WORK PERFORMED
DOCUMENTATION TRAINING
SEMINAR
FEBRUARY 11, 1993
PHILADELPHIA, PA
OFFICE OF WASTE PROGRAMS ENFORCEMENT
-------
Work Performed Documentation Training
Table of Contents
Tab 1 Preface
Tab 2 Presenter Bullet Points
Tab 3 Introductory Remarks by Bruce Diamond
Tab 4 The Basis for this Training
Tab 5 Session I Handouts
Tab 6 Session II Handouts
Tab 7 Session III Handouts
Tab 8 Session IV Handouts
Tab 9 Session V Handouts
Tab 10 Session VI Handouts
Tab 11 November 3, 1992 Memorandum regarding Superfund
Cost Recovery Case Support
Tab 12 November 9, 1992 Memorandum regarding Superfund
Cost Recovery Case Support
Tab 13 November 16, 1992 Memorandum regarding Level of
Documentation Needed for Filing CERCLA Cost
Recovery Actions
Tab 14 January 13, 1993 Memorandum regarding Training
Seminar on Compiling Work Performed Documentation
for Cost Recovery
Tab 15 Proposed Rule on Cost Recovery for CERCLA Response
Actions
In the Front Pocket:
Agenda
Map of Philadelphia and List of Surrounding Attractions
Evaluation Form
In the Back Pocket:
Attendee List
Presenter I$s
Note Ta’king Paper
-------
1
-------
PREFA
“Work Performed Documentation” Training
Why We are Conducting This Training
o The Department of Justice (DOJ) feels strongly that EPA’S
CERCLA cost recovery referrals are inadequately documented.
A complete cost package is rarely available prior to filing
the complaint. In many cases, this information is still
unavailable well after the case has been filed. DOJ has found
itself unable to obtain the necessary documentation in time
to meet discovery deadlines, file for summary judgment, and,
in some cases, prepare adequately for trial.
o On November 16, 1992, Bruce Gelbar (DOJ) sent the EPA Regional
Counsels and Superfund Branch Chiefs a memo outlining these
concerns and stating that DOJ will no longer file cost
recovery actions without sufficient documentation or other
evidence to support EPA’S claims for costs. This memo
summarized DOJ’s concerns, as discussed in its meeting with
EPA on October 19, 1992.
o In response to the DOJ-EPA meeting, Don Clay (AA, OSWER) sent
a memo on November 3, 1992 to the Regions discussing Superfund
cost recovery case support. He stated that the evidence EPA
needs to prepare consists of work performed documentation and
cost information. Of these, EPA is already implementing its
system to provide cost information summaries, in the Regions.
Don stated that we needed to improve our gathering and
processing of documents describing the work performed by the
Regions, contractors, states, and other Federal agencies to
evaluate and clean up Superfund sites. He asked the Regional
Waste Management Division Directors to report to him by
December 1, 1992 with (1) the name of the Regional manager
responsible for compiling cost and work performed documents
and information for cost recovery cases and (2) the Region’s
procedures for compiling such information. He further asked
that those Regions who do not have any procedures to report
their plans to establish such procedures.
o In response to the DOJ-EPA meeting and the Don Clay memo,
Bruce Diamond sent a memo on November 9, 1992 to DOJ, OE-
Superfund, OARM-FMD, OARM-PCMD, Regions 2 and 3, and the SRO.
Bruce outlined a list of actions to be taken to address these
deficiencies. He asked that the addressees identify lead
individuals to address the action items. Under the work
performed documentation part of that list, OWPE was
responsible for conducting training of Regional personnel,
with the help of DOJ and Region 3.
-------
7
The Audience for This Training
a The audience for this training are Regional staff and first
line supervisors from the Office of Regional Counsel, the
Waste Management Division, and the Finance Office. This will
be staff compiling and updating work performed documents for
cost recovery referrals, staff responsible for coordinating
this activity, their first line supervisors, and Regional
Project Officers responsible for administration of contracts
supporting CERCLA site evaluation and cleanup. Other
participants will include DOJ attorneys, Headquarters OE-
Superfund, and OWPE staff.
The Time and Place of the Training
o The training will be held on February.ll, 1993, at the
Sheraton-Society Hill Hotel, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
-------
2
-------
SESSION I
IDENTIFYING SPECIFIC WORK Acrivrr — AUTHORIZED AND PERFORMED
This should be a narrative description of response actions
o Description of what has been done at the site
o Description of related enforcement activities
o For each extramural cost, state the response actions associated with
that cost
o State tasks EPA performed for the payroll and travel costs we are
claiming
o List tasks EPA employees performed
-------
SESSION II
DOCUMENTING WORK PERFORMED IN EXISTING AND
CLOSED OUT CONTRACTS
A. Existing Contracts
o Work Assignments, TDDs, or other task orders
o Monthly progress reports — technical and financial
o Final work products
o Contracted site-specific invoices
o Detailed SCORES summary paper
B. Old, Closed Out Contracts
o Redistribute non-site specific accounts into site-specific accounts
o Journal vouchers
o Transmittal of approved historic cost report
o Historic cost report with attachments
o Contractor’s certification of site-specific breakdown in historic costs
report
o Project Officer’s Certification of Reasonableness
o Proof of Payment
o Work Assignments, TDDs, or other task descriptions
o Detailed SCORES summary page
o The Letter Report and redacting packages
C. EPA Costs
o Payroll
o Indirect
o Travel
-------
SESSION UI
How TO IDENTIFY TASKS PERFORMED UNDER
THE PERFORMANCE DOCUMENT
A. Region III: SCORE$ Memo Field Capability
o Describe SCORE$
o Can be used to supplement $ with actual short assumptions of activi-
ties performed
o Give examples of how to use the memo field
B. Region I: Summary from the Work Assignment Prepared of the Superfund
Response Tasks
-------
SESSION IV
INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS AND STATE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS
A. lAG
o lAG and other proof of work
o Interagency vouchers
o Underlying documentation from other agencies
B. SCA
o Cooperative Agreement
o Proof of Payment by EPA to State
o Documentary description of site-related tasks State performed
o Underlying documentation from the State
-------
SESSION V
MAINTENANCE OF COST RECOVERY FILES
A. General Maintenance of Files
What to keep
How long to keep it
Keep it in office or store it at the Federal Records Center?
B. Cost Recovery Files
u Regional Cost Recovery File System
Regional Site Files
-------
SESSION VI
COURT TESTIMONY, PREPARATION OF AFFIDAVITS, AND
IDENTIFICATION OF EXPERT WITNESSES
o File early
o Produce cost documentation early in the case
o Link costs to work
o Prepare summary judgement motions on affirmative defense issues
early in the case
o Review administrative record before EPA’s certification to the court
o Update cost package every three months
o Have a witness available who can testify about the accounting system
itself
o Call state witnesses to explain how the state spent the money
o Evaluate EPA’s initial assessment of risk during litigation — undertake
appropriate discovery accordingly
— DOJ must serve contentious interrogatories on defendants early
o Resist special masters — keep the case before the judge
o Hold debriefing sessions after each cost litigation trial
o Develop a DOJ cost case library
-------
3
-------
Bruce Diamond’s Introduction
1. This training course is designed to help you perform a vitally
important function, compile work performed documentation for
CERCLA cost recovery cases.
2. Uses of proper and timely work performed documentation:
- to negotiate with responsible parties for maximum
cost recovery settlements
- to litigate and achieve the best possible success in
that litigation
3. The work performed documentation effort vitally underpins the
whole cost recovery program:
— Fl 1992 was a very successful year; we recovered more
money than before
- much is expected of us; we must continue to maximize our
efforts to get the public’s money back
4. Our audience expects us to get the public’s money back.
Our audience is:
- the public, GAO, the Inspector General, and Congress
- we can do better in getting money back
5. The cost recovery program is related to the rest of the
Superfund enforcement program in the following way:
- the great success of the Remedial Design/Remedial Action
portion of the program (getting responsible parties to
do the work in the first place) depends on maintaining
the threat of a successful cost recovery program
6. I hope you find this training useful and enjoyable.
-------
TALKING POINTS
for
“work Performed Documentation” Training
Videotaped Introduction
Time: 10—12 minutes
Audience: Regional staff from ORC, WMD, and Finance Office
who prepare work performed documents for CERCL
cost recovery referrals.
Purpose: Provide the Office Director’s vision of the use
and benefits of this training.
I. Introduction (1-2 minutes)
A. Welcome audience to the training
B. Briefly discuss the overall importance of cost
recovery to the Superfund program
— Importance of maximizing returns to the Fund
— Our recent successes in the cost recovery program
In 1992, cost recovery settlements achieved were
$274 million (of $867 million achieved since the
beginning of the Pro ra1 Lc : f9&V )
In 1992, cost recovery settlements collected were
$184 million (of $543 million collected since the
beginning of the
C. Outline the importance of Regions in the cost recovery
process.
II. Uses of the Training (4 minutes)
A. Regions can more confidently approach development of
work performed documents, since they will know what
documents are needed and will have a list of contacts
in Headquarters and other Regions who can advise them.
B. Regions can learn some ways to adapt to improve their
Regional procedures for compiling work performed
documents.
C. Regions can collect work performed documents from the
beginning of a site in the pipeline, thus resulting in
less collection time needed at the case preparation
stage.
-------
2
D. At the case preparation stage, Regions can concentrate
on working with DOJ to identify the appropriate
documents and to be more responsive to DOJ’s concerns
on the case.
III. Benefits of the Training (4 minutes)
A. Readily available and complete work performed
documentation helps DOJ to meet discovery deadlines,
file for summary judgment, and prepare adequately
for trial.
B. Having the case information early means that DOJ is in
a better position to map out a case strategy.
C. Having detailed documents means that DOJ can show
defendants that the United States is prepared to
support its claims. It also allows us to provide
defendants with requested documents in a timely and
complete manner, showing our willingness to be
responsive.
D. Having complete documents means that DOJ can
concentrate on the legal aspects of the case,
rather than spending time compiling documents.
IV. Closing (1 minute)
A. The cost recovery process has great potential to
be a major force in alleviating the effects of
our existing and future tight resource situation
in the Superfund program.
— Let’s keep up the momentum on our cost recovery
settlements achieved and collected
-------
e
‘ L t tt c?_ o i
4L
p.
-------
EPA HEADQUARTERS ALPHABETICAL DIRECTORI —
AND LOCATOR UPDATES
Thus alphabetical section lists the anticipated telephone numbers of those employees ex
relocate dunng the winter These numbers reflect the most up4o-date and accurate
available at the date of publication of thus directory
The EPA Headquarters Express Locator form, 65040-13, may be found on the following Page ,
changes, additions or deletions to the Locatordatabase must be signed by your administratu
listed at the end of thus section and submitted to the Washington Telecommunications Center ’.
PM-21 iT, Directory staff Under normal cirtum stances, Locator changes are processed within g hc 0
of receipt and may be ventied by calling the EPA Locator at (202) 260-2090, Monday through F
from 7 30 a m toG p m , ESTIEDT
The Locator database us repeatedly used by the personnal Locator, EPA mail room, and guard ser
Our objective us to maintain accurate and current Locator information, to attain thus goal, we n 0
help of every employee, supervisor and administrative contact
if you have any questions concerning Locator updates or if you need forms, please call 2 80-37 s
BUILDING LOCATIONS Building Acroyuim
USEPA Waterulds Mail WSU
401 M Strs.t,SW
Washington, DC 20460
USEPA Fairchild Building FC
499 South Capitol Street. SW
Washington, DC 20460 I.L1
USEPA Judiciary Square JS
601 3rd Street C l )
Washington. DC 20005
USEPA Weststory Building WSB
607 14th Street, NW, 5th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
USEPA Crystal Mcliii CM-2
1921 J.ffersen Davis Highway
Arlington VA 22202
USEPA Crystal Station I CS-I
2806 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
USEPA Crystal Gateway I CO-I
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
USEPA Rosslyn Building ROSS
1550 Wilson Boulevard
Rosatyn, VA 22209
USEPA SOC SAIC Building SAIC
200 North Glib. Road
Arlington, VA 22203
USEPA Analytical Chemistry Section ACS
Building 306 - 8ARC East
Beitsvile, MD 20705
136
-------
ASSISTS ADMINISTRATOR FOR
SOLID . (EAND
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
05-100 Assistant Administrator Don R Clay SE380
St.ff Assistant Caroline Brown SE360
Special Assistants to the Assistant Administrator
Mary Cutler SE360
Marianne M Lamont SE380
Deputy Assistant Administrator Richard J Guimond SE360
Executive Assistant Rachel E Hughes SE380
Special Assistants to the Deputy Assistant Administrator
Florence Blair SE315
Janet L Weiner SE360
Deputy Assistant Administrator C Bowdoin Train SE380
Special Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Administrator
Matthew W Morrison SE306
OS-100 External Relations Director Marjorie W Buckholtz SE360
Program Assistant Jane E Sanford SE360
Organizational Management and Integrity Staff
OS-100 Director Laune J May SE360
Management Assistant Pamela S Wlkes SE360
Hazardous Waste and Superfund Ombudsman (Vacant) SE315
Secretary Kathenne Robleski SE315
Resource Management and Information Staff
OS-I 10 Director Judith Kertcher SE308
Secretary Karen Y Self SE306
Information Management Staff
Director Ma (Jack) R Frost. Jr M2416
Secretary Rosalind S Caiter M2416
Budget Section
Kathleen M Gordon Chief SE308
Policy Analysis and Regulatory Management Staff
OS-i 10 Director Margaret N Schneider SE3O6K
Secretary Julie A Johnson SE306
Superfund Revitalization Team
05-110 Director Timothy Fields. Jr (Acting) SE315
Secretary Sandra L Connell SE315 260-4O3
Chemical Emergency Preparedness
id Prevention Office
os-i ° Director JamesL Makns M3103
Secretary (Vacant) M3103.
Chemical Emergency Preparedness Staff
Director David N Speights M3609
Chemical Accident Prevention Staff
Director Elaine F Davies M3103
Information Management and Program Support Staff
Director Antonio J Jover M3101
Special Preparedness Staff
Director Kenneth Stroech M3103
Technology Innovation Office
08.110W Director Walter W Kovalick. Jr CS-I OFt.
Secretary Gail Davis CS-I 9FL.
Deputy Director Margaret M Kelly CS-I 9FL
Secretary Melinda R DeLoatch CS-i OFt.
Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response (Superfund)
0S-200 Director Henry L Longest II SE393
Secretary Joyce W Howard SE393
Deputy Director Stephen D Luftig (Acting) SE393
Secretary Barbara A Skogebo SE393
Executive Assistant Cheryl A Hawkins SE393
Special Assistant Jan Baker SE393
Office of Program Management
5201G Director Thomas R Sheckells (Acting) CG-1 12FL
Secretary Mnane (Michele) N WIb urn CG-i 12FL
Deputy Director Suzanne E Wells (Acting) CG-i I2FL
Secretary Robersena G Young CG-I 12FL
Contract Operations Review and Assessment Staff
Director Joan Barnes CG.I 1 2FL
Management and Systems Development Staff
Director Michael (Mike) J Cullen CG-I 12FL
Policy and Analysis Staff
Director John D Hams CG-1 12FL
Program Development and Budget Staff
Director David (Dave) S Evans CG-i 12FL
Emergency Response Division
52020 Director Debbie V Dietnch (Acting) CO-i 13FL
Deputy Director John E Riley (Acting) CO-i 13FL
Secretary Jannie M WIlliams CO-i 13FL
Response Operations Branch
Bruce A Engelbert Chief CG-1 13FL
Response Standards and Criteria Branch
Betty Zeller Chief (Acting) CO-I 13FL
Environmental Response Branch Edison. NJ
Joseph LaforNara Chief
260.4810
260 -46i
260.4810
260-48,C
260 -83e
280-4610
260.4610
260.4611
260 -46t
280.4610
260.4610
260-9361
260-4510
260.6760
280-45W
260-4611
2804600
280-5338
260-8800
260-2387
280-9777
308-8800
308-8800
260-2180
260-2180
280-2180
260-2180
260-2180
(703) 603-8710
(703) 603-8710
(703) 603-8720
(703) 603-8730
(703) 603-8740
(703) 603-8750
(703) 603-8760
(703) 603-8770
(703) 603-8780
(908) 321-6740
as
-------
Hazardous Site Control Division
5203G Director Gerald (Jerry) M Clifford CC-i 14FL
Secretary Deborah Y Washington CC-i 14FL
Deputy Director Paul F Nadeau CC-i I4FL
Specie’ Projects and Supporl Slat?
Carol ‘ Offult Chief CC-i 14FL
Reme ,nd Operations Guidance Branch
John & r Harris Chief (Acting) CC-I I4FL
Design and Construction Management Branch
John J Smith Chief CC-I 14FL
State and Local Coordination Branch
Murray Newton Chief CG-I I4FL
Hazardous Site Evaluation Division
5204G Director Larry C Reed CC-i 14FL
Deputy Director Sandra D Lee CC-i 14FL
Secretary Jacqu line (Jackie) N Eaton CC-i 14FL
Site Assessment Branch
Janet J Grubbs Chief CC-I 14FL
Malylical Operations Branch
Hans J Crump-Wiesner Chief CC-i I4FL
Toxics Integration Branch
David A Bennett Chief CC-i I4FL
Office of Solid Waste
OS-300 Director Sylvia K Lowrance M2101
Secretary Nancy L Beeler M2101
Deputy Director Jeffery D Denit M2i01
Secretary Sharon N Brent M2101
Special Assistants
Nancy Bacon M2101
Fredncli D Chanania M2i01
Angela H Leith M2101
OS-300W Sandra E Farrell CS-i 7FL
Chnstine L Dibble M2101
Municipal and industrial Solid Waste Divison
OS-301 Director Bruce R Waddle M2105
Deputy Director Robert W Deltinger M2817
Secretary Denise R Roy M2105
Recycling and Implementation Branch
Truett V Degeare, Jr Chief M24i7
Waste Reduction and Management Branch
Terrance (Terry) N Grog an Chief (Acting) N 2817
lndustnal Solid Waste Branch
James I Lounsbury Chief M281 I
j Communications, Analysis and Budget Division
OS-310 Director Loretta A Marzetti SE258
Deputy Director Stephen F Heare (Acting) SE256
Secretary Carol. Y Holland SE258
oS-312 Information Management Branch
Myra J Galbreath Chief SE264
()S-31 1 Regulatory Analysis Branch
Barnes Johnson Chief (Acting) SE256
Communicalions Services Branch
Thea R McManus Chief SE205
Budget and Mministrative Services Branch
Cheryl 0 Barton Chief (Acting) SE208
Waste Management Division
OS-320W Director Mathew (Matt) A Strauss CS-i 6FL
• Secretary Mary Georgene BoIling CS-i 6FL
Deputy Director Elizabeth A Cotsworth (Acting) CS-i 6FL
OS-322W Waste Treatment Branch
Richard J Kinch Chief CS-i 7FL
OS-323W Special Wastes Branch
Robert J Tonetti Chief CS-i 6FL
OS-320W Waste Minimization Branch
Donna T Perla Chief CS-i 7FL
Capacity Programs Branch
Michael T Taimi Chief CS-i 7FL
Permits and State Programs Division
5303W Director Devereaux Barnes CS-i 7FL
Secretary MeIl F Farmer CS-i 7FL
Deputy Director Matthew Hale Jr CS-i 7FL
Information Support Stat?
Dale M Ruhter Chief CS-i 7FL
Permits Branch
Frank (James) McAjistar Chief CS-I 7FL
Assistance Branch
James F Michael Chief (Acting) CS-i 7FL
• State and Regional Programs Branch
Michael P Flynn Chief CS-i 8FL
Corrective Action Programs Branch
Denise M Keehner Chief CS-I 7FL
Characterization and Assessment Division
OS-330 Director David Bussard SE240
Deputy Director Elizabeth W LaPointe 5E240
Secretary Brenda R Marshall SE240
OS-331 Technical Assessment Branch
sAiexander C McBride Chief SE243
OS-332 Regulatory Development Branch
Michael J Petruska Chief SE242
OS-333 Waste Identification Branch
Rick Brandes Chief SE248
(703) 603-8800
(703) 803-8800
(703) 603-881o
(703) 603-8820
(703) 603-8830
(703) 603-8840
(703) 603-8850
(703) 603-8860
(703) 603-8870
(703) 603-8880
260-462?
280-4621
280-3700
280-4621
280-4453
3084679
280-4621
260-9872
260-9872
260-8261
260-3346
260 4801
260-9391
260-4697
260-2791
260-4646
260-4649
308-8414
308-8414
308-8434
308-8426
308-8402
308-8440
308-8404
308-8404
308-8192
308-8612
308-8661
308-8766
308-8484
260-4637
260-4761
260-9888
260-4770
100
-------
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
OS-400W Director David W Ziegele CS-i 9FL
Secretary Cheryl T Johnson CS-I 9FL
Deputy Director Lisa C Lund CS-i 9FL
Secretary Dorothy L Peyton CS-i 9FL
Policy and Standards Division
OS-410W Director Sammy K Ng (Acting) CS-I 9FL
Secretary Barbara M Telesford CS-I 9FL
Standards Brunch
Joshua (Josh) C Baylson Chief (Acting) CS-I 9FL
Regulatory Malysis Branch
Sammy K Ng Chief CS-i 9FL
Secretary Barbara M Telesford CS-I 9F1.
impiementatlon Division
OS -420W Director Dana S Tuba (Acting) CS-i 9F1
Secretary Cheryl Jones CS-i 9FL.
Operations Branch
Dana S Tulis Chief (Acting) CS-i 9FL
Secretary Cheryl Jones CS-i 9FL
Planning and Communication Branch
Karen K Ellenberger Chief (Acting) CS-I 9FL
Secretary Barbara M Telesford CS-i Oft
OUST Docket M2427
of Waste Programs Enforcement
OS-400
Office
OS-500 Director Bruce M Diamond SE384
L Secretary JoyceL M Rivera SE364.
U.puIy IJirectOrkiaui .,
Secretary Carolyn F. Snow SE364
OS-505 Program Management and Support Office
Director David W Chambedin (Acting) SE269
Secretary Ethel R Bailey SE269
CERCLA Enforcement Division
5502G Director Sally S Mansbach CG-1 13FL
Secretary Isabella L Ward CG-1 I 3FL
Deputy Director Linda Y Boomazian CO-i I3FL
Secretary (Vacant) CO-i I3FL
Compliance Branch
Bruce R Kulpan Chief (Acting) CO-i i3FL
( r..u R uvsiy branch
Francas1Frank )J.Biros Chief CO-i i3FL
Joseph C Acton, Jr Chief (Acting) CO-I i3FL
Guidance and Evaluation Branch
MhurB.Weissman Chief CO-i I3FL.
RCRA Enforcement Division
OS-520 Director Susan E Bromm M27i4A
Secretary Marcella Dupont M2714
Policy and Regional Operations Branch
Debora J Villan Chief (Acting) M27i8
Technical Assistance and Training Branch
Kenneth A Gig hello Chief M2838
...30848
• .308 48 5
• . 260-9130
260 -48 1i
2604250
(703) 603-8900
(703) 603.8900
(703) 6034910
( 703)6034920
(703) 603-8030
(703) 603-8940
260.4800
260-2201
2604320
102
-------
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
FOR ADMINISTRATION AND
RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
PM-208 Assistant Administrator Chnstian R Holmes Wilil
Secretary Deborah 0 Walker Will i
Special Assistant Craig E Hooks WI 111
Deputy Assistant Administrator Edward J Henley WIll 1
Secretary Patncia Johnson Will I
Special Assistant Cynthia (Cindy)S Sayers Willi
Deputy Assistant Administrator Sallyanne Harper Willi
Secretary Lisa Reaves Wi Ill
Special Assistant Ron Kovak (Acting) Will 1
Program and Policy Coordination Office
PM-208 Director (Vacant) W1123
Deputy Director Fredenck (Rick) C Garman Wi 123
Office Manager Crete C Johnson Wi 123
Administrative Officer Bernadine (Bernie) Davis WI 121
Resource Management Staff
Director James (Jim) Tagert NEGOI4
Secretary Tonya J Ford NEGO14
Program and Management Staff
Director (Vacant) Wi 123
Secretary (Vacant) W1i23
Acquisition Management Staff
Direcfr . (Vacant) Wi 123
Secr rary (Vacant) Wi 123
Office of Administration
PM-217 Director John C Chamberlin WiiO9
Secretary Rebecca (Becky) A Vidi Wi 109
Special Assistant SherTy A Kaschak Wi 109
Deputy Director William Finister Wi 109
Secretary Alma Ruth Batts W1109
H3201 New Headquarters Project
Director Nelson W Hallman CY3030
Secretary Yvette M Pnce CY3030
Safety, Health and Environmental Management Division
PM-273 Director Julius C Jimeno M3712
Secretary Tangie I Brown M3712
Headquarters Operations Branch
Dennis J Bushla Chief NEBO14
Secretary Lynneti C Thomas NEBO14
Policy, Resources and Development Branch
David Scott Smith Chief M3712
Technical Assistance and Evaluation Branch
Howard 0 Wilson Chief M3712
Facilities Management and Services Division
PM-215 Director Richard I Lemley NEGOI9
Secretary Beth Jo Royster NEGO19
Deputy Director John C Beecher NEGO19
Secretary Chnstena U Fink NEGOI9
Quality Assurance Staff
Director Thomas (Tom) A Pastore NEGOI9
Secunty and Property Management Branch
Mn M Linnertz Chief NEBO1S
Secretary Suellan A. Gardner NEBOI5
Facilities Operations Branch
Portia B Johnson Chief NEBO22
Secretary Pamela Ruffin NEBO22
Resources and Administrative Management Branch
Stanley (Stan) W Fredencks Chief NEGO2O
Secretary (Vacant) NEGO2O
Engineering, Planning and Architecture Branch
Luther (Butch) E Mallen Ill Chief NEGO1S
Secretary Pamela S Fagen NEGO16
Real Estate and Space Management Branch
Michael H Penn Chief NEGO13
Secretary Harriett J Mitchell NEGO13
Printing Services and Mail Management Branch
RobertJ Kelly Chief MG100A
Secretary Sheila Bernard MG100A
Management and Organization Division
PM-213 Director Kathryn (Kathy) Petruccell, M3304
Secretary (Vacant) M3304
Agency Management Analysis Branch
Robert A English Chief M3304
Secretary Amy J Sonnemann M3304
Program Management Analysis Branch
Prudence J Goforth Chief M3304
Secretary Stacey Wages M3304
Office of Grants and Debarment
PM-2i6F Director Harvey G Pippen, Jr FC8FL
Secretary Brenda M Gibson FC BFL
Special Assistant Harry Baker FC 8FL
Grants Administration Division
PM-216F Director Gary M Katz FC 8FL
Secretary Barbara L Artis (Acting) FC 8F1
Resource and Automation Staff
Manan P Cody FC 8FL
Program Management Coordinator
creta Vane
LAG and oan Operations Branch
W Scott McMoran Chief FC 2FL
Secretary Karen Johnson FC 2FL
Grants Operations Branch
Mildred Lee Chief FC 8FL
Secretary Beverly Clam ons FC 8FL 260-5252
260-4800
260-4600
260-1151
280-1151
260-4600
260-4600
260-4083
260-4093
260-9310
260-4083
260-4083
260-8400
260-8400
260-8400
260-3581
260-1640
260-7183
260-1847
260-1846
260-2030
260-2030
260-2064
260-2110
260-2085
260-7930
260-2160
260-2022
260-2040
260-5000
260-5000
260-5000
260-5240
260-5240
260-5240
260-9273
260-5245
260- 68 .’
260-4392
54
55
-------
Suspet nd Debamient Division
PM-218F Director Robert F Meu flier FC 8F1
Secretary Felica (Faye) Palmer FC 8FL
MvoCacy Branch
(Vacant) Chief FC 8FL
Investigations and Oversight Branch
Cartene Foushee Chief (Acting)
Office of Acquisition Management
PM-214F Director Michael E Bower (Acting) FC 8FL
Secretary Linda M Fletcher (Acting) FC 8FL
Deputy Director (Vacant) FC 8FL
Secretary (Vacant) FC 8FL
Special Assistant Manan Cooper FC 8F1
Special Assistant Susan Kantrowilz FC 8FL
Compel ition Mvocate Jordan A Strauss FC 8FL
Policy , Training and Oversight Division
PM-214F Director Belle N Davis FC 8FL
Deputy Director (Vacant) FC 8FL
Secretary Peggy N Looper FC 8FL
1CMS Manager Timothy (Tim) Fame FC 8FL
Procurement Policy Branch
Edward (Ed) J Murphy Chief FC 8FL
Secretary Annetla Duncan FC 8FL
Quality Assurance Branch
Thomas (Tom) A O’Connell Chief FC OFL
Secretary Barbara T Jones FC 6F1.
Training and Certification Branch
(Vacant) Chief FC 8FL
Secretary (Vacant) FC 8FL
Systems and Information Management Branch
John Oliver Chief (Acting) FC 2FL
Secretary Traci N Jones FC I A.
Headquarters Procurement Operations Division
M-214F Director John (Chuck) Gherardini Ill FC 7FL
Deputy Director (Vacant) FC 7FL
Secretary Thelma M Rasper (Acting) FC 7FL
sADP Procurement Branch
Thomas (Tom) 0 McEnteg art Chief FC 7F1
Secretary (Vacant) FC 7FL
Mministrative Procurement Branch
(Vacant) Chief FC 7FL
Secretary (Vacant) FC 7FL
Purchasing end Contracts Management Branch
Rosemarie Nance Chief FC 3FL
Secretary Thelma N Resper FC 3FL
Cost Review and Financial Analysis Division
M-214F Director Donald (Don) L Hambric (Acting) FC 2FL
Washington Cost Advisory Branch
Stephen (Steve) 0 Leahy Chief (Acting) FC 2FL
Secretary Melissa R Brown FC 2FL
Financial Malysis Branch
Dale W Roberson Chief (Acting) FC 2FL
Secretary Tarn my E Thomas FC 2FL
Cost Review and Rate Negotiation Branch
John J Zabretsky Chief (Acting) 2FL
Secretary Deedna J Pierce FC 2FL
4 Superfund!RCRA Procurement Operations Division
PM-214F DireckrWai Toppu Chief (Achng) FC :WL 280-9458
Sü i f iiidiRCRA Program Managemenu Staff
Harvey (Pat) Palterson Chief FC 3FL
Secretary Natalie A. Twyman FC 3FL
Superfund!RCRA Headquarters Contract Operations Branch
WIlliam (Bill) J WIlfon Chief FC 3FL
Secretary Janice M I ee FC 3FL. 260-8577
) naonra rPmcarn.nfsreneh—----
f WIlliam (Bill) R Topping Chief FC 3FL
I R tet a 260-9i
Contracts Management Division
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Director Don Sutton (Acting) ALDM.131
Deputy Director (Vacant) ADM-133
Secretary Sandy Camp ACM-I 32
Contract Support Branch
Sandra C Davis Chief (Acting) ADM-127
Procurement Technician Mn Raddan
Contract Placement Branch
Horns H Powell Chief ACM-i 28
Procurement Technician Judy Livingston
Contract Management Branch
Thomas Sharpe. Jr Chief ADM-135
Procurement Technician Mary Ferrell
CLP Acquisition and Management Branch
Janet L Simmons Chief ADM-149
Procurement Technician Betty Kelley
Small Purchases Branch
Chief (Vacant) ACM-i 37
Procurement Technician (Vacant)
Contracts Management Division
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Director Marli Kellerman NWD
Deputy Director Marsha Wood NWD
Secretary Theresa A Sisk RN 266
Acquisition Management Branch
Mona S Synder Chief NWD
Contract Management Branch
Robert L Edgeton Chief NWD
Cost Advisory Branch
Warren Reynolds Chief NWD
Small and Disadvantaged Business Office
Norm White NWT)
MD-33
280-8025
280-8025
260.8025
260-5020
260-5020
2804482
260-8178
260-9428
260-5024 I
260-8303
280-6034
260-9279
260-5024
280-5024
260-8288
2804281
280-6035
260-8564
260-6035
260-6566
260-9404
260-3163
260-6307
260-3178
(919) 541-3045
(919) 541-3046
(919) 541-3044
(919) 541-3024
(919) 541-3750
(919) 541-4369
(919) 541-0952
(919) 541-3572
(919) 541-3699
(919)541-4081
(919) 541-3697
(919) 541-3416
(919)541-3692
(513) 366-2002
(513) 388-2020
(513) 366-2028
(513) 366-2028
(513) 366-2104
(513) 366-2045
(513) 366-2024
-------
Office of Administration and Resources Management
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
MD-20 Director Willis E. Greenstreet ADM-110
Secretaly Ruby N Demerit ADMilO (919) 541.2258
Deputy Director William Gillespie (Acting) ADM-109
Secretary Jane N Carpenter ADM-110 (919) 541-3011
Associate Director William R Hooks ADM-110.... (919) 541-2817
secretary (Vacant) (919) 541-2817
Facilities Management and Services Division
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
MD-30 Director Charles J Foster ERC-A-228A (919) 541-3560
Secretary Baibafa J Gilchnst ERC -A.228A (919) 541-3022
Human Resources Management Division
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
MD-29 Director Randy N Brady ADM-108 . .
Secretary Mary Anne Smith ADM-108
National Data Processing Division
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
MD-34 Director Donald W Fulford ERC-A-307A
Executive Assistant Joan S Bivins ERC-A-307
Deputy Director Amos (Jerry) A. Slaymaker. Jr
ERC-A-307C
ADP Operations Management Branch
Charles S Conger Chief ERC-A-303
Architectural Management and Planning Branch
Theodore R Harris Chief ERC-A-301
Information Centers Branch
Charles W Webb Chief W 1C56 .. .
Program Management Support Branch
Maureen M Johnson Chiet ERC -A305
Telecommunications Branch
David A. Bittenbender Chief ERC-A-309
George T. Kranich Deputy Chief WTC A-25
Scientific Computing Branch
Walter Shackelford Chief ERC-A-321
urnce Oi RomInIsLraUOfl ano p esources svIdsI yelIIeI.L
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Director William N Henderson RN 244
Deputy Director William J. Bailey RN 286
Secretary Letitia (lish)V Newland RN 244 .
Publications Clearinghouse
Director Earl Eastwood (Acling)
Facilities Management and Services Division
Director Deborah Ward Beard RN 261
Secretary (Vacant) RN 261
Human Resources Management Division
Director Sandra K Bowman RN 275
Secretary AlisaR Williams RN 275..
information Resources Management Division
Director Robed R Caster RN 291
Secretary Suzanne N Mercuruo RM 291
Office of the Comptroller
PM-225 Comptroller David P Ryan W1115A
Secretary Vanessa Y Bowie Wi 115
Associate Comptroller
David J. OConnor W1115B
Secretary Kathleen (Kathy) R Lewis WillS
Resource Management Division
H3304 Director John J Sandy NELCOO8
Secretary Tanya V. Jones NELCOOB
Deputy Director David E Osterman (Acting) NELCO14
Productivity and Management Improvement Branch
Kathy Sedlak-0’Bnen Chief NELCOO8
Secretary Frednell Williams NELCOOB
Resource Planning and Analysis Branch
George Ames Chief NELCO14
Secretary Alecia Crichiow NELCO14
Management Controls Branch
Peter B Nobert Chief NELCO14
Secretary Sylvia A Miller NELCOI4
(513) 569-791(
(513) 569-791
(513) 569-791
(513) 569-798
• (919)541-3071
(919) 541-3072
WIC
MD-34
MD-90
PM-21 iT
MD-34
(919)541-3970
(919)541-3408
(919)541-3483
(919)541-0613
(919)541-2538
260-7530
(919) 541-2501
(919) 541.0849
260-3602
(919)541-1190
(513) 569-7251
(513) 569-7801
(513) 569-7765
260-9674
260-9674
260-4425
260-4160
260-9650
260-1020
260-1020
260-416u
59
-------
Budget •fl
PM-225 Director Richard M Brozen W7IIC
SecretaiY Shem L Chatham (Acting) Will
Associate Director Sarah E Ducich WTI1D
Secretary Tracy Hicks-Hunt Will
1 jr Legal Services, and Management Branch
Michael (Mike) R Haley Chief WF17B
Budget Formulation and Control Branch
Delia G Scott Chief W709B
Budget Planning and Regional Operations Branch
Terry A Ouverson Chief W713E
Research and Development!EnfOrCement Branch
Gerald (Michael) M Feldman Chief (Acting) W747B
SuperfundIRCRA LUST Branch
VeraAnnAshwOlth Chief (Acting) W721B
Water, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances Branch
DennisDeVoe Chief (Acting) W731A -
Budget Information and Technical Systems Branch
Wlliam J Boone Chief W727B
Management and Policy Branch
Rebecca P Fredericks Chief WTO9B
Financial Management Division
‘M-226F Director Jackie Shipley (Acting) FC 6FL
Secretary Ethel A Mckay FC 6FL
Deputy Director Ronald (Ron) H Bachand (Acting) FC 6FL
Associate Director John H Elliott, Jr FC 6FL
Fiscal Policies and Procedures Branch
Douglas L Barrett Chief FC 6FL
Financial Reports and Analysis Branch
Carl Dolinka Chief FC 8FL
Financial Systems Branch
Robed E Cluck Chief FC 6FL
Financial Compliance and Quality Assurance Staff
German Guajardo Chief FC 6FL
Headquarters Accounting Operations Branch
William (Bill) D Cooke Chief (Acting) FC 6FL
James V Wood Financial Management Officer
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Las Vegas Accounting Operations Office
Alan B Lewis Financial Management Officer
POBox98515 Las Vegas, NV 89193
Research Triangle Park Financial Management Center
Dennis A Schur Financial Management Officer ADM-102
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Office of Human Resources Management
PM-224 Director Kenneth F Dawsey Wl 129
Secretary Mary E Hursey W1129
Deputy Director Clarence Hardy WI 129
Deputy Director John Richard Bashar Wi 129
Secretary Renee L Goins W1129
Quality Mvisory Group
Director Kerry M Weiss NEBO29
Deputy Director John N Mullins NE8029
Secretary Lisa R Barber NEBO29
Empioyee Participation and Communications Division
PM-212 Director Thorns W Chambers M3910
Secretary Andrea C Taylor M3910
Administrative Manager Joan M Graham M3910
Agency Labor Management and Employee Relations Branch
James T Jackson, Jr Chief M3910
Communications and Project Management Staff
Dwight F Doxey M3249C
Employee Counseling and Assistance Program Staff
PamelaW Parker M2117
Counseling Clerk Canton R Burns M2117
Executive Resources and Special Programs Division
PM-224 Director Donald W Sadler M3910
Deputy Director Thomas vill N 3910
Secretary Lisa S Thomas M3910
Executive Resources Program
Dons W McCurdy M3910
Special Resources Program
Peter (Pete) A Hoffman M3910
Managenal Excellence Support Program
Clara N Shea M3910
Executive Development Program
Bettie R Reilly 143910
Field Operations, Evaiuation and Support Division
PM-212 Director Amy S Keams (Acting) M3624
Deputy Director Leigh B Diggs (Acting) M3624
Secretary Patricia Wright 113624 -
Quality Assurance and Evaluation Staff
John I O’Bnen, Jr M3624
Systems Support Staff
Paulette Ellison Chief (Acting) 143624
Las Vegas Branch Martin (M) A Sandoval
Secretary Robin Demis
260-8340
280-8340
280-7164
260-1176
260-4157
260-1179
260-1165
260-1170
260-3367
260-2470
260-5097
260-5091
260-9689
260-5113
260-6431
260-5107
260-9507
280.9 !j
(513) 386-2080
(702) 798-2485
(919) 541-3042
‘M-226
M-226F
MD-32
280-4467
260-3300
260-6241
260-6241
260-6241
260-3317
260-3317
260-3322
260-3317
260-4420
260-3328
260-3328
260-3328
260-3328
280-3328
260-3352
260-3352
260-3352
(312) 686-2407
60
61
-------
Headquarters Operations and Client Services Division
PM-212 Director Michael A Hamlin M3020
Deputy Director Judy D Mercer-King M3020
Secretary Mynetta Denise Shorter M3020
Central Services Branch
Rosyletta 0 Simm a Chief N 3020
Headquarters Human Resources Management Branch
Rosanne L Tucker Chief (Acting) M3020
Personnel Services Management Branch
Juelee B Street Chief M3020
EPA institute Division
PM-212 Director Renelle P Rae M3624
Senior Special Assistant Jeull Bartensteun M3629
Secretary (Vacant) H 3624
Strategic Planning and Research Branch
James R Carr Chief M3624
PM-224 Training Operations and Evaluation Branch
Paul A Martin Chief H 3824
Career Development and Services Branch
Ronald (Ron) G Rago Chief M3214
Poiicy, Research and Development Division
PM-224 Director HectorE Suarez M3910
Deputy Director Robert Cleary M3910
Secretary Angela (Angie) H Langreuch M3910
Hispanic Program Coordinator
Eduardo S Rodela M3910
Performance Management Systems Program
Sandra (Sandy) N Williams H 3910
Research and Innovations Program
Beverly C Weise (Acting)M3910
Recruitment and Employment Programs Branch
Dinah Gnsby Chief M3632
Office of Information Resources Management
PP.4-211 Director Alvin M Pesachowitz W1123
Secretary Xaren A Swanru Wi 123
Deputy Director Paul A Wohlleben Wi 123
Secretary Clans. (Wanda) W Kyler W1123
Special Assistant Philip W Flewallen WI 123
Special Assistant for Regional Operations
John (Jack) P Sweeney AZlanta, GA
MD-34 Scientific Systems Staff
Director David N Cline RIP, NC
PM-21 1M Management Planning and Evaluation Staff
Associate Director Patnck J Garvey SW257
Secretary (Vacant) SW257
260-3266
280-3266
280-3268
260-3286
260-3297
2806678
260-3297
260-2998
260-3308
260-3308
260-3308
260-3308
280-3305
260-4465
260-4465
260-4465
(404) 347-2316
(919)541-2500
260-2381
Administrative Systems Division
PM-218 Director Sandra W Marlin SW259
Secretary Karen E Phillips SW259
Deputy Director (Vacant) SW259
Appli&.atuons Software Branch
Orlando Platter Chief SW259
Client Support Branch
Howard A Howell Chief 143818
Planning and Management Branch
Michael (Mike) A Kaplan Chief SW259
Systems Support Branch
David J Lindsey Chief (Acting) SW259
information Management and Services Division
PM-21 1 D Director Dauva A Balkus M2003F
Secretary Tammy Hester 142003
Information Management Branch
Stephen S Hufford Chief M2003G
Information Services Branch
Michelle Zenon Chief M2003D
Information Access Branch
Mary (Brugid) B Rapp Chief 142003
Program Systems Division
3405R Director Stephen Schullung ROSS
Deputy Director Richard (Rick) A Martin ROSS
Secretary Colleen J Baggeti ROSS
Client Support Branch
Philip (Phil) H Lund ensiruth Chief ROSS
Information. Integration, Management Branch
Jeffery (Jeff) W Byron Chief ROSS
Software Development and Maintenance Branch
Joseph (Joe) A Sierra Chief ROSS
Systems Planning and Analysis Branch
William (Bill) Stuart Chief ROSS
Technology Branch
Barbara Jarvus Chief ROSS
280-5220
280-5638
260-5641
260-5139
260-5303
260-5304
260-5914
260-7732
260-5913
260-8710
(703) 235-5600
(703) 235-5600
(703) 235-5598
(703) 235-5589
(703) 235-5560
(703) 235-5573
(703) 235-5614
(2
p
-------
4
-------
, , 2026162427.; 2/ 2
‘Th t _ - - * -
S’k-v. .
Filomena,
Hers are “bullets” for the DOJ introductory presentation on
2/il. Thanks for your efforts.
-- We need to prove that the United States incurred costs,
and that they were “costs of removal or remedial action.”
-- To meet the first requirement, we need to collect
financial documentation such as time sheets, invoices, and
treasury schedules.
—— To meet the second requirement, we need to describe the
action undertaken.
—- Documents describing the action undertaken can include
Work Assignments, Technical Directive Documents or other work
initiation documents and contractor progress reports (for
contractors); for Interagency Agreements, the interagency
agreement and contract documents f or the other agency’ s
contractors; for State ‘cooperative agreements, the cooperative
agreemonta and contract documents for their contractors.
-— Historically, as we understand it, management in most
Regions has not made the commitment to assign people and
resources to collecting these documents prior to filing. It has
been extraordinarily difficult, for both EPA and D0 1 7, to collect
such documents in the midst of litigaton.
—— We appreciate the fact that both HQ and Regional
management have now made a commitment to collect such documents
prior to filing.
-— DOJ has committed to reviewing the documents prior to
filing to determine if they are adequate.
- If we both fulfill these commitments, we can eliminate
the problems associated with desperate, last-minute attempts to
gather the documents, one of which, we are well aware, consists
of EPA irritiation with D0 4 7 when DOJ demands large quantitie. of
documents in short quantities of time.
-— We have learned, the hard way, that it j possible to
find all these documents if you know where to go. Region III has
a procedure in place for devoting resources to this process;
Leslie Vasallo, who embodies that commitment, can tell you how
they go about finding those documents.
-- Steve Gold
202 514 5260
-------
5
-------
8 SSION I
“IDENTIFYING SPECIFIC WORK ACTIVITY
AUTHORIZED AND PERFORMED”
PRESENTER: TERRY CHANDLER
REGION III
CERCLA COST RECOVERY SECTION
215/597—7982
FAX: 215/597—9890
BULLET ITEMS:
SOURCE OF IDENTIFICATION:
I. Personnel and Contractors Involved
- Scanning the SPUR
- Observation of Account Numbers
II. Review of Superfund Site Files
- Emergency Removal Folders
- Site Identification
- Imagery - overflights
- ATSDR - Health Assessments
III. CONTACT WITH TARGET INDIVIDUALS
— On Scene Coordinators
— Regional Project Managers
— Office of Regional Counsel Lawyer
IV. SOURCE OF FURTHER INFORMATION
- Consent Orders/Decrees
-------
:..., [ I’ C $ ”$ 1 , DQ’ ”I Tfl $ A(P lY
‘• ‘ CO TR C’S rc’p prr.rn SlIP lPInILJ sir” NO. s i
psO, / /
PP ’PAP’I ‘ Y VTR’.TNTA HOW”
A’I ‘)OC fl9I ,F” ACCOIJ’ .? ORJ ” CIIMUI.11 ’ IVF OPI ” CUll PAYMENTS (IN
rr r L i’ ’ ‘ IiIli”’$ riAc ORLIflATL 1S C )N ITI F’IT (EXCLUDING Opi Ic
r J ’iM’ ”P N’J 1I. CUR IT .PFT OP ADVANCES)
S $‘ ))1 c—’r 37 sr ”v3c17A’ 7k3c 1,565.00 0.00
TOT SOP i ,S .0’ 0.00
1 cl ’7 6qb$c, FOo7 fsUFvlSJlal
2535
71.5’—
TOT
SOP
77 N D?AOL1 flO( ,oC L6 ,9
I 565.00
1, 56S .00
27.57—
27.57—
6 071$D’IO 19f , ’Ifll6(.69
0 ’101$6 OO6MAhfif ,6’)
srr 7’1A 7 2’ilS
— TOT SOP
(,tIPA72IYAP 7635
r, ’)rA7? yA7 7635
nq ’ v I ’
17 • 1 ( 18 • 77
12, l i i P. 77
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
12,7 (18.77 —rAT
12,7 ( 18.77
66(1.76 ESA’T
66(1.76
1,55 11.20 _e(zCc
35,062.00 .I2C5/ DO.
7, 57 14.01$
(11$. 190.2(1
1.153.11 1 A(
( 150.00-I
SESSION I
PRESENTER: TERRY CHANDLER
TOTAL A
n
D 7 ‘ flu 1
n ‘$1111
l )rA7?’Y 7 7515
TOT SOP
O Th 1 t
106)01 (,ct,0
fl” ‘ ‘Ifl t 6 ‘)
p ri7?3y 7
P5I’A72 )Y 1
rc F 771! AT
TOT
2S1 ’
? 53 5
IS i S
s o”
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0’)
0.00
0.00
77 • 06
1 ,47 1.70
127.18
1161 .2
7, I6 . 17
S fl?F0fl1 flP (,6 )
I “P00 1’ s ‘)06q0)7 1 143
1,619.14?
27.06
27.06
l,8ll.l -I
127.1 TAT
‘161 • 29
2, (460. 17
ItFAl?3I,A7 ?S’S
— ‘i)T SOP
(4 fl’”fllb
9 ‘P07 5
I L)?F 7
“. P I0O
l’2 0?2
P?A 06 1 1
006’lOI 6 9 3
1 3’ 0 1
O4 )300’.
0O6 0lr,R 1
0D6 0l666 ’)
O0 “fli ‘( ,6q
“All 1A 7
(IT P Al liP Al
4TPAJ23”I l
— TOT
s’rA 7? 3! Al
STr Al flY Al
TOT
7535
2535
2S36
S ’) P
2515
2635
‘535
sop
dr,6q • 16
66(5 • if.
1,5 S’s • ‘0
3C 062 00
7.57(1 • O’i
l$U, IQO. 711
(1( 13 • (I P
‘II I? • 7 (1
I • 070.00
1, 1 5 • (In
‘I 50 • 00—
.a, i .e
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.09
0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
whO’)
0.09
1 $83.L48
(1(12.7(1 j TAT
1,920.00
2 ,8(16.26
-------
¼.4 _J!lIIJl .4. . .....
SESSION I
PRESENTER: TERRY CHANDLER FI’A rn’r” c’” CIJcT Fop 1flM I I IJFERFII9D SITE Nf l. 17
*50’ / /
PRCPARFI) flY VIPGIPIIA POIIE
arr’u,•iy OPJT r’tt’LAT IVE OPFN CON PAYMENTS Oil
DflCU F’If 1 1 1 1 11 14’P CLAS 09L1(ITI ON S CO PPITMF’ ltS (EICLUDINC 011116
lI:i9Fq CUHII T• PR10 ADVANCES)
1 ‘(FflU(,) lp)?97w1 51
I 3 .264.00UC /O.0.
20,000.00
20,000.00-
13 .76 1 1.00
0TC!lfllcPAl 2515
TOT SOP
19 ,2S0.o0
39. 750.00
li ,0O ).0fl
1 1.000.1)1)
7,770 • no
1. iia.on
o • 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0 • 01
19,250.00
19. 250.00
14,000.00
(1,000.00
0.00 r tC ’I
0.00
SQPS to EO 31
TOTAL AN
91,11117. la
1 7.00
f U • ii
0.00
0.00
0.0 ’)
0.00
90 .069.3 1 1
ii • a a
6(4.11 I
1111 . 99 J P’ ..d 4
FA I9’ ITAt P fllC 1 TOhI AC.F!ICY
19 1 p-lr
I) CANRL
F N I1I • ’l
0 0 I’AC? U
,rV)433 1
TI 022
T’OO ill
-in q i MA A
w900050031
1 ,1001 1 50331
J90 ’ )5003L
‘)TFAO 3(19 Al
0 7C M 3 PA7
0 7C 1 10 1SP 17
O’C (10 iSP A?
TOT
2 SU 0
?S35
2335
OF
17F 10392A7 25111’
TOT sor
ii .p’w’ir
NO flClfl
N’ )OC NO
(l ’ ) .qQ i 13 1’l
r)IfLt’:A T!’ ’I
II’ LI I IT I
1(12.10
11, 13’1 •
1 u . • “ A
35, (aSh. 76
It)1 • 71
lot.,’
11, 26” .On
2( ,000.OP
20,000.00—
13 ,2611.00
‘ II TO) TA?
‘I1r l9 1Rr 17
I 4 71q3)RTA7
— TOT
2335
25?fi
2 576
so’
182.10 —
2,602.99
17 ,15 1 1.69
111 ,91 1 1.90
35, 1 4511.76
191.21
191.21
0.00
o • 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0 • 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Mt 5C.
6 vq6006 4C’OOl1O 3l
6 I.O,A776 ‘)06 flt725fl
P T ’OO Ol OC6’lOj725’
STFAO3KI.A7 U 111
— TOT SOP
CIJr ’)lliLA7 2 3
TO’ SOP
1,9olosoo3l
vQ0O )S ’ )0)l
w’1 0 00 50fl3 1
. noocoo ii
iI10006O’i 31
9 —10002
TrOO1O
T V ’ ) 20 1 1
T (1211
‘F021 7
36 p ‘ q151
36” . I 1
9tCR33 5PA7
9T S’OI6PA7
‘I’C ’lO 3spAl
TOT
2533
231 5
2513
7 6 36
SOT
3,6?’. 17
7, 331.61
2,777.16
1, lQ. tfs
q•959. ir,
31 ,109.’i I
0 • 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,627.32
1,333.3)
2,212.15
1.1119.16
(4,859.25
17 ,909.111
PS’V331’ 17 2S3
pSr,1337A1 7636
— TO? OF
-------
SESSION I .v!i1n’ r’:TAL I F(TTOtJ Af.F.”CY
PRESENTER: TERRY CHANDLER rn iIo*rrc CflST3 ?OP R ”IO’I TIT cuPr r’JN” STTE NO. i
S or __/ /
PRFPARED 0’ VTR(INTA ROWR
‘, S r i.I . CCO’JNT OI’JT C’I”LATIV’ OPEN CUN PAYNENTS UN
0 (‘0NT! .L OCII’!PT CL ORLtG TION C0M IT FWTS (PTCLUDING OflLIG
V ‘J Pf p Ct fthlENTePfl10R ADVANCES)
7’ 1 F’AU•l O’)6Pa17 7’) 7QF 7flL’ 7 2 c 0.00 7AI.f,7 1 .L_P
TOT SOF 701. 7 0.00 763.67
TOTAL AU 0.00 6 11•q2q .u l
ei u A?A’ 13 n qoi750 bQI’ 1 nA7 253S )6 670.r fl 0.00 0.00 2EM 3
tor sor c 1 ’ O.OO 0.00 0.00 3
1 T?AIS )0( AO17 50 6tJC99l ’$A’ 253 16,000.OA 0.00 1I,363.3A I2 PA
TOT SOF 16.0 0 0.OtY 0.00 13,36S.3
TOTAL All S1 .67 .0 0.00 13,36S.i’. 3
r.aAND TOTAL ?IS,S61. 1 0.00 169,q78.59
-------
SESSION I
PRESENTER: TERRY CHANDLER
8Th DIGIT OF ACCOUNT NUMBERS - ACTIVITY CODES
“A” HISTORICAL
“B” PRE-ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY
“E” REMOVAL ACTIONS
“L” REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY
“N” REMEDIAL DESIGN
“P” OVERSIGHT OF RESPONSIBLE PARTY
“U” CONTRACT LAB
-------
CERCLA FILE CIRCULATION / check-out
Name: State or
Site Type: PA/SI NPL REMOVAL _______
Check-out Date: _________
L A File User: _____________________ EXT _________ RetU fl Date: ________
SITE IDENTIFICATION (blue) REMEDIAL IMPLEMENTATION (red) COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
# of folders C of folders (yellow) C of folders
Op.rsbi. Unit
DBackground la rlRemedial Design 5a Communhty Relat Plan IOa
Notulication lb 0 medial Action 5b Fact Sheets lOb
PA/SI Reports IC Deletion Sc Meeting Sumrnanes lOc
HAS Reports _____ Id FFE ration & maint Sd DNeWSPaP.r articles lOd
Correspondence 10 Correspondence Se RMeetino Notes/Corr tOe
subsection subsection FOIA tOt
QDuspositioniNPL Rank if :lWorIc Assignments 51
COST DOCUMENTS
REMEDIAL ENFORCEMENT EMERGENCY REMOVAL restricted access 11
PLANNING (red) (orange)
C of folders C of folders
LEGAL ACTIONS (gold)
r1PRP Search Reports 2a PEE Olechnical Docs 6a
hPRP General Corr 2b rr Operatuonal Docs 6b Action: ____________ # of folders
Con by PAP 2c t_jFinancual Docs Sc DPRI weferravcase D VI 12a PEE
PRP Gen Reports 2d 9 OSC Report Sd DCorrespondence 12b
Dratt Order 21 m PldngsIMtnsFCrt Decis 12d
Orders-Negoliations 2e Photo Doc 6e Co m plaunt 12c
Signed Order 2g Discovery Req/U.S. 12e
Compliance Mon 2h REMOVAL ENFORCEMENT Discovery Req/Defend 12?
RESPONSE (orange) Technical Evidence 12g
C of folders _____
REMEDIAL RESPONSE DPRP Evidence 12h
PRP General Corr 7b m Depositions 12j
PLANNING (red) PRP Search Reports 7a pp Wflnasses 12i
____ PAP Gen Reports 7d Settlements 121
OWork Plan 3a rders-Negotiatuons 7e Admin Record Index 12m
Operable Unit _____ C of folders :orr by PAP 7c Legal Research/Notes 12k PFE
R Ri/FS Reports 3b Draft Order 7? PEE
Health Risk/Endangrnit Signed Order 7g DEntire File
OCorrespondence 3d DWoiIc Plan 7h ________________________
Work Assignments 3e Compliance Mon I Checked-out Folders :
subsection Feasibilly Study 7i
LJR0D/EDo 3?
DSIate.Sprlnd Contracts Correspondence 7l.
IMAGERY (goldenrod)
REMEDIAL ENFORCEMENT C of folders
IMPLEMENTATION (red)
rilmagery 8a
C of folders Oversuzed Docs Sb
_____ LjBound Imagery 8c
DNegotiatrons/Stlmnts 4a
DDraft Consent Decree 4b PEE CONGRESSIONAL
DFinaI Consent Decree CORRESPONDENCE (silver)
R Draft Unilateral Order 4d
Final Unilateral Order 4e C of folders
DEntire File 9
SESSION I
PRESENTER: TERRY CHANDLER
-------
SESSION I
PRESENTER: TERRY CHANDLER
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL. PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION III
IN THE MATTER OF:
Westinghouse Elevator Plant Site
Westinghouse Electric Corporation,
a E SF0 N Dt NT
Proceeding Under Section 106(a)
of the Comprehensive Environ-
mental Response, Compensation,’
and Liability Act of 1980, as
amended by the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986,
Pub. L. No. 99—499, 100 Stat.
1613 (1986), (42 U.S.C. § 9606(a))
A
T ‘ ;‘ :. :)
•‘ — 9Er _.._.
U.S. EPA Docket No._111—87—4—DC
CONSENT ORDER
I. JURISDICTION
This Consent Order is issued pursuant to the authority vested in the
President of the United States by Section 106(a) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42
U.S.C. § 9606(a), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99—499, 100 Stat. 1613 (1986), (CERCLA), and delegated to
the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
on January 23, 1987, by Executive Order 12580, 52 Federal Register 2923, and
further delegated to the Regional Administrators of EPA.
II. FINDINGS OF FACT
A. The Respondent, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, is a Pennsylvania
corporation doing business in Pennsylvania.
B. The Westinghouse Elevator Plant Site (hereinafter Site”) is located
along Route 34 in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. The Site is a plant facility
-------
SESSION I —21-
PRESENTER: TERRY CHANDLER
performed by Respondent in accordance with the provisions of this Consent
Order, at any time. In the event EPA undertakes any of the above mentioned
actions, EPA reserves the right to seek reimbursement from the Respondent
thereafter for such costs incurred by the United States. In addition, nothing
contained in this Order shall affect any right, claim, interest, or course of
action of any party hereto with respect to third parties.
XV. REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS
At the end of each year, EPA shall submit to the Respondent an accounting
(without privileged supporting documentation, unless such privilege is waived)
of response oversight to include: overhead, personnel, contractor and sampling
costs. The Respondent shall, within seventy—five (75) calendar days of receipt
of that accounting, remit a check for the amount of those costs made payable
to the Hazardous Substance Response Fund. Checks should specifically reference
the identity of the Site and be addressed to:
EPA—SUPER.FUND
P.O. Box 371003M
Pittsburgh, PA 15251
A copy of the check and transmittal letter shall be sent to:
Francisco Barba, Project Coordinator
U.S. EPA, Region III (3HW12)
CERCLA Remedial Enforcement Section
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
The Respondent can object to any portion of the costs not consistent with
the NC? incurred and presented in the accounting, and any such portion shall
be subject to the Dispute Resolution procedures set forth in Section XI, except
that the time periods set forth in said section shall be of thirty (30) days
each instead of fourteen (14).
-------
SESSION I
PRESENTER: TERRY CHANDLER
—25—
Xx iv. TERMINATION AND SATISFACTION
The provisions of this Consent Order shall be deemed satisfied upon the
Respondent’s receipc of written notice from EPA that the Respondent has demon-
strated to the satisfaction of EPA, chat all of the terms of this Consent
Order, including any additional tasks which EPA has determined to be necessary,
have been completed.
IT IS SO AGREED AND ORDERED:
BY: st ghouse Eleétric Corpo ation Date
u.s onAr cion eacy
Effective Date: reh 10. 1QR7
-------
02/83 /93 j 5:49 US EPA BOSTON.MA REGION 1.
SESSION I
“identifying specific Work otivity
Autborizad and Performed”
PRESENTER: Joan Meddalozzo
Region I
8upsrfund nforQsmont Support section,
Cost Recovery Unit
(617) 573—9642
TAX (617) 573—9662
Region I uses contractor sunoort for this task
• Provides copy of latest cost summary to contractor
• Contractor reviews site file, contracts management files,
and RPM and OSC files -
• For documentation not available in region, assists EPA in
generating request memos to )IQ contacts
Problem; there is no central source of information as to
TDDs, work assignments, eta,, that are related to a given
site. Some of this information has to be gleaned from
cost documentation.
-------
6
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER: LEStIE VASSALLO
Cai s
!.JST FG STE=’RENTQI
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
310ct-I6 - . I .TD0L
SITE PWC TOO Mli i i TA E PA Mliii STATE CCIl rf DRNT
R.H. logic P34412—09 Dioxin iis II I . -27 1 51 510 01.31.85
R.K. Iogi Diical C.. P3-8863-86 Prilisin Aewscnt ‘ -271 51 510 05.10.83
1.!. I rksD p P3—8402— il Attend a 2 day s inai WA N/A WA 03.15.84
R.L. lrandt I Sine P3-841014 Prelisin Auiient ‘.* 8 65 51 159 6 *i F
RM. Winstead P3—84 47-86 Site In..cnsn I 133 24 510 3 *s 0
R.M. Winstead C ry F3- 8X5- Sit. Iaiectios P-1fl 24 510 08.86.83
014 tagiet Wire P3-1602-07 PA . -321 51 586 05.16.86
17 7 Disical Sit, F3-8X54 SII*S 10- 15 24 015 3 As 0
Radiant Steel PrsAicte P3— 6 6 05- i l PA PA- 1438 42 081 08.08.86
RIei i County IJ P3-8407-29 Prelisia Assosenent II -21 l 54 081 6 i s F
Randal h Fav P3-886244 Prelisia Aiseemeent M86 2871 51 041 04.86.83
Rayco jto and Trv T3441?33 SI,ISS 54 3 iái 0
lMaTk F3- 640H86 iDv il1/S 1 PA-478 42 017 3 As 0
h s a rk P3-8509-33 £Movceeni Support P A179 42 091 11.86.85
P3-6601-44 11$ PA-Gil 42 091 03.31.86
Reading hid., Plant 140. 1 P3-8402-02 Rn 1e 42 011 3 As 0
Reading hid., Plant Ph. 4 P3-6605-23 Site lice. PA-lOll 42 011 07.18.86
Reading lnjslrin P3—8311-29 SI/*S PA- 8 42 011 06.10.83
Reading !nAistvies P3-8405-26 R .vi. d Caent PA-358 42 011 3 ubs 0
leading InAjstri.s Ph. 4 P3-8403-86 ‘SI PA—101 42 011 3 * s Q
Reclaimed Stvipltin*ea 01 P3-6512-15 PA 14J-1N 54 009 6 s P
Reclaimed Stvipltin*ea $2 P3-8512-16 PA I0P- 191 54 009 6 As P
Reclaimed Striplbn*e, 03 P3-8512-I? PA PW-186 54 009 6 As P
Reclaimed Stripllin*ea $4 P3-8512-il PA IIP-1fl 54 009 6 As F
Reclsation Ri ourcei P3—8863-28 Obtain Grad water info PA—26 42 n 05.31.83
Recticon Corp., Parkerferd P3-8312-24 P •liuin Aswsuent 0O2353%I 42 029 02.28.83
lecticon Corporation P3—6410—26 Site Inepection PA—240 42 029 11.86.84
Red Lion Creel P3-8504—IS Sty.. P’*w Tia9 WA 10 003 06.31.85
Red Lion LI P3460146 PA PA-1703 42 133 04.10.86
Red Lion Plinacipal IrIceTtT P3160145 PA PA-1704 42 133 04.09.86
Re ond Finithing P3-00541 51/43 PA-637 42 089 3 As 0
Re nd Finis iing P3-8505-21 43 PA-837 42 089 06.21.85
Ree ird LF P3-I865- 51/11 5 10-39 24 510 2 uiths F
ieew’s LI P3-6306-OS 113 PA- el I 42 017 06.10.83
hews P3-630745 PAlI/1 IS 168 42 077 10.86.83
Reidld— 1, 2, 13 P3-141311 11$ Is, edi (4) site 86-2,3,4,5 Il 001 84.12.84
Reidisid isaca1/Cubers LI P30311—386 SIte Inepictisa 86—02 10 001 05.26.83
Reidield Cdrs Ii. I F3 1•3S Sits Ilipectiu 8644 I I 001 84.31.83
Reidiold Colts Ph. 2 P3- 1-39 Site Inepection 86-05 10 001 04.31.83
hidisid Cekrs Ph. 3 F3 1-37 Site Inepectie. 86-03 10 OIl 04.31.83
Reilly Tar $ Di.. Corp. P3-1305-23 Site Rican/SI IW-172 54 039 3 *s F
Renidial Plaming huise P3- 1-O4 Mietiag WA WA WA 01.18.85
Remington Trinity Plaitics P3—8602-10 PA 51 61 n .16.86
Rentokil Ihod Pves.v,.s P3-6403-186 IS 51 760 3 As 0
Rentdil,lhod Preiirvis P3-6402-86 SIte Inspection cm-ao 51 741 3 iAs 0
Republic Creosotiag P3-8302-fl Prelisin Asees.eet 8O 1I80 51 710 04.86.83
Republic Creosoting P3 13 17-44 SIte Inspection l -31 l 51 710 11.86.84
Republic Creesotiuig P3—8404-02 P 15 .1-311 51 710 04.86.84
Republic Cvieuotiuig P3-6401-27 Resle l-fl1 51 710 3 As 0
Republic Steel - loeli knob P3-1303-IS Pr.lisia Ass.suest W -173 54 019 12.31.83
Republic Steel - C.strnne, Dt P3-0410440 Site Visit I IJ-l74 5 8 029 12.07.84
Republic Steel - P3-6303.11 Pi 1isia Aswsst MM75 54 081 12.31.83
Repgblic Steel - PAllippi P3-6863-17 Prelisia Assessant M .P176 54 061 07.29.83
Republic Steel/Jesephino P3-0611-39 SIt, leo .. PA-l O S 42 063 02.39.86
-------
SESSION TI
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
PAGE
PROGRAM NO TATEX3
ROY
F. WESTON. INC.
RUN DATES 0S103191 ATi
9i5 1 AM
COST
RECOVERY REPORTS FOR CPA
CONTRACTi
68-03-PU?
REGION 03
SITE NAME
AMERICAS
SITE NO
WOSS)
TOO NUMBER
035705)5
STATE
PA
SITE NAME
ADAUSTOWN
SITE NO
COOLS
W0926
TOO NUMBER
03170906
03193113
STATE
MD
PA
CONSHOHOKEN
CSX DERAILMENT
WOSSO
10540
03070534
03170501
PA
PA
AERNAL WAREHOUSE
AGUAR ESTATES
W09S4
10954
03900340
039002L01
PA
PA
CUYAHOGA WRECK
10544
03170432
PA
AGMAR ESTATES
03900331
PA
CUYAHOGA WRECK
W0544
03 190)L )
PA
AGOSTONI RESIDE
0390031-10
PA
CUYANOOA WRECK
W0544
03090)L IA
PA
AGOSTONI RESIDE
COOP?
03070239
PA
GERMANTOWN LAB
W054 5
03170434
PA
ALADDIN PLATING
03170313
PA
PINEVILLE GAS
SANSOM MERCURY
W0546
W0549
0317050$
03170511
WV
PA
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
£00P7
0317011-2
03170911
PA
PA
17TH AND MOYA
75TH STREET
2ND $ MAIN ST
W0932
WOOlS
W093 $
03191216
0309027?
03900301
PA
WV
PA
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
E00P7
EOOP7
COOP?
03070933*
030709)35
03110516
PA
PA
PA
4 SITES
4 SITES
4 SITES
4 SITES
4 SITES
4-H CAMP TAR PIT
4-H CAMP TAR PIT
4-H CAMP TAR PIT
4-H CAMP TAR PIT
4-H CAMP TARPIT
WOISI
10111
WOO lS
W0999
W0999
EOOZN
EOOZN
£OO2N
EOO2N
W059?
0309003?
03190137*
030909105
03900422
039004100
03070327
03000633
03003633*
03000034
03070009
VA
VA
VA
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
COOP?
COOP?
COOP?
£00P7
LOOP?
COOP?
COOP?
COOP?
E03P7
COOP?
030 105L7
03000633
03000712
03000713
038500)3
03010013*
0300093 IC
030111 I
03590315
03093207
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
4-H CAMP TARPIT
4-H CAMP TARPIT
S DRUMS SITE
S DRUMS SITE
• DRUMS SITE
I DRUMS SITE
• DRUMS SITE
• DRUMS SITE
A S VENAGO ST
A P HILL
A. STCIERT I SON
A. STEIERT $ SON
A. STEICRY S SON
A. STEICRT $ SON
ABANDONED CHEM
ABANDONED CHEMICAL
ABANDONED CHEMICAL
ABANDONED CHEMICAL
ABANDONED TANK
ABCRDEEN-MICHACLS
ADAMSON FLATGLA
AOAMSOH FLATOLA
ADAUSON FLATCIA
*0* 1 150K FLATOLA
LOAMSON FLATOLA
ADAMSON FLATOLA
ADAMSON FLAIGLA
AOAUSTOUN
ADAMSTOWN
10597
WO 597
10033
W0033
WOS3I
WOOl)
W0531
WOOl)
W0606
£0004
1096?
WO967
W096?
WO967
W0S63
E0O M
EOO2M
E002M
WOS?)
COONS
10951
WO983
W091 1
WO9SI
10951
1090)
10951
COOLS
(0015
03073013
03000405
03090420
03S9042 1A
030904255
03 190420C
03 1904L06
03093213
03500509
03090205
03900213
03900233*
039002335
039003L 11
03110231
03003036
0355)065
03 5 1)OSSA
03070636
03090729
03900324
03900324A
039003245
O3900321C
039003240
039004L02
O39007L02
03070323
03070324
WV
MV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
PA
VA
PA
PA
PA
PA
WV
PA
PA
PA
PA
MD
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
WV
MD
MD
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADDIN PLATING
ALADIN PLATING
ALOERSER LF
ALOERFER IF
ALDERFER IF
ALOERFER LF
ALDERFER LF
ALOERFER LF
ALDERFER IF
ALD(RFCR IF
ALDERFER IF
ALOCRFER IF
ALEXANDRIA CITY
ALEXANDRIA CITY
ALGONQUIN CHEMICAL CO.
ALL RIGHT RUBBISH
ALL RIGHT RUBBISH
ALLEGHENY RIVER
ALLEGHENY STREET
ALLIED CHEMICAL
ALLIED CHEMICAL
ALLIED CHEMICAL
ALLiED CHEMICAL
ALLIED SIGNAL
AU MOSILC CLEAN
AM MOBILE CLEAN
AMBLER ASBESTOS. AUB
AMBLER ASBESTOS. AMS
COOP?
10506
£0031
[ 0031
C003R
LOO3R
EOO3R
£0031
£0031
£0031
£0031
£0031
WOSSI
WO9SS
WIO?3
10063
W0 563
NIOSO
W IOI2
WI00 1
W)005
WI 000
1)001
10604
10534
10514
£0096
£0096
03900630
03070913
03000027
03000014
03 5 11’)2 1
O3Sl1 )76
03590ilS
03090436
030904 ISA
03090429
0309)130
03900036
03900204
039003114
03900734
03900332
03900132*
03900705
03900837
0390053?
03900532*
039006102
0390(6L 13
03000505
03070309
03070523
035030305
03090211
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
VA
VA
PA
DC
DC
PA
WV
VA
VA
VA
VA
PA
WV
WV
PA
PA
-------
CERCLA FILE CIRCULATION / check-out
1e Name: State Of
I Site Typ€ PA/SI NPL REMOVAL ______
LEPA File User - ________
Oteck..ovt Da _______
SITE IDENTIFICATiON (blui) REMEDIAL IMPLEMENTATION (red) COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
C of folders C of folders (yellow) I of folders
Operable Unft
Background is flR.meøual Ossign Si Corrv iunty Refit Plan lOa
Notification lb MR.rre i.i Action Sb Fact Sheets lOb
PAISI Reports 1C Sb Meeting Summaries lOc
HRS Reports Id PT! erat’on & maint Sd Newspaper articles 100
Correspondence II rrespond.nce Se MeetIng Notes/Corr lOs
Subsection subsection FOIA 10?
Disposition/NPL Rank If Dw Auignm.nts 51
COST DOCUMENTS
REMEDIAL ENFORCEMENT EMERGENCY REMOVAL restricted access
PLANNING (red) (orange)
C of folders I of folders LEGAL ACTIONS (gold)
- PRP Search Reports 2a PT! r T n aj Does Ba
_____ Action: ___________ 5 of folders
PRP General Corr 2b P T! OperationaI Docs
Con by PRP 2c Financial Does Sc if! - fpj/ $ Dvi 12a PT!
PRP Gen Reports 2d OSC Rport : Csspondence 12b
: Drdera.N. otI IoflS 2e L_ Pt lOtO S. • Corrpaint
Draft Order 2? • Ptdngs/MIns/Crt Decis 120
: SIgn.dOrd.r 2g • Discov.ryR.qrU.S. 12.
- Cor liance Mon 2h REMOVAL ENFORCEMENT • scoviry Req Defend 12?
RESPONSE (orange) TSCM 1J Evidence 12g
C of folders • PAP Evidence 12h
REMEDIAL RESPONSE
PLANNING (red) - PAP Searcti Reports 7. pfl • WItnesses 12 i
PAP General CarT To PT! : Depositions 12j
Operable UnIt _____ N of folders : o by PAP 7c • Legal Research/Notes ____ 12k PT!
____ PRP Gen Reports — — id Settlements 121
RIFFS Reports • rdSfs41egotIati0fls 7. Admin. Record Index 12m
Work Plan ____
___ OrWiOrdur 1t rn
M 5iIth RiswEndangmn____ : ig DEntire Fill
Correspondence 3d N O ___________________
Subsection : FusibilIty Study 71
IWork Assignments 3d • øit 1IaflCe Mon 7) CltOkSd.aUt Foldeis :
ROD/EDO ____
lStat..Spr?rd Contracts - oirsspond.nc. 7k
IMAOE” (goldenrod)
REMEDIAL ENFORCEMENT N of folders
IMPLEMENTATION (red)
rThrnag.ry Ba
N of fOlders Over,ized Does
_____ ...jBound Imagery
Negotiations /Sllmnts 4a
a
Draft Consent Decree 4b PER CONGRESSIONAL
Final Consent Decree c CORRESPONDENCE (silver)
Draft Unilateral Order 4d
Final Unilateral Order 4 1 I of folders
DEure File 9
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLOREGION III TES VII CONTRACT (68—W9—OOO4
_____________________ ;i e : arj
- •
- :)-
L. ‘.
- --
:t. a
ti . .f
- LIZ . . -334
- -.. C — I ,
I ’. —
C . ..
., u..t
, 7:7
- t
. 3
• .t i.:_’ i S
r .
41’?
• — C . , 141
-. 0
24. 6
450
.37 t , :i ,-i 0. 85 1
24. 559
.03: 1. 9 02 t1&,& 6
6Z4. 889
• 2, Z0 197j?:Z
470 2 0.72 8
:2.rcwIi ;I
a:. 1 12
i. i s 5
2.951 16 .8 O8
16
95 ’O 57, 104
18,761
181,41:
2.4 05 1:5,49 0
¶51 1.942
i I 1
— ,
26,926
400 22. 17
• 1. 1 8 so 2. socs
1 .554 9a. 7 81
hO
•‘- if
- - o
-: S
E:te Jainendork Ass RnI er. :
5TJGr4CU3E G TT’ (fl 3
S :ORNER
r cEZIGERATIGr.
E3 !LE: FJPLATING
i_s , c._-.._I i. .jr—J
rJE CCuT’’ L_rJur LLL
4r E GRE . ;E:TiCOrJ,A_IEE TE
‘ OFTE
r5:Er:..L itS ; r- r
— — . — — y r c• ir
— .t_r ’t’nr’. — S
--i.. ’ RJM
r’jt • L .GCIO!J
A; - _‘WHE--: LA r
3F. £ FORi). ECICGN ’AL.AED 3T -1
—: .ArJD. !L..
• L-J
.-.rr.c •A Jr.tEL .TCur;T,
r C)E-rJ ;ArJIT.ZrIC.J
5 ECTFON
hE&ELF . AUTO
CUL2.IPEP LsJO.0
(bTh !‘1ATJLFACTIJF ING
OVE :JNT—INER INGHp-fl
W , DL UJN COLNT / LArJDFI L
CR E JCAT ON4L. PROGR AM
NT .3UNTr ArJDFILL
0HJ FIVE PAF
*SSEX 0!JNT r’ LANDFI_L
EAST MOUN fl’JN
SAU NDE rS SUPrL ,
3U53E COU:JT’, LANDFIL_
ROUTE C4.j DRUM
LO’ E CONTAINER tBUCF iN3HAM
rigOr. S DISPOSAL
EI ODHEAD CREEP
SOUTHEPN MARYLAND WOOD TREATIN
A BERDEEN — EDGEWOOD
AE ERDEEN/M I CHAELSV I LLE
)OVER GAS LIW4T
DOUGLASSVIL -
FEDERAL FAC flIES SUPPORT
DOVER GAS LIGHT
WOODLAWN COUNTY LANDFILL
3 EGERTOWN INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER
T’v.ER REFRIGERATION
ORA l CHEMICAL COMFANY
EAST TENTH STREET
JLC CITY OF YOR k LANDFILL
EA3T TENTh STREET
SFECTRON
WH I ThC • ER LABCPA TOP I ES
3F SENWOOD CHEM I CAL
A\ MARl
E L LANDFILL
3U OLI CIT ’ LANDFILL
: 1
0Th 25 ’ 9j
i , 2;. /
C t.’O4 :
?9,
-------
PAGE NO.
12/10/87
SESSION II
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
TES-2 WORK ASSIGNMENTS AND PLANS
BY CERCLA/RC1A, REGION, WA NUMBER
WA Site Name
Task
Description
C
Task R
Re g Type 0 Subconcr
** REGION: 3
Mi licrask
Brown’s Battery
Seaco Tranafor.er
Brown’s Battery
Myerstovn Laboratories
Old Tire Fir. Site
Kane and Lombard
Welab. P.oa.d Site
Bruin Lagoon
Avtsx Fibers
Hel.va Landfill
Modern Sanitation
Harvey & Knott
MD Sand, Gravel and Stone
Raymark Corp.
Delaware PVC
La.town PsstLcida
Shaffer Equipment Co.
Mobay Chemical Corp
Wildcat Landfill
U.S. Titani
New Castle Spill
lE N $.nauas
Limestone Road
Delaware Sand & Gravel
Big John Salvage
Mobsy Chemical Corp
Avtex Fibers
B1o snaki Sita
IBM Manaaaas
Doaino Salvage Sits
Latterk. y Army Depot
Big John Salvage
Voor an Perm Sits
Keystone Sanitation Ldf1
Robm and Ra. .
Raymark Corp.
Tyson’s D p Site
Clark Property Sit.
Blosenaki Landfill
Elaine Street
Defense General Supply
Doug lassvills
Old American Glycerine
Rayark
Reap Party Search
Financial Assess.
Reap Party Search
Research Review
Rasp Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Reap Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Rasp Party Sea:ch
Rasp Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Focused Feas . Study
Tech Review Doe
Reap Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Deed/Title Search
Reap Party Search
Focus Feasbity Stdy
Tech Review of Dec
Reap Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Desd & Title Srch
Tech Review of Doe
Tech R .. Duc its
Focused F.aa.Seudy
Tech Rev of Doc ts
Tsch Review of Dec
Tech R.vtew of Dec
Expsrt Witness
Rasp Party Search
Reap Party Search
Tech Re.’ of Docants
Reap Party Search
Records Comp
Rasp Party Search
Resp Party Search
Reap Party Search
Rasp arty Search
Reap Party Search
Rasp Party Search
Records Comp
3 1 C TechLaw
3 10 C TechLav
3 1 C TechLaw
3 40 C Versar
3 1 C TechL.av
3 1. C TechLa ’
3 1 C TechLav
3 1 CGCA
3 1 CGCA
3 1 C Versar
3 1 C Vetsar
3 1 C teebLaw
3 1 C TechLav
3 1 C Versar
3 46 CPRC
3 60 CCCA
3 1 C TechLav
3 1 C Versar
3 5 C Versar
3 1 CPRC
3 45 CCCA
3 60 CPRC
3 1 C TechLav
3 1. C Versar
3 1 C Versar
3 1 C TechLaw
3 60 C Intera
3 60 CPRC
3 46 CPRC
3 60 CGCA
3 60 C Versar
3 60 C Versar
3 65 C Life Syst
3 1 C TachLav
3 1 C T.chLav
3 60 C V.rsar
3 1 CGCA
3 15 CGCA
3 1 C Versar
3 1 CPRC
3 1 CCCA
3 1 C Versar
3 1 C Techi.aw
3 1. C TechLaw
3 15 CGCA
1
23
25
26
44
54
62
63
64
73
75
84
85
91
94
103
104
109
115
116
122
125
129
214
215
217
227
261
242
244
258
259
264
289
312
313
332
334
335
355
356
357
363
386
401
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
ARCS PROJECT OFFICFRS WORX ASSIGNMENT FILING SYSTE ’
SECTION CONTEN’r
Work Assignment Forms -Original Work Assignment Statement
of Work
-Work Assignment Amendments
-Procurement Requests
-Copy of Independent Govern-
ment Estimate
Correspondence -General Correspondence related to
the work assignment
Meetings —Notes from meetings with the
contractor
Work Plan/Cost Estimate -copy of the Work Plan
Progress Reports -Copies of Monthly Progress
Reports
Deliverables (Cover Letter) -Copy of Cover Letter forwarding
the deliverable to RPM
Subcontracts (Optional) -Info, related to procuring services
of a non-team subcontractor
Labs (CRL/SMO -Info, related to analytical wor c
correspondence) performed under the work assignment
(Optional)
Performance Evaluation -Includes copy of Work Assignment
Reports Completion Report for the Award
Fee Process
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
TES HI 6a-Ol-7331 (CDM)
Work Assignment
Stale Number
Delaware
Arniy Creek 0982 (C03042)
Chem-Solv Inc. 0602
De lawareCityPVC 0191
Delaware Sand & Gravel 1003 (C03044)
Du Pont-Newport 0852 (C0300 1)
Harvey & Knott Drum Site 0975 (C03024)
1122 (C03057)
Kent County Landfill 0350
Koppers Co Facilities Site 07 15
NCR Corp. 0711
New Castle Spill Site 0069
0942 (C03031)
Pigeon Point Landfill 0369
Sealand LTD 1002 (C03043)
Standard Chlorine Co. 0931 (C0302 1)
Tybouts Corner Landfill 1076 (C03060)
Maryland
Anne Arundel Co. Landfill 0370
Bush Valley Landfill 1006 (C03047)
Capital Assay Labs Site 0547
Kane & Lombard Sneet Drums 0834
Mid Atlantic Wood Preservers 0900 (C03009)
Old Cumberland City/Limestone Road 0527
Sand Gravel & Stone Site 0974 (C03023)
Southern Maryland Wood Treating 0757
Trans Tech/Admstwn 0188
Woodlawn Co Landfill 0790
Pennsylvania
AIW Frank 0867 (C03005)
Aladdin Plating 0135
Ambler Asbestos 0796
1077
AMP Inc. 0894 (C03008)
,American Elecuonics 0223
0334
Ametek 0220
0330
Anzon 0573
Avco Lycoming 0249
B.F. Goodrich 0376
Bally Ground Water Contamination 0771
Bell Landfill 0180
Bendix Flight Systems Div. 0375
Berkley Prod Co Dump 0248
-------
SESSION II
DOCUMENTING ORK PERFORMED
IN
EXISTING AND CLOSED OUT CONTRACTS
PART I: IDENTIFICATION OF WORK PERFORMED DOCUMENTS :
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
REGION III, CERCLA COST RECOVERY SECTION
215/597—6679
FAX: 215/597—9890
I. Introductory Comments: Initial and Completion Documents
II. Samples of Work Performed Documents for Each Contract
(Handouts and Overheads)
III. Incorporation of Monthly Progress Reports
PART II: SOURCE OF WORK PERFORMED DOCUMENTATION
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
REGION III, CERCLA COST RECOVERY SECTION
215/597—3171
FAX: 215/597—9890
I. Source of Work Performed Documents - Closed Out Contracts
-Regional Deputy Project Office Files/Lists
-Contractor Lists
-Headquarters Files
II. Source of Work Performed Documents — Existing Contracts
-Regional Project Officer Files/Lists
-List of Documents
-Use of Contractor Deliverables
-Contacts at Other EPA Offices
III. General Comments: Current vs. Closed Out Contracts
-Coordination with Regional Contract Staff
-Regional Maintenance of Contractor Files
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
LIST OP WORI PERPORMM4CE DOCUMENTS
- Alternative Remedial Contract Support (ARCS) Contract
- Work Assignments
- Statement of Work
- Modification to the Contract
- Emergency Removal Contract (ERC) Contract
- Delivery Order
- Amendments/Modifications
— Definitization Modification
- Emergency Response Unit (ERU) Contract
- Work Order
- Work Order Completion Form
- Environmental Services Assistance Team (ESAT) Contract
- Technical Instruction Document (TID)
- Field Investigation Team (FIT) Contract
- Technical Directive Document (TDD)
- Acknowledgement of Completion (AOC)
- Interagency Agreement (lAG)
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)
- Agreement
- U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
- Activation Confirmation Form
- Atlantic Strike Team Incident Summary Report
- USCG Cost Summary Report
— Cost Certification Statement
- National Enforcement Investigation Center (NEIC) Contract
- Work Assignment Form
- Remedial (REM) Contract
- Work Assignment
- Scope of Work
- State Cooperative Agreements (SCA)
- Agreement
- Quarterly Progress Report
-------
- Technical Assistance Team (TAT) Contract
- Technical Direction Document (TDD)
- Acknowledgement of Completion (AOC)
- Technical Enforcement Support (TES) Contract
— Work Assignment
- Scope of Work
- Work Assignment Completion Report (WACR)
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER:
CHARLENE ARNOLD
WORK ASSIGNMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA Contract No.
&W0 .0001
Contractor
TeehLaw me.
Aaaignment No.
(
Assignment Change No.
‘fltl.
A Iit an 4 Titia at n nnnm.t f w !PA Pnf wirw, ,.nt fl.yø1nnm int -
l te
7/!lli9O
Descnptfon
1. Case prepara cn assistance far:
A. Cannons Engineering, Region I
B. Charles George, 104. Summary, Region I
C. Charles George, PRP File Extraction, Region I
D. D’Addario (Litigation Support Reserve), Region I
E. Davis Liquid Chemical, Region I
F. Laurel Park, Region I
G. New Bedford Harbor, Cost Recovery, Region I
H. Nyanza, 104E Tracking, Region I
I. Nyanza, Corporate History, Region I
J. OTIS, Region I
K. Pleading Tracking System, Region I
L. South Municipal, Region I
M. Diamond Alkali, Region II
N. Lipari, Region II
0. Lipari Document Inventory Update, Region II
P. Lone Pine Landfill, Region II
Q. Love Canal Cost Summary, Region II
R. BFG Electroplating, Sample Profiles, Region III
S. Moyer Landfill, Region III
T. Tonolli PRP Tracking Database, Region III
U. Tonolli Site, Region Ill
V. Aberdeen Pesticides, Region IV
W. Chemform, Region IV
X. Distler Farm Site, Region IV
Y. DSI Tiansachional Databaae, Region IV
Z. Escambia Lit. Reserve Fune, Region IV
Appropria onsi 6& 146 M?Z5OH4OO Es niated Cost: $325 OOO
lity section of the rontract
qwi I Org. Cods j h ne Dat.
Approval (as applicebla
Sgratwe
Branch Chief
Division Chief
pr proiect Officer)
‘i( 41 $ i
/7/ 0
-------
EPA (RTP)395
1. Case preparation for (continued):
AA. Pembroke Road/Petroleum Products PRP Tracking System, Region IV
BB. Tn-City Oil LI. Region IV
CC. Wetlands Enforcement Tracking System, Region IV
DD. Wilson Concepts, Region N
EE. Criminal Case 23S, Region V
FF. Criminal Case 44T, Region V
GO. Criminal Case, 98V, Region V
fiN. Greina s Lagoon, Region V
IL H. Brown Company, Field Audit, Region V
JJ. Kohier Landfill Lab Audit, Region V
XX. MT Richards, Region V
LL. NL Industries, Region V
MM. OTI ’ Story - Cordova, Region V
NN. 011’ Story Administrative Recoi4, Region V
00. Rose Township, Region V
PP. Skinner Landfill Field Evidence Audit, Region V
QQ. Superfund Attorney File Inventory. Region V
RR. Union Scrap Document Inventory, Region V
SS. Waync Waste Database Update, Region V
11’. Cleve .Reber, Document Inventory/Cost Recovery, Region VI
UU. Compass Industhes, Region VI
VV. D. L. Mud PRP Tracking System, Region VI
WW. Duichtown Refinery, Region VI
XX. Geneva Cost Recovery, Region VI
YY. Guidance Pro asnming. Region VI
72. Gulf Coast Vacuum Service, Region VI
AAA. Guriey Pit Cost Recovery, Region VI
BBB. PAB Oil Cases . Region VI
CCC. PRP Milestone Tracking System, Region VI
DDD. PRP Tracking System Assistance, Region VI
EEE. Royal Hardage de Minimis Tracking Database, Region VI
FFF. Sand Springs, Region VI
GGG. Supeifund Anorney Database, Region VI
HNH. Tc Tin Corporation, Region VI
I I I. Aidex Sample Inventoiy, Region VU
Iii. Aides. Region VU
KICK. Bluff Electric, 104E Tracking, Region VU
LLL. CERCLA Tesm Files, Region V I I
MMM. Cherokee, Region VII
NNN. Criminal Case 73V, Region VII (Litigation Support Reserve)
000. Dcpke Holiday, Region VU
PPP. Ui. iuri Electric Works, Region VII
QQQ. PRP Database , Region VU
RRR. Sharon Steel Audits, Region VIII
SSS. Sharon Steel III, Region V I II
iT !’. Silver Bow Creek Cost Recovery, Region Vifi
UUU. Hassayampa Landfill, PRP Tracking Database , Region DC
VVV. Lorenta Barrel and Drum LI, Region IX
WWW. Aerojet II, Region IX
XXX. San Fernando Valley. Region IX
YYY. Stringfellow Administrative Record. Region IX
Z72. Suingfellow, Region IX
AAAA. Northwest Transformer, Tranactional Database, Region X
BBBB. AI ck2 Battery Enterprise, Region X
CCCC. Bunker HiU I I, Region X
DDDD. Bunker Hill III, Region X
-------
____ Commencement Bay, Coat Recovery, Region X
11Pt. Hborlsland,RegionX
GGG (. Nearshore Tide Flats, Region X
Nerthwest Transfonner, Coat Recoveiy, Region X
m l . United Chrome, Region X
Jill. Western ProcessLig Programming. Region X
KICKK. Western Pmccsalng, Docwnait Inventoty, Region X
I I Wycoffitagle Harbor, Region X
MMMM. Computer lndcxlAivhiving (Ncn-Superfimd), NEIC
NNNN. Computer IndexlArcbiving (Supeifund). NEIC
0000. Criminal Case Pogramming, NEIC
PPPP. NEIC - NSF. Colorado Lia tioa Review
QQQQ. National PRP Tracking Dai se, NEIC
RRRR. Non-S uperfund Project Closeout, NEIC
SSSS . Operating Indi tries Programming, NEIC
In I. Superfund Project Closeout. NEIC
UUUU. Texas NEIC
VVVV. Evidence Audit Case File SOP Development, Headquarters
WWWW. Love Canal, Headqtaiias
X 0CX. S Ama, Headquarters
YYYY . SOP Development - Field Protocols, Headquarters
Supeifund Case Management Tracking. Headquarters
-------
2. Begin Case preparation assistance for
a). Iron Horse Park, Region I
b). Ny i’4 Document Invent.,ry, Region I
c). PSC Resources, Region I
d). Fike Chemical Copying, Region III
e). Maryland Sand & Gravel, Region III
f). Tonolli Site, Transactional Database, Region III
g). Caidwell Systems Inc., Region N
h). Medimora Evidence Audit, Region V
i). Mobile Tank Car, Region V
j). Pagel Pit, Region V
k). Panhandle Eastern (Litigation Support Reserve), Region VI
I). Sand Springs, 104E Tracking, Region VI
in). Bluff Electric, Document Inventory, Region VII
n). Western Processing, Deposition Preparation, Region X
3. Continue project closeout for completed CEAT projects
4. Continue document inventory of completed NEIC files
5. Continue in-house audits of contract laboratory program case files
6. Conduct Potentially Responsible Party Report Audits as assigned
7. Conduct laboratory audits at:
Clayton Environmental Consultants (CLAYTN), Novi, MI(V)
Gulf South Environmental Labs (GULF), New Orleans, LA (6)
ETCfFoxicon Laboratories (ETCTOX), Baton Rouge, LA (6)
Environmental Control Technology Corp. (ENCOT), Ann Harbor, MI (V)
Southwest Research Institute (SWRI), San Antonio, TX (6)
Enseco/California Analytical (ENSECO), W. Sacramento, CA (DO
OP Environmental Services (JTC), Gaithersburg, MD (UI)
Chemtech Consulting Group (CHEM), New York, NY (U)
Environm ntal Testing and Certification Corp. (ETCTOX), Edison, NJ (II)
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER:
CHARLENE ARNOLD
ACTIVATION CONFIRMATION FORM
THIS CONFIRMS THE ON—SCENE COORDINATORS ACTIVATION OF THE ATLANTIC
STRIKE TEAM UNDER lAG * DW6998-4253—0. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
IS PROVIDED FOR COST TRACKING AND REIMBURSEMENT PURPOSES:
SITE NAME:
Fike/Artel
EPA I.D.*:
10
USCG/AST CASE t:
LCN—028—91
ON-SCENE COORDINATOR:
Jerry Saseen
PROJECT ACTIVATION:
PROJECT COMPLETION:
June 1988
On—Going
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION
)
SteP vel
EPAPRO .Th C’ 9FFI CER
Qr ? Jerry S a / ee &aA/-..___
ON-SCENE COORDINATOR
I. rLzL aTION OF FUNDS
ORIGINAr TO: USCG
cc:
CINCINNATI, OHIO, EPA
STEPHEN JARVELA, EPA
ON-SCENE COORDINATOR, EPA
KATHY MASTROPEIRI, EPA
EPA
DATE
DATE
7- ,s-q ,
DATE
DCN t
—
lAG *
ACCT *
OBJECT
CI AS S
MOUNT
DE-OBLIGATE
FROM:
RVO235
.
DW6998—4253—0
9TFA3ASEZZ
25.76
$5,189.24
OBLIGATE TO:
—
RV0235
DW6998—4253—0
-
-
9TFA3ASE1G
25.76
I
—
$5,189.24
-------
, Commanding Officer Aviation Training Center
U.SDartrneflt U. S. Coast Guard Mobile, AL 36608-9690
of Tronspor?aTlofl 1 Atlantic Area FTS: 537-6601
United States Strike Team
Coat Guam
16465
14Jun91 L U
Mr. Jerry Saseen 41
0SC EPA Region III
303 Methodist Bldg
11th and Chapline 4 , ‘
Wheeling, WV 26003 1 -
Dear Sir:
Enclosed is a summary of activities carried out by the
Atlantic Area Strike Team during the response to the Fike/Artel
Superfund Site (LCN-028-91) from 6 January - 19 April 1991.
Included is a summary of costs incurred by the Atlantic Area
Strike Team during this response. Costs totaling S3,179.24 for
the period 11-19 April 1991 are reimbursable to this unit for
expenses incurred( during this response and are chargeable against
the blanket interagency agreement.
Also enclosed is a Cost Certification Statement covering the
reimbursement of costs incurred during this portion of the
response. Please certify the costs by signing in the appropriate
place. Once the costs have been certified, please forward the
documentation to National Pollution Fund Center (CF), Washington,
DC in the enclosed envelope for billing to EPA. These costs are
in addition to costs totaling $9,366.49 covering the period 6-26
January 1991 which were previously submitted on 8 February 1991.
I appreciate the opportunity for Strike Team involvement in
this response. Please contact me at FTS 537-6601 or (205) 639-
6601 if you need any additional information concerning our
activities during this incident. I look forward to working with
you again in the future.
Sincerely,
G. A. WILTSHIRE
Lieutenant Commander
United States Coast Guard
Commanding Officer
End: (1) LAST Incident Summary Report, Fike/Artel Superfund Site
6 January - 19 April 1991 (LCN-028-91)
(2) Cost Summary Report
(3) Cost Certification Statement
Copy: CO WT (G-MEP)
National Pollution Fund Center (CF)
Atlantic Area (Aoo)
PACAREA Strike Team
-------
Commanding Officer Aviation Training Center
U. 6. Coast Guard Mobile, AL 36608-9690
Atlantic Area FTS: 537-6601
Strike Team
16465
14 Jun 91
Mr. Jerry Saseen
OSC EPA Region III
303 Methodist Bldg
11th and Chapline
Wheeling, WV 26003
Dear Sir:
Enclosed is a summary of activities carried out by the
Atlantic Area Strike Team during the response to the Fike/Artel
Superfund Site (LCN-028-91) from 6 January - 19 April 1991.
Included is a summary of costs incurred by the Atlantic Area
Strike Team during this response. Costs totaling $3,179.24 for
the period 11-19 April 1991 are reimbursable to this unit for
expenses incurred during this response and are chargeable against
the blanket interagency agreement.
Also enclosed is a Cost Certification Statement covering the
reimbursement of costs incurred during this portion of the
response. Please certify the costs by signing in the appropriate
place. Once the costs have been certified, please forward the
documentation to National Pollution Fund Center (CT), Washington,
DC in the enclosed envelope for billing to EPA. These costs are
in addition to costs totaling $9,366.49 covering the period 6-26
January 1991 which were previously submitted on 8 February 1991.
I appreciate the opportunity for Strike Team involvement in
this response. Please contact me at rrs 537-6601 or (205) 639-
6601 if you need any additional information concerning our
activities during this incident. I look forward to working with
you again in the future.
Sincerely,
G. A. WILTSHIRE
Lieutenant Commander
United States Coast Guard
Commanding Officer
End: (1) LAST Incident Summary Report, Fike/Artel Superfund Site
6 January - 19 April 1991. (LCN-028-91)
(2) Cost Summary Report
(3) Cost Certification Statement
Copy: COMDT (G-MEP)
National Pollution Fund Center (CF)
Atlantic Area (Aoo)
PACAREA Strike Team
-------
LAST Incident Summary Report
FIKE/ARTEL Superfund Site
Nitro, Wet Virginia
6 JANUARY TO 19 APRIL 1991
LCN-028 -91
1. SUMMARY OF STRIKE TEAM ACTIVITIES: The following is a
summary of activities involving Atlantic Area Strike Team personnel
during the response to the Superfund site at FikefArtel Chemical
Manufacturing in Nitro, West Virginia. A detailed chronology has not
been provided but is available from this unit if required.
a. 11 December 1990 - Jerry Saseen, an OSC from EPA Region Ill,
contacted LCDR Wiltshire at 1225 and requested Strike Team
assistance at the Fike/Artel EPA Superfund site in Nitro, West
Virginia, for operations beginning in early January.
b. 6-7 January 1991 - SKi Cowley and DC2 Kuhr departed the
Strike Team facility at 1200, on January 6, in a government vehicle,
towing the mobile command post. BMCS Ascroft, DCC Mansfield, and
MK1 Youngblood departed for Nitro at 1650, on January 7, via
commercial aircraft. All Strike Team personnel arrived in Nitro late
in the evening on January 7, and secured for the day around 2330.
c. 8 January - Strike Team çersonnel arrived on Site at 0800 and
met with Bob Parkins, lead TAT, and discussed the work plan and
scope of operations for the next few weeks. Strike Team personnel
spent the morning setting up the mobile command post and other
Coast Guard support equipment. SKi Cowley and DC2 Kuhr departed
Nitro at 1200 via government vehicle and arrived in Mobile at 0330,
on January 9th. OHM Response Manager Dave Meeker arrived on site
at 1300. OHM response trailers and associated gear began arriving
during the afternoon. At 1400, BMCS Ascroft and DCC Mansfield met
with NitrG-Mayor Don Carnes to advise him that certain operations
were to bsjn again at the Fike/Artel site. They also paid visits to
the Nitro Police Chief and Fire Chief. At 1510, BMCS Ascroft, MK1
Youngbiood, and three TATs made an entry to familiarize
themselves with the site. A meeting between Strike Team perconnel,
TATs, and the OHM Response Manager was held at 1745. It was
noted that the parking area, decon, transition, and support zones
were in a state of disrepair. Portable toilets, gravel, and other
-------
necessary items for the remobilization of the site were arranged for
by OHM. Strike Team personnel vecured at 1800.
d. 9 January - Strike Team personnel arrived on site at 0800 and
conducted a safety meeting with all parties involved. Personnel
were given assignments for the Site Emergency Response Team.
During the morning, the Strike Team contacted the local hospital to
notify them that operations were resuming at Fike Chemical.
Chemical data sheets were telefaxed to the hospital for their
information. The EPA Region II I OSC, Jerry Saseen, arrived on site at
1200. Work continued throughout the day on the parking area,
decon, transition, and support zones, as well as on the vapor recovery
building, and special operations. MK I Youngblood made an entry to
note safety hazards around the site. A meeting was held at 1610 to
update the OSC on the status of the site and to discuss the overall site
work plan. Immediate plans for the next few days were also
discussed. Strike Team personnel secured for the day at 1730.
e. 10 January - Strike Team personnel arrived on site at 0720 and
conducted the daily safety meeting with all parties. At 1130, BMCS
Ascroft accompanied TAT Brian Burns and Lewis Baker of the West
Virginia Department of Natural Resources on a response to Lob, WV,
to investigate a reported transformer dump with possible PCB
contamination. During the day, work continued on the decon,
transition, support zones, and vapor recovery building. The sodium
metals were also repackaged. MST3 Morton arrived on site at 1720
and Strike Team personnel secured for the day at 2330.
f. 11 January - Strike Team personnel arrived at 0730 on site to
conduct the daily safety meeting. Strike team personnel monitored
OHM personnel erecting a vapor collection hood in the vapor
recovery building for the BF3 etherate operation. They also
observed the completion of the sodium metal operation. Throughout
the day, the Strike Team and the TATs conducted air monitoring
during ther;acid neutralization operation. Repairs to the decon,
transition, id support zones were als: completed. Strike Team
personnel departed the site at 1730.
g. 12 January - Strike Team personnel arrived on site at 0730 and
conducted the ddily safety meeting with all parties. At least one
Strike Team member was on scene at the acid neutralization
operation throughout the day to assist with the air monitoring and
contractor monitoring duties. At the request of the OSC, DCC
-------
Mansfield contacted LT Stanton, the Strike team Executive Officer,
and requested that SKi Cowley ret rn to Nitro to take over the RCMS
duties for approximately two weeks. At 1335, BMCS Ascroft entered
the hot zone with OHM personnel to observe the sampling of the
mercaptide tanks. It was noted that the lab packs in building “c” had
been removed from the standing water and placed on pallets. Set-up
for the BF3 etherate operation in tue vapor recovery building
continued throughout the day. Strike Team personnel secured for
the day at 1730.
h. 13-17 January - During this period, the operations at
Fike/Artel became somewhat routine. Strike Team personnel
continued to provide air monitoring support, site safety, and
contractor monitoring. DCC Mansfield departed for Mobile at 0630 on
January 13th, and arrived there around noon. SKi Cowley arrived
back on the site at 1530 on the thirteenth and assumed RCMS duties.
The BF3 etherate transfer operation began on January 13th and was
completed on January 17th. A BF3 cylinder was also emptied during
this period. Strike Team personnel and the TATs, closely monitored
the LEL’s in the vapor collection hood and in the vicinity outside the
vapor recovery building.whenever BF3 operations were in progresS.
Strike Team personnel also provided air monitoring for the acid
neutralization operation which was completed on January 16th. On
January 15th, BMCS Ascroft accompanied the OSC and Pat Oaughn,
EPA Public Affairs Representative, to the mayor’s chambers at Nitro
City Hall for a public information briefing on operations at the
Fike/Artel site. Also on the fifteenth, MKL Youngblood discovered a
full, two gallon cylinder of ethyl chloride in the hot zone near a stack
of emptied and drilled cylinders. At 1130, on January 17th, OSC
Saseen departed the site to perform a facility inspection and then
proceed to the Wheeling, WV office for a few days. Shortly after his
departure, OHM completed the transfer of 5,100 gallons of paint
wastewater to a tank truck for removal offsite. OHM also sent off the
eight mercaptide samples for analysis.
i. 1S January - During this pe.iod, Strike Team personnel
continued with their site safety, air monitoring, and contractor
monitoring duties. Strike team personnel assisted the lead TAT and
the ERCS chemist in identifying the remaining site wastes through
photo documentation and structural integrity assessments. They
monitored the repackaging of the lab packs in building “c” and the
bulking of the diesel and ethanol left from the sodium metal
operation. They also monitored the cleanup of the residues left from
-------
the acid neutralization operation and the general housekeeping of the
entire Site. At 1445 on January 18.h, the OHM PCT reported to BMCS
Ascroft that someone had been dumping grease/sludge wastes near
the entrance to the Fike/Artel office building. BMCS Ascroft
investigated and found about two barrels of sludge that appeared to
have been dumped by someone from DANA Trucking since
wheelbarrow tire tracks lead to their property. OSC Fox was notified
along with WVDNR. /.t 1600, WVDNR Officer Chris Gatens arrived on
scene and took charge of the investigation. By 1615, the situation
was resolved. On January 19th, Strike Team personnel monitored
the repackaging of a vessel of sodium fluroacetate into smaller, one
gallon containers.
j. 2 1-23 January - The Strike Team continued it’s site safety, air
monitoring, and contractor monitoring duties during this period. OSC
Jerry Saseen arrived back on site at 1115 on January 21st. BM I
Stannard also arrived in Nitro on January 21st. to relieve BMCS
Ascroft. Strike Team members assisted in evaluating the structural
integrity of several of the tanks on site including the tanks
containing mercaptide sludges. They also monitored the removal of
debris from around these tanks. On January 22nd, Strike Team
personnel provided air monitoring for the removal of oil
contaminated water from tanker number 10310. Because of the
extreme cold weather, the tanker was sealed weachertight for EPA
Remedial Branch to handle removal. On January 23rd, Strike Team
personnel conducted air monitoring on site during plasma arc torch
cutting of several large tanks.
k. 24-26 January - BMCS Ascroft departed Nitro on January 24th,
with BM1 Stannard assuming Site. Safety Officer duties. During this
period, Strike Team personnel continued to perform site safety,
contractor monitoring, and air monitoring support during tank
cutting and desludging operations. Tanks 10100 and 10251 were cut
with the I sma torch and samples were taken and sent for analysis.
Due to tl*fact that sample analysis would take at least three weeks,
OSC Sa.s decided to demobilize the site and return when plans for
the anhydrous ammonia tank and the mercaptide tanks were
finalized. Strike Team personnel departed Nitro on January 26th.
1. 11 April 1991 - BM1 Stannard and EM2 Cradic were
remobilized to the site by OSC Saseen due to extensive damage on
site from tornados on April 9th. The combined sewage treatment
facility and vapor recovery building were completely destroyed; six
-------
tanks were knocked down; command post trailers were blown off of
foundations; and asbestos on veral product tanks had been
exposed.
m. 12-19 April - Strike Team personnel provided contractor
monitoring and site safety during the cleanup of hazardous and non-
hazardous debris from the tornado damage. Assistance was also
provided in the assessment of work plans for the transfer of
anhydrous ammonia and for the treatment of the mercaptide sludges
remaining on site. Direct input from Strike Team personnel on these
plans led to a more cost effective transfer procedure from an outside
source on the anhydrous ammonia, and to the subsequent rejection
of the mercaptide transfer plan submitted by OHM. Site operations
were discontinued on April 19th, due to the inability of all parties to
concur on an acceptable plan for removing and treating the
mercaptide sludges.
2. EQUIPMENT UTiLIZED:
a. The following Atlantic Area Strike Team equipment was
utilized during this response:
Mobile Command Post
Communications Kit
Level “B” PPE
Level “C” PPE
Gascech GX86
HNU
OVA
Camera Kit
Macintosh Computer
3. EFFECTIVENESS OF STRIKE TEAM UTILIZATION...
a. At tic Area Strike Team personnel were effectively used to
conduct site safety operations, air monitoring, contractor monitoring,
and logkeeping. Strike Team personnel were also effective in
assisting with the inventorying of all remaining products and hazards
remaining on site, and with assisting the OSC in the evaluation of
work plans submitted by OHM. BMCS Ascroft and BM1 Stannard
were also effective in supervising site operations during the absence
of an OSC.
-------
4. PROBLEMS ENCOUN1ERED:
a. Cold weather in January slowed down the transfers of some of
the more viscous products on site.
b. Too fast a mixing rate led to fuming and rapid heating of the
neutralizing solution during the acid neutralization process.
c. Site operations had to be discontinued due to the misplacement
of sample analysis records from January and because transfer work
plans had not been approved prior to the site remobilization in ApriL.
5. LESSONS LEARNED:
a. It was found that the Gastech GX86 will give false readings
when batteries do not have a sufficient charge.
b. All parties concerned with the approval of work plans and
safety plans should meet and approve said plans prior to the
mobilization of entire work crews and equipment. The cost savings
should be significant.
6. EXPENSES INCURRED:
a. Attached is a breakdown of Strike Team costs incurred during
the response to the Fike/Artel Superfund Site.from 6 January 1991
to 19 April 1991. Detailed documentation to support these costs has
not been provided but is available from this unit, if required.
-------
COST SUMMARY REPORT
NITRO, WEST VIRGINA
11 — 19 APRIL 1991
LCN-O2 -91-02
FPN 1TF03W810
1. USCG Equipment Expenses:
COMMAND POST 8 days @ $9/day $72.00
MACINTOSH COMPUTER 8 days @ $0 $0.00
TOTAL USCG EQUIPMENT EXPENSES $72.00
*T TAL USCG STRIKE TM. EQUIP? T REIMBURSABLE $0.00
2. Personnel Expenses:
ATLANTIC AREA STRIKE TEAM
BM1 G. STANNARD 57 hrs @ $20/hr $1140.00
EM2 C. CRADIC 57 hrs @ $14/hr $798.00
TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS 1,938.00
3. Travel And Per Diem Expenses:
11-19 APR 91 STANNARD 11918413XZW28 $1869.84
11—19 APR 91 CRADIC 11918413XZW24 $1309.40
TOTAL PER DIEM: $3,179.24
4. Government Transportation Requests:
NONE
TOTAL GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS: $0.00
*TOTAL TRAVEL AND PER DIEM EXPENSES 53,179.24
5. Purchase Orders:
* AL PU ASE ORDER ENSES $0.00
TOTAL L $5,189.24
TOTAL ATLANTIC AREA STRIKE TEAM EXPENSES $3, 251 • 24
TOTAL REIMBURSE? IT FROM POLWTION FUND $5, 189.24
TOTAL COST FOR TRACKING PURPOSES ONLY(CERCLA FUNDED) $0.00
* AL REIMBURSEMENT TO STRIKE TEAM $3, 179 .24
-------
OSC CERTIFICATION
I certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that the amounts
shown above are proper, that the services have been performed and
accepted, and such expenditures do not exceed appropriate monetary
ceilings.
CERTIFICATION FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE ACTIVITIES
NITRO, WEST VIRGINA
11 — 19 AFUL 199].
LCN-028 -91-02
FPN 1TFAO3W81O
OBLIGATIONS:
USCG Personnel $1938.00
USCG Reserve Personnel 0.00
USCG Civilian Personnel 0.00
USCG Equipment Usage $72.00
Travel & Per Diem Expenses S317g.24
Equipment and Supply Expenditures 0.00
State Reimbursable Activities 0.00
Removal Activities Damage Claims 0.00
Total $5 189.24,,/C L .’
—
, 9 n-Scj.ce ‘Coordinator (original signature)
6’
Date
ENCLOSURE (1)
-------
SESSIO’ U
PRESE TEF :
CH RLE .E AR\OLD
TID #: _ q38902031 I ZONE: ____________
DATE: 01/27/89 1 ESAT I CONTRACT *: 68017443
CONTRACTDR ACCTI TEC * ICAL INSTRUCTION D0CU T I RFGION: III
CODE: - I I ZMO: ________________
* * ********************h******* *************** ********** ***h**** * ****.***,
TID TYPE: I PRIORITY: I TYPE OF I EPA SITE I PROJ. NO./
. ORIG. . ........HIGH I PROGRAM: I NAME: I CASE NO.
_MOD. I ...L.! DIUM I ...L.SARA I PRIN’rou’r (if
(NO.: _)I ......_LOW I _OTHER I EPA SITE I applicable
I I (specify)I ID/ACCT*: I N/A
I I _________I PRINTOUT __________
********* ********************************* ***** **************************
APPLICABLE TASK AR : ... .. .1 ANALYSIS _2 DATA REVIEW _3 ADMIN. SUPPORT
_4 QPL/QC SUPPORT _5 OTHER (specify: ______________) _6 !9 NAGE? JT
******************************************** ******************************
EST. HRS. 6 MRS • PER GRP. START COMPLETION
REQUIRED: OF 4 SMPLS. PER TRIX DATE: 01/27/89 DUE DATE: 04/26/89
* ******* *************** ***************************************************
GD ERAL TASK DESCRIPTION: ANALYSIS OF WATER AND/OR SOIL/SEDI N’T SAMPLES
FOR CYANIDE.
_______________ INTERIM DEADLINES: 1
flF “ T1 WT1 WT?J
SOP/! THOD AVAILABLE? jç ... _N
ATTACHMENTS? . .. ....Y _N
SOP/METHOD NO.:
C!%T -032
REQUIRED REPORT FORM/FORI T: ____
1. STANDARD PIG ION III FOP1 T .
**a ******************************
**************
*******a*************** ***
REQUESTING DPO:
THERESA A. SIMP ON (ACTING)
•ikLAlA.L. ii
DATE:
01/27/89
TASK MONITOR:
SEE PRINTOUT
_____________________________________ PHONE: ( 301) 266—9180
TID RECEIVED BY: DATE: ‘ ACCEPTED
, ____ ACCEPTED WITH EXCEPTIONS
If!/ ? (Provide Supporting Documentation
ESAT TEAM NAGER ____ REJECTED
(Provide Supporting DocurnentatiCfl
*
SPECIFIC E1D TS: 1. PREPARE AND
ANALYZE SAMPLES. 2. CLEAN ALL
GLASSWARE. 3. NOTIFY DPO AND J.
ROBERSON OF TASK COMPLETION.
4. WRITE REPORT. 5. SUBMIT REPORT
TO DPO AND 3. ROBERSON. 6. REVISE
AS NECESSARY.
flY I Tt T
- -_
HOLDING
TI .
2.
SUBMIT REPORT
TO
ESD
ONE WEEK
PRIOR TO DUE DATE
ON
PRINTOUT.
revised 01/89
-------
TID $; 03890204 1 I ZONE: 1
DATE: 01/27/89 I ESAT I CONTRACT *: 68—01-7443
CONTRACTOR ACCTI TEC IICAL INSTRUCTION DOCt .Th ’r j REGION: III
CODE: _________I I ZMO: ________________
******** *a** ****************a*a**Il *************a*********h*****a**********,
TID TYPE: I PRIORITY: I TYPE OF I EPA SITE PROJ. MO.!
I _HIGH PROGRAM: I NAME: CASE MO.
_MOD. I _&.MEDIUM I ....L.SARA PRIN’rOTrr (if
(NO.: _) I _LOW I __omz I EPA SITE applicable:
I I (specify) I ID/ACCT*: N/A
I I PRINTOUT __________
APPLICABLE TASK AREA: . . . . 1 ANALYSIS _2 DATA REVIEW _3 ADMIN. SUPPORT
_4 QA/QC SUPPORT _5 OTHER (specify: ______________) _6 MANAG ’ IT
* *****a** *** ****** ******* *aa a **a**** **** a***a * * ***** ****** **** ***** *******.
EST. MRS. START COMPLETION
REQUIRED: ATTACHED DATE: 01/27/89 DUE DATE: 04/26/89
***** aa*****aa*a*aa***aa**aaaaa**aa*a*aa a*a***aa**a****a*a*aaaaaa****a****,
G JERAL TASK DESCRIPTION: ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FOR TOTAL ALKALINITY.
CARBONATE ALKALINITY. BICARBONATE ALKALINITY. ACIDITY. TOTAL SOLIDS. TOTAl
niccnriwn sr r.inc rnmr. STTSP Ffl snr.inc - _________
LM) TVST ç
SPECIFIC ELEMENTS: 1. PREPARE AND
ANALYZE SAMPLES. 2. CLEAN ALL
GLASSWARE. 3. NOTIFY DPO AND J.
ROBERSON OF TASK COMPLETION.
4. WRITE REPORT. 5. SUBMIT REPORT
TO DPO AND J. ROBERSOM. 6. REVISE
AS NECESSARY.
INTERIM DEADLINES: L
WITHIts HOLDING TIMES. 2. SUBMIT
REPORT TO ESD AT LEAST ONE WEEK
PRIOR TO DUE DATE ON PRINTOUT .
ATTACMI’ TS? ....L.Y _N
REQUIRED REPORT FORM/FORMAT:
1. STANDARD REGION II I FORMAT .
SOP/METHOD AVAILABLE? ..L..Y _N
SOP/METHOD NO.: TIDS -040.: TSS —041 : ____
ALKALINITY —042: TS -045 : ________________________________
ACIDITY -047 (DRAFT) .
*************** ***********a***********************************************
REQUESTING DPO:
THERESA A. SI SON (ACTING)
i 1JA ILL. ( . 1 / if J1Li DATE: 01/27/89
TASK MONITOR:
RON ALTMAN PHONE: ( 301) 266—9180
TID RECEIVED BY: DATE: ____ ACCEPTED
____ ACCEPTED WITH EXCEPTIONS
C W i - . (Provide Supporting Documentation)
ESAT TEAM MANAGER ____ REJECTED
(Provide Supporting Documentation)
******a*****a ************a*aa*******a*a a *aaa aaaaa****a**aa*** aaaaaa*a*****
revised 01/89
-------
,lOO.) 7’01’ 0’ 1 • s.,. . —
1’ IOO?3i —C.JJ —1-
1& U £UI T$ __ 2 1
£U! 1 7 04113/ 59 .— TU WQIJ Da2U 590412 70 500413
_CI) à jwju. W 1JS mr t 1-$ .I )
Die. Oat. Ssq a.ats 4 Pszt.r.
ul r S.a . SW.Lf Bats to as .1 .d
ii
CA
000412-01 LXT S7CD & CO
000112-02 LI flCS & CO
$0041.2-OS LZ? 5?CD I CD
100412-04 IJVILIICD I CD
500412-03 LIVI00ITCU & CD
59041.2-04 UV I7CD $ CD
50041.2-07 LTVI 1?CD & CD
500812-OS LX7 G1TCD 4 CD
$0041.2-DO L2V G01CD I CD
590812-10 LXT I I I DO
$00 4 13- i l JVA PV.L
100413-13 jTA L& P .L
10413-18 NA?TUWI $CI L
$00813-i) N*flUW$ 1CTR0PL1G
500413.1 5 N*!TUWS .ZC?00PL
590813-17 N*2TUW I JC LJ0
5 90813-il N* WS
50081.3-10 NJ&TTUVI J L
$50413.90 I TTUV1 • C7 I
190811-21 II4 VS
$50813-SI N&?T I .1C?L
50Pfl-lD LAL aC1IUZ I
D-W IAL T A01I0U S
I fl-ID L*L U3I0ZI S
U-I LaL *0310U I
50Pfl-W UL 97*0310 )3 I
lU- Za1 17*00,23 S
90?U- L8L 97*03 50)2 S
507U-l IAL A0Sl9ZZ S
50Ffl-t L*Z. 97*0)IUZ S
U-IE !AL 174035022 S
U-lLAL 97*335939 3.0
SCPfl—I L4Z. 97*331035 3.0
U-I LAL 97*0 )5915 0
U-I.D LAL 97AO)1 1 5
U-l L41. 97*035014 5
U-I L*L 97*035515 9
U-I ZAL 97*3)5915 0
U4DrL*L 17*0)1015 0
aoiois
U-ID L6L 97*011915 5
U- I* ). 17*031015 9
0 ) 110/S O m
0 4 1 1 1 1S 9
0)/108 15 W
I4l l ilS,
03110110 =
04 812 IS O
O)ll0II9
“Iii’S,
ISI,.OII ,
0 4I 11 1S0
0)1101 50
O ’I111 10
0)1121 10 =
04/li/I,
03110110
041 1 2119
03110110 W
04 1111 50
03I1 01S0
04111 1 10
O)I22
O8,l2
0) 12.2
048 .2/IS
00u10 1I0
58 11.2/IS
03110 115
0 4 l 1 . 3/S
5Sf 10/55 =
• 4 1 1 2 1 50
19110150
08I12150
03,1,I 50
04 11.2150
0) /10150
04,13/SO
19110110
S4I 1.2119
03I1 5I$0
04 112 159
03 10II0
0411.3110
/
0”
SW-i, 57*
50032201
Pd-i, 11*
$9032202
PW-2, 5Th
10032203
IW-2. 17*
$9032206
SW-). 17*
$5032207
IW-4. 17*
‘903220$
SW-i. 11*
$903220,
SW-2. ITA
$0032210
1W-S. 17*
10032211
*0—31. 57*
$9032212
0W-202-1$1.
17* 202
0W—202-201.
11* 202
.*X?CP I V,
57* 0W-i
0077 IV. S A
1.0W! SW. 5Th
SW—)
JA i0W IV.
7 3*
ICWT.Z3 I V. 5Th
SW-S
StAT IV.
01* SW-S
VILISW IV. 5Th
0V—7
50ItCD. 57*
SW—S C SOWUS)
COT IV 574
SW-IC (E.&)
I , ,,
-------
SAMPLE PREPARATION AND/OR ANALYSIS EVALUATION C .IST
lID I: 031? 4. ?oJ4 Task #:_1€Ij7_ Revision Number:_k........ SOP #: 32
Lab Sample #54 1f/I3-, —g3
Site Name: / 1 e(trnL Analysis Type:_______________
Analyst(s) fl7. 1 4iv o/ $.fftL y c&.k.. . Date Submitted to EPA: _____________
CRITE1 IA Q CO 2t lTS
Holding times met
Standards & QC samples:
o analyzed at
specified frequency
o results within limits
Corrective action taken
Calculations correct
Logbook documentation
sufficient
EF CIENCT Q
CONTRACTOR
Analysis approved
Previously noted
discrepancies corrected
Report accepted
C , hours spent on
analysis are reasonable
X l i jQ CO lENTS
7
Q OV S tORT
DATES
Received at EPA
Oversight rec’d by TM
Oversight complete
Feedback givei(
Submitted to Lab Ch.tef
DPO/JR
ci i4i
MONITOR/
EVALUATOR / I _
• r-,4- k’c
QA eview ________
5/
1,
Attachment(s), check if applicable:
phone log _____ co ents _____
revised 03/89
-------
Di.b
l1j(,’dOf” ’ ’’ s
Oo3C O-
—
W IJ a333 1$ 23.4! 1
aSSIG ! I 04113 119 su w i.z oAru 590812 TO •,o i,
_(O) àI 1&ju. W T.U .Z2S. ( -I O. I-S .I )
Piesri.
Di i . Dais Iaqim.t.d Psr t. .
Dais to hi aoa1 ssd
- ___
S ’c
£f 1 J 3
0”
190412-01 L!Y 1TOU 2 00
7fl-I W. M3llZZ
I
$90412.02 LZYZ 1TOl 1 00
PU-Th IAL A$$I9U
S
190812-03 LZV ST I 00
S D-W Ia . 17.403192 1
I
190412-04 LV1 L1W. & 00
7u-lD Li2. 174032921
S
590822-03 LIV1 $TOU 1 00
W7U-1 I42. 174039922
I
190812-01 L1TI $TOI 1 00
1OPD-$ ZaL 11*03 1021
S
$90412.07 LV STOS & CO
S0?U .I L*L 11.4031921
S
l9041a05 LTVT $TVU & 00
1OPfl-1 IaL t7*03 1922
I
190412-09 LIVX $70U 2 00
WPU-l W. 1039922
S
190412-10 L VT 1TC. & CO
Pfl-I ZAL 11*011922
S
190813-12 .IVA JD? J.
PU-W W. 11*031939
3.9
S90413-13 JVA PIU.
1V?U-D 1*L 11*031959
3.9
$90413.18 *TT V1 .ZCT90PL
I PU -L LlL_ 11403591$
9
590413-13 *TT WS .ICTP.0PL1G
WPU-I 1AL 17403191$
9
590413-1 5 ATT WS .gCTIc JG
fl-I !AL 11401191$
9
$90413-it M*?T W5 .W! JG
Pn-ia Z*L 11*01 191 1
9
590413-il TT WS .1C! PI
fl-ID I&2. 11*01191 1
9
$90413-il 1 V$ ZCT L
U-I IAL 11403191$
9
590413-20 II4 1
1 fl-I ZA2. 11413191$
I
•904j) .3 iu*rruws C.ICT90PL
U-lP Z*& 11403191$
I
‘I
190413-22 1*2T V5 C&C190P! .
90P -I IAL 11401U1 1
I
03110159
0 4I11I 19
03110119
04111/19
05110 /SI =
0 4 1 1 1/ 59
03110119
04l1 1IS9
OhIO/SI a
04111159
05110/59
04,11/SI
03 110/SI
04111119
03110119 m
04 111119
03110119
0 1111 119
03110119
0*/11/ 59
03 /32
04’U
Oil 22
03119119
0* 112119
03119119
04112119
03119119 W
0 4/12/Il
03119111 a
041121 59
03119119
04112199
03119119
04112/SI
03 119/Il
0 4l12lS9
03119119
04112119
03119159 W,
04112/ 59
/
U’,
) -1. ITA
59032201
SW-i. ITA
$9032202
PW-2. 116
5903220 )
UW-2. ITA
99032.200
SW- ), ITA
SOC 3220 7
lW-4. 1?A
$9032201
SW-I. ITA
$9032209
SW-3. ITA
$9032210
SW- ). ITA
$9032211
-I1. 5Th
$9032212
SW-202- ill.
11.4 202
SW-202-201.
STA 202
XT0O SW.
5Th 1
007? SW. 5Th
LOW! I V. flA
SW— I
JA .SCII IV.
$14 GW-4
ISWLL S IV. 516
SW-S
ITATZD IV.
$14 SW-I
VTLSC$ IV. STA
IS!) D. 5Th
IV-9(IOWL2S)
COT IV. 57*
SW-iC ($1.2.)
‘4.
-------
SA LE PREPARATION AND/OR ANALYSIS EVALUATION C C LST
TID 9 : Task 9: ( O Revision Number: 0 SOP 9: 0ç4 0’#I, oYL
Lab Sample S’5: v ,g, -,2 —D3
Site Name: haiitd4 iJI Analysis Type: TSS 1 Ths 1 i4IIzih. .4
Analyst(s): 5L JL/(ft’4k J( ) Date Submitted to EPA: fr1t’
CRITERIA ________
Holding times met ______________________________________________
Standards & QC samples:
o analyzed at
specified frequency ________________________________________________
o results within limits ______________________________________________
Corrective action taken ________________________________________________
Calculation.s correct ______________________________________________
Logbook documentation
stiff icient ________________________________________________
EPPICI 1CY QZ
CONTRACIOR
Analysis approved ______________________________________________
Previously noted
discrepencies corrected ______________________________________________
Report accepted
____ hours spent on
analysis are reasonable ____________________________________________
£ OV SIGHT
MONITOR! IL “-
DATES / DPO/JR EVALUATOR __________ QA Review ________
Received at EPA ___________
Oversight rec’d by TM ____________________
Oversight co plete I I
Feedback given _____________
Submitted to Lab Chief F-io-Yf
Att’achment(s), check if applicable: phone log _____ co entS _____
HQ cori rrs
c7
NQ CO ITS
fh!tJ( L
revised 03/89
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
USEPA WORK ASS!GNMENT FORM
I 4 P t1
(hf , ,, ‘t ’ £P3A 5 (f) - - / ‘.‘
YNffY Z rt 5 -V-
(i/p/f ?
t ,
--
a Q a a — a STa.ICTTcITas
IOATT T
41 WT •
• saw. • • i • saw — —
-
. --
• FP •
- — • W .
a —
- w
• - . ‘ 1___ ._
— I i — — —
A — -
*
COP T
1 1
.e
‘
0
-a ’ (
tUfM
•
—-—.--- — —
-
—.
W
0 0
/ 1 ’y#e Ji( i
Øfh
•
—
.-
mw
0
I 01
0
1/c’1 ’o Jfl 1 n, i
QIñ
.
.—
a
—
_____
- - : ____
1 ,4 ‘MS O UI
— S va
A1TACH STATEMENT OF WORK
(P(R X3 FD 4 o TD’O
q
n s a
-------
i AT’ IT OP VO*J
FOR CO1!PUCTIN I UL 1!3TT
the purpose of this reasdial lnvutigaeion is to
d.t.cmine the nature and extent of the problem at the sJts
and to gather all necessary data to support hi
fIasibiLLty study. The Engineer will furnish .1]
personnel. materials md services necessary for, or
in identai to, performing the remedial inve sttqatlon .‘e
an uncontrolled basa dous wasti site.
Thi remedial investigation consists of seven tasks’s
Task I. Description of Current Situation
Task I • Plan. and anage . t
Task 3 - Site Ziwistigation
TIft a • sate Investiqauon Analysis
Task S Laboratory and Bench.Scals Studies
Task S • P.ports
Task 7 - Ce unity Relations Support
T&U 1. • D!SCR!PTIOH 0? CURRENT SITUATION
Describe e r ie ba kq ound inforasUon p.cttn.nt to the
sit, and its problems and outUne the purpose for remedial
il%vestiqation at the sit.. The data gathered durin9 any
previous investigations or inspections and ether relevSnt
data should be ised.
This task may bs conducted concurrently with Task 2,
development of the weck plan.
a. Bit. Background
Prepar, a summary of the Regional Location.
pertinent area boundary features, and general.
site physiography, hydrology, and geology.
The Remedial Xnvestigation guidanc. should be
consulted for additional Information on the tasks
listed below.
-------
STATEJ’I Fr OF Vol
FOR CONDUCTING TEASI3ILITY S?uD
PURPOSE
The purpose of this fe3sLbiiity study ii to develop
and evaluate remedial. al.tecnst iv.s fec / p c,,rs,eJ
The Engineer will. furnish the necessary p.esonn.l,
materials, and services necessary to prepare the remedial
action feas bLLity study, except as othetwise specified.
scops
The feasibility study consists of eight tasks,
Task a • Description of Proposed Response
Task • Preliminary Remedial Technologies
Tau 10 • Development of AlternatIves
Task I L • Initial Screening of AlternatIves
Task 12 • Evaluation of th. Alternatives
Task 13 Preliminary Report
?as 14 • final Report
Task 15 • Additional Requirements.
A wotk plan that includes a detailed technical
ipproach. a budget, personnel i equigements, and schedules
will be submitted Lot the proposed feasibility study.
TAU S - DESCRIPTION 0? CU &EN?SITUAflON .
Information en the site background, the nature and
extent of the problem, and previous response activities
presented in Talk 1 of the remedial investigation may be
incorporated by reference. Any changes to the original
project scope described in the task 1. description should
be discussed and ustif ted based on results of the
remedial investigation.
Fo]lovthq this sui ary of the current situation, a
sito-specific statemer.. of purpose for the response, baled
on he reaul.ts of the remedial investigation, should be
presented. The statement of purpose should Identify the
actual or potential exposure pathways that should be
d essed by rem.diat alternatives.
-------
PAGE 1
CONTRACT NO. 68-W8-oogt MODIFICATION NO. TWO (0002)
AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT
____________________________— 1,. CONTRACT ID CODE
NDt1ENT.’MODIFICATION NO.
TW( (OO
4REQUI.3LTION/FURCHASE REQ. NO.
3. EFFECTIVE DATE
SEPTEMBER 29. 1988
5. PROJECT NO. (IF APPLICABLE)
ISSUED BY 7. ‘ ADMINISTERED BY: (IF OTHER THAN
CODE: ITEM 6)
Environmental Protection Agency
3uperfund Financial and Contracts
Management Section (3PM32) ATTN; SIDNEY OZER
841 Chestnut Street
Phi1 delphia, Pa. 19107
8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (NO., 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION
STREET, COUNTRY, STATE AND ZIP CODE)
Black & Veatch, Inc. 98. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)
Public Ledger Building
Suite 272 10*. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.
Independence Square 68-W8-009].
Philadelphia, Pa. 19106 108. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)
ODE. FACILITY: 06/29/88
11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS
( ] The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in
Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers
( ] is extended, ( ] is not extended. Offerors must acknowledge
receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified
in the solicitation or as amended by one of the fo11owi
methods: (a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning —
copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this
amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or Cc) by
separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the
solicitation and amendment number..
FAILURE OF YOUR ACEZIOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT TEE PLACE
DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO TEE HOUR AND
DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by
virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already
submitted, such change may be made by telegram or litter,
provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the
solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the
opening hour and date specified.
12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (IF REQUIRED)
SEE ATTACHED
APPROVED BY OIRM 3/84. FAR (48 CIR 53.214(C)) EXCEPTION TO STANDARD FORM 30
SESSION II
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
-------
PAGE 2
CONTRACT NO: 68-W8-0091. MODIFICATION NO. TWO (0002)
AMENDMENT OF SOLECITATION/MODLFICATIOtI OF CONTRACT
THE. TEP1 APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACT/ORDERS
:: ut: : THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.
I A THIS CHANGE ORDER 13 ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify
: . c ’rity) ThE CHANGE3 SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE EN THE
.r1T ACT/uRDER NO. EN ITEM 10 A.
i. J B THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER ES MODIFIED TO REFLECT
THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such ae changes in paying office,
appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO
TIlE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).
( ] C. THIS SUFPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO
AUTHORITY OF:
(X I D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)
UNILATERIAL I/A/W ARTS. B-2, B-i, G-13, AND 11-12
E. IMPORTANT: contractor ( X ] is not, ( ] is required to sign
this document and return _______ copies to the issuing office.
14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF
section headings including solicitation/contract subject
matter where feasible).
See Continuation Sheet(s)
Except as provided herein, all terse and conditions of th. document
referenced in Item 9A or 10*, as heretofore changed, remains
unchanged and in full force and effect.
15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 18A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING
(Type or Print) OFFICER (Type or print)
MARIE K. MURPHY
CONTRACTING OFFICER
158. CONTRACTOR/OFVEROR 163. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Signature of person (Signatur, of Contracti1 g
authorized to sign) Officer)
15C. DATE SIGNED 16C. DATE SIGNED
SEP2$i
APPROVED BY OIRN 3/84, FAR (48 CFR 53.214(c)) EXCEPTION TO STANDARD FORM 30
-------
.‘.‘r:t a :t N ’e’ : c9—H —0 1
fz’aezcn Nu eb r : ‘)‘?O
Th 0 r’p se • i this modirz:atZo is to h1 Qate Tunds f.ir
of ad i’io al ‘r ) 7raa manaqeient an.i site
: 7.; 1 : :c: I’:tie, Ii l )N :
, .e
: tterv
‘ rt.r. I
•.J r. ratzr.a
! tiV1 v
Proqraa Mgt.
i ,F3
Ri/PS C”ersig
: Z ’R4 0 1er:i 9 he
ai .1
i.’ k As;z ir ent
• l —)l—3LB4.0
3 l—0Z —3LPL0
l—03—3N26.O
l—04—3RP7.0
I
STFAO.35 L S4
BTGSO3SPP3
- T6B03$P2á
STFA3ASRP7
Pc.m.izn
450.000
$ 4 8.77$
5 30.000
$ B0,0O0
s2.oO O.O Ou
Para iraoh A or Aa t. 0.7 Lz.ztation of Funds—Cost—Plus
w rd—Fee’ is ao4 f 1 as follows:
this Mod .
Fundzno
Ft.ndina ____
? hJ .
-------
H:j b : c.9—H8—00 1 Hu bep : 0O0
j.:.. r. ing j 4oor ’or:at ?jj. D4ta
£30055
• :. u0 ? City: e%000 1 Cu: t: 42
c.8/8145 RR0074 STPAOJSLS4
City: 05816 Cot Oi 3e: 4
•:TF Vc’
- 4.:’r-FI Cl c8/20x8145 TE0033 8TG3 03$pp3
S 30.000 City: 86500 Cot 015 SC: 4
. -‘. ôc:
i4S—84039—F3 Cl c 8/20x8145 TE0029 STG9 03Sp26
•35 S 80.000 City: 57696 Cu: 025 SC: 42
Vz;t: 11
NS-94040—F1 Cl 8/20X8145 RA0018 STFA3ASRP7
s2,oOO.000 City: 13480 Co: 069 Se, 42
DisC: 04
Paq• (4)
-------
I USti’ A
SESSION II
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
“ . r t% I r srtiwi
aSI IHT TtII L -
u ..A I — CCM1 1 R ark Vp orth T P1
RI FS pyerst ht !ps f C. 68W80091
9 uS 88 • —
•C.idlvL CI u..C .ii,,
—
CF
141 II
0
*43Q dT øi.C&
I_
NC I( PLAN
Ap0 VA
0 “ AC ( m
CVAL
•
I rECI*uC .i 35C7
I
WA
OW
A33 I ?T
C J1 N P 1tFICAflON
N
‘ “
• • . I $
OW L —
S
——
NCR!7dV4TM.
JCIG
— M 4Nt l IIAI.
— A xPlJl4 CVa
CJ’vq.. LC€. •
•
I ..SS SJCW4UIO ow.
• . — OW -. SOW
.1.1 ‘rquu a .-.
..
SIOII 4vm,.,.,
r
.
a
. sCF SO SF I4Ifl
L I .d E PA COi
,A
4IG3
I
4lCOJ 1
?UTIL SCp
wv c T
.
LW
(f e L LW
LW
30_pop
30.000
—
500 30.000
500 30,000
500 30.000
_____
•___
LN O
9/30/s
vw_____
Co r t!t or 5TIP
Woodlawn landfill site. See attached background information and
scope of work. The budtet is to be uied for reviei, of b*i k r und
inforatiou review of responsible Darty’s work nian.. field overst ht
rsvtsv of sub.itted report, subcontractor procureent and technical and
fta cial anage ent. Workplan d in 0 day . rk should start
— gligipt
(all work)
to work plan approval. •. g
StP2S-
•.
p.
ATTACH STATEMENT OF WORK
(P 0U T NGP TU0
SEP 29
-------
coL.Ac L FIL
BACK QJND INFORZ IT ION
Woodlawn Landfill covers approximately 37 acres in Woodlawn, Cecil County
. The County owned and operated the landfill frQn 1965 to January
1979, when it was closed under State order. Prior to becut ing a
landfill, the property was a privately owned sand arid gravel quarry.
Cecil County filled 2 large quarry pits with agricul iral, municipal, arid
industrial wastes. The landfill was open 24 hours a day until 1973.
‘I re are few records as to what was disposed of at the landfill.
According to the State, the only doc z nted waste disposal at the site
was polyvinyl chloride sludge, resin arid waste po1 ner. The PVC was
initially disposed of throughout the landfill; in 1978 t designated
cells ware used for the sludge. 1 PVC sludge area was capped in the
spring of 1981. Monitoring walls have been installed at the site.
The entire site is covered with a soil cover.
EPA has entered into an re nent with a potentially responsible party
for the perfo nar e of an Rt/FS.
Ongoing toxicological tort suits require the work to be
performed by the responsible party, and therefore also
the work to be performed by the contractor under this
work assignment, be on a fast track.
SEP $$
-------
sco OF oi x
P1 ,4 ’S OVERSIG’iT
The Consent Order bet €n EPA and Firestone Tire and Rubber structures
the work to be perforn d so that the results fran the preliminary
investigations are used to develop the work plan for the next subsequent
part of the investigation. The first deliverable under the Consent Order
is a work plan which outlines the methods to be used for performing a
soil gas survey and various surface geophysics (magnetareter, EI ’131, E 134,
and sei nic refraction).
Work to be Performed
Task I- REVIEW OF BACW RWND I ORtc TICN & PREPARATIC!4 OF ThE RKPLAN
The Contractor will perform a preliminary review of background
information, obtained fran EPA’S files, in order to develop a basic
understanding of the site and develop the work plan, schedule, and
estimated tzidget. The draft Work Plan will be prepared and su nitted to
EPA. A final Work Plan will be prepared approximately 1 ek following
the Contractor’ s receipt of EPA’S canrents on the draft Work Plan.
* Work should begin prior to EPA’S approval of the Work plan.
Task 2- REVIEW OF PRP RK PtAN
The Contractor will review the Work Plan prepared by the PRP’s contractor
to determine if the PRP Work Plan utilizes tkL best technology available,
is sound technically, and illustrates a grasp of the )a owledge necessary
to evaluate results fran these investigations. The Contractor will also
review tk QA/QC plan and Health and Safety plan for these investigations.
This should be revie d for project specific details on sa piing, field
testing, chain of custody, s ple handling, packaging, preservaion,
shipping, record keeping, docunentation, and analytical and laboratory
procedures.
The contractor will use as a m.th 4 ’ ” the following refeEerxes for this review;
* NC?
* C1 w t Or r bet en EPA and the responsible parties
* s Qaidaz on ‘mMial Investigations and Feasibility Studies
under *, ? rth 1988 draft
* 1$ gu,jjd e on Quality As izanoe, i luding as appropriate, the
“users iis to contract Laboratory Progren”, “Q.iidelines for
Establi ing ¶ st Procedures for _ Analysis of Pollutants Under “ (49-
FR-209), SW-846, “EPA NEIC Policies and Procedures Maa al ” (EPA Doc nt
No. 330/9 -78-øø] .-R)”, and “Inten fl Qiidelines and Specifications for
preparing Quality Project Plans” (Q MS-4g5/8 )”.
* “Data Quality Objectives for dial sponae Activities”
* “G.aidarx on edia1 Actions for Contaninated onnd Water at
Superfund Sites”
2 9
-------
Ca inents will, be s xiinatized in a draft letter report to EPA which Wi ] . ].
aLso contain the listing of docwencs which have been considered and/or
revie d under this Scope of brk. Following EPA review of the draft
Letter report and inclusion of EPA ca!rnents in final Letter report, a
reeeing may then be conducted bet een the contractor and EPA to discuss
the conclusions of the letter report. The draft Letter report will. be
su nitted to EPA 21 days after receipt of the report.
Task 3— SITE VISIT
The contractor will conduct a one—day site reconnaissarre after su nittaL
of the draft Work Plan to EPA. The contractor will notify the EPA EPM of
the site visit, so the EPA EPM can make access arrangeients. The
contractor will prepare a task-specific health and safety plan, suitable
for conducting a site “walk through”, to utilize during the site visit.
The contractor will prepare a trip report and sithnit it to EPA following
this visit, docuiurtting the site reconnaissance. report will be
su itted to EPA either with the next month’s progress report, or 15 days
after the site visit, which ever is sooner.
Task 4— ERSIQiT OF i1 FIELD INVESTI TICVS
The contractor will develop a scope of work for overseeing the field
investigations performed by the PRPS according to the PRP work plan. This
scopa of work should include cost- man hour estimates as wall as
personnel requirenents to in3are that all PRP directed field activities will
be carried out in accordance with the PRP Work Plan and QWQC plan, and
standard ir istry sound practises.
The contractor will prepare a field trip report and ikinit it to EPA.
The contractor will report if the PRP5 are out of ca pliance with the
work plan or QAI’QC plan. report will be suhnitted to EPA either with
the next month’s progress report, or 15 days after the c p1etion of the
field activities, which ever is sooner.
Task 5- REVIEW T RE R AND JBS JENT RK PLAN
The contractor will review the report suhiiitted by the p pg at the
caclusion of this pc.liminary investigation. Th. report wil]. be
evalua t. ira whether the study was perfo d consistent with
the and QI/ plan, and if the analyses and data evaluation
and ic, are correct. This task will require t efforts of
those vi ti in various gecç* ysical techniques, and soil gas
st iss.
•tI contractor vii] also review the work plan s iheitted by U _ - Pups at
this tune which doounents the ground water ‘ pling prngr . This will
include, inter alia , the installaicn of monitoring walls, s p1ing and
analysis, slug and p. p tests. The contractor will review this work
planto dete ine if the P work plan outlines the renedia.] activities
necessary to identify possible sources of contanination, and characterine
the nature and extent of contan.ination. It vii]. also be revi d for
project specific details on sanpling, field testing, chain of custcxly,
SEP29
-------
sanpie handling, packaging, preservation, shipping, record keeping and
doctrientatio , ar*i analytical aid laboratory procedures. The references
outi ir d above under Task 2 wilL, at a miruirnxn, be used.
c nents will be sum arized in a draft letter report to EPA, which will.
also contain the listing of doucients which nave been considered or
revie under this task. Following EPA review of the draft letter report
and inclusion of EPa caTitEnts in final letter report, a a eting may then
be conducted bet en the contractor and EPA to discuss the doc nents
revie d and the conclusion of the Letter report. The draft letter report
will be suth itted to EPA 21 days after receipt of the report.
$IPsl M
-------
2. o./7 3Z
3. PRIORITY:
mined late T . sk
Short-Term Tas
(ldays)
Long-Term Project
(>ldays) —
Continuous Long-Term
Support_
4. AUTHORIZED
OV . 1ME:
‘. Yes
No
5. CONFIRMATION OF
VER A . WO:
/Yes
6. REFERENCE INFORMATION:
. Yes No
Pick-up
——______
7. FINAL DUE j
DATE: I a
8. INTERIM
DEADLINES:
9. SPECIFIC ELEMENTS:__________________________________________________________________
/ 4 . , C., -
4 , A i - A/ 2 .
A ‘1 J / L Ji 6’ j
? / £ T.’,, “z / # ‘j fp’i,, o’ / J ‘v-, 7, /
?. I4 ,W/ ( 1 4 5 - 4 -- .dd % -
7 % 1’8,1’S.
..Z ’,’ , ,,, ..J , j , 414’ ,- ,. , —, , %,4/l % , , - ‘,.
2) z — / i - - i i 4 .c ,
- --—-- -
7+IC,?c , /7 -
10. (ST. COSTS________ EST. WORK MRS______ 11. ACCOUNTING: ? /c c’.
12. CONCURRENCE: 1 t’.f ,‘ir..
Section/Branch Chief
.ontrac or ignatureIUaLe
16. CO1’PIENTS:_____
SESStON II
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
1. DATE:
4 J. /LC..AI
•EKÔ WOi K OROER**
14. RECEIVED:
_____Accepted
____Rejected
____Accepted With
Modification
15. (RB CONCURENCE:
(If not accepted)
Signature/Date
rflPIFc• rn.,P. .i-’--
-------
_______________________ 9t IS.t .
1. DATE: ‘7 /. r/ y **ERB WORK ORDER COMPLETION FORM** 2. wo # R .3 2_.
3. CORP. DATE: / ‘ )cg J4. TOTAL WORK FI S: —
________ NALC ______ _______
6. WORK HRS(IN HOUSE): SUPV.______ ENGR.______ TECH. SECY. OTHER______
-7. W0RK HRS(EXTERNAL): SUPV._______ ENGR.______ TECH._______ SECY.______ OTHER______
8. EQUIPMENT PURCHASED(OETAIL):_____________________________________________________
A ti -
9. COI4IENTS( CONTRACTOR): / ‘ 2 l4e.1Lgi J 1 . .+. ,J*.
J .J /‘ f2 . a A .t
10. c reoa(/9’
11. CO*IENTS(ERT) (I / g f,.,
— -
4 ;’ j 1 ; # —p t( c
12. 13. SectIon Chief Signatureloate
Requester i gnature/Oate
I __ __ ._.. •Jl V..._S.I ...&1_ I.J.D
-------
CENTER.
FIT ZONE I CONTRACT
CONTRACT NO. 68-01-7346
NO.. TECHNICAL DIRECTiVE DOCUMENT (TDO)
2. NO.
.
F3-8612-56
2.A..
0 NEW ASSIGNMENT
El AMENDMENT
IA. ESTIMATE OF LA.SSID NO.. 6. DESIRED REPORT FORM
TECHNICAL HOURS
WV3IO FORMAL REPORT 0 FORMAL
BRIEFING
IS. EPA SITE NAME. 0 LETTER REPORT
wv_ il
Fike Chemical 7.A. START DATE:
CONTACT: lB. ESTIMATE OF 1 87
SUBCONTRACT COST: 5.C. CITY/COUNTY/
L I I STATE: 7.1. ES11MATED
597-6623 k/A Ritro, Kanawha DATE:
County, WY
ACT1VfTY;
SI 0 ESI 0 HRS SUPPORT 0 0* SUPPORT 0 SPECIAL STUDIES
SUPPORT 0 TRAINING 0 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 0 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
TASK DESCRIPTiON:
Dioxin sa 11ng at the subject site (Enforc nt Support)
ELEMENTS:
Review_b*ckground_Inforastlon;_contact_W._Lee_for_specific_requirements
11. INTERIM DEADUNES;
and submit u 1ing plan to EPA for approval
access will be arranged by EPA
lab analysis and arrang, for spiked ssu iles, If needed
sampling to be performed according to the nest recent dioxin protocal
$ written by EPA RegIon 3
chain—of-custody for all samples, cIemnt all sampling and relal
activities
for proper disposal; all contaminated clothing and .st.rlals EPA will
kendis disposal
labeling requirnts
Prepare_and_submit_field_trip_report_and_pilot._docimintation
ADDmONALScOPIATTACNEO sndoent due to change in due date (draft to fiu
1)
sat. Code 054 Citmt
/, j1 1
DOPO OPO rAiAc# r. ..
(sIGNA REr
14. DATE:
/ /j -
BY:
0 ACCEPTED WITH
EXCEPTIONS (ATTACHI / i A
(CONTRACTOR FITOM SIGNAIUREI
16. DATE:
lip/a 7
SHEET t WI4IYE-PITOM COPY
SHEET 2 QREEN-P OJECt OFRCERS COPY WASHINGTON 0 C p
SHEET 3 CANMY.RPO COPY
SHEET 4 PINK. N COPY
- 3
0
z
z
-3
U
0z
— I i
(/) C#3
cd)”J
C)
-------
--.—-. _a__--_.-.____ -
1.COSTCE NTER. — ________________
FIT ZONE I 2 NO F3-8612- 6
RegIon CONTRACT NO. 68-01 -7346
1.A.ACCOUNTP4 TDDACKNOWLEDGE( 1 ENT OF COMPLETION 2.A SSIONO XX2
S575 bEFX 2 B
3.A DESCRIPTION: FIk ChsuIcu WV71 COMPLETE
EIIfercsmt Support (dioxin sappllng} tsk capplete 0 CANCELLED
Final Held Trip report sutslttid 9/23/87 ____________________
FORMAL REPORT
o LETTER REPORT
o FORMAL BRIEFING
o STANDARD REPORT
o OTHER (SPECIFYI
3.B. TECHNICAL LABOR HOURS EXTENDED: 3.C. SUBCONTRACTOR COST:
431.50
4. FIT.RPp ACTION:
‘ ACCEPTED 0 ACCEPTED WITH EXCEPTIONS 0 REJECTED
(ATTACH)
5. COMMENTS:
IA. FURTHER ACTION RECOMMENDED BY mOM:
0.1 CERTiFY ThAT THE ATTACHED MATERIALS MEET AND COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF
ThE SUBJECT TOO.
) . 1 A)
7. DATE:
/i/ - 4e J
(CONTRA 4% OM SIGNATURE)
e. T SEE EDTHEMATEIIAI.$ AND SERVICES SPECIFIED
-. - P0 SIGNATURE)
9. DATE:
s.ei i UTh4ITOM COP! SHEET 3 C4JIARY.RPO COPY
SHEET 2 OnEEN-PnOJECTOFPICEN$ COPY (WASHI OTON. DCI SHEET 4 COPY
SHEET S OOt.CENROD.CONTnACT1NG OFFiCERS COPY WA$M(NOTON 0 C I
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
3 .1Lo!d
P.s. I of S
Ualtsd S tss 4uu,a .taI Protection Agency —
WaihlnWu” DC 20410
1. EPA! L O Identi Icatlon Number
DW96943596 .01 .0
. Funding Location
b Region
InteraQency Agreement I
EPA Amendment
Pail I - General Information
AlencY ID Number
03
i• Program Ofllcs
l s1)on
SUPERFUND
3. Type of Audon
NEW
I. Name and Address f EPA Organ 11on
U. S. EPA, REGION III
HAZARDOUS WASTE MGMT DIV
841 CHESTNUT BLDG
PHILA, PA 19107
7. N .m. and Address of Other Agency
U. S. ARMY CORPS ENGRS
MISSOURI RfV DIV
P08103, DOWNTOWN STA
OMAHA, NE 68101.0103
& Project Title REMEDLAL ACTiON FOR OPERABLE UNif #
1 AT FIKE CHEMICAL SIrE, VIRGINLO
B. EPA Project Officer (Name, Address, Tslsphons NUMber
PAUL LEONARD (31 V24)
U. S. EPA REGION iii
841 CHESTNUT BLDG
PHILA, PA 19107
(215) 597.8485
Is. Other Agency Project Officer (Name, Address, T.lephon. Numb.r)
UNDA PFLUG
U. S. ARMY CORPS ENGRS
POB 103, DOWNTOWN, STA
OMAHA, NE 68101.0103
(FTS) 864-7 7
11. Project PerIod 12. Budget Period
01/17/92to 12/15/92 01/17/92to 12/15/92
13. Scop. of Work (Attach additional sbests, u nesd.d)
This agreement authonzes the U. S. Army Corps cs’ Engineers Rapid Response
Program to complete Operable Unit #1 Remedial Action at the Fike Chemical Superfund Site.
This action Includes the removal of all remaining tank contents that were n addressed by
EPA ’s removal program. The estimated volume of materials which needs to be removed and
treated as necessaiy is 82,000 gallons.
RevIsed Reimbursable $413,660
Direct Fund Site 2,500,000
Total $2,913,600
f . M..
l Sla1utcryAuuuodIy BISTI_ et Ptmdu end Projeu A vWas CERCLA AS AMENDED (42 USCA 9601 15. Other Agency Typ
ECONOMYACT19 AMe DED(31USC1535) Er SEQ) , 5.0. 12580 FEDERAL
FUNDS
PREVIOUS AMOUNT
AMOUNT THIS ACTION
AMENDED TOTAL
1PA*jnm.
0
2,913,660
17. EPA tiWDnd Amonct
0
0
l&OtierA gencyAj nesjnt
0
0
IB.OtherA gency l,wOM*moijnt
0
0
20.Tc u dPr*c lCo st
0
2,913,660
21. Asc iI bdomiatlon
Proqrvn Ds’nant
TFAY9A
FY
ApproprIation
68 /20X8145
Des. Contol N..
RA 0 004
Mocijet Number
ZTFA3ASR IO
Object css
25.76
C gtic, Dsobllg. Ami.
2,913,660
(pap ,.IQ.I ,.4
—
- -
-------
Psqs 2 c l i
Pitt II. Approved Budget
PA AO IdsnVflos Nwnbor
DW96943596.o1.O
S*on Uon
CdSgOItoS This Acöon
ftsmI cn cl liii Pro sct
Endmatsd Co to Oafs
130,000
130000
54600
54.600
52,608
52,608
975
975
1,479
1,479
2,500.000
2,500,000
0
0
30,000
30,000
- 2,769662
&769.662
184600. 143,998
143,998
0.0Oi 2,913,660
Z913,660
by EPA or ! purchsssd, or rsaf.d wIBl CPA 0140
mar..)
.zvamwal sgn. nanis7 (5.. 11am 4 ( ] y o N
0 Cc sUvs A niaf ocw.mont (Inctudus Smal PwJ s. Ords,
T. E or . mur.l Ammml w dar ds Profsaf
2,500,000
Parom U und.d by EPA (If bi )
100.00
Part III • Fundlna Methods and BIIllna Instructions
-
EPA Agency Location Cod. (ALC) .68010727)
for rspa ,’muI1 of acitsi oasis must bs lismiad on SF40 10 ond m*mittsd to iii Fbisnd.l Msncgsmsst
cto .km Off 4
‘ 5 v 0 “v 0 upon c1r n of Wait
ass by F4. ,J a indss on , . .i g cspI timd or af ii app ivpdsls .smI aSun of nssd for
of m.dlod. IMm dsd *mds at compisSon olwoit bs rstansd to EPA. Oatorly coat
bs Isi .Jad to V i i ?bi.nclsi Mac.g.msst Class,, EPA, OH 4*254.
oNgsVonsi wthoulIy or IansI.r . ai&4 n batsm.n tsdsrsi a. ,..J.... Must rsoslvs p 1W
Vii OM.. cl iii Co oiar, 5u4p.t C k Itidgat Formulsion and Convof Breath EPA HdqVL
pslaIs mporto to us iindsi flspon. and An.Plsis Bmact Fkasicf of Meaag.sssnl DMsIo , PM-
W1J*I S.A DC 20440
—
M o
EPA urn Ofios Allovainc. HQI4&/Rssp . Contsr No.
ALC or Sisi e Spmb.J ffianber)
Othsr Aqsncy. Bluing bmtucion and Ptsqusncy
-------
Psg. 3 ol e
27. General Conditions
I EPA *0 Ids cation Nwnbs,
Part P4 - Acceptance Conditions I DW96943596.01 -0
Th, other agency covenants and agrees that It will expeditiously initiate and
complete the project for which funds have been awarded under this agreement.
s. Condmo. .
Special Conditions for Remedial Action LAG
The USACE agrees to meet the site-specific financial management and recording
responsibilities contained in EPA ‘Supeifund Financial Management and Recordkeeping
Guidance for Federal Agencies (Januaiy 1989).
1. Cost Documentation Requirements
EPA acting as manager of the Hazardous Substances Supedund requires current
information on CERCLA response actions and related obligations of CERCLA funds for
these actions. in addition, CERCLA as amended, authorizes EPA to recover from
responsible parties all government costs incurred during a response action. in order to
help assure oversight and successful recovery of CERCLA funds, both the USACE and
EPA have responsibilities under this agreement The USACE accounting system reports
Part V • Offer and Acceptance
NOTL I) For Funds-Out actions, St. sgrsamenvsm.ndment must be signed by the other agency official In duplicate and one
original rstwnsd to the Grants Admlnls ation Division for Headquarters agreements or to Ste appropriate EPA Regional
lAG sdml.J.U..Uon elites wIthin 3 calendar ws&s alter receipt or within any extsnslon 01 tim as may be grantsd by the
EPA. The .graainant/amsndmsnt must b. fomrdsd to the ad eie cited to Item a after .ooeptance signature.
Reea4* of a written refusal or hOurs to return the prop.ssly exscutsd document within the prescribed time may result In the
wlthth awal of the off Sr by EPA. Any change to the sgrsarn.nt by St. other agency subsequent to the doc*imsnt being
signed by the EPA Action Official. wtech Ste Action Official detenninse to materially alter the agrsem.ntfamendmsnt, shall
void the agr.em.n*/amendmsnt.
For Funds-In actions, the other agency M I Icitilt. the action and two original aqrseinsnWamendmsnts to the
appropriate EPA program 0111.. for signabuw. The agrsamaflts/aInsndm.ms will then be forwarded to Ste approprtat.
EPA LAO admlnls ation elites for accsptene. slgnabos on behalf c i the EPA. One original copy wilt be returned to the
other agency after acceptance.
EPA lAG AdmnlnlsVation Office (for ad . 1 Inl ll .U s assistance)
EPA Program 0111.. (for t.chnlcai assistance)
29. Organlallon / Aidrao
US ENV1RONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
GRANTS MANAGEMENT SECTION., 3PM71
841 CHESThUT BLDG
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107
30. Organ tion / Address
U. S. EPA, REGION ill
HAZARDOUS WASTE MGMT DIV
841 CHESThUT BLDG
PHILA PA 19107
Ceilm i c ition
All signers cermy that the statements mad. on thIs form and all attachments thereto irs tnae,
accurate, and cosçl.t.. Signers acknowledge that any knowingly fals, or mIsleading statement
may be ounisliable by ftn. or hitorisonment or both under aoolIcable law.
Or ” n Official on Behalf of the Environm.ntal Prntsction Agency Program Office
31. cigeasis
, ) ,7 f) ,‘
( j j w (
Typed NarnS and Tile
ABRAHAM FERDAS, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
OFFiCE OF SUPEPFUND PROGRAM
Date
-
/ I )/ ‘ Z
Action Official on Behalf of the EnvIronmental Protection Agency
Z )
Typed Name and Tile
WILUAM T. W1SNIEWSKI
ARA FOR POUCY &MANAGMENT
I o.
,
1
mci ii on aertair or umer agency
pee rianne sac ties
MARY C. YOUNG
Chief. B idg & Manpow .
gem
(
. signature
Aullloll ,,g C
-------
____________________________ _________________________________ P.g.dofe
PA lAG ldSinfflca on Numbst
Part IV Acceptance Conditions (continued) DW96943596010
& SpeeI Cond) ons (co.i wsd)
must be supported by site- and activity-specific cost documentation. The USACE will
organize and retain in a site file documentation of costs by site and activity (e.g. vouchers,
billing statements, evidence of payment, audit reports) as follows:
a. Direct Costs
- Payroll timesheets or timecards to support hours charged to a
particular site, induding the signature of the employee and/or the
employee’s supervisor.
- Travel - travel authorizations (including purpose of trip), local travel
vouchers, travelers reimbursement vouchers, carrier bills
(including airline tickets), government owned vehicle bills,
appropriate receipts for hotel, car rental, etc.. proof of payment
Proof of payment is satisfied by providing a copy of the
accomplished SF1166 1 Voucher and Schedule of Payment” or
equivalent.
• Contractor services - copies of contracts, requests for proposals
(RFPs), detailed evaluation of contractor bids, contractor invoices,
USACE project officer approval of invoices, proof of payment.
Proof of payment is satisfied by providing a copy of the
accomplished SF1166 or equivalent.
- Supplies and Equipment. EPA authorization to purchase non-
expendable property of $1,000 or more, vendor invoices, proof of
payment, and hourly records of equipment use, when applicable.
- Any other direct costs not induded in the above cate9ones.
b. Indirect Costs
if indirect costs are not calculated by the USACE accounting
system, a worksheet showing calculations of indirect costs charged to a
site will be retained by the USACE
Un this lAG, the USACE certifies: 1) that any indirect costs
included in billings to EPA represent, in accordance with GAO principles,
indirect costs that are funded out of the performing agenc s currently
available appropriations and that bear a significant relationship to the
performing of the service c c work, cc 2) that statutory authority exists for
charging other than these costs of performance. If an audit determines
that any direct or indirect costs charged to EPA are unallowable, EPA will
be notified immediately following the resolution of the audP and EPA will
be aedfted for those costs .
2. Reporting Requirements
a. The USACE will provide monthly progress reports to the RPM listed on the
lAG form containing:
-------
_________________ _______________________________________ PS 5 S 5015
EPA AG ld.inansa on Num j
Part IV — Acceptance Conditlone (continued) DW96943596010
. Sp.di CondI onu , (cos% mIsd)
• Site name and lAG number.
- Summary of work performed.
- Estimate of the percentage of project completed.
- Accounting of funds expended during the reporting period and on
the project to date, which indudes budget category cost
breakdown.
- Summaries of all change orders and claims made on the contract
during the reporting period. Attach copies of all change orders as
appendix.
• Summaries of all contacts with representatives of the local
community, public interest groups, or State government during the
reporting period.
- Summaries of all problems or potential problems encountered
during the reporting period.
- Projected work for the next reporting period.
b. The USACE will submit a completed and certified Request for
Reimbursement (SF1080) and a copy of the monthly progress report to the
EPA Financial Management Center, Cincinnati, containing, as appropriate,
USACE cost by budget category identified by the site, site-specific account
number, and lAG number.
C. USACE will provide a final inventory of property, within 30 days of project
completion, describing the condition of each item and requesting
disposition instructions. If the duration of the project is greater than one
year, USACE w II provide an annual inventory of all property acquired by
or furnished to USACE with EPA funds.
3. CostR ery
In the event of a contemplated cost recovery action, the USACE will provide to
EPA or the Department of Justice (DOJ) a cost documentation package detailing site
specific costs and induding copies of the back up documentation. In some cases, these
requests from EPA or DOJ may require that this documentation be provided in less than
thirty days. If additional time is required to comply with a request, USACE will negotiate
with EPA or DOJ a schedule for responding. USACE wlU provide EPA with a contact for
obtaining necessary site-specific accounting information and documentation.
4. Record Retention Requirements
The USACE and its contractors Will retain the documents described in these
‘Special ConditionV for a minimum of ten years after submission of a final SF1080 for a
-------
_____________________________ _________________________________ Pig. , 0 , 8
EPA AG dsinscrlon Numb.r
Pert IV Acceptance Conditions (continued) DW96943596 010
. Sp,e4.I Cond ons Icon nu.d)
site or sites, after which the USACE and its contractors must obtain written permission
from the authorized EPA award official before disposing of any of the records.
5. Project Specific Conditions
a. The USACE Will schedule and invite (with a two week notice), the EPA
RPM to participate in contractor meetings in which scope of the project
and/or progress is discussed.
b. The USACE will invite the EPA RPM to participate in the contractor
selection process, as appropriate.
c. The USACE will have final approval authority for RA bids, shop drawings
and contract modifications (with 15% contingency fund limitation).
d. Upon request, the USACE will, in a timely manner, submit to the EPA
RPM all final negotiated contracts and contract modifications with budget
information.
e. The USACE personnel and its contractors will have the appropriate safety
training and be involved in a medical monitoring program as specified in
29 CFR Part 1910; 51 CFR 45663-45675; and Section 125(e) of CERCLA,
as amended.
f. EPA will provide indemnification of USACE contractors for extraordinary
risk to the extent that CERCLA funds are available in accordance with the
EPNUSACE Memorandum for th Record dated 11 April1983.
g. Prior to contract award for a remedial action project the USACE will submit
to the EPA RPM a Quality Assurance Management Plan.
h. The USACE will have final authority, with EPA comment, for approving
Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs), Sampling and Malysis Plans
(SAPs) which reflect environmental sampling and laboratory analysis, and
Health and Safety Plans (HASPs).
i. All project deliverables will be reviewed by appropriate USACE and EPA
personnel wIthin 30 days. Shortened time frames may be appropriate in
ceses expedited schedules.
j. The USACE will provide on-site inspections of contractor performance.
The USACE will keep a daily log of all activities occuning on site and
submit the log to the RPM upon request
k. The USACE will provide weekly teleconference construction/design status
updates to the RPM.
6. Audits
-------
__________________________________ _______________________________________ p . 9 .
PA L Q Idimificidofi Numbs,
Part IV — Acceptance Conditions (continued) DW96943596O1o
. Condl ons ( mth asd)
a. Certain agencies are required by CERCLA, as amended, to perform
annual audits of transactions invoMng the Superfund. The USACE may
also be required to perform annual audits. Cost documentation must be
available for audit or verification upon request of the DOD Inspector
General.
b. If an audit determines that any direct or indirect cost charged to EPA are
unallowable, EPA will be notified immediately following the resolution of
the audit and EPA will be credited with those costs.
7. Other EPA Involvement
a. Payment to USACE contractors is contingent upon receipt of a USACE
certified payment request. Reimbursement to USACE for in-house costs is
contingent upon receipt of a USACE certified reimbursement request (SF
1080). Final project payments for specific contracts and in-house cost
shall be reviewed and approved by the EPA Regional program office.
b. EPA will hold title to all property acquired with Superfund monies. EPA
will provide the USACE with property disposal instructions upon
termination of the IAG and receive fair-market value for any property
disposed of or used for non-Superfund activities.
8. Minority Business Utilization
In accordance with CERCLA, as amended (P.L 99-499), Section 105(f),
any Federal agency awarding contracts, grants or cooperative agreements utilizing
Superfund monies shall consider the availability of minority contractors for
participation in contracts. This indudes, but is not limited to: contracts.
subcontracts SCA 8(a) awards and any subagreements.
The USACE, as a recipient of Superfund monies under this LAG, must
report annually on minority contractor participation and efforts taken to encourage
(outreath endeavors) the utilization of minority firms.
Reports will be forwarded annually (by November 15th) to the Minority
Business Ev*erprise Coorcfinator, EPA-Region 3, Grants Management Section
(3PM71). flepoits will be submitted on EPA Forms 6005-3, TM Superfund Minority
Contractors UtILr aJion Report”, and 6005-3/., “Superfund Minority Contractors
Utilization Report - Part r (copies attached).
9. As a recipient of monies under this LAG, the USACE must ensure to the
fullest extent posrible that at least 8% of funds for prime or subcontracts and
subgrants for services are made available to businesses owned or controlled by
socially and economically disadvantaged indMduals, women-owned businesses,
and Historically Black, Colleges and Universites. (DBE)
The USACE must submit a report to EPA showing the actual amount and
percentage of extramural funds awarded to DBEs on Forms 6005-3 and 67005-3a,
by December 15,1992. Reports should be submitted to:
-------
__________________________________ _______________________________________ Peg. i
EPA lAG ldsnUficsdo i Num
Part IV — Acceptance Conditions (continued) DW96943596010
. Sp. Ccnd ons (conWwsd)
Mr. George Mon, Senior Program Officer
Office of SrnaH and Disadvantaged
Business Utilization (A.149C)
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
‘ION: R TABLIEID: REQL USERID:
*** REQUISITION ACCTG LINE INQUIRY SCREEN ***
f IS TRANS CODE, REQ NO, LINE NO
\NS CODE: RQ
- LINE NO: 001 BFY:
BUDGET ORG:
COST ORG:
BDGT OBJ:
LAST CRC STATUS:
‘- LINE NO: BFY:
BUDGET ORG:
COST ORG:
BDGT 087:
LAST CRC STATUS:
s- LINE NO: BFY:
BUDGET ORG:
COST ORG:
BDGT 087:
LAST CHG STATUS:
APPR:
PE:
SITE/PRY:
REPT CATG:
APPR:
PE:
SITE/PRY:
REP 1 r CATG:
2T
TFA
0310R
RPIO: 03
LINE ANT:
CLOSED ANT:
OBLG ANT:
RPIO:
LINE ANT:
CLOSED ANT:
OBLG ANT:
RPIO:
ANT:
ANT:
ANT:
REQ NO: 923ARA0004
92
3ASR1O
2576
APPR:
PE:
SITE/PRY:
REPT CATG:
2,913,660.00
0.00
0.00
LINE
CLOSED
OBLG
- LOO9 HEADER CHANGE
-------
e mm ir NCTIa
NS? Prsp’ it * 1S1 4S5 Si .Ui 1 ii us i . The e .1 aa k Is iasus . .
.‘eU ULz it ! ..1U1.4 It f SS! 17P.S .1 sp tfl.d
?Ns$ yv is? Vi*M$*C SN YMI A M7 0, , Pb9i s ,o
NO 5 O aSS
0 ( ) a .u.Cw Ii uS uN?SON a
ZAG
0CsCrnPtu0 o ømO 1C?. 00001. o sc v c 3
RD DLAL ACTION FOR OPERABLE UNIT #1 at FIKE C1IDtICAL SITE, WEST VIRGINIA
NA C Q G *eTWC0NYUACT0 V(M00
U.S. ACE 1M 1 .0Y1RIO1MT.NQ .(jU
?A1 . SOAP. 0 OTMIN 1.0CM. SOtNYIFuIP
$PIC$A1. COMNIMYS OM SMI7M%ICteMi
£U.OVAMCI MOL0 11 £PP*OVAL.S 40III . St ai_ .1 Afl. .... K.Sd.Ø
M.1.a.aaCg No .o 1N nT; .1
STAFF £PPUOVAIJ
hO AtUNC
3ranc
or.
isiooDirsct
F
0*?N
L
,q, ,,fl
ØSSONL
9
LJ7 ff . ,
PWowsisIuT y CIM?1* 1 171.1
Pw.s lTIPIC.A110$
• ep40SSSV
*..,ovtouy
N a SN
NsMa?U i
Carletta Parlin I J1.. ) t(Lj
s aii -
S II P dasIL4TY óm.y
IsO I. te __ ...I —. sl .ip i b tOl. eI . ..&urLg t i hr
?M1 AMOUNT OF LU U
D SNCMOASNY a a OWLAI* 70 a
SMS5. — U_ •MS SSMS MNI ..lI
NA1 Ai, M?A i_ g..._ —
is ip AiIsss
. USN
I
I
&C 0 ?
ui
I OOI S
- - — - —
L 2 3 1 ’ !. I
I I I
: :: :
- J_
— )
I
:‘:
—
- —
SIi_
I
::
—
J..
! Sj
° 4
a :
!.I.: .’
2U.3 1L4
0
: :
0
-o
&alIs$ 711suIii I
r iAIda 141
: : i: : :
-
SIIJzI13I34l21;3N3?Uhl30I4il.tI.2I 3I f4hI ta?uSs..SI$i I$&IUIS.31t” I II
2lTIPla)31A1S R 1 olol 518 316 19’ 3 °
: :i:i: :: :i: : : : :‘ i:: :: : :
— — — • . i — — 0 — — .1 — I —
- j_ - - 1 1 1 k ’
— .. IO .I l$ Z4)
• NVI.lJS E _TTQ I i 0iMN.S?
k €
-------
DELIVERY ORDEh .OR EMERGENCY RESPONSE CLANUP SERVICES
(This delivery order is issued subject to all terms and conditions of the contract identified in Block 2)
DATE OF ORDER —
2 CONTRACT NUMBER
çP,_i Q. ’ 3
3 ORDER NUMBER OR1c!,y
.O. 13 (Red) L
4 TIME OF INITIAL ORDER (If ,ns’t,el order
was verbal)
(Specify Time Zone)
0 AM
OPM
5 DELIVERY ORDER CEILING AMOUNT (Obligated Amounts
.
- , _1 -
6 ACCOUNTING AND
APPROPRIATION DATA
Appropriation Number
Document Control No
Account Number Object Class
( f? ”x 31 5
£ ‘ ‘
7a ISSUED TO CONTRACTOR (Name. Address, and ZIP Code)
D 4
Ba ISSUED BY ORDERING OFFICE (Name. Address, end ZIP Code,
—3
7b PROGRAM MANAGER (Name and Phone Number)
?
8b EPA REGION/USCG DISTRICT Bc ZONE
!PA-3 I
7c RESPONSE MANAGER (Name and Phone Numbei)
Sd ON-SCENE COORDINATOR (Nan a and Phone Number)
J RY (1J 5!OI .-:o
9 RESPONSE LOCATION (Site Name and/or Address an d ZIP Code)
‘ . ‘r S. Jt ’ A ‘ RAV 1TE
‘o te “
.
10 CONTRACTOR REQUIRED ON SITE (Date and Time)
(Specify Time Zone) 0 AM
3! Dr BT C C 0 PM
1 ¶ REQUIRED WORK COMPLETION DATE
3’ wo ’k mys
12 STATEMENT OF WORK
The Contractor shall furnish the necessary personnel, materials. services, facilities, and otherwise do all things
necessary for or incident to the performance of the woili set forth below
1. reet lacking trtaek t eM link fence se required at aeee e roadi.
‘. .rect snow fence or eq vs1ent .ro 4 seep s .s.
3. lbta .tn 3seplee and provt na3.yss. as direet.d by OSC.
SESSION II
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
13 ORDERING OFFICER
NAME/TITLE SI A1URE / - — . ,‘ DATE
‘ IC %P2. ZICKL , PO .. ‘ I ‘ /
.1 ( i7; ( I ,
EPA Form 1900.69 (11.83 1
EMERGENCY RESPO’ SE DIVISION
* U.S. GPO 19 53—426.222/364
-------
SESSION II
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
‘4,,’
3 2 — J 3-0 13
AMENDMENT OF soLIc:TAT:oN/ c3IFIcAr:oN OF CONTRACT
MODIFICATION 03
?age I f
1. CONTRACT ED CCDE
2. AMENDMENT/Moo:FICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE
Three (3)
4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If app ca:e
6. ISSUED BY 7. ADMINISTERED BY
(If other than It.. 6)
Code:
Code:
Environmental Protection Agency
Emergency Response Branch
401 N Street, SW (PM 214-F)
Washington, DC 20460
8.
NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR
9k.
AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION
NO.
(No., Street, County, State
and Zip Code)
99.
DATED (See It.. it)
O.H. Materials, Corp
16406 U.S. Route 224 East
10k.
MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.
P.O. Box 551
6893-03—013
Findlay, OH 45839—0551
109.
DATED (See It.. 13)
7/26/84
Code: Facility:
ii.
THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO
AMENDMENTS
OF
SOLIICITATIONS
- —
is
The above n soitcitation amended at set forth in Item 14. The hour and
date specified for pt of Offers ( I is extinded, ( 3 is not extended. Offerors
must acknowledge r of this amendment prior to the hour and data specified in the
solicitation or as by on. of the following methods: (a) By completing Items B and
15, and returning I copy of the amendment; (b) By acknovledqing receipt of this amendment
on each copy of the offer submitted; or Cc) by separate latter or telegram which includes
a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO
BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE
SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you
desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or
letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this
amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.
12. ACCOUNTING
AND APPROPRIATION
DATA
(If
required)
68/20X8145
4T!A03RE42 EJ0006
25.35
$368.86 Q Q 1 I
-------
.4 , .
k?PRC’1! 9Y ois 3/84, FAR (48 CFR S3.2:4. CH !XCZPT:oN TO !A JDAR FORM 30
MODIFICATION 03
Page 2 :
AMENDMENT OF SOLIC:TATON/M0DIFIcATI ON OF CONTRACT
.3. THIS :T!M APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACT/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE
CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.
A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authorLty) THE CHANG!! !E
FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10*.
B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE
CHANGES (such as changes in paying offIce, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORT:
IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAT 43.103(9).
[ X J C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:
ARTICLE XV - DEFINIT!ZATION OF DELIVERY ORDERS
I D. OTHER (Specify type of sodification and authority)
E. IMPORTANT: contractor ( I is not, ( X I is required to sign this docuient and
return ___L.._ copies to the issuing oVflce.
14. DE5cRIeTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section heading., including
solicitation/contract subject satter where feasible).
Except as provided a, all tsras and conditions of the docuient referenced in Item 9A
or 10*, as heretofo ged, iains unchanged and in full force and effect.
15k. NAME AND TITL O SIGWU 16k. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER
(Type or Pria%) - (Typ. or Print)
James S. Walker
Vice P id p DAVID R. YOUNGER
Contracting Officer
159. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 163. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(S ature of person authorized to sign) (Signature 9’ Contt’ictinq Officer)
I5C. D j E IgNEpg 8 g 16C. DATE SIGNED APR 0 IE
-------
A ”) ’ V o:RM 3/94, FAR (49 C!R 53. :4 :: Exc!PT: N o S J:ARD FORM 30
‘ : at: n No 03
e ..Ie y 0r e 93-O3—Ci3
:‘a;e 3 cf 3
The purpose 3f this modification is to set forth the final total cost of ei.ve /
Order 6993—03-013.
1. The final total cost of the Delivery Order is S16.054.14. Whereas the Contractor ha
already received payments tota1l nq 516.054.14, there is no payment due between the
part es. The Contractor’s latest invoice shall be considered the Completion tnvoice as
spec f ed in ARTICLE XIII, SOBMISSION OF INVOICES, Section F.
2.
In consideration of this modification agreed to herein as a complete final paywnt
for the contractors immediate waste removal activities at the Maryland Sand and Grav L
Site at Elkton, MD, the contractor hereby releases the Government from any and all
liability under the contract for further payment, except in those circumstances spectf:ed
in ARTICLE XII. CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT, Section 0.
-------
i*I(’C £P/&W’7 -c ô - WA- c c v -
FJ DENG: CERCt .A TES WtJ ER: 03 WORI( ASs:c vr : L cR: C030 5
CONTRACT *:6801-7331 MND N’r NTJt ER: 00000
ACCT *: CONTRACTOR:Ca flp Dresser PRIORITY: Expedite
sITE/FAcILITy NAME: Rentokil
LOCATION: Hertrjco County ST: VA REGION/MQ: 03
EPP SITE/rAC ILITY ID *: NPL SITE: T RCRA FACILITY:
CERCLA ONLY:FMS SITE/SPILL ID *: 3B .4 CERCLIS OP UNIT *:
CERCLIS/EV s1T/ 1TORCEZ T ACTIVITY/NSS: 2101- L OL-NS :
PURPOSE: Initiate New Work Assignment
TASK TYPE: Responsible Party search TASK NUMBER: 01
COt2IZNT: I. Perform PP Search as per attached SOW.
2. Finish Phase I before scarcing Phase II.
Expedite Justification: Consent Order signed one year ago. PRP Search never done
Co find ocher responsibLe parties.
BASE PERIOD OPTION PERIOD
tOE COST/FEE tOE COST/FEE
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 0 0 0 0
THIS ACTION: 0 0 500 26.500
TOTAL: 0 0 500 26,500
PERIOD OF PERFORZ NCE PERIOD OF PERZDR!O.NCE
FRM: / / FR?!: / /
TO: / / TO: 06/29/89
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW: 5
REFER ZCE INTORZ9TION: X ATTACHED — TRANSMITTED SEP3RATELY — PICK JP FROM
REPORTING REQUIR ITS:X BRIEFING — LETTER REPORT YINAL REPORT OThER( P
INITIATOR: WO ASSI
ADDRESS:841 Chestnut Bldg., Phila., PA
(SIGN) __________________________ DATE:0l/05/89
NAME: Randy turge FTS *:215—597—0978 OFT-NET *:215-597-O
APPROVAL: RGNL PROJ OFFICER OR HQPO
• ADDRESS:841 Chestnut Bldg., Phila., PA 1
(SIGN) f . 49 w ,it ) D ATE:0l/05/89
NAME: e ‘SpiáSu,ak FTS *:2l5—597—8183 OFT—NET *:215597—8
CONTRACTING OFFICER
(SIGN) 4 Q ft 1 i’A 4 4c . DATE: / 1/3/f f
NAME: Ba ar / kubrski (Effective Date)
CONTRACTOR AC OWLEDG €NT OF RECEIPT
(SIG ThTURE AND TITLE)
(TITLE)________________________ DATE: / /
(SIGN) _______________
SESSION U
PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
-------
Rentokil
Henrico County, Virginia
Backgroi id
The Rentokil site (Virginia Wo Preserving Division) is Located
north st of Rictmcnd, Virginia, in Heririco Coin ty. The site is s tuated
over nine acres near 1-95, 2.4 miles st of the Parhani ad exit at the
intersection of Oakvie Avenue and Peyton Streets. The site s proposed
for inclusion on Update 6 of the National Priorities Cist (NPr..) in
January 1987. c’bod preserving continues at this date.
The affected site inc1 es a rectangular area of 4.96 acres owned by
Rentolcil and an adjacent 5-acre site leased by Rentokit frau the Riciriond
:.and Corporation, an affiliate of the Rict’r nd, Fredericksburg and tanac
(RP&P) Railroad. The land s originally held in private o rship and
Leased to the TPICO Corporation. The TACO Corporation and Taylor-Coiquit
re the parent caupanies of the Virginia ‘.tbod Preserving Caupany which
built the original plant in 1957. PF&P bought the land and later sold the
4.96 acre plot to the T’ Corporation which had becau.e the sole o r of
Virginia c od Preserving. Rentokil bought the T Corporation in 1.974,
thus making Virginia od Preserving a division of Rentokil.
Since 1982 the plant has only treated od with c wauated-co r-arse-
nate ((XA) in a pressure treating process using stea’. Previously, ta—
chlorophenol (PCP) • creosote, chrausted-rinc-arsenate ( A), xylen and
ai nl phosphates and sulfates wsre used as treating agents as wsll.
Mineral spirits and $2 fual oil re also usei. In the P process. Mrr—
niiiu thiocyanate s an a&litive in the a uaniiau phosphate. An nillned
lagoon s timed to collect stewster frau the process until the late 1960s.
In 1976 or 1977, 1,109 to 1,499 po .r is of off—spec wss buried in the
northeast quadrant of the site.
Studies have indicated contaninated gro x wster soil and sediment.
The vironnental Protection Agency (EPA) CE LA forc nt is pirsuing
a Responsible Party c1eant of the site.
Project
Identify alt tential1y Responsible Parties (PRPS) associated with
the oie srehip and oparatlon of the site as ll as those associated with
any pouthla generation, transportation, and disposal of wsste at the site.
C A 104( a) tatters shalt he used as necessary. The contractor shall
draft letters only after a review of existing letters and replies. All
104 Ce) responses should b analyzed to determine whether 1.04 (a) responses
agree or disagree with the info tion obtained fra n interviews and fran
doc ts. Discrepancies should he noted.
-------
-2—
The Con actor shall maintain eekly verbal cai unication with the
PA prunary contact regarding tne process of the investigations and inter-
views and shall su ni t cnonthly wr i. tten reports. For each pnase, the
Contractor shall present the PRP information requested by EPA in a
c nprehensive written sutinary that discusses the investigation performed,
investigation results and recaiinandations for additional investigation in
draft and final form. The reports shall ne fully docunented attributing
all information presented to specific sources. Interviews done by the
Private Investigator must be attached to the final report with no
alterations by the contractor. Mark on the cover of the report that it
was prepared in anticipation of litigation.
Use a t phase approach. The tasks of each phase are identified
below:
Phase I
Task
1. PRP W and Address Update
Obtain current PRP na s and addresses enabling EPA to send C R A
104(e) C etters/Notice (.ettezs. Collect the following for e corporate
PRP: current corporate address, registered agent, msrgers, r changes
and dissolutione.
2. PRP Status and History
Develop background irifo nation on canpanies or individuals identified
as PRPs, thus enabling EPA to identify successor or parent c npariy PRPs,
correspond with PRP and conduct finarrial assessnant of PRPs. Corporate
information should tncli e the date and state of irrorporation, whether or
not corporate PRPs currently exist, the fate of inactive current
mailing addresses (facility, headquarters and registered agent) and parent
or successor c mpanies. Information obtained for individuals and unirror-
porated c paiues should irrlude their current location, their association
with other PRPS (c pany officer for another PRP) and their involv nt with
the site. For ex ple: determine when, how and under what terms the TACO
Corporation and Taylor-Colquilt acquired the Virginia Wood Preserving Cas-
pany. Get details on the aquisition of T Corporation and/or Virginia
Wood Preserving C pariy by Rentokil, Irr. Also determine if any liability
exists on part of Southern Wood Piedeont Caspany and on the part of
zi’r Gri U.
3. Deed and Title Search
Conduct a deed and title search to obtain certified copies of deeds
and Leases. The search snouid go back to immediately before the first
industrial usage of the site . Also a title tree and tax map should be
-------
—3—
ncl x ed. Boundaries rf the si = snould be drawn to scale n the tax i ap.
title abstract clearly delineating datES of ownership and o rat ion shall.
be inc1i ed. I ecause there iS contamination off—site, obtain na s and
addresses of owners and operators of the si (s) adjacent to Rentokil.
Clarify the relationship of the Richu nd Land Corporation and the Ric!rnond
E’redericksburg Potanac Railroad CaT pany as it affects the previous owner-
ship of the site and current ownership of adjacent and/or leased property.
4. Financial Status
The contractor will assess the financial status of a PRP in order
to assist EPA in determining a PRP’s ability to pay. Copies of inn and
Bradstreet reports will be cecured through the EPA primary contact.
Phase II
Task
I. Agency Record Collection and File Review
The contractor shall locate and obtain copies of all goverri nta1.
records pertinent to the site and relevant to the PRP Search. The docu nts
are to su l nt those contained in Region III files. The i docun ts
obtained as wsll as those already contained in Region It! files shall be
reviewsd, analyzed and incorporated into this search report. Develop a
list of files reviewsd or considered for review. If the file wss revie d,
provide a description of the file’s contents and list the contact(s) who
is (are) in charge of the file.
The folLowing are examples of the types of files to be inc1 .i ed in this
search:
- RCRA, P/SI/HRS package and Fckardt survey information files
— dia articles
- violative history records with goverrii ntal authorities
- Virginia, 5DM, Bureau of :lazardous Waste files which investigated
allegations that the site wss a hazardous wsste dunp
- State files regarding an dnplo lwe who charged that there re
driane burled on—site.
2. History of Operation at tha Site
Review the site history information contained in Region II! files.
Interview goverrr ntal sources of information. Oversee the Private
Investigator’ s interviews of non-goverrrmmnta I . sources and PRP5, and incor-
porate the information contained in these interviews into this section of
the report. Analyze and incorporate all relevant information on site
operational history gathered fran interviews and docunents.
-------
—4—
Information shall be arranged :n c, onological order for each opera-
tional tima piriod aid include “housekeeping” practiced during each period,
hazardous substances used during each period, disposal practices used for
each period aid who designed then, officers involved in day to day operations
for each period, equipI nt utili d for each period, lists of pLo ees
and their addresses for each period. The site operational history section
should begin with the first industrial use of the property which EPA has
reason to believe s with the Laurel Manufacturing C npany. EPA would
like this confirn d. Look for any written contractual agresiwnts and
leases on site property.
Secure relevant site records to su ldmant what is contained in the
I gional files fran the ficns which operated at tbe site. levant records
would include those concerning ste generation, wsste disposal nethods
practiced at the site and a history of goverrinental enforc nt actions
at the site. ! levant records would also include the minutes of Board of
Director’s n etings of the corporations operating the site, inspection
reports, wsste disposal permits and correspondence involving the site
o a er. It is requested that particular attention be given to allegations
regarding the site being used as a hazardous wsste d np aid regarding an
snplo ee’s report of druns being buried on-site.
3. Private Investigator
A Private Investigator (Pt) will 10 interviews of non—
goverrinental sources of information and of PRPS. The qualified Private
Investigator will work with the technical su ort of the CPA primary contact,
Assistant gional counsel and CPA Civil Investigator.
— After the sub-contract has been awsrded, a inesting is needed with
the & priaaxy contact, Assistant gional Counsel aid the EPA
Civil mvestigator to review site history, available PRP inforrna—
tian, aid results of previous interviews aid to identify individuals
to be intervlewsd.
- The Pt will locate these parties and interview than.
- The Pt will follow-up on leads provided by initial intervi *-cs
and contact will be established with those parties.
- The Pt will, if possible, develop information ci i an anplo e’s
report of druns being buried on—site.
-------
—
The Pt will. if possible de:elop inforrnation on the allegation
that the site was being used as a hazardous waste d .znp.
The Pt will corroborate and ipp1 nent the site oparational history
information regarding volune and nature of wastes disposed of at
the site contained in Regional files througn interviews of present
and past nployees, officers and directors paying particular atten-
tion to the points enurierated above under Task 3, Phase II The
Pt should pay particular attention to identifying the parties
who designed the disposal. syst n(s) and housekeeping practices
utilized at the site by the different operating canpanies. klso
if these sane wastes ware disposed of at other sites. please
state the locations of these other sites. EPA will furnish the
Pt with aerial and plant pnotograpns which the Pt will, bring
with hiiu/1 er to the interviews to pinpoint disposal locations
and points of waste generation.
-------
1 1/3
TEC} JICAL ENTORCEME T SUPPORT AT HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
FUNDING: CERCLA TES NUMBER: 03 WORK ASSIGNMENT NUMBER: CO 3065
INDEX:03CO3’ 03O65 CONTRACT *:68—01- 331 A1 DMENT NUMBER: 00002
ACCT *: CONTRACTOR:Cainp Dr mser PRIORITY: Normal
SITE/FACILITY ! 1 J Rentokil
LOCATION: I ST: v c REGION/HQ: 03
EPA SITE/FACILITY ID *: VADO7] .O40752 NPL SITE: N RCRA FACILITY: N
CERCLA ONLY:FMS SITE/SPILL ID *: 3BN4 CERCLIS OP UNIT *: 00
CERCLIS/EV T/ JFORCEMENT ACTIVITY/NSS: 2101- I 1701-MS I NNS-
PURPOSE: Closeout Work Assignment
TASK TYPE: Responsible Party Search TASK NUMBER: 01
CO?*IENT: The purpose of this aiitendinent is to closeout this work assignment.
Uncompleted tasks have been transferred to TES VII - WA *C03036.
BASE PERIOD OPTION PERIOD
LOE COST/FEE LOE COST/FEE
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED: 0 0 500 27,50?
THIS ACTION: 0 0 0 0
TOTAL: 0 0 500 21,507
PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE
FRN: / / FRM: 01/13/89
TO: / / TO: / /
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW: 0
REFERENCE INFORMATION: ATTACHED TRANSMITTED pApA y ,y - PICK UP FROM
REPORTING REQUIRENENT$: BRIEFING LETTtX REPORT — FIMAL REPORT — OTHER
I NI TIATO : WORN AS$ GNM 4T MAMAGER
U — 4’ ADDRESS:841 Chestnut Bldg., Phila., PA 19]
(SIGN) I DATE:07/26/89
NAME: Randy (j Stur J FTS *:215—597—0978 OFF—NET t:ZlS_ 597 _0c
APPROVAL: RNL PRQJ OFFICER OR HQPO
c ADDRESS:841 Chestnut Bldg., Phila., PA 19]
(SIGN) ( DATE:07/26/89
NAME: EThne S jewaic FTS *:215-597—8183 OFT—NET *:215-5978
CONTRACTING OFFICER / CDMIFPC
(SIGN)____________________ DATE: CONTRACTS
NAME: Mictl’ael Riley 7 (Effective Date) 8 %989
CONTRACTOR ACKNOWLEDGDIENT OF RECEIPT
(SIGNATURE AND TITLE) RECEIVE
onak Se”oViCfl
(TITLE) : ce. reS 1Ceflt DATE: ////Py
(SIGN) OR G N*IL
-------
I COS CENTER I TAT — CONTRACT 68.01 -7367 2 NO
TECHNICAL DIRECTION DOCUMENT (TDD)
OHM EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND 03881018
SPILL PREVENTION PROGRAM 2018
03 2A TYPE
ROY F. WESTON INC.
______________ _________________ ________ ___________ _________________ 11
r RIOR TY 4.SOURCEOFFUNDS S EPASITE 0 6.COMPLETIONOATE 8 REFERENCEINFO
E0010 03/31/89
HIGHI1 ) CERCLA (1)
MEDIUM (2) 5A EPA NAME 7. OVERTIME APPROVED YES NO
LOw (3) ATTACHED
FIKE CHEMICAL YES NO PICK UP
9 GENERAL TASK DESCRIPTION FIKE/ARTEL CHEMICAL NPL REMOVAL PROJECT SUPPORT,
SAMPLING SUPPORT, AIR MONITORING SUPPORT, DATA RESEARCH,
PHUTU DOCUM TATIUN NLU(V, L ANAWUA cU. , WV
9A ESTIMATEDCOST $ 325000.00 ESTIMATEOHOURS 5000
10 SPECIFIC ELEMENTS 11 INTERIM DEADLINES
PREPARE SAMPLING PLAN, CONDUCT AIR MONITORING, / /
PROVIDE ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICE, / /
REVIEW PRP PLANS AND SPECS., PREPARE CONTINGENCY PLAN, / /
PREPARE POLREPS, DOCUMENT ON-SITE ACTIVITIES, / /
IMPLEMENT SAMPLING PLAN, CONDUCT MULTIMEDIA SAMPLING / /
CONDUCT ON-SITE CONTRACTOR MONITORING / /
ORGANIZE SITE DOCUMENTATION FILES / /
PROVIDE CHEMICAL TECHNICAL SERVICE / /
120 DESIRED REPORT FORM FORMAL REPORT LETTER REPORT FORMAL BRIEF
OTHER (SPECIFY)
13 COMMENTS ASSIGNOR: GERALD HESTON TAT TO
COORDINATE ACTIVITIES W/FAS, USCG/AST & OSC/OSCS. TAT TO CONTINUE
TO PROVIDE OSC/OSCS W/ON AND OFF SITE SUPPORT.
14 AUTHORIZING OPO HESTON, GERALD
f &xf4 / -taitl
IS. DATE
j,-, -rr
16. ECEIVEOBY BRIGGS, TERRY
ACCEPTED ACCEPTED CEPTIONS REJECTW
( RE
17. DATE:
-
lie. DESCRIPTOR 29622103881018 2018111FIKE CHE? -- -
SESSION It
3C —ZPt C y PRESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
4 — — w C ________
X I
-------
03
cv c;Q
6801 7357
RCPORT.P G Et..EMENT -
L T003 04/01/89
MAP’4CE EVALLJATIOPd CATEGORY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COMPLETION
PERFORMANCE OBSERVATION REPORT PART I
ROY F wESTON INC
R P QX NU OF ‘OU
TO 09/28/89 11551
REMOVALS (FUNDED) CERCLA 104C FIKE CHEMICAL
OESCRIPTON OF CONTRACTOR OeSeMVATION By NAMEtTITLE FELL INGER, JOHN
,.-Iu,.1O 0388101ac —
I 2 563 I.ic 1
FORMAL REOCQ-
LCrTE EPQqv
ORVAL 3RIC I, .
ISPECi ’. i
UM1 ( QF REPORT U Ut V TlQN
TAT HAS CONTINUED TO PROVIDE OUTSTANDING SUPPORT TO EPA CLEAN-UP EFFORTS AT
FIKE. THEY ASSISTED IN THE METHY MERCAPTAIN TRANSFER BY PROVIDING SAFETY
INFORMATION/DATA AND DIRECTLY MONITORED THE OPERATIONS BY PROVIDING THEIR
LEVEL A TEAM. TAT CONTINUED TO SUPPORT SITE CLEAN UP IN THE LABORATORY CON
I TAINER CRUSHING OPERATIONS BY REVIEWING THE PROPOSED WORK PLAN AND BY PROVI
DING A LEVEL A AIR MONITORING TEAM. THE NEED AND WORTH OF THE LEVEL A TEAM
\1—i=- -
Vu 0
090 SIGNATuRE (INTERIMI
u•TI “OOT•$ COC OffiAfO
..T, OC v
ILUI rAy v
C I(N Z COp
PUoj c? Ol C(l Co.,
•0 co.yaacn,. Q p.CI Co.’
GOI.O( .m0o o.o ,NTt N co.vi
-------
PRESENTER: dARLENE ARNOLD
STATI OF WEST VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
OIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
1260 Greenbner Street
GASTON CAPERTON Chartaslon. West Virginia 25311 J. EDWARO HAMRICI( Iii
Governor Director
January 30. 1990 LARRY W. GEORGE
Deputy Director
Mr. Bill Hagel
USEPA Region Ill
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Dear Mr. Hagel
Here is the quarterly report for the Superfund Agreement for
Fike/Artel site. The reporting period is October 1, 1989 to December 31,
1989.
The following activities took place during this period and I
was involved with it.
- A detailed inventory of all tanks, process vessels, process
equipment, process lines and contaminated materials was conducted.
Asbestos sampling of these items was completed.
- Sampling of soils in the process area of the site was completed.
- Reconnaissance, sampling and smoke testing of the sewer
system was completed.
- Groundwater, surface water and sediment data was validated
and reduced.
- Training in the operation of CST was conducted.
- Sampling methods determination for waste area was conducted.
I joined the Superfund program on October 1, 1989. I attended
two seminars since then, one in Sacramento, “Landdisposal Restriction,”
and the other in Philadelphia. “Immobilization Technology.” I also
attended a class in computer “Introduction to PC and Controlling your
PC.’,
I will visit the Fike/Artel site once a week during the Remedial
Investigation Feasibility study. I have attended the community awareness
board meeting twice a month and will continue to do so.
An IBM P5/2 Model 30 286 has been ordered.
-------
Mr. Bill Hagel
January 30, 1990
Page Two
I am presently being paid out of the SC Account (8311-26).
The Division of Natural Resources will change the account number
to federal account number 7930-12. This will be effective the next
quarterly report.
Sincerely.
Riad Tannir, Engineer
Site Investigation and Response
RT/dw
Enclosure
-------
. ENVIRONMENTA!.. PROTECTION AGENCY
Pig.
EPA ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT / AMENDMENT
PART I - & sISTANCE NOT1FICAnON INFORMAT iON
I. ASSISTANCE ID NO.
V003481.O1.0
12. LOG NUM8EA
03 -v .000
3. DATE OF AWARD
SE 27 ;gq
4. M NC DATL -
‘I
6 AGREEMENT TYPE . T 6.PAYMENTME T HOO
X l 0 0 68130349
GuM f
$ •.v .-’ P.s 1 , . u 7. TYPE OF ACTION
N/A NEW
1.
I RECIPIENT
wv DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
c DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
I 1900 KANAWHA BLVD. E
CHARLESTON, WV 25305
E
9. PAYEE
SAME
N EIN NO. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
T 55600076381 03
10. RECIPIENT TYPE
STATE
O II. PROJECT MANAGER AND TELEPHONE NO.
R B DOUGLAS STEELE
0
(304) 348.2745
12. CONSULTANT (WWT 0 1* 1
N/A
13. ISSUING OFFICE (CITY! STATE) 14. EPAPPOJECT / STME OFFICER AND TELEPHONE NO.
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTiON AGENCY L ROSENBERG, PROJECT OFFICER
A GRANTS MANAGEMENT SECTiON
U S EPA. REGION 3, 3PM71 (2151 5974173
N 841 CHESTNUT BLDG
I PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107
15. EPA CONGRESSIONAL LIAISON & PHONE 16. STATE APPL ID (cI : I?. SCIENCE FIELD I 9. P!.P
L PAT GASKJNS, (202) 382-5184 NA ‘ N/A
19. STATUTORY AUTHORITY
CERCLA SEC 104 AMENDED BY SARA
20. REGULATORY AUTHORITY
40 CFR PART 35, SUBPART
o
21. STE 2 + 3 5 STEP 3IwWTC. ’l v11.m wbOf
“---‘-—“
N/A
0. Y.....L....J Ps,... . .
22. PROJECT TITLE AND DESCRIPTION SUPER UND SUPPORT AGENCY COOrERA11VE AGREEMENT
FIKE/ARTEL CHEMICAL SITE
MULTI-ACTIVITY
23. PROiFCT LOCATION s - w “
COy P .c.
NITRO
C
KANAW)WPUTNAM
0
WV 3RD
24. ASSISTANCE PROGRAM cvoA Pvsr & T 68.802
Hazardous Substance Response Tru Fund
26. PROJECT PERIOD
10/01/89 to 03131/91
26. BUDGET PERIQO
10101/8910 03/31/91
27. COMMUNITY POPULATION 26. TOTAL BUDGET PERIOD COST
IWW? C .dãsm N/A 73.193.
29. TOTAL PROJECT PERIOO COST
73,193
FUNDS
FORMER AWARD
TWS cfl
AMENDED TOTAL
3a EPAAa. ThIsA os
0
71,258
71,258
3 EPA Ie . il,I A
0
0
0
31. Un pso PñY.SS
0
0
0
0
0
0
3 4 a.CC4 . .b ..
0
1,935
1.935
31. $S Ciui ,D, uu
0
0
0
c&C l bu .o
0
0
0
3 ?. 0 1w, CouiV.b,sti ,
0
0
0
, 0 73,193 73,193
31. Pegs.. EI.iu P ’V Ap gi e, ot 1 1.s 0 C. sl 10. 0usd C . I C
P
C
(See c ThflUa1IOfl page)
EPA Fa,m 310020* OI. $42). R 5p4 5 5 4P& P ‘ ‘ .IA,I,C. O,ii d l 110
SESStON It
P’ ESENTER: CHARLENE ARNOLD
-------
39. F I S C A L (continued)
She Name Program Ei.m.m P1 Approprtallon Ooc. Co.itrol ACcount Number Ob$.ci
- Number Chers
00)
FIKE(RA CU#1) 01) TFAY9A 8 68 20X8145 RR0246 9TFAO3SR1O 41 85
FIKE(RI/FS OU#2) 02) TFAY9A 89 68.20X8145 RR0246 YTFAO3SL1O 41 85
-------
SP€CIA . Cor4OIT,0r45
PART IV
NOTE: The Agr..m.m must be completed In duplicate sled the Original returned to the Grant. Administration Division for Headquarter,
awards and to the appropriate Grams Administration Office for Stat. and local awards wIthin 3 calendar waebs after raccipt or
within any extension of time as may i granted by EPA.
Rec.lpl eta written refusal or failure to return the property .x.cuted document within the prescelbed time, may result In ties
withdrawal of the offer by the Agency. Any change to the Aqrearn.m by the recipient subsequent to the document being signed
by the EPA Award Official, which the Award Official determines to materially alter the Agrsarnanl, shall void the Agrsenecet.
OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE
The United Statee of America, acting by and through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), hereby offer,
asslstanc./.mendm.m to tie. WV DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES for 97.0 SOt aS cost.
REcIPIENT ORGAN T1ON
incurred up to and not exceedIng 5 71.258 for the support of appruved budget period effort described
ASSISTANCE AMOUNT
In application (including all application inodlflcetions) cited is item of this Agrumam
09/05/89 SUPERFUND SUPPORT AGENCY COOPERATIVE AGREEMEN . teersite by reference .
DATE AIlD TiTLE
ISSUING OFFICE AWARD APPROVAL OFFICE
ORGANIZATION / ADDRESS ORGAN ATION / ADDRESS
GRANTS MANAGEMENT SECTION REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
U S EPA, REGION 3, 3PM71 U S EPA, REGION 3, 3RAOO
841 CHESTNUT BLDG 841 CHESTNUT BLDG
PHILADELPHIA, PA . 19107 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107
T j UNITED STAT S Of AMERICA SY ThE U.S ENViRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
iii TYPED NAME AND mu EDWIN B. ERICKSON DATE
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR SEP 2 7
This agreement is sublect to . pplleiea , U.S Envituarnanlal ProSa tion Ageney Silo,y provisiono and malubsios regr Mlsns.
in accepting this award or MelAdmatti ned sty paijm.ms made pursuant thalsto , (1) lie mderslgned rspruant . that lee is
authorized to act on behalf of th. recipient orgartizetion, end (2) lie rov $a.d agree . (a) that the award is iidi$ ,st to us
applicable provisions of 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter S and of the pto%fswis of this agreement (Ports I thru IV ), and (b) that
acceptance of any payment. coresilMee an agra,am.11I by the payee list lee amoraits, If any found by EPA to leave been
overpaid will be refunded or credited In full to EPA.
DATE
1 0—23—8 9
TYPED NAME AND iini
7. Edward Flamrlck rrr, Director
It
-------
02/03/93 15:53 US EPQ BOSTON,t ’ RE6ION 1 010
SESSION II
“Documenting Woric Performed Lu Existing and
Closed Out Contracts”
PRESENTER: Arthur MarL
Region I
Superfund Enforcement Support Section,
Cost RecoVery Unit
(617) 573—9633
FAX (617) 573—9662
— contractor provides the CRU with disJcette containing
form memo and merge file of the HQ contact names and
addresses.
- the CRU generates the memos on EPA letterhead and
sends them to HQ contacts.
— their memo explains that EPA is seeking to compile
all work performed documentation from the contracts
under the HQ contact’s jurisdiction.
— attached to each memo is a contract—specific list of
documentation that hasn’t been located; the list is
generated from an audit report prepared by contractor.
- copies of the memos are sent by the CRU to the
contractor so they know when memos vent out.
- the CRU forwards any documentation received as a
result of the communication to the contractor to
incorporate into work performed package.
— after three weeks the contractor gives the CRTJ a
list of documentation that is still missing. the CRU
calls HQ contacts to follow up an the memo request.
-------
02 /03/93 15:54 US EPA BOSTDN MA REGION 1 012
SESBION II MANDO T
COST RECOVERY DOCUMENT COLLECTION
LIST OF CONTRACT OFFICERS/CONTACTS
REGION I
ARCS-Metca1 & Eddy, CDM, Ebasco; REM 4; REM 6
Nancy Barmakian (617) 573—5797
Region I, Waste Management Divi5ien
JFK Federal Building, Mail Code HPC-CAN7
Boston, MA 02203
ERCS, TAT
John Car]aon (617) 060—4624
New England Regional Laboratory
60 Westview Street, Mail Code EER-LEX
Lexington, MA 02173
ESAT
Don porteous (617) 860—4317
New England Regional Laboratory
60 Westview Street, Mail Code EDA-LEX
Lexington, MA 02173
lAG
Eileen Hahnen (617) 573—9606
Region I, Waste Management Division
JFK Federal Building, Mall Code MPC—CAN7
Boston, MA 02203
lAG
Janet Bartlett (617) 573—3040
Region I, Grants & Information Management
JFK Federal Building, Mail Code PCI
Boston, MA 02203
lAG
Rick Leighton (617) 573—9654
Region I, Waste Management Division
JFK Federal Building, Mail Code HPC-CAN7
Boston, MA 02203
ARCS -ADL
Heidi Rorohan (617) 573—5798
Region I, Waste Management Division
JFK Federal Building, Mail Code HPC-CAN7
Boston, MA 02203
ARCS-TRC/Alliance, Weston, NUS
Diane Kelley (617) 573—9672
Region I, Waste Management Division
JFK Federal Building, Mail Code HPC-CAN7
Boston, MA 0220]
-------
@2/03/93 15:54 us EP 8OSTON,M REGION 1 013
TES III, TES IV, TES V 1 TES VI
Mary Grealish (617) 573—5507
Region I, Wa8te Management Division
JFK Federal Building, Mail Code HPCLCA.N7
Boston, NA 02203
REM/FIT
Don Smith (617) 573—9648
Region I, Waste Management Division
7FK Federal Building, Mail Code H3S-CAN7
Boston, MA 02203
SCA
Deborah Harstedt (617) 565—3842
Region I, Grants & Information Management
FK Federal Building, Mail Code PGI
Boston, MA 02203
Additional Coatt ats;
Overf 3 ight Contract
Tom Osberg (703) 349—8970
Environmental Photographic Interpretation center (EPIC)
Vint Hill Farms Station
Bicher Road Building, P.O. Box 1587
Warrenton, VA 22196
HEADQUARTERS
TES I, TES II
Nancy Deck (202) 308—8647
EPA Headquarters, Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
401 N Street SW, Mail Code OS—510W
Washington, DC 20460
TES III, TES IV
Rose Harvel]. (202) 300—8651
EPA Headquarters, CERCLA Enforcement Division
401 N Street SW, Mail Code 03—510W
Washington, DC 20460
TES V, TES VI
Hildegard Pollard (202) 260—6105
EPA Headquarters, Procurement and Contracts Management Divie ion
401 N Street SW, Mail Code PM—214F
Washington, DC 20460
lAG
Herb Yab3.on (202) 260—8267
EPA Headquarters, Grants Administration Division
401 M Street SW, Mail Code PM-216F
Washington, DC 20460
-------
02/03/93 15:55 US EPP BOSTON,MP REGION 1 014
IAG-AT SDR
Betty Jones (404) 639-0550
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
1600 Clifton Road
NE Mailstop E—28
Atlanta, GA 30333
REM-CDM
Icixic MarusaJc (202) 260—6305
EPA Headquarters, Procurement and Contracts Management Division
401 P1 Street SW, Mail Code PM-2 14F
Washington, DC 20460
REM-Ebasco
DaVe Boyd (202) 260—9964
EPA Headquarters, Procurement and Contracts Management Division
401 M Street SW, Mail Code PM-214F
Washington, DC 20460
Mditional Readguarters Contacts:
Tim Fontaine (202) 260—9748
EPA Headquarters, Hazardous Site Evaluation Division
401 M Street SW, Mail Code OS—230
Washington, DC 20460
REM
Jim Morant (202) 260—9170
EPA Headquarters, ore ice of Waste Programs Enforcement
401 N Street SW, Mail Code RD-674
Washington, DC 20460
-------
02.’03’93 15:56 US EPA BOSTON, MA REGION 1 015
BE8SION IX - HANDO
SAMPLE WORK PERFORMED DOCUMENT REQUEST LETTER
UNITED ITATE8 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION I
J.F.K. Federal Building Boston, MA 02203
) (ENORANDUM
DATE: June 10, 1992
SUBJ: Sullivan’s Ledge Cost Recovery
FROM: Arthur Man
Region I, Waste Management Division
TO: Tom Osberg
Environmental Photographic Interpretations Center
The Region I Cost Recovery Unit is attempting to locate all
wor) assignments (including Technical Directive Documents,
Technical Direction Documents, Technical Instruction Documents,
Delivery Orders, Interagency Agreements, and state Cooperative
Agreements), their scopes of work, work plans, amendments, and
notices of comp.etion for the Sullivan’s Ledge site. Certain
documents from work assignments under the Overflight (OVR)
contract(s) for this site have not been located.
The Contract Evidence Audit Team (CEAT-TechLaw) is providing
assistance to the Region I Cost Recovery Unit on this project.
The CEAT has compiled the attached list of documents that have
and have not been located under the OVR contract(s) (Contract
not identified) for the Sullivan’s Ledge site.
Please forward signed arid completed copies of the non-located
contract documents, and any others pertaining to the Sullivan’s
Ledge site that may not have been identified, within 2 weeks
to:
Arthur Man
EPA Region I
Waste Management Division
Mail Code HES-CAN6
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
If you do not have the documents or you are having difficulty
locating them, please contact me at (617) 573-9633. Thank you
for your cooperation.
-------
e2’Ø3 ’93 15:56 US EPP BOSTON.MA REGION 1. @16
ATTACHMENT
SULLIVAN’S LEDGE
DOCUMENTS LOCATED AND NOT LOCATED
Contract Nu ither: Not icientificd
Overflight (OVR) Contract, Epic-Bionetics
— Work Assignment Number; Not identified
Located: None
Not Located: Initiating document, scope of work,
work plan(s), amendments through proj eat
completion, .montbly progress raports, and notice
of completion
-------
02/03/93 15:49 US EPA BOSTON 1 MA REGION 1
SESSION XX
“Documenting Work Performed in Existing and
Closed Out Contracts”
PRE8ENTER Joan Maddalozzo
Region I
Buperfund Enforcement Support Section,
Cost Recovery unit
(617) 573—9642
FAX (617) 573—9662
Process Region I follows in enlistin Contractor su ort
• SOW to Paula Smith or Mary Rohrer of EPA ’s National
Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC)
• NEIC accepts SOW and assigns work assignment to TechLaw
under CEAT contract
• TechLaw submits work plan and proposed schedule for
de1iv rab)es
• Deliverables: — draft work summary and audit report
— 3 sets of work performance documentation
— (1 original and 2 redacted sets)
— final work summary and audit report
cost Recovery Unit’s role and responsibilities
• manage TechLaw work assignment
• review draft work summary with RPM
• review draft audit report against cost package
— match up progrees reports with invoices in the cost
package so that last progress report in package
corresponds with last invoice
— double-check that amendments fall within timefrarte
covered by cost package
— confirm work assignment status flag
review the work performance documents for accurate
redact ion
• at direction of site team, integrate the work performance
documents with the cost package, or alternatively, turn
over the work performance documents for use as a separate
exhibit
-------
02/03/93 15:50 US EPR BOSTON.M REGION 1 004
+ +
+ SESSION II - XANDOUT +
+ +
+ 4
+ SAMPLE SOW -— CONTRACTOR SUPPORT FOR COMPILING WORK +
+ PERYORMANCE DOCUMENTATION +
+ +
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION I
J.T. KENNEDY FEDERAL BUILDING, BOSTON, MA 02203-2211
MEMORANDUM
DATE ; October 15, 1992
SUEJ: CEAT Contractor Support Request — Rose Hill
FROM: Joan L. Maddalozzo
Superfund Enforcement Support Section
TO; Paula Smith, Project Officer
This memorandum is a request for CEAT support. Region I is in
the process of compiling cost and other supporting documentation
for the Rose Hill case in preparation for a possible bankruptcy
hearing.
Specifically, CEAT support is required for the following tasks in
connection with locating certain supporting documentation:
1. Review cost documents currently available in region,
as well as the site file, to identify the necessary
work assignments, Technical Directive Documents (TDDs),,
delivery orders, and work products associated with the
Davic Liquid site.
2. Make a copy of all such documentation located during
the review process.
3. Locate and copy all contractor monthly progress
reports. This documentation will also be included in
the inventory.
4. Prepare a list of a].]. missing documentation. Forward
list to EPA Work Assignment Manager for use in
contacting other sources (e.g., project officers, MQ)
to locate missing documentation.
5. Prepare an inventory of all work products associated
with the site.
-------
02/03/93 15:50 US EP BOSTON.M REGION 1 005
SP ’LESOW-- page 2 *
The final deliverable will be a report that includes an inventory
of all work products associated with the site and a summary of
documentation by contract; one clean copy of all available
documentation located during CEAT’s search; two unbound copies of
the redacted documents and contract summaries; and a list of all
missing documentation, with a description of CEAT’S effort to
locate and obtain the documentation.
The CEAT contractor should compile documentation throu9h
September 1992. This effort should be completed by December 11,
1992.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact inc at
(617) 573—9642.
cc: 1(athleen Woodward, Region I
-------
e2’03’93 15:51 US EP BOSTON,M REGION 1
** SESSION II
- - SA LE AUDIT REPORT **
REGION I
Oi./28/93
SAVAGE
MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY
AUDIT REPORT
COSTS
THROUGH:
tl/ kX/ 06/30/92
DRAFT PAGE: 5
16. Reznedi l (REM)
Camp, Dresser & McKee (68-01-6939)
Work Assignment flS-1L45
QCLOSuRE DATE:
LOCATED:
03/01/88
Initial
dated),
Report),
(05/85 —.
Work Assignment, Scope of Work, Work Plan (not
Amendments 2, 3 (Work Assignment Completion
anU 4 (Closeout), Monthly Progress Reports
07/85 and 09/85 — 01/88)
NOT LOCATED:
Amendment 1, Monthly Progress Report (08/85)
Planned changes to format :
1. Add period of performance (initiation date - closure date)
2. Add work assignment status flag — active vs. closed
-------
—
Azu Codes 617
565—3339
565—4880
565 —3661
565—3663
565—3664
565—9465
565—3668
PCC/2 6$
,CC/2 68
PCC/2 6$
PCC/26 1
P C/26S
PCC/361
[ ..L
— L — ‘ “
J J &T I , 199*
SUPIUWID UGION3L CØN?*ACTUI PUSOIWIL
U6XO) L SUPI*VX IOU $
U*DQ T1U I IflUD/P 1 CPJ flIOC B OPUATZOXI D2VIIZO
IrLI/O ptcI PLIMI 1L ØO ’
VAX 0 617—565—9464
Alice Vitsqsrs1d—-C tro11er
EL1$ry Zslisy--chi.f, Sup.rfund Contracts
David $.ni --Contzactinq Officer
Joshua Wonzer- -Contracting Of fic$r
Susan Waltsr--Cantractinq Of fic.z
Linda syrn.- -Contracting Off icsr
Xathl.sn mint--Contracting Ot fic r
U.S. Uk—legion I (PCO/1903)
Coeptro l lsr
John?. Xssin.dy Fodsz’al Building
Boston, NA 02203
(617) —5*5—3339
lAX 0 212 264—S100/7610
Jaisu Vo3.ey--chisf,
Vacuity a A in. 1 t Broach
lid B W.. ti*S
contracts section
Xsven Ws*vr--cont ..
Sti
‘4
Deborah
Phyllis Cutts— —Contracti
Donna
John
264—1760 PAul
264—2381 lANA
90S —321 —6736
Area Codes 213
264—1414 lANA
364—1791
264—2376
264—1710
264—4578
264—0194
264—2252
264—9365
264—2703
l w
TAXI
TAXI
PA ul
1131$
‘aim
71 1 1 $
arsn Giacobbe--Contract Special L$t
Carol Fitzpatrick--Contract speci4list
Sophie Xastner-—Contract Specia1i t
)Q1 4/tkI] SA 9260 66. 60
-------
inx i x cay, ’
U.S. EPA-Region II (FAMB)
26 Federal Plaza (9th Floor)
New York, WY 10278
(212) —264—2525
FAX 8 215—597—5029 Area Code: 215
Prank U..k .chi.f, 597—6172 3 I73
Contract. Xanagem.nt Section
(iris Wurphy——Contracting Off icsr 597—8328 3 I73
Sidney Oser——Contracting Officer 397—8574 3P1(73
James Clark—-Contracting Officer 597—9921 3PX73
Nan Ides——Contract Specialist 597—6419 3P1(73
Ilona Poppks——Contract Specialist 597—1704 3 73
Deborah Ibis-—Contract Specialist 597—9909 3 (73
Anzimari. Xnorr-—Contract Sp.ciali t 597—6167 3P1173
David Senderlirig-—Contract Specialist 597—7697 3P1173
U.S. EPA—Region III (3PW73)
Contracts Management Section
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) —597—9800
FAX 1 404 347—2400 Area Cods: 404
VERIFICATION 404 34 -’2374
William Waldrop — —Dsputy Assistant
Regional Administrator 347—2140 4MB
William H. McBride, Acting Chief
Contracts and Grants Adninistrati n Branch 347-2374 4MB
Jams Iiagl.y——Chief, Contract 347-2374 4 MM!
Negotiation and Management Sectiow
Sam lami.on-—Chief, Removal 347—2374 4MB
Contracts Unit
Nancy Bach——Chief, Remedial & Prog aa 347-2374
Support Contracts Unit
Sharon Erickson——Contracting OfCiCSr 347-2374 4MB
Keith Mills——Contracting Officer 347—2374 4MB
Carols wallace——Contracting Off ice ’ 347—2374 4RNB
Cedric Walker—-Contracting Off icex 347—2374 4MB
Lest.z Levis-—Contracting Officer 347—2374 4MB
Fran Harrel l——Contnscting Officer 347—2374 4MB
Jeff sapier——Contracting Officer 347—2374 4MB
2
xna DJ’ d3 SA eS:Le E6 1 C 3J
-------
1IG! ?
Gloria Allen——Contract Sp.cia1i.itl 347—2374 4P1 15
Deborah Davidson--contracting ufficer 347—2374 4R113
U.S. SPA—legion IV (4R) )
Contracts (4RKB)
4th floor - Tower Building
345 Cocrtjand St., LB.
Atlanta, GA 30365
(404) —347—2374
FAX 0 312—353—1879 Area Cods: 312
Ivan £atsns —Chi.f, 816—2040 3—11CC
Contracts and Grasts Branch
Pat 1 ford —-Cbi.f 886—2400 5—11CC
Contracts Section
Bob ael1e—Contracting Officer 186—!3 165 5— ICC
Peggy Nendrizeon -—Contract Spicial4at 886—5864 5-11CC
Brigitte Mansics-Contracting Of ficØ 886—6581 5—11CC
Martin Sandoval-—Contract Speciali$it 886—7955 5-11CC
Don Anderson-—contract Specialist 186—7159 5—11CC
Wilitea Massie--Contracting Of fic F 8865868 3 -ICC
Marianne Duffer——Contract Sp.cial±st 886—3630 5—11CC
IThaSI Willii——C ntrscting Officer 886—5858 5 —ICC
Lisa Saith-—Contrsct Specialist 886-6876 3-1 1CC
W0n-Sap.afft a
Claudea Maiso—-’Contrsct Specialist 353-8989 5-11CC
U.S. RPk- ion V (5 -IICC-107)
77 11. Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604—3590
(312) —353—2000
FAX # 214 655—2146 Area Code: 214
Sheldon srandt, Acting Chief, 653-6550 6 1 1PP
Financial Branch
Brenda 5 4sn ——Acting Chief
Procur .”t Section 655—7460 6K—PP
Deborah Ponder--Contracting Off icer 655-7461 611’??
3
%1 J/ 3 SA EE:80 E6 ee 834
-------
212101 V I 001? ’
Laverns Baker--Contracting Off iceF 655-7463 6K—PP
Tobin Richards-—Contract 5peci31i t 655—6512 6K—PP
U.S. EPA-Region VI I
Ad ninistrative Services Branch (6k-A0)
1445 Ross Avenue—Suits 1200
Dallas, TX 75202—2733
(314) -655—6444
FAX 1 913 551—7579 Are. Code: 913
Toll Free 1: 1—8OO 848—4568
Larry Kalvsi— —Regional Conptro1le 551—7739
Alma laves—-Director,
Superfund Contracting Office 551-7212
Marcia Trudeau--Contracting Of ficir 551—7607
Ron Stewart——Contracting Officer 552—7743
Lowell Tools—-Contracting Officer 551—7639
Marie No.1-—Contract Specialist 551—7276
Melinda Cecil——Contract Sp.cialis1 551-7564
Phyllis Ayrss-—Contract Sp.ciali. 551-7349
U.S. Uk-Region VII (C4PT)
726 )Iinnsaota Ave
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913) —276—7046
ZQL1ZU TAX 1 303 293-1647 Area Code: 303
or 293—1199
Martha 1Loo4es s-- ief, 293—1672 $PM-GAC
Grant., Audit & COntracts Branch
Heidi Ernst--chief, 293-1619 SPK-G&C
Superfund Acquisition & kasistancet section
Clyde Losasso- -Contracting Officez f 293-1893 BPII-GAC
B.n Jordan--Contracting Officer 293-1635 SPK-G&C
Mark Csb.n*Contract Specialist 294-13 SO SP -GRC
Ioa—I p.rf1ftd
Mel McCottry, Chief,
Adainistrat ivs Services Branch 293-1645
Virginia Burns——Contract Sp.ciali 293—1634
Anderson Ramp, Jr.--Contract Specialist 293-1614
4
aia 4/ d3 SA 2S Lø E6 1 EO B34
-------
wI Ix1
U.S. EPA-Region VIII
Grants, Audit and Contracts Branc) 1 18PX-GAC)
999 18th Street-—Suite 500
One Denver Place
Denver, 10203-2405
(303)’ -293-1672
FAX 0 415 744.1680 Area Cods: 415
or 744-1678
Joyce $y . -—Chisf, 744—1701. P—72
support Services Iranch
Tc Varaer’ --Chi.f
Contracts )lgat. Section 744-1693 P-7-2
Wenona Garside--Contracting Off icó 744-1682 P ’7—3
Dee Morrison——Contracting Officer 744—1692 P7 —2
Jeri Sons——Contracting Officer 744—1697 P -7—2
U.S. EPA—Region IX (P—7)
75 Eavthorn. Street
San Francisco, C 14105
(415) —744—1702
FAX I ITS 206 553-49S!7 Area Cod.: 206
Jessl* 111m*sao—”C isf, 553—3914
kdaiilistrative *aMg snt Iranch
0.7. Lovelady-—Lead Contracting OfiUcer 553—1770 110—144
Deborah Larsen-—Contracting Off ic 553—6701 110—144
U.S. EPA-legion X (110-104)
1200 81xth Avenue
S.att3., 98101
(206) —553—5810
S
Pd %1 D4/ d3 S/ PE:8ø E6 E 3J
-------
flADQUUT*RS
?I L1/071IC1 P,0U tL 0001
Area Cedss *02
FAX # 202 260—6881 (8th F1ooL ), 260—1880 (SF/R RA)
and 260—6483 (Document Distrib. Unit)
Xicbecl 1. lower——Acting Director, 260-5020
Of fic. of Acquisition *anagon.át
otane H. lsldszion— —Dir.ctor, 260—9458
lup•rfund/RCU Procuriaeat Operitions Division
Carolyn H. Anderson--Acting chief
Hegion..1 Contract *amsg.asnt lranc
lrnce lsksysa--8.ction Head,
fl.t.rn Section, Acting Section 1 4
Western Section 260—2308
Pat Patterson, chief, 260—9158
Supirfund/ICIA Progran Xanagon.nt Staff
chief, 260—8577
B ap.rfund/RClA Headquarters Op.ratlens Iranch
David Stuta, Section Head, 260-6201
Placsnt Section
Hark Themes, S.ction Head, 260—9172
Xaasqemest Section
William W.çpiag, chi.f, 260—91*4
Hegional Contract Plecument Snack
SAila I*Uy Section Head, 260—1985
Sit. Ivaluatlon a *nforcon.nt S.otI on
Hazy Jo l1 enfs1d, Acting 260—3192
Section Head, Remedial a .rg.ncy i$eatien
PK—2 14?
PK—2 14?
SUPU U D/RCU PHOCURIXEST OPUATXONS IUSOUS
ezna,on ica 0003
Axis Codes *02
260—9170 PK—214?
PK—2 14?
PN —2 14?
PX—2 14?
PN-2 14?
PX—2 14?
P11—214?
PH—2 14?
PH—2 14?
S
C) fl DJ/ d] SA PS: .ø E6 1 E9 B3J
-------
lull (‘f
EPA-Procurement and Contracts Management Division
Sup.rfwtd/RCRA Procurement Op rat .ions
401 31 Street, S W (P31 —2141)
Washington, DC 20460
K-Mall Iu ari of Interest t
pa .iCO — All Regional ST COntracts Personnel, their Supervisors,
RQI3 staff •1
— £11 MQ Superfund ontracta Personnel
ua. mu — All 8 ? Regional C tracting Officer Supervisors
n. aaU — All sup.rfund Branch and Section Chiefs end
Associate Di sctor
— Region S 5 10 COs
P000 —R.gion9&1OCOs&POs
• Rsgien 5 10 POe
RRCI.P0 • All ARCS Poe
00*1 5 - AU CORAl Staff Members
7
Y]1 J/ id3 SA SS: 2 £6 £0 834
-------
ai - L,: q L
&44- (\JIt:
O 0 ?- <)- y’,q 1
Closed Out Contracts
Documentation requirements similar to those for ongoing contracts
EPA will continue to work with DOJ to manage the demand for
documents
Documents tend to be somewhat more scattered than for current
contracts
Significant differences in where the documents have come to rest
in each region - some available only from HQ due to contracting
vehicle
PCMD single largest resource for documents not available in
regional offices
Proposed OIRN changes in retention schedules will affect most of
the expired contracts - allowing immediate FRC storage
FRC probably most readily available storage/retrieval option
Until a more sophisticated archival/retrieval system can be
developed, regions should make extensive use of the FRCs
-------
1
-------
SESSION III
INCORPORATION OP WORE PERPORMANCE DOCUMENTATION
INTO
COST SUMMARY REPORT
PRESENTER: TANYA THOMAS
REGION III
CERCLA COST RECOVERY SECTION
215/597—6679
FAX: 215/597—9890
BULLET ITEMS:
I. W iere is work performance ir. ,rmation placed in cost summary
report.
II. What information is extracted from the work performance
documentation.
III. Where does this work performance information reside after we
complete our cost summary report.
-------
SESSION III
PRESENTER: TANYA THOMAS
Page No. 1
01/26/93
DOUGLASSVILLE DISPOSAL, PA = 3 5] .)
REMEDIAL (REM) CONTRACT
CONTRACTOR
CONTRACT NUMBER
PROJECT OFFICER
DATES OF SERVICE
NUS CORPORATION
68—0l—6699R
W. KASCHAK/N. PERKINS
From :05/01/83 To :02/28/87
SU 4ARY OF SERVICE : REFER TO CONTRACTOR INFORMATION LISTED AFTER INVOICES
TOTAL CONTRACTOR COST : S 666554.91
Documentation : Copies of Applicable Paid Vouchers and Treasury Schedules
VOULIfER
NUMBER
VOUCHER VOUCHER
DATE AMOUNT
TREASURY SCHEDULE
NUMBER AND DATE
SITE
AMOUNT
8D
9D
1OD
ilD
12D
13D
14D
17
15D
18
19
19
20
21
22
23
24
24E
24
25
06/20/83
07/22/83
08/25/83
09/26/83
10/21/83
11/21/83
12/30/83
02/15/84
01/18/84
03/15/84
04/15/84
04/15/84
05/15/84
06/15/84
07/15/84
08/15/84
09/15/84
09/15/84
09/15/84
10/15/84
221777.05
246249.94
247619.56
340603.65
366279.94
497865.87
287363.21
2064873.26
359024.23
1981897.86
2673882.58
2673882.58
2158717.96
2743402.28
2830535.45
2356809.73
2439496.75
2439496.75
2439496.75
2036185.97
07646
07696
07039
07039
07069
07122
07180
07224
07228
07270
07327
07327
07373
07445
07500
07563
C7039
C 339
07039
07098
08/26/83
09/22/83
11/03/83
11/03/83
11/21/83
01/09/84
02/21/84
03/16/84
03/20/84
04/16/84
05/21/84
05/21/84
06/14/84
07/24/84
08/23/84
09/27/84
10/26/84
10/26/84
10/26/84
12/11/84
8112.27
5755.05
965.46
879.81
476.00
410.19
1697.84
8901.14
2473.37
1820.27
5554.1.2
—55.55
7149.42
796.23
30344.43
25038.08
25726.32
984.76
2 .62
88862.31
-------
SESSION III
PRESENTER:
Page No. 2
TANYA THOMAS
01 / 26 / 93
DOUG tSSVILLE DISPOSAL, PA (SSID = 3 51)
Contractor
Contract Number
NUS CORPORATION
68 —O 1—6 69 9R
Voucher
Number
Voucher Voucher
Date Amount
Treasury Schedule
Number and Date
Site
Amount
REMEDIAL (REM) CONTRACT
25
10/15/84
2036185.97
07098
12/11/84
631.54
25
10/15/84
2036185.97
07098
12/11/84
25.62
26
11/15/84
2180460.27
07147
01/10/85
17544.77
26
27
11/15/84
12/15/84
2180460.27
2191097.50
07147
07184
01/10/85
02/11/85
860.61
11387.99
27
12/15/84
2191097.50
07184
02/11/85
1111.17
28
01/15/85
2746283.94
07250
03/14/85
13794.84
28
01/15/85
2746283.94
07250
03/14/85
2.88
28
01/15/85
2746283.94
07250
03/14/85
798.96
29
02/15/85
2)35153.31
07285
04/01/85
28905.25
29
30
02/15/85
03/15/85
2335153.3].
2235810.29
07285
07342
04/01/85
04/29/85
79.17
43051.65
30
03/15/85
2235810.29
07342
04/29/85
11.37
31
04/12/85
2864867.78
07377
05/16/85
44812.39
31
04/12/85
2864867.78
07377
05/16/85
169.28
31
04/12/85
2864867.78
07377
05/16/85
119.21
32
05/09/85
2617968.41
07441
06/24/85
34871.22
32
05/09/85
2617968.41
07441
06/24/85
—15.21
33
06/06/85
2321923.67
07495
07/29/85
31884.19
33
06/06/85
2321923.67
07495
07/29/85
24.85
34
07/12/85
3668098.01
07566
09/03/85
22820.33
3.
OC,08/85
2056935.19
07593
09/16/85
7794.30
36
09/12/85
2566244.92
07013
10/24/85
11256.39
37
10/10/85
1910391.80
07020
11/22/85
5546.13
38B
11/11/85
1193804.19
07028
12/30/85
1587.67
39B
12/12/85
1682974.44
07035
01/30/86
3156.21
403
01/08/86
1371601.96
07041
02/20/86
1141.30
41B
02/04/86
1206032.82
07046
03/17/86
217.29
423
03/06/86
1181170.81
07054
04/14/86
531.91
-,33
04/09/86
1381259.91
G/061
05/12/86
1338.68
44B
12—AWARD
05/07/86
05/09/86
1109603.88
182302.60
07068
07071
06/09/86
06/19/è6
739.65
177.00
453
06/10/86
1358234.86
07075
07/10/86
895.76
46B
07/09/86
707941.75
07082
08/11/86
7583.31
47B
08/05/86
923816.18
07088
09/05/86
1102.05
48B
09/05/86
1213476.03
07000
10/07/86
119.92
49B
10/03/86
1327131.08
07010
11/10/86
—65.58
54B
03/10/87
480547.80
08503
04/16/87
8981.00
-------
SESSION III
PRESENTER: TANYA THOMAS
Page No. 3
01/26/93
DOUGLASSVILLE DISPOSAL, PA (SSIE. = 3 51)
REMEDIAL (REM) CONTRACT
Contractor : NUS CORPORATION
Contract Number : 68—O1—6699R
Voucher Voucher Voucher Treasury Schedule Site
Number Date Amount Number and Date Amount
Contractor Information
Period of Performance: 4/25/83 - 9/30/83
vJORK ASSIGNMENT NUMBER Ol-3V5l
DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Provide technical support to EPA for preparing
site-specific Remedial Action Master Plan and project work statements.
Activities include reviewin 9 existing information provided b ’ the Region for the
site, conduct site visit, discuss the site problems and preliminary remedial
objective with EPA, coordinate background activities with State as directed,
prepare fact sheet and/or action memorandum, develop phasing options, identify
all planning and implementation projects to be undertaken at the site, identify
fast-track projects to expedite remedial implementation, prepare an overall RA
shedule at the project level of detail, prepare order of magnitude cost
estimate, prepare detailed work statements and cost estimates (including
work-hours), and prepare input forms for the EPA site response management
system.
Period of Performance: 12/14/83 - 6/30/86
WORK ASSIGNMENT NUMBER 59-3L51
DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Conduct the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study.
Activities include identifing well locat.. ons, notify owners and well-users,
locate well construction data, hydrogelogical investigation, inspection,
development, and sampling of existing monitoring wells, monitoring well nest
installation and construction, shallow well construction and installation,
monitoring well survey, hydraulic conductivity tests, site reconnaissance, drill
and sample lagoon areas, soil analysis, groundwater sampling, groundwater
analysis, surface water and sediment sampling, surfac .. water and sediment
analysis, water tank and buried tank sampling, domestic w 2.l sample collection,
laboratory analysis of private wells, data evaluation, prepare final report,
description of current situation, selection of remedial response objectives and
-------
SESSION III
PRESENTER; TANYA THOMAS
Page No. 4
01/26/9)
DOUGLASSVILLE DISPOSAL, PA (S ID = 3 51)
REMEDIAL (REM) CONTRACT
Contractor : NUS CORPORATION
Contract Number : 68—O]—6699R
Voucher Voucher Voucher Treasury Schedule Site
Number Date Amount Number and Date Amount
criteria for evaulation of alternatives, identification of alternatives,
laboratory and field studies, evaluation of alternatives, conceptual design of
selected alternative and coordination, and community relations.
Period of Performance: 8/84 — 7/10/85
WORK ASSIGNMENT NUMBER 12-3V51
DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Provide technical support for preparing Community
Relations Plan and project work statements. Activities include reviewing
existing information provided by the Region, conduct on-site community
interviews, discuss the site technical problems and preliminary remedial
objectives, coordinate activities with State as directed by EPA, and prepare
monthly progress report.
ADDITIONAL SOURCE OF DOCUMENTATION: Copy of Work Assignments, Scope of Works,
Work Assignment Amendments, and Procurement Requests
-------
15:28 FROM EPA TO 8703603911? P.002
SESSION III
PRESENTER: Steve Pandza
Financial Management Section
Region It!
1. Handouts
-------
FEB—04—1993 15:29 FROM EPA TO 87036039117 P.003
Superfund Cost Organization and
Recovery Enhancement System
SCORE $
Participant Training Manual
Version 1.0
-------
FEB—g4-1993 15:29 FROM EPR TO 87036039117 P.004
IV. COST SUMMARY PREPARATION
USING SCORE$
-------
FEB-04-1993 15:29 FROM EPR TO 8’?036e39117 P.005
• Voucher Deac. Code a user-defined code allowing the source of voucher
documentation to be customized for a contract
The ORDERS option on the Site Contractor Data Update screen allows additional information to be
reflected for delivery orders work assignments, or Case or Special Analytical CLP cost information
falling under a specific contract. After the ORDERS option has been selected, order or work
assignment-specific information can be edited, added, or de’eted. This information will be reflected
in the voucher detail report for a contract. ORDERS data that can be modified include the following:
• Order # the delivery order or work assignment number
• POP Start - the start date of the period of performance for a delivery order or work
assignment
• POP End Date - the end date for the period of performance for a delivery order or work
assignment
• Officer - the project officer for th, delivery order or work assignment (usually
the project officer who has approved the invoice included in a given
documentation package)
• Contractor - the contractor for the delivery order or work assignment
The ENDNOTES option on the Contractor Data Update screen allows addition of a contract-specific
endnote for a specific contract. This endnote will be printed at the end of the voucher detail report
for a specific contract or at the user’s option, at the end of a cumulative cost report. Selecting the
ENDNOTES option invokes a word processor, enabling the user to create customized endnotes of any
length. Once in the word processor. keys are displayed that allow the user to make use of all the
word processor’s functions). (NOTE: The ‘‘ tharecter corresponds to the control key on the
keyboard.) These keys include:
• Y - Delete a line
• AG • Delete character
• -w Save
• iris Insert
• Pgup - Page up
IV-14
-------
02 ’B3’93 15:53 US EPA BOSTON 1 REGION 1 011
S 88ION III
“Summarizing Work Performed in a Cost Summary Report”
PRESENTER; Arthur MarL
Region I
Ouperfund Enforcement Support Section,
Cost Recovery Unit
(617) 573—9633
PAX (617) 573—9662
- for each contract used at a given site, we include
the total contract costs in the contract banner portion
of the work summary (sea sample work summary, 4a).
- review draft contractor work summary to identity the
work aBsignments or TDD’s for each contract.
— review the site—specific portion of each invoice and
and identity the U llar amounts paid agai.nst each work
assignment.
- determine the total dollar amount for each of the
work assignments or TDD’s and add them to the work
assignment section of the draft contractor work
summary (see sample work summary, 4b).
Z ote: this total dollar amount is included only in
cases where we can identify 100% of the costs for the
particular work assignment. If we cannot determine
100% or the costs, we leave the dollar field blank for
that work assignment or TDD.
-------
02’03’93 15:51 US EPR BOSTON,MA REGION 1 00?
SESSION XI I
“Gu unarizing work Performed in a Cost Summary Report”
PRESENTERI loan Naddalezzo
Region I
Superfund Enforcament Support Section,
Cost Recovery Unit
(617) 573—9642
PAX (617) 573—9662
Work Summary
• The final product is an independent work summary, which
can be attached to the cost summary or used as a separate
document, at direction of site team
• Some changes being made to current work summary format:
— adding period of performance dates
— adding dates of actual work performance
— flagging status of work assignment: active vs.
closed
— reflecting costs incurred by contract and by work
assignment, when possible
-------
8
-------
SESSION IV
INTERAGENCy AGREEMENTS & STATE COOPREATIVE AGREEMENTS
REGION III’S APPROACH
PRESENTER: BERNARD MCCULL GH
GRANTS MANAGEMENT SECTION (3PM71)
215/597—3860
FAX: 215/597—6170
STATE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS:
I. ROLE OF THE GRANTS MANAGEMENT SECTION
II. OUTREACH ACTIVITIES/TRAINING
III. APPLICATION/REVIEW PROCESS
IV. AGREEMENT CONDITIONS
V. ON-SITE REVIEWS
VI. FSR/IFMS RECONCILIATION
-------
9
-------
L_ —
(2 . - 2
Presentation at Work Performed Documentation Seminar
February 2, 1993
Session V - Maintenance of Cost Recovery Files
Part A - General Maintenance of Files
o What are records? “All books, papers, maps, photographs,
machine readable materials, or other documentary materials,
regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or
received by an agency of the United States Government under
Federal law or in ccnnection with the transaction of public
business and preserved or appropriate for preservation by that
agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the
organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures,
operations or other activities of the Government or because
the informational value of the data in them.” 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 33, 3301.
o What do you have to keep? Records.
o What can you toss: Non-records (technical reference and
personal papers)
o What constitutes non-records?
Technical Reference Materials
o Publications (CFRs, SOP manuals, pc licy and
guidance documents, and compendiums) used for
reference
o Stocks of publications for distribution
o Library or museum material
O Unofficial copies of documents that are kept
only for convince or reference
Personal Papers
o Files accumulated by an individual before
joining the agency that are not used to
conduct government business
o Files relating solely to an individual’s
outside business pursuits, professional
affiliations, or private political
associations and having no connection with
agency business
o Diaries, journals, and personal correspondence
not prepared, received, or used in the process
of transacting agency business
-------
o Personal copies of agency papers and reports
generated as part of your work whose official
copies are filed elsewhere
o Why are these distinctions important?
o No government records can be disposed of without the
proper disposition authority.
o All government records must be scheduled (i.e., have a
disposition schedule created and approved by the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA)) to receive
their disposition authority.
O Once a record is scheduled, then it is mandatory that it
be dispositioned in accordance with its retention value.
(e.g., If its retention value is 5 years then it not only
can’t be deBtroyed before 5 years but it should be
destroyed when it is 5 years old.)
o Non-record material should be destroyed when no longer
needed for reference. (i.e., Non-records are not
scheduled, have no legal retention value and thus do not
have to be kept for or destroyed at a certain period of
time.)
0
O Non-record material should not be interfiled with record
material. -
O If individuals have extra copies of material they have
drafted, reviewed, or otherwise used, they may retain
these copies with agency approval only if doing so does
not cost too much or violate the confidentiality required
by national security, privacy, or other interests
protected by law.
o Only a records officer is allowed to ultimately determine
what is record or non-record.
o What are records schedules (A.K.A. records disposition
schedule, records retention schedule)? Printed records
descriptions and disposition instructions (i.e., when, whether
and how to destroy, retire or archive records), formally
approved by NARA, that provide the legal authority to dispose,
retire or archive specific record series (i.e., types of
records).
o There are schedules for every type of record. Administrative
records (not to be confused with Administrative Records that
document rule-making and records of decision for public
review) include calendars, controlled correspondence, travel.
Everyone has these, but they are usually maintained centrally
by a secretary or office administrator. Program records
document your Agency mission-oriented work. For example, if
-------
you’re in cost recovery, your mission is to recovering the
costs of site cleanups. The records you generate you may not
need for long, but someone else may need them later. Cost
recovery is a perfect example - records generated in cleaning
up the site are not needed by the RPM after the site is
cleaned up, but are essential to cost recovery and litigation
folks later. On the other hand, you don’t want to have to
make copies of stuff for FOIA and Discovery that should have
been disposed of long ago. That’s why the disposition
schedules exist - they help make sure we don’t dispose of
stuff too soon, and don’t keep stuff too long.
o Most cost recovery records are covered under schedules NC1-
412-85-27/11-7 and NC1-412-85-27/III-6.
NC1-412-85-27/II-7: Title Records Relating to the Support
of Agency Recovery Claims Under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(Superfund) . Description The official file contains the
following documents: (1) Time and Attendance Report (EPA
Form 2565-1). (2) Timesheets and (3) Redistribution of
Payroll Charges (EPA Form 2550-6). Retention Retain 20
years after completion of all cost-recovery litigation.
Disposition Break file upon completion of all cost-
recovery litigation. Keep in office for 2 years, then
transfer to the FRC. Destroy when 20 years old.
NC1-412-85-27/III-6: Title Records Relating to the
Support of Agency Recovery Claims Under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(Superfund). Description Files contain the following
documents: (1) Copies of orders, contracts, travel
authorizations, grants, miscellaneous obligation
documents (2) Letter-of Credit documents and records (3)
Disbursement vouchers including paid invoices, receiving
data, and authorization orders for purchases,
advertising, contracts, grants, travel, transportation,
GSA requisitions, and other disbursements including
refund vouchers. Retention Retain 20 years after
completion of all cost-recovery litigation. Disposition
Break file upon completion of all cost-recovery
litigation. Keep in office for 2 years, then transfer to
the FRC. Destroy when 20 years old.
Note: In many cases it says “copy.” This means the documents
are also stored elsewhere (e.g., contracts, travel
authorizations, grants, etc. files). The duplication is
necessary and important because the different files (record
sets) serve different purposes and have different lives (i.e.,
retention periods)
Note: These FMD retention schedule descriptions are missing
most of the work performed documentation (affidavits,
testimonies on actions taken; task orders, work assignments,
-------
TDD’s TID, lab requests, monthly progress reports, daily
activity reports, acknowledgments of completion (if finished),
deliverables, final products, affidavits to fill in gaps;
state task orders, affidavit of what state did in connection
with agreement or grant cost summaries, documentation on
indirect costs, underlying documents for intramural and
contractor costs for Interagency Agreements (lAGs) and for
State Cooperative Agreements (SCAs). When these schedules
were written in 1985, FMD did not consider them part of the
“Records Relating to the Support of Agency Recovery Claims
Under CERCLA.” The implication is that they are stored
separately and retired separately which may be a source of
some of the problems we are having with linking cost and work
performed documents.
Most of this work performed documentation is described under
NC1-412-85-18/23.
NC1-412-85-18/23 Title Hazardous Site File. Description
a. Contains documentation of policy and decision made by
HQ and Regional personnel concerning the cleanup of
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Records include
correspondence between the Regions and HQ and other
Federal Agencies, priority list for cleanup of hazardous
waste sites, reports, approval of design and engineering
of waste containment/remedial system, requests from
Region for additional money to continue cleanup
operations, and other related records. Includes index
(paper and microform). b. Contains documentation and
information concerning the remedial investigations and
feasibility studies of uncontrolled hazardous waste
(Superfund) sites. Records include contractor notebooks
of field observations, calculations, maps, photographs,
drawings, supporting documentation, draft and final
reports used in the investigation and choice of a
remedial action at a Superfund site. Includes indexes
(paper and microform) . Retention Paper Record Systems -
Permanent; Micrographic Record Systems - Retain paper
records until conversion to microform has been completed,
retain Microform copy permanently. Disposition Paper
Record Systems - Break file upon completion of all cost-
recovery litigation. Keep in office 2 years, then
transfer to the FRC. Offer to the National Archives in
5 year blocks when 20 years old. Micrographic Record
Systems - Keep paper records in office until conversion
to microform has been completed and microform is verified
for completeness, then destroy. Keep microform copy in
office 2 years after all cost-recovery litigation is
complete, then transfer to the FRC. Offer to the
National Archives in 5 year blocks when 20 years old.
Destroy other microform copies when no longer needed.
Note: Both the FMD and the Hazardous Site File records are to
be kept 2 years in the office after completion of all cost-
-------
recovery litigation, then sent to the FRC. However, because
the regions are running out of space, the FRC has authorized
us to send cost recovery records to the FRC prior to close out
of the site - as long as the records are retired by site.
Fortunately, this is usually the way cost recovery records are
organized, but this poses a problem for some types of records
like CLP and HQ contract records which are not arranged by
site. The FRC has allowed exceptions: allowing us to retire
CLP records by case as long as they are retrievable by site
and allowing us to retire CLP files in no particular order as
long as we retrieve whole boxes, and don’t ask for specific
files within boxes. (See the reference list for procedures
on sending CLP records to FRCs) . The FRC also asks us to
reschedule site related records that have been retired once we
know the date that all cost recovery has been completed - so
the clock can be reset to start ticking off 20 years again.)
o The schedules are being revised. New schedules have been
drafted and distributed throughout EPA for comment. Draft
schedule 024A - Cost Recovery Records includes some wording in
the description related to work performed documentation:
“documentation that describes technical aspects of the
response action” and “work assignments”, but those of you
involved in preparing the cost recovery packages should take
a close look at this schedule and make sure it is complete.
o The Agency is headed toward organizing files in structures
based on the new disposition schedules. The new schedules
have been developed to reflect how EPA thinks about its
records, particularly how they are grouped. In addition, the
schedules are used to disposition records. A logical
progression is then to arrange files based on the schedules.
Standardization should make it easier to institute policy, to
share procedures and ideas that work and to communicate across
regions and programs. We have begun to institute this logic
in OSWER, OIRM is adopting it to provide guidance throughout
the agency, and it will be taught in a Files Maintenance and
Improvement class scheduled March 24 and 25 in D.C. This is
part of a new holistic approach to records management.
o Superfund Document Management System. This is an imaging
utility for storing, managing, retrieving Superfund site file
records. We are about to test the new Netware Compatible
Image Processing System (NCIPS) platform off the IBM-IPS
contract against our requirements. Then we plan to implement
a pilot system in Region 9. The new platform provides full
text indexing, redaction, and all the usual imaging features.
(See the fact sheet on SDMS in this packet.) Once the pilot
proves successful, (and we have worked out how to: 1) link the
indexing and redaction capabilities of the two main software
programs that comprise the system, and 2) improve the
efficiency of the manual indexing), we plan to offer it to all
regions to implement as they see fit (all or some sites, all
documentation related to a site or only parts, etc.)
-------
Related materials for packet:
* Records management flyers
* List of records management contacts
* List of reference materials
* Draft Cost Recovery Schedule
* Fact sheet on SDMS
-------
Do you think about the new CD you just bought
when someone talks to you about records?
Do you think about your next dental appointment
when someone talks to you about records management 7
If you were honest and answered “yes” to any
of the questions above, you are not alone. Those
who work in the records management profession
often get that reaction when they talk “business”
with a client. This reaction often leads to what I
like to call the Records Manager’s Lament” -
What can I do to get managements attention?
TranslationS How can I get the resources / need
to improve our records system?
Managers are responsible for making sure the
agencys goals and objectives are being met with
available resources and planning for future
resources. How does records management fit in
with this Ana why is it important to include
records management in resource planning?
EPA along with other federal agencies, as
well as the corporate world, face major
challenges today to become more productive.
Administrative costs rise steadily and need to be
controlled. An effective records management
program can help accomplish this by ensuring
you find the information you need when you
need it.
“Finding the in formation you need when you
need it.” Sounds simple. But anyone who’s
worked in an office, whether it’s a federal agency,
an insurance company, or a bank, knows it’s just
not that simple.
Most people are not concerned about their
records until they:
c Can’t find wilat they need,
Outgrow their file cabinets,
: Move their office, or
Become involved in litigation.
So, how do we manage records?
We start by understanding that information is
a resource and has value. This means it needs to
be managed just like any other resource. The
traditional management techniques of planning.
controlling, directing, organizing, communicating.
etc., need to be applied to our records. It’s not
only our obligation to manage our information
resources in a responsible and cost effective
manner, it just makes good business sense.
By effectively managing our records, we can
save staff time (and reduce stress), save space.
and make better use of equipment - in other
words, save MONEY.
The following are some fundamental records
management concepts which you must
understand in order to effectively maintain your
organization’s files.
August 1992
EPA-220-F-92-O1 2
Do you think about where you’re going to go on vacation
when someone talks to you about your files?
National Records Management Program, Information Access Branch
Off tce of l’iformatuon Resources Management, U S Environmental Protection Agency
Printed ci ’ R .
-------
Records Life Cycle
Records Appraisal
Records need to be managed from their
creation to their destruction, not just when the
paper gets to the file room. This includes not only
the paper most people think about when they
think of records, but non-paper records such as
data, audio-visual materials, forms, maps, and
drawings
Records Creation
Very often, this important step is ignored in
the records management system. We need to
make sure we’re creating reports, forms, and
other records because there is a real need for
them. If we don’t create them, we aon’t have to
manage them.
Records Inventory
The records inventory is the way we find out
exactly what it is we need to manage. A good
inventory will tell you, among other things, what
you have, how much of it you have, and where it
is. It helps identify what is record material and
what is non-record material, what you can keep,
and what you can destroy.
The next step in the process is an appraisal -
determining the value of the records. This can be
a complex process and requires a collaborative
effort with program staff, records management
staff, and the National Archives. Legal, fiscal,
scientific and technological, evidential, and
informational values must be weighed so records
are kept for the appropriate length of time.
Records Disposition Schedule
A disposition schedule is the system that
controls the life span of your records. It tells you
how long to keep temporary records and when to
transfer records to the Federal Records Centers
and the National Archives for longer term or even
permanent retention.
File Plan
A file plan is a guide to how your files are
organized. It’s also called a file guide, file
structure, or file index. Well organized fiie plans
help you find what you need in your active files
as well as facilitate transfer and disposition of
inactive records. File plans must also include
the non-paper records in your office.
Records Maintenance
There are many different methods of
maintaining records - centralized/decentralized
file rooms, color coded files, microfilm/optical
technology, etc. You need to decide what system
will work best for your needs - what equipment
and technology will make the operation more
efficient, what controls will be put into place, and
who will be responsible for what.
Human Resources
Staffing of your records management system
is a critical element. Without the appropriate
staffing, you will have system failure. Your
records management staff not only needs to be
proficient in records management techniques and
technology, but also have management and
communication skills.
Definition of a Record:
all books, papers, maps. photographs.
machine readable materials, or other
documentary materials, regardless of
physical form or characteristics, made or
received by an agency of the United
States Government under Federal law or
in connection with the transaction of
public business and preserved or
appropriate for preservation by that
agency or its legitimate successor as
evidence of the c’ anization, functions,
policies, decisions. orocedures,
operations, or other activities of the
GovernmenT or because of the
informational value of data in them.
From : 44 U.S.C
Chapter 33,
Section 3301
-------
Records managers often need to be
salesmen, negotiators, diplomats.
teachers, and politicians. You need file
clerks, certainly, to keep documents filed,
prepare documents for mucrofilming,
and other more typical clerical functions.
But you also need staff with the ability and
knowledge to:
• Prepare budgets.
• Design equipment and floor layouts.
• Perform system analyses.
• Conduct training sessions.
• Plan and implement cost efficient use
of technology.
How do we get started?
You have probably already started.
Most offices have some elements of a
records system in place. What you need
to do now is evaluate what you have and
how to get to where you want to be.
I Are you meeting all your legal,
regulatory, administrative, fiscal
and evidentuary requirements?
I Are you doing it in the most cost
effective manner?
/ Can you find what you need when
you need it?
It you need help getting your program
in shape, contact your Records Officer,
or the National Records Management
Program staff, Mike Miller. Many offices
also have professional records
management contractor resources
available for assistance.
Management support for records
programs is vital. Without that support,
records management improvements
cannot be made and the agency cannot
neet its obligations.
Records Management Laws
Records Creation and Disposition :
• Federal Records Act of 1950 and Federal Records
Management Amendments of 1976
44 U.S.C. 2107-2108
44 U.S.C. 2901 -2909
44 U.S C. 31 03-31 07
44 U.S.C. 3301 -3314
Government agencies must create and maintain adequate
and proper documentation of policies and develop and
maintain schedules for records disposition and retention
Information Access :
• Freedom of InformatIon Act
5 U.S.C. 552
Government agencies must provide a recordkeepung
system that will facilitate public access to information.
• PrIvacy Act of 1974
5 U S C. 552a
Government agencies must provide individuals access
to federal records concerning them and safeguard
individual privacy from misuse of federal records.
• AdminIstrative Procedure Act
5 U.S.C. 551 et. seq., 701 et seq., 3105, 3344
Government agencies must make substantive rules and
statements of general policy available and to give notice
of proposed rulemaking so interested persons can
participate.
Program Specific Le is1ation :
• Trade Secrets Act and ToxIc Substances
Control Act
18 U.S.C. 1905 and
15 U.S.C. 2613
Government agencies must protect confidential business
information (CBI) from the public. •
3
-------
Publications Available from the National
Records Management Program:
10 Quick Ways to Improve Records Managem
Barcoding Basics. Technical Leaflet #1. in Any Office. [ flyer] August 1992.
April 1992. EPA 220-F-92-01 1
A Basic Approach to Improving Your Files. Too Much Paper? Make the Federal Records
[ flyer] June 1992. Center Work For You. February 1992.
EPA 220-F-92-003
EPA Records Management Tools. [ flyer]
Revised August 1992. EPA 220-F-92-009 Using the Federal Records Center: A Guide for
Headquarters Staff. July 1991. EPA/IMSD/91 -004
Guidance for Developing In formation Processing
Systems. April 1991. What is a Record? [ poster] February 1992.
EPA-220-E-92-0O1
Index to Agency Records Control Schedules.
July 1991. EPA/IMSD/91 -007 What Makes Papers Personal? [ flyer]
August 1992. EPA 220-F-92-013 •
INFOACCESS: Records and Library Network _________________________________________
Communications. [ monthly]
For More Information
In formation Resources Management Policy
Manual (2100) - Chapter 10: Records
If you would like to know more about records
Management. November 1987. management at EPA, contact the National
Is Microfilm the Answer? [ flyer] June 1992. Records Management Program (NRMP).
List of Records Disposition Schedules, 1991. The role ot the Agencywide records managemer +
program is to develop and update policy and
Make Your Next Move ... A C’.3an Getaway. guidance, direct records disposition and
October 1991. EPA/IMSD/91 011 retirement program, support communications
National Records Management Program. among records managers in the records
August 1991. EPNIMSD/91 -009 management network, enhance the capability of
the Dockets and Records Centers, conduct
A Practical Guide to Developing Records briefings and training classes, and provide
Disposition Schedules. August 1992. leadership in the application of technology to
EPA 220-F-92-008 solve records management problems.
Records Disposition Schedules. Note: please EPA Records Management Contacts:
specify your program office.
Michael L. Miller, NRMP Manager
Records Management Manual (2160), 1984. (202) 260-5911
Updates in 1986 and 1988. Dmail: Miller.Michael-OIRM
Records Management Resource Directory.
August 1992. EPA 220-F-92-007 Harold Webster, Headquarters Records Officer
(202) 260-5912
Regional Records Management ManuaL Omail: Webster. Harold
November 1991. EPA/IMSD/91-020
National Records Management Program
Safeguarding and Disposition of Official Records. (PM-2 110)
EPA Notice 88-1. Environmental Protection U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Agency, September 12, 1988. 401 M Street. SW,
Washington. DC 20460
10 Frequently Asked Questions About Records.
[ flyer) August 1992. EPA 220-F-92-010 4
-------
Ten \
/ Frequently \
/Asked Questions\
/ About Records
0. Why do we have to do records management?
A. Three reasons - it makes sense from an economy and efficiency standpoint; it
enables the Agency (and you) to fully document its standpoint; and it is required by
Federal statute and regulation.
0. How do I benefit from good records management?
A. You benefit several ways.
• Free up office space for other purposes.
• Allow quicker retrieval of documents.
• Provide better documentation with less paper.
• Save money on space, equipment, and staff time.
• Comply with Federal and Agency requirements.
0. What are my basic records responsibilities as a manager or employee?
A. Only three major ones:
• Create the records necessary to document the activities for which
you are responsible,
• File those records in a manner that allows for them to be safely
stored and efficiently retrieved when necessary, and
• Dispose of records in accordance with Agency and Federal regulations.
0. Is all of the paper I have in my office record material?
A. No. In most programs probably a quarter of the paper volume is actually record
material that needs to be retained for any length of time. Much of what is in most offices
is either reference material which can be destroyed when no longer needed, or working
files of individual staff members. Although working papers are records, they generally
need to be maintained for only a short period of time.
0. What is a record?
A. Books (and laws) have been written on this subject. The basic definition is found in
the Federal Records Act. Records are defined as al1 books, papers, maps, photographs,
machine readable materials, or other documentary materials, regardless of physical form
or characteristics, made or received by an agency of the United States Govemment.
[ 44 U.S.Code, Chapter 33, Section 3301]
National Records Management Program, Information Access Branch August1992
Office of Information Resources Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA -220-F-92-O1O
-------
Q. What I should treat as a record in my office?
A. The real question facing most managers is “what am I responsible for filing in my office?”
From a records management perspective a document is a record in your office if:
• Your office created it.
• Your office acted on it.
• Your office received it for action.
• Your office is designated as the custodian because
of oversight duties or for other reasons.
• Your office needs it to document its activities or decisions.
If one of these criteria applies, the document should be included in your program’s official
files and retained and/or destroyed according to the records schedule.
0. What should I do with my records once I don’t need them?
A. The Agency has a system of records disposition schedules that provides this information.
Schedules are rigorously reviewed to ensure that records are retained a sufficient length of time.
Once the schedules have been reviewed within the Agency, they are submitted to the Archivist
of the United States for approval as required by law. Following signature by the Archivist, they
serve as the legal authority for the destruction of records or their transfer to the National
Archives.
0. Can technology solve my records management problem?
A. In many cases technology can help but only after the real records management issues have
been resolved. The rule of thumb is that if you automate a records management problem rather
than solve it, you have an automated records management problem rather than a solution.
Before you apply technology - whether it be automation, microform, or imaging - you need to
understand what your records management problem is and exactly how technology can solve it.
Q. Am I stuck wIth all of the paper I have here?
A. No, you’re not. There are several ways of decreasing your paper volume:
I We your records disposition schedules as a guide to eliminating unnecessary paper.
I Review your files for outdated reference materials.
/ Microfilm your records. in most cases if records are properly microfilmed, the paper
originals can be destroyed. The National Records Management Program can advise
you on the destruction of paper after filming.
I Use imaging technology to eliminate the need for massive amounts of paper on-site.
0. Does my program need a records manager?
A. Most programs need a person to manage its records on at least a part time basis and serve
as the contact point for records issues in the program. That person should be trained in records
management, and be an active network member. The percentage of time devoted to records will
depend on the size of the operation. Generally speaking the following are minimum staffing
guidelines: A full time records manager is essential in Headquarters AAships and major
programs, Regional Offices, and major field facilities such as Research Triangle Park. A half to
full time records manager, depending on work load, is needed for EPA laboratories,
Headquarters offices, and Divisions in Regional offices. Part tIme records staff are suitable for
most Divisions at Headquarters and Branches in Regional offices. *
-------
10 Quick Ways to Improve Records
Management in Any Office
In most offices only about 25% of the paper is program record materials that need to be
managed in the office. That means that 75% of the paper mountain we face falls into one of the
following categories:
• Administrative records used to carry out routine operations.
• Older program records that can be stored oft-site.
• Working files used by staff to carry out their assigned duties.
• Reference materials.
The trick to good records management is identifying which of the files in your office belong to
each category, and managing them appropriately. Here are 10 suggestions for improving records
management in your office. By applying any or all of them, you will decrease the amount of paper
in your office, increase the amount of space, and improve staff efficiency. The key idea is to
understand what portion of the paper in your office really needs to be managed.
1. Segregate your paper into four categories: records for which your program is
responsible, administrative records, working files, and reference materials.
2. Set up a “records center” or official file station for your major program files. Make
someone responsible for each major program file your office maintains, and send those
persons to records management training.
3. Apply your records disposition schedules. Most programs keep more records
longer than they need to. Hold regular cleanup days to encourage staff to retire older
records to the Federal Records Center or recycle them as the schedule specifies.
National Records Management Program, Information Access Branch
Office of Information Resources Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
August 1992
EPA-220-F-92-O1 1
-------
r
4. Draft lists of documents that need to be included in the official program files and
those that don’t need to be retained. Coordinate the list with your records manager and
counsel as necessary.
5. Cut off your program and administrative files at the end of each year. Start new
files and bring forward only the material that is still active. This will simplify retiring
inactive records later.
6. File records by type and by disposition rather than filing everything together.
For example, file final reports which have a long retention and active life separately from
drafts which have a short retention. Separate controlled correspondence from general
correspondence and so on.
7. Use the Agency’s alpha-numeric file plan for your routine administrative records.
8. When you create a new type of record or file, develop a disposition for it in
conjunction with the records management program. This will allow you to plan how long
you need to retain records.
9. When you automate be sure to include records management considerations
and responsibilities in your mission needs analysis.
10. Set up a central reference file for documents that are needed by the staff on
an occasional basis, rather than having each staff member retain a copy. .
For More Information
If you would like to know more about records management at EPA, contact the National
Records Management Program (NRMP).
The role of the Agencywide records management program is to develop and update policy and
guidance, direct the records disposition and retirement program, support communications
among records managers in the records management network, enhance the capability of the
Dockets and Records Centers, conduct briefings and training classes, and provide leadership in
the application of technology to solve records management problems.
EPA Records Management Contacts:
Michael L. Miller, NRMP Manager
(202) 260-5911; Dmail: Miller.Michael-OIRM
NRMP Harold Webster, Headquarters Records Officer
(202) 260-5912; Dmail: Webster.Harold
NatIonal Records Management Program (PM-21 1 D)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460
-------
Managing Working Files
When it comes to describing working files the old saw about art comes to mind:
“I can’t define what it is, but I know it when I see it.
According to the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA), working files
-consist of docum ”h such as rough notes,
calculations, or drafts assembled or created and
used to prepare or analyze other documents.” But
ask most EPA employees, and they will say that
the files in their filing cabinets are their “working
files.” So who is right?
The answer is that NARA is right in theory,
and EPA’s definition fits far too many offices at
EPA. Why? Because too many EPA programs
have lost the distinction between “official files”
and “working files.” One of the biggest challenges
to records management in EPA is to reintroduce
this vital distinction which is fundamental to
effective management of our records. This is
done by developing recordkeeping requirements
for each of the Agency’s major programmatic and
administrative files, an initiative that EPA will be
implementing over the next five years.
One function of recordkeeping requirements
is to identify what documents need to be included
in the official file. In fact the easiest way to define
working files is to define official files first. Within
EPA, officIal records are defined as
any final product related to administration,
management, enforcement, regulation or
other Agency function and all documentation
necessary to support that document, the
decision trail leading up to it and the actions
that result from it.
Working papers are everything else.
Too many EPA programi
have lost the dlsllncllon
between offlclal flles
and worklng files.
One of the biggest challenges
to records management in EPA
is to reintroduce this vital dIstinction
which is fundamental
to effecilve management
of our records.
Why is the working files question important?
As long as they consist only of “rough notes,
calculations, or drafts” working files are not a
major problem. But professional staff frequently
maintain a substantial portion of their project
documentation in “working files.”
When working files contain records needed
to document program activities they pose two
problems. If working files are poorly organized
and inscrutable to anyone but the creator (which
they often are) identifying record material to
document program activity is difficult. If staff
mix record and non record materials in one
voluminous “working file” (as they frequently do)
the Agency is forced to manage an even larger
volume of material than is necessary.
EPA 220-F-92-016
October 1992
L
]
National Records Management Program, Information Access Branch
Office of Information Resources Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Pnnted on Recycled Paper
-------
Managing Working Filesj
Everyone creates working files and they are
necessary to keep operations running smoothly.
How to manage them is the question. The basic
considerations are to make sure that records
needed to document Agency activity are
separated out from working documents and filed
in official files, and that the volume of working
files is keot to a minimum by constant weeding.
Programs often take one of two approaches
to manage working files. The first approach is to
minimize their existence by having staff create an
official file when the action is initiated, and file the
official records and only official records in it. This
is the best solution from a theoretical perspective,
and it works especially well for repetitive actions
where approvals are required, such as the issuing
of permits, travel vouchers, purchase requests, or
the approval of directives.
In other cases, staff retain most or all of the
papers until a specified milestone is reached or
the activity or task is completed. At that time an
official file is compiled. This works well when
several individuals are contributing to one product
or result, or when projects are unique. Some
:ograms also use this approach in compiling
administrative records.
What binds these two approaches together is
that there is an established profile for what types
of documents need to be included in the official
file. Staff then assess the value of their
documents against this benchmark to know
which records in their possession need to be
filed and retained, and which ones can be safely
recycled or destroyed.
What if There Is No Guidance?
Unfortunately not all programs have guidance
on what is to be included in the official file. What
then? Do you have to save everything? No, but
you need to be careful as you sort through the
documents before you. First double check to
make sure that no guidance does exist. If there
is none, develop an approach to the materials
using the general guidelines listed below, and
discuss it with your supervisor, and with counsel
if there is a likelihood of litigation.
Here are some guidelines for handling the
types of documents you frequently find in working
files.
• Record Material: Develop a plan to
organize the materials and file according to
the file plan. If the file is large consult with
your records manager on whether it makes
sense to set up a file for the major documents
and a separate one for supporting materials.
Continued on page
L
General Guidelines
)
Supporting Materials and
WorkIng Flies
Supporting materials are not
working files. True supportIng
materials are documents that
are necessary to substantiate the
final document or decision trail.
Supporting materials are part of
the official record. atthough they
may be filed separately if volume
warrants.
National Records Management Program
2
October 1992
-------
( Some Basic Questions and Answers
Concerning Working Files )
Q. Are working flies
records?
A. As discussed in the article, working files usually contain a
mixture of record and non record materials. Until the holder of
the files separates out and files all records, the working files
themselves must be considered record.
Q. AreW6 ng files the
same as personal
papers?
Q. Are working papers
subject to the Freedom
of Information Act
(FOIA)?
Q. Should working files
be retained past the
close of the project?
A. No. Personal papers are nonofficiai, or priv t - apers
relating solely to an individual’s own affairs. Working files,
by definition, relate to Agency business and are not personal
papers. See the August issue of INFOACCESS for more on
personal papers.
A. The FOIA does not exclude working files. If there are
documents in the files that are exempt from the FOIA under
one of its exclusions, those documents may be withheld from
disclosure. However, the fact that they are working files does
not, in itself, exempt them from disclosure. See the FOIA
Manual (Manual 1550) for more details.
A. There is no simple answer to this question. As noted in the
article, some working file materials can be destroyed when no
longer needed. Other portions should be retained for a brief
time, usually 6-12 months after the project is completed, and
then destroyed. Check your records disposition schedule. if
documents are worth retaining for a longer period of time, they
should be kept as part of the official file. It “working files” are to
be retained, they should be pruned of non record material and
organized so that they can be understood by someone other
than the creator. Otherwise there is no reason to keep them
beyond their immediate usefulness. .
National Records Management Program
3
October 1992
-------
General Guidelines continued
For Further Reading
You may wish to consult the following
• Non Record and Technical Reference publications for information on related issues.
Materials: Extra copies of articles, periodicals,
reports, documents, studies, vendor catalogs, A Basic Approach to Improving Your Files.
and similar materials that are needed for [ flyer] June 1992.
convenience or reference but are not part of
the official file. Such items should be EPA Records Management Tools. [ flyer]
destroyed as soon as they are no longer Revised August 1992. EPA 220-F-92-009
needed. INFOACCESS: Records and Library Network
Communications. [ monthly]
• Suspense or Tickler Copies: Extra copies
of documents-to-remind persons of actions Information Resources Management Policy
to be completed by a certain date should Manual (2100) - Chapter 10: Records
be destroyed once the action has been Management. November 1987.
completed.
A Practical Guide to Developing Records
• Telephone slips, notes, email messages Disposition Schedules. August 1992.
that are facilitative not substantive in nature EPA 220-F-92-008
(e.g. “Mike, please call Ann about the Records Management Manual (2160), 1984.
project.”). Destroy when no longer needed. Updates in 1986 and 1988.
• Telephone slips, notes, email messages Safeguarding and Disposition of Official
that are substantive in nature. Either retain or Records. EPA Notice 88-1. Environmental
create official documents, such as memos Protection Agency, September 12, 1988.
for the record summarizing substantive
conversations, meetings, telephone calls, 10 Fr uently Asked Questions About
and the like, and destroy the notes. Records. [ flyer] August 1992.
EPA 220-F-92-01 0
• Drafts that are not circulated for comment
or review can be destroyed when no longer io Quick Ways to Improve Records
needed. Management in Any Office. [ flyer]
August 1992. EPA 220-F-92-01 1
• Drafts that contain only editorial changes
suggested by others can be destroyed when Using the Federal Records Center: A Guide
no longer needed. for Headquarters Staff. July 1991.
EPNIMSD/91 -004
• Drafts that contain substantive changes
What is a Record? [ poster] February 1992.
need more analysis. If the changes are EPA-220-E-92-001
important, you may wish to retain them as
supporting the documentation. In most cases, What Makes Papers Personal? [ flyer]
however, it is sufficient to summarize the August 1992. EPA 220-F-92-013
comments in a memo for record. In the case
of documents circulated for comment, you Contact the National Records Management
can always keep an original full copy and Program at (202) 260-5272 for copies of
then retain only the annotated pages of the these publications. .
copies with comments. .
National Records Management Program 4 October 1992
-------
What Makes
Papers Personal?
“But I don’t have any records!
All I have in my office are personal papers,
the stuff that I work on
working files and things like that.”
This is one of the most common responses a
records manager gets from EPA staff when he asks
what is in the file cabinets in their offices. And like
many common statements it is a misconception both
of what is a record and what constitutes personal
papers.
Personal papers are defined in Federal
regulations as:
“...documentarj materials, or any
reasonably segre gable portion thereof,
of a private or nonpublic character
that do not relate to or have an effect
upon the conduct of agency business.”
Many EPA employees do have personal papers
in their file cabinets or computers. There are three
generally accepted classes of personal papers:
1) Matenals accumulated before joining government
service that are not used subsequently in the
transaction of Government business;
2) Materials relating solely to an individual’s private
affairs, such as outside business pursuits,
professional affiliations, or private political
associations that do not relate to agency business;
3) Diaries, journals, or other personal notes that
are not prepared or used for, or circulated or
communicated in the course of, transacting
Government business.
Some examples of what are and are not personal
papers are included in the box on the other side of this
flyer.
How do I Decide What’s What?
There are four common tests for whether
something is a personal paper. Although these tests
are not definitive, they do offer general guidance for
making day-to-day decisions.
If a document:
/ Is a necessary part of the adequate and proper
documentation of an Agency program, its
functions, or its policy and decision making
process, it should be considered a record.
/ Relates solely to an individual’s own affairs, it is
probably a personal paper. If it relates to an
individual’s job, is done on Government time, or
with Government equipment, it should be
considered a record until proven otherwise.
/ Is prepared for your own use and is not circulated
to other staff or used as the basis for agency
action, it is probably a personal paper.
/ Is covered by a records disposition schedule, it
is a record.
Labeling materials as “personal,” “private,” or
“confidential” does not make them personal papers
Documents marked with those or similar designations
are Federal records and not personal papers if they
are used in the transaction of agency business.
For additional information see EPA Ethics
Advisory 89-2, Disposition of Federal Records
and Personal Papers, January 18, 1989.
August 1992
EPA-220-F-92-O1 3
What are Personal Papers?
National Records Management Program, Information Access Branch
Office of Information Resources Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Pnnted on Recycled Paper
-------
Can I Keep Copies of My Work?
Many employees want to keep copies of materials
which they have drafted, reviewed, or otherwise acted
upon. You are permitted to accumulate extra copies Of
these documents for your own convenience provided
that retention would not:
• Diminish the official record of the Agency,
• Violate confidentiality required by national
security, privacy, or other interests provided
by law. or
• Exceed normal administrative business
economies.
Technically speaking, such extra copies are
considered nonrecord material and not personal
papers. However, officials can arrange to take the
extra convenience copies with them when they leave
the Agency or move to another job within the Agency.
If you wish to keep copIes of your work, It is much
easIer to make the copies on a regular basIs rather
than to walt until you are departIng.
Managing Personal Papers
If you keep personal papers in your office there
are three simple rules you need to follow to manage
them properly.
• Clearly designate the files as personal papers.
• Maintain them separately from official Agency
records.
• If you receive a document that contains
information about both private matters and Agency
business, the document is a record, and the part that
concems the Agency business must be made part of
the official record. There are two means of doing this.
You can either immediately copy the document with
the personal information deleted and treat the
sanitized copy as an Agency record, or extract the
Agency business portion and add the extract to the
Agency files.
If you have any questions about personal papers,
you can contact Mike Miller, National Program
Manager for Records Management at (202) 260-5911,
or Don Nantkes, Alternate Agency Ethics Official, at
(202) 260-4550.
These Are “Personal Papers”
The line between personal papers and records is not always dear. Here are some examples of records and
personal papers. If you have any questions about specific documents or files you should ask trained records
management staff to review them.
• Your copies of personnel actions, performance
standards, and similar docunients.
These Aren’t “Personal Papers”
• Materials for your activities as a member of a
union or a professional association.
• A journal of daily events maintained for your
personal use that is separate from the schedule
of daily activities you use for your job.
The following are some examples of items that
many people feel are personal papers but are
actually Federal records:
course.
• Notes taken for your personal use at a training
• Calendars, appointment books, schedules of
activities, etc., that record your activities as a
Federal employee.
• Notes taken for your personal use at a
meeting that:
1) are not circulated to other staff, and
2) are not used as a basis for action.
• Drafts, background materials, notes, and other
documents prepared in the course of your
assigned duties, even though these are not made
part of the “official file.”
• Speeches given or artides written in your
capacity as an Agency employee or Government
official.
• Notes used to give a briefing to Agency staff.
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Superfund Records Management Contacts
February 2, 1993
Agencywide Contacts:
Michael L. Miller Program Manager, National Records Management Program,
(202) 260-5911, PM 2110; Dmail - MiIIer.Michael-OIRM
Joe Moeltner Records Manager/Records Support (contractor),
(202) 260-5272; PM-21 1 A; Dmail - Moeltner.Joseph
HEADQUARTERS CONTACTS
EPA Headquarters: 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
PrIncipal Contact : LISA JENKINS (202) 260-7951
AAs OffIce (and OMIS, PARMS) OS-lb [ WSM-M2416J
DMAIL: Jenkins.Usa; CCMAIL - LJENKINS
BETTE DRURY (202) 260-6757
OS-i 10; OMAIL: Drury.Bette
OFFICE of EMERGENCY and
REMEDIAL RESPONSE BEfl1 VAN EPPS (703) 603-8918
(OERR/OPM) 5201G [ CG1-12FLJ
DMAIL: Vanepps.Betti; CCMAIL-BVANEPPS
- Emergency Response Division GIL LASKOWSKI (703)603-8719
5202G [ CG1-13FLJ
DMAIL: Laskowski.Gilbert;
CCMAIL.-GLASKOWS
* = contractor
1
-------
- Hazardous Site Control Division CR A1 -D CN (703)603-8746
5203G [ CG1-14FL]
CCMAIL-GALDRESO
- Hazardous Site Evaluation Division DELORES (DE) SMITH (703)603-8856
5204G [ CG1-14FL]
DMAIL: Rodgers.Detores;
CCM AJL-DRODGERS
Office of Waste Programs DARLENE WILUAMS (202) 260-5549
Enforcement OS-505 (WSM-SE3641
(and PM&S) CCMAIL-DW 1LLIAMS
- CERCLA Enforcement SALLY MARTINY (703)603-8994
5502G [ CG1-13FL]
DMAIL: Martiny.SaIIy; CCMAIL-SMARTINY
REGIONAL CONTACTS
REGION 1: JFK Federal Building, Boston, MA 02203
Regional Records OffIcer MARGO PALMER (617) 565-1495
PMD/PIM; DMAIL: Paimer.Margo
Records Manager - Congress Street BARBARA A. CALLAHAN * (617) 565-4905
Records Centers PIM; DMAIL: Caliahan.Barbara
Remedial AR Coordinator MARGARET MEEHAN (617) 573-9647
[ PegJ (HES-CAN6); DMAIL:
REGION 2: 26 Federal Plaza, New York, NY 10278
Regional Records Officer JOSEPH CLORE (212) 264-5354
OMAIL: Clore.Joseph
Superfund Records Manager - Remedial JENNIE DELCIMENTO (212) 264-8676
Coordinator - AR
* = Contractor
2
-------
REGION 3: 841 Chestnut Street,
Regional Records Officer
Superfund Records Manager
REGION 4: 345 Courtland St,
Regional Records Officer
Supertund Records Manager
AR Coordinator
Superfund Records Center
REGION 5: 77 West Jackson
Regional Records Officer
Waste Management Division
Records Manager
Superfund Records Center
Regional Records Disposition Officer
* = Contractor
Philadelphia, PA
19107
BARBARA BROWN (215) 597-0580
(3PM51); DMAIL:Brown.BarbaraJ
ANNA M. BUTCH (215) 597-3037
(3HW16); DMAIL: Butch.Anna
NE, Atlanta, GA 30365
REBECGAKEMP (404) 347-2316
OPM/IMB; DMAIL: Kemp.Rebecca
DOUG HAIRE (404)347-2416
DMAIL: Haire.Douglas
HAROLD L KEY (404) 347-2930
DMAIL: Key.Harold
DEBBIE JOURDAN (404)347-2930
DMAIL: Jourdan.Debbie
TOM LOVE (404) 347-0506
Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604
LYNNCALVIN (312) 886-1305
MISR-12J; DMAIL: Calvin.Lynn
LYNETTE KINCHEN (312) 886-3451
5MC-1 9J
JANET PFUNDHELLER (312) 353-5821
H-7J; DMAIL: Pfundheller.Janet
JAMIE BELL (312) 886-0393
DMAIL: BelI.James
TRUDY RANDOLPH’ (312) 886-0894
DMAIL: Randolph.Truly
LOUISE SMITH (312) 353-6690
(MISR-12J); DMAIL: Smith.Louise
3
-------
REGION 6: 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202
Regional Records Officer NANCYYARBERRY (214) 655-6537
DMAIL: Yarberry.Nancy
Superfund Records Mgmt Coordinator DANA WESSELS (214) 655-6585
6H-M; DMAIL: Wessels.Dana
Superfund Records Center MARGARET ANDERSON * (214) 655-2257
6H-M; DMAIL: Anderson.Margaret
LOIS DILLARD (214) 655-6720
DMAIL: Dillard.Lois
REGION 7: 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101
Regional Records Officer CAROLBRAKEALL (913) 551-7527
PLMG/INFO/INSV; DMAIL: Brakeall.Caroi
Regional Records Center - RMO PATRICIA JONES (913) 551-7238
DMA1L: Jones.Pat
Records Center Manager PAT SHIRLEY (913) 551-7156
DMAIL: Shirley.Patricia
Waste Management Division BARRY THIERER (913) 551-7515
Records Officer IRMS; DMA1L: Thierer.Barry
Waste Management Records Center SHERRY HAYS (913) 551-7586
Manager DMA1L: Hays.Sherry
Removal Records Manager TERI HANKINS (913) 551-5151
DMAIL: Hankins.Tereasa
* = Contractor
4
-------
REGION 8: 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-2405
Regional Records Officer JACKIE RIVERA (303) 293-1700
DMAIL: Rivera.Jackie
AR RemediaV Records Mgmt Coord CAROLE S. MACY (303) 294-7038
8HWM-SR; DMAIL: Macy.Carole
AR RemovaL’ Records Mgmt Coord TINA ARTEMIS (303) 294-7039
(8HWM-ER); DMAIL: Artemis.Tina
CINDY OSBORNE (303) 391-6767
(8HWM-SR); Dmaii: Osborne.Cynthis
REGION 9: 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105
Regional Records Officer W0f9JEPEDERSON (415) 744-1517
P-5-3; DMAIL:
Superfund Records Manager/ ELAINECHANG (415) 744-2380
AR Coordinator H-7-4; DMAIL: Yee.Elaine
Superfund Records Center Manager DIANE WHITE * (415) 744-2166
H-6-1; DMA 1L: White.Diane
REGION 10: 1200 SIxth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101
Regional Records Officer ‘ [ ROBIN GONZALEZ (206) 553-2977
DMAIL: Gonzalez.Robinl
** Acting Regional Records Officer JULIENNE SEARS (206) 553-2969
DMAIL: Library.Reg.X
FERN HONORE (206) 553-4480
HW-074; DMAIL: Honore.Fern
Superfund Records Manager/ LYNN WILLIAMS (206) 553-2121
AR Coord. - Remedial & Removal HW-1 13; DMAIL: Williams.Lynn
KATHE RUTSALA * (206) 553-4817
HW-1 13; DMAIL: Rutsala.Kathe
* = Contractor
5
-------
LABORATORY AND FIELD OFFICE CONTACTS
New England Regional Laboratory
60 Westview Street, Lexington, MA 02173
Laboratory Records Manager PAM BRUNO (617) 860-4309
DMAIL: Bruno.Pam
Central Regional Laboratory
839 Bestgate Road, Annapolis, MD 21401
CLR Analytical Records Manager ANN i I LAGE (410) 573-2799
DMAIL: CMS22 [ Direct: 573-2640)
National Enforcement Investigations Center
Denver Federal Center, Bldg 53, Box 25227
Denver, CO 80225
NEIC Records Manager PAULA SMITH (303) 236-5147
* = Contractor
6
-------
Records Maintenance and Disposition Resources
“Using the Federal Records Center (FRC) : A Guide for Headquarters
Staff” (Available from EPA HQ Records Management Support
Contractor, Joe Moeltner 260-5272.)
“Procedures for Transfer of Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) Files
for Storage in the Federal Records Centers (FRCs) ‘ (Available from
Lisa Jenkins, OSWER Records Management Officer, 202-260-7951.)
“Agencywide Draft Disposition Schedules” (Available from EPA HQ
Records Management Support Contractor, Joe Moeltner 260-5272.)
“OSWER, Superfund and RCPA Draft Disposition Schedules” (Available
from Lisa Jenkins, OSWER Records Management Officer, 202-260-7951.)
“Automated SF135 Dispositioning Software t (Available in several
regions from the Superfund Records Management staff or from EPA HQ
Records Management Support Contractor, Joe Moeltner 260-5272.)
For more details on SDMS, please see: (available from Lisa Jenkins,
OSWER Records Management Officer, 202-260-7951.)
“Superfund Document Management Study: Initiation Phase
Report,” December 6, 1989;
“Superfund Document Management System: System Concept Volume
II: Alternatives Definition, Evaluation, and Recommendation,”
April 12, 1991;
“Superfund Document Management System: Detailed Functional and
Data Requirements,” May 6, 1991;
DRAFT “Superfund Document Management System Region 9 Benef it-
Cost Analysis,” December, 1992.
DRAFT “Superfund Document Management System Region 9 Pilot
Project Analysis,” December, 1992.
-------
DRAFT OF 10/7/92
U • S • EPA RECORDS CONTROL SCHEDULE
SERIES TITLE: Cost Recovery Records
PROGRAM: Agencywide/Superfund Program
EPA SERIES NO: 024A
NARA Sc riiiULE NO. Pending
(use this number to retire records to the FRC)
APPLICABILITY: Can be applied by all Superfund programs Agencywide
IDENTIFYING INFOR A1’IoW :
DESCRIPTION: Site—specific records relating to activities undertaken to
secure response costs from responsible parties at remedial and removal sites.
Records used for cost recovery actions include compilations of documentation
that describe technical aspects of the response action and cost accounting
i.nformation necessary to document the costs incurred to implement the response
action. Specific types of records include the cost recovery documentation
checklist , Software Package for Uniaue Reports (SPUR), agency indirect costs,
categorical cost summaries, contractor cost information, cost reports and
invoices, field expenses, letter reports/Pre—FY86 cost vouchers, payment
records, timesheets, travel vouchers, work assiqmen , cost summary package,
cost recovery deliverables, closeout meiitörandum, and the 10 point document.
ARRANGEMENT: Arranged by site
TYPE OF RECORDS: RESTRICTIONS:
Case files Privacy Act
Confidential Business Information
Enforcement Sensitive Information
MEDIUM: VITAL RECORDS:
Microform, paper
FUNCTIONS SUPPORTED:
Program operations
SPECIFIC LEGAL REQUIREMENTS:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980,
as amended, Sections 104, 106, and 107, 42 USCA 9604, 9606, and 9607
40 CFR 300
-------
EPA SERIES NO. 024A
DISPOSITION INFORKATION :
FINAL DISPOSITION:
Disposable
TRANSFER TO FRC PERMI&-x D:
Yes
FILE BREAK INSTRUCTIONS: Break file when cost recovery action is completed.
DISPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS: Retain
years after the completion of the
after date on which the last cost
concluded, then transfer to FEC.
transferred to the FRC. Destroy
in office for no longer than the later of 6
remedial action (or delisting) or 3 years
recovery action relating to the site is
If volume necessitates, records may be
30 years after file break.
APPLICATION GUIDANCE :
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION: Records required for cost recovery support.
AGENCYWIDE GUIDANCE:
?ROGRAJ4 OFFICE GUIDANCE/ DESCRIPTIVE INPORI4ATION:
CUSTODIAL INFORMATION :
CONTROLLING UNIT:
Name:
Location:
Inclusive Dates:
Mail Code:
Telephone:
Volume on Hand (Feet):
Annual Accumulation:
(feet or inches)
CONTROL INFORMATION :
RELATED ITEMS: EPA 023A, EPA 025A
Office:
Room:
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY
NARA SCHEDULE NOS: NC1—412—85—27/II—7, NC1—4]2--85—27/III—6
Multiple units CONTACT POINT:
Name:
Approva.L
ApprovaL
entry
ast
Date
EPA
Date
NARA
Date
5/30/91
Modified
10/7/92
-------
SDMS FACT SHEET
February 3, 1993
The following is the information about the Superfund Document
Management System as it is currently envisioned by the Project
Management Team.
Platform:
The Netware Compatible Image Processing System platform from
the IBM-IPS contract. Includes Highland Technologies’
HighView (with redaction and work flow capabilities),
TechLaw’s Intellex (with optical Character recognition (OCR)
and full text indexing and retrieval capabilities) and
LaserData hardware. The platform works on a Novell network,
like those currently implemented in the regions.
Implementation in Regions:
Region 9 Pilot planned for FY’93 after some testing to
validate that the NCIPS platform meets the SDMS requirements.
The current plan is for the system to be made available after
the pilot to all regions to implement as they see fit.
Link with SCRIPS:
The relationship between SCRIPS and SDMS is still being
discussed, but the SCRIPS project management does envision
moving to the same NCIPS platform sometime in the near future
(within 2 years). SCRIPS images can be translated to SDMS
images. SDMS can include the fields currently being used to
identify images in SCRIPS.
-------
SESSION V
MAINTENANCE OF COST RECOVERY FILES
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
CERCLA COST RECOVERY SECTION (3HW12)
215/597—3171
FAX: 215/597—9890
BULLET ITEMS
I. Superfund Site Files
-Structure of the Superfund Files
—PFE Documents
—Access to Files and File Room
II. Maintenance of Cost Recovery Files
Within the Central File Room
—Structure of Cost Recovery File
—Access to Cost Recovery Files
III. Regional Repository of Closed Out Contract Files
-------
CERCLA FILE CIRCULATION / check-out
Site Name:
Site Type: PA/SI
EPA File User —
NPL
REMOVAL
EXT__
State 01
DSN:
Q eck-out Date: ________
Rebmi Date:
# of folders
lb
IC
Id PVE
le
SITE IDENTIFICATION (blue)
Backgroun0 ia
Notification
PA/SI Reports
HRS Reports
Correspondence
subsection
Disposition/NPL Rank if
REMEDIAL ENFORCEMENT
PLANNING (red)
PRP Search Reports
PRP General Corr
orrbyPRP
PRP Gen Reports
Orders-Negotiations
Draft Order
Signed Order
Cor liance Mon
REMEDIAL RESPONSE
PLANNING (red)
0
# of folders
2a
2b
2c
2d
2e
2IPFE
2g
2h
# of folders
Work Plan 3a
RI/FS Reports 3b
Health Risk/Endangrmt 3c
3d
p.rabi. UnIt
Correspondence
subsection
R Work Assignments 3e
ROD/EDO 3f
State-Sprfnd Contracts 3g
REMEDIAL ENFORCEMENT
IMPLEMENTATION (red)
Negotiations/Stlmnts
Draft Consent Decree
Final Consent Decree
Draft Unilateral Order
Final Unilateral Order
# of folders
4a
4b PEE
4c
4d
4e
Sa
Sb
Sc
Sd
Se
Sf
REMEDIAL IMPLEMENTATION (red)
# of folders
Op.rabl. Unit
Remedial Design
Remedial Action
Deletion
peration & maint
Correspondence
subsection
Assignments
EMERGENCY REMOVAL
(orange)
# of folders
PEE echnical Docs
PEE perational Docs
Financial Docs
SC Report
Photo Doc
REMOVAL ENFORCEMENT
RESPONSE (orange)
# of folders
ç PRP Search Reports
PRP General Corr
:
PRP Gen Reports
• Drders-Negotiations
• Draft Order
• Signed Order
Notk Plan
• FeasibilIty Study
• Con llance Mon
- Correspondence
IMAGERY (goldenrod)
Imagery
ereized Docs
Bound Imaclery
6a
6b
Sc PEE
Sd
Se
7a FEE
mm
7c
7d
7e
7? PIE
79
7h
71
7j
___ 7k
# of folders
8a
Sb
Sc
CONGRESSIONAL
CORRESPONDENCE (silver)
# of folders
Entire File
9
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
(yellow)
# of folders
Community Relat Plan ¶Oa
Fact Sheets i Ob
Meeting Summanes bc
Newspaper articles i
Meeting Nctes/Corr 1 Oe
FOIA 101
COST DOCUMENTS
restñcted access
LEGAL ACTIONS (gold)
Action:
.
.
U
.
.
U
U
U
.
U
.
.
— #offolders
aseDvt 12a PEE
* 12b
I 2c
120
2e
121
I 2g
1 2h
______ I 2i
121
12k PF
121
I 2m
Co r r aint
Pldngs/Mtns/Crt Decis
Discovery Req/U.S.
Discovery Req/Del end
Technical Evidence
PRP Evidence
Witnesses
Depositions
Legal Research/Notes
Settlements
Admin Record Index
DEntlre File
II
SESSION V
PRESENTER:
Checked-out Folders :
LESLIE VASSALLO
-------
ARC S ____________ ___ ___
AT DR ____________ ___ ___
CLP ____________ ___ ___
EERU ____________ ___ ___
E RC ____________ ___ ___
RERCS ___________ ___ ___
ESAT ____________ ___ ___
FIT ____________ ___ ___
NEIC ____________ ___ ___
EPIC/EMSL ____________ ___ ___
REAC ____________ ___ ___
REM ___________ ___
I AG s ____________ ___
SCA ___________ ___
State
Contracts ________________________
TAT ______________________ liz
TES _______________________ llaa
R&D ___________ iibb
SESSION V
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
Site Name: _________________________________ Check Out: _____
State or DSN: __________________________________ File Update:
Site Type: PA/SI _____ REMOVAL _____ NPL _____ New File: _____
Date
EPA File User: EXT Date Returned______
CERCLA FILE CIRCULATION & UPDATE
Cost Recovery Financial Package
Case Resolution Doc ___ ___ ha Payroll (HQ&Region) ___ ___ hf
Cost Rec Checklist ___ ___ lib Agency Indirect Costs ___ ___ hg
SPURS ___ ___ hic Travel (HQ&Region) ___ ___ hih
General Correspondence ___ ___ lid Prejudgment Interest ___ ___ lii
Cost summary report ___ ___ lie Misc Expenses ___ ___ Ii )
Contracts by Contractor
. .•.• •.• .. .. V. •.
,
ilk
iii
1 lm
un
110
lip
liq
1’, .
- LI
his
lit
hlu
liv
11w
lix
Folders
-------
CONTRACTOR INVOICES
1. EERU
IT Corp.
68-03-3255
2. EPIC
Bionencs
68-03-3161
3. FIT
CH2M Hill
68-01-6692
E&P
68-01-6056
NUS
68-01-6699
4. NEIC
Free C. Hart
68-01-6640
68-01-6546
Techiaw
68-01-6838
FIT CONTRACT
STAT
E&E
68-01-S 158
Weston
68-01-6669
6. TES I
GCA
68-01-6769
7. TES II
PRC
68-01-7037
8. CLP
VL R
68-01-6354
68-01-6702
68-01-7253
(TECHNICAL DIRECTIVE DOCUMENTS)
E&E
68-01-6056
1. Fiscal Year 1980
8005-01 to 8009-14
2. Fiscal Year 1981
8010-01 to 8104-27
8105-01 to 8109-34
3. Fiscal Year 1982
8110-01 to 8209-24
4. Fiscal Year 1983
8210-01 to 8210-05
TAT CONTRACT
1. 1001-1199(8210-01/8303-19)
2. 1200-1399 (8303-20/8306-38)
3. 1400-1599 (8306-39/8401-07)
4. 1600-1799 (8401-08/8408-07)
5. 1800-1865 (8408-08/8409-41)
6. 3001-3199 (8410-28/8501-15)
7. 3200-3399 (8501-16/8506-13)
8. 3400-3476 (8506-14/8509-12)
NU S
68-01-6699
1. Fiscal Year 1983
8211-01 to 8303-43
8304-01 to 8309-10
2. Fiscal Year 1984
8310-01 to 8409-15
3. Fiscal Year 1985
8410-01 to 8509-45
4. Fiscal Year 1986
85 10-01 to 86 10-29
NUS
68-01-7346
1. Fiscal Year 1986
8611-01 to 8612-107
2. Fiscal Year 1987
8701-01 to 8703-75
8704-01 to 8706-42
8707-01 to 8712-23
3. Fiscal Year 1988
8801-01 to 8805-13
8806-01 to 88 12-25
4. Fiscal Year 1989
8901-01 to 8905-56
8906-01 to 8912-52
SESSION V
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
(TECHNICAL DIRECTION DOCUMENTS)
Weston
68-01-6669
9. 5001-5 199 (8510-01/8604-10)
10. 5200-5342 (8604-11/8609-19)
11. 6001-8030 (8610 01/P1fl1 83)
Special Projects
A. 0101-0256 (821 1-S1/8409-S5)
B. 0301-0426 (8501-S 1/8509-S6)
C.050 1-0803 (8510-S 1/8701 -S3)
-------
1. SITE IDENTIFICATION
A. BACKGROUND SESSION V
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
• Site file index
• Dump Site Summary Sheet
• Most recent CERCLA printout
• Pre-Superfurtd activity on site including correspondence, reports
(e.g., RCRA permits)
• State activity on site
B. NOTIFICATION
• NOTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE ACTIVITY FORM
• POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE IDENTIFICATION FORM
• POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE LOG
C. PA/SI REPORTS
• Preliminary Assessment Forms and bound reports
• Site Investigaticn Forms and bound reports
• Site Inspection F
IPIFIE D. HRS REPORTS
cb 1 c .
• I- IRS Reports
• Reference Package
• PA Score sheets
• Mitre model form aI £ J JL L
• All Correspondence containing the HRS SCORE
E. CORRESPONDENCE
• Administrative package
• Contamination Potential Forms
• Field Trip Reports
• HRS Deficiency Checklists
• Internal and external correspondence and memoranda
• Peer Review Comments on PA/SI
• Sampling data and reports
• Scopes of work
• Site Safety Plans
• Site visit reports
• State Readiness Questionaire
• Technical Direction Documents (TDDs)
• Work Plans
12/29/92
-------
IFIFIE F. DISPOSITION/NPL RANKING
• Tentative Disposition Forms
• Final Strategy Determination Forms
• Cerclis Correction Forms containing DeLex miiiations for F Luie Site
Actions ONLY (NOT to be confused with any other Cerclis Correction
Forms)
12/29/92
-------
2. REMEDIAL ENFORCEMENT PLANNING
IP ; ,. PRP SEARCH RET P S LESLIE VASSALLO
• Ability to Pay findings (financial assessment of PRPs)
• Any analysis of PRPs -- e.g., investigator’s notes
• Interview summaries
• PRP search reports (may include Attachments and Interim Reports)
and Work Plans for search reports (often contain CBI)
• Title searches, deeds, and documents related to PRP search
IPIFIE B. PRP SEARCH - GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
• All documents regarding PRP work assignment
- updates
- transmittal letters
- status reports (often contain CBI)
- cost estimates (often contain CBI)
• Close-out memo (where no viable PRPs identified)
• Correspondence with the Secretary of State and other government
agencies requesting information about PRPs
• Correspondence within EPA about PRP search
• DRAFI’ 104(e) and Notice Letters
• Dun & Bradstreet Reports
• Interagency meeting notes, phone records, and memoranda regarding
PRP search
• Lists of PRPs
• Responsible party status sheets
C. PRP SEARCH - CORRESPONDENCE BY PRP
• 104(e) letter and response
• Internal and external meeting notes, phone records, and memoranda
related to PRP (PFE) — may often be filed in 2B, e.g., all telecons with
PRPs would be grouped alphabetically and placed in a folder labeled
“l’elecons with PRPs”
• Notice letter and response Genera1 and Special Notice letters for RI/FS
negotiations • RD/RA notice letters are filed in 4a***
D. PRP-GENERATED REPORTS AND DATA
• Bound reports, documents, or data generated by PRP but not accepted
by EPA as a Work Plan or RI/FS (e.g., a report submitted by a PRP or
group of PRI’s that identifies additional PRPs)
12/29/92
-------
E. ORDERS AND DECREES - NEGOTIATIONS
• Access Agreements
• Correspondence including meeting notes, phone records, and
memoranda relatir ‘o orders and decrees concernin , rf -,-m nr-
RIJFS (including communication with the state)
IPIFIE F. DRAFT ORDERS . DECj E S. AI’LP COMMENTS
• All drafts of orders and decrees pertaining to RI/FS implementation
• Comments regarding draft orders and decrees
G. SIGNED ORDERS AND DECREES
• Copies of orders and decrees bearing necessary signatures
H. COMPLIANCE MONITORING
• Reports and correspondence pertaining to compliance (e.g., progress
reports, compliance schedules) Specific reports required by the order
and/or decree such as the RI/FS, are filed in the appropriate category in
section 3.
12/29/92
-------
3. REMEDIAL RESPONSE PLANNING
A IAI 0 T T T AN SESSI N
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
• Any Plan regarding RI/FS action
• Final work plan approvals
• Site Operation Plan
• Project Operations Plan
• Proposed Plan
• Quality Assurance Project Plan
• Site Health and Safety Plans
• Site-specific Sampling and Analysis Plan
• Treatability Study Work Plan
• Work plans
B. REMEDIAL NVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORTS
• RI/FS Reports and reference packages
C. HEALTH RISK/ENDANGERMENT ASSESSMENT (HR/EA )
HR/EA
• Draft Risk Assessment
• Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARS)
D. CORRESPONDENCE
• Comments regarding WPs, RI/FSs, etc. (excluding RODs)
• Interagency agreements, contracts and invitations for bids
• Internal and external correspondence including meeting notes,
phone records, (including correspondence with PRPs regarding
technical issues)
• Reports and data not specifically related to WPs, RI/FSs, or HR/EAs:
Chain of Custody,
Sampling Data,
Survey Reports
Trip reports
Traffic Reports,
Treatability Studies
12/29/92
-------
E WORK ASSIGNMENTS
• Contract Pricing Proposal (if not included with WP)
• Procurement request orders
• Public Vouchers
• Scope of work
• Status and progress reports (MAY BE CBI)
• Work assignment amendments, including Stop Work documents
F. RECORD QF . . . .QECISION/ENFORCEMENT DECISION DOCUMENT
• Copies of ROD/EDD
• Comments on ROD/EDD
• Internal and external correspondence pertaining to ROD/EDD
• Remedial Alternative sheets/ Responsiveness Summaries
• Proposed Remedial Action Plan (PRAP)
G. STATE-SUPERFUND CONTRACTS
12/29/92
-------
4. REMEDIAL ENFORCEMENT IMPLEMENTATION
SESSION V
A. NEGoTIATrg ,sETrLEMENTs PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
• Authorization for Reimbursement forms and comments
• Internal and external correspondence including meeting notes, phone
records, and memoranda -- including communication with the state --
relating to 106/107 consent decrees or unilateral orders (these pertain to
RD/RA implementation or a combination of RD/RA implementation
and recovery of past costs)
IPIFIE B. DRAFT CONSENT DECREES AND COMMENTS
• Comments on the draft consent decrees
• Draft consent decrees (RD/RA)
C. FINAL CONSENT DECREE
• Consent decrees bearing necessary signatures
IPIPIE D. DRAFT UNILATERAL ORDER
• Comments on the unilateral orders
• Drafts of all unilateral orders pertaining to RD/RA implementation
E. FINAL UNILATERAL ORDER
• Unilateral orders bearing necessary signatures
12/29/92
-------
6. EMERGENCY REMOVAL
SESSION V
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
A. TECHNICAL
• Analytical data, sampling, mor 1 toring
• Analytical Package, bid sheets, Centers for Disease Control Package,
correspondence, Chain of Custody, Quality Assurance/Quality Control
sheets
• Drum inventory
• General correspondence
• Manifests, Disposal Reports, Disposal options
• Medical log
• Milestone chart
• Miscellaneous technical information, technical reports
• 0. H. Materials Analysis Report, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)
B. OPERATIONAL
• Action Memorandum, Time exemptions
• Background information
• Business cards
• Chronology/narrative of events
• Command Post Signs
• Discrepancy Log
• Funding Requests, Additional Funding Requests, Ceiling Increases
• General correspondence, information
• Incident Notification Reports
• Justification for Approval
• Legal documents
• Locks, keys
• Maps, sketches
• Operational reports
• Organizational chart
• Pollution Reports (poireps)
• Project Summary
• Removal Site Assessment Forms
• Removal Site Discovery Forms
• Removal Site’ Initialization Forms
• Right of Entry Agreements
• Scope of Work
• Site Initialization Forms
• Site Monitoring Logs
• Site Safety Protocol, Site Safety Plan
• Trip report
12/29/92
-------
7. REMOVAL ENFORCEMENT RESPONSE
SESSION V
IFIFIE A. PRPSEARCH REPORTS PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
• Ability to Pay findings (financial assessment of PRPs)
• Any analysis of FRi’s -- e.g., investigator s notes
Interview summaries
• PRP search reports (may include Attachments and Interim Reports)
and Work Plans for search reports (often contain CBI)
• Title searches, deeds, and documents related to PRP search
IPIFIE B. PRP SEARCH - GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
• All documents regarding PRP work assignment
- updates
- transmittal letters
- status reports (often contain CBI)
- cost estimates (often contain CBI)
• Close-out memo (where no viable PRPs identified)
• Correspondence with the Secretary of State and other government
agencies requesting information about PRPs
• Correspondence within EPA about PRP search
• DRAFT 104(e) and Notice Letters
• Dun & Bradstreet Reports
• Interagency meeting notes, phone records, and memoranda regarding
PRP search
• Lists of FRI’s
• Responsible party status sheets
C. PRP SEARCH - CORRESPONDENCE BY PRP
• 104(e) letter and response
• Internal and external meeting notes, phone records, and memorinda
related to PRP (PFE) — may often be filed in 2B, e.g., all telecons with
PRPs would be grouped alphabetically and placed in a folder labeled
9’elecons with PRPs”
• Notice letter and response (General and Special Notice letters for RI/FS
negotiations ***RDIRA notice letters are filed in 4a***
D. PRP-GENERATED REPORTS AND DATA
• Bound reports, documents, or data generated by PRP
12/29/92
-------
8. IMAGERY
SESSION V
A. IMAGERY PRSENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
• Maps, photographs, sketches, dr vings, slides, and video c sscttcz cf
the site, computer discs
B. OVERSIZED DOCUMENTS
C. BOUND IMAGERY
9. CONGRESSIONAL
CORRESPONDENCE
•
Correspondence
between EPA and
members of U.S. legislative
bodies
10.
COMMUNITY
INVOLVEMENT
A. COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN
B. FACT SHEETS. PRESS RELEASES, PUBLIC NOTICES
C. MEETING SUMMARIES, TRIP REPORTS, CORRESPONDENCE WITH
PUBLIC
• Correspondence with the public including individual addresses,
community group correspondence, and community group literature
• Meeting summaries including sign-in sheets and meeting
announcements
• Public comments on RI/FS, RDRA, etc...
• Technical Assistance Grants (TAG) and corresponding documentation
• Trip reports
D. NEWSPAPER ARTICLES
E. INTI KAGENCY MEETING NOTES. GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
• Addresses
• Business cards
• Correspondence with the State
• Press queries
F. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT ( FOIA) REOUESTS AND RESPONSES
12/29/92
-------
SESSION V
PRESENTER: LESLIE VASSALLO
12. LEGAL ACTIONS
IFIFIE A. PRN/REFERRAL /CASE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
• Covcr letter and attachments (including Technical Support
Document), Civil Litigation Report (referral *)
• Decision Not to Pursue Cost Recovery
Notify Records Center staff of dassification of each and distinct
referral that is sent (i.e., which action it pertains to). All subsections of 12
will be labeled accordingly in order to keep each referral together with its
related documentation but separate from the other referrals.
B. CORRESPONDENCE
• Claims of business confidentiality (the claims themselves may
be CBI, please indicate) these may be referring to documents submitted
as part of a 104(e) response, if this is the case, they should be filed in
section 2c or 7c
• Internal correspondence may be PFE, please indicate if this is
the case
C COMPLAINT
• Includes Answer to complaint
D. PLEADINGS/MOTIONS/COURT DECISIONS
• Includes Motions, Judgements, Warrants, Stipulations, Affidavits,
Subpoenas, Orders, Waivers of Defenses, Miscellaneous Notices
(e.g., notice of extension), and Pleadings Bible, LIENS
E. DISCOVERY REQUESTS - U.S. REQUEST TO DEFENDANTS and
DEFENDANTS RESPONSE
• e.g., Requests for Admissions, Interrogatories, and responses
F. DISCOVERY REQUESTS - DEFENDANTS REQUEST TO U.S. and U.S.
RESPONSE
• e.g., Requests for Admissions, Interrogatories, and responses
12/29/92
-------
02 ’a3’93 15:52 US EP BOSTON.M REGION 1 009
SESSION V
“Naintei ance of Coet Recovery PiLes”
PRESENTER: Joan Maddal.ezzo
Region I
Bup.rfun Enforcement Support Section,
Cost Recovery Vnit
(617) 573—9642
VAX (617) 573—0662
Region I retains original and one set of redacted work
performance documentation within region
• The work performance documentation will be added to the
cost documentation section already established at the
Region I Records Center
• CEAT contractor retains one set of work performance
documentation
• CEAT contractor also naintains central file of multi-site
work assignments for future use at other Region I sites
-------
10
-------
11
-------
O S7 q
S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
FROI 4 ’
N N 3 1992
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Superfund Co Recove y Ca e Support
FROM: Don R. Cia
Assistant Ad •nistr or
TO: Directors, Waste M agenient Division,
Regions I, IV, V , and VII
Directors, Hazardous Waste Management Division
Regions III, VI, VIII, and IX
Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division
Region II
Director, Hazardous Waste Division
Region X
I am writing to request your immediate attention to a
serious concern relating to the support provided for cost
recovery actions in the Superfund enforcement program.
Specifically, the concern relates to the compilation of
documentation and information to support the Agency’s expenditure
of response costs at Superfund sites in these cases.
In preparing and supporting case referrals to the Department
of Justice, and entering negotiations with PRPs for recovery of
past costs, Superfund policy and guidance requires compilation of
certain evidence, i.e., documentati n and information, to support
the elements of a CERCLA §107 case. In the context of the
government’s expenditure of response costs, the evidence consists
of work performed documentation and cost information.
1 See “Model Litigation Report for CERCLA Sections 106 and
107 and RCRA Section 7003,” OSWER Directive No. 9835.11—1, June
21, 1989; “The Superfund Cost Recovery Strategy,” OSWER Directive
No. 9832.13, July 29, 1988; and, “Procedures for Documenting
Costs for CERCLA §107 Actions,” OSWER Directive No. 9832.0—la,
January 30, 1985.
Pnnted on Recycled Paper
-------
—2—
Cost information is derived from the Agency’s Integrated
Financial Management System (IFMS) and summarized in the
automated Superfund Cost Organization and Recovery Enhancement
System (SCORES). OSWER staff has worked with the Office of
Administration and Resources Management (OARN) in the
installation of SCORE$ in all Regions this past fiscal year.
Generally, implementation of this system to provide cost
summaries in support of cost recovery cases has proceeded well to
date in the Regions.
Of major concern, however, are our procedures for compiling
work performed documentation in support of cost recovery cases.
Work performed documents, consisting of records describing the
response action, that are generated by Waste Management Division
(WMD) staffs, contractors, ..states, and other federal--agencies,
have not been compiled timely or completely in support of
referrals or negotiations. In fact, our efforts in this regard
have been inconsistent among all Regions and unsatisfactory in
many cases. This is clear from Headquarters EPA and DOJ staffs
review of referrals, delays by DOJ in filing cases because of
incomplete referrals, and the need in many cases to expend
extensive resources to compile these documents after a case is
filed.
Compilation of documents and information for cost recovery
cases is primarily the responsibility of the Waste Management
Division unless delegated elsewhere in the Region by the Regional
Administrator. Therefore, I request that each of you report to
me by December 1, 1992 the name of the responsible Regional
manager, and your Region’s procedures for compiling work
performed documentation and cost information and documentation in
support of cost recovery cases. If your Region has no
procedures, I would like a report by the same date of your plans
to establish adequate procedures for this critical cost recovery
case support. Please provide these reports to Bruce Diamond,
Director, Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, Mail Code OS-500.
I recognize that our Superfund enforcement resources have
been straight—lined for several fiscal years and we are strained
to achieve our ambitious enforcement program goals. You should
be commended for the many Superfund enforcement program
accomplishments recorded in FY 1992.
Nevertheless, our crisis management approach to cost
recovery case support is inefficient and must be addressed
through improved procedures. The cost recovery program has been
the subject of extensive reviews and audits by GAO, OIG, and
congressional committees. Many of these studies focus on the
need for improvements to our cost recovery documentation efforts-.
As a result of the findings and recommendations of these reviews
and other considerations, OSWER has designated cost recovery as a
Federal Manager’s Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) material
-------
—3—
weakness for FY 1993. We must begin to apply corrective actions
to improve our cost recovery program.
I urge your cooperation and support in addressing this
serious concern. If there are any questions regarding this
memorandum, please do not hesitate to contact Frank Biros, Chief,
Cost Recovery Branch, OWPE, at FTS (703)603-8954.
cc: John Cruden, DOJ
Herbert H. Tate, Jr. OE
Bruce Diamond, OWPE
Bill White, OE
Jack Shipley, FMD
Regional Counsels, Regions I — X
CERCLA Branch Chiefs, Regions I - X
-------
12
-------
, O Sr 4 ,
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. I) C. 20460
4( pq 0 1t
NOV I992
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Superfund Cost Recovery Case Sup
FROM: Bruce M. Diamond, Director
Office of Waste Programs En ement
TO: Distribution
This memorandum is a followup to the inter—office, inter-
agency meeting held at the Department of Justice (DOJ) on Monday,
October 19, 1992 to discuss issues relating to Superfund cost
recovery enforcement case support.
We have compiled the attached draft Action Item List to
address the major issues discussed at this meeting. The draft
list includes Action Items and Office Responsibilities for
followup. I ask each of you to review he Action Items and
Responsibilities, and provide my staff with your comments by
November 30, 1992. We request that you identify lead individuals
to address assigned issues.
I have instructed my staff to keep track of all the Action
Items and to schedule meetings to discuss followup activities.
One meeting will be scheduled to discuss the applicability of the
indirect cost rates proposed in the cost recovery regulation to
current cost recovery cases. This meeting will be scheduled with
representatives from DOJ, the Office of Enforcement (OE), and the
Financial Management Division (FMD). A second meeting will be
scheduled to discuss superfund audits, site—specific accounting,
and work performed documentation. This meeting will be scheduled
with representatives of DOJ, OE, FMD, and the Procurement and
Contracts Management Division (PcMD). These meetings will be
scheduled immediately. At these meetings we expect to work
together to identify necessary followup actions, including policy
formulation and guidance development, and establish schedules for
accomplishment of these tasks.
The cost recovery program has been the subject of intensive
reviews and audits by the General Accounting Office, Office of
Inspector GePeral j nd several obngre s1onel cb u1uitteeS . OSWER
has designated the program as a Federal Managers Financial
Integrity Act (FMFIA) material weakness for FY 1993.
Primted i RecycI.d Paper
-------
—7..-
I strongly support the efforts identii ed on the Action Item
List to improve our management of cost recovery in Superfund.
request your cooperation and assistance in addressing these
measures which will enhance our success in the Superfund cost
recovery program.
If there are any questions or comments concerning the Action
Item List, please contact Frank Biros, Chief, Cost Recovery
Branch, OWPE, at FTS (703)603—8954.
Distribution:
Department of Justice--
John Cruden, Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section
Bruce Gelber, DOJ
Steve Novick, DOJ
Office of Enforcement—Superfund——
Bill White, Enforcement Counsel for Superfund Enforcement
Ben Lammie, OE
Financial Management Division——
Jack Shipley, Acting Director, FMD
Ron Bachand, Acting Deputy Director, FMD
Bill Cooke, Acting Chief, Superfund Accounting Branch (SAB)
Charles Young, FMD, SAB
Procurement and Contracts Management Division——
Michael E. Bower, Acting Director, P MD
Bill Topping, Acting Asscciate Director for Superfund/RCRA
Procurement Operations
Dale Roberson, P MD
David Younger, PcMD
Region 2
Leslie Peterson, Chief, Cost Recovery Section, ERRD
Paul Simon, Office of Regional Counsel
Region 3
ames Webb, Chief, CERCLA Cost Recovery Section, HWMD
___.._—Margaret Cardamone, Office of Regional Counsel
OSWER-Superfund Revitalization Office (SRO)
Ika Joiner
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE)
Sally Mansbach, Director, CERCLA Enforcement Division
Frank Biros, Chief, Cost Recovery Branch
Lee Jennings
cc: Dianne Thiel, Superfund Lead Region Coordinator,
Region 8
Da1 shiel; CO-Chaif, ORC LeadRegiöfl Co t RecOVe ry
Workgroup, Region 7
-------
ATTACHMENT
DRAFT
CERCLA COST DOCUMENTATION
ACTION ITEMS
November 9, 1992
ACTION
ITEM
I. Work Performed Documentation
RESPONSIBILITY
o Issue memo requesting Regions to identify
responsible managers for supervising
compilation of cost documents and to
describe how cost packages (including
work performed documents) are assembled
and by whom.
0 Issue memo to RPM5, DPOs, DCOs, lAG
Agencies, State Cooperative Agreement
Agencies describing their obligations
under new cost recovery rule.
O Prepare guidance materials—-revise
Procedures Manual (“Blue Book ” ____
-r Conduct training of Regional personnel--
cost recovery training video, live
training with Region 3 assistance.
0 Contract modifications--Require
contractors to include work assignment
or TDD numbers on invoices. (Discuss
concern relative to number of TDD5).
0 Establish centralized repositories of
certain categories of cost documents——
eg., historic cost documents; zone
contracts, headquarters contracts, etc.
0 Identify record custodian for each
category of cost document.
II. Audits
OWPE
OWPE-fl
OWPE-DOJ--
Ass istance of
Region 3
P MD
PCMD-FMD
OWPE-FMD-
P MD
0 Site-specific accounting of disallowed
costs.
O Ensure accurate - and timely - couflt-ir g
of audit adjustments in SCORES; ensur
timely notice to Regional Offices.
FMD
OWPE
FMD
-------
—2—
o Establish centralized repository of
audit reports and work papers. PCMD
O Establish procedures for post-
judgment reimbursement (or billing) of
additional costs to account for audit
adjustments (as contemplated by Hardage
and American Cyanamid decisions). FMD
O Develop guidance on how to address the
impact of post-judgment audits during
settlement negotiations. OWPE
O Schedule meeting to discuss all above
audit issues with responsible offices. OWPE
III. Site-Specific Accounting
O Reissue guidance memo on site—specific
billing in Superfund (especially for
supervisory and management staff, enforcement
and response activities, in Headquarters FMD—OE—
and the Regions). OWPE
O Review EPA timesheets to ensure adequate FMD-OE—
level of work performed documentation. OWPE
o Discuss issue of separate accounting for
subsites and divisible portions of
sites. FMD
o Schedule meeting to discuss all above
site—specific accounting issues with
responsible offices and DOJ. OWPE
IV. CBI Issues
O Ensure implementation of proposed CBI
rule-—facilitate disclosure of CBI to
authorized representatives and PRPS. OGC
o Examine issue of segregating CBI in
EPA contract documents. OWPE
0 Ensure followup on CBI issues. OWPE
-------
_.) —
V. Application of New Indirect Cost Rates
O Schedule separate meeting with DOJ, OE,
FMD to discuss application of new
indirect cost rates in negotiations/
litigation. OWPE
O Develop unqualified annual list of
indirect cost rates. FMD
-------
13
-------
Memorandum
ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED
NOT RELEASABLE UNDER FOIA
ubjcct
Date
Level
of Documentation Needed for
Filing
CERCLA Cost Recovery Actions
November 16, 1992
To From
EPA Regional Counsel Bruce S. Gelber
Superfund Branch Chiefs Deputy Chief
Environmental Enforcement
Section
As you know, to establish our entitlement to CERCLA
response costs, we need to present documents or testimony that
demonstrates the amount of money expended on a site and describes
the work performed or actions taken in return for those
expenditures. In light of this requirement, the proposed Cost
Recovery Rule provides that, to support claims for cost recovery,
EPA will maintain documentation that “provides an accurate
accounting of federal costs incurred” and “describes the site—
specific response actions taken” with respect to the site. 57
Fed. Reg. 34742, 34753-54 (Aug. 6, 1992) (proposed 40 C.F.R.
300.160(a)).
The first category described in the rule (usually
referred to as “cost” or “financial” information) includes such
documents as vouchers, invoices, purchase orders, time sheets,
Treasury schedules, and other documents that show requests for
payment and the amount and date of payment. The second category
(usually referred to as “work-performed” docuin ritation) includes
contracts, lAGs, work assignments , TDDS, progress reports, and
other documents that describe the workpe tëã A Tte.
These standards are not new, but are consistent with the
documentation courts have required to support cost recovery
claims. Accompanying this memorandum are several lists that
identify in some detail the types of documents and testimony
required for each category of costs normally incurred at a
Superfund site.
The 1989 Model Litigation Report for CERCLA § 106 and
107 Cases provides that a omp1ete cost package containing the
above—referenced information should be available at the Region at
the ine a case is referred to€he Departim nt t f Justice . This
package should include a relatively current SCORES su nmary and
complete backup documentation, including both financial and work-
performed documentation, for each entry in the cost summary. In
practice, however, a complete cost package is rarely available
prior to filing the complaint. In many cases, this information
-------
—2—
is still unavailable well afte.. the case has been filed. As a
result, in far too many cases, we have been unable to obtain the
necessary documentation in time to meet discovery deadlines,
file for summary judgment and, in some cases, prepare adequately
for trial.
Continuing the practice of filing cost recovery actions
without sufficient documentation is untenable in light of se,eral
recent developments. First, Executive Order 12778 requires that
we engage in meaningful pre-filing negotiations and, pursuant to
the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990, many district courts are
now requiring us to appear at mandatory settlement conferences
with “final settlement authority” shortly after a case is filed.
The absence of relatively complete cost documentation makes it
difficult for us to assess our cost claims for purposes of
settlement. In addition, the lack of supporting documentation
results in fluctuating demands and severely impairs our ability
to explain specific line items on the cost summary, both of which
undermine our credibility in negotiations.
Second, defense attorneys, who often request copies of
cost documentation before agreeing to settle, can now be expected
to cite to the proposed Cost Recovery Rule for the proposition
that such documentation should be readily available. Moreover,
the Executive Order and many local rules require that we be
prepared, shortly after filing, to produce “core information,”
including information about the identity and location of key
documents. Without compiling, or at least locating, cost
documentation prior to filing, we will be unable to meet these
obligations.
Third, the absence of a relatively complete cost
package puts us at a severe disadvantage once the case is filed
and creates a crisis management approach to litigation. Problems
in locating cost documentation result, in many cases, in our
being unable to meet discovery deadlines, to file for summary
judgment in a timely fashion, or to prepare adequately for trial.
In addition, our failure to produce cost documentation early in
the case only encourages defendants to scrutinize our cost claims
more carefully, hire accounting firms to fly—speck our
documentation, and engage in burdensome discovery on our cost
accounting system and work performed at the site.
Finally, the absence of complete documentation prior to
filing has imposed unacceptable burdens on our litigation teams.
In far too many cases, attorneys from our offices have had to
devote substantial time and effort to locating and assembling EPA
cost and work—performed documentation, usually from multiple
offices and almost always under the pressure of litigation
deadlines. This is a highly inefficient use of our resources
since most of our attorneys are not trained in accounting
procedures and lack familiarity with EPA’S contract and financial
-------
—3—
management systems. For these reasons, we will no lo e
cost recovery tions wi thout sufficient oc mentation or other
tdE support EPA’s claims for costs.
I recognize, however, that at present many Regions are
having difficulty compiling a complete, verified, and up-to-date
cost package in support of each referral. I understand that
Assistant Administrator Don Clay recently wrote to the Regional
Waste Division Directors about this problem, especially the need
for more timely compilation of work—performed documentation, and
requested that they advise him as to their plans for improving
the procedures for collecting cost documentation in support of
cost recovery cases.
Because these improvements may take some time to
implement, I have been asked to consider whether, on an interim
basis, some reduced level of documentation, short of a complete
cost package, may be sufficient to permit the filing of a cost
recovery action. Attached is a draft memorandum listing several
alternative approaches. I intend for this memorandum to provide
guidance to EES staff attorneys and managers as to what level of
documentation might be sufficient to permit commencement of an
action. Whether a given approach makes sense in a particular
case, however, will depend on the circumstances of that case. I
invite your views and comments on these alternatives.
Finally, it should be under&ood that, even under these
alternatives, any missing or deferred documents will need to be
provided within a reasonable period of time after filing to
, ip 4 + tjmely respons?. to discovery and, ultimately, tg pport
our clai u h summary judgment or t triaL. . If the
a i ional documents or estunony are not forthcoming,
the claim for those costs will likely be abandoned.
I look forward to discussing these matters with you in
Kansas City later this week.
cc: William White
Bruce Diamond
EES Assistant Chiefs
-------
I
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION
NOT RELEASEABLE UNDER FOIA
November 13, 1992
LEVEL OF DOCUMENTATION NEEDED FOR
FILING CERCLA COST RECOVERY ACTIONS
Because a number of EPA Regions have expressed concern
about their present ability to compile a complete, verified cost
documentation package in support of each CERCLA cost recovery
referral, we have been asked to consider whether, on an interim
basis, some reduced level of documentation, short of a complete
cost package, may be sufficient to permit the filing of an
action. What follows is a list of several alternatives. Whether
a given alternative will be appropriate in a particular case,
however, will depend on the circumstances of that case.
Further, it should be understood that, even under these
alternatives, the missing or deferred documents will need to be
provided within a reasonable period of time after filing to
permit timely responses to discovery and, ultimately, to support
our claims through summary judgment or at trial. If the
additional documents or supporting testimony are not forthcoming,
the claim for those costs will likely be abandoned.
Provide Complete. But Unredacted Cost Package
Under this approach, the Region would assemble a
complete cost package, including financial and work—performed
documentation, but would not redact CBI or Privacy Act
information before sending the cost package to the Department of
Justice. This approach would ensure that we have a reliable cost
summary at the time of filing, but would save the Region the
substantial time now spent on redacting cost documentation.
Under this approach, we would be able, during
settlement negotiations, to rely with some confidence on our cost
summary. Our attorneys will be able to inform the PRP5 that
support for our cost figure exists, but would be instructed not
to produce the documents unless they can work out agreements with
EPA’s contractors or can secure a protective order from the
court. if an agreement or order can be obtained, this would
obviate the need to do much of the time—consuming redacting that
now takes place. If the case does not settle and we cannot
secure an appropriate protective order, redaction of the
documents could still be performed in a tinieframe to permit
timely responses to discovery. (Note that if EPA’s proposed
-------
—2—
amendments to the CBI regulations are adopted, the task of
redacting cost packages will be substantially reduced in most
cases.]
Provide A Verified Cost Package, But Defer Final “Backfilling ”
In most cases, a properly compiled cost package, when
initially assembled, is typically 80-95% complete. Some gaps,
however, are inevitable. Sometimes these gaps are difficult to
fill. For example, finding a missing work assignment or tracking
down a missing Treasury schedule can, on occasion, be time—
consuming. Conscientious Regional cost recovery staff
nevertheless do not consider a package complete until all gaps
are filled and each line item is properly supported by all needed
documents.
One approach that could reduce the burden of compiling
cost documents would be to tolerate such gaps in the cost package
provided prior to filing. Because most of the package would be
complete and the undocumented costs constitute oily a fraction of
the overall claiiii we should still be able to rely on th st
-sainhii iy for purposes of settlement negotiations and for filing
the complaint. As with the other options, however, if the case
does not settle, the Region will need to locate the missing
documents after the case is filed in the timeframe allowed to
respond to requests for these documents.
Provide Complete Package for Substantial Portion of Costs;
Defer Backup Documents for Certain Line Items
Under this approach, the Region would provide, prior to
filing, a complete, verified cost package, including both
financial and work—performed documentation, for a very
substantial portion (e.g., at least 85%) of the costs listed on
the cost summary, but would defer collecting backup documentation
for certain line items on the summary. This approach would
enable the Region to postpone collecting backup documents for
categories of costs for which documentation is generally
available, but where the time and effort needed to collect the
documents is disproportionate to the amount of money involved.
Examples include travel authorizations and vouchers for travel
costs and timesheets and Treasury schedules for payroll costs.
It would also allow the Region to defer certain time—consuming,
but low—dollar document searches (e.g., for small purchase orders
or certain historic contracts), where the documents are difficult
to obtain and the search thus resource—intensive in comparison to
the amount of the costs involved, provided that t ese line items
i epresent only a small percentage o e overall cost claim.
Again, in both in E hces, the RegioirVzfl1WUfiT fi these
documents after filing within the timeframe allowed to respond to
discovery requests.
-------
—3—
Provide Partial Documentation for Certaix Components of Package
A. Partial Financial Documentation
Under this approach, EPA would provide complete work-
performed documentation, along with a detailed SCORES cost
summary, but could defer providing backup financial documentation
until after the complaint is filed. Because most Regions have a
relatively well-established system for collecting financial
documentation, especially compared to collection of work—
performed documents, and because the SCORES summary in most
Regions is relatively accurate, it may be acceptable, on an
interim basis, to defer the relatively routine (although time-
consuming) task of collecting financial documents in return for
focusing available resources on the more difficult task of
compiling work-performed information.
This approach would again enable us to engage in
settlement negotiations with some degree of confidence in our
cost figures. It should also lead to less of a crisis atmosphere
once the case is filed and discovery begins, since collection of
work-performed documentation has often proven to be a far more
difficult task during discovery than has compilation of financial
information. Moreover, PRPs are frequently more interested in
learning what work was performed at the site than in scrutinizinci
EPA’s financial documentation. This approach, however, should bi
employed only as an interim measure, pending improvements in the
Regions’ cost compilation procedures.
B. Partial Work-Performed Documentation
Alternatively, the Region could provide a complete,
verified financial package at the time of filing, but defer
inn nfwor]ç—performed documentation . Because of€Fi
substantial difficulties we have had in locating work-performed
documentation once the case is initiated, this approach would
only be acceptable if the referral package also include& —— in
lieu of work—performed documentation —— a detailed narrative of
the res onse aken in connection
t e SCO ar . This narrative should include a
scription of the work performed; the dates the actions were
taken; the work assignment, TDD or other task order numbers under
which the work was performed; the name of the RPM, project office
or contract officer who was responsible for overseeing and
approving the work; and the name of the individual who has
custody of the relevant documents. While not as complete as
compiling the documents themselves, this information should at
least enable the Region to locate the documents in a timely
manner once discovery begins.
-------
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION
NOT RELEASABLE UNDER FOIA
November 1, 1992
SCHEMATIC OF EVIDENCE NEEDED TO SUPPORT
RECOVERY OF CERCLA RESPONSE COSTS
Fundamentally, proof of CERCLA costs involves establishing
that the United States (1) performed response actions for which
(2) specified amounts of costs (3) were incurred. How we prove
each of those facts depends on the type of cost. The following
is a simplified guide to the evidence needed to establish each of
these facts by type of cost incurred. This list may vary
somewhat from case to case, but should provide a useful guide in
most cases.
Fact to Prove Evidence
I. Response Actions Taken
A. By EPA Staff Affidavit or testimony describing the
work performed
B. On EPA Travel Travel authorization (links to Site
and may describe work) plus affidavit
C. By Other Federal Interagency agreement, affidavit or
Agencies task orders to or by other agency
D. By Contractors Task orders: WA, TDD, TID, lab
(regardless of requests; Monthly Progress Reports or
how each Daily Activity Reports; Acknowledg-
contractor’s ments of Completion if finished; plus
costs are deliverables, final products, or
documented) affidavit if necessary to fill in
gaps
E. By States Cooperative agreement if it helps;
any other agreement showing state’s
role; state task orders; or
affidavit/testimony (from EPA and
state)
-------
II. kmount of Costs
A. Summary Documents Summary; detail pages for line items;
affidavit/testimony re: accounting
system, cost package compilation
process
B. EPA Payroll From Region & HO : Payroll summary +
Reg, HQ timesheets/time cards;
affidavit explaining summary
C. EPA Indirect Costs From HO : rate memos (Region should
have standard set) plus affidavit
explaining derivation of rates; From
Region : computer calculation (hours x
rate)
D. EPA Travel From Region & HO : Authorizations &
vouchers
E. lAGs
1. Reimbursable From Cincinnati : Interagency vouchers
& proof of transfers
From Other Agency : Underlying docs
for intramural, contractor costs
2. Transfer From Other Agency : Letter Report or
Allocation equivalent; underlying documents for
intramural and contractor costs
F. Contracts
1. Site-specific From RTP (moving to Regions) : Invoice
billing packages (voucher, site breakdown,
P.O. certification)
2. Historic From RTP : Journal voucher, P.O.
certification of reasonableness
From HO (but sets should be in
Regions) : Historic report
w/certification; approval;
attachments A,B,C
3. Letter From Contractor : Letter report with
Reports supporting docs. E.g., for Viar
(Historic or ( CLP) : Letter report; RAS & SAS
off—system summaries; invoices (lab, original,
costs) reconciled)
—2—
-------
G. SCAs From Region : SCA; drawdown docs;
payment screens. From State :
Underlying cost docs (may not be
needed)
III. Incurrence (Proof of Payment )
A. EPA Payroll Affidavit - explaining that summary
proves payment b/c data is from
payroll system
B. EPA Indirect Costs Affidavit - explaining that method of
computing rate includes only incurred
expenses
C. EPA Travel Treasury schedules and associated
documents
D. lAGs (either type) Should get proof of intra— and
extramural payments from other
agency; currently, for reimbursable
lAGs, we use computer 3creens showing
funds transferred
E. Contracts
1. Site—specific Treasury schedules and associated
billing documents included in invoice
packages
2. Historic Practice has been to use invoice
packages w/Treasury schedules and
associated documents, showing $0.00
Site amount. Hbwever, can probably
use affidavit that reconciliation
process ensures all amounts on
historic report were paid
3. Letter Should be required with letter
Reports report or EPA documents should be
(Historic located showing overall payment as
or off—system has been done with vouchers for
costs) historic costs
F. SCAs Copies of screens or documents
confirming letter of credit drawdowns
—3—
-------
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION
NOT RELEASABLE UNDER FOIA
November 1, 1992
LIST OF DOCUMENTS NEEDED TO SUPPORT A SUMMARY
JUDGMENT NOTION FOR RECOVERY OF CERCLA RESPONSE COSTS
I. Description of response actions by line item (narrative
affidavit)
II. Description of accounting and cost documentation process by
type of cost (narrative affidavit)
III. “Short” SCORES cost summary
IV. Documentation of EPA Payroll Costs
A. All timesheets or timecards
B. SCORES payroll summary showing hours and dollars by pay
period
V. Documentation of EPA Indirect Costs
A. Indirect cost summary showing hours x rate by pay
period
B. Indirect rate transmittals from headquarters plus
affidavit
VI. Documentation of EPA Travel costs
A. Detailed SCORES summary pages
B. Travel authorizations
C. Travel vouchers
D. Proof of payment
VII. Documentation of Interagency Agreement costs
—.—------A. The Interagency Agreement and other proof of work
B. Interagency Vouchers
Underlying Documentation from the other agency
-------
VIII. Documentation for Contract costs billed
site—specifically
A. Work Assignments, TDDs, or other task orders
B. Monthly progress reports (optional but recommended)
- C. Final work products (optional)
D. Contractor site-specific invoices with proof of payment
E. Detailed SCORES sununary pages - 11
ix. ico o t o&
A. Journal voucher
B. Transmittal of approved historic cost report (note:
approved historic cost reports are reconciled with EPA
payments, so documentary proof of payment not required)
C. Historic cost report with attachments A, B, and C
D. Contractor’s certification of site—specific breakdown
in historic costs report
E. Attachments A, B, C to historic cost report
F. Project Officer’s Certification of Reasonableness
G. Proof of Payment
H. Work assignments, TDDs, or other task descriptions
I. Detailed SCORES summary page
H-6 14 .-‘---Qt
Historic Letter Rep D unientation
A. The Letter Report
B. Work assignments, TDD5, or task orders
C. Proof of payment
D. Detailed SCORES summary page -- take special care with
date of services
XI. costs
Viar summary of costs (the “l tter report”)
Case sample list for RAS
Viar
A.
B.
------— X.
-------
C. Detailed Viar invoices (original or reconciled) for RAS
showing final case costs and SMO costs
D. Reconciling invoices for RAS
E. Viar summary of SAS costs, showing SMO Costs as well,
and list of canceled checks
F. SAS invoices from laboratories
G. Orders for the various analyses conducted, if possible
H. Proof of payment
I. Detailed SCORES summary page
—... XII. State cooperative agreement costs
A. The cooperative agreement
B. Drawdowns or other proof of payment by EPA to state
C. Documentary description, if available, of site-related
tasks the state performed pursuant to the agreement
D. Underlying documentation from the state
E. Detailed SCORES summary page
-------
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION
NOT RELEASABLE UNDER FOIA
November 1, 1992
ANNOTATED LIST OF DOCUMENTS NEEDED TO SUPPORT A
SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION FOR RECOVERY OF CERCLA RESPONSE C )STS
This list is intended to describe a cost package sufficient
to obtain summary judgment on costs. It is based on our past
experience and our current understanding of both the burden
imposed by the courts and the documents maintained by EPA. For
purposes of referral of cases, affidavits may be in draft form or
may take the form of detailed narratives in the litigation report
itself, so long as the report identifies appropriate
affiants/witnesses. This list may be subject to change. We
welcome suggestions from DOJ and EPA staff to ensure the
completeness and accuracy of the list.
I. Description of response actions
For summary judgment, a narrative description of the
response actions in affidavit form is essential. At a minimum,
this should include (1) a general description of what has been
done at the Site; (2) a general description of related
enforcement activities; (3) for each extramural cost, a statement
of the response actions for which that particular cost was
incurred; (4) a general statement of the tasks performed by EPA
personnel for whom payroll and travel charges are sought,
preferably broken down by EPA office ( e.g . CRC staff did this;
ESD staff did that).
Given the current state of recordkeeping and the possibility
that EPA personnel currently working on a site may have little
historical knowledge, this requirement suggests a need to
establish some mechanism for contemporaneous recordkeeping that
could be used to support affidavits by future RPMs. Even
something as simple as a sheet entitled “Chronological tracking
of response actions” put in the front of every site file -- not a
daily docket, but a listing of major events, such as issuing new
work assignments, completing tasks, changing RPMs, completing OSC
reports, etc. -- would help. ..\lso, EPA may eventually need to
maintain, in addition to timesheets, some kind of records
showing, at least generally, what tasks its employees perform.
II. Description of accounting and cost documentation process
This should be essentially a form affidavit, or perhaps two
(one for front end accounting process and one for back end
documentation process). Depending on regional practice and the
extent of witnesses’ personal knowledge, the person who prepares
-------
the package, or that person phi’s a regiona3. or headquarters
financial officer, should s gn the affidavits(s).
III. “ Short” cost summary
The cover portion of the report generated by CDMS/SCORES,
i.e. , showing a single line entry for each contract, cooperative
agreement, etc. The narrative summary soin times provided is
often not really useful or necessary. The detail pages ( i.e. ,
one or more page per contract showiTng vendor, contract number,
project officer, services rendered, and a line entry for each
invoice or billing) should probably be sorted with the backup
documentation for each type of cost. (Regions should no longer
be using SPUR reports; it is our understanding that all Regions
now have access to SCORES.)
IV. Documentation of EPA Payroll Costs
A. Timesheets or timecards
Timecards should be copied one per page, two-sided, with the
front of the timecard on side one and the back of the timecard on
side two. If two-sided copying is unavailable or is too
expensive, we should still do one timecard per page, and the
order of copies should be: front of timecard #1; back of titnecard
#l; front of tiinecard #2
B. Payroll summary showing hours and dollars by pay period
The affidavit referred to in Section II should explain
clearly how the site-specific time data are linked to the payroll
system and how the summary is prepared and retrieved from the
accounting system, in order to avoid the spurious argument that
we haven’t proved anybody’s salary by documents.
V. Documentation of EPA Indirect Costs
A. Indirect cost summary showing hours x rate by pay
period
B. Indirect rate transmittals from headquarters plus
affidavit
For proof purposes it would be wise for HQ to issue,
annually, an official list of the indirect rates to be used
during that fiscal year for all previous years. The memo should
say: “The following are the indirect rates to be used for
Superfund cost recovery during Fl ‘92. This memorandum
supersedes all previous indirect rate transmittals.” Then it
would be a list, showing Fiscal Years from 1983 to 1992 and
Indirect Rates for each year. This should be accompanied by a
form affidavit explaining how the rates are developed.
—2—
-------
VI. Documentation of EPA Travel costs
A. Detailed summary pages
B. Travel authorizations
Presumably, these justify the travel in terms of Site work.
C. Travel vouchers
D. Proof of payment
VII. Documentation of Interagency Agreement costs
A. Interagency Agreement and other proof of ork
This is especially critical with site—specific lAGs, where
the agreement itself will provide proof of the services
performed. If the interagency agreement cannot be located or
does not state the services to be performed, we should try to
locate some documentation that evidences initiation and
completion of work for the specific site. If there is a formal
request, equivalent to a TDD, that should be included; if the
other agency provides progress reports, they should be included.
If such documentation cannot be found, we will need an affidavit
describing the work performed.
B. Interagency Vouchers
C. Underlying Documentation from the other agency
Whenever possible, we should obtain this documentation
because a cost has is not actually “incurred by the United
States” until the other agency has incurred it. For example, we
should know whether the other agency is billing for its own
intramural costs or whether it hired contractors; and we should
get appropriate cost documentation, i.e . timesheets and payroll
data, contractor invoices and proof of payment, etc. Of course,
strictly speaking, we could treat these similarly to the way we
treat DOJ costs if the other agencies get their acts together
about site-specific cost tracking: the lAG entries could, and in
principle ought to, come off the EPA cost summary and instead be
supported wholly by proof of costs from the other agency.
VIII. Documentation for contract costs billed
Site—specifically
A. Work Assignments, TDDs, or other task orders
All task orders should be included if any costs of
performing the task were incurred before the cost cut—off date.
—3—
-------
Task orders too recent to have resulted 1fl C DStS should be
excluded. Acknowledgments of ....ompletion •shci tld be included where
they exist. Although this cannot be done f ozr past bills, we
recommend that on future site—speciti’c tnvoia’ces, the contractors
should be reauired to identify the woz k a .s i!gnment number(s) for
which they are billing on each invoice.
B. Monthly progress reports
The relevant portions of inonthi’ progi ss reports, both
technical and financial, should be provide . The monthly
progress reports will provide good documentation that our costs
are incurred for “response actions” and the financial portion
should correlate with the monthly invoices.. If the progress
reports do not, as a rule, correlate simply with the monthly
invoices, then we can handle that by providing a generic
explanation of the differences in the general affidavits referred
to in Sections I and II above. Because complete sets of monthly
progress reports may be difficult to obtaij (especially
retrospectively), DOJ expects to argue that while monthly
progress reports can be helpful in proving a costs case, they are
not indispensable to meeting our burden of proof. However, we
should turn over any progress reports we locate in response to
properly framed discovery requests. For removal actions,
inclusion of daily activity reports is appropriate.
C. Final work products
Work plans and work plan revisions are clearly not essentia
to proving the case and obtaining a complete set years after the
fact is unlikely. In general, they do not need to be provided in
support of a summary judgment motion, unless they fill
specifically identified gaps. However, where the task’ assigned a
contractor has an easily defined final deliverable, and where
that deliverable has in fact been completed, then including it in
support of summary judgment is sometimes useful.
D. Contractor site-specific invoices with proof of payment
The site-specific invoice packages we have now are generally
good. We should verify that each invoice set contains,
preferably in this order : (1) front page of contractor’s bill,
showing invoice #, total amount, and contractor’s certification
of correctness; (2) site—specific breakdown from contractor,
showing site and site amount; (3) project officer approval; (4)
proof of payment using documents appropriate to the date of the
bill.
Site-specific pages tend to come in two varieties: (1)
showing many sites on a single page, with a cryptic single line
for each site; or (2) with one or two pages for each site,
showing labor, equipment, subcontractor, etc. costs separately.
—4—
-------
Type (2) obviously is prefera e to type (1). The extent to
which either type, as well as . ;sociated proof of payment, needs
to be redacted is an issue that DOJ and EPA should address.
For example, it has been suggested that other site information
not be redacted on grounds of relevance alone since this process
is time—consuming and often results in a document that is
difficult to understand.
For removal actions, we frequently have access not just to
the invoices but to substantial underlying documentation from the
contractor (because the OSC’s file includes such documents).
These include daily time reports, detailed breakdowns of
equipment and supplies charges by day, phone bills, subcontractor
invoices, etc. Where we have such documents, we ought to provide
them in discovery, and they ought to be incorporated in the
underlying contract documents for summary judgment purposes.
They are not, however, essential to proving the costs incurred k
the United States , for which the paid invoice should be
sufficient.
E. Detailed summary pages
Listing each voucher, etc. (see III, above).
IX. Historic cost documentation
A. Journal voucher
B. Transmittal of approved historic cost report
C. Historic cost rep3rt to extent relevant
D. Contractor’s certification of site—specific breakdown
in historic costs report
E. Attachments A, B, C to historic cost report
We need to develop a more consistent policy position with
respect to redacting (or not redacting) these documents.
F. Certification of Reasonableness
A concerted effort should be made to find final
certifications, without extra handwritten qualifiers, wherever
possible.
G. Proof of payment
We can probably safely do away with the stacks of non-site-
specific invoices and associated treasury schedules, as well as
doing away with the list of “0.00” vouchers on the detailed
summary. An affidavit from Bill Cooke or another competent
—5—
-------
witness should explain that the nature of the historic
reconciliation ensures that pa 1 inent has bee n made, or else the
cost could not have been included.
H. Work assignments, TDDs, or other task descriptions
To the extent possible, we should locate the same work
documents for historic contracts as we use -for other contracts.
Failing that, we will need to prepare an adequate descriptio.i of
the services rendered in an affidavit.
I. Detailed summary page
If all the “0.00” vouchers go, this page would show only the
JV plus any site—specific invoices received from the particular
contractor.
X. Historic Letter Report Documentation
Be aware that heavy redaction of historic letter reports
tends to undermine their acceptability to judicial fact finders.
A. The Letter Report
We should redact far less. it is not unreasonable for the
contractor’s explanation of how it created the report to be
available in support of our claim.
B. Work assignments, TDDs, or task orders
C. Proof of payment
This is a real problem with historic letter reports; the
best approach would probably be to require the contractor, in the
report, to indicate the total amount paid under non—site—specific
billing over a specified period of time prior to 10/1/85. That
way we don’t have to dig up a stack of meaningless invoices.
D. Detailed summary page —— take special care with date of
se rv ices
XI. Viar costs
A number of the items identified below are not in the
“standard” Viar package. However, they are essential to
completing the loop tracing the analyses to the site to the
costs.
A. Viar summary of costs (the “letter report”)
B. Case sample list for RAS
—6—
-------
C. Detailed Viar invoices (original or reconciled) for RAS
showing final case costs and SMO costs
D. Reconciling invoices for RAS
E. Viar summary of SAS costs, showing SMO costs as well,
and list of canceled checks
F. SAS invoices from laboratories
C. To the extent possible —- and it may not be —— orders
for the various analyses conducted.
H. Proof of payment
I. Detailed summary page
XII. State Cooperative Agreement costs
A. The cooperative agreement
As with lAGs, this is especially important where the SCA is
site-specific; but should be included even if not.
B. Drawdowns or other proof of payment by EPA to state
C. Documentary description, if available, of site—related
tasks the state performed pursuant to the agreement
D. Underlying documentation from the state
This documentation may not be necessary if xii.c provides an
adequate description of what we paid the state to do; then we can
try to treat the state as we would a contractor (we produce the
contractor’s bills to us, but not its employee timesheets, for
example). However, if XII.C is not adequate for this purpose, we
will need state documentation equivalent to EPA documentation:
timesheets, payroll data in some form, contractor invoices, proof
of payment, etc. Wherever possible, this information should be
processed by the state and should meet the same standards set
forth above for EPA costs. An affidavit from a state employee
should be used to establish the response actions and costs. All
the EPA affidavit will then need to show is how much EPA paid the
state.
E. Detailed summary page
—7—
-------
Memorandum
Subject
Suggestions
from
the Flying Pig
Ddte
Farm
(on Cost Recovery Litigation)
August 5, 1992
To From
All EES Attorneys Picillo Site Cost
Recovery Litigation
Team (Beehier, Bessette,
Chassy, Gold, Jaffe,
Hennick and Kiernan)
The Picillo Superfund Site Cost Recovery Litigation
Team, based on its experience in United States v. American
Cyanainid et al. , (D.R.I.) (Civil Action No. 89—0565P), offers the
following suggestions in handling cost recovery litigation.
A. Cost documentation
1. DOJ lawyers should review cost documentation early
and often . It should be done with the DOJ attorney and both the
EPA Assistant Regional Counsel and the EPA cost recovery person
working together. Inevitably, missing documents, ambiguous
documents, and badly redacted documents will be discovered.
Prior to filing the complaint, spot checking is probably
sufficient, given time constraints. However, careful final
review prior to filing a summary judgment motion is essential.
EPA staff or DOJ paralegals might be able to assist in this
effort.
2. Pay attention to how cost documents are coDied .
Above all, make sure that the copy contains all the information
that will be needed to verify the summary. For example, EPA
disbursement reports are computer printouts that list all the
checks included in a treasury schedule as proof of payment. The
treasury schedule is also part of the cost documentation; its
number must match the number shown on the disbursement report.
However, one version of the disbursement report only shows the
treasury schedule number on the first aae ; if only the page
showing the particular contract payment in issue has been copied,
then the documents cannot properly be reconciled. Also, check to
see that the form in which documents have been copied is the most
useful. For instance, in the case of EPA time cards (used in
earlier years of the CERCL program), both the front and the back
of the cards are needed to document the cost. Accordingly, these
cards should be copied one per page, double—sided, or if copied
single-sided, should have the back immediately follow the front
of each card.
-------
3. For State Cooperative Agreements (SCAs).
supplement any such cost documentation which EPA may have with
that from the relevant Stet . The state will have more complete
documentation than EPA, particularly concerning work performed,
as well as a staff expert to explain it correctly. Ask EPA to
provide the name of the appropriate point person at the state.
4. Work Assignments. Technical Directive Documents
( “TDDs”). and other task orders are an essential Part of the cost
package . They should be assembled early -— preferably at the
time of referral but in any event at the same time the cost
package is prepared. Monthly progress reports would also be
helpful. This applies to nistoric as well as site-specific
billing contractors.
5. Consider whether gaps in the work performed record
can and should be filled by work clans and deliverables . Your
prima facie cost case should include a testimonial and
documentary description of the work done at the Site and, in
particular, of the work for which extramural costs were billed by
contractors, the state, or other federal agencies. The simplest
way to do this is by compiling the task orders (often called work
assignments, TDDs or technical instruction documents (“TID5”)),
monthly progress reports, and acknowledgments of completion (for
finished work) that correspond to the invoices in the cost
package. Often, your record of task orders and especially
progress reports wil]. be incomplete. You need to consider, on a
careful, document—by—document review, whether you should use
other documents to evidence performance of the work -- such as
work plans, final reports, and other deliverables. These
documents do not directly relate to costs; they just provide
general evidence that a contractor worked on certain tasks, and
they contain a wealth of unnecessary information that defendants
may be able to exploit. Rather than relying on deliverables, try
to assemble a record of task orders and progress reports that
will be sufficient to establish the work that was done, even if
it is not 100% complete.
6. Check every word of the detailed cost summary .
Nothing is more embarrassing that relying on a summary and
finding it full of mistakes. The tendency is to skip everything
but invoice number and dollar amount; resist it. Either the
program or the programmer who generates those summaries makes
assumptions that are often mistaken, e.g. , dates of service. In
addition, beware of the possibility of typographical errors for
dates of contracts, work performed, and cost incurred. And —
although this ought to go without saying-make sure you have the
detailed summary.
7. Make sure documentation of Viar costs is complete .
Viar, Inc. runs EPA’s Contract Laboratory Program (CLP). As Viar
costs have been billed in a unique manner, they are often not in
—2—
-------
EPA’s computerized Integrated Financial Management System and
must be documented through special reports. Viar will generate
such reports, and does a very good job —— CLP costs are amon ui
est documented costs (though, as a caveat, over the last se :a]
years, there have been several cases of CLP fraud). However, thE
present standard cost package may not contain all the documents
your cost witness will need in order to trace the dollars spent
to the samples analyzed to the Site. Work this through very
carefully with your witness and instruct him or her to call Viar
to obtain any missing pieces.
B. Motion for Summary Judament
1. File early in the case with established standard
categories of suPDortina documentation . This will instill
confidence in our cost case and help avoid pettishness or fly—
specking on the part of defendants or judge; conversely, if made
promptly as a matter of established policy (e.g., within thirty
days, after court ruling establishing liability of defendants, if
not sooner), the judge is likely to appreciate the government’s
attempt efficiently to conclude the case. Also, assembling the
necessary support for filing the motion is an effective way to
assure that the cost package is really solid.
2. Link costs to work as stronalv as possible . For
summary judgment, an affidavit or declaration giving a narrative
description of the response actin is essential, including a
general description of cleanup and enforcement activities, a
statement of the response actions undertaken pursuant to each
contract, lAG, or SCA, and a general statement of the tasks
performed by EPA personnel who billed time or travel to the site.
For trial, one or more witnesses who can so testify are
essential.
3. Affirmative defense issues . Summary judgment
motions on any affirmative defense issues should also be prepared
early in the case and timely submitted, prior to a court’s ruling
on actual costs incurred. The most important reason for early
analyses of administrative law issues and the timely submissions
of Rule 12(f) motions to strike affirmative defenses, motions in
limnine and partial summary judgment motions is to ensure that the
Court limits defendants’ discovery requests in accordance with
administrative law principles and limits its scope of review to
the administrative record. Generally the Court should not
entertain the introduction of extra record evidence during the
Court’s costs recovery proceeding, except as it relates to
whether cost have, in fact, been incurred. In addition, this
should eliminate irrelevant defenses, e.g., costs are “excessive,
redundant, and not cost—beneficial,” and permit negotiations and
court deliberations to focus on the narrow issues f whether the
incurrence of costs was “appropriately documented” and “not
inconsistent with the NCP.”
—3—
-------
C. Litigation Preparation and Strategy .
1. Review Administrative Record prior to EPA’s
certification to the Court . Analyze proposed record to determine
if it satisfies EPA’S Guidance requirements for assembly of
administrative record, and if not, discern why not and correct,
where possible. Critical : Since the Court should be able to
discern from its review of the Administrative Record that costs
were incurred “not inconsistent with the National Contingency
Plan (“NCP”),” attorneys should satisfy themselves that the
proposed record will justify such a conclusion, and if not, make
certain that the record is supplemented, accordingly. Cross
reference Administrative Record Index against defendant’s
response to your discovery request for documents that “should be
included in the Administrative Record” to determine if pre-filing
“supplementation” is required. Interview Assistant Regional
Counsel and EPA program personnel who actually screened the site
file to assure yourself that “informal screening rules” that were
adopted for inclusive/exclusive from the record comport with EPA
Guidance and Subpart I of the NCP. Finally, determine if
“confidential” documents that had been withheld from the publicly
available part of the record should be included to mitigate any
damage that might arise from documents already in the record.
(E.g., in Picillo, the record included documents stating that the
project manager believed a Focused Feasibility Study -- for which
we were seeking to recover costs —— was “inconsistent with the
NCP.) If contemporaneous documentation is available to make
EPA’s request for cost recovery arguably “reasonable,” consider
supplementing the record. Further, note that any reference to a
document in the Administrative Record will be the subject of a
discovery request.
2. Everybody -- EPA. DOJ. and the DOJ Cost Contractor
— — needs to be sensitized to the need to supplement discovery .
The cost package ought to be updated every three months after the
initial production, with interrogatory answers, too.
3. Do not rely entirely on the cost recovery
specialist or eaujvpjent to orove your case . The person who
prepared the cost summary is a good affiant or declarant for
summary judgment and will be the best witness to describe the
cost hoc process of accumulating and summarizing costs and cost
documentation. In a case th:t is not seriously contested, that
testimony should be enough. In a seriously contested case,
however, the attorney should have a witness available who can
testify about the accounting system itself. That person should
have a better understanding of the nuances of many documents, and
may have some personal knowledge of issues that the cost recovery
specialist does not know firsthand, i.e. , how the payroll system
works or how relevant computer data is downloaded into the
—4—
-------
relevant program cost system The attorney should also have at
least one project officer or ‘ott er person who can speak
knowledgeably about the pto ess for approving payment of
extramural costs.
4. Do away with nori—site—specific invoices and
associated summary eatries for historic costs . “Historic costs”
are payments to contractors that originally were not billed site-
specifically. EPA has done a ‘ øost hoc analysis and
reconciliation and distributed these costs to individual sites i
so-called “historic cost reports,” information from which was
entered into EPA’s accounting system via journal vouchers. EPA
does have the non-site-specific invoices relating to these
contracts and proof that those invoices were paid. These
invoices frequently show up in cost packages and summaries, with
“$0.00” listed as the site-specific amount. They are very
confusing and their only usefulness is to prove that historic
costs were paid. However, EPA witnesses familiar with the
historic cost accounting project will testify that because the
project’s first step is reconciling invoiced amounts to amounts
paid by EPA, then the existence of a final historic cost report
necessarily implies that the amounts shown in that report were in
fact paid. This testimonial proof of payment should be preferred
over introduction of stacks and stacks of meaningless invoices.
5. Miminize EPA testifying about state costs, other
than to say we raid them . EPA personnel rarely have first hand
knowledge of how the state spent the money, and, therefore, it is
usually better to call state witnesses.
6. Pre-Judqment Interest (PJfl Calculations . Try to
keep PJI out of testimony as the number always changes. Propose
to opposing counsel, and if that fails to the Court, to submit a
calculation (and explanatory affidavit) after the amount of costs
is determined by the Court, subject to objection from opposing
counsel and argument or testimony if needed. If you have
testimony, try to use a person who is knowledgeable about the
program. Further, check all figures for correct starting and
completion dates, and for inclusion of correct amounts for
underlying principal. Also remember DOJ and EPA generally do not
use the same rate of interest for the Same period of time for
their respective calculations. (Both use a U.S. Treasury Bill
Rate; however, D0J uses a rate approximately six months more
current than that used by EPA.)
7. Evaluate and re—evaluate EPA’s initial litigation
risk assessment and undertake aPDroDriate discovery accordingly .
In Picillo , the area of costs which the government initially
believed to be the most suspect in terms of recoverability,
ultimately received 100% recovery (pre-Superfund costs billed and
financed through the U.S. Coast Guard); conversely another area
of costs which the government initially perceived as solid was
—5—
-------
almost completely unrecovered due to subsequent exposure of
weaknesses (pre—1986 costs subject to non—site specific historic
costs contracting documentation). As for discovery, structure an
appropriate strategy to limit the number and effectiveness of
defendants’ challenges. In particular, it is essential that DOJ
serve contentions interrogatories upon defendants early in the
process to identify what area(s) justify further probing and what
admissions should be solicited. Use of this technique minimizes
surprises and maximizes the effective use of scarce resources in
preparing for acknowledged challenges.
D. Special Masters
1. Resist Special Masters: keen the case before the
judge . We should try to take advantage of judicial reluctance to
get bogged down in cost minutiae. If we have to have cost
trials, having them before Article III judges with busy dockets
will minimize nitpicking. Conversely, having them before paid-
by—the—hour special masters will encourage minute perusal of
documents, especially if the masters have a stake in learning the
weak spots in EPA cost cases. A corollary: the better and
simpler our cost packages look, particularly on summary judgment
motions, the more likely our trials (if we even have them) will
be quick, based on summaries and general disputes between
accountants, and the less likely they will involve picayune
examination of one document at a time. Read DOJ guidance on this
issue.
2. If involvement of S ecia1 Master is unavoidable:
a) Use only at the reauest of the Court; b) Insist that Defendant
pay a].]. such associated costs; and c ) Avoid using an
environmental practitioner . The Court in this case clearly did
not want to hear all of the “non—legal” evidence and wade through
cost documentation; therefore, the parties had little choice but
to accede to the Court’s request to appoint a special master. It
required specific Assistant Attorney General approval. In a
conference call to the judge, DOJ attorneys insisted that
defendants pay for the costs of the special master, and
defendants’ counsel did not object. The parties, with the
Court’s approval, did select the special master, who was a highly
recommended environmental practitioner (for both plaintiffs and
defendants) in a small firm. Moreover, DOJ should attempt to
limit and specify delegation of authority of the special master
as much as possible, i.e., no cross—examining witnesses.
E. Post—Mortems
1. DOJ/EPA Pici].lo hearing debriefing : Two months
after the conclusion of the hearings, representatives of EPA
Region/Headquarters and DOJ who had participated in the
litigation met at DOJ for a series of debriefing sessions. Both
—6—
-------
attorneys and program staff were inv’olve . Significant issues
raised at the trial, such as historic ccst documentation, letter
reports, redaction and re2ated--.busi ess c onfidential concerns,
witness testiInony and sup rtiarg dc’cume tation for summary
judginen ts motions were discussed a corrective action was
suggested. This session as very prothictive. Such debriefing
should be strongly considered for each cost litigation trial.
2. Exit Debriefing Mexnora idwn to File by any
departing DOJ attorney : It would have been helpful to the
current litigation team if we had a written status report (with
insight on potential problems and rnfinished tasks) from the
staff attorney who departed six months prior to any involvement
by the current litigation team. The Section should consider
requiring written exist memorandum by departing attorneys on each
of their litigation matters.
3. D0J Cost Case Library should be developed . An
increasing number of 107(a) cases are likely to be reaching the
cost phase of litigation in the near future. The Section is
generating a checklist of strategic and tactical concerns that
each trial team should be prepared to address, accompanied with a
synopsis of the Section’s policy determinations, a library of
sample pleadings and discovery probes, an annot ted bibliography
of relevant EPA guidance and regulatory documents, and a
collection of resumes and attorney evaluations for experts.
—7—
-------
14
-------
ST 4 ,
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C 20460
4( vc1 ’
OFFICE OF
JAN I 3 I SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Training Seminar on Compiling
Work Performed Documentation for Cost Recovery
FROM: Douglas F. Mundrick, P.E., Acting Direct
CERCLA Enforcement Division
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
TO: Hazardous Waste Division Directors, Regions I — X
Regional Counsels, Regions I — X
Comptrollers, Regions I - X
We have scheduled a training seminar on compiling work
performed documentation for cost recovery cases under CERCLA.
The seminar will be held on February 11, 1993, in Philadelphia, PA,
at the Sheraton-Society Hill Hotel. The program is being developed
in cooperation with the Department of Justice, and EPA’S Office of
Enforcement — Superfund and Office of Administration and Resources
Management. Region 3 is co-sponsoring this training and will
provide major support for the effort.
This training was developed as a followup to the memo of
November 3, 1993, by Don Clay, Assistant Administrator for Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, entitled “Cost Recovery Case
Support.” This memo identified Regional procedures for compiling
work performed documentation as an area of major concern in our
cost recovery program. The training will focus on this aspect of
cost recovery case support. Although focusing on work performed
documents, the training will also address the interrelationship
of these documents with other activities supporting cost recovery
cases. The training will be held in conjunction with and at the
same location as the meeting of the Lead Region, Office of
Regional Counsel (ORC), Cost Recovery Workgroup, scheduled for
February 10, 1993. Daniel Shiel, Region 7 - ORC, is the contact
for that meeting. Dan can be reached on (913) 551-7278.
Please review the attached agenda (Attachment 1) and send
appropriate staff and first line supervisors to attend this
training. We believe that the appropriate audience for the
training in each Regional office (ORe, Waste Management Division,
7 j Printed on Recycled Pap6
-------
2
Finance Office) are staff co72 p:iling and ccpdating work performed
documents to support CERCLA cost recovery referrals, staff
responsible for coordinating this activity their first line
supervisors, and Regional Project Officers esponsible for
administration of contracts supporting CER L cleanup. Other
participants will include DOJ attoxT eys, eadguarters OE-
Superfund and OWPE staff.
Please register with Filomena Chau for the training by
January 22, 1993, by faxing to her the following information for
each participant: name, address, telephone number, fax number.
Filomena’s fax number is (703) 603—9117, office number is (703)
603—8966, and mail code is 5502G. Please make reservations with
the Sheraton-Society Hill Hotel by January 25, 1993. The Hotel
number is (215) 238-6000. Attached is a description of the Hotel
rates, services, and other information regarding the training
(Attachment 2).
Please also send any comments you may have on the attached
agenda to Filomena by January 22, 1993. we plan to videotape the
training seminar and to provide the Regional offices with an
edited videotape subsequent to the seminar.
We appreciate your cooperation and support of this very
critical training and look forward to a successful program in
Philadelphia.
Attachments (2)
cc: Cost Recovery Program Contacts, Regions I — X
Cost Recovery ORC Contacts, Regions I - X
Cost Recovery Contacts, Finance Office, Regions I — X
Dan Shiel, Region 7
Jim Webb, Region 3
Margaret Cardamone, Region 3
John Fogarty, OE-Superfund
Jack Winder, OE-Superfund
Steve Novick, DOJ
Bill Cooke, OAPN-FMD
Bill Topping, OARM-PCMD
Ika Joiner, SRO
Frank Biros, OWPE
Tai-Ming Chang, OWPE
Bruce Kulpan, OWPE
Arthur Weissman, OWPE
-------
Attachment 1
WORK PERFORMED
DOCUMENTATION TRAINING
Sheraton-Society Hill Hotel
Philadelphia, PA
February 11, 1993
8:00 — 8:15 a.m. Registration
8:15 — 8:30 a.m. Introduction
- Bruce Diamond, OWPE
8:30 — 9:15 a.m. The Basis for this Training
“Level of Documentation Needed for Filing
CERCLA Cost Recovery Actions”
- Steve Novick, DOJ
SESSION I
9:15—10:15 a.m. “Identifying Specific Work Activity
Authorized and Perfor ned”
- Region 3: Leslie Vassallo
- Region 1:
10:15 — 10:30 a.m. BREAK
SESSION II
10:30 — 11:45 a.m. “Documenting Work Performed in Existing
and Closed Out Contracts”
- Region 3: Leslie Vassallo
- Region 1:
- Headquarters: PCMD:
OWPE: Chad Littleton
11:45 a.m. — 1:00 p.m. LUNCH
SESSION Til
1:00 — 1:30 p.m. “SCORES Memo Field Capability”
- Region 3: Leslie Vassallo
Steve Pandza (Finance Office)
- Region 1:
-------
2
SESSION IV
1:30 — 2:00 p.m. “Interagency Agreements and State Cooperative
Agreements”
- DOJ
- HQ Grants Administration Division
- Region 3 Grants Office
SESSION V
2:00 — 2:30 p.m. “Maintenance of Cost Recovery Files”
- AA OSWER or OWPE-PMSO
- Region 3
- Region 1
2:30 — 2:45 p.m. BREAK
SESSION VI
2:45 - 3:30 p.m. “Court Testimony, Preparation of Affidavits,
and Identification of Expert Witnesses”
- DOJ: Steve Novick, Steve Gold
— Region 3: Mar.garet Cardamone
SESSION VII
3:30 - 4:45 p.m. Mock Trial - “Alice in Cost Recoveryland”
- Roles played by selected panelists
CLOSING REMARKS
4:45 — 5:00 p.m. “Closing remarks, comments, questions,
fol lowup”
- Frank Biros, OWPE
-------
Attachment 2
Hotel and Other Information
1. The training will be held at the Sheraton-Society Hill
Hotel, 1 Dock Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19106, (215) 238-
6000. There is one restaurant, one bar, and one atrium
lobby bar in the hotel and numerous restaurants within
walking distance for lunch. The hotel will provide coffee,
tea, and water for the training. You can buy a continental
breakfast from 6:30 — 10 a.m. at the courtyard cart in the
main lobby. You can eat a sit down breakfast (6:30 - 10
a.m.) or lunch (11 a.m. — 2 p.m.) at Hadley’s Restaurant,
in the hotel. You can buy snacks or a newspaper at the
hotel gift shop (7 a.m. - 11 p.m.).
2. We have reserved a block of hotel rooms for the nights of
February 10 and also for the 11th, for those who will be
leaving Philadelphia early on February 12. You must call
the hotel at (215) 238-6000 to reserve a room by January 25,
1993. Any reservations accepted beyond that date will be at
the group rate, as long as group rooms are still available.
The room rates are $89.00 single and $99.00 double. The
room tax is 12%. The hotel requires a deposit equal to one
night’s stay, to guarantee all reservations. All non-
guaranteed reservations are canceled from their system by
4:00 p.m. on the day of arrival. The hotel accepts personal
check, money order, or a valid Diners Club, American
Express, MasterCard, or VISA card number, with expiration
date. Check in time is 3:00 p.m. and check out time is
12:00 p.m. The hotel will try to accommodate early arrivals
and late check ins, when possible.
3. The hotel also has 24 hour room service, a complimentary
health club (6 a.m. - 10 p.m.), a heated indoor pool and
2 gift shops. The newspaper with room service is “USA
Today.” The gift shop sells the “New York Times” and the
“Wall Street Journal.” The 30th Street train station is
a short cab ride away. The airport is 11 miles away. There
is an airport shuttle, “Airport Limousine,” which is a
minivan and costs $8 per person, one way. The shuttle
leaves every hour on the hour from the airport and from the
hotel.
-------
15
-------
3 42
10 warr the Pr par non of a
Federaj Ausessuient
Eovu na t
The Coa.t Guard conaxda tha
envlronmea Impact of this proposal
ann Concluded that preparation of an
env1 on entaJ zmpa j atatem 1 La not
necessary. An Envuonme .al
Auess 1 and a Finding of No
Signifia 1 Impact are available In the
docket for 1 nspe on or copying where
Indicated under “AOOe-
Ust of Subject , In 33 CFR Part i6
Hirbo,,, Marine safety, Naviga
(water), Security measure, Vessel,
Waterway,,
For the reasons set Out in the
preambj , the Coast Guard Proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follow,:
1. The authority citation for pare 165
COtitiflues to Tee d ,’
Aathonj,,- 3 U &c, 1231:50 U.S C. 191:49
CPR 148 and 33 ‘R L05 -i(g). 0.04-i 0.04-a.
and 100.5.
2. A new sectl li 185j n is added to
read as foliow,:
* iU. 8fsI Zone Pac e ‘
Range Fs,.a , (P ffi1 , 3. ,
Us na of kai ,
(a) The following area is
estabIjs as a safety zone _____
launch operati at PMRF. Kaaai. -
Hawaii: The waters bounded by the
followulg Coordinates: (221flZN,
15r47 .3 JJ (22 flZN. 15950.7wj
(2rct3p j, 15r50 .71fi1),
( 2 Zi .3’N.15rNa w)
(b) A v:g j Tb. bove safety
zone will be activated during launch
opera at PMRF. JCauax. Hawaii. The
Coast Guard will provicj , conca that the
safety zone will be activa through
pubhghed and broadca ,, local notice to
mariners prior to schednI d launch
dates.
(c) ReguJg, ,, The area described in
Paragraph (a) of this section will be
dosed to all vessel. and persona, except
those veIs lg and persons authorImd by
the Com ntje, Fourteenth Coast
Guard Dlsfrfct, or the Captain of the Port
(COTPJ HoneJu3 Hawaii, whenever
Strate c Target System (STARS)
vehicle, are to be launched by the
United State, Go am froar the
PMRF. Bsrldng Sands, ICenal. Hawmi.
(d) The genep regulations goverm
safety zones Contained in 33 CFR 185.23
apply. . -
Datedi July 2L 1gg ,
opto n, U.S G a t of the Porr
noIu/u. Howe,, ,
IFR.Doc. 92—i Filed S-6-e 8.43 am)
os os
C I I VJNU fl , PROTEC ’flON
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 300 arid 308
( Da& .t No. I I5 FRL .3S3s.4)
Rseovesy of C to, CERCLA
R. .poiia
AQaNcy EnvIJonmental Protection
Agency.
ACT1O Proposed rule. -
su Na The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency ( A)is authorized
to recover froni responsible paine.
under section 107 (a) of the
Comprehe ,t, Environ t,
Response. Compensation. and Liability
Act the costs it has Incurred
for response actions taken for release,
or threats of release, of hazardous
substanep 5. This Proposal clarifie, far
purpose, of respons , actions taken by
EPA What coats are recoveruble,
including direct cost a. indirect costs. and
Interest how the,, costa are
determined: what information will
support WA’s cost rew -jr efforts by
desaib the respons, action taken
and providing an accurate accotm of
all costs Incinveth and, certain terms in
the statute of limitation, for
cost recovery aCtion,.
The proposed regulation would amend
certa provision, and establiak new
regulations on Cost Racovm’y.
The proposed regulatioti as intended, to
clarify certain aspects of the cost-
recobai process and thereby avoid
unnecessary costs and delays involved
in that process whether u r
during settleme neganau or
ad! ejn ti.tiveop udi j proceeding ,,
OAYIaiC0 n e,ta on his proposal must
be received on or before October 3. 1992.
wc— Interested persons may
Participate in this rulemalcmg by
submimngco , , to Francti . S Ims
a . .A Edo m -j visum (OS ..
510W), O e of Solid West, end
Emerg 5 cy Response, U.S.
Envrome aj Utc HanAge cy, 402 M
Street, SW.. Washingti,,, DC 204w,
DOC 7 Copie, of materials
referent to this rulema ig are -
contamed In room M2427 at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Sbeet. SW., Weshljigt, 0. DC 20460
(Docket Number I15CCRJ. The docket is
available for inspection between the
hour, of 9 a.m. and 4p.m. Monday
through Friday, excluding federal
holidays, APPOInt its to review the
docket may be made by calling 202-260..
304&
FOR P%j 5 pØ
Sally Martiny, 17$. Environmental
1992 / Pr000sed Rules
Protection Agency (0S- iow 1 . at 703-
308.4454. or the RCRA/CER Hothne
1-800 -424...93 (703-420.99w in the
Washingt, , DC me o ales).
SUP tpy i Ouesavioer
The preamble is orga?u as follow,:
I Introdection
A. Authority
B. Sathgroun
C. Stamto, Protnern
U. Issues Addressed by the Propo,.d Rule
A. Costa Reoavs, , Under a .&
B. Determin t,
1. Direct Cast.
2. Indirect Costs
3. 1nte,e,
C. Documenting Resp 0 n_ .e Action, and
0. Stittit, of Lininatime
F. Public COrn_meat
ilL Secuan.by.&cuos Sumsiaiy
IV. Summery of Suppon Analyses
I. Infroduc
i. Authority
Today’s proposed rule will amend 40
CFR pan 300 and establish a new 40
CFR part 308, Cost Recu ,
The authority to amend 40 CFR pan 300
is cited in this regulation , The authority
to issue 40 C ’R part 308 Is found in the
Complehen, ve EnvIronh!t, al
Response, Compensa o , and Liability
Act of 1980. as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorizanon Act of 1999 (SARA). (42
U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), Teferred toes
Section 115 of
authorizes the Presidern to delegate and
a.szgn any duties OPpowes , imposed
upon or assigned to him and to
Promulgate any regulations necessary to
carry out the provisions of title I of
These duties and pow , have
been delegated to the U.S.
Envlroxun,ntal Protection Ag,n y (WA)
pursuant to Executive Order izsao (52
FR 23).
B. Background
gives the United States
broad authority to respond directly to
release, or threat, of releases of
hazardou, substano,, into the
environmano, release, or threats of
releases into the environment of any
pollutant orcontam neriz which may
present an “ent and aubs’ tj
danger to the public health or welfare. l
addltl to authorising direct federal
response, C CL authorizes the
federal govern t to
responsible pa ine. to taka response
actions at their own expense.
establiake, a Trust Fund, known as the
Hazardous Substance Superfun
(Superfund), to pay for federal
goveTnm t response actions, It is
financed Primarily with a tax on audo
Fsd.aj Re ,t,, / Vol. 57, No. 152 / Thurs ay . August 6.
-------
Federal Register I VoL . 57. No.152 / Thursday . August 6. 1992 / Proposed Rules
34743
oil and certain chenucala. Executive
Order 12580 delegates to EPA primary
responsibility for implementing the
Superfund proqram.
In 1980. CLA established a five-
year. $1.8 billion Trust Fund. In 1988.
amendments to C rL.A reauthorized
the Superfund otogram for five years
and inci’eased the size of the Trust Fund
by $8.5 billion. In 1990. Congress
reauthonzed the Superfund program for
three additional years to 1994 and
extended the taxing provisions for four
years to 1995. This extension will add
$5.1 billion to the Trust Fund. The
Congress has appropriated, and EPA has
obligated approximately $8.5 billion by
the end of fiscal year (FY) 1991 in the
unplementation of the Superfund
program. Disbursements at the end of
FY 1991 were approximately $8.0 billion.
CLA authorizes the federal
government, states, and Indian tribes, as
well as private parties, to recover their
response action costs from those
responsible for releases or threats of
releases of hazardous substances.
CERCLA’s legislative history reflects
Congress concern that the objectives of
the statute would not be met without a
highly successful enforcement program
achieving privately funded cleanups and
recivenng government response costs
(see e.g. 132 Cong. Rec. 514903. remarks
of Sen. Stafford (October 3. 1998)). Both
avenues are needed because EPA. by
itselL could not secure the financial and
human resources necessary to address
the problems associated with the
nation’s uncontrolled hazardous waste
sites.
‘Ilils proposed rule focuses on the cost
recovery aspect of CERCLA. Cost
recovery actions under CLA
potentially involve billions of dollars
and complex litigation. The time and
costs incurred by the United States and
responsible parties in preparing for.
negotiating. and litigating these cases
have been and will continue to be
substantiaL
This proposed rule Is designed to
reduce some of that time and. cost
burden. by clarifying some of the major
issues related to cost recovery.
C. Statuinr Provisions
Section 107(a) of CLA authorizes
the United States to recover. ‘all costs
of removal or remedial action incurred
by the United States’ ‘not
inconsistent with the national
contingency plan.” Pursuant to section
107(a). the following parties are liable:
(1) the owner and operator of a vessel or a
facility. (2) any person who at the time of
disposal of any hazardous substance owned
or operated any facility at which such
hazardous substances weie disposed of. (3)
any person who by connect. agreement. or
otherwise arranged for disposal or teawient.
or arranged with a transporter for transport
for disposal or treatment, of hazardous
substances owned or possessed by such
person. by any other party or entity. at any
facility or ananereuon vessel owned or
operated by another party or entity and
containing such, hazardous substances, and
(4) any person who accepts or accepted any
hazardous substances for transport to
disposal or treatment facilities, incineration
veisels, or sites selected by such person.
These persons are referred to as
responsible parties. Courts have
interpreted C Q.A’s liability standard
to provide for joint and several, as well
as strict, liability for these responsible
parties.
Section 104 of CLA authorizes
EPA to take a “removal” or “remedial”
action or any other response action
consistent with the national contingency
plan, which EPA deems necessary to
protect public health and the
environment, whenever there is a
release or a substantial threat of release
of a hazardous substance into the
environment, or whenever there is a
release or substantial threat of release
of any pollutant or contaminant into the
environment that may present an
,mllunent and substantial danger to
public health or welfare. These actions
are authorized to be taken to protect the
public health, or welfare, or the
environment
Section 101(23) of CLA defines
“remove” or “removal” to include short-
term responses to clean up or remove
releases or threats of releases of
hazardous substances from the
environment These so-called
“traditional” physical removals may
include installing security fencing.
removing and disposing drums or spills
of chemicals or containing and treating
con’ ”ated soils or sludges on- or off-
site. In order for EPA to undertake these
removal actions and pay for them out of
the Supeifund. the action must cost less
than $2 million and last less than. one
year. unleu a waiver is granted
pursuant to section 104(c)(1) of CLA.
This statutory limitation does not apply
to removal actions infraii by responsible
parties.
In addition to these “traditional”
physical removals. CLA’s definition
of removal also includes certain other
activities, including studies and
investigations of releases and threats of
releases to determine their nature and
extent and other actions taken to plan
and direct response actions pursuant to
section 104(b) of CLA. Removal
activities prior to a remedial action refer
to preliminary assessments (PAs). site
investigations (Sis), remedial
investigations/feasibility studies (RI!
FSs). a record of decision (ROD) that
describes the remedy selected for the
site, and remedial design (PD).
Section 101(24) of CERCLA defines
“remedy” or “remedial” generally to
include long-term efforts to mitigate or
permanently remedy problems at a s:te,
They may be taken instead of. or in
addition to. removal action in the event
of a release or threatened release of a
hazardous substance into the
environment, to prevent or r” ”e the
release of hazardous substances so that
they do not migrate or otherwise cause
substantial danger to present or future
public health or welfare or the
environment There is no statutory
dollar limit to these response actions.
According to the national contingency
plan, 40 CFR part 300. EPA will not
expend Superfund monies for a remedial
action at a site unless it is on the NPL.
This NPL-limitation does not apply to
remedial actions undertaken by
responsible parties or to removal
actions.
CLA and the national contingency
plan include within the definitions of
removal and remedial actions related
enforcement activities such as cost
recovery activities under section 107(a).
Both removals and remedials are
considered to be “response” acefmi
“Response” actions are defined in
section 101(25) of CLA as “remove,
removal, remedy, and remedial action.
all such terms (including the terms
‘removal’ and ‘remedial action’) include
enforcement activities related thereto.”
EPA ranks hazardous sites according
to the seventy of the problem at the site
and places those deserving priority
attention on its National Priorities List
(NPL). Information upon which a site’s
ranking is based is collected as part of
the PA and SI, As of July 29, 1991. the
NPL Included 1,188 sites. usduiling 118
federal facility sites, with an additional
23 sites proposed for inclusion on the
NPL. Final and proposed sites now total
1211, 58 FR 35840 (1991).
II. Issues Addressed by the Prn 1 ,o.ed
Rula
A. Costs Recoverable Under CERC A
CLA section 107(a) provides
authority to federal agencies to bring an
action against responsible parties for
recovery of all costs incurred for
removal or remedial action not
inconsistent with the national
contingency plan. The proposed rule
would define the scope of costs that are
recoverable by EPA in enforcement
actions filed under section 107(a). First.
the proposed rule in * 30820 . would
-------
34744
Federal Rngister / Vol. 57, No. 152 I Thursuav. August 8. 1992 / Prooosed Rules
cociifv the liability staridarg i tt CERCLA
section 107 (a)(4)(A) wriicn states that
responsible parties are liable for federal
costs of response actions incurred not
inconsistent with the national
contin!ency plan. Second. in 308.25.
the rule would mane ciear that “all costs
of removal of remedial action incurred,”
referenced in section 107 (a). include the
catesones of diret costs. indirect costs . -
and interest . ThIii câiTh are incurred by
EPA in performing ail the Superfund
response activities authorized by
CERCLA and governed by the national
contingency plan. Dj ç cositare
expenditures wnich are mace rot site-
specific response action ann which are
icientified in individual site accounts in
EPA’s financial management system.
1n rec cqg pa p operation and
manug ern costs. comparable to
overhead, which support site response
actions and the Superiwtd program in
general. but which cannot be arrectly
.iccounted for on an individual site
oasis. on federal expenditures is
specifically recoveraole unoer section
107(a) of CLA. As discussed below
in section 8. Determining Coats. of this
preamble. the proposed rule would
further define and desa’ibe the method
for determuung direct costs, indirect
costs, and interest.
The proposed rule would clartfy p
Slates under se ön1 7a): First, that
indirect costs are recoverable: and
second, that defendants In section 107 a)
cost recovery actions, in addressing the
issue of whether costs are incurred iii a
manner not Inconsist ent with the
national contingency plan. r v f nt avoid
payment of united States costs on the
grounds that such costs are
“unaecoss.ry or “unreasonable.” The
proposed rule ii consistent with and
supported by current federal case law
addressing C.A issues in cost
recovery ac’ ’
The clear weight of federal court case
law supports recovery of the United
States’ indirect costs. See. for eiiample.
United States v. Oggati & Goes. 900 F.Zd
429 (1st CIt. April 4. 1990): United States
v. R.W. Meyer. Inc.. 889 F.Zd 1497 (0th
Cit. November . 1989): Lfzuted States v
Bell Petroleum Semces. Inc.. 734 F.
Supp. 771 (W.D. Ten. March 8. 1990): and
United States v. Northeastern
Pharmaceutical and Chemical Co.
(“NE PA CCO’J. 579 F. Supp. 823.850
(W.D. Mc. 1984). afl ’d in part and rev’d
in part an other grounds. 810 F.2d 728
(8th Cit. 1988), cerr. den.. 108 S. Ct. 148
(1987). The United States is entitled to
recover its proportionate overhead
e .oenses. which comprise a large
portion of Sunerfunc extienoitures. this
is clearly consistent with Corisressional
intent, reflected in section 107(a). thit
the United States recover ‘all costs o
removal or remedial action incurrec.’
Recovery of indirect costs in recovery
actions is also consistent with standard
business practices iii the private sector
with respect to allocation of costs.
Case law has also established that
responsible parties in section 107(a)
actions cannot avoid payment of coats
on the 9rounds that sucn costs are
‘unnecessary” or “unreasonable.”
Section 107(a)(4)(A) does not qualify the
term “all costs.’ Attempts by
responsible parties to impose additional
restrictions on the United States right to
recover costs. such as arguments that
the United States cannot recover
unnecessary,” ‘unreasonable.’ or
“excessive” costs, or the costs of
‘inefficient response actions, have been
repected by the courts, which have
concluded that the express terms of the
statute preciude suca limitations. See
VEPACCQ. 579 F. Supp. at 851,810 F.24
at 748.
This interpretation of CERCLA is
consistent with Congress intent that
private parties take the lead in cleaning
up Superfund sizes. As Congress
envisioned the process. responsible
parties would be encouraged by the
standards of strict. )oint and several
Liability, and the United States right
under se on 107 to recover “every
dollar” expended at sites. to undertake
cleanups voluntarily. 132 Cong. Rec.
S1493& remarks of Sen. Durenberger
(October 3. 1980). Thus, mole resources
would be “spent on necessary and
effective cleanup of Superfund sites. and
less on convoluted litigation 132
Cong. Rec. S14932, remarks of Son.
Simpson (October 3. 1906). It was
Congress’ intent that responsible parties
have an niceonve to conduct voluntary
cleanups, rather than wait perhaps
yeersto conduct lengthy. resource-
intensive litigation over the wisdom
shown by EPA personnel when
unplemen g valid Superfund response
actions.
Case law has clarified the burden of
proof which the United States must meet
to recover its actual costs In cost
recovery actions, and the burden which
defendants must meet once the United
States has established irtpnma fade
case. See NEPACCO. 579 F. Supp. at 850.
810 P. 24 at 747. The United States must
prove that the defendants In a section
107 action are liable. Then, the Umte
States must demonsn’ate that It
conducted a removal or remedial action
and establish the costs which were
incurred for that action.
When the United States nas met its
ourden of proof under section 107(a). the
burden shifts to the defendants to show
that coats were incurred inconsistent
with the national contingency plan. If
defendants fail to meet this buraen of
proof. the United States is entitled to
recover all of its response costs.
The proposed regulation does not
address the issue of recoverability of
costs in the circumstance where a court
rules that the United States. in
conducting a removal or remedial
action. failed to comply with a
requirement of the national contingency
plan. E &jgIi e. ibltc,,cnmment on
whether the regulation should include
further clarification of the CLA
section 107(a)(4)(A ) liability standard in
this respect. EPA is considering adovnng
the standard developed by the court in
O’Nezl v Prcillo, 682 F. Supp. 706 (D.R.1.
1988). aff’d 883 F.2d 178(1st Cit. 1989).
The.clara tioo would state that where
the Agency does not materially comply
with the applicable requirements of the
national contingency plan. and as s
result incurs costs demonstrably in
excess of those costs that would have
been incurred in the absence of such
material noncompliance with the
national contingency plan. recoverable
costs (i.e. the “costs of removal or
remedial action incurred by the United
States’ • not inconsistent with the
national contingency plan.” 42 U.S.C.
9607(a)(4)( ’)). would not include the
demonstrably exceu costs Incurred as a
direct result of the noncompliance with
the national contingency plan. The
clarification would further state that
where material noncompliance with the
national con ig u.y plan does not
result in demonstrably excess costs. all
costs of respons. action are recoverable
costs.
B. Deterrnznzn,q Costs
EPA incurs costs. including direct and
indirect costs. in t Irlng response
actions. Other federal agennies. states.
and b Ai.,i tribes also may incur costs
for response actions. As mentioned
previously, these entities have
independent authority under
secoon 107( 5) to recover their response
action expenditure.. However, while
slates or other federal agencies. as well
as EPA. may be the lead agency for
response actions as provided in the
national coathigency plan. EPA Is
geneally the lead agency for recovery
under .,A section 107 of most
response action expenditures.
Accordingly, the provisions otthai.
oosed rule apply to cost recovery
actions initiated by EPA and are not
• ,.,_,) , - ‘0 :,. - • •iry 7
-------
Federal R. tter I Vo4. 57. No. 152 / Thursday. August 8. 1992 / Propound Rules
34745
bLnDa other federal agencies.
states. tribes.
States funds under
Superfund ‘ative agreements.
ho... . ,.. are required to cow,Ay with
the unuforin smstrutzve req Inremems
for grants inn cooperanve aa’eements
to states and local governments at 40
dR pan 31. and the aduustrutiv,
reqinrements specifically related to
cooperuuve agreements and state
contracts for Soperfund reepunse
arP at subpart 0 of 40 CFR part 35.
These regulations include requirements
for the completion end maintenance of
certain deGi.mIfltatiOQ and information
necessary lot the of
grant. and cooperative agreements.
With respect to federal agencies.
where EPA incurs costs by reimbursing
other isderal agen es foe work
performed under interagency
eremnents. and plans to include these
au as part of a cost recovery action.
A will request. pursuant to terms of
...tarageocy agreements, that suca other
federal aga n . maintain
doci .i a don and I formation
regarding response actions and cotta
condataal with the documentation and
information provisions in this proposed
rule.
LOkeotCo at ,
The proposed rule would define direct
costs as disbursements (also own as
outlays’ or “expenditures”) recorded In
individual site accounts in WA’s
finana I management system. The
terms “disbursement” and ‘Inazicial
management system” are used in this
rule hi accordance with standard and
established federal government practice
discussed below.
costs are expenditures which
ar” de for the execution of a site
rer’. . e action and are identified In the
inarviaual site accounts In the Agency’s
tuisenal “ igemem system. They
inelude WA employee salaries and
benefits. avel cost,. EPA payments for
goods and ee,vtces furnished by
organizations other than EPA under
contracts (with private companies).
interagency agreements (with other
federal agencies). cooperative
agreements (with states pursuant to
sectIon 104(d) of grant. to
groups of individuals (Tedimcal
Assistance Grants). preauthorized
response daises made by responsible
parties porfeiming response actions
under a “mixed funding” settlement
aeiee t pursuant to se on 1 of
reimbursements made
pursuast to se cu 106(b) of CLA.
and fn jflcatson &h, a wider
section 119 of C CLA. They include
any other site -specific response cost,.
including oversight costs. incurred by
the Agency under authority of C C1A
and the national contingency plan.
The Agencys direct costs include all
costs of other organizations performing
site-specific response actions under
Superfmid conira a. cooperative
agreements. interagency a i-n tUentL
and grunt.. For example. in connects
with private companies performuig site-
specific work, the contractors overhead
and profit along with direct Labor and
ruaierml cost.. is part of the costs to
EPA of those contracts. Overhead and
pru6t Is inchxled in company invoices
for sate work at those sates and is
charged in EPA’s financial management
system as a direct cost to WA.
Similarly. EPA’s payments to federal
ageiscias and statse through Interagency
agreement. and cooperative agreements.
respectively, for site-specific work
includes their indirect costs.
The federal governments recognition
and receiding of disbursements is in
accord ’ with Office of Management
and Budget (0MB) CIrcular A-34
lnstiacucos on Budget Execution” and
tide 2 of the General Accounting Office
(GAO) Policie. and Procedures Manual
I rGi iA of Federal Agencies. Title
2 was promelgated pursuant to 31 U.S.C.
3311. which grants the Comptroller
General of the United States authority to
prescribe accounting principles.
standards. and requirements for each
executive agency.
WA ’s finazunal inariagement system
cou.sts of th. total ofi (1) Agency
financial systems. both manuel and
automated. for planning budget
formulation and execution. program and
administrative a ....ii wting. and audit
and, (2) all other systems for recording
and classifying financial data and
I ,II.ILtiIg financial information.
including J amng. property.
inventory. etc. This desuription is based
on the definition of financial
fnanRgement system from 0MB Circular
A-ID Vtnancial Management
System..”
EPA’s accounting policies and
procedure. are based on the laws.
regulations. and policies cited above
and other applicable authorities
discussed below. in recording direct
CostS ID the individual site accounts.
EPA employs a variety of systems.
methods. and techniques. As required
by title 7. chapter 8 of GAO. Policies
and Procedures Manual for Guidance of
Federal Agencies. EPA reviews end
approves basic payment documents
before any disbursements are made.
Soperfand direct costs are based ott
records such .. tiniecerds. timesheets.
vouchers, invoices and electronic
transfers. In addition, some direct costs
are recorded thr ournal entries ano
iournai voucher transfer, trots other
accounts.
EPA’. financial management system
incorporates monerous accoutring and
internal controls in accordance with 31
U.S.C. 3512. These control. ensure that
obligations and costs comply with
applicable law and that the revenues
and expenditures applicable to Agency
operations are recorded arid accounted
for properly. The controls also ensure
that account, and reliable financial and
statistical are prepared.
The foregoing discussion has focused
on WA’s accounting of costs. Under 31
U.S.C. 3512. other federal agencies are
subject to the same controls and
regulations as WA arid consequently
follow similar. though not necessarily
identical, internal procedures
impLementing these controls and
regulations. As explained above. WA’.
direct costs include payments to other
federal agencies pursuant to interagency
agreement.. Under Agency policie, and
procedures. WA does not account for
these payments as direct costs until the
other federal agency has incurred the
costs and submitted an invoice for
reimbursement to WA, In turn, other
federal agenaes are subject to the same
controls and regulations regarding the
recording of disbursement, discussed
above, as apply to WA. Both WA and
government-wide policies reqinre
recipient federal agencies to maintain
adequate internal controls end support
for all charges to interagency accounts.
Consequently. all pay” to other
federal agencies have been subject to
extensive review and control by the
time the charges are recorded as direct
cost. an EPA’s Fnnna!1a4 “s4ement
systems.
2. Indirect Costs
The proposed rule would define
indirect costs as disbursements from the
Superfund for the upuration and
management of the Superfund program
that are not direct cost.. It also would
provide a methodology for deterrmrung
the Indirect cost pool and indirect coat
rate. Since the purpose of appropriations
from the Superfund is to support.
C .A goals and objectives, any
charge to the Trust Fund supports the
clean-up process at Superfund sites.
Accordmgly. WA believes that any cost
to Superfuad not charged to a specific
site should be included in the Indirect
cost pool. This definition, together with
that foe direct - us . would make all
di.L, ,..,emest , from the Supeifinid
potentially eligible for cost recovery.
lndi . 1 ,t costs are support costs.
comperarile to a private company s
-------
34746
Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 152 I Thursaav. August 6. 1992 I Protiosed Rules
overnead. which support site resoonse
actions. or the Suoertwia program in
general. but which cannot be directly
accounted for on an individual site
basis. EPA ’s indirect coats may include
payTnents for non-site-specific activities
under contracts, grants. and interagency
agreements. Indirect costa include:
1. Ad.muustrauve management (e g..
facilities. personnel. finance budget.
procurement. and other support
services I:
2. Enforcement, legal. and audit
services (e.g.. non-site-specific costs
from EPA’s Offices of General and
Regional Counsels. Inspector General.
and Enforcement);
3. Program management (all non-site-
specific costs for EPA’s program offices
and 10 regional hazardous waste
management divisions for such
functions as management, and policy
direction and formulation):
4. Initial site analysis costs
(preliminary assessments and site
investigations of potential Superfwid
sites): and,
5. Researca and development (R&D)
costs.
EPA excludes, and will continue to
exclude from its indirect cost pool
certain other response action costs.
which are accounted for on a site-
specific basis. and their associated
indirect coats. These costs include:
(1) Unrecovered response action costs
expended on sites where less than 100%
of total expenditures are recovered
through settlements with responsible
parties and no further cost recovery at
the site is pursued:
(2) Response costs at sites where
there are no financially viable
responsible parties (orphan sites), at
sites wnere no responsible parties have
been identified, and at sites where
response costs are not pursued: and
(3) Costs associated with federal
facilities sites.
EPA also has not sought other indirect
costs, such as the total of all Indirect
costs incurred in fiscal years 1981 and
1982. Under EPA’s Supesfund R i a al
management policy, these costs were
applied to the startup of the Superfund
program.
From 1983 to date. EPA’s accounting
methodology has resulted in a limited
amount of indirect costs being allocated
to sites for cost recovery. This is a result
of two ma;or factors relating to EPA’s
current allocation methodology. The
first factor involves the composition of
he ini t irect cost pooL Certain sub-
categories of the first three types of
indirect costs listed above (for example.
eqwpment costs and related
depreciation expense) were omitted
from the cost recovery process. Initial
site analysis cost. and R&D were
excluded in their entirety.
The second factor limiting EPA’s ‘ -
allocation of indirect costs to sites for
cost recovery involves the methodology
by which the indirect cost pool is
currently distributed. In this process.
EPA divides the total of its indirect cost
pool by the total of site-specific and
non-site-specific employee hours to
compute an hourly indirect cost rate.
However. EPA’s indirect cost rate is
applied only to site-specific employee
hours when computing a site’s share of
indirect costs. Since these site-specific
employee hours have amounted to
approximately 35% of the total
Superfund employee hours, only this
portion of the indirect cost pool is
distributed to sites for potential cost
recovery. The remaining 65% of the
indirect cost pool is not allocated to
sites in any manner and is therefore
excluded from potential cost recovery.
The Agency is fully aware that this
coixibinauon of factors significantly
limits recovery of certain indirect costs.
The General Accounting Office. in its
report, Superfund: A More Vigorous and
Better Managed Enforcement Program Is
Needed, December 1988. estimated that
all of these practices have had the effect
of excluding a total of $800 million in
indirect costs through fiscal year 1988
from potential cost recovery.
Selection of this indirect cost
allocation methodology was not based
on the premise that certain indirect
costs were not recoverable, but instead
was based on a consideration of
efficient athnin styation of this
methodology by the Agency’s then
current financial management system.
Generally accepted accounting
principles would permit the allocation of
all of the costs of the Superfund program
to sites. This has been recently
supported by a federal district court
awarding EPA Indirect costs in a
CLA cost recovery action. See
United States v. Royal N. Hcxdoge. et ci.
(“Hardage”). Clv. No. 88-.1401P. slip op.
at 103 (W.D. 0km. August 9, 1990). The
court in Hardage found that EPA’s
current system of cost distribution
allocates 35% of Superfunè non-site-
specific costs and that under generally
accepted accounting principles.
allocation of 100% would be appropriate.
Accordingly, today’s proposed rule
would revise EPA’s indirect cost
methodology to ensure implementation
of a full cost accounting approach which
allocates all costs of the Superfund
program to sites.
EPA’s current indirect cost allocation
methodology is a cost.based approach
and includes certain non.Superfwtd
costs in the indirect cost pool. This
approacn was adooted by EPA from
recommenaauons made ‘oy Ernst &
Young, inc . EPA’s CPA consultant. in it’
report, Evaluation of Existing EPA Cost
Accounting Principles and procedures
and Recommendations for a Cost
Allocation Process and Methodology for
Supertund Sites. August. 1983.
Expenditures from appropriations other
than Superfwid were included because
the Superfund program received certain
benefits and support from other Agency
apprvpnations primarily the Salaries
and Expenses appropriation. The
proposed rule would change the current
procedures by limiting indirect costs to
disbursements from the Supethmd
appropriation. This change is consistent
with EPA’s current financial
management policy to bridge the cost
allocation and budgetary accounting
systems in the Superfund program.
The proposed rule would also provide
the methodology for allocating indirect
costs to specific sites. The proposed
methodology would divide the indirect
cost pool by site-specific employee
hours in determining an indirect cost
rate. Therefore. all indirect costs would
be recoverable if full cost recovery at
every site were pursued. However, full
cost recovery at every site will not
always be pursued. For example. certain
sites have no viable responsible parties
for a cost recovery action. Indirect costs
aUocated to the site would not be
reallocated to other sites and would not
be pursued. EPA specifically requests
public comment on the indirect cost
allocation methodology deseribed In
today’s proposed rule and also requests
comment from the public on alternative
allocation methodologies for Superfund
indirect costs.
The first step in determining an hourly
indirect cost rate would be to divide the
indirect cost pool into two categories.
The first mapor category would Include
indirect costs that support the Superfund
program on a national basis.
National Indirect costs consist of two
components. The first component
consists of EPA headquarters indirect
costs deseribed as follows.
• Superfund program managemont
costs are Superfund dollars that
headquarters expends for the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response
to maintain program support. such as
Regional coordinators and national
policy and gwdance. The funds
expended in headquarters program
management offices benefit all sites.
This program man.. aement includes
payments to site response contractors
for effort which supporta the Superfinid
program as a whole rather than
individual sites. it also includes costs
-------
Fatt&,al Ragisterl VoL 57. No. 152 / Thursday. AU USt 6. 19 I Proposed Rules
34747.
incinred by EPA under reimbursable
interagency a eemenei with other
federal agencies, for example. the
N onsl Ins Wute of Environniental
Health S i s The amount of such
general support effort is determined
frian ‘epora suued annually by the
site response MIUactOrs. All sate
respo contiactors are subject to this
process. For FT 1991. the headquarters
program management costs were
approximately $180 million in Superfund
expenditures. For the period of FT 1981
through F? 1991. these costs are
estimated to be approximately $725
million. The estimated expenditure
sists of actual disbursements for the
pe d FT 1981 through FT 1991. The
expenditures reported for the od six
categories of indirect costs, described
below. were also derived in the same
manner.
Staperfund headquarters
management and support costs are
Superfund costs incurred by EPA
primary and subordinate headquarter.
offices which provide ad” inistratave.
legal. and management suppoit These
pumary o fi s daring FY-iggo consist of
the Office of the EPA Ad vth.,rtrator: the
Office of General Counsek the Office of
Administration and Resources
Management the Office of Enforcement
the Office of Policy. Planning and
Evaluationi the Office of the Inspector
General: and, the Office of International
Activities. Superfund costs incurred
those for offices subordinate to
these primary For F? 1991. the
headquarters m .nagament and support
costs were approximately $90 million in
Superfund expenditures. Through FY
1991. these costs are estimated to be
approximately $450 mtIH i in total
Superfund expenditures.
The Agency. org iz tion and office
structure has changed over time and
could change in the future. As an
example, the Office of Admini .tratlon
and Resource. Management and the
Office of Policy. Plsitrthig and
Evaluation were once the single Office
of Planning and Management Also, the
Office of Pnfr’i’cernent and Compliance
Monitoring was recently reorganized to
the Office of Enforcement The
management and support offices listed
above represent the current Agency
structure. Any future office
reorganization may result in the
incorporation of a new office(s) in this
functional category.
Other EPA headquarters program
office indirect costs are Superfwid
expenditures in program fT . other
than those listed above to support the
Superfund program. These offices.
include the Office of Water. the Office
of Air. and the Office of Pesticides and
Toxic Substances. For example. the -
costs of policy wcà ducted in the
office of Pesticides and Toxic
Substances may support regulatory
work in the Superfluid program. These
costs are the costs of providing
Superfund support on an as-needed
basis for areas in which the program
office has expertise. For F? 1291. the
other program office costs were
appi’wui ateIy $5 millio’t mSupethind
expenditures. Through FT 1991. these
costs are estimated to be approximately
$25 million in total Superfund
expenditure..
• Equipment/depreciation costs are
Superfand expenditures n . .d by
EPA for Supm’fu .d for non-site-specific
capital e ywent namely. eqmpntent
with a unit price . exceeding $5,000.
Examples include electronic data
processing equipment and photocopying
machines. Generally accepted
accounting principles requn’e that the
expense recognition for equipment be
through depreciation. Effective with the
final rule. depreciation will be computed
and form the basis for inclusion as the
indirect costs. This depreciation is
predominantly a headquarters cost
although there is some depreciation in
EPA’s regional accounts. For FT 1991.
equipment and depreciation costs were
approximately $10 million in Supedwid
expenditures. Through F? 1991. these
costs are estimated to be approximately
$75 million in total Superfund
expenditures.
• Research and development costs
are S4lperfund eI p.illSiturea for sr nfif¼
studies including innovative t. 4 ’ ia1gy
studies. health effects studies and
procedures. and research on the use of
scientific te hftiques in Supedund. The
innovative technology studies refer. to
the Staperfund Innovative Technology
Evaluation (SITE) Program. ThIs
program evaluates the feasibility of an
innovative technology before it becomes
generally available and used. This cost
category supports the Superfund
program in general. EPA was
considering alternative methods for
detwi Ynurg the appropriate allocation
(direct costing or indirect costing) of the
research costs to sites, considering the
benefits provided by this research. EPA
has now determined that such research
is properly allocated as uzdizect costs
based on the long-term benefits of such
costs and the iveve lent private secwr
pra ce of eh ging such costs as
indirect in accordance with generally
accepted accommung prrriph’.
However, the costs of implementing
innovative te ”logy at a sits where
such technology is seim ed by EPA as
the remedy at the sits are direct costs.
For F? 1991. the research and
development costs were approximately
S75 miilion in Superfund expenditures.
Through F? 1991. these costs are
estimated to be approximately $250
million in total Sriperfwid :xi,enthtuies.
• site analysis costs axe
generally far preliminary assw ”ta
and site investigations of cotential
Superfund sites. These costs represent
Superfund expenditures on potential
Superfund sites before any declsaon is
made regarding the need for further EPA
action. including removal response
action and listing on the f WL. Given the
nature of these activities, EPA proposes
to account for these expenditures as
indirect costs.
Initial site analysis costs represent a
cost to the Agency for operating end
managing the Superfund programs.
When a c .rncerned party ywvidea EPA
with information on a potential
Superfund site. the Agency responds by
evaluating the site to determine if any
federal action is necessary. To date.
EPA has pe fu . . d preliminary
assessments on over 30.000 such
potential Superfimd sites. EPA’s
proposed policy to for initial
site analysis costs as in&ect costs is
consistent with generally accepted
accounting principles for tieating costs
of this nature. i.e. initial or “up-front”
costs. as indirect or overhead costs. For
example. many private businesses’
initiaL “up-front” costs include costs
associated with providing estimates or
bids on the costs of their services to
potential clients. Some of these bids will
be successfully and result in acceptance
by a client and other bids will not. The
recovery of these initial estimating costs
occurs through bi1fli g to all clients. A
portion of the price billed to clients will
generally include a pm rota share of all
estimating costs as indirect costs.
A specific example involves the bid
and proposal costs incurred by
prospective federal govei ’
contractors. The Federal Acquisition
Regulations (48 CFR 31.205-18) perout
contractors to include bid and proposal
costs as part of the indirect costs
charged to the federal government.
These costs are allowable regardles, of
whether the bid was successful
(resulting in the award of a contract), or
unsuccessful (resulting in no award).
Under this proposed regulation. EPA’s
ind ect coat pool will Include all initial
site analysis costs. The recovery of
these costs will occur through the
application of the indirect cast rate to all
sites. For F? 1991. these trutial te
analysis costs were approximately $80
million in Superfund iatures.
-------
34748
Federal Re ster / Vol. 57, No. 152 I Thursday. August 6. 1992 / Pronosed Rules
Throuan FY 1991. these costs are
estimated to be approximately $350
million in total Superfund expenditures.
The second component of national
malted costs consists of costs incurred
by otner federal agencies. under
allocation transfer interagency
agreements. in support of the national
Superfund program. Currently, only
health effects research conducted by the
Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Remstry pursuant to section
1O4(ifls) of C CLA is included. Unlike
the WOtK of other federal agencies.
which is charged as direct costs to the
Superiund. these health effects studies
will not be conducted for specific sites
and cannot be charged reasonable as
direct costs.
Pursuant to section 104(i)(5)(D) of
C CLA. the costa for health effects
researcn are to be borne by
manufactures and processors under the
Toxic Substances Control Act.
registrants under the Federal
Lnsecucide. Fungicide, and Rodenucide
Act aria resnonsible parties under
CERCL.A. This proposed rule would
consider costs of health effects research
which cannot be allocated to these
manufacturers, processors and
registrants as indirect costs in EPA’s
indirect cost pool. Generally, health
effects research included in EPA’s
indirect cost pool will cover those
hazaroous substances that are no longer
manufactured or used as pesticides or
which are chemicals (or mixtures o
chemicals) that are disposed of at
hazardous waste sites and cannot be
linked with any such manufacturer,
processor or regisfrant.
The second major category of indirect
costs consists of Superfund program and
administrative management incurred in
each of EPA’s ten regional offices. These
costs are incurred for region-specific
activities which apply to all sites in the
respective region. Examples include
planning and directing Superfund
response activities within the region and
regional financial and personnel
services. For FY 1991. the indirect costs
for EPA’s regions were approximately
S 125 million in Superfund expenditures.
Through FY 1991. these indirect costs
are estimated to be approximately $800
million in total Superfund expenditures.
After determirnqg the Indirect cost
pool from the national and regional
indirect costs expenditures, the next
step in detertriining the indirect cost rate
would be to identify each region’s total
direct and mdire Superfund employee
hours. A region’s oirect Superftmd
employee how’s are employee hours
charged to individual Sueprfund sites
(resulting in salaries being charged as
direct costs). Indirect Superfund
employees hours are hours cnarged in a
region to the Superfund program but not
to individual Superfund sites.
Once tue national indirect costs.
?egional indirect costs. and regional
Superfund employee hours are
determined, indirect costs rates can be
calculated. First. national indirect costs
are distributed to eacir region by
multiplying the total national indirect
costs by the percentage (ratio) of each
region’s total Superfund hours (direct
and indirect) to the combined total of all
regions’ total Superfund hours (direct
and indirect). The proposed rule refers
to this percentage as a regions
‘allocation percentage.”
Next, each regions indirect cost pool
would be calculated by adding a
region’s distribution of the national
indirect costs, as calculated above, to its
own indirect costs which support the
Superfund program.
To compute the regional indirect cost
rate, the total regional indirect cost pool
is divided by regional Superfund site
hours. To identify indirect costs for a
specific site, the regional indirect cost
rate is multiplied by regional Superfund
site hours charged to the site.
The nature of the indirect cost
allocation process results in the
establishment of provisional or interim
indirect cost rates. The establishment of
provisional indirect cost rates is a
generally accepted cost accounting
concept and accepted business practice.
The indirect cost allocation process can
result in three or more separate indirect
cost rates for a particular fiscal year
until a final, audited rate is established
after the end of the fiscal year. The first
rate would be established at the
beginning of the fiscal year based on the
best available information. In most
cases. this provisional rate would be
based on the prior fiscal year’s indirect
cost rate. After completion of the current
fiscal year. the indirect cost rate would
be recalculated based on actual fiscal
year disbursements. This may result in a
revised provisional indirect cost rate.
There may be additional revisions to the
provisional indirect cost rate based on
accounting adjustments such as
reclassification of costs. Finally. EPA’s
indirect costs undergo audit by EPA’s
Office of Inspector GeneraL Upon
completion of the audit. EPA would
determine the final indirect cost iates.
The proposed rule contains
provisional indirect cost rates for each
EPA region for fiscal years 1983-1988.
These rates were determined using the
proposed methodology.
After promulgation of the proposed
rule, the provisional and final indirect
cost rates for past and future fiscal
years would also be published in the
Federal Register with public comment
requested. The last published rate for
any fiscal year would be in effect for
purposes of calculating indirect costs in
EPA cost recovery actions until a new
rate is published. Resolved cost
recovery actions would not be affected
by the publication of a new rate,
Thus. the FY 1988 rates would apply
to cost distributions made in FY 1989
through FY 1993 until new rates for
these years are published. In addition.
indirect cost rates for prior fiscal years
may be recalculated and new rates
published. Any such recalculations
would occur. as described above, if new
information becomes available based on
recommendations from Agency internal
audits (e.g. Office of Inspector General
audits) or from accounting adjustments
made pursuant to Agency financial
management policy.
The indirect cost rates for fiscal years
1981 and 1982 were not calculated, In
the past, EPA has not sought recovery of
indirect costs for those years and
believes that it Is inappropriate to
rhange that policy at this time. At the
inception of the Superfund program. the
Agency made the decision that indirect
costs for these fiscal years would be
applied to startup of the Superfund
program and would not be recovered.
As a matter of enforcement discretion.
after the effective date of the final rule.
EPA will apply the new indirect cost
rates to all cost recovery actions that
have not been finally resolved. EPA will
apply discretion with respect to
application of the new indirect cost
rates in cases where a demand for
indirect costs has been made. based on
the prior rates. and the settlement
negotiations and/or litigation have
proceeded to a point where EPA
believes application of the new rates
would have an adverse impact on the
settlement negotiations and/or
litigation.
The docket to today’s proposed rule
contains the complete calculations and
information describing the methodology
and specific calculatione used to
determine the EPA regional hourly
indirect cost rates from FY—1983 to FY—
1988 included in S 308.50 .
3. Interest
Section 107(a) of states
(tjh. amounts recoverable in an action under
this secuon shall include interest on the
amounts recoverable under subp.regrsphs
(A) through ID). Such interest shall accrue
from the later of (I) the date payment of a
specified amount is demanded in writing, or
(ii) the date of the expenditur, concerned.
The rate of interest on the outstanding unpaid
balance of the amounts recoverabl, under
-------
Federal Register I Vol. 57. No. 152 I Thursday. August 8. 1992 / : posed Rules
34749
this section shall be the same rate as is
specified for mteie.t on Investments of the
Hazardous Substance Superfund established
under subchapter A of chapter 98 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1954.
Prior to enactment In 1988 of this
provision for charging interest in
CERCI.A. EPA had the authority to
collect pie-judgment interest on
recoverable costa under Superfund. See
N E PA CCO. 579 F. Supp. at 852.
Accordingly EPA charge. responsible
parties with interest on recoverable
costs in all coat recovery actions.
The intent of today’s rule is to clarify
certain terms in CLA relating to
charging of interest and to clarify the
interest rate and method of calculating
interest in cost recovety actions. The
proposed rule would establish the “data
of expenditure.’ under section 107(a), as
the date identified in EPA’s finan ial
management system for the expenditure
event involved. The event date
established depends on the type of
transaction or method of payment.
For transactions where EPA arranges
for a check payment by the U.S.
Department of Treasury, the date of
expenditure is the date of the check.
Examples of this type of transaction
include payments to contractors and
vendors and to EPA employees
reimbursing travel expenditures. For
payroll transactions. EPA uses a bi-
weekly pay period ending on alternate
Saturdays. Any payroll date of
expenditure is the second Tuesday
following the Saturday ending a pay
period. This date may be either the date
of checks to employees receiving checks
or the effective date of electronic
transfers for those employees paid by
electronic fund transfer to their bank
accounts.
There are other transactions involving
electronic fund transfers such as EPA
reimbursements to other federal
agencies (e.g. the US. Coast Guard).
performing work under Interagency
agreements. Another example is a state
cooperative agreement where payments
are made by EPA to a state under a
letter-of-credit arrangement. In these
cases. the date of expenditure is the
date EPA is notified of the electronic
fund transfer by the U.S. Dcpartinent of
.Treasury.
There are some transactions where
the direct. site-specific disbursement is
charged by means of a journal voucher
transfer from another account to which
the disbursement was originally
charged. in these instances, the date of
expenditure is determined by EPA as
the date applicable to the original
charge.
The date of expenditure for indirect
Costa would be the same as the date of
expenditure of the related Superfund
regional employee site-specific payroll
costs. As explained previously in this
preamble. the indirect costs for a site
are determined by application of the
indirect cost rate to direct Superfund
employee site-specific hours expended.
The proposed rule would also clarify
the date of written demand as the
earlier of the date of ni iling of a special
notice letter. demand letter. or other
correspondence which demands past
costs and which may include an
estimate of future costs. Alternately, the
date of written demand Is the date of
filling of a section 107(a) coat recovery
action in federal district court by the
Department of Justice.
Special notice letters are issued by
EPA pursuant to C CLA section 122(e).
They inform responsible parties of their
potential liability for response costs.
mark the start of a statutory moratorium
period on certain EPA actions. and
initiate the process of formal
negotiations for responsible party
conduct of response action at a site.
In accordance with EPA policy.
special notice letters may include a
demand. pursuant to section 107(a), that
responsible parues reimburse EPA for
the costs the Agency has incurred in
conducting response activities at the
site: identify the actions EPA has
undertaken and the cost of conducting
the actions: indicate that the Agency
anticipates expending additional funds
on activities at the site: estimate future
costs for these activities: and. demand
payment of interest for put and future
response costs incurred by EPA.
A demand letter is a request that
responsible parties reimburse the
Superfund for a specified amount
associated with one or more response
activities. Prior to filing a cost recovery
lawsuit. as a matter of policy. EPA
sends a written dpinand letter to
responsible parties pursuant to section
107(a). Demand letters may be issued for
each separate response activity
conducted at a site and may include
estimates of future costs, where
appropriate. Response activities at
Suierfund sites may include individual
or multiple operable units of removal,.
remedial iflvestigadons and feasibility
studies (RI/FSs). remedial designs
(RUs). and remedial actions (RAs).
EPA believes that interest begins to
accrue fortliosecosts already expended
from the date of wMttm demand unless
there was-a prior written demand. in
which case. Interest would accrue from
the date of the prior wnttcn demand.
Interest begins to accrue for subsequent
expenditure:. i.e. future costs. upon the
date of expenditure. Specified sums in
special notice letters, demand letters.
casts issued by the Agency are not an
indication of EPA’s willingness to settle
for those amounts in any case.
The proposed rule would also
establish a procedure for assessing
interest • iiich is consistent with the
manner in which the U.S. Department of
Treasury earns interest on the
investment of Superfund tax revenues.
The U.S. Department of Treasury
compounds interest annually on
Superfund tax revenues. The procedure
proposed in today’s rule would
compound interest for coal recovery
purposes. by adding at the end of the
fiscal year. unpaid principal to unpaid
accrued interest to determine new
unpaid principal, interest then accrues
on the new unpaid principal for the new
fiscal year.
In defining certain terms and
methodologies for determining interest
today’s proposed regulation is not
intended to affect or preclude EPA’s
recovery of interest under any legal or
equitable authority or principles. This
view is consistent with the court’s
opinion in United States v. Bell
Petroleum Semces. Inc.. 734 F. Supp.
771 (W.D. Tex. March 8. 1990) which
construed the statutory language
regarding interest in C CLA section
107 as a guideline for the court to follow
in detervneT mg interest not as a strict
requirement which could bar recovery of
Interest.
C. Documenting Response Actions and
Coats
Today’s proposed rule amends 40 C
306.180 to specify the documents and
information that EPA will complete and
maintain to support CERQ.A cost
recovery actions. EPA proposes that the
documents and information specified
meet the requirements of the national
contingency plan to describe the
response action taken and provide an
accurate accounting of costs incurred for
that action by the Agency for purposes
of CLA sectIon 107(a) cost recovery
actions. This section of the proposed
rule would not apply to documentation
requirements that the Agency may issue
by policy or regulation relating to claims
against the Superfund pursuant to
CERCLA sections 111 and 112: petitions
for reimbursement pursuant to CERCLA
section 106(b): and. reimbursements to
local governments pursuant to CERCLA
section 123.
This part in the proposed rule would
apply prospectively to cost information
assembled and response action
documented by EPA on or after the
effective date of the promulgation of the
final regulation. It Is EPA’s intent
-------
34750
!ed 1 Reatsier I VoL 57. No. 152 / Thuraaav. Au2ustB. 1992 I Prc osed Rules
however, to adopt the doctitation
process defined in the proposed
amendm ”t to 40 C ’R 30Q.1 as an
intanm policy which would apply to
current cost recovery actions, where
apprcpn.ate.
The detailed process for completion
and maintenance of docnmcots and
information in 300.1e0(a)(3) and (4) of
the proposed rule would not directly
apply to other federal agencies, states,
and Indian tribes. As stated previousky
in this preamble, it Is EPA ’s thtent to
r qe17 ? that federal ageuQes. inider
terme of Superfend interagency
agreements. complete and maintain
documents and information to support
coil recovery ac oni cosmistent with
the requirements of the proposed rule.
Certain parts of the proposed rule.
however. particularly 305.50. EPA
Indirect Costs, of the new 40 CFR part
308 will apply, when finaL to cost
,. actions under section 107 of
CERCLA which have not been finally
resolved. The remaining provisions of
part 305 wouid apply to cost reccoery
acacos initiated alter the effective date
of the final rule.
The prop d rule would clarify that
documentation stiffirient to desenbe
what the emts of the resJ u a cn
were inred far wasid be provided in
two entegames. The first cat ry.
docim.ntation that ,ers the rit 1
resp Ii e.w rii’wi ink.i would be werk
im bon documents that EPA luium to
contractors and lead agencies
describing the work to be undertaken to
iniplemem the selected response action.
Documents issued to contractors by EPA
in this cata would be werk
asst” ’ ta and other terh i ’ l
directive ‘ ‘i’qs . if the lead a cy
implementing the response action is not
EPA. but rather is a state. or federal
agency. documentation in this catea
would be the appropriate cuop reUve
agreement or interagency a .ainent
that is issued by EPA when it initiates
the i pemeruatlon of response aenon.
if the response action includes a
tp rn i asaas ancs grant to a group of
ind yi ht I’— the documentation would
be Ph. appropriate grant issued by EPA.
Ameni4m Iita to all thee. docotheats
would also be provided.
The , Dci nd category would be
do’ wneote that describe the t ehiiii k
aspects of the unpiemeuzation of the
response action In generaL these
documents wouLd be deliverables. he..
periodic, interim, and for final project
reports, that may be required” 4 r
EPA’s work initiation orders. These
documents would be reports prepared
by EPA officials. or reports prepared by
contractors, states. local governments.
federal agencies. or groups of -
individuals for stih ui.saon to EPA
OifirlAE . wruch are conipietad pursuant
to requirements in work initiation’
documents and which describe the
actual response ar na that have been
taken. These documents would be
reports prepared describing progress of
implementation of the response action
and final reports describing the
completion of response acti
The proposed rula than clarifies EPA’s
approacti to account for coats incurred
for site-specific respons actions.
Certain information would be completed
and maintaLn 1 ccnc g the costs
incurred, by the Agency. For direct coats
this information would be the site
identification code and - -
salary (iwthithng beno ta amounts), and
hours cnarged for all EPA employees
pravidnig site-specific work: nam . of
payees. amounts and date. paid for
purchases and contract charges incurred
for site activities by EPA vendors, and
as applicable. identification of related
contracts. purchase orders. or invoices,
as well as related journal vo&i rs.
The identification of site-specific costs
incurred by EPA vendor. may result
from Iwo different types of accounting
transactions. EPA vendors submit an
invoice for their services on a site-
specific basis. C’ .Ia for these services
can be identified by the invoios.
However, there are also situations
where contract coats. ongmillly billed as
non-sate-specific coats are reel— tfied to
direct site-specific accounts. This
rerlI tion. i.i certain cas permits
more aomrate coat accounting. The
reclassified azrn..ne.specific contract
costs represent contact specific
a,I,rnnistrative coats that are best
allocated to the sites foe which the
contractor expended the costs.
‘l’bere may be other situations for
which casts are redasaafied from non-
site.speciflc accounts to site-specific
accounts such as the re ‘ tion of
pre.FY 1988 contract disbursements
based on speóai reports submitted by
the con actors. The-dgcumen*
accounting for these is a
journal vouchen Theteiora. dep.”ding
on the type of tiunsacuon. an invoice or
a pournal voucher, provides the j -r
appropriate information forth. g tr t
disbursements. ‘ .c. ‘ 4c ‘ -
For cooperative agrermen nth state
and local gover eats end l eragoncy
agreements federaLag.nipes. this
information woul4 )ie lie ‘ cpf -
recipient entatLesjg.g.depw ents.
agencies. etc..). A”n” • and 4%tes paid.
n agreement idtiop r n4nbers
rot all costs incurred.- ,.. 4,
In addition. thia.inforanqowould
include employee amounts and
dates paid. ds nnat on . and travel
authorization number for all sne.spemfic
Lravel by EPA ewpioyees.
For mdn’ect costs. the mtofmahcn
completed and maintained by EPA
would be the applicable annual regional
hourly indirect cost rate, the
identification of the Superfund employee
site-specific hours upon which the
hourly rate is appbed. and the
corresponding mdnect cost totals for
each government fiscal year involved.
For interest charges. the information
would include the amounts and date.
paid of coats on which the mtereea is
calculated and the total of Interest
charges for the sne.
Up to the present, this information has
been provided in extensive and
voluminous documents to responsible
parties end courts in cost recovery
actions. This has resulted in enormous
transaction costs to EPA and
responsible partie, and has frequently
delayed the outcome of a mstratzve
and judicial cost recovery proceedings.
The procedure , w,,oaed In this rile
would substantially stie ” 1 e the cost
accounting associated with EPA’s cost
recovery actions by shifting Agency
practice to cost accounting by means of
manual and automated reports.
Recent rhnrtges in the uet and
practice of governmental and private
business fi iwi i transactions form the
basis for EPA’s decls&on to adopt the
approach in the proposed rule for
accounting for federal costs incurred in
the Superfund program. With adv ”
in business technology. goveroment and
private ‘ “- tr ’ tiona are
moving away from use of do 1!,1,T1taboa
paper (hardcopy). to the tr ’ ien.
recording and storage of electromc
impulses in computerized financial
management systems. For example. US.
Deparunent of Treasury confirmation of
expenditures pursuant to approved EPA
vouchers is currently received
electronically. EPA does not reonve
hardcopy do’ um” ” tion of the..
expow4’*ures..The Agency believes that
government end other
tr n euons incr° gIy will be
conducted electronically ln the future.
The proposed rule reflects this
inevitable trend in utilization of
advanced t çhnology by providing ibbat
theAgen yitLl furnish certain
informauod that would account for
federal costs expended in the Superfimd
program. The iñlbrmatton would include
the sigruf’icant data elements that would
be sufficient to meet the A cy’s
obligations under the national
contingency plan to establish Supafuzid
expenditures. The infotmation would be
provided in the form of automated or
manual reports listing the detailed
-------
Federal Reglster / Vol. 57. No. 152 / Thursday. August 6. 1992 / Proposed Rules
34751
information stated in the proposed
amendment. 40 CFR 300.160(a )(4).
Exampie documents containing the
financial information required by the
proposea rule are included in the docket
to todays proposed rule.
The documentation and information
specified in the proposed rule would in
all cases be sufficient to form the basis
for EPA’s cost recovery action and
satisfy the requirements of
300.160(a)(l) of the national
contingency plan. There may be
instances, however, where certain
documents and information may not be
available because of the urgency of the
response action or other circumstances
beyond the control of EPA. For example.
progress reports describing the response
action taken may not be produced in
every case by EPA contractors. or states
under cooperative agreements. In cases
where certain documentation and
information specified in todays rule are
riot available. EPA wi&I identify other
documentation and information which
describes the response action taken and
provides an accurate accounting of costs
as reqwred by the national contingency
plan.
In clarifying the scope of
I 300.160(a)(1), the proposed rule
excludes documentation and
information which do not describe the
response action taken or provide an
accurate accounting of costs incurred.
For example. “pre-award”
documentation associated with the
procurement of contracts for response
action work does not relate to. and
would not be part of the documentation
and information to be completed and
maintained by EPA to support a cost
recovery action. These documents do
not provide information on the selection
or unplementatzon of the response
action taken at any site that relates to
the nature and extent of costs incurred.
since these pro-award documents are
prevared prior’to pcrformance of any
acttial work under the contract
Similarly, tuitional or r ional EPA
‘contracts (e.g. those providing for
general advisory and assistance
services to theAgency). ,wculd not be -
pars of the documentation nnd
iafovntation produced for cost recoyery
,acticns because they do not contain,
desc.zmption.q of site-specific response
action and do not-contain information
related to cosm incui-red with respect to
any Superfund hite. ‘
Other documents w’r.ich would not,be,.
among the documents produced under
I 300.160(a)(1) in a specific cost
recovery action include general audit
reports or audit work papers that do not
-elate to a particular site. Such general
audit reports. however, that are used as ‘ iii the context of EPA’s response action
a basis for calculation of provisional or procedures. Accordingly. to provide
rinal indirect cost rates would be made more clarity, the proposed rule would
available when EPA publishes these define certain of the terms usea in
rates in the Federal Register. in section 113(g)(2).
accordance with procP. res proposed in As indicated above, the proposed rule
this rule. applies to EPA cost recovery actions.
EPA also believes that preliminary, The proposed rule’s definition of certain
interim, or draft documents, or portions statute of limitations terms are based oct
of these documents are- not necessary to administrative events that occur in
meet the documentation and Information EPA’s Superfund response action
requirements of today’s proposed rule in procedures. The administrative events
cost recovery actions under CERCL.A. that may occur in the Superfund
Accordingly, EPA does not intend to program activities of other governmental
produce these preliminary. interim, or entities and parties may significantly
draft documents pursuant to the differ from those that occur in EPA. The
procedures for cost recovery actions definitions of statute of linutaticns
proposed in today’s proposed rule. Final, events, therefore. do not apply to cost
or “last draft” documents would meet recovery actions taken by other
the provisions in the proposed governmental entities or parties.
300.160(a)(2) of the rule to support a The proposed rule would define
cost recovery action. “completion of removal action” only in
En summary. EPA believes that the the circumstances where remedial
proposed documentation and actions are aLso undertaken at the site,
information amendments to 40 CFR Superfund remedial actions are always
300.160 will contribute to the swift preceded by certain removal actions.
resolution of cost recovery actions under The removal actions may include
section 107(a) of C CLA. traditional physical removals (those
0. CERCLA Statute of Limitations taken to prevent. mitigate, and cleanup
releases or threat of releases of
Section 113(g)(2) of C CLA states: hazardous substances), as well as
An ini.zal action for recovery of costs studies or investigations conducted
referred to in section 107 must be under section 104(b) of CLA (as
commencedi clarified by the national contingency
(A) fore removal action, within 3 years plan). Examples of studies and
after completion of the removal action.
except that such cost recovery action must be investigations include remedial
brought within 8 years after a determination investigations and feasibility studies (40
to grant a waiver under section 1o4(c)(l)(C) CFR 300.430). and remedial design
for continued response action: activitIes (40 CFR 300.435). Because of
(B) for a remedial action. within 8 year, the complexity of the response process
after initiation of physical on-site and the fact that several of these
conseucuon of the remedial action. except removal actions may be taken
that. if the remedial action a initiated within simultaneously or in sequence at a site.
3 years after the completion of the removal the completion of the removal action for
action. costs incurred in the removal action
purposes of cost recovery may be
may be recovered in the cost recovery action cult to ascertain,. The proposed rule
brought under this subparagraph.
In any such action described in thi . would define all pro-remedial response
ubsecuon, the court shall enter a declaratory actions as removal actions and define
judgment o’t liability for rew onse costs os . thu “completion of the removal action”
d,m,tgen that will bu bindi’ig on any Por cost recovery purpooee as the date of
r.. ,bsequent action o actions to recover the )ast remedinl design report prepared
further respoicâ’CS3lt or damages. ‘ . by. EPA preparatory to implementation
suibaequepçacuon or action. under section “o:rmrrndial construction activities at the
107 for Iu her response coils it the vènset or . . - -.
fachfy may be ma&nta)hid at any time during - m teriii’ completion of removal
iha re pon.e action. but must be commenced
no latar$han 3 years after the date of action” at sites where only traditional
crarnp(iitlon of all response action. Except as physical removal actions addressing
oth rwi: .provmded in this paragraph. an releases or threat of releases of
athon ma%r lid commenced under section 107 h.izth ’clcmus substances are undertaken
for recôvery’ef castetai ’any time after such wo l i not be defined by the proposed
costs huve incurred... . “
- -i-f. -
.‘Because thO’iothplemty of the ,The term”physical on-site
Superfthid ‘ progra ni arid this many types construction” for remedial actions
of activities that are involved in removal vou1d be defin’ed by the proposed rule
and remedial aàtions: the Agency -‘ to be limited to actions that occur after
believes it would be helpful in cost compiJtion and approval of the remedial
recovery actions if iefimtio’ns of certain design and the issuance by EPA. the
terms in sectioñ-113(g)(2) were available lead agency. or prime contractor oi a
-------
Fed.. .j Remus, I VoL 57. No. 152 / Thursoav. Aumisi 8. 1992 I Pronosed Rules.
notice to bonn ?emedjaj aenon “nnnce concluded. EPA .pectficaliy requests
to proceed”) by aUthOT personasi. A public c.mnleut on this definition of the
cuan” event
notice to proceed is a written
COmn UflicetiOn I Ssued to the conu a or
conducting the resoonse acuon once
won plans and other cantiact comment on all
documents have been reviewed and aspects of todays rule. However, the
approved by the Lead agency or prone preamble discus’on identifies certain
contractor offi aL In e - , case. the issues addressed in today’s rule on
date of initiation of physical wisite which EPA speaficaliy ieauests public
construction would oceur after the Last comment, These issues include the
remedial design rep rt has been following.
approved and the notice top has 1. Further clarification of the CIA
been issued, in effect the rule proposes section 1C77 Ia)(4)(A) liability a? ia4 rd in
that only consn’ocnon following the mrstance where a court rules
approval of the last remedial design that the United States. in conductin9 a
report and IsatI ! l e of the u cs to removal ar remedial action, failed to
proceed is construction within the comply witha requtrement of the
meaning of CLA section 113(g)(2flB). national contingency plan.
Under the provisions of se on 2. The indirect cost allocation
113(g)(2flB). where a deciaretory methodology proposed in todays rule
ju$g n.nt on liability has been entered and alternative allocation
by a court, the methodologie, for Superfimd indirect
period for a subsequent action is COsts.
extenoed to three rears after 3. The definition of “all response
completion of all response action,” The action • as that term is used in section
declaratory ju4gmr ”q is binding on all 113(g)(2) (B) addressing the circionstance
subsequent actions to recovery response where a declaratory p’dgrr.nI on
costs or damages. Subsequent acoons liability having been entered by a cowl.
under section 107(a) by the Agency, the statutory limitation period for a
however, must be v no La subsequent action is extended to three
than three years after completion years after “completion of all response
response a ion Under the proposed action.”
rule, the term “all response action’ as Comments on this proposed rule must
used in CERQ.A section 113(g)(2)(8) be received within sixty days of
would include, but would be Li publication in the Federal Registw .
to. all response actions that occiir before [ IL Seedoo.by -Se on
the date on which the Superfund Site
Close-OutReporttssignedbyanEPA 40 Pofl3XNati 1°ib
Regional Athne’it.tratcr. The Close ’Out Hazariious Substances Pollution
Report is issued following a fl al Contingency Plan
inspection of the site by EPA staff. A Section 300.180 of the national
desa’iption of a Close-Out Report can be contingency plan establishes
found in “Procedures for Completion requirements for the lead agency to
and Deletion of Sites From the National complete and maintain certain
Priorities Last” (OSW Dliectrve documentation to support all actions
9330.2-Ifla. April. 1999. a ’mded by under the national contingency plan and
OSW Directive 9330.Z-4mb. to form the barns far cost rv ef7.
December, 1999). SInce a Clos&Out Section 300.1e a)(1). which deeeribe.
Report is prepared for each operable the general categories of documentation.
unit at a site, the Clos. ’Out Report for would not be i4iiiwgeid by the proposed
the Last operable unit would be used for rule. i,
puPpo s of fdent1fyln the completion H wever..faiz new subparagrapbs to
of “ l1 responAe action”. The Close-Out “ paragraph (a) would be added. These
Report date wps elected because it Is a anbpazsg apha would set forth EPA’s
definabld date me ud d In; docsgicoa’ obllgntoils ondlt * 3801OI aX1)
developed at every. which provides’ speal, eslIy with pect to cost
the overall te icai f recovery ncncn Sub$regriph (2)
response action completion, would make it clear thIt dXomentatidn
EPA considered other options for and IJiIOTm;UOn spe f fed In the
defining “all response action” including sueceeding two subpara aphs woulil
administrative compli of fedmul .“ apply’td A’.nd would satisfy the
funding of restoration activities as . termu a 1X0.1I0(.H1 ) nf the flata8flal
provided’ i 40 C R The Close’ cant1 gendy-plan with ia spect to colt
Out Report. however, is a Ieflnable .‘ recoi pry 5c!ipns. Subparagraph (3 “
a& 4 m Irtiitretrve event, which would oomr would dçllsie Wh ;t dpcumentatioo is
for all Supiifund si es i ii nine when . sufflc$ent to deseribe’ thi responmi - .
all fçd r I fmithng * 1I have been . .. ac on taken, Subpsi .ph (4) wbuld -
define what informs non is sufficient to
accurately account for federal coats
incurred for each site-specific response
action. Subparagraph (5) would make it
clear that in those cases where all of the
documentation and information
specified in subparagrapns (3) and (4)
are not available. EPA would identify
other doaumentation and information
which describe, the response acuon
taken and provides an accurate
accounting of costs which would meet
the requirements of * 300.180(a)(1) of the
national contingency plan. and would be
suffiment to form the basis for’ a cost
recovery action. This Part of the
proposed rule would apply prospectively
to cost information assembled and
removal or remedial actions
documented for cost recovery actions
instituted by EPA on or after the
effective date of the final rule.
40 CF7I Part 308 C CL .A Coal Recoverj
This part would be new, It would
consist of three siibparts Subpart A—
General—, I I 308.10 and 308 .1k Sabpart
3—Actions for Recovery of Costs under
C a.A-, I V 30 through
and Subpart C—Categories of Costs—,
I 308.40 through i-
Section 308.10 would desaib. the
scope end applicability of part 308. Pert
308 would specify what costs are
recoverable in cost rew.. , , actions
under section 107(a)(1)-(4) (A) and (0)
of CL.A for recovery of costs
incurred by EPA. Part 308 would also
clarify certain response action events
that relate to the statute of limitations
applicable to cost recovery actions
under section 107, that are expressed
C Q.A section 113 g)(2). In addition to
costs incurred by EPA. costs incurred by
other federal agencies would be EPA
costs if incurred for respons, actions
funded by EPA through interngeecy
a ements. Costs incurred by states or
local goverronents would be EPA costs If
incurred for response actions fended by
EPA through a QA section
104(d)(1) cooperative agreement
Section 308,12 would define the terms
used Inpart 308ag they are defined In
section 101 qI Q.A or 40 R part
300. unless ptheiwtee stated.
G . Section 30t wo 1 i1d dódify
responsible parfy liability for f 1 deral
costs wider eeqqpn 107(aK4) (A) and (0)
of C2.A. Sub Jec to defenses m
“ . section 107(b) of CLA. responsible
parties under secti p 107(a) of Q.A
are liable for all costs of zusponse
actions mcurred by the United States
not uiconaistent with the national
contingency plan a id for the costs of
any health assessment or health effects
sludy carried ’out updei’secnon 1o4 (tfl5)
-------
F tL 1 l Resister / Vol. 57, No. 152 I Thw ’saay. August 6. 1992 / Proposed Rules
34753
CLA. SectIon 30825 would define
ecoverable costs as all costs including
‘direct and ind irect costs. arid Interest on
rthose costs.
Section 308.30 would explain the
terms “co ietion of removal action.”
“physical on-site consuuctiori.” and “all
response action” for Superfund response
action events as those terms are coed in
section 113(g)(2) of C1A in
determining when cost recovery actions
must be initiated.
Section 308.40 would explain that EPA
direct costs are disbursements recorded
in individual Superfund site accounts in
EPA’s financial management system.
Section 3 n(a) would explain that
EPA indirect coats are all disbursements
from Superfund for the operation and
management of the Superfund program
that are not direct costs. Section
308.50(b) would provide the method of
an hourly indirect cost rate
for each EPA region that would be used
to determine the indirect costs for a
specific response action. Section
108.50(b) would also clarify that health
effects research costa conducted by the
Agency for Toxic Substance. and
Disease Registry pursuant to section
t04(lJ(5) of QA would be rec v l
as indirect cost,. Section 308.50(c)
would contain a table of provisional
indirect omt rates for each of EPA’s ten
regioss for fiscal year, 1983 through
1988. The proposed rule state. that
provisioaal and final rates would be
published, for subsequent year, after the
completion of the fiscal Year. The last
published rate would remain in effect
until a new provisional or final rate was
published for the relevant year.
Section 308.60 would cLarify “date of
expenditure” and “date of demand” as
those terms axe used in section 107 (a) of
(L& for detsrsiming interest It also
explains the “date of expenditurs” for
purposes of interest acerual prior to the
enactinantof the m ,1m.rnI’
of 1988. ThIs section would also clarify
how interest is calculated,
(3) Significant adverse effects on
competition, employment. investment.
productivity. innovation, or on.the
ability of United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreign.
based enterprises in domestic or export
markets.
This rulemaking would not affect the
economy by $100 million annually
because the regulation would not
inmeese the liability of responsible
parties and would not increase the
response costs at Superfund sites. The
costs for which responsible parties are
liable would not be affected by this
r’ ” ’ Because the proposed
regulation provides for full cost
acnounnng for indirect costs. it is
po aibIe that the regulation may result
in a small loorease in the costs
recovered from responsible parties. but
any such increase would be only an
incremental addition to the costs
recovered without this rule. The
rulemaking would not dixecüy increase
costs or prices for consumers. industries.
or federal, state, or Local government.
The regulation would not contain any
new standards, criteria, or performance
levels to be achieved by the regulated
community. Furthermore, the rulemaking
would not have adverse affects on
competition. employment, investment.
productivity, or innovation because the
regulation seeks only to expedite coat
recovery actions and reduce the
Agency’s resource burden in
documenting response costs.
This proposed nile has been
submitted to 0MB for review, as
required by 8.0. No. 12291.
economic effect on a substantial number
of small entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This regulation is not subject to the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act. Any collection of information in
this regulation is required in the course
of an enforcement action against a
specific party or parties and. therefore.
is exempt from coverage under the Act
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 300
Hazardous substances. Hazardous
waste. Intergovernmental relations.
Natural resources. Superfund.
40 CPR Part X8
Atlynii igUauve practice and
procedure. CI thn.. Freedom of
information. Hazardous substances.
Hazardous waste. Intergovernmental
relations. Natural resources. Superfund.
Dated July 28.1992.
William I C. & 1Iy.
4 iflVafr T-.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble. 40 R cli. Ii. proposed to be
amended as follows.
PART 300 NATIONAL OIL *110
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
POLLUTiON CONTINGENCY PLAN
1. The authority citation for part 300
continues to read as followsi -
Auth..dt c 42 USC 9801-9587:33 U.S.C.
1321(c)(2). 8.0.11735.38 FR 21243:8.0. 1258O
52 FR 3023,
2, Section 300.1601. amended by
redesignatuig paragraphs (aX2) and
(a)(3) as (a)(6) and (a)(7 and by adding
paragraphs (e)(Z) thronga (a)(5J to read
as follows:
B. Regulatoiy Flexibility Analysis
____ Pursuant tu the Regulatory Flexibility ____
Act. S U.S .C. 601 at seq.. whenever an
agency Is re 1 d to publish a notice of
rulevii*Idng fin any proposed or final
rule, It must prepare and availahi. § 300.160 Doewuisnts6ee end cost
_______ for public comm i t a regulatory rsee .. ,., .
flexibility analysis that desaibe. the ... ‘ ‘ —“
effsut of the rule anjmall ent s1 (L ”e.. .., , 4 -‘ ‘ ‘? ,j -
- a 2).49adO 1 ’ . # .
IV. $tn uui ry of 9 -4ea sti ; a i i * l tdfbt ionaJ. .
? lo I .ruaJorfuIes4 e rep so.r 4 tq atory I 1sht t bem’3 ‘ ( )
that axu likely to zei.,zg,be _ ., .•. agtt roe .* r t eagreemern
(1) Anaitnual effect bathe gonomy thdsØ do srd oi’ i d h. lbs dponsf
of $100 milliq moiei r. - “! ‘ .. . doe t 1 ff ” i tfoui m a Cakun. 08
: 2) A ft ) .tn ea* jn e orptf that s all çtit*ti ‘ ‘1 1l)? 5ç’ft orti *!1d fl s
(or conmthecv. Individual ipftnst rs. ‘ responiible ct br ‘&of Mj. or b c ga L
Federti. Stat ,. or oc*f’gqvtrpment. rfbet .j l1” L otherTttI *I - ‘o zpr
age ici c olcqg : or. . pthpo edrule vii} t hi k i1ld1 iduslstO f ictuls III f
- , ,,.• - , - . . - “.A - _ —
-------
ext’ 4 & 4L
2i —
!
me
c’
s’
r
E
/
ii
— -
7_ -
t’ 24 __ %n 7 2t
4 .4- ,-1 -
I lw.iz€. , 4— ?’
1/L4 L4-C J d €J
3 g2--( l
e2- -L L
- - C z á
2i 2 -
4c 2- - 74 ’ -
I - 4- - / ?/9 CS L-d -
i 4 2Z- .-6 L-
I__ i -
-
—
: -
I
‘.4/,t 7Zd!- ..
-------
- —---—;L 7 -;;YT
— / L o /2 i. rn - ‘-‘-c’ - —
l g -t .4 &i Q i j i (,, ,.
- /L4 - - -
4 - -
r ___ _ __ __- 7 - i -
- Y?L Z &LE -e C- . • - - - —
2 .—
- ‘, ‘ t _________ .
/
_____— ,- - , - -‘ . — - - - - -
I:: e __- - - -- -- _ itii: -
- - --
I — ________________________________ ——_______ —— — — —
I
-------
;i ’
- .
• -
- ---
• - —-• I
—
-------
II-72 7 A
___iz 4tU7-
a 4 -- &: 7_44
I__ C4 4- - & t4 -•
-y /L - 1114 ’ !
____ C ’ VL !4’ Il
_ ,4Z / 4 .4 4•
j 4 !’ /43
&o,i-4e4 / e!4 4 L
- 4i - 4 4 f - -- -; ee4
‘4 7 __
- -- -f 4 2
da
f; _ (J
-------
2/5/9 3
WORK PERFORMED
DOCUMENTATION TRAINING
Sheraton-Society Hill Hotel
Philadelphia, PA
February 11, 1993
8:00 — 8:15 a.ln. Registration
8:15 - 8:25 a.m. Introduction
- Meeting Logistics: Filomena Chau, OWPE
- Videotape: Bruce Diamond, OWPE
8:25 — 9:15 a.m. The Basis for this Training
“Level of Documentation Needed for Filing
CERCLA Cost Recovery Actions”
- Frank Biros, OWPE
- Steve Gold, DOJ
— Magaret Cardamone, Region III
SESSION I
9:15 - 10:00 a.m. “Identifying Specific Work Activity
Authorized and Performed”
- Introduction: Jim Webb, Region 3
- Region 3’s Approach: Theresa Chandler
— Region l’s Approach: Joan Maddalozzo
10:00 — 10:15 a.m. BREAK
SESSION II
10:15 — 11:45 a.m. “Documenting Work Performed in Existing
and Closed Out Contracts”
- Introduction: Leslie Vassallo, Region 3
- Region 3’s Approach: Leslie Vassallo,
Charlene Arnold
— Region l’s Approach: Joan Maddalozzo,
Arthur Man
- Where to Find the Documentation You Need
Pat Patterson, OARN
- Closed Out Contracts: Chad Littleton, OWPE
11:45 a.m. — 1:00 p.m. LUNCH
SESSION III
1:00 — 1:40 p.m. “Summarizing Work Performed in a Cost Summary
Report”
- Introduction: Leslie Vassallo, Region 3
-------
2
- Region 3’s Approach, SCORES Memo Field
Capability: Tanya Thomas, Steve Pandza
— Region l’s Approach, Summary from the Work
Assignment of the Superfund Response Tasks
Performed: Joan Maddalozzo, Arthur Man
SESSION IV
1:40 — 2:15 p.m. “Interagency Agreements and State Cooperative
Agreements”
- Case Support Needs: Alex Beehler, DOJ
— General Grants & Region 3’s Approach:
Bernard McCullagh
SESSION V
2:15 — 3:00 p.m. “Maintenance of Cost Recovery Files”
- Retention Life of Files: Lisa Jenkins,
AA OSWER
- Region 3’s Approach: Leslie Vassallo
— Region l’s Approach: Joan Maddalozzo
— Confidential Business Information:
Filoinena Chau
3:00 - 3:15 p.m. BREAK
SESSION VI
3:15 - 4:15 p.m. “Court Testimony, Preparation of Affidavits,
and Identification of Expert Witnesses”
- DOJ: Steve Novick, Steve Gold,
Alex Beehier
— Region 3: Margaret Cardamone
SESSION VII
4:15 - 4:45 p.m. “Fear and Loathing in the Cost Recovery
Courtroom” (videotape)
- Steve Novick, DOJ
CLOSING REMARKS
4:45 — 5:00 p.m. “Closing remarks, comments, questions,
followup”
- Frank Biros, OWPE
-------
S (f hcI ’Q nt nna, o m00”” - -
I E I F 1 o
H I I J
I C 1 o
-- t__it_ I J JL J1 It JI
IL IflLL VISITORS GUIDE
Li i c L j L1L1 L PHILADELPHIA
1-—— - -- - vr ‘ 4 L.J t [ III L 1 [ ] Li • PUSIJSMrDAP4NUALLY I OIO4TION
nr LI [ I i - -
— [ W flH - : ‘° - -
F I l 1 fl
LJ J 1 , L i uoo l? [ J1 i It I / 2
L fl.L DUDH ft Li
\ \ r u ririri — • l, H
i : 1JL - /
31 ‘ ‘ \ \ 11 LI r i TI}L ]H’H ll
‘ 4
____ ] JL 1HL 1HrYt1 5
1J7 , iL] 1 i [ ] [ i 1I
1 JLiH [ iL IIIdlL
r Li [ k L ]U
— ‘ J, ! r ’ ,
6( L1 U I i1LiLiLiL1Li L1L- -- - 1 \ 6
N \ I 1 LJLiLJLi I LiL J L i L iLiLILiLiLJL- U _11 1
ir
1
T - ‘ 1LJL]L L ff1111 ]‘L]D I ]H II IL I Li
i I U 1i H ii ir i i iF
A
2 ‘
-------
Independence
National
Historical Park
Army-Navy Museum Chestnut St
between 3rd & 4th Sts Museum
housed in a replica of the 18th cen-
turv home of the Quaker merchant
Joseph Pemberton Museum depicts
the development of the Arms’ and
.Javv, 1775-1800 Daily 9am-Spm
Bishop White House 309 Walnut
St Home of the first bishop of the
Episcopal Diocese of Pennsylvania
Built in 1786-87 Tours arranged at
Visitor Center
Carpenters Hall 320 Chestnut St.
925-0167 The First Continental
Congress met here in 1774 Exhibits
of early tools and original chairs
Tue -Sun IOam-4pm
City Tavern 2nd & Walnut Sts.
923-6059 A working restaurant in a
reconstruction of the famous Rev-
olutionarv War tavern where del-
egates to the First and Second con-
tu’tental Congress gathered Daily
11 3Oam-IOPM
Congress Hall 6th & Chestnut Sts
Where U S Congress met, 1790-
1800 Daily 9am-Spm
Franklin Court Between 3rd & 4th,
Chestnut & Market Sts Once
owned by Ben Franklin, developed
as a tribute to him Working print-
ing office and bindery, under-
ground museum, and the B Free
Franklin Post Office, the only post
office open 7 days a week Daily
9am-5pm
Graff House 7th & Market Sts The
reconstructed house where Thomas
Jefferson lived when he wrote the
Declaration of Independence Film
on Jefferson. displays Daily 9am-
5pm
Independence Hall 5th & Chestnut
Sts Declaration of Independence
adopted here U S Constitution
written here Built as the State
House for the Province of Penn-
sylvania Daily 9am-5pm Tours
throughout the day
Liberty Bell Pavilion Market St
between 5th & 6th Sts Our nation’s
most hallowed symbol of liberty in
it’s own glass enclosed building
across from Independence Hall
Daily 9am-5pm
Marine Corps Memorial Museum
Chestnut St between 3rd & 4th Sts
Museum commemorating the early
history of the Marine Corps Re-
construction of the 1790 building
Daily 9am-Spm
Old City Hall 5th & Chestnut Sts
Home of the U S Supreme Court.
1791-1800 An interior audio-visual
presentation depicts the early his-
tory of the judiciary and portraYs
life ii Philadelphia in the latter part
of the 18th century Daily 9am-5pm
Pennsylvania Horticultural Society
325 Walnut St Oldest in U S 18th
century Garden Changing exhibits
Second Bank of the United States
Chestnut St. between 4th & 5th Sts
The park’s histoncal portrait gal-
lery. featuring portraits by Charles
Wilson Peale and other noted
Amencan artists, is located in this
William Strickland designed build-
ing Daily 9am-5pm
Thaddeus Kosciuszko National
Memorial 3rd & Pine Sts This
small towrthouse where the Polish
patriot once staved in 1797-98 has
been restored as a memorial to his
efforts (or the American Revolu-
tionary cause Daily 9am-5pm
Todd House 4th & Walnut Sts
Built in 1775, home of Dolley Payne
Todd. who later became Dolley
Madison, wife of President James
Madison Tours arranged at Visitor
Center
Visitor Center 3rd & Chestnut Sts.
597-8974, voice or TDD Call 627-
1776 for 24-hour tape recording
Call for speclai events
Other
Historic
Sites
Betsy Ross House 239 Arch St.
19106, 627-5343 Restored 2h/2
story Colonial home where Betsy
Ross lived and where she is credit-
ed with making the first United
States flag Daily 9am-5pm
Christ Church 2nd St above Mar-
ket St. 19106, 922-1695 Patriots,
loyalists, heroes and traitors have
worshipped at this church since
1695 Sit in pews once occupied by
George Washington, Benjamin
Franldm and Betsy Ross Open with
guides on duty, Mon -Sat, 9am-
5pm, Sun l-Spm Free Accessible
to the disabled
Christ Church Burial Ground 5th
& Arch Sts. 923-1100 Benjamin
Franklin is buried here, as are other
Colonial and Revolutionary War
leaders Open April 15-Oct 15,
weather permitting Free Access-
ible to the disabled
Edgar Allen Poe National Historic
Site 532 N 7th St. 19123, 597-8780
Where Poe lived in 1843-44 The
Black Cat. Gold Bug, The Tell Tale
Heart were published during this
penod Tours. slideshow, school
programs Daily 9am-Spm Free
Elfreth’s Alley 2nd St between
Arch & Race Sts, 19106. 574-0560
Oldest residential street in America
with 30 houses dating from 1728 to
1836 #126 is a museum with penod
turnishings and changing exhibits
Open daily lOam-4pm
Gazela of Philadelphia at Dock St.
923-9030 World’s oldest and largest
i%’ooden sailing ,esseI in operable
condition Launched from Portugal
in 1883 Call (or hours Admission
923-9030
Head House Square Next to New
larket. 2nd & Pine Sts, 19106 Es-
tablished in 1745 for the shopping
convenience of Colonial house-
%ives Reno ated in the early
1970’s Now a red brick market fair
of restaurants, craft shops and an
open air market Special weekend
craft shows throughout the sum-
mer
Hill-Physick-Keith House 321 5
4th St. 19106, 925-7866 Only re-
maining free-standing Federal
house in Society Hill Dr Physick
was its most prominent resident
and the “father of American sur-
gery “ Outstanding collection of sil-
%er and early 19th-century fur-
niture Tue-Sat, lOam-4pm, Sun,
1-4pm Admission charge
Port of History Museum Delaware
Ave & Walnut St. 925-3804 Fre-
quently changing exhibits, inter-
national arts and crafts, presenta-
nons of dance, music, theatre
Wed -Sun, lOam-4 3Opm Admis-
sion
Powell House 244 S 3rd St. 19106,
627-0364 Built in 1765, the house
was the residence of Samuel Powel,
the last mayor of Philadelphia be-
lore the Revolutionary War and the
hrst mayor after the establishment
of the United States Tue -Sat,
lOam-4pm, Sun, 1-4pm Admis-
sion
Tomb of the Unknown Soldier
Washington Square The only tomb
in the U S erected to the memory of
the unicriown Revolutionary War
soldier Eternal flame installed in
1976
USS Olympia and USS Becuna
Delaware Ave & Spruce St, 922-
1898 Olympia was Commodore
Dewey’s, flagship during the Span-
ish-American War Becuna is a
World War II submarine Both open
daily, lOam-Spm Admission
Sights
To See
Academy of Natural Sciences Mu-
seum 19th St & Ben Franklin Park-
way. 299-1020 Museum attractions
include, “Discovenng Dinosaurs.” a
permanent S2 5 million exhibit,
“Outside-In,” a hands on children’s
nature center, mummies and live
animal programs Open M-F 10am-
4pm. weekends and holidays 10am-
5pm
Balch Institute for Ethnic Studies
18 5 7th St. 925-8090 America’s
hentage is explored in a collection
of artifacts representing more than
50 ethnic groups
Barnes Foundation 300 N Latches
Lane, \4erion, 667-0290 World-
rekntowned collection of French Im-
pressionists Fri & Sat 930am-
4 3Opm (200 admitted, 100 with res-
servations), Sun lpm-4 3Opm (100
admitted, 50 with reservations) No
children under 12 (Closed July &
August) 51 00
Bicentennial Bell 3rd and Chestnut
Sts The bell was cast from the same
foundry as the Liberty Bell and giv-
en by the people of Great Bntiari in
konor of the 1976 Bicentennial The
bell is rung at 11am and 3pm
The Franklin Institute Science Mu-
seum 20th and Benjamin Franklin
Parkway, Philadelphia. 19103, pro-
gram information, 448-1200 Visit
the Franklin Institute’s Science Cen-
ter and new Futures Center Stroll
through a giant heart or learn about
the environment while exploring a
rain forest Take a ride on a loco-
motive or climb aboard a model
space Station Catch a movie in the
Tuttleman Omniverse Theater, with
a four-story domed screen, that
puts you in the middle of all the ac-
tion, In the Fels Planetarium you
can explore space and astronomical
phenomena The Franklin Institute
opens every day at 930am The Fu-
tures Center and Omniverse The-
ater are open every evening except
Monday
Italian Market 9 St. between
Christian and Federal Sts The Old-
World flavor of Italy permeates this
open-air South Philly market,
where vendors sell fresh produce,
meats and baked goods
Norman Rockwell Museum 6th &
Sansom Sts .922-4345 Collection in-
cludes all of the famous Saturday
Evening Post covers Slide and
Sound presentation Daily lOam-
4pm
Phi
St
8101
mu
pair
prin
roor
collt
Ame
Ope
sion
Phil
Me
tion
1,6 0C
and
beeh
preh
favoi
zoo
ends
Pleat
dren
The
dren
are ii
pene
art ai
both
Tue - ,
Rod ii
Parks
lect,oi
mous
Open
Mona
U.S.
7350
and
July a
4 3Opr
4 30pr
R
Bridget
1813 T’
has bee
food (or
is the
lunch e
cozy at
and st,
culent
best ba
SB $5’
Cafe 1..
Every
nationa
restaur,
and Ne
balaya
cajun p
gested
cards
City T.
923-605 ’
-------
Philadelphia Museum of Art 26th
St & Ben Franklin Parkway. 763-
8100 America’s third-largest art
museum with more than 500.000
paintings, sculptures. drawings.
prints, decorative arts, period
rooms and Oriental art Permanent
collection 01 arms and armor.
American Wing Guided tours
Open Tue -Sun lOam-5pm Admis-
sion
Philadelphia Zoo 34th St & Girard
Ate. 243-1100 A world of imagina-
tion and disco’. erv awaits You See
1.600 amphibians. reptiles. birds
and mammals After, climb a giant
beehive, hatch from an egg, ride a
prehistoric dinosaur or teed your
favorite animals at the children’s
zoo Open M-F 9 3Oam-5pm. ‘ .‘.eek-
ends 9 3Oam-opm
Please Touch Museum For Chil-
dren 210 \ 21st St. 963-0666/67
The nation’s Iirst museum for chil-
dren 7 years and younger Children
are introduced to the museum ex-
perience with a ‘ .arietv of cultural.
art and science exhibits, which are
body and hands-on learning Open
Tue -Sun lOam-4 3Opm
Rodin Museum 22nd St & the
Parkway. 787-5476 The largest col-
lection outside France by the fa-
mous 19th-century French sculptor
Open Tue -Sun lOam-5pm Closed
Monday Donations only
US. Mint 5th & Arch Sts. 597-
7350 Largest mint in the U S May
and June Mon -Sat 9am-4 3Opm
July and August Mon-Sun 9am-
430pm Sep -Apr \‘ton -Fn 9am-
4 3Opm
Restaurants
Bridget Foy’s 200 South St. 922-
1813 This South Street Institution
has been serving eclectic American
food for 13 years The outside cafe
is the perfect place for cocktails,
lunch or dinner Inside, enjoy a
cozy atmosphere with grilled fish
and steaks, fresh pastas. and suc-
culent salads Sunday brunch is the
best bargain in Philadelphia’ L. D,
SB 55 Major credit cards
Cafe Nola 328 South St. 627-2590
Every night is Mardi Gras ui this
nationally celebrated cajun-creole
restaurant featuring fresh seafood
and New Orleans classics like jam-
balaya and blackened redfish and
cajun prime rib Reservations sug-
gested L, D, SB 5555 Major credit
cards
City Tavern 2nd & Walnut Sts,
923-6059 Just a short walk across
the street. this 18th century tavern
provides classic American dining in
a Colonial setting \lenu includes
fresh fish, prime beef and fowl ac-
companied by a selection of wines
and spirits Private dining rooms
a’.ailable L. D. SSSS Mator credit
cards
The Courtyard Sheraton Society
Hill. 238-6000 Enjoy son piano mu-
sic under the trees in this atrium
lobby where the drinks are cool and
the atmosphere is tropical Light B.
L. D menu $55 Major credit cards
Facilities for the disabled
DiNardo’s Famous Crabs 312 Race
St 925-5115 Four times winner 01
the ‘ Best 01 Phillv,” DiNardo’s
the place to have your shell crack-
ing. claw sucking. crab eating or-
gies Steamed Louisiana crabs
ser ed hot and dirt’.’ (kno’. ’ .n as Bal-
timore style) Other seafood spe-
cialties include the Dinardo family’s
secret, succulent sauce recipes at
prices that wont make you crazy
Open 7 days L. D 555 Major credit
cards
Downey’s Front & South Sts. 625-
9500 An authentic lnsh pub with
its own raw bar Menu features a
full range of American foods in-
cluding seatood. cteaks, pastas and
a complete selection of homemade
desserts and pastries Reservations
suggested L. D. SSB. 5555 Major
credit cards
Famous 4th Street Delicatessen
700 S 4th St. 922-3274 A phil-
adelphia landmark and institution
since 1923 This traditional Jewish
deli is known for its corned beef.
roast beef, fresh roast turkey, full
selection of smoked fish and their
outrageous chocolate chip cookies
B, L. S AMEX
Hadley’s at the Sheraton Society
Hill. 236-6656 Enjoy fresh and
wholesome American cuisine with
a twist of French bistro cooking
The restaurant’s casual atmosphere
lends itself to a quiet dinner for two
or a fun night out with friends B, L,
D, SB 555 Malor credit cards
La Famiglia 8S Front St .922-2803
Northern and Southern Italian cui-
sine L. D 5555 Major credit cards
La Scala’s Copper Penny 2nd &
Dock Sts. 925-1802 Serves veal,
chicken, seafood, steaks, pasta and
more Reser ’ . anons recommended
Entertainment on Friday and Sat-
urday L, D $55 Major credit cards
La Truffe & Jeann.ne’s Bistro lOS
Front St. 925-5062 A short walk
from the Sheraton Society Hill. La
Truffe is one of Philadelphia’s Old-
,,-st and most famous French res-
taurants It is inviting, warm and in-
timate and highly rated by the Za-
gat and Mobile tra ’ .el guides Jean-
nine’s Bistro, located above La
Truffe. offers a more casual at-
mosphere and country food Music
on Fridays makes for a relaxing at-
mosphere Closed Sunday L. D All
major credit cards La Truffe 5555
Jeannine’s Bistro 555
Meiji-In Pier 19 North. Delaware
Ave at Callowhill. 592-7100 Enjoy
fine Japanese food in an elegant and
sophisticated waterview setting
which overlooks the Delaware Riv-
er D. SSB 555 Major credit cards
Middle East 126 Chesmut St. 922-
1003 Guaranteed adventure in fun
and great dining Huge menu of
Lebanese. Greek. Turkish, Israeli
and American cuisine as well as
American seafood and steaks Belly
dancing rightly Full wine and
great bar Home 01 the “Comedy
Works “ D SSS Major credit cards
Old Onginal Bookbinder’s 125
Walnut St. 925-7027 This world fa-
mous seafood restaurant is right
across the street from the Sheraton
Society Hill L, D 55$ Major credit
cards Facilities for the disabled
Pizzena Uno 509 S 2nd St. 592-
0400 Featuring the world’s most
celebrated deep-dish pizza in a fun
and casual atmosphere Full menu
also featuring appetizers. salads.
burgers and full bar services Pri-
vate rooms available for up to 60
people Reservations accepted Fax
your order or reservation for quick
service Fax 4* 922-6032 L, D 55
AMEX
Ruth’s Chris Steak House 260 S
Broad St. 790-1515 Originated .n
New Orleans, Ruth’s Chris is the
“Home of Serious Steaks” in Phil-
adelphia Choose from the finest
cuts of prime beef, fresh seafood
veal chops. chicken and more L. D,
SSSS Major credit cards
Saloon Restaurant 750 S 7th St.
627-1811 Noted for superb classic
Italian/American cuisine, the Sal-
Ion has been one of Philadelphia’s
favorites for more than 20 years
The saloon features an excellent
menu complimented with fine
wines and dail) specials Private
dining room also available L. D,
555$ Major credit cards
Spint.of Philadelphia The Piers at
Penn’s Landing. 923-1419 Enjoy a
narrated tour while dining on fresh-
lv prepared buffets, complete with
bar service, dance bands and a “Sa-
lute to Broadway” revue in the cli-
mate controlled comfort 01 two en-
closed decks Moonlight party
cruises L. D. SSB 5555 Major credit
cards Facilities for the disabled
The Wooden Nickel at the Sher-
aton Society Hill The warm and
cozy atmosphere of this comfort-
able neighborhood bar is the pertect
place to relax Drop a quarter in the
jukebox. play a ideo game or chal-
lenge a friend to a game of darts
Enjoy the Nickel’s hearty pub food
which includes crispy Reuben sand-
wiches and hot Philly cheesesteaks
55 Major credit cards
Symbol Key
Meal Symbols
B Breakfast
L Lunch
D Dinner
SSB Saturday/Sunday Brunch
SB Sunday Brunch
Average Dinner Entree
555$ OverSI2
55$ 59—512
55 56—S8
S Under 56
—
-------
L) O a c Ja
XYL Q Un th
Ppc
Ô3t )Th ji -
k’
Q /!1 f
V I 5 m
— d )J
(7 ’)
3 O r\
á c& A Ufl 5 -
A 5 c D
i-1
703- 3- rL77
-------
WORK PERFORMED DOCUMENTATION TRAINING
SESSION VI
“COURT TESTIMONY, PREPARATION OF AFFIDAVITS,
IDENTIFICATION OF WITNESSES”
- Two critical functions that the witnesses must perform:
(1) At least one witness must be able to explain how the
cost summary was prepared; explain the financial information in
the cost summary; and explain the documents which provided that
explanation. The witness must be able to explain the process an
invoice goes through to get paid; must be able to explain the
meaning of every line on the invoice .
(2) For each item of work, a witness must be found who is
familiar with the work that was done and can describe the work
that was done (perhaps with the assistance of the contract
documents that describe the work). In most cases, this witness
(or these witnesses) should be the RPM or OSC (or, in some cases,
multiple present and past RPMs/OSCs).
NOTE: It would be nice if someone could explain the “work—
performed” documents too —— explain how a Work Assignment (or TDD
or what have you) is approved, what each line means, etc.
- Interagency Agreements: Unless the EPA RPM or OSC was
personally familiar with the work that was done, the other agency
equivalent of the RPM/OSC should testify.
— State Cooperative Agreements: Work Performed: There
should be an EPA person familiar with the work the State did (if
we didn’t know what we did we shouldn’t have paid ‘em). However,
in some circumstances we may wish to have a State witness to
provide a detailed description.
— State Cooperative Agreements: Financial Information: An
EPA person must be prepared to explain the process whereby EPA
approves and conducts a transfer of funds to the State; in some
circumstances, you may need a State witness to explain the
State’s accounting system.
- Bill Cooke should always be identified as an expert
witness on EPA indirect costs.
— DOJ designates its own witnesses for is own costs. Pat
McGeehin or Bill Kime should always be designated as an expert
witness on DOJ indirect costs.
-------
NATIONAL COST RECOVERY TRAINING COURSE
Compilation of Work Performed Documentation for Superfund Cost Recoveiy Case Support
Philadelphia, PA
February 11. 1993
EVALUATION FORM
ATTENDEE PROFILE
I. What is your affiliation?
EPA Headquarters
_____ EPA Region
____ DOJ
Other (please specify)
2. What is your position/title?
3. How long have you been in your position?
4. Please briefly descnbe your responsibilities.
PROGRAM COMPONENTS -- Please answer the se questions following each presentation
5. Were you satisfied with the content
of the presentations of the
individual sessions?
Introductory Remarks by yes no
Bruce Diamond
Level of Documentation Needed yes no
for Filing CERCLA Cost Recovery
Actions
-------
Identifying Specific Work Activity yes no
Authorized and Performed — —
Documenting Work Performed in yes no
Existing and Closed Out Contracts — —
Summarizing Work Performed yes no
in a Cost Summary Report — —
Interagency Agreements and State yes no
Cooperative Agreements — —
Maintenance of Cost Recovery Files yes no
Court Testimony, Preparation of yes no
Affidavits, and Identification — —
of Expert Witnesses
Videotape -- Fear and Loathing in yes no
the Cost Recovery Courtroom — —
Closing Remarks, Comments, Questions yes no
an’d Followup — —
6. Were you satisfied with the
presentation methods of the
individual sessions?
Remarks by Bruce Diamond yes no
Level of Documentation Needed yes no
for Filing CERCLA Cost Recovery — —
Actions
Identifying Specific Work Activity yes no
Authorized and Performed — —
Documenting Work Performed in yes no
Existing and Closed Out Contracts — —
Summarizing Work Performed yes no
in a Cost Summary Report — —
Interagency Agreements and State yes no
Cooperative Agreements — —
Maintenance of Cost Recovery Files yes no
Court Testimony, Preparation of yes no
Affidavits, and Identification — —
of Expert Witnesses
2
-------
Videotape -- Fear and Loathing in yes
the Cost Recovery Courtroom
Closing Remarks, Comments, Questions yes no
and Followup —
REACTION TO THE PROGRAM AS A WHOLE -- Please answer these questions at the conclusion of the
training seminar
7. Will you apply what you learned yes
in this course to your job?
8. Which parts of the training course will be most applicable to your job?
9.
Would
you recommend this training yes no
course
to others?
Please
explain:
10.
Did this course meet your
yes
no
expectations?
—
Please explain:
no
maybe
no
3
-------
11. Was this course appropriately
designed for your level of
expertise?
Please explain:
yes
no
12.
Were you satisfied
with
the
yes
no
way the course was
conducted?
Please explain:
13.
Were the general
sessions
an
yes
no
effective means
training?
Please explain:
14.
15.
Which
part of this course did
you
like best?
Which
part of this course did
you
like least?
4
-------
Ask questions to presenters? yes
Have your questions thoroughly yes
answered?
Please explain:
17. What other issues related to Work Perfomied Documentation would you include in this training course?
18. How could this training course be improved?
19.
Were you
pre-course
satisfied with the
communication?
yes
no
Please explain:
16. Was there enough time allocated in the course to:
Cover the training materials? yes no
no
no
5
-------
20. Were you satisfied with the
quality of the training materials?
Please explain:
yes
no
21.
Were the presentations
yes
no
well-related to each
other?
Please explain:
22.
Were the presenters knowledgeable
yes
no
about their subject matter?
Please explain:
23.
Were the presenters well-prepared? yes no
Please explain:
6
-------
24. Were you satisfied with the
quality of the audiovisuals?
Please explain:
25.
Were you satisfied with the yes no
quality of the meeting facilities? —
—
Please explain:
26. Do you have any additional comments concerning this training course?
Please return this form to the registration table at the end of the training course, or mail it to:
Filomena Chau
Cost Recovery Branch
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (5502G)
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
(703) 603-8966 or (703) 603-9117 (fax)
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP!
yes no
7
-------
34754
Federal Register / VoL. 57. No. 152 I Thursday. August 6. 1992 I Proposed Rules
describe the implementation of the
response action taken.
(4) Information that provides an
accurate accounting of federal coats
incurred for each site-specific response
action referred to in paragiaph (a)(1). of
this section. speciflcally
(I) For direct costs. as described in
* 308.40 of this chapter:
(A) Site identification code number
and name(s):
(B) Names. hours charged. and salary
(including benefits amounts) paid to
A employees who provided site-
specific work:
(C) The names of vendors or payees.
amounts paid, dates paid. and as
applicable, the identification of related
invoices. contracts, or purchase orders.
as well as all related joureal vouchers.
for purchases and contract charges
associated with the site:
CD) The names of recipient(s).
amounts and dates paid. and giant and
agreement number(s) for all costs
involving cooperative agreement. with
any state or local governments.
technical assistance giants awarded to
groups of individuals, and interagency ___
agreements with other federal agei czes:
and, ___ ___
(E) The employee name, amounts and
date paid, destination, and travel
authorization number for all site-speafic
travel by ‘A employees. ____
(II) For indirect costs, as described in
* 308.50 of this chapter. for each fiscal
year involveth
(A) The applicable re onal indirect
cost rates;
(B) The site-specific Superfund g UabWty.
employee hours upon which the rates Subject to the defenses provided in
are appliedi and. section 107(b) of CLA. persons
(C) The indirect cost totals, identified in section 107(a) of CERCLA
(ill) For interest charges, as described are liable to the United States for all
in *308.60 of this chapter: costa of resporep actions incurred by
(A) q c’emoun ’az ilutap,upgn-..., the piteg tiut•
whf l r ca1cd
(B) e wb h au Y$te Sun* jn
cha es pr thb iftf ____ ___
_______ EPAs
d’ zi’a1fnn an4 an iai ’ci t âr he th ’R (2 t qasfinf8eegionai employoo
In! - ded Iniparegraphs stuijj. p ,, . ,.
(a) ) anc 4 b i j ,juiaosoot
omprdj ea of ’As z’PgiAuahI to
t tg jj fh ls La ,hi cf5 , ei to
Co ____
___ i det ed’thai s r. ze
* are
n ac’iiwte. th1f J 1 . ..
1 Skt incurrefb co
. S ‘ 5 • • —
se Individual
3. aR°3 8 I& dded to eatl .a paZ!
beir.g u’ ’ge J i! ft::r
(1 1Y 4 :qi’:e chargbiI
not td c i i but
Subpart B—Aceoes for Rs o.’sry of Costs
under CERCLA
308.20 Liability. - -
308.25 Recoverable costs.
308.30 Definitions of events affecting
limitations of actions to recover costs.
Subpart C—Cat.Owtss of Costs
308.40 EPA direct costs.
308.50 EPA indirect costs.
308.60 Interest.
Authesity: 42 U.S.C. 9601-0657: EQ. 12588.
52 FR 2023.
Subpart A—Consrsj
§308.10 Seep, and appIlcab IIty.
(a) This part specifies the cost that are
recoverable under section 107(a)(4)(A)
and (D) of CLA, and defines certain
events that determine the period in
which actions under section 107 for
recovery of costs may be brought
pursuant to section 113(g)(2) of CLA.
(b) This Part does not apply to costs
incurred by other federal agencies.
states. or Indian tribes. With respect to
these entities. this part applies where
the EPA In an action under section 107
of CLA is seeking recovery of its
costs expended in a response action
under an interagency agreement.
cooperative agreement, or grant.
§308.12 Osfinfllens.
Terms in this part shall have the
meaning set forth in section 101 of
as amended and the national
contingency plan at 40 CFR part 300.
Subpart B—Actions for Recovery of
Costs under CERCLA
113(g)(2) of CLA. the following
applies:
(a) The term “completion of the
removal action for sites where
remedial actions are taken means the
date of the final remedial design
prepared in connection with the final
remedial action at the site.
(b) The term “physical on-site
construction’ for remedial actions is
limited to actions that occur after
completion of the remedial design and
issuance of the Notice to Proceed on
which remedial action personnel are
authorized to begin remedial
construction activities.
(c) The term “all response action’ in
Section 113(g)(2)(B) of CI .A
includes, but is not limited to. all
response actions that occur before the
Superfund Site Close-Out Report is
signed by EPAs Regional Administrator.
Subpart C—Categories of Costs
§ 301.40 EPA direct ossts.
EPA Direct costs consist of
disbursements which are recorded in
individual Superfund site accounts in
EPA ’s financial mAnagement system.
§ 0&60 EPA Indirect ceets
(a) EPA indirect costs are
disbursements from Superfund for the
operation and management of the
Superfund program which are not direct
costs under § 308.40 of this subpart,
(b) EPA indirect costs for a site-
specific response are determined on a
fiscal year basis as follows:
(1) IndIrect costs are divided into two
exclusive categories:
(I) National. Those indirect costs,
Including health effects research
conducted by the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry
pursuant to section 104(i)(5) of CLA.
t Inch support tho Supcifund program
on b RL I*he Super’,ind p,qgrm
(ll) 3 sJmg4hagrindirt cooto
— a
p.
SC 5€11nd ep UaebMti .-
30 a 1 th4ons. iI.
or1c r .s ! t1j 5 ,
Fo 1
_w 1 t -
1Md1 ’7 ’:n region .1 liper . iL
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 152 / Thursday. August 8. 1992 / Proposed Rules
347S
howe (defined by paragraph (b)(2J of
this section) by the total Superfund
hour, of aUregion. combined.
(4) NatIonal indirect costa are
distributed to the EPA regions by
multiplying the total national indirect
costs by each ra ions allocation
percentage as determined in paragraph
(bfl3) of this section.
(5) A regional indirect cost pool for
each of the EPA regions is the total of
the amount determined in paragraph
(b)(1)(ii) of this section and.the regions
share of national indirect costs
determined in paragraph (blf4) of this
section.
(8) For each legion, the indirect cost
rate is the regional indirect cost pool
deternuned in paragraph (b)(5} of this
section divided by the direct Superfund
hours in the region determined in
paragraph (b)(2)(iJ of thin section.
(7) The indirect costs for a specific
site are determined by multiplying the
regional indirect cost rate from
paragraph (b)(6) of this section by the
direct Superfwzd hours charged to the
site from paragraph (bX2) (i) of this
section.
(a) Indirect Cost Rates.
(1) Indirect cost rates shall be
determined using the procedures in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(8) of this
secuon.
(2) The regional indirect cost rates for
fiscal year, 1983 through 1988 are as
follows:
.
F
.
1963 119 sIlga si laeehee7 1988
I
Re i I ..._...._... ;337 S 192 1$ 188!$255I3244 1$380
Ro o. 2.................J 2451 2321 220t 2511 2401 361
Rs n 3. J
Re afl 4 .-
Reran 5.
1
J
Rs il.. J
Reecn 9.
R n 10
2281 212) 217) 347) 3181 376
I 269 ) 2811 2101 33O 296) 374
I 171) 1991 1801 2391 251) 331
2811 1571 2051 2711 3693 330
iss) is a) 157 198) 197) 333
383) 162) 1811781 178 295-
l4 145 138 205) 211 336
236p 308 270 259
(3) Public notice of Indirect cout rates.
EP will publish the Indirect coat rate
for each region In the Federal Register
alter the completion of the fiscal year.
The last published rate remains in effgct
until a new rate ii published.
(iii) Other correspondence including a
demand for a specified amount in
writing for response costs; or.
(iv) The date of filing of a cost
recovery action under section 107 of
C CI.A by the Department of lustice
on behalf of the EPA.
(2) The date of expenditure shall be
the date identified in the EPA’s financial
menagement system for the type of
transaction or method. of payment on
which interest will be calculated.
(b) The interest rate applicable on any
unpaid principal balances during a fiscal
year shall be the same as the yield on
the annual investment of Supenfund
trust balances. The yield on the an” I
investment of Superfund trust balances
is determined by the U.S. pepar’tment of
Treasury.
(c) At the end of each fiscal year. EPA
will add unpaid accrued Interest for that
year to the unpaid principal balance.
The total is the new fiscal year’s unpaid
principal bal*ni
(FR Doc. 92-18202 Filed 84-02:8.45 am)
s- I II I , cose usa-is- .
DEPARTMENT OF ThE INTERIOR
43CFR Part 12
RIM 1090.AA34
Admte vs and Audft
R.qulrsm.nte and Cost PrtncIp . for
ASBICT: Department of the Interior.
Office of the Secretary.
acnoic Notice of proposed rulemaking .
SUMMAa!! This proposed rule revises a
rule published by the Department In the
September 9. 1991. Issue of the Federal
RegIster (58 FR 45807). The rule
irnnlementpd C iv.rne, piw.w dp
o*nm Comments must be received by
September 8. 1992.
AODRE U& Comments should be
mailed to Acquisition and Assistance
Division. Office of Acquisition and
Property Management. Department of
the Interior. 1849 C St.. NW.. Mail Slop
5512. Washington. DC 20240.
FOR PURThIR INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dean A. Tilcomb. (Chief. Acqwsauon
and Assistance DivIsion). (202) 208-6431.
suPPISMMSTARY INPORMATIOIC Bureaus
and offices within the Department are
entering into a variety of partnership
agreements with profit, as well as non-
profit organizations, through which the
Bureaus receive support of various
kinds. This may include dissemination
of information about programs.
proniotion.of activities of mutual
interest which further those programs.
and generation of financial and other
types of support. where authorized.
These types of agreements are
consistent with a Departmental and an
Administration emphasis on
partnerships and cooperative efforts to
accomplish public purpose.. and
therefore are encouraged. However.
under these agreements. there is risk
that certain promotion ‘ii material
produced wider the agreement such as
publications, advertisements in
newspaper,. maga mPs and on
television, might improperly infer
agency endorsement of a product
service or position which the recipient
represents. Such endorsements violate
the provisions of Executive Order IV31.
October 17, 1990. which states:
Employees shall endeavor to avoid any
actions creating the appearance that
they are violating the law or the ethical
standards promulgated pursuant to this
order.” Those standards Include:
(1) Performing official duties
impañlaily and not giving preferential
treatment to any orgII’Ii tmos or
individuah (2J Avoiding the use of public
office for private gain: and (3) Making
no unauthorized commitments or
promises of any kind purporting to bind
the Government
The provision that prohibits the use of
public office for private gain baa b een
interpeted by the Office of Government
Ethics to mean the private gain of
anyone. incIuii iflg Federal officials.
contractors. cooparators. partners. etc.
As a result, the Department of the
Interiors regulations on Employee
Responsibilities and Conduct. at 43 CFR
20.735—17(f) implement the Executive
Order by statingi “Endorsements.
Employees are prohibited from
endârsing in an official capacity the
proprietary products or processes of
____ requiren ents eâiabl shed by the Office
of Management and LudgetfOMB)
_________ _______________ underOMBcfrculey,forthi
ad 1I4atratlon of assistance
agreements. -
This tevislon will implement for , ,
grads and cooperative agreements, the
Secretarial Outreach issue Paper
Decision—Issue 4—Endorsement of
CommerciaL Products or Services. The
____ Secretary determined-that as a matter of
4308.60 Departmental Pol1 . there should be a
(a) For the recoyoyy of interest foi . provtsion ut all conirects (exceeding
cuets incurred i ot Inconsistent wl h-the :S25.000). assistance agreebtents. and
national conffnpncy, Ma; the foIIowiiig: Mernoranda of Understanding! -
- - . . Agreement (MOAs) wh1c would c
(1) Th. date of demand for payment of prevent the nongovernmental party from
a specified amount in writing by EPA Is using the arrangement to imply
the earliest of the date of mailing of a: Government Prn 4 I r5ement of a product.
(i) Special notice letteri - service r position which the recipient -. -
(ii) Demand letten or. reprise s in its commercial advertising.
-------
WORK PERFORMED DOCUMENTATION TRAINING
OUTLINE TO ACCOMPANY VIDEO, “A WELL-DOCUMENTED CASE ”
The video is largely self-explanatory. There are a few
points, however, which could bear some elaboration or
supplementation. The purpose of this outline is to serve that
function.
— Categories of Costs: EPA Contractors, State (Cooperative
Agreement), EPA personnel (and travel), Other Federal Agencies
(Interagency Agreements).
— Cost Summary: Should list what was done, when it was done,
and who did the work, as well as what it cost and when payment
was made.
— Contractor cost documentation should include documents
which describe the work, including both work authorization
documents (TDDs, Work Assignments Delivery Orders) and documents
reflecting the completion of work (Monthly Progress Reports, Work
Assignment Closeout Reports, Acknowledgments of Completion, Final
Contract Modifications). Invoices and Project Officer Invoice
Approvals, which reflect the amount of contractor costs, are also
necessary.
As Pat Patterson explains, the work authorization/work
completion documents are located —— if you can’t find them
anywhere else -- in the official contract file, maintained by the
Contracting Officer.
You can reach the Contracting Officer by going through the
Work Assignment Manager -- i.e. , the OSC or RPM -- who supervised
the actual work. The OSC or RPM, of course, is ALWAYS LOCAL,
always in the Regional Office. The OSC or RPM can direct you to
the Project Officer (the person whose signature is required on
every approved invoice). The Project Officer will generally also
be in the Regional Program office. The Project Officer is
responsible for ensuring that the particular Work Assignment (or
TDD or delivery order) meets contract requirements; the Project
Officer is the Program’s interface with the Contracting Officer.
Thus, the Project Officer will al iáv s be able to direct you to
the Contracting Officer.
The Contracting Officers themselves will usually be in the
Region, occasionally at Headquarters. If they are in the Region,
you should be able to reaàh them b .dalling the Regional
contracting office. If they are at Headquarters, you, with 1 he
help of the Project Officer, should. be able t reach them with
one or at most two phone calls.
— Indirect costs: Bill Cooke explains the difference
between direct costs (which include any costs incurred for and
-------
billed directly to the SPECIFIC SITE, including EPA contractor
costs, EPA intramural (time & travel) costs, State Cooperative
Agreement Costs, and Interagency Agreement costs), and indirect
costs. Bill describes the methodology used to create a “rate per
hour” for indirect costs; the indirect costs for a specific site
are computed simply by multiplying the indirect rate by the
Superfund program hours worked at that site by EPA personnel.
— Interagency agreement cost documentation: Leslie Vasallo
explains that to fully document interagency agreement costs, we
need, not only the other agency’s bill to EPA, but copies of the
other agency’s backup documentation: the other agency’s
timesheets, its invoices from its contractors, all the same
documents/information that we need for EPA itself. The reason
for this is that our task is to prove that the United States
incurred costs, that money left the Federal treasury; simply
showing that money was transferred from one agency to another
does not do that job. We also need work authorization/completion
documents from the other agency, just as we would from EPA.
- NOTE: There is not a full discussion in the video of
State cooperative agreement cost documentation. For those costs,
too, we need documents (such as the interagency agreement itself
and, hopefully, progress reports from the State to EPA)
describing the work that was done, as well as documents (such as
documents reflecting State “drawdowns”) reflecting the fact and
amount of EPA’s payments to the State.
Question: Do we need to have the same documentation from the
State (such as invoices from, or work assignments issued to, the
State’s contractors) that we would require from another Federal
agency? Answer: not clear—cut. Unlike in the other—agency
situation, if we can show that we paid the State money, we have
showed that the U.S. incurred costs; we don’t necessarily have to
produce the State’s invoices from its contractors to prove that
we incurred costs. However, we must provide a reasonably
detailed description of the response action(s) the State
conducted, and identify the costs associated with that (those)
response action(s). If the State has provided detailed, regular
reports to EPA, they might be sufficient for this purpose; if
not, we may be forced to demand all the State’s invoices,
contract documents, etc., simply to prove —— as we must always
prove for each cost —— that the cost was indeed incurred for an
activity which falls within the definition of “removal or
remedial action.”
- Historic costs: Bill Cooke explains that during the
period 1981—1985, many EPA contractors did not bill EPA on a
site—specific basis; we do not have invoices that break down
those costs by site. After 1985, each of those contractors was
required to prepare a historic report, retroactively breaking dow
the contractor charges by site. These reports are critical
2
-------
evidence in each case where “historic costs” are at issue; they
can be obtained through Bill or the DOJ cost recovery library.
— Steve Gold reiterates that a cost summary is not enough
to support a costs case; it is vital that the “backup”
documentation be included in the “costs package.” Notes that DOJ
may decline to litigate cases which are not supported by
sufficient documentation.
3
-------
Work Performed Documentation Training
Attendee List
Sheraton-Society Hill
Philadelphia, PA
February 11, 1993
REGION I
Lee Clouthier
Superfund Finance Section
US EPA - Region I
JFK Federal Building
One Congress Street
Boston, MA 02203
Phone #: 617/565-3323
Fax #: 617/565-3346
Lee MacMichael
Environmental Services Division
US EPA - Region I
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02173
Phone #: 617/860-4365
Fax #: 617/860-4397
Chris O’Connor
Superfund Enforcement Support, HES-CAN 6
US EPA - Region I
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
One Congress Street
Boston, MA 02203
Phone #: 617/573-9688
Fax #: 617/573-9662
Beth Tomassallo
Office ofRegional Counsel
US EPA - .Region I
JFK Federal Building
One Congress Street
Boston, MA 02203 .
Phone #: 617/565-3429
Fax #: 617/565-1141
-------
REGION I
Kathleen Woodward
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region I
JFK Federal Building
One Congress Street
Boston, MA 02203
Phone #: 617/565-3687
Fax #: 617/565-1141
REGION II
Carol Y. Berns, Assistant Regional Counsel
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region H
NY/Caribbean Superfund Branch
26 Federal Plaza - Rm. 437
New York, NY 10278
Phone #: 212/264-9791
Fax #: 212/264-4359
Masoon Kahn
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region II
New Jersey Superfund Branch
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
Phone #: 212/264-0494
Fax #: 212/264-9694
John Koechley
Superfund Program Support Branch
US EPA - Region H
26 Federal Plaza, Rm. 759
New York, NY 10278
Phone #: 212/264-3034
Fax #: 212/264-9331
-------
REGION H
Sonya Malone
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region II
New Jersey Superfund Branch
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
Phone #: 212/264-2979
Fax #: 212/264-9694
Richard Manna
Financial Services Section
US EPA - Region II
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 100278
Phone #: 212/264-2959
Fax #: 212/264-5223
Debbie Mellott
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region H
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
Phone #: 212/264-3299
Fax #: 212/264-9694
Lance Richmond
Program Support Branch
US EPA - Region H
26 Federal Plaza, Rm 1300
New York, New York 10278
Phone #: 212/264-6695
Fax #: 212/264-6119
Paul F. Simon, Section Chief
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region H
NY/Caribbean Superfund Branch
26 Federal Plaza - Rim 437
New York, NY 10278
Phone #: 212/264-4710
Fax #: 212/264-4359
-------
REGION II
Erwin Smieszek
S uperfund Programs Support Branch
Contracts Management
US EPA - Region H
26 Federal Plaza - Rm. 737
New York, NY 10278
Phone #: 212/264-4311
Fax #: 212/264-7611
email: smieszek. erwin
Jo-Ann Velez
Financial Management Division
US EPA - Region H
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10278
Phone #: 212/264-0939
Fax #: 212/264-5223
REGION ifi
Diane Malacone
Office of Comptroller
US EPA - Region ifi
841 Chestnut Street (3PM31)
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Phone #: 215/597-4282
Fax #: 215/597-6185
Catherine Mastropieri
Office of Comptroller
US EPA - Region ifi
841 Chestnut Street (3PM31)
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Phone #: 215/597-4149
Fax #: 215/597-6185
Stephen Nelson
Office of Comptroller
US EPA - Region ifi
841 Chestnut Street (3PM31)
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Phone #: 215/597-9955
Fax #: 215/597-6185
-------
REGION HI
Steve Pandza
Office of Comptroller
US EPA - Region LII
841 Chestnut Street (3PM31)
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Phone #: 215/597-6161
Fax #: 215/597-6185
Virginia Rowe
Office of Comptroller
US EPA - Region III
841 Chestnut Street (3PM31)
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Phone #: 215/597-4282
Fax #: 215/597-6185
Noel Schleifman
Office of Comptroller
US EPA - Region LII
841 Chestnut Street (3PM31)
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Phone #: 215/597-6162
Fax #: 215/597-6185
REGION IV
Greg Armstrong
Cost Recovery Section
US EPA - Region IV
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia ,30365
Phone #: 404/347-5059
Fax #: 404/347-7817
Carolyn McCall
Cost Recovery Section
US EPA - I egion IV
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Phone #: 404/347-5059
Fax #: 404/347-7817
-------
REGION IV
Ray Strickland
Cost Recovery Section
US EPA - Region IV
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Phone #: 404/347-5059
Fax #: 404/347-7817
Kathy Urbach
Finance Office
US EPA - Region IV
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Phone #: 404/347-2641 ext. 2237
Fax #: 404/347-5246
Will Wainser, Chief
Accounting Operations
Finance Office
US EPA - Region IV
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Phone #: 404/347-3278
Fax #: 404/347-1747
REGION V
Mila Bensing
Cost Recovery Section (HSMO-5J)
US EPA - Region V
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590
Phone #: 312/353-2006
Fax #: 312/886-0753
Michael Berman
Office of Regional Counsel (CS-3T)
US EPA - Region V
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, illinois 60604-3590
Phone #: 312/886-6837
Fax #: 312/886-7160
-------
REGION V
Shirley Dorsey
Cost Recovery Section (HSMO-5J)
US EPA - Region V
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590
Phone #: 312/886-4843
Fax #: 312/886-0753
Janet P. Fundheller
Records Management Section (5H-7J)
US EPA - Region V
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590
Phone #: 312/353-5821
Fax #: 312/353-6519
Deborah Garber
Office of Regional Counsel (CS-3T)
US EPA - Region V
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590
Phone #: 312/886-6610
Fax #: 312/886-7160
Craig Mankowski
Cost Recovery Section (HSMO-5J)
US EPA - Region V
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590
Phone #: 312/886-9493
Fax #: 312/886-0753
Gail Nabasny
Contracts Management (HSMO-5J)
US EPA - Region V
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590
Phone #: 312/353-1056
Fax #: 312/886-0753
-------
REGION V
Mary Ellen Ryan
Superfund Accounting Office (MFS-IOJ)
US EPA - Region V
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590
Phone #: 312/353-4881
Fax #: 312/886-3631
Ron Pearman
Cost Recovery Section (HSMO-5J)
US EPA - Region V
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590
Phone #: 312/353-8923
Fax #: 312/886-0753
REGION VI
Cindy Brown
Superfund Finance Accounting (6M-FS)
US EPA - Region VI
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75208
Phone #: 214/655-7480
Fax #: 214/655-7284
Monica Chapa Smith
Remedial Project Manager (6H-EO)
US EPA - Region VI
1455 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75208
Phone #: 214/655-6780
Fax #: 214/655-6460
Anne Foster
Assistant Regional Counsel (6C-WT)
US EPA - Region VI
1455 Ross Ave.
Dallas, Texas 75208
Phone #: 214/655-2169
Fax #: 214/655-2182
-------
REGION VI
Patrice Miller
Enforcement Officer (6H-EC)
Cost Recovery Section
US EPA - Region VI
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, Texas 75208
Phone #: 214/655-6712
Fax #: 214/655-6460
Pamela Phillips, Section Chief
Office of Regional Counsel (6C-WT)
US EPA - Region VI
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, Texas 75201
Phone #: 214/655-2131
Fax #: 214/655-2182
REGION VII
Ray Bosch
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region VU
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone #: 913/551-7501
Fax #: 913/551-7925
Gerhardt Braeckel
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region VII
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone #: 913/551-7471
Fax #: 913/551-7064 or 7925
Anna Docking
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region VU
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone #: 913/551-7451
Fax #: 913/551-7925
-------
REGION VII
Leslie Humphrey
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region VII
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone #: 913/551-7227
Fax #: 913/551-7064
David Piet
Financial Management Office
US EPA - Region VII
726 Minnesota Branch
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone #: 913/551-7526
Fax #: 913/551-7579
Paul Roemerman
Remedial Project Manager
Program Support Branch
US EPA - Region VII
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone #: 913/551-7694
Fax #: 913/551-7063
Baerbel Schiller
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region VII
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone #: 913/551-7257
Fax #: 913/551-7064
Dan Shiel
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region VU
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone #: 913/551-7278
Fax #: 913/551-7925
-------
REGION VII
Darrell Sommerhauser
Remedial Project Manager
Program Support Branch
US EPA - Region VII
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone #: 913/551-7711
Fax #: 913/551-7063
REGION VIII
Sharon Anderson
Superfund Remedial Branch (HWM-SR)
US EPA - Region VIII
999 18th Street Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
Phone #: 303/294-7639
Fax #: 303/294-1230
David Sturn
Montana Superfund Branch
US EPA - Region Vifi
Federal Building
301 S. Park, Drawer 10096
Helena, Montana 59626-0096
Phone #: 406/449-5414
Fax #: 406/449-5434
REGION IX
Betsy Curnow
Case Development Section
US EPA - Region IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone #: 415/744-2378
Fax #: 415/744-1917
-------
REGION IX
Sharon Johnson
Cost Recovery Section (H7-4)
US EPA - Region IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone #: 4151744-2381
Fax#: 415/744-1917
Joann Marchetta
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone #: 415/744-1343
Fax#: 415/744-1041
REGION X
Marcia Colvin
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region X
1200 Sixth Ave.
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone #: 206/553-6907
Fax #: 206/553-0163
Sharon Eng
Superfund Program Management
US EPA - Region X
1200 Sixth Ave. (FIW-1 13)
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone #: 206/553-2120
Fax #: 202/553-0124
Elizabeth McKenna
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region X
1200 Sixth Ave.
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone #: 206/553-0016
Fax #: 206/553-0163
-------
REGION X
Anne Nickless
Office of Regional Counsel
US EPA - Region X
1200 Sixth Ave.
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone #: 206/553-6696
Fax #: 206/553-0163
Peter Rubenstein
Superfund Program Management
US EPA - Region X
1200 Sixth Ave. (HW-l 13)
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone #: 206/553-1067
Fax #: 206/553-0124
HEADOUARTERS
Nellie Boone
Cost Recovery Branch (5502G)
US EPA - OWPE-CED
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 703/603-8957
Fax #: 703/603-9117
Kevin Brittingham
Chief, Cost Documentation Section
Superfund Accounting Branch
Financial Management Division
Office of the Comptroller
Office of Administrative and Resource Management
US EPA (Rm-226F)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 202/260-2886
Fax #: 202/260-6543
-------
HEADOUARTERS
Bill Cooke
Chief, Superfund Accounting Branch-
Financial Management Division
Office of the Comptroller
Office of Administrative and Resource Management
US EPA (Rm-226F)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 202/260-9268
Fax #: 202/260-6453
Nancy Deck
Contracts and Planning Branch (55020)
US EPA - OWPE-CED
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 703/603-8967
Fax #: 703/603-9117
Daniel Dickson
Cost Recovery Branch (55020)
US EPA - OWPE-CED
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 703/603-8969
Fax #: 703/603-9117
Frank Finamore
Contracts and Planning Branch(5502G)
US EPA - OWPE-CED
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 703/603-9069
Fax #: 703/603-9117
John Fogarty
Office of Enforcement (LE- 1345)
US EPA
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 202/260-8865
Fax #: 202/260-3069
-------
HEADQUARTERS
Karen 1-laison
Office of Enforcement (LE- 1345)
US EPA
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 202/260-3114
Fax #: 202/260-3096
Lisa Harris
Cost Recovery Branch (5502G)
US EPA - OWPE-CED
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 703/603-8976
Fax #: 703/603-9117
William Jennings
Cost Recovery Branch (5502G)
US EPA - OWPE-CED
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 703/603-9879
Fax #: 703/603-9117
Benjamin Lammie
Office of Enforcement (LE- 1345)
US EPA
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 202/260-9735
Fax #: 202/260-3969
Dave Moore
Office of Enforcement (LE- 1345)
US EPA
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone #: 202/260-3067
Fax #: 202/260-3069
-------
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION CENTER (NEIC )
Mary Rohrer
NEIC
US EPA
Denver Federal Center - P.O. Box 25227
Denver, CO 80225
Phone #: 303/236-5122
Fax #: 303/236-5116
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Cindy Phisch
Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Litigation Support Group
801 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Rm. 8035
Washington, D.C. 20530
Phone #: 202/616-3360
Fax #: 202/616-3531
-------
Presenters of Sessions
Work Performed Documentation Training
Sheraton-Society Hill
Philadelphia, PA
February 11, 1993
Introduction:
Bruce Diamond
Director, Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W. (OS-500)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260—4814
The Basis for This Training:
Francis J. Biros
Chief, Cost Recovery Branch
CERCLA Enforcement Division
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W. (5502G)
Washington, DC 20460
(703) 603—8954
(703) 603—9117, fax
Steve Gold
U. S. Department of Justice
Environmental Enforcement Section
1425 New York Avenue, N.W., Room 11057
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 514—5260
(202) 616—2427, fax
Session I:
James Webb
Chief, CERCLA Cost Recovery Section (3HW12)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region III
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 597—6624
(215) 597—9890, fax
-------
2
Theresa Chandler
CERCLA Cost Recovery Section (3HW12)
see address for James Webb, Session I
(215) 597—7982
(215) 597—9890, fax
Joan Maddalozzo
Superfund Enforcement Support Section (HES-CAN 6)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region I
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
One Congress Street
Boston, MA 02203
(617) 573—9642
(617) 573—9662, fax
Session II:
Leslie Vassallo
CERCLA Cost Recovery Section (3HW12)
see address for James Webb, Session I
(215) 597—3171
(215) 597—9890, fax
Charlene Arnold
CERCLA Cost Recovery Section (3HW12)
see address for James Webb, Session I
(215) 597—6679
(215) 597—9890, fax
Joan Maddalozzo
see Session I
Arthur Man
Superfund Enforcement Support Section (HES-CAN 6)
see address for Joan Maddalozzo, Session I
(617) 573—9633
(617) 573—9662, fax
Harvey (Pat) Patterson
Chief, Superfund/RCRA Program Management Staff
Superfund/RCRA Procurement Operations Division
Office of Acquisition Management
Office of Administration and Resources Management
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W. (PM-214F)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260—9158
(202) 260—1880, fax
-------
3
Chad Litt].eton
Cost Recovery Branch
CERCLA Enforcement Division
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W. (5502G)
Washington, DC 20460
(703) 603—8991
(703) 603—9117, fax
Session III:
Leslie Vassallo
see Session II
Tanya Thomas
CERCLA Cost Recovery Section
see address for James Webb, Session I
(215) 597—6679
(215) 597—9890, fax
Steve Pandza
Financial Management Section (3PM31)
see address for James Webb, Session I
(215) 597—6161
(215) 597—6185, fax
Joan Maddalozzo
see Session I
Arthur Marl
see Session II
Session IV:
Steve Novick
U.S. Department of Justice
Environmental Enforcement Section
1425 New York Avenue, N.W., Room 10010
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 514—2746
(202) 514—4180, fax
Bernard McCullagh
Grants Management Section (3PM71)
see address for James Webb, Session I
(215) 597—3860
(215) 597—6170, fax
-------
4
Session V:
Lisa Jenkins
Resource Management and Information Staff
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 N Street, S.W. (OS—ho)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260—7951
(202) 260—8929, fax
Leslie Vassallo
see Session II
Joan Maddalozzo
see Session I
Session VI:
Steve Novick
see Session I V
Steve Gold
see Basis for this Training
Margaret Cardamone
Office of Regional Counsel
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region III
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 597—1632
(215) 597—3235, fax
Session VII:
Steve Novick
see Session IV
Closing Remarks:
Francis Biros
see Basis for this Training
Organizer:
Filomena Chau
Cost Recovery Branch
CERCLA Enforcement Division
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W. (5502G)
Washington, DC 20460
(703) 603—8966
(703) 603—9117, fax
------- |