United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
Publication 9200.1-12-2
PB92-963279
September 1992
Superfund
&EPA Superfund Progress
Summer 1992
Focus: The Environmental Response Team
Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model
Superfund Progress Report
-------
Focus: The Environmental Response Team
EPA's Special Forces Are Always
Ready for Action
A brick compound in Edison, New
X~X Jersey, used as a weapons depot
in two world wars, is now the base
for EPA's Environmental Re-
sponse Team (ERT). The ERT's
skilled scientists and their high-
tech equipment comprise a
major force in EPA's war
against environmental degra-
dation.
The ERT stands ready to go
anywhere any time they are
needed to deal with the toughest
environmental emergencies. When
the oil tanker Exxon Valdez ran onto
Alaska's Bligh Reef in 1989, ERT members
were on their way to Prince William Sound
within hours. When retreating Iraqi solders set
more than 500 Kuwaiti oil wells ablaze in early
1991, the ERT took the first air samples to gauge
the fires' effect on people and the environment.
And when drums of arsenic were swept into the
sea from the decks of a freighter earlier this year,
the ERT found them for the Coast Guard.
EPA established the ERT in 1978 to provide on-
site expert assistance at oil spills. As the nation's
environmental protection programs grew to
encompass hazardous materials and other
environmental threats, ERT's responsibilities
grew along with them. Today ERT members
work on water and air quality issues, health and
safety procedures, training, new environmental
clean-up technologies, and a host of related
topics. They advise Superfund On-Scene Coordi-
nators at emergencies and Remedial Project
Managers in charge of long-term cleanups. The
ERT swings into action only when asked, but
even foreign countries can tap the ERT through
the U.S. State Department or the Agency for
International Development. And team members
still work on oil spills.
People Make The Program
"The people who work here are, I think, the best
in the world at what they do," says Dr. Joseph P.
Lafornara, who heads the ERT's environmental
scientists, chemists, biologists, engineers, and
other specialists. Plaques and citations that fill
the walls of his office—and those of other team
members—attest to their excellence and
commitment to environmental
protection.
"Rod Turpin, for example, has
taken safety programs for
chemical emergencies from
nothing, from just hold your
nose and approach from up-
wind, to today's attitude of
protecting the responders first,"
says Lafornara.
As head of the ERT's Safety and
Air Surveillance Section, Rodney D.
Turpin's job is to ensure the safety and
health of all EPA field personnel within the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
His group also assesses the potential risks faced
by residents, on-site personnel, and the environ-
ment at or near Superfund and other hazardous
waste sites. To make these assessments, section
members develop and use the latest air sam-
pling and monitoring techniques.
"We respond to just about anything that has to
do with air sampling, long-term cleanup, or
emergencies," Turpin explains.
Often, calls come from Superfund On-Scene
Coordinators faced with tire fires, industrial
fires, or train derailments that pour particularly
dangerous chemicals into the air. "Most of the
time we go out and set up a sampling plan,"
says Turpin. "After a period of time, the EPA
Region, State, or a contractor can pick up the
job."
The Safety and Air Surveillance Section relies on
various high-tech gear to help do its job. Its
mobile Trace Atmospheric Gas Analyzer
(TAGA), also known as the "million-dollar bus,"
is one of about six in the world that can detect
particles in the parts per billion range. That's
akin to finding the one penny painted blue in
$10 million worth of pennies. It can tell right
away if a passing car needs a tune-up. The
section's open-path Fourier Transform Infrared
Spectrometer sends out a beam of light to
measure contaminants in the air instanta-
neously. That gear has piqued the Secret
Service's interest; they think it might be useful
for protecting the White House.
-------
Focus: The Environmental Response Team
High-Tech Support
The latest high-tech robots extend the ERT's
capabilities in the field, and in the water. Dr.
David Charters, who's in charge of the ERT's
ecological assessment work, also drives an
unmanned remotely operated vehicle (ROV)
designed to find environmental hazards under-
water.
"Historically, water problems have been ignored
because we had no technology to access them,"
Charters explains. "You don't want to put divers
into the water to determine if there's been a
chemical spill because of the danger to the
divers. Chemicals can corrode parts of their
scuba gear, or penetrate holes in their air hoses
so that the divers end up breathing contami-
nants at high pressure. And suits leak; even dry
suits aren't completely dry."
So, safe and dry in a boat, Charters pilots the
specially outfitted remotely controlled machine
to find sunken drums of chemicals and other
hazards in water as deep as 500 feet. He's taken
the ROV to the Niagara and Mississippi Rivers
and 35 miles off the New Jersey shore. Driving
the ROV took a little getting used to, sort of like
a tricky video game. "You just crash into things.
Any type of angle is difficult, and you have to
do it in three dimensions. But the more hours
you have behind the sticks, the better you get at
it," he notes.
The ROV, officially a "MiniRover Mkll," has
been used at about a dozen sites in the past three
years. "That includes the Continental Steel site
in Kokomo, Indiana, where we went to look at a
Artist's rendering of the ERT's Remotely Operated Vehicle nn the Prowl.
few drums in shallow water and ended up
findings hundreds in deeper water not visible
from the surface," says Charters.
The ERT has made a few modifications to the
three-foot long submersible. It came with a
video camera, so its controller could see where
the machine was going, even if no one knew
exactly where it was. Not knowing exactly
where the ROV found something could be a
problem, so ERT technicians added a tracking
system. Later, they added sonar to detect
submerged 55-gallon drums. To find such
objects, Charters takes the ROV to the bottom,
switches on the sonar, and if the sonar finds a
likely target, "flies" the ROV in for a closer look.
That's how he found drums of arsenic that were
washed off the decks of a freighter in the
Atlantic earlier this year. "Even the Coast Guard
doesn't have this capability," says Charters.
While the ROV has many uses, its primary one
is to protect the ERT's three-person diving team
by removing as many unknowns as possible
before they enter the water to draw samples and
assist in the recovery of hazardous materials.
Diving is dangerous enough on its own, and the
hazards posed by underwater contaminants
only add to the danger.
The Importance of Training
The sophisticated detection gear used by the
ERT can readily identify what's in the air, but
even at the speed it works firefighters or indus-
trial workers already will have been exposed
before contaminants are identified. How can
they be protected from airborne
contaminants?
"The best way is to have a health and
safety program already in place so
that workers don't have to do what
they used to: go in, smell something,
then do something about it," Turpin
says. "Our industry is one of un-
knowns. Anything out there can be
handled appropriately if your pro-
;ram is geared to the unknown and
/ou train people properly."
Training people properly is another
part of the ERT's job. Superfund's
Hazardous Materials Incident Re-
sponse Training (HMIRT) Program
offers almost a dozen courses on
management, air sampling and
monitoring, clean-up, and safety. Each
vear about 6,000 federal, State, local,
-------
Focus: The Environmental Response Team
and private industry personnel attend the
courses held in Edison and in Cincinnati, Ohio.
HMIRT also simulates full-scale hazardous
materials accidents around the country several
times a year to train police, firefighters, and
other public safety personnel who often are the
first to arrive at the scene. These simulations are
conducted at the request of EPA Regions to test
Hazardous Material Contingency Plans and
Operating Procedures, their plans for respond-
ing to hazardous materials emergencies. Realism
is the by-word of the simulations, which feature
harmless smoke, running liquids, and actors
playing concerned citizens, victims, and news
reporters.
ERT training courses are also held at various
locations around the world, wherever the need
exists. For example, ERT has trained Panama
Canal Zone firefighters in the proper response
procedures for accidents involving hazardous
chemicals routinely shipped through the canal.
ERT also designed, at the request of the Hungar-
ian government, a special course for senior
response officials, which covered conditions
typically found and chemicals typically used in
that country. Conducted less than a year after
the withdrawal of Soviet troops, the ERT
training was the first U.S. hazardous materials
course presented in Eastern Europe.
The Chemistry Connection
Knowing what in the air, soil, or water can harm
people and animals requires careful laboratory
analysis of samples taken in the field. That's
where the ERT's chemistry labs come in. State-
of-the-art mobile laboratories—35-foot trailers
crammed with the same analytical gear used in
the ERT's Edison labs—can measure the pres-
ence of some chemicals in as little as 24 hours.
That quick response will become even more
important as the Superfund Program imple-
ments the Superfund Accelerated Cleanup
Model (SACM). SACM is designed to speed site
cleanups and protect more people and the
environment from the effects of hazardous
waste sites. (See related story on page 9.)
The fully staffed labs in Edison can analyze just
about any contaminant likely to be found in the
field. (The biggest exception is the cancer-
causing chemical dioxin, which requires expen-
sive, specialized testing equipment. Demand for
dioxin analyses by the ERT is too low to make
purchasing such equipment worthwhile. Sus-
pected dioxin samples are sent to other labs.)
Five years ago, the ERT sent about 90 percent of
the samples it received to outside labs for
analysis. Today, about 90 percent of the samples
are analyzed in-house, at a savings to taxpayers
of millions of dollars. And the mobile labs save
even more money. Rapid turnaround of a
sample tested for volatile organic chemicals
(chemicals that evaporate readily in air) can cost
$1,200 when done by a private lab, compared to
$200 when done by the ERT. And the ERT labs
can find smaller amounts of chemicals in the
samples than private labs can find.
Chemist Raj Singhvi is proud of the fast turn-
around, sensitive analysis, and high-quality data
his labs provide. Because the ERT handles some
of the toughest environmental problems, often
on short notice, the equipment and ingenuity of
the labs and lab staff is often challenged. "I
never say no to anyone who needs work. If I
can't do it, I'll find a way to do it," Singhvi says.
About 25 people work in the ERT's labs, analyz-
ing about 6,000 samples a year. "We do analysis
of air, soil, and water from all over the U.S. and
even internationally," says Singhvi. Air samples
collected by ERT members from the Kuwaiti oil
fires, for example, were flown to Edison for
analysis.
Many of the ERT labs' processes are automated,
freeing technicians from tedious chores while
ensuring a consistently high-quality analysis.
Preparing samples by hand, however, can take a
lot of time—as much as three weeks—while
actual analysis takes only two days. Singhvi
hopes automation can help. He has his eye on a
$100,000 computer hardware and software
system that can get 50 samples ready at one
time. It still has some bugs, however, but once
they are worked out, and the price drops, that
automated system may join the ERT's impres-
sive inventory.
Deploying the best people and the best equip-
ment to tackle short- and long-term hazardous
materials problems at a moment's notice is what
the ERT is all about. They provide, as one team
member says with the understatement that
typifies the group, "a little oomph" to the EPA
Regions' capabilities.
To report oil or
S^ai
1-800-424-8802
'A* 0fv Washington, DC:
-------
Focus: The Environmental Response Team
Innovative Communication: Presenting
Environmental Response Television
Music begins as a darkened television screen brightens
and a logo proclaiming "ERTV" flies onto center
screen; Environmental Response Television is on the air.
TIT
ERTV is one of the innovative approaches the Environmen-
tal Response Team is taking to communicate information
about the assessment and cleanup of hazardous waste problems. ERT Environmental Scientist Robert W.
Cibulskis produces the ERTV videotapes, which currently number about 15 titles on topics ranging from
cleaning up abandoned wood treatment sites to worker health and safety. More are planned as ERTV
begins production in earnest.
"If we're going to make a serious stab at technology transfer and information distribution, we have to do
something like ERTV/' Cibulskis says. "I'd like it to be ERTV."
ERTV's mission is to present technical information in a way that non-scientists find interesting and can
readily understand, the short video tapes currently are used to support the ERT's training classes, but
Cibulskis envisions a half-hour news magazine format for distribution to other EPA Headquarters offices,
Regional Offices and, eventually, outside the Agency. These videos will cover technical and general
interest subjects, as well as current events in the area of hazardous wastes. The first half-hour news
magazine tape, featuring leaking underground storage tanks at a site in Virginia not far from Washing-
ton, DC, is already in the works.
Cibulskis started making ERTV tapes about a year ago, and he has collected quite a bit of footage from
field sites. He stresses the high quality of videos, which feature sophisticated production techniques.
"This isn't home video that we're doing," he says.
New Releases
These eight titles recently became available
through ERTV Video Distribution:
Cleanup by the CRV
[Length: 21 minutes]
A five-year Superfund cleanup in Eliza-
beth, New Jersey left 182 unmarked cylin-
ders untouched because a safe and legal
means for their cleanup was lacking. A new
technology, the Cylinder Recovery Vessel
(CRV) cleaned up the site in three months.
This video shows the step-by-step cylinder
cleanup using the CRV.
e-DATA (Electronic Data Transfer
and Validation System) Overview
[Length: 6 minutes]
EPA's micro computer-based program e-
Data, aids in the validation, management,
and communication of hazardous waste
sample information. This brief video shows
how e-Data is used at each of the three key
waste-management locations: the site, the
laboratory, and the office.
Wood Treatment Sites Cleanup
[Length: 9 minutes, 32 seconds]
The first of two ERTV videos illustrating
the problems caused by abandoned wood
treatment facilities, this production pro-
vides an overview of the wood-treating
process. It gives special attention to the
toxic chemicals, such as creosote and PCP,
once used at these facilities.
Investigation and Clean Up of Wood
Treatment Sites
[Length: 7 minutes]
Abandoned wood treatment sites provide
a unique backdrop for this ERTV produc-
tion, which delves into cleanups underway
at 90 sites.
Operation Wildfire
[Length: 13 minutes, 15 seconds]
Emergency response personnel from three
California communities, U.S. EPA Region
IX, and the Environmental Response Team
practice evacuation, emergency response
setup, and rescue techniques at a simulated
toxic spill.
Superfund Seniors
[Length: 12 minutes]
A dozen students from Washington, DC's
Duke Ellington School for the Gifted and
Talented attend a six-week internship at
EPA Headquarters. The video highlights
the students' experience in the classroom
and on field trips to the Coast Guard Re-
sponse Center, a Superfund site, a labora-
tory, and an emergency response team lo-
cation.
Tire Fires
[Length: 15 minutes]
This video discusses the health and envi-
ronmental threats posed by tire fires. It also
offers practical suggestions on how to deal
with tire-infested landfills, the advantages
and disadvantages of various extinguish-
ing methods, and what communities can
do to prevent tire fires.
Worker Protection Standards
[Length: 21 minutes]
This video investigates the EPA and Occu-
pational Safety and Health Administration
standards for hazardous waste operations
and emergency response, known as the
HAZ-WHOPER. It also presents details
about each of the regulation's provisions
designed to protect the health and safety of
workers who use hazardous materials or
who respond to hazardous materials emer-
gencies.
-------
Focus: The Environmental Response Team
Overseas Action: ERT Monitors the
Kuwait Oil Fires
The scientific expertise available to Superfund
and other environmental clean-up programs
in this country also is available to foreign
nations faced with environmental emergencies.
Environmental Response Team (ERT) members
have worked with officials in almost two dozen
countries since 1980. Perhaps their most spec-
tacular overseas job was monitoring the air
pollution from 650
burning Kuwaiti oil
wells at the end of the
1991 Gulf War.
to determine whether the fires were a public
health risk. They collected the first air samples
from the fires, which Campagna brought back to
ERT headquarters in Edison, New Jersey for
analysis. And they set up monitoring equipment
to measure hydrogen sulfide, sulfuric acid, and
other contaminants in the billowing plumes of
black—and sometimes white—smoke.
The pictures of blazing
wells belching thick
smoke, blotting out the
sun and turning day into
a hellish night are some ^^^^^^^^^^^
of the most enduring ^™^^^^^^^™"™"""
images of the Gulf War. Iraq's torching of the
wells, and its deliberate release of 250 million
gallons of oil—20 times more than the Exxon
Valdez spilled into Prince William Sound two
years earlier—led press commentators to label
the carnage "eco-war."
Ten days after the war ended, ERT personnel
travelled with a military escort from Saudi
Arabia to Kuwait as part of the Interagency Air
Assessment Team. "All the wells we're still
ablaze when we arrived. Firefighters were
mobilizing and gathering resources. The envi-
ronmental devastation was indescribable. The
burning high-pressure wells created jet-like
noises, thick plumes, and fierce winds 24 hours
a day," says chemist Phil Campagna.
Oil fields south of Kuwait City hadn't yet been
swept for mines, so the men followed tank and
other tracks in the sand as they approached the
burning wells. Live munitions and burned-out
military vehicles were scattered throughout the
well fields.
Wearing respirators and other protective gear,
Campagna and ERT member Alan Humphrey
got within 200 feet of some fires. "There was
really no smell, no burning sulfur, as expected.
Contrary to many predictions, conditions near
the wells were not acutely life threatening,"
Campagna says.
Their job was to identify the chemicals, gases,
and other components of the smokey fires and
"We have the best emergency
response air monitoring
capability in the world," says
ERT head Dr. Joseph P.
Lafornara.
It's no wonder the ERT
was called in on such an
unprecedented environ-
mental disaster. "We
have the best emergency
response air monitoring
capability in the world,"
says ERT head Dr. Joseph
P. Lafornara.
Using analysis methods pioneered at ERT, the
Kuwaiti air samples were studied for metals and
various chemical compounds. Despite the
awesome images of blazing oil fires on the
nightly news, and concerned discussions about
health and environmental affects by expert
commentators, the sampling indicated only trace
amounts of chemicals. "There was more dust,
more black soot, than there were organic com-
pounds," says ERT chemist Raj Singhvi. These
findings were later supported by extensive
studies conducted by multi-national teams
during the summer of 1991.
The real-time monitoring equipment Campagna
and Humphrey set up produced similar results.
"We didn't detect harmful levels of sulfur
dioxide or hydrogen sulfide, we did detect high
levels of soot," Campagna says. Some of the
particles were attributed to wind-driven sand.
The remaining Kuwaiti oil fires were extin-
guished last November, months after the Gulf
War ended. Since then, ERT members have been
called to even more distant, more foreign lands.
Earlier this year, an oil well blow out and fire
took them to Uzbekistan, a former republic of
the Soviet Union.
"We were the first Americans they had ever
seen in their city, and it was the first time I had
ever been exposed to the descendants of
Genghis Khan," says ERT environmental
scientist Harry Allen. Given the international
reach of the ERT, it may not be the last time.
-------
ERT Responds Around
Acetone Cyanohydrln
Spill in Major Waterway
Three Disposal Sites
Treatment Technologies,
Disposal Options Review
Oil Well Blowout and Fire
Trash, Incinerator Ash
Dumped
Environmental Impact
Assessment
Ship Grounding and
Ocean Oil Spill
Environmental Impact
Assessment
Drum Disposal Options,
Health and Safety Support
Industrial Waste Drum
Site
Abandonned Gas Cylinders
Waste Characterization
Hazard Evaluation
Assist in Detonation and Disposal
Toxic Cloud Release
Hazard Evaluation,
Source Identification,
Cloud Analysis
Where: When
Environmental
Emergency
ERT Response
-------
The World: 1980-1992
Kuwait: 1991
Kuwait: 1990
Residential Development
Near Landfill
Air Quality Monitoring
Evaluation of Gas
Emissions, Hazards, and
Remedial Options
Oil Well Blowout and Fire
Environmental
Assessment
Chemical Warehouse
Explosion
Health and Safety
Assessment
Air Quality Monitoring
Pesticide Warehouse
Fire
Damage and
Environmental Impact
Assessments
Pesticide Container Ship
Runs Aground
Damage Assessment
Leaking Pesticide
Containers
Development of Disposal
Options
Mozambique: 1992
Ship Grounding and Oil
Spill
Environmental Assessment
-------
Focus: The Environmental Response Team
Domestic Action: ERT Responds to the
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
One of four "special forces" established by
the National Contingency Plan (NCP) in
1978, the Environmental Response Team's early
duties included handling oil spills in inland
waters. (The U.S. Coast Guard has responsibility
for spills in coastal waters and the Great Lakes.)
As environmental programs focused on hazard-
ous wastes and other problems during the 1980s,
EPA's oil spill response activities dwindled.
And then the Exxon Valdez ran onto Bligh Reef
in Alaska's Prince William Sound, and the ERT
was called in to consult with the Coast Guard,
Alaska State authorities, and others working to
clean up the mess.
A Challenging Response
"When the Valdez came along, there wasn't
much institutional memory about oil spills,"
says ERT environmental scientist Dr. Royal
Nadeau. Eleven million gallons of Alaskan
North Slope crude poured into the Sound,
eventually producing a 900-square-mile oil slick
and fouling miles of rocky beaches southwest of
the port of Valdez.
Nadeau led the ERT members activated under
authority of the Oil Pollution Act. They pro-
vided technical support to the EPA Regional
people at the scene, arriving four
days after the tanker ran onto
the reef. They'd have gotten
there sooner, but airline
problems left them
stranded for the night in
Seattle. They tried to sleep
in the noisy airport
terminal, and next day
caught a plane to Anchor-
age, and another to
Valdez.
The EPA crew was faced with
the nation's worst oil spill. "It was a
completely mind-boggling situation," says
Nadeau.
One of the few EPA people with oil spill experi-
ence, Nadeau served as advisor to the represen-
tative of EPA's Alaska office. "I had some
experience with, and knowledge of, the biologi-
cal affects of oil spills. And I had an appreciation
for the difficulty of cleaning up the Alaskan
shore line, with its irregular surfaces that trap
oil," he says.
Pointing to a map on his office wall, Nadeau
explains how floating barriers, called booms,
were used to keep the oil away from salmon
hatcheries and other sensitive areas threatened
by the oil. Additional clean up actions were
often hampered by a lack of equipment. It
wasn't available at the scene, and there were no
roads to haul it to Prince William Sound. "I had
never been to a spill that had to be cleaned up
entirely from the water," Nadeau says.
Holistic Approach to Cleanup
While Nadeau was attending meetings on the
cleanup, Dr. David Charters was working with
the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (ADEC) and as liaison with the
Coast Guard to coordinate assessments of the
spill's effects on sea birds and marine mammals.
He attempted to provide a "holistic approach"
to match the chemical components of the spill
with the effects observed on animals that came
into contact with the spill. Charters also tried to
promote careful planning of information collec-
tion activities.
"Basically, I was there to start getting people to
think in a little longer term than they usually do
at emergencies," Charters says. "We were
pushing real hard for different groups doing the
ecological work to submit work plans, so we
could have an integrated assessment at the end,
but we weren't always successful." Such experi-
ences, however, can provide important lessons
to be used at the next, inevitable, big oil spill.
8
-------
Streamlining Superfund
Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model
EPA is streamlining Superfund to speed
hazardous waste site cleanups and quickly
reduce risks to people and the environment.
The Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model, or
SACM (pronounced sack-em), will combine
Early Actions, such as removing
hazardous wastes or contaminated
materials, with ongoing studies
so that immediate public health ^
and environmental threats are ,&
taken care of while long-term ^S
cleanups are being planned. QJ
"SACM is about achieving
more cleanup, quickly," says
Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response (OERR)
Director Henry Longest.
Faster... C/ea/ier...Safer
While the site is studied, the Regional Decision
Team will begin the short-term work required to
correct near-term public health or environmen-
tal threats. Besides removing hazardous materi-
als, these Early Actions include taking precau-
tions to keep contaminants from moving off
site and restricting access to the site.
"Although these actions are short
term and quickly implemented,
they could eliminate most
human risk from these sites,"
Longest says. "More public
participation and public
information activities will be
focused during assessment
and Early Action."
Emergencies such as train derailments and
motor vehicle accidents will be handled expedi-
tiously, as they are today. Teams of highly
trained technicians will swing into action right
away, coordinating the cleanup and removal of
hazardous materials to ensure public safety as
quickly as possible.
Breaking With Tradition
The traditional Superfund process begins with a
lengthy phase of study and site
assessment, but SACM will save
time by combining separate, yet
similar, stages of site assessment.
A Regional Decision Team of
Superfund site managers, risk
assessors, community relations
coordinators, Regional counsel
and other experts will monitor
the studies and determine
whether a site requires Early
Action (taking less than five
years), Long-term Action, or both.
Long-Term Solutions
Many hazardous waste problems can be cor-
rected, and most public and environmental
protection can be achieved, by Early Actions,
but some problems will take a long time to
correct. Cleanups of mining sites, wetlands, es-
tuaries, as well as projects involving incineration
of contaminants or restoration of ground water,
can take far longer than the three to five years
envisioned for Early Actions.
"The Regional Decision Team,
composed-of people with cross-
cutting program skills, will have
the latitude to make decisions
about the most appropriate action
for each site," explains Longest.
"These teams will have the
expertise and flexibility to
determine the best way to meet
the goal of site cleanup."
SACM's Streamlined Superfund Process
Public Notification ot Early Action Start
Early
Action
To Reduce Risk
(<5 Years)
Public Notification of Completion
Early Action
Completed
Enforcement Activities
State/Public Participation/Community Relations
-------
Streamlining Superfund
EPA will take steps to pursue the potentially
responsible parties (PRPs) who may have
caused or contributed to the site contamination.
Expedited enforcement and procedures for
negotiating PRP involvement in cleanups will
secure their participation. EPA's Superfund
personnel will continue to oversee cleanup work
performed by PRPs.
Measuring Success
SACM will focus Superfund on the very sub-
stantial risk reduction that is now achieved and
achievable. No longer will Superfund's success
be measured by how many sites are struck from
the National Priorities List (NPL). Protection of
people and the environment at all Superfund
Actions will be the program's yardstick.
"We need to move away from defining success
as deleting sites from the NPL; success inthe
Superfund program is cleaning up hazardous
waste sites to reduce risk to people and the
environment," Longest says. "SACM will
achieve appropriate cleanup at as many sites as
possible."
%,
."
^
, site studies, and clean.Up|;ifeg
btency, redwcte'costs, and: speMfte«i;-^."]{f/-.
straightforward: sites with simiWclr
istics, 01 which were previously, •usgad.fifc'^
are
econ
oac
is
es to speed,
u- Program.
f .and an expert team
Super
test the p
* cleanup.
treatment,
sites.
on the number,
ount of historical
types of
, andttie
clean up such
ndwa
Superfund
rater. This initia
Superfund is
to determine
"Accelerating Superfund With Presumptive Remedies
_.... . *^. . * .... . ' ' * ._ . .. !•'. f '.. , . ;.:,,-..., .>/.'-
-------
Superfund Progress Report
Making the Polluters Pay for Cleanup
""The McKin site in Gray, Maine is one of the
J. most successful Superfund cleanups in the
nation. EPA pursued more than 400 potentially
responsible parties (PRPs), compelling them to
share the costs of the cleanup.
Under the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability Act (CER-
CLA), each PRP can be liable for the entire cost
of a site cleanup. Getting PRPs to perform or
fund cleanups is a very significant aspect of
Superfund because EPA clean-up funds are lim-
ited and sites requiring cleanup are numerous.
Using private resources allows EPA to clean up
many more sites, while conserving Superfund
money for real emergencies and abandoned sites
where PRPs cannot be identified or cannot be
made to participate in the cleanup.
Since its discovery 10 years ago, the McKin site
has proved to be a landmark achievement in
public- and private-sector cooperation. EPA, the
Superfund Progress Report
Cleanups at Superfund Sites
(Excluding Federal Facilities)
(Data as of June 30,1992)
Sites
Emergency Cleanups /
NPL Cleanups Begun
Total FY FY 1980 to
1992 Date
/' 160 / 1954
"
/26 ' 409
Total FY FY 1980 to
1992
Date
Value of PR!
* as of September 1,1992
** Does not include State Lead Settlements, and Federal Facilites
Inter-Agency Agreements.
State of Maine, local officials, and responsible
parties worked closely to identify the site's prob-
lems, remove hazardous liquids, and decontami-
nate 12,000 cubic yards of polluted soil. Other
highlights include:
• using innovative technology to excavate and
treat contaminated soil on site;
• supplying an alternate drinking water supply
to the community;
• providing a strong community relations pro-
gram to inform local residents of EPA's ac-
tions and encourage public participation in
clean-up decisions;
• recovering EPA's past costs totalling more
than $3 million from 339 companies responsi-
ble for the contamination; and
• inspiring local officials to strengthen regula-
tions involving zoning, hazardous waste li-
censes, and recycling.
Today, the site is a thriving meadow, safe
enough for recreational use.
A Two-Pronged Approach
In many ways, Superfund is two programs
whose aim is to protect us and the environ-
ment from uncontrolled releases of danger-
ous chemicals. The emergency program
handles short-term problems such as train
wrecks, truck accidents, and fires that in-
volve chemicals. It also handles emergencies
at Superfund sites. The site clean-up pro-
gram addresses long-standing problems,
like the McKin site, which took years to de-
velop and will take years to correct.
At most emergencies, work crews will clean
up the chemicals and haul them away for
proper disposal or treatment. If that's not
possible, the workers will treat the chemi-
cals at the site to make them safer, or they
will make sure the chemicals can't escape to
harm people or animals. By law, emergency
teams can spend up to $2 million and must
finish within one year.
During FY 1991, Superfund responded to
346 emergencies involving dangerous chem-
icals. c
11
-------
Superfund Progress Report
Since Superfund began in 1980, teams have re-
sponded to more than 2,941 emergencies at 2,337
locations nationwide.
Site Cleanups
Mention Superfund to most people, and chances
are they'll think about places like Love Canal,
New York where decades of chemical dumping
contaminated the ground and water, threatening
the health of nearby residents and forcing a
large-scale evacuation. EPA's site cleanup pro-
gram works to correct long-standing hazardous
waste problems, although most Superfund sites
are not as notorious as Love Canal.
There are 1,275 Superfund sites listed on the Na-
tional Priorities List of the nation's worst haz-
ardous waste sites. Superfund sites are eligible
for cleanup under the federal program. In addi-
tion, there are hazardous waste sites in each
state whose cleanup is the responsibility of state
or local governments or private organizations.
Depending on the work to be done—treatments
to be used, structures to be built—a cleanup may
take as long as six years. If contaminated ground
water must be treated, the cleanup may take de-
cades. Cleanups were successfully concluded at
111 Superfund sites as of September 1,1992.
Almost a tenth of the nation's population, 23
million people, have been protected by
Superfund actions since 1980. About 450,000
(roughly the population of Atlanta, Georgia)
have been given alternate sources of safe drink-
ing water. Another 4,000 people living near
Superfund sites have been temporarily or per-
manently relocated. In addition, more than
25,000 people (about the size of a standing-
room-only crowd at Boston's Fenway Park) have
been temporarily relocated due to emergencies
not involving Superfund sites.
Site Investigations and Clean-up Flans
Before actual cleanup begins, EPA carefully in-
vestigates a site to identify what chemicals are
there, how dangerous they are, and who is most
likely to be harmed by them. The Agency also
considers its cleanup options and, after much re-
view, recommends a course of action.
The public is encouraged to comment on the
clean-up options and on EPA's recommended
course of action. EPA will tailor its clean-up
plans to meet public desires whenever possible,
but the Agency is responsible for deciding
which clean-up option will be used at a site.
Two-way communication between EPA and the
public is a crucial component of the Superfund
process. It begins early, as the Agency explores
community concerns and finds out what resi-
dents want to know from EPA. The information
community residents provide can also help EPA
plan its investigation of the site and tailor the
site cleanup to satisfy community needs.
Making Responsible Parties Pay
Whenever possible, EPA makes individuals,
companies, and government agencies responsi-
ble for creating a Superfund site—known as
"potentially responsible parties" (PRPs), or "re-
sponsible parties" (RPs) when their links to the
pollution are established—pay for its cleanup.
PRPs financed 52 percent of the cleanups started
(and 46 percent of the cleanups completed) be-
tween Superfund's start in 1980 and December
31,1991. For each enforcement dollar EPA spent
in FY1991 ($173 million), it received eight dol-
lars in PRP commitments to site work ($1.4 bil-
lion). In fact, these commitments equaled Super-
fund's entire FY 1991 budget.
Since 1980, RPs have committed to spending
more than $6 billion on site work; half that
amount has been committed in the two years
since EPA began its get "tough policy."
EPA can take to court PRPs and RPs who fail to
comply with federal cleanup orders. By law, the
federal government can recover its cleanup costs
plus triple that amount in damages. Since 1980,
the Agency has referred to the U.S. Justice De-
partment 459 cost recovery cases worth an esti-
mated $798 million, achieved 1,113 settlements
to recover $592 million, and returned $359 mil-
lion total U.S. Treasury.
12
-------
>' ,
fff
. »
Your New Issue of Superfund Progress Has Arrived!
^ .«, * *•< *^ ko. -"W9 ^ i >»,&* •$ « ^
Here's What You'll Find Inside A,
1 / •' * ' H' < * «>,*'*fel 0<
^ "* ^^-f5^*?? *yvj j ¥i3v * £-*"^^
Focus: Environmental Response Team
' ' >,>^^-^
^jial forces and
P 4J.4
30.
• the
eiictently.
•y
Maine's McKin Superfund Site, where €PA *HI collect mow that : ,^
y< $3 million from more than 300 companies,4s
N in public and private sector cooperation.
vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
OS-200
Washington, D.C, 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
First Class Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
Permit No. G-35
------- |