,V16D Sr/|,
I
5
                   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                   Office of Inspector General

                   At  a   Glance
                                                            08-P-0235
                                                       August 20, 2008
                                                                Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Why We Did This Review

We conducted this review to
I determine whether deletions
from the Superfund National
Priorities List (NPL) have
(1) consistently followed U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) guidance and
met the National Contingency
Plan (NCP) criteria, and
(2) been supported by
complete and high quality data
and analysis which provide
reasonable assurance that
public health and the
environment are protected.

Background

Generally, EPA may delete a
site from the NPL either when
all appropriate responses
under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability
Act have been implemented or
a response under the Act is not
appropriate.
For further information,
contact our Office of
Congressional and Public
Liaison at (202) 566-2391.

To view the full report,
click on the following link:
www.epa.qov/oiq/reports/2008/
20080820-08-P-0235.pdf
EPA Decisions to Delete Superfund Sites
Should Undergo Quality Assurance Review
 What We Found
As of September 2007, EPA had deleted 322 sites from the NPL. Among the
eight sites we reviewed, documentation for the Agency's decision to delete three
sites was not consistent with EPA guidance.  The Agency's decisions for two of
these sites were also not consistent with criteria specified by EPA guidance and
not supported by data and analysis.  EPA did not ensure cleanup activities and
goals were complete and remedies were fully protecting human health and the
environment before deleting these two sites.

Response actions are ongoing at one of the three sites where the decisions did not
meet the criteria specified by EPA guidance. However, EPA needs more data on
the response before it will be able to determine whether this site remains able to
protect human health and the environment. For the second site, EPA has not
ensured that appropriate response actions were taken to address all regulated
substances at the site and that monitoring requirements were met. EPA also has
not ensured that the cleanup requirements were met after the third site  was deleted.

EPA has conducted limited national oversight of deletion decisions made by
EPA's regional offices. National review of deletions is limited because regions do
not always submit required information. When reviews of decisions and
documents did occur, EPA did not verify that sites met criteria specified in
Agency guidance.  Other reasons for the deletion problems include
misinterpretation or noncompliance with deletion requirements.
                               What We Recommend
We recommended that EPA implement a national quality assurance process that
ensures deletion decisions meet criteria specified by EPA guidance and the NCP
and are supported. We also recommended actions to ensure better support for
deletion decisions and oversight of ongoing cleanup activities at the deleted sites
we reviewed. EPA agreed with our recommendations. The recommendations will
remain open until they are fully implemented.

-------