UNITED STATES..ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C 20460
October 30, 1985
OF FICII O*
THE ADMiNlST^
Hon* Lee M. Thomas
Administrator
U. 'S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S. W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Mr. Thomas;
The Science Advisory Board's Environmental Engineering Comtnittee is concerned
that enormous expenditures are being made under Superfund without an adequate
technological data base to support rehabilitation of both public and private
hasardous waste disposal sites. The Committee has expressed this 'concern in
a resolution, a copy of which is.enclosed, which recommends using Superfund
monies for a comprehensive research and development program,
The Executive Committee of the Board has approved this resolution, and for-
wards it for your consideration. We believe that it is very important to
support, with Superfund funds, research in the transport and fate of contam-
inants, and in technologies to control releases from disposal sites and to
treat contaminated soils and ground water. It is also very important to
resolve administrative problems related to the use of Superfund sites as
field laboratories.
We would be pleased to discuss the resolution with you, should you wish
further information.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
Raymond C. Loehr
Chai rman, Environmental
Engineering Committee
Science Advisory Board
D. ELreth Chairman, Executive Committee
J. Skinner
-------
Resolution
of the
Environmental Engineering Committee
Science Advisory Board
U«S«Environmental Protection Agency
October,1985
Background
The Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act
(CE1CLA), or Superfund, was enacted on December 11, 1980*
The Supetfund Act was passed to remedy the most egregious abandoned
chemical waste sites in the United States, as well as to provide resources
to minimize public health hazards from imminent chemical disasters, such as
spills, from transportation accidents.
That Act was funded at $1.6 billion, with 10% matching funds from the
states for remedial action at sites. The Congress is actively considering
additional legislation that will add $7,5 billion to $10 billion dollars to
the next phase of Superfund.
Since enactment of Superfund, over 20,000 sites have been identified as
potential candidates for Superfund cleanups. More than 800 have been listed
as "priority" sites for Federal response, with acre to be listed. Department
of Defense facilities (including abandoned ordnance facilities and dumps),
Department of Energy installations, and other federal facilities have been
added to the nation's overall requirement for cleanup. Restoration of those
sites will require several additional billions of dollars. The Federal
government is the actor of last resort for cleanup and is required to attempt
to recover its cost from responsible parties.
The criterion for cleanup is to provide the cost—effective.response which
adequately protects human health and the environment, Unfortunately, that
criterion, the problems of liability, the problems of cost recovery, the
heterogeneity of the chemicals to be addressed, and the physical differences
at various sites have all contributed to the general use of "perpetual care"
solutions rather than "permanent and final" solutions to the site problems.
At the same time, private industry has little incentive to solve this public
problem through Innovative or new technology, especially when there is no
established or predictable market for their product. The problem of long-
tera liability further inhibits private' attempts to try new ideas.
The very few tried and true, short-tern methods of removing drums or
chemicals to another site, using bulldozers or dump trucks to remove soil
residuals, as well as containment by slutry walls and caps (with which we
have very little long-term experience), are used at most of the sites that
are being rehabilitated. A practice at aany Superfund sites is to remove
contaminants from their original site to a new site permitted under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Incineration is also used in
some cases* Detoxification, fixation, neutralization techniques, and other
-------
-2-
raore permanent technological solutions require additional study and are not
widely used.
There is a dire public need for long-term solutions to these very com-
plex, multi-faceted problems. However, no well funded, comprehensive, long-
term research, development and demonstration program is planned for the
development and application of new technologies to Superfund type problems.
At this time, a long list of emerging technologies is not being applied,
because no private entity has the resources or ability to put these ideas
into practice. A list of emerging innovative technologies, as well as rela-
ted monitoring, health effect, and other research ideas is included in the
recent Office of Technology Assessment report entitled Superfund Strategy,
dated April 1985. At most, some of these potential solutions have been
developed only through research or pilot stages, and usually have only been
tested on homogeneous rather than heterogeneous hazardous waste problems.
Thus, a standard based on cost-effectiveness response can not at present re-
commend these solutions with reliability and cost-effectiveness guaranteed,
as is required by the National Contingency Plan for Superfund,
In view of these facts, the Environmental Engineering Committee of the
Science Advisory Board, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, recommends the
following to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and to
the members of Congress considering amendments to CESCLA.
Resolution
Whereas, public need for long-term and permanent solutions to the prob-
lems of 20,000 or more abandoned chemical waste sites is great; and
Whereas, the present Superfund program, because of the statutory standard
of cost-effectiveness and the potential future liability of cleanup contractors
that use Innovative or alternative technologies, does not encourage research
and field trials (demonstration) of new technologies; and
Whereas, the heterogeneity of the chemicals and other problems at each
site creates an amorphous and unknown "market" for industrial entrepreneur-
ship to develop new technologies! and
Whereas, the present cost-effectiveness standard constrains the use of
new technologiesj and
Whereas, the present techniques for rehabilitation of both public and
private chemical waste sites rely on assured short term solutions usually
based upon brute force, tried and true "bulldozer" technology for removal of
the problem;
Therefore Be It Resolved: There must be a nationally well-funded and
well-coordinated comprehensive research, development and demonstration
program to develop effective, long-term permanent solutions to the problems
of cleanup of chemical spills and remediation of abandoned chemical waste
-------
-3-
sites* The Research, Development and Demonstration (1. D. and D) program
must include a full range of problem solving not only to develop improved
technological solutions but also to determine appropriate long term monitor-
ing to assure the protection of public health.
Be It Further Resolved: That the Administrator recommend amendments to
CERCLA that authorize and encourage EPA to immediately embark on a comprehen-
sive R. P. and D* program for Superfund sites. Such a program will save many
millions of dollars in remedial costs and most importantly develop permanent
solutions to these urgent health and safety hazards to so many Americans.
These amendments should include changes to the cost-effectiveness standard
and the potential liability of response action contractors as they relate to
R» D, and D». Such an amendment will permit EPA to lead this new cooperative
initiative with industry, state and local governments, non-profit organi-
zations and aeademla to identify innovative approaches and to try out new
ideas!
Be it Further Resolved; This R* D. and D. program should be: a) funded
at not less than 1.5% of the annual Superfund appropriations, b) include
R. D. and D. that has broad potential application at more than one specific
site, c) include research in the basic processes that govern the fate and
transport of contaminants in the air, soil, and ground water, and d) include
development and demonstration of new technologies to control the transport
of contaminants and to treat contaminated soils and groundwater.
Be it Further Resolved: The proposed R* D. and D. program not only
address the problems of sites that come directly under GERCLA but also the
similar requirements for Federal installations.
The adoption of the recommendations in this resolution will enable the
United States to proceed with the cleanup of abandoned chemical waste sites
in what will be a much more cost-effective, permanent solution to this
national problem!
------- |