United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement (2271 A)
Washington, DC 20460
&EPA cleanupnews
Fall 2001
EPA300-N-01-009
Issue #8
inside
News 2
TIO: The Triad
Approach 4
Superfund Reforms 5
In the Courts: 6
Irvington Tire Fire
Dico/Des Moines TCE
Caldwell Trucking
Bob's Beverage
Deadlines 8
Times Beach Deleted from
National Priorities List
On September 25th, EPA took the
long-awaited step of deleting Times
Beach, Missouri from the Super-
fund National Priorities List of hazardous
waste sites. EPA and the State of Missouri
have determined that the site no longer
poses a significant threat to public health
or the environment and that no further
remedial measures are needed.
Along with Love Canal and the Valley
of the Drums sites, Times Beach cap-
tured the nation's attention in the early
1980s and focused public concern on
environmental matters. Over the past 18
years, all residents and businesses of
Times Beach were permanently relo-
cated, the land was purchased and con-
continued on page 3
CleanupNews is a quarterly
newsletter highlighting
hazardous waste cleanup
cases, policies, settlements,
and technologies.
25 Years of RCRA:
Building on Our Past to Protect Our Future
Twenty-five years ago, hazardous waste was an enigma. We did not know how much waste was pro-
duced or what ultimately happened to it. By the middle of 20th century, the American people stood up
and demanded that something be done about the dangers posed by pollution from industrial waste.
And Congress listened. On October 21,1976, Congress passed the most sweeping legislation on
waste ever enacted: the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
When signing the legislation. President Ford called hazardous waste disposal "one of the highest
priority environmental problems confronting the nation," and tasked EPA with solving the problem. In
the past 25 years, RCRA has made great strides in pollution prevention and waste minimization. Amer-
icans have updated and improved their methods of waste management and are cleaning up past con-
tamination. Today, individuals, organizations, and businesses are not only working to reduce the
amount of waste they generate, but to prevent it altogether. People and businesses are reducing risk
from waste by practicing safer, smarter, and more economical waste management than ever before.
The success we have achieved in the last century is only a springboard to the challenges of the
new century. We must continue our strong commitment to pollution prevention efforts and to intro-
ducing innovation and efficiency into our waste management systems. We must also continue to seek
partnerships with industry, government, and the public. By working together, we will achieve resource
conservation and eliminate threats from waste.
To commemorate RCRA's anniversary, EPA is preparing a report highlighting the successes of
RCRA's protective framework. It acknowledges the vital roles that states, tribes, industry, and com-
munities have played in that success. The report, 25 Years of RCRA: Building on Our Past to Protect
Our Future, will be available in hard copy and on the Office of Solid Waste website
(www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw) in December.
For more information, or to order hard copies of the report, call the RCRA Call Center. Callers within
the Washington Metropolitan Area, call 703-412-9810 or TDD 703-412-3323 (hearing impaired). Long-
distance callers, call 800-424-9346 or TDD 800-553-7672. Address written requests to: RCRA Infor-
mation Center (5305W), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001.
Printed on recycled paper
-------
t
0)
EPA Contributes
Emergency Support
Administrator Christie Whit-
man and employees of the
United States Environmental
Protection Agency have expressed
their deepest condolences to every-
one affected by the terrible tragedy of
September llth. At the request of
FEMA in the aftermath of the attacks,
EPA has worked closely with state,
federal, and local authorities to pro-
vide expertise on cleanup methods for
hazardous materials, as well as to
monitor the presence of contaminants
in samples of ambient air, drinking
water sources, and runoff near the
disaster sites. EPA and OSHA have
been analyzing samples for the pres-
ence of pollutants such as asbestos,
radiation, mercury and other metals,
pesticides, PCBs, or bacteria that
might create health hazards.
While careful not to impede the
search, rescue, and cleanup efforts
at the World Trade Center or the
Pentagon disaster sites, EPAs pri-
mary concern has been to ensure
that rescue workers and the public
are not being exposed to elevated
levels of potentially hazardous conta-
minants in the dust and debris, espe-
cially where practical solutions are
available to reduce exposure. Among
other activities, EPA brought ten
3,000-gallon capacity HEPA (highly
efficient particulate air) filter vac-
uum trucks into lower Manhattan to
help safely clean streets, vehicles,
and buildings of potentially haz-
ardous dust.
OERR's Environmental Response
Team Center continues to support
FEMA New York and the New York
City Emergency Operations Center.
Members of EPAs Chemical Emer-
gency Preparedness and Prevention
Office have assisted FEMA in staffing
the Emergency Support Function
desk, which is responsible for haz-
ardous material issues. EPA has been
tasked to monitor air, debris, and
water for presence of hazardous mate-
rial, help identify personal protection
equipment needed by the emergency
responders, and organize decontami-
nation stations for the emergency
responders. EPA has also been
involved in debris disposal issues.
On the Legislative
Front
Brownfields and MTBE (methyl ter-
tiary butyl ether) have been receiving
attention on Capitol Hill in recent
months. A number of brownfields bills
were introduced in Congress this year.
S. 350, the Brownfields Revitalization
and Environmental Restoration Act of
2001, was introduced in February by
Sen. Lincoln Chafee. It was passed
with an amendment by the Senate on
April 25th by a vote of 99 to 0, and sent
to the House.
H.R 2869, the Small Business Lia-
bility Relief and Brownfields Revital-
ization Act, was introduced in the
House of Representatives on Septem-
ber 10, 2001, by Rep. Paul E. Gillmor
with seven co-sponsors. It would simi-
larly promote the cleanup and reuse of
brownfields, provide financial assis-
tance for brownfields revitalization,
enhance state response programs, and
provide relief for small businesses
from liability under Superfund. The
bill was referred to subcommittees of
the Energy and Commerce Commit-
tee and the Committee on Transporta-
tion and Infrastructure.
On MTBE, the Federal Reformu-
lated Fuels Act of 2001 (S. 950), intro-
duced by Sen. Bob Smith in May 2001,
was approved without amendment by
the Senate Committee on Environ-
ment and Public Works on September
25th. The bill would require EPA to
conduct studies of health problems
related to MTBE. It would authorize
the use of the Leaking Underground
Storage Tank Trust Fund to carry out
corrective actions in cases of MTBE
releases, and to conduct inspections,
issue orders, or bring actions under
the underground storage tank regula-
tion program. The bill would authorize
certain states to impose controls on
any fuel or fuel additive for the pur-
pose of water quality protection, and
would require the EPA Administrator
to ban the use of MTBE in motor fuel
within four years.
USTfields Pilots
On August 23, 2001, Administrator
Whitman announced $4 million in
financial assistance to clean up conta-
mination from leaking underground
storage tanks (USTs) around the
nation. EPA expects to select up to 40
pilot projects to help states and cities
clean up these properties and return
them to productive economic and
public use. Modeled on the success-
ful brownfields program, the new
USTfields program involves aban-
doned or under-used industrial and
commercial properties with per-
ceived or actual contamination from
petroleum from underground stor-
age tanks (which brownfields cannot
address under CERCLA).
Each selected pilot will receive up
to $100,000 in Leaking Underground
Storage Tank Trust Fund monies. The
deadline for submitting proposals for
the USTfields Pilots has been
extended to November 19,2001.
For more information, go to http://
www.epa.gov/oust/ustfield/index.
htm#pilots.
cleanupnews
-------
Times Beach Now a
State Park
continued from page 1
veyed to the State of Missouri, struc-
tures at the site were demolished,
dioxin-contaminated soils were exca-
vated and incinerated, and the site was
restored to a state park.
Background
Times Beach was formerly an incor-
porated city in southwest St. Louis
County, approximately 20 miles
southwest of the City of St. Louis.
The unpaved roadways of Times
Beach were sprayed for dust control
in the early 1970s with dioxin-conta-
minated waste oil.
The presence of dioxin contamina-
tion was initially confirmed by EPA
through sampling conducted in
Then: Times
Beach inciner-
ator in the
mid-1990s...
November 1982. In response to the
discovery of dioxin contamination
and a health advisory issued by the
Centers for Disease Control, EPA
announced the permanent relocation
of the nearly two thousand residents
of Times Beach in February 1983.
The Times Beach site was added to
the NPL later that year.
In 1988, EPA approved a tempo-
rary incinerator to be located at
Times Beach for the treatment of
dioxin-contaminated materials from
Times Beach and other eastern Mis-
souri sites. In 1990, a consent decree
was entered between EPA, the State
of Missouri, and the primary PRP
group.
Under the consent decree, EPA
was responsible for excavation and
transportation of dioxin-contami-
nated soils from eastern Missouri
dioxin sites to Times Beach for incin-
eration. The State was responsible
for long-term management of the
Times Beach site. The settling defen-
dants were responsible for demoli-
tion and disposal of structures and
debris remaining after the perma-
nent relocation, construction of a
ring levee to flood-protect an inciner-
ator subsite, construction of a tempo-
rary incinerator, excavation of conta-
minated soils at Times Beach,
operation of the incinerator, and
restoration of Times Beach upon
completion of response actions.
Full-scale operation of the inciner-
ator between March 1996 and June
1997 treated a total of 265,354 tons of
dioxin-contaminated materials from
27 eastern Missouri dioxin sites,
including 37,234 tons of dioxin-conta-
minated materials from the Times
Beach site itself. Solid treatment
residue from the incineration of
these materials was land disposed
on-site after testing confirmed that
required treatment levels had been
achieved. Site restoration was com-
pleted by the settling defendants in
accordance with a design approved
by the State and EPA
In September 1999, the State of
Missouri announced the opening of
Route 66 State Park, which encom-
passes the former Times Beach site.
The newly created park has been
among the most visited of all state
parks in eastern Missouri.
Times Beach will remain eligible
for Superfund-financed remedial
actions following deletion from the
NPL. In the event that a significant
release of a hazardous substance is
identified at the site, Times Beach can
be restored to the NPL without appli-
cation of the Hazard Ranking System.
For more information, contact Bob
Feild, Remedial Project Manager, EPA
Region 7,913-551-7697.
t
0)
cleanupnews
-------
The Triad Approach to Site Cleanup
By Dan Powell, Deana Crumbling, OSWER/Technology Innovation Office
o
o
o
0)
The Technology Innovation
Office (TIO) of the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER) is supporting a
streamlined approach to the monitor-
ing and measurement activities that
occur throughout the waste site
cleanup process. The support
reflects a growing trend towards
using smarter and faster technolo-
gies and work strategies. TIO is coor-
dinating with offices inside and out-
side OSWER and EPA (DOD, DOE,
states, etc.) to inform regulators,
practitioners, site owners, and others
involved in site cleanup decisions
about the benefits of a streamlined
approach.
The new approach can signifi-
cantly reduce the total cost and time
for site cleanup while providing deci-
sionmakers with better information
on site conditions. The focus is on
aligning the selection of sampling
and analytical methods with the deci-
sions and site objectives they sup-
port. Field analysis and rapid sam-
pling technologies allow users to
actively and economically manage
the major sources of uncertainty in
environmental data, namely, sam-
pling error and sample representa-
tiveness.
Success hinges on
the presence of
an experienced
field team leader
empowered to
"call the shots"..
The trend towards modernization
and streamlining focuses on three
main aspects, thus TIO is referring to
it as the "triad" approach. The three
prongs of the triad are:
• Systematic planning for all site
activities. Rather than relying
on prescriptive, one-size-fits-all
approaches to method selection
and sampling strategies, system-
atic planning requires site deci-
sionmakers to clearly define end
goals for the site and objectives
for data collection. Systematic
planning then involves charting
the most resource-effective
course to reach those end goals.
A team of multi-disciplinary,
The "Triad" Approach Embodies
Concepts Advanced by Other/Past Efforts
1. Performance Based Measurement Systems or PBMS (EPA, Agency-wide effort)
2. Data Quality Objectives Guidance (EPA, Agency-wide)
3. Expedited Site Characterization, Accelerated Site Characterization (ASTM Guide)
4. Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model and Dynamic Field Activities Guidance (EPA,
Superfund Program)
5. Dynamic Work Plans (Tufts University, EPA Region 1 Project)
6. Rapid Site Characterization (Petroleum Industry)
experienced technical staff trans-
lates the project's goals into real-
istic technical objectives.
• "Dynamic" work plans allow pro-
ject teams to make decisions
in the field about how subsequent
site activities will progress. This
approach uses a regulator-
approved decision-tree, and is
supported by the rapid turn-
around of data collected, ana-
lyzed, and interpreted in the field.
Success hinges on the presence
of an experienced field team
leader empowered to "call the
shots" based on the decision logic
developed during the planning
stage. Dynamic work plans allow
users to fully realize the benefits
of real-time data analysis and to
reduce the number of mobiliza-
tions necessary to meet the data
needs of decisionmakers.
• On-site analytical tools, rapid sam-
pling platforms (e.g., direct push
technologies), and on-site data
interpretation and management
are the key technology compo-
nents making dynamic work
plans possible. During the plan-
ning process, the team identifies
the type, rigor, and quantity of
data needed. Those decisions
then guide the design of sam-
pling regimens and the selection
of analytical tools and methods.
The emphasis on aligning meth-
ods and data to the decisions and
objectives they support is essential
to managing uncertainty. It helps
remove biases against new technolo-
gies vs. "approved" approaches,
continued on page 7
cleanupnews
-------
"Foreclosure" Prospective
Purchaser Agreement
EPA has issued an unusual
prospective purchaser agree-
ment (PPA) as part of the
Agency's commitment to protecting
greenfields by removing the liabilities
associated with redeveloping contami-
nated properties. The PPA in question
was for the Center Star Manufacturing
Superfund Site in Oxford, Calhoun
County, Alabama. What made it
unusual was that a mortgage holder
requested the PPA on behalf of an
unknown prospective bidder at a
scheduled foreclosure auction. The
PPA enabled the mortgage holder,
First Commercial Bank, to foreclose
on the site property and protect the
highest bidder at the foreclosure sale
from incurring Superfund liability.
The site is the location of a defunct
fabric processing facility operated by
Center Star Manufacturing, Inc. Oper-
ations ceased in 1996 when the corpo-
ration filed for bankruptcy protection.
Title to the site is currently vested in
the Industrial Development Board of
the City of Oxford (IDE). The IDE
leased the property to Center Star
Manufacturing, Inc. EPA has deter-
mined that the IDE is not a liable party
due to the Lender Liability Exemption.
In 1999, EPA conducted a removal
action at the site in which various
drums containing hazardous sub-
stances, contaminated debris, and
other waste materials were removed.
EPA conducted a preliminary assess-
ment in December 1999, a site investi-
gation in September 2000, and an
expanded site investigation into the
extent of ground water contamination
in early 2001. As of January 12, 2001,
EPA had incurred $188,799.49 in
response costs.
Allocation Pilots Completed
Allocating shares of costs for cleaning up Superfund sites among potentially responsi-
ble parties has long been a source of controversy. A settlement reached recently at the
Whitehouse Oil Pits site in Jacksonville, Florida, marks the successful completion of an
initial round of "allocation pilots."
EPA offered participation in allocation pilots to PRPs at 12 sites beginning in 1995.
The pilots were part of a package of Superfund administrative reforms that EPA was
testing to determine its feasibility and its impact on settlements.
Under the pilot, allocation parties were initially given the opportunity to nominate
additional parties. The parties then selected a neutral "allocator" to conduct a non-bind-
ing, out-of-court process resulting in an allocation report. The allocation report detailed
each allocation party's assignment of shares of responsibility. Parties were offered an
opportunity to settle with EPA based on their allocated share. Under the pilot, EPA was
responsible for 100 percent of the orphan share (i.e., shares of insolvent or defunct par-
ties), as well as the shares of non-settling parties.
For sites that went through the entire process, it took approximately 18-24 months
to complete the complicated settlement negotiations. The most difficult issue was get-
ting the PRPs to agree to perform the response action under a consent decree.
For more information, contact Gary Worthman, EPA/OSRE, 202-564-4296.
The Center Star PPA
The usual PPA process involves an
agreement between EPA and a
known purchaser. However, First
Commercial Bank was in a situation
where the only means of recovering
its security was through the foreclo-
sure process. EPA Region 4 drafted a
PPA, negotiated an appropriate con-
sideration amount (the bank agreed
to reduce the security it received
from the foreclosure funds),
obtained the United States' signa-
ture, and offered the PPA for public
notice and comment in advance of
offering the PPA to the highest bid-
der at the conclusion of the sale.
Notice of the federal Superfund inter-
est and offer of the PPA was placed in
the foreclosure sale notices, and a
copy of the PPA was made available
to the public at the local library.
On June 5, 2001, the EPA staff
attorney attended the foreclosure
auction and prior to the sale,
explained the potential Superfund lia-
bility, the PPA process, the PPA con-
tract terms, and answered questions
posed by the bidders. The property
was purchased by the City of Oxford
for redevelopment. Immediately after
the sale (prior to taking title), the
City of Oxford became a signatory to
the PPA and cut a check to EPA for
$87,500. Absent this innovative PPA,
the bank would not have been able to
successfully foreclose on the prop-
erty and the site would have
remained abandoned and a blight
within the community for years.
For more information, contact
Kathleen Wright, EPA Region 4, 404-
562-9574.
•o
i
0)
Q.
cleanupnews
-------
o
o
0)
£
c
EPA Sets Precedent
in Successfully
Pursuing Generators
of Used Tires at
Irvington
For the first time in the history of
the Superfund program, EPA
has successfully pursued an
enforcement action against generators
of used tires. Each year, EPA and state
agencies expend millions of dollars in
responding to tire fires. Usually, the
owner/operator of the facility is insol-
vent and as a result, the taxpayer bears
the financial burden of cleanup. For
the first time, an EPA enforcement
team has pursued the generators of
the used tires under the theory that
they were arranging for the disposal of
a hazardous substance. The enforce-
ment strategy against the generators
is novel and was developed in Region 4
with the full concurrence of EPA
Headquarters and the Department of
Justice. Other EPA regions and state
agencies have followed this case
closely and are interested in pursuing
similar enforcement activities. The set-
tlement will greatly impact EPAs
approach to enforcement actions at
tire recycling facilities/dumps that
require Superfund response actions.
In 1997, Region 4 responded to a
fire involving 100,000 to 300,000 tires
stockpiled at a site in Irvington,
Alabama. EPA suppressed the fire and
removed thousands of gallons of
pyloric oil runoff from the fire that was
threatening a wildlife sanctuary, incur-
ring approximately $230,000 in
response costs. After investigation,
EPA determined that the owner/oper-
ator was insolvent.
In the past, EPAs cost recovery
efforts at similar sites have been lim-
ited to pursuing owners and operators
who typically had few financial
resources. However, because of recent
rulings in the law and the exclusion of
whole tires under the Superfund Recy-
cling Equity Act, EPA Region 4 and
DOJ decided to pursue the tire genera-
tors at this site. Initially, the major gen-
erators balked, claiming that their dis-
posal of used tires did not constitute
disposal of a CERCLA "hazardous sub-
stance." Region 4 and DOJ persisted,
however, and the tire generators
agreed to settle their liability with EPA
The Region relied on a Second Cir-
cuit case that held that a finished prod-
uct that contained hazardous sub-
stances was hazardous and that the
intervening force of an event such as a
fire that caused the release did not cre-
ate a liability barrier. While the Second
Circuit's holding could be applied to
most consumer products, EPA exer-
cised its enforcement discretion and
has only applied this reasoning to tire
fires where the Agency routinely
expends fund money on large stock-
piles of finished products. This settle-
continued on page 7
In Brief
• Caldwell Trucking PRP Group v. Caldwell Trucking Company: On September
19,2001, the United States filed an amicus brief on behalf of the defendants in this
private party action brought by plaintiff in state court for contribution and related
relief. The United States argued that, because it had entered into a consent decree
resolving defendants' liability for CERCLA cleanup costs at the site and extending to
defendant contribution protection as provided in CERCLA Section 113(f)(2) for all
site-related costs, a suit by plaintiffs for contribution toward cleanup costs and sim-
ilar relief would be proscribed by CERCLA Section 113(f)(2) when and if that consent
decree is entered by the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
Accordingly, the United States asked the state court to stay its proceeding until
the U.S. District Court had an opportunity to decide whether to enter the consent
decree. The United States further argued that, since maintenance of a state court
contribution action directly conflicted with the intent of CERCLA Section 113(f)(2) to
promote settlements by extending contribution protection to settling parties, such
state court action was preempted by CERCLA Section 113(f)(2). (ESX-L-9812, NJ.
Super. Law Div.) Contact: Steve Bolts, EPA/RSD, 202-564-4217.
• Sixth Circuit Holds That Passive Migration of Hazardous Substances Does Not
Constitute Disposal Under CERCLA: On September 4, 2001, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in a private-party contribution action under CERCLA
(Bob's Beverage, Inc. v. Acme, Inc., 2001WL1011894 (6th Cir. 2001)) affirmed a dis-
trict court's decision and held that: (1) a previous owner was not liable for response
costs incurred by the present owner and operator; (2) that the previous owner who
replaced a septic system did not cause the disposal of hazardous waste; and (3)
that passive migration of hazardous substances does not constitute disposal within
the meaning of CERCLA.
The Sixth Circuit stated that under CERCLA a disposal is not the same as a
release; the term release is broader than disposal. According to the Sixth Circuit's
interpretation of CERCLA's provisions, disposal requires evidence of active human
conduct and addresses activity that precedes the entry of a substance into the envi-
ronment. The decision in this case is consistent with the Court's prior decision in
United States v. 150 Acres of Land, 204 F.3d 698 (6th Cir. 2000). Contact: Clarence
E. Featherson, EPA/RSD, 202-564-4234.
cleanupnews
-------
Triad Approach
continued from page 4
reduces confusion (and confusing,
unnecessary data), and decreases
the need for multiple sampling
events.
The results, which TIO is now doc-
umenting in case studies, show faster,
cheaper, yet still protective resolution
of contaminated sites. If used correctly,
innovative rapid-turnaround field ana-
lytical and software tools coupled with
on-site decisionmaking can signifi-
cantly condense a project's overall
budget and lifetime, while increasing
the likelihood that the gathered data
will guide transparent, scientifically
defensible decisions.
EPA, along with a number of other
federal agencies and state organiza-
tions, is accelerating the develop-
ment of policies and information
resources to support site decision-
makers as they shift to newer,
streamlined approaches. An array of
educational, training, and guidance
resources already exists and addi-
tional ones are under development.
Access to these resources is pro-
vided through TIO's Internet site at
http://clu-in.org web site (under
"Site Characterization and Monitor-
ing"). The "Perspectives" area of this
section includes a number of papers
and resources more fully describing
the concepts covered briefly above.
The Superfund program is now
developing guidance in this area as
well (go to http://www.epa.gov/
superfund/programs/dfa).
Updating hazardous waste site
practices to accommodate these new
tools and strategies has broad ramifi-
cations for both practice and policy.
Revising institutional and regulatory
barriers will take time and effort.
Nevertheless, the benefits offered by
"smarter strategies" make the effort
worthwhile.
In the Courts
continued from page 6
ment also enhances environmental
protection by giving notice to
arrangers for tire disposal that there is
potential liability for tire fires and that
they should take precautions to ensure
that the tires are disposed of at respon-
sible and secure facilities.
For more information, contact
Kathleen Wright, Region 4 Assistant
Regional Counsel, 404-562-9574.
Eighth Circuit Affirms
District Court's Award
of Oversight Costs,
Indirect Costs and
Attorney's Fees
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals
has held that the district court did not
err in granting summary judgment to
the United States, awarding it over $4
million in cleanup costs in connection
with the Des Moines TCE site. (United
States v. Dico, Inc., 2001 WL 1094944
(2001))
The defendant, Dico, Inc., argued
that the definitions found in CERCLA
do not permit the recovery of indirect
and oversight costs. Dico relied on the
Third Circuit's decision in U.S. v. Rohm
& Haas (2 E3d 1265 (1993) which held
that the government is not entitled to
recover oversight costs in the context
of a removal action. The Court dis-
agreed and declined to accept the "nar-
row approach" adopted by the Third
Circuit. Rather, the Court was per-
suaded by the Tenth Circuit which
found that Rohm & Haas "departed sig-
nificantly from prior case law that had
construed the cost recovery provisions
of CERCLA broadly." Putting aside the
Rohm & Haas decision, the Court
looked at the broad definition of "reme-
dial action" and concluded that over-
sight activities are included in the defi-
nition and, therefore, are a recoverable
cost under Section 107 (a) of the statute.
Dico also argued that CERCLA
does not authorize the recovery of the
government attorney's fees and even if
it did, the government bears the bur-
den of proving that its attorney fees
are reasonable. The Court rejected
both arguments, finding that the
terms "response," "removal," and
"remedial action" all include the lan-
guage "enforcement activities related
thereto" that allows for the recovery of
attorney's fees. In addition, the Court
noted that the language of CERCLA
creates a conclusive presumption that
all costs incurred by the government
that are not inconsistent with the
National Contingency Plan (NCP) are
reasonable costs. Therefore, the
Court concluded that Dico bears the
burden of proving that the govern-
ment's costs - attorney's fees or other-
wise - are inconsistent with the NCP
Although the Court found "attrac-
tive" the Ninth Circuit's decision in
U.S. v. Chapman (146 E3d 1166
(1998), holding that the United States
is only entitled to "reasonable" attor-
ney's fees), the Court rejected that
court's analysis, noting that all CER-
CLA requires is that response costs
not be inconsistent with the NCP
For more information, contact
David Dowton, EPA 202-5644228.
cleanupnews
-------
0)
0)
•o
November 15,2OO1
Applications for FY 2002 Brownfields
Cleanup and Revolving Loan Fund
Pilots.
Download guidelines from www.epa.gov/
swerosps/bf/applicat.htm#guide.
November 19,2OO1
Applications for USTfields Pilots.
$4 million available for up to 40 projects to
clean up properties with petroleum contam-
ination from leaking USTs. Go to www.epa.
gov/oust/ustfield/index.htm#pilots.
Let CleanupNews Come
to You on E-MAIL!
CleanupNews has been gradually shifting to an elec-
tronic format. Now CleanupNews is being made avail-
able on e-mail to all EPA recipients and others on our
e-mail list. To get CleanupNews via e-mail, please
send your name and e-mail address to Debra Kemp at
dkemp@scicomm.com or fax to 301-652-7001.
CleanupNews is also available on the Web at www.
epa.gov/oeca/osre.
CEPPO Chemical Emergency Preparedness
and Prevention Office
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (Superfund law)
EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community
Right-To-Know Act
FEMA Federal Emergency Management
Administration
MTBE Methyl tertiary butyl ether
NCP National Contingency Plan
NPL National Priorities List (Superfund)
cleanupnews
CleanupNews is a quarterly publication of EPA's
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement, in cooper-
ation with the Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, Office of Underground Storage Tanks,
Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention
Office, and the Technology Innovation Office.
Glossary
OERR
OSHA
PPA
PRP
RCRA
RSD
SREA
TCE
UST
Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response(EPA)
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
Prospective Purchaser Agreement
Potentially Responsible Party
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (hazardous waste)
Regional Support Division (OSRE/EPA)
Superfund Recycling Equity Act
Trichloroethylene
Underground Storage Tank
www. epa.gov/oeca/osre
Rick Popino, Ph.D., editor
EPA Review Board: Rick Popino, Paul Connor,
Karen Ellenberger, Ken Patterson, Helen
DuTeau, Jeff Heimerman, Carole Macko
Cameron
Gilah Langner, writer
Robin Foster, SciComm Inc., designer
To comment on the newsletter, contact Rick Popino at MC-2271A, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street
SW, Washington, DC 20460, e-mail: popino.rick@epa.gov.
For mailing list inquiries, contact Debra Kemp, SciComm Inc., 7735 Old Georgetown Rd,
5th Floor, Bethesda, MD 20814, fax: 301-652-7001, e-mail: dkemp@scicomm.com.
9£-9 'ON
Vd3
QlVd S333 V 39VlSOd
ssvno isau
008$
Bua j
ssamsng lepgjo
3d 'uo^uiqsBAV
(VILZZ)
|Bju9iuuojiAug S9JBJS
------- |