Environmental Protection
United States Office of Enforcement and March 2011
Environmental Protection Agency Compliance Assurance EPA-330-F-11-003
CERCLA Liability and Local
^^ . ....
Government Acquisitions
and Other Activities
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
Local governments can play an important role in facilitating the cleanup and redevelopment of
properties contaminated by hazardous substances. In particular, by acquiring contaminated
properties, local governments have an opportunity to evaluate and assess public safety needs and
promote redevelopment projects that will protect and improve the health, environment, and
economic well-being of their communities.
One impediment to local government acquisition of contaminated property is concern about
potential liability for the cleanup costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, also known as "Superfund" or "CERCLA," 42 U.S.C.
§§ 9601-9675.
This fact sheet addresses CERCLA liability issues for local governments and summarizes key
statutory provisions and requirements.1 It is intended to assist local governments by identifying
CERCLA liability issues and protections that may be applicable to local governments as they
consider involvement at contaminated properties.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends that local governments refer to
the statutory language of CERCLA, the regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 300 (known as the
"National Contingency Plan"), and relevant EPA guidance (referenced at the end of this
document) for more detail. EPA's Regional offices2 also may be able to provide information and
assistance to local governments considering acquisition of contaminated properties. EPA also
encourages local governments to consult with their state environmental protection agency and
legal counsel prior to taking any action to acquire, cleanup, or redevelop contaminated property.
What is CERCLA?
CERCLA outlines EPA's authority for cleaning up properties contaminated with hazardous
substances regardless of whether the properties are in use or abandoned. Additionally, CERCLA
establishes a strict liability system for determining who can be held liable for the costs of
cleaning up contaminated properties. CERCLA also provides EPA with robust enforcement
1 A local government also may have obligations and/or be potentially liable under other environmental statutes such
as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 6901-6992 (RCRA) or state laws.
2 For contact information, see http://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/postal.htmMregional.
-------
authorities to compel cleanups and recover EPA's response and enforcement costs incurred at
these properties. Properties addressed under CERCLA authorities are commonly known as
"Superfund sites."
CERCLA also includes authority for EPA to provide grant funding for the assessment and
cleanup of brownfield sites. CERCLA § 101(39)(A) defines a brownfield site as "real property,
the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or
potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant." Many of the properties
that local governments may be interested in acquiring may qualify as brownfield sites.
For more general information about, and an overview of, CERCLA, please see EPA's website at
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/policy/cercla.htm.
What are the various ways local governments become involved at
contaminated properties?
Local governments may become involved with contaminated properties in a number of ways,
many of which present opportunities to facilitate cleanup or redevelopment. The ways include:
• Providing incentives to promote redevelopment (i.e., zoning, tax increment financing,
etc.);
• Responding to an emergency on the property;
• Transferring of tax liens;
• Collaborating with the current property owner;
• Leasing of the property by the municipality;
• Acquiring the property and "simultaneously" transferring it to a third party;
• Acquiring the property with subsequent transfer to a third party;
• Acquiring the property and managing it through a "land bank"; or
• Acquiring the property for long-term use.
Can a local government be liable under CERCLA?
Yes. CERCLA is a strict liability statute that holds potentially responsible parties (PRPs) jointly
and severally liable, without regard to fault, for cleanup costs incurred in response to the release
or threatened release of hazardous substances. Under CERCLA § 107, a person, including a
local government, may be considered a PRP3 if the person:
• Is the current owner or operator of the contaminated property;
• Owned or operated the property at the time of the disposal of the hazardous substance;
• Arranged for the hazardous substances to be disposed of or treated, or transported for
disposal or treatment; or
• Transported the hazardous substances to the property.
1 According to CERCLA, federally recognized tribes are not included as PRPs.
-------
A local government that falls into one of the classes of PRPs described above may be potentially
liable under CERCLA. Fortunately, CERCLA includes liability exemptions, affirmative
defenses, and protections that may apply to local governments. Additionally, EPA has
enforcement discretion guidance and site-specific tools that may address concerns about
potential CERCLA liability.
Is a local government liable under CERCLA if it responds to an emergency on
a contaminated property?
Local units of government, especially fire, health, and public safety departments, are often the
first responders to emergencies and other dangerous situations at contaminated properties in their
communities. So as not to interfere with these activities, CERCLA § 107(d)(2) provides that
state or local governments will not be liable for "costs or damages as a result of actions taken in
response to an emergency created by a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance by
or from property owned by another party." Note: This protection does not apply in cases where
the local government is grossly negligent or intentionally engages in misconduct. CERCLA §
107(d)(2). Negligence and intentional misconduct are fact-specific determinations.
In addition, CERCLA § 123 authorizes EPA to reimburse local governments for the costs of
temporary emergency measures taken in response to releases within their jurisdiction. These
temporary measures must be "necessary to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the
environment associated with the release or threatened release of any hazardous substance,
pollutant, or contaminant." This reimbursement is to give financial assistance to government
entities that do not have a budget allocated for emergency response and cannot otherwise provide
adequate response measure. The amount of the reimbursement may not exceed $25,000 for a
single response.
For more information on CERCLA § 123 reimbursements, please see EPA's website at
http://www.epa.gov/ceppo/web/content/lawsregs/lgrover.htm.
What CERCLA liability protections are available to local governments if they
acquire contaminated property?
CERCLA contains liability exemptions, affirmative defenses, and protections which may apply
to a local government when it:
• Acquires contaminated property involuntarily by virtue of its function as a sovereign,
CERCLA § 101(20)(D);
• Qualifies for a third party defense or innocent landowner liability protection, CERCLA
§§ 107(b)(3), 101(35)(A);
• Qualifies as a bona fide prospective purchaser (BFPP) when it acquires the
contaminated property, CERCLA §§ 101(40), 107(r)(l); or
• Is conducting or has completed a cleanup of a contaminated property in compliance
with a state cleanup program, CERCLA § 128(b).
-------
Each of these is discussed below in further detail.
Key CERCLA Provisions
• - Could apply to local
governments
o - Could apply to local
governments under
certain circumstances
Involuntary Acquisition
§101(20)(D)
Bona Fide Prospective
Purchaser Protection
§§ 101(40) and 107(r)(l)
Third Party and
Innocent Landowner
Defenses
§§ 107(b)(3) and
101(35)(A)
Enforcement Bar
§128(b)
Methods of Property Acquisition
•_
s
VI
_O
"3
to
M
H
•
•
•
u
O.
S
•_
c
pa
•
•
•
jg
o
to
•
•
•
•
'«
S
o
Q
"c
c
s
o
•
•
•
cS
o
5
0.
•
o
•
o-
o
u
e
c
HH
•
•
•
"c
S
o
•o
c
es
^
«
•
•
c^
C
O
Q
«s
o
•
•
The method or type of property acquisition by a local government will play a critical role in the
application of liability exemptions, affirmative defenses, or protections. Although most often
applied in the purchase and gift/donation context, BFPP status is available for the majority of
property acquisitions. Note: In cases where it is unclear whether the involuntary acquisition
exemption, affirmative defenses, or liability protections are sufficient, EPA encourages the local
government to achieve and maintain BFPP status to increase certainty that it will not be liable
under CERCLA.
-------
What is the meaning of "involuntary acquisition"?
CERCLA § 101(20)(D)4 provides that a unit of state or local government will not be considered
an owner or operator of contaminated property (and thus is exempt from potential CERCLA
liability as a PRP) if the state or local government acquired ownership or control involuntarily.
This provision includes a non-exhaustive list of examples of involuntary acquisitions, including
obtaining property through bankruptcy, tax delinquency, abandonment, or "other circumstances
in which the government entity involuntarily acquires title by virtue of its function as sovereign."
However, it is important to note that this exemption will not apply to any state or local
government that caused or contributed to the release or threatened release of a hazardous
substance from the facility.
For purposes of EPA enforcement, EPA considers an involuntary acquisition or transfer to
include situations "in which the government's interest in, and ultimate ownership of, a specific
asset exists only because the conduct of a non-governmental party.. .gives rise to a statutory or
common law right to property on behalf of the government." Moreover, EPA acknowledges
that tax foreclosure and other acquisitions by government entities often require some affirmative
or volitional act by the local government.6 Therefore, a government entity does not have to be
completely passive during the acquisition in order for the acquisition of property to be
considered involuntary under CERCLA.7 Instead, EPA considers an acquisition to be
involuntary if the government's interest in, and ultimate ownership of, the property exists only
because the actions of a non-governmental party give rise to the government's legal right to
control or take title to the property. For example, although a local government might be required
to engage in certain discretionary or volitional actions to acquire title to a property through tax
delinquency foreclosure or abandonment per state statute, EPA would consider the acquisition
involuntary.8
For more information on state and local government involuntary acquisition, please see EPA's
website at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/revitalization/local-acquis.html.
How does a local government become a bona fide prospective purchaser
(BFPP)?
A local government, whose potential liability is based solely on the fact that it knowingly
purchased a contaminated property and is, therefore, considered the current owner or operator,
will not be liable under CERCLA if it achieves and maintains BFPP status. BFPP status may be
4
CERCLA § 101(35)(A)(ii) also discusses involuntary acquisitions for a unit of state or local government in the
context of the innocent landowner defense pursuant to CERCLA § 101(35)(A).
5 Municipal Immunity from CERCLA Liability for Property Acquired through Involuntary State Action
(EPA/OSRE/OSWER, 10/20/1995) at 3.
6 Mat 4.
1 Id.
8 Id.
-------
achieved even when the buyer has knowledge of the contamination on the property at the time of
purchase. Moreover, EPA encourages local governments to achieve and maintain BFPP status in
cases where it is unclear whether involuntary acquisition, affirmative defenses, or other liability
protections may be sufficient to avoid CERCLA liability.
CERCLA §§ 101(40) and 107(r)(l) provide that a BFPP is a person or tenant of a person who
acquired the property after January 11, 2002 and meets the following threshold criteria:
• All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) were performed prior to purchase of the property
pursuant to CERCLA § 101(35)(B);
• All disposal of hazardous substances occurred before the party acquired the property;
and
• The party has "no affiliation" with a liable or potentially liable party.
CERCLA §§ 101(40)(C)-(G) provide additional criteria for maintaining BFPP status. These
continuing obligations that must be met after acquisition of the property include:
• Complying with land use restrictions and not impeding the effectiveness of the
institutional controls;
• Taking "reasonable steps" to prevent the release of hazardous substances. These
obligations are site-specific, but may include preventing threatened future releases
and/or limiting exposure to earlier hazardous substance releases. Institutional controls,
discussed further below, may play a critical role in complying with reasonable steps;
• Providing full cooperation, assistance and access;
• Complying with information requests and administrative subpoenas; and
• Providing legally-required notices.
To remain protected from CERCLA liability for the existing contamination while it owns the
property, a local government must maintain its BFPP status for as long as the potential for
liability exists. Potential liability exists for as long as contamination remains on the property
and/or the statute of limitations on CERCLA cost recovery actions is not in effect. It is
important to note that a local government may become liable for any new contamination that
may occur, even if the statute of limitations has run on existing contamination.
Although a BFPP is not liable for the cost of cleaning up the property, the property itself could
be subject to a "windfall lien"9 if EPA has spent money cleaning up the property after the BFPP
acquires it and EPA's cleanup efforts have increased the fair market value of the property.
CERCLA § 107(r)(2). The windfall lien is limited to the lesser of EPA's unrecovered response
costs or the increase in fair market value attributable to EPA's cleanup. EPA may be able to file
a windfall lien on the property if:
• EPA spent money cleaning up the property before acquisition by a BFPP if certain
requirements are met (i.e., where there are substantial unreimbursed costs);
• EPA's response action results in a significant increase in the property's fair market value;
• There are no viable, liable parties from whom EPA could recover its costs; and
9 CERCLA contains two sections which discuss the ability of the federal government to impose liens. This fact
sheet addresses the windfall provision of CERCLA § 107(r), but will not discuss liens provided under CERCLA §
107(1).
-------
• A response action occurs while the property is owned by a person who is exempt (other
than a BFPP) from CERCLA liability.
Whether EPA will perfect a windfall lien and prevent a potential windfall in such instances will
be determined by site-specific circumstances and the equities of the particular situation.
For more information on AAI, please see EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/
aai/index.htm. For more information on the BFPP liability protection and/or windfall liens,
please see EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/revitalization/bfpp.html.
What are the requirements for the third party defense or innocent landowner
defense?
CERCLA § 107(b)(3) provides a "third party" affirmative defense to CERCLA liability for any
owner, including local governments, that can prove, by the preponderance of the evidence, that
the contamination was caused solely by the act or omission of a third party whose act or
omission did not occur "in connection with a contractual relationship." Moreover, an entity
asserting the CERCLA § 107(b)(3) defense must show that: a) it exercised due care with respect
to the contamination; and b) it took precautions against foreseeable acts or omissions, and the
consequences thereof by the third party that caused the contamination.
Congress enacted the Brownfields Amendments10 and expanded the third party defense by
creating exclusions to the definition of a contractual relationship. Previously, the deed
transferring title between a PRP and the new landowner was a "contractual relationship" that
prevented the new landowner from raising the traditional CERCLA § 107(b)(3) third party
defense. To promote redevelopment and provide more certainty, Congress also clarified the
"innocent landowner defense," which requires an entity to meet the criteria set forth in CERCLA
§ 101(35), in addition to the requirements of CERCLA § 107(b)(3). CERCLA § 101(35)(A)
distinguishes three types of innocent landowners:
• Purchasers who acquire property without knowledge of contamination, CERCLA §
• Governments "which acquired the facility by escheat, or through any other involuntary
transfers or acquisition, or through the exercise of eminent domain authority by
purchase or condemnation," CERCLA § 101(35)(A)(ii); and
• Inheritors of contaminated property, CERCLA § 101(35)(A)(iii).
For more information on qualifying for the innocent landowner defense where the purchaser
acquired property without knowledge of the contamination, please see EPA's Interim Guidance
Regarding Criteria Landowners Must Meet in Order to Qualify for Bona Fide Prospective
Purchasers, Contiguous Property Owner, or Innocent Landowner Limitations on CERCLA
Liability (Common Elements Guidance) available at
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/cleanup/superfund/common-elem-guide.pdf
10 Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (Pub. L. No. 107-118)(hereinafter the
"Brownfields Amendments").
-------
How do state response programs interact with CERCLA's enforcement bar?
Many states have established state-specific response programs (for example, State Superfund,
brownfields, and voluntary cleanup programs). These programs play a critical role in assessing
and cleaning up the vast majority of our nation's brownfields and other lower-risk sites. EPA
supports state response programs through:
• Grant funding to establish and enhance state programs; and
• Non-binding Memoranda of Agreement with individual states that provide general
enforcement assurances to encourage assessments and cleanups pursuant to a state
response program.
CERCLA § 128(b) protects local governments and other parties from EPA enforcement, subject
to specific exceptions, when they comply with a state response program and are conducting or
have completed a cleanup of an eligible response site, as defined by CERCLA § 101(41). This
protection is known as the "enforcement bar." EPA has entered into non-binding Memoranda of
Agreement with over 20 states which clarify EPA enforcement intentions under CERCLA at
sites addressed in compliance with state response programs. It is important to note that while
CERCLA § 128(b) may prohibit EPA from taking an enforcement action; it does not preclude
third party litigation.
For more information about state voluntary cleanup programs and Memoranda of Agreement,
please see EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/revitalization/state.html.
What should a local government do if it obtains contaminated property from
a land bank or redevelopment authority?
EPA recognizes the importance and increased use of land banks and redevelopment agencies as a
tool to address abandoned or vacant properties, promote smart growth, improve existing land use
practices, and support local community development. In an effort to make greater use of these
tools, an increasing number of states and local governments are passing legislation creating land
banks or redevelopment authorities to acquire, redevelop, and reuse abandoned properties.
While many abandoned properties that are of interest to land banks and redevelopment
authorities are not likely to be contaminated, local governments should be aware that
contamination and potential CERCLA liability may exist. A local government may increase the
likelihood that the land bank or redevelopment authority is eligible for CERCLA liability
protection by ensuring that the land bank or redevelopment authority conducts AAI prior to
acquiring the property. Not only is AAI a critical requirement for obtaining most CERCLA
landowner liability protections, but it also aids local governments in making informed property
acquisition decisions. When acquiring abandoned contaminated properties, EPA encourages
local governments to obtain BFPP status prior to acquisition if it is unclear whether other
exemptions, affirmative defenses, or liability protections may apply.
-------
How does CERCLA liability affect eligibility for federal brownfields grant
funding?
EPA brownfields grant money is available to
eligible entities as defined by CERCLA § 104(k)(l).
However, these funds cannot be used to pay
response costs at a brownfield site for which the
grantee is potentially liable under CERCLA § 107.
If an applicant for brownfields grant money may be
potentially liable at the site for which they are
seeking funds, they must document that they qualify
for one of CERCLA's liability protections.
Therefore, one benefit of being covered by a
CERCLA liability protection is that it enables
certain non-liable entities to be potentially eligible
for federal brownfields grant funding. If a local
government intends to protect itself against
CERCLA liability and compete for federal
brownfields grant funding, it is advisable for the
local government to evaluate whether it is eligible
for a grant or become eligible through a liability
protection before acquiring a brownfield site.
For more information about obtaining an EPA
brownfields grant, grant guidelines, and discussions
about the various types of grants that are available, please see EPA's website at
http://www.epa.gov/brownfi elds/grant_info/index.htm.
TYPES OF BROWNFIELDS FUNDING
OPPORTUNITIES
CERCLA §§ 104(k)(4) and (6) authorize
EPA's Brownfields Program to provide
funding in a variety of ways:
• Assessment Grants
• Cleanup Grants
• Revolving Loan Fund Grants
• Job Training Grants
• Training, Research, and
Technical Assistance Grants
• Targeted Brownfields
Assessments
• Area-Wide Planning Pilot
Program
What protections exist when municipal solid waste is disposed of at a
contaminated property?
Prior to the Brownfield Amendments, entities that disposed of municipal solid waste at
contaminated properties argued that they should not be liable for the cleanup of contamination
that was originally and primarily caused by industrial polluters. To address this issue, the
Brownfield Amendments included CERCLA § 107(p) to create a qualified exemption from
CERCLA liability for certain residential, small business, and non-profit generators of municipal
waste at sites on CERCLA's National Priorities List. However, this exemption does not apply to
municipalities who owned or operated a site.
For more information on the municipal solid waste exemption and EPA's guidance on the
exemption, please see EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/
policies/cleanup/superfund/interim-msw-exempt.pdf
-------
What steps might a local government take at a contaminated property to
protect human health and the environment and ensure the integrity of a
cleanup?
When contamination remains on a property during or
after cleanup activities, institutional controls may be
used alone or in combination with engineered
controls to ensure protection of human health and the
environment. Generally, institutional controls are
designed to limit land or resource use (e.g.,
prohibitions on residential use or extraction of ground
water) and to ensure the integrity of engineered
controls (e.g., restrictions on excavating soils on or in
the vicinity of a landfill cap).
As with engineered controls, institutional controls
must be maintained, monitored, and evaluated for as
long as contamination remains on the property at
levels that do not allow for unrestricted use and
unlimited exposure.
WHAT IS AN
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL?
An institutional control is a legal or
administrative restriction on the
use of, or access to, a contaminated
property to protect:
1) the health of both humans and
the environment; and
2) ongoing cleanup activities and
to ensure viability of the
engineered controls.
There are four categories of institutional controls:
• Proprietary Controls (e.g., easement, real covenant, statutory covenant)
• Governmental Controls (e.g., zoning, building permit, land use ordinance)
• Enforcement and Permit Tools (e.g., consent decree, permit, order)
• Informational Devices (e.g., deed notice, government advisory, state registry)
Whether or not a local government asserts BFPP status, it may play a key role in implementing,
monitoring, and enforcing certain institutional controls - particularly for those it has the legal
authority to implement or enforce. A local government also may work proactively with
developers, prospective buyers and tenants, and other parties to ensure that institutional control
requirements are understood and properly integrated into the planning and future reuse of the
property.
If institutional controls are already in place on a particular property, it is important for local
governments to understand the obligations the institutional controls impose and to consider how
those obligations might be viewed by future owners, developers and property users. In some
situations, EPA or the state may be willing to modify existing institutional controls to facilitate
the appropriate reuse of the property as long as the engineered controls component of the cleanup
will not be compromised and remains protective of human health and the environment.
For more information about institutional controls issues, please see EPA's website at
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/policy/ic/index.htm.
10
-------
^RCLA Liability and Local Government Acquisition of
Contaminated Property:
Key Documents
Local
Government
Issue
CERCLA
Provision
Relevant EPA Documents or Guidance (if
Involuntary § 101(20)(D) • Policy on Interpreting CERCLA Provisions Addressing Lenders and
Acquisition Involuntary Acquisitions by Government Entities (EPA/OSRE, 6/30/1997)
• Policy on CERCLA Enforcement Against Lenders and Government Entities
that Acquire Property Involuntarily (EPA/DOJ, 9/22/2005)
• Municipal Immunity from CERCLA Liability for Property Acquired
through Involuntary State Action (EPA/OSRE/OSWER, 10/20/1995)
• Fact Sheet: The Effect of Superfund on Involuntary Acquisitions of
Contaminated Property by Government Entities (EPA/OSRE, 12/31/1995)
Third Party §§ 107(b)(3),
and Innocent 101(35)(A)(ii)
Landowner
Defenses
• Interim Guidance Regarding Criteria Landowners Must Meet in Order to
Qualify for Bona Fide Prospective Purchasers, Contiguous Property Owner,
or Innocent Landowner Limitations on CERCLA Liability ("Common
Elements") (EPA/OSRE, 3/6/2003)
Bona Fide § 101(40) and • Interim Guidance Regarding Criteria Landowners Must Meet in Order to
Prospective § 107(r) Qualify for Bona Fide Prospective Purchasers, Contiguous Property Owner,
Purchaser or Innocent Landowner Limitations on CERCLA Liability ("Common
Elements") (EPA/OSRE, 3/6/2003)
• Issuance of CERCLA Model Agreement and Order on Consent for Removal
Action by a Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser (OSRE/USDOJ, 11/27/2006)
• Enforcement Discretion Guidance Regarding the Applicability of the Bona
Fide Prospective Purchaser Definition in CERCLA § 101(40) to Tenants
(OSRE/OSWER, 1/19/2009)
• Enforcement Discretion Guidance Regarding the Applicability of the Bona
Fide Prospective Purchaser Definition in CERCLA Section 101(40) to
Tenants: Frequently Asked Questions (OSRE, 11/1/2009)
Windfall
Liens
§ 107(r)
• Interim Enforcement Discretion Policy concerning Windfall Liens Under
Section 107(r) of CERCLA (EPA/DOJ, 7/16/2003)
• Windfall Lien Guidance: Frequently Asked Questions (OSRE, 4/1/2008)
• Windfall Lien Administrative Procedures (OSRE, 1/8/2008)
11
-------
Local
Government CERCLA
Issue Provision
Brownfield
Grants
§ 104(k)(4) and
(6)
Relevant EPA Documents or Guidance (if any)
• Brownfields Assessment Pilot/Grants at
http://epa.gov/bro wnfields/assessment_grants.htm
• Revolving Loan Fund Pilot/Grants at http://epa.gov/brownfields/rlflst.htm
• Cleanup Grants at http://epa.gov/brownfields/cleanup_grants.htm
• Area-Wide Planning Pilot Program at
http://www.epa.gov/bro wnfields/areawide_grants.htm
• Brownfield Grant Guidelines Frequently Asked Questions at
http://www.epa.gov^ownfields/proposal_guides/faqpguid.htm
Institutional
Controls
§§ 101(40)(F),
• Institutional Controls: A Citizen's Guide to Understanding Institutional
Controls at Superfund, Brownfields, Federal Facilities, Underground
Storage Tank, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Cleanups
(EPA/OSWER, 2/2005)
• Institutional Controls: A Guide to Implementing, Maintaining, and
Enforcing Institutional Controls at Contaminated Sites (EPA Interim Final
Draft 11/2010)
• Institutional Controls: A Site Manager's Guide to Identifying, Evaluating
and Selecting Institutional Controls at Superfund and RCRA Corrective
Action Cleanups (EPA/OSWER, 9/2000)
State
Voluntary
Cleanups and
Memoranda
of Agreement
§§ 101(41), • To see state-specific voluntary cleanup programs Memoranda of
128 Agreement, please see
http://www.epa.gov^owrrfields/state_tribal/moa_mou.htm
Contact Information
If you have any questions about this fact sheet, please contact Cecilia De Robertis of EPA's
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement at 202-564-5132 or derobertis.cecilia@epa.gov.
Disclaimer: This document is provided solely as general information to highlight certain
aspects of a more comprehensive program. It does not provide legal advice, have any legally
binding effect, or expressly or implicitly create, expand, or limit any legal rights, obligations,
responsibilities, expectations, or benefits for any person. This document is not intended as a
substitute for reading the statute or the guidance documents described in this document. It is the
local government's sole responsibility to ensure that it obtains and retains liability protections.
EPA does not offer any guarantees or warranties for or related to acquisition of a contaminated
property or formerly contaminated property. It is also the local government's sole responsibility
to maintain liability protection status as a contiguous property owner, bona fide prospective
purchaser, or innocent land owner.
12
------- |