EPA
United Sttt»
Envtonm§rtsj Pfotwtion
Agmcy
Offle* of Sold Waste
swl Emwgcney
Washington. O.C. 20460
Office olWsastProgrsrnsEnfc
wnt
Summer 1988
Environmental
Fact Sheet
The Super-fund Enforcement
Process: How It Works
INTRODUCTION
In 1980. Congress passed tte Ga
iprehensive Environ*
sad Liability Aa
(CERCLA), oommonry called Superfund. This law pro-
vides te U.S. Environmental Protection Afeacy (EPA)
with the authority and necessary tools to respond directly or
I potentially responsible perdes (PRPs) to respond
to releases or dnetteaed releases of hazardous substances,
CERCLA ueaied two parallel
and complementary prognms timed at adbeving das foiL
TTic flnt piugiuu iDvolvd ite ciMJuit of • MI ftntd
rtimmh s tpcciil tsx on tte chrniicil sod peoo-
leoin industries. lUs tntst ftmd, kuovn • tte Superfkiod.
may be tvailable tor site remedijuioo when no viable PRPs
•R found or when FRPs nu to ttloe
d progrsffi provide* EPA wiih the •ohofitjr to nefoti-
ate tffrtcmenu. to issue orden to PRPs directing diem to
take necessary mponsc actions, or to sue PRPs to repay die
costs of soch actions when die Trust Pond has been toed for
these purposes. The sctions EPA tskes
or to compel responsible psrtes to p*y for or undertake die
remediation of sites are referred to ss tte Superfund enforce-
ment process. CERCLA was resmborized snd amended on
October 17. 1986. by the Superfund Anvnrtmmn snd
Resuthorizsdon Aa (SARA). SARA provides EPA widi
new authorities snd tools tnst inenjthcn the enforcement
projrani.
IAQ:
NBAft
NPL
RCRA:
ROffU:
RlfFS:
ROD:
SARA:
LIST OF ACRONYMS
at RMPOHM.
Comptmtfon m) LMMy Act of i960
ktmgmey AgrMintni
NorvbrtlngAloctitonotRMponstity
' Nritonsj PrioribMLJit
Resown Conservttion and Rwovtiy Act.
as Amended
RWMOW DttignfRcfnecial Action
RHOR) of DecWon
Suptrfund AmMdmnn »d
ribesdieenfbrc
u authorities and the
process dmUfdlowed under the Superfund program. It de-
scribes die octionssvaQable to EPA fcff remediating hazani-
»sues; die tools and mechanisms dm EPA may use
ale
***
snd describes the
OVERVIEW OF THE ENFORCEMENT
PROGRAM
A major goal of the Superfund program is to encourage PRPs
to fT">»iHitf hazardous waste sites. The enforcement proc-
ess normally used by EPA to enlist PRP involvement may
include five major efforts.
-------
SUPERFUND REMEDIALJENFORCEMENT PROCESS
mmmmlt tj.m fmmmj^mA^A ^^^mMmt ^^mm^
sonaDMaopmanonBWQHipnce
gram. EPA takes long-tens aLtiuus to
reduce rflfasfs or threats of releases of
dm sre serious but not unmediafeJy Ufc-direatc&uif. Removal
HRS scare of 2SJ or steve t
LJttCNPL).
Nest.*
of the contam
s added to the National Priorities
(RI) is conducted ID assess the
nation and die potential risks. A
feastbOiiy sudy (F5) is ten prepared to examine and evt' iaie
indBCiBdbyneSaNB.
**'* ***** I"*** * '**•••* *** *»"««•• tiaalth *rm~tl*r*nrtkm ailuiii'm-
roeiitt may be taloen at any point 01 tte nmeoau pfpcmi
TT>e Supecfund
site inspectioo (PA/SI),
to
oai
Tbesteistnmmilridasinttf>8H«aart»iailrin|Sys»ni(HRS).
a niaiKii 10! fM**'|iy sysauu nod to idHiiify ine siai's potential
haianl to die envmnment and ptibic health SMS iui|ued"sn
tive and die dnftFSreporuEPAcnooaasaspecific remedial ptao
i ia seJecdon in the Record of Daesdon (ROD).
dw auial site woric, or
•vRDfllA activities have
toensoredieefracdvcness
quire onsjomf operation or
Ftm. EPAattempts to identify PRPs as eaily in tbe Super-
fimd process sspocsibie. Once ideotified. EPA wffl notify
tttftf p«Tt4*« rrf Higir pnaMirial Hahllhy (bTICSpUOK WOIII
5VQBQ tnB SlfiB U SCuBQIUfiQ suf 90a^D£ ftCDOa^L S0COO0* itt QIC
couneofidendfyinf respoowwoikBbeojoae, EPA win
fePRPstDdotbewofkataste.
Thfad. if EPA bettsvs* the PRP is wfflmg and capable of
ifctimthF '"vit. PP fk ^TU attfinpTTtirfTjiaaf m.Ti»im -T-
ment agreement withttscruPCsX The enforcement agree-
ment may be an agreement entered ia coon (such as a
judicial consent decree) or it may be an administrative
order (where EPA and the PRP(s) sign an agreement
outside of court). Both of these agreements are enforce-
able in a court of law. Under both agreements EPA
oversees die PRP.
Fourth, if a settlement is not reached. EPA can use ia
of actknij PRPs are directed to peiftjiut removal or reme-
dial actions at a SUB. If the PRPs do not respond to an ad-
nimistrajive order. EPA has the option of filing a law suit
Fifth* if Pi^Psdoootperfonndieif tpuiiwi *wUo
-------
ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES
OISMB $•*«-SARA
on October 17.1986, when Praktant Reagan signed into tew the
vUDQg^TlflJs] f^JlftflBall^BflfllB flDfi LwAflllllVjflg^ftBtSflKfJ f^fSm QK l7BO
(SARA). IQCSCtt&COQBMOOBCfttMOBtoBSiflpiVHnwMTntttnBll
to SSJ billion and clarified and
ID me my person.
feranyvtateiioaaf
at the tew.
EPA's ahutty to
obainiafonMcionnDmp
•SARA
win knowledge of the BIB.
SARAalJoadds*soa»ndealingwidindets«oflazardoussab-
i at Federal fiKiliaei. Tttjspravisiancbnnci that Super-
ia nqainmena. SARA clearly defines the pnxen Fedenl
NPL am. EPA OHkH d» tat Mta.*» of to needy if the
EPA diaaowj. A Fadoal agency must
•
•ft
(IAG). except in auatgaeej onabon. lAOs are eataccabte
0^ »k^
ljU DIB
iuun • SARA vd to MrtOB 109 pmloes. if
dH mpoodiac •coney does not comply wfah dw tenns of the
compel *PRP
dveaiof
heakhordw
EPA nay
from any or aO of the
ACW
forme in fuuire
of aD data.
ScaM an grwn a flBiiial oppomnity to
Public paniupa
atCeoBn^ocilnieiiienhincedby
SARA. wUsh esablisnes a Fedenl Agency Hazanhm Wane
yofin-
Car faUnreiD provide
it
•SARA
k»ofa
i fbrdiepobUc andisiwibbie nvpsbBc incpecoon.
EmysixDontaiafiBr oaaUUnmani of thedocfcecEPA wUl
r« HKor •eFedral ndfite Oat
•tike
TWi tateacdoa is fanpaittDt
cmttcy
ddiyi tn coodui'ili
k pTovidcs toe oppor*
Ite ste and Buy tcducc
The ***fi<"''**'*T*'> pnrfffii bcfDM wbb OB KUCII CorPRPi*
COOT micnt wiitaNFL Uuluf.
Once identified. PRP» ire typically faaued a lenenlnoboe
leoer. The fenenl notice infoans FRPi of ihdr poteotiil
liability. The general notice tin m«yinciQ
-------
Negotiations tor tbt RI/FS
Mixed
ThePRPnuyowtoatnelU/FSifEPAdaenniiwtbePRP CERCLAwnborliatbeuje of "mixed ftndinf.- In mixed
is qualified to conduct the RI/FS aid if the PRP agrees to
reimburse EPA for tbe cost of oversight The terns of mis
agreement to conduct the RI/FS are mitHn^H in either an
Administrative Order on Consent or a Consent Decree, both
of which are enforceable in court. If negotiations do not
result in an order or a decree. EPA may use Trust Fund
monies to perform the RI/FS and seek reimbursement for in
costs.
Negotiations for tht RIVRA
Where a special notice is used, the moratorium for RIVRA
may be extended to a tool of 120 days. The terms of the
agreement to conduct die RIVRA are oodined in a Consent
Decree, which aD parties sign and is emend in conn. Ifne-
goditions do not result in« settlement. EPA may conduct the
remedial activity using Trust Fund monies, and sue for reim-
bursement of its costs wuti the assistance of the Department
of Justice (DOT), fr EPA inayissw a unfcBenl administra-
tive onkr or directly fik suit •> force the PRPi to conduct the
The Information used by EPA to select a remedy at a she
must be made available to the pubik. TMs mjbmation. u>
cludi
ng p
ts, is compfled
d in the
administrative record files. The administrative record
serves two main purposes. First. it cniuiti an oppor&inity
for public involvement in the selection of a remedy at a she.
Second, it provides a basis fix judicial review of the
TOOLS FOR ENFORCEMENT
In additton >> ootlfarinf die proceduiBi iar theento
process, CERCLA provides tod* flat <
EPA achieve setnemeoi
! designed o> help
t authori-
ties may be used by EPA ID!
'iffffd of ***r*>*g diem to court. EPA believes that PRPs
should be involved early in ate Soperfund process at a she.
It is in die beat interest of PRPi to negotiate wfch EPA and *>
conduct the RI/FS. as this can keep the proms f|MM|irl and
with PRPs using tools in SARA and la g"""""'"t» work
towards improvements in the settlement process itself.
These new SARA tools include, but are not limited to:
funding, sealing PRPs and EPA share the costs of the re*
spouse action and EPA pursues viable non-semen for the
costs EPA incurred. Through tuMif****. EPA 'Hyuttfs the
use of three types of mixed Amdinfc arrangements. These are
"ptfjuilmiiiaiiun.' where the PRPs conduct die remedial
action and EPA agrees to reimburse the PRPs for a portion
of their response costs "cash-outs." where PRPs pay for a
portion of die irnmrtlf* costs and EPA conducts the work;
and "mixed work." mere EPA and PRPs both agree to
conduct and fliiamf d* xrete portions of a remedial action.
EPA prefers a "preauthorized" mixed-funding agreement.
EPA
ff^tifn
100 percent of
USB Of
, but wfll f*"**™* to seek
nth
coats from PRPs where possible.
not change EPA's approach to de-
termining liability. PRPs may be held jointly and severally
liable and EPA will seek to recover EPA's mixed funding
share from noo-setHing PRPs whenever possible.
separate
•MDK vOf 100 CD006Q VGOftOOy• ^JOOCf uC
relatively small contributors of waste
to a ate. or certain 'Innocent' landowners, may resolve their
liability. '»•««»•••• i«««if»«m»i« •«» p*"*^ «*" *emtf* [""p-
errywm^oa knowing that it was used nx hazardous waste
agreements with a party where the jcrrtfinftnt includes only
a |>|''>*<> |nmit*i «r me rfiponsemju and when die
of waste lepresents a relativeiy '"^''i1* WKHint and is not
highly toxic, compared to other hazardous substances at die
tacutty. ^JB ouQiflAis settlements aiao may oe used ^vnere the
PRP is a site owner who did not sonduct or permit '
of hazardous sub-
typically used in con-
\ generally win be in die font of administrative orders
Covenants Not To Sue
A covenant not to sue may be used toUmit the preseni and
future liability of PRPs, thus encouraging them to reach a
sptrtrmenf early. However, agree menu generally include
s" that would allow EPA to hold parties liable for
-------
COnditinnt unknown atthe time of «»n|fP.»m nr tnr fy>y fo.
formation Indirartng dm the remedial action is not protec-
tive of human health and the envin'»»n**" In some '•am.
such as d£ mjofrnji settlements, releases may be g*«i«»^
without reopenen. Covenants not to sue are likely to be
used only in instances where the negotiating PRP is respon-
sible for only a very small portion of a site, and. therefore,
EPA is assured that any future problems with the site are not
likely to be the result of dm PRFs contribution
Non-binding A llorattom of Responsibility (NBAR)
NBAR is a process for EPA to propose a way for PRPs to
allocate costs among diemselves. EPA may decide to
prepare an NBAR when the Agency determines this alloca-
tion is likely to promote settlement. An NBAR does not bind
the government or PRPs and ftaiinm be admitted as evidence
or reviewed in any judicial proceeding, inching citizen
suits. Since each PRP may be held liable for the entire cost
of response, regardless of the size of its contribution to a site,
knowing EPA's proposed allocation scheme may encourage
the PRPs to setdeoutofoamramer than runferiskofbeing
held fully
STATE PARTICIPATION
The Superftmd program allows for and encourages Stan
participation in enforcement activities, rim. EPA is re-
quired to notify die State of negotiations with PRPs and
provide the opportunity for the State to participate. States
may be a party to any settlement in which they participate.
In addition. EPA is authorized to provide funds to States to
allow State participation in enforcement activities and to
finance certain State-lead enforcement actions.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/COMMUNITY
RELATIONS
EPA policy and die Superfund law establish a strong pro-
gram of public participation in the decision-making process
at both Fond-lead and enforcement sites. The procedures
and policy for public participation at enforcement sites are
basically the same as for rion-enforcement sites. This fact
sheet is limited to those special differences in community
relations when the Agency is negotiating with or pursuing
litigation •gajt*tf PRPs. The T»«T linpd below has nu-
merous fact sheets on die Superfund program, including a
fact sheet on Public Involvement.
Community i
-lead sites may differ
from omnmunity relations activities at Fund-lead sites
because negotiations between EPA. DOJ and PRPs gener-
ally focus on the issue of liability. The negotiation process.
thus, requires that some information be kept confidential
and is not usually open 0 the public.
When tiwse discussions deal with new technical*informa-
tion that changes or modifies remedial decisions, tins infor-
nuuionwmbedocunientedandplacedmtheadmimsvanve
recofd files. This process provides the public with critical
information ""d enables !*r Agency to move quickly to-
wafds sfirlfiBfUL Information on enforcement strategy;
details of the negotiations, such as the behavior, attitudes, or
kgal positions of responsible parties; and evidence or attor-
ney work product material developed during negotiations.
must remain
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
------- |