-i
3EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
OSWER Directive Initiation Request
Interim Directive Number
9010.15
Originator Information
dame of Contact Person
Winston Porter ,^
Lead Office . .- , Q OUST
D OERR D OWPE
E OSW Q AA-OSWER
Mail Code
WH 562
Telephone Number
382-4610
Approved for Review • 3
Signature of Office Director
W. Porter, Assistant Administrator
Date
2/11/86
itle
OSWER Priorities
Summary of Directive
Describes Dr. Porter's program philosophy and establishes goals and priorities
for OSWER programs.
Type of Directive (Manual. Policy Directive. Announcement, etc.)
Memorandum
Status
D Draft
123 Final
CLJ New
LJ Revision
Does this Directive Supersede Previous Directive(s)? [ | Yes | y| No Does It Supplement Previous Directive(s)' [ | Yes [xl No
If "Yes" to Either Question, What Directive (number, title)
Review Plan
D AA-OSWER
CD OERR
D OSW
D OUST
D OWPE
LJ Regions
LJ OECM
D OGC
D OPPE
LJ Other (Specify)
N/A
This Request Meets OSWER Directives System Format
Signature of Lead Office Directives Officer
Herman
Signature of OSWER Directives Officer
Herman
Date
2/21/86
Date
2/21/86
EPA Form 1315-17 (10-85)
-------
OSWER
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: OSWER Prioritie
FROM: 3/. Winston Porter
Assistant Administrator -
TO: Regional Administrators, I-X
Regional Waste Management Division Directors, I-X
Regional Counsels, I-X
Now that I have had time to settle into the Assistant
Administrator's job, I wanted to convey some of my goals and
priorities for the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
(OSWER). Included also are a number of specific comments in the
Superfund and RCRA program areas.
My general program philosophy is to be "results oriented".
I intend to stress outputs such as cleaned-up hazardous waste
sites and completed RCRA permits or closures. This is not meant
to de-emphasize procedural matters, but simply to have the
program focus primarily on final "products". These products will,
I believe, yield substantial environmental benefits.
SUPERFUND PROGRAM
My overall goal for the Superfund program is to increase the pace
of remedial activities while maintaining the quality of the work.
I also want to increase the amount of work done directly by States
and potential responsible parties (PRPs). In achieving these
objectives, I want to stress the following aspects.
1. We need to ensure better accountability for our work products
at Superfund sites. This should normally be achieved through
clear designation of an EPA Site Manager who has overall
responsibility for the work at a site. It would be this
individual's role to see that all work is coordinated, and
that we are working expeditiously toward final site
remediation.
-------
OSWER # goio.iT
-2-
Similarly, I want to move towards a process by which a technical
services organization, normally either a consulting engineering/
fwRn-r-or other entity such as the Corps of Engineers, would
be.-the -Project Manager for the site in question. Severally
speaking, this project management organization would conduct
the RI/FS, do the design engineering, and serve as construction
manager for site remedial actions. The objective, again, is
to vest responsibility and authority in one organization
which'can move the work expeditiously and be accountable for
results.
Next, I want to emphasize how important a strong Enforcement
program is to our efforts. I am particularly interested
in building on what is already a successful settlement policy.
I believe we have a real winner in this, and should expand
the number of settlements in which the PRP does the work
directly. With the amount of work we have, we simply can
not do everything ourselves. I will also be looking to the
Regions to implement, where appropriate, items such as the
de-minimis contributor and mixed funding concepts. I want us
to go after recalcitrant parties vigorously with our enforce-
ment tools.
I want to insure that we are doing a good job technically
and are looking at the options available to us, including
innovative technologies, where appropriate. In this regard,
I will be putting a premium on technology transfer, thus
ensuring that the Regions are aware of remedial solutions
used elsewhere. Similarly, we all need to be aware of
developmental work going on in the Superfund area to be sure
that we are using techniques which move toward more permanent
solutions.
I believe it is imperative that we have an effective community
relations program under Superfund. I have been impressed
with the commitment of the community relations staffs, and
the jobs they are doing. I believe it is important, however,
to stress that the major community relations need is for EPA
and contractor management and technical people to interact
with the community. We must illustrate, on an ongoing basis,
the technical alternatives involved, as well as the health
and environmental situations at sites. It is particularly
important that we use the resources of our "project
management" contractors to assist us with understandable
technical" presentations to the communities.
Finally, my emphasis will be directed toward the completion
of Superfund projects, as opposed to simply adding more sites
to the front end of the pipeline. While it is obviously
important to locate serious new hazardous waste sites, I believo
the public expects us to more rapidly complete those sites
which we have underway. Both in Headquarters and the Regions,
-------
OSWER # 9010.15"
-3-
I would like to see us work toward planning goals which
stress overall project completion, in addition to the many
~~" "starEs'" and procedural steps required along the way^.-.,
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA) PROGRAM
We have a large regulatory development program underway in the
RCRA program. We are working very hard on this program and will
make every effort to complete these regulations, and associated
guidances, in a timely fashion. I want to urge the Regions to
participate actively in regulatory development workgroups and
the development of associated implementation plans.
Let me now turn to my main RCRA focus in this memo - Regional
workload and priorities. Specifically, I want to focus on the
mandated permitting deadlines for land disposal units (11/88),
incinerators (11/89), and treatment/storage units (11/92).
I want us to meet the above permitting deadlines. Regarding
closures, we should approach them on a priority basis, identifying
and proceeding on the most environmentally significant first.
These activities will take a sustained effort by the Regions,
with effective Headquarters assistance. Some guidance with
respect to permitting and closures follows.
1. Similar to Superfund projects, I think it is important that
the Regions designate a Facility Manager to oversee work at
individual locations. This Facility Manager concept should
fit well with the facility management plans being developed
for land disposal and other systems. It will be the role of
this Manager to coordinate the work and move towards the
defined permitting goal, or alternatively seeking closure of
the facility in question. I want to see a team effort using
all the management, technical, and enforcement tools at our
disposal.
2. With respect to both permits and closures, I believe it is
critical to engage the regulated parties in dialogue as
early in the process as possible. I would like for us to
avoid letter writing contests with many month intervals
between contacts. I believe it is particularly important to
get a sense of whether an applicant is ever going to achieve
the necessary monitoring and other items needed to obtain a
permit. If not, we should consider revoking interim status
and moving toward closure. Very importantly, we will need
to use the enforcement tools at our disposal to move the
process as required.
-------
OSWER
-4-
3_. Fcy^ Jioth permitting and closures it will be necessary for
the Regions to make judgement calls with respect to3*uch
issues as to "how clean is clean" and adequacy of ground-
water monitoring. We have and will provide guidance, but
ay sense is that these tough calls will still be made by
the Regions. The overall goal is to protect human health
and the environment, based on site specific factors.
/
4. Another key aspect of our permitting and closure work will
be the use of corrective action authorities. It will be
important for the Regions to identify solid waste management
units; and, working with the regulated community, develop the
means necessary to effect corrective action. Again, consi-
derable judgement will be required to determine the level
of clean-up needed. In this regard, we do believe it will
often be appropriate to use alternative concentration limits
(ACL's). It is also important to understand that corrective
actions can occur through environmental prioritization and
compliance schedules.
5. With respect to corrective action, let me also note that
RCRA 3008(h) and CERCLA 106 orders are vital tools in
moving the process. TSCA authorities can also be used.
Finally, we should consider treating highly contaminated
facilities as a whole, not unit-by-unit, in compelling
corrective action.
6. For RCRA permitting, closure, and corrective action work,
adequate groundwater monitoring/analysis is important. I
want the Regions to use the Technical Enforcement Guidance
Manual, once finalized, as well as the capabilities of the
Groundwater Monitoring Taskforce, in this regard. Once
again, however, the Regions will need to make the tough
decision as to the adequacy of monitoring. I urge you to
make these decisions, based on site specific aspects.
7. Finally, it is imperative that we have land disposal permits
coming out of the pipeline all during the next three-year
period. I would like to see a number of land disposal permits
issued this year. All permits are not equal in difficulty,
and I think it is important that we not work toward the
•ultimate fourth quarter", but that we try to complete some
projects as we go. The same thing is true of incinerator and
other permits.
------- |