United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement (2271 A)
Washington, DC 20460
SEPA cleanup news
Winter 1998
EPA300-N-98-009
Issue #1
inside
Short Takes
MSW Policy
About OSRE
In the Courts
TechDirect
OERR Celebrates
5000 Removals
National Notable
Awards
ADR.SEPs at
Brownfields
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
10
Reports and Guidance 11
Calendar 12
GE to Spend $200 Million
on Cleanup of
Housatonic River
General Electric has agreed in prin-
ciple to spend between $150 and
$250 million on cleanup of PCBs
and other hazardous substances released
by its Pittsfield plant into the Housatonic
River in Massachusetts. In announcing
the agreement in principle on September
24, 1998, John E DeVillars, Regional Ad-
ministrator for EPA Region 1, remarked:
"With this agreement, we have moved the
cleanup onto the fast track. We have hon-
ored our most important responsibility
to protect the health and environment of
Pittsfield and Berkshire County."
Under the mediated agreement, GE
will remove contaminated sediments from
the one-half mile of the Housatonic River
nearest the GE plant. Through a cost-
sharing agreement, GE will also fund
much of the anticipated cost of an addi-
tional mile-and-one-half of river cleanup to
continued on page 4
Cleanup News Is an occa-
sional newsletter highlighting
hazardous waste cleanup
cases, policies, settlements,
and technologies. Published
by ERA'S Office of Site
Remediation Enforcement,
jointly with ERA'S Office of
Emergency and Remedial
Response, Office of Solid
Waste, Technology Innovation
Office, and Office of Under-
ground Storage Tanks.
Welcome to the first issue of
Cleanup News! Our goal is to
keep you up-to-date with the lat-
est happenings in Superfund cleanups,
RCRA corrective actions, and other reme-
dial efforts related to underground storage
tanks and oil spills. We'll be covering pol-
icy developments, case studies, technol-
ogy advances, new resources and
publications, court decisions, and more.
welcome
This first issue features articles on the GE
cleanup agreement for the Housatonic
River, EPAs municipal solid waste policy,
supplemental environmental projects at
brownfields, and much more. We look for-
ward to bringing you the latest informa-
tion from the cleanup world. Write to Rick
Popino with your comments at Cleanup
News, U.S. EPA (2271A), 401 M Street
SW, Washington, DC 20460.
Printed on recycled paper
-------
0)
tr
o
(ft
Cleanup 2000
Underway
EPA's Office of Solid Waste has
launched CLEANUP 2000 in an
effort to improve the RCRA cor-
rective action program through admin-
istrative reforms by December 31,
2000. The goals are to speed up
cleanups, enhance the role of state
partners, promote innovative but prac-
tical approaches, and foster greater
public involvement in cleanup deci-
sions. Overall, the intent is to make cor-
rective action more "results-driven"
rather than "process-driven." That
means moving away from the lock-step
process of RCRA facility investigation,
corrective measures study, and correc-
tive measures implementation to a
more fluid, compressed approach.
Several projects are underway to
further the CLEANUP 2000 effort.
EPA is developing National Corrective
Action Performance Standards which
emphasize results, rather than process
goals. A new training program will dis-
seminate approaches that have proven
their effectiveness at corrective action
sites. For more information, contact
Robert Hall at 703-308-8432.
Superfund Opens Risk Assessment Web Site
EPA's Office of Emergency and Remedial Response has launched a new Web site
to provide stakeholders with a consistent framework to evaluate and communi-
cate the risks posed by hazardous waste sites. The Web site offers "tools of the trade"
useful to risk professionals as well as the general public. Introductory material is
available for users with a non-technical background, who can learn about the role of
risk assessment at each step in the Superfund "pipeline." The "Improving the Sci-
ence"f eature highlights EPA's efforts to improve Superfund and Agency-wide risk as-
sessments. In "Ask Your Question," EPA staff (or other experts) will answer questions
on risk assessment within 7-14 days. Links to guidance, policies.databases.software,
and other technical tools for conducting risk assessment are provided. Access the site
at:http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/risk/index.htm.
Check out the following Web sites
for more information and links to
publications:
http://es.epa.gov/oeca/polguid/enfdock.html
OECA Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center
http://es.epa.gov/oeca/osre.html
OSRE home page
http://es.epa.gov/oeca/osre/osredoc.html
OSRE documents
http://www.epa.gov/supertund
Superfund home page
http://www.epa.gov/oust
OUST home page
http://clu-in.org
TIO homepage
ATSDR Looking
at Medical
Monitoring Sites
The Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry is considering the
medical monitoring of populations that
face increased health risks as a result
of exposure to hazardous substances
released from facilities. The medical
monitoring program would provide
medical evaluations and referrals to
treatment specialists. ATSDR's data-
base on hazardous waste sites shows
that about 50% of all NPL sites repre-
sent public health hazards, with 5% cat-
egorized as urgent.
ATSDR is currently initiating med-
ical monitoring at the Bunker Hill
Mine and Metallurgical Site in Idaho,
where future screening will be done
for hypertension, kidney disease, and
other disorders among an eligible pop-
ulation of 8,500 that may have been ex-
posed to lead, cadmium, and arsenic.
ATSDR is considering other sites for
monitoring as well. For more informa-
tion, contact Bruce Kulpan, EPA 202-
564-4252, or Dr. Pam Tucker, ATSDR,
404-639-6204.
News
-------
MSW Policy Aims at Resolving Munis' Liability
EPA's MSW CERCLA Settlement
Policy, signed in February 1998, is
intended to provide a fair, consis-
tent, and efficient settlement methodology
for resolving the liability of parties at co-dis-
posal sites on the National Priorities List
The policy reaffirms EPA's practice of not
seeking cleanup costs from generators and
transporters of municipal solid waste
(MSW) at NPL sites. However, in recogni-
tion of the strong public interest in reduc-
ing the burden of contribution litigation,
EPA has proposed to offer settlements to
any MSW generators and transporters
who wish to resolve their potential Super-
fund liability. In addition, the policy sets a
presumptive settlement range for munici-
pal owners and operators of co-disposal
sites on the NPL who desire to settle their
liability.
Currently, about one quarter (approxi-
mately 250) of NPL sites are "co-disposal"
landfills that accepted both MSW and
other wastes, such as industrial wastes,
containing hazardous substances. Many of
these landfills were or are owned or oper-
ated by municipalities to provide sanitation
and trash disposal services to residents
and businesses. EPA recognizes the differ-
ences between MSW and the types of
wastes that usually give rise to the environ-
mental problems at NPL sites. Although
MSW may contain hazardous substances,
they are usually present in only small con-
centrations. Landfills at which MSW alone
was disposed of are not typically serious
enough to be designated as NPL sites, and
the costs of remediating MSW are gener-
ally lower than the cost of remediating haz-
ardous waste. Nevertheless, the presence
of small concentrations of hazardous sub-
stances in MSW has resulted in contribu-
tion claims by private parties against MSW
generators/transporters.
Settlement Share for MSW
Generators/Transporters
EPA's settlement method involves multi-
plying the known or estimated quantity of
MSW contributed by the generator or
transporter by $5.30 per ton. The unit cost
methodology is based on the costs of clo-
sure/post-closure activities at a "clean"
MSW landfill and increased slightly if cer-
tain site conditions exist.
Settlement Offers to
Municipal Owner/Operators
Under EPA's proposal, the government
will offer settlements to municipal
owner/operators of co-disposal facilities
zens, their non-profit status, and the
multi-year fiscal planning cycle that mu-
nicipalities require.
As a baseline presumption, EPA has
proposed that 20% of the total response
costs for a site be considered as the set-
tlement amount for an individual munici-
pal owner/operator to resolve its liability
at the site. EPA's Regional Offices will
have the discretion to deviate from the
presumption (but not to exceed 35%),
based on the following factors:
(1) whether the municipality performed
specific activities that exacerbated en-
vironmental contamination or expo-
sure; and
EPA re cognizes the djjlrences between MSW
and the types of wastes that usually give rise to
the environmental problems at NPL sites.
who wish to settle; those municipal
owner/operators who do not settle with
EPA will remain subject to site claims by
EPA and other parties.
In developing a standardized settle-
ment amount for municipal owner/opera-
tors, EPA examined the data from past
settlements of CERCLA cost recovery
and contribution cases with municipal
owner/operators at co-disposal sites
where there were also PRPs who were po-
tentially liable for the disposal of non-
MSW, such as industrial waste. EPA also
evaluated public interest considerations
relating to municipalities, including their
unique public health obligations to pro-
vide waste disposal services to their citi-
(2) whether the owner/operator received
operating revenues in excess of waste
system operating costs during owner-
ship or operation of the site that are
substantially higher than the
owner/operator's presumptive settle-
ment amount pursuant to this policy.
The MSW policy is available electroni-
cally at http://www.epa.gov/oeca/
osre.html. Copies can be ordered from
the National Technical Information Ser-
vice (NTIS), U.S. Department of Com-
merce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
VA 22161, reference # PB98-118003, tel:
703-4874650 or 800-553-NTIS. Send e-
mail orders to: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov.
-------
About Us
EPA'S Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement (OSRE) strives to
protect human health and quality
of the environment by providing direc-
tion, evaluation, oversight and assistance
for remediation enforcement at non-fed-
erally owned sites subject to Superfund,
RCRA, the Oil Pollution Act, and the Un-
derground Storage Tank program. We
support and provide the means for EPA
regions and states to vigorously and ef-
fectively enforce these statutes. We are
advocates for enforcement perspectives
in national program policies and regula-
tions. Our goals are to achieve prompt
site cleanup and maximum liable party
participation in performing and paying
for cleanup in ways which promote envi-
ronmental justice and fairness.
Mqjor OSRE Objectives
Maximizing private party
cleanups. Currently, approximately
70 percent of long-term cleanup ac-
tions are financed by potentially re-
sponsible parties (PRPs). The goal of
the Superfund enforcement program
is to maintain that level by maximiz-
ing PRP participation in conducting
or funding new remedial work.
Enhancing fairness. Fairness to the
different parties involved is enhanced
through numerous reforms and poli-
cies, including orphan share compen-
sation, de minimis settlements,
cash-out, mixed funding, mixed work,
alternative disupte resolution, ability-
to-pay settlements, and interest-bear-
ing special accounts, where applicable.
Maximizing cost recovery. EPA in-
tends to seek cost recovery at all NPL
and non-NPL sites with a statute of
limitations on total past costs equal to
or greater than $200,000. By recover-
ing costs from PRPs and by getting
PRPs to conduct or fund cleanups,
EPA is able to focus Superfund re-
sources on sites where PRPs do not
exist, or where the known PRPs lack
the funds or the capability to conduct
the cleanup. Over the life of the Su-
perfund program, PRPs have commit-
ted over $7 for every dollar obligated
for Superfund enforcement.
GE Cleanup
continued from page 1
be conducted by EPA These river
cleanups will include contaminated river
banks and soils in properties in the flood-
plain along the river. Later, after a cleanup
plan is selected for downstream portions
of the river, GE will perform that cleanup
as well. In addition, GE will remedy cont-
amination at the Pittsfield plant and other
nearby areas, including a school and sev-
eral commercial properties.
The agreement will also address claims
that hazardous substances released from
the GE plant caused injuries to natural re-
sources in the Housatonic River down-
stream of the plant, extending through
Massachusetts and into Connecticut. In
addition to cleaning up the injured re-
source, GE has agreed to pay $15 million
in damages and to conduct a number of
projects designed to acquire or enhance
wildlife habitat The damages payment will
be used by the natural resource trustees
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-
ministration, and agencies of Massachu-
setts and Connecticut to restore,
replace, or acquire the equivalent of the in-
jured natural resources. Finally, the agree-
ment provides for a process to determine
whether remediation will be required in an
additional 12-mile stretch of the river.
'This settlement will enable the gov-
ernments and GE to begin restoring the
ecological integrity of a truly valuable nat-
ural resource the Housatonic River,"
said Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "We ex-
pect restoration to enhance the biological
diversity of the Housatonic River
Valley, and to create significant recre-
ational and economic benefits for the
people of Western Massachusetts and
Connecticut."
The City of Pittsfield will benefit, too,
from the agreement. GE has agreed to a
"brownfield" redevelopment project on a
portion of the defunct plant, including a
multi-million dollar investment in Pitts-
field, in conjunction with the new Pitts-
field Economic Development Authority
(PEDA). PEDA will commit up to $4 mil-
lion of anticipated revenues from the re-
development to further enhancement of
natural resources.
GE and the government agencies in-
volved will now turn their attention to ne-
gotiating a consent decree that will give
legal effect to the agreement in principle.
The consent dcree will be submitted for
public comment and approval to a federal
judge before becoming finally effective.
For more information, contact Rich
Caragnero, 617-918-1251, orTimConway,
617-565-3349, of EPA Region 1.
News
-------
Hercules and Uniroyal Ordered to Pay
$102.9 Million for Vertac Site
I
In a major victory that affects the
cleanup of hazardous waste sites
around the country, the U.S. Dis-
trict Court, Eastern District of
Arkansas ruled on October 23, 1998
that Hercules, Inc. and Uniroyal
Chemical Ltd. must reimburse the fed-
eral government $102.9 million for past
costs incurred in cleaning up the Ver-
tac Superfund site in Jacksonville,
Arkansas. Under the Superfund law,
the money must be returned to the Su-
perfund Trust Fund, where it can be
used to clean up other hazardous
waste sites across the country.
The Vertac site was one of the worst
dioxin-contaminated sites in the coun-
try. Operated as an herbicide manufac-
turing plant by Hercules and Vertac
Chemical Corp. from the 1960s to the
1980s, its products included Agent Or-
ange, a defoliant used in the Vietnam
War. The facility's operations caused
widespread contamination of soil,
groundwater, and surface waters on
the site and in surrounding areas, in-
cluding the yards of neighboring
homes. When the facility closed in
1987, more than 28,000 leaking drums
of corrosive, ignitable hazardous
wastes were left at the site, presenting
an imminent danger to the surround-
ing community.
EPA incurred approximately $105
million in cleaning up and incinerating
the drummed dioxin waste, as well as
supervising Hercules' performance of
a series of remedial actions ordered by
EPA to clean up contaminated soil and
groundwater. The state of Arkansas in-
curred an additional $10.7 million for
incineration of the drum waste, which
was paid for by a trust fund created by
a prior settlement with Vertac Chemi-
cal Corp. Other defendants in the case
(left) View of process are a cleanup from atop Mt. Miac, September 1997.
(right) Demolishing the chlorination plant, September 1997.
also reached earlier settlements with
the United States, totaling $7.6 million.
The two remaining defendants,
Hercules and Uniroyal, declined to
settle and vigorously challenged the
government's right to recover EPA's
costs. Hercules and Uniroyal argued
to the court that EPA had overesti-
mated the health hazards of dioxin,
that a less thorough cleanup should
have been done, and that they should-
n't have to pay for the costs of inciner-
aton of drummed wastes.
District Judge George Howard over-
ruled the defendants' arguments and
awarded the United States summary
judgment for the full amount of the
costs it has incurred to date plus pre-
judgment interest. In addition, the
court awarded the United States a de-
claratory judgment for future costs,
which are estimated at approximately
$5 million. [United States v. Vertac
Chemical Corp., et al., CA # 80-109,
E.D. Ark.]
'This ruling means we can clean
up more hazardous waste sites and
make our communities safer and
more livable," said Lois J. Schiffer, As-
sistant Attorney General for Environ-
ment and Natural Resources at the
Department of Justice. "Companies
thinking about fighting their Super-
fund obligations ought to think again.
If you don't settle, we will use the full
force of federal law to hold you ac-
countable."
For more information on the case,
contact James Turner, EPA Region 6,
214-665-3159.
"Companies thinking about fighting their
Superfund obligations ought to think again/'
i
i
0)
-------
Check Out TechDirect
TechDirect is a free monthly e-
mail service that brings you cap-
sule summaries of the latest
publications and events related to site
assessment and remediation technolo-
gies. A service of EPA's Technology In-
novation Office, TechDirect is
currently delivered to over 5000 sub-
scribers in more than 45 countries.
Once a month, subscribers to
TechDirect receive an e-mail message
that identifies recent publications, de-
scribes their contents, and provides
hotlinks to document locations on the
Internet or ordering information. For
conferences and events, registration
and contact information is provided.
To subscribe, go to http://clu-
in.org/membersh.htm. To catch up on
recently highlighted technology publi-
cations, check out the TechDirect
archive at http://clu-in.org/techdrct.
htm. If you have any questions, contact
Jeff Heimerman at 703-603-7191 or
heimerman.jeff@epa. gov.
New from TIO
Information Resources for Innovative
Remediation and Site Characterization
Technologies (EPA 542-C-98-003, July
1998). TIO's new CD-ROM assembles
in one place most of the publications
and databases produced by TIO over
the last few years. The CD operates on
Windows 3.1 and Windows 95 systems.
For copies, contact 1-800490-9198 or
513-489-8190 or faxyour request to 513-
891-6685.
Site Remediation Technology InfoBase: A
Guide to Federal Programs, Information
Resources, and Publications on Conta-
minated Site Cleanup Technologies
(EPA #542-B-98-006, August 1998, 70
pages). This document was prepared by
member agencies of the Federal Reme-
diation Technologies Roundtable. View
or download it from http://clu-
in.org/techpubs.htm. For copies, con-
tact 1-800-490-9198 or 513489-8190 or
faxyour request to 513-891-6685.
Technology Developers and Vendors
Note!!! CLU-IN is beta testing a new
Vendor Support area. The idea is to di-
rect technology developers and ven-
dors to funding sources and technical
support for all stages of product devel-
opment, from bench-scale to full im-
plementation and commercialization.
We have tried to identify public and
private programs and resources to as-
sist vendors with: Market Analysis, Re-
search and Development, Testing and
Demonstration, Permitting and Regu-
latory Assistance, Marketing Assis-
tance, and Contracting Opportunities.
Improvements will be made based on
your comments, so please visit and let
us know what you think http://clu-
in.org/vendweb/vendrspt.htm.
New Case Studies
on Remediation
Technologies
At the November meeting of the Air &
Waste Management Association Fed-
eral Facilities Compliance Conference,
the Federal Remediation Technolo-
gies Roundtable announced the avail-
About TIO
I he U.S. EPA Technology Innovation Office (TIO) acts as an advocate for furthering
new technologies for site assessment and cleanup. TIO produces numerous
publications to help cleanup professionals understand advances in new technologies.
TIO strives to provide information that is relevant to technology developers, academics,
consulting engineers, technology users, and state and federal regulators.
Most of TIO's information is available on the Clean-Up Information (CLU-IN) home
page at http://clu-in.org. CLU-IN contains information on policies, programs.organiza-
tions, publications, and databases useful to regulators, consulting engineers, technol-
ogy developers, researchers, and remediation contractors. The site contains technology
descriptions and reports as well as current news on business aspects of waste site re-
mediation, as well as links to other sites important to managers interested in site char-
acterization and soil and groundwater remediation technologies.
ability of over 80 new cost and perfor-
mance case studies for remediation
technologies. They are available in a
searchable database at http:// www.
frtr.gov or in seven volumes available
through NCEPI. (Call 1-800490-9198
or 513489-8190 or fax your request to
513-891-6685.) The seven reports (all
dated September 1998) are as follows:
Volume 7: Ex Situ Soil Treatment -
Bioremediation, Solvent Extraction,
Thermal Desorption (EPA 542-R-98-
011,272 pp.)
Volume 8: Soil Vapor Extraction
(EPA 542-R-98-012,298 pp.)
Volume 9: Groundwater Pump and
Treat - Chlorinated Solvents (EPA 542-
R-98-013, 251 pp.)
Volume 10: Groundwater Pump and
Treat - Nonchlorinated Contaminants
(EPA542-R-98-014, 256 pp.)
Volume 11: Innovative Groundwater
Treatment Technologies (EPA 542-R-
98-015, 281 pp.)
Volume 12: On-Site Incineration
(EPA 542-R-98-016, 272 pp.)
Volume 13: Debris and Surface
Cleaning Technologies, and other
Miscellaneous Technologies (EPA
542-R-98-017,196 pp.)
News
-------
EPA Celebrates 5,000 Removal Actions
i
o>
On September 15,1998, EPA's Of-
fice of Emergency and Reme-
dial Response celebrated the
5000th removal action conducted by the
Superfund program since it began in
1980. The occasion was marked by a
typical quick-response removal action at
the Great Lakes Container Corporation
in St. Louis, Missouri.
The Superfund removal program
averages about 340 removal actions
per year, handling fires, explosions,
contaminated drinking water, toxic
fumes, and other immediate and time-
critical threats from hazardous sub-
stances. In addition to protecting
people from immediate health threats,
the program also reduces chronic and
acute health risks, curtails environ-
mental damage, and returns land to
beneficial use.
Michael J. Sanderson, Superfund Division Di-
rector, EPA Region 7; Timothy Fields, Acting
Assistant Administrator, OSWER; Nathaniel
Scurry, Assistant Regional Administrator, EPA
Region 7; and Dennis Grams, Regional Ad-
ministrator, EPA Region 7.
EPA usually takes the lead on re-
moval actions, but often encourages re-
sponsible parties to shoulder the effort.
Of the 5,000 removal actions started
since 1980, about 3,600 have been led by
the Superfund program; about 1,200
have been undertaken by the responsi-
ble party under EPAs oversight, and
the remainder have been managed by
the U.S. Coast Guard, states, and other
federal agencies.
By moving quickly to prevent or
clean up an emergency, lives are pro-
tected, the environment is protected
AND there is greater opportunity for
sites to be returned to a community for
redevelopment. In marking the occa-
sion, Timothy Fields, Jr., Acting Assis-
tant Administrator for EPAs Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
commended the staff on federal, state,
and local removal response teams, not-
ing: "Being part of an emergency re-
sponse team means sacrificing family
time, and holiday time. It can mean
putting your own lives on hold and in
danger to protect others. All of you
should be very proud of the work you do
to make the Superfund program
stronger and to make the lives of citizens
safer and the environment healthier."
0)
o
-
First National EPA Community Involvement Conference Held
Nothing is more central to the success of the Superfund program
than active, engaged communities. That fact was the impetus
behind the first annual National EPA Community Involvement Con-
ference, held in Boston, Massachusetts on August 3-7,1998. The
purpose of the conference was to provide training and networking
opportunities for public participation experts at EPA in order to serve
communities better. More than 250 participants attended, including
state, other federal agencies and citizen representatives.
Among the presentations were three keynote addresses high-
lighting the importance of working with communities to acheive
better environmental decisions. Susan Seacrest,President of the
Groundwater Foundation, focused on the "P's:"Promise, Process,
Partnerships and Products. Greg Watson of the Dudley Street
Neighborhood Initiative in Boston spoke about an environmental
renewal project that was realized by "tapping into the wisdom of
the community." And Ernie Barnett, with the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, spoke about Florida's Ecosystem Man-
agement Initiative which focuses on the importance of developing
partnerships with communities.
Among the most popular sessions at the conference was
"Talking with and Learning from Our Critics." This session pro-
vided an opportunity for government and citizens to engage in a
dialogue about community involvement. The goal was to chal-
lenge traditional assumptions about citizen inclusion and to stim-
ulate ideas that may help EPA move toward ensuring the public a
more genuine voice in environmental decision-making.
Among the training sessions offered, "Community Involvement
and Collaborative Problem Solving with a Cross-Cultural Focus,"
was particularly well attended. The training focused on develop-
ing community involvement skills to use in cross-cultural set-
tings. Through understanding differences, collaborative problem
solving, and interest-based negotiation skills, attendees took
away skills they can be applied in the field.
The 1999 National Community Involvement Conference will be
held in Kansas City, Missouri on May 24-27. For more information
about the conference, please contact Helen DuTeau, EPA/OERR,
703-603-8761.
Cleanup News ~7
-------
0)
s
i
EPA Recognizes 1998 National
Notable Achievement Award Winners
The 1998 National Notable
Achievement Awards ceremony
was held in Arlington, Virginia,
on May 7, 1998. Created in the late
1980s to recognize exemplary perfor-
mance in Regional Superfund pro-
grams, the awards were expanded in
1998 to included the RCRA and En-
forcement components of waste man-
agement and remediation. At this
year's ceremony, 52 award recipients
received honorary plaques and cash
awards for outstanding accomplish-
ments. Congratulations to all of the
award recipients for contributions to
the Agency and its mission, and to
communities across the country!
Superfund
On-Scene Coordinators of the Year: Don
Rigger, Region 4; Terry Stilman, Re-
gion 4; and Greg Fife, Region 6 for
handling EPAs largest removal ac-
tionthe evacuation of 1,700 people
due to methyl parathion in Jackson
County, Mississippi.
Site Assessment Manager of the Year:
Mark Ader, Region 10 for the listing
of approximately 70 federal facility
sites on the 1997 Federal Facilities
Docket Update.
Remedial Project Manager of the Year:
Arturo Palomares, Region 8 for
work on the EE. Warren Air Force
Base in Wyoming.
Community Involvement Coordinator of
the Year: Cynthia B. Peurifoy, Region 4
for coordinating the operation of
the Community Coordination Center,
and other activities.
Leader/Mentor of the Year Award: David
Superfund
Superfund Team of the Year Award: Ohio River Valley Flood Team
An exceptional team effort of four Regions and the Envi-
ronmental Response Team was mobilized in response to
the federally declared natural disaster. In some areas
water rose more than 50 feet in 12 hours. During a two-
month period, crews maintained a continuous presence
with resources to identify, recover, and dispose of ap-
proximately 6,000 drums, cylinders, tanks, and contain-
ers. The Ohio River Valley cleanup totaled $1.9 million making it the most significant effort in
Region 4 Federal Response Plan activation to date.
This massive emergency effort entailed developing innovative approaches for land-based and
floating operations and establishing complex coordination among federal, state, and contractor
personnel. Adverse conditions during the effort varied from difficult terrain, cold and wet weather,
continuous demand for movement of base stations, and physical communication problems.
The Team established open relationships by thoroughly informing community residents and of-
ficials of removal plans and ideas, and encouraging feedback and involvement in the process. By
assessing the needs of each disaster area on an individual basis and managing the allocation of
resources cooperatively, the Team was able to simultaneously run multiple recovery operations in
geographically distinct areas. Their efforts were enhanced by the development and implementation
of continuous data collection efforts, and an extensive planning/tracking topographic map system.
Williams, Region 7 for training new
On-Scene Coordinators and managing
some of the most complex sites in Re-
gion 7.
Technical Support Award: Marian
Olsen, Region 2 for her chemical ex-
pertise and technical support in Re-
gion 2 and across the nation.
Superfund Team of the Year Award: Ohio
River Valley Flood Team, Kevin Koob,
Dennis Matlock, William Steuteville,
Region 3; Charles Eger, Gordon Goff,
Bill Joyner, John Nolen, Fred Stroud,
Region 4; Stavros Emmanouil, Steven
Renninger, Kenneth Theisen, Kevin
Turner, Sonia Vega, Region 5; Jim
Kudlinski, Region 7; ERT: John
Gilbert and Greg Powell for a two-
month response effort to floods in 13
southern Indiana counties, and 23
counties and 25 towns in Ohio and
Kentucky, covering more than 750
miles of waterways. (See box.)
Superfund Team of the Year: Jackson
County Methyl Parathion Site Team,
Region 4 (Elmer Akin, Tony Best, War-
ren Dixon, Frank Garcia, Carol Men-
ell, Cynthia B. Peurifoy, Don Rigger,
Robert Rosen, Paul Schwartz, Steve
Spurlin, Terry Stilman, Matt Taylor,
Samantha Urquhart-Foster) for re-
sponding to the illegal application of
methyl parathion (MP) in homes along
the Gulf Coast of Mississippi, includ-
ing sampling more than 2,500 struc-
tures, cleaning up more than 450
residences, and relocating more than
1,700 people.
Superfund
Enforcement
Legal Enforcer of the Year: James Doyle,
Region 2 for simultaneous negotia-
tion of Superfund consent decrees for
three separate National Priority List
News
-------
Tecl
Superfund Enforcement
Technical Enforcer of the Year: Greg Armstrong, Region 4
In 1997, Greg Armstrong used a number of administrative reform tools and techniques
to achieve several site settlements. Mr. Armstrong maximized cost recovery, addressed
fairness issues, and reduced transaction costs at three sites in Florida. His ability to in-
terpret and implement the reforms resulted in settlements without the need for litiga-
tion, and addressed more than $35 million of future work and $10 million in past costs.
Mr. Armstrong also represents Region 4 on national workgroups to develop and inter-
pret policy and procedures on administrative reforms.
Mr. Armstrong maximized cost recovery on CERCLA sites by developing an oversight
tracking and billing system to recover $27 million in unbilled costs at the beginning of
FY1997. To reduce transaction costs and increase protection of de minimis and de mi-
cromis parties, Mr. Armstrong developed a "de minimis cost matrix," which was used
initially to determine a fair allocation for a very complex de minimis settlement with
input from all parties. The matrix is now widely used in Region 4, among the PRP com-
munity, and at EPA Headquarters.
sites: Barceloneta Landfill, Kentucky
Avenue Wellfield, and Sealand Restora-
tion, without the need for litigation.
Technical Enforcer of the Year: Greg
Armstrong, Region 4.
Enforcement Team of the Year: Ben-
nington Landfill Case Team, Region 1,
Ed Hathaway, Marilyn Goldberg, and
Hugh Martinez for a settlement at
the Bennington Landfill Superfund
site in Vermont that incorporated the
orphan share initiative.
RCRA Corrective
Action
Outstanding Friend of the State: Donna
Wilkinson, Region 4 technical as-
sistance resulting in the first Subpart
X permit applications issued in Florida
and Georgia.
Outstanding Stakeholder Involvement
Andrew Fan, Region 3 for achieving
full community buy-in on the risk as-
sessment and proposed remedy for
the Pickett Road Tank Farm site in
Fairfax, Virginia.
Outstanding Administrative Innovation:
Ernest R P. Waterman, Region 1.
Outstanding Stabilization and Environ-
mental Indicator: Wesley S. Hardegree,
Region 4 (for control of contamination
at the Dames & Moore/Brookhill
Facility) and Kenneth Scott Ritchey,
Region 7 (for efforts to stabilize Farm-
land's Coffeyville, Kansas refinery and
control of contamination at Farmland's
Phillipsburg, Kansas refinery).
Outstanding Team of the Year: Environ-
mental Indicators/Performance Part-
nership Grant, Region 2, OSW, and
NJDEP (Anthony Kahaly, Richard
Krauser, Agathe Nadai, Barry Tor-
nick, Henry Schuver, OSW, Janine
MacGregor, NJDEP Site, Remediation
PPG Lead, John DeFina, NJDEP,
Technical/CIS Lead) for develop-
ment of Quantitative Environmental
Indicators of Contamination (QEICs),
an environmental media-measuring
and decision-making tool vital to pro-
ject managers.
RCRA Corrective
Action
Outstanding Administrative
Innovation: Ernest R. P. Waterman,
Region 1
Ernest Waterman initiated Region 1's
first voluntary Corrective Action Agree-
ment and then took this innovation a
step further with multisite agreements
that have resulted in significant cost
savings to the government. The agree-
ments offer better schedule control, are
more focused on achieving real goals
than on procedural questions, typically
do not require attorney support, give fa-
cilities incentives to initiate cleanup ac-
tions, and can be implemented in as
little as one to two months, rather than
the typical six to 12 months associated
with permits and orders.
The voluntary agreements also shift
EPA's oversight burden from detailed
compliance evaluation to an evaluation
of actual data gaps at completion of the
RCRA facility investigation (RFI). The
agreements focus the efforts of the fa-
cilities on achieving specific goals and
answering the important questions
about the site, rather than merely meet-
ing specific terms and conditions of a
permit or order. This approach en-
hances the quality of the work EPA re-
views and ultimately produces better
environmental results.
Call for 1999
Nominations!
The nomination process has begun for
the 1999 National Notable Achievement
Awards. For more information.contract
Ann Eleanor at 703-603-7199.
Cleanup News 9
-------
Tackling Brownfields
0)
In settling environmental enforce-
ment cases, EPA encourages de-
fendants and respondents to
include Supplemental Environmental
Projects (SEPs) in their settlements.
SEPs are environmentally beneficial
projects that parties agree to under-
take in settling a civil penalty action,
but which they are not otherwise
legally required to perform. In return,
a percentage of the SEP's cost is con-
sidered as a factor in establishing the
final cash penalty. SEPs enhance the
environmental quality of communities
that have been put at risk due to the vi-
olation of an environmental law.
Because of their connection to the
community, EPA is encouraging SEPs
that facilitate the reuse of "brownfield"
properties. "Brownfields" are aban-
doned pieces of land usually in
inner city areas that are lightly con-
taminated from previous industrial
use. These sites do not qualify as NPL
sites because they do not pose serious
public health risks. However, because
of the stigma of contamination and
legal barriers to redevelopment, busi-
nesses do not buy the land and sites
remain roped off, unproductive and
vacant.
SEPs at brownfields may involve
investigating or monitoring the envi-
ronmental media at the property, re-
moving or remediating contamination,
or creating conservation land. If you
are considering undertaking a SEP at
a nearby brownfield property, here
are some of the considerations you
should keep in mind. First, SEPs at
brownfields cannot include action that
the defendant/respondent is other-
wise legally required to perform
under federal, state, or local law or
regulation. As a general rule, if a party
owns a brownfield or is responsible
for the primary environmental degra-
dation at a site, assessment or cleanup
activities cannot constitute a SEP.
Second, the SEP must be within
the same ecosystem or within a 50-
mile radius of the site from which the
violation occurred, and the environ-
ment where the brownfield is located
must be affected or potentially threat-
ened by the violation.
Third, SEPs at brownfields cannot
include action that the federal govern-
ment is likely to undertake or compel
another to undertake. Thus, for exam-
ple, because of EPAs statutory obliga-
tions, SEPs are inappropriate for NPL
sites or other sites where the federal
government is planning or conducting
a removal action.
Fourth, SEPs may be performed at
brownfields involuntarily acquired by
municipalities, but they are not likely
to be approved if they provide addi-
tional funds to a municipality, state, or
other entity to perform tasks for which
they have received a federal Brown-
fields Assessment Demonstration Pilot
or other federal brownfields grant.
Finally, local communities should
be afforded an opportunity to com-
ment on and contribute to the design
of a proposed SEP at a brownfield site.
For more information, contact
David Gordon at 202-564-5147 or go to
www.epa.gov/brownfields.
Alternative Dispute Resolution
b
9
One of the unheralded suc-
cesses of the GE settlement
(see story on page 1) has been
the role of alternative dispute resolu-
tion (ADR) in achieving a long-sought
agreement among the nine govern-
ment agencies involved and GE.
ADR is a short-hand term encom-
passing a wide range of techniques in-
volving the use of neutral parties to
resolve disputes and to facilitate a
more meaningful community role in
environmental decision-making. ADR
can play many roles in dispute resolu-
tion, including mediation, arbitration,
fact-finding, and allocation of relative
responsibilities. It is EPA policy to con-
sider the use of ADR in every dispute
and to use ADR whenever it may re-
sult in a more efficient or equitable
resolution. ADR has been used in over
150 cases, with 30 cases currently un-
derway. All EPA regions have ADR
specialists who offer a wide range of
consultation and support services on
the use of ADR
In the GE case, mediators Howard
Bellman and Greg Sobel were brought
in after negotiations reached an im-
passe on the cleanup of the river. The
mediators were jointly selected by the
parties after an extensive search. In
addition to helping the parties negoti-
ate the settlement, the mediators facil-
itated an unusual one-day public input
session at which representatives of cit-
izen, environmental, and business
groups were invited to present their
concerns to the negotiators. ADR is
continuing to be used in finalizing a
consent decree and in the launching of
a Citizens Coordinating Council which
will serve as a focal point for commu-
nity participation in the cleanup.
For more information on ADR, con-
tact David Batson, EPA Headquarters,
202-564-5103, or Effie Tonkin, Region
1, 617-565-1154.
1O
News
-------
Superfund Effort to Enhance the
Role of the States and Tribes
In March 1998, OERR issued the
Plan to Enhance the Role of States
and Tribes in the Superfund Pro-
gram (EPA 540-R-98-012, PB98-
963221) with recommendations that
came out of a collaborative effort with
states and tribes. As state and tribal
roles and capabilities have grown over
the last decade, the goal of the plan was
to allow for an equitable sharing of Su-
perfund program responsibilities with
interested states and tribes, to enable
quicker cleanup of more sites. The
plan delineates a series of principles
including maintaining EPAs "enforce-
ment first" policy and the importance
of public involvement to ensure
consistency, fairness, and flexibility.
The basic framework for enhancing
state and tribal roles in Superfund in-
cludes the following points:
Communication: EPA should
hold general discussions with state
and tribal Superfund program
managers to explore their interest
in an enhanced role in the Super-
fund program.
Readiness: When a state or a
tribe expresses interest in an en-
hanced role in the Superfund pro-
gram, EPA and the state or tribe
should meet to discuss the full
range of program activities that it
would like to implement. The EPA
region works with the state or
tribe to identify the program crite-
ria by which to evaluate the state
or tribal program, and works with
that state or tribe to gauge the
level of readiness to assume pro-
gram responsibilities.
Assistance: The state or tribe and
region should identify and discuss
the technical and financial assis-
tance needed for the state or tribe
to perform the negotiated activi-
ties. Assistance needs are identi-
fied for activities the state or tribe
can begin conducting in the near
term (i.e., when the state or tribe
meets the readiness criteria), as
well as activities that the state or
tribe hopes to implement in the
long term (i.e., developing capac-
ity to meet the readiness criteria in
specific program areas).
Agreements: The region and
state or tribe should negotiate and
sign a program agreement to for-
mally establish and document
their roles and responsibilities in
an enhanced partnership to imple-
ment Superfund.
Tribal Programs: EPA has learned
that there are different concerns
and priorities when working with In-
dian tribes rather than states. Ways
to address these differences will be
incorporated into the implementa-
tion process to ensure that tribes, as
well as states, are fully involved in
developing and implementing Su-
perfund programs.
The report may be obtained by con-
tacting the National Technical Infor-
mation Service at 703-4874650 or from
the Internet at http://www.epa.
gov/superfund/oerr/ini_pro/stat_tri
/toc.htm.
The next step is to pilot this initia-
tive. EPA has been discussing pilot op-
tions with states and tribes. Once
pilots are selected, readiness assess-
ments will be conducted and agree-
ments delineating roles and
responsibilities for EPA and the states
or tribes will be signed.
o
o
(0
;u
u>
o
(0
o
a
How to Receive Cleanup News
To be placed on the mailing list for a free
copy of Cleanup News, please mail or fax this
form to: Rick Popino, Cleanup News (2271 A),
U.S.EPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC
20460,fax:202-564-0094. Or e-mail the in-
formation to cleanup@scicomm.com.
If you would like to be notified by e-mail
when the next issue of Cleaup News is avail-
able for downloading from the Web, please
include your e-mail address.
U Check here if you do NOT want to receive
future issues of Cleanup News.
Name:.
Organization:
Address:.
E-Mail:
11
-------
CO
o
0)
8
January 20-21,1999
1999 Mid-Atlantic Pollution
Prevention (P2) Conference
Baltimore, MD
Sponsor: Region 3 Pollution Prevention Round-
table. Contact: Michele Russo, National Pollution
Prevention Roundtablejel: 202-466-P2P2, Fax:
202-466-7964, E-mail: michelerussoOcom-
puserve.com
February 2-4, 1998
6th International Forum on
Environmental Technologies:
Entering the Global Remediation
Marketplace
Dallas, TX
Sponsors: US Dept of Commerce and EPA. Con-
tact: 1-800-783-3870
March 3-4, 1998
Great Lakes Regional Pollution
Prevention Roundtable
cteanupnews
Chicago, IL
Sponsor: EPA Region 5. Contact: Lisa C. Morri-
son, Waste Management and Research Center,
Tel: 217-244-6061; Fax: 217-333-8944; E-mail:
morrison@wmrc.hazard.uiuc.edu
March 8-11, 1999
International Oil Spill
Conference 1999
Seattle, WA
Sponsors: EPA, Coast Guard, API,IPIECA, IMO
Contact: David Lopez, 703-603-8707 or
http://www.iosc.org
March 29-31, 1998
Probabilistic Risk Assessment
Workshop
Sarasota, FL
Sponsors: EPA, National Institute for Environ-
mental Health (NIEHS), University of Florida.
Contact: 352-392-4700,ext.5500
Glossary
CERCLA
CleanupNews is a publication of EPA's Office of
Site Remediation Enforcement, in cooperation with
the Office of Emergency Response and Remedia-
tion,Office of Solid Waste,Office of Underground
Storage Tanks, and the Technology and
Innovation Office.
EPA Review Board: Rick Popino, Paul Connor,
Reggie Cheatham, Suzanne Wells,
Jeff Heimerman
Gilah Langner, writer
Robin Foster, SciComm lnc.,designer
To receive copies of the newsletter, write us at Cleanup News (MC-2271 A), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW,
Washington, DC 20460, fax:202-564-0094, e-mail swallis@scicomm.com.
EPCRA
MSW
NPL
OERR
OPA
OSRE
PRP
RCRA
SDWA
SEP
TIO
Comprehensive
Emergency Response,
Compensation, and
Liability Act
(Superfund law)
Emergency Planning
and Community Right-
To-KnowActof 1986
Municipal Solid Waste
National Priorities List
(Superfund)
Office of Emergency
Response and
Remediation (EPA)
Oil Pollution Act
Office of Site Remedia-
tion Enforcement (EPA)
Potentially Responsible
Party
Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act
(hazardous waste)
Safe Drinking Water Act
Supplemental Environ-
mental Project
Technology and
Innovation Office (EPA)
United States Environmental
Protection Agency
(2271A)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
FIRST CLASS
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT NO. G-35
Address Service Requested
------- |