United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
&EPA
DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9230.0-05
TITLE: Correnunity Relations Requirements For
Operable Units
APPROVAL DATE: 10/02/85
EFFECTIVE DATE: 10/02/85
ORIGINATING OFFICE: OERR/HRSD
ScFINAL
D DRAFT
STATUS:
REFERENCE (other documents):
OS WER OS WER OS WER
E DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE D
-------
03/19/87 United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
EPA OSWER Directive Initiation Request
1. Directive Number
9230.0-05
2. Originator Information
Name of Contact Person
GEMMILL
Mall Code
Office
OERR/HRSD
Telephone Number
382-2460
3. Title
COMMUNITY RELATIONS REQUIREMENTS FOR OPERABLE UNITS
4. Summary of Directive (Include brief statement of purpose)
Discusses impact on community relations efforts of
the concept of dividing remedial activities at a
site into "operable units" as defined in the
amended NCP (50 FR 47911, 11/20/85). No major
changes needed in the planning and implementation
of Superfund community relations (10/02/85, 4 pp).
5. Keywords
SUPERFUND, CERCLA, COMMUNITY RELATIONS
6a. Does this Directive Supercede Prevtous Dlrectlve(s)7J| yes X| No What directive (number, We)
b. Does ft Supplement Previous Directlves(s)? | j yes ( X No What directive (number, title)
7. Draft Level
A - Signed by AA/DAA
B - Signed by Office Director
C - For Review & Comment
In Development
This Request Meets OSWER Directives System Format
8. Signature of Lead Office Directives Coordinator
Date
9. Name and Title of Approving Official
HEDEMAN
Date
10/02/85
OSWER OSWER OSWER
DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE
-------
s.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OCT - 2 1985
OF
SOUIDWASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
OSWER Directive 9230.0-5
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Community Relations Requirements for Operable Units
FROM: William N. Hedeman, Jr^Y>JL
Director, Office of EmergenrcyandReraedial Response
TO: Addressees
This memorandum presents community relations requirements
and guidance for operable units of remedial actions. The first
section discusses the concept of an "operable unit" as defined in
the proposed revisions to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), providing an example of how
remedial activities at a site can be divided into operable units.
The second section of the memorandum presents guidance and require-
ments. This guidance for operable units does not require major
changes in the planning and implementation of community relations
programs for Superfund remedial actions. All other community
relations requirements remain unchanged.
BACKGROUND
The proposed revisions to the NCP (50 PR_ 29, February 12,
1985, PP. 5862-5932) define an "operable unit" as "a discrete
response measure that is consistent with a permanent remedy, but
is not the permanent remedy in and of itself." According to the
preamble to the revised NCP, the proposed change "reflects EPA's
practice of dividing complex response actions into operable
units." Operable units can be conducted as removal actions, even
though they are parts of remedial responses at NPL sites. Operable
units are implemented prior to selection of a final remedial
action, provided "such measures are cost effective and consistent
with a permanent remedy" (Section 300.68(d)).
In practice, an operable unit is a flexible concept, applicable
to a wide range of construction measures that result in measurable
public health or environmental improvements at a given site.
Operable units are not limited to short-term actions; the terra
should not be equated with "initial remedial measure." Instead,
remedial response activities can be divided into any number of
-------
OSWER Directive 9230.0-5
-2-
operable units, depending on the complexity of the problems
associated with the site. Each operable unit, however, must by
itself serve to eliminate or mitigate a release or threat of a
release. If more than one operable unit is conducted during
remedial activities at a site, each operable unit may require a
separate remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/PS).
The need for a separate RI/PS for each operable unit, however, is
determined on a site-specific basis.
An example of how response actions at a site can be divided
into operable units may help in understanding the operable units
concept. Using a hypothetical remedial action, response activities
at this particular site are divided into three operable units.
The first operable unit involves the removal of drums and other
hazardous materials located on the surface of the site. As the
second operable unit, waste oil lagoons are drained and contaminated
soil at the site is removed. The third operable unit involves
activities to control groundwater contamination at the site; the
extent of the groundwater contamination plume is assessed, and
measures are taken to mitigate the contamination problem. Because
each of these operable units involves separate response measures,
it is possible that two or more of the operable units could be
conducted concurrently. For example, the operable unit involving
the removal of drums stored on site could be started at the same
time as the operable unit involving the removal of waste oils on
site. If appropriate, both of these operable units could be
addressed in one RI/PS.
As the background discussion above suggests, the term "operable
unit" has a specific technical meaning; however, the meaning is
not likely to be clear at first to citizens. In public documents,
therefore, operable units can be referred to as "segments" of the
response action.
GUIDANCE ANDREQUIREMENTS
The community relations requirements for operable units will
enable the public to have meaningful opportunity to comment on
all remedial measures before they are implemented. Specific
requirements are expressed as answers to the questions below.
1) Is a three weekpublic comment period required for each
operable unit?
A three-week public comment period is required for each
operable unit including removals, unless the operable
unit is conducted as an emergency removal action. The
operable unit will be initiated after the three-week
public comment period.
-------
OSWER DirectiV^"9230.0-5
If there has been a feasibility study explicitly addressing
the operable unit, the basis for comment will be public
review of the draft feasibility study report. If'there
has not been a feasibility study explicitly addressing
the operable unit, a. public comment period is still
required; the basis for public comment will be the work
plan for the operable unit, or an agency-prepared summary of
the work plan.
2) If the draft feasibility study report proposes dividing
response activities at a site into more than one operable
unit, must a separate public comment period be held for""
each operable unit?
For each draft feasibility study, only one public comment
period is necessary, regardless of how many operable
units are proposed as part of the recommended remedial
alternative. In effect, the comment periods for the
operable units are combined; the public still has the
opportunity to comment on each operable unit. No matter
how many feasibility studies are conducted during the
remedial response, however, there must be a three-week
public comment period on each draft feasibility study
report.
3) Does a community relations plan have to be prepared for
each operable unit?
A community relations plan does not need to be prepared
for each operable unit provided the plan covers all
anticipated operable units. The community relations
plan prepared prior to beginning the initial RI/FS
should be revised, however, if unanticipated operable
units are implemented, or if unanticipated HI/PS activi-
ties are initiated for subsequent operable units, during
later stages in the response action.
Addressees
(See Attached List)
-------
OEWER Directive 9230.0-5
Addressees
Director
Waste Management Division
Region I
Director
Office of Emergency & Remedial Response
Region II
Director
Hazardous Waste Management Division
Region III
Director
Air and Waste Management Division
Region IV
Director
Waste Management Division
Region V
Director
Air and Waste Management Division
Region VI
Director
Air and Waste Management Division
Region VII
Director
Air and Waste Management Division
Region VIII
Director
Toxics and Waste Management Division
Region IX
Director
Hazardous Waste Division
Region X
Superfund Community Relations Coordinators, Regions I-X
------- |