United States
                       Environmental Protection
                       Agency
                                 Office of Site Remediation
                                 Enforcement (2271 A)
                                 Washington, DC 20460
©EPA    cleanupnews

                                         Fall 1999
                                         EPA300-N-99-008
                                         Issue #3
 inside

 Short Takes        2
 U.S..FMC Settle Avtex 3
 Brownfields Summit  4
 Technology Insights   5
 In the Courts       6
 About OUST        8
 New RMP Law      9
 SF Reauthorization   10
 Superfund Relocation
   Policy         11
 Calendar
12
 Cleanup News ;s an occa-
 sional newsletter highlighting
 hazardous waste cleanup
 cases, policies, settlements,
 and technologies.
                  New Initiative  to Restore Super-
                  fund Sites to  Productive  Use
     Speaking at the Avtex Superfund site
     in Front Royal, Virginia on July 23,
     1999, EPA Administrator Carol M.
Browner announced a new pilot program —
the Superfund Redevelopment Initiative —
to help communities restore toxic waste
sites to productive use. Nearly $1 million in
grants will be awarded to 10 communities in
the first round of grants, with about $5 mil-
lion in grants going out by the end of next
year to 50 communities around the country.
  'Through this initiative, we will create
jobs and encourage economic redevelop-
ment in communities that are saddled with
old abandoned hazardous  waste sites,"
said Browner. "We will work cooperatively
with local governments  and businesses to
clean up old toxic waste sites and trans-
form them into new parks, neighborhoods,
or thriving commercial  districts." The ini-
tiative aims to encourage development on
existing industrial sites rather than in un-
developed areas. It is designed to em-
power states, local government and com-
munities  to   develop  public/private
partnerships that restore abandoned sites
to new uses, thereby increasing property
values, stimulating tax revenues, and revi-
talizing communities.
  One pilot site is the  Escambia Treating
Company in Pensacola, Florida — a 26-
acre abandoned wood preserving facility.
During its period of operation, from 1942
to 1982, excess wood preservative was al-
lowed to drain from the treated products
along drip tracks before on-site storage.
Soils at the site are  contaminated with
dioxin and benzo(a)pyrene. The site was
placed on the NPL in  1994 and EPA has
excavated about 225,000 cubic yards of
contaminated  materials that are now
                 continued on page 7
                                  Love Canal Cleanup  Completed
                       After 21 years of cleanup work, in
                       September 1999 EPA completed
                       all construction activities at the
                  Love Canal site in New York State. 'The re-
                  mediation is in place.  Homes in the Love
                  Canal neighborhood have been rehabili-
                  tated and more than two hundred families
                  have moved back into this revitalized area
                  which has been more  closely monitored
                  than probably any other area in the coun-
                  try for environmental safety," said Damian
                  Duda, EPAs Project Manager for the site.
                                   Love Canal played a key role in the en-
                                actment of the original Superfund legisla-
                                tion. Located in the southeast corner of
                                the City of Niagara Falls, approximately
                                70,000 people live within three miles of the
                                site, originally built as a channel  or canal
                                by William T Love in the late 1800s for a
                                proposed hydroelectric power project. Be-
                                tween 1942 and 1952, the Hooker Chemi-
                                cals & Plastics Corp. (now Occidental
                                Chemical Corporation) disposed of ap-
                                                 continued on page 2
                                                                                    Printed on recycled paper

-------
 0)
•c
 o
 0)
 Love Canal Cleanup
 Completed
 continued from page 1

proximately 22,000 tons of drummed
and liquid chemical wastes in the canal,
turning it into a landfill.
  After two Presidential Declarations
of Emergency,  several evacuations,
years of investigation and remediation,
and a five-volume habitability study, the
site is ready for rehabilitiation. Numer-
ous remedial activities have taken place
over the period, culminating in the treat-
ment and disposal of sewer and creek
sediments in 1998-99. The state agency
in charge of revitalizing the Love Canal
area has sold 239  homes in the areas
slated for residential use and has estab-
lished a master plan for the areas slated
for commercial/industrial use. An ex-
tensive  array of nearly 200 monitoring
wells currently exists around the con-
tainment area indicate that the contain-
ment system is working effectively. On-
going maintenance and monitoring will
continue at the site, and a five-year re-
view  of the  site will be  conducted by
September 2004. For more information,
contact Damian Duda at 212-637-4269.
                                                Love Canal site in 1993. Leachate treatment facility is to the right of the containment
                                                area, Niagara River at the top.
                                                ATSDR Public Health
                                                Assessments
                                                     The ATSDR  (Agency for Toxic
                                                     Substances and Disease Reg-
                                                     istry) issued public health assess-
                                                ments between April 1 and June  30,
                                                1999 for 18 sites (see below) that  are
                                                listed or proposed for inclusion on  the
                                                National Priorities List At some of these
                                                sites, the assessments were prepared in
                                                response to requests from the public.
                                                  Completed public  health assess-
                                                ments and addenda are  available  for
                                                public inspection at the  Division of
Health Assessment and Consultation,
ATSDR, Building 33, Executive Park
Drive, Atlanta, Georgia (not a mailing
address), between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday except legal
holidays. The completed public health
assessments are also available by mail
through the U.S. Department of Com-
merce, National Technical Information
Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, Virginia 22161, or by tele-
phone at 703-605-6000. For more infor-
mation, contact  Robert C. Williams,
ATSDR, 404-639-0610.
              FY99  Shows Significant Accomplishments
                      ore  Superfund sites have
                      been cleaned up in the past
                      five years than in all prior
             years of the program combined. As of
             October 21, 1999, EPA reports the
             following achievements:
             •  91% of sites on the final Super-
                fund National Priorities List (1,289
                out of 1,412) are either undergoing
                cleanup construction (remedial or
                removal), are completed, or have
                been deleted.
             •  670 Superfund sites have had  all
                cleanup construction  completed
                (48% of sites on the final NPL).
                                      443  (438 Final/5 Proposed) Su-
                                      perfund sites (31% of sites on the
                                      final NPL) have cleanup construc-
                                      tion underway. An additional 197
                                      (172  Final/25 Proposed)  sites
   have had or are undergoing a re-
   moval cleanup action (12% of sites
   on the final NPL).
•  Over 1,000 sites  have all final
   cleanup plans approved.
•  Over 5,900 removal actions have
   been  taken at hazardous waste
   sites to immediately reduce the
   threat to public health and the en-
   vironment.
•  More than 31,700 sites  have
   been removed from the CERCLIS
   waste site list to help promote the
   economic redevelopment of these
   properties.
         Cleanup News

-------
 U.S.,  FMC  Settle AVTEX
 Fibers  Lawsuit  for  $63  Million
 Cleanup  Paves the Way for Community Redevelopment
     FMC Corporation will clean up
     one of Virginia's largest Super-
     fund sites under a consent de-
cree entered on October 21,1999. The
Avtex Fibers Superfund site in Front
Royal, VA, will undergo a cleanup pro-
ject estimated at $63 million, and FMC
also will reimburse the EPA $9.1 mil-
lion for its past costs associated with
the property. The site is located in the
foothills of the  Blue Ridge Mountains.
   'This  agreement  to  clean  up
blighted property on the banks of the
Shenandoah River is a terrific example
of how the Superfund program works
effectively now to restore  contami-
nated land," said Lois Schiffer, Assis-
tant Attorney General for the Environ-
ment and Natural Resources Division.
   Under the oversight of EPA and the
Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality, FMC will be responsible for re-
mediation at the 440-acre site, consis-
tent with  redevelopment plans by the
Town of Front Royal  and Warren
County. The  Avtex facility manufac-
tured synthetic fibers for  49 years.
FMC operated the plant from 1963 until
1976. The facility, built by the American
Viscose Corporation in the 1930s, sup-
plied material to the U.S. Armed Forces
during World War II and for many years
was the largest rayon manufacturer in
the United States. The last owner,
Avtex Fibers-Front Royal, closed the fa-
cility in  1989 after being cited for more
than 2,000 violations of Virginia envi-
ronmental laws, primarily associated
with wastewater discharges into the
Shenandoah River.
   Since the site was listed in 1986 on
the National Priorities List, EPA has
dismantled more than 740,000 square
feet of building space at the site. FMC
has spent an estimated $20 million on
cleanup  activities, which  addressed
water quality degradation, removed
tons of hazardous substances, and de-
contaminated buildings. As part of the
current cleanup  plan, FMC will  ad-
dress the remaining building deconta-
mination and demolition issues; dis-
pose of demolition debris, sludge,
liquids and other wastes;  remove
above-ground and underground tanks;
remove hazardous substances in cer-
tain  building  basements;  continue
waste water treatment; control erosion
and  sedimentation  on the  site; and
clean up some 220 acres of waste la-
goons, basins and waste disposal units.
   To settle prior lawsuits brought by
FMC, a number of federal agencies
agreed to pay FMC about one-third of
its cleanup costs. The government's li-
ability is associated with its control of
rayon manufacturing  operations dur-
ing World War II and production of
specialized fibers for aerospace appli-
cations through the 1970s and '80s.
  Avtex is one of the pilots for EPA's
"Superfund Redevelopment Initiative"
(see article on page 1). Through the
resolution of the Avtex Fibers Bank-
ruptcy  (expected by 12/31/99),  the
local Economic Development Author-
ity will receive title to the Avtex Fibers
Site. A Prospective  Purchaser Agree-
ment is being negotiated with  the
town and  county  to  coincide with
transfer of the property to the locali-
ties, eventually making the entire  site
available for redevelopment.
  "We're pleased that this settlement
will enable EPA and FMC to  focus
only on cleaning up the entire site,  and
not on the courtroom," said EPA Re-
gional Administrator W Michael Mc-
Cabe.  "A successful cleanup will re-
move this  land from the  Superfund
priority list and return it to the com-
munity for commercial, recreational,
and conservancy uses."
  For  more  information,  contact
Meredith McLean, 202-564-4216.
                                                                           i
                                                                           o>
                                                                                              Cleanup News 3

-------
     Showcase
     Communities Share
     Successful Models
      *4\/«n  October  18-20,  1999,  16
     ^   ^
     \f '^Brownfields  Showcase  Com-
      *-"t  ' * munities  and 90 federal offi-
     cials shared models of successful local-
     federal  brownfields collaboration at
     the second  Brownfields  Showcase
     Community Summit. Hosted by the
     National Association of Local Govern-
     ment Environmental Professionals, the
     summit featured  EPA Administrator
     Carol Browner, representatives from
     20 federal agencies, and the mayors of
East Palo Alto, CA and Stamford, CT.
   Brownfields are abandoned, idled,
or under-used industrial and commer-
cial facilities where expansion or rede-
velopment is  complicated by  real or
perceived  environmental  contamina-
tion. The 16 Showcase  Communities
are: Baltimore, MD; Chicago, IL; Dal-
las, TX; East Palo Alto, CA; Eastward
Ho!, FL; Glen Cove, NY; Kansas City,
KS/MO;  Los Angeles, CA  Lowell,
MA  Portland,  OR;  Providence, RI;
Saint Paul, MN; Salt  Lake City, UT;
Seattle/King  County,  WA; Stamford,
CT; and Trenton, NJ.
   The summit highlighted some of the
effective partnerships  the Showcase
Communities are developing with par-
ticipating federal agencies.  For exam-
ple,  Kansas  City  has  worked  exten-
sively  with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers  and received planning, engi-
neering, and technical assistance  in
support of the Riverfront Heritage Trail
project. The U.S.  Department  of En-
ergy designated the City  of Chicago a
Brightfields pilot and awarded $200,000
in technical assistance  to locate solar
collecting stations on brownfields.

                  continued on page 5
  first Brownfields Revolving Loan Issued. Although several dozen
  cities have been awarded Superfund money to set up revolving loan
  funds for brownfield redevelopment, cities have found it difficult to
  actually issue loans. In October 1999, though, Stamford,Connecti-
  cut awarded the first loan made in the nation under EPA's Brown-
  fields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund (BCRLF) program to help clean
  up a Stamford Harbor waterfront property. The $250,000 loan was
  awarded to Southfield Associates, LLC, a real estate developer, for
  cleanup of the site. The 15.1 acre project will be redeveloped into a
  residential community, including 320 housing units, a marina facil-
  ity, and a boardwalk system.
     "Private development companies have a key role in addressing
  the brownfields challenges within our communities," said Seth We-
  instein, Managing Partner of Southfield Associates and Chairman of
  Clearview Investment Management. "I have been very pleased to
  work effectively with the City of Stamford and the U.S. Environmen-
  tal Protection Agency to  clean up one of the key  brownfields sites
  on the Stamford Waterfront."
     Stamford was selected as a BCRLF pilot in September 1999. EPA
  provided the city with $500,000 to capitalize its revolving loan fund
  to leverage funds to clean up three major sites in its South End and
  Waterside neighborhoods. For more information,  contact  Sandy
  Pennies with the City of Stamford at 203-977-4190, or Barbara Bas-
  suener with EPA at 202-260-9347.
  FY2000  Pilots. EPA is  accepting proposals  for  50 new National
  Brownfields Assessment Pilots, each funded up to $200,000 over two
  years. An additional $50,000 may be awarded to assess contamina-
  tion if the brownfield will be used for green space purposes. All ap-
  plications must be postmarked no later than Feb.16,2000. Copies of
  the application package  can be obtained from 1-800-424-9346 or
  703-412-9810, or downloaded at: http://www.epa.gov/ brownfields.
  CUED Study Yields Brownfields Cost Data. EPA's brownfields pro-
  gram has been criticized by Congress for not producing measurable
                  results. Now a study of 107 completed brownfields redevelopment
                  projects conducted by the Council for Urban Economic Development
                  (CUED) has come up with hard numbers on the program's costs,
                  funding sources, and demographics. The study found that the me-
                  dian amount of private funds leveraged per public dollar spent is
                  $2.48. The median remediation cost per acre was $56,945, with the
                  cost per square foot running at $4.46. Within a one-mile radius of
                  the brownfields sites, the residents were 35%  minority (compared
                  to the national average of 24%), and 25% below the poverty level
                  (twice the national average of 12.6%), indicating that the sites are
                  indeed serving environmental justice objectives. To order the study,
                  contact CUED at 202-223-4735 or http:// www.cued.org.
                  Environmental Justice Complaints. EPA recently conducted  six
                  case studies to determine whether the redevelopment of brownfields
                  have been impeded by Title VI environmental justice complaints and
                  whether these complaints are deterring businesses from redevelop-
                  ing brownfields. The study showed that community residents were
                  not likely to file Title VI complaints because they were actively  in-
                  volved in the redevelopment process and could identify and address
                  their concerns; and residents were more interested in the economic
                  benefit. Also, most brownfield sites did not require environmental per-
                  mits.therefore limiting  the chance of a Title VI complaint being filed.
                  (Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, a person can file a complaint al-
                  leging discriminatory environmental and health effects from actions
                  taken  by  recipients of EPA financial  assistance, including environ-
                  mental (pollution control)  permits.) Copies of the case studies can be
                  accessed at http://www.epa.gov/brownfields or by calling the hotline
                  at 1-800-424-9346.

                  Don't miss Brownfields '99! on December  6-8 in Dallas, TX!
                  For information on the conference or other brownfields topics,
                  go to: http://www.epa.gov/brownfields.
Cleanup News

-------
Annual Treatment
Technology Report
Available
   nformation about treatment tech-
   nologies being used at more than
	900 hazardous waste sites around
the United  States is available in a re-
port issued in June 1999, Treatment
Technologies for Site Cleanup Annual
Status Report - 9th Edition (#EPA-542-
R99-001). This year's report includes a
broad range  of treatment technolo-
gies, such as control technologies and
innovative  groundwater  treatment
technologies being used at Superfund
sites, RCRA corrective action  sites,
and Departments of Defense and En-
ergy sites.  The report updates pro-
jects included in the 8th edition, and
information on projects derived from
79 Records of Decision signed in 1996
and 1997. It also now  includes infor-
mation on 217 incineration and solidi-
fication/stabilization projects not pre-
viously  covered.  For  the   most
frequently selected technologies, the
report analyzes  selection trends over
time, contaminant groups addressed,
quantities of soil treated, and project
implementation status.
   Detailed project information  is now
available in a new searchable elec-
tronic database, EPA REACH IT sys-
tem,  at  http://www.epareachit.org.
The report also is available electroni-
cally at http://clu-in.org or can be or-
dered by calling the EPA National Ser-
vice   Center   for   Environmental
Publications at 1-800-490-9198.


Innovative Remediation
and Site Characteriza-
tion Technologies
Resources
This revised CD-ROM contains many
new  publications, easy access to the
new EPA REACH IT database, and the
ability to do simple searches. The re-
sources on this CD can help federal,
state, and private-sector site managers
evaluate alternatives among innovative
technologies for site assessment and
cleanup. The ability to gain access to
resources that provide  information
about innovative site  characterization
and remediation technologies will in-
crease understanding  of those tech-
nologies  and of the cost and perfor-
mance factors related  to them. Such
understanding is essential to the con-
sideration of those technologies for
use in addressing contamination at
hazardous waste sites.
   The new CD should be available in
late November.  To  order a copy, call
NSCEP 1-800-490-9198  and request
document number 542-C-99-001.


EPA and DoD Agree to
Evaluate New Environ-
mental Technologies
In July, EPA and the Department of De-
fense signed an agreement to collabo-
rate on testing new commercial-ready
environmental technologies. EPA and
DoD are now joining forces to verify
technologies through EPA's Environ-
mental Technology  Verification pro-
gram (ETV) and DoD's Environmental
Security Technology Certification pro-
gram. This will allow companies that
develop new pollution prevention, con-
trol, and monitoring technologies to ob-
tain objective third-party testing and
will help superior technologies pene-
trate markets of interest to  both EPA
and DoD.  After the technology  is
tested, the companies will receive a ver-
ification report that  they can use  in
marketing their products. Results  of
the testing will also be made available
on the Internet. This agreement will
save time and expense for both agen-
cies, while supplying the public with in-
formation on new technologies which
is currently unavailable. More informa-
tion on this  program  is  found  at:
http://www.epa. gov/etv.
BROWNFIELDS
continued from page 4

   A number of communities are mov-
ing rapidly  on  their redevelopment
goals. In Salt Lake City, Utah, an 18-acre
railyard in the center of the District has
been purchased by Salt Lake City for
the development of an  Intermodal
Transportation Hub to serve Amtrak,
Greyhound, City bus, future light rail
and future commuter rail. Amtrak has
already relocated to the new site. Forty
million dollars in funding for this pro-
ject was authorized in TEA-21. The De-
partment of Transportation's  recent
policy  allowing federal funding to be
used, on a site-specific basis, at proper-
ties with environmental contamination,
was instrumental in making this project
possible. Another  30-acre railyard be-
hind the historic Union Pacific Depot
Gateway District has been sold to a pri-
vate developer for a $250 million mixed-
use development.  This project  is ex-
pected to create  7,300 to 10,000 new
jobs. Construction of the first phase
will begin in the summer of 1999 and is
scheduled for completion in 2001.
   The summit identified numerous
obstacles that showcase  communities
have encountered, including lack  of
awareness of the benefits  of brown-
fields development, the need for ex-
tensive  time  and coordination with
each constituency group, and financ-
ing issues, including the lack of gap
funding  and the scarcity of  local
matching resources. In addition, gov-
ernment regulations on the  use of fed-
eral  funds  (e.g.,  Superfund monies
cannot be used on petroleum contami-
nation) limit flexibility.
   For more information on the sum-
mit, contact NALGEP at 202-638-6254.

                         Cleanup News

-------
     Findett Corporation:
     U.S. District Court
     Upholds  EPAs Annual
     Allocation Costs
     [United States v. Findett Corp.,
     No. 4:97-CV-1557-CDP(ED.
     Mo., Sept. 15, 1999)]
     !   V .n September 15, 1999, the
       I   | United States District Court
     •:====='' for the Eastern District of Mis-
     souri filed a memorandum and order
     granting the United States' motions
     for summary judgment on CERCLA li-
     ability and recovery of response costs
     against  Findett Corporation.  The
     court  held that Findett was a liable
     party  at the Findett/Hayford  Bridge
     Site  and  that  CERCLA's six-year
     statute of limitations did not bar the
     United States' action. The court also
     found that the  government was enti-
     tled to recover all of its response costs
     (including the  costs of non-site-spe-
     cific response activities of contractors,
     i.e., annual allocation costs).
       The site is located in St. Charles,
     Missouri  and   for over  ten years
     housed a recycling operation owned
     by Findett. Operations ceased in 1976.
     In the early eighties, EPA began an in-
     vestigation and determined that the
     site was contaminated with PCBs and
     volatile  organic  compounds,  sub-
     stances disposed of by Findett in its re-
     cycling operations.  Findett  entered
     into a consent  decree for cleanup of
     the site in May 1990 and agreed to pay
     EPA's oversight costs. At that time,
     however,  the United States reserved
     its right to seek recovery of all other
     past and future  costs incurred at the
     site.
       In  1994, an  existing  shareholder
     bought all of Fmdett's shares and ac-
     quired a 100 percent ownership inter-
     est. On July 25,1997, the United States
     brought an action for recovery of its
     past and  future response costs, and
subsequently filed motions for sum-
mary judgment on liability and recov-
ery of response costs. In response,
Findett argued that:  (1) the govern-
ment's liability claim was  barred by
CERCLA's  six-year statute  of  limita-
tions; (2) it was no longer a liable party
and/or a third party was liable for the
United States' response costs; and (3)
the government's costs were  inade-
quately documented and inconsistent
with the  National Contingency Plan
because the United States failed to fol-
low the NCP and a Superfund finan-
cial management directive.
   Findett  argued that the  United
States'  cost   recovery  action  was
barred by  the statute  of  limitations
under Section 113 (g) (2) (B)  of CER-
CLA This  section requires the gov-
ernment to file an "initial" action for
recovery of costs no later than  six
years after the initiation of physical on-
site construction. Findett claimed the
entry of the 1990 consent decree was
not an "initial" action because Section
113(g) (2) (B) required any such action
to include a declaratory judgment on
liability for future response  costs or
damages. Because the  court did not
enter a declaratory judgment when
the consent decree was entered, it
could not be an "initial" action. Thus,
the United States "initial" action was
brought in July 1997 and was too late.
   The district court  disagreed.  It
stated  that the purpose  of  the lan-
guage in Section 113 (g) (2) (B) was to
avoid the  need to relitigate liability
questions  and did not  mandate  that
every "initial" action include a declara-
tory judgment. Therefore, the court
held that the entry of the consent de-
cree in 1990 was an "initial"  action
under Section 113 (g) (2) (B) and  that
the 1997 cost  recovery action  was a
"subsequent action" and was not time
barred.
   Findett also argued that it was no
longer a liable party after a share-
holder purchased all of its stock. The
court again  disagreed  and held that
the successor cases cited by Findett
were inapposite because  in this case
the shareholder  had purchased with
knowledge of the environmental cont-
amination at the site. Thus, Findett re-
tained its liability. Though Findett also
claimed it had a third party defense,
the court determined that Findett did
not prove  the release was caused
"solely" by a third party.
   The court also granted the United
States' motion to recover $3,293,909 in
past response costs.  Findett had ar-
gued that most of these costs were not
recoverable because the government
had failed to follow an EPA directive,
"Financial Management of the Super-
fund   Program"  (EPA  Directive
2550D). On  summary judgment, the
court held that Section 107 (a)'s  lan-
guage limited Findett's defenses, stat-
ing, "even assuming the government
failed to comply  with the EPA Direc-
tive 2550D, that failure does not bar its
recovery in this  action." The  court
also found  that  the government's
costs were not inconsistent with the
NCP  because it provided detailed
costs summaries and related affidavits
to support its costs.
   In upholding  EPA's annual alloca-
tion costs, the court explained:
   Through  the annual allocation
   process, a contractor who works on
   multiple sites under a single con-
   tract with the EPA allocates to  a
   given  site the  costs of a non-site-
   specific response activities that are
   nevertheless necessary to support
   its site-specific response actions
   (e.g., rent on a regional office from
   which a contractor oversees work
   at several sites). Allocation to a par-
   ticular site is made on the basis of
   the ratio of that site's direct costs to
   the total cost of all site and non-site
Cleanup News

-------
   activities. By totaling the  site-spe-
   cific costs with the allocated non-
   site specific costs, the government
   endeavors to develop the real total
   cost of the site work performed by
   the contractor.
Because  the government offered  a
thorough and detailed explanation of
its contractor allocation process, the
court concluded  that inclusion  of
these costs was proper. Contacts: Ben
Lammie, OSRE, 202-564-7126; Audrey
Asher, EPA Region 7, 913-551-7255.

Keystone Sanitation
Landfill: Court
Enters  De Micromis
Settlements.

[United States v. Keystone
Sanitation Co.etal., Civ No.
1:CV-93-1482]
On July  28, 1999,  Judge Sylvia H.
Rambo granted the United States' mo-
tions to enter three "de micromis" con-
sent decrees. The first consent decree
involved 95 "de micromis" parties and
was lodged with the court on April 5,
1996. A second consent decree, involv-
ing 72 de micromis parties, was lodged
with the court on May 23, 1996, and a
third consent decree, involving 28 de
micromis parties, was lodged  on No-
vember 24,1998. This last consent de-
cree was unopposed by the de mctximus
defendants. The de  micromis parties
resolved their Superfund liability with
nominal $1.00 settlements. These par-
ties were all brought into the litigation
by other defendants, and none were
sued by the United States. Most of the
de micromis settlers are small  busi-
nesses — including apartment build-
ings, pizza shops, and theaters — that
could not afford the  legal expenses of
protracted Superfund litigation.
   The Keystone Sanitation Landfill is
located on a 40-acre property in Union
Township, Adams County, Pennsylva-
nia It accepted municipal, industrial
and construction debris from 1966 to
1990. The landfill is located in an area of
hilly terrain above fractured bedrock.
Leachate from the  landfill has contami-
nated the  local aquifer, which  is  a
source of drinking water in the area
   Judge Rambo ruled that EPA has
the statutory authority  pursuant  to
Section 122 (g) of CERCLA to define a
de minimis party's eligibility on a case-
by-case basis. The  court noted that the
United States had reasonably deter-
mined a 0.1% volumetric cut-off in ac-
cordance  with  EPA's  1993  de  mi-
cromis policy and had ensured that
only the  smallest amounts  of  haz-
ardous substances could be  consid-
ered. In the agreement, EPA had used
a maximum limit of 55 gallons or 100
pounds of hazardous  substances as a
cut-off. The court also cited the gov-
ernment's use of  questionnaires and
certifications  to determine a party's
contribution to the site.  It noted the
United States had conducted addi-
tional investigations  and had cross-
checked the certification with existing
information. It also noted that the re-
opener provision in the agreements al-
lowed the United  States to reopen a
settlement if information is discovered
that a party's certification was false or
that it no longer qualifies for  de mi-
cromis status. The court stated it was
satisfied that the de micromis settle-
ments met the statutory requirements
of CERCLA SARA and the case law.
  The Keystone  Sanitation  Landfill
has been the subject of a large amount
of publicity both in the national new
media (CBS' 60 Minutes)  and in Con-
gress during the Superfund reautho-
rization hearings.  With the de mi-
cromis settlements being entered  by
the court, the United States has re-
duced transaction  costs and obtained
finality for the truly small waste con-
tributors at the site.
   Contacts: Mary Rugala, EPA Re-
gion 3,  215-814-2686; Carolyn  Lane-
Wenner, OSRE, 703-242-9647.
Superfund
Redevelopment
continued from page 1

being stored at the site under secure
cover. The site may be redeveloped as
a commercial, light industrial, and/or
a commerce center.
   Other pilot sites include: Pownal
Tannery, Pownal, VT; Roebling Steel,
Roebling, NJ; Avtex  Fibers, Front
Royal, VA; Tar Lake, Mancelona, MI;
Many Diversified Interests, Houston,
TX; National Mine Tailings, Park Hills,
MO; Midvale Slag, Midvale, UT; Fron-
tier  Fertilizer, Davis,  CA  and Mc-
Cormick and Baxter Creosoting Com-
pany, Portland, OR
   Each community will receive up to
$100,000 in the form of a cooperative
agreement with the local government
or a comparable level of support from
private responsible parties, to conduct
reuse assessments and public outreach
to help determine the likely future use
of the site. The national focus on rede-
veloping Superfund sites builds on the
success   the   Administration  has
achieved in its Brownfields Economic
Redevelopment Initiative and relies on
many of the tools that have been devel-
oped over the last six years under the
Superfund Administrative Reforms.
   For more information about the ini-
tiative,  visit EPA's  web page at:
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/pro-
grams/recycle/index.htm or call the
Superfund hotline at 1-800-424-9346 or
703-412-9810.
                                                                                                    Cleanup News

-------
          eaking underground storage
          tanks  (USTs)  can  threaten
          human health and the environ-
    ment,  especially by  contaminating
    groundwater. About half of the U.S.
    population depends on  groundwater
    as a source of drinking water. In 1984,
    Congress responded to the increasing
    threat to groundwater posed by leak-
    ing USTs by adding Subtitle I to the
    Resource Conservation and Recovery
    Act (RCRA). Subtitle I required EPA to
    develop a comprehensive  regulatory
    program for USTs. EPAs Office of Un-
    derground  Storage Tanks  (OUST)
    was established to carry out those
    Congressional mandates.
       In 1988, EPA issued regulations
    setting minimum standards for new
    USTs installed after  December 22,
    1988 and requiring owners of existing
    substandard USTs to upgrade, re-
    place, or close them by December 22,
    1998. In addition to compliance with
    the preventive requirements for spill,
    overfill, and corrosion protection, all
    UST sites must meet requirements for
    release detection, notification, installa-
    tion, corrective action, reporting, and
    recordkeeping.
       Early in the underground storage
    tank program, EPA recognized that,
    because of the large size and great di-
versity of the regulated community,
state and local governments were in
the best position to oversee USTs.
Subtitle I of RCRA allows  state  UST
programs approved by EPA to operate
in lieu of the federal program, and EPA
sets objectives for state programs to
meet. As of September 1999,28 states,
the District of Columbia, and Puerto
Rico have received final state program
approval to operate the  UST program
in lieu of the federal program.
   As of April 1999, more than 824,000
active USTs are regulated by the federal
UST  requirements,  while  approxi-
mately 1.3  million substandard USTs
have been closed. An underground stor-
age tank system is a tank and any un-
derground piping connected to the tank
that has at least 10 percent  of its com-
bined volume underground. Federal
UST requirements apply only to tanks
storing  petroleum and certain  haz-
ardous substances. Approximately half
of USTs are owned by marketers who
sell gasoline, while the remaining USTs
are owned by noncommercial entities,
such as local  governments, largely to
provide fuel for service vehicles.
   OUST estimates  that, as of April
1999, over 80 percent of USTs met the
preventive requirements for spill, over-
fill, and corrosion protection. Compli-
ance rates  have risen from about 60
percent in November 1998  to the cur-
rent level, and all indicators show that
compliance continues  to  improve.
However, EPA still has more work to
do to ensure  that all owners comply
with the technical requirements,  in-
cluding leak detection requirements.
For example,  EPA is concerned  that,
although owners installed leak detec-
tion equipment on their tanks, a signif-
icant percentage of leak detection sys-
tems   may  not  be   operated   or
maintained properly.  Nevertheless,
owners and operators and  those non-
marketers  who are  responsible for
UST  sites should  be prepared  to
demonstrate  compliance with state
and federal UST requirements or risk
the likelihood that their UST sites may
be found to be in violation and subject
to potentially costly penalty fines — or
in some states, non-delivery of fuel.
   Congress created the Leaking Un-
derground Storage Tank  (LUST)
Trust Fund in 1986 by amending Sub-
title I of RCRA The Trust Fund, which
OUST administers,  provides  money
for overseeing corrective action taken
by a  responsible party who is  the
owner or operator of the leaking UST.
The  Fund also provides money for
cleanups at UST sites where the owner
or operator is unknown, unwilling, or
unable to  respond,  or which require
emergency action.
  When releases of product do occur,
the UST regulations require  owners
and operators to report the release, re-
move the source, investigate the extent
of the contamination, and clean up the
soil and groundwater. As of April 1999,
385,927 releases have been confirmed;
327,210 cleanups have been initiated;
and 211,637 cleanups have been com-
pleted. However, there is still more
work to be done in  the corrective ac-
tion   area. Approximately  170,000
cleanups have not yet been completed,
and EPA  estimates  that as many as
80,000 additional releases may be con-
firmed  before  2005. Priorities  for
OUSTs efforts over the next few years
are: evaluating UST systems; improv-
ing operation and maintenance of UST
systems; carrying out and overseeing
corrective  actions; and implementing
the UST program in  Indian country.
   For more  information about  the
UST program, refer  to the OUST web
site at http://www.epa.gov/OUST/.
The   RCRA/Superfund   Hotline  at
1-800-424-9346 can provide free compli-
ance assistance  materials  and  answer
questions about the UST program.
Cleanup News

-------
New Law Requires
RMP Facilities To Hold
Public Meetings
;">. '•; n Aug. 5,1999, President Clin-
[    |   ton signed the Chemical Safety
 •./"/y Information, Site Security and
Fuels Regulatory Relief Act. This law
primarily concerns the public  avail-
ability  of the Off-Site Consequence
Analysis (OCA)  sections of the Risk
Management Plans submitted by com-
panies under Section  112(r)  of the
Clean Air Act. Such companies include
chemical plants, petroleum refineries,
paper mills, water treatment plants,
warehouses, and food businesses with
large ammonia refrigeration systems.
OCA information addresses the worst
possible accident that could occur at a
facility if all safety systems failed.
   The new law prohibits government
officials from disclosing to the public
the off-site analyses sections of the Risk
Management Plans until at least Aug. 5,
2000. By that date, the federal govern-
ment  must complete an  assessment
and rulemaking to  address future pub-
lic availability of those materials.
   However, the law does not bar facil-
ities from sharing the OCA data with
the public.  Moreover, approximately
95% of the 14,800 facilities that  re-
ported RMP information by the June
21 deadline must provide the public
with at least a summary of that infor-
mation. A public meeting must be
held by  Feb.  1, 2000. Small busi-
nesses that qualify as a small business
stationary source under the Clean Air
Act's Section 507 (c) technical assis-
tance program may post a summary of
their OCA information instead of hold-
ing a public meeting.
   Reasonable  notice  to the  public
must be given before the meeting is
held. At  the meeting, facilities must
talk about the local implications of the
plan submitted by the facility,  includ-
ing a summary of the OCA portion of
the plan. The small percentage of facil-
ities (5%)  that have no potential for off-
site consequences are not required to
host a meeting. Facilities that hosted
meetings between Aug. 5,  1998, and
Aug. 5, 1999, get credit for that meet-
ing if it was publicly advertised and if
the local impact of a worst-case acci-
dent was discussed
   By June 5, 2000, the owner or oper-
ator of the facility must send the FBI a
certification statement that the public
meeting has been held, or the OCA
summary posted. The FBI will docu-
ment receipt, and provide the docu-
mentation to the EPA
   Many plant managers and business
owners  say  that  sharing RMP data
openly has been a springboard to a bet-
ter relationship with their community.
The public meeting  gives these busi-
nesses an opportunity to get acquainted
with their Local  Emergency Planning
Committees, fire chiefs, or elected local
officials. Other facilities have chosen dif-
ferent forums,  such as the PTA  and
local school board meetings, to talk to
the public about their RMPs.
   For more information, tap into EPAs
Chemical  Emergency  Preparedness
and Prevention  Office  at   http://
www.epa. gov/ceppo. RMPs can be ac-
cessed at http://www.epa.gov/enviro.
Technical Outreach
Services for Communi-
ties Proves Its Worth
 ]] he 1999 Technical  Outreach
 |   j Services   for   Communities
 1	!  (TOSC)  National  Conference
and Training was held in Potomac,
Maryland, on September 27-29,1999,
bringing together university represen-
tatives, EPA community involvement
staff and citizen leaders, involved with
TOSC projects at cleanup sites.  With
115 projects undertaken, the TOSC
program provides free, independent
technical assistance to citizens who
want to  be involved in understanding
hazardous waste  issues at hazardous
waste  cleanup   sites. Two  citizen
speakers provided the keynote ad-
dresses.
   Tony Davenport, representing four
Chicago   communities,  described
TOSC as a "godsend" that provided
both technical help and peace of mind.
He stressed that because TOSC was
independent and had no stake in the
outcome, the community could and
did readily accept the analysis and in-
terpretations produced by TOSC, even
though some  of the information was
not what they expected.
   Rosa  Hilda  Ramos  of  Catano,
Puerto Rico, a member of the National
Environmental Justice Action Commit-
tee, noted that the TOSC program can
help rebuild trust when citizens have
become disillusioned and shut out of
the regulatory process. In her case,
the community  received assistance
from the New Jersey Institute of Tech-
nology, which worked directly in the
community and through a partnership
with a local university.  Ms. Ramos
urged that the  program expand be-
yond toxics to more general environ-
mental issues, and stressed that EPA
should seek out smaller, more com-
munity-oriented universities for the
program.  Both  speakers  recom-
mended that universities participating
in TOSC expand their services to in-
clude mediation or other dispute reso-
lution assistance.
   Other topics included skillbuilding,
the role  of  Community  Advisory
Groups, cultural risk assessments  in
tribal communities,  and Internet re-
sources. For more information on the
conference, contact Helen DuTeau at
703-603-8761.
                                                                                                   Cleanup News

-------
   Superfund  Reauthorization
   [	ihe last few months have seen
         continuing  efforts on  Capitol
         Hill to move forward on a Su-
   perfund Reauthorization bill. Unfortu-
   nately, as EPA officials have testifed in
   hearings on several different bills, the
   proposed legislation would actually
   weaken  the  Superfund  program
   rather than strengthen it. H.R 1300,
   H.R. 2580, and H.R 2247 are all "fatally
   flawed" in that they address problems
   that have already  been fixed through
   Superfund Administrative Reforms.
   As Timothy Fields stated in testi-
mony before the Subcommittee on Fi-
nance and Hazardous Materials of the
House  Committee  on  Commerce
(Sept. 22,1999), EPA believes that "as
the result  of the progress made  in
cleaning up Superfund sites in recent
years, and the program improvements
resulting from administrative reforms,
there is no longer a need for compre-
hensive legislation. Comprehensive
legislation  could  actually  delay
cleanups, create uncertainty and litiga-
                           Cle
     July 8,1999 — New Reforms Will Accelerate Cleanups at More Than 1,700 RCRA
     Hazardous Waste Management Sites. The reforms include annual cleanup goals and
     guidance to encourage creative and  flexible approaches to ensuring cost-effective
     cleanup progress. Under the reforms, EPA the  states, and the involved industries will
     continue to assess and address contamination from toxic and other materials at some
     3,000 RCRA facilities, focusing on the most highly contaminated areas first. EPA already
     has assessed many of these sites and believes that these facilities do not pose immedi-
     ate health threats. At 255 sites, cleanups already have been completed, and early actions
     have been taken at more than 800 sites to protect against any immediate threats to pub-
     lic health or the environm ent. The contamination at the 1,712 facilities targeted under the
     reforms is primarily the result of past toxic pollution that occurred prior to modern RCRA
     practices. Cleanups are expected to proceed at an average rate of 200 per year through
     2005. For more information, go to: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/ cleanup.htm or
     call the RCRA hotline at 1 -800-424-9346 or 703-412-9810.

     October 21,1999 — EM Adds 10 Sites and Proposes 9 Sites to HPL.The primary
     purpose of the National Priorities List is to guide EPA in determining  which sites war-
     rant further investigation. Currently there are a total of 1,221 final sites and 57 pro-
     posed sites. The 10 recent additions include: Basin Mining Area,Basin,MT; UpperTen-
     mile Creek Mining Area, Lewis and Clark County, MT; Georgia-Pacific Corp. Hardwood
     Sawmill, Plymouth, NC; Iceland  Coin Laundry Area Ground Water Plume, Vineland.NJ;
     Lightman Drum Co.,WinslowTownship, NJ; Fruit Avenue Plume, Albuquerque, NM; Gar-
     land Creosoting, Longview, TX; State Road 114 Ground Water Plume, Levelland, TX; Vi-
     enna  Tetrachloroethene, Vienna.WV; and one federal facility, McGuire Air Force Base
     #1 ,Wrightstown,NJ. More information about these and the proposed sites is available
     at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/index.htmSdesnqry.
tion,  and  undermine  the  current
progress of the program. As a result,
the Clinton Administration  believes
only provisions that provide narrow,
targeted  liability  relief  for qualified
parties that builds upon the current
success of the Superfund program are
appropriate."
   Specifically,  the provisions  that
EPA supports — in addition to legisla-
tion to reinstate the Superfund taxes,
— would be limited to:
•  prospective purchasers of contam-
   inated property
•  innocent landowners
•  contiguous property owners, and
•  the liability of small parties.

   The problems  with the proposed
bills  include: liability provisions that
could increase  litigation, undermine
the critical "polluter pays principle,"
and exempt many parties who should
pay for cleanup; replacing the current
goal  of   restoring  contaminated
groundwater to beneficial uses, wher-
ever practicable, with a much lower
standard;  and new risk assessment
terms and requirements that would re-
quire EPA, states, and contractors to
change the way a Superfund cleanup
remedy is chosen and thereby  delay
cleanups; reduced incentives for re-
sponsible parties to  settle, and an
overly burdensome allocation process
that could discourage settlements.
   EPA continues to support reinstate-
ment of the Superfund taxes and en-
actment of narrowly targeted Super-
fund legislation that builds upon the
success of Superfund's administrative
reforms.
Cleanup News

-------
EPA Issues Superfund
Relocation Policy

I  ...   PA issued for public comment a
i	!,'	j new relocation policy that pro-
I     . vides direction to EPA staff on
when to  consider permanent reloca-
tion of residents and businesses near
or on Superfund sites. The "Interim
Policy on the Use of Permanent Relo-
cations as Part of Superfund Remedial
Actions" issued in July 1999 outlines
some  of the circumstances  under
which permanent relocation may be
considered to pro-
tect  human health
and  the  environ-      ,,,'",
ment.
   EPA's preference        t   ,
is to clean up and re-
store property  so      .'
that people may  re-
main safely in their
homes  and  busi-
nesses. The primary
reasons for conduct-
ing permanent relo-
cations at Superfund
sites would be to address an immedi-
ate risk to human health (where an en-
gineering solution is not readily avail-
able) or where the structures (homes
or businesses) are an impediment  to
implementing a protective cleanup.  In
the limited cases where permanent re-
location may be deemed appropriate,
the policy demands  that EPA must
"make  every effort to implement ac-
tions in an expeditious, thoughtful and
fair manner."
   The interim relocation policy was
developed in  response to a request
made by the National Environmental
Justice Advisory Council's Waste and
Facility Siting Subcommittee. Specifi-
cally, NEJAC asked EPA to determine
when citizens should be relocated
away from residential areas near or af-
fected  by Superfund  sites.  NEJAC
based its request on concerns it had
heard from communities affected by
Superfund sites. These communities
wanted to be relocated because they
feared the potential effects sites pose
to their health, property values, and
overall quality of life.
   As part of the groundwork for de-
veloping  the policy, EPA undertook
several efforts to understand the is-
sues associated with relocation. One
effort entailed establishing the Escam-
bia Wood Treating Company site in
Pensacola, Florida, as a national relo-
cation pilot. A second effort involved
an EPA review of a number of sites
where  cleanups in residential areas
had been conducted. The findings of
that review revealed that EPA cleans
up the overwhelming majority of Su-
perfund sites in residential areas with-
out the need to permanently relocate
residents and businesses. Finally, EPA
sponsored a series of stakeholder fo-
rums to solicit views and experiences
on the  subject  of relocation. Stake-
holders stressed  the importance of
EPA working  closely with community
members to address their issues, in-
volve the community in the  site deci-
sion-making process, and communi-
cate openly and honestly.
   EPA is seeking public comment on
this interim policy and will address
these comments before issuing a final
policy. A multi-stakeholder meeting is
scheduled to be held in March 2000 to
hear comments on the policy. The in-
terim policy is available on the Web at
http://  www.epa.gov/oerrpage/su-
perfund/tools/topics/relocation or by
calling the Superfund hotline at 1-800-
424-9346 or 703-412-9810.


Negotiation and
Enforcement
Strategies Memo
f^'y^. n June  17, 1999,  Barry Breen,
	| .. j Director OSRC signed a mem-
\- °.< />-;;•
  .-:•••"","-  orandum on  "Negotiation and
Enforcement Strategies to Achieve
Timely  Settlement  and Implementa-
tion of  Remedial Design/Remedial
Action at Superfund Sites." The memo-
randum is a product of a workgroup
with representatives  from all ten EPA
Regions, OSRE, OGC,  and the U.S.
Department of Justice.
   The memo recommends strategies
which can be used to encourage PRPs
to enter into a settlement using the
model RD/RA Consent Decree. It dis-
cusses  the  current  model Unilateral
Administrative Order,  and suggests
practical alternatives to expedite Super-
fund settlements and  the cleanup
process. The memo  relies on existing
guidance to identify incentives available
to PRPs for settling with EPA and disin-
centives for not settling. It also high-
lights  how EPA can  ensure that
cleanups being performed under a set-
tlement are not delayed and what EPA's
enforcement options are when settle-
ment negotiations fail. Contacts: Ben
Lammie, OSRE, 202-564-7126; Baerbel
Schiller, EPA Region  7,913-551-7257.
                                                                                                  Cleanup News

-------
       December 6-9,  1999
       4th Annual Joint Services Pollution
       Prevention / Hazardous Waste
       Management Conference and
       Exhibition
       San Antonio, TX
       An open forum for exchanging ideas, success stories,
       case histories, and technologies related to pollution pre-
       vention and hazardous waste management. The confer-
       ence will cross federal, academic, and industry lines. For
       more information, visit http://www.serdp.org/sympo-
       siums/sym posiums.html.

       December 6-8,  1999
       Brownf ields '99
       Dallas, Texas
       Brownfields '99 will  provide discussions, opportunities
       for critical networking,  and a forum  for making deals
       that will change the face of America. For information,go
       to:http://www.epa.gov/brownfields.
ADR
         Alternative Dispute
         Resolution
ATSDR   Agency for Toxic Substances
         and Disease Registry
CEPPO   Chemical Emergency Prepared-
         ness and Prevention Office
CERCLA  Comprehensive Emergency
         Response, Compensation.and
         Liability Act (Superfund law)
         Department of Defense
         Department of Energy
         National Contingency Plan
         National Priorities List
         (Superfund)
DoD
DOE
NCP
NPL
NSCEP

OERR

OGC
OSRE

OUST

PCB
PRP
RCRA
National Service Center for
Environmental Publications
Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response (EPA)
Office of General Counsel (EPA)
Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement (EPA)
Office of Underground Storage
Tanks (EPA)
Polychorinated biphenyls
Potentially Responsible Party
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (hazardous
waste)
                     mews
Cleanup News is a publication of EPA's Office
of Site Remediation Enforcement, in cooperation
with the Office of Emergency Response and
Remediation,Office of Solid Waste,Office of
Underground Storage Tanks, Chemical Emergency
Preparedness and Prevention Office, and the
Technology and Innovation Office.
                                        EPA Review Board: Rick Popino, Ph.D.,
                                        Paul Connor, Karen Ellenberger, Ken
                                        Patterson,Helen DuTeau.Jeff Heimerman,
                                        Carole Macko
                                        Gilah Langner, writer
                                        Robin Foster, SciComm Inc..designer
                                                        To comment on the newsletter, contact Rick Popino, Ph.D. (MC-2271A), U.S. EPA.401 M
                                                        Street SW, Washington.DC  20460,fax: 202-564-0094,e-mail:popino.rick@epa.gov.
                                                           For mailing list inquiries.contact Robert France, SciComm Inc.,7735 Old Georgetown Rd,
                                                        Bethesda.MD    20814,fax:301 -652-7001 ,e-mail:rfrance@scicomm.com.
                                                                                                                                   ooss
                                                                                                                                   IBTOJ
                                                                                                                          sssmsng jEpifJO

                                                                                                                 09WZ Dd 'ua^uiqsBM
                                                                                                                                (VTA22)
                                                                                                                     AjiraSy uotpajcu j
   99-0 'ON
           Vd3
QlVd S33J ? BOVlSOd
     ss^no isau

-------