c/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9360.0-7
TITLE' *"* 86 Emergency Response Program Funding Strategy
APPROVAL DATE: 11/25/85
EFFECTIVE DATE: 10/2/85
ORIGINATING OFFICE: «
E FINAL
D DRAFT
STATUS:
REFERENCE (other documents):
OSWER OSWER OSWER
/£ DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE D
-------
SEPA
United Slates Environmental Protection Agency
Washington. OC 20460
OSWER Directive Initiation Request
Interim Directive Number
Originator Information
Name of Contact Person
HMnt
Mail Code
Telepngne Numoer_
Lead Office
[3 OERR
D OSW
D OUST
O OWPE
ED AA-OSWER
Approved for Review
Signature of Office Director
Date
Title
frfc
Summary of Directive
fat ifa&tt
Type of Directive /Manual. Policy Directive. Announcement, etc/f
T *^^ . ... —-^
Status
Q Draft
1 _ 1
Revision
Does this Directive Supersede Previous Direcuve(s)' [_J Yes jifNo Does It Supplement Previous Directives)? I I Yes
If "Yes" to Either Question. What Directive {number, tale)
Review Plan
D AA-OSWER D OUST
O OERR" D OWPE
D OSW D Regions
D OECM
CD OGC
LJ OPPE
D
Other (Specify)
This Request Meets OSWER Directives System Formal
Signature of Lead Office Directives Officer
Date
OSlXfER
icer
Date
EPA Form 1315-17(10-851
-------
OSWER Directive 936^-r
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
NOV 2s IS85
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: FY86 Emergency Response Program Fungping/^trategy
FROM: Henry L. Longest II, Director
Office of Emergency and Remedial
TO: Waste Management Division Directors, Regions I-X
Environmental Services Division Directors, Regions I, VI, and VII
On October 2, 1985, Dr. J. Winston Porter, Assistant Administrator for
Solid Waste and Emergency Response, held a teleconference at which time he
informed Regional management of removal program funding constraints because
CERCLA has not been reauthorized. In this teleconference, Dr. Porter
outlined EPA's strategy for conducting removal activities only at those
sites which meet the definition of true "emergency". This memorandum
outlines that strategy. For purposes of this strategy "emergency" removal
actions are defined as those situations where response is required in a
matter of hours or days resulting from actual threats to human life or
health or the environment. An "emergency" removal action will include the
following categories of actions: fire or explosion threats, contamination
of drinking water supplies at the tap, direct contact to acutely toxic
substances, or other such similarly acute situations.
We have adopted the following removal program strategy for the first
quarter of FY86 or until such time as CERCLA is reauthorized. In general,
funding will only be provided for those removal actions which are true
emergenci es.
On-going Projects:
1) On-going removal actions which were forward funded during FY85
should be continued using FY85 funds, unless higher priority
removal actions are identified.
2) On-going removal actions requiring FY86 funds for continuation
or completion which are not true emergencies should be demobilized
except for those actions where continuation of the project would
be more cost-effective than demobilization (or because of other
practical reasons).
3) On-going true emergency response actions which cannot be deferred
until later in FY86 should be continued. FY86 funds have been
provided to the Regions for these actions.
-------
OSWER Directive
-2-
New Projects:
4) Mew first quarter, FY86 removal actions which are truly
emergencies may be funded.
5) New first quarter, FY86 removal actions which are not emergencies
will be deferred until later in FY86.
Removals in response to unanticipated emergencies should be conducted
by the Regions as the urgency of the situation dictates. The available HQ
contingency fund for unanticipated emergencies has nearly been depleted.
Regional requests for additional funds will be carefully considered and
funding decisions made in the context of national program needs.
Based on our best judgement to date, and after consultation with your
staff, we believe the proposed second quarter removal allowances will
be adequate to meet Regional needs. New unanticipated emergencies will
again be considered and funding decisions made after consideration of
national removal program needs. Of course, when CERCLA Reauthorization occurs,
this funding strategy will be modified.
Should you have any questions concerning this memorandum, please contact
your appropriate ERD Regional Coordinator or Steve Heare at FTS 382-2206.
cc: John Moebes, Region I
Don Berger, Region I
Fred Rubel, Region II
Tom Voltaggio, Region III
Tom Massey, Region III
Al Smith, Region IV
George Moein, Region IV
Rich Bartelt, Region V
Jerry Regan, Region V
Charlie Gazda, Region VI
Bill Keffer, Region VII
John Giedt, Region VIII
Kathleen Shimmin, Region IX
Terry Brubaker, Region IX
Bob Courson, Region X
Jim Will man, Region X
------- |