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-
tion—the 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

-------