United States Environmental Protection Agency April 1984 HW-2 &EPA Environmental Response learn JiA ------- Environmental Response Team Contents 2 ERT: What we do 4 Operating in the Field 5 Making Environmental Decisions 7 Developing Data 8 Training Response Specialists 9 Incident Response Operations 10 ERT in action 10 Throughout the Years 11 Across the United States 12 Case Histories 16 How ERT is activated ------- ER1 What we do Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in December 1980 to broaden and strengthen Federal initiatives in responding to hazardous waste emergencies. Limited authority to deal with these emergencies previously had been based on Section 311 of the Clean Water Act A new office, the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), was established within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to ad- minister CERCLA, Section 311 of the Clean Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) which had preceded CERCLA. OSWER has quickly become the nerve center of a compre- hensive, well-coordinated nationwide at- tack upon solid waste problems dealing with uncontrolled hazardous waste sites and environmental emergencies. One of the basic OSWER missions is provision of technical services to both National and Regional offices of EPA in nonenforcement aspects of response ac- tions. This mission is carried out by the Hazardous Response Support Division (HRSD) located in OSWER’s Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. HRSD’s responsibilities are to: • Provide field support and technical assistance to on-scene emergency efforts. • Train personnel involved in response actions. • Conduct a comprehensive program of collecting, processing and disseminat- ing technical information to National and Regional offices. • Serve as the focal point with EPA’S Office of Research and Development in identification of new research needs, evaluation of new technologies, and their incorporation into EPA’s emer- gency response and hazardous waste site program. The Environmental Response Team The focal point of HRSD cleanup efforts is the Environmental Response Team (ERT), a group of 12 hazardous waste experts who provide multidisciplinary assistance to EPA’s other hazardous waste response experts located in its 10 Regional offices. Together they can bring to bear upon a problem nearly 130 years of technical experience in dealing with hazardous wastes. The ERT was estahlished in 1978 under the National Contingency Plan, the ve- hicle through which the Clean Water Act directed coordination of Federal hazard- ous cleanup and response efforts. The basic ERT function initially was to advise On-Scene Coordinators and Regional Re- sponse Teams on environmental issues dealing with cleaning up oil spills in navigable waters, and accidents involving approximately 300 hazardous substances. When Congress enacted the Comprehen- sive Environmental Response, Compen- sation, and Liability Act in 1980 to estab- lish adequate legal mechanisms for cleaning up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites, it directed the National Contingency Plan to broaden its emergency responses. Thus, CERCLA, commonly called Superfund, currently is activated by emergencies at sites as well as spills, by threats to air, land and non-navigable as well as navigable wat- ers, and by accidents involving a much larger number of hazardous substances. Local communities are on the receiving end of all these environmental catas- trophes, but solutions often are beyond the communities’ abilities and means. Through the ERT EPA is able to furnish around-the-clock support personnel highly skilled in all aspects of environ- mental emergencies. The 12 ERT members represent every discipline involved in dealing with hazar- dous substances, including: biology, ecology; chemistry and chemical en- gineering; civil and sanitary engineer- ing; environmental health and science; and industrial hygiene. The Team is proficient not only in planning but con- ducting field operations, with special emphasis upon application of new technology and equipment, especially safety equipment and decontamination procedures. Some of the primary functions Team members are trained to perform include: chemical, biological and physical treat- ment and monitoring techniques; control, restoration, disposal and contingency planning during emergencies; installa- tion, operation and evaluation of in- strumentation and field response sys- tems; sampling and analysis of air, water and soil; water pollution biology and toxicology; environmental radiation train- ing; occupational health and safet and computerized gas chromatography/mass spectrometr i ------- The ERT’s major functions are to: • Maintain an around-the-clock activation system. • Upon request, dispatch Team mem- bers to emergency sites to assist Re- gional and program offices. • Provide critical consultation in water and air quality criteria, toxicology, in- terpretation and evaluation of analyt- ical data, and engineering and scientific studies. • Develop and conduct site-specific safety programs. • Provide technical experts for a Public Affairs Assist Team (PAAT). • Supervise the work of contractors. • Provide specialized equipment to meet specific site requirements such as monitoring, analytical support, waste treatment, containment and control. • Help to develop technical manuals, policies, and standard operating pro- cedures (SOPs). • Assist in developing new technology for use at environmental emergencies and uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. • Train Federal, State and local govern- ment officials and industry repre- sentatives in the latest technology for environmental emergencies at hazard- ous waste responses. For further information about the ERT: J. Stephen Dorrler Chief, Environmental Response Team U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Edison, New Jersey 08837 201-321-6740 FTS-340-6740 Organization Chart 3 ------- ER1 What we do The Nature of the Response Each year, EPA answers hundreds of calls for emergency assistance and cleanup expertise at spills and hazardous waste sites. The Agency’s On-Scene Coordina- tors and Superfund Coordinators are drawn from more than 100 emergency response specialists located in EPA’s 10 Regional offices. These coordinators also are highly trained in such disciplines as biology, chemistry, engineering and ground water hydrology. They are experi- enced in cleaning up and removing spills or mitigating the adverse environmental effects of hazardous waste sites. They review and implement spill prevention control and countermeasures which must be prepared by facilities handling oil or other hazardous materials. If they need help, they call upon the EAT The type of ERT response varies. In a chemical spill into a river, for example, the ERT provides immediate assistance. (Re- sponsibility for on-scene coordination rests with EPA for inland incidents, while the Coast Guard is responsible for those in coastal waters and the Great Lakes.) The assistance might include monitoring the chemicals, predicting the dispersion rate, and providing emergency water treatment technology or alternate water supplies. In the case of a hazardous waste site, the Team assists in developing tech- niques and solutions to minimize the immediate threat, and then helps identify long-term solutions. The Environmental Response Branch, The Organizational Entity for the ERT, includes three sections: Operational Support, Environmental Impact, and Analytical Support. Operating in the Field The OPERA11ONAL SUPPORT SEC11ON, through the EPA Regional representative, develops and implements site-specific strategies for both short-term and long- term responses at uncontrolled hazard- ous waste sites and environmental emergencies. The Section: • Conducts or assists Regions in conduct- ing engineering feasibility studies for containment, cleanup and disposal ac- tions at hazardous waste sites. • Develops alternatives for on-site/off- site disposal of hazardous materials, toxic wastes and recovered spill mate- rial, on both temporary and permanent bases. • Evaluates existing technical approaches. • Develops and implements new techni- cal approaches as necessary • Performs cost analyses. • Ensures that all operations, such as access control, decontamination, per- sonnel monitoring and respiratory pro- tection, incorporate the latest safety and health preservation techniques. • Ensures compliance with all appropri- ate Federal and State regulations, in- cluding those of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensa- tion, and Liability Act, Resource Con- servation and Recovery Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and Safe Drinking Water Act. • Provides and supervises on-site con- tract support as necessary. • As required, supports other programs such as training, ADP and enforcement activities, both in Headquarters and the Regional offices. - 4 ------- En vfronmenta! Emergency Response Unit Here is an example of how the Opera- tional Support Section responds: The Section is called upon to assist a Regional office in lowering the liquid level in a hazardous waste lagoon which is threatening to overflow. Within 24 hours, a Mobile Activated Carbon Treatment Trailer is at the site to pump and treat the contaminated water, thus minimizing the environmental emergency. A Mobile Ana- lytical Laboratory arrives to ensure that the discharge from the carbon treatment unit meets State water quality standards. These pieces of equipment are part of the arsenal which makes up the Environmen- tal Emergency Response Unit (EERU). The EERU is a cooperative effort between the EAT, the Oil and Hazardous Materials Spills Branch (OHMSB) of EPA’S Office of Research and Development, and contrac- tor personnel. The Unit provides the most effective use of methodology and equip- ment under development or already field-tested. This technology, available for operational response through the ER1 includes proven and prototype spill con- trol and cleanup equipment, treatability studies and laboratory consultation services. The ERT is responsible for activating EERU when the latter’s capabilities are required. Upon such activation, the ERT assumes operational control for EERU and provides overall coordinating ca- pacity during the incident. Equipment available through the EAT! EERU includes: • Mobile Activated Carbon Treatment Trailers (2). • Mobile Analytical Laboratory (GC/MS, GC, IR, AA, Compatability Studies). • Mobile Flocculation/Sedimentation System. • Mobile Stream Diversion System. • Pilot Plant Treatability Unit Other special mobile equipment, includ- ing a unique mobile incinerator now undergoing final testing, will be added to the Team’s arsenal in the future. For further information on Operational Support Section services, contact: Making Environmental Decisions The ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SEC- TiON, through the Regional representat- ive, develops and implements new ap- proaches to risk assessment, determining the extent of contamination, the degree of cleanup necessary and restoration re- quirements at uncontrolled hazardous waste sites and environmental emergen- cies. The Section: • Rapidly assesses the toxicity of leachates, treatment system effluents and environmental samples. • Develops and implements priority sys- tems to ensure that all corrective ac- tions are directed to the most sensitive and vulnerable environmental, social and economic areas. • Coordinates human health studies conducted by the Communicable Dis- ease Center of the Public Health Serv- ice and/or State health officials to identify impacts and remedial activities on specific population segments. • Prepares, evaluates and reviews En- vironmental Assessments to ensure that response actions produce the fewest possible complications for the environment and local population. • Develops data and evaluates informa- tion to ensure that the effective cleanup and restoration activities are carried out. • Provides input to other programs as required. John Gilbert Chief, Operational Support Section, ERT U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 26 West St. Clair Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 513-684-7537 FTS-684-7537 - 7- -: ‘ , 4 5 ------- ER1 What we do HazaidAssessment One of the first steps the Environmental Impact Section takes in formulating a hazardous substance strategy is to de- termine the degree of risk to people and the environment Since the hazard may affect its target population in several ways, it is essential that the assessment consider all environmental media — air, surface water, ground water, soil, and biomass. The Section has been conducting hazard- ous assessments at a variety of spills and waste sites; each operation produces an increasingly refined hazard assessment technique. This increased sophistication has resulted in improved documentation of the extent of contamination, a logical approach for defining “when clean is clean enough7 and the extent of cleanup ultimately recommended. The Section’s approach is first to consider the hazard itself, then to determine its probable pathways. Identification of the actual pathway or pathways and the speed of the contaminant’s migration will dictate selection of the most cost-effective remedial actions. These findings are then used to develop engineering options for containing and removing contaminants, and restoring the site. Toxicity Testing In its field activities the Environmental Impact Section employs a new instru- ment which rapidly assesses the toxicity of leachates, treatment system effluents and ambient water. The portable instru- ment has been used successfully at a number of hazardous waste sites and spills for toxicity screening of waterborne contaminants, as well as for substantia- tion of other aquatic bioassay tests. The instrument operates on the fact that toxic chemicals in water inhibit the light- emitting capacity of certain marine bac- teria. The degree of light inhibition is directly proportional to the concentration of the chemicals. The instrument’s effectiveness is derived from its portability, its compactness and its dependence upon regular household electric current. Requiring only four feet of table top or laboratory bench space, it can be setup in a command post or a motel room. Individual samples can be assayed in 5-15 minutes. This type of speed can be particularly valuable if the sample is from stored, treated wastewaters that must be discharged only after toxicity tests are completed. The instrument also reveals the synergistic effects of toxic mixtures, which cannot be predicted by interpreting data from chemical analysis. The data produced by the instrument are the result of toxic chemicals acting on various physiological systems of the marine bacteria. As such, the data do not have as much ecological relevance as a bioassay of fresh water fish or macroin- vertebrates. However, the instrument has been used enough on certain fish/macro- invertebrate bioassays to make correla- tions with specific toxic chemicals. The Environmental Impact Section is also developing a portable unit using fresh water fish and Daphnia (a small crusta- cean) to generate toxicity information. This unit will soon be combined with the rapid assessment instrument to provide a complete system for defining toxicity in aqueous hazardous materials. This new unit consists of modules that can be transported as baggage on most airlines and set up in a trailer. Its own temperature control unit maintains ap- prop nate temperatures for test organisms. While the unit’s diluter system is espe- cially designed to produce the concen- trations of pollutant required for generat- ing standard U data, it can be easily modified to perform special tests using more than one pollutant at a time. The information generated from these two new instruments can be used to determine: • The most environmentally acceptable means of counteracting effects of hazardous material discharges. • The environmental acceptability of the effluent from various treatment processes. • The biological “zone of influence” re- sulting from the discharges of hazard- ous materials. For further information on Environmental Impact Section services, contact: Dr. Royal Nadeau Chief, Environmental Impact Section, ERT U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Edison, New Jersey 08837 201-321-6743 FTS-340-6743 6 ------- Developing Data The ANALY11CAL SUPPORT SECTiON, through the Regional representative, de- velops and implements sampling and analytical programs to handle particular problems associated with environmental emergency and uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The Section: • Ensures that collected samples are representative of the problem at hand. • Provides mobile laboratory equipment operation and support personnel. • Provides nonroutine analytical support on or off site, either through in-house or contract laboratories. • Interprets data and provides informa- tion in a format that can be readily used by operational personnel. • Provides remote sensing services for multimedia episodes through aerial reconnaissance, fixed-position monitor- ing equipment and portable instruments. • Provides and ensures quality control so that data generated on a case-by-case basis can be used with confidence by those making technical remedial decisions. • Prepares site-specific safely plans, in- cluding the levels of protection re- quired by workers onsite, control of access to the site, and decontamination procedures. Site-Specific Analytical Plans The Analytical Support Section has pioneered the development and im- plementation of analytical plans tailored to the needs of individual sites. At uncon- trolled hazardous waste sites, for in- stance, the Section developed and im- plemented compatibility testing protocols (CW) to allow the safe bulking of barrel- led wastes. The basic protocol, modified for each site, consists of spot tests for pH, oxidation-reduction potential, radiation, flammability volatile gases, and water reactivity At sites where disposal re- quirements demand testing for specific materials, such as PCBS, cyanides and organic chlorine, the Section adds rapid analytical procedures to screen each bar- rel. Custom compatibility schemes have been developed and used successfully at several sites, including those in Kingston, New Hampshire; Coventry, Rhode Island; Baltimore, Maryland; Rock Creek, Ohio; Ellisville, Missouri; and Lock Haven, Pennsylvania. Compatibility testing is very economical because it avoids the necessity of separately and completely characterizing the contents of each of the thousands of drums found on most sites. Site-Specific Safety Plans At the request of the On-Scene Coor- dinator, the Section develops and imple- ments site-safety plans incorporating the unique requirements of each site. Using “Interim Standard Operating Safety Pro- cedures” issued by the Office of Emer- gency and Remedial Response, the Sec- tion determines the zones of contamina- tion, the type of personal protective equipment required for each operation being conducted in a given zone, the method and frequency of workplace air monitoring for each zone and type of operation, and the method and location of personnel and equipment decontamina- tion. Custom safety plans have been used at several sites, including Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania; Ellisville, Missouri; Elizabeth, New Jersey; Lock Haven, Pennsylvania; Baltimore, Maryland; Ep- ping, New Hampshire; Tacoma, Washing- ton; Fresno, California; and Nampa, In- diana. For further information on Analytical Support Section services contact: Dr. Joseph Lafornara Chief, Analytical Support Section, ERT U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Edison, New Jersey 08837 201-321-6741 FTS-340-6741 ------- Training Response Specialists Item: An abandoned storage warehouse catches fire. Local volunteer firemen ex- tinguish the blaze but find many drums, containers and cartons whose labels indi- cate they contain a variety of chemicals. Pungent odors also are obvious. Realizing their lack of expertise in dealing with chemicals could present a serious threat to themselves and local inhabitants, the firemen seal off the warehouse and re- quest outside help. Item: A fiat-bed tractor trailer rig, placarded with diamond-shaped signs reading “DANGEROUS,” spills its load at an intersection off a freeway exit during the morning rush hour. A number of 55-gallon drums and boxes of various sizes litter the site. A deputy sheriff arrives on the scene, reroutes traffic and radios his office that a serious situation involving hazardous materials could exist. He re- quests expert assistance immediately to assess the situation and advise on cleanup. If uncontrolled, release of hazardous sub- stances in these two incidents could have adversely affected public health or the environment The incidents, however, were not real but simulated. Staged periodically by the ERT at EPA’S Region II facility in Edison, New Jersey, they are designed to approximate real events as closely as possible. “Assistance” is pro- vided by participants in a training course entitled “Hazardous Materials Incident Response Operations.” Following a week of instruction, the truck incident provides a mock crisis to which the class responds as a team. 8 ------- Incident Response Operations To improve EPA’s readiness to manage environmental episodes involving hazardous materials, EPA’s Office of Emergency and Remedial Response di- rected the ERT to plan, organize and conduct a training program. As a result, courses were developed to train emer- gency response personnel from Federa’, State and local levels in five areas of hazardous environmental response: a general introduction, monitoring and sampling, hazard evaluation, mitigation and treatment, and personnel protection. The program’s goal is to provide practical knowledge about response activities dur- ing the initial phase of hazardous sub- stance incidents. Focusing on team func- tions, methods, procedures, organization and safety in responding to hazardous episodes, the courses emphasize the fol- lowing considerations: • Recognizing the hazards associated with specific materials. • Determining the risks to the public and the environment. • Developing methods of reducing or preventing hazardous effects. • Protecting response personnel. Although each release of a hazardous substance presents a unique situation, corrective principles remain the same; they must merely be adapted to meet specific incidents. The course on Hazardous Materials Inci- dent Response Operations is a unique course within EPA because it emphasizes field exercises. Each course presentation is limited to 18 participants who come from EPA, Coast Guard, State and local emergency response offices, other Fed- eral agencies and private organizations. During the work and field sessIons, parti- cipants are divided into small groups which operate independently. The first part of the instruction covers problem- solving and decision-making, evaluation of hazards, determination of risks and selection of appropriate personnel protec- tive equipment and methods. The next block of instruction provides detailed direction in the use of protective clothing and breathing equipment, the body’s first line of defense against hostile, toxic environments. All students receive a self-contained breathing apparatus and full-face air purifying mask. After thor- ough instruction in its uses, limitations and inspection procedures, the equip- ment is worn by the students in a smoke-filled environment, on obstacle courses and while operating field instru- ments. The participants also practice wearing various types of fully encapsulat- ing suits over the breathing apparatus. Both laboratory and outdoor exercises provide students with a basic understand- ing of the fundamental instruments avail- able for initially assessing the hazards and characterizing the site. While learning how to work under adverse conditions, the students also establish a series of decontamination lines to demonstrate the correct procedures for removing chemi- cals from protective clothing during re- sponse operations. As they move through their exercises, the students begin to develop an awareness of the complexities involved in hazardous substance incidents. Each situation in- volves specific factors which must be evaluated and managed, based upon the information available. The class learns to organize, develop and mount a team effort that effectively reduces the en- vironmental impact of the incident The final exercises are designed to test the participants’ ability to use their newly-acquired knowledge in a full-scale environmental episode. Although simu- lated, the incidents represent events that have actually happened. Throughout the course, emergency response principles and procedures are discussed in detail; the final test is their application to the simulated environmental episode. Plans call for at least one training presen- tation per month for the next fIscal year. For more information about this course and the other technical courses, contact: Thomas Sell Training Coordinator, ERT U .S. Environmental Protection Agency 26 West St .Clair Street Cincinnati , Ohio 45268 513-684-7537 FTS-684-7537 9 ------- I j ERT in action Since its founding in 1978, the ERT has responded to more than 400 emergency incidents and hazardous waste sites; it has provided direct technical assistance in another 500 + incidents. Responses have been pro- vided for alt 10 EPA Regions, includ- ing Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the Com- monwealth of the Northern Marianna Islands (Saipan). In addition, the ERT has been requested to assist the Gov- ernment of Mexico on two separate occasions, the Governments of Can- ada, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Venezuela, Brazil and Italy. The type of support the EAT provides has changed since 1978 from strict “emergency” response, typically short in duration, to “quick” response invotving more Team members over a longer period. For example, during its first year of operation, the ERT responded to 42 incidents, approx- imately half of which were oil (Continued on Page 12) ON SITE RESPONSES BY MONTH 20 FISCAL YEAR 1981 TOTAL RESPONSES 49 15 10 20 15 10 5 20 ______________________- _____________- ____________ FISCAL YEAR 1980 TOTAL RESPONSES = 53 15 — - FISCAL YEAR 1983 TOTAL RESPONSES = 113 20 FISCAL YEAR 1982 TOTAL RESPONSES = 65 15 10 — - hhd 9 13 11 11 . 2 (2 2 ------- ON SITE RESPONSES BY REGION I II j III IV V VI VII VIII IX X 40—— - — — _________ FISCAL YEAR 1980 TOTAL RESPONSES = 53 30 —- 20 FISCAL YEAR 1981 TOTAL RESPONSES = 49 30 20 10 iL J4 1 2 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X II 40- 40— - _______ FISCAL YEAR 1979 TOTAL RESPONSES = 42 30——- - — 20——————-— 10 11 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X 40 40 FISCAL YEAR 1982 TOTAL RESPONSES = 65 30 — 21 20- - -— 10 3I FISCAL YEAR 1984 TOTAL RESPONSES = 89 (as of 3 3184) 30 -—-- -—- --- —- - — 26 20 - ___________________________ 15 14 13 iii ; 11 ------- ERT in action spills. Oil can be handled by a single individual with little or no respiratory protection. The present responses, however, require a minimum of two people operating on the “buddy sys- tem” and generally utilizing sophisti- cated personnel protection equipment. Average duration of responses has in- creased from 4.5 days in 1978 to eleven days. Some responses have entailed in- termittent actions over several months. At the present rate of response, the EAT will be on-site at more than 130 inci- dents during Fiscal Year 1984. The ERT’s responses have historically been concentrated in the Eastern half of the United States, primarily because of the area’s large concentration of indus- trial operations. In the ERT’s early years, when its re- sponses were primarily to oil spills, acti- vities peaked in the early spring when the annual thaw brought increased movement of petroleum products on waterways and through pipelines. This response pattern has predominantly shifted to hazardous waste sites. Overall, preventable incidents such as housekeeping-type oil spills, which formerly comprised approximately 90% of all reported hazardous substance epi- sodes, have decreased steadily in recent years. Credit for this welcome trend is due to a growing sense of responsibility by industry, to rapidly-advancing waste disposal technology, and to the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Program which is a part of Section 311 of the Clean Water Act. ------- Case Histories Emergency Response International At the urgent request from the Govern- ment of the United Arab Emirates, the ERT, as part of a US Team, went to the Middle East (Abu Dhabi) to provide technical counsel on controlling a spreading oil slick in the Persian Gulf. The oil spill was a result of Iraqi military action against offshore oil wells owned by Iran. The Team advised the United Arab Emirates on the best means of mitigating the worst effects of the oil spill should it threaten the Gulf Coast. In response to a request for assistance from the Venezuela Ministry of Health, ERT recommended disposal methods of toluenediisocyanate-contaminated cot- tonseed oil. These recommendations consisted of incinerating the contamin- ated oil in a power plant boiler with con- tinuous air monitoring for residual TDI and HCN. Information on portable, real- time air monitors capable of detecting these compounds, together with safe handling procedures in the field, were also provided. At the request of the World Health Orga- nization of the United Nations, ERT rep- resented EPA in Rome, Italy, with the development of a guideline document on Rehabilitation Following Chemical Accidents. The document will be used by Nations to design and implement programs to assist populations affected by releases of hazardous chemicals. At the request of Environment Canada, ERT provided its expertise in the evalua- tion of the Canadian Government’s sys- tem for providing analytical data follow- ing hazardous materials incidents. When assistance was requested by a Regional OSC with the hazard assess- ment at the site of the reported disposal of etiological (biohazard) wastes, the ERT developed a site safety plan and organized and supervised the complete biological and chemical characterization of the “lab-packed” materials. A Level A (fully-encapsulated) entry party, consist- ing of ERT and contractor personnel (complete with the ERT-Decon trailer), used a remote television transmitter sys- tem supplied by EPA-ORD to document !‘ 13 ------- ERT in action the conditions at the site of the “burial mound.” This allowed off-site govern- ment and industry experts to assess the nature of the materials. With the OSC, the ERT developed the plan to excavate and recontainerize the bottles in ques- tion, and directed and participated in the selection and packaging of representa- tive containers for complete biological and chemical characterization. EAT then supervised and interpreted the analyses, which led to the determination that dis- posal of the wastes, at a site approved for “lab pack” chemicals, was in order. Air Monitoring ERT also provided assistance to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, State Health and En- vironmental Departments at a hazar- dous waste disposal facility. The ERT was not only instrumental in conducting an on-site air monitoring program and safety protocol evaluation, but also was the primary developer/implementor of the long term air monitoring program. In addition, ERT assisted with the plan- ning and review of the responsible party’s risk-assessment for various re- medial options. Because of ERT’s in- volvement in the Site Assessment, Air Monitoring and Safety protocols, ERT was requested to serve as the technical focal point for similar assistance at a different site involving the same re- sponsible party. Operational Support ERT’s assistance was requested in the removal clean-up activity of a recycling facility involving hazardous substances. The Team assisted the OSC in develop- ing and implementing: 1) a site safety plan; 2) on-site mobile laboratory capa- bilities for heavy metals, PCB’s, and other organic materials; 3) a field com- patibility test and computerization of all data which expedited bulking/shipping the waste from the site; 4) a site specific air monitoring program and an overall air monitoring program for hazardous waste sites and; 5) the containment! treatment operations. Tire Fire EAT assisted the Regional office in the response to a fire involving 5-7 million tires in Frederick County, Virginia. The fire produced thick black smoke for several days. For several months after- ward pyrollysis inside the pile produced up to 300 gpm of a complex oil-like tar. Activities encompassed all three ERT sections and included: a detailed air monitoring program to identify and quantify any hazardous vapors and par- ticulate that might have been present; an assessment of the environmental im- pact of the oil on the watershed; recom- mendations on the design and imple- mentation of the oil containment and re- moval system and the accompanying flow measurement devices and fire fighting plan; a feasibility study to deter- mine if the fire could be extinguished and to develop cost estimates for the effort; assistance in briefing the press, EPA, State, local, and Federal officials on the status of the site and the clean-up; the establishment of an on-site data pro- cessing (microcomputer) capability to track project costs, oil shipments, and perform word processing (Pollution Re- ports, Bulletins, Contract SOW’s, Fund Requests); and the coordination of the scientific and technical community at the site. Missouri Dioxin EAT has been involved with the Region- al Office in Missouri Dioxin Sites since the Denny Farm Site investigation in 1979. As part of this continuing involve- ment, ERT provided the chairman for a committee that was tasked with identify- ing and resolving technical problems which may be encountered in the re- moval and transportation of TCDD con- taminated soils from the confirmed dioxin sites to the interim storage vault ------- planned for Times Beach. Topics of con- sideration were excavation guidelines, transportation issues, sampling pro- tocols, and analytical support. Recom- mendations developed by the commit- tee will be used as guidelines for site specific work plans, which in turn will evolve into standard procedures for this type of work. Extent of Contamination ERT is often requested to design and implement “extent of contamination surveys” to determine the nature and impact of waste migration from hazar- dous waste sites. As part of a Superfund removal effort, the ERT conducted a comprehensive study to determine the location of wastes buried in the large fill area and the migration of solvents in soils and groundwater. On a rapid turn- around basis, remote sensing tech- niques were used to locate buried mate- rials, a groundwater monitoring system was installed and sampled, contamina- tion of the soil profile was examined, the site was topographically surveyed, surface water and biota were sampled. The results of the intensive study were compiled in a report to the OSC includ- ing maps of the site, a detailed evalua- tion of the waste source, contaminant transport mechanisms and potential adverse health and environmental im- pacts associated with the site. ERT re commended appropriate mitigative ac- tions to limit any off-site transport of hazardous wastes. The Regional OSC and ERT presented this EOC study to in- terested parties at a public meeting. It provides a scientific basis for EPA ac- tions taken regarding the hazardous waste. - • .&_. : 15 ------- How the ERT is activated The ERT maintains a 24-hour response capability. Once an EPA On-Scene Coor- dinator (OSC) determines that EAT assist- ance is required for an effective response, he may telephone these officials: • During working hours, Kenneth Big- lane, Director of the Hazardous Re- sponse Support Division (FTS 245-3048). • During nonworking hours, Steve Dorr- ler, the EAT leader (or his designee) at the 24-hour response telephone (201-321-6660) or FTS (340-6660). The authority to activate the EAT rests with the Director of Hazardous Response Support Division or his designee. Upon activation, appropriate ERT personnel and resources are dispatched to operate under the direct operational control of the OSC. In incidents involving an OSC from other Federal or State agencies, requests for the EAT should go to the EPA Regional Emergency Response Coordinator who, in turn, will contact the appropriate officials. In non-emergency situations, such as providing assistance at hazardous waste sites, the Director of Hazardous Response Support Division approves use of the ERT IL 16 * U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1984 0 - 454-949 ------- |