September, 1981
What is SUPERFUND?
SUPERFUND, enacted on Decemoer 11, 1980, creates a trust fund of Si.6
billion during a five-year period beginning 'n 1981, to provide emer-
gency cleanup by the Federal Government of chemical spil's and hazardous
waste flumps that threaten human health or the environment.
The fund closes a gap in hazardous waste control by allowing the ~ed-
eral Government to take immediate action against spills or dumps for
which no responsible party can be immediately found.
In responding to an emergency cleanup, the Governirwrt will take one of
three approaches: (I) Where the owner of a dump canrot be identified,
the Government will proceed with the cleanup; (2) Where, the owner can be
identified but refuses to clean up or cleans up inadequately, the Gov-
ernment will assume -esocnsibility and hold the owner liaole for the
cost; (3) Where the owner can be identified and agrees to a cleanup, the
owner will proceed with the cleanup and the Government wi;l monitor the
worlc.
The 3'JPERFUND law is actually named the "Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act of ]980" and is also referred
to as CERCLA.
What does SUPERFUND cover?
It covers discharges from hazardous waste dumps and so1! Is •'nto wate**-
ways, ground water, the air ana land discharges and spills tnat tnreaten
to ham human health and the environment. It does not cover every chem-
ical nishaa such as a cnemical spill affecting only employees at 3 work-
place . (This type of incident is dealt with jnaer other cede--al laws.1!
Where does the money come from?
It comes from two sources: 37.5 screent of SU'-'E^.F^ND trust-fur^G
money from taxes imposed on oil (the raw matar-al -jsec to produce ,nany
synthetic chemicals) and on 42 specific chemical ;,cmoounds, 12.5 percent
from general tax revenues.
Congress has approved President Reagan'- r^auect ~?.r a 5H8 -nil'! or
'-seal vear 1981
from the fund.
ion for SUPERFUND for 1982.
. ne :--esident nas
Region 5 • 2CO S. D«?ari>or-n
uoa«o.
L.
• 13L2) 353-2072
-------
- 2 -
What is the State's role?
The law specifies that States must be consulted before the Federal
government moves in to clean up a dangerous site. Barring an emergency,
cleanup cannot continue after $1 million has been spent or six months
have elapsed, unless the State agrees to pay part of the cost. A
State's share is 10 percent if the site is privately owned; 50 percent
if the site is State- or local government-owned. In the course of a
cleanup the State must assure offsite disposal in a Federally approved
facility.
Are the final rules in place to operate the program?
Two key documents will provide the basic blueprint for carrying out
cleanups under SUPERFUND. The first is an executive order from the
President that will assign various responsibilities under the law to
certain Federal agencies, such as EPA and the Coast Guard.
The second is a revision of the National Contingency Plan that will
detail methods for discovering and investigating dumps; methods for
evaluating their cleanup; the roles of Federal, State, and local govern-
ments in these actions; methods for assuring that remedial actions are
cost-effective; and criteria for determining which dumps to clean up
first.
In addition, the National Contingency Plan will list 400 dumps as
priority "response targets." To the extent practicable, the 100 high-
est-priority facilities will include at least one dump in each State.
The National Contingency Plan is now being revised and will be issued
later this year. On August 14, 1981, the President issued Executive
Order #12316 regarding CERCLA implementation.
What is EPA doing in the interim?
The SUPERFUND law required present and former owners and operators of
hazardous waste sites, who have not previously reported to EPA, to noti-
fy the Agency of their sites by June 9, 1981.
EPA will develop a system for determining which dumps or spills pose
the most serious threats to people or the environment. The worst of
these will be tackled first. The States will submit their own list of
dumps for priority cleanup for EPA to consider. EPA's exact system
for ranking dumps and spills for action will be further defined in the
National Contingency Plan.
Once the framework for implementing SUPERFUND is in place, the actual
cleanup of spills or dumps will be done in most cases by private firms
under contract to EPA or the States, that will be delegated SUPERFUND
authority and money. Where the Federal Government is primarily respon-
sible for conducting the cleanup, a Federal on-scene coordinator will
ensure that the work is done correctly.
-------
- 3 -
How does Section 311 under the dean Water Act relate to
SUPERFUND?
Section 311 of the Clean Water Act provides money for EPA and the
Coast Guard for emergency cleanup of oil spills and spills of 297
specific hazardous chemicals into U.S. waterways.
When SUPERRJND was enacted, Congress authorized EPA to use half the
money remaining in the 311 account, or $6,7 million out of $13.4 million
available.
The U.S. Treasury Department began allowing EPA to spend this money on
February 25, 1981. Prior to this, EPA carried out cleanups by borrow-
ing from the other half of the 311 money earmarked primarily for oil
spill control by the Coast Guard.
Now that EPA's share is available, the Agency has to return to the
Coast Guard the money it borrowed prior to February 25th ~ about $5
million.
This leaves EPA about $1.5 million of 311 money for removal action
at dumps. About $500,000 is being held in reserve by EPA to respond
to any new and extremely serious release of toxic compounds that may
occur. Funds to continue minimal cleanup at existing emergency response
sites, as well as for long-term remedial actions at other sites, will
come from the remaining 311 monies and from the new supplemental appro-
priation.
Since the recently enacted SUPERFUND is intended to cover chemical
spills, the 311 fund in the future will be used primarily for cleaning
up oil spills.
What is EPA doing now to remedy dangers from dumps?
Several things:
— EPA, the States, and private parties have identified more than 9,400
dumps. Of that number, they have made a preliminary assessment of
5,900 dumps, and have inspected 2,600. A tentative disposition on
further action has been made on more than 1,700 dumps. In addition,
the Federal Government has filed 59 enforcement cases against dumps
and issued 53 administrative cleanup orders. Emergency actions have
been taken at 46 dumps, and more than 100 such actions are in the plan-
ning stages.
— EPA is continuing cleanup, monitoring or other protective action at
23 dumps in 11 States (Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and
Texas). These dumps contain wastes including solvents, PC3s and other
possible carcinogenic compounds, heavy metals, and other discards that
have contaminated, or threaten to contaminate, nearby surface and
underground waters and may cause other environmental or human harm.
-------
—As part of the SUPERFUND legislation, EPA in February 1981 selected
20 sites around the country for engineering design studies to determine
how best to alleviate the health threat they may pose. (See Attached.)
The studies will begin soon under agreements between EPA and the States.
The 20 sites will be among those considered by EPA for eventual remedial
action.
-------
- 5 -
A SUPERFUM) FACT SHEET
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has allocated $3.8 million
for engineering design studies at 17 hazardous waste sites.
The funds are part of a $14 million amendment to the Fiscal Year 1981
budget, which was approved by Congress to accelerate the current EPA
program of site assessment, investigation, case development, and reme-
dial* design, and to prepare to implement the new SUPERFUND law. One
element of the amendment allowed ,EPA to initiate engineering studies
at selected sites to determine least cost, and practical remedies before
SUPERFUND monies become available.
The 17 sites are among others that could later qualify for some form
of remedial cleanup action through Federal or State programs, or through
EPA or State enforcement actions. The list of sites is attached.
Actual selection of sites for Federal remedial action under SUPERFUND
will occur later, and may or may not Include these sites.
EPA 1s allocating funds for engineering design studies based on such
studies conducted to date and readiness at the site to proceed to final
design, on potential hazard to public health or the environment, and on
current enforcement status. Some funds were allocated to some of the
sites for preliminary studies.
Before any of the $3.8 million 1s spent, EPA will try to get respon-
sible parties to clean up the sites voluntarily. If responsible parties
undertake the studies and remedial design activities proposed for the
site in a timely manner, EPA will use the tentatively allocated planning
money to respond to other sites.
The engineering studies are scheduled to begin in April and will be
carried out through joint agreements between EPA and the applicable
States, or through direct EPA or State contracts.
In addition to the 17 sites selected, there are hundreds of other
sites where considerable work has already been completed by EPA, State
agencies, and responsible private parties. Currently over 9,400 sites
have been identified, 5,900 preliminary assessments have been under-
taken, and about 2,600 investigations have been completed at hazardous
waste sites. A total of 59 enforcement cases have been filed; 53 admin-
istrative cleanup orders issued. Emergency actions have been undertaken
at 46 sites, and more than 100 such actions are in the planning stages.
-------
- 6 -
SITES SELECTED FOR ENGINEEERING DESIGN STUDIES
Woburn
Woburn, Massachusetts
* Seymour Recycling Corporation
Seymour, Indiana
Bridgeport Rental and Oil Service
Gloucester County, New Jersey
Cordova Chemical
Muskegon County, Michigan
Kin-Buc
Edison, New Jersey
* Gratiot County Landfill
Gratiot County, Michigan
Lipari
Gloucester County, New Jersey
* Reilly-Tar
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Burnt Fly Bog
New Jersey City, New Jersey
Arkansas City Dump
Arkansas City, Kansas
PAS Site
Oswego, New York
Motco
La Marque, Texas
Love Canal (Black Creek)
Niagara Falls, New York
BWS-Tate Cove
Yille Platte, Louisiana
Bruin Lagoon
Butler County, Pennsylvania
Denver Radium Sites
Denver, Colorado
North Hollywood Dump
Memphis, Tennessee
Stringfellow Landfill
Riverside, California
Valley of the Drums
Bull it County, Kentucky
Caron Chemical
Monmouth, Oregon
[ * U.S. EPA REGION V {Midwest Region) SITES ]
------- |