Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement (2271 A)
Washington, DC 20460
Summer 2004
EPA300-N-04-005
Issue #17
Environmental Protection
Agency
cleanupne
^^^^_
inside
Spotlight
CASES
Highlights
Guam UST Facilities Fined
Power of Change
OSWER News
RCRA CA Conference
In the Courts
Non-Settlor Challenges
U.S. Responsible for Costs
Tidbits
Performance Track
Compost Awareness
Calendar
Glossary
CleanupNews is a quarterly
newsletter highlighting hazardous
waste cleanup cases, policies,
settlements and technologies.
National Award
Recipients Honored
EPA recognized the
achievements of indi-
viduals and teams in
Regional waste management pro-
grams at the Notable Achieve-
ment Awards ceremony on April
27, 2004. Thirty-three awards
were presented in 10 categories
including Superfund, Superfund
Enforcement, and RCRA Correc-
tive Action. Other award catego-
ries include Assistant Adminis-
trators Priorities, Brownfields,
Chemical Emergency Prepared-
ness and Prevention Office, Fed-
eral Facilities Response, Regional
Science, Resource Conservation,
and the Underground Storage Tank
Program.
Attending her last ceremony as
Assistant Administrator (AA) of
OSWER, Marianne Horinko gave a
welcome speech and presented the
Assistant Administrator's Priori-
ties Award to Charles K. Eger for
his work for Operation River City,
a 60-hour mock terrorism exercise
conducted last year in Louisville,
Kentucky.
The Acting AA of the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance As-
surance, Thomas V. Skinner, intro-
continued on page 2
EPA Releases Guidance
on Ability to Pay and De
Minimis Amendments
By Susan Boushell, Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
On May 17, 2004, EPA
issued the Interim
Guidance on the Ability
to Pay and De Minimis Revisions
to CERCLA § 122(g) by the Small
Business Liability Relief and
Brownfields Revitalization Act.
This guidance addresses changes
made to CERCLA § 122 (g) by the
2002 Brownfields Amendments,
which generally fall into two cat-
egories: 1) those that apply to po-
tentially responsible parties
(PRPs) that are de minimis and
demonstrate a limited ability, or
inability, to pay their entire liability
at a site; and 2) those that apply to
all de minimis parties regardless of
their financial status.
First, the guidance discusses exist-
ing EPA policy regarding ability to
pay (ATP) and de minimis parties.
The guidance clarifies that, for the
most part, the ATP and de minimis
amendments to Section 122(g) do not
change EPAs existing guidances and,
therefore, these documents will re-
main in effect.
Second, the guidance discusses the
ATP amendments and their relation-
continued on page 3
on recycled paper
-------
Awards, continued from page 1
ducedthe four awards in the Superfund
Enforcement category, which were pre-
sented by Elliott Gilberg, Deputy Di-
rector of the Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement. Mike Stephenson of
Region 4 was honored with the Legal
Enforcer of the Year Award. As the
lead Regional attorney, Mike was in-
strumental in achieving a consent de-
cree (CD) for the complex Anniston
PCB Superfund Site in Anniston, Ala-
bama. The settlement provides for
funding of a $3.2 million educational
foundation for children, conduct of both
a time-critical and a non-time critical
removal action, and completion of a
remedial investigation/feasibility
study.
Cliff Davis, a Civil Investigator for
Region 9's Superfund Program, re-
ceived the Technical Enforcer of the
Year Award. In FY03, Cliff provided
enforcement support services at eight
Superfund sites, provided financial
assurance training and financial con-
sultation services, and developed an
innovative enforcement system that
combines data from several data-
bases. Cliff also was recognized for
mentoring new staff, participating in
national workgroups, and managing
Region 9's Superfund enforcement sup-
port contract.
Linda Baric and Barbara Borden,
the Region 3 Office of the Controller
Superfund State Contracts (SSC)
Team, won the Financial Management
Team of the Year Award. Region 3
ranks number one among all EPA re-
gions for SSC revenue utilization and
manages the second largest number
of SSC accounts and dollars. The Re-
gion 3 Team developed the Superfund
State Contract Billing System
(SSCBS) to track and manage ac-
counts receivables from Superfund
Sites. The team also developed an
SSC spreadsheet to manage SSC rev-
enue and report on progress that has
been adopted by EPA HQ for use na-
ional Notable
Elliott Gilberg presents the Legal Enforcer of the Year Award to Mike Stephenson,
Region 4, for his work at the Anniston PCB Site in Anniston, Alabama. Also
pictured are Marianne Horinko and Thomas V. Skinner (far right)
tionwide. The SSCBS helped the Re-
gion 3 SSC Team collect $49.2 million
in revenue.
The NL/Taracorp Enforcement Team
(Brad Bradley, Sheri Bianchin, and
Larry Johnson) of Region 3 received the
Enforcement Team of the Year Award.
The Team successfully negotiated
three major CDs, valued at over
$63,000,000, for the NL/Taracorp
Superfund Site in Granite City, Illinois.
Because of the Team's efforts, the
cleanup of 1,600 lead-contaminated
residential yards and the $2 million in
funding for a lead paint abatement pro-
gram in homes near the site is assured.
For more information on the Notable
Achievement Awards visit:
http://www.clu-m.org/awards/orcontact
Ann Eleanor, (703) 603-7199.
Want to join us in conserving paper?
It's fast and simple.
Go to the CleanupNews page at:
, enter your email
address, and click "Submit." When a new issue of
CleanupNews comes out, you'll receive it in HTML—right to
yourdesktop!
Note: Signing up for electronic issues does not automati-
cally cancel your hard copy subscription. Send hard copy
subscription change requests to
cleanup
-------
"Smart Enforcement" Strategy
Announced
ByTriciaBuzzell, Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
At the recent National RCRA
Corrective Action Conference
in Orlando, Florida, Steve Shimberg.
Associate Assistant Administrator
of EPAs Office of Enforce-
ment and Compliance As-
surance (OECA), announced
a new targeted strategy to
better control human expo-
sure at or near hazardous
waste facilities that were identified
as high priorities for cleanup in 1999.
The Corrective Action Smart Enforce-
ment Strategy (CASES) is one of sev-
eral approaches EPA is using to get
almost 2,000 facilities to address
contamination that is potentially
harmful to human health. CASES is
a strategy to ensure that EPA is us-
ing its enforcement authorities, where
appropriate, to meet performance
goals.
CASES focuses efforts on meeting
the human exposure environmental
indicator (El) goal because it directly
relates to protection of public health.
There is little room for slippage in the
projections for achieving this indica-
tor by 2005.
The strategy applies the elements of
EPAs Smart Enforcement initiative to
a specific task. As Shimberg stated in
CASES is a strategy to ensure that EPA is
using its enforcement authorities, where
appropriate, to meet performance goals.
his remarks at the conference, "Target-
ing enforcement attention to the
situations where it can really help move
cleanups along, and exercising flexibil-
ity in what tools we use, is what Smart
Enforcement is all about and is the way
we will be doing business."
CASES is truly a targeted approach
aimed at success. EPA developed a list
of 16 candidate facilities after review-
ing several factors, including when the
facilities were projected to meet the hu-
man health El and whether EPA had
the lead for making the El determina-
tion . EPA then further refined the list by
removing sites that were clearly
unable to meet the El due to site
specific issues unrelated to compliance —
for example, complex technical factors.
OECA is working closely with the
EPA Regional offices to develop and
implement facility-specific plans for
these 16 targeted facilities.
The plans vary widely, reflect-
ing CASES' flexible approach
to enforcement. EPA believes
that even with a relatively low
level of effort (and possibly
without even a formal enforcement ac-
tion), the enforcement program can
have a significant impact on meeting
the 2005 Corrective Action perfor-
mance goals. According to Shimberg.
"CASES is already starting to have a
real impact at sites. We have issued
several orders under the strategy and
already are starting to see more
cleanup. At some facilities where we
merely considered enforcement, com-
panies got the message and agreed to
clean up voluntarily."
For more information about Corrective
Action enforcement, see the compliance
•website at: http://www.epa.gov/
compliance/cleanup/rcra/index.html.
0)
Guidance, continued from page 1
ship to EPAs existing ATP policy. The
amendments specifically authorize
EPA to negotiate settlements based
on a PRP establishing an inability or
limited ATP rather than on its full
liability at the site, and require ATP
applicants to promptly provide EPA
with the information necessary for the
Agency to assess the PRP's inability
or limited ATP. The amendments
also direct EPA to consider appropri-
ate alternative payment methods
when ATP PRPs are unable to pay the
"total settlement amount at the time
of settlement."
Third, the guidance explains the de
minimis amendments and their im-
pact on EPAs existing policy. Under
these amendments, EPA will:
• Determine if a PRP is eligible or
ineligible for a CERCLA §122(g)
settlement
• Notify a PRP of a de minimis
eligibility determination
• Consider a PRP's degree of
cooperation when making a
settlement eligibility determination
• Impose a waiver of claims
requirement on CERCLA § 122(g)
settlers
• Impose on settlors a continuing
obligation of cooperation at the site
• Notify non-settlors about a final
CERCLA §122(g) settlement
Finally, the guidance provides four
model notice letters for use by Re-
gional staff. Two of the model let-
ters, "Model Notice of Eligibility to
Receive a De Minimis Party Settle-
ment" and "Model Notice of Ineligi-
bility to Receive a De Minimis Party
Settlement", apply to all de minimis
parties. The "Model Notice Approv-
ing Reduction in Settlement Amount
Based on Inability to Pay" and the
"Model Notice Denying Reduction in
Settlement Amount Based on Inabil-
ity to Pay" specifically address ATP.
The guidance and models are available at
http://www. epa.gov/compliance/
resources/policies/cleanup/superfund/.
For additional information, contact Susan
Boushell, OSRE (202) 564-2173.
cleanupnews 3
-------
(ft
Four Guam Facilities Fined for
Underground Storage Tank Violations
In February 2004, EPA issued field
citations resulting in total fines of
$1,800 to four Guam facilities for fed-
eral underground storage tank (LIST)
violations. These facilities are the
AAFES Service Station at
Anderson Air Force Base.
the Hotel Palmridge, the
MCI Agana, and the Tumon
Bay Capital Hotel. The vio-
lations included failure to
properly maintain release
detection systems, failure to give
Guam EPA 30 days notice prior to
bringing an LIST system into use, fail-
ure to install overfill prevention
equipment on existing tanks, and fail-
ure to obtain adequate pollution in-
surance .
EPA and Guam EPA intend to in-
spect all LIST systems in Guam by
2005 to make sure that the systems
can prevent and detect leaks and re-
leases to the environment. Because
Guam has a limited fresh water sup-
ply, ensuring safe, reliable LIST system
operation is critical.
EPA imposed the Guam fines un-
der the LIST federal field citation
program, which encourages EPA to is-
sue field citations to address com-
mon, easily corrected violations
that carry a penalty. The Office of
Underground Storage Tanks
(OUST) established a framework
for addressing specific UST viola-
" Owners and operators who fail to settle a
field citation could receive penalties up to
$11,000 per violation per tank per day in
addition to the costs associated with the
cleanup of leaking tanks. "
tions with field citations. The
framework, outlined in the Federal
Field Citation Enforcement Guid-
ance (April 1992, Revised October
1993), establishes the scope and
procedures for issuing field cita-
tions. For example, facilities cited
for violations have 30 days from
the date of issuance to pay fines.
Within that 30-day period, facility
owners and/or operators must per-
form and document any necessary
corrective action. If either compli-
ance is not achieved or payment is
not made within that 30-day pe-
riod, or an extension has not been
obtained, the field citation is au-
tomatically withdrawn, leaving
EPA free to pursue additional en-
forcement measures with potentially
much higher fines. Owners and op-
erators who fail to settle a field cita-
tion could receive penalties up to
$11,000 per violation per tank per
day in addition to the costs
associated with the cleanup
of leaking tanks.
EPAs use of field citations
expedites the enforcement
process for these targeted vio-
lations. Field citations are is-
sued on-site, with a minimum of le-
gal paperwork and procedural re-
quirements. This allows EPA to con-
centrate enforcement staff time and
resources on addressing releases or
violations that can not be addressed
through the field citation program.
In addition to EPA and state re-
sources, the field citation program
also saves owners and operators time
and resources. Rather than spend-
ing money on the litigation process.
the owners and operators focus on cor-
recting the violation and achieving
compliance.
For further information, contact
Norwood Scott, EPA Region 9, (415) 972-
3373.
ower of Change:
Older Americans
A New Education Campaign for
EPAs Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER)
launched a new education campaign,
called the Power of Change, on April
14, 2004, at the Joint Conference of
the American Society on Aging and
the National Coalition on Aging in
San Francisco, CA. The Power of
Change will help older Americans
learn how to reduce waste and make
better environmental decisions.
The campaign is part of EPAs Re-
source Conservation Challenge, a
nationwide program finding more ef-
fective ways to reduce waste by con-
serving natural resources and en-
ergy. The Power of Change is also
part of the Agency's Aging Initiative,
which is intended to improve the
health of older Americans.
The Power of Change campaign
offers a tool kit that provides infor-
mation on making good environmen-
tal decisions when moving, traveling,
and using health care products. The
resources offered in the Power of
Change tool kit can be ordered or
downloaded directly from http://
www.epa.gov/epaoswer/aging/
index.htm
For more information, contact Diane
Bartosh, Office ofSolidWaste (703)-308-7895.
cleanupnews
-------
National Corrective Action Conference,
Orlando, FL - May 11-12, 2004
By Karen Tomimatsu, Office of Solid Waste
Over 350 people representing states,
EPA regions, consultants and indus-
tries gathered in Orlando, Florida for
the annual National Corrective Ac-
tion Conference. Marianne Horinko,
Assistant Administrator for the Of-
fice of Solid Waste and Emergency Re-
sponse, gave the keynote address an-
nouncing the 2020 RCRA Corrective
Action Challenge. Horinko said,
"Cleaning up more than 3800 sites
with a RCRA corrective action obliga-
tion is no small matter, but I believe
the RCRA clean-up program can be re-
shaped to achieve that goal. The 2020
Challenge is forcing us to re think how
we implement the corrective action
program, and we have to look far be-
yond the traditional corrective action
process, and consider novel approaches
in a way we never have before. We need
to pursue innovative ideas such as self-
implemented, self-certified cleanups
with audits — a 'trust but verify' model;
use of third party professionals to over-
see clean-up processes; enrollment of
RCRA facilities in streamlined state
response programs; and development
of an 'oversight light' model that out-
lines a few key check-in points where
discussion of clean-up decisions may
be important."
Ms. Horinko presented awards to
companies who recently took the Envi-
ronmental Indicator (El) Pledge:
BeazerEast, Inc., Dow Chemical Com-
pany, Dupont Engineering, Koppers,
Inc., and Safety-KLeen. By taking the
El pledge, these companies have com-
mitted to achieving "yes" determina-
tions for both human exposure and mi-
gration of contaminated groundwater
Els at all of their facilities by Septem-
ber 30, 2005. These companies are
considered model partners with EPA
and the states in working to help
achieve important RCRA cleanup goals.
Dwight Bedsole, representing Dow Chemical Company, accepts EPA's
Environmental Indicator Pledge Certificate from Marianne Horinko,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
The following industry, state and re-
gional programs also were recognized.
• Hamilton Sundstrand facility, in
Denver, CO, received the Industry
El Leadership Award for rapidly
addressing residential indoor air
contamination and groundwater
contamination.
• The New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation re-
ceived the State El Leadership
Award for their consistent leader-
ship in the corrective action program.
They were particularly successful in
attaining positive El determina-
tions for high-priority facilities in
New York.
"Cleaning up more than 3800 sites with a RCRA corrective
action obligation is no small matter, but I believe the RCRA
clean-up program can be reshaped to achieve that goal. "
-Marianne Horinko, Assistant Administrator for
the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
* The Dow Chemical Company re-
ceived the Industry Streamlining
Award for their work at their site
in Gales Ferry, CT. This facility
moved from starting the investiga-
tion to remedy selection in 6.5 years.
Dow also created a standing
Citizen's Advisory Panel to involve
community stakeholders at the
site.
The Virginia Department of Envi-
ronmental Quality received the
State Streamlining Corrective Ac-
tion Award for their outstanding
leadership in implementing the cor-
rective action program, embracing
RCRA Reforms, and for setting the
standard for an effective federal-
state partnership.
continued on page 6
cleanupnews 5
-------
(ft
•c
o
o
0)
Corrective Action continued from page 5
* EPA Region 7 received the Regional
El Leadership Award. Region 7
made excellent progress in meeting
El goals, with projected expectations
of reaching between 98-99 percent
for the human exposure El and over
80 percent for the groundwater mi-
gration under control El by the end
of 2005.
• EPA Region 9 received the Regional
Leadership in Streamlining Correc-
tive Action Award. While facing ma-
jor challenges at some of their larg-
est facilities, dedicatedpersonnelcon-
ducted significant streamlining ef-
forts to maximize environmental re-
sults in both El and final cleanups.
EPA, in consultation with the states.
is developing a comprehensive imple-
mentation strategy for the 2020
Challenge. Participants attended
workgroup sessions in which they
brainstormed the "top four things
neededto achieve the 2020 Challenge,"
and the "top two things that need to
be done to meet the 2020 Challenge."
The strategy will be available later
this year.
All conference presentations and
abstracts will soon be available at:
http://www.nationalcaconf.com.
For further information contact Karen
Tomimatsu, OSW, (703) 605-0698.
Courts Differ on
Non-Settlor
Challenges to
Consent Decrees
By David Dowton, Office of Site
Remediation Enforcement
Two recent decisions highlight the
difference of opinion regarding a non-
settling party's right to intervene and
challenge a lodged consent decree
(CD). In United States v. Acorn Engi-
neering, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8282
(C.D. Ca., Mar. 23, 2004), a California
district court denied Carrier
Corporation's motion to intervene and
challenge the fairness of the CD lodged
for the Puente Valley Operable Unit
of the San Gabriel Valley Site. The
district court held that a non-settling
potentially-responsible party's (PRP)
contribution claim does not provide a
right to intervene under CERCLA or
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court reasoned that allowing non-
settlors to intervene would undermine
one of CERCLAs main goals to en-
courage settlement. The court noted
that the notice and comment proce-
dures found in Section 122(d)(2) of
CERCLA are the proper avenue for a
non-settling PRP to raise concerns re-
garding the consent decree.
Reaching the opposite conclusion, a
New York district court held in United
States v. City of Glen Cove, 2004 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 7496 (E.D.N.Y., April 29,
2004), that a non-settling PRP's con-
tribution claim did give it an interest
in the action as the public review and
comment process did not adequately
protect its interest. The non-settling
PRP, TDY Industries, brought a con-
tribution claim against a number of
Federal PRPs. Subsequently, the
United States entered into a CD with
a private party, a municipality and the
Federal PRPs. TDY moved to inter-
vene and challenge the CD arguing that
entry of the CD would extinguish its
contribution claims against the Fed-
eral PRPs. The court acknowledged
that most jurisdictions have found
that a loss of a contribution right is
not enough to warrant intervention.
but elected to align itself with the
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals that
has held that a contribution right is
enough to warrant intervention if the
settlement purports to cut off the
rights of a party not present in the liti-
gation. The court notedthat interven-
tion was particularly appropriate
in this case since "the federal gov-
ernment was on both sides of the
negotiation table and essentially
reached a settlement with itself."
For further information, contact
David Dowton, OSRE, (202) 564-
4228
U.S. Held
Responsible
for Superfund
Costs at
DuPont Site in
Morgantown,
WV
By David Dowton, Office of Site
Remediation Enforcement
In DuPont v. United States, 2004
U.S. App. LEXIS 8368 (Fed. Cir.,
Apr. 28, 2004), the Court of Ap-
peals for the Federal Circuit has
ruled that the U.S. must reim-
burse DuPont for Superfund costs
incurred by DuPont to investigate
and clean up a munitions plant in
Morgantown, WV.
In 1940, the U.S. contracted
with DuPont to design, construct
and operate a munitions plant in
Morgantown. The contract in-
cluded an indemnification clause
protecting DuPont from any loss.
expense, or damage arising out of.
or in connection with, the perfor-
mance of work under the contract.
In 1946, the U.S. terminated the
contract and entered into a
supplemental agreement with
DuPont that preservedthe indem-
nification clause.
More than 50 years later.
DuPont brought an action to re-
cover costs incurred under
CERCLA. The Court of Federal
Claims held that, although the
cleanupnews
-------
U.S. agreed to indemnify DuPont, the
open-ended indemnification clause
violated the Anti-Deficiency Act and
barred any recovery. (The Anti-Defi-
ciency Act prohibits an executive
agency from entering into a contract
for future payment of money in excess
of the congressional appropriation for
that fiscal year unless the contract is
authorized by law.) The Court of Ap-
peals reversed holding that, in this
particular case, the Contract Settle-
ment Act of 1944, which allowed the
military to terminate the bulk of its
contract duties entered into during
World War II, authorized the U.S. to
preserve the indemnification clause.
The Court went on to find that the
indemnification clause was written
broadly enough to include the costs of
future environmental liability. The
decision means the U.S. will have to
reimburse DuPont for investigating
and cleaning up the site. The Court
remanded the case to the trial court
for an exact cost determination, but it
is believed DuPont incurred roughly $2
million in costs at the site.
The decision could potentially sub-
ject the U.S. to similar claims at the
many other plants operated during
World War II.
For further information, contact David
Dowton, OSRE, (202) 564-4228
Performance Track
Rule Increases
Participant
Incentives
On April 14, 2004, EPA Adminis-
trator Mark Leavitt signed the Per-
formance Track Rule, expanding the
administrative and regulatory incen-
tives of this voluntary, performance-
based environmental compliance pro-
gram. The rule builds on the incen-
tives already offered by the National
Environmental Performance Track
program, begun in 2000 and managed
by EPAs National Center for Envi-
ronmental Innovation.
The rule, proposed in August 2002.
became effective on April 22, 2004. It
states that facilities participating in
the Performance Track program are
not required to submit reports under
the Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) provisions of the
Clean Air Act as frequently as non-
participants. In addition, partici-
pants who are large quantity hazard-
ous waste generators and meet spe-
cific conditions are now allowed to
accumulate hazardous waste for up
to 180 days without a RCRA permit
or interim status. Generators having
to transport hazardous waste over
200 miles for disposal are allowed up
to 270 days to accumulate waste un-
der this rule.
Currently, the Performance Track
program has 344 members. To qualify
as a participant in the program, each
member must meet the following cri-
teria: have implemented an Environ-
mental Management System; have
demonstrated past, current, and fu-
ture commitment to environmental
improvements, public outreach and
reporting; and have demonstrated cer-
tification of and commitment to envi-
ronmental compliance.
The benefits of participating in this
program include: public recognition by
EPA through awards, website list-
ings, and networking opportunities;
increased information exchange to
improve environmental performance
via seminars, roundtable discussions.
and mentoring programs; and admin-
istrative and regulatory incentives.
such as decreasedpriority of participant
facilities for routine inspections and
more flexible permitting procedures.
More information on the National
Environmental Performance Track
program can be found on EPA's website:
http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/index.htm.
Raising Compost
Awareness
During May 2-8, 2004, the US
Composting Council, a national non-profit
organization, promoted International
Compost Awareness Week to raise
awareness of composting as an effec-
tive way to reduce municipal solid
waste (MSW) destined for landfills.
Composting advocacy groups in the US
and Canada held a variety of community
events, including compost give-aways.
sales, and demonstrations to raise
awareness.
Composting is a natural method of re-
cycling organic wastes (e.g., yard trim-
mings and kitchen wastes). Through
controlled decomposition, utilizing time.
heat and microorganisms, these wastes
are diverted from the waste stream and
converted into compost, a soil enhance-
ment that can be used in gardens and
landscaping. Many kinds of household
wastes including yard trimmings; food
scraps (e.g., fruit and vegetable wastes.
egg shells, coffee grounds); fireplace ash;
and even wool or cotton rags can be
composted. Food scraps and yard trim-
mings make up approximately 25 per-
cent of all household waste, while 67 per-
cent of the total MSW generated in the
U.S. can be composted. This means that
composting can significantly reduce the
total amount of MSW going to landfills.
Compost has several uses including
bioremediation and pollution preven-
tion, suppression of plant diseases, pest
and erosion control, landscaping, refor-
estation, and wetlands and habitat res-
toration. The use of compost reduces
the need for expensive chemical fertiliz-
ers and pesticides, increases the health
and longevity of plants, and increases the
conservation of natural re sources.
From individual backyard compost heaps
to community-wide compost drop-off
facilities, there are many ways to
participate in composting to reduce
municipal waste.
For more information on composting, see
EPA s website: http://www.epa.gov/
epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/compost.htm.
deanupnews 7
(ft
-------
June 23 & 24, 2004
Restoring Greenspace: Using
Ecological Enhancements at
Regions 2 and 3
Contaminated Sites
Philadelphia, PA
July 12-14, 2004
ASTSWMO 2004 State
Hazardous Waste Managers
Conference
Washington, DC
Contact: Jocelyn Scott (202) 564-4795
http://www,astswmo,org
August 16-18, 2004
ASTSWMO 2004 State
Superfund Program Managers
Symposium
Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: Jocelyn Scott (202) 564-4795
http://www,astswmo,org
September 20-22, 2004
Brownfields 2004: "Gateway to
Revitalization"
St. Louis, MO
http://www.brownfields2004.org
Glossary
AA Assistant Administrator
ATP Ability to Pay
CASES Corrective Action Smart Enforcement
Strategy
CD Consent Decree
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
El Environmental Indicators
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
cleanupne
OSRE Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
OSW Office of Solid Waste
OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response
OUST Office of Underground Storage Tanks
PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls
PRPs Potentially Responsible Parties
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RI/FS Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study
SSC Superfund State Contracts
SSCBS Superfund State Contract Billing System
UST Underground Storage Tank
^^^yww.epa.gov/compliance/abouVoffices/opre.l
Richard W. Popino, PhD REM, editor
EPA Review Board; Elliott Gilberg, Diane Bartosh,
Paul Connor, Sandra Connors, Karen Ellenberger,
Jeff Heimerman, Kenneth Patterson, Neilima
Senjalia, Suzanne Wells
AnnePolitis, Sarah Heberling, DPRA Inc., writers
Lauren Grantham, DPRA Inc., designer
CleanupNews is a quarterly publication of
EPA's Office of Site Remediation Enforcement,
in cooperation with the Office of Superfund
Remediation and Technology Innovation, Office
of Underground Storage Tanks, and Office of
Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and
Response. Past issues of CleanupNews can
be found at http://www.epa.qov/conipliance/
resources/newsletters/cleanup
cleaniipnews.html
To comment on the newsletter contact Richard W. Popino, PhD REM, atMC-2271A, U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylva-
nia Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, emaihpopino.rick@epa.gov.
To receive CleanupNews by email, join the listserv at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/listserv/
cleanup.html.
The print edition of Cleanup News is delivered to subscribers via U.S. Mail and/or electronically, depending
on subscriber preference. We also produce an electronic supplement to the Cleanup News print edition.
The supplement, CleanupNews II, is delivered electronically to subscribers four times a year.
008$
^uATj^ joj jfyjuua^
ssauisng T.EIOTJJQ
9E-9'ON Ill/\iy3d
VcB
aiVdS33d1S39VlSOd
ssvioisyid
09tOS OQ '
(VILLZ)
AoueSy uoi
------- |