-8, 5-1, 5-6, 6-2, 7-4
                            4-7, 5-3, 5-6
                                    5-4
                                    5-4
                                    6-3
                                   B-70
                              C-3, C-13
                                    C-5
Chain-of-custody record
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
       Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA)
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
       and Liability Information System (CERCLIS)
Community Relations
Consent Decree (CD)
Containerized waste
Contract Laboratory Program (CLP)
Cooperative Agreement (CA)
Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army (COE)
Cost recovery
Cross contamination prevention
Custody Seals
                              B-64, B-70
                   1-1,3-6,3-8,7-4,8-4

                               1-10,3-6

                                     3-5
                                1-3,2-1
                                   B-48
                               B-3, B-69
                                    1-13
   1-11, 2-5, 3-12, 4-7, 5-7, 6-10, 7-6, 8-4
                                     3-5
                              B-74, C-18
                                   B-70
Decontamination
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Dispute resolution
Drilling
       -  Auger
       -  Cable tool
                         B-5, B-72, C-16
                                    2-6
                                    1-18
                                    C-3
                                    C-7
                                   C-10
-------
KEY WORDS                                                                     PAGES

       -  Drilling fluid                                                          C-5, C-10
       -  Drilling waste                                                             C-12
       -  Rotary                                                                    C-7


Environmental Response Team (ERT)                                          2-5, 7-6, 8-4
Environmental Services Division (ESD)       1-31, 2-5, 2-13, 3-12, 4-3, 4-7, 5-7, 6-8, 7-6, 8-4


Feasibility Study (FS)                                            1-1, 3-4, 7-1, 7-3, 8-1, 8-3
Field sampling plan (FSP)                                                             B-1
Financial Management System (FMS)                                                    3-6
Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. (FWS)                                                    2-5


Geological logging                                                                  C-13
Geological reconnaissance                                                             C-4
Geological surveys                                                                   C-4
Geologic unit                                                                        C-4
Ground water                                                                       B-17


Health and safety plan                                                  3-1, 3-9, 3-11,8-2
Health assessment                                                        4-3, 4-7, 5-4, 6-2
Holding times                                                                       B-69


Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)                                               5-5


National Contingency Plan (NCP)                                                   1-3, 1-9
National Priorities List (NPL)                                            1-1, 1-3, 1-13, 2-3


Octanol-water partition coefficient                                                    B-30
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR)                                   1-15
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE)                                         1-15
Organic vapor analyzer                                                         B-37, B-41
Organic vapor detector                                                          B-41, B-58
       -  Flame ionization detector (FID)                                        B-41, B-54
       -  Photoionization detector (PID)                                         B-41, B-54
Oversight tools                                                                      B-2
       -  Field activity report                                             B-2, B-81, C-30
       -  Photographic log                                                     B-80, C-29
Oxygen detector                                                                    B-56


Pilot-scale study                                                                      6-2
Potentially Responsible Party (PRP)                                                1-1,2-13
Preliminary Assessment (PA)                                                          1-14


Quality assurance project plan (QAPjP)                                             3-9, B-l
Quality review activities                                                    1-30, B-l, B-74
-------
KEY WORDS
                       PAGES
Record of Decision (ROD)
Remedial action (RA)
Remedial design (RD)
Remedial Investigation (RI)
Remedial Project Manager (RPM)
                     1-10,2-13
         1-29, 3-4, 5-1,6-1, 7-1
                           6-1
1-1, 1-29,2-1,4-5,4-6, 5-1,6-1
                      1-1, 1-9
Sample containers
Sample labels
Sample packing
Sample preservation
Sampler, ambient air
Sampler, ground water
       -   Bailers
       -   Pumps
Sampler, liquid sludge/slurry
       -   Bacon bomb sampler
       -   Coliwasa
       -   glass tube
Sampler, sediment (and nearly solid sludge/slurry)
       -   BMH-60
       -   Grain sampler
       -   Hand push tube
       -   Ponar dredge
Sampler, soil vapor
       -   Soil gas probe
Sampler, soil water
       -   Lysimeter
       -   Membrane filter sampler
Sampler, subsurface soil
       -   Split spoon
Sampler, surface soil
       -   Sampling trier
Sampler, surface water
       -   Kemmerer or Van Dorn sampler
       -   Weighted bottle sampler
       -   Peristaltic pump
Samples, quality review
       -   Trip blanks
       -   Field blanks
       -   Equipment blank
       -   Background sample
       -   Split sample
Sampling and analyses plan (SAP)
       -   Field sampling plan (FSP)
       -   Quality assurance project plan (QAPjP)
       -   Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
Shipping
Site characterization
Site file
Site inspection (SI)
Sludge/slurry
Soil vapor
Soil water
State Project Officer (SPO)
Statement of Work (SOW)
                         B-57
                         B-59
                         B-66
                         B-60
                    B-54, B-55

                    B-19, B-22
                    B-19, B-22

                    B-45, B-47
                    B-43, B-47
                -   B-43, B-46

                         B-14
              B-12, B-32, B-51
                         B-14
                    B-12, B-46

                         B-40

                         B-26
                         B-28

                         B-35

                         B-32
                         B-ll
                     B-9, B-48
                     B-9, B-47
                     B-9, B-47
                         B-79
                         B-75
                         B-75
                         B-76
                         B-76
                         B-77
  1-21, 1-29,2-10, 3-1, 3-9, B-l
                       3-9, B-l
                       3-9, B-l
                 1-13,3-1,4-6
                         B-69
                 2-10,4-1, 7-2
                           2-5
                          1-14
                         B-41
                         B-37
                         B-23
                          1-15
            1-9,  1-28,2-1,2-10
-------
KEY WORDS

Sub-surface soil
Superfund Memorandum of Agreement (SMOA)
Surface casing
Surface seal
Surface soil
Surface water
                        PAGES

                           B-35
                           1-13
                           C-24
                           C-24
                           B-31
                            B-6
Technical Support Team
Technical Enforcement Support (TES)
Traffic reports
Treatability studies
                        2-1,2-5
                            1-3
                           B-66
              1-28,4-2,6-1,6-3
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
                        2-3, 2-5
Vadose zone
                           B-24
Well completion
Well design
Well development
Well installation
Work Plan
                           C-24
                           C-19
                           C-25
                           C-23
1-10,2-1,3-1,3-4,3-9,3-11,5-2
                                    OU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: i 1992-311-932-72630
-------