United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of Enforcement
(2261)
EPA 300-R-94-001
February 1994
The State Of
A Comprehensive Overview Of
The Environmental Compliance
Status Of Federal Facilities
Through The End Of FY1992
-------
THE STATE OF FEDERAL FACILITIES
U.S. EPA OFFICE OF FEDERAL FACILITIES ENFORCEMENT
The State of Federal Facilities FY92 Report
-------
THE STATE OF FEDERAL FACILITIES
Overview
Over recent years, the Federal Government has experienced a marked shift of environmental
consciousness. Many Federal agencies have issued guidance from the highest levels incorporating
environmental objectives into their mission statements and stressing the need for increased
environmental performance. This focus has improved the climate in which Federal environmental
programs operate.
Concurrently, EPA has strengthened its commitment to Federal facilities. EPA works with all
Federal agencies in a variety of forums to assist their efforts to improve the environment.
EPA's efforts at Federal facilities are founded on achieving the appropriate balance between
enforcement and providing technical assistance activities, in cooperation with the many fine efforts of
State agencies. Activities range from the core inspection and enforcement activities required under
environmental statutes to innovative pollution prevention projects.
The State of Federal Facilities Report
The purpose of this document is to provide a comprehensive overview of the state of affairs at
Federal facilities through the end of FY 1992. This document reflects the major program activities
tracked by the mainframe data systems managed by EPA Headquarters. It is our first attempt to collect
and present such data. Given these limitations, there are several important caveats:
• Only data that are managed by EPA mainframe computer systems are presented in this
document. Any data inaccuracies in those systems are likely to be present in this document.
• Data that are managed or maintained solely by EPA regional offices are not contained in this
document.
• Data that are maintained by other Federal agencies are not contained in this document.
Several sets of data are clearly relevant to this document, and would enhance the accuracy of
this document. For example, The Office Of Federal Facilities Enforcement is aware that
additional removal actions have been conducted at Federal facilities which are on the
Supertund National Priorities List of sites. EPA does not routinely record this information.
• Because of a data linkage problem, approximately 1,000 of the 4,396 RCRA regulated Federal
facilities are not represented in the FY 1992 data. While we do not believe that this affects
any of the larger Federal facilities, especially those which are treatment, storage, or disposal
facilities, it is a limit of the data herein.
• Most of the data are current to the end of FY 1992. Where data indicates that it is from FY
1993, it only represents year-to-date, as of the date of the chart.
-------
Despite these limitations, all projects must start somewhere. In future editions of this document,
we hope to correct these data issues. In the meantime, any comments, suggestions, or additions should
be submitted to:
Director
Strategic Planning and Prevention Division
Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement
Office of Enforcement
U.S. EPA (OE-2261)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Conclusion
We hope this document will assist all stakeholders concerned with Federal facilities environmental
restoration activities. We look forward to continuing to serve a catalyst for improvement, and we look
forward to developing more creative and effective strategies for improving the many activities described
herein. With this summary document, we hope that all parties will have a clearer sense of where we
have been and where we are now so that we may jointly agree on where we should go.
Breen
Acting'Director
Office Of Federal Facilities Enforcement
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement gratefully acknowledges the many, offices and
individuals who provided the support necessary to complete this document. Specifically, OFFE would
like to thank Mark Antell, Stationary Source Compliance Division, OAR; Debra Villari, Karen Ashe
and William Bouchet, Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, OSWER; George Grey and Karen
Taimi, Office of Wastewater Enforcement and Compliance, OW; Lawrence Weiner, Enforcement and
Program Implementation Division, OW; David Meredith, Office of Compliance Monitoring, OPPTS;
Gerry Brown, Information Management Division, OPPTS; Lisa Capozzoli, TRI Librarian; and Nick
Morgan, (formally from OFFE). Additionally, we are most appreciative of the hard work performed
by the contractors who supported the development of this effort, such as Pat White, Maria Gilbreath
and Doreen Bennett (in the last case, formerly of) PRC Inc., and especially Kym Estes, of Booz-Allen
& Hamilton Inc and Bob France of SciComm, Inc., whose extraordinary efforts have made this
document possible.
-------
', ^ «•
kSK
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TRANSMITTAL
I. Introduction Introduction-1
II. Strategic Vision Strategic Vision-1
III. Overview Overview-1
IV. Environmental Program Status Status-1
• Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA) Program CERCLA-1
Base Realignment and Closure (6RAC) Program BRAC-1
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Program RCRA-1
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program NPDES-1
Air Program AIR-1
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Program TSCA-1
Public Water Supply Supervision (PWSS) Program PWSS-1
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (TRI) Program TRI-1
V. Enforcement Highlights Highlights-1
VI. Next Steps NextSteps-1
List of Acronyms List of Acronyms-1
The State of Federal Facilities i FY92 Report
-------
Appendices
• Program Data Tables for Federal Facilities
• Federal Facilities Settlements: Interagency Agreements
• Federal Facilities Settlements: Compliance Agreements
• Detailed Select Logic for CERCLA Data
The State of Federal Facilities ii FY92 Report
-------
Introduction
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
The State of Federal Facilities Introduction-1 FY92 Report
-------
Introduction
EPA COORDINATES COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS AT FEDERAL FACILITIES
This report is intended to provide an overview of the activities, accomplishments, and vision of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement (OFFE).
The mission of OFFE is to protect human health and the environment by:
• Establishing a framework that ensures the Federal Government is accountable to the public for its
environmental record
• Obtaining broad support for making necessary investments in environmental cleanup and
compliance
• Applying traditional and non-traditional strategies and innovative technologies.
OFFE works closely with staff from each of EPA's environmental program and regional offices to ensure
that the approach to enforcement at Federal facilities is consistent with the policies, regulations, and
trends that guide program implementation.
The State of Federal Facilities Introduction- 2 FY92 Report
-------
Introduction
OFFE, IN CONJUNCTION WITH EPA PROGRAM AND REGIONAL OFFICES,
USES AN ARRAY OF ENFORCEMENT AND ASSISTANCE TOOLS TO ACHIEVE
ACCOUNTABILITY
Program Tools include:
• The execution of enforceable cleanup and compliance agreements and orders
• Enhanced public access to the Federal Government's environmental management decision-making
process
• Execution of voluntary environmental programs.
Each of these tools is critical to the success of the Agency's enforcement program at Federal facilities.
OFFE's philosophy is further described in the following pages.
The State of Federal Facilities Introduction- 3 FY92 Report
-------
Introduction
OFFE HAS INSTITUTED A RANGE OF MECHANISMS TO ENCOURAGE AND SUPPORT
FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP
OFFE supports Federal environmental leadership through a combination of traditional and non-
traditional strategies for preventing pollution, achieving and monitoring compliance, and expeditiously
cleaning up Federal hazardous and radioactive sites.
• OFFE believes that a new partnership is needed to effectively address the environmental
challenge posed by Federal facilities.
• Federal facilities are the nation's largest industrial sector — the opportunities posed at Federal
facilities are among the most significant in the nation.
• Looking toward the end of the decade, a renewed commitment to enhance compliance and reduce
the threats posed by Federal facilities will require broad, continued support from all stakeholders.
The State of Federal Facilities Introduction- 4 FY92 Report
-------
Introduction
THIS REPORT Is ORGANIZED TO PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
AND TO HIGHLIGHT ENFORCEMENT OBJECTIVES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The remainder of The State of Federal Facilities is divided into five sections:
• The Strategic Vision Section, which outlines the primary OFFE objectives and the Agency's
corresponding strategy for attaining each of those objectives.
• The Overview Section, which defines the regulated community and provides data regarding the
overall enforcement activity at Federal facilities.
• The Environmental Program Status Section, which contains eight chapters of program-specific data
illustrating the status of enforcement activities at Federal facilities. This section also describes the
primary legislative authorities for EPA's enforcement program.
• The Enforcement Highlights Section, which describes recent EPA activities according to program
area.
• The Next Steps Section, which summarizes the 10 key areas of emphasis for EPA's enforcement
program at Federal facilities.
Each section provides program descriptions, charts and tables of background data about enforcement
activities, and illustrations of enforcement and compliance trends.
The State of Federal Facilities Introduction- 5 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
SECTION II
STRATEGIC VISION
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-1 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
OFFE HAS DEVELOPED A TEN-POINT PROGRAM FOR RESTORING FEDERAL
El^JVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND LEADERSHIP
This program includes the following activities:
• Enforcing Environmental Laws
• Involving Citizens in Federal Environmental Decision Making
• Preventing Pollution
• Accelerating Cleanup and Reuse of Closing Bases
• Accelerating Site Cleanup and Restoration
• Developing Innovative Technologies at Federal Facilities
• Addressing the Nuclear Weapons Complex
• Developing Multi-media Enforcement
• Conserving Natural Resources on Federal Lands
• Building the Federal Environmental Infrastructure.
Specific approaches for implementing these activities are summarized on the following pages.
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-2 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
ENFORCEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS is AN ESSENTIAL COMPONENT OF THE
OFFE MISSION
EPA will utilize an appropriate balance of technical assistance and vigorous enforcement to promote
environmental leadership.
• EPA is actively involved in numerous technical assistance activities which promote necessary
institutional changes to achieve and maintain sustained compliance.
• Cooperatively addressing environmental management needs/ through A-106 and budget reviews/
pollution prevention projects/ and technical assistance ensures environmental protection without
resorting to enforcement activities.
• Public confidence and program credibility can only be maintained if EPA approaches Federal non-
compliance with the same vigorous/ timely/ and consistent enforcement response used with non-
Federal entities.
• Recent passage of the Federal Facilities Compliance Act affirms Congressional intent to treat
Federal facilities in the same manner as private parties.
Each of these themes is echoed in OFFE's compliance and enforcement approach.
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-3 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic vision
OFFE INTEGRATES COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT INTO EVERY PHASE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
OFFE seeks to create the partnership between EPA and other Federal agencies, Tribes, States, citizens,
and other stakeholders in support of Federal environmental excellence.
• A central tenet of OFFE's program is increased program accountability through enhanced
stakeholder involvement in all aspects of Federal environmental decision-making.
• OFFE believes that all stakeholders, such as citizen, environmental, labor, Tribal, State, and other
Federal entities should participate more actively in key environmental decisions. Enhanced
involvement means greater accountability and greater confidence in Federal programs.
• The recommendations contained in the Interim Report of the Federal Facilities Environmental
Restoration Dialogue Committee provide a blueprint for greater stakeholder involvement at
Federal facilities.
• All decision-makers must be open about the challenges and options they face in managing their
program. Increased communication and participation will invest all parties in the results, thereby
furthering program confidence and support.
OFFE works closely with EPA Regional offices and program staff to achieve community involvement
beyond the requirements of existing laws and regulations.
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-4 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
POLLUTION PREVENTION is THE AGENCY'S PREFERRED WASTE MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY - OFFE INTEGRATES POLLUTION PREVENTION PRINCIPLES INTO EVERY
PROGRAM
The Federal government has unique responsibilities as the nation's largest consumer and waste
producer.
OFFE, in conjunction with the Office of Pollution Prevention, has developed a Federal sector
Pollution Prevention Strategy that will implement the President's Executive Order signed on
August 3,1993, which requires:
Reduction of federal toxic emissions by 50% by 1999
A review of all DOD and GSA specifications and standards for pollution prevention
opportunities
Federal compliance with the planning and reporting requirements of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
Maximum phaseout of all Class I and II ozone depletion substances.
OFFE continues to lead the Agency in efforts to better incorporate pollution prevention principles
into all aspects of enforcement, including innovative targeting strategies and settlements. Working
with other Federal agencies, States, local entities, and citizens, OFFE will continue to serve as a
catalyst for innovative Federal pollution prevention projects, such as the Federal Agency mini-
exchange bulletin board system, training courses, and field audits.
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-5 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
OFFE is COLLABORATING WITH DOD ON DEVELOPING STRATEGIES FOR EXPEDITING
CLEANUP AND REUSE OF MILITARY BASES PROPOSED FOR CLOSURE
• OFFE participates in a partnership with DOD cleanup and NEPA teams, DOD's economic reuse
teams, the communities, and the parties that have an interest in reuse of all or portions of the
closing bases. OFFE will work to ensure that environmental concerns are identified and factored
into reuse decisions at the earliest possible stage.
• OFFE is working with DOD and DOE to establish and implement a policy that supports greater
use of interim remedial cleanup actions and greater use of removal actions.
• The Agency is committed to minimizing risk at closing facilities, in an effort to stabilize the sites
and eliminate sources of pollutants while assessing the most cost-effective remedial approach.
OFFE will also ensure that the restoration decisions adequately reflect statutory requirements for
public health and environmental protection.
• EPA's Base Closure program is dynamic and will continue to evolve in response to Federal and
State legislative initiatives, in addition to the concerns of stakeholders.
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-6 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
OFFE RECOGNIZES THE NEED TO CREATE A CLIMATE FOR INNOVATION AND
OUTLINE A CLEAR PATH FROM THE TECHNOLOGY IDEA TO THE TECHNOLOGY
MARKETPLACE
• Innovative technologies designed to tackle the broad range of cleanup problems at Federal
facilities can foster novel approaches that can be applied at other sites.
• OFFE proposes a partnership with state regulators, regulated Federal agencies, and the private
sector to create a climate for innovation in four areas:
Site assessment
Cleanup
Pollution Control
Pollution Prevention.
• EPA has joined three other Federal agencies and the Western Governors' Association in
implementing a Memorandum of Understanding to promote the use of innovative cleanup and
waste management technologies at Federal sites in the West.
o EPA is sponsoring a series of focus groups to define a strategy for developing priorities for
applying innovative technologies at Federal facilities. The Agency is seeking feedback from
stakeholders representing the technology development arena, including technology companies,
regulators, Federal agencies, and community groups, on novel strategies for invigorating
technology development at Federal facilities.
The State of Federal Faculties Strategic Vision-7 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
ADDRESSING THE CLEANUP AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DOE
WEAPONS COMPLEX is ONE OF THE NATION'S GREATEST ENVIRONMENTAL
CHALLENGES
• EPA has a four-step plan for addressing the unique set of environmental protection challenges
found in the nuclear weapons complex:
Negotiating comprehensive cleanup agreements and compliance agreements/orders for
every major facility.
Establishing site-specific advisory boards at each weapons facility (where requested) to
ensure a strong role for all stakeholders in cleanup decisions.
Working with stakeholders to implement the mixed waste requirements of the Federal
Facility Compliance Act in a timely and efficient manner.
• Providing technical assistance to DOE in a variety of forums, including two Federal advisory
committees: the Environmental Management and Environmental Safety and Health Advisory
Committees (EMAC and ESHAC), National Policy coordination, training and video development,
and joint training workshops.
• The technical and resource challenges posed by the contamination at DOE facilities are enormous.
EPA will continue to work closely with DOE, other Federal agencies, States, local entities, and the
public to define the greatest cleanup priorities at weapons complex facilities. Innovative
technologies will be applied to the greatest extent practicable. Emphasis is placed on risk
reduction and comprehensive environmental and public health protection, which balances cost
considerations, community concerns, and technology availability.
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-8 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
EPA, IN COORDINATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE STATE OFFICIALS, HAS LAUNCHED
A PILOT MULTI-MEDIA ENFORCEMENT INITIATIVE THAT WILL TARGET AT LEAST 40
PRIORITY FEDERAL FACILITIES FOR COMPREHENSIVE COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS
• EPA is committed to using a holistic, risk-based approach as part of a vigorous Federal facility
enforcement program, involving different media programs within EPA and the States.
• Through the Agency's two-year, comprehensive enforcement initiative, EPA will integrate
pollution prevention profile opportunities into the selection of facilities, and, to the maximum
extent possible, into any enforcement settlements.
• EPA's approach in enforcement will strive toward obtaining "global settlements" that address all
media violations in one enforcement action, with a shared lead between EPA and state authorities,
where appropriate.
• OFFE will evaluate the multi-media enforcement initiative to determine whether program goals
are met and to define any necessary improvement.
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-9 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
OFFE is TAKING THE LEAD IN FASHIONING A STRATEGY FOR CONSERVATION AND
NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT THAT WILL INCORPORATE CLEANUP AND
COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES AT FEDERAL FACILITIES
• As the nation's largest landowner, the Federal Government supports a host of missions that affect
natural resource management.
• OFFE will attempt to integrate the principles of environmental stewardship into enforcement
agreements.
• OFFE will work with Federal agencies with large land holdings and natural resource
responsibilities to incorporate environmental compliance and stewardship into their operating
missions.
• OFFE will work with Federal agencies, States, local entities, and citizens to ensure that
environmental threats on our Nation's public.lands are identified and responded to in a timely
manner.
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-10 FY92 Report
-------
Strategic Vision
OFFE COLLABORATES WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES TO DESIGN QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS THAT WILL RESULT
IN LONG-TERM SUCCESS
• OFFE assists other Federal agencies to develop environmental capacity to achieve environmental
success with programs which:
Ensure full compliance and sustainable environmental programs through a coordinated,
integrated environmental strategy
Encourage efforts that go "beyond compliance" and into environmentally beneficial areas,
which may be beyond traditional approaches
Assist Federal agencies in performing their basic environmental work in an efficient and
cost-effective manner
Balance regulatory responsibilities and good government
Match resources to priorities.
• Specifically, OFFE utilizes a variety of tools and strategies to promote Federal agency capacity to
achieve environmental leadership. The primary vehicle is the Civilian Federal Agency Task Force,
but other tools include:
Government Responsible for Energy Environment and Natural Resources (GREEN) Program
Integrated Management Strategy (IMS)
EPA/Civilian Federal Agency Task Force
Improved A-106 Planning and Budgeting
Training and Technical Assistance.
The State of Federal Facilities Strategic Vision-11 FY92 Report
-------
Overview
SECTION III
OVERVIEW
The State of Federal Facilities Overview-1 FY92 Report
-------
Overview
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S CAPITAL, PERSONNEL, AND REAL ESTATE Is
SUBSTANTIAL
Owns over 450,000 Buildings
Employs more than 2.5 Million
Persons
Owns or Operates 31,500
Installations
Owns or Manages over 662
Million Acres
The State of Federal Facilities
Overview- 2
FY92 Report
-------
Overvie
, mm=^^^malM^SS*=
OFFE COORDINATES COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES FOR ALL OF
EPA's ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS AT OVER 7,000 FEDERAL FACILITIES
Map of Federal Facilities Generated By the Geographic Information Service: FY92
Note: Due to graphical limitations, the map presented above does not portray those Federal facilities that are located in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Trust
Territories.
The State of Federal Facilities
Overview- 3
FY92 Report
-------
Overview
THE NUMBER OF POLLUTION ABATEMENT PROJECTS AND REQUESTED FUNDING FOR
THESE PROJECTS HAS INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS
Number of Federal Facility Pollution Abatement Project* by Dollar Value: FY89-FY93
11000
9000
7000
J 5000
c 3000
&
&
•£ 1000
100
75
50
25
0
$10,038
$8,556
$6,
$3,014
FY89
FY90
FY91
FY92
Federal Budget Authority
- Number of A-106 Projects
The State of Federal Facilities
Overview- 4
FY92 Report
-------
Overview
THE BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES HAS INCREASED TO ADDRESS
FEDERAL FACILITY CLEANUP AND COMPLIANCE DEMANDS
Selected Agency Budgets for Cleanup Activities at Federal Facilities: FY89-FY93
The State of Federal Facilities
Overview- 5
FY92 Report
-------
Overview
THE BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES HAS INCREASED TO ADDRESS
FEDERAL FACILITY CLEANUP AND COMPLIANCE DEMANDS
Budget Authority for Federal Agencies; FY89-FY93
Budget Authority Actual
(in millions)
FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93
1,762 2354 3,687 4,434
Department of Energy (DOE)
1,155 1,422 2,168 4,172
Department of Defense (DOD)
102 135 158 250
Other Agencies
3,019 3,911 6,103 8,556 10,038
Source: Office of Management and Budget data, provided February 1993.
The State of Federal Facilities
Overview- 6
FY92 Report
-------
Overview
FEDERAL FACILITY ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE RATES HAVE IMPROVED,
IN SOME CASES DRAMATICALLY
Air Violations at Major Sources: FY90-FY92
The State of Federal Facilities
Overview- 7
riyz Report
-------
OverView
FEDERAL FACILITY ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE RATES HAVE IMPROVED,
IN SOME CASES DRAMATICALLY (CONTINUED)
Percentage of Major Facilities on Exceptions List
E3 Major Non-Federal Facilities • Major Federal Facilities
i ne state or reuerai racuities
Overview- 8
FY92 Report
-------
Overview
FEDERAL FACILITY ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE RATES HAVE IMPROVED,
IN SOME CASES DRAMATICALLY (CONTINUED)
Compliance Rates for RCRA at Federal Facilities: FY90-FY92
The State of Federal Facilities
Overview-
r i7Z Kepon
-------
Overview
FEDERAL FACILITY ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE RATES HAVE IMPROVED,
IN SOME CASES DRAMATICALLY (CONTINUED)
5,000 j.
4300 . -
4,000 . -
3300 .
Non-Federal Public Water Systems in Significant Non-Compliance (SNQ Compared to
Federal Public Water Systems in SNO FY89-FY92
Non-Federal Systems in SNC
The State of Federal Facilities
Overview- 10
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
SECTION IV
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM STATUS
The State of Federal Facilities Environmental Program Status-1 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
EPA REGULATES A BROAD RANGE OF ACTIVITIES AT FEDERAL FACILITIES
Federal facilities are subject to environmental statutes in the same manner as any private party. EPA, in
conjunction with States, has an oversight responsibility for Federal environmental programs. This
section summarizes each of the Agency's enforcement programs; defines the regulated community of
Federal facilities, gives an overview of enforcement activities according to program area, and provides
comparison data regarding compliance at Federal vs. Non-Federal facilities.
The Environmental Program status section provides a summary of activities for the following programs:
• Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Program: CERCLA,
as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), created the
Superfund program to respond to releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants
stemming from accidents or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.
%.
• Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Program: The Defense Base Realignment and Closure Acts of
1988 and 1990 provide for the closing of military installations in 1988,1991,1993, and 1995. To
assist in meeting the environmental restoration needs under the BRAC program, the Community
Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) was enacted in 1992 to facilitate transfer of
uncontaminated and remediated parcels.
• Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Program: RCRA and the RCRA amendments
regulate the generation, transportation, storage, treatment, and final disposal of hazardous and
solid wastes.
The State of Federal Facilities Environmental Program Status- 2 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
THIS REPORT FOCUSES ON EPA's FEDERAL FACILITY ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
FOR SEVEN MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM AREAS (CONTINUED)
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program: Under the Clean Water Act
(CWA), EPA or approved States issue permits that establish effluent limits for all municipal and
industrial discharges.
Air Program: The Clean Air Act (CAA) authorizes EPA to establish emission control standards to
achieve its air quality goals of meeting health-related National Ambient Air Quality Standards
nationwide.
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Program: Under TSCA, EPA identifies and controls toxic
chemical hazards to human health and the environment.
Public Water Supply Supervision (PWSS) Program: As authorized by the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA), EPA sets standards to control both manmade and naturally occurring contaminants. In
most cases States have the primary responsibility for oversight and enforcement.
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (TRI) Program: Under the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), EPA provides information about toxic chemicals to the public
through an annual report of the releases of toxic chemicals.
The State of Federal Facilities Environmental Program Status- 3 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DATA FOR THIS REPORT WAS COMPILED IN COOPERATION WITH EACH OF EPA's
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM OFFICES
Data regarding compliance with EPA's environmental programs is maintained by the program staff.
Therefore/ OFFE tracks compliance and program accomplishments using the following program
databases:
• FFIS: The Federal Facilities Information System is the national database that maintains budget and
project information on all Federal environmental activities pursuant to the Office of Management
and Budget Circular A-106.
• CERCJJS: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System is the primary Superfund database system.
• Hazardous Waste Docket: The Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket database
contains a listing of Federal facilities affected by hazardous waste legislation.
• RCRIS: The Resource Conservation Recovery Information System is the mainframe database that
tracks hazardous waste handlers under RCRA. RCRIS replaced the Hazardous Waste Data
Management System (HWDMS) in FY91.
• RAATS: The RCRA Administrative Tracking System tracks violations and penalties by
enforcement action assessed at RCRA facilities.
• PCS: The Permit Compliance System is a database that tracks EPA Region and State compliance
and enforcement data for the NPDES program.
The State of Federal Facilities Environmental Program Status- 4 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DATA FOR THIS REPORT WAS COMPILED IN COOPERATION WITH EACH OF EPA's
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM OFFICES (CONTINUED)
• AIRS: The Aerometric Information Retrieval System manages data about airborne pollution in the
United States and contains aerometric emissions and compliance data on point sources tracked by
EPA and State and local government agencies.
• NCDB: The National Compliance Data Base is the national repository for compliance and
enforcement data collected by the EPA Regions and Headquarters via the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodentiride Act (FIFRA) and TSCA Tracking System (FITS).
• FRDS-II: The Federal Reporting Data System is a national database that tracks public water
supply systems compliance and enforcement data collected by EPA Regions and States.
• TRIS: The Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System tracks facilities' releases of 300 listed
chemicals according to chemical type, quantity, and nature of release.
• IDEA: The Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis is a mainframe system that ties together key
compliance data across programs by pulling data elements from other mainframe systems
including CERCLIS, RCRIS, and AIRS.
Throughout this document, the data source and, where appropriate, the date that data was pulled from
the database are cited. OFFE wishes to acknowledge the support and technical contributions of each of
the program offices that submitted data for inclusion in this report.
The State of Federal Facilities Environmental Program Status- 5 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE,
COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA)
The State of Federal Facilities CERCLA-1 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
THE CERCLA PROGRAM REGULATES POTENTIAL RELEASES
OF HAZARDOUS WASTES AT FEDERAL FACILITIES
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, requires the
Government to establish a program to respond to a release or threatened release of hazardous
substances, pollutants, and contaminants.
EPA, in conjunction with the States, provides regulatory oversight of Federal facility
environmental restoration activities. EPA's primary goals include risk reduction, improved
program efficiency, and enhanced citizen involvement in Federal facility environmental decision-
making.
The State of Federal Facilities CERCLA-2 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DEFINITIONS RELEVANT TO THIS SECTION INCLUDE:
Federally-Owned A Federal facility where the government owns and operates all regulated
and -Operated activity.
Facilities
Government-
Owned and
Contractor-
Operated Facilities
(GOCO)
National Priorities
List (NPL)
A facility that is owned by a Federal agency but all or portions of it are
operated by private contractors. Where appropriate, EPA will pursue the I
full range of its enforcement responses against private operators of
Federal facilities. In addition, sanctions may be sought against
individual employees of Federal agencies for criminal violations of
environmental statutes.
EPA's list of sites identified for possible long-term remedial action under
Superfund. Sites are "proposed" for the NPL based on their score in the
Hazard Ranking System (HRS). A site must be "final" on the NPL to
receive money from the Trust Fund for remedial action.
Privately-Owned A facility where the government leases buildings or space for its
and Government- operations; a Federal facility where a single agency occupies all or most
Operated Facilities space in the building.
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-3
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DEFINITIONS RELEVANT TO THIS SECTION INCLUDE (CONTINUED):
Remedial
Investigation/
Feasibility Study
(RI/FS) Phase
Remedial Design
(RD) Phase
Remedial Action
(RA) Phase
The RI/FS is an investigation designed to categorize the site, assess the
nature and the extent of the contamination at a site, evaluate the potential |
risk to human health and the environment, and develop and evaluate
potential remedial alternatives. The RI/FS accomplishes two primary
objectives:
Provides information to assess the risk posed by the site
Evaluates a range of remedial alternatives on specified
criteria.
This phase of the project begins when the Potentially Responsible Party
(PRP) selects qualified in-house staff or engineering contractors to
prepare detailed plans and specifications for the remedial action.
During the RA phase, the remedy for the site is constructed. The PRP is
responsible for ensuring that the construction contractor fulfills the
requirements of the plans and specifications of the project, and for
overseeing change orders to the construction contract, if needed.
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-4
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
OFFE TRACKS COMPARISONS AMONG PROGRAMS AND FACILITY TYPES USING
THE FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET
CERCLA §120(c) mandated the establishment of the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste
Compliance Docket. Specifically, CERCLA requires the establishment of a list of Federal facilities
that report hazardous waste activity under §3005, §3010, or §3016 of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) or §103 of CERCLA.
The Docket:
— Identifies the universe of Federal facilities that must be evaluated to determine potential risk
to human health and the environment
— Compiles and maintains information submitted to EPA
— Provides a mechanism to make information available to the public.
Sites included in the Docket fall into one of two categories:
— Government-owned/contractor-operated
— Privately-owned/government-operated.
The Docket is maintained by OFFE; it is updated periodically to provide the Agency with an
ongoing assessment of the number of Federal facilities reporting hazardous waste activity.
The following pages illustrate the increasing population of Federal facilities on the Docket.
The State of Federal Facilities CERCLA-5 FY92 Report
-------
K .K
•SSL.
THE NUMBER OF FEDERAL FACILITIES TRACKED BY THE FEDERAL AGENCY
HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET Is INCREASING
Number of Federal Facilities Listed in the Docket
Initial
Data are from CEHCUS DTD 2/5/93
IV
Update Number
The state of federal Facilities
CERCLA-6
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
FEDERAL FACILITIES INCLUDED ON THE DOCKET ARE LOCATED
IN ALL EPA REGIONS
Number of Federal Facilities by Region
Virgin Islands
Total = 1,930 federal Facilities
in the Docket
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 2/5/93
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-7
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
69% OF THE FEDERAL FACILITIES IN THE DOCKET ARE DOD OR DOI FACILITIES
Universe of Federal Facilities in the Docket According to Agency
22%
Includes 424 DOI Facilities
5%
27%
Includes 512 Other Facilities
46%
Includes 901 DOD Facilities
Includes 93 DOE Facilities
Data are from CERCLIS 2/5/93
Total = 1,930 Federal Facilities are in the Docket
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-8
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
75% OF DOI FACILITIES IN THE DOCKET ARE OWNED
OR MANAGED BY THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Number of DOI Facilities in the Docket By Bureau
7%
Includes 31 Facilities
<1 % Includes 2 Facilities
2% Includes 10 Facilities
6%
Includes 25 Facilities
8%
Includes 35 Facilities
• Geological Survey
Q Bureau of Indian Affairs
• Bureau of Land Management
• Bureau of Mines
D National Park Service
Bureau of Reclamation
D Fish and Wildlife Service
1%
Includes 5 Facilities
75%
Includes 316 Facilities
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 2/5/93
Due to rounding, components will not add up to 100%
Total = 424 DOI Facilities are in the Docket
The State of Federal Facilities
CFJRCLA-9
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
NUMBER OF DOD FACILITIES IN THE DOCKET is EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED AMONG THE
NAVY, ARMY, AND AIR FORCE
Number of DOD Facilities in the Docket According to Agency
31%
Includes 279 Navy Fadlitie
7%
Includes 67 Facilities Operated
by Other DOD Services
29%
Includes 261 Air Force Facilities
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 2/5/93
Due to rounding, components will not add up to 100%
2%
Includes 19 Defense Logistics
Agency Facilities
Includes 4 Defense
Mapping Agency Facilities
30%
Includes 271 Army Facilities
Total = 901 DOD Facilities are in the Docket
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-10
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
^
CERCLA, AS AMENDED BY SARA, Is THE PRIMARY VEHICLE BY WHICH FEDERAL
AGENCIES CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AT FACILITIES THROUGHOUT
THE UNITED STATES
• CERCLA, in conjunction with RCRA, is the authority for nearly every cleanup action.
• CERCLA §120 and Executive Order 12850 describe detailed requirements for EPA and Federal
Agencies regarding environmental restoration, including:
• Establishment of the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket
• Listing of Federal facilities on the National Priorities List (NPL)
• Timely execution of Interagency Agreements (lAGs)
• Selection of remedy
• Prompt remedial actions.
• The CERCLA Information System (CERCLIS) is the primary system used to track CERCLA
progress at Federal facilities. CERCLIS is maintained by EPA and data is updated quarterly by the
Agency's Headquarters and Regional program staff. The following sections illustrate the
accomplishments of the program to date based on CERCLIS data.
The State of Federal Facilities CERCLA-11 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL FACILITIES SITES ARE INCLUDED IN CERCLIS
Total Universe of Sites in CERCLIS: FY92
96%
Includes 34,989 Non-
Federal Facilities
4%
Includes 1390 Federal
Facilities
Data are from CFJtCLIS DTD 2/5/93
Total = 36,579 Federal and Non-Federal Facilities in CERCLIS
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-12
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
130 FEDERAL FACILITIES ARE ON THE NPL
AND THAT NUMBER WILL INCREASE IN THE YEARS TO COME
Universe of Federal Facilities Listed in CERCLIS: FY92
59%
Includes 931 Sites
Under Evaluation
8%
Includes 123 Sites Final
and 3 Proposed for the NPL
33%
Includes 533 Site
Evaluations
Accomplished (SEAs)
Total = 1,590 Federal Facility Sites in CERCLIS
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 2/5/93
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-13
Keport
-------
Environmental Program Status
DOD AND DOE REPRESENT 95% OF THE FEDERAL FACILITIES ON THE NPL
Universe of Federal Facilities on the NPL (FY92)
3 Proposed DOD NPL Sites
18 Final DOE NPL Sites
6 Final Other Federal NPL Sites
5% Other Federal
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 2/5/93
Total = 126 Federal Facility NPL Sites, Final and Proposed
i ne state or federal facilities
CERCLA-14
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
EPA HAS INITIATED 109 REMOVAL ACTIONS AT FEDERAL FACILITIES;
62 REMOVAL ACTIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED (AT FEDERAL FACILITIES)
Total Reported Federal Facility Removals: FY92
CD Complete
Q Initiated
Other Federal Agencies
DOE
Federal Agency
DOD comprises M% of the removal actions, DOE 32%, and Other Federal Agencies 4%.
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-15
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
FEDERAL FACILITY PROJECTS HAVE NEARLY DOUBLED SINCE 1990 AND NOW
REPRESENT 48% OF THE NPL WORKLOAD
Number of Ongoing Remedial Projects by Fiscal Year FY90-FY92
Non-Federal Facilities D Federal Facilities
Data are from CERCUS DTD 10/7/93
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-16
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
EPA Is OVERSEEING AN INCREASING NUMBER OF FEDERAL FACILITY ACTIVITIES
THAT ARE MOVING THROUGH THE PIPELINE TOWARDS CLEANUP
CERCLA Pipeline Activities for Federal Facilities: FY90-FY92
Remedial Investigations D Remedial Design
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 10/7/93
The State of Federal Facilities
C_hKl_LA-17
. IxCpOll
-------
Environmental Program Status
THE SIGNING OF THE INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT (IAG) Is PIVOTAL
IN THE CLEANUP AND ENFORCEMENT PROCESS
The Interagency Agreement (IAG), or Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) under CERCLA §120
supports several steps necessary to achieve EPA's mission of environmental protection at Federal
Facilities. Specifically, the IAG or FFA:
• Serves as a binding agreement between EPA, the Federal Agency, and, in many cases,
the State
• Defines detailed roles, responsibilities, and milestones
• Triggers EPA oversight of cleanup activities
• Provides citizens with an opportunity to review and comment on proposed activities.
EPA has signed 102 lAGs for Superfund cleanup at Federal facilities. An IAG may cover activities
at more than one site; lAGs signed for Federal facilities cover 111 sites.
The State of Federal Facilities CERCLA-18 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
lAGs REGARDING FEDERAL FACILITIES HAVE BEEN EXECUTED IN EVERY REGION
Number of Signed lAGs by Region, to Date
25-,
20.
15
JB
Data are from CERCUS DTD 2/5/93
Total = 102 Signed lACs for Federal Facilities
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-19
FY92 Report
-------
tnvironmental Program Status
EPA HAS SIGNED lAGs AT FEDERAL FACILITIES IN 38 STATES AND TERRITORIES
Number of Signed lAGs by State
Total=104 Signed lAGs for
Federal Facilities Covering 111 Sites
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 2/5/93
*First Number Indicates the Number of Signed lAGs/Second Number Indicates the Number of Sites Addressed.
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-20
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
EPA HAS SIGNED IAGs AT MOST OF THE FEDERAL FACILITIES ON THE NPL
Cumulative Number of Signed lAGs: FY87-FY92
Percentage of Federal Facilities
CNPL) Addressed by lAGs
FY89 FY90
Fiscal Year
FY87 FY88
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 2/5/93
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-21
rryz Report
-------
environmental Program status
The Majority of EPA's lAGs for Superfund Cleanup Activities Have Been with DOD
Signed lAGs by Agency
14% DOE
Includes 13 Signed lAGs
Includes 1 Signed LAG
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 2/5/93
Due to rounding, components will not add up to 100%
Total = 104 Signed lAGs for federal Facilities
85% DOD
Includes 90 Signed lAGs
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-22
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
86 lAGs HAVE BEEN SIGNED WITH THE ARMY, NAVY, AIR FORCE,
AND DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY (DLA)
Number of Signed lAGs with DOD
According to Service (FY92)
25.5% Navy
Includes 22 Signed lAGs
<1%DLA
Includes 1 Signed IAG
41% Army
Includes 35 Signed I AGs
Data are from CERCLIS DTD 2/5/93
Due to rounding, components will not add up to 100%
Total = 86 Signed lACs with DOD
32^% Air Force
Includes 28 Signed I AGs
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-23
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DOCUMENTATION FOR CHARTS IN THIS SECTION
Page#
CERCLA-6
CERCLA- 7
CERCLA-8
CERCLA- 9
CERCLA- 10
CERCLA- 12
CERCLA- 13
Chart Title
Number of Federal
Facilities Listed on the
Docket
Number of Federal
Facilities by Region
Universe of Federal
Facilities in the Docket
According to Agency
Number of DOI Facilities
in the Docket by Bureau
Number of DOD Facilities
in the Docket According
to Agency
Total Universe of Sites in
CERCLIS
Universe of Federal
Facilities Sites Listed in
CERCLIS
Information
Resource
(EPA office/system)
Hazardous Waste
Compliance Docket
Hazardous Waste
Compliance Docket
Hazardous Waste
Compliance Docket
k
Hazardous Waste
Compliance Docket
Hazardous Waste
Compliance Docket
CERCLIS
CERCLIS
Date of Data
Pull
Update VII
Update VII
Update VII
j
Update VII
Update VII
2/5/93
2/5/93
Parameter of Data Pull or Special
Conditions for Data
Data are cumulative through Update VII of the
Docket, which included FY92.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Data are from CERCLIS. The select logic used for
CERCLIS data pulls is presented in the
appendices.
Ibid.
"SEA" indicates that the site has been evaluated
and EPA has determined that no further remedial
action is needed at this time. Sites under
evaluation are currently being evaluated to
determine whether remedial action is necessary.
Such sites may become SEAs, listed on the NPL, or
deferred to the RCRA program.
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-24
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
CERCLA- 14
CERCLA- 15
CERCLA- 16
CERCLA- 17
CERCLA- 19
CERCLA- 20
CERCLA- 21
CERCLA- 22
CERCLA- 23
Universe of Federal
Facilities on the NFL
Total Reported Federal
Facility Removals
Number of Ongoing
Remedial Projects by
Fiscal Year: FY90-FY92
CERCLA Pipeline
Activities for Federal
Facilities: FY90-FY93
Number of Signed lAGs
by Region, to Date
Number of Signed I AGs
by State
Cumulative Number of
Signed lAGs: FY87-FY92
Signed lAGs by Agency,
to Date
Number of Signed I AGs
with DOD According to
Service
CERCLIS
CERCLIS
CERCLIS
CERCLIS
Regional phone interviews
conducted by a contractor.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
2/5/93
10/7/93
10/7/93
10/7/93
February 1993
February 1993
February 1993
February 1993
February 1993
Data are from CERCLIS. The select logic used for
the CERCLIS data pulls is presented in the
Appendices
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Phone interviews were conducted with all Regions
to verify I AGs for each Region. Data are from
CERCLIS. The select logic used for the CERCUS
data pulls is presented in the Appendices
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
The State of Federal Facilities
CERCLA-25
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC)
The State of Federal Facilities BRAC-1 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC) ACTIVITIES PRESENT A CHALLENGE TO
ENSURE COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND TIMELY
REUTILIZATION
BRAC Activities are based upon two key pieces of legislation:
• The Base Realignment and Closure Acts of 1988 and 1990 provide for the closing of military
installations based on revised force structure needs. The acts provide for the selection of bases to
be closed in 1988,1991,1993, and 1995. Selected bases will be closed on schedules established by
each military service. The impact of base closures on local communities and the need to reduce the
economic impact present unique opportunities and challenges, including the need to ensure that
environmental restoration needs are effectively addressed. EPA is working closely with DOD, the
states, and local communities to ensure comprehensive environmental protection and timely base
reuse.
• The Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA), enacted October 19,1992 as
PL 102-426, amends CERCLA §120 in an effort to facilitate base closure and reuse. CERFA also
impacts a broad range of Federal real property transfers. CERFA directs Federal agencies to
identify uncontaminated parcels, with regulatory concurrence, and allows transfer by deed of
remediated parcels at the point when the successful operation of an approved remedy has been
demonstrated to EPA.
The following map illustrates the result of the above legislation.
The State of Federal Facilities BRAC-2 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE AFFECTS NEARLY EVERY EPA REGION
Map of Faculties Affected by 1988 and 1991 and 1993 BRAC Listings
Qunuie AFB 88
Ft. Sherid«i«
Glomew NA5-93
O'Hire IntTrurionil Akpoit
Air Force Re»er»e SUIKXI 93
Jeffenoa FO-M
Font
Orisnm AFB-91
RkkentMckerAGB-91
Newtrk AFB-W
AMTL88
•Ft. D«v«u-»l
South Weymoulh NAS-93
Fondle Sinrige 88
Wummith AFB-9
•Milker AF*-tt
•Norton AFB-M
Pre.idx.SF4l
Hlmillon Army Airfield »S
Sillon St. Tal Bee 88
Bennett ANO 88
Lowiy AFB 91
Nilu KC 30-88
Rich«ds Gtbtui
ARS-91
Ejker AFB-91
FofiCht/Tee-91
N.vijo Dtp 88
AFB-M
NS G«lve«ion 88
Bcrjitrom AFB-91
Cmwdl AFB-91
NAS Chu. F.tW-91
E*Bm NAS-93
•AAAP-*
CoouRivaAnnH-88
Ft McCkbn-93
NSMoWI«-93
Tustin MCAS-91
NS Lon, Beack-91
Nival Sf*ct Sy«nu-91
IntegiaBd Combu-91
N«>) Ekcmia. Sn Diejo 91
N..il Eleoronia. VtHejo-91
•C-«kAFB-»l
•FortOrxltl
• Armj 91
•MofTett FVId NAS-«1
Mn bind Niril Shipynd-93
Oddml Nnal S»pj>ty Cenler-93
AlBnedi NAS-93
Aimed* AviMion Depot 93
0>Up>iil-93
•Tr€M«rt lrt«d NS-W
•El Toco MwtM COCT. Air SUU»-»3
Sm Dkjo Nivtl Triinmi Cenler-93
K^«l«n. Miliury Rej. 88
Nivil Oc«a Synenu-91
Btrben Pant NAS-93
•NCBC-91
IS Brooklyn 88
Suien Illmd NS-93
Nike Phili. 88
•Tecony Whte-M
Nival Hospilil-18
NS PhilL-91
NSY PhU^-91
Phila. Aviation Supply
Office-93
Defenie Penonnel
Support Cenler-93
•Nik. Slle API; M
ARC-IS
Fort Hol.bbd-88
FonMexte-gB
Nivil Eleclronk Syiumt
Engawering Center 93
Suiion-88
DefenK M«ppin(-«8
Hmj DUmorid Ub-91
NivilMineWvfn-91
Norfolk NlYll A»i.lion Depol-93
Vim Hill F«rms 93
*fe\
6
Ne«OrlenMOT-U
NSUkzCtela-8*
Enilnd AFB-91
Cq>e Si George-48
NmilReierceClr-M
Penucoli Ninl Aviiuon Depot 93
•tlo^tcM.< AFB-M
Cecil Field NAS 93
Orhndo Niril Truing Center 93
• N.lion»l Priorillw List
Myrtle Bach AFB-91
Qurlenon Nwd Shipytrd 93
Owleuon NS-93
4/16/93
*BRAC III list, submitted by the President on July 1,1993.
The State of Federal Facilities
BRAC-3
rY9Z Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
(RCRA)
The State of Federal Facilities RCRA -1 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA) REGULATES
FACILITIES THAT MANAGE HAZARDOUS WASTES
RCRA provides the framework for ensuring that hazardous waste management is safe and
effective. In addition, RCRA provides for cradle-to-grave management of hazardous wastes,
which helps to ensure that risks are minimized. Relevant to Federal facilities, the passage of the
Federal Facility Compliance Act further ensures that Federal facilities are treated in the same
manner as private parties.
State agencies are important partners in ensuring Federal compliance with RCRA. Therefore, this
section includes information regarding RCRA §3008(a) Federal Facilities Compliance Agreements
and RCRA §3008(h) Compliance Orders, which usually involve State environmental program staff.
The State of Federal Facilities RCRA - 2 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DEFINITIONS RELEVANT TO THIS SECTION INCLUDE:
Class I Violations
Disposal Facility
Facility
Generator
Deviations from regulations or provisions of compliance orders, consent
agreements, consent decrees, or permit conditions that could result in a
failure to assure that hazardous waste is destined for and delivered to
authorized treatment, storage, or disposal facilities (TSDFs); prevent
releases of hazardous waste or constituents, both during the active and
any applicable post-closure periods of the facility operation where
appropriate; assure early detection of such releases; perform emergency
clean-up operations or other corrective actions for releases.
Facility or part of a facility at which hazardous waste is intentionally
placed into or on any land, or into water, and where the waste will
remain after closure.
All contiguous land, structures, or other appurtenances, and
improvements on the land used for treating, storing, or disposing
hazardous waste. A facility may consist of several TSDFs; e.g., one or
more landfills, surface impoundments, or a combination of them.
Any person, by site, whose act or process produces hazardous waste
identified or listed in 40 CFR Part 261 or whose first act causes a
hazardous waste to become subject to regulations.
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA-3
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DEFINITIONS RELEVANT TO THIS SECTION INCLUDE: (CONTINUED)
Out of Compliance A facility that is not in compliance with regulations or provisions of
(OOC) compliance orders, consent agreements, consent decrees, or permit
conditions. OOC is assessed at the end of the fiscal year for the purposes
of this Report.
Return to
Compliance (RTC)
Treatment Facility
A facility that has been reinspected by EPA, following a discovery of a
violation(s), and found to have corrected previous violation(s). RTC is
assessed at the end of the fiscal year for the purposes of this Report.
1
A facility that uses any methods, technique, or process, including
neutralization, designed to change the physical, chemical, or biological
characteristics or composition of any hazardous waste so as to neutralize
it; to render it nonhazardous or less hazardous; to recover it; to make it
safer to transport, store, or dispose of; or to make it amenable to
recovery, storage, or volume reduction.
Treatment, Storage, Facilities that perform methods, techniques, processes or other functions
and Disposal that "treat," "store," or "dispose" of RCRA-regulated wastes, as defined by
Facilities (TSDFs) 40 CFR Section 260.10. Also referred to as TSD Facilities.
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA-4
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
SINCE FY87, RCRA HAS USED A NUMBER OF SYSTEMS TO TRACK COMPLIANCE AND
ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
Data included in this section, regarding compliance and enforcement activities under the RCRA
Program, was extracted from four systems:
• RCRA Information System (RCRIS) - a mainframe database designed to track hazardous
waste handlers under RCRA, the vast majority of data in this section was derived from this
system. For example, the data regarding facilities by handler type, inspected facilities, and
the number of Class I Violations was provided by RCRIS.
• RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System (RAATS) - data regarding compliance
orders and agreements authorized under RCRA §3008(a) or §3008(h) was derived from this
system.
• Hazardous Waste Data Management System (HWDMS) - replaced by RCRIS in FY91, data
from this system was used for pre-FY91 RCRA activities.
• Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) - a multi-media system managed by the
Office of Environment, provided data on numbers of violations.
Data for each of these systems is compiled by EPA's Headquarters and Regional program staff.
The State of Federal Facilities RCRA - 5 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program status
FEDERAL FACILITIES MADE UP APPROXIMATELY 8% OF THE UNIVERSE
OF TSDFs IN FY92
RCRA Total TSDF Universe: FY92
8%
Represents 338
Federal TSDFs
92%
Represents 3,840
Non-Federal TSDFs
Total = 4,178 Facilities in RCRA TSDF Universe
The state or Federal Facilities
RCRA- 6
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
GENERATORS AND TSDFs MADE UP APPROXIMATELY 96% OF RCRA FEDERAL
FACILITIES IN FY92
RCRA Federal Facilities: FY92
10%
Represents 338 Facilities
Represents 22 Facilities
9 Generators
D Transporters
Non-Notifier
TSD
3%
Represents 89 Facilities
86%
Represents 2313 Facilities
Total = 3,262 Federal Facilities in RCRA Universe
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA-7
r i yz Keport
-------
Environmental Program status
77% OF THE 338 FEDERAL TSDFs BELONG TO DOD
Federal Facilities TSDF Universe: FY92
(9 Facilities) ^Facilities)
(2 Facilities)
1%
(3 Facilities)
9%
(29 Facilities)
77%
(261 Facilities)
0 Other Federal Agencies
Total may not = 100% due to rounding,
components will not add up to 100%
Total = 338 Federal Facilities are TSDFs
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA- 8
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
^ -^
JSK
ACROSS DOD SERVICES, MOST FACILITIES ARE CATEGORIZED AS GENERATORS OF
RCRA-REGULATED HAZARDOUS WASTE
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA- 9
r Y92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
FEDERAL FACILITY COMPLIANCE WITH RCRA HAS INCREASED
STEADILY SINCE FY90
100%
90%
Compliance Rates for RCRA at Federal Facilities: FY90-FY92
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA -10
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
IN FY92, OF THE TOTAL 319 FEDERAL TSDFs INSPECTED, 119
HAD CLASS I VIOLATIONS
Federal TSDFs with RCR A Inspections
and Class I Violations: FY89-FY92
• Federal Facilities with Class I Violations O Federal Facilities Inspected
The State of Federal Facilities
RCR A -11
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
91 OF THE 248 DOD TSDFs INSPECTED IN FY92 HAD CLASS I VIOLATIONS
300
DOD TSDFs with RCRA Inspections
and Class I Violations: FY89-FY92
Federal Facilities with Class I Violations D Federal Facilities Inspected
*Note: The Number of Facilities with Violations is a subset of the Number of Facilities Inspected,
and both are subsets of the Total Number of Facilities.
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA -12
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
THE NUMBER OF CLASS I VIOLATIONS AT DOE FACILITIES DECREASED STEADILY
SINCE FY89
Number of RCRA Inspections and Violations
at DOE Facilities: FY89-FY92
DOE Inspections D DOE Violations
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA-13
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
EPA HAS EXECUTED 96 FEDERAL FACILITY COMPLIANCE AGREEMENTS/COMPLIANCE
ORDERS, A CRITICAL STEP TOWARD ENSURING SUSTAINED COMPLIANCE
Number of RCRA §3008(a) and §3008(h) Agreements
FY85-FY92
Total = 96 Federal Agreements have been
signed, including 11 §3008(h) and 82 §3008(a)
Orders
m §3008(a) • §3008( h)
The btate of Federal Facilities
RCRA-14
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
85% OF EPA's AGREEMENTS/ORDERS WITH FEDERAL FACILITIES HAVE BEEN WITH
DOD AND DOE
RCRA §3008(a) Agreements and §3008(h) Orders
by Agency Type, to Date
5%
Includes 5 Other Defense
Includes 15 Other Federal Agencies
20%
Includes 19 Army
24% Total= 96 Agreements have been signed
includes 23 Navy with Federa I Agencies
Due to rounding, components will not add up to 100%
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA -15
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
EPA HAS SIGNED RCRA AGREEMENTS/ORDERS RELATED IN ALL 10 REGIONS
RCRA §3008(a) and §3008(h) Federal Facility Agreements
by Region: FY81-FY92
Total = 96 Federal
facility Agreements
have been signed
Note: Values equal to '0" are not
labelled on this chart
§3008(a) Agreements
§3008(h) Orders
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA -16
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
EPA HAS SIGNED RCRA AGREEMENTS/ORDERS IN 29 STATES AND ALL 10 EPA
REGIONS
Number of RCRA §3008(a) Agreements and §3008(h) Orders by State to Date
Total = 96 RCRA Agreements or
Orders have beat signed
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA-17
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DOCUMENTATION FOR CHARTS IN THIS SECTION
Page*
RCRA-3-4
RCRA-6
RCRA-7
RCRA-8
RCRA-9
RCRA-10
RCRA-11
Chart Title
Definitions
RCRA Total TSDF Universe:
FY92
RCRA Federal Facilities:
FY92
RCRA Total TSDF Universe
Total DOD Universe by
Handler Type: FY92
Compliance Rates for RCRA
at Federal Facilities: FY92
Federal TSDFs with RCRA
Inspections and Class I
Violations: FY89-FY92
Information
Resource
(EPA office/system)
RCRA Enforcement Division
(RED)/RCRA Information
System (RCRIS)
RED/RCRJS
RED/RCR1S
RED/RCRIS
RED/RCR1S
RED/RCRIS and Integrated
Data for Enforcement Analysis
System (IDEA)
Date of Data
Pull
May 1993
May 1993
May 1993
May 1993
May 1993
RCRIS, May 1993
IDEA, March 1993
Parameter of Data Pull or Special
Conditions for Data
Definitions are based on the following
documents: Federal Facilities Compliance
Strategy (Yellow Book) and Agency Operating
Guidance (Green Book).
RCRA TSD Universe of Federal facilities is
relatively constant.
For the purposes of this Report, facilities can only
be counted as RTC if they have been reinspected
by EPA.
Compliance Rate is calculated as the difference
between the Federal Class I violations OOC in the
first year and those facilities RTC in the second
year divided by the number of Federal violations
discovered in the second year.
All violations in this system have to correspond
to a formal action, although, RED also uses
informal actions to obtain compliance.
The number of Federal facilities with violations is
a subset of the number of facilities inspected.
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA -18
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
RCRA-12
RCRA-12
RCRA-13
RCRA-14
RCRA-15
RCRA-16
DOD TSDFs with RCRA
Inspections and Class I
Violations: FY89-FY92
Number of RCRA
Inspections and Violations
at DOD Facilities: FY89-
FY92
Number of RCRA §3008(a)
and §3008(h) Agreements:
FY85-FY92
RCRA §3008(a) Agreements
and §3008(h) Orders by
Agency Type, to Date
RCRA §3008(a) and §3008(h)
Agreements by Region:
FY81-FY92
Number of §3008(a)
Agreements and §3008(h)
Orders, by State
RED/RCRIS and IDEA
RED/RCRIS
RED/RCRA Administrative
Action Tracking System
(RAATS)
RED/RAATS
RED/RAATS
RED/RAATS
RCRIS, May 1993
IDEA, March 1993
RED/RCRIS
RED/RCRA
Administrative
Action Tracking
System (RAATS)
RED/RAATS
RED/RAATS
RED/RAATS
Ibid.
Ibid.
Data is represented according to annual number
of Agreements/Orders related to Federal
facilities.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
The State of Federal Facilities
RCRA -19
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
"--•
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE
ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
The State of Federal Facilities NPDES-1 FY92 Report
-------
environmental Program status
THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEMS (NPDES)
PROGRAM REGULATES FEDERAL FACILITIES' DISCHARGES TO WATER
The Clean Water Act (CWA) directs EPA and approved States to issue permits that establish
effluent limits for all municipal andlndustrial discharges.
EPA and approved States implement the NPDES Program.
The Permit Compliance System (PCS) is the primary system used to track NPDES progress at
industrial, municipal, and Federal facilities. PCS tracks EPA Regional and State compliance and
enforcement data for NPDES and is updated by EPA Headquarters and Regional staff.
The State of Federal Facilities NPDES- 2 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DEFINITIONS RELEVANT TO THIS SECTION INCLUDE:
Approved States
Exceptions List
Major Facilities
Reportable Non-
Compliance (RNC)
Significant Non-
Compliance (SNC)
States that have been authorized with NPDES permitting and enforcement authority.
A list of Significant Non-Compliance (SNC) facilities that remain in SNC after 2
quarters without returning to compliance or without the administering agency
initiating appropriate formal enforcement action.
Facilities which, as a group, are believed to contribute more of the pollutants to
surface waters. Because of limited resources, designation of major facilities allows
the program to focus resources effectively and efficiently. All majors are subject to
Reportable Non-Compliance (RNC) and Significant Non-Compliance (SNC) criteria
and reporting on the Quarterly Non-Compliance Report (QNCR).
NPDES program criteria which distinguishes a subset of total non-compliance
required by regulation to be reported on the QNCR.
A violation of sufficient magnitude and/or duration to be considered among the
Agency's priorities for regulatory review and/or response. There are several
categories of violations that can be considered "significant/' this report includes all
categories noted in the NPDES permit compliance system. Because the definition of
SNC is not regulatory, it can change or evolve as the NPDES program changes to
encompass new initiatives.
The State of Federal Facilities
NPDES- 3
FY92 Report
-------
dnvirunmeinal Program status
MAJOR FEDERAL FACILITIES REPRESENT 2% OF THE UNIVERSE OF MAJOR FACILITIES
THAT ARE REGULATED UNDER THE CLEAN WATER ACT
Federal Facilities as a Percentage of the Total Universe
of Major Facilities Under NPDES
2%
Represents 146
Major Federal
facilities
98%
Represents 7,034
Major Non-Federal
facilities
Total = 7,180 Major Facilities
The State of Federal Facilities
NPDES- 4
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
OVERALL, THE NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS AT MAJOR FEDERAL FACILITIES
HAS INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY SINCE FY89
NPDES Inspections at Major Facilities: FY89-FY92
15,000
FY89
FY90
Fiscal Year
FY91
0 Non-Federal Facilities • Federal Facilities
FY92
The State of Federal Facilities
NPDES- 5
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
THE COMPLIANCE RATE AMONG FEDERAL FACILITIES RANGED BETWEEN
APPROXIMATELY 80% AND 90% FROM FY89-FY92, AS IT DID FOR NON-FEDERAL
FACILITIES
NPDES Compliance Rate at Major Facilities: FY89-FY92
100%
Percent of Non-Federal Facilities not in SNC
Percent of Federal Facilities not in SNC
The State of Federal Facilities
NPDES- 6
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
MAJOR FEDERAL FACILITIES WITH SNC VIOLATIONS IN Two CONSECUTIVE
QUARTERS DECREASED BETWEEN FY89 AND FY92
Percentage of Major Facilities on Exceptions Lisl
Major Non-Federal Facilities
The State of Federal Facilities
NPDES- 7
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DOCUMENTATION FOR CHARTS IN THIS SECTION
Page*
Chart Title
Information
Resource
(EPA office/system)
Date of Data
Pull
Parameter of Data Pull or Special
Conditions for Data
NPDES-3
Definitions
Office of Water, (OW), Office
of Wastewater Enforcement
and Compliance (OWEC)
Definitions are based on the guidance, NPDES
Program: Tracking Enforcement Response, and
Reporting Non-Compliance (ONCR), 1993
NPDES-4
Federal Facilities as a
Percentage of the Total
Universe of Major Facilities
under NPDES
OW, OWEC/Permit
Compliance System
February 1993
Non-Federal Facilities = Total Universe of
Facilities-Federal Facilities
The inspection year ends in June; data is through
6/92.
NPDES-5
NPDES Inspections at Major
Facilities: FY89-FY92
OW, OWEC/Permit
Compliance System
February 1993
Non-Federal Inspections = Total Inspections-
Federal Inspection
The compliance rate is calculated as those
facilities not in SNC.
NPDES-6
NPDES Compliance Rate at
Major Facilities: FY89-FY92
OW, OWEC/Permit
Compliance System
February 1993
Compliance Rate=100%-(Inspections-
Violations)/Inspections
NPDES-7
Percentage of Major
Facilities on Exceptions List
OW, OWEC/Permit
Compliance System
February 1993
Non-Federal Major Sources=Total Universe of
Major Sources-Federal Major Sources
Notes:
1. The Exceptions List contains major facilities
with SNC violations in two consecutive
quarters.
2. This is the actual total number of major
facilities.
3. Data is presented for the end of each fiscal
year.
The State of Federal Facilities
NPDES-8
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
AIR
The State of Federal Facilities AIR-1 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
THE AIR PROGRAM REGULATES AIRBORNE EMISSIONS AT FEDERAL SOURCES
The Clean Air Act (CAA) authorizes EPA to establish emission control standards to achieve
national air quality goals, including health-related National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Recent amendments to CAA will change the definitions of some program standards.
EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) is tasked to implement the Agency's Air program.
The Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS), maintained by OAR, is the primary
system used to track air program progress at Federal facilities. AIRS contains data on airborne
pollution in the United States. Specifically, it contains air quality as well as emissions and
compliance data on sources.
The State of Federal Facilities AIR- 2 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DEFINITIONS RELEVANT TO THIS SECTION INCLUDE:
Emission Control
Standards
National Ambient
Air Quality
Standards
Major Sources
Regulations that limit emissions of a pollutant that may tend to harm
human health or welfare.
The Air program's goals for achieving substantial reductions in
pollutants at major stationary sources through Source Performance
Standards and at mobile sources through Emissions Standards through
the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program.
Facilities that emit or have the potential to emit over 100 tons/year of a
regulated pollutant.
The State of Federal Facilities
AIR-3
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
IN FY92, FEDERAL MAJOR SOURCES COMPRISED 1% OF THE TOTAL UNIVERSE
OF MAJOR SOURCES REGULATED BY EPA's AIR PROGRAM
Federal Facilities as a Percentage of the Total Universe
of Major Sources: FY92
1%
Represents 434
Federal Major
Sources
99%
Represents 38,265
Major Non-Federal
Sources
Total = 38,699 Major Sources
The State of Federal Facilities
AIR-4
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
THE COMPLIANCE RATE OF MAJOR FEDERAL SOURCES HAS REMAINED ABOVE 90%
AND HAS STEADILY INCREASED SINCE FY90
Percent of Major Federal Sources Not in Violation of Air Regulations:
FY90-FY92
Percent of Major Non-Federal Sources in Compliance
Percent of Major Federal Sources in Compliance
The State of Federal Facilities
A1K-5
r i jj. r\epur i
-------
Environmental Program Status
SINCE FY90, THE NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS AT MAJOR FEDERAL SOURCES HAS
DECREASED, MIRRORING A DECREASE IN INSPECTIONS IN THE TOTAL UNIVERSE
OF MAJOR AIR SOURCES
Air Inspections at Major Sources: FY90-FY92
0 Major Non-Federal Sources • Major Federal Sources
The State of Federal Facilities
AIR-6
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL VIOLATING SOURCES DECREASED 4-5% BETWEEN
FY91 AND FY92
Air Violations at Major Sources: FY90-FY92
Non-Federal Source Violations • Major Federal Source Violations
The State of Federal Facilities
AIR-7
rxyzKeport
-------
Environmental Program Status
DOCUMENTATION FOR CHARTS IN THIS SECTION
Page*
Chart Title
Information
Resource
(EPA office/system)
Date of Data
Pull
Parameter of Data Pull or Special
Conditions for Data
AIR-3
Definitions
OFFE
Definitions are based on the following Documents:
Federal Facilities Compliance Strategy (Yellow Book),
Agency Operating Guidance (Green Book). Definitions
will change under Clean Air Act Amendments.
AIR-4
Federal Facilities as a
Percentage of the Total
Universe of Major Sources:
FY92
Office of Air and Radiation
(OAR), Stationary Source
Compliance Division
(SSCDVAIRS
2/15/93
A facility can be a major source for more than one
Air program.
AIR-5
Percent of Major Federal
Sources Not in Violation of
Air Regulations: FY90-
FY92
OAR, SSCD/AIRS
2/15/93
Compliance is defined in terms of whether the
facility is in violation of any Air program with which
it must comply; more than one program can be
relevant to one facility. Compliance data is
cumulative, meaning that numbers represent all
major sources in violation or compliance at that
point.
AIR-6
Air Inspections at Major
Sources: FY90-FY92
OAR, SSCD/AIRS
2/15/93
Air inspections look at all components of a facility
that are covered by an air program; some data is self-
reported.
AIR-7
Air Violations at Major
Sources: FY90-FY92
OAR, SSCD/AIRS
2/15/93
Violations are tallied once for each Air program;
there is a small degree of overlap in calculating
violations. Compliance data is cumulative, meaning
that numbers represent all major sources in violation
or compliance at that point.
The State of Federal Facilities
AIR-8
FY92 Report
-------
Toxic SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT (TSCA)
The State of Federal Facilities TSCA-1 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental rrogram status
THE Toxic SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT (TSCA) REGULATES SELECTED CHEMICALS
USED AT FEDERAL AND PRIVATE FACILITIES
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 is the legislative basis for the Agency's toxic chemical
control program. Under TSCA:
• EPA is authorized to test, regulate and screen all chemicals produced in or imported into the U.S.
• Any existing chemical which is alleged to pose health and environmental hazards must be tracked
and reported to EPA.
• The Agency is authorized to take corrective action under TSCA in the event of toxic materials
contamination.
TSCA supplements other Federal statutes and is administered by EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxic Substances (OPPTS).
The State of Federal Faculties TSCA- 2 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DEFINITIONS RELEVANT TO THIS SECTION INCLUDE:
Significant Non-
Compliance (SNC)
Stand Alone
Actions
A violation under TSCA, for which the level of
enforcement action is, at a minimum, an administrative
complaint in accordance with the appropriate
enforcement response policy (ERP), and for which the
penalty is, at a minimum, $25,000.
Any enforcement action that does not result from an
inspection, such as a self-confessor or a record violation.
The State of Federal Facilities
TSCA- 3
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
OVERALL, THE NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS AT FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL FACILITIES
HAS DECREASED OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS
TSCA Inspections at Regulated Facilities: FY89-FY92
Non-Federal Facility Inspections • Federal Facility Inspections
The State of Federal Facilities
TSCA- 4
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
«
THE NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS AT FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL FACILITIES HAS
DECREASED OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS
TSCA Violations: FY89-FY92
Non-Federal Facility Violations • Federal Facility Violations
The State of Federal Facilities
TSCA- 5
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
THE NUMBER OF SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIANCE AT FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL
FACILITIES HAS DECREASED OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS
TSCA Significant Non-Compliance at Federal Facilities:
FY89-FY92
Non-Federal Facilities in Significant Non-Compliance • Federal Facilities in Significant Non-Compliance
The State of Federal Facilities
TSCA- 6
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
STAND-ALONE ACTIONS AT FEDERAL FACILITIES AS WELL AS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
STAND-ALONE ACTIONS HAVE DECREASED
6,000 -r
TSCA Total Stand-Alone Actions Compared to
Federal Stand-Alone Actions: FY89-FY92
Federal Facility Stand-Alone Actions
Non-Federal Facility Stand-Alone Actions
The State of Federal Facilities
TSCA-7
r Y 92 Keport
-------
Environmental Program Status
DOCUMENTATION FOR CHARTS IN THIS SECTION
Page#
Chart Title
Information
Resource
(EPA office/system)
Date of Data
Pull
Parameter of Data Pull or Special
Conditions for Data
TSCA-3
Definitions
OPPTS, Office of Compliance
Monitoring/National
Compliance Database
February 1993
TSCA-4
TSCA Inspections of
Major Sources: FY89-FY92
OPPTS, Office of Compliance
Monitoring/National
Compliance Database
February 1993
TSCA-5
TSCA Violations of Major
Sources: FY89-FY92
OPPTS, Office of Compliance
Monitoring/National
Compliance Database
February 1993
Reviews of inspection data were not complete at
time of data pull; therefore, there were more
violations in FY92 than noted.
TSCA-6
TSCA Non-Federal
Violations
OPPTS, Office of Compliance
Monitoring/National
Compliance Database
February 1993
Ibid
TSCA-7
TSCA Non-Federal
Violations
OPPTS, Office of Compliance
Monitoring/National
Compliance Database
February 1993
Violations are counted in terms of enforcement
actions; an action can cover more than one violation
at a facility.
TSCA-7
TSCA Total Stand Alone
Actions
OPPTS, Office of Compliance
Monitoring/National
Compliance Database
February 1993
Data is not cumulative; violations not addressed in a
given year are not counted again in subsequent
years.
The State of Federal Facilities
TSCA- 8
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
- ..
PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM SUPERVISION (PWSS)
The State of Federal Facilities PWSS-1 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
THE PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM SUPERVISION (PWSS) PROGRAM REGULATES FEDERAL
AND NON-FEDERAL PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), as amended by the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments
of 1986, required EPA to set standards for drinking water, including national limits on
contaminant levels in drinking water and the frequency with which public water systems must
monitor for these contaminants and report the analytical results to the State or EPA.
Protection of public health through ensuring compliance with drinking water standards is a
primary focus of the PWSS program.
EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water implements the PWSS program in
conjunction with EPA Regional Offices and States.
The Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS)-II is the primary system used to track compliance of
all Federal and non-Federal public water systems with Federal drinking water regulations. FRDS-
II tracks compliance and enforcement data on public water systems and is updated by EPA
Regional and State personnel.
The State of Federal Facilities FWSS- 2 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DEFINITIONS RELEVANT TO THIS SECTION INCLUDE:
Major Sources
Significant Non-
Complier (SNC)
Community (CWSs), non-transient non-community
water, (NTNCWSs), and transient non-community water
systems (TNCWSs).
A public water system (CWS, NTNCWS, or those TNCWS |
serving 500 or more people) that has more serious,
frequent, or persistent violations.
The State of Federal Facilities
PWSS- 3
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
IN FY92, FEDERAL SYSTEMS REPRESENTED 3% OF THE UNIVERSE OF SYSTEMS
REGULATED BY THE PWSS PROGRAM
Federal Facilities as a Percentage of the Total Universe
of Systems Regulated Under the SOW A: FY92
3%
Represents 5,655
Federal Systems
97%
Represents 191,405
Non-Federal Systems
Total = 197,060 Systems
l ne Mate or federal racuities
PWSS- 4
FY92 Report
-------
m)
Environmental Program Status
FEDERAL SYSTEMS, LIKE THE NON-FEDERAL SYSTEMS,
EXPERIENCED A DECREASE IN VIOLATORS FROM FY90 TO FY92
Number of Public Water Systems in Violation:
FY89-FY92
• Non-Federal System Violations • Federal System Violations
The State of Federal Facilities
PWSS-5
FY92 Report
-------
environmental Program status
FOLLOWING A CONSIDERABLE INCREASE IN SYSTEMS IN SNC BETWEEN FY89 AND
FY90, FEDERAL SYSTEMS IN SNC INCREASED
FROM FY91 TO FY92
Non-Federal Public Water Systems in SNC Compared to Federal Public Water
Systems in SNC: FY89-FY92
Non-Federal Systems in SNC
1 he State of Federal Facilities
PWSS-6
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DOCUMENTATION FOR CHARTS IN THIS SECTION
Page#
Chart Title
Information
Resource
(EPA office/system)
Date of Data
Pull
Parameter of Data Pull or Special
Conditions for Data
PWSS-3
Definitions
Office of Policy, Planning
and Evaluation
FY1993
PWSS definitions are based on guidance issued by
the Office of Water
PWSS4
Federal Facilities as a
Percentage of the Total
Universe of Systems
Regulated Under the
SDWA: FY92
Office of Enforcement, Office
of Federal Facility
Enforcement, Federal
Reporting Data System
(FRDS-n)
March 1, 1993
PWSS-5
Number of Public Water
Systems in Violation:
FY89-FY92
Office of Enforcement, Office
of Federal Facility
Enforcement, Federal
Reporting Data System
(FRDS-C)
March 1, 1993
Non-Federal Violators=Total Violations-Federal
Violators
PWSS-6
Non-Federal Public
Water Systems in SNC
Compared to Federal
Public Water Systems in
SNC: FY89-FY92
Office of Enforcement, Office
of Federal Facility
Enforcement, Federal
Reporting Data System
(FRDS-II)
March 1, 1993
Non-Federal systems in SNC=Total Facilities in
SNC-Federal systems in SNC
The <
Facilities
PWSS- 7
FY92 Report
-------
Toxic CHEMICAL RELEASE INVENTORY (TRI)
The State of Federal Facilities TRI-1 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
GENERATORS OF HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS, AS DEFINED UNDER THE EMERGENCY
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT (EPCRA),
REPORT RELEASES TO THE Toxic RELEASE INVENTORY SYSTEM (TRIS)
• The Toxic Release Inventory System (TRIS) tracks releases of 300 listed chemicals according to
contamination sources. Releases are categorized according to chemical type, quantity, and the
nature of release, e.g., releases to air, water, and soil, and transfer of waste for off-site disposal.
TRIS tracks releases of chemicals that are included in the Agency's 33/50 Program. •
• EPA's 33/50 Program is a voluntary pollution prevention initiative aimed at reducing the
generation and off-site transfer of 17 targeted TRI-listed chemicals. Chemicals are selected for
inclusion in the Program based on:
— Quantities produced and released
— Nature of the chemical as a toxic or hazardous pollutant
— Potential to reduce the release of chemicals through Agency emphasis on prevention.
The Agency's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic Substances and the National Library of
Medicine's Toxicology Data Network administer the 33/50 Program and TRIS .
The State of Federal Facilities TRI-2 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
w
GENERATORS OF HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS, AS DEFINED UNDER EPCRA,
REPORT RELEASES TO TRIS (CONTINUED)
Under §313 of EPCRA (Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986),
facilities are required to report (1) releases to the air, water, and land, (2) transfers to off-site locations of
any specifically listed toxic chemicals, and (3) source reduction/recycling activities if the facility:
• Employs 10 or more full-time employees;
• Conducts activities included in Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Codes 20 through 39;
• Manufactures, processes, or otherwise uses, in the course of a calendar year, any specified
chemical in quantities greater than a set threshold.
The State of Federal Facilities TRI- 3 FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
DEFINITIONS RELEVANT TO THIS SECTION INCLUDE:
Fugitive air sources Non-point air emissions, i.e., releases that are not in a confined directional
flow, which include releases from equipment, such as leaks through valves,
flanges, compressors, sampling connections, and open-ended lines;
evaporative losses from surface impoundments and spills; and releases from |
building ventilation systems.
Stack air sources
Government
Owned/Contractor
Operated (GOCO)
Sources
Underground
injection
Point air emissions or releases that are in a confined air stream, particulary
releases of toxic chemicals to the air through stacks, vents, ducts, pipes, lab
hoods, or other confined air streams.
Facilities that release emissions and are owned by the Federal Government
and operated by a private contractor. Contractors operating GOCO sources
can be issued administrative penalties as part of enforcement action.
The injection of toxic chemicals into any type of wells. Under §313, facilities
are required to report both "routine" and "accidental" releases to any
environmental medium.
The State of Federal Facilities
TRI-4
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
FROM FY87 THROUGH FY90, FEDERAL GOCO SOURCES REPORTED IN TRIS HAVE
SHOWN AN OVERALL DECREASE IN TOTAL EMISSIONS QUANTITIES
Millions
of
Pounds
Total Emissions Quantities: FY87-FY90
\/A Delisted Chemicals
I Other Chemicals Included for That Year
The State of Federal Facilities
TRI-5
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
IN FY90, THE MAJORITY OF AIR EMISSIONS AT GOCOs WERE RELEASED VIA
FUGITIVE AND STACK AIR (BY GOVERNMENT AGENCY)
Percentage of TRIs-Reported Methods of Release: FY90
Off Site 9%
Due to rounding, components will not add up to 100%
The State of Federal Facilities
TRI-6
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
IN FY90, THE MAJORITY OF AIR EMISSIONS AT
GOCOs WERE RELEASED VIA FUGITIVE AND STACK AIR (BY REGION)
Methods of Release at GOCOs by Region I-V: FY90
Water 1% Off Site 1%
Fugitive Air 67%
Underground
Injection
73%
The State of Federal Facilities
TRI-7
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Pi
IN FY90, THE MAJORITY OF AIR EMISSIONS AT
GOCOs WERE RELEASED VIA FUGITIVE AND STACK AIR (BY REGION)
Methods of Release at GOCOs by Region VI-X: FY90
POTW 1%
Slack Air 16%
Region 9
POTW = Publicly-Owned Treatment Works
The State of Federal Facilities
TRI-8
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
FROM FY87 THROUGH FY90, FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL SOURCES REPORTING TO
TRIS REDUCED TOTAL CHEMICAL RELEASES VIA ALL METHODS EXCEPT
UNDERGROUND INJECTION
Yearly Total of Chemical Releases: FY87-FY90
Millions of
Pounds
The State of Federal Facilities
TKI-9
r X7,£ Kepo:
-------
Environmental Program Status
FROM FY87 THROUGH FY90, FEDERAL SOURCES
HAVE DECREASED RELEASE OF 33/50 CHEMICALS VIA ALL METHODS EXCEPT
UNDERGROUND INJECTION
Total 33/50 Chemical Releases: FY87-FY90
Millions of
Pounds
16
Delisted Chemicals
Other Chemicals Included for That Year
33/50 Chemicals
ine state or reaerai facilities
TRI-10
FY92 Report
-------
(seJ
N-X
Environmental Program Status
OVERALL, MOST FEDERAL AGENCIES REDUCED TOTAL CHEMICAL RELEASES FROM
FY87 THROUGH FY90
Chemical Releases at GOCOs by Agency: FY87-FY90
V/A Delisted Chemicals
Other Chemicals Included for That Year
33/50 Chemicals
The State of Federal Facilities
TK1-11
ivcport
-------
Environmental Program Status
FROM FY87 THROUGH FY90, MOST REGIONS DECREASED CHEMICAL RELEASES BY
ALL CHEMICAL TYPES
Chemical Releases at GOCOs by Region I-V: FY87-FY90
Delisted Chemicals
Other Chemicals Included for That Year
33/50 Chemicals
87 88 89 90
Region 1
89 90
Region 2
87 88 89 90
Regions
The State of Federal Facilities
TRI-12
FY92 Report
-------
Environmental Program Status
FROM FY87 THROUGH FY90, MOST REGIONS DECREASED CHEMICAL RELEASES BY
ALL CHEMICAL TYPES
10 —1
8 —
6 —
4 —
Chemical Releases at GOCOs by Region VI-X
DeUsted Chemicals
Other Chemicals Included for That Year
33/50 Chemicals
87 88 89
Region 9
89 90 I 87
87 88 89 90
87 88 89 90
Region 10
The Sta«» of Federal Facilities
TRl- 13
r i7Z tveport
-------
Environmental rogram status
DOCUMENTATION FOR CHARTS IN THIS SECTION
Page*
TRI-4
TRI-5
TRI-6
TRI-7
TRI-8
TRI-9
TRI-10
TRI-11
TRI-12
TRI-13
Chart Title
Definitions
Total Emissions
Quantities
Yearly Total of Chemical
Releases
Percentage of TRIs -
Reported Methods of
Release
Methods of Release at
GOODs by Region I-V
Methods of Release at
GOCOs by Region VI-X
Total 33/50 Chemical
Releases
Chemical Releases at
GOCOs by Agency
Chemical Releases at
GOCOs by Region (I-V)
Chemical Releases at
GOCOs by Region (VI-X)
Information
Resource
(EPA office/system)
OPPTS/Toxic Release
Inventory System (TRIS)
OPPTS/TRIS
OPPTS/TRIS
OPPTS/TRIS
OPPTS/TRIS
OPPTS/TRIS
OPPTS/TRIS
OPPTS/TRIS
OPPTS/TRIS
Date of Data
Pull
2/24/93
2/24/93
2/24/93
2/24/93
2/24/93
2/24/93
2/24/93
2/24/93
2/24/93
Parameter of Data Pull or Special
Conditions for Data
Definitions are based on the guidance, Toxic Chemical
Release Inventory Reporting Form R, EPA 745-k-93-001 .
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory: Questions and
Answers, January 1990.
Data applies only to those GOCO facilities required
to report in FY 92.
Ibid.
Data applies only to those GOCO facilities required
to report in FY 92.
Ibid.
Ibid.
The State of Federal Facilities
TRI-14
FY92 Report
-------
'n urcem n lig igh »
SECTION V
ENFORCEMENT HIGHLIGHTS
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights-1 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement
FY92 Enforcement Accomplishments
BUILDING AND MAINTAINING A STRONG NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT
PROGRAM
In 1992, the Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement (OFFE) continued to
ensure Federal Government compliance with all environmental laws. Recognizing
the unique challenges and opportunities posed by Government facilities, Federal
facilities enforcement and compliance was achieved through a mix of enforcement
and technical assistance activities. These activities range from the core inspections
and enforcement activities that are required under every environmental statute to
innovative pollution prevention approaches, crucial technology development, and
testimony and passage of key legislation (e.g., Federal Facility Compliance Act).
The Federal Government manages a vast array of industrial activities at its
27,000 installations. These activities present unique management problems from
the standpoint of compliance with Federal environmental statutes. Although
Federal facilities are only a small percentage of the regulated community, many
Federal installations are larger and more complex than private facilities and often
present a greater number of sources of pollution in all media. The Federal
Government is investing significant resources in addressing environmental
cleanup and compliance issues at Federal facilities. With the DOD supplement
enacted late in September 1992, a total of $8.42 billion for all Federal Facilities was
authorized to implement over 10,000 environmental projects. The President's FY93
budget request provides for an additional $1.48 billion for environmental projects,
bringing the total to $9.90 billion.
ENFORCEMENT POLICY
Cleanup/Superfund
At the start of EPA's Federal facilities enforcement program, EPA directed its
resources largely to the completion of negotiations for CERCLA Section 120
interagency agreements. These agreements made up the cornerstone of the
enforcement program addressing the 126 final and 4 proposed Federal facilities listed
on the National Priorities List (NPL). Each agreement contained specific schedules
for the study and cleanup of hazardous substances at these facilities.
During FY92, twelve additional Federal facility CERCLA interagency
agreements (lAGs) were executed. Of the 123 facilities listed on the NPL, 115 are
now covered by enforceable agreements. With the majority of these agreements
completed, EPA now concentrates most of its efforts on their implementation. The
number of accomplishments reported by the Regions reflects that work has
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights-1 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
proceeded into the implementation phase; at the end of FY92 there are now 470
ongoing Superfund projects at the NPL sites. There were 45 Records of Decision
(RODs) signed in FY92. In addition, there were 107 Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Study (RI/FS) starts, 36 remedial design starts, 27 remedial design
completions, 27 remedial action starts and 10 remedial action completions.
EPA anticipates that with more sites moving through the study and cleanup
phase, more issues will arise leading to disputes between EPA and Federal agencies.
This past fiscal year, EPA had a major dispute arise at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal.
The parties to the Rocky Mountain Arsenal Federal Facilities Agreement, the
Army, Shell Oil Company, the Fish & Wildlife Service, and EPA, reached an
agreement on September 15,1992 resolving the dispute but deferring the issue of
whether the Endangered Species Act, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and
Migratory Bird Treaty Act are chemical-specific and location-specific Applicable or
Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) for the Rocky Mountain Arsenal
(RMA). The settlement acknowledges that these statutes apply at RMA and that
they will provide a basis for establishing remediation goals that will maintain and
enhance wildlife populations and their habitats at RMA.
Region VIII also invoked dispute resolution on a number of other issues
relating to the Feasibility Study (FS). For instance, the Army proposed that a ID'**
limit be used for evaluation of alternatives, i.e., no further action remedies would
be preselected for areas with risks below 10"^ and above 10"^. The Army further
proposed that the entire Arsenal, 27 square miles, be considered as one area of
concern (AOC), effectively eliminating all Land Disposal Regulation considerations.
In addition, the Army eliminated the exposure scenario for industrial workers,
contrary to the representations made to Congressional staffers in discussions of the
Refuge Bill. Finally, the Army ignored the agreed-upon procedures for evaluating
groundwater at the Arsenal, asserting that the only point of compliance that needs
to be evaluated is the installation boundary. Most of these issues were resolved at
the national level.
Compliance
EPA has also increased its efforts in the compliance arena. Five additional
Federal facility compliance agreements (FFCAs) were signed under RCRA providing
a total of 86 FFCAs. EPA has had similar success in water enforcement. For
example, OFFE and Region II successfully concluded negotiations with the U.S.
Army for issuance of a Region II consent order under the CWA to address long-
standing CWA violations at Ft. Dix, New Jersey. The compliance order requires
construction of a new waste water treatment facility to serve Ft. Dix. The order also
incorporates a unique sanction provision for violations of the agreements. When
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights- 2 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
there is a violation, the order will require the U.S. Army to propose and fund
environmentally-beneficial projects subject to EPA approval.
OFFE continues to pursue Federal facility compliance with the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). TSCA compliance became an issue in the transfer
of a Navy aircraft carrier. OFFE was requested to coordinate all the necessary parties
and to address the compliance requirements under TSCA and the PCB regulations
when the City of Corpus Christi, Texas acquired the legendary Navy aircraft carrier,
USS Lexington. The Lexington is contaminated with PCBs in a variety of
unauthorized uses. 'Facilitating the transfer of the vessel required the drafting and
execution of two Compliance Agreements within a few months. The Agreements
were executed on June 10,1992, about three months from the time OFFE was
initially contacted by the Navy and Region. VI. The famous aircraft carrier is now
exhibited as a museum in Corpus Christi.
For the past fiscal year, OFFE has been engaged in negotiations with the Navy
for an umbrella Compliance Agreement that addresses the unauthorized use of
PCBs on all affected Naval vessels. The Agreement, which provides for
maintenance, transfer, and ultimate disposal of these vessels, is expected to be
executed in FY93.
EPA has also successfully enforced air requirements at Federal facilities. On
March 3,1992, Region VIII issued a Clean Air Act Section 113 Compliance Order to
EG&G (Department of Energy contractor at the Rocky Flats Plant) for violations of
Subpart H of the radionuclide NESHAPS. The order requires EG&G to achieve
compliance with the effluent monitoring requirements of 40 C.F.R. section 61.93(b)
and to complete four specified projects to evaluate the existing radionuclide
monitoring systems for modifications to bring them into compliance.
Implementation of the Rocky Flats Clean Air Act order has been very
successful. As a result of this and similar actions, EPA will be increasingly exercising
its enforcement authorities against contractors as appropriate. OFFE is developing
an enforcement policy addressing contractor-operator enforcement issues to provide
guidance to the Regions.
ENFORCEMENT LEGISLATION
In September 1992, Congress passed the Federal Facility Compliance Act
under RCRA. EPA and OFFE have been working closely with Congress for almost
five years in an attempt to secure passage of this law. The new legislation, which
became law on October 6,1992, greatly enhances State and EPA enforcement
authorities. For example, States and EPA can now assess and collect penalties for
violations of RCRA requirements.
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights- 3 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
A key provision regarding mixed waste was also included to provide
structure to the Department of Energy's mixed waste treatment technology
development program. The new law further provides that Federally-owned
treatment works are eligible for the domestic sewage exclusion, that public vessels
should be treated like private vessels for purposes of hazardous waste regulation,
and that EPA will develop regulations governing munitions as hazardous waste.
Since September 1992, EPA has been putting together a strategy for
implementation of the Compliance Act's provisions. Many workgroups have been
and are being formed to carry out Congressional direction. In addition, guidance
regarding EPA's new enforcement authorities has been transmitted to the Regions
for comment.
DOD AND BASE CLOSURE
There are currently 69 military installations, not including residential
facilities, which are scheduled to be closed under the 1988 and 1991 base closure acts.
Of these, 15 are currently on the National Priorities List (NPL). Bases identified for
closure frequently contain land and facilities that are desired for non-military use.
There may be considerable pressure for the expeditious transfer of property to non-
Federal interests for purposes of economic development. EPA and DOD are
working with States to achieve the goal of protecting public health and the
environment and returning closing bases to safe and productive use as soon as
possible.
Building on the efforts of the Defense Environmental Response Task Force, a
multi-agency group directed by Congress to examine the environmental issues
raised by base closure, EPA has worked extensively with DOD to identify and
implement solutions to the questions raised. In February 1992, EPA announced its
position on the appropriate balance between the need to protect human health and
the environment and the desire to make property at closing installations available
for reuse. The memorandum described the point in the remediation process at
which EPA believed that a transfer by deed could occur. In October 1992, Congress
amended the statute to provide for transfers by deed at a comparable point, allowing
property to be deeded while long term remedial action continued.
Another major effort has been to establish procedures for the identification of
uncontaminated parcels at closing bases which could be transferred by deed for re-
use. The joint efforts produced a DOD guidance document, released in June 1992,
which sets forth the necessary process to identify and document parcels of real
property that are environmentally suitable for transfer. Under this procedure, DOD
prepares a Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) document in consultation with
EPA and the State. In addition, EPA is reviewing procedures DOD has proposed for
transferring remediated parcels by deed and procedures for leasing parcels.
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights- 4 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
On the Regional and State level, EPA and DOD co-sponsored conferences in
Sacramento, California and Boston, Massachusetts, which served as forums for
improving communication between DOD, EPA, States, and other interested parties
to facilitate cleanup and redevelopment of dosing bases and help resolve issues
affecting the base closure process.
Conference participants met to discuss acceleration initiatives, risk
management, real estate and redevelopment (Boston), remediation technologies,
and the development of standardized techniques relative to hazardous waste
cleanups at closing military bases.
Among the acceleration initiatives that offered the greatest potential for
improving the cleanup and reuse process were: installation-wide joint planning;
identification of cleanup standards based on land-use, concurrent review of
documents, intensive in-person review of comments and resolution of issues,
overlapping the phases of the CERCLA process, identification and implementation
of interim actions, and improving contracting procedures.
EPA believes that the pressures associated with the closure of military bases
and associated land transfers should be seen as an opportunity for streamlining the
overall process by which DOD meets its environmental obligations. Much of the
experience gained from the conferences will have direct and immediate application
to DOD cleanups in general.
Other precedents were set in the base closure policy arena. EPA worked
during FY92 to meet the dual statutory mandates to close bases and satisfy
environmental concerns through balancing the competing interests of
environmental and economic goals. OFFE established a Base Closure Workgroup
consisting of Regional representatives to focus on crucial base closure issues. In
conjunction with DOD and the States the Workgroup established a landmark
interpretation of CERCLA Section 120(h)(3) concerning the appropriate point for the
transfer by deed of property at closing bases on the NPL, assisted DOD in developing
procedures for the transfer of uncontaminated property at closing bases, and focused
on the development of methods for accelerating the cleanup process at closing
military installations to facilitate the reuse of those installations.
DOE AND THE NUCLEAR WEAPONS COMPLEX
Other difficult situations were addressed as EPA focused on DOE and the
nuclear weapons complex. OFFE took the lead in coordinating EPA participation in
an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review of all DOE environmental
funding requirements for FY93. The massive undertaking directly involved EPA
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights- 5 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
senior policy officials and their counterparts at DOE, Department of Justice (DOJ),
DOD, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE).
The review was designed to develop DOE's environmental budget for FY93
and to estimate the cost of those activities. Teams from OMB and DOE visited
various sites around the nation and reported to OMB management on the results.
OFFE staff coordinated with the Regions to prepare site briefings for these
OMB/COE teams, addressed policy issues raised by the teams, and briefed senior
agency personnel for high-level meetings on the results of the reviews.
EPA has also taken significant enforcement actions at DOE facilities this fiscal
year. For example, as part of the Hanford Tri-party agreement, DOE was to complete
construction and initiate operations of a low-level mixed waste laboratory on or
before January 31,1992. On October 31,1991, DOE submitted a request to change this
deadline, which EPA and the State of Washington denied. DOE then initiated
dispute resolution.
After protracted negotiations, the parties reached agreement on the dispute.
As part of the settlement, DOE must seek funding for new expedited response
actions at Hanford, and construct and operate an on-site laboratory that is smaller
than the original laboratory. In addition, DOE agreed to the assessment of a $100,000
penalty. Finally, the settlement allows DOE one year to demonstrate that low-level
mixed waste laboratory needs can be satisfied using the combination of existing
commercial laboratory capacity and the downsized on-site laboratory currently
under construction.
EPA signed a letter of intent for a CERCLA agreement at DOE's Savannah
River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. SRS is a DOE megasite that produces nuclear
materials for defense programs (tritium is currently the primary product of the
SRS). The SRS is currently divided into 64 "study areas" for purposes of
investigation and remediation under CERCLA.
The Federal Facility Compliance Agreement, which addresses TSCA
violations at the DOE gaseous diffusions plants in Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee,
became effective in February 1992. The agreement establishes a plan to bring the
facilities into full compliance with TSCA and the PCB regulations. It also commits
DOE to a cleanup schedule and requires worker safety measures in the meantime. A
related case against a DOE contractor-operator at the facilities, Martin Marietta
Energy Systems, was settled with payment of a $50,000 penalty and correction of the
violations.
In DOE policy matters, OFFE initiated dialogue on a mixed waste compliance
strategy, a multi-year compliance and technology development effort to characterize
and develop the technology to treat mixed waste, DOE's most intractable problem.
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights- 6 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
Preliminary strategies and recommendations have been developed for eight mixed
waste and materials management issues: scrap or excess lead; scrap and residue;
transportation of recyclable hazardous material; management of wastes containing
only source, special nuclear, or byproduct material; representative sampling of
nonhomogeneous waste forms; DOE compliance with RCRA Land. Disposal
Restrictions; and DOE compliance with RCRA technical standards. In addition, DOE
and EPA have established a dialogue to address policy concerns regarding RCRA
technical standards and applicability of RCRA to radioactive wastes exhibiting a
hazardous characteristic.
Interagency agreements were signed at DOE facilities such as Idaho National
Engineering Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (Site 300). By
the end of FY92, all nuclear weapons sites were covered under multiyear
enforcement agreements with States as signatories, representing $100-150 billion in
cleanups.
FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET
In FY92, two updates to the docket were published in the Federal Register.
The purpose of the docket is to identify Federal facilities that engage in hazardous
waste activity or have the potential to release hazardous substances into the
environment, to compile and maintain the information submitted to EPA on those
facilities, and to provide a mechanism to make the information available to the
public. At the end of FY92, there were 1,709 Federal facilities listed on the docket, an
increase of 107 from FY91.
Responding to Federal agencies' concerns and inquiries, OFFE provided oral
presentations and training that explained the docket process, i.e., how a facility gets
reported prior to listing, what each reporting mechanism (CERCLA Section 103,
RCRA Sections 3005,3010, 3016) means, how Federal agencies get an opportunity to
clarify a facility's status, and the frequency of Federal Register updates. These
presentations reinforced communications between EPA and the Federal agencies.
POLLUTION PREVENTION
EPA continues to recognize that it is far more efficient to prevent pollution
problems«at Federal installations before those problems actually occur. The Agency
has continued to seek fundamental changes in the behavior and understanding of
Federal agency personnel regarding responsibilities in the environmental arena. To
promote this change, EPA has continued to coordinate a number of important
interagency efforts in the enforcement area to accomplish this goal.
EPA devised mechanisms for shaping the direction and focus of the Federal
sector policies and programs in pollution prevention. A national agreement with
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights- 7 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
DOE has been initiated to significantly reduce the amount of waste being generated
by Federal facilities. The agreement involves voluntary participation in TRI
reporting and participation in EPA's 33/50 program.
EPA also commenced implementing the Tidewater Interagency Pollution
Prevention Program (TIPPP) as a model installation demonstration program with
Army, Navy, Air Force, and NASA. Under the TIPPP, participating agencies are
charged with developing and implementing alternative practices to reduce the
wastes, emissions, and adverse environmental impacts of their facilities. EPA, in
conjunction with the Air Force, conducted Pollution Prevention Opportunity
Assessment (PPOA) training at various Air Force installations and is developing
plans for PPOA training with other Federal agencies.
Additionally, the Federal Government Pollution Prevention Strategy was
drafted. The strategy sets pollution prevention goals and objectives for the Federal
sector by focusing on the three primary roles in which the Government can make a
significant impact, i.e., manufacturer and generator, consumer and large purchaser,
and policy-maker and regulator.
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
In the area of technology development, EPA is attempting to be a leader in
innovative technology research, development, and implementation. EPA
established Federal facilities as development centers for innovative technologies in
site assessment and remediation. McClellan Air Force base is the site of a public-
private partnership project. The project is a collaborative effort among EPA, the
State, the Air Force, and Fortune 500 companies with cleanup liabilities to measure
the performance of a number of innovative technologies for site remediation.
Implementation of the project is expected to lower cost, reduce time to cleanup, and
increase efficiencies at Federal sites.
EPA signed the joint implementation plan for a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with the Western Governors Association, DOE, DOD and
DOI. The implementation plan requires an examination of technology needs for
environmental restoration and waste management activities in western States.
Reports generated from the MOU identify barriers to technology development and
address a more cooperative approach in developing technical solutions to
environmental restoration and waste management problems. The key part of this
MOU is to establish a number of Federal sites as innovative technology
demonstration sites in collaboration with the private sector.
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights- 8 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
MULTIMEDIA INITIATIVE
Achievements were made in the area of multimedia compliance and
enforcement. EPA developed a comprehensive, Agency-wide program to address
multimedia risk and compliance issues through comprehensive evaluations at
Federal facilities. The multimedia initiative is designed to provide a holistic view
of environmental compliance and emphasize prevention-based solutions to
environmental compliance problems. Guidance for a FY93/94 multimedia
initiative in all 10 regions was drafted in FY92.
EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
Education and outreach efforts continued during FY92. EPA continued to
host the highly successful EPA/Federal Agency Environmental Round table, where
representatives of approximately 50 Federal agencies meet monthly to exchange
information. At the Roundtable, EPA media experts discuss existing or proposed
regulatory approaches affecting compliance by the other Federal agencies. The
Roundtable also provides a forum for an exchange of technological information
between agencies. Key topics include hazardous waste cleanup and disposal,
pollution prevention, base closure, and EPA as an information resource.
EPA also continued a high-level dialogue with DOD and DOE to improve
protection of the environment at installations under their control. This was
accomplished through the efforts of a steering committee consisting of DOD's
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Environment), DOE's Director of the Office of
Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, EPA's the Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Federal Facilities Enforcement, and seven workgroups consisting
of subject matter "experts" from each of the three agencies. These workgroups
developed position papers, coordinated through the Office of Federal Facilities
Enforcement, that focused on removing barriers to effective compliance and
cleanup programs.
Also during FY92, OFFE continued its pivotal national dialogue on Federal
Facility Environmental Management. The participants in this effort, facilitated by
the Keystone Center, met several times during FY92. This multi-party group
includes representatives from DOD, DOE, EPA, State and tribal governments, and
environmental and public interest groups. To date, the group has focused on issues
surrounding the extent of citizen and regulatory agency involvement in Federal
agency decision making, responses to constrained funding, and strategies for
prioritizing Federal cleanups.
Beginning in January 1992, EPA and the U.S. Air Force implemented an
extremely successful joint training project. The "AF/EPA Team approach to
Environmental Clean-up and Risk Communication" workshop provided an
The State oFfederaTPacilities2 Enforcement Highlights- 9 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
opportunity for more than 500 Air Force and EPA technical, legal, and community
involvement participants to explore and overcome some of the corporate cultural
differences and other communication barriers inhibiting effective working
relationships at Federal facilities. The workshop was conducted at 16 Air Force bases
in almost every EPA Region in FY92. Efforts are being made to expand the scope of
this program to include the rest of DOD in FY93. Plans are also underway to possibly
develop a similar joint project with DOE.
The Federal Facilities Cleanup Leadership Council, consisting of Headquarters
representatives, Regional officials from program offices, and Regional Counsels,
met several times to focus on policy matters and strategic initiatives. The key
national cleanup program issues of 1992 included distribution and use of oversight
resources, accelerated cleanups, technology development, and base closure.
During the summer of 1992, the Offices of Enforcement and Administration
and Resources Management sponsored an Environmental Awareness Program at
Camp Ernest W. Brown, a summer camp operated by the Metropolitan Police Boys'
and Girls' Clubs. The Camp is located in Southern Maryland, along the banks of the
Potomac River and Chesapeake Bay. From late June until the middle of August,
campers between the ages of 7 and 12 attended the camp and, among other activities,
received daily lessons on plant and animal life, protecting their surroundings,
recycling and reuse, water testing, making paper from wood pulp, and other areas of
environmental awareness. At a Director's Day program, in early July, a tree was
planted in the name of the Environmental Protection Agency. District of Columbia
Police Chief, Isaac Fulwood, assisted in the tree-planting ceremony. The program
was a huge success and is expected to continue and expand in the summer of 1993.
EPA REVIEW OF FEDERAL AGENCY POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLANS
During FY92, OFFE coordinated the review by Regional EPA program offices
of approximately 10,000 environmental projects, with an estimated cost of $10
billion, proposed by Federal agencies for funding throughout the United States.
Executive Order 12088, directs the head of each executive agency to ensure that all
necessary actions are taken for the prevention, control, and abatement of
environmental pollution with respect to all facilities and activities under control of
the agency.
The A-106 process sets environmental funding priorities, based on
compliance status, with the highest priority being given to those facilities that have
signed compliance agreements or consent orders or are already out of compliance or
will go out of compliance if needed environmental funding is not provided. OMB
Circular A-ll also requires that "estimates for design and construction of Federal
facilities or remedial environmental projects will be submitted [for funding] only
after consultation with EPA as provided under the A-106 process."
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights-10 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
MAJOR ENFORCEMENT LITIGATION AND KEY LEGAL PRECEDENTS -
PROTECTING PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH
ENFORCEMENT
CERCLA
Fernald Consent Agreement: During FY92, DOE cleanup of its Feed Materials
Production Center located in Fernald, Ohio has progressed in accordance with the
requirements of the Amended Consent Agreement signed on September 20,1991.
Most activities have been timely and for those activities that were delayed, DOE
obtained extensions of time in accordance with procedures and criteria set forth in
the Consent Agreement. There are currently 27 removal actions either completed,
ongoing, or planned.
One of the most notable problems at Fernald are the K-65 silos. These two 80-
foot (diameter) surface tanks of residue from the Manhattan Project formed the
largest point source of Radon in the country. The K-65 Silo, removal action,
involving the installation of 800 tons of bentonite into the silos was completed
ahead of schedule on November 28,1991. Radon emission is 95 percent less than
before the bentonite installation. During the past fiscal year, DOE reorganized its
management at Fernald, including the hiring of a new lead cleanup contractor to
more efficiently focus its clean-up activities.
Hanford Nuclear Reservation: As part of the Hanford tri-party agreement, DOE was
to complete construction and initiate operations of a low-level mixed waste
laboratory on or before January 31,1992. On October 31,1991, DOE submitted a
request to change this deadline, which EPA and the state of Washington denied.
DOE then initiated dispute resolution.
After protracted negotiations, the parties reached agreement on the dispute.
As part of the settlement, DOE must seek funding for new expedited response
actions at Hanford, and construct and operate an on-site laboratory that is smaller
than the original laboratory. In addition, DOE agreed to the assessment of a $100,000
penalty. Finally, the settlement allows DOE one year to demonstrate that low-level
mixed waste laboratory needs can be satisfied using the combination of existing
commercial laboratory capacity and the downsized on-site laboratory currently
under construction.
DOE Oak Ridge Reservation: A CERCLA Section 120 Federal Facilities Agreement
(FFA) for Oak Ridge was finalized in November, 1991 and became effective on
January 1,1992. The Oak Ridge Reservation is a DOE "megasite" that consists of
three different major facilities: the Oak Ridge National Lab, which is charged with
conducting research for both defense and non-defense purposes; the Y-12 Plant,
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights-11 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
which produces components for various nuclear weapons programs; and the Oak
Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, which was used for Uranium enrichment until 1985
when the plant was permanently shut down. The Oak Ridge site is currently
divided up into 43 operable units for purposes of investigation and remediation
under CERCLA.
Schofield Army Barracks Federal Facility Agreement: The State of Hawaii, EPA, and
the Army signed a CERCLA Section 120 FFA for the Schofield Army Barracks in
Hawaii. This agreement, signed in September 1991, ensures that the environmental
impacts associated with past and present activities at the site are thoroughly
investigated and appropriate remedial action taken to protect public health and the
environment. The FFA identifies the nature, objective, and schedule of response
actions to be taken at the Site.
Tracy Defense Distribution Region West (DDRW): EPA, the State of California, the
California Water Control Board, and the Defense Logistics Agency signed a CERCLA
Section 120 FFA on June 27,1991 for Tracy. The Defense Logistics Agency and
DDRW are operators of this site, approximately 1 mile from Tracy, California.
Because of the water concerns at this site, the State Water Board is also a signatory of
the document.
Davisville Naval Construction Battalion Center (NCBC) and the Naval Education
and Training Center (NETC): EPA, the State of Rhode Island, and the Navy entered
into Federal Facilities Agreements (FFAs) under CERCLA Section 120 for these two
facilities on March 23,1992. The NCBC and NETC agreements are designed to
address the investigation, development, selection, and implementation of response
actions for all releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances at the two
installations. The FFAs were negotiated concurrently and contain similar language,
except for site specific provisions. NCBC Davisville is 18 miles south of Providence
in North Kingstown, Rhode Island. It was listed on the NPL on November 21,1989.
NCBC is scheduled for closure pursuant to the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act of 1990. The tentative closure date is September 1994. NETC
Newport was listed on the NPL on November 21,1989. NETC is currently the
Navy's largest officer training facility.
AIR
Savannah River: A Federal Facility Compliance Agreement between EPA and DOE
was executed on October 31,1991 that will bring DOE into full regulatory compliance
with the Subpart H radionuclide National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAPS) requirements by September 30,1993. This agreement is a
follow-up to the interim compliance agreement completed in June 1991.
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights-12 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
Rocku Flats: On March 3,1992, Region VHI issued a Clean Air Act Section 113
Compliance Order to EG&G, the site's operators for DOE, for violations of Subpart H
of the radionuclide NESHAPS. The order requires EG&G to achieve compliance
with the effluent monitoring requirements of 40 C.F.R. Section 61.93(b) and to
complete four specified projects to evaluate the existing radionuclide monitoring
systems for modifications to bring them into compliance.
RCRA
Oak Ridge Site: On June 12,1992, EPA signed a Federal Facility Compliance
Agreement (FFCA) with the Department of Energy to address the RCRA Land
Disposal Restriction (LDR) issue at DOE's Oak Ridge Reservation site at Oak Ridge,
Tennessee. The FFCA was entered into as a result of DOE's storage of wastes at Oak
Ridge that are prohibited from land disposal. The land disposal restriction program
prohibits the land disposal of certain wastes unless they are either treated using
specific technologies or are treated to specific treatment levels. The storage of these
wastes for which no operational treatment system exists constitutes a technical
violation of the land disposal requirements of RCRA. The Oak Ridge FFCA is an
important commitment on behalf of DOE to develop technologies and carry out the
treatment of radioactive mixed waste streams as well as to address the related waste
management issues associated with those waste streams at Oak Ridge.
Paducah Site: The Paducah Agreement addressing LDR storage prohibition
violations was executed in July 1992. It is similar to the Oak Ridge Agreement on
land disposal.
In the Matter of Westinghouse Materials Company of Ohio. Inc.
Docket No. RCRA-V-W-89-R-11 (Ohio): On February 9,1989, Region V filed an
Administrative Complaint against Westinghouse Materials Company of Ohio, Inc.
(WMCO) alleging that WMCO had violated RCRA requirements as the operator of
the Department of Energy's Feed Material Production Center located in Fernald,
Ohio. WMCO filed a Motion for Partial Accelerated Decision which, on December
31,1991, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied in part and granted in part.
The ALJ ruled that hazardous wastes mixed with radioactive wastes were subject to
dual authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and EPA; thus the
RCRA regulations would be applicable to the hazardous wastes mixed with
radioactive wastes and RCRA gives EPA the authority to regulate such wastes.
The parties were further directed to attempt to settle the matter. A draft Consent
Agreement and Final Order has been developed. Factors complicating negotiations
include a concurrent State of Ohio action filed in Federal District Court against
WMCO that is nearing settlement, expiration of WMCO's contract to operate the
Fernald facility as of December 1992, and resolution of certain compliance issues.
Settlement negotiations should continue through at least the early part of FY93.
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights-13 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
Former Air Force Plant 36 (Ohio): The former Air Force Plant 36 located near
Evendale, Ohio is being cleaned up pursuant to RCRA Section 3004 (u), 42 U.S.C.
Section 6924 (u). While the General Electric Company (GE) now owns this site, the
United States Air Force, as a condition of the GE purchase agreement for the site, is
conducting the corrective action activities. The corrective action activities focus on
identifying the nature and extent of soil and groundwater contamination at the site
as part of the Remedial Field Investigation (RFI). The principle contaminants are
Trichloroethylene (TCE) and Trichloroethane (TCA). Ongoing interim measures
include an assessment of 21 underground storage tanks and a pump-and-treat
system for remediation of groundwater. Data collected for the RFI is now being
evaluated and remedial alternatives are being developed.
UST
Hanford Reservation: Region X issued a field citation to DOE for compliance
violations of the underground storage provisions. DOE achieved compliance with
the field citation in a timely manner.
Selfridge Air National Guard Base (Mt. Clemens. Michigan): EPA has issued a
notice of noncompliance for 71 violations of underground storage tank rules. The
base did not dose 14 out-of-service tanks as required and did not notify EPA of the
existence of 16 tank systems. Other violations include failure to conduct proper
inventories, failure to provide adequate procedures to detect leaks, and failure to
notify EPA about confirmed leaks. Negotiations on a Federal Facility Compliance
Agreement (FFCA) are ongoing and expected to continue through the early part of
FY93. In the interim, the Air National Guard has begun to correct the cited
violations.
TSCA
USS Lexington Compliance Agreements: When the legendary Navy aircraft carrier,
USS Lexington was slated to be transferred to the city of Corpus Christi, Texas as a
museum, OFFE undertook primary responsibility for coordinating all the necessary
EPA offices and drafting the required documents to address the unauthorized use of
PCBs on the vessel. Facilitating the transfer of the vessel required the drafting and
execution of two Compliance Agreements within an expedited timeframe. The
Agreements were executed on June 10,1992, about three months from the time
OFFE was initially contacted by the Navy and Region VI. The aircraft carrier is now
exhibited as a museum in Corpus Christi.
FFCA for DOE Gaseous Diffusion Plants at Oak Ridge. Paducah. and Portsmouth:
The Federal Facility Compliance Agreement, which addresses TSCA violations at
the DOE gaseous diffusions plants in Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, became
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights-14 FY92 Report
-------
Enforcement Highlights
effective in February 1992. The Agreement establishes a plan to bring DOE's
Uranium Enrichment Plants in Portsmouth, Ohio and Paducah, Kentucky and
DOE's former Uranium Enrichment Plant located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee into full
compliance with TSCA and the PCB regulations.
The FFCA addresses the requirements of the PCB regulations applicable to the
unauthorized use of PCBs in process lubrication oil, ventilation duct gaskets, and.
electrical potential devices and the unauthorized storage of PCBs at the facilities.
This FFCA commits DOE to a cleanup schedule, and requires certain worker
safety measures in the meantime (e.g., troughing and air sampling). The. FFCA, will
remain in effect until decommissioning and demolition of all three facilities
(scheduled for 2015).
A related case against a DOE contractor-operator at the facilities, Martin
Marietta Energy Systems, was settled with payment of a $50,000 penalty and
correction of the violations.
The State of Federal Facilities Enforcement Highlights- 15 FY92 Report
-------
Next Steps
SECTION VI
NEXT STEPS
The State of Federal Facilities Next Steps-1 FY92 Report
-------
Next Steps
EPA WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH STATES, FEDERAL AGENCIES, INDIAN TRIBES,
AND THE PUBLIC TO ACHIEVE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP
Specifically, EPA will focus its resources on the following key objectives:
• Apply the full range of enforcement authorities available under environmental laws.
• Involve the public in each stage of the Federal government's environmental decision-making
process.
• Work with all Federal agencies to factor pollution prevention into life cycle planning.
• Accelerate cleanup by using statutory authorities to expedite cleanup and streamline the
decision-making process.
• Establish a process for accelerating the cleanup at military bases proposed for closure.
• Reduce cost and increase the effectiveness of environmental technologies.
• Ensure compliance with negotiated enforcement agreements at major nuclear weapons
facilities.
• Address multimedia risk and compliance issues through comprehensive risk-based
evaluations at high priority sites.
• Train Federal agency staff in the objectives and approaches for environmental cleanup and
compliance.
EPA is committed to supporting environmental program objectives at Federal facilities and meeting
EPA's responsibility for an efficient and effective environmental cleanup and compliance program at
Federal facilities.
The State of Federal Facilities Next Steps- 2 FY92 Report
-------
APPENDICES
LIST OF ACRONYMS
The State of Federal Facilities FY92 Report
-------
List of Acronyms
LIST of ACRONYMS
STATE OF FEDERAL FACILITIES REPORT
AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System
AMTL Army Material Technology Lab
BRAC Base Realignment and Closure
CAA Clean Air Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act
CERCUS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Information System
CERFA Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act
CWA Clean Water Act
DoA Department of Agriculture
DoD Department of Defense
DoE Department of Energy
Dol Department of Interior
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
FRDS II Federal Reporting Data System II
GIS Geographic Information Systems
GOCO Government-Owned/Contractor-Operated
IAG Interagency Agreement
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPL National Priority List
OAR Office of Air and Radiation
OFFE Office of Federal Facility Enforcement
PCS Permit Compliance System
POTW Publicly-Owned Treatment Works
PWSS Public Water Supply System
RA Remedial Action
RAATS RCRA Administrative Tracking System
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCRIS Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System
RD Remedial Design
RI/FS Remedial Investigation/Feasibility System
ROD Record of Decision
State of Federal Facilities Report List of Acronyms-1
FY92 Report
-------
List of Acronyms
LIST of ACRONYMS (Continued)
SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
SB A Small Business Administration
SOW A Safe Drinking Water Act
SEA Site Evaluation Accomplished
SNC Significant Non-Compliance
TRI Toxic Release Inventory
TRIS Toxic Release Inventory System
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TSDF Treatment, Storage, and Disposal' Facility
State of Federal Facilities Report List of Acronyms- 2 FY92 Report
-------
Appendices
APPENDICES
Program Data Tables for Federal Facilities
Federal Facilities Settlements: Interagency Agreements
Federal Facilities Settlements: Compliance Agreements
Detailed Select Logic for CERCLA Data
The State of Federal Facilities FY92 Report
-------
APPENDICES
PROGRAM DATA TABLES FOR FEDERAL
FACILITIES
The State of Federal Facilities FY92 Report
-------
Appendices
AIR DATA
Total Universe
Total Non-Federal Facilities Universe
Total Inspections
Total Violations
Total Facilities not in Violation
Federal Facilities Universe
Federal Facilities Inspections
Federal Source Violations
Federal Facilities not in Violation
Non-Federal Facilities Inspections
Non-Federal Source Violations
Non-Federal Facilities not in Violation
Federal Facilities Percent of Total Universe
Percent of Federal Facilities with Violations
Percent of Total Universe with Violations
Percent of Federal Sources in Compliance
Percent of Non-Federal Sources in Compliance
TOO
36311
35,875
&M7
tjSfo
34,739
4&
397
30
406
3i#0
1,542.
32728
1,20%
6.88%
4M%
93,12%
&&%
FY91
38,077
37,619
32,866
1,575
36,502
448
395
25
423
32/471
1,550
30,921
1.18%
5.58%
4.14%
94.42%
82.17%
FY92
38,699
38,265
30,057
1,486
57,213
<#4
#*'
19
415
W,6S1
-M67
28,184
1.12%
438%
184%
95.62%
7&65%
Source: Office of Air and Radiation, Stationary Source Compliance Division/AIRs Database, February 15,1993
The State of Federal Facilities
FY92 Report
-------
Appendices
TSCA DATA
Total Universe
Total Inspections
Total Violations
Total Significant Noncompliance
Total Stand-Alone Actions
Federal Sources Universe
Federal Facilities Inspections
Federal Facilities Violations
Federal Facilities Significant Noncompliance
Federal Facilities Stand-Alone Actions
Non-Federal Sources Universe
Non-Federal Facilities Inspections
Non-Federal Facilities Violations
Non-Federal Facilities Significant Noncompliance
Non-Federal Facilities Stand-Alone Actions
Percentage of Federal Facilities in Compliance
Percentage of Non-Federal Facilities in Compliance
FYS*
4656
136$
186
5781
0
116
71
23
i4
0
4540
1294
m
5257
SO.17%
96Al%
FY90
4,349
1,233
149
1,177
0
128
66
25
32
0
4,221
1,167
124
1,145
80.47%
97.06%
rm
4,168
1,127
132
975
Q
n
38
7
4$
9
4,076
l/W
125
- 926
92.39%
- 96,n%
FY92
4,272
853
64
1,165
71
23
7
32
0
4,201
830
57
1,133
90.14%
98.64%
Source: Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic Substances, Office of Compliance Monitoring/National Compliance
Database, February 1993.
FY92 Report
-------
Appendices
PWSS DATA
Total Universe of Major Facilities
Total Facilities in SNC
Total Violations
198,123
4,758
37,095
J98457
4524
197,060
4,110
34,143
Federal Facilities Universe
Federal Facilities in SNC
Federal Facilities Violations
Federal Facilities Percent of Total Universe
Federal Facilities Percent of Total Violations
193,858
1,294
192,844
4,478
Non-Federal Facilities Universe
Non-Federal Facilities in SNC
Non-Federal Facilities Violations
193,858
4,698
36,398
191,405
4,056
33,282
Non-Federal Facilities Percent of Total Universe
Non-Federal Facilities Percent of Total Violations
Percent of Total not in Violation
Percent of Federal Facilities not in Violation
Source: Office of Enforcement, Office of Federal Facility Enforcement/Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS-H),
March 1,1993
The State of Federal Facilities
FY92 Report
-------
Appendices
NPDES DATA
FV89
FY90
FY91
FY92
Total Universe (Major)
Total Cumulative Major Inspections
Total Facilities in SNC
Federal Facilities Universe (Major)
Cumulative Major Federal Facilities Inspections
Federal Facilities in SNC
Non-Federal Facilities Universe (Major)
Cumulative Major Non-FF Inspections
Non-Federal Facilities in SNC
Federal Facilities Percent of Total Universe
Federal Facilities Percent of Total Inspections
Federal Facilities In SNC as Percent of Total in SNC
Percent of Non-Federal Facilities Not in SNC
Percent of Federal Facilities Not in SNC
85,14%
2%
8630%
89.19%
4%
90.43%
90.41%
EXCEPTIONS LIST
Total Facilities (Major)
Federal Facility (Major)
Non-Federal Facilities (Major)
Percent of Total Facilities on Exceptions List
Percent of Federal Facilities on Exceptions List
Percent of Non-Federal Facilities on Exceptions List
Source: Office of Water, Office of Wastewater Enforcement and Compliance/Permit Compliance System, February 1993
The State of Federal Facilities
FY92 Report
-------
APPENDICES
FEDERAL FACILITIES SETTLEMENTS:
INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS
The State of Federal Facilities FY92 Report
-------
PACE NO.
02/24/93
FEDERAL FACILITIES SEITLEHEHTS
INIEMGEHCV AGREEMENTS
Facility
State
Agency
NPL Date HPl Date Date Signed
Proposed Final Signed By State
•* Region: 1
Mew London Submarine Base
Fort Devens
Fort Devens-Sudbury Training Annex
Otis Air National Guard Base/Coup Edward*
Brunswick Naval Air Station
Lorlng Air Force Base
Pease Air Force Base
Davisville Naval Construction Battalion Center
Newport Naval Education ft Training Center
*• Region: 2
Federal Aviation Administration Technical Center
Haywood Interim Storage Site
Naval Air Engineering Center
Naval Weapons Station Earle (Site A)
Picatlrmy Arsenal
U.S. Array Training Center ft Fort tin (Landfill Site)
W.R. Grace ft Co., Inc./Wayne Interim Storage Site
Brooknaven National Laboratory
Griffiss Air Force Base
Plattsburgh Air Force Base
Seneca Amy Depot
Naval Security Group Activity (Sebana Seca)
•• Region: 3
Dover Air Force Base
Aberdeen Proving Ground (Edgevood Area)
Aberdeen Proving Ground (Nicnaelsville Landfill)
Letterkemy Arey Depot (Properly Disposal Office Area)
Letterfcemy Army Depot (Southeast Area)
Naval Air Developnei. iter (8 Waste Areas)
CT
HA
NA
NA
NE
ME
NH
Rl
RI
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NT
NT
NY
NY
PR
OE
HD
HO
PA
PA
PA
Navy
Army
Army
Air Force
Navy
"Air Force
Air- Force
Navy
Navy
Transportation
Energy
Navy
Navy
Army
Army
Energy
Energy
Air Force
Air Force
Army
Navy
Air Force
Army
Army
Army
Army
Navy
10/69
07/89
07/69
07/69
10/84
07/89
07/89
07/89
07/89
07/69
09/85
10/64
07/69
10/84
09/83
07/89
10/84
07/89
07/89
06/88
10/64
04/85
04/85
04/85
10/84
06/86
08/90
11/89
02/90
11/69
07/67
02/90
02/90
11/89
11/89
08/90
07/87
08/90
02/90
07/67
09/84
11/89
07/67
11/89
08/90
10/89
03/69
02/90
10/69
03/69
07/87
10/89
/ /
OS/13/91
OS/13/91
07/17/91
10/19/90
01/30/91
12/21/90
03/23/92
03/23/92
/ /
09/17/90
10/04/69
02/16/91
04/17/91
07/19/91
09/17/90
02/28/92
06/14/90
07/10/91
01/21/93
03/19/92
06/02/89
03/27/90
03/27/90
02/03/89
02/03/69
09/20/90
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
-------
PAGE MO.
02/24/93
FEDERAL FACILITIES SEULEHENIS
INTERAGEIICr AGREEMENTS
facility
State
Agency
Tobytianna Army Depot
Defense General Supply Center
Vest Virginia Ordnance Works
•• Region: 4
Alabama Army Ammunition Plant
Amiston Army Depot (Southeast Industrial Area)
Cecil Field Naval Air Station
Homestead Air Force Base
Jacksonville Naval Air Station
Pcnsaeola Naval Air Station
Marine Corps logistics Base
Robins Air Force Base (landfill (K/Sludge lagoon)
Camp lejeune Military Reservation (once Listed as Camp Lejeune)
Savannah River Site
Milan Amy Anmunition Plant
Oak Ridge Reservation
•* Region: 5
Jot let Army Amnunition Plant (Load-Assembly-Packing Area)
Joliet Amy Ammmltion Plant (Manufacturing Area)
Sangano Electric Dump/Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge
Savanna Army Depot Activity
Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant
luin Cities Air Force Reserve Base (Small Arms Range Landfill)
luin Cities Army Amtunitfon Plant
Feed Materials Production Center (Fernald)
Hound Plant
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
•• Region: 6
Louisiana Army Amnunition Plant
PA
VA
WV
AL
AL
FL
FL
FL
FL
GA
CA
KC
SC
IN
IN
IL
IL
IL
IL
MM
MH
MM
01
01
01
Army
Array
Army
Army
Army
Navy
Air Force
Navy
Navy
Navy
Air Force
Navy
Energy
Army
Energy
Army
Army
Interior
Anny
Navy
Air Force
Amy
Energy
Energy
• Air Force
NPl Date
Proposed
07/69
10/84
10/81
10/84
10/84
07/89
07/89
07/89
07/89
07/89
10/M
06/88
07/89
10/84
07/89
04/85
10/84
10/84
10/84
07/89
01/87
07/82*
07/89
7/89
06/88
NPL Date
Final
08/90
07/87
09/8S
07/87
03/89
11/89
08/90
11/89
11/89
11/89
07/87
10/89
11/89
07/87
11/89
03/89
07/87
07/87
03/89
11/89
07/87
09/83
11/89
11/69
10/69
Date :
Signed B
09/28/90
10/29/90
07/16/89
12/07/90
05/01/90
10/23/90
02/04/91
10/23/90
10/23/90
07/02/91
06/14/89
02/14/91
01/15/93
07/25/89
11/22/91
06/09/69
06/09/69
09/13/91
09/27/69
03/27/91
11/06/89
08/12/87
04/09/90
08/06/90
03/21/91
Signed
y State
N
Y
N
T
T
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
V
V
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
-Y
N
N
N
LA
Army
10/84
03/69
02/06/69
-------
PMC NO.
02/24/91
FEDERAL FACILITIES SEI1LCNENTS
INTERAGENCV AGREEMENTS
Facility
State
Agency
Cat West Metals
Lee Acres Landfill
Timer Air force Ba»e (Soldier Creek/Building 3001)
Afr Force Plant M (General Dynamics)
Lone Star Amy Amnwitlon Plant
Longhern Amy Ammunition Plant
*• Region: 7
Iowa Amy Anaunltion Plant
Fort Rlley
Lake City Army Annumtion Plant CNortfctiest Lagoon)
St. Louie Airport Sites
Ueldon Spring Former Amy Ordnance Works
Veldon Spring Ouarry/Plent/Pits
Cornhusker Amy Anmnitlon Plant
Hastings Croumf-Uater Contamination
Nebraska Army Ordnance Plant (Heade)
•• Region: 8
Air Force Plant PJKS
Rocky Flats Plant
Rocky Mountain Arsenal
Ellsworth Air Force Base
Hill Air Force Base
Mont (cello Mill Tailings
Ogden Defense Depot
Tooele Amy Depot (North Area)
f.E. Warren Air Force Base
•• Region: 9
Luke Air Force Base
Williams Air Force Base
m
NM
ox
TX
TX
TX
IA
KS
MO
NO
NO
NO
HE
ME
HE
CO
CO
CO
so
UT
UT
UT
UT
UV
AZ
AZ
SBA
Interior
Air Force
Air Force
Army
Army
Any
Arny
Amy
Energy
Any
Energy/Army
Army
Army
Air Force
Energy
Amy
Air Force
Air Force
Energy
Defense
Army
Arny
Air Force
Air Force
•PL Bate
Proposed
06/68
06/88
04/85
10/84
10/84
07/69
07/69
07/69
10/84
05/89
07/89
10/84
10/84
10/84
07/89
10/64
10/84
10/89
tO/B4
07/89
10/84
•10/84'
07/89
07/89
07/89
•PL Date
Final
03/69
08/90
07/67
08/90
07/87
08/90
08/90
08/90
07/87
10/89
02/90
07/87
07/67
06/86
11/89
10/89
07/87
08/90
07/67
11/69
07/87
08/90
02/90
08/90
It/89
Bate
Signed
09/01/90
/ /
12/09/88
08/31/90
07/17/90
10/16/91
09/20/90
09/01/90
09/28/89
06/26/90
08/07/90
12/04/91
04/23/90
/ /
09/30/91
/ /
01/22/91
02/15/69
01/24/92
04/10/91
12/19/88
12/01/89
09/16/91
09/26/91
09/27/90
09/21/90
Signed
By State
T
Y
Y
V
N
Y
T
N
T
Y
N
T
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
-------
PAGE NO.
02/24/93
FEDERAL FACILI1IES SEITIEHENTS
INIE8AGENCV AGREEMENTS
Facility
State Agency
Vuna Marine Corps Air Station
Barstow Marine Corps Logistics Base
Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base
Castle Air Force Base
Edwards Air Force Base
El loro Marine Corps Air Station
Fort Ord
George Air Force Base
Jet Propulsion laboratory
Lawrence Livermore National laboratory
Laurence Livermore National laboratory (Site 300)
Harch Air Force Base
Mather Air Force Base
HcClellan Air Force Base (Ground Water Contamination)
Hoffett Naval Air Station
Norton Air Force Base
Riverbank Any Anrounition Plant
Sacramento Army Depot
Sharp* Army Depot
I racy Defense Depot
Iravis Air Force Base
treasure Island Naval Station-Hunters Point Annex
Schofteld Barracks
•• Region: 10
Eielson Air Force Base
Elmendorf Air Force Base
Fort Uatnuright
Standard Steel ft Metals Salvage Yard
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
Mountain Norn Air Force Base
Umatilla Amy Depot (Lagoons)
AZ
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
HI
AK
AK
AK
AK
ID
ID
OR
Navy
Navy
Navy
Air Force
Air Force
Navy
Army
Air Force
NASA
Energy
Energy
Air Force
Air Force
Air Force
Navy
Air Force
Army
Army
Army
Army
Air Force
Navy
Army
Air Force
Air Force
Army
Transportation
Energy
Air Force
Anny
tin. Date
Proposed
06/88
07/89
07/89
10/84
07/89
06/88
07/89
07/69
10/84
07/89
07/89
10/84
10/84
04/85
10/84
06/88
10/84
10/84
07/89
07/89
07/89
07/69
07/89
07/89'
07/89
07/69
07/89
07/69
10/84
NPLDate
Final
02/90
11/89
11/89
07/87
08/90
02/90
02/90
02/90
07/87
08/90
11/89
11/89
07/87
07/87
07/87
02/90
07/87
07/87
08/90
11/89
11/89
08/90
11/89
08/90
08/90
08/90
11/69
08/90
07/67
Date
Signed B
01/07/92
09/27/90
09/27/90
07/21/89
09/25/90
09/27/90
07/23/90
09/21/90
12/02/92
11/02/88
06/29/92
09/27/90
07/21/89
07/21/89
09/14/90
06/29/89
04/05/90
12/16/88
03/16/89
06/27/91
09/28/90
09/28/90
09/27/91
05/21/91
11/15/91
03/25/92
/ /
12/09/91
01/16/92
10/31/89
Signed
y State
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
V
Y
Y
If
Y
»
-------
PAGE NO.
02/24/91
FEDERAL FACILITIES SETILEKENTS
INTEM6ENCT AGREEMENTS
Facility
State Agency
Benjor Naval Submarine Base
Bangor Ordnance Disposal
Bcmeville Power Adninistratlon Ross Complex
Falrchlld Air Force Base (4 Waste Areas)
Fort Lewis (landfill No. 5)
Fort Lewie Logistics Center
flanford <100 Area)
•anford (1100 Area)
•antord (200 Area)
•anford (300 Area)
•HcChord Air force Base (Wash Reck/treatment Area)
Naval Air Station, Uhidbey Island (Ault Field)
Naval Air Station, Miidbey Island (Seaplane Base)
Naval Undersea Warfare Engineering Station C4 Waste Areas)
WA
UA
UA
WA
UA
UA
UA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
VA
WA
Havy
Navy
Energy
Air force
Army
Army
Energy
Energy
Energy
Energy
Air Force
Navy
Havy
Navy
HPL Gate
Propose*!
07/89
10/84
07/89
06/88
10/84
07/89
06/88
06/88
06/88
06/88
10/84
09/8S
09/85
06/86
NPL Date
Final
08/90
07/87
11/89
01/89
07/87
11/89
10/89
10/89
10/89
10/89
07/87
02/90
02/90
10/89
Date
Signed
01/29/90
01/29/90
05/01/90
03/27/90
02/07/90
02/07/90
05/15/89
05/1S/89
05/15/89
05/15/89
09/01/89
09/17/90
09/17/90
07/17/90
Signed
By State
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
V
Y
Y
Y
-------
APPENDICES
FEDERAL FACILITIES SETTLEMENTS:
COMPLIANCE AGREEMENTS
The State of Federal Facilities FY92 Report
-------
PAGE NO.
02/24/93
FEDERAL FACILITIES SETTLEMENTS
FEDERAL FACILITY COMPLIANCE AGREEMENTS
Facility
•• Region: t
Neii London Naval Submarine Base
Otic Air Hatfonal Guard-Base/Camp Edwards
U.S. Coast Guard Station
Loring A(r Forea Base
Naval'Air Station-BrunsMick.
U.S. Coast Guard Station
" Region: 2
Arnanent I t 0 Comnd
Mcfiulre Afr Force Base
McCuIra Air Force Base
U.S. Military Ocean Terainak
U.S. Military Ocean Terminal.
U.S. National. Marine fisheries: Service
F. Bennett Field Air Station (USCG)
State of New York (Any. National Guard)
••Region: 3
Walter Beed Ann/ Medical. Center.
Adelphi Laboratory Center
Beltsville Agricultural Research.Center
Defense Personnel Support Center,
Naval Air Development Center
Pittsburgh Naval Reactors Oflice
Fort Belvoir
Lengley Air Force Base
Letterkenny Air Force Base
Naval Surface Warfare Center (U.S. Navy)
Naval Surface Warfare Center at Dalgren
Oceana Naval Air Station
Bedford Any Aonunftfon Plant
tate
CT
MA
MA
ME
ME
ME
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NJ
NY
NY
DC
MD
KB
PA
PA
PA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
Agency
Navy
Army
Transportation
Air Force
Navy
Iransportat ion
Any
Air Force
Air Force
Amy
Army
Comerce
Transportation
Any
Defense
Any
Agricul ture
Defense
Navy
Navy
Any
Air Force
Air Force
' Navy
Navy
Navy
Any.
NPL Date
Final Signed
08/90 08/14/87
11/89 04/03/85
04/15/85
02/90 1 1/03/88
07/87 12/18/89
12/06/91
08/17/88
08/26/88
02/28/90
12/03/88
06/27/91
09/21/90
02/14/91
08/15/91
03/29/90
04/07/92
08/31/90
12/31/90
10/89 11/05/87
09/28/90
12/31/90
05/07/92
07/17/91
03/24/92
03/24/92
06/06/91
02/26/92
-------
PACE HO.
02/24/93
FEOERAl FACILITIES SETUERENTS
FEDERAL FACILITY COMPLIANCE AGREEMENTS
Facility
•* Region: 4
Fort tucker
G.C. Marshall Space Flight Center
Marine Corp* Air Station
Rational Institute of Environ. Real tit Science
Pope Air force Base
U.S. Coast Guard Support Center
XVIII Airborne 1 Ft. Bragg
Charleston Naval Shipyard (U.S. lavy)
Savannah River Sfta
Savannah River Site
Shan AFB
•• Region: 5
U.S. Araqr Soldier Support Center - Fort Beni«
Feed Materials Production Center (Fernald)
Porteanuth (Iraniin Cnridnent Coaplm
U.S. Department of Energy (Portsmouth)
•• Region: 6
Bolloman Air Force Base
JSC White Sands Test Facility
U.S. NASA JSC White Sands lest Facility
White Sands Missile Range
Coodfellow Air Force Base
Reese Air Force Base
U.S. Department of Energy (Pantex Plant!
•• Region: 7
low Any Anmunition Plant
Western Area Power Administration
Fort Riley & I St. Infantry Div. HO
gin Harrison
tate
Al
AL
MC
NC
MC
BC
K
SC
sc
SC
sc
IN
OH
OH
OH
KM
MM
MM
W1
TX
TX
TX
IA
IA
KS
Agency
Army
NASA
Navy
MSHS
Air Force
Transport** Ion
Defense
it—till
HltjVy
Energy
Energy
Air Force
Army
Energy
Energy
Energy
Air Force
NASA
NASA
Amy
Air Force
Air Force
Energy
Amy
Energy
Amy
NPL Data
Final Signed
09/25/90
09/26/86
12/04/89
09/07/89
12/13/89
10/04/90
09/07/89
03/22/91
11/89 07/30/87
11/89 03/1S/91
07/20/90
12/12/89
11/89 06/30/88
08/03/88
09/27/89
12/20/88
10/06/86
12/12/89
05/06/86
09/20/90
09/06/90
12/10/90
08/90 04/29/88
12/30/87
08/90 09/28/90
-------
PAGE NO.
02/24/93
FEDERAL FACIUIIES SETTLENENfS
FEDERAL FACILITY COMPLIANCE ACREEHENTS
Facility
Lake City Amy Ammunition Plant
U.S. Department of Energy (Kansas City Plant)
'• Region: 8
Rocky Flats Plant
Rocky Flats Plant
Rocky Mountain Arsenal
Ellsworth Air Force Base
State
MO
HO
CO
CO
CO
SD
Agency
Army
Energy
Energy
Energy
Army
Defense
NPL Date
Final
07/87
10/89
10/89
07/87
08/90
Signed
12/22/88
08/22/90
09/15/89
07/30/86
01/24/86
OS/22/89
•• Region: 9
Beate Air Force Base
Castle'AIr Force Base
Edtords Air Force' Base
George Air Force Base
Harine Corps LB-NEBO Annex
Marine Corps LB-VERMO Annex
Port Huerwne Naval Construction Battalion Center (U.S. Navy)
U.S. Army National Training Center •
U.
U.
U.
U.
U.
tment" of Energy & University of California
, Marine Corps Air Station*-"El toro
. Marine Corps Air Station - fust in
: Marine Corps, Marina Corps Base
, Navy Public Works Center - North Island
U.S. Navy Public Worts Center - San Diego
U.S. Navy Public Works Center
Pacific Nissfle Range facility
•• Region: 10
Eielson Air force Base
Elnendorf Air Force Base
Fort Creely
Fort Richardson
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
GU
HI
AK-'
AK
AK
AK
Air Force
Air Force
Air force
Air Force
Navy
Navy
Navy
Army
Energy
Navy
Navy
Navy
Navy
Navy
Navy
Navy
Air Force
Air Force*
Amy
Amy
11/20/90
07/87 06/16/89
08/90 06/09/89
02/90 03/12/85
09/28/90
09/28/90
04/11/91
02/20/91
02/24/89
02/90 09>2B/90
09/28/90
05/22/91
12/22/87
11/14/84
03/03/89
10/17/84
11/89 06/15/88
08/90 08/06/91
03/29/91
03/29/91
-------
PACE NO.
02/24/93
FEDERAL FACIUIIES SETTUMENTS
FEDERAL FACUIH COMPLIANCE AGREEMEMIS
Facility
Fort Uairwright
Fort uairwright
Maval Air Station • Adak
Shenya Air Force Base
U.S. Coast Guard
U.S. Federal Aviation Administration
USCG Ketch Ikan Base
U.S. Department of Energy (INEL)
Umatilla Arm/ Depot Activity {U.S. Arm/)
NUUES • Indian Island
HUMES - Keyport
Naval Air itstJon • Miidbey Island
Maval Air Station - Miidbey Island
State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
ID
OR
VIA
UA
UA
WA
Agency
Anny
Anny
Navy
Air Force
transportation
transportation
transportation
Energy
Army
Navy
Navy
Navy
Navy
MPL Data
Final
08/90
08/90
07/87
10/89
02/90
02/90
Signed
Oo/ 14/89
03/29/91
11/20/90
03/15/91
05/23/90
11/08/88
03/21/89
07/10/87
10/24/91
03/28/90
03/28/90
12/13/90
12/13/90
-------
FEDERAL FACILITIES SETTLEMENTS
SIGNED INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS AND RCRA FEDERAL FACILITY COMPLIANCE AGREEMENTS
2/23/93
No. of NPL No. of 3-Party
Sites I Agreements
FY91 FY90 FY89
-------
FEDERAL FACILITIES SETTLEMENTS
SIGNED INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS AND RCRA FEDERAL FACILITY COMPLIANCE AGREEMENTS
2/23/93
No. of NPL No. of 3-Party
Total Sites Agreements
FY92 FY91 FY90 FY89
DOD
DOE
Other
DOD
DOE
Other
DOD
DOE
Other
DOD
DOE
Other
DOD
DOE
Other
Total Number of Signed lAGs == 108 (covering 115 NPL Sites including 112 Federal NPL Sites and 3 non-Federal NPL Sites, plus 2 non-NPL Sites for a
total of 117 sites)
Total Number of Signed lAGs for DOD = 89 (covering 94 NPL Sites)
Total Number of Signed lAGs for DOE = 16 (covering 18 NPL Sites)
Total Number of Signed FFCAs = 96 (68 DOD, 13 DOE, 15 Other)
-------
APPENDICES
DETAILED SELECT LOGIC FOR CERCLA DVTA
The State of Federal Facilities FY92 Report
-------
CERCLIS Select Logic
CERCLIS Select Logic
For CERCLA Charts 12 through 17, the February 5,1993 CERCLIS database was used,
and these exceptions to the CERCLIS data were made:
• The following sites were NOT considered to be Federal facilities:
MN7213820908 NEW BRIGHTON / ARDEN HILLS.
MOD980633176 ST LOUIS AKPORT/fflS/FUTURA COATING.
WAD980833065 AMERICAN LK GARDENS (MCCHORD - AREA D).
WVD980713036 WEST VIRGINIA ORDNANCE.
• CTD980906515 NEW LONDON NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE was counted as a
Navy site.
• MAD980520670 FORT DEVENS - SUDBURY TRAINING ANNEX was counted
as an Army site.
• MO3210090004 WELDON SPRING QUARRY/PLNT/PITS (USDOE) was counted
as a DOE site.
Total Universe of Sites in CERCLIS (CERCLA-12)
In addition to the above stated CERCLIS exceptions, the counts include all sites
where:
• Region (Cl) is not 11.
AND
• The first character of the EPA ID (C101) is not Z.
AND
• Federal Facility Flag (C135) is Y for Federal Facilities, and N for Non-Federal
Facilities.
AND
• NPL Status (C305) is not O.
AND
• Event (C2111) is DS, PA, SI, ES, HR, NP, NR, or NF.
AND ,
• Actual Complete (C2141) is on or before end of reporting period.
State of Federal Facilities Report 1 FY92 Report
-------
CERCUS Select Logic
Universe of Federal Facilities Listed in CERCLIS (CERCLA-13)
In addition to the above stated CERCLIS exceptions, the counts include all sites
where:
• Region (Cl) is not 11.
AND
• The first character of the EPA ID (C101) is not Z.
AND
• Federal Facility Flag (C135) is Y for Federal Facilities.
AND
• NFL Status (C305) is not O.
AND
• Event (C2111) is DS, PA, SI, ES, HR, NP, NR, or NF.
AND
• Actual Complete (C2141) is on or before end of reporting period.
A site is counted as "Proposed" if the NPL Status is P, "Final" if the NPL Status is F,
SEA if it meets the criteria for PA, SI, or ES SEAs (see below), otherwise it is
considered to be "Under Evaluation."
Federal Sites with Evaluations Accomplished (SEAS) meet the criteria for "Federal
Facilities Listed in CERCLIS" as well as having an NPL Status of N, S, or blank.
For specific SEA categories:
For PA SEAs, the latest PA event (C2141 is latest on or before end of reporting period
where C2111 is PA) must meet the following:
• PA Qualifier (C2103) must be N.
AND
• PA Completion Date (C2141) must exist.
AND
• PA Completion Date (C2141) must be later than the completion date of the latest
SI event which was completed on or before the end of reporting period.
AND
• PA Completion Date (C2141) must be later than the completion date of the latest
ES event which was completed on or before the end of reporting period.
For SI SEAs, the latest SI event (C2141 is latest on or before end of reporting period
where C2111 is SI) must meet the following:
• SI Qualifier (C2103) must be N.
AND
State of Federal Facilities Report 2 FY92 Report
-------
CERCUS Select Logk
• SI Completion Date (C2141) must exist.
AND
• SI Completion Date (C2141) must be later than or on the completion date ofthe.
latest PA event which was completed on or before the end of reporting period;
AND
• SI Completion Date (C2141) must be later than the completion date of the latest
ES event which was completed on or before the end of reporting period.
For ES SEAs, the latest ES event (C2141 is latest on or before end of reporting period
where C2111 is ES) must meet the following:.
• ES Qualifier (C2103) must be N.
AND
• ES Completion Date (C2141) must exist.
AND
• ES Completion Date (C2141) must be-later than or on the completion date of the-
latest PA event which was completed on or before the end of reporting period.
AND
• ES Completion Date (C2141) must be later than or on the completion .date of the
latest SI event which was completed on or before the end of reporting period. •.
Universe of Federal Facilities on the NPL (CERCLA-14)
In addition to the above stated CERCUS exceptions, the counts include all sites
where:
• Region (CD is not 11.
AND
• The first character of the EPA ID (C101) is not Z.
AND
• Federal Facility Flag (C135) is Y for Federal Facilities.
AND
•.. NPL Status (C305) is P for Proposed, or F for Final.
AND . ,
• Event (C2111) is DS, PA, SI, ES, HR, NP, NR, or NF.
AND
• Actual .Complete. (C2141) is on or before end of reporting period.
Sites are grouped by 4th .and 5th character of the EPA ID (C101), and are as follows:
17,21,57,96, or 97 are DOD, 89 is DOE, any other site is placed in the "Other"
category.
State of Federal Facilities Report 3 FY92 Report
-------
CERCUS Select Logic
Total Reported Federal Facility Removals (CERCLA-15)
In addition to the above stated CERCLIS exceptions, initiated removals include all
events that have the following:
• NPL Status (C305) is not O or blank.
AND
• Federal Facility Flag (C135) must be Y.
AND
• Event Type (C2111) must be IR, or PR, or RV, or UR, or ER
AND
• FSS Code (C2115) is A, B, C, or D.
AND
• Lead(C2117)isFF.
AND
• Actual Start Date (C2140) exists.
AND
• Actual Start Date (C2140) is prior to the end of the fiscal year reported for
cumulatives, or spans the fiscal year for FY accomplishments.
Completed removals must meet the criteria for initiated removals as well as the
following:
• FSC Code (C2116) is A, B, C, or D for removal completions.
AND
• Actual Completion Date (C2141) must exist, and is prior to the end of the fiscal
year reported for cumulations, or spans the fiscal year for FY accomplishments.
Number of Ongoing NPL Remedial Projects By Fiscal Year (CERCLA-16)
In addition to the above stated CERCLIS exceptions, ongoing remedial projects
include all events that have the following:
• NPL Status (C305) is not O or blank.
AND
• Lead (C2117) is FF for Federal Facilities; MR or MP for PRP and Mixed; or F or FE
for Federal-Lead and EPA.
AND
• Event Type (C2111) must be RL FS, CO, RD, or RA.
AND
• Actual start must exist prior to end of report period.
State of Federal Facilities Report 4 FY92 Report
-------
CERCUS Select Logic
CERCLA Pipeline Activities for Federal Facilities (CERCLA-17)
In addition to the above stated CERCLJS exceptions, pipeline activities include all
events that have the following:
• NPL Status (C305) is not O or blank.
AND
• Lead (C2117) must be FF.
AND
• Event Type (C2111) must be RI, FS, or CO for Remedial Investigations, RD for
Remedial Designs, or RA for Remedial Actions.
AND
• Actual start must exist prior to end of Fiscal Year.
State of Federal Facilities Report 5 FY92 Report
------- |