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
------- |