vv EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9360.0-15
TITLE: The Role of Expedited Response Actions Under SARA
APPROVAL DATE: *Pril 21, 1987
EFFECTIVE DATE: *Pril .21 / W87
ORIGINATING OFFICE: Office of Solid Waste
0 FINAL
D DRAFT
STATUS:
[ ]
{ j
[ ]
[ ]
A- Pending OMB approval
B- Pending AA-OSWER approval
C- For review &/or comment
D- In development or circulating
headquarters
REFERENCE (other documents):
OSWER OSWER OSWER
fE DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE Di
-------
United Slates Environmental Protection Agency
'^ Washington, OC 20460
OEPA OSWER Directive Initiation Reauest
1 . Directive Number
9360.0-15
2. Originator Information
Name of Contact Person
Robert Quinn
Mail Code
WH-548E
3. Title
The Role of Expedited Response Actions
Office
OERR/HSCD
Telephone Number
382-2350
Under SARA
4. Summary of Directive (Include britf statement of purpou)
Provides an update to a July 8, 1986 memorandum from Henry Longest to David Wagoner
(Dir. #9360-10). Clearly defines ERAs as removal actions performed by remedial
contractors. Provides direction on the appropriate use of ERAs.
s. Keywords Superfund, CERCLA, SARA, response actions, renoval, remedial,
expedited response actions. ERA. NPL
6a. Does this Directive Supersede Previous Directives)? [_J Yes
b. Does It Supplement Previous Directives)? fxkYes Q No
9360.0-10 - Expedited Response Actions
£3] No What directive (number, title)
What Directive (number, title)
7.. Draft Level . ,
D A — Signed by AA/DAA D 8 - Signed by Office Director Q C - For Review & Comment D In Development
This Request Meets OSWER Directives System Format
8. SignatjttiMM^b Office Directives* Coordinator
. Name and Title of Approving Official
Henry L. Longest IT, Director, OERR
1Z,/?*7
Date
APR 2 1 1987
OSWER OSWER OSWER
DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, O.C. 20460
APR2I1907
OFFICE or-
SO'Cl D WAS T¥ AN 13 EMERGENCY P6S?Oi\'3E
Directive 9360.0-15
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: The Role of Expedited Response Actioy* Under SARA
FROM: Henry L. Longest II, Director
Office of Emergency and RemediayfRVs^jbnse (WH-548)
TO: Addressees
This memorandum serves as a follow-up to a July 8, 1986
memorandum sent from me to David Wagoner, Director of the Waste
Management Division in Region VII.. That memorandum,. OSWER
Directive #9360.0-10 (attached), laid out the basic tenets of
expedited response actions (ERAs) and their role in the Superfund
Remedial Program. in light of the developments which have occurred
in the interim, as well as in response to the numerous inquiries
we have received on ERAs over the past few months, I believe an
update to that memorandum is needed at this time.
ERAs were-created in response to the February 1986 update to
.the^National.. Contingency .P.,l.a.n, (NCR),,: which ;melde.d three previously-
existing activities, immediate removals, planned removals and
initial remedial measures, into one general activity category of
removals. ERAs, which fall under this general removal heading,
are designed to address those situations at National Priorities
List (NPL) sites which were previously performed as initial
remedial measures (e.g., fences, drainage controls, alternative
water supplies, et.c.). The major distinction between ERAs and
other removal actions, however, is the fact that ERAs are directed
by Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and are performed by remedial
contractors who are either in the process of conducting a response
activity, such as an RI/FS, at the site or are scheduled to
initiate a response activity at the site.
One possible scenario which might lend itself to the implemen-
tation of an ERA is the case of a remedial contractor who, while
performing a remedial investigation of a proposed or final NPL
site, discovers buried drums. Upon discovery of the drums, a
determination must first be made that a threat exists sufficient
to meet the removal criteria as spelled out in the NCP. A further
determination must be made that the existing threat is not so
-------
-2- 9360.0-15
significant as to warrant the performance of a classic emergency
or time-critical removal action. Once these determinations have
been made, it is then left to the discretion of Regional Management
to have the excavation and disposal of the drums performed as
an ERA by the remedial contractor or as a non-time-critical
removal.by a removal contractor. The implementation of an ERA
would negate the ntjed to bring in-a removal contractor specifically
for this task. This would result in a savings of time and money
by ensuring consistency and thus avoiding the need to expend
resources for the education of the removal contractor on site
conditions, etc. \s is the case with all removal actions, any
activity implemented as an ERA-must, to the maximum extent practic-
able, contribute to the efficient performance of any long-term
remedial action performed at the site.
Once the decision has been made to perform an ERA at a site,
the remedial A/E firm next conducts an engineering evaluation/cost
analysis (EE/CA). Draft guidance on how to perform an EE/CA for
all types of removal actions, including ERAs, will be released
in draft form in the near future. With regard to the analysis
of alternatives for an ERA, the EE/CA is closely .akin to. a
focused feasibility study. As such, the EE/CA should consider
all Federal and State applicable or relevant and appropriate
requirements and should stress the use of permanent solutions
and alternative treatment technologies to the maximum extent
practicable. In addition, all alternatives involving off-site
disposal should be consistent with SARA and the Off-site Disposal
Policy. Furthermore, any EE/CA performed for non-time-critical
removal actions, such as ERAs, will be subject to an environmental .
review and a:three - week public comment period. After preparation
of a responsiveness summary, the recommended alternative for the
ERA is officially approved'by the Regional Administrator through
the signing of an Action Memorandum.
Given that ERAs are removal actions, they are subject to
all removal program requirements, including the one-year, $2
million statutory limitations. (It should be noted by remedial
staff not familiar with these limitations that the $2 million cap
includes the cost of EPA project management during the implemen-
tation phase. This results in the need for precise recordkeeping
on the part of the RPM.) A Region may apply to Headquarters for
an exemption from these limitations. However, it is recommended
that, if the Region anticipates that the action to be taken will
he long-term and complex in nature, the Region should consider
performing the action as a remedial operable unit. RPMs should
work closely with their counterparts in the removal program
throughout the implementation of an EE/CA and ERA in order to
ensure that all removal authority requirements have been met.
Regional personnel should also refer to the Superfund Removal.
Procedures for further information on specific removal
requirements.
-------
-3- 9360.0-15
As with all non-tLine-critical response actions, the R°M should
provide adequate opportunity For potentially responsible parties
(PRPs) to conduct the ERA. The Agency policy on the Issuance oF
Administrative Orders for Removal Actions (February 21, 1984) is
still i'i effect *nd should be consulted when .* ^essi i_j tho selec-
tion of an EPA. RPMs should coordinate notification of PRPs
with Regional-enforcement personnel. The Region should conduct a
PRP-search if one has not already been conducted and issue notice
letters. At sites designated as enforcement-lead, the Region
siould consider the issuance of unilateral Administrative Orders
and, if necessary, the referral of a judicial action. If a sattle-
nent is reached and the PRPs agree to perfora the work originally
intended to bt> conducted as an ERA, the activities performed by
the PRPs would be considered a non-time-critical removal an1 not
specifically an ERA since, by definition, ERAs are performed by
remedial contractors.
Funding for ERAs is included within the remedial SCAP budget.
However, current policy calls For these funds to be drawn down
on the removal accounting code. This has caused some difficulty
and confusion in a number of Regions. In response, we have
established a separate accounting code for ERAs. This code,
letter W, is the sane code previously used for the now-obsolete
initial remedial measures. (Note: This memorandum serves as an
advance notification oF the establishment of this code. YOJ will
be receiving in the near future a formal notification which will
contain other information on the use }F this code.)
If you have any further questions with regard to the
appropriate use of ERAs, please contact Bob Quinn of my staff at
382-2350.
,_•.?«.,
Attachment
Addressees:
Director, Waste Management Division, Regions I, IV, V, VI, VII
and VIII
Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division, Region II
Director, Hazardous Waste Management Division, Region III
Director, Toxics and Waste Management Division, Region IX
Director, Hazardous Waste Division, Region X
Director, Environmental Services Division, Regions I, VI, and VII
cc: Superfund Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X
Gene Lucero
Russ Wyer
Tim Fields
-------
xvEPA
United Srares
;."v":n,~
------- |