Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
FY 2013 NATIONAL PROGRAM
MANAGER'S GUIDANCE
Final - April 27, 2012
Publication Number 530R12001
-------
This page intentionally left blank
-------
of
Executive Summary 1
Key National Program Strategies and Priorities 11
Superfund Remediation and Federal Facilities 11
Balancing the Overall Remedial Pipeline 13
Managing to Completion 15
Federal Facility Cleanup Dialogue 21
Emergency Response and Prevention 24
Emergency Response and Removal Program 24
National Approach to Response 25
Facility Oil Spill Preparedness and Prevention Program 26
Chemical Accident Prevention, Preparedness and Response Program 27
Brownfields and Land Revitalization 31
Assessment, Cleanup, Revolving Loan Fund, and Job Training 32
Area-Wide Planning Program 34
State and Tribal Response Programs 35
Targeted Brownfields Assessment Program 36
Resource Conservation and Recovery 41
Sustainable Materials Management 41
Permitting Program 44
Corrective Action Program 48
Underground Storage Tanks 52
Prevention and Detection of Releases 56
Cleaning Up Contamination 57
Performance Monitoring and Reporting 61
Tribal Program Development 64
Environmental Justice and Community-Based Programs 65
Grants Management Guidelines 68
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 75
Attachments
FY 2013 Measures Appendix I
-------
Explanation of Key Changes between FY 2012 and FY 2013 II
-------
Executive Summary
I. Program Office
This guidance contains implementation priorities for all OSWER program offices: the
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI), the Federal
Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office (FFRRO), the Office of Emergency Management
(OEM), the Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization (OBLR), the Office of
Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) and the Office of Underground Storage
Tanks (OUST). OSWER's enforcement counterparts, principally the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance's (OECA) Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement (OSRE), Office of Civil Enforcement (OCE) and Federal Facilities
Enforcement Office (FFEO), also are represented in this guidance. Additionally,
OSWER collaborates with other agency programs on cross-media issues to address
environmental concerns as One EPA.
II. Introduction/Context
The OSWER guidance defines national policy, strategic goals and priority activities and
related enforcement goals managed by OECA that should be used by the regions, and in
some instances, states and tribes. This guidance, prepared to implement priorities and
strategies described in EPA 's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan1 and in EPA 's FY 2013
Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification2, should be used by the
regions to align their activities with this guidance. Separately, it should be used to assist
in National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS) discussions with
states and with tribes as appropriate. The issuance of this guidance also marks the
beginning of the process wherein regions, with input from states and tribes, establish their
performance commitments toward achieving the agency's goals and enter them into the
Annual Commitment System (ACS). Regions should allocate FTE and extramural
resources as needed to achieve these national goals.
III. Program Priorities
In January 2010, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson highlighted seven priorities to focus
the work of the agency. These themes include taking action on climate change,
improving air quality, assuring the safety of chemicals, cleaning up our communities,
protecting America's waters, expanding the conversation on environmentalism and
working for environmental justice and building strong state and tribal partnerships.
OSWER supports these goals by cleaning up and restoring contaminated land, ensuring
I1\\s FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan including the agency's cross-cutting fundamental strategies can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan.html Waste programs are contained in goal 3.
2 EPA's FY 2013 Annual Performance Plan an d Congressional Justification can be found at
http://www.epa. gov/planandbudget/annualplan/fy2013 .html
Page 1
-------
proper management of waste and petroleum products, promoting sustainable materials
management (SMM), preparing for emergencies and strengthening oversight of oil and
chemical facilities subject to response and risk management plan requirements. The
Community Engagement Initiative (CEI) advances the conversation on environmentalism
by enabling early and effective community engagement of all stakeholders to ensure
meaningful participation in government decisions on land cleanup, emergency response,
and the management of hazardous substances and waste. Environmental justice is a
priority through all of OSWER's waste programs, promoting community engagement and
healthy and environmentally sound conditions for all people.
OSWER Priorities for FY2013:
Promoting the Sustainable Use of Materials: Promote the sustainable use of
materials in the development of goods and services in order to advance the
efficient use of resources, reduce the need for waste disposal capacity, minimize
the environmental impacts of obtaining new mineral resources, and support our
competitive advantage in a global market through nationally focused, results-
oriented sustainable materials management (SMM).
Cleaning up Contaminated Sites and Promoting Reuse: Reduce risk to human
health and the environment by making communities safer and healthier, restoring
groundwater to beneficial uses, protecting other natural resources, and promoting
reuse of formerly contaminated sites.
Balancing the Overall Superfund Remedial Pipeline: Balance the overall
remedial pipeline, including site assessment, site characterization, remedial
design, remedial action, and post-construction operations. Priority will be given
to completing projects already underway and at various stages in the response
process, as opposed to starting new project phases.
Implementing Contracts 2010 Strategy: Implement the Contracts 2010
Strategy by placing emphasis on expanding use of socio-economic firms and local
hires, while maintaining flexibility in the program's acquisition tools. Current
efforts include evaluation of current acquisition tools to identify opportunities for
streamlining and efficiencies. Headquarters and regional offices are collaborating
to develop the framework for achieving the Contracts 2010 goals.
Promoting Brownfields Grant Efficiencies: Implement streamlining measures
to expedite the delivery of resources to communities, states and tribal
governments to promote completion of assessments and cleanups leading to the
reuse of the brownfield properties.
Safeguarding Communities from Chemical and Oil Spill Accidents: Maintain
high response readiness for chemical and oil releases while identifying ways to
maximize resources by focusing on high risk facilities. Respond to hazardous
Page 2
-------
substance releases and identify responsible parties to maximize Superfund
resources.
Protecting Communities through Regulatory and Guidance Actions: Make
progress in the subjects covered by several significant rulemakings, including the
revised Definition of Solid Waste for hazardous secondary materials, standards
for coal combustion residues, financial assurance requirements under CERCLA
section 108(b), and adding the vapor intrusion pathway to the Hazardous Ranking
System.
Expanding Job Training Opportunities in the Environmental Field: Support
non-profit organizations and other eligible entities through Environmental
Workforce Development and Job Training (EWDJT) cooperative agreements to
recruit, train and provide local unemployed and under-employed, predominantly
low-income and minority residents with the skills needed to acquire full-time,
sustainable careers in the environmental field and solid and hazardous waste
remediation.
IV. Regional Priorities
OSWER works with EPA's 10 regional offices, states, tribes and other partners, to
achieve its national goals. Regional offices also undertake efforts with our partners to
address region-specific environmental conditions or concerns. OSWER recognizes these
challenges and strives to provide flexibility and support for regional strategies that align
with our shared priorities and goals.
V. Implementation Strategies
OSWER's cleanup programs stress the importance of incorporating environmental justice
into all of its regulatory and non-regulatory activities. Recognizing that certain
communities are disproportionately burdened by pollution - including minority and low
income communities and tribes - OSWER works to address adverse health and
environmental effects and to ensure they are given the opportunity to participate
meaningfully in environmental cleanup decisions. The program places a strong emphasis
on engaging communities in all stages of decision-making processes and working
collaboratively to develop solutions that address community concerns.
OSWER will continue to implement the Community Engagement Initiative (CEI) started
in October 2009 to enhance OSWER core programs and related regional engagement
with local communities. The CEI promotes transparent and accessible decision-making
processes and delivery of information that communities can use to easily and
meaningfully participate in agency work. Proactive, meaningful engagement with
communities helps EPA programs obtain better information about environmental
problems and local situations, leading to more effective policies and decisions that can
support community goals and plans.
Page
-------
In FY2013, OSWER will continue to coordinate with the multi-region, multi-program
effort led by the Office of Policy to steer the agency toward using communities as one of
the agency's "organizing principles." Regions should look for opportunities to produce
outcomes that enhance internal coordination among major community based programs, to
help communities build capacity and leverage EPA funding and resources; strengthen
staff capacity; and leverage partnerships with public and private sector entities. OSWER
will continue to share best practices and lessons learned from the CEI to integrate into the
larger agency-wide effort.
For the past two years OSWER has advanced specific actions to operationalize
community-based participation across OSWER's programs and into all aspects of our
core programs and processes (e.g., decision-making, rule-making, providing technical
assistance, employee training). In FY 2013, OSWER will institutionalize the results and
products from its CEI3 and integrate them into all OSWER programs through several
activities, including:
o Continued development of an interactive Community Engagement Network;
o Coordinating community engagement training for EPA personnel;
o Integrating CEI results and products into program and project planning (e.g.
considering the "3 R's" framework of delivering the right information to the right
place at the right time to communities);
o Supporting ongoing internal EPA and inter-agency partnerships that align
resources or activities in communities, and;
o Enabling agency-wide use of OSWER's Technical Assistance Services for
Communities (TASC) contract to provide technical assistance to communities.
The CEI also supports the principles of the Presidents Open Government Directive
promoting transparency, collaboration and participation; the agency's Environmental
Justice 2014 strategic plan; and key focus areas within the cross-cutting fundamental
strategy action plans.
OSWER and OECA will continue to implement the Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI), a
multi-year effort to better use the most appropriate assessment and cleanup authorities to
address a greater number of sites, accelerate cleanups where possible, and put those sites
back into productive use while protecting human health and the environment. EPA will
apply regional best practices for managing cleanup projects, as well as lessons learned
from project management pilots and other ICI initiatives more broadly in the program.
Given current budgetary challenges, there will be increasing focus on integrating
successful new concepts and project management strategies.
The ICI has the following five objectives: 1) Starting Cleanups focuses on site
identification and assessment activities in the early stages of the cleanup continuum; 2)
Advancing Cleanups emphasizes coordination during cleanup activities, including
enforcement strategies; 3) Completing Cleanups focuses on applying lessons learned
3 The Community Engagement Initiative (CEI) Action Plan can be found at
http://www.epa. gov/oswer/docs/cei_action_plan_12-09.pdf
Page 4
-------
from pilot projects aimed at accelerating cleanup to the full spectrum of Superfund
cleanup, reporting to the public, and leveraging revitalization efforts as cleanups are
completed; 4) Evaluating Performance Metrics and the Effectiveness of the ICI Activities
focuses on performance measurement; and 5) Communicating the Progress focuses on
communicating the benefits of our cleanup programs.
The following are examples of activities in EPA's cleanup programs which are being
undertaken as part of this initiative:
o Examining current site assessment program policies and practices;
o Revising Hazard Ranking System (HRS) to reflect current science and include
vapor intrusion as a pathway for contaminants;
o Striving to increase the number of Superfund sites where optimization studies
are conducted;
o Evaluating how streamlining the delivery of brownfields resources to
communities, states and tribal governments for site assessment and/or cleanup
can more effectively lead to the cleanup and reuse of sites;
o Leveraging Superfund Removal and Brownfields program resources to
increase cleanup, revitalization and economic development at brownfield
properties and removal sites;
o Assessing possible contract efficiencies;
o Applying regional best practices for managing Superfund cleanup projects and
lessons learned from project management pilots;
o Examining opportunities for early and focused enforcement efforts to compel
timely cleanup;
o Examining opportunities for maximizing PRP-led removal actions.
o Maintaining progress toward constructing remedies at most RCRA corrective
action sites, and cutting off human exposure and groundwater pathways at
these sites, by 2020;
o Enhancing RCRA program focus on federal facilities by building on existing
relationships with federal corrective action partners (e.g., Army, Navy, Air
force, NASA, DOE);
o Improving communication to the public regarding significant milestones at
RCRA corrective action sites making progress for a targeted number of long-
term, complex, high visibility facilities;
o Finalizing a new RCRAInfo code to better communicate progress at operating
facilities as they reach construction completion; and
o Pursuing strategies to reduce backlog of UST releases.
EPA will continue to implement its RE-Powering America's Land: Siting Renewable
Energy on Potentially Contaminated Land and Mine Sites initiative4 to encourage siting
renewable energy facilities on thousands of currently and formerly contaminated
properties across the nation. Cleanup project managers in all land cleanup programs are
4 For more information about RE-Powering America's Land: Siting Renewable Energy on
Potentially Contaminated Land and Mine Sites initiative, please see
http://www.epa.gov/renewableenergyland/index.htm
Page 5
-------
encouraged to consider renewable energy production on their sites as a redevelopment
option. The RE-Powering Rapid Response Team, assembled to provide quick and
accurate input on renewable energy development, is available to assist with assessing
sites for renewable energy and moving projects forward. OSWER's Center for Program
Analysis (CPA) is working with the RE-Powering team to develop tools and communication
materials to promote national consistency across the regions for siting renewable energy on
potentially contaminated lands. In FY 2013, OSWER will implement action items under
the RE-Powering management plan that include providing training for EPA regions,
states, local governments and tribes, working with the National Renewable Energy Lab
(NREL) and communities selected for feasibility studies, coordinating with state and
local governments to improve capacity, developing case studies and reporting results.
OSWER will maximize existing resources while maintaining high response capabilities
and conducting prevention and preparedness activities. Focus will be placed on
inspecting high-risk Risk Management Plan (RMP) and Facility Response Plan (FRP)
facilities, making RMP data more available to the public and working with labs with
chemical warfare agent capabilities to determine whether consolidation is possible while
maintaining effectiveness. Cost-benefit analysis was conducted during FY 2012 and will
continue in FY 2013. EPA also will begin development of the third party audit program
to help improve the efficiency of targeting inspection resources at lower risk facilities.
OSWER will continue to build upon strategies used for implementing the agency's FY
2010-2011 Brownfields Area-Wide Planning Pilot Program priority goal. The
Brownfields Area-Wide Planning (BF AWP) program provides planning assistance in the
form of grant funding (and technical assistance, as needed), to targeted areas - such as a
neighborhood or local commercial corridor - affected by a single large, or multiple,
brownfield site(s). Receiving a BF AWP grant enables the recipient to develop reuse
plans for catalyst brownfield sites, and determine strategies for plan implementation
(including identifying site assessment, cleanup, and other local improvements needed to
help revitalize the area and ensure successful reuse of the brownfields).
Recipients develop an area-wide plan for brownfields through the following actions:
o facilitating community involvement activities, to identify community priorities
and ways to meet those priorities through area brownfields revitalization; and
o conducting research into the existing conditions of the targeted brownfields area
(such as brownfields market analysis, infrastructure studies, known environmental
conditions of the properties, community health issues and environmental justice
concerns, etc); and
o developing a detailed implementation plan, which includes leveraging of
federal/state and other resources for key infrastructure improvements.
OSWER will be implementing an expanded approach to Environmental Workforce
Development and Job Training (EWDJT) that will provide funding to governmental
entities and nonprofit organizations. The funding will enable these organizations to
recruit, train, and provide local unemployed and under-employed, predominantly low-
income and minority residents with the wider skill set needed to acquire full-time,
Page 6
-------
sustainable careers in various aspects of hazardous and solid waste management and
within the larger environmental field. EWDJT cooperative agreements help residents
take advantage of the jobs created by the assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment of
solid and hazardous waste sites in their communities. This effort also gives communities
more flexibility to provide differing types of environmental training based on local labor
market assessments and employers' hiring needs. An example of how OSWER might
support, and how a recipient may choose to provide, a specific training need is the
advancement of sustainable materials management (SMM). Local governments,
community groups or other types of recipients can choose to tailor a curriculum to a
variety of focus areas including materials reuse, recycling and/or composting.
OSWER will advance the sustainable materials management (SMM) practices to create a
cradle-to-cradle perspective. This involves integrating information to foster a national
focus, formulating and issuing policy, and addressing market challenges on raw material
usage (non-fossil fuel or food). EPA considers the human health and environmental
impacts associated with the full lifecycle of materialsfrom the amount and toxicity of
raw materials extraction, through transportation, processing, manufacturing, and use, as
well as re-use, recycling and disposal. The agency's approach to SMM integrates the
safe reuse of materials with economic opportunity. The initial strategy areas include: (1)
federal green challenge to reform government practices, including purchasing, in an
environmentally friendly manner; (2) sustainable food management to help capture and
prevent food from being disposed in landfills; and (3) increase the amount of used
electronics managed by accredited third party electronics recyclers.
In a June 2011 policy statement, Administrator Jackson affirmed the agency's
commitment to anticipate and plan for future changes in climate and required that each
NPM complete a Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plan by the end of FY
2013. In FY 2013, OSWER will complete its Climate Change Adaptation Plan, targeting
activities based on anticipated risks and include steps to more fully integrate climate
change adaptation planning across all OSWER program offices. The major climate
change stressors that may affect OSWER's programs are changes in temperature and
precipitation and rising sea level. For example, the changes in temperature contribute to
the melting of permafrost which may allow contaminants at sites in Alaska to migrate
more readily to adjoining sites and may cause land shifting and subsidence. Furthermore,
the agency's FY 2011 - 2015 Strategic Plan includes a measure to integrate climate
change impacts into financial mechanisms, such as grants. In FY 2013, the Brownfields
program will continue to implement the term and condition in their cleanup grants to
consider climate adaptation and mitigation measures. For all these actions, OSWER
headquarters offices will work closely with the regions to ensure consistent goals and
strategies.
OSWER will continue its extensive and carefully planned participation in state
organization meetings of the Environmental Council of States (ECOS) and the
Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO). In
FY 2013, OSWER management will continue sponsoring quarterly contact with state
organizations, including conference calls with the ECOS Waste Committee in the spring
Page 7
-------
and fall, and Open Door Video Webinars with an open invitation to all states in the
winter and summer. We will continue outreach to our co-regulators to recognize ongoing
fiscal pressures and help identify ways to ease state burdens, such as work sharing,
without compromising environmental protectiveness.
VI. Performance Measures
EPA is pursuing program efficiencies under its ICI to improve the management of the
program and increase joint efforts among programs as well as defining and implementing
new performance measures that further describe the achievements of EPA's cleanup
programs. In FY 2013, OSWER will continue to explore opportunities for improved
performance metrics, communication and coordination among EPA's programs and partners.
EPA is currently working with OMB to establish its FY 2012-2013 priority goals. As part
of these discussions, OSWER has proposed a cross-program goal tracking progress with
cleaning up contaminated sites and making them ready for use. Setting goals for making
sites ready for anticipated use is an important facet of EPA's overall strategy to improve
the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of EPA's cleanup programs. By
September 30, 2013, an additional 22,100 sites will be ready for anticipated use.
OSWER continues to emphasize the importance of cross-program revitalization measures
to promote and communicate cleanup and revitalization-related accomplishments and
associated benefits/values to society. In FY 2013, OSWER will enter its second year of
reporting on the number of sites made ready for anticipated use under its priority goal.
OSWER will also report the number of acres that are ready for use. These measures
enable OSWER to more fully describe the collective scope of sites being addressed by all
of its cleanup programs as well as acres-based progress. Further, OSWER will continue
to collect and report results for two other cross-program revitalization measures:
Universe Indicator - the total number of sites and acres being addressed by all
OSWER's cleanup programs.
Protective for People Performance Measure - the number of sites and acres at
which there is no complete pathway for human exposures to unacceptable levels
of contamination based on current site conditions.
OSWER programs are expected to provide updates on these measures in the OSWER
Accomplishment Report.
In the area of waste minimization, OSWER will be implementing a new SMM annual
performance measure, "Tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin resources
through sustainable materials management," with performance targets for FY 2012 and
2013. To support the national goals, we also will implement a measure in ACS, "Number
of participants recruited for Sustainable Materials Management Challenges." For
purposes of reporting, OSWER will continue efforts to improve measurement of
materials management which might require adjustments to or the replacement of the
Page 8
-------
existing MSW Characterization report.
OSWER has identified performance measures and is exploring their potential for
reflecting benefits to children's health and environmental justice populations. These
include the Superfund and RCRA programs' human exposures to toxins under control
measures for children's health populations and the acres of brownfields property made
ready for reuse measure for both children's health and environmental justice populations.
OSWER supports the agency's focus on children's health and environmental justice and
is in the process of exploring options for reflecting progress in these priority areas.
EPA and DOD have formed a Goal Harmonization workgroup which is committed to
better assess cleanup progress at Superfund federal facility NPL installations in an effort
to: 1) harmonize critical performance measures and metrics; 2) improve out-year
planning; 3) and effectively communicate cleanup results. EPA will also continue to
work with stakeholders, including tribes, to identify and address priority issues in
assessing cleanup progress. In addition, FFRRO is considering new metrics to better
capture the contributions and goals specific to EPA's federal facility cleanup program.
OSWER will focus on improved data quality for its Superfund removal measures.
Fundamental information, such as the contaminant of concern, is often not provided for a
removal action. New tools have been developed to enable data sharing between the
regions and headquarters and certain data elements will need to be entered into the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information
System (CERCLIS) for regions to receive credit for a removal completion. The new
tools will make it possible for regional staff to enter required data only one time, with the
assurance that the data will be available to multiple audiences. OSWER also will work
with OECA to continue to pursue PRP-led removal actions to maximize performance
output and to make the most of program resources.
VII. Program Contacts
Program/Issue
General OSWER
Superfund Remedial
Emergency Management
Brownfields
OSWER Revitalization
Resource Conservation and
Recovery
Underground Storage Tanks
Contact
Sue Priftis (202) 566- 1901
Howard Rubin (202) 566-1899
Glen Cuscino (202) 566-1906
ArtFlaks(703)603-9088
Bill Dalebout (703) 603-8826
Lisa Guarneiri (202) 564-7997
Peter Oh (202) 564-2375
Bill Finan (202) 564-7981
Derrick Brown 202-566-2752
Ryan Smith (202) 564-0629
Patricia Overmeyer (202) 566-2774
Wayne Roepe (703) 308-8630
Judy Kertcher (703) 603 7172
Page 9
-------
Program/Issue
Federal Facilities
Tribal
State Liaison/ Innovation
Clean Energy/ Climate Change
Environmental Justice & CARE
Contact
Tencil Coffee (703) 603-0053
Brendan Roache (703) 603-8704
Andrew Baca (202) 566-0185
Jeffrey Kohn (202) 566-1407
Lura Mathews (202) 566-2539
Jennifer Brady (202) 566-1701
Pat Carey (202) 566-0 199
Page| 10
-------
Key National Program Strategies and Priorities
SUPERFUND REMEDIAL AND FEDERAL FACILITIES RESPONSE PROGRAMS
Program Overview
On December 11, 1980, Congress passed the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLA was enacted to fill a major gap
in environmental and health protection by providing the Federal Government with
additional statutory authority to respond to releases and threats of releases of hazardous
substances, pollutants and contaminants. CERCLA was later amended by the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) in 1986.
This NPM guidance provides direction to the regions, states, tribes, local governments,
and other federal agencies that are key government partners in the cleanup of Superfund
hazardous waste sites. The Superfund Remedial and Federal Facilities Response
programs will continue to work closely with these partners in accomplishing these key
goals and objectives under the EPA FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan.
Superfund Remedial Program
The Superfund Remedial program protects the American public and its resources, making
communities safer, healthier, and more economically viable. It is responsible for
implementing the federal program aimed at longer term cleanup at the nation's largest,
most complex contaminated sites - private party and orphan.5
Superfund sites exist in hundreds of American communities encompassing a very small
footprint or covering thousands of acres (land and/or water bodies). Sites have
combinations of contaminated soils, buildings, sediments, surface water, air, and
groundwater. The sites are located in all types of communities from rural to large urban
settings. Many are co-located in economically distressed communities and frequently
these communities suffer from disproportionate adverse environmental exposures.
Since its inception the Superfund program has assessed nearly 50,000 sites and currently
has over 13,700 active contaminated sites.6 EPA Remedial program activities include
assessing a site for degree and scope of contamination, developing cleanup strategies,
designing and constructing remedies, and long-term monitoring of certain remedies.
EPA also supports making formerly contaminated sites community assets, having placed
more than 500 National Priorities List (NPL) sites into reuse over the past decade.
Throughout this process the program actively engages the communities, local
governments, states, tribes, investors, and potentially responsible parties to ensure site-
progress information is shared and opportunities for feedback are provided.7 During FY
2013, the Superfund Remedial program and other Superfund programs will continue to
Orphan sites are sites where the previous owner no longer exists (e.g., .a corporation that has been dissolved).
6 Data are from CERCLIS, the program's information management system, as of 12/13/11.
7 For more information on the Superfund Remedial program go to http://epa.gov/superfund/
Page|11
-------
increase efforts to explain its work to all stakeholders.
Superfund Federal Facilities Response Program
The Superfund Federal Facilities Response program facilitates faster, more effective and
timely cleanup and reuse of federal facilities while ensuring protection of human health
and the environment from release of hazardous substances. Nationwide, there are
thousands of federally-owned contaminated sites. These federal facilities are
contaminated with hazardous waste, military munitions, radioactive waste, fuels, and/or a
variety of other toxic contaminants. These facilities include various types of sites, such
as: realigning and closed military installations, abandoned mine lands, former and current
nuclear weapons production facilities, fuel distribution areas, and/or landfills.
The agency fulfills a number of statutory and regulatory obligations at federal facilities,
including conducting oversight of those sites on the Superfund NPL where cleanup is
conducted by other federal agencies, such as the Department of Defense (DoD) and the
Department of Energy (DOE). One major role of the program is to ensure statutory
responsibilities related to the transfer of contaminated federal property at both NPL and
non-NPL sites are properly met. Such responsibilities include approval of transfers prior
to implementation of remedies at NPL sites (i.e., early transfer), and approving
determinations that remedies are Operating Properly and Successfully (OPS) at both NPL
and non-NPL sites. Often EPA, and the parties implementing the remedies, face unique
challenges due to the types of contaminants present, the size of the facility and extent of
contamination, ongoing facility operations, community involvement and input, and
o
complexities related to the redevelopment of the facilities.
The Superfund Federal Facilities Response program also works with DoD at select Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) installations. With the enactment of BRAC
legislation, more than 500 major military installations representing the Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Defense Logistics Agency were slated for realignment or closure in 1988,
1991, 1993, 1995 and 2005. Under the first four rounds of BRAC, 107 of those
installations required accelerated cleanup.
Through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between EPA and DoD, EPA
supports accelerated cleanup and transfer at select BRAC I-IV installations. Once the
remedy for a site on a DoD BRAC installation designated for closure is determined to be
OPS, as defined in EPA's Guidance for Evaluation of Federal Agency Demonstrations, or
a portion of the installation is transferred, DoD will discontinue funding EPA's assistance
and support under the MOU. As more BRAC I-IV installations reach OPS or are
transferred, the number of installations where EPA provides accelerated support will
decrease and eventually end. Additional work may be required by EPA at NPL BRAC
sites, once DoD's funding stops, to fulfill its statutory responsibilities but the work will
no longer be on an accelerated path. FY 2015 is DoD's target date for ceasing
reimbursable funding at most BRAC I-IV sites.
1 For more information on the Federal Facilities program go to http://www.epa.gov/fedfac.
Page | 12
-------
The Civilian Property Realignment Board's FY 2012 Congressional Justification to the
President included the Civilian Property Realignment Act which creates a Civilian
Property Realignment Board to investigate disposal and consolidation opportunities for
federal property and present recommendations to Congress. The Federal Government is
the largest property owner and manager in the United States, with an inventory of over
one million buildings, structures, and land parcels. It is anticipated that a small number
of these properties will require site characterization under CERCLA before they can be
transferred. In FY 2013, the Federal Facilities Response program will partner with other
federal agencies on site characterization and Civilian Real Property transfers, consistent
with EPA's authority under CERCLA.
Program Funding
Balance the Overall Remedial Pipeline: As part of the FY 2013 EPA budget request,
the Superfund Remedial program absorbed an over $33 million reduction from the FY
2012 enacted budget. This is in addition to an over $40 million cut to the Remedial
program's budget in FY 2012. These reductions will have significant effects on program
performance and will require the program to further balance the overall remedial
pipeline, including: site assessment, remedial investigation/feasibility study, remedial
design, remedial action, and post-construction operations. Priority will be given to
completing projects already underway throughout the response process, as opposed to
starting new project phases. Consequently, we are not planning on new starts using
appropriated dollars. At the same time, the agency will continue to examine the human
health and environmental risks posed by sites in the pipeline and make determinations on
the reallocation of funds from ongoing construction projects, if appropriate. This will
lead to a reduction in the number of projects initiated throughout the pipeline, as well as
extend project durations. It will also lead to a decline from FY 2012 to FY 2013 in
performance outputs for four of the Remedial program's performance measures.
Special Accounts: The agency will continue to focus attention on the management of
special accounts to further advance program effectiveness and site cleanups. Special
accounts are site-specific, interest bearing sub-accounts within the Superfund Trust Fund
established through settlements with potentially responsible parties and used to fund site-
specific response work. Over the past two decades, EPA has collected and placed in
special accounts more than $3.7 billion in settlement funds, and has expended or
obligated more than $2.2 billion to the cleanup of hundreds of Superfund sites. EPA will
continue efforts in FY 2013 to improve the management of Superfund special account
resources. Efforts will include conducting beginning of year and mid-year reviews of
special accounts to ensure appropriate planning and use of these resources, with a
particular focus on those accounts with more than $1 million available and reviewing
accounts with small balances for opportunities to close them out. In addition, EPA's
Special Accounts Senior Management Committee will review and update the Special
Accounts Management Strategy in FY 2013 to ensure it reflects current priorities and
encourages effective management of special accounts.
Federal Facility Program: In the FY 2012 enacted budget, EPA's federal facilities
Page | 13
-------
program absorbed a 16% extramural budget reduction and a 12% reduction in FTE's from
the FY 2011 enacted budget. These reductions have limited all Superfund federal facility
oversight work to NPL sites only. The program can no longer work on non-NPL site-
specific activities. The FY 2013 President's Budget provides the federal facilities
program with a 2% increase which will be directed toward NPL oversight efforts.
Program Priorities
The Superfund Remedial program's top priority remains reducing risk to human health
and the environment. To achieve this goal, the program will continue to investigate
actual or potential releases of contaminants at sites, and where appropriate, designate
certain sites as national priorities by placing them on the NPL. For sites on the NPL, the
agency will focus on completing the ongoing project phases (remedial
investigation/feasibility study, remedy design, and remedy construction) as opposed to
starting new project phases. EPA will not reduce its statutorily mandated actions to
operate ground water remedies it has constructed or activities that monitor and assess the
protectiveness of the constructed remedies (five year reviews). The program will
continue to place emphasis on promoting site reuse in affected communities. The
Superfund Remedial and Federal Facilities Response programs will also focus on a
variety of other priorities.
Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI): FY 2013 will mark the fourth year of the
agency's multi-year ICI9. During this fiscal year, many of the outcomes of the ICI
will be implemented as part of the program's operations to leverage the resources
available to address needs at individual sites.
Given the experience gained under the ICI, including results from pilots that
explored new approaches to project management, or that demonstrated regional
best practices with an eye to broadening their use across other regions, the
Superfund Remedial program will apply the most promising lessons learned at
other sites. The program will also use focused planning to project remedial action
costs and time frames for three years in the future. The program will manage a
constrained budget by strategically managing remedial action funding and will
continue to use risk as the overriding factor in its fund-lead cleanup work. Those
sites that are not "human exposure under control" or "groundwater migration
under control" will receive greater consideration, as will sites recommended by
the National Risk Based Priority Panel. Specific work being done that supports
this initiative includes:
o Update the Hazard Ranking System (HRS): The Superfund program
recognized that the current HRS used to place releases on the Superfund
NPL excludes a significant real exposure pathway: vapor intrusion. The
HRS was last updated in 1990. In order to reflect the science that evolved
over the past two decades and to protect public health, in FY 2013, EPA
9 For additional information on the Agency's ICI, please refer to
http://www.epa.gov/oswer/integratedcleanup.htm
Page | 14
-------
will continue to move forward to add this pathway to the HRS. The EPA
does not expect that this addition will result in additional site assessments
being conducted per year. However, because subsurface intrusion sites
have the potential to pose a higher level of risk than other exposure routes,
EPA expects that there will be a realignment and reprioritization toward
subsurface intrusion evaluations.
o Managing to Completion: As part of the ICI, in FY 2013, OSWER will
continue to implement the measure, "Number of remedial action (RA)
projects completed at Superfund NPL sites," which was reported for the
first time in FY 2011. This measure augments the long-standing
construction completion measure by reporting incremental progress in
protecting human health and the environment. Tracking and reporting
progress at sites at a more granular level provides a perspective that is
fundamental to a successful project management strategy.
Best Management Practices (BMPs): In the fall of 2010, OSWER's
Superfund Remedial and Federal Facilities Response programs, OECA's
Site Remediation program, and the regions compiled and shared BMPs for
regions to consider as they work to improve Superfund Remedial project
management under the ICI. As part of this effort, regional Superfund
division directors submitted region-specific plans for testing or
implementing selected practices. Examples of these BMPs include: new,
enhanced, or re-invigorated use of Regional Decision Teams (RDTs);
improved project management planning and communication; improved
coordination with partners/stakeholders; and increased use of removal
resources for remedial work. Progress in implementing regional BMPs
was discussed by the regions and headquarters during FY 2011 mid-year
and end-of-year work planning sessions. EPA will continue to apply the
most promising business practices more broadly across the regions in FY
2013.
In addition to the above activities, in FY 2013, EPA will implement final
revisions to site assessment program policies and practices as well as new
guidance intended to improve the consideration, use, and maintenance of
institutional controls in Superfund site communities.
Pilots: As part of EPA's ICI, nine pilot projects were identified where best
management practices and innovative solutions are being employed.
Lessons learned from the nine pilots initiated during FY 2011 to explore
cost effective options for accelerating remedial action projects and for
otherwise improving the way we manage Superfund remedial projects to
completion will be applied more broadly at our sites. Four pilots were
completed by the end of FY 2011, most will be completed by the end of
FY 2012, and all nine should be completed by the end of FY 2013.
Superfund site cleanup strategies involve many different stakeholders. As
Page | 15
-------
a result, it is important to share information about cleanup progress and
plans for future work in a straightforward and visible manner. For these
reasons, OSRTI, OECA, FFRRO and the regions have explored options
for sharing information about cleanup progress and plans for future work
at sites and are now implementing a 16-month, cross-regional pilot to
achieve this goal. Completion of a final report on the site schedules pilot
is expected in second quarter of FY 2013.
Results from completed pilots to date highlight several promising themes
that may contribute to the acceleration of remedial work in the following
ways:
1) Assurance that funding will be available to complete the project
permits a more streamlined decision-making process;
2) Use of pre-placed contracts saves acquisition time and money over
site-specific procurements;
3) Increased use of in-house EPA resources and expertise enhances
project efficiency by saving time and money;
4) Beginning the remedial action as soon as possible (concurrent with
the remedial design or earlier), permits compression of the
typically sequential remedial design and remedial action schedules
thus reducing overall time to project completion; and
5) Enhanced investment by EPA personnel in the pace and success of
a cleanup brings greater likelihood of outcomes that are both
timely and cost effective.
Further, given that resources will be limited in FY 2013, EPA will work
with regional offices to appropriately balance resources against more
immediate remediation needs to ensure that communities are well
protected and that sites are cleaned up as quickly as possible.
o Optimization: In FY 2013, the Superfund Remedial program will advance
the implementation of the National Strategy to Expand Superfund
Optimization Practices from Remedial Investigation to Site Completion.
The program will strive to incorporate optimization principles into our
core business practices related to site cleanup at all sites. Consistent with
the goals of the strategy, OSRTI will undertake a number of activities to
better integrate best practices and lessons learned from past optimization
studies into the framework of earlier site activities, and, where
appropriate, optimize activities earlier in the pipeline process. Separately,
OSRTI will also expand the application of optimization studies at more
sites and earlier in the process by increasing the number of sites where
optimization studies are conducted from past rates of 5-10 per year to 20-
30 (ongoing and new sites) per year, contingent on the availability of
funding to maintain this increased workload. In addition, the Remedial
program will improve tracking, reporting and dissemination of
Page| 16
-------
optimization study results. Based on the results of the application of
optimization across the clean-up life cycle, the increased technical support
and the improved tracking, the Remedial program will emphasize
incorporation of optimization lessons into the institutional framework of
the program through activities to augment program, contract, and technical
guidance and through an active optimization training program.
o Contracts 2010 Strategy: In March 2011, the Superfund Senior
Regional Management Acquisition Council (SRMAC) issued the
Contracts 2010 Strategy Report. The strategy is intended to provide EPA
with an acquisition approach for carrying out Superfund cleanup and
enforcement that is fully integrated across all the programs and efficiently
and effectively uses available workforce and financial resources. This
update to the Superfund Contracts 2000 Strategy includes seven goals
which emphasize identifying opportunities for process and cost
efficiencies, green remediation, expanding the use of socioeconomic
firms, and identifying a full range of vehicles available for obtaining
services for the Superfund programs. In FY 2012, through a
collaborative effort, regions and headquarters participants will be
developing the framework for implementing the Contracts 2010 goals.
Evaluations of current contracting and benchmarking of best practices
throughout the federal government and industry will be used to improve
our current contracting tools for all stages of cleanup. Implementation of
Contracts 2010 will capitalize on the lessons learned in optimization
studies.
o Green Remediation: The Superfund Remedial program strives to use
natural resources and energy efficiently, reduce negative impacts on the
environment, minimize or eliminate pollution at its source, and reduce
waste to the greatest extent possible. The practice of green remediation
considers and addresses all environmental effects of remedy
implementation for contaminated sites and incorporates options to
maximize the net environmental benefit of cleanup actions including local
impacts to adjacent communities.10 Regions benefit from the renewable
energy certificate (REC) purchase by the Superfund Remedial program. In
FY 2013, OSWER will continue its work with other site cleanup programs
and organizations to advance green remediation practices and identify new
opportunities and tools to make greener decisions across Superfund
cleanup sites by implementing its national strategy for green remediation,
without compromising cleanup goals and environmental protection.
o EPA/DoD Goal Harmonization Project: The Superfund Federal
Facilities Response program has been working with DoD to attain long-
term environmental measures through the Goal Harmonization Project.
10 For more information about green remediation, please see
http://www.epa. gov/superfund/greenremediation/ and http://cluin.org/greenremediation/
Page | 17
-------
These efforts will continue in FY 2013. The EPA/DoD Goal
Harmonization Workgroup released a joint recommendations document,
which is available at http://www.epa.gov/fedfac/pdf/dod-
epa goal harmonization workgroup recommendations final.pdf
Additionally, EPA's Superfund Federal Facilities Response program has
focused efforts on improving data and planning processes for targeting and
completing cleanup milestones. Recommendations from analyses and
studies are currently being evaluated and/or implemented, and will
continue in FY 2013.
o Federal Facilities Site Evaluation Project (FFSEP) In FY 2012, the
FFSEP was initiated, focusing on the earliest phases of cleanup -
assessment, categorization, and evaluation. FFRRO, in coordination with
EPA regions, had identified 514 federally-owned contaminated sites for
which the current disposition is either unknown or unclear due to the lack
of documentation of site cleanup activities. It has been determined that
truly stalled sites make up a minority of the original list.
Under the FFSEP, EPA is evaluating sites for current status progress
towards cleanup goals. The information gathered through this process will
assist EPA in meeting the ICI goal of better utilizing the agency's cleanup
authorities to share information, accelerate cleanups where possible,
address a greater number of contaminated sites, and put these sites back
into productive use while protecting human health and the environment.
As sites are updated, information will be made available on the FFRRO
website, Superfund Site Profiles and linked to the ICI website. The FFSEP
report and subsequent updates serve to maintain a level of diligence for the
purposes of protectiveness and transparency to inform the public and
allow communities to engage in local cleanup activities as it pertains to
their health and surrounding environment. Further, streamlined Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) templates will be available in FY 2013
that should simplify the QAPP development process and create greater
ease in the use of the graded approach to quality activities.
Community Engagement Initiative (CEI): In FY 2013, the Superfund program
will continue to integrate OSWER's CEI into its decision-making processes in
order to ensure EPA's cleanup decisions are informed by the communities that are
impacted by the contamination. Projects supporting this initiative include:
continue to provide risk communication training for Superfund site teams;
establish electronic information repositories for all new information repositories;
prepare or update Community Involvement Plans (CIPs) in accordance with the
CIPs tool11; conduct technical assistance needs assessments (TANAs) prior to
providing technical assistance; work with communities to encourage diverse and
broad-based participation in Citizen Advisory Groups, Technical Assistance
11 For more information on CIPs, please refer to
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/community/pdfs/toolkit/ciplans.pdf
Page | 18
-------
Grant (TAG) awards, and other technical assistance; participate in CEI efforts to
develop an OSWER-wide community engagement training program; and select
multiple sites for Superfund Job Training Initiative (SuperJTI) projects.
Environmental Justice: The Superfund Remedial program has long incorporated
environmental justice into its work and supports the Administrator's key priority
ofExpanding the Conversation on Environmentalism and Working for
EnvironmentalJustice. This priority encourages EPA to identify new and better
ways to address the environmental justice issues facing many minority, low-
income, and indigenous people, and the Remedial program is committed to
promoting healthy and environmentally sound conditions for all people through
its remedial cleanup program. The Remedial program works toward building
capacity to engage communities in environmental decision-making. Toward that
end, the Remedial program is committed to several efforts, including:
o Technical Assistance: EPA provides technical assistance to communities
to help them participate in decisions at Superfund sites in their
community. EPA does this through TAGs,12 which provide money for
communities to obtain technical assistance in interpreting information with
regards to sites on the NPL, as well as the Technical Assistance Services
for Communities (TASC)13 contract, which provides technical advisors
who can explain hazardous waste problems and cleanup plans to
communities affected by Superfund sites.
o Training: EPA provides assistance to communities through a variety of
training resources.
Through its SuperJTI,14 EPA supports job training in communities
affected by nearby Superfund sites and encourages the employment of
trainees at local site cleanups. By offering SuperJTI training, EPA
provides career opportunities to environmental justice communities.
The Superfund Remedial program also provides community involvement
training and professional development opportunities for Superfund
employees and affiliated partners through its Community Involvement
University15 (CIU), which offers one-, two-, and three-day courses at
regional offices and national conferences. This training is intended to
provide Superfund staff with the necessary skills, techniques, and
practices to engage communities in the Superfund process.
The Superfund program is also pursuing collaboration with the Institute
for Tribal Environmental Professionals (ITEP) to support training,
12 For more information about TAGs, please visit http://www.epa.gov/superfund/communitv/tag/
13 For more information about TASC, please visit http://www.epa.gov/superfund/communitv/tasc/
14 For more information about SuperJTI, please visit http://www.epa.gov/superfund/communitv/sfiti/
15 For more information about CIU, please visit http://www.trainex.org/ciu/default.cfm
Page | 19
-------
technical information dissemination, technical assistance, and research on
cleanup technologies and resource conservation in the areas of solid and
hazardous waste. The Superfund Remedial program will share existing
training materials and assist in the delivery of training courses, as well as
continue to raise awareness among tribes of our capabilities to provide
technical support and review of technical tools and approaches for tribal
site cleanup and investigation.
Lastly, the Superfund Remedial program is developing a program to meet
training and information needs of minority-owned and disadvantaged
small businesses (MDSB) to build their technical capacity to successfully
compete for site cleanup contracts. The program identified technology
and program training and information needs of MDSBs through a series of
discussion forums held across the country in 2010 and 2011. With support
from the Office of Small Business Programs, we initiated training delivery
in 2011 and will continue to offer training opportunities in 2012 and 2013.
o Outreach Activities: After a site is placed on the NPL, Superfund
develops a Community Involvement Plan (CIP) that provides
recommendations for addressing community needs. CIP is a living
document that should be continuously updated, and explains when a
comprehensive CIP revision should be undertaken. In FY 2013, Superfund
will continue to emphasize the importance of the CIP.16
o Information Tools: The Superfund Remedial program supports the
development of information tools to more clearly portray site information
site technologies, and risk information to communities.
The Superfund Remedial program is collaborating with EPA's Office of
External Affairs and Environmental Education (OEAEE) to pilot a new
color-coded sampling results communication tool on select Superfund
sites (one Remedial and one Removal site in each region) and to help
OEAEE train Superfund staff in this new risk communication tool. The
Superfund Remedial program will continue this work in FY 2013.
In addition, the program is also providing translation and interpreter
support for Superfund regions through an Interagency Agreement (IA)
with the State Department, and is updating the Superfund en Espanol
website and will continue to manage, improve, and showcase Spanish
translated documents displayed on the Superfund en Espanol website.
Site Re-use: Revitalizing communities and ensuring the long-term protection of
human health and the environment remains a high priority for the EPA at
Superfund sites. The agency works with local governments, local residents, reuse
16 See the Community Involvement Plans tool at
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/community/pdfs/toolkit/ciplans.pdf
Page | 20
-------
entities, and others to identify reasonably anticipated future land use and seeks to
avoid response actions that might hinder or prevent site-reuse. The Site-wide
Ready for Anticipated Use measure communicates that all cleanup goals for an
entire site have been achieved for both current and reasonably anticipated future
land uses. The measure reflects the high priority EPA places on land
revitalization as an integral part of the agency's mission for the Superfund
program as well as the priority EPA is now placing on post-construction activities
at NPL sites. In FY 2013, EPA expects to achieve a net total of 60 sites qualified
for this designation bringing the program's cumulative total to 665 sites that are
ready for re-use. The target change reflects reductions to the Superfund
Enforcement program which is critical to implementation of institutional controls.
Technical Support to the Regions: The Superfund Remedial program maintains
considerable in-house expertise, knowledge, and field support capacity on
technologies, approaches, and techniques related to site investigation and clean-up
activities. In FY 2013, the program will continue to raise awareness in the
regions of available headquarters technical support and to emphasize technical
areas correlated to regional needs. The Remedial program will continue to
provide access to high quality and cost-effective analytical services through the
Contract Laboratory Program (CLP). Superfund Remedial activities will support
the active information and application support on investigation and cleanup
methods, the identification and application of innovative techniques and best
practices, on a site-specific level, and the optimization of cleanup activities
throughout the Superfund pipeline. To accomplish this objective, the Superfund
Remedial program will fully utilize headquarters staff as well as available
external support mechanisms (e.g., contracts, lAs) and partnerships (e.g., ORD
technical support centers). In addition, OSWER will continue to work with the
regions to increase the efficiency of the CLP.
Healthy Communities Initiative: The Superfund Remedial program has
dedicated an FTE to partner with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in cleaning
up contaminated sediments in rivers adjacent to Superfund sites. The Corps
receives funding under the Water Resources Development Act to dredge
navigational channels in the same rivers where Superfund is responsible. In
cleaning up contaminated sediments, our FTE coordinates the two program
actions to ensure resources are effectively utilized and eliminate any duplication
of efforts.
Federal Facility Cleanup Dialogue: OSWER will continue engaging with
stakeholders and other federal agencies to address issues raised in the FY 2011
Federal Facility Cleanup Dialogue (Dialogue) meetings. During those meetings,
stakeholders discussed the progress, achievements and challenges surrounding the
cleanup of federally-owned contaminated sites. Since then, EPA has established
an ongoing Dialogue process for discussing specific challenges related to long-
term stewardship, community involvement, and environmental justice.
Participants in the Dialogue include representatives from tribal, state and local
Page | 21
-------
governments, advisory boards, non-profit groups, and communities as well as
representatives from the DoD, DOE, Department of Agriculture (USDA) and
Department of the Interior (DOT).
EPA, DoD, and DOE formed a workgroup to address improving the federal
facility five-year review process and to explore the idea of including long-term
stewardship information in the reports. The workgroup is developing a
framework that should further improve the capability to produce technically
accurate and timely five-year review reports, and subsequently provide for more
timely and consistent review and approval. The workgroup is also developing a
video on the five-year review process that can be used at community meetings to
educate community representatives on the five-year review process. In addition,
OSWER will conduct a series of webinars highlighting currently available
information, and future webinars will focus on emerging information platforms
and the potential information needs of stakeholders. We anticipate these outreach
efforts to continue into FY 2013.
Federal Facility Five Year Reviews: In FY 2011, OSWER finalized a policy
memorandum that addressed program priorities for five-year reviews. The policy
memorandum provides guidance to the regions on how EPA can make an
independent decision on the protectiveness of the remedy and confirmed that five-
year reviews are generally enforceable under the Federal Facility Agreements
(FFAs). In FY 2013, we will continue to ensure that the policy memorandum is
being implemented consistently. OSWER has developed a CERCLIS report of
unresolved recommendations in the five-year review reports and will continue to
work with its regions to ensure that these recommendations are monitored,
tracked, and implemented. We will also continue to ensure that the results of
five-year reviews continue to be made publicly available.
Federal Facility Agreements (FFA): Enforcement supports faster, more
effective and timely cleanup and reuse of federal facilities. EPA has FFAs in
place at almost all federal facility NPL sites regarding the cleanups conducted by
the facilities and EPA's oversight of those cleanups. Those agreements lay out
procedures for resolving disputes. Regions are expected to use the procedures of
the agreements, or other applicable enforcement authorities (such as imminent
and endangerment orders in applicable circumstances), when federal facilities are
not complying with the terms of the agreements or with other legal requirements.
Additionally, regions and headquarters offices will work together to get remaining
NPL sites, as well as any new federal NPL sites, under agreements or other
legally-enforceable agreements.
Performance Indicators and Goals
Performance Goals for FY 2013 (with ACS measure codes):
Total of 650 remedial site assessments complete (ACS 122);
Page | 22
-------
Total of 115 remedial action project completions (ACS 131);
Total of 19 site-wide construction completions (ACS 141);
A net increase of 10 sites with human exposures under control (ACS 151);
A net increase of 15 sites with groundwater migration under control (ACS 152);
A net increase of 60 sites deemed ready for anticipated use site-wide (ACS S10).
Various performance goals and measures for the Superfund Federal Facilities Response
program are a subset of the Superfund Remedial program's measures. The agency's
ability to meet its annual Superfund targets is partially dependent on work performed by
other federal agencies at NPL federal facility sites.
Page | 23
-------
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS
Program Overview
EPA's Emergency Response and Removal program is founded on the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, commonly called the National
Contingency Plan (NCP). The NCP was first published in 1968 to provide a federal
blueprint for a coordinated approach among responsible parties and local, state, and
federal responders for coping with potential oil spills in U.S. waters. Over the years,
revisions have been made to the NCP to keep pace with the enactment of legislation.
Following the passage of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA) in 1980, EPA and other federal agencies were provided
increased authority and funds to respond to a release or substantial threat of a release of a
hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant into the environment, not just to the waters
of the United States. Accordingly, the NCP was broadened to cover emergency response
and removal actions to releases at hazardous waste sites.
Removal actions are of three types: (1) emergency, where action is required within hours
or days; (2) time-critical, where timely action must begin to protect human health or the
environment and the lead agency has up to six months to plan the response action; and (3)
non-time-critical, where the lead action has at least six months to plan the response
action.
Emergency Response and Removal
EPA's Emergency Response and Removal program is organized to work with and
complement the varying capabilities of local and state agencies for responding to the
types of oil and hazardous substances releases that occur in each region. The program
acts as a federal safety net to allow for response to immediate threats when such response
is necessary (e.g., when the nature, size or complexity of a spill is beyond the capacity or
capabilities of the state or local responders). OEM will also focus on improved data
quality for its Removal measures. New tools have been developed to enable data sharing
between the regions and headquarters, and OEM will require certain data elements (e.g.,
the contaminant of concern, volume cleaned up) to be entered into CERCLIS for the
region to receive credit for a removal completion.
In order to maintain a high state of effective response readiness and improve our
capabilities to protect human health and the environment, using the NCP criteria, regions
will continue to respond to high priority hazardous substance releases and oil discharges.
OEM is also working with five regional labs where chemical warfare agent capabilities
have been developed to identify efficiencies and determine the ways in which
consolidation is possible while maintaining response readiness. Cost-benefit analysis
was conducted during FY 2012, and OEM will continue this work in FY 2013.
OEM is working to advance the goals of OSWER's Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI), a
multiyear effort to better use assessment and cleanup authorities to address a greater
Page | 24
-------
number of sites, accelerate cleanups, and put those sites back into productive use while
protecting human health and the environment. One example of leveraging is the use of
Superfund Removal resources to assist Brownfields cleanup and redevelopment.
Specifically, this connection will allow the agency to utilize the removal program, when
appropriate and in accordance with the applicable statutory criteria, as a resource to assist
communities with some or all of the cleanup activities at brownfields sites where cleanup
monies are not otherwise available. This connection will be particularly productive when
the Removal program is activated in conjunction with a Targeted Brownfields
Assessment. The Brownfields program will activate its resources to help bring
completed removal action sites into productive reuse. These resources can include
further site characterization, technical assistance with necessary institutional controls,
community engagement and site end-use planning. In FY 2013, OEM will work with
OSWER's Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization (OBLR) to build upon
coordination activities that are already in place in the regions to achieve further
integration of the two programs. OEM also will work with OECA to continue to pursue
PRP-led removal actions in order to make the most of program resources.
Along with the efforts of the ICI, OEM is continuing its progress in increasing
community involvement through OSWER's Community Engagement Initiative (CEI).
This initiative is designed to help local communities meaningfully participate in
government decisions on land cleanup, emergency preparedness and response, and the
management of hazardous substances and waste. As communities become more
involved, the agency is working to improve the ways in which we communicate
important information back to the community. In recent responses (e.g., BP Oil Spill)
and in exercises, OEM has developed websites with data about the event, with an eye to
making the data more easily available to the communities involved. One tool developed
to achieve this goal is a Sampling Methodology Scale that provides easy-to-understand,
color-coded information on contamination levels. OEM will work with the Office of
External Affairs and Environmental Education (OEAEE) and OSWER's Office of Site
Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) to build upon the color coding pilot
projects from FY 2012 and further refine the system for broader use within OSWER.
OEM is also working with OSRTI to enhance OSWER's approach to risk communication
and develop a training program for EPA staff, addressing the need to communicate risk
more clearly to the diverse audiences that are affected by removal cleanups. This work
will continue in FY 2013, integrating feedback from the other OSWER program offices.
To prepare for large-scale responses to incidents such as the Deepwater Horizon Oil
Spill, World Trade Center, the anthrax attacks, and Hurricane Katrina, the agency
instituted its National Approach to Response (NAR). The NAR emphasizes the need to
provide the necessary levels and appropriate types of support during major responses and
greater consistency across the regions in emergency response capabilities. Preparedness
on a national level is essential to ensure that emergency responders are capable of
managing multiple, large-scale emergencies. EPA will continue to improve its capability
to effectively prepare for and respond to these incidents, working under its statutory
authorities and, for major high-consequence incidents, will work closely with the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other government agencies within the
Page | 25
-------
National Response Framework (NRF).
Through coordination of emergency preparedness and response activities, the Emergency
Response and Removal program has many opportunities to integrate its work with that of
other EPA offices, as One EPA, and will continue to build these relationships in FY
2013. The program plays a coordination role through the National Incident Coordination
Team (NICT), which includes senior level representatives from all AA-ships.
EPA will continue to improve its capability to respond effectively to incidents that may
involve harmful chemical, oil, biological, and radiological substances. This will involve
exploring improvements in field equipment, response training and exercises, and
technical capabilities. Further, EPA is improving the ways that response personnel share
information and making it easier for regions to collect and input response data. We also
will review response data provided in after-action reports prepared by EPA emergency
responders following a release and examine lessons learned reports to identify which
activities work and which need to be improved. Application of this information and other
data will advance the agency's state-of-the-art emergency response operations.
There is also a need for collection and analysis of quality data to learn more about the
results associated with prevention and preparedness activities and their effect on the
prevention of releases and mitigation of the consequences. These data-related activities
involve coordinated use of technology to ensure the data can be shared and analyzed
across the key emergency management activities and the various accident scenarios. In
FY 2013, we will continue to work with our partners at the local, state, tribal and federal
levels to ensure that we are focusing on the areas where agency support is most required.
EPA will finalize Subpart J of the NCP that stipulates the criteria for listing and
managing the use of dispersants and other chemical and biological agents used to
mitigate oil spills. EPA will work with the U.S. Coast Guard to strengthen Area
Contingency Plans (ACPs) and Regional Contingency Plans via revising and
implementing guidance based on lessons learned from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill,
discussions at National Response Team (NRT) and Regional Response Team (RRTs)
meetings, and enhanced preparedness exercises.
Facility Oil Spill Preparedness and Prevention
The amended Clean Water Act requires facilities with certain quantities of oil to prepare
Facility Response Plans (FRPs) and submit them to EPA (or other appropriate agencies).
Approximately 4,000 facilities must submit FRPs to EPA. EPA uses information in the
FRPs to develop ACPs under the NCP. EPA inspects FRP facilities and conducts
unannounced drills to test facility preparedness. The Spill Prevention, Control and
Countermeasure (SPCC) regulation under the Clean Water Act requires covered facilities
to take specific steps to prevent and contain oil spills. EPA estimates that approximately
600,000 facilities are subject to the SPCC regulation. On November 5, 2009, EPA
amended certain requirements of the SPCC rule in order to provide regulatory reform.1?
17 For more information on EPA's final SPCC rule, please see
Page | 26
-------
EPA inspects approximately 1,000 SPCC facilities each year.
In FY 2013 the program will focus on high-risk SPCC and FRP facilities to maintain the
national SPCC and FRP database and to complete connectivity to OECA's ICIS database
and add the capability for electronic submission of FRPs. EPA also will continue to
outreach to the SPCC community to assist them with implementing the program. The
program will continue to support local, state, tribal and other federal responders at
incidents when federal support is needed and appropriate, and direct and/or monitor
responses by responsible parties. EPA also will begin development of the third party
audit program to help improve the efficiency of targeting inspection resources at low risk
facilities. Efficiencies realized through the third party audit program may enable regional
offices to focus available resources on achieving additional inspections at high risk
facilities.
Performance Goals for FY 2013 (with ACS measure codes):
Removal: Number of PRP removal completions (including voluntary, AOC, and
UAO actions) overseen by EPA (target 170; ACS 133).
Removal: Number of Superfund-lead removal actions completed (target 170;
ACS 132).
Oil: Percent of all SPCC facilities found to be non-compliant which will be
brought into compliance (target 40 percent; ACS 328A)
Oil: Percent of all FRP facilities found to be non-compliant which will be
brought into compliance (target 40 percent; ACS 327A).
Homeland Security: Score for Core NAR evaluation (target 72 percent; ACS Cl).
Supporting Chemical Accident Prevention, Preparedness and Response at the Local
and State Levels
The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA), also
known as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, established
requirements for federal, state and local governments, Indian tribes, and industry
regarding emergency planning and Community Right-to-Know reporting on hazardous
and toxic chemicals. The Community Right-to-Know provisions help increase the
public's knowledge and access to information on chemicals at individual facilities, their
uses, and releases into the environment. States and communities, working with facilities,
can use the information to improve chemical safety and protect public health and the
environment.
EPA will actively inspect facilities that are required to have Risk Management Plans
(RMPs), analyze RMP data to understand trends and causes of chemical accidents and
utilize this data to conduct outreach to improve chemical safety, provide greater
transparency and address broad community impacts. EPA is also investigating other
ways to increase transparency in its chemical accident prevention activities, including the
http://epa.gov/emergencies/content/spcc/spcc nov09amend.htm
Page | 27
-------
possibility of posting non-Offsite Consequence Analysis RMP data to the EPA web site.
In FY 2012, EPA remains committed to working with states, tribes and local
governments to promote transparency and open communication with local communities
regarding chemical safety. In 2013, EPA will build upon these activities. States and
local governments have a vital role to play in this work. State Emergency Response
Commissions (SERCs) establish Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs) that
use information about chemicals in the community to develop comprehensive emergency
plans. In addition, tribes can establish Tribal Emergency Response Commissions
(TERCs).
There are more than 3,000 LEPCs nationwide and EPA has supported these organizations
by developing and providing guidance as well as technical assistance, and some limited
grants. EPA also worked with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) to develop and provide the Computer-Aided Management of Emergency
Operations (CAMEO) software to these committees free of charge. According to the
latest LEPC Survey conducted in 2008, LEPCs and SERCs are continuing to address
their responsibilities under EPCRA and some have expanded their activities to address
homeland security.
EPA has further refined its strategy for maximizing resources devoted to the RMP
program and will continue to focus its activities on high-risk facilities. Section 112(r) of
the Clean Air Act encompasses both the General Duty Clause found in section 112(r)(l)
and the Chemical Accident Prevention Provisions of 40 C.F.R. part 68. Regions will
continue to devote inspection resources to identifying and addressing noncompliance in
both areas; however inspections that pertain exclusively to the General Duty Clause will
be limited to 10 percent of the total number of inspections. As inspection activities
progress during the year, EPA headquarters will re-evaluate these percentage limits on a
per region basis in the event that special issues arise. In order to more efficiently use
enforcement resources and in light of continuing concerns regarding public safety, EPA
has developed criteria for determining which facilities pose a higher risk to human health
and the environment.
Regions should inspect at least 4 percent of the total number of regulated facilities in the
region during FY 2013. Of these inspections, at least 30 percent should be conducted at
high-risk RMP facilities. A high risk facility is one that meets one or more of the
following criteria: 1) facilities whose reported RMP worst-case scenario population
exceeds 100,000 people; 2) any RMP facility with a hazard index greater than or equal to
25; and/or 3) facilities that have had one or more significant accidental releases within the
previous five years (Note: facilities that have only program 1 processes are not
considered high risk). Regional program managers may, after consultation with and
approval by headquarters, alter the population and/or hazard index thresholds for their
region in order to include additional facilities on the regional high-risk list. Regions may
use this approach to account for region-by-region variations in population density, types
of covered facilities, facility geographic clustering or other factors. However, all changes
to the high-risk criteria must first be approved by headquarters.
Page | 28
-------
EPA will count inspections at high-risk RMP facilities as a subset of the overall
inspection target. All RMP inspections must be conducted in accordance with "Guidance
for Conducting Risk Management Program Inspections Under Clean Air Act Section
112(r)" (EPA 550-K-l 1-001, January, 2011).18 The field portion of all inspections at
multi-process or high-risk facilities should require a minimum of one certified RMP
inspector for one day on site. For inspections at larger and more-complex facilities,
regions should devote additional staff and/or time as appropriate to the size and
complexity of the facility. Inspections must result in a narrative inspection report that
includes the information elements described in Appendices C and D of the guidance, and
include narrative findings (i.e., potential compliance deficiencies) that are supported by
objective facts gained during the inspection through document reviews, personnel
interviews, and observations of facility and equipment status, conditions and operations.
All findings should relate directly to a specific requirement of CAA Section 112(r), 40
CFR Part 68 or an industry code or standard that the facility is subject to. Regions may
use variations of the report or checklist formats contained in the guidance provided all
necessary information is present in the inspection report. RMP inspections conducted at
high-risk facilities should also include an evaluation of the facility's compliance with
EPCRA sections 304 and 311/312. At the end of the fiscal year, regions must report the
number of high-risk facility inspections completed, as well as the total number of non-
filer investigations completed and of that total, the number of actual non-filers identified
and required to comply with the RMP regulations. Inspection reports for high-risk
facility inspections must be made available to headquarters on request in order to count
toward the region's high-risk facility inspection target.
Performance Goal for FY 2013 (with ACS measure code):
Number of risk management program audits and inspections completed (target 50019;
ACS CH2).
Environmental Justice
OEM will continue to work through the CEI to address environmental justice issues.
Actions 11 (Evaluate Risk Communication Processes and develop a Comprehensive
Education Program) and 12 (Improve Communication of Sampling and Testing Results)
of the CEI will help EPA to improve the way that it communicates with the public and
other stakeholders with regard to contamination levels and the associated risks of
contaminants. This will result in a better-informed public. OEM will also continue to
engage tribes in oil and chemical emergency prevention, preparedness and response
activities through outreach and direct consultation. Regional programs will provide and
encourage participation in emergency response exercises, technical and regulatory
training, area plan development, and RRT efforts.
18 The Guidance for Conducting Risk Management Program Inspections Under Clean Air Act Section
112(r) can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/docs/chem/clean air guidance.pdf
19 EPA is requesting an increase in FY 2013 funding for the RMP/EPCRA program. If additional funding
is not appropriated, the ACS inspection target will be decreased to 460.
Page | 29
-------
Useful websites:
Office of Emergency Management http ://www. epa.gov/oem
National Response Team (NRT) http://www.nrt.org
Page|30
-------
BROWNFIELDS CLEANUP AND LAND REVITALIZATION PROGRAM
Program Overview
EPA's Brownfields and Land Revitalization program (OBLR) will continue to facilitate
the cleanup, redevelopment and restoration of brownfields properties. Under the
Brownfields Law (Public Law 107-118, Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields
70
Revitalization Act ), brownfields are defined (with certain exclusions) as real properties,
the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or
potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Brownfield
properties include, for example, derelict or underutilized properties, abandoned industrial
properties, drug labs, mine-scarred land, abandoned gas stations and properties
contaminated with petroleum or petroleum products. Through its Brownfields program,
EPA will continue to provide funding and technical assistance for the assessment and
cleanup of these properties, and to leverage cleanup and redevelopment opportunities,
and to help preserve green space, all offering combined environmental and economic
benefits to local communities.
Performance Goals for FY 2013 (with ACS measure codes):
Number of brownfields properties assessed (target: 1,200; ACS B29).
Number of brownfields properties cleaned up using brownfields funding (target:
120; ACS B32).
Acres of brownfields property made ready for reuse (target: 3,000; ACS B33).
Jobs leveraged from brownfields activities (target: 5,000; ACS B34).
Billions of dollars of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at brownfields
sites (target: $1.2; ACS B37).
Note: Performance estimates and results from $100 million received to implement the
ARRA are tracked separately and described later in this guidance.
Environmental Justice
OBLR will continue its efforts to ensure that brownfields funding benefits low income,
underserved and minority communities through assessment, cleanup, area-wide planning,
job training, and technical assistance activities. OBLR will implement changes to its
grant funding guidance to facilitate this goal beginning in the FY2012 grant solicitation
cycle and continuing in FY 2013. Additionally, OBLR will utilize EJ Screen, as
appropriate, and as tools become available to assist with further identifying communities
with brownfields and indicators of need in an effort to better direct resources and
outreach to prospective brownfields grant applicants. Outreach efforts will also include
increased assistance to prospective applicants from minority academic institutions, tribes,
and nonprofit and community development corporations where brownfields are located.
20 Signed in January 2002, for more information on Public Law 107-118, please see:
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/laws/index.htm
Page|31
-------
Based on changes made to the FY 2011 Assessment, Cleanup, Revolving Loan Fund, and
Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training (EWDJT) Grant Guidelines
and as referenced in OSWER's Community Engagement Initiative (CEI) Action 1
91 ^-,
items, These changes will strengthen the community notification and engagement
aspects of OBLR's grants process, will make more transparent the process for making
selection and funding decisions, and will allow for a more thorough analysis of the
cumulative impacts of environmental conditions, the need for equitable development and
meaningful community benefit from the funded activities. OBLR will evaluate lessons
learned from changes incorporated in 2011 and evaluate the effectiveness of these
changes to better target environmental justice communities and improve more meaningful
community involvement. OBLR will also continue to analyze how principles of
equitable development (affordable housing, local hiring, etc.) can be further integrated
into brownfields revitalization activities to ensure local residents benefit from brownfield
cleanup and revitalization efforts.
For the FY 2013 grant application cycle, EPA will provide presentation materials for
regional outreach and training meetings and webinars as they relate to specific public
health concerns and considerations for safe reuse for environmental justice communities,
children and other sensitive populations. OBLR also will utilize its existing grants and
cooperative agreement components to contribute to initiatives that support the agency's
cross-cutting fundamental strategies.
Brownfields Assessment, Cleanup, Revolving Loan Fund, Area-Wide Planning, and
Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training Cooperative Agreements
OBLR will continue to provide Assessment, Revolving Loan Fund (RLF), Cleanup,
Area-Wide Planning and EWDJT cooperative agreements to communities. Brownfields
Assessment cooperative agreements provide funding to inventory, characterize, assess,
and conduct planning and community involvement activities related to brownfields
properties. Brownfields RLF cooperative agreements provide funding for a cooperative
agreement recipient to capitalize a revolving loan and for a recipient to make low or no
interest loans and/or subgrants to carry out cleanup activities at brownfields properties.
Brownfields Cleanup cooperative agreements will fund cleanup activities at brownfield
properties owned by grant recipients. Brownfields Area-Wide Planning cooperative
agreements provide funding to communities to develop area-wide plans for brownfields,
and identify next steps and resources needed to implement the plan. EPA also will
provide funding to create local environmental workforce development training programs
to enhance the economic benefits, derived from brownfield revitalization efforts, to the
community.
In 2011, OBLR led an effort to collaborate more closely with other OSWER offices on
environmental workforce development and job training. We coordinated with the Office
of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR), Office of Superfund Remediation and
21 CEI Action 1: Proposed Brownfields Process Improvements can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/oswer/engagementinitiative/oblr.pdf
Page|32
-------
Technology Innovation (OSRTI), Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST), Federal
Facilities Restoration and Reuse (FFRRO), Center for Program Analysis (CPA),
Innovation, Partnerships, and Communication Office (TPCO), and the Office of
Emergency Management (OEM) to develop a job training cooperative agreement
opportunity that includes expanded training in other OSWER programs outside the
traditional scope of just brownfields. As a result of these discussions, the EWDJT Grants
Program, formerly known as the "Brownfields Job Training Grants Program," now
allows applicants to deliver additional hazardous and solid waste training. During FY
2012, OBLR as One EPA has further collaborated with the Office of Water (OW) and the
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP). Through these
partnerships, in FY 2013 applicants will be able to deliver training in waste water
management and enhanced chemical safety related activities.
EWDJT cooperative agreements provide funding to governmental entities and nonprofit
organizations to recruit, train, and place local unemployed and under-employed,
predominantly low-income and minority residents with the skills needed to acquire full-
time, sustainable careers in the environmental field and solid and hazardous waste
remediation. These resources help residents take advantage of the jobs created by the
assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment of solid and hazardous waste sites in their
communities. Graduates of the program typically earn certifications and training in
HAZWOPER, lead and asbestos abatement, mold remediation, innovative and alternative
treatment technologies, demolition and debris recycling, leaking underground storage
tank remediation and prevention, confined space entry, first aid, CPR, soil and
groundwater sampling, and other environmental health and safety training. Through the
expanded EWDJT program, graduates will develop wider skill sets that will improve
their ability to secure full-time, sustainable employment in various aspects of hazardous
and solid waste management and within the larger environmental field. This effort also
gives communities more flexibility to provide differing types of environmental training
based on local labor market assessments and employers' hiring needs.
EPA will publish proposal guidelines, solicit proposals, conduct a national competition,
announce, and award Assessment, RLF, Cleanup, Multi-Purpose Pilot and EWDJT
cooperative agreements. Evaluation panels consisting of EPA regional and headquarters
staff and other federal agency representatives will assess how well the proposals meet the
selection criteria outlined in the statute and the proposal guidelines. Final selections will
be made by the OSWER Assistant Administrator, the Selection Official, after considering
the ranking of proposals by the evaluation panels and other special considerations, as
applicable. The statute requires that funds be directed to the highest ranking proposals.
4- Proposal Guidelines for Brownfields Assessment, Revolving Loan Fund, Cleanup
and Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training cooperative
agreements are available at: http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/applicat.htm.
Following award, EPA will assist recipients in achieving specific objectives as agreed
upon in the project work plan. EPA will conduct post award monitoring activities, as
appropriate, to ensure the successful implementation of projects. Cooperative agreement
Page|33
-------
terms and conditions require recipients to report on interim progress (e.g., assessment
started, cleanup started) and any final accomplishments (e.g., assessment completed,
cleanup required, contaminants, Institution Controls, Engineering Controls, number of
participants completing training and placed in full-time employment) by completing and
submitting relevant portions of the Property Profile Form and Job Training Reporting
Form using the Brownfields program on-line reporting system, known as Assessment,
Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES).
J- The Property Profile Form and the Job Training Reporting Form are available at:
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/pubs/index.html.
r-*-, 99
The Brownfields Area-Wide Planning (BF AWP) program is designed to provide
support to communities by helping recipients 1) develop an area-wide plan for
brownfields within their identified community, and 2) determine next steps and identify
resources needed to implement the plan. To facilitate these outcomes, the program:
provides assistance to recipients for research and planning activities within a
targeted area- such as a neighborhood or local commercial corridor affected by a
single large, or multiple, brownfield site(s); and
aims to connect cleanup and redevelopment of individual brownfields to their
neighborhood and city-wide contexts.
Recipients develop an area-wide plan for brownfields by:
facilitating community involvement activities, to identify community priorities
and ways to meet those priorities through area brownfields revitalization, and
- conducting research into the existing conditions of the targeted brownfields area
(such as brownfields market analysis, infrastructure studies, known environmental
conditions of the properties, community health issues and environmental justice
concerns, etc).
OBLR is transit!oning the BF AWP program out of the pilot phase. In FY 2010, OSWER
began implementing its Brownfields Area-wide Planning Pilot priority goal by initiating
23 brownfields area-wide planning pilot projects. The 23 pilot projects are expected to
close in FY 2013.
An additional round of BF AWP program grant funding will be awarded to
approximately 20 BF AWP projects in FY 2012. In FY 2013, OBLR will support pilot
completion and close-out of the 23 pilot projects and ongoing grant/project support for
the approximately 20 BF AWP grants to be awarded in FY 2012. A grant competition
for BF AWP is not expected in FY 2013.
The Brownfields program expects that project synergies will exist between BF AWP
projects and existing brownfield resources for assessment and cleanup already present in
22 For more information about the Brownfields Area-Wide Planning Pilot program, please see
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/areawide_grants.htm
Page|34
-------
several of the recipient communities. EPA regional Brownfields programs are in the best
position to evaluate those opportunities and engage with the appropriate local partners,
such as the state, tribe, local government or community-based organizations, to identify
local needs and leverage the investments being made in these communities. The BF AWP
projects awarded in FY 2012 will be managed at the regional level to facilitate project
communication and cross-program coordination, with overall program support and
project-specific support as needed from OBLR.
In coordination with the BF AWP program efforts to advance intra- and inter-agency
project community and coordination, the EPA region should take a leading role in
convening other regional EPA program staff (such as water, air, sustainable communities,
environmental justice and enforcement staff, other OSWER cleanup programs, as
appropriate) and regional staff from other agencies (such as HUD, DOT, EDA, USD A,
and ATSDR, as appropriate), in addition to the states, tribes, local governments and
community-based organizations, to identify possible barriers, solutions and resources for
implementing the BF AWP projects. In addition, where there are BF AWP projects that
are part of the HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities (PSC) and the
PSC networks that have been created within the regions and headquarters, we expect that
these tools should be fully utilized.
The resulting area-wide plan from the BF AWP recipients will facilitate the assessment,
cleanup and reuse of individual brownfields properties, identify additional area-wide
investments and improvements necessary to revitalize the community, and include
strategies for area-wide plan implementation.
Brownfields State and Tribal Response Programs Cooperative Agreements
EPA will continue to work in partnership with state and tribal programs to address
brownfield properties under the Section 128(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Section 128(a) authorizes a
noncompetitive $50 million dollar grant assistance program to establish and enhance state
and tribal response programs. State and tribal response programs oversee assessment and
cleanup activities at the majority of brownfields properties across the country.
The depth and breadth of state and tribal response programs vary. Many programs also
offer accompanying financial incentive programs to spur cleanup and redevelopment.
The primary goal of this funding is to ensure that the state and tribal response programs
build the sufficient organizational capacity to establish and build a response program.
This includes taking reasonable steps to include, four specific elements and a public
record. The four elements of a response program are: 1) timely survey and inventory of
brownfields sites in state or tribal land; 2) oversight and enforcement authorities or other
mechanisms and resources; 3) mechanisms and resources to provide meaningful
opportunities for public participation; and 4) mechanisms for approval of a cleanup plan
and verification and certification that cleanup is complete.
The secondary goal of this program is to provide funding for other activities that increase
Page|35
-------
the number of response actions conducted or overseen by a state or tribal response
program. The funding may give recipients the ability to establish, enhance, or increase
the number of properties addressed by a response program. Recipients may use the
funding to start a new response program and public record requirement. States and tribes
also may use funding to increase the number of properties at which response actions are
conducted, or perform activities that add or improve a response program. In addition,
though not the primary focus, the funds can be used to oversee cleanups, to conduct
property-specific activities (e.g., assessments, cleanups), purchase environmental
insurance, or develop other insurance mechanisms to provide financing for cleanup
activities. EPA will publish an annual guidance regarding the criteria for state and tribal
response program funding.
>t Grant Funding Guidance for State and Tribal Response programs (CERCLA)
Section 128(a) is available at:
http://www.epa.gOv/swerosps/b f/state_tribal/fund_guide. htm.
Following award, EPA will assist recipients in achieving specific objectives as agreed
upon in the project work plan. EPA will conduct post-award monitoring activities to
ensure the successful implementation of projects.
All property-specific activities (e.g., assessments, cleanups) performed by state and tribal
response programs under their cooperative agreements contribute to the Brownfields
program overall accomplishments. Since conducting property-specific activities is not
the main goal of the 128(a) state and tribal response program, regions should not set state
or tribal targets. States and tribes are required to report property-specific
accomplishments conducted with Section 128(a) funds by completing and submitting
relevant portions of the Property Profile Form using ACRES.
»t The Property Profile Form is available at:
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/pubs/index.html.
Targeted Brownfield Assessment Program
EPA will continue to make the Targeted Brownfield Assessment (TEA) program more
transparent, and will work with the regions to identify specific criteria when prioritizing
TEA funding. Criteria will include information on site eligibility, applicant eligibility,
and the application process and procedures. The program will also work with the regions
to develop a mechanism for evaluating and prioritizing requests. EPA regions will work
to take economic distress and environmental justice concerns into account when
providing funding to projects. A strong focus will also be on choosing projects with a
viable plan for cleanup and redevelopment. Additional factors which may be considered
include whether or not there is a strong municipal commitment and clear municipal
support; strong community support for the project; a clear need for revitalization in the
area, with significant deterioration or environmental justice issues; whether the TEA
would address direct threats to human health or the environment; whether revitalization
would serve as a catalyst for additional activities in the area; whether other funds are
Page|36
-------
available to perform the work; if adequate leveraged funds are available for cleanup and
redevelopment; and whether the property has strong development potential. EPA also
will work to identify ways to enhance community engagement in the overall TEA
process. The program will focus on ways to improve and coordinate community
engagement while still maintaining the speed with which TBAs are normally carried out.
Program Priorities and Initiatives
Integrated Cleanup Initiative: Through the Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI), EPA will
bring to bear the relevant tools available in each of the cleanup programs (Remedial,
Removal, Federal Facilities and Brownfields) and will better leverage the resources
available to address needs at individual sites. One example of leveraging is the use of
Superfund Removal resources to assist brownfields cleanup and redevelopment.
Specifically, this connection will allow the agency to utilize the removal program, when
appropriate and in accordance with the applicable statutory criteria, as a resource to assist
communities with some or all of the cleanup activities at brownfields properties where
cleanup monies are not otherwise available. This connection will be particularly
productive when the Removal program is activated in conjunction with a TEA and in
those instances will allow the agency to target both assessment and cleanup resources to
help a state, tribe or community assess, clean and redevelop a contaminated property
where other resources are not available. The Brownfields program will utilize its
resources to help bring completed removal action properties into productive reuse. These
resources can include further environmental characterization, technical assistance with
necessary institutional controls, community engagement and end use planning.
The ICI workgroup convened to research and document examples of regional best
practices for making decisions that can benefit from both Brownfields and Removal
programs. The workgroup discovered that the majority of regions have identified best
management practices and provided concrete examples where individual contaminated
sites benefited from both the Brownfields and Removal programs. Through the
workgroup's research, the main theme discovered for successful coordination was to have
a representative(s) from each program meet regularly to discuss sites and potential issues
and innovate ways to use available EPA cleanup funding to move these properties back
into reuse. The workgroup developed and distributed a best practices document
highlighting successful examples in FY 2011. In FY 2013, the workgroup will continue
coordination, collecting success stories and solving issues as they arise.
OBLR will continue its efforts to evaluate the impacts of brownfields assessment and
cleanup grants, to assist in guiding the program's decisions about the most effective and
impactful allocation of resources among the different grant types utilized under in the
program.
Additionally, through the ICI, OBLR will continue its efforts to improve the timing and
delivery of Brownfields cooperative agreement resources to successful applicants. The
Brownfields program in collaboration with the Office of Grants and Debarment
conducted a comprehensive review of the Brownfields competition and grant award
Page|37
-------
process and developed a report with nine actions to streamline the competition/award
process. In FY 2012/2013, the program will continue implementing the streamlining
recommendations and evaluate their effectiveness in improving the timeliness of the
Brownfields grant awards. Regional program staff will work with OBLR and with
Regional Grants Management Officials to implement these recommendations and to
evaluate their effectiveness.
Community Engagement Initiative for the Brownfields Program: OSWER' s CEI
Action 1 items23 include extensive and significant improvements to the Brownfields grant
solicitation, selection and award processes to ensure that the program is reaching the
communities in a meaningful way; to ensure that the selection and funding decisions of
the program are transparent and guided by the programmatic goal of serving communities
impacted by cumulative environmental conditions and that are economically distressed
and underserved.
Federal Partners: EPA is committed to working and developing partnerships internally
and externally to help communities address contaminated properties and create
sustainable communities. EPA will continue efforts to highlight examples of how
brownfields resources can support community driven efforts to create and expand urban
parks and greenspaces that improve and restore ecological systems while creating
healthier human scale environments in urban and rural areas. Cleanup of historic
properties or urban brownfields will support and compliment other Federal Government
initiatives. America's Great Outdoors (AGO) activities are underway with the leadership
of the US Department of Interior (DOI) and the US Department of Agriculture (USD A).
EPA will continue to use Interagency Agreements under its MOU with the U.S. Park
Service to fund and expand the network of Groundwork Trusts, which support
community led greenspace and park creation projects, youth programs to engage the next
generation of environmental stewards from brownfields communities, and holistic
community revitalization.
U.S. EPA - U.S. DOT- U.S. HUD Sustainable Communities Partnership: In June
2009, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), U.S. Department
of Transportation (DOT), and EPA joined together to form the Partnership for
Sustainable Communities, an unprecedented agreement to coordinate federal housing,
transportation and environmental investments, protect public health and the environment,
promote equitable development, and help address the challenges of climate change. The
agencies are working together to identify opportunities to build more sustainable
communities and to remove policy or other barriers that have kept Americans from doing
so. The Brownfields and Land Revitalization program is a key member of this
partnership, committing to continue working with HUD and DOT to further coordinate
investments and leverage resources in areas where there is a convergence of brownfield
redevelopment, transit oriented development, and affordable housing. Regions will be
called upon to coordinate with OBLR and seek opportunities within their regions to work
with partnership agencies.
23 CEI Action 1: Proposed Brownfields Process Improvements can be found at:
http://www.epa.gov/oswer/engagementinitiative/oblr.pdf
Page|38
-------
This partnership will maximize the impact of millions of dollars in federal resources on
transit, housing and brownfields. It will ensure equitable redevelopment of brownfields
near transit is supported. Lessons learned from partnership activities are being
incorporated into BF AWP and assessment grant programs.
OBLR will partner with other EPA offices and other federal agencies to highlight
opportunities for incorporating urban gardening practices into community revitalization
plans.
NIEHS-DOL-EPA Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training
(EWDJT): EPA will continue to work with the NIEHS Worker Education and Training
Program and DOL Employment and Training Administration (ETA) to coordinate
environmental workforce development and job training activities. This coordination will
include identifying potential areas of duplication either through offered training or
communities being served. EPA will also continue to solicit participation by NIEHS and
DOL in the review of EPA EWDJT grant proposals, participation in the National
Brownfields Conference, and participation at the annual EWDJT All Grantees Meeting.
ARRA and Brownfields
Under the ARRA, EPA received $100 million in supplemental appropriation for the
Brownfields program. The funding went toward awarding brownfields assessment,
cleanup, new and supplemental RLF and job training cooperative agreements through a
competitive process, as well as, providing technical assistance and targeted brownfields
assessments to brownfields communities via regional contracts and Interagency
Agreements (IA). During FY 2013, any remaining open awards outside of their period of
performance should be aggressively pushed toward completion and closeout. Some
awards will still be within the remaining period of performance and should maintain the
expected high level of performance and reporting; while keeping in mind that any
opportunity for early closeout should be taken.
4- The Property Profile Form and the Job Training Form are available at:
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/pubs/index.html.
Air and Water Quality Impacts and Sustainable Redevelopment
EPA research of the air and water quality impacts of brownfields redevelopment shows
that brownfield/infill development results in significant environmental benefits, when
compared to developing on greenfields. A national scale study of the environmental
impacts of brownfield/infill development was undertaken in FY 2011 and FY 2012. The
local or regional fiscal implications of these findings can inform community planning
investments, ensuring the financial sustainability of redevelopment projects in a larger
context. By working to provide community development finance tools and model
governance structures that support successful implementation, the Brownfields and Land
Revitalization program will support more sustainable redevelopment that protects human
Page|39
-------
health and the environment.
Page | 40
-------
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY PROGRAMS
Program Overview
The foundational purpose of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) is to
reduce the total quantity of materials that ultimately become wastes, effectively
practicing conservation during the useful life of materials and natural resources. To
achieve this conservation, EPA advances Sustainable Materials Management (SMM)
practices to create a life-cycle based approach for the management of used materials.
Under RCRA, EPA has been working successfully in partnership with state and local
governments, as well as American business and non-governmental organizations to drive
significant change in waste and materials management practices. The intent of this
change is to provide incentives for companies to reuse materials; design better waste
management systems that prevent contamination from adversely impacting our
communities; have facilities rather than taxpayers bear the costs of cleaning up
contamination they cause; and consider used materials that would otherwise be
considered wastes as potential commodities that can be incorporated into development of
new products, allowing us to conserve valuable natural resources.
RCRA is a vital component of our nation's legislative framework for public health and
environmental protection and is critical to the comprehensive and protective management
of solid and hazardous materials. The comprehensive, national regulations define solid
and hazardous waste, and impose strict standards on anyone who generates, recycles,
transports, treats, stores, or disposes of waste. This regulatory framework prevents
exposures to contaminants from wastes and also enables other environmental programs,
such as the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA), to function
effectively and achieve real human health and environmental results. Improvements in
air pollution control devices and wastewater treatment systems have removed
contaminants from our air and water, generating greater amounts of solid waste. These
wastes are then managed under RCRA to ensure that the benefits of these improvements
are realized. RCRA also includes a corrective action program which is responsible for
overseeing and managing cleanups which protect human health and the environment.
Further, EPA provides Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants that provide
resources for authorized states to implement a comprehensive hazardous waste
management program.
Sustainable Materials Management
OSWER supports an approach that reflects the need to look at our environmental
challenges with a whole-systems approach, leverage cross-program efforts and tools, and
collaborate within EPA and with external partners and stakeholders. Thus, it reflects an
emphasis on sustainability in meeting today's complex challenges for protecting human
health and the environment as One EPA. As One EPA, OSWER is collaborating with
other EPA offices, including the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
(OCSPP), the Office of Research and Development (ORD) and the Office of Policy (OP).
To that end, EPA's sustainability efforts will systematically integrate and promote the
Page | 41
-------
prevention of pollution, and act as a guiding principle for collaboration between EPA
programs in the alignment of priorities and measures of success. Specifically, each office
mentioned above will incorporate sustainable approaches in their work. This includes the
following projects:
Sustainable Materials Management is an approach to reduce negative
environmental and societal impacts across the life cycle of materials from
resource extraction, manufacturing, use, reuse, recycling and disposal.
Efficiencies gained in SMM approaches can result in less energy used, more
efficient use of materials, more efficient movement of goods and services,
conservation of water and reduced volume and toxicity of waste.
Pollution Prevention (P2) encourages source reduction, advances the development
of safer, "greener" materials and products, and promotes the implementation of
improved practices such as the sustainable use of materials. Environmental and
economic benefits obtained through pollution prevention include reduced use of
hazardous and non-hazardous materials, water and energy, reduced emissions of
greenhouse gasses and reduced costs of operations for businesses, governments
and other institutions. P2 contributes to economic sustainability through increased
profit, employment and community vitality. One key element of EPA's pollution
prevention strategy is advancing green chemistry which provides a framework for
sustainability by designing chemicals and chemical processes that reduce or
eliminate chemical hazards.
OCSPP and OSWER will pursue alignment in work that utilizes and integrates
sustainability efforts consisting of SMM, P2 and other ongoing EPA sustainability
approaches and will adopt ACS commitments that will capture the progress achieved in
those areas. In particular, opportunities presently exist to integrate these pollution
prevention approaches into sector-based initiatives such as manufacturing, health care,
hospitality, sporting and other venues, groceries, and colleges and universities and other
sectors considered to be a priority. In addition, OSWER and other headquarters offices
will work to develop a systematic way to share best practices.
In coordination with OCSPP, OSWER will explore additional formal mechanisms and
opportunities for cross-office coordination. Examples of cross-NPM collaboration
already occurring that could be expanded through this effort and serve as models for
additional initiatives include OCSPP's work with OSWER to extend the useful life of
solvents through revisions to the RCRA Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) rule. These
efforts also include reducing exposure from recycling processes; OSWER's and OCSPP's
collaboration on programs and standards across the lifecycle of electronics products; and
the agency-wide effort to promote sustainable practices in the design and operation of
sports venues.
The RCRA program will promote the sustainable use of materials in the development of
goods and services, in order to advance the efficient use of resources, reduce the need for
waste disposal capacity, minimize the environmental impacts of obtaining new mineral
resources, and support our competitive advantage in a global market through nationally
Page | 42
-------
focused, results-oriented approaches. In FY 2012, the EPA transit!oned to SMM from
the many discontinued partnership programs of the Resource Conservation Challenge
(RCC). Under SMM, EPA has developed and implemented strategically targeted
programs with national impact. For FY 2013, the priority areas for SMM are: showing
results in the SMM Challenges, measurement, and beneficial use of industrial materials in
a manner that is protective of human health and the environment.
To establish a foundation for these priority areas, EPA regions and the Office of
Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) will maintain a predominant national
focus on Sustainable Food Management, the Federal Green Challenge, and the Certified
Electronics Recycling Challenge. Based on the results of these areas of focus, ORCR in
consultations with the regions will determine next steps to expand SMM activities to
other areas. In addition to the three initial challenge areas, OSWER recognizes the
important role communities; local, state, and tribal governments have in creating and
managing the infrastructure necessary to support sustainable materials management.
OSWER will continue to provide technical support to state, local and tribal sustainable
materials management initiatives. In FY 2013, OSWER will continue to lead
implementation of certain commitments of the National Strategy for Electronics
Stewardship that was developed as part of the Interagency Task Force on Electronics
Stewardship, including revising export notification requirements for cathode ray tubes
(CRTs) and evaluating accreditation standards for certifying recyclers.
ORCR and the regions will continue to move forward in improving its measurement of
materials in relation to generation, reduction, reuse and recycling across the waste stream.
ORCR and the regions are implementing a Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA) goal to increase the tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin
resources through sustainable materials management annually from 8.5 million tons at the
end of FY 2011 to 8.7 million tons by the end of FY 2013. This goal was designed to
reflect EPA's direct influence through the SMM Challenges and contributions to the
nation's goal of increasing sustainable materials management.
For FY 2013, ORCR is requesting that all regions identify Annual Commitment System
(ACS) commitments in the area of the SMM Challenges that contribute toward increasing
the tons of materials and products offsetting the use of virgin resources. Regional
commitments toward achieving the annual national target for the SMM measure will be
tracked in ACS as the "Number of participants recruited for Sustainable Materials
Management Challenges."
ORCR will continue its work on evaluating the environmental acceptability of the
beneficial use of industrial materials. Following an accepted methodology, EPA will first
assess encapsulated uses of coal combustion residuals (CCRs) beginning in FY 2012 and
then move to unencapsulated uses in FY 2013. After the coal ash final rule is
promulgated, ORCR and the regions will work on implementation of the rule in FY 2013.
Furthermore, ORCR will work with regions and states to begin to prioritize beneficial use
activities.
Page | 43
-------
Initial or Updated Approved Controls
In FY 2013, the permitting program has a goal to collectively achieve 100 additional
hazardous waste facilities under initial or updated approved controls (see ACS measure
code HWO). Since all but two states are authorized to issue permits, and because states
receive grant funds to implement the RCRA hazardous waste program, regions must
work with states to:
Update and implement multi-year strategies to meet the FY 2013 annual goal and
the FY 2015 strategic goal.
Update assessments of what is needed for each facility to achieve approved
controls and update when each facility is projected to achieve approved controls.
Ensure that the programs are making progress on cleaning up permit renewals
data in RCRAInfo and decreasing the backlog of renewals.
Regions should work with the states toward achieving the FY 2015 national strategic
target of preventing releases at 500 RCRA hazardous waste management facilities by
implementing initial approved controls or updated approved controls. This includes
removing facilities from interim status by issuing an initial RCRA permit, and updating
controls at additional facilities, for a total of 500 facilities between FY 2011 and FY
2015.
Tribal Programs
EPA has significant responsibilities related to the safe management of solid and
hazardous waste in Indian country. Regions will be expected to achieve the following
targets during FY 2013, which will be entered into the ACS:
Assist tribal governments to ensure that an additional 3 tribes are covered by an
integrated waste management plan approved by an appropriate governing body
(ACS measure code TR1);
Assist tribal governments to ensure that an additional 57 open dumps in Indian
country and on other tribal lands are closed, cleaned up, or upgraded (ACS
measure code TR2).
IWMPs identify existing solid waste systems, assess needs, and set forth ways to design,
implement, and monitor more effective and sustainable solid waste management
programs. ORCR has outreach materials on the EPA website. In FY 2013, ORCR is
continuing to develop an IWMP "tool kit" of four fact sheets to provide a descriptive
framework for collecting background data, writing and implementing an IWMP and a tri-
fold brochure on successful tribal waste management programs. These resources are
available on the EPA Tribal Portal:
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/wyl/tribal/pdftxt/tribaliwmp.pdf
Page | 44
-------
During FY 2013, EPA will implement the action items contained in the upcoming EPA
Agency-wide Plan to Provide Solid Waste Management Capacity Assistance to Tribes.
This Plan responds to recommendations made by OIG in FY 2011.
As an additional support to tribes, ORCR regularly produces the Tribal Waste Journal.
Issue 7, published in September 2009, includes resources and information, including
interviews with tribal environmental program managers, on IWMPs:
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/wyl/tribal/pdftxt/twi-7.pdf
While EPA cannot require tribes to develop IWMPs or to include any criteria within
IWMPs, ORCR developed five elements that should generally be included in tribal
integrated waste management plans and published these elements in Issue 7 of the Tribal
Waste Journal. Regions consider these elements when evaluating which IWMPs the
agency includes in the ACS as an accomplishment for this performance measure.
The Indian Health Service (MS), in collaboration with EPA, customized the IHS
Operation and Maintenance Data System (OMDS) database, a subset of the web
Sanitation Tracking and Reporting System (w/STARS). The w/STARS database is the
official repository for EPA data on open dumps in Indian country. Regions should
continue in FY 2013 to conduct site assessments, perform data updates and clean up, and
work with fflS to enter data into w/STARS.
Environmental Justice
EPA has made great progress in implementing environmental justice (EJ) into its
programs and policies. While the agency is a government leader in this area, we
recognize opportunities for improvement. EPA has been working to develop and
implement Plan EJ 2014, a four-year plan to provide a roadmap to help integrate EJ into
its programs.
Under Plan EJ 2014, EPA developed an implementation plan relating to "Considering
Environmental Justice and Permitting." ORCR will continue supporting the initiative in
its overarching goals to enable overburdened communities to have full and meaningful
access to the permitting process and to develop permits that address environmental justice
issues to the greatest extent practicable.
EPA will continue to integrate EJ in its rules and guidance as noted in a memo from the
OSWER AA (dated February 3, 2011) re-emphasizing the importance of considering all
stakeholder input early in the process and anticipating the environmental concerns of the
actions OSWER is developing. This memo gives direction and provides information that
will help OSWER staff further environmental justice in our rules and guidance.
ORCR embraces the Administrator's environmental justice priority and is committed to
promoting healthy and environmentally sound conditions for all people through its
RCRA waste management programs.
Page | 45
-------
Supporting Community-Based Action Programs
ORCR engages with stakeholders and the public in a multi-faceted approach to consider
community needs in the decision-making process. The following are just a few examples
of this engagement:
The public continues to have access to RCRA regulatory and non-regulatory
documents and data, particularly in high risk communities (e.g., through
multimedia data integration projects, other studies, and communication/outreach
activities);
EPA solicits and considers public participation (e.g., through periodic listening
sessions, outreach efforts, etc.), as appropriate, during all phases of the RCRA
permitting, corrective action, and PCB decision-making processes;
EPA places continued emphasis on collaborative problem solving with other
federal, state, tribal, and/or local agencies to address EJ concerns; in EJ training
efforts; and in national, state, tribal, or local dialogue around the issue of EJ (e.g.,
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council [NEJAC], Community
Involvement Conference, Brownfields Conference, Regional Listening Sessions,
public meetings, etc.);
Strengthen Internal EPA Mechanisms to Integrate Environmental Justice
Under Plan EJ 2014, EPA committed to develop a nationally consistent screening and
targeting tool to enhance EJ analysis and decision-making. In the past, regions have used
various screening tools such as EJ SEAT, EJ LandView, and census track data to identify
overburdened and underserved communities. In moving forward, OSWER will utilize
EJSCREEN as the single screening tool to screen for the presence of EJ communities
impacted by RCRA Corrective Actions.
Community Engagement Initiative
Through the Community Engagement Initiative (CEI), ORCR provides program
descriptions for OSWER's CEI website.24 ORCR also collaborates with EPA regions,
tribes and states through the Initiative to suggest improvements to its programs. OSWER
will seek input from outside stakeholders on the programmatic improvements. Under
Action 4 of the CEI action plan, ORCR conducted a multi-stakeholder dialogue to solicit
input on its Definition of Solid Waste rulemaking and will present lessons learned from
the engagement efforts it has utilized in its rulemaking activities.
Under the Community Engagement Initiative Implementation Plan, ORCR will continue
its efforts begun in 2011 to identify and integrate effective community engagement
24 OSWER's CEI website can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/oswer/engagementinitiative/
Page | 46
-------
practices for facilities located in or near communities, and assess how community
engagement can be tailored to size and impacts on facilities. ORCR expects to release its
compendium of effective practices document in early 2012. EPA will update this living
document with additional examples of community engagement practices as they come to
our attention. In FY 2013, ORCR will work with EPA regions and states to discuss how
the effective practices can be integrated into the RCRA program.
Electronic Manifest System
In FY 2013, if funding is provided, EPA will begin the development of an electronic
manifest system to replace the required paper hazardous waste manifest, the primary
tracking document in our "cradle to grave" hazardous waste regulatory system. EPA will
work with stakeholders, including states, regions, and industry, as we begin to develop
the system. Moreover, EPA will work with Congress to obtain authority to collect and
retain user fees so that development costs will be recouped and operation and
maintenance of the system will be paid for by user fees. When completed, an electronic
manifest system will have substantial benefits for the program, including increased access
to data for communities (as well as for states and EPA), and is estimated to save the
private sector much more.
Use of the Exchange Network for Reporting RCRA Subtitle C Data
In a July 2009 memorandum, EPA Administrator Jackson made enhanced use of the
National Environmental Information Exchange Network a part of her strategic vision for
the agency. She wrote in response to a unanimous request from the Environmental
Council of the States emerging from their spring 2009 meeting that she intends "the
agency to work with the states to set an aggressive timetable for completing the transition
to the Exchange Network (EN) for regulatory and national system reporting..." She
directed the NPMs to work to achieve the vision of the Network as "the preferred way
EPA, states, tribes, and others share and exchange data." She added "I look forward to
reviewing our progress toward achieving this goal...." In response to this direction from
the Administrator, OSWER places a high priority on increasing the use of the EN for the
transmission of RCRA Hazardous Waste data from states to EPA and from EPA to the
states to support RCRAInfo. (Please see the sections on Initial or Updated Approved
Controls, and Cleaning Up Communities through RCRA Corrective Action for further
direction on specific RCRAInfo activities.)
OSWER Actions:
In FY 2013, OSWER will take the following actions to continue to improve the
utilization of the Exchange Network for the exchange of RCRA Subtitle C Data:
Continue development of outbound web services that will allow for partners to
retrieve data from RCRAInfo in a more automated fashion States may leverage
these services for a variety of purposes such as accessing RCRAInfo data through
Page | 47
-------
their own applications, integrating RCRAInfo data with other programmatic
datasets, and using the services to assist with the QA/QC of data;
Conduct training and provide support to states that are integrating with the
Exchange Network; and,
Continue to work with the states to establish reasonable targets for those that are
integrating the Exchange Network into their business processes.
Regional Actions:
Regions should work with states to:
Establish reasonable timelines for those that are integrating with the Exchange
Network; and,
Establish strategies for accomplishing this transition.
More broadly, the Environmental Information Exchange Network has provided the
foundation for EPA, states and tribes to now move aggressively to convert from old
fashioned paper reporting to electronic reporting. To reduce burden, improve
compliance, expand the information available to the public about pollution that affects
them, and improve the ability of EPA, states and tribes to implement environmental
programs, the agency has commenced a comprehensive initiative to convert to electronic
reporting. EPA is focusing this initiative in two main areas: (1) developing an agency
wide policy to ensure that new regulations include electronic reporting in the most
efficient way; and (2) developing and then implementing an agency plan to convert the
most important existing paper reporting to electronic, while also looking for opportunities
to reduce or streamline outdated paper reporting. Since this work is cross-cutting, EPA
has established an agency-wide Electronic Reporting Task Force to lead and manage this
work.
The agency is interested in learning from the states and tribes about their successes and
challenges in converting from paper reporting to electronic. And, the agency will keep
states and tribes informed about its progress in this initiative. If a state or tribe would like
to share information with the Electronic Reporting Task Force, please contact David
Nicholas (nicholas.david@epa.gov) in OSWER for more information.
Cleaning Up Communities through RCRA Corrective Action
The 2020 Corrective Action Universe lists 3,747 hazardous waste management facilities
identified for cleanup under the RCRA Corrective Action program. This list, which can
be found online at
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/correctiveaction/facility/index.htmtf2020, will serve
Page | 48
-------
as the "RCRA Cleanup Baseline" for FY 2013.25 EPA's FY 2011 - 2015 Strategic Plan
commits the program to reaching specific percentages for three key measures at these
sites by FY 2015:
Control all identified unacceptable human exposures from site contamination to
health-based levels for current land and/or groundwater use conditions (Human
Exposures El)
Control the migration of contaminated groundwater (Groundwater El)
Complete construction of final remedies (Remedy Construction)
EPA's aspirational goal is to achieve 95 percent completion for all three goals by the end
of FY 2020. To assist with achieving these goals, the National Enforcement Strategy for
Corrective Action (NESCA) was developed to provide a framework for strategically
using enforcement where needed. In FY 2013, EPA will make any necessary
adjustments to our targets and/or resources in response to the results of our FY 2012
analysis of the corrective action program workload and will consider future resource
needs. This analysis is in response to a recommendation by GAO in its report.26 This
analysis will focus on the resources needed to reach our long term goals for completing
cleanups at corrective action facilities.
Performance Goals for FY 2013 (with ACS measure codes):
Human Exposures El - 85 percent (152 facilities; ACS CA1)
Groundwater El - 73 percent (137 facilities; ACS CA2)
Remedy Construction - 51 percent (168 facilities; ACS CAS)
Existing progress at facilities on the "RCRA Cleanup Baseline" varies across regions and
states. As a result, to meet our national goals, we will tailor regional performance
estimates for FY 2013 based upon each region's profile of facilities. Regional targets that
together add up to the national percentage goals will be set via the ACS in the last two
quarters of FY 2012.
Further Information
All regions should work with states to achieve the FY 2013 targets. Planning
accomplishments for the year, as well as frequent discussions of progress with state
partners, will be essential to meeting program goals. Beyond planned accomplishments
for FY 2013, regions should begin to lay the groundwork for future accomplishments In
25 This universe of sites is a subset of the approximately 6,000 potential sites with corrective action
obligations. With regard to sites not currently on the 2020 Corrective Action Baseline universe, EPA is
reviewing these sites to determine which, if any, should be included in our program workload in future
years.
26 Hazardous Waste: Early Goals Have Been Met in EPA's Corrective Action program but Resource and
Technical Challenges Will Constrain Future Progress (GAO-11-514), July 2011. The report can be found at
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/dl 1514.pdf
Page | 49
-------
response to significant progress made through FY 2011, EPA revised its annual
performance targets for FY 2012 and estimated new strategic planning goals for FY 2013
- 2017. In FY 2012 EPA will be working, in consultation with states, to assess the
remaining workload and resources to meet these goals, and any new findings or strategies
would be implemented to move the region's most difficult sites toward final remedies in
FY2013 and beyond.
OECA encourages the regions to use enforcement authorities and tools where appropriate
to address the aforementioned program goals. In addition, the Superfund and RCRA
Corrective Action enforcement program commitments for the financial assurance priority
are included in OECA's portion of the ACS. In collaboration with state partners, regions
should work to implement the National Enforcement Strategy for RCRA Corrective
Action (NESCA) to help achieve the 2020 RCRA Corrective Action goals.
While the RCRA corrective action program will continue its primary focus on the 2020
goals to drive cleanup program progress, regions should also work with their states to
promote making RCRA Ready for Anticipated Use (RAU) determinations to support
OSWER' s Cross-Program Revitalization Measure2 RAU determinations can now be
recorded in RCRAInfo through the CA800 event code.
Regions are also encouraged to work with states by using approaches under the
Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI) to accelerate cleanups and address a greater number of
contaminated sites. One such ICI measure is the newly defined Remedy Construction -
Remedy Deferred determination for operating facilities (CA550OF). This determination
will be used to better communicate and drive interim progress at Corrective Action sites
with operating manufacturing process areas, and starting in FY 2013, should be adopted
and entered into RCRAInfo by the states and regions.
Non Hazardous Secondary Materials
EPA has received a large number of inquiries as an outgrowth of the March 21, 2011,
rulemaking regarding non-hazardous secondary materials that are solid wastes when used
as fuels or ingredients in combustion units. Regions that receive requests for regulatory
interpretations or petitions under 40 CFR 241.3(c) for non-waste determinations should
obtain the concurrence of the Assistant Administrator for OSWER before responding to
such requests.
PCBs (Polychlorinated Biphenyls) Cleanup and Disposal
PCB disposal approvals are issued to assure safe management of PCB wastes and support
PCB cleanup activities. OSWER will continue to issue disposal approvals that are
designated by regulations to be issued by EPA headquarters (e.g., for mobile PCB
treatment units operating in more than one region). During FY 2013, regions are
27 Please see "Guidance for Documenting and Reporting RCRA Subtitle C Corrective Action Land
Revitalization Indicators and Measures" at
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/correctiveaction/resources/guidance/brfields/lr guid.pdf
Page | 50
-------
expected to continue to issue approvals for PCB cleanup and disposal as required under
40 CFR Part 761. ORCR is assessing the current ACS measures PCI and PC2 and will
be working with the regions to evaluate them in FY 2013.
In FY 2013, efforts in this program area will support the EPA's Healthy Communities
Initiative. We will work with our partners to promote safe handling and management of
PCB-containing caulk in schools while building necessary regional technical support and
outreach to effectively implement site-specific cleanup and disposal plans. We expect
regions to implement guidance issued in FY 2012 to expedite the removal of PCB bulk
product waste and remediation waste as an effort to reduce potential exposures in schools
and commercial buildings. Additionally, we will work to clarify the approach for
determining the regulatory status of PCB sediments, in order to remove impediments to,
and reduce costs of, PCB cleanups under Superfund and other regulatory programs. .
During FY 2013, EPA will assess the need to modify current program guidance as it
relates to community involvement through the Community Engagement Initiative.
Page | 51
-------
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS PROGRAM
flagrant Overview
The purpose of the Underground Storage Tank (UST) program is to protect communities
living and working near UST sites as well as land and groundwater resources from
contamination caused by releases of regulated substances (typically petroleum-based
motor fuels and their additives) from leaking USTs.28 The program is designed to
implement a dual approach for achievement of this goal: the first is to prevent and detect
releases from UST systems, and the second is to clean up contamination from releases
that occur from leaking USTs (sometimes referred to as "LUSTs"). Both of these
program elements are part regulatory and part formula grant, and they work in concert
with one another as an integrated whole. The Office of Underground Storage Tanks
(OUST) was created in 1985 as the result of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act
Amendments (HSWA) to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The
HSWA added Subtitle I, which directs EPA to develop a comprehensive program for the
regulation of UST systems "as may be necessary to protect human health and the
environment."
The UST program provides states29 and tribes with financial and technical assistance and
assists with capacity building through training and state program approval. States operate
their UST and LUST programs after being granted state program approval or via
Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) with EPA. Only for the USTs in Indian country does
EPA directly implement the program. Supported by grants and cooperative agreements,
state agencies implement the program for the vast majority of USTs. Except for a small
core of headquarters personnel, federal UST program personnel are geographically
dispersed to EPA's 10 regional offices and it is regional personnel who both directly
implement and enforce the program in Indian country and also provide technical,
logistical, and administrative support to the state programs in their region. **
Regulatory Framework
Regulations promulgated by EPA in 1988 establish the regulatory framework for
achieving the program's goal. Regulations at 40 CFR Part 280, "Technical Standards and
Corrective Action Requirements for Owners and Operators of Underground Storage
Tanks," include both technical standards and financial assurance requirements for owners
and operators of UST systems and are broken down into eight subparts:
28 Thirty-nine states identify leaking underground storage tanks as one of the top 10 sources of groundwater
contamination. (EPA Office of Water 305(b) report, Figure 6-5,
http://www.epa.gov/owow/305b/2000reporf)
29 The term "states" as used in this guidance refers collectively to UST programs implemented by the
individual states, territories, and the District of Columbia, see the definition of "State" in the Solid Waste
Disposal Act (SWDA) of 1976 (42 U.S.CA. 6903 at http://uscode.house.sov/search/criteria.shtml).
** In some cases, EPA also supports states in conducting inspections and enforcement.
Page | 52
-------
1. Program Scope and Interim Prohibition (Subpart A);
2. UST Systems: Design, Construction, Installation, and Notification (Subpart B);
3. General Operating Requirements (Subpart C);
4. Release Detection (Subpart D);
5. Release Reporting, Investigation, and Confirmation (Subpart E);
6. Release Response and Corrective Action for UST Systems Containing Petroleum
or Hazardous Substances (Subpart F);
7. Out-of-Service UST Systems and Closure (Subpart G); and
8. Financial Responsibility (Subpart H).
State programs that have regulations that are no less stringent than federal regulations can
be approved to operate in lieu of the federal program. The procedures for approving such
state programs are found at 40 CFR Part 281: "Approval of State Underground Storage
Tank Programs." These regulations are broken down into six subparts:
1. Purpose, General Requirements and Scope (Subpart A);
2. Components of a Program Application (Subpart B);
3. Criteria for No Less Stringent (Subpart C);
4. Adequate Enforcement of Compliance (Subpart D);
5. Approval Procedures (Subpart E);
6. Withdrawal of Approval of State Programs (Subpart F).
Thirty-seven states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia have received approval for
their UST programs. The remaining 14 states and 4 territories implement UST programs
under their own authorities in cooperation with EPA.
Program Funding
EPA provides funds to help states and tribes develop and implement their Underground
Storage Tank programs through grants or cooperative agreements under the authorities
and appropriations described below. Specific activities eligible for funding under EPA
approved scopes of work are determined through discussions between the states and
tribes and the EPA regional offices based on national guidance issued by OUST.
In FY 1999, through PL 105-276, Congress gave EPA authority to provide assistance
agreements to federally-recognized tribes to develop and implement programs to manage
USTs and to carry out leaking UST corrective action programs. In general, such
assistance agreements can be used for the same purposes for tribes as they are used for
states; however, EPA does not have authority under RCRA to approve tribal programs to
operate in lieu of the federal program. Examples of eligible projects that can be
conducted under these grants include the development and administration of an UST or
leaking UST program including leak prevention, conducting an unregistered tank survey,
providing leak detection and installer training, and cleaning up releases.
In 2004, through PL 107-73, Congress gave EPA authority to award cooperative
Page | 53
-------
agreements to federally-recognized tribes and eligible tribal consortia to assist EPA in
implementing federal environmental programs in the absence of an approved tribal
program. To date, Congress has always renewed this authority in EPA's annual
appropriation acts. These agreements are called Direct Implementation Tribal
Cooperative Agreements (DITCAs) and they provide tribes with the flexibility and
opportunity to hire and train environmental staff to effectively manage UST programs,
promote compliance, and address specific tribal needs and priorities within EPA's
authority for direct implementation. Tribal staff who have received EPA credentials can
also assist EPA by conducting UST inspections.
UST State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG): Any STAG funding appropriated in
FY 2013 for the UST leak prevention programs will be given as grants or cooperative
agreements under the authorities of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) of 1976, as
amended by the Superfund Reauthorization Amendments of 1986 (Subtitle I), Section
2007(f), 42 U.S.C. 6916(f)(2), and Section 9011 and other applicable authorities; and
such additional authority as may be provided for in EPA's annual appropriations acts.
STAG funding is provided in grants and cooperative agreements to assist states and
territories in the development and implementation of UST programs and for leak
prevention, compliance and other activities authorized by the EPAct and EPA's annual
appropriations acts. The STAG funding is provided to the states based on programmatic
need. The UST State Grant program is implemented by regulations at 40 CFR 35.330.
There is a 25-percent matching requirement for states under 40 CFR 35.335. State
matches may include in-kind contributions.
LUST Trust Fund Cooperative Agreements for UST Release Prevention Activities:
Any LUST funding appropriated in FY 2013 for the prevention program will be given as
assistance agreements to states and tribes under the authorities of Section 9011 and
Section 9013 and other applicable provisions of Subtitle I of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act (SWDA) of 1976. EPA also provides funding to non-governmental organizations to
provide training and assistance to tribes under section 8001 as amended by the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (P.L. 98-616). The assistance agreements will be
for prevention and compliance assurance activities, such as inspections, as well as for
enforcement activities related to release prevention. Priority will be given to providing
funds to enable the states to meet their responsibilities under Title XV, Subtitle B of the
EPAct. States that have entered into assistance agreements with EPA have the authority
to inspect and take other compliance and related enforcement actions to prevent releases
from USTs. EPA provides financial assistance to tribes to develop and implement
programs to manage USTs. This financial assistance program is not eligible for inclusion
in Performance Partnership Grants under 40 CFR 35.133. Assistance agreements are
only available to states that have UST programs. Additionally, these assistance
agreements are only available to federally-recognized tribes and Intertribal Consortia that
meet the requirements, as described in the Federal Register Notice, Vol. 67, No. 213, pp.
67181-67183, "Update to EPA Policy on Certain Grants to Intertribal Consortia."
LUST prevention funding is awarded under an allocation process developed by the
agency. The agency distributes funds based on the number of federally-regulated USTs
Page | 54
-------
in a state and other indices of state needs. As a matter of policy, OUST has determined
that states will provide a twenty-five (25) percent match for cooperative agreements
awarded under Section 9011 and other applicable provisions of Subtitle I. There is no
matching requirement for LUST prevention assistance agreements for tribes or Intertribal
Consortia awarded pursuant to annual appropriation acts.
LUST Trust Fund Cooperative Agreements for Corrective Action Activities: Any
LUST funding appropriated in FY 2013 for the LUST cleanup program will be given as
cooperative agreements under the authorities of Section 9003 (h)(7) of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act of 1976 (SWDA), as amended, and Public Law 105-276. Under Public
Law 105-276, Congress authorized EPA to use LUST Trust Fund appropriations to
award cooperative agreements to tribes for the same purposes as those set forth in Section
9003(h)(7). Policies and procedures applicable to EPA-State LUST Trust Fund
cooperative agreements are presented in detail in OSWER Directive 9650.10A, issued
May 24, 1994, including site prioritization, allowable costs, and site eligibility. LUST
corrective action funding awarded to the states under Section 9003 (h)(7) of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act is subject to an allocation process developed by the agency. By
guidance, the agency has established a process for allocating funds to states under Section
9003(h)(7) based on the number of UST releases and other indices of state needs. This
program allocates funding to tribes and Intertribal Consortia non-competitively based on
their programmatic needs and national guidance. By statute, states must provide a 10
percent cost share for cooperative agreements awarded under Section 9003(h)(7). There
is no matching requirement for corrective action cooperative agreements for tribes or
Intertribal Consortia awarded pursuant to Public Law 105-276.
Headquarters and Regional Underground Storage Tanks Program: Funds from
OUST's Environmental Program and Management (EPM) and the LUST Trust Fund
national program accounts support activities, subject to funding availability, that promote
the prevention, identification, corrective action, enforcement and management of releases
from underground storage tank systems.
EPA's Regulatory Responsibilities for Monitoring Performance Under Assistance
Agreements: As a provider of federal funds to state UST programs, EPA has a
responsibility under 40 CFR Part 31 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants
and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments) and Part 35 (State and
Local Assistance) to monitor state performance and require performance reporting under
the funding sources listed above for each of the elements of 40 CFR 280 and 281 to
ensure accurate and complete information on program performance and financial
management.
Regions are also responsible for negotiating the terms and amounts of the assistance
agreements listed below and also for monitoring performance and requiring performance
reporting under these agreements:
1) STAG Appropriation to States and Territories: Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) of
1976, as amended; Superfund Reauthorization Amendments of 1986, Subtitle I, Section
Page | 55
-------
2007(f) and Section 9011 and other applicable provisions of Subtitle I.
2) LUST Appropriation to States, Territories and for Tribes:
a) Corrective Action: Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1976 (SWDA), as amended,
Section 9003(h), Public Law 105-276, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009.
b) Prevention: Section 9011 and other applicable provisions of Subtitle I of the
SWDA as amended for States and Territories Energy Policy Act of 2005 specified in
Section 9508(c) of the Internal Revenue Code; EPAct, Title XV, Ethanol And Motor
Fuels, Subtitle B, Sections 1521 - 1533, Public Law 109-58, 42 U.S.C. 15801; and
Section 8001 (a) and (b) as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984 (P.L. 98-616); Public Law 105-276.
3) EPM and LUST Appropriations: Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1976, Section 8001 (a)
and (b) as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (P.L. 98-
616); P.L. 105-276
Performance Indicators and Goals
To monitor performance of the program in meeting its twin objectives (prevention and
detection of releases, and cleaning up contamination from releases that do occur) OUST
has established two primary performance objectives.
Prevention and Detection of Releases
The first objective, prevention and detection of releases, has two measures: (1) significant
operational compliance (SOC) and (2) number of confirmed releases.
(1) SOC. This indicator measures the number of tanks that comply with both the
release prevention and release detection requirements, and that the tanks are operating
and the systems are properly maintained. The implementation of EPA's traditional
tools, supplemented by the new tools provided to the program through the EPAct, will
over time work with state authorities to show a marked increase in the SOC rates
across the country.
(2) Number of confirmed releases. A primary goal of the UST program is to reduce
the number of releases that occur annually. It is critical that every release that occurs
be discovered, reported as expeditiously as possible, and appropriately addressed
because costs for cleanup are sharply reduced the earlier a release is discovered.
Inspections can create incentives for owners and operators to properly operate and
maintain their systems because well-maintained systems experience fewer leaks. With
groundwater being the primary source of drinking water to nearly half of the country's
population, leaks from USTs are a significant threat to human health and the
environment. By decreasing the number of releases, and continuing our focus on the
Page | 56
-------
cleanup of existing contamination, the underground storage tank program will make
an important contribution to the nation's health.
Release Prevention and Detection Performance Goals for FY 2013:
Increase the percentage of UST facilities that are in significant operational
compliance (SOC) with both release detection and release prevention
requirements by 0.5% over the previous year's target. (Target: 67%; ACS measure
code ST6).
Reduce the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities to five percent (5%)
fewer than the prior year's target. (Target <7,715; ACS measure code ST1).
Cleaning Up Contamination
The second objective, cleaning up contamination from releases that do occur, has a single
performance goal, which is increasing the number of cleanups that meet risk-based
standards for human exposure and groundwater migration. In addition to serving as the
national tanks program goal, this objective contributes to the broader OSWER priority
goal of sites ready for anticipated reuse.
Of the approximately 501,000 confirmed releases reported since the beginning of the
program, over 413,000 (82.5%) of these have been cleaned up, leaving a backlog of
approximately 88,000 remaining to be completed.30 Because there are thousands of new
releases added to this backlog every year, reducing the backlog remains a challenge for
the program.
LUST Cleanup Performance Goal for FY 2013:
Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human
exposure and groundwater migration. (Target: 10,100; this includes 45 cleanups
in Indian country. ACS measure code 112).
Underground Storage Tank Programs in Indian Country
EPA is responsible for directly implementing the UST program in Indian country and
consults with tribal governments in accordance with the Tribal Consultation Policy. The
agency assists tribes in developing their capacity to administer UST programs and works
to ensure that UST facilities in Indian country operate in compliance with regulations in
order to prevent future leaks and to clean up existing leaks. Federal funding is provided
to support prevention and remediation activities such as training for tribal environmental
staff, education for owners and operators in Indian country about UST requirements, site
assessments, cleaning up releases, and Indian country UST data collection and
improvement efforts.
30 For the most current corrective action measures, see http://www.epa.sov/swerustl/cat/camarchv.htm
Page | 57
-------
EPA's forward-looking strategy for the implementation of the UST program in Indian
country was developed with the close collaboration of tribes and lays out priorities and
objectives for the agency to improve the UST tribal program. In particular, the strategy
identifies steps that EPA and tribes are taking to further the cleanup and compliance of
USTs. EPA continues to work with tribes toward meeting the objectives of the strategy
which include strengthening relationships, communication, and collaboration; improving
information sharing; implementing the provisions of the EPAct; and implementing UST
prevention and LUST cleanup activities.
EPA continues to work with its tribal partners to meet or exceed established goals to
improve UST compliance and release cleanup in Indian country along with meeting the
objectives laid out in the tribal strategy. EPA is also working with the tribes to meet the
EPAct requirement of conducting on-site inspections of all tanks in Indian country once
every three years.
LUST Cleanup Performance Goal for FY 2013 in Indian country:
Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human
exposure and groundwater migration in Indian country (Target: 45; ACS measure
code 113).
Program Priorities and Initiatives
OUST fully supports the Administrator's desire to create a culture of One EPA where all
EPA offices coordinate with each other across traditional program boundaries to achieve
our mutual priorities. For example, we are working with OSWER's Office of
Brownfields and Land Revitalization and the Office of Policy's Office of Sustainable
Communities program to jointly develop our second three-year strategy to address
petroleum brownfields, and to leverage expertise and resources across programs. This
work supports the Administrator's priority of Cleaning up our Communities and the
agency's cross-cutting fundamental strategy of Working for Environmental Justice and
Children's Health. OUST also is coordinating with the Office of Air and Radiation on
their efforts to approve new alternative fuels to achieve improved air quality and address
the Administrator's priority of Taking Action on Climate Change, while at the same time,
ensuring that these new fuels can be safely stored in the nation's infrastructure of
underground storage tanks.
In FY 2013, EPA regions and states should look for opportunities for partnerships
between the UST and Brownfields programs that can both address petroleum brownfields
sites and reduce the LUST backlog, including best practices recently identified by OUST.
Regions and states should also take steps to implement compatibility regulations and
guidance regarding alternative fuels.
Page | 58
-------
Community Engagement
OUST will work to enhance community engagement in UST program decision-making.
By partnering with our state and tribal partners, we can improve access to information
and more effectively communicate site risks. Enhancing community engagement will
ensure local communities have a voice in programmatic actions, including redevelopment
options. Our work will support OSWER's Community Engagement Initiative (CEI).
OUST, in consultation with states and the Association of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO), has developed best practices for tailoring
community engagement practices.
In FY 2013, OUST will continue to assist states and regions (with stakeholder input) in
enhancing state and tribal public involvement policies and processes. Specifically,
OUST, through regular communications (quarterly and bi-weekly calls, meetings, etc.)
with the regions, states and tribes, will encourage them to utilize the tools and resources
made available on the UST community engagement web page. OUST will also continue
to encourage, through various venues, regions and states to use their best professional
judgment to identify LUST sites that may warrant enhanced community engagement, i.e.,
tailor community engagement activities to site circumstances.
OUST will continue to encourage and welcomes additional ideas and input from regions
and states regarding community engagement activities and is committed to sharing this
information on the OUST community engagement web page as well as through other
mechanisms. By communicating real-life approaches and experiences, EPA, states, and
communities can benefit from this collective knowledge.
Environmental Justice
In support of the Administrator's priority to "Expand the Conversation on
Environmentalism and Work for Environmental Justice," the agency has developed a
Plan EJ 2014 to help EPA integrate environmental justice into its programs.
OUST supports this plan and will work to ensure that environmental justice communities
are not disproportionately impacted by releases from underground storage tanks. Toward
that end, OUST is committed to several efforts such as:
Following the guidance as outlined in the AA/OSWER's February 3, 2011,
memorandum, entitled Integrating EnvironmentalJustice in Rules and Guidance,
for the revisions to the UST regulations.
Working to integrate re-use opportunities with overall community planning,
providing tools to communities to locate potential candidates for re-use, inspiring
vision for re-use possibilities and providing practical knowledge to implement
reuse plans.
Supporting prevention activities through a grant with the Inter-Tribal Council of
Arizona (ITCA) that provides targeted compliance assistance training to tribal
governments and tank owners/operators.
Page | 59
-------
Analyzing and exploring strategies to assess environmental justice impacts
associated with the underground storage tanks program.
Utilizing EJSCREEN as the nationally consistent screening tool to screen for the
presence of EJ communities impacted by underground storage tanks.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)
The LUST cleanup program received significant supplemental funding through the FY
2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Additional details can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/recovery and http://www.recovery.gov/. These funds
enabled states to work toward assessing and cleaning up underground storage tank
releases at over 7,000 sites in our country and provided an economic stimulus in all the
states that received LUST Recovery Act funding. The period of performance for 30 out
of the 54 LUST ARRA grants ended September 30, 2011 and all but 3 grants will end by
the end of FY 2012. Therefore, Recovery Act activities will continue into FY 2013 but
will be limited.
Preventing Underground Storage Tank Releases
EPA recognizes that compliance with UST regulations offers the best prospect for
preventing releases and detecting releases as early as possible. In partnership with its
state and tribal partners, EPA is committed to fully implementing the Energy Policy Act
UST provisions, including more frequent inspection, requiring secondary containment for
new installations, properly training operators, and prohibiting delivery to severely
noncompliant UST. The UST program is currently updating the federal regulations to
incorporate Energy Policy Act provisions and update additional provisions of the
regulations based on suggestions from extensive stakeholder outreach. We anticipate
finalizing the regulations in FY 2013, and beginning to work with states and tribes to
implement them. The Tanks program, in close coordination with EPA's Air program, is
working to ensure that higher blends of ethanol such as El5 are stored in compatible UST
systems in order to avoid any unintended consequences such as a potential increase in the
number of leaks from systems that are not compatible. Regions and states should also
take steps to implement compatibility regulations and guidance regarding alternative
fuels. Other program priorities include providing continued technical guidance and
assistance to other governments and the regulated community.
Cleaning Up Underground Storage Tank Releases
EPA has efforts underway to continue to reach out to new partners and find new
information and new tools to enhance the ability to address these cleanups. For example,
in 2011 as part of the Integrated Cleanup Initiative, EPA completed a detailed study of
the open sites with contamination remaining in the backlog. As an outgrowth of that
study, in FY 2013 EPA will work with states to implement a practical suite of strategies
to accelerate corrective action, improve program management and target sites of interest.
EPA also is working to monitor the financial mechanisms being used by states and
private parties to finance cleanups, in order to assure there is, and will continue to be,
Page | 60
-------
sufficient funding available. In FY 2012, OUST completed its regional guidance to assist
in the review of the soundness of state funds and began a piloting process with several
regions on the guidance's implementation. Depending upon the outcome of these pilots,
the regional offices will begin a regular review of state funds using this guidance in FY
2013.
Another action under the ICI is to build on the success of the traditional Brownfields
program by looking for opportunities to promote the cleanup and redevelopment of
abandoned gas stations (more generally known as "Petroleum Brownfields"). In FY
2013, OUST will work with OBLR, regions, states and tribes to implement the second
three-year plan, developed jointly with OBLR. Another important resource EPA
provides to states and tribes is continuing research into the specific contaminants at
LUST cleanup sites, the risk associated with them, and appropriate cleanup tools to
address them. Finally, EPA provides technical assistance and guidance toward
addressing challenging technical issues (e.g., biofuels, petroleum vapor intrusion). In
particular, OUST will develop its petroleum vapor intrusion (PVI) guidance in 2012 to
assist investigators in their examination of this pathway. Training and implementation
activities associated with this guidance are expected for FY 2013.
Performance Monitoring and Reporting
Regional Coordination
Regional planning meetings, regional Division Directors' meetings, and regularly
scheduled monthly conference calls between OUST and the regional UST/leaking UST
program managers provide opportunities for OUST and regional management to assess
the strengths and weaknesses of federal and state programs and decide where EPA's
support is most needed and would be most productive. OUST holds additional Regional
Program Manager meetings, as needed.
Regional offices are expected to verify the accuracy and completeness of data provided
by states in the web-based Oracle database, known as LUST4. Verification must be an
ongoing process each time states submit data in the LUST4 database. Regional offices
are to follow the verification guidance provided by OUST and also included in the
LUST4 training video located in the EPA Portal database. In general, such processes
should involve sufficient interaction with states that the regional offices can be confident
that the data submitted at the end of each reporting period are complete, up-to-date and
accurate. Each regional office should conduct reviews of state data. Each region must
certify with an electronic signature in the LUST4 database that the reviews have occurred
and are accurate. In addition, regional offices are held accountable for working with
states to improve their data systems where appropriate.
Page | 61
-------
State Reporting Requirements and Schedule
States must submit performance data31 on a semi-annual basis. States are to report mid-
year performance data on or before April 5, 2013. Regional offices must report the
region-specific mid-year performance data on or before April 12, 2013. All mid-year
performance data must be reported and verified via the online LUST4 Semiannual
Measures subsystem.
States are to report the estimated number of end-of-year cleanups completed on or before
September 6, 2013. Regional offices must report the estimated number of end-of-year
cleanups completed in Indian country by September 13, 2013.
States are to report end-of-year performance data on or before October 7, 2013. Regional
offices must report the region-specific end-of-year performance data on or before
October 14, 2013. All end-of-year performance data must be reported and verified via
the online LUST4 Semiannual Measures subsystem.
For states and regions (for tribes) with active ARRA grants, each are requested to report
the eight program performance measures32 reflecting cumulative totals within 10 days
after the end of each calendar quarter. ARRA performance measures and locational
information must be reported and verified via the online LUST4 ARRA Measures and
Location subsystems.
Deliverable Dates for State and Regional Programs
Date
April 6
April 13
September 7
September 14
States
Report mid-year data in
LUST4 semiannual
performance measures
online application.
Report estimates of
cleanups completed for
end-of-year.
Regions
Report final mid-year
region-specific data in the
LUST 4 semiannual
performance measures
online application. Verify
data by completing and
signing checklist in the
LUST4 semiannual
performance measures
online application.
Report estimates of
31 Semiannual performance measure definitions can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/oust/cat/PMDefinitions.pdf.
32
ARRA performance measures can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oust/eparecovery/perfmeas.htm.
Page | 62
-------
cleanups completed by
tribes and states to OUST.
October 9
Report end-of-year data in
LUST4 semiannual
performance measures
online application.
October 15
Report end-of-year region-
specific data in LUST4
semiannual performance
measures online application.
Verify data by completing
and signing checklist in the
LUST4 semiannual
performance measures
online application.
Page | 63
-------
Tribal Program Development
OSWER is committed to protecting human health and the environment in Indian country
while supporting tribal self government, acting consistently with the federal trust
responsibility, and strengthening the government-to-government relationships between
tribes and the EPA. Support provided to tribal governments includes capacity building,
technical and financial assistance, research and outreach. OSWER will continue
implementing the OSWER Tribal Strategy, an EPA and Tribal Partnership to Preserve
and Restore Land in Indian Country, which describes in detail OSWER program
strategies, priority activities, and associated measures for tribes from 2009-2014. By
implementing this strategy, EPA will strengthen partnerships with tribes, improve tribal
participation in all OSWER-related programs, enable tribes to achieve better
environmental outcomes, and enhance environmental protection in Indian country.
While implementing these priorities, OSWER will use cross-program approaches to
integrate and leverage activities (e.g., EPA Agency-Wide Plan to Provide Tribal Solid
Waste Management Capacity Assistance), and anticipate future needs as tribes develop
more mature programs. In 2013, OSWER intends to focus on the following key areas to
help improve tribal program development and performance:
Actions that enable tribes to develop and implement sustainable waste
management programs, where tribes have built capacity and demonstrate
program readiness.
Supporting tribal community engagement efforts across OSWER.
Work with tribes, as part of the Integrated Cleanup Initiative, to identify and
implement improvements to the agency's land cleanup programs.
Work across the agency to implement the EPA Policy on Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribes, and ensure that OSWER consults with tribes on
applicable rules and guidances.
Ensure OSWER meets its obligations to involve the public and be responsive to
the environmental justice concerns of non-federally recognized tribes, individual
tribal members, tribal community-based/grassroots organizations and other
indigenous stakeholders.
Tribal support through the OSWER cooperative agreement with the Institute for
Tribal Environmental Professionals, including the annual Tribal Lands Forum.
New technologies and opportunities for tribal outreach.
Technical assistance on mining impacts on tribal lands.
Tribal and EPA roles under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
Enhancing opportunities for tribes in green initiatives (e.g., RE-Powering
America, Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE), and the
Sustainable Materials Management (SMM) program).
Climate change impacts on Native American communitiesadaptations and
opportunities to reduce the carbon footprint in Indian country (e.g., land
management, waste management and energy and resource conservation
initiatives in Indian country).
Understanding and reducing risk in Indian country.
Page | 64
-------
Environmental Justice and Community-Based Programs
Environmental justice (EJ) is a priority through all of OSWER's waste programs,
promoting healthy and environmentally sound conditions for all people. By integrating
EJ into all its programs, OSWER seeks to mobilize its resources to address the needs of
disproportionately burdened communities.
To facilitate the continued integration of EJ into its programs, OSWER will:
Implement Plan EJ 2014 to address the needs of overburdened, minority, low-
income, and indigenous populations by empowering local communities to take
action to improve their health and environment;
Utilize guidance and tools produced under Plan EJ 2014 as it works to advance
and promote the agency's environmental justice objectives, including EJ Legal
Tools, rulemaking guidance, and permitting guidance;
Develop and implement key strategies for EJ and Children's Health to promote
healthy and sustainable communities;
Provide opportunities to engage communities in our work;
Continue to support the CARE program;
Develop improved methods of information delivery and technical assistance to
communities underrepresented in EPA cleanup decisions at contaminated sites;
Overcome barriers to incorporating EJ in decision making; and
Consider approaches for incorporating EJ in setting priorities, allocating
resources, targeting activities, and measuring progress.
EJSCREEN
In the past, regions have used various screening tools such as EJ SEAT, EJ LandView,
and census track data to identify overburdened and underserved communities. In moving
forward, OSWER will utilize EJSCREEN as the nationally-consistent screening tool to
screen for the presence of EJ communities impacted by RCRA Corrective Actions,
underground storage tanks, and hazardous waste sites. EJSCREEN connects the
evaluation on demographics and environmental data to determine whether a community
is burdened by a disproportionate impact. The results of EJ SCREEN should inform the
agency of areas needing more in-depth exploration.
EJ Legal Tools
In FY 2012, OSWER will focus on the EJ Legal Tools document due to its immediate
applicability. The EJ legal Tools set forth authority under RCRA, the Emergency
Planning and Community Right to Know Act, and CERCLA to address EJ
considerations. These authorities give EPA the right to take actions "necessary to protect
health and welfare or the environment" and it authorizes EPA to ensure fair treatment and
meaningful participation in environmental decision-making for minority, low-income,
and indigenous populations that are disproportionately impacted. For example, under
several RCRA authorities and CERCLA, EPA or the state can take into account
Page | 65
-------
cumulative risk, unique exposure pathways, and scenarios or sensitive populations in
establishing priorities for the permit and corrective action programs or UST releases.
These authorities establish a process for addressing EJ through decision making,
engagement mechanisms and technical assistance. OSWER will work with the EPA
regional offices, as well as the states and tribes, to explore additional opportunities to use
these tools.
Under Plan EJ 2014, OSWER has identified two program initiatives to focus its efforts
on maximizing the environmental, health, and economic benefits to overburdened
communities. OSWER will build on the work of the Community Engagement Initiative
and the Brownfields Area-Wide Planning Initiative to better serve EJ communities.
Another example of OSWER's work on Plan EJ 2014 is its leadership of the cross-
agency focus area on Supporting Community-Based Action Programs. OSWER strives
for true cross-agency coordination by working with other NPMs and all ten EPA regions.
It is the goal of OSWER and the agency to better support the creation of healthy and
sustainable communities through this effort. Activities under this cross-agency focus
area include:
Development of EJ and Title VI language for inclusion in agency NEPPS and
NPM guidances for FY 2013.
Creation of a catalogue of EPA funding opportunities to support equitable
development for all communities.
Working with state and local partners to identify how EPA's work impacts land
use planning, siting, and decision making.
Support the agency's One EPA efforts by creating planning documents for large
conferences and meeting.
OSWER will work directly with EPA's Office of Policy (OP) and OECA, as well as the
regions, to support the agency's Environmental Justice and Children's Health strategies.
Under this key area, OSWER and the agency will look at how to replicate and expand use
of best practices from EPA's multimedia community-based programs to improve their
efficiency and effectiveness for reducing environmental risks and promoting healthy
communities. The aim of this effort is to improve the EPA's collective understanding of
how to harmonize agency's programs. It will focus on a single community in each of the
ten EPA regions to align the various community-based programs and to promote
partnerships with private and public entities.
This effort ties to EPA 's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, Cross-Cutting Fundamental
Strategies and Administrator's Priorities in the following ways:
Supports EPA 's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, Goal 3, Objective 1: Promote
Sustainable and Livable Communities;
Supports the cross-cutting fundamental strategy on Working for Environmental
Justice and Children's Health; and
Page | 66
-------
Supports the Administrator's Priority on Expanding the Conversation on
Environmentalism and Working for EnvironmentalJustice.
OSWER will also be a direct partner with the Office of Water in implementing the Urban
Waters Initiative, and in particular in engaging other federal agencies in this effort. This
initiative offers an opportunity for communities to revitalize both land and water areas,
which are inextricably linked. Where OSWER is working to help clean and revitalize
contaminated sites, OSWER will partner with the Office of Water to coordinate efforts to
also revitalizing and improving access to surrounding waters.
Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE)
The CARE program provides funding tools and technical support that enable underserved
communities to create collaborative partnerships to take effective actions to address local
environmental problems. OW is the NPM leading coordination of the CARE program,
with OAR as co-lead until January FY 2014. OSWER, OCSPP, OEJ and OCHP
principals and staff continue to actively participate as One EPA in this cross-agency
program.
Page | 67
-------
OSWER FY 2013 GRANTS MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
EPA believes that consistent and quantifiable reporting of state results is critical toward
achieving national goals and results. In concert with this belief, OMB's FY 2007 Budget
passback instructed EPA to "develop a standardized template for states to use in reporting
results achieved under grant agreements with EPA". In early FY 2008, a workgroup was
created to identify lessons learned in EPA's State Grant Template Measures (SGTM)
approach and provided recommendations for FY 2009 and beyond. The workgroup
found that the SGTM approach by itself is inadequate to fulfill the objectives of
accurately characterizing, delineating, and communicating results under state grants
relative to EPA's mission. As a result, EPA and the Environmental Council of the States
(ECOS) have developed alternative approaches to discuss with OMB on how best to
achieve accountability for state grant performance during FY 2013.
In FY 2013, EPA remains committed to strengthening our oversight and reporting of
results from state grants, not only linking state grant work plan commitments to EPA's
strategic plan, but also enhancing transparency and accountability. EPA and the states
will continue working in FY 2013 to achieve this through two related efforts:
State Grant Workplans: The agency's long-term goal is for EPA and the states to
achieve greater consistency in workplan formats. To achieve that goal, The Office of
Grants and Debarment (OGD) recently issued Grants Policy Issuance (GPI) 11-03, "State
Grant Workplans and Progress Reports". The GPI was developed by the State Grant
Workplan workgroup, composed of EPA and state grant practitioners, and replaces the
state grant performance measures template. The effective date of the GPI is October 1,
2012. Based on that effective date, the agency's goal is to have all covered grants
awarded on or after October 1, 2012 comply with the GPI.
The workgroup built upon the results of the FY 2009 State Grant Workplan Pilot. The
new state grant workplans do not mandate a change in format as long as they satisfy the
three essential elements:
Essential Element 1 - Strategic plan goal
Essential Elements 2 - Strategic plan objective
Essential Element 3 - Workplan commitments plus time frame
To address Essential Elements 1 and 2, workplans must clearly label the Strategic Plan
Goal(s) and Strategic Plan Objective(s) from the current version of the agency's Strategic
Plan, that are associated with each Workplan Commitment or group of Commitments.
It will be important for national program managers and regional program offices to
provide appropriate outreach, assistance and education to state recipients on developing
this format. In addition, OGD will work with the regions on a case-by-case basis to
address any implementation challenges. If a particular state agency has difficulties under
state law in adopting the established format, OGD will work with the affected region and
NPM to resolve the issue. Please contact Howard Corcoran, OARM/OGD, at (202) 564-
1903 should you have any questions.
Page | 68
-------
Grant Progress Reports:
Regional program offices must ensure that interim and final progress reports submitted
by state recipients prominently display the three Essential Elements.
In FY 2013, the agency will utilize new information technology (IT) tools to improve
program management including e-reporting, new targeting tools, and upgrades to agency
IT infrastructure. A key part of this approach is assisting states in modifying their
programs to implement electronic reporting with regulated facilities. States will now be
able to include IT infrastructure and reporting as allowable costs in programmatic grants.
State Grant Performance Measures (formally known as State Grant Template
Measures): The current set of measures flagged as State Grant Template Measures in
ACS will be retained for FY 2013 reporting. As in FY 2012, the use of the template to
capture results for these measures is not required. However, reporting on the results
remains the responsibility of the regions and states. The agency and members of ECOS
have had ongoing discussions as to whether there is utility in identifying a set of common
measures that reflect the primary functional work areas under each of the 14 categorical
grants. Issues that have been raised include how the agency would capture and use these
measures. The agency, in consultation with ECOS, will continue to evaluate the
workplan initiative discussed above and determine whether it sufficiently enhances
transparency and accountability such that developing a common set of measures is
unnecessary. Please contact Margo Madsen, OCFO/OPAA, at (202) 564-1211 should
you have any questions.
During FY 2013, OSWER will continue to "Promote the Exchange Network for
Reporting Environmental Information" consistent with the Administrator's July 2009
directive to NPMs to work to achieve the vision of the Network as "the preferred way
EPA, states, tribes, and others share and exchange data."
OSWER places a high priority on accountability and effective grants management in the
solicitation, selection, award, and administration of assistance agreements in support of
OSWER's mission. The following key areas will be emphasized as we implement our
grant programs:
1. Standardizing the timing of issuance of grants guidance for categorical grants
(i.e., by April of the fiscal year prior to the year in which the guidance applies);
2. Ensuring effective management through emphasis on training and accountability
standards for Project Officers and their managers; and
3. Utilizing new state grant measures to link grants performance to the achievement
of environmental results as detailed in the agency's Strategic Plan, Annual Plan
and the OSWER National Program Manager Guidance.
The Office of Grants and Debarment (OGD), in its efforts to strengthen the management
and oversight of agency assistance agreements, issued a "Grants Management Plan for
2009-2013." The plan is designed to help ensure grant programs meet the highest
Page | 69
-------
management and fiduciary standards and further the agency's mission of protecting
human health and the environment. The plan highlights five grants management goals:
1. Demonstrate the achievement of environmental results;
2. Foster a high-quality grants management workforce;
3. Enhance the management process for grants policies and procedures;
4. Standardize and streamline the grants business process; and
5. Leverage technology to strengthen decision making and increase public
awareness.
OSWER continues to promote these goals and to work closely with OGD.
Timing of Guidance Issued for Categorical Grants
One of OSWER's objectives is to organize and coordinate the issuance of draft and final
guidance documents, including grants guidance, to coincide as much as possible with
state, tribal, and regional planning processes. As a result, all guidance packages for
categorical grant programs are to be issued by April of the year in advance of the fiscal
year of availability of funds if at all possible (e.g., guidance for fiscal year 2013
appropriated funds needs to be issued by April 2012). Not all categorical grant programs
issue annual guidance. These programs may simply indicate that they are continuing to
use their current guidance.
Effective Grants Management
OSWER's Acquisition and Resources Management Staff (ARMS) serves as liaison to
OGD and the first resource for Project Officers and their managers in disseminating,
implementing, and ensuring compliance with EPA new and existing grants management
policies and procedures. ARMS also serves as the point of contact in consultations with
our regional offices and Grant Coordinators Workgroup.
ARMS' central coordinating role serves to ensure consistent implementation and
compliance with agency grants management policies and procedures throughout OSWER
Headquarters and regional program offices. This enables OSWER project officers to
focus on how best to properly manage assistance agreements to meet program goals and
objectives.
ARMS provides training, on an as-needed basis, and strongly encourages OSWER Grant
Coordinators, Project Officers, and their managers to participate in training which
addresses the core competency areas identified in the agency's Long-Term Grants
Management Training Plan.
Promoting Competition
OSWER places great importance on assuring that, to the maximum extent possible, all
discretionary funding opportunities are awarded in a fair and open competitive
Page | 70
-------
environment and that no applicant receives an unfair advantage. OSWER Project
Officers must ensure that these actions are fully compliant with EPA Order 5700.5Al,
Policy for Competition of Assistance Agreements in the solicitation, selection, and award
of assistance agreements.
The competition policy, effective January 15, 2005, applies to:
1. competitive announcements issued, released, or posted after January 14, 2005;
2. assistance agreement competitions, awards, and disputes based on competitive
announcements issued, released, or posted after January 14, 2005;
3. non-competitive awards resulting from non-competitive funding
recommendations submitted to a Grants Management Office after January 14,
2005;and
4. assistance agreement amendments issued after January 14, 2005.
For each competitive funding opportunity announcement, OSWER's Senior Resource
Official certifies that the expected outcomes from the awards are appropriate and in
support of program goals and, that the announcement is written in a manner to promote
competition to the maximum extent practicable.
In accordance with agency policy, all OSWER competitive funding opportunity
announcements are advertised by posting to Grants.gov, the central federal electronic
portal for applying for grant opportunities.
Policy for Competition of Assistance Agreements in the solicitation, selection, and award
of assistance agreements.
The competition policy, effective January 15, 2005, applies to:
5. competitive announcements issued, released, or posted after January 14, 2005;
6. assistance agreement competitions, awards, and disputes based on competitive
announcements issued, released, or posted after January 14, 2005;
7. non-competitive awards resulting from non-competitive funding
recommendations submitted to a Grants Management Office after January 14,
2005;and
8. assistance agreement amendments issued after January 14, 2005.
For each competitive funding opportunity announcement, OSWER's Senior Resource
Official certifies that the expected outcomes from the awards are appropriate and in
support of program goals and, that the announcement is written in a manner to promote
competition to the maximum extent practicable.
In accordance with agency policy, all OSWER competitive funding opportunity
announcements are advertised by posting to Grants.gov, the central federal electronic
portal for applying for grant opportunities.
Page | 71
-------
Ensuring Effective Oversight of Assistance Agreements
Consistent with guidance from the Grants Administration Division, OSWER develops a
Post-Award Management Plan which presents our strategy for ensuring proper oversight
and management of assistance agreements, specifically, grants and cooperative
agreements. The plan, developed in accordance with EPA Order 5700.6 Al, "Policy on
Compliance, Review and Monitoring, " establishes baseline monitoring requirements for
all OSWER grants and cooperative agreements and defines the responsibilities of
OSWER managers for post-award monitoring of assistance agreements. The plan does
not apply to OSWER regional grants or cooperative agreements, nor does it include
requirements for Interagency Acquisitions (IA).
Monitoring activities ensure satisfaction of five core areas:
1. Compliance with all programmatic terms and conditions;
2. Correlation of the recipient's work plan/application and actual progress under the
award;
3. Availability of funds to complete the proj ect;
4. Proper management of and accounting for equipment purchased under the award;
and
5. Compliance with all statutory and regulatory requirements of the program.
Baseline monitoring activities are conducted by Project Officers on every assistance
agreement award issued through OSWER program offices. Project Officers are
responsible for conducting baseline monitoring on an ongoing basis throughout the life of
each agreement. The objective is to keep track of progress on the assistance agreement,
ensuring that each recipient maintains compliance with all terms and conditions of the
award, including financial and programmatic conditions.
Annually, OSWER conducts Advanced Monitoring Activities (including both on-site and
off-site evaluative reviews) on a minimum of 10 percent of our assistance agreement
recipients. The reviews are conducted using the "Desk and Off-site Review Protocol"
and "On-site Review Protocol" guidance offered in EPA Order 5700.6 Al. Project
Officers are required to submit reports of the reviews, in the "Required Format for
Writing a Programmatic Review Report for On-site and Off-site Evaluative Reviews,"
within 60 calendar days of completion of the evaluation.
OSWER continually stresses the importance of Project Officer's timely submission of
evaluative reviews into the Grantee Compliance Database. Implementation of EPA
Order 5700.8, "EPA Policy on Assessing Capabilities of'Non-Profit Applicants for
Managing Assistance Awards," effective March 31, 2005, further highlights the necessity
of timely submission. Under the Order, Project Officers are required to assess the
programmatic capability of the non-profit applicant when the dollar amount of the federal
share exceeds $200,000; taking into account pertinent information from the Grantee
Compliance Database and the grant application. Project Officers are required to provide
an assurance in the funding recommendation/funding package that the applicant
Page | 72
-------
possesses, or will possess, the necessary programmatic capability.
All competitive grant announcements, under which non-profit organizations can compete,
must contain a programmatic capability ranking factor(s). Non-profit applicants and
other applicants that compete will be evaluated under this factor. Non-profit applicants
selected for funding will be subject to a review for administrative capability similar to
that for non-competitive awards.
Project Officer Performance Standards
OSWER supports the requirement that all employees involved in grants management
should have their grants management responsibilities appropriately addressed in their
performance agreements. On January 5, 2007, OGD issued a memorandum entitled
"Assessing 2007 Grants Management Performance under the Performance Appraisal and
Recognition System (PARS)." The memorandum implements recommendations
resulting from a cross-agency Performance Measures Workgroup that developed several
performance measures for assessing the grants management performance of project
officers, supervisors and managers.
OSWER's Senior Resource Official has mandated the inclusion of factors that address
grants management responsibilities in the performance standards of our Project Officers.
To assist in this effort, OSWER has disseminated the guidance provided by OGD's
January 5, 2007 memorandum to all of our Project Officers, Managers, and Grant
Coordinators.
Environmental Results of Grants and Link to Strategic Plan
On January 1, 2005, EPA issued the Environmental Results Order (5700.7). Under the
Order, program offices are required to identify and link environmental results from
proposed assistance agreements to the agency's Strategic Plan/GPRA architecture.
Further, the Order requires that the linkage to the Strategic Plan, as well as anticipated
outputs and outcomes are identified and addressed in assistance agreement competitive
funding announcements, work plans, and performance reports submitted to Grants
Management Offices after January 1, 2005.
In compliance with the Environmental Results Order, OSWER requires that Project
Officers identify the linkage to EPA's Strategic Plan, including goals, objectives, and
sub-objectives, and anticipated outcomes and outputs in all competitive funding
announcements, prior to obtaining AA certification. Additionally, OSWER has identified
environmental results as a "key topic" area in reviewing and approving funding packages
for award, prior to submission to GAD.
Goal 3 of EPA 's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan presents specific OSWER objectives and
strategic targets that define, in measurable terms, the change in public health or
environmental conditions to be accomplished by FY 2015. To achieve these long-term
targets, EPA includes annual performance goals its Congressional Justification and
Page | 73
-------
Annual Plan. EPA 's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan is available at
http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan.html and its Annual Performance Plans
can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/budget/
Community-Based Grants
Beginning March 31, 2012, a new grants policy (GPI-12-02, Community-Based Grants)
was implemented to establish a transparent, One EPA approach to coordinating and
implementing the agency's community-based grant programs, including streamlining
grants processes consistent with EPA's fiduciary responsibilities and providing useful
grants information to communities. The new policy results from the Office of
Sustainable Communities "Community-Based Coordination Project" which seeks to
make the community framework one of the pillars of how EPA achieves its mission of
protecting human health and the environment. The new policy codifies reforms
developed to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of EPA's system for awarding and
administering community-based grants.
Page | 74
-------
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
It is a priority of the agency to ensure compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, http://www.epa.gov/civilrights/t61awrg.htm. This statute prohibits discrimination
based on race, color, and national origin, including limited English proficiency (LEP), by
entities receiving Federal financial assistance.
As required by implementing EPA regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 7, EPA
applicants must complete EPA Form 4700-4 to demonstrate compliance with
Title VI and other non discrimination statutes and regulations,
http://www.epa.gov/ogd/forms/adobe/4700-4 sec.pdf. The regulations also
impose specific obligations on grant recipients, including providing
compliance information, establishing grievance procedures, designating a
Title VI Coordinator, and providing notices of non-discrimination,
http://www.epa.gov/civilrights/docs/40p0007.pdf
Title VI requires EPA financial assistance recipients to provide meaningful
access to LEP individuals. To implement that requirement, and consistent
with Executive Order 13166,
http://www.epa.gov/civilrights/docs/eol3166.pdf the Office of Civil Rights
(OCR) issued guidance to recipients entitled, "Guidance to Environmental
Protection Agency Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI
Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English
Proficient Persons." http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-
bin/getdoc. cgi?dbname=2004 register &docid=fr25jn04- 79.pdf
OCR also published a Title VI Public Involvement Guidance for EPA
Assistance Recipients Administering Environmental Permitting Programs,
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/pdf/06-2691.pdf
In coordination with the grants management community, OARM will work
with OCR and the Office of General Counsel to develop and implement
appropriate grant conditions, training programs and monitoring strategies to
help achieve compliance with Title VI and implementing regulations and
guidance.
All recipients of EPA financial assistance have an affirmative obligation to
implement effective Title VI compliance programs and ensure that their
actions do not involve discriminatory treatment and do not have
discriminatory effects even when facially neutral. Recipients should be
prepared to demonstrate that such compliance programs exist and are being
implemented or to otherwise demonstrate how they are meeting their Title VI
obligations.
Page | 75
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
FY 2013 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
ACS Code
B29
B32
B33
B34
B37
SM2
CH2
PC1
PC2
CARE-1
Measure Text
Number of brownfields properties assessed.
Properties cleaned up using brownfields funding.
Acres of brownfields property made ready for reuse.
Jobs leveraged from brownfields activities.
Billions of dollars of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at brownfields sites.
Number of participants recruited for Sustainable Materials Management Challenges.
Number of risk management plan audits and inspections completed.
Number of sites receiving 40 CFR 761 .61 (a) or (c) approvals.
Number of acres to be remediated under 40 CFR 761 .61 (a) or (c) approvals.
Number of Community Action for Renewed Environment (CARE) cooperative agreement projects managed in order to obtain
toxic reductions at the local level.
Non-
Commit-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Nat.
Target
1,200
120
3,000
5,000
1.2
TBD
500
40
100
N/A
Attachment I, page 1
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
FY 2013 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
ACS Code
HWO
ST1
ST6
TR1
TR2
132
133
327A
328A
C1
112
113
Measure Text
Number of hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls.
Reduce the number of confirmed releases at LIST facilities to five percent (5%) fewer than the prior year's target.
Increase the percentage of LIST facilities that are in significant operational compliance with both release detection and
release prevention requirements by 0.5% over the previous year's target.
Number of tribes covered by an integrated waste management plan .
Number of closed, cleaned up or upgraded open dumps in Indian country or other tribal lands.
Number of Superfund-lead removal actions completed.
Number of PRP removal completions (including voluntary, AOC, and UAO actions) overseen by EPA.
Percent of all FRP facilities found to be non-compliant which will be brought into compliance.
Percent of all SPCC facilities found to be non-compliant which will be brought into compliance.
Score on Core NAR evaluation.
Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration.
Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration in
Indian country.
Non-
Commit-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Nat.
Target
100
< 7,715
(UST
releases)
67%
3
57
170
170
40%
40%
72%
10,100
45
Attachment I, page 2
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
FY 2013 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
5.1
5.1
5.1
ACS Code
122
131
141
S10
151
152
CA1
CA2
CAS
OSRE-01
OSRE-02
HQ-VOL
Measure Text
Number of Superfund remedial site assessments completed.
Number of remedial action projects completed at Superfund NPL sites.
Number of Superfund construction completions.
Number of Superfund sites ready for anticipated use site-wide.
Number of Superfund sites with human exposures under control.
Number of Superfund sites with contaminated groundwater migration under control.
Number of RCRA facilities with human exposures under control.
Number of RCRA facilities with migration of contaminated groundwater under control.
Number of RCRA facilities with final remedies constructed.
Reach a settlement or take an enforcement action before the start of a remedial action at 99 percent of Superfund sites
having viable, liable responsible parties other than the federal government.
Address all Statute of Limitations cases for Superfund sites with unaddressed total past costs equal to or greater than
$200,000.
Volume of contaminated media addressed as a result of concluded CERCLA and RCRA corrective action enforcement
actions.
Non-
Commit-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
Nat.
Target
650
115
19
60
10
15
85% or
152
facilities
73% or
137
facilities
51% or
168
facilities
99%
100%
300M CY
Attachment I, page 3
-------
Explanation of Changes between FY 2012 and FY 2013 Template
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Change from FY 2012 Guidance Document
Reason for Change
Affected Pages and Sections
Priorities
Described efforts regarding Chemical Warfare
/ Centers of Expertise.
Described Contract 2010 priority.
Finalize new UST regulations and begin
implementation.
Current preparedness priority.
Highlight emphasis on expanding use of
socio-economic firms and local hires, while
maintaining flexibility in the program's
acquisition tools.
Regulations were proposed in Dec 2011,
anticipate becoming final in early FY 2013.
Key National Program
Strategies and Priorities, page
24.
Executive Summary, page 2.
Key National Strategies and
Priorities, page 59.
Strategies
Balance the overall Superfund Remedial
Pipeline.
Transition Brownfields Area-wide Planning
(AWP) program from pilot to implementation
phase.
Expand the Brownfields Job Training grants
program which will now be called the
Environmental Workforce Development and
Job Training grants program.
Implement practical strategies for accelerating
corrective action at unaddressed contaminated
Focus on completing projects already
underway as opposed to starting new project
phases.
Implementing AWP program more broadly.
Another round of AWP grant funding will be
conducted in FY 2012.
Improve skill sets of training recipients to
improve prospects for employment within a
larger environmental field.
Completion of Backlog Study in 2011
provided basis to develop strategies (2012).
Executive Summary, page 2.
Key National Program
Strategies and Priorities, page
13.
Key National Program
Strategies and Priorities, page
34.
Executive Summary, pages 3
and 6.
Key National Program
Strategies and Priorities, page
32.
Key National Program
Attachment II, page 1
-------
UST sites.
Monitor financial mechanisms to ensure that
adequate funding will continue to be available
to clean up contaminated USTs.
Guidance developed in FY2012 for assuring
fund soundness, and pilots on guidance will
be conducted in FY2012.
Strategies and Priorities, page
58.
Key National Program
Strategies and Priorities, page
60.
Annual
Commitment
Measures
New measure: Number of participants
recruited for Sustainable Materials Management
Challenges.
Replaces waste minimization measure
"Billions of pounds of municipal solid waste
reduced, reused and recycled."
Executive Summary, page 8.
Key National Program
Strategies and Priorities, page
43.
Measures Appendix, page 1.
N/A
Tracking
Process
Contacts
Bill Dalebout, 703-603-8826.
Derrick Brown, 202-566-2752.
Judy Kertcher, (703) 603 7172
New Superfund Remedial contact.
New Brownfields contact.
New Underground Storage Tanks contact.
Executive Summary, page 9.
Attachment II, page 2
------- |