United Slates
             Environmental Protection
             Agency
               Office of
               Solid Waste and
               Emergency Sesoonse
  4>EPA
 DIRECTIVE NUMBER.-9932.1

 TITLE: Guidance for Environmental Priorities
  Initiative (EPI) Facilities in the Superfund
  Pre-Remedial Program

 APPROVAL DATE:  JAN 31 1989

 EFFECTIVE DATE:  ^ 3| 1989

 ORIGINATING OFFICE:owPE/ RED

 (3 FINAL

 D DRAFT

  LEVEL OF DRAFT

    G3 A — Signed by AA or DAA
    D 8 — Signed by Office Director
    DC — Review & Comment

 REFERENCE (other documents):9932.0 Method for
Prioritizing CERCLA Preliminary  Assessments at
RCRA Facilities
SWER       OSWER       OSWER
  DIRECTIVE    DIRECTIVE    Dl

-------
                           United States environmental Protection Agency
                                 Washington. DC 20460 '
              1  OSWER Directive initiation Request
                                 1. Directive Numoer

                                   9932.1
                                2. Originator Information
      Name of Contact Person
            Ellen  Brown
    {Mail Code
      OS  520
Offi
  '8WPE
Teiepncne Code
  475-9848
      3. Title
         Guidance  for Environmental Priorities Initiative  (EPI)  Facilities
         in the  Superfund Pre-Remedial Program
      4. Summary of Directive include tone! statement of purpose)
         Provide  guidance to the Regions and States as to  how  EPI  facilities
      should  be handled by the Superfund Pre-Remedial Program.
      5. Keywords
         EPI,  Sreening Site Investigations(SSIs), Preliminary  Assessments (PA)
      6a. Does'This Directive Supersede Previous Directness)?
      b. Does It Supplement Previous Oirective(s)?
                                          No
                                          No
                    Yes   What directive (number, trtle)
                    Yes   What directive (number. tWe) 9932.0
       Method for Prioritizing CERCLA TTeliminTry Assessments at RCRA  Facilitie
       JDraft Level
          A - Signed by AA/DAA
B - Signed by Office Director
      C - For Review & Comment
         0 - In Devetopmem
8.
Document
to
be
distributed
to
States
by Headquarters? | 	 | Yw
X

No
This Request Meets OSWER Directives System Format Standards.
9. Signajuw of Lead Office Directives Coordinator
kM* Yfi. ulilc^J
10. Name and Title of Approving Official
i
\
0.1. ,
//av/il
Date '
     EPA Form 1315-17 (Rev. 5-87) Previous editions are obsolete.
   OSWER           OSWER              OSWER              O
VE     DIRECTIVE         DIRECTIVE        DIRECTIVE

-------
               UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                          WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
                                                     OSWER Directive 9932.1

                                  31 |989
                                                           •,•--', c , -
 MEMORANDUM

 SUBJECT:  Guidance for Environmental Priorities
           Initiative (EPI)  Facilities in the Superfund Pre-
           Remed^al Program.
               /'   •   ,•'  '~(,^
 PROM:      J.  Winston-Porter'
           Assistant Administrator

 TO:        Waste Management Division Directors
           Regions I-X


     The purpose of this memorandum is to provide direction on
 the  treatment of RCRA facilities in the Superfund Pre-Remedial
 Program under the Environmental Priorities Initiative (EPI).   EPI
 is an  integrated RCRA/CERCLA system to identify and focus
 resources for clean up  on the most environmentally significant
 sites  first.   It is an  important tool to ensure that the Agency
 fulfills its  mandate to protect human health and the environment.
 As such I want to stress my support for this important
 initiative.

     This guidance presents a process for assessing RCRA
 facilities so that the  most environmentally significant
 facilities can be identified.  This process will allow the Agency
 to meet its mandate under both CERCLA and RCRA.

 BACKGROUND                         *

     The EPI  is designed to allow the Agency to address in a
 timely  manner those sites that present the greatest threat to
 human health  and the environment.   Under the EPI an integrated
 RCRA/CERCLA management  approach will be applied to certain RCRA
 Subtitle C facilities to ensure that the sites presenting the
 greatest threat are identified for action under RCRA or CERCLA.

     I  provided previous guidance (OSWER Directive 9932.0,
May 31,  1988)  that described the EPI concept and also suggested a
method  of  assigning priorities to RCRA facilities for entry into
the CERCLIS inventory and subsequent evaluation under the CERCLA
pre-remedial  program.   This memorandum addresses the subsequent
steps of the  process.

-------
                                                  OSWER Directive 9932.1
      The RCRA universe to be addressed  under EPI consists of two
 groups of sites.   First are the roughly 2,000 RCRA sites that
 over the years have already been entered into the CERCLIS
 inventory.   Most,  if not all,  of these  have received preliminary
 assessments (PAs).   Some of them also received site inspections
 (Sis).   The second group of roughly  3,000  facilities consists of
 closing treatment,  storage,  and disposal facilities, as well as
 active storage and treatment facilities.


 CERCLIS ENTRY AND  PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENTS

      As discussed  in my May 31,  1988, memorandum, the Regions are
 to  enter RCRA EPI  sites into the CERCLIS inventory in a phased
 manner beginning in FY '89.   Approximately 3,000 PAs will be done
 on  EPI  facilities  over three years.  All EPI sites should be
 entered into CERCLIS over a three year  period with approximately
 one-third of each  Region's sites entered in each fiscal year.

      All sites that are entered into CERCLIS must receive a PA.
 The Agency  has set a goal for completing PAs within one year of a
 site's  entry into  CERCLIS.   Once the RCRA  sites are entered into
 CERCLIS,  they should be treated no differently from other sites
 in  CERCLIS  for purpose of setting priorities for, PAs.  No
 separate target for PA accomplishments  on  RCRA sites will be set,
 but all PAs on RCRA sites will count toward the CERCLA SCAP
 target  for  PAs.  However,  entries onto  CERCLIS at the conclusion
 of  the  PA will identify RCRA sites so that we can track progress
 under EPI.

      Based  on the  data collected in  the PA, a projected HRS score
 (or Prescore)  will  be developed.  This  score should be used as a
 basis  for setting  priorities for site inspections or to eliminate
 sites  from  further action under CERCLA.  Using the Prescore, EPI
 sites,  like other  sites,  would be categorized as either high
 priority, medium priority,  or no further remedial action planned
 (NFRAP).  In performing PAs,  EPA's 'preliminary Assessment
 Guidance  for FY '88  (OSWER Directive #9345.0-011 should be used
 until it  is supplemented by new guidance under the revised HRS.

     Upon completion of the PA,  information concerning all RCRA
 sites that  are designated as NFRAP should  be handed back to the
RCRA program,  including the final PA report,the projected HRS
 score,  background documents,  and any other support documents.
Sites that  arc assigned a high or medium priority, should be
referred  on for a screening site inspection SSI or, in some
cases, will  be handed back to the RCRA  program for direct
enforcement or permitting action, including conducting RFAs as
necessary.   This is  discussed further below under Site
Inspections.

-------
                                                     OSWER DIRECTIVE 9932.1
      RCRA facilities that were in CERCLIS before the
 implementation of EPI that have received a PA but not an SI may
 need to be reviewed to determine the next appropriate steps.
 OSWER Directive 9345.0.01 discusses reassessing PAs.  The
 Directive gives the Regions discretion as to which PAs they will
 reassess.  Each Region should apply the same criteria to RCRA
 facilities that it is using for other facilities in CERCLIS to
 decide whether to reassess a PA.  All sites with completed PAs
 where no SI has been done must be assigned a high, medium, or
 NFRAP disposition.  As a result of the reassessment, those RCRA
 sites identified as having incomplete PAs should be upgraded like
 other non-RCRA sites.
 SITE INSPECTIONS

      Upon completion of PAs, RCRA and CERCLA program managers in
 the Regions should determine which of the high and medium
 priority sites identified will receive a CERCLA SSI or RCRA RFA
 and in what time frame.  The CERCLA SCAP target for SSIs will be
 increased beginning in FY '90 to accommodate conducting SSIs at
 approximately 1,200 RCRA facilities over a three to five year
 period.  This is the number of facilities, out of the 3,000
 facilities that will be added to CERCLIS under EPI, that we
 estimate will receive SSIs.   The 1,200 figure results from the
 assumption that the following types of facilities will be handed
 back to the RCRA program after a PA without receiving an SSI:

      o    Facilities that have been designated "NFRAP" at the
           conclusion of the PA;

      o.    Facilities that have already received an RFA under RCRA
           (there should be very few of these because facilities
           that have received RFAs,  normally, would not be entered
           onto CERCLIS under EPI);

      o    Facilities that,  since entry onto CERCLIS, have become
           likely to receive RCRA permits; and

      o    Facilities that are owrred by large, financially robust
           firms.
      An analysis of the financial characteristics  of  EPI
facilities was  performed  for EPA by  ICF,  Inc.   The results may be
helpful to Regions  that wish to hand back sites -owned by large
firms to the RCRA program  after the  PA.   Copies of the results
will be distributed under  separate cover.   In order to reach the
.estimate of 1,200 SSIs  required at RCRA  facilities it was assumed
that facilities owned by  firms with  a net worth of over $4
billion or sales of over  $10 billion would not receive an SSI
under CERCLA.   This was the  most restrictive definition of a

-------
                                                       OSWER directive 9932.
 Although SSIs at RCRA EPI facilities will not begin in earnest
 until FY '90, Regions are not precluded from doing SSIs at  high
 priority RCRA sites in FY '89.

      SSIs performed at RCRA facilities should satisfy the needs
 of the RCRA program to the extent feasible.   This is important
 because at the conclusion of the SSI the facility will be handed
 back to the RCRA program for permitting or enforcement action.
 The SSI should support such actions.  This may require some
 additional data gathering and may mean that information should be
 organized somewhat differently in the SSI report than it would
 for other-than-RCRA sites.  Some of the Regions have developed
 guidelines for conducting an SSI that can also support action
 under RCRA.  The Office of Emergency and Remedial Response  and
 the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement are developing
 information to provide assistance in this area.  It will be
 available shortly.

      Approximately one-quarter of the roughly 2,000 RCRA sites
 that were entered onto CERCLIS before the implementation of EPI
 have received an SI.  Those Sis that have a draft HRS score or
 equivalent should be referred to the RCRA program.  Those sites
 without a preliminary HRS score may be scored or upgraded to add
 any additional RCRA elements.

      The other three-quarters of the 2,000 RCRA facilities  that
 have been on CERCLIS since before the initiation of EPI but have
 not yet been given Sis or rated "NFRAP" are part of the existing
 SI backlog.  These sites should be screened according to the
 criteria discussed above to determine whether they should be
 handed back to the RCRA program.  The rest should receive SSIs
 according to their environmental significance along with
 facilities added to CERCLIS under EPI.

      There will not be a separate SCAP target for SSIs at RCRA
 facilities.  These SSIs will count toward a single SSI SCAP
 target.                             *

 CORRECTIVE ACTION
                                 f
      Upon completion of the SSI/RFA the final report and all
 supporting documents should be referred to the RCRA program for
-financially robust firm that was considered.  Regions may want to
use  a  less restrictive definition if the percentages of
facilities that are handed back to the RCRA program after a PA
are  less than we have estimated.

-------
                                                   OSWER Directive 9932.1
                                  5

  appropriate action.2  At a later time, if an owner/operator is
  found to be bankrupt  or has  demonstrated  unwillingness to
  undertake corrective  action  as  described  in the Federal Register
  notice of August 9, 1988  (53 FR 30005), the site would become
  eligible for listing  on the  NPL.

  RESOURCE IMPACTS

       The FIT teams  in each Region  should  be staffed at sufficient
  levels so that,  along with State pre-remedial funding, the work
  associated with  this  initiative can be accommodated.  This
  assumes that FIT teams  continue to be focused on pre-remedial
  activities.

  EPI COORDINATORS

       EPI will work most efficiently if the RCRA and Superfund
  program managers and  staffs  communicate well and frequently.
  Communication will help both programs anticipate workload and
  assure that  information on facilities as  they are passed from one
  program to another meet the  needs  of each program.  Toward that
  end,  we ask  that each Region appoint someone from the RCRA
  enforcement  program to  be an EPI Coordinator.  It is anticipated
  that  many EPI sites will be  the subject of RCRA enforcement
  action and thus  a person familiar  with the  procedures and needs
  of that program  would be most appropriate to serve as
  coordinator.  The coordinator would serve as a liaison between
  the RCRA and Superfund  programs in the Region and a source of
  information  as to procedures  and program  needs.  The headquarters
  EPI coordinator  is Ellen Brown  at  FTS 475-9848.

  CONCLUSION

       In  summary, I ask  that  you follow the guidelines in this
 memo  in  implementing  EPI.  I  do not expect that every Region will
 take exactly the same approach.  The following principles should
 be applied in your implementation: *

      o    3,000 RCRA  sites should  be entered onto CERCLIS in
       The Agency has determined that the preliminary and
 projected scores generated as part of PAs and Sis are not
 releasable to the public (unless a final decision of NFRAP is
 made).  For this reason they are generated as a document separate
 from the PA and SI reports.  In negotiating with the
 owner/operator for corrective action, it is appropriate to
 Indicate that preliminary scoring of the site suggests that the
'site has a potential to meet NPL scoring requirements.  However,
 specific scores and the score sheet may not be released until
 final  Agency decision (to list or NFRAP) is made.

-------
                                                    OSWER Directive 9932.1
          order  of  environmental  significance over a three year
          period;

          RCRA facilities  should  receive PAs in the same time
          frame  and in  the same manner as other facilities on
          CERCLIS and will count  toward the PA SCAP target in the
          same way;

          After  the PA, determine which sites should have
          an SSI/RFA funded by the CERCLA program using the four
          criteria  outlined in this memorandum;

          Beginning in  FY  '90 it  is expected that 1,200 SSIs will
          be performed  at  RCRA facilities during a three to five
          year period based on the principle of "worst sites
          first."   The  SCAP target for SSIs will be raised to
          reflect this  expectation.
cc:  EPI Task Force Members
     Bruce Diamond
     Sylvia Lowrance
     Henry Longest
     RCRA Enforcement Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X
     Superfund Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X

-------