United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
EPA540-R-96-03I
Publication 9200.3-14-1C
PB96-963241
September 27, 1996
.Superfund
EPA Superfund/Oil Program
Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Program Implementation Guidance for OERR, OSRE, FFRRO,
FFEO and the Oil Program
Program Goals and Planning Requirements
Program Implementation Procedures
-------
EPA540-R-96-031
Publication 9200.3-14-1
PB96-963241
September 27, 1996
Superfund/Oil Program
Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
-------
DISCLAIMER
The policies and procedures established in this document are intended solely for the guidance of employees of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. They are not intended and cannot be relied upon to create any rights,
substantive or procedural, enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States. EPA reserves the right to act
at variance with these policies and procedures and to change them at any time without public notice.
-------
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Addressees
TO: Superfund Branch Chiefs (Regions I - X)
Office of Regional Counsel Superfund Branch Chiefs (Regions I -X)
CC: Waste Management Division Directors (Regions I - X)
Regional Counsels (Regions I - X)
Information Management Coordinators (Regions 1 - X)
Budget Coordinators (Regions 1 - X)
Steve Luftig
Barry Breen
Larry Reed
Elaine Davies
Susan Bromm
OERR Center Directors and Senior Process Managers
Linda Garczynski (5101)
BennHam(5101)
Linda Boomazian
Sandra Conners
Charles Breece
Fred Stiehi (OECA)
Jim Woolford
Dan Dickson
Dela Ng
Dana Stalcup
Walt Johnson
Terry Eby
Awilda Fuentes
Randy Hippen
Sheila Kelly
Gloria King
Dave Reynolds
Dottie Pipkin
Renee Wynn
Angelo Carasea
Sharon Blandford
Terry Keidan
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
SEPTEMBER 23, 1996
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: FY 97 Superfund Implementation Manual (SPIM)
FROM: Robin Richardson, Director (Acting)
Planning Analysis & Resource Management, OERR
Neilima Senjalia, Chief f\J •
Program Evaluation & Coordination Branch, OSRE
TO: Addressees
PURPOSE
The purpose of this document is to transmit the attached
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C, "Superfund/Oil Implementation
Manual (SPIM), Fiscal Year 1997." This document is also
available in WORDPERFECT.
BACKGROUND
The SPIM was last published in October 1993 for Fiscal Year
(FY) 1994. For FY 95 and FY 96, we published supplements to the
FY 93 document. The FY 97 document is a completely new manual in
loose leaf, three ring binder format.
DOCUMENT
Please distribute this document to your Superfund managers
and responsible staff. This document, also, is available in
WORDPERFECT and will soon be available on LOTUS NOTES.
The SPIM will be amended as needed. Change pages with a
Change Log will be issued to update the SPIM to reflect changes.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact
Robert White, OERR/PARM (703-603-8873) or Dela Ng, OSRE/PPED
(202-564-6073).
-------
FY97 SPIM DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
EVENT
KICK-OFF MEETING
DEVELOP. MATRIX + SCHEDULE
COMPILE FY96 REGIONAL FOCUS FORUM MATERIALS
FY96 SUPERFUND FOCUS FORUM (SFF)
LIST ACTION I ITEMS from SFM
WRITE MINUTES FOR MEETING-
DEVELOP DRAFT MANUAL * SEE GPRA COMMENT BELOW
REVIEW DRAFT
CHANGE DRAFT & PRINT REVIEW COPIES
DISTRIBUTE DRAFT FOR REVIEW
SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT s ' (SME) REVIEW
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix f
INCORPORATE CHANGES* COORDINATE ISSUES w/SME
DISTRIBUTE DRAFT
REVIEW DRAFT
PREPARE NOTEBOOKS
REVIEW COMMENTS A ISSUES w'SME + HQTRS STAFF
INCORPORATE CHANGES
PRINT LIMITED NUMBER OF ADVANCE COPIES
PRINT FY97 SCAP MANUAL
DISTRIBUTE LIMITED NUMBER OF ADVANCED COPIES
DISTRIBUTE FY97 SCAP MANUAL
PREPARE FY97 CODING + USER GUIDE
PRINT FY97 CODING + USER GUIDE, LIMITED NUMBER OF COPIES
MAINTAIN FY97 SPIM (CHANGE PAGES)
KICK-OFF MEETING for FY98 SPIM
DEVELOP MATRIX + SCHEDULE
COMPILE FY97 REGIONAL FOCUS FORUM MATERIALS
FY98 REGIONAL FOCUS FORUM
SUBJECT PLANNED
MATTER START
EXPERTS (SME) DATE
RESP/PERSON
R While 26-Ocl-95
R White 26-Oct-95
G Padgeti/R White 3I-Jan-96
Hqtrs + Reg's 04-Mar-96
R White, el al 07-Mar-96
R White 07-Mar-96
Contractor 25-Mar-96
R White 20-May-96
Contractor 20-May-96
R White 20-May-96
Hqtrs 24-May-96
EZiomkaski/R Whit 24-May-96
Carasea/Blandford 24-May-96
D Pipkin/D Reynold 24-May-96
PARM/Hippen 24-May-96
R White 24-May-96
D Ng 24-May-96
Renee Wynn 24-May-96
WJohnson 24-May-96
D Stalcup/G King 24-May-96
Contractor 24-Jun-96
R White 09-Jul-96
Regions + Hqtrs ll-Jul-96
Contractor 02-Aug-96
(R White + }Hq Staff 21-Aug-96
Contractor 22-Aug-96
Contractor 20-Sep~96
R While 27-Sep-96
R White 30-Sep-96
R White 21-Ocl-96
Contractor IS-Oct-96
Contractor 22-Nov-96
Contractor 27-Sep-96
R White 30-OGI-96
R White 30-Oct-96
p Sthmbkcm White 3 1- Jan-97
p Schwcbte/R whiit 26-Feb-97
ACTUAL
START
DATE
26-Oct-95
26-Oct-95
3l-Jan-96
04-Mar-96
06-Mar-96
07-Mar-96
22-Mar-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
3I-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
24-Jun~96
09-M-96
ll-Jul-96
3l-Jul-96
21-Aug-96
22-Aug-96
23-Sep-96
27-Sep-96
27-Sep-96
PLANNED
COMPLETION
DATE
26-Oct-9S
26-Ocl-9S
28-Feb-96
06-Mar-96
21-Mar-96
2S-Mar-96
20-May-96
20-May-96
20-May-96
22-May-96
21-Jun-96
2t-Jun-96
21-Jun-96
2I-Jun-96
21-Juh-96
21-Jun-96
21-Jun-96
21-Jtm-96
2l-Jun-96
21-Jun-96
08-M-96
IO-M-96
Ol-Aug-96
20-Aug-96
2I-Aug-96
19-Sep-96
27-Sep-96
18-Oct-96
03-Ocl-96
28-Oct-96
IS-Nov-96
29-Nov-96
30-Sep-97
30-Oct-96
30-Oct-96
25-Feb-97
Ol-Mar-97
' ACTUAL
COMPLETION
DATE
26-Oct-9S
26-Oct-95
28-Feb-96
06-Mar-96
06-Mar-96
2S-Mar-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
23-May-96
27-Jun-96
19-Jun-96
20-Jun-96
19-Jun-96
2I-Jun-96
25-Jun-96
2I-Jun-96
21-Jun-96
21-May-96
OS-Jul-96
: IO-M-96
06-Aug-96
18-Aug-96
2I-Aug-96
' I9-Sep-96
26-Sep-96
27-Sep-96
EARLY
EARLY
EARLY
ON TIME
ON TIME
ON TIME
ON TIMp
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
* GPRA evolution will parallel SPIM development. Expect late SPIM changes to reflect GPRA developments
file: scapx5wk4
-------
USE AND STRUCTURE OF THE MANUAL
The information in this Manual is targeted to Information Management Coordinators (IMCs), Remedial Project
Managers (RPMs), and On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs), Its primary purpose is to provide guidance to this audience
on management of the Superfund program.
The FY 1997 Superfund Program Implementation Manual contains information on:
• Manager's Schedule of Significant Events;
* Program goals and priorities;
* Program planning and reporting requirements; and
* Financial management.
In addition, the appendices at the end of the manual contain pipeline specific planning and reporting definitions
and, in some instances, program priority and financial information:
• Appendix A presents measure definitions for Site Screening and Assessment and Regional Decisions;
• Appendix B provides measure definitions for Early and Long Term Actions;
• Appendix C presents measure definitions for Enforcement;
• Appendix D contains program priorities and measure definitions for Federal Facilities;
• Appendix E provides information on Superfund Information Systems;
• Appendix F contains program priorities, measures, definitions, planning and reporting requirements, and financial
information for the Oil Program; and
• Appendix G provides GPRA referenced material.
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
Super fund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
MANAGERS SCHEDULE OF SIGNIFICANT EVENTS , xvii
ACRONYMS xxii
ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS
OSWER xxviii
OERR xxix
OECA xxx
OSRE xxxi
REGIONAL MAP xxxli
PROGRAM GOALS AND PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
CHAPTER I
PROGRAM GOALS AND PRIORITIES 1-1
Introduction , 1-1
Superfund and its History 1-1
Reauthorization 1-2
FY 97 Themes 1-2
Current Program Priorities 1-2
Superfund Reforms 1-3
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 Implementation 1-3
Current Program Priorities & Superfund Reforms 1-3
Current Program Priorities 1-3
Worst Sites First: A Framework for Setting Priorities 1-3
Construction Completions 1-3
Federal Facilities 1-4
Reinventing Site Assessment 1-4
Enhancement of State/Tribal Role 1-4
Performance Partnership Grants 1-5
State/Tribal Programs: State Remedy Selection 1-5
Brownfields 1-6
Base Closures 1-8
i September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
CHAPTER I (cont'd)
Environmental Indicators 1-8
Enforcement Fairness/Reduce Transaction Costs 1-9
Enforcement First/Cost Recovery 1-10
Effective Contract Management 1-10
Innovative Technologies . 1-11
Accelerated Cleanup 1-11
Superfund Reforms 1-12
Risk Based Priorities for Contaminated Sites 1-13
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 1-13
Strategic Plan Requirements 1-14
Comprehensive Mission Statement 1-14
General Goals and Objectives 1-14
Description of How General Goals and Objectives Will Be Achieved 1-15
Relationship Between Goals in the Annual Performance Plan and in a Strategic Plan 1-15
Key Factors Affecting Achievement of General Goals and Objectives 1-15
Program Evaluations 1-15
Annual Performance Plan 1-16
Performance Goals , 1-16
Resources 1-16
Performance Indicators 1-16
Verification and Validation 1-16
Program Performance Reports 1-16
CHAPTER D
PROGRAM PLANNING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS H-l
Introduction II-l
Brownfields II-l
Reinventing Site Assessment II-l
Integrated Planning II-l
Introduction to The Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishment Plan (SCAP) II-2
Relationship of SCAP to Other Management Tools II-3
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-IC
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
CHAPTER D (cont'd)
Management Tools H-4
Superfund Information Systems . 0-5
Overview of The SCAP Process II-5
SCAP Change Control Requirements II-6
HQ/Regional Roles And Responsibilities II-7
Maintaining SCAP in CERCLIS II-7
Program Evaluation 0-8
Procedures For Annual Target Setting II-9
Planning For Negotiations 0-9
Planning Process II-9
CERCLIS Reports for SCAP Planning/Target Setting II-12
Regional Accomplishment Reporting 11-13
CERCLIS Reports for Accomplishment Reporting . 0-13
HQ Evaluation of Regional Performance 0-14
Mid-Year Assessment 0-15
End-of-Year Assessment 11-16
Regional Reviews 11-16
Management Reporting 11-16
Superfund Management Reports 11-17
Annual Reporting Requirements 11-17
SCAP Target And Definition Change Requests 0-18
Maintaining the Targets and Accomplishments File 0-21
Archiving CERCLIS Sites 11-22
Progress to Date 0-22
Definition 11-23
Information Management 11-23
Eligible Sites . 0-23
Business Process 0-24
Returning Sites to CERCLIS 0-24
iii September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
CHAPTER D (cont'd)
Partial Deletion of NPL Sites 11-25
CHAPTER m
SUPERFUND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT III-l
Introduction III-l
Brownfields . III-l
Reinventing Site Assessment III-l
Outyear Budget Development III-2
FY 98 Budget Development III-2
Development of the FY 97 National Budget , . III-6
FY 97 Regional Budget III-6
Response Budget HI-7
Enforcement Budget III-8
Federal Facilities Budget III-8
Relationship Between SCAP and the Annual Regional Budget HI-8
Initial Annual Regional Budget Development IH-9
Site-Specific Travel III-9
Regional Analytical Budgets , III-IO
ADA Utilization IH-10
Advice of Allowance Procedures and Financial Reporting Requirements III-l I
Regional Allowances III-l 1
The AOA Process Ill-12
AOA Flexibility 111-14
RA Allowance 111-15
Flexibility in the Other Allowances 111-15
AOA Change Request Procedures 111-16
Relationship Between SCAP and the AOA 111-18
Superfund Financial Management 111-27
Financial Management Tools and Systems 10-28
September 27, 1996 iv
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
CHAPTER m (cont'd)
"OZZ" and "OWQ" Accounting Information IH-30
Regional Financial Management Responsibilities 10-30
HQ Financial Management Responsibilities 111-30
Financial Management and Funding Processes 10-30
Financial Management Funding Mechanisms 10-30
Contracts 111-30
Interagency Agreements (lAGs) . 111-31
Cooperative Agreements (CAs) . 111-31
Superfund State Contracts (SSCs) HI-31
Cost Recovery/Cost Documentation 01-45
Handling Financial Data in the CERCLIS Environment 111-45
Entering Response and Federal Facility Data into CERCLIS 01-48
Entering Enforcement Extramural Budget Data into CERCLIS 10-48
Correcting Financial Data 111-49
INDEX , A
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES
APPENDIX A
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION
FY 97 TARGETS AND MEASURES A-l
Reinventing Site Assessment A-l
Overview of FY 97 Site Screening and Assessment/Regional Decision Targets and Measures A-l
Superfund Durations A-2
Site Screening and Assessment/Regional Decision Definitions A-4
SSA-1 » Site Characterization Starts A-4
SSA-2 • Site Screening and Assessment Decisions A-4
SSA-3 • Sites Archived A-7
Site Discovery A-8
Preliminary Assessments (PA) A-9
Site Inspections (SI) A-l I
Site Inspection Prioritizations (SIPs) . A-12
Expanded Site Inspections (ESI) A-14
Integrated Expanded Site Inspection/Remedial Investigation (ESI/RI) A-15
v September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
APPENDIX A (cont'd)
Hazard Ranking System Package (MRS) A-16
Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation . A-17
Regional Decisions A-19
Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) A-20
Community Relations A-20
Support Agency Assistance A-21
Technical Assistance A-21
Technical Assistance Grants (TAGs) A-22
Remedial Investigation (RI) Starts A-22
Feasibility Study (FS) Starts A-24
Combined RI/FS Start A-25
Stan of Public Comment Period (FS Report to Public) A-26
RI/FS Duration A-27
RDT-1 • Decision Document Developed A-27
APPENDIX B
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION FY 97 SCAP TARGETS AND MEASURES B-l
Overview of FY 97 Early And Long-Term Action Targets/Measures B-l
Superfund Durations B-l
Early And Long-Term Action Definitions B-4
Community Relations B-4
Support Agency Assistance B-4
Technical Assistance B-5
Technical Assistance Grants B-5
Treatability Studies B-6
Design Assistance B-6
Remedial Design (RD) Start B-7
RD Completion B-8
Remedial Action (RA) Start B-8
RA Contract Award B-9
ACT 5 • Sites Addressed Through Early or Long-Term Action On-Site
Construction Stare B-10
ACT-6 • Early or Long-Term Action Completions B-12
ACT-7 » NPL Site Construction Completions Through Early Actions,
Long-Term Actions, or RODs B-15
Operational And Functional (O&F) B-23
Long Term Response Action (LTRA) B-23
NPL Site Completions B-24
Groundwater Monitoring B-32
September 27, 1996 vi
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
APPENDIX B (cont'd)
Operation And Maintenance (O&M) B-33
Five-Year Reviews B-33
Partial NPL Deletion B-34
Final NPL Deletion B-35
EI-1A • Progress Through Environmental Indicators
(Addressing Immediate Threats at NPL And Non-NPL Sites) B-36
El-IB • Progress Through Environmental Indicators
(Achievng Permanent Cleanup Goals) B-38
APPENDIX C
ENFORCEMENT FY 97 TARGETS AND MEASURES C-l
Overview C-l
Enforcement Target and Measures Definitions C-3
Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) Search Starts C-3
PRP Search Completions C-3
Section 104(e) Letters Issued C^t
Section 104(e) Referrals and Orders Issued C-5
Issuance of General Notice Letters (GNLs) C-5
Issuance of Special Notice Letters (SNLs) C-5
ENF-1 • Duration from Regional Decision or ROD to PRP Cleanup
Negotiation Completion C-6
ESI/RI/FS Negotiation Starts C-8
RD/RA Negotiation Starts C-8
ENF-2 • Cleanup Negotiation Completions C-9
State Order for ESI/RI/FS C-ll
State Consent Decree for RD/RA C-ll
ENF-3 • Settlements for Cleanup Actions C-12
ENF-4 • Section 122(g) Settlements and Number of PRPs C-13
ENF-5 • Percentage of PRP Lead Cleanup Actions to All Cleanup
Actions C-15
Section 106, 106/107, 107 Case Resolution C-16
Administrative Record Compilation C-17
Issue Demand Letter C-18
Cost Recovery Actions/Decisions < $200,000 C-18
ENF-6 • Past Costs Addressed ^$200,000 C-20
vii September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
APPENDIX C (cont'd)
ENFORCEMENT MEASURES OF SUCCESS - FY 97 C-22
Overview of Superfund Reforms Measures of Success C-22
Enforcement Measures of Success Definitions C-22
Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) C-22
Settlements Where EPA Settled Based on Ability-to-Pay Determinations C-24
Recoverable Past Costs That Have Been Addressed Program to Date C-24
Prospective Purchaser Agreements (PPA) , C-26
Number and Amount of CERCLA Penalties Assessed Via Judgement C-27
Number and Amount of Supplemental Environmental
Projects (SEPs) Agreed Upon Under CERCLA C-27
Noncompliance with Consent Decrees, Administrative Orders on Consent, and
Unilateral Administrative Orders C-28
Noncompliance with Consent Decrees, Administrative Orders on Consent, and
Unilateral Administrative Orders That Have Been Addressed C-30
Superfund Reform (October 1995) Enforcement Measures of Success Definitions C-32
EPA Compensation of a Portion of the Orphan Share C-32
Use of Interest Bearing Special Accounts , C-33
Issue Cleanup Orders to Parties in an Equitable Manner C-35
De Micromis Settlements and Number of Parties C-36
Oversight Cost Savings C-36
EPA Adoption of Allocations Proposed by Parties Including Compensation of a Portion of the
Orphan Share C-37
APPENDIX D
FEDERAL FACILITIES PRIORITIES D-l
Overview D-l
Superfund Federal Facility Goals And Priorities D-4
Strategic Federal Facility Goals D-4
Streamlining Federal Facilities Cleanup and Oversight D-5
RCRA Activities at Federal Facility NPL Sites D-7
BRAC Budget And Financial Guidance . D-7
Resources and Tracking Mechanisms D-7
Accountability for Resources D-8
September 27, 1996 viii
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
APPENDIX D (cont'd)
FEDERAL FACILITIES FY 97 TARGETS AND MEASURES D-10
Overview of FY 97 Federal Facilities Targets And Measures D-10
Reporting of Non-NPL Federal Facilities Data at BRAC Fast Track Sites D-10
Federal Facilities Definitions D-12
FF-1 • Base Closure Decisions D-12
FF-2 • Federal Facility Agreement (FFA)/interagency Agreement (IAG) Starts D-12
FF-3 • FFA/IAG Completion D-13
FF-4 • Federal Facility Dispute Resolution D-13
FF-5 • Remedial Investigation/feasibility Study (RI/FS) or RCRA
Facility Investigation (RFI) Starts — First And Subsequent D-14
FF-6 • Feasibility Study (FS), Corrective Measure Study (CMS) or EE/CA Starts D-15
FF-7 • Timespan From Final NPL Listing to RI/FS or RI/FS Start D-15
FF-8 • Decision Documents — First And Subsequent D-16
FF-9 • RI/FS or RFI/CMS Duration D-16
FF-10 • Remedial Design (RD) or RCRA Corrective Measure Design (CMD) Starts —
First And Subsequent D-17
FF-11 • Remedial Design (RD) or Corrective Measure Design (CMD) Completions —
First And Subsequent D-18
FF-12 • Remedial Action (RA) or RCRA Corrective Measure Construction (CMC) Starts —
First And Subsequent D-18
FF-13 • Timespan From ROD Signature to RA Start D-18
FF-14 • RA or CMC Completions — First And Subsequent D-19
FF-15 • Final RA or CMC Completion D-20
FF-16 • RA Duration D-21
FF-17 • Timespan From RI/FS Start to RA Complete D-21
FF-18 • Removal, Early Actions, or RCRA Interim/stabilization Measure (ISM) —
Starts And Completions D-22
FF-19 • Federal Facility Partial NPL Deletion D-22
FF-20 • Federal Facility Final NPL Deletion D-23
ix September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
APPENDIX E
SUPERFUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS El
Overview E-l
CERCLIS 3 E-2
Data Architecture E-2
Site Assessment and Project Management Personnel E-4
Enforcement Personnel E-4
Community Involvement Personnel E-4
Risk Assessment Personnel E-5
IMCs and Regional Management Personnel E-5
Program Analysis and Resource Personnel E-5
Reporting Superfund Information , E-6
Applicability of the Freedom of Information Act E-7
CERCLIS Reports Releasable under Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) E-7
Sensitive Information Not Releasable under FOIA , E-7
Ad Hoc Reporting E-10
Accessing FOIA Information , E-10
Data Owners/Sponsorship E-l 1
APPENDIX F
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM PRIORITIES F-l
Overview F-l
Oil Program Initiatives F-l
Addressing Above-Ground Storage Facility (ASF) Leakage and Contamination , F-l
Implementing FRPs F-l
Implementing the NCP F-2
Developing and Maintaining Data Systems F-3
Improving the SPCC Program F-3
Coordinating with Other Agencies F-4
Oil Spill Prevention and Cleanup Activities F-4
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM PLANNING AND
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS F-5
September 27, 1996 x
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
APPENDIX F (cont'd)
Overview F-5
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan F-5
Regional Contingency Plans F-5
Area Contingency Plans F-5
Federal Response Plan F-5
Communications Requirements Associated with a Release F-7
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT . . . F 9
Overview F-9
Budget Formulation F-9
Operating Plan Development F-9
Budget Execution F-9
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM FY 97 MEASURES F-ll
Overview F-ll
Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Program Definitions F-12
Prevention/Preparedness Measures F-12
OIL-1 • Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Inspections and Plan Reviews . . F-12
OIL-2 • Oil Facility Response Plans Reviewed and Approved F-12
OIL-3 • Area Contingency Plans F-13
OIL-4 • Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) Area Drills F-14
Response Measures F-14
OIL-5
OIL-6
OIL-7
OIL-8
OIL-9
Oil Spill Notifications F-14
Oil Spill Investigations/Preliminary Assessments F-15
Oil Spill Cleanups F-15
Oil Spill PRP Monitoring/Directing F-16
Cost Documentation F-16
Enforcement Measures F-17
OIL-10 • Administrative Penalty Enforcement Actions for Spill Violations and
Prevention Regulation Violations F-17
OIL-11 • Judicial Penalty Enforcement Actions for Spill Violations And
Prevention Regulation Violations F-17
OIL-12 • Orders for Removal Issued to a Responsible Party F-17
xi September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Contents
APPENDIX G
GPRA REFERENCED MATERIAL — PILOT MEASURES G-l
GPRA . , G-l
Environmental Goals For America With Milestones For 2005 G-1
Performance Goals And Strategies , G-l
I. Screen and Assess Sites G-l
II. Early and/or Long-Term Action Completions , G-2
III. Complete Construction at NPL Sites G-3
IV. Conduct Outreach and Provide Assistance to Foster Increased State, Tribal, and Community
Involvement in Superfund G-3
Superfund Reform Measures of Success G-4
I. New Initiatives , G-4
II. Enhanced and Continuing Initiatives G-5
EPA Goals . . . '. , G-6
Office of Solid Waste & Emergency Response (OSWER) Goals G-6
Superfund Reforms Measures of Success (OERR & OECA) G-7
September 27, 1996 xii
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Exhibits
PROGRAM GOALS AND PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
CHAPTER O
EXHIBIT II. 1 FLEXIBILITY SCALE FOR BUDGETING/PLANNING II-3
EXHIBIT II.2 HQ/REGIONAL INTEGRATED PLANNING RESPONSIBILITIES II-4
EXHIBIT II.3 HQ/REGIONAL SCAP AND CERCLIS RESPONSIBILITIES II-7
EXHIBIT II.4 EVALUATION RESPONSIBILITIES II-8
EXHIBIT II.5 PROCEDURES FOR ANNUAL TARGET SETTING 11-10
EXHIBIT II.6 REGIONAL PLANNING FOR NEGOTIATIONS 11-11
EXHIBIT II.7 SCAP PLANNING/TARGET SETTING CERCLIS REPORTS 11-12
EXHIBIT II.8 PROGRAM EVALUATION CERCLIS REPORTS 11-14
EXHIBIT II.9 THE REGIONAL EVALUATION PROCESS 11-15
EXHIBIT 11.10 CFO PERFORMANCE MEASURES 11-18
EXHIBIT 11.11 CHANGES AND ADJUSTMENTS 11-19
EXHIBIT 11.12 SCAP TARGET AND DEFINITION CHANGES 11-20
CHAPTER m
EXHIBIT III.l BUDGET TIMELINE II1-4
EXHIBIT III.2 OPERATING PLAN CATEGORIES 111-10
EXHIBIT III.3 THE ADVICE OF ALLOWANCE PROCESS Ill-13
EXHIBIT III.4 CHANGE REQUEST REQUIRED 111-17
EXHIBIT III.5 AOA CHANGE PROCESS PROCEDURES 111-18
EXHIBIT III.6 SITE- VERSUS NON-SITE SPECIFIC PLANNED OBLIGATIONS 111-20
EXHIBIT III.7 BUDGET SOURCES 111-21
xiii September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Exhibits
CHAPTER m (cont'd)
EXHIBIT III.8 WHO PAYS FOR WHAT 111-21
EXHIBIT III.9 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CONTACTS 111-27
EXHIBIT III. 10 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT TOOLS AND SYSTEMS 111-28
EXHIBIT III. 11 ACCOUNT NUMBER STRUCTURE 111-29
EXHIBIT III. 12 REGIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES IH-32
EXHIBIT III. 13 DESCRIPTION OF REGIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT STAFF 111-33
EXHIBIT III. 14 RESPONSIBILITIES OF REGIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE
FINANCIAL STAFF 111-34
EXHIBIT HI. 15 FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF HQ MANAGEMENT OFFICES 111-35
EXHIBIT III. 16 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND FUNDING PROCESSES IH-36
EXHIBIT III. 17 HANDLING FINANCIAL DATA IN THE CERCLIS ENVIRONMENT 111-38
EXHIBIT III. 18 EPA FORMS COMMONLY USED FOR SUPERFUND PROCUREMENTS 111-39
EXHIBIT III. 19 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF SITE-SPECIFIC CONTRACTS 111-40
EXHIBIT IH.20 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF NON-SITE SPECIFIC CONTRACTS 111-41
EXHIBIT IH.21 DISBURSEMENT IAG FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT HI-42
EXHIBIT 111.22 ALLOCATION TRANSFER IAG FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT IIW3
EXHIBIT 111.23 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 111-44
EXHIBIT 10.24 SSC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 111-46
EXHIBIT III.25 COST RECOVERY REFERRAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 111-47
EXHIBIT 111.26 CORRECTIONS TO FINANCIAL INFORMATION 111-49
September 27, 1996 xiv
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Exhibits
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES
APPENDIX A
EXHIBIT A.I SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION ACTIVITIES A-3
EXHIBIT A.2 SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION
PLANNING REQUIREMENTS A-29
APPENDIX B
EXHIBIT B.I EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION ACTIVITIES B-3
EXHIBIT B.2 LONG-TERM ACTION FLOW CHART B-40
EXHIBIT B.3 EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS B-41
APPENDIX C
EXHIBIT C.I ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES C-2
EXHIBIT C.2 ENFORCEMENT PLANNING REQUIREMENTS C-38
APPENDIX D
EXHIBIT D.I FEDERAL FACILITIES PROFILE D-2
EXHIBIT D.2 FEDERAL FACILITIES ACTIVITIES D-l 1
EXHIBIT D.3 FEDERAL FACILITIES PLANNING REQUIREMENTS D-25
APPENDIX E
EXHIBIT E.I CERCLIS DEVELOPMENT PROCESS E-2
EXHIBIT E.2 CERCLIS 3 DATA ARCHITECTURE E-3
xv September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Superfund Program Implementation Manual
Fiscal Year 1997
Table of Exhibits
APPENDIX F
EXHIBIT F.I RELATIONSHIP OF OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND
RESPONSE PROGRAM PLANS F-6
EXHIBIT F.2 FY 97 OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM ACTIVITIES ,. F-ll
September 27, 1996 xvi
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Manager's Schedule of Significant Events
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Left
Intentionally Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
MANAGERS SCHEDULE OF SIGNIFICANT EVENTS
OCTOBER 1996 QUARTER 1 (FY 97>
3* The AAs and OC approve the first quarter AOA
7 HQ pulls 4th Quarter FY 96 accomplishment data from CERCLIS and provides for:
1) Special program reports; and
2) Initial FY 96 end-of-year assessment
24 HQ pulls 4th quarter FY 96 accomplishment data from CERCLIS for review of end of year
accomplishments
NOVEMBER 1996
1 Enforcement extramural budget carryover calculated
15 OMB passback of FY 98 budget request
DECEMBER 1996
6 HQ pulls CERCLIS data for second quarter AOA
6 HQ pulls accomplishment data on key accomplishments from CERCLIS
15 HQ appeal of the OMB FY 98 budget passback
23 HQ submits second quarter AOA request to AAs and places it in CERCLIS
30 Regions input AOA to IFMS
JANUARY 1997 QUARTER 2 (FY 97)
3 The AAs and OC approve the second quarter AOA
7 HQ pulls accomplishments data from CERCLIS and provides for special reports
7 Enforcement provides:
1) Special program reports; and
2) First quarter performance evaluations
10 HQ submits FY 98 budget request to the President
Dependent on approval of final appropriations.
xvii September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FEBRUARY 1997
5-9 HQ/Regional Superfund Focus Forum Meeting
7 HQ pulls national Environmental Indicators (El) data from CERCLIS
7 HQ pulls accomplishment data on key accomplishments from CERCLIS
16 HQ prepares El questions and answers to send to the Regions
MARCH 1997
7 HQ pulls data from CERCLIS for enforcement extramural budget and third quarter AOA
7 HQ pulls accomplishment data on key accomplishments from CERCLIS
24 HQ submits third quarter AOA request to the AAs and places it in CERCLIS
31 Regions input AOA to IFMS
31 Regional response to HQ El questions and answers
APRIL 1997 QUARTER 3 fFY 97)
3 The AAs and OC approve the third quarter AOA
7 HQ pulls accomplishment data from CERCLIS and provides for:
1) Special program reports; and
2) Mid-Year performance evaluation
25 HQ distributes FY 96 El analysis to HQ/Regional managers
25 HQ prepares preliminary Regional FY 98 operating plan based on past three years
obligating/tasking averages
MAY 1997
7 HQ analysis of Regional pipeline
7 HQ allocates 90 percent of FY 98 budget to Regions
7 HQ pulls accomplishment data on key accomplishments from CERCLIS
September 27, 1996 xviii
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
MAY 1997 (cont'd)
12 HQ program offices characterize and submit their FY 98 program initiatives
29 HQ program offices meet with the Administrator to review FY 98 program goals
JUNE 1997
2-27 Regions generate their plans for FY 98 by updating schedules and financial information in
WasteLAN and uploading to CERCLIS
6 HQ pulls planning information from CERCLIS:
1) for fourth quarter AOA; and
2) to support FY 98 and FY 99 budget request
6 HQ pulls accomplishment data on key accomplishments from CERCLIS
6 HQ pulls financial data for analysis of Regional obligation/commitment rate
9 HQ presents FY 98 Superfund goals and priorities and FY 99 investments to the Administrator
and Regional Administrator
13 Administrator and OC provide HQ program offices and Regions with policy for FY 99 budget
formulation
23 HQ submits fourth quarter AOA request to the AAs and places it in CERCLIS
30 Regions input AOA to IFMS
JULY 1997 QUARTER 4 (FY 97)
3 The AAs and OC approve the fourth quarter AOA
8 HQ pulls 3rd Quarter FY 97 accomplishments data from CERCLIS and provides for special
program reports
8 Enforcement provides:
1) Special program reports; and
2) Third quarter performance evaluations
8 HQ submits FY 99 Superfund investment summaries to the Administrator and Budget to OC
8 HQ pulls data from CERCLIS to review and analyze:
1) SCAP and pipeline workload and FY 98 budget request;
2) Past Regional accomplishments and planned durations/dollars; and
3) Regional request for 10 percent FY 98 budget reserve
xix September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
JULY 1997 (cont'd)
14-18 HQ program offices and lead Regions make presentation to Administrator/ Deputy Administrator
on FY 99 program priorities
21-25 Regional conference calls on HQ analyses
31 Administrator passback of FY 99 budget request
AUGUST 1997
1-15 HQ develops FY 99 budget for submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
7 HQ pulls accomplishment data on key accomplishments from CERCLIS
7 HQ pulls CERCLIS data to assist in preparation of the FY 99 budget
11-22 HQ/Regions conduct negotiations on the final FY 98 SCAP targets and measures and budget
29 HQ develops strategy for presenting the FY 99 budget to OMB
29 HQ sends memorandum to Regions on final budgets and targets and measures
SEPTEMBER 1997
5 HQ submits FY 99 budget to OMB
8 Regions revise CERCLIS to reflect final negotiated budgets and targets and measures
8 HQ pulls data from CERCLIS for first quarter FY 98 AOA
8 HQ pulls accomplishments data on key accomplishments from CERCLIS
16 HQ performs final FY 98 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) distribution
22 HQ submits FY 98 first quarter AOA request to the AAs and places it in CERHELP
30* Regions input AOA to IFMS
* Dependent on approval of final appropriations.
September 27, 1996 xx
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
OCTOBER 1997 QUARTER 1 fFY 98)
3* The A As and OC approve the first quarter AOA
7 HQ pulls 4th quarter FY 97 accomplishment data from CERCLIS and provides for:
1) Special program reports; and
2) Initial FY 97 end-of-year assessment
21 HQ pulls 4th quarter FY 97 accomplishment data from CERCLIS for review of end of year
accomplishments
NOVEMBER 1997
3 Enforcement extramural budget carryover calculated
19 OMB passback of FY 99 budget request
DECEMBER 1997
5 HQ pulls CERCLIS data for second quarter AOA
5 HQ pulls accomplishment data on key accomplishments from CERCLIS
12 HQ appeal of the OMB FY 99 budget passback
22 HQ submits second quarter AOA request to AAs and places it in CERCLIS
29 Regions input AOA to IFMS
Dependent on approval of final appropriations.
xxi September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
This Page Left
Intentionally Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Acronyms
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
AA —
A/E —
AAOE —
AA SWER -
AA OECA -
AAU —
AC-
ACP-
ADCR —
ADR-
AHRC —
ALT-
AN-
AO- •
AOA —
AOG-
APR-
AR —
ARAR-
ARCS —
AR1P-
ARM-
ASF-
AST —
ASTW —
ASU-
ATSDR —
ATSDR HAZDAT
BC/AOA —
BLM-
BRAC —
BTAG —
BUREC -
CA-
CADD —
CAS No. -
CBD-
CD-
CED-
CEPP-
CEPPO -
CERCLA —
CERCLIS —
CERFA —
CFO —
CIAO —
CIOC-
CLP-
CN —
CO-
Assistant Administrator
Architect/Engineer
Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement
Assistant Administrator for the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Administrative Assistance Unit
Area Committee
Area Contingency Plan
Automated Document Control Register
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Allowance Holder/Responsibility Center
Alternate
Account Number
Administrative Order
Advice of Allowance
Administrative Order on Consent
Agency Operating Guidance
Approved
Administrative Record
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
Alternative Remedial Contracting Strategy
Accidental Release Information Program
Administration and Resources Management
Above-ground Storage Facility
Above-ground Storage Tank
Above-ground Storage Tank Workgroup
Administrative Support Unit
Agency for Toxic Substances and Diseases Registry
Agency for Toxic Substances and Diseases Registry Hazardous Data System
Budget Control/Advice of Allowance
Bureau of Land Management
Base Realignment or Closure
Biological Technical Assistance Group
Bureau of Reclamation
Cooperative Agreement
Corrective Action Decision Document
Chemical Abstract Number
Commerce Business Daily
Consent Decree
CERCLA Enforcement Division (OWPE)
Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Program
Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Office (OSWER)
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information
System
Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act
Chief Financial Officer
Citizen Information and Access Offices
Community Involvement & Outreach Center (OERR)
Contract Laboratory Program
Commitment Notice
Contracting Officer
September 27, 1996
xx n
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
COI-
CORA-
CPCA-
CR-
CRCR-
CRP-
CWA-
CWG-
3DB —
DA-
DAS-
DCN-
DNAPL -
DOD-
DoD-
DOE-
DOI-
DOJ-
DOT-
DPO-
DRG-
EA-
EBS-
EE/CA —
EI-
EMSL-
ENRD-
EPA-
EPA-ACH -
EPA ID —
EPCRA-
EPI-
EPIC-
EPS-
ERA-
ERCS -
ERNS -
ERRS —
ERT —
ESAT-
ESC-
ESD-
ESF-
ESI-
ESI/RI -
ESS-
FCO-
FE-
FEMA-
FFA-
FFCA-
FFEO-
FFRRO -
Conflict of Interest
Cost of Remedial Action
Core Program Cooperative Agreement
Community Relations
Cost Recovery Category Report
Community Relations Plan
Clean Water Act
Community Work Groups
Decision Document Database
Deputy Administrator
Delivery of Analytical Services
Document Control Number
Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids
Deputy Office Director
Department of Defense
Department of Energy
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Transportation
Deputy Project Officer
District Response Group
Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation
Environmental Baseline Survey
Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis
Environmental Indicators
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Environment and Natural Resources Division (DOJ)
Environmental Protection Agency
EPA Automated Clearing House
EPA Identification Number
Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act of 1986
Environmental Priorities Initiative
Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
Environmental Protection Specialist
Expedited Response Action
Emergency Response Cleanup Services
Emergency Response Notification System
Emergency and Rapid Response Services
Environmental Response Team
Environmental Services Assistance Team
Enforcement Support Contract
Explanation of Significant Differences
Emergency Support Function
Enhanced Site Inspection
Expanded Site Inspection/Remedial Investigation
Enforcement Support Services
Funds Certifying Officer
Federal Enforcement
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Federal Facility Agreement
Federal Facility Compliance Agreement
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office
XXlll
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FFIS-
FFS-
FINDS —
FMC-Ci—
FMD —
FMFIA —
FMO —
FOIA —
FOSL —
POST —
FR-
FRP-
FS —
FSC-
FSS-
FTE-
FUDS-
FY —
FY/Q-
GAD —
GAO-
GFO —
GICS —
GIS-
GNL-
GPRA —
HAZDAT —
HHS-
HI —
HQ-
HRS-
HSWA —
HWC-
IAG —
IFMS —
IG-
IMC-
IMPM —
IMS-
IOTV —
IRM —
ISIF —
LAN-
LEPC-
LERP-
LOC-
LOE-
LTCS —
LTRA-
MARS-
MBO —
MM/DD/YY -
Federal Facilities Information System
Focused Feasibility Study
Facility Index System
Financial Management Center - Cincinnati
Financial Management Division
Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act
Financial Management Office
Freedom of Information Act
Finding of Suitability to Lease
Finding of Suitability to Transfer
Federal Register
Facility Response Plan
Feasibility Study
First and Subsequent Completion
First and Subsequent Start
Full-time Equivalent
Formerly Used Defense Sites
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year/Quarter
Grants Administration Division
Government Accounting Office
Good Faith Offer
Grants Information Control System
Geographic Information System
General Notice Letter
Government Performance and Results Act
Hazardous Data System
Health and Human Services
Hazard Index
Headquarters
Hazard Ranking System
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
Hazardous Waste Collection
Interagency Agreement
Integrated Financial Management System
Inspector General
Information Management Coordinator
Information Management/Program Measurement Center (OERR)
Integrated Management Strategy
Interoffice Transfer Voucher
Initial Remedial Measure
Integrated Site Information Form
Local Area Network
Local Emergency Planning Committee
Local Emergency Response Plan
Letter of Credit
Level of Effort
Long Term Contracting Strategy
Long Term Response Action
Management and Accounting Reporting System
Management by Objectives
Month/Day/Year
September 27, 1996
xxiv
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
MMS —
MOHR —
MORR —
MOU —
MSCA-
NAPL-
NBAR —
NCP-
NFRAP -
NOAA —
NPL —
NRC —
NRS —
NRT-
NSEP —
NSFCC -
NTC —
NTIS —
OAM —
OARM-
OC-
OD-
OE-
OECA-
OERR —
O&F-
OFFE —
OIG-
O&M —
OMB —
OPA —
OPAC —
OPC —
OPPE-
OPRP-
ORC-
ORD-
OSC —
OSRE —
OSW-
OSWER -
OU-
OUST —
PA-
PAH —
PARM-
PC-
PCB —
PECB —
PNRS —
PO-
POD-
Minerals Management Service
Magnitude of Hazard Reduction
Magnitude of Risk Reduction
Memorandum of Understanding
Multi-Site Cooperative Agreement
Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
Non-Binding Allocation of Responsibility
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan or National Contingency Plan
No Further Remedial Action Planned
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Priorities List
National Response Center
National Response System
National Response Team
National Security Emergency Preparedness
National Strike Force Communication Center
Non-Time Critical
National Technical Information Services
Office of Acquisition Management
Office of Administration and Resources Management
Office of the Comptroller
Office Director
Office of Enforcement
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OSWER)
Operational and Functional
Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement (OE)
Office of the Inspector General
Operation and Maintenance
Office of Management and Budget
Oil Pollution Act of 1990
On-line Payment and Collections
Oil Program Center
Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation
Oil Pollution Response & Prevention Center (OERR)
Office of Regional Counsel
Office of Research and Development
On-Scene Coordinator
Office of Site Remediation and Enforcement
Office of Solid Waste
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Operable Unit
Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OSWER)
Preliminary Assessment
Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons
Program Analysis & Resources Management Center (OERR)
Personal Computer
Polychlorinated biphenyl
Program Evaluation & Compliance Branch (OSRE)
Preliminary Natural Resource Surveys
Project Officer
Program Operations Division (OFFE)
xxv
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
POLREP
POS-
PPED —
PQOP —
PR-
PRA-
PREP-
PRP-
PRSC —
PSO-
QA-
QAPP-
QAT —
RA-
RAC —
RADS-
RAGS —
RCMS —
RCP —
RCRA —
RCRC —
RD —
RDT-
REMT —
RFP-
RI-
RIDS-
RI/FS —
RME-
ROC-
ROD —
RODEIS
RPM-
RPO —
RRT-
RTP-
SACA —
SACM—
SAM-
SARA —
SAS-
SCAP —
SCORES
SEA-
SEP-
SERC-
SERP-
SFO-
SI-
SIBAC -
SIF-
Pollution Report
Program Operations Staff (OSRE)
Program Policy & Evaluation Division (OSRE)
Pre-Qualified Officers Procurement
Procurement Request
Prospective Purchaser Agreement
Preparedness Response Exercise Program
Potentially Responsible Party
Post Removal Site Controls
Program Support Office
Quality Assurance
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Quality Action Team
Remedial Action
Response Action Contract
Risk Assessment Data System
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
Removal Cost Management System
Regional Contingency Plan
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Regional Cost Recovery Coordinator
Remedial Design
Regional Decision Team
Reg'ional Emergency Preparedness Team
Regional Environmental Services Assistance Team
Request for Proposal
Remedial Investigation
ROD Information Data System
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
Reasonable Maximum Exposure
Remedial Oversight Contract
Record of Decision
ROD and Enforcement Information System
Remedial Project Manager
Regional Project Officer
Regional Response Team
Research Triangle Park
Site Assessment Cooperative Agreement
Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model
Site Assessment Manager
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
Special Analytical Services
Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishments Plan
Superfund Cost Organization and Recovery Enhancement System
Site Evaluation Accomplished
Standard Evaluation Procedures
State Emergency Response Commission
State Emergency Response Plan
Servicing Finance Office
Site Inspection
Simplified Interagency Billing and Collection
Site Information Form
September 27, 1996
XXVI
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SIP-
SITE-
SMOA-
SMP-
SMSA-
SNAP-
SNL-
SOL-
SOW-
SPCC-
SRA-
SRIS-
SSA-
SSAB —
SSC-
S/S ID -
SSP —
START -
STSI-
TAG-
TAT —
TBD —
TDD-
TSCA-
TQM-
TRC-
TRW-
TSD-
UAO-
USCG-
USCOE -
USFWS -
USGS-
VRP-
WA-
WAM-
ZPO —
Site Inspection Prioritization
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
State Memorandum of Agreement
Site Management Plan
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area
Superfund National Assessment Program
Special Notice Letter
Statute of Limitations
Statement of Work
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure
Superfund Reform Act
Superfund Report Information System
Site Screening and Assessment
Site Specific Advisory Board
Superfund State Contracts
Site/Spill Identification Number
Site Safety Plan
Superfund Technical Assistance and Response Team
State, Tribal, & Site Identification Center (OERR)
Technical Assistance Grants
Technical Assistance Team
To Be Determined
Technical Direction Document
Toxic Substances Control Act
Total Quality Management
Technical Review Committee
Technical Review Workgroup
Treatment, Storage, Disposal Facility
Unilateral Administrative Order
United States Coast Guard
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
United States Geological Survey
Vessel Response Plan
Work Assignment
Work Assignment Manager
Zone Project Officer
xxvn
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Organizational Charts
September 27, 1996
-------
in
ft
1
I
m
»
D
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Technology Innovation
Office
Chemical Emergency
Preparedness and
Prevention Office
Office of Program
Management
Office of the Assistant
Administrator (AA, DAA,
DAA, Ombudsman,
Superfund Reauthorization)
Office of Emergency
and Remedial
Response
I
o
Federal Facilities
Restoration and Reuse
Office
Outreach and Special
Projects Staff
Office of
Underground
Storage Tanks
1
Office of Solid
Waste
-------
Senior Process Managers
OERR Immediate Office
Risk: David Bennett
Response Decision: Bruce Means
Pipeline Integration: John Smith
Emergency Response: Mark Mjoness
Teaming: Phyllis Anderson (Special Assistant)
Director: Stephen Luftig
Deputy Director: Elaine Davies
Deputy Director: Larry Reed
Superfund Reform Advocate:
William Ross
Special Assistant: Jan Baker
Patricia Tidwell
n
*s
n
a"
n
September 1995
U.S. EPA
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Reorganization
m
50
q
8
o
N)
O
O
58
O
-------
•a
rS
I
m
?o
D
s
x
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Administration and
Resource Management
Support Staff
Enforcement Capacity
and Outreach Office
Assistant Administrator for
Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance
Office of
Compliance
Office of
Federal
Activities
National
Enforcement
Investigations
Center
Federal Facilities
Enforcement Office
Planning Prevention
and Compliance Staff
Site Remediation and
Enforcement Staff
Office of
Regulatory
Enforcement
Office of Site
Remediation
Enforcement
VO
SJ
o
-------
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
Regional Support Division
Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement
CO
n
•o
H
Policy and Program
Evaluation Division
Regions 1,2,6 & 9
Branch
Regions 5, 7, & 10
Branch
Regions 3,4, & 8
Branch
Program Evaluation
and Coordination
Branch
Program Evaluation
Team
Program Coordination
Team
Remediation
Enforcement
Management Team
Policy and Guidance
Branch
Policy and Guidance
Development Team
Policy Integration
Team
m
73
D
I*
o
n
u>
*k
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Regional Map
September 27, 1996
-------
o
t/1
C/J
t»
X>
1
>-l
ti
OS
lew York
San
Francisco
8
53
q
I
<°
n
w
S
oston o
IX
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Program Goals and Planning Requirements
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter I: Program Goals and Priorities
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 920Q.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter I
Program Goals and Priorities
Table of Contents
CHAPTER I PROGRAM GOALS AND PRIORITIES 1-1
Introduction 1-1
Superfund and its History 1-1
Reauthorization 1-2
FY 97 Themes 1-2
Current Program Priorities 1-2
Superfund Reforms 1-3
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 Implementation 1-3
Current Program Priorities & Superfund Reforms 1-3
Current Program Priorities 1-3
Worst Sites First: A Framework for Setting Priorities 1-3
Construction Completions 1-3
Federal Facilities 1-4
Reinventing Site Assessment 1-4
Enhancement of State/Tribal Role
Performance Partnership Grants
State/Tribal Programs: State Remedy Selection ,
Brownfields ,
Base Closures
Environmental Indicators ,
Enforcement Fairness/Reduce Transaction Costs
-4
-5
-5
-6
-8
-8
-9
Enforcement First/Cost Recovery 1-10
Effective Contract Management 1-10
Innovative Technologies 1-11
Accelerated Cleanup 1-11
Superfund Reforms 1-12
Risk Based Priorities for Contaminated Sites 1-13
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 1-13
Strategic Plan Requirements 1-14
Comprehensive Mission Statement 1-14
General Goals and Objectives 1-14
Description of How General Goals and Objectives Will Be Achieved 1-15
Relationship Between Goals in the Annual Performance Plan and in a Strategic Plan 1-15
Key Factors Affecting Achievement of General Goals and Objectives 1-15
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter I
Program Goals and Priorities
Table of Contents (cont'd)
Program Evaluations 1-15
Annual Performance Plan , 1-16
Performance Goals 1-16
Resources , , 1-16
Performance Indicators 1-16
Verification and Validation 1-16
Program Performance Reports 1-16
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
CHAPTER I
PROGRAM GOALS AND PRIORITIES
INTRODUCTION
The focus of the Superfund program is to maximize the protection of human health and the environment through
fast, effective cleanup of priority hazardous waste sites and releases. The most essential principle of the Superfund
program is that the worst sites are cleaned up first. In addition, the acceleration of site cleanup and National Priority
List (NPL) construction completion is integral to the success of the program. Implementation of the program also
will be facilitated by a strong collaboration with the States and Indian Tribes. Partnerships are an integral part of the
Brownfields program. Furthermore, collaboration with the Department of Defense will be necessary as the Agency
continues to assist in assessing base closure properties. Finally, the Superfund program will continue to employ
Environmental Indicators (Els) as a crucial tool for evaluation and communication.
Superfund and its History
The Superfund program began when Congress passed the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in 1980. Prior to this, there was no authority for direct Federal response
to hazards posed by abandoned and uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Existing environmental laws, such as the
Resource Conversation and Recovery Act (RCRA), provided regulatory requirements to address present activities and
prevent future catastrophes, but lacked authority to allow Federal emergency and long-term responses to past disposal
problems.
CERCLA is unique in that it provided the first Federal response authority to address the problem of uncontrolled
hazardous waste sites. CERCLA, for the first time, required EPA to step beyond its traditional regulatory role and
provide response authority to clean up hazardous waste sites.
In October 1986, Congress reauthorized CERCLA by enacting the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA). The enactment of SARA resulted in the following changes to the Superfund program:
• Increased the size of the Trust Fund to $8.5 billion and refined its finances;
(Note: The Fund is financed by a tax on crude oil and 42 commercially used chemicals.)
• Stressed the development and use of permanent remedies;
• Provided Enforcement and Settlement tools, as well as, increased State involvement in the Superfund Program;
and
• Included Title III, a free standing statute, that created the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-know
Act (EPCRA). EPCRA is designed to help communities prepare to respond in the event of a chemical
emergency, and to increase the public's knowledge of the presence and threat of hazardous chemicals.
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) resulted from SARA and is the
major regulatory framework that guides the Superfund response effort. The NCP outlines a step-by-step process for
implementing Superfund responses and defines roles and responsibilities of EPA, other Federal agencies, States,
private parties, and the communities in response to situations in which hazardous substances are released into the
environment.
1-1 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
In 1992, EPA introduced the Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model (SACM). SACM was responsible for
expediting the cleanup of uncontrolled waste sites and redefining the way Superfund progress is measured.
Fiscal Year (FY) 97 is a critical year for the Superfund program as CERCLA, as amended by SARA, is being
considered for reauthorization.
The Superfund program is comprehensive, yet flexible and innovative. Its mission is both immediate and long-
range. Its focus is specific enough to handle individual site cleanup with precision, yet broad enough to encourage
advances in a relatively new scientific and technical field. Today the hazardous waste problem in the United States
remains large, complex and long-term.
Reauthorization
Superfund reauthorization bills are currently in Committee in both the U.S. Senate and the House of
Representatives. Congress has extended SARA authorities for FY 97. The debate over the language of the
reauthorization bills is ongoing. Additional information will be provided following enactment of a revised Superfund
law.
FY 97 THEMES
Superfund is now more than 16 years old. After 16 years, significant progress has been made in reducing risks
posed to human and natural ecosystems from releases of hazardous substances into the environment. Accomplishments
in FY 97 will expand and refine Superfund's measures of success, refocus the debate on Superfund progress, and
explore options for making administrative changes that will improve Superfund in the future.
* Current Program Priorities - These priorities summarize the challenges that Regional and Headquarters (HQ)
Superfund managers must work together to address in FY 97. These challenges and administrative improvements
will be discussed in more detail later in this chapter. Please note the following:
Worst Sites First: A Framework for Setting Priorities
Construction Completions
Federal Facilities
Reinventing Site Assessment
Enhancement of State/Tribal Role
Performance Partnership Grants
State/Tribal Programs: State Remedy Selection
Brownfields
Base Closures
Environmental Indicators
Enforcement Fairness/Reduce Transaction Cost
Enforcement First/Cost Recovery
September 27, 1996 1-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Effective Contract Management
Innovative Technologies
Accelerated Cleanup
* Superfund Reforms - Please refer to Superfund Reforms section later in the Chapter.
* Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 Implementation - Please refer to GPRA section
later in the Chapter.
CURRENT PROGRAM PRIORITIES & SUPERFUND REFORMS
The continued focus of the Superfund program in FY 97 is to maximize the protection of human health and the
environment through fast, efficient cleanup of priority hazardous waste sites and releases. Protecting human health
and the environment are Superfund's highest priorities for FY 97. Superfund also shall work for reauthorization and
shall progress with Superfund Reforms and compliance with GPRA.
Current Program Priorities
The following are Superfund current program priorities:
Worst Sites First: a Framework for Setting Priorities
Over the past few years, Regional personnel have been told that completions/deletions, "enforcement first," and worst
sites/worst problems first are each the highest program priority. While it is frequently possible to address all
priorities, it is not always possible to optimize them. This section will address the reconciliation of the competing
priorities of the Superfund program.
The highest priority of the Superfund program is the management of imminent risk to human health and the
environment. Worst site/worst problems first is a guiding Superfund principle. Efforts to streamline and accelerate
the entire Superfund process also support this important goal. Once it is determined that the site poses no imminent
risk, the Agency moves on to other priorities. Given current resource constraints, maximizing PRP involvement in
the cleanup process by using all available enforcement tools will be necessary to meet the mandates of SARA and the
goals of the Agency.
When PRPs are recalcitrant, the Region must determine what mix of Fund and enforcement tools should be used to
move the site expeditiously to cleanup. The use of both Unilateral Administrative Orders (UAOs) and Fund-financed
cleanup actions should be considered. If UAOs are issued and the PRPs do not comply, a Fund-financed cleanup
should be considered, as appropriate, to ensure that the site moves forward quickly. Appropriate cost recovery efforts
should be pursued when PRPs do not comply and Fund-financed activities are initiated.
Construction Completions
EPA is committed to increasing the number of NPL construction completions. The goal established by the
Administrator is 650 construction completions by the end of the year 2000. There are a sufficient number of sites
with final RODs signed to meet this goal. Sites in the RD/RA stages will be efficiently managed to ensure work
continues in a timely manner through to construction completion. Regions and States must continue to work together
to identify opportunities for expediting construction completions and response actions. Maximum PRP involvement
will be imperative to meeting these goals.
1-3 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-I4-1C
Federal Facilities
The primary mission of the Superfund Federal facilities program is to ensure that the hazardous waste sites owned
or operated by the Federal government are addressed and cleaned up as quickly as possible. Regional efforts should
be focused on getting to completion of construction activities at Federal facilities whether they are accomplished under
remedial or removal authority. Meeting these goals will help build the program's credibility, which is vital to the
Superfund's long-term success.
Reinventing Site Assessment
EPA is reinventing the site assessment process. EPA is redesigning the site assessment process to allow it to better
pursue Brownfields redevelopment, increase State and Tribal programs' expertise, and address sites in CERCLIS and
on the NPL. The intent is to ensure protection of public health and the environment while increasing State
responsibility, encouraging more efficient and effective cleanups, reducing costs, and aiding economic redevelopment
and environmental recovery.
Priorities for site assessment include listing appropriate sites on the NPL, evaluating the backlog of sites in the
CERCLIS inventory to determine high-priority sites and those not requiring Federal response action, and assessing
non-CERCLIS sites in conjunction with EPA's Brownfields initiatives. The percentage of site assessment funding
devoted to each of these priority areas will not be established given variations in Regional workloads; however, careful
balancing of these priorities is important given constrained site assessment resources. Regions and States with
significant CERCLIS backlogs need to ensure steady progress is being made addressing them. Regions and States
without such backlogs can give higher priority to non-CERCLIS sites.
Enhancement of State/Tribal Role
The Superfund program places a very high priority on empowering States and Indian Tribes to play a greater role in
the Superfund program's implementation. The Administration's Superfund reauthorization position and several
superfund reforms are evidence of this.
In 1993 - 1994 and in recent reauthorization debates, the Administration has supported a substantial shifting of current
programs to the States. The Superfund program direction is evidenced by a number of Superfund reforms such as
State Deferral, Block Funding, and Voluntary Cleanup.
Throughout FY 97, preparation will be made for an enhanced State and Tribal role in the Superfund program. It is
crucial that the transfer of these programs, to Slates and Tribes wishing to adopt them, be smooth and successful.
Working with issues surrounding State readiness, assistance to States, EPA/State partnership agreements, and the
unique considerations that pertain to enhancing Tribal participation are critical to successful implementation of any
new reauthorizaton law.
Collaboration with Superfund's co-implementors, the States and Tribes, is essential in developing a strategy for strong
partnerships between the Federal and State governments. Superfund can learn from State expertise developed from
their cleanup. Superfund will work with Tribes to assist them in assuming cleanup programs. Tribes will be
recognized as sovereign nations and not entities of State governments.
Superfund is planning for the ultimate transfer of the cleanup program to States and Tribes. This will enable EPA
to identify and analyze major issues associated with program and technology transfer. It also will result in a
comprehensive and flexible strategy for decentralizing this program.
September 27, 1996 1-4
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Performance Partnership Grants
A Performance Partnership Grant (PPG) is a single grant made to a State or Tribe from grant funds allocated and
otherwise available for existing categorical grants programs. PPGs are voluntary and provide States and Tribes with
the option to combine funds from two or more categorical grants into one or more PPG(s). Recipients may receive
their financial assistance as one or more PPG(s) or continue receiving funds as categorical grants. States and Tribes
may apply for these grants for any period after enactment of statutory authority for the PPG program.
The purpose of the PPG is:
• To increase State and Tribal flexibility to address their highest environmental priorities across all media and
establish resource allocations based on those priorities, while continuing to address core program
commitments;
• To more effectively link program activities with environmental goals and program outcomes;
• To develop innovative pollution prevention, ecosystem, and community based strategies; and
• To develop partnerships between EPA and the States and Tribes where all parties share the same
environmental and program goals, and deploy their unique resources and abilities to jointly accomplish those
goals.
All PPGs will be required to contain a legally binding set of program commitments, in the form of National
Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS) agreements. Program commitments are a description of
the program goals and objectives, results and benefits expected, a plan of action, and quantifiable projections of the
program and environmental accomplishments to be achieved and the performance measures to be used. The States
and Tribes are encouraged to adopt outcome- and output-oriented performance measures that track program
performance, environmental conditions and trends, and business environmental performance. Program performance
measures assess how effectively or reliably a State/Tribal program is achieving its objectives. The NEPPS/PPG
performance measures should be consistent in scope and purpose with ongoing EPA and State or Tribal initiatives,
such as The New Generation of Environmental Protection: EPA's Five-Year Strategic Plan; the National
Environmental Goals Project; and EPA National Program performance measures (developed under the NEPPS). The
PPG commitments are the legal basis for the expenditures of Federal grant funds and the recipient's matching
requirement.
At present, Superfund monies can not be included in PPGs, because these funds may not be expended for purposes
other than Superfund. Nonetheless, several States are including their Superfund programs in NEPPS agreements and.
in time, it may be feasible to include Superfund resources in PPGs. In the near-term, Superfund is exploring the
feasibility of Superfund Block Funding awards to move in a direction consistent with PPGs; initial block funding
awards have been made to Minnesota and Colorado. We will be working to encourage further progress toward the
goals of flexible funding within the context of strong program commitments to Superfund outcomes.
State/Tribal Programs: State Remedy Selection
State Remedy Selection is an administrative reform where pilots will allow some States to select remedies consistent
with the National Contingency Plan (NCP) for some sites. The goal of this reform is to provide States and Tribes
with an increased role in remedy selection at NPL sites, only in certain circumstances. State Remedy Selection allows
States and Tribes to take the lead in selecting remedies while ensuring that the cleanup approach will be consistent
with the NCP. Under this pilot project, the State or Tribe determines the cleanup approach for the Record of Decision
(ROD).
1-5 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The goal of this reform is to provide States and Tribes with an increased role in remedy selection at NPL sites. EPA
and selected States and Tribes enter into agreements through which the States and Tribes conduct the remedy selection
process, consistent with applicable laws and regulations, at certain NPL sites. Participating States and Tribes
supervise the entire remedy selection process with minimal EPA oversight or involvement, giving States and Tribes
significantly more control over NPL site cleanup.
The implementation plan envisions sharing lessons from experiences to date with States exercising a lead role in
remedy selection, and defining criteria for selecting new pilots. New pilots will be selected in late 1996. During
1997, the pilot project will be evaluated to determine what lessons it may offer for a more broadly enhanced role of
States and Tribes in the Federal Superfund program.
Brownfields
History
In January, 1995, EPA Administrator Carol Browner unveiled the Brownfields Action Agenda. It is a
comprehensive approach empowering the States, communities, and other stakeholders interested in environmental
cleanup and economic redevelopment to work together in a timely manner to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and
sustainably reuse Brownfields. The Brownfields properties are generally not traditional Superfund sites as they
are not generally highly contaminated and present lesser health risks. The program focuses on enabling quicker
and more effective assessments, clarifying liability and cleanup issues, providing funding for demonstration pilot
projects, initiating partnerships with key stakeholders, and implementing job development and training programs.
This action agenda identified and addressed barriers created by regulations, guidance, and administrative
practices, and recommended swift, aggressive measures for changes within the context of existing Superfund law.
The Agency has worked with States, cities, Federally recognized Indian Tribes, community representatives, and
other stakeholders to implement the many commitments made in January 1995. In mid-June, the Agency
accomplished 100% of the commitments with the announcement of the last awards for Brownfields pilots and the
signing of the Soil Screening Level guidance. Some of the remaining issues will require a new Superfund law.
EPA efforts have focused on four main categories:
• Brownfields Pilots;
• Clarifying liability and cleanup issues;
» Partnership and outreach; and
» Job development.
Brownfields Pilots
As part of the Brownfields action agenda, the Agency committed to funding 50 Brownfields pilots by 1996 for
up to $200,000 each. This commitment was met in mid-June with the announcement of the final awards. The
Brownfields pilot program is intended to provide EPA, States, local governments, and Federally recognized
Indian Tribes with useful information and new strategies for promoting a unified approach to environmental
assessment, cleanup and redevelopment. EPA is currently funding 60 Brownfields pilots across the country.
EPA Headquarters is sponsoring 39 pilots and an additional 21 pilots are being supported by EPA Regional
Offices.
The Agency also held a Brownfields Pilots National Workshop on February 13 and 14, 1996 which provided pilot
recipients as well as representatives from other Federal agencies, States, Federally recognized Indian Tribes, and
sector organizations with an opportunity to exchange information.
September 27, 1996 1-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Brownfields Tax Incentive/Prospective Purchaser Agreements
In his January 23, 1996 State of the Union address, the President announced a Brownfields tax incentive.
Currently, tax expenditures which increase the value or extend the useful life of the property must be capitalized
for tax purposes, and the costs recovered over the life of the property. This capitalization treatment contrasts with
repair and maintenance expenditures, which are generally deducted in the year incurred. The time frame for the
deductibUity of environmental remediation expenditures has long been disputed between taxpayers and the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS). In 1994, the IRS passed a ruling that enables current owners to immediately write off
environmental remediation costs.
The White House proposal would provide the same tax incentive for prospective purchasers, allowing them to
"expense" their cleanup costs at Brownfields sites over a relatively short period of time rather then "capitalize"
them over the useful life of the property. Because of budgetary constraints, the administration is evaluating the
length of the "expensing" period and options for targeting the incentive. In addition, the Treasury has asked EPA
for options on certifying environmental expensing costs of prospective purchasers.
FY 97 Budget Request
In FY 97, EPA has requested to expand the Brownfields pilot grant awards to States, local governments, and
Federally recognized Indian tribes. Funding will provide incentives and seed money to assess properties which
may be contaminated. $5,000,000 will be used for environmental assessment cooperative agreements to 25
States, local governments, or Federally recognized Indian tribes for up to $200,000 each. In addition,
$10,000,000 will be used for follow-up cleanup cooperative agreements of up to $350,000 each to capitalize
revolving loan funds for the first 29 pilot recipients who received assessment funds prior to 1996. These
additional grants will bring the knowledge basis of the local governments, States, and Federally recognized Indian
tribes to the next logical step, site cleanup. $10,000,000 will be used to fund State Voluntary Cleanup Program
infrastructure for.purposes of implementing the proposed Brownfields tax incentive. State involvement is critical
to the success of a sustained Brownfields program. Also, EPA will use $3,000,000 to expand the current site
assessment initiative using EPA and State resources to assess Brownfields sites. Funding for State Voluntary
cleanup and expanded Site Assessments will be distributed to Regions as extramural funds from HQ. Dollars will
be held at HQ and issued to Regions through the Advice of Allowance (AOA) process. (See Chapter III, Advice
of Allowance Procedures and Financial Reporting Requirements.) This is not a new program, but rather a
redirection of the existing site assessment program to include a greater emphasis on Brownfields.
In addition, $4,920,000 will be used to build, foster, and perform outreach to Regional, State, existing
Brownfields pilot programs, and external groups. EPA will coordinate with Brownfields pilot programs,
organizations, and stakeholders to develop working agreements and develop interagency cooperative agreements
so that an efficient and non-overlapping program is maintained. Another key part of the Brownfields program
is cooperation among Federal agencies and the leveraging of limited resources so that communities and
stakeholders are best served. The end result is that community groups, lenders, investors, developers, and other
affected parties join forces and develop creative solutions to assess and clean up contaminated sites and return
them to productive uses. The Agency will continue to support, through funding and technical assistance, outreach
to States and local governments on Brownfields and hazardous waste management. EPA will disseminate
outreach materials, and will provide guidance documents as well as targeted assistance to State and local
government organizations to continue to develop strong partnerships.
EPA also will continue to support, through funding and technical assistance, Brownfields outreach to Federally
recognized Indian tribes. This will aid Tribal programs in their effort to attain capacity to implement and manage
hazardous waste programs on Tribal lands. Specifically, EPA's role is to provide leadership, training, policy
guidance, and documents to the Tribes, American Indian environmental offices, as well as to other Federal
government offices. EPA will strive to develop and support stronger partnerships with Native American
organizations.
1-7 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Base Closures
Under the Base Realignment and Closure Acts of 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995, 113 military installations are scheduled
for closure or realignment. Of this total, 21 sites are on the National Priorities List (NPL), and there are a number
of non-NPL sites requiring some degree of decontamination. The Agency must continue to assist the Department of
Defense (DoD) in assessing these properties, accelerating cleanup actions wherever possible, listing sites on the NPL
where appropriate, and ensuring that remedies selected at NPL sites meet Superfund criteria. HQ and Regional
managers must work with DoD, State/local governments, and private interests to expedite cleanup and support
responsible transfers of Federal property to non-Federal parties for reuse and economic development.
Environmental Indicators
In 1989, EPA's Administrator directed all EPA programs, including Superfund, to develop Environmental Indicators
(Els) to help program managers and interested citizens assess program accomplishments from a more ecological
viewpoint than either administrative or budgetary measures alone permitted. Today, El data is fundamental to the
effective evaluation and communication of the Superfund program from an environmental standpoint. Els are the
preeminent means for EPA to show how, and to what extent, Superfund cleanups are reducing risks to people and the
environment.
Els are designed to measure progress at each stage of Superfund's "cleanup pipeline." This is done by identifying
the following: the number of emergency actions undertaken to immediately protect people from hazardous waste sites
(Indicator A); the achievement of cleanup goals set for a site's soil, groundwater, and surface water (Indicator B);
and the counting of technologies applied and volumes of waste handled (Indicator C). The data collected via these
three indicators shows how Superfund cleanup activities are continually and incrementally reducing the threats that
hazardous waste poses to people and the environment. This incremental environmental progress reporting is critical
to Superfund's efforts to move evaluations of the program away from total site cleanup and "deletion" from the NPL
as being the only measure of Superfund's progress and success.
Therefore, Els serve a number of important purposes for the Superfund program, including:
• An information base to communicate incremental cleanup results to Congress, the media, environmental
groups, and the public;
• A mechanism to improve understanding of site characteristics and cleanup activities on the pan of the
community, media, elected officials, and other stakeholders, and to encourage community interest and
involvement in site decisions;
• A compendium of technical data on Superfund sites that supplements administrative and budgetary data 10
enhance program management capabilities;
• An automated "institutional memory" allowing program managers to identify trends in the types of
technologies and cleanup methods used at different types of hazardous waste sites; and
» A means to quantify threats posed by hazardous waste sites to human health and the environment, and assess
efficacy of efforts to address these threats.
A fourth El has recently been proposed for use by the Superfund program and will be piloted on only a few sites
nationally (sites chosen will be based on amount of risk data available). Indicator D (Reducing Risk to Affected
Populations) is an attempt to assess the degree to which health threats have been reduced by the actions taken at
hazardous waste sites—both in terms of cancer risk reduction and non-cancer hazard reduction. Given that the
fundamental purpose of undertaking cleanup actions is to alleviate these risks and hazards, it is critical to create useful
Els that not only identify the nature and extent of risks and hazards, but also profile their reduction.
September 27, 1996 1-8
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Environmental Indicators and CERCLIS 3
During 1996, CERCLIS 3 was piloted in Region 2. A number of system and architecture improvements have
occurred to update El and reflect the program's increased understanding of environmental progress tracking.
Improvements to Environmental Indicators under CERCLIS 3 include:
• Reduced El reporting requirements on the Regions due to increased sharing of data between functionally-
linked areas in the new database;
• Goal attainment tracked for non-NPL as well as NPL sites;
• In some instances (for example, at the site level), goal attainment is automatically calculated;
• Risk data is used to support Indicator D reporting;
• Groundwater and surface water volumes are tracked by flow rate, not overall volume;
• On-line El reports are available to RPMs and IMCs — for example, the national, Regional, and State-level
El data compilation reports, and an El Audit Report (Site 12); and
• The El Audit Report allows RPMs and IMCs to automatically view and edit El data errors regarding their
sites.
Enforcement Fairness/Reduce Transaction Costs
EPA must assure fair treatment of all Potentially Responsible Parties, especially small volume contributors and parties
with a limited ability to pay, who will be targeted for early and prompt settlements. PRP searches to pursue parties
identified by other PRPs will be emphasized, as will Alternative Dispute Resolution. Allocation of response costs will
be emphasized through pilots and mixed funding will be used where possible. Steps will be taken to reduce private
sector transaction costs associated with cleanup of contaminated sites.
EPA has initiated several reforms to address enforcement fairness and reduce transaction costs, including
compensating settlors for a portion of the orphan share, adopting private party allocations, and using special accounts
in order to dedicate settlement funds to specific sites. These initiatives are now a part of the way we do business.
The initiatives fall roughly into two categories: some are intended to reduce the transaction costs paid by PRPs as part
of the settlement process; others are designed to ensure that PRPs are only asked to assume a fair portion of the
response costs for the sites where they are involved. Specific initiatives include:
Orphan Share Compensation — EPA will help fund a portion of the Superfund cleanup costs attributable to
parties that are financially insolvent as a way to ensure that remaining viable PRPs are not asked to pay for
substantially more than their share of the site cost.
"De Micromis" Settlements — EPA has doubled the threshold amount of waste a party may have contributed
to a Superfund site without being held liable for cleanup costs. The new policy relieves these small contributors
of having to pay for a portion of the cleanup at a site, virtually eliminates their transaction costs, and protects
them from "third-party" suits from larger waste contributors. While EPA will enter into "de micromis"
settlements when requested, the ultimate measure of success of this policy change will be that "de micromis"
parties are no longer pursued and there is no need to enter into such settlements.
1-9 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
Alternative Dispute Resolution — EPA is expanding its use of ADR as a way to reduce the costs of achieving
settlement with PRPs. PRPs who choose this alternative should see dramatically reduced transaction costs
compared to what would have been encountered during litigation.
Equitable Issuance of UAOs — EPA will issue UAOs to the maximum manageable number of PRPs wherever
there is sufficient basis to include them. Issuance of these UAOs will compel those PRPs to participate in, and
share the cost of, the specific response actions. The participation of these PRPs, even if only through a financial
contribution, will reduce the portion of the cleanup cost that is borne by PRPs who have settled with EPA.
Adopting Private Party Allocations — By adopting allocations of orphan share costs prepared by the PRPs, EPA
hopes to eliminate one area of dispute and reduce the transaction costs associated with reaching settlement.
Interest Bearing Special Accounts — As a result of a special agreement between OMB, the Treasury
Department and EPA, EPA Special Accounts will now accrue interest. Special Accounts are created when PRPs
settle their liability at a site with a cash payment toward the future costs of the response. All funds in a Special
Account must be applied to the direct costs of the response covered by the settlement. Now that these accounts
will accrue Interest, the total amount of money available from the accounts will increase, providing EPA with
more money to: 1) pay for part of an EPA led response; 2) defray costs EPA incurs at a PRP led site (e.g., past
costs or oversight costs); 3) or help pay the costs of a PRP led response.
Enforcement First/Cost Recovery
In order to leverage the number of cleanups that can be accomplished, maximizing PRP participation is a priority.
Key areas of emphasis are early initiation of PRP searches, negotiations to secure PRP-lead cleanup activities,
maximizing PRP response leads, addressing cost recovery at all sites with total costs greater than $200,000 prior to
the expiration of the Statute of Limitations, using Alternative Dispute Resolution to resolve costs owed, and
compliance monitoring to ensure violations are documented. As a result to this approach, PRPs have lead the majority
of new cleanup actions in past years, accelerating the pace of cleanup far beyond what could be done if only Superfund
resources were used. Early involvement by PRPs ensures that their transaction and cleanup costs are kept to a
minimum.
Effective Contract Management
Good contract management is a Superfund priority, as well as an Agency-wide priority. The Agency will continue
to implement the recommendations of the task force on Alternative Remedial Contracting Strategy (ARCS) contracts,
and build a future with reliable cost-effective contracts across the program through implementation of the Superfund
Long-Term Contracting Strategy (LTCS).
In recent years, HQ has been working with the Regions on implementing the LTCS. The LTCS provides the
mechanisms for greater contractor flexibility and improved oversight and cost management by giving Regions full
responsibility for contract management. For example, the national Special Analytical Service (SAS) contract has been
totally decentralized. Each Region has implemented their own strategy by taking over the management of the SAS
contract. In addition, Regional contracting officers and project officers are currently managing a new stable of
Regional Superfund contracts in the following areas: Superfund Technical Assistance and Response Teams (START);
Emergency and Rapid Response Services (ERRS); Response Action Contracts (RACs); and Enforcement Support
Services (ESS).
Responsible, trained, and reliable personnel should oversee the procurement and administration of all Superfund
contracts. Senior management involvement is essential and all staff must work together and communicate with their
contracting support offices. Principles of good contract management must permeate the day-to-day activities of the
program.
September 27, 1996 1-10
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Federal Facilities
At Federal facility sites, particular attention must be paid to potential or actual conflicts of interest involving EPA
contractors who also may be working for another Federal agency. OECA is developing a strategy for improving
the government's procurement process, addressing inter-agency Conflicts of Interest, and the issue of contractor
indemnification.
Innovative Technologies
Environmental technology development and commercialization are a top national priority for this Administration.
EPA stresses its importance for the long-term hazardous waste remedy challenge that lies ahead.1 The following
describes several initiatives designed to facilitate the testing, demonstration, and use of innovative cleanup and field
measurement technologies.
EPA seeks to improve the performance, as well as lower the cost, of site cleanup. In addition, cleanups continue (and
are increasing in pace) in other EPA programs as well as the many emerging voluntary State and local programs.
The Agency has made considerable progress using new technologies in the Superfund, RCRA, and Underground
Storage Tank (LIST) programs. In the Superfund program, better than half of the recent remedial cleanup decisions
for source control call for technologies which were not available when the law was reauthorized in 1986. The LIST
program has seen tremendous growth in the application of alternatives to pump and treat or land filling of petroleum
contaminated media. Tens of thousands of LIST sites are employing approaches such as bio-remedy, soil vapor
extraction, air sparging, and natural attenuation either in combination with traditional technologies or as the sole
method of cleanup. The large remaining cleanup needs in EPA programs, as well as the formidable future
requirements for State and other Federal agencies, provide a continuing impetus to find less expensive and more
effective solutions.
These initiatives recognize that the state of remedy science today requires EPA to take experimental approaches. They
are based on cooperation with other government and private entities that share EPA's interest in developing the next
generation of remedy technologies. They envision partnerships with agencies, States, and the private sector to jointly
develop and apply solutions which will allow us to protect public health and the environment more efficiently. While
these initiatives are directed primarily to programs EPA implements, many States are actively pursuing innovative
approaches and may find these initiatives to be of value.
EPA encourages proposals and efforts to promote the development and implementation of these potentially high payoff
solutions. Its initiatives apply, as appropriate, to UST cleanups, RCRA Corrective Actions, Federal facility-lead and
Fund-lead, Responsible Party^lead, and removal and remedial sites.
Federal Facilities
Federal facility sites provide an excellent testing ground for assessing innovative technologies. Federal facilities
offer a number of benefits: sole responsible party; acknowledged liability; controlled sites; funding; and
willingness. For these reasons, the Agency expects to see more public-private partnerships established at Federal
facility sites.
Accelerated Cleanup
The technical complexity of hazardous waste site cleanup, coupled with complex Superfund site study and cleanup
requirements, have left the Superfund program vulnerable to criticism on the slow pace of achieving cleanup. The
Administrative Improvements identified new and continued initiatives that Regional managers should implement to
accelerate cleanup. The initiatives that are being implemented include:
1 Please see OSWER POLICY DIRECTIVE 9380.0-25
Ml September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
« Presumptive remedies — Promoting the use of presumptive remedies for cleanup of municipal landfills and
volatile organic chemicals in soil. Expanding the use of presumptive remedies to other sites including wood
treaters, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), groundwater pump and treat systems, grain storage, and coal
gasification;
* Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (DNAPL) contamination — Developing and implementing a methodology for
quickly assessing the presence of DNAPLs, characterizing site contamination problems, and developing a
remedial strategy for addressing DNAPL contamination;
• Soil acceptance levels — Developing national soil acceptance levels for a variety of chemicals. These acceptance
levels will be an important screening tool to identify contaminant levels below which there is not concern and
above which further site-specific evaluation would be warranted. The acceptance level also could be used as a
cleanup level for certain exposure pathways; and
* Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model — SACM was introduced in FY 92, piloted with field demonstrations in
FY 93, and implemented in FY 94. The purpose of SACM is to streamline and accelerate the cleanup process,
resulting in prompt risk reduction and restoration of the environment over the long term.
Superfund Reforms (Previously Known as Administrative Reforms)
The Superfund program has achieved substantial progress in cleaning up hazardous waste sites and protecting
human health and the environment during its 16 year existence. However, there have been serious proposals for
improvement of the statute and the program to make it faster, fairer, and more efficient. Since 1993, EPA has
launched three rounds of reforms to Superfund to address criticisms raised by affected parties and to improve the pace,
cost, and fairness of the program. Each set of reforms consists of various initiatives and pilots focusing on changes
to the program that can be implemented within the existing statutory framework. These reforms were intended to
accomplish different goals, ranging from strengthening of the program prior to reauthorization to testing concepts
developed during Congressional debate on actual legislation. As a result of all the new and continuing reforms,
Superfund is a dramatically different program today than it was at its inception.
EPA and other Superfund stakeholders have worked since the inception of the program to reduce risks posed by
abandoned and uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Since 1980, EPA has evaluated more than 40,000 sites, conducted
over 4,200 early actions, and has completed construction at over 350 of the more than 1,300 sites on the National
Priorities List in an effort to protect human health and the environment. Much has changed in the Superfund program
since 1980. Not only did the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 produce significant
legislative changes, but EPA also instituted a substantial number of administrative changes.
In February 1995, EPA announced 12 initiatives designed to improve the Superfund program. This second round
of reforms encompassed six general areas: enforcement; economic redevelopment; community involvement and
outreach; environmental justice; consistent program implementation; and State and Tribal empowerment. Many of
these initiatives included pilots which are continuing to furnish information on the operation and changes in the
program.
In October 1995, EPA Administrator Carol Browner announced the third and final round of "Superfund
Reforms." This third round of "common sense" reforms was intended to assist State and local governments,
communities, and industries involved in cleanups to more easily: (1) make cost-effective cleanup choices that protect
public health and the environment; (2) reduce litigation so more time and money can be spent on cleanup and less on
lawyers; and (3) help communities become more informed and involved so that cleanup decisions make the most sense
at the community level. [For additional information on this topic, please see the Superfund Reform Measures of
Success (OERR & OECA) section of Appendix C and G.]
September 27, 1996 . 1-12
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Risk Based Priorities for Contaminated Sites
EPA considers risk to be a major factor when establishing priority and allocating resources for contaminated sites
posing the greatest threat to human health and the environment. In order to develop this priority-setting system for
funding cleanups, the Superfund program has a National Risk-Based Priority Panel for reviewing new start
construction activities and for recommending funding strategies for Fund-lead response actions based upon the
principle of "worst problems first."
The panel consists of representatives from the ten Regions and Headquarters. Panel members are chosen based upon
experience and expertise in construction cleanup and resource management. The panel ranks projects using various
factors such as human health risk, contaminant stability and characteristics, ecological risk, and program management
considerations. Risks to human population exposed and contaminant stability are given the greatest weights. A
cumulative score is tallied for each construction activity reviewed by the panel, and a prioritized list is developed for
new start construction activities during the fiscal year. Funds for new cleanup work during the fiscal year are based
primarily on the project evaluations and recommendations of the National Risk-Based Priority Panel.
GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND RESULTS ACT (GPRA) OF 1993
"The Law ... requires that we chart a course for every endeavor... see how well we are progressing, tell the public
how we are doing, stop the things that don't work, and never stop improving..."
President William Clinton, 3 AUG 93
Superfund's program planning and reporting requirements have evolved and matured from intricate, internally
focused measures, to aligning and measuring resources with activities and reporting the environmental outcomes of
the work undertaken at hazardous waste sites. The National Goals Project of 2005 and the Chief Financial Officers
(CFO) Act are legislative and administrative initiatives that have guided the evolution of Superfund program
management by gradually shifting the focus from administrative program success to a results-oriented future (e.g.,
Superfund Environmental Indicators) in which the program is held accountable for its actions. These various
initiatives will be the starting point for finalizing the Congressionally-mandated GPRA, which provides the
overarching principles for Superfund program management now and in future years. For additional information
regarding GPRA, please see Appendix G: GPRA Referenced Material.
In 1993, Congress enacted the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (Public Law 103-62) based on
its findings that:
• Waste and inefficiency in Federal programs undermine the confidence of the American people in the government
and reduces the Federal government's ability to address adequately vital public needs;
• Federal managers are seriously disadvantaged in their efforts to improve program efficiency and effectiveness
because of insufficient articulation of program goals and inadequate information on program performance; and
• Congressional policy making, spending decisions, and program oversight are seriously handicapped by insufficient
attention to program performance and results.2
The purposes of the Act are to:
• Improve the confidence of the American people in the capability of the Federal government, by systematically
holding Federal agencies accountable for achieving program results;
Public Law 103-62, section 2(a)
1-13 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• Initiate program performance reform with a series of pilot projects in setting program goals, measuring program
performance against those goals, and reporting publicly on their progress;
• Improve Federal program effectiveness and public accountability by promoting a new focus on results, service,
quality, and customer satisfaction;
• Help Federal managers improve service delivery, by requiring that they plan for meeting program objectives and
by providing them with information about program results and service quality;
• Improve Congressional decision making by providing more objective information on achieving statutory
objectives, and on the relative effectiveness and efficiency of Federal programs and spending; and
• Improve internal management of the Federal government.3
To carry out the provisions of GPRA, agencies are required to generate strategic plans, annual performance plans,
and program performance reports,
Strategic Plan Requirements
Agencies are required to submit the strategic plan no later than September 1997. The strategic plan must be
updated once every three years or when there are significant policy, programmatic, or other changes to any element
of the current plan. Minor changes to the strategic plan can be incorporated in advance of the three-year cycle by
including the changes in the annual performance plan."
The strategic plan covers a period of six years — the current fiscal year (FY) and the five fiscal years following
the current fiscal year. For example, if the strategic plan is submitted for FY 1998, the plan would cover the fiscal
years 1998 through 2003.5 The elements of the strategic plan required by GPRA are as follows:
Comprehensive Mission Statement
The mission statement is a brief statement which defines the basic purpose of the agency. It focuses on the core
programs and activities, including a brief discussion of the enabling or authorizing legislation and issues Congress
specifically charged the agency to address.*
General Goals and Objectives
The strategic plan documents the long-term programmatic, policy, and management goals of the agency, including
the planned accomplishments and the schedule for their implementation. The general goals and objectives
elaborate how the agency is carrying out its mission. Often this will be in the form of outcome-type goals.7-8
3 Public Law 103-62, section 2(b)
4 OMB Circular A-l 1 (revised 1995), part 2, section 200.4
5 OMB Circular A-l 1 (revised 1995), part 2, section 200.5
6 OMB Circular A-l 1 (revised 1995), part 2, section 200.8
7 An outcome goal is defined as a description of the intended result, effect, or consequence that occur from
carry out a program or activity.
8 OMB Circular A-l 1, (revised 1995), part 2, section 200.9
September 27, 1996 1-14
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The criteria for the general goals and objectives are as follows: (a) the goals/objectives need to be precise in order
to direct and guide the staff to fulfill the mission of the agency; (b) the goals/objectives should be within the
agency's span of influence; and (c) the goals/objective should be defined in a manner that allows future
assessment to be made on whether the goals/objectives were or are being achieved.9
Description of How General Goals and Objectives Will Be Achieved
This section describes the means the agency will use to meet the general goals and objectives. This includes,
when applicable: (a) operational processes; (b) skills and technologies; and (c) human, capital, information and
other resources.10
Relationship Between Goals in the Annual Performance Plan and in a Strategic Plan
The strategic plan should briefly outline: (a) the type, nature, and scope of performance goals to be included in
a performance plan; (b) the relationship between the performance goals and the general goals and objectives; and
(c) the relevance and use of performance goals in helping determine the achievement of general goals and
objectives."
Key Factors Affecting Achievement of General Goals and Objectives
The strategic plan identifies key external factors12 that are beyond the Agency's control that could significantly
affect the achievement of the general goals and objectives. The external factor needs to be linked to a goal(s) and
describe how the achievement of the goal could be affected by the factor.13
Program Evaluations
Program evaluations that were used in preparing the strategic plan should be briefly described. Also, a schedule
for future program evaluations needs to be included.1" The development of the strategic plan is considered to be
an inherently governmental function; therefore, 'it can only be performed by Federal employees.15
9 OMB Circular A-l 1, (revised 1995), part 2, section 200.9
10 OMB Circular A-l 1, (revised 1995), part 2, section 200.10
11 OMB Circular A-l 1, (revised 1995), part 2, section 200.11
12 External factors may be economic, demographic, social or environmental and the factors may remain stable
or change within a predicted rate or vary to an unexpected degree. Achievement of goals can also depend
on the action of Congress, other Federal agencies, States, local governments, Tribes, or other non-Federal
entities.
wiauge wiuim a pieuiuieu laic ur vary 10 ail uiie*.pei;ieu uegiee. /\wiicvci
i the action of Congress, other Federal agencies, States, local governments,
itities.
13 OMB Circular A-l 1, (revised 1995), part 2, section 200.12
14 OMB Circular A-l 1 (revised 1995), pan 2, section 200.13
15 Public Law 103-662, section 306(e)
1-15 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Annual Performance Plan
Agencies are required to submit a performance plan to OMB by September 1997. Beginning with fiscal year
1999, the performance plan must be submitted to Congress. The plan must be submitted annually thereafter, and it
must be consistent with the agency's strategic plan.16 The performance plan includes the following:
Performance Goals
Objective, quantifiable, and measurable performance goals should be established that define the level of
performance to be achieved by a program activity. If it is not feasible to express the goals in an objective,
quantifiable, and measurable form, then OMB may authorize an alternate form.
Resources
A brief description of the operational processes, skills and technology, and the human, capital, information, or
other resources required to meet performance goals.
Performance Indicators
Performance indicators to assess the relevant outputs, service levels, and outcomes of each activity.
Verification and Validation
A basis for comparing actual program results with the established performance goals, and a description of the
methodology to be used to verify and validate measured values.17
The development, of the annual performance plan is considered to be an inherently governmental function;
. therefore, it can only be performed by Federal employees.18
Program Performance Reports
Agencies are required to submit the program performance report to the President and Congress no later than
March 31, 2000." The performance report includes:
• The performance indicators in the agency performance plan with a comparison of the program performance
achieved against the performance goal(s) that were set;
• A review of the success in achieving the performance goals;
• An assessment of the performance plan for the current fiscal year relative to the performance achieved in the
preceding fiscal year;
16 Public Law 103-62, section 4(a)(29)
17 Public Law 103-62, section lllS(a)
18 Public Law 103-662, section 1115(e)
19 Public Law 103-62, section 1116(a)
September 27, 1996 1-16
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• An explanation and description where a performance goal was not met, of: (a) why the goal was not met; (b)
plans and schedules for achieving the performance goal; or (c) recommended action if the performance goal is
impractical or infeasible (e.g., current or future funding is inadequate, an unforeseen occurrence impedes
achievement);
• A description of the use and effectiveness of a managerial flexibility waiver in achieving the performance goal.
An indication of any individual or organizational consequences resulting from a failure, after using the
waiver, to maintain the previous level of performance.
A brief explanation of the reasons for suspending or ending prematurely any waiver that was in effect for
the fiscal year;
• The summary of the program evaluations completed during the fiscal year;
• Performance trend data for the three preceding fiscal years. This is phased in (e.g., for FY 2000, FY 1999 data;
for FY 2001, FY 1999 - FY 2000 data; for FY 2002, FY 1999-2001 data; for FY 2003, FY 2000-2002 data);
and
• An acknowledgment of the role, and a description of the contributions made by non-Federal entities in the
preparation of the report.20
Agencies may elect to report on program performance under GPRA, using the annual financial statement required
by the Chief Financial Officer's Act, but the report must be submitted by March 31 of the year following the FY
covered by the report.21 The development of the program performance report is considered to be an inherently
governmental function; therefore, it can only be performed by Federal employees.22
20 Public Law 103-62, section 1116(d)
21 Public Law 103-62, section 1116(e)
22 Public Law 103-662, section 1116(f)
1-17 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 920G.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter II: Program Planning and Reporting Requirements
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter II
Program Planning and Reporting Requirements
Table of Contents
CHAPTER n PROGRAM PLANNING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS II-l
Introduction II-l
Brownfields II-l
Reinventing Site Assessment II-l
Integrated Planning II-l
Introduction to The Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishment Plan (SCAP) II-2
Relationship of SCAP to Other Management Tools II-3
Management Tools II-4
Superfund Information Systems II-5
Overview of The SCAP Process II-5
SCAP Change Control Requirements II-6
HQ/Regional Roles And Responsibilities II-7
Maintaining SCAP in CERCLIS II-7
Program Evaluation II-8
Procedures For Annual Target Setting II-9
Planning For Negotiations II-9
Planning Process II-9
CERCLIS Reports for SCAP Planning/Target Setting 11-12
Regional Accomplishment Reporting 11-13
CERCLIS Reports for Accomplishment Reporting 11-13
HQ Evaluation of Regional Performance II-14
Mid-Year Assessment 11-15
End-of-Year Assessment 11-16
Regional Reviews 11-16
Management Reporting 11-16
Superfund Management Reports 11-17
Annual Reporting Requirements 11-17
SCAP Target And Definition Change Requests 11-18
Maintaining the Targets and Accomplishments File 11-21
Archiving CERCLIS Sites 11-22
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter II
Program Planning and Reporting Requirements
Table of Contents (cont'd)
Progress to Date 11-22
Definition H-23
Information Management H-23
Eligible Sites H-23
Business Process II-24
Returning Sites to CERCLIS II-24
Partial Deletion of NPL Sites 11-25
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter II
Program Planning and Reporting Requirements
List of Exhibits
EXHIBIT II. 1 FLEXIBILITY SCALE FOR BUDGETING/PLANNING II-3
EXHIBIT II.2 HQ/REGIONAL INTEGRATED PLANNING RESPONSIBILITIES .11-4
EXHIBIT II.3 HQ/REGIONAL SCAP AND CERCLIS RESPONSIBILITIES II-7
EXHIBIT II.4 EVALUATION RESPONSIBILITIES II-8
EXHIBIT II.5 PROCEDURES FOR ANNUAL TARGET SETTING II-10
EXHIBIT II.6 REGIONAL PLANNING FOR NEGOTIATIONS 11-11
EXHIBIT II.7 SCAP PLANNING/TARGET SETTING CERCLIS REPORTS II-12
EXHIBIT II.8 PROGRAM EVALUATION CERCLIS REPORTS II-14
EXHIBIT II.9 THE REGIONAL EVALUATION PROCESS 11-15
EXHIBIT 11.10 CFO PERFORMANCE MEASURES II-18
EXHIBIT 11.11 CHANGES AND ADJUSTMENTS 11-19
EXHIBIT 11.12 SCAP TARGET AND DEFINITION CHANGES 11-20
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
CHAPTER II
PROGRAM PLANNING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
INTRODUCTION
The Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR), Office of Site Remediation and Enforcement (OSRE),
the Federal Facilities Enforcement Office (FFEO), and the Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office (FFRRO)
are responsible for program planning and reporting requirements. The Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishment
Plan (SCAP) is the mechanism used by the Superfund program to plan, budget, track, and evaluate progress toward
site cleanup. The SCAP process serves as the foundation upon which changes in direction (e.g., Administrative
Reforms) and the parameters within which the program operates, and will operate in the future, will be reflected.
Planning in the Superfund program is accomplished through the budget, SCAP, and program evaluation processes.
Successful planning requires the reflection and accurate costing of program priorities in the budget and workload
model, and translation of the priorities and resource requirements into specific output commitments in SCAP. Candid
evaluation of performance against these commitments is essential to assess the viability of program priorities, resource
requirements, and overall effectiveness.
BROWNFIELDS
The Brownfields Pilot Program is funded using Superfund money under EPA's CERCLA investigatory authority.
These properties are generally not traditional Superfund sites as they are not highly contaminated and present lesser
health risks. The Brownfields pilot program is intended to provide EPA, States, local governments, and Federally
recognized Indian tribes with useful information and new strategies for promoting a unified approach to environmental
assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment. As such, this program leads to the cleanup of hazardous waste sites but not
in the traditional context. Therefore, a traditional approach such as SCAP cannot capture the true benefits of the
program. To do this, EPA has signed a cooperative agreement with the Institute for Responsible Management (IRM)
to work with the pilots and track their progress. This progress tracking of the Brownfields program will not be done
via the CERCLIS database as all other Superfund progress is reported. IRM will have the responsibility for tracking
and reporting. IRM will review the goals and objectives, measures of success, and progress of each pilot, and develop
a pilot-specific matrix that will.track the progress at each pilot. Through this effort, EPA will capture the progress
at the Brownfields pilots and fulfill the spirit of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) intention for
financial accountability.
REINVENTING SITE ASSESSMENT
As the nature of site assessments change, we need to address new reporting and accountability challenges to
accurately portray the extent of State, federal, and local government site assessment activities. Traditional CERCLIS
site assessments, including integrated assessments, should continue to have accomplishments coded into CERCLIS
on a routine (i.e., quarterly) basis. As Regions provide States flexibility in Cooperative Agreement applications and
work plans by expanding the definition of types of assessment activities to be performed, the States also need to
provide accountability for the activities performed through quarterly or annual reporting of the number of sites
assessed, types or nature of assessments performed, and assessment results. Management systems at the State and
probably Federal level will be needed to provide the accountability necessary and, also, to identify program
accomplishments.
INTEGRATED PLANNING
Integrated planning is the responsibility of HQ and Regional program offices, Regional finance offices, the States,
the Office of Regional Counsel (ORC), and DOJ. Information on planned activities should also be coordinated with
the Natural Resources Trustees and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). To provide
II-1 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
adequate resources for priority actions at Superfund sites, HQ allocates resources within and between response and
enforcement actions. Regions are responsible for providing data on the level of resources needed to accomplish those
priority activities and negotiate commitments consistent with realistic site planning. Regions should not accept targets
that require completion of activities that cannot be funded or staffed within the resources provided. This requires
Regions to reconcile FY 97 targets and their Superfund pipeline with the financial operating plan proposed by HQ.
Flexibility is greatest in the budget planning years. Realistic outyear planning data (milestones and funding needs)
allows HQ to prepare requests for resources based on Regional needs. Exhibit II. 1 summarizes levels of flexibility
as the operating year is entered. Major phases in the decision making continuum include:
• Formulation of the outyear budget occurs 12 to 18 months prior to the FY. Development of the budget includes
identification of major program issues, analysis of program costs, and alignment of resources among competing
priorities. These activities receive resource allocations that are established by the Administrator and the Assistant
Administrator for the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (AA SWER) or the Assistant Administrator
for the Office of Enforcement (AA OECA). These allocations balance the needs of the Superfund program with
the needs of other Agency programs.
• Development of the initial operating plan occurs six months prior to the FYand is finalized before the start of the
FY. The proposed response and enforcement operating plans are developed based on the average amount of
money obligated/tasked by the Region over the past three years. The Federal facility budget is based on Regional
requested needs and an evaluation of prior year expenditures. OSWER and OECA negotiate the final operating
plan based on Regional response to the initial operating plan, the Regional pipeline, past Regional
accomplishments and planned durations/dollars, Regional requests for the budget reserve, and associated SCAP
output commitments. OSWER and OECA provide resources to support the program through the Advice of
Allowance (AOA) and workload process. Regions are expected to work within the annual Regional budgets
established at the start of the year until the mid-year evaluation. Regions have flexibility within the general
budget and AOA structure to shift funds as needed to meet priority activities. (See Chapter III for additional
information on shifting funds.) Once the operating plan is established at the start of the year, additional resources
generally can be shifted to a Region only at the expense of resources from other Regions. However, HQ may
shift funds among the Regions depending on the level of use and need.
• Use of the mid-year evaluation to realign resources in the current FY. Current year resource adjustments focus
on changes needed due to cost and project schedule modifications. Changes may result in shifts within program
areas and among Regions, and revised annual funding levels. Estimates developed in April/May for the upcoming
FY represent the first formal opportunity for changing resources among program areas at a national level. The
revised resource estimates also serve as a "baseline" for examining program needs in the budget year.
Exhibit 11.2 describes the information flow and HQ and Regional responsibilities associated with integrated
planning.
INTRODUCTION TO THE SUPERFUND COMPREHENSIVE ACCOMPLISHMENT
PLAN (SCAP)
The SCAP process is used by the Superfund program to plan, budget, track, and evaluate progress toward
Superfund site cleanup. The SCAP planning process is a dynamic, ongoing effort that has a significant impact on
Superfund resource allocation and program evaluation. Planned obligations and SCAP targets and measures are
generated through SCAP and influence the Superfund budget and evaluation process. SCAP planning is a day-to-day
responsibility of the Regions. An annual process has been established through which HQ and Regions formally
negotiate plans for the future. CERCLIS serves as the conduit for the SCAP process by providing both HQ and
Regions with direct access to the same data. With the implementation of the new CERCLIS system, reports can be
produced allowing for daily interactive updates of planning and site cleanup progress information.
September 27, 1996 II-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT n.l
FLEXIBILITY SCALE FOR BUDGETING/PLANNING
<- Minimum Maximum ~*
Operating Year Budget
(FY 97}
1. Operating Plan Establishes
Funding Ceiling (96/4)
1 . Semi-Annual Targets are Set -
Targets can be Changed Only
through Formal Regional
Administrator Request. Sites can
be Substituted to Meet
Commitments
1 . Pricing Factors are Set - Cannot
Change Pricing on
Events/Activities
1 . Additional Funds can only be
Obtained through Special
Requests
1 . Regions have flexibility within
General Budget and AOA
Structure to Shift Funds to Meet
Priority Activities
1 . Mid- Year SCAP Evaluation Used
to Realign Current Year
Resources
1. Flexibility on Dollars much
Greater than FTEs through Reg.
Reprogramming
1 . Resources for response actions
will be funded based on the
Priority Panel decisions
Planning Year Budget
{FY98)
2. Development of Operating Plan
Begins 6 Months Prior to FY; 90
percent of Operating Plan based
on Prior Years's Obligations
(Begins 97/2)
2. SCAP Targets finalized in
September
2. Pricing Factors can be changed
through Regional/HQ Consensus
2. The Budget is Set but There is
More Leeway to Make
Adjustments based on Proven
Need
2. Regions -Request Funds to Meet
Regional Pipeline Goals and
National Program Priorities
2. Final SCAP Targets Set Final
Resource Levels (97/4)
2. Flexibility on Dollars and FTE
may be Constrained by
President's Budget
2. Candidate sites are identified for
the Priority Panel
Oatyear 8»dgct
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-1C
EXHIBIT H.2
HQ/REGIONAL INTEGRATED PLANNING RESPONSIBILITIES
HQ Responsibilities
Manage projects to integrate Enforcement and Fund
milestones and to ensure schedules and timelines are met
Involve the State, ORC, and finance offices in the planning
process
Provide accurate, complete, and timely project planning
data in CERCLIS
Follow established planning procedures and requirements so
that HQ has a common basis with which to evaluate
Regional proposals (See Chapter III and Volume II
Appendices)
Assess Federal agencies cleanup needs identified as part of
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) A-106
process
Identify multi-media planning and cleanup opportunities
Recognize that missed commitments severely impact
resource availability
Identify potential unused funds and return them to HQ
within reasonable timeframe for redistribution
Establish a combined Fund and Enforcement hierarchy of
program priorities in consultation with the Regions to be
used in negotiations and adjustment of targets
Review integrated operating plans and site commitments
proposed by the Regions prior to negotiations
Coordinate OSWER, OECA, DOJ, Financial Management
Division (FMD), and the Office of Administration and
Resources Management (OARM) activities throughout the
planning process
Work with Regional managers to formulate preliminary
resource requests and determine how resources should be
adjusted to meet program priorities
Communicate with the Regions on changes/additions to
SCAP schedules
Provide funding and FTE levels consistent with each
Region's active pipeline phases, shifting Regional resources
if needed to support priority activities
Develop policy and guidance in response to Congressional
or Agency initiatives
Management Tools
Most of the Superfund program's budget is based on SCAP. The operating year's budget is developed 18 months
prior to its beginning. For example, SCAP data existing in the third quarter of FY 97 will be used to formulate the
FY 99 budget. The site schedules reflected in SCAP serve as the foundation for determining outyear budget priorities,
such as the dollar levels to be requested in the budget and the total level of FTEs to be made available for distribution
through the workload model. Because dollars for Fund-financed RAs, early actions (remedial authority), and RDs
dominate the overall Superfund budget, it is critical that SCAP identify RD, RA, and early actions (remedial authority)
candidates and projected funding needs. Cost estimates for RAs and early actions (remedial authority) should be
derived using the draft FS or ROD estimates. Brownfields budgets are based on decisions during selection of pilot
sites. For pilot purposes, Brownfields are being identified via the Priority Flag in the new CERCLIS system.
Progress tracking of the Brownfields program is being led by IRM with support from individual Regions.
The Superfund budget provides the basis for the Agency Operating Plan. The Operating Plan, which is finalized
prior to the FY, establishes the funds available to the Regions for performing Superfund work. Enforcement operating
plans are adjusted in the first quarter of the FY based on Regional contract carryover.
September 27, 1996
11-4
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-1C
To meet the requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) discussed in Chapter I,
Superftind will be developing its strategic plan and its annual performance plan during FY 97, Included in the annual
performance plan will be objective, quantifiable, measurable performance goals. The goals established for GPRA
will replace/supplement the present SCAP goals and will be reported semi-annually by HQ and the Regions to the
Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation (OPPE). OPPE will track Superfund's progress towards achieving GPRA
goals as part of the overall Agency performance evaluation process. GPRA accomplishments will be tracked through
CERCLIS. Commencing March 30, 2000, an annual performance report will be submitted to Congress discussing
the previous year's program successes and failures in meeting GPRA goals and objectives.
The Superfund workload models distribute FTEs for each program and Region. There are two Superftind
program models: the Hazardous Site and Spill Response model, which distributes resources for the site assessment
and response programs, and the Technical Enforcement model, which distributes enforcement FTEs and extramural
dollars. SCAP plans form the basis of the workload models. In FY 97, each Region's FTEs distribution continue
to be frozen at the FY 90 distribution ratio. While the freeze ensures that the total Regional Superfund resources are
not affected, shifting of resources within the Region among the different program areas to support Agency/Regional
program priorities may occur. This includes shifts between the response and enforcement programs. All shifts will
be based on the national budget (see Chapter III) and program priorities (see Chapter I). [Note: Shifts between
program elements in excess of $500,000 require both HQ and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval.]
FFRRO and FFEO will coordinate with OERR and OSRE throughout the SCAP process. FFRRO and FFEO
will rely on CERCLIS data in planning, budgeting, tracking, and evaluating progress at Superfund Federal facility
sites. In addition to CERCLIS, FFEO and the Regions will utilize information gathered in conjunction with the A-106
Pollution Abatement Planning Process to evaluate the adequacy of other Federal agency budgeting for Superfund sites.
These data will enable FFRRO, FFEO, and the Regions to evaluate actual outlays and accomplishments at Superfund
sites as they relate to budget authorities and obligations. Changes to the A-106 data base, also known as the Federal
Facilities Information System (FFIS), and to the information collection procedures will enable improved planning and
coordination with Federal agencies, and post-funding evaluation of accomplishments. A-106 data will complement
information provided in CERCLIS and will provide FFEO and the Regions with additional insight into Federal agency
planning and cleanup support.
Superfund Information Systems
Effective management of the Superfund program requires the availability of accurate information on Superfund
sites throughout the country. CERCLIS was developed in the mid-1980s as an integrated system to hold national site
assessment, remedial, removal, enforcement, and financial information. To facilitate Regional use of the information
in the centralized CERCLIS data base, a local area network (LAN) version of CERCLIS, called WasteLAN. was
implemented. Beginning in FY 97, Regions will start using the third generation of CERCLIS, CERCLIS 3, to record
Superfund planning and accomplishment information. CERCLIS 3 has been designed to support the evolving business
needs of the Superfund program. (See Appendix E for more information on CERCLIS 3.)
OVERVIEW OF THE SCAP PROCESS
The SCAP process generates data that fulfill the following functions.1
• Tracking of accomplishments against targets/measures;
• Updating planning assumptions (schedules and funds) for the current FY;
• Developing planning data for the upcoming FY; and
* Providing data for ouryear budget planning purposes.
II-5 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The SCAP cycle was revised in FY 93. Instead of a semi-annual, formal update and negotiations process, the
SCAP planning cycle begins in late April/early May and ends with formal negotiations in September. Therefore, it
is essential that SCAP data remain current and up-to-date throughout the year and that accomplishments be reported
as soon as they occur. Site schedules and financial planning information should be reviewed and updated on an
ongoing basis (at a minimum on a monthly basis).
Following is a summary of the revised SCAP cycle:
• Late April/early May - HQ prepares the response and enforcement Regional operating plan based on the past three
years of Regional obligations and tasking averages. The enforcement program will also consider unliquidated
balances in relation to current invoicing rates. The proposed operating plan will be coupled with an analysis of
where each Region is in the Superfund pipeline. HQ will distribute 90 percent of the budget, holding a 10 percent
reserve to negotiate in August. At this time, HQ will also pull data from CERCLIS to determine the number of
active sites and the phase each site is in for the initial run of the workload model.
• Mid-May/late June - Regions should do their site planning using CERCLIS as in years past. The Regions should
focus on their individual pipeline, the overall goals and priorities of the program (See Chapter I), and how they
can achieve their portion of the national effort given proposed resources.
• July- HQ generates each Region's proposed workload and budget, reviews past Regional accomplishments and
planned durations/dollars, and reviews Regional requests for the 10 percent reserve. A preliminary round of
Regional conference calls are conducted to share the HQ analysis with the Regions.
• August - Final negotiations on Regional budgets and targets occur between HQ and the Regions.
• November- Enforcement extramural budget carryover amounts are calculated and the FY Regional enforcement
budget allocation is finalized. Regions revise their final negotiated targets based on commitments that were not
met the previous year.
Regions are required to manage their funds and operate within the annual budgets established. Non-RA funds within
the Region's budget must be reprogrammed to meet unexpected needs.
SCAP CHANGE CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
Stability in the SCAP process through the year is essential to the success of SCAP planning and accomplishment
reporting/evaluation procedures. The following procedures are used to control changes to items in SCAP:
* Changes (including additions or deletions) to SCAP targets, measures, definitions, methodologies, planning
processes, accomplishment reporting, financial management, or any other process described in this Manual must
be presented by the Office Director for the program office proposing the change, and receive the
comments/concurrence of OSRE, OERR, FFRRO, and OFFE;
• All proposed changes must be sent to the Regions and all other program offices for review and comment prior
to implementation; and
• The decision on whether to proceed with the proposed change must be documented in writing. Copies of all final
decisions should be provided to all program offices and Regions. If the proposed change will be implemented,
an addendum to the Superfund Program Implementation Manual may be issued.
September 27, 1996 II-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
HQ/REGIONAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Maintaining SCAP in CERCLIS
Exhibit H.3 describes the HQ/Regional responsibilities for maintaining SCAP data in CERCLIS,
The Information Management Coordinator (IMC) is a senior position which serves as Regional lead for all
Superfund program and CERCLIS systems management activities. The following lead responsibilities for Regional
program planning and management rest with the IMC:
• Coordinate SCAP planning, development, and reporting;
• Ensure Regional accomplishments are completely and accurately reflected into CERCLIS;
• Ensure nationally established CERCLIS core data requirements are met and the data are complete, accurate, and
up-to-date;
• Reconcile Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS) and Enforcement Support Services Work Assignment
Tracking System (ESSWATS) data with CERCLIS financial data;
• Provide liaison to HQ on SCAP and program evaluation issues;
• Coordinate Regional evaluations by HQ; and
• Ensure that the quality of CERCLIS data is such that accomplishments and planning data can be accurately
retrieved from the system.
EXHIBIT H.3
HQ/REGIONAL SCAP AND CERCLIS RESPONSIBILITIES
iliiiiii
Planning and scheduling all events and enforcement
activities from site assessment and PRP search through NPL
deletion
Keeping SCAP planning data current in CERCLIS,
including updating site schedules established at the ESI/RI
stage and cost estimates for long-term action and early
action (remedial authority) when better planning data
become available
Updating site back-up in the Targets and Accomplishments
data file to reflect adjustments to SCAP throughout the year
Reporting accomplishments in CERCLIS as they occur
For Regions still in the CERCLIS 2 environment, uploading
WasteLAN data to CERCLIS on a regular basis
Entering and maintaining quarterly planning, budget, and
accomplishment reporting for non-site specific activities
Preparing SCAP amendments and change requests
Tracking and maintaining the enforcement extramural
budget and the Federal facilities budget
Entering/negotiating final SCAP targets and measures
Updating the numbers and site back-up in the Targets and
Accomplishments data file to reflect approved amendments
to the SCAP throughout the year
Entering preliminary and final budget data into the Budget
Control (BC)/AOA component of CERCLIS
Determining the AOA based on SCAP planned activities in
CERCLIS
Entering and maintaining AOA data in the BC/AOA
component of CERCLIS
Responding to Regional requests for changes in plan
through the amendment/change requests process
Utilizing CERCLIS to obtain SCAP, budget and other
Superfund site information to respond to special requests for
information and planning data
Communicating with Regions and HQ offices regarding
changes in budget, SCAP process, SPIM, and other SPFD
program guidance that will impact CERCLIS, and
subsequently implementing these changes in CERCLIS
II-7
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Program Evaluation
HQ and the Regions have different roles and responsibilities in Superfund program evaluation and management, as
shown in Exhibit II.4.
EXHIBIT D.4
EVALUATION RESPONSIBILITIES
Regional ResponsibJJittes
Meet quarterly/semi-annual SCAP targets and solve
performance problems when they arise
Provide quarterly SCAP data to HQ through CERCLIS
Maintain CERCLIS data quality at high levels for Superfund
program and project management
Negotiate performance standards that provide individual
accountability for targets
Assess Federal agency needs identified during the OMB A-
106 process
Participate in the Regional reviews
Provide guidance to the Regions for the quarterly reporting,
the mid-year assessment, the year-end assessment, and
Regional reviews
Implement and report on follow-up action items from the
Superfund quarterly and/or mid-year assessment and
Regional reviews
Review performance data reported by the Regions and assist
Regions having difficulties in meeting targets
Conduct Regional reviews
Continually assess program performance and analyze
timeliness and quality of work
Recommend resource reallocation based on Regional needs
and performance
Assure that all staff are informed of results of performance
reporting
Compare Federal agency budget authorities, obligations,
and outlays to monitor cleanup activities
The Superfund evaluation process provides managers with an opportunity to meet program objectives by:
• Examining program accomplishments;
• Analyzing and discussing issues that affect the successful operation of the Superfund program; and
• Initiating changes in program operations or reallocating/redirecting resources.
The strategy for assessing the performance of the Superfund program is comprised of the following:
• Establishing semi-annuaJ and annual targets and planning measures;
• Quarterly reporting of response and enforcement SCAP accomplishments based on CERCLIS data;
• Semi-annual reporting of response internal measures and Federal facility SCAP accomplishments based on
CERCLIS data;
• Quarterly evaluation of enforcement SCAP accomplishments against internal measures;
September 27, 1996
II-8
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• Semi-annual performance evaluation; and
• Regional reviews.
This strategy enables management to recognize high performance, concentrate Superfund resources in those
Regions that demonstrate success, and provide training and technical assistance to those Regions that are experiencing
difficulties.
In addition to the program management and assessment tools traditionally used by OSWER, FFEO will also be
utilizing the A-106 Pollution Abatement Planning Process to ensure sufficient Federal agency funding of response
programs. Modifications to the A-106 process have been made to provide FFEO, Regions, OMB, other Federal
agencies, and Congress with improved information to evaluate accomplishments at Federal facilities.
PROCEDURES FOR ANNUAL TARGET SETTING
The process for developing SCAP targets/measures for a FY begins with the SCAP developed during the third
quarter of the previous FY, as shown in Exhibit II.5. All targets/measures are established in September only after
negotiations between OERR, OSRE, FFRRO, FFEO, and the Regions. In the Regions, a joint review of commitments
should be undertaken by die program office and ORC. The dates for pulling CERCLIS data that will be used in
developing the proposed Regional operating plan, generating the Regional workload and budget, and negotiations can
be found in the Manager's Schedule of Significant Events presented at the beginning of this Manual,
The Region's focus in preparing for negotiations should be on its individual pipeline (i.e., more site assessments
or more construction completion oriented), the overall goals and priorities of the program, and how it can achieve
its portion of the national effort given proposed resources. HQ compares Regional plans with program goals and
resource allocations. In addition, HQ reviews past Regional accomplishments and planned durations/dollars to ensure
that the Region is planning the appropriate amount of work given the dollars it is requesting. This provides HQ with
a benchmark going into negotiations on what the Region should be able to accomplish based on its unique pipeline
status.
PLANNING FOR NEGOTIATIONS
Regions are required to keep the SCAP data in CERCLIS up-to-date and accurate. Changes in planning
information (schedules and funds) should be entered into CERCLIS within five days after the Remedial Project
Manager (RPM)/On-Scene Coordinator (OSC)/Site Assessment Manager (SAM) are aware of the need for the change.
If changes affect a SCAP target or measure or the approved funding level for a site, the Planning Status and Funding
Priority Status fields in CERCLIS must also be updated.
Planning Process
Exhibit II.6 outlines the steps a Region must go through to prepare for negotiations.
As a final check to ensure that SCAP data are up-to-date, Regions should generate CERCLIS SCAP and Audit
reports routinely, especially those Regions that have delegated responsibility for entering information into the
CERCLIS data base to RPMs, OSCs, and SAMs. At an absolute minimum, reports should be generated prior to HQ
development of the proposed operating plan and in late June for internal review of the planning data in CERCLIS.
These planning data should reflect any adjustments or approved amendments made to the annual plan.
II-9 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
As designated, HQ pulls SCAP reports from CERCLIS, The data in these reports serve as the basis for
HQ/Regional final negotiations. HQ will perform all negotiations based on the information in CERCLIS on these pull
dates. To ensure consistency in the negotiation phase, the CERCLIS data bases are frozen prior to pulling the reports
used for negotiations. As a result, all parties (HQ and the Regions) will have identical data for use during the
negotiation process.
CERCLIS data quality problems that affect the SCAP update shall be resolved prior to negotiations. These
problems are to be resolved on a Region-specific basis through telephone calls between HQ and the IMC or program
manager.
EXHIBIT O.S
PROCEDURES FOR ANNUAL TARGET SETTING
•; ':'j '. \:^|;:|Sflip|i|;illi
April/May
May /June
July
August/September
November
l^iphi^iii^i^^P^p^B^^^E^^^^^^::
Consult with States and ORC on FY 98 activities
Update site schedules and funding needs based
on plan, Regional pipeline, and national goals
and priorities
Participate in HQ conference calls on analysis of
Regional plan
* Negotiate final targets/measures and budget
• Enter schedule or target changes that result
from the negotiations into CERCLIS
Revise negotiated targets during open season
based on commitments missed in the prior year
if^l^'i^^pl^p^^i^iilfe^iKflPMfS
• Prepare program and enforcement Regional
operating plan based on past three years
average Regional obligations/tasking
• Analyze Regional pipelines
• Allocate 90 percent of FY budget to
Regions (proposed operating plan)
* Distribute official "call memo" for
upcoming negotiations planning
* Review Regional SCAP and pipeline
workload and budget
• Review past Regional accomplishments and
planned durations/dollars
• Review Regional requests for 10 percent
budget reserve
• Conduct Regional conference calls on the
results of the analyses
• Distribute draft SPIM for review and
comment
• Negotiate final targets/measures and budget
* Enter final commitments and site specific
back-up into CERCLIS
• Send targets/measures and Regional
budgets to AAs for approval
« Revise Regional Enforcement operating
plans
September 27, 1996
11-10
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT D.6
REGIONAL PLANNING FOR NEGOTIATIONS
iiiaiiiii
May/June
Identify response, enforcement, and Federal Facility
projects as "Primary" (P) or "Alternate" (A) in the
Activity/Event Planning Status field (C1725/C2110),
« Primary projects have the greatest likelihood of
meeting schedules and are used to determine
SCAP commitment,
• Alternates are projects that can be substituted for
primary targets that slip or are deferred.
EMCs and Regional management can identify actions
as "Primary" or "Alternate" in the Planning Status
field on the Regional Planning screen. The Planning
Status field assists in identifying actions with the
greatest likelihood of meeting scheduled start and
completion dates. However, this designation is
specific to an action (e.g., RA) and is not sufficient
when the start of the RA is a primary candidate to
achieve the target/measure for RA Starts and the
completion of the RA is an alternate to achieve
credit for the RA Completion target/measure. An
indicator field has been added that is specific to each
target/measure. Primary candidates for a
target/measure can be selected and identified by
checking the target icon box on the Regional
Planning screen.
» Primary projects have the greatest likelihood of
meeting schedules and are used to determine
SCAP commitments.
« Alternates are projects that can be substituted for
primary targets that slip or are deferred.
July/August
Identify events/activities requiring funding by
placing "Approved" (APR) in the Funding Priority
Status Field (C2625/C3225). The total of all
approved funding must not exceed the proposed
operating plan.
* Only "Primary" targets/measures should have an
"Approved" funding status.
• Projects the Region would like to conduct with
the 10 percent budget reserve should have a
Funding Priority Status of "Alternate" (ALT).
• Projects may also be identified with a Funding
Priority Status of "CON" (planned contingency
funds), indicating projects that have a medium or
high potential for the PRP to assume lead
responsibility. The funds for the event/activity
that has the greatest likelihood of proceeding
would be coded as "APR;" the funds for the
event/activity that has the least likelihood of
proceeding would be coded as "CON."
Identify actions requiring funding by placing
"Approved" in the Priority field. (EMCs gain access
to the Priority field through the Budget/AOA screen
in the Program Management view or the Site
Financial screen in the Cost/Financial view.
SAMs/OSCs/RPMs must access the Priority field
through the Site Financial screen in the Project
Management view.) The total of all approved
funding must not exceed the proposed operating
plan.
• Only "Primary" targets/measures should have an
"Approved" funding status.
• Projects the Region would like to conduct with
the 10 percent budget reserve should have a
Priority status of "Alternate."
» Projects may also be identified with a Priority
status of "Contingency Funding Planned,"
indicating projects that have a medium or high
potential for the PRP to assume lead
responsibility. The funds for the actions that has
the greatest likelihood of proceeding would be
coded as "Approved;" the funds for the action
that has the least likelihood of proceeding would
be coded as "Contingency Funding Planned."
II-11
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
CERCLIS Reports for SCAP Planning/Target Setting
Exhibit II.7 presents the CERCLIS reports used by HQ and the Regions in the development and negotiation of
Regional targets/measures. Following is a description of these reports:
• The Site Summary Report (SCAP-02) is used by EPA to display enforcement sensitive CERCLIS data for NPL
and non-NPL sites. SCAP-11 and SCAP-12 are Site Summary Reports used to generate external or public NPL
and Non-NPL Site Summary reports.
• The SCAP Response Financial Report (SCAP-04R), Federal Facility Financial Summary (SCAP-04F), and
Enforcement Financial Summary (SCAP-04E) aggregate dollars by program area and provide both site-specific
and non-site specific backup from CERCLIS. These reports should be used to compare the funding requests with
the Regional budgets. Regions are prompted for "APR," "ALT," "CON," and "TOTAL."
• The OPA Measures Report (SCAP-08) is used by EPA for tracking estimates and accomplishments for reporting
progress made toward achieving program goals under the Oil Pollution Act (OPA).
• The Site Assessment Report (SCAP-13) is used by EPA for reporting estimates, plans, and accomplishments for
SCAP measures. The information provided by this report is used in conjunction with the SCAP-14 and SCAP-18
reports to encompass the entire range of SCAP measures.
• The Superfund Accomplishments Report (SCAP-14) is used by EPA to track both event information reflecting
targeting, planning, and accomplishment actions and SACM goals.
• The Response Budget Control Report (SCAP-21) and Financial Report for Enforcement (SCAP-21E) are similar
to the SCAP-04R and SCAP-04E. They are used by the Regions to track and balance their fiscal year budgets
and by HQ to issue the quarterly Advice Of Allowance (AOA). The report calculates the difference between the
Regions current planned budget and its negotiated budget for each line item category. The report also calculates
the AOA against the amount of funds actually obligated (including open commitments).
* The SOL Management Report (ENFR-17) identifies planned and actual completion dates and obligations for
response activities.
* The Cost Recovery Category Report (ENFR-46) is used to negotiate cost recovery targets and track cost recovery
actions at sites. It divides sites into a number of categories based on SOL considerations and planned or actual
cost recovery enforcement activity.
EXHIBIT H.7
SCAP PLANNING/TARGET SETTING CERCLIS REPORTS
SCAP-2:
SCAP-4E:
SCAP-4F:
SCAP-4R:
SCAP-08:
SCAP-13:
SCAP-14
SCAP-21
SCAP-21E:
ENFR-17:
ENFR-46:
Site Summary Report
Enforcement Financial Summary
Federal Facility Financial Summary
SCAP Response Financial Report
OPA Measures Report
Site Assessment Report
The Superfund Accomplishments Report
Response Budget Control Report
Financial Report for Enforcement
SOL Management Report
Cost Recovery Category Report
September 27, 1996
II-12
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
REGIONAL ACCOMPLISHMENT REPORTING
Accomplishments data are entered into CERCLIS by the IMC, RPM, OSC, SAM, or other designated program
staff (i.e., PRP search, cost recovery) or are recorded on other Regional data entry forms, and entered into CERCLIS
by the IMC or designee. Data on accomplishments should be entered into CERCLIS within five working days of the
action occurring. Only accomplishments correctly reported in CERCLIS will be recognized by HQ. If a Region feels
that it has correctly recorded an accomplishment that is not showing in the Superfund Accomplishments Report
(SCAP-14) or Site Assessment Report (SCAP-13), please contact the appropriate HQ office.
Regions should perform data quality checks and make adjustments to CERCLIS if the data base does not reflect
actual accomplishments. In any event, Regions need to be sure the information reflected in CERCLIS is up-to-date
and accurate.
On the fifth working day of each month, HQ will pull data from CERCLIS on a selected number of key indicators
of progress in the Superfund program (e.g., construction completions, early action completions, site characterization
starts, negotiations, RODs, on-site construction starts, response settlements and referrals, cost recovery
actions/decisions). These numbers will be the official numbers used in any reports of progress given to the
Administrator, the AA SWER, the AA OECA, Congress, and the news media.
On the fifth working day of each quarter, HQ pulls SCAP reports from CERCLIS. Preliminary end of the year
accomplishments will be pulled on the fifth working day of September; it is the starting point for preparing for the
end of the year assessment in November. Since many senior managers and Congress request final accomplishments
immediately following the end of the year, CERCLIS accomplishment reports will be pulled on the fifth and the tenth
working days of October and reported in late October to mid-November (see Manager's Schedule of Significant Events
at the beginning of this Manual for specific dates). This allows the Regions ample opportunity to review end-of-year
financial data, ensure that all accomplishments are accurately reflected in CERCLIS, and determine which
commitments were not met.
CERCLIS Reports for Accomplishment Reporting
Exhibit II.8 presents the CERCLIS reports HQ uses to evaluate Regional accomplishments. All are used for
reporting and crediting accomplishments for SCAP targets and internal reporting measures. Following is a description
of these reports:
• The SCAP Response Financial Report (SCAP-Q4R), Federal Facility Financial Summary (SCAP-04F), and
Enforcement Financial Summary (SCAP-04E) aggregate dollars by program area and provide both site-specific
and non-site specific backup from CERCLIS. These reports should be used to compare the funding requests
contained in CERCLIS to the Regional budgets. Regions are prompted for "APR," "ALT," "CON," and
"TOTAL."
• The Site Assessment Report (SCAP-13) is used by EPA for reporting estimates, plans, and accomplishments for
SCAP measures. The Superfund Accomplishments Report (SCAP-14) is used by EPA to track both event
information reflecting targeting, planning, and accomplishment actions and SACM goals.
• Settlements Master Report (ENFR-3) - This report lists all settlements to date. Data are divided by settlement
category and summarized by FY, Region, and remedy.
• Litigation Master Report (ENFR-6) - This report lists all litigation cases to date. Data are divided by litigation
type and summarized by FY and Region.
• Administrative/Unilateral Orders Issued (ENFR-25) - This report lists AOs and UAOs that have been issued.
H-13 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Cost Recovery Category Report (ENFR-46) - This report lists all completed removals, RA starts, and certain pre-
RA activities that are candidates for cost recovery. Sites/projects are divided into one of four universes and seven
categories of cost recovery response.
Measures of Success Report (ENFR-62) - This report is intended to allow Regions to report progress on newly
developed measures of success relating to enforcement fairness and trust fund stewardship.
Environmental Indicators Report (ENVI-01) - This report provides EPA Regional management with a tool to
easily monitor environmental indicators (El) data.
Under Section 116(e) of SARA, EPA was required to initiate continuous and substantial remedial action at 200
new NPL facilities during the period of October 18, 1989 through October 17, 1991. EPA acknowledged that
the mandate goal could not be achieved. HQ is tracking the progress being made toward meeting the SARA
mandate. Information on RA start accomplishments will be pulled from the RA on-site construction data field,
per OSWER Directive 9355, O-24A, dated December 22, 1992. This data is captured in the SCAP-14 Report.
EXHIBIT n.8
PROGRAM EVALUATION CERCLIS REPORTS
SCAP-4E:
SCAP-4F:
SCAP-4R:
SCAP-13
SCAP-14:
ENFR-3:
ENFR-6:
ENFR-25:
ENFR-46:
ENFR-62:
ENVI-01:
Enforcement Financial Summary
Federal Facility Financial Summary
SCAP Response Financial Report
Site Assessment Report
Superfund Accomplishments Report
Settlements Master Report
Litigation Master Report
Administrative/Unilateral Orders Issued
Cost Recovery Category Report
Measures of Success
Environmental Indicators
HQ EVALUATION OF REGIONAL PERFORMANCE
Accomplishment data for SCAP are pulled from CERCLIS at the close of business of the fifth working day of
the quarter; therefore, it is necessary that the Regions update their accomplishments quarterly prior to the fifth
working day pull date. HQ management tracks and bases its evaluation of Regional program performance on
these data. The data are pulled on a selected number of key indicators of progress in the Superfund program (e.g.,
construction completions, early action completions, site characterization starts, response settlements and referrals,
RODs, on-site construction starts, and cost recovery activities). These numbers are the official numbers used in any
reports of progress given to the Administrator, Deputy Administrator (DA), AAs, Congress, and the media. Detailed
HQ management evaluation occurs at two points during the FY: after the second quarter (mid-year assessment) and
after the fourth quarter (end-of-year assessment). (See Exhibit II.9.) In addition, HQ will be conducting Regional
reviews in FY 97.
September 27, 1996
II-14
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT O.9
THE REGIONAL EVALUATION PROCESS
1st Quarter
* PullCERCLIS
Reports on SCAP
Accomplishments
— *
2nd Quarter
Mid-Year
Assessment
* PullCERCLIS
Reports on SCAP
Accomplishments
and Internal
Measures
* Develop Senior
Management
Reports Package
* Evaluate
Program Status
* Distribute
Deputy
Administrator
(DA) Memo
* Brief Senior
Management
_>
3rd Quarter
* Pull CERCLIS
Reports on SCAP
Accomplishments
* Report on
Progress of
Regions Having
Difficulties
Meeting Targets
4th Quarter
End-of-Year
Assessment
* Pull CERCLIS
Reports on SCAP
Accomplishments
and Internal
Measures
* Develop Senior
Management
Reports Package
* Evaluate
Program Status
* Evaluate Annual
Performance and
Produce National
Progress Report
* Provide Input
Into Next FY
Resource
Allocation
Process
* Distribute DA
Memo
* Brief Senior
Management
Mid-Year Assessment
The purpose of the mid-year assessment is to:
• Track Regional progress toward accomplishing SCAP targets;
• Evaluate Regional accomplishments against internal planning and reporting measures;
* Identify and assess problems impacting performance;
• Work with Regions experiencing difficulty in meeting their targets;
H-15
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
« Provide both HQ and the Regions with an opportunity to assess performance;
* Consider the impact of Regional program performance on the Superfund pipeline; and
• Identify trends in program performance and adjust program management strategies accordingly.
On the fifth working day of April, second quarter SCAP data are pulled from CERCLIS. Prior to the mid-year
SCAP briefing (the second week in May), OERR, FFEO, and OSRE Directors have briefed the AA SWER on the
steps being taken to ensure the accomplishment of annual targets. To ensure that these actions are implemented, HQ
will track follow-up items and reallocate resources. The results of the mid-year assessment can result in increases
or decreases to third or fourth quarter AOAs. The measure of a Region's ability to meet their targets will be
considered in August when final FY 98 SCAP commitments and Regional budgets are established.
End-of-Year Assessment
Before the end of the fourth quarter, there is a preliminary pull for end-of-year accomplishments (the first week
of September). This pull is used to project end-of-year accomplishments. It is important to stress that this is only
a projection and that the actual pulls, on the fifth and tenth working days of October, are likely to be somewhat
different than the projected numbers. Since many Superfund managers and Congress request final accomplishments
immediately, Regions should make every attempt to update CERCLIS at the earliest possible date and, in no event,
any later than the fifth working day after the end of the year.
In November, HQ conducts the official end-of-year assessment. This assessment is an integrated analysis of
program performance activities for the year. The purpose of the end-of-year assessment is to emphasize pipeline
issues (e.g., slipped targets and their impact on commitments for the next year). The end-of-year review also notes
progress toward implementing strategies identified in the mid-year assessment, and identifies Regions that might
require additional assistance as the new FY begins.
HQ considers the end-of-year assessment in developing the final SCAP target and measures. In this way, the
results of the end-of-year assessment have a double impact.
Regional Reviews
Before the beginning of the FY, the program offices and Regions identify key program areas and issues in the
strategic plans or individual program management guidance. Those issues that HQ program managers believe to be
important to the general success of the program's mission are selected for discussion during the Regional reviews.
Management Reporting
Periodically, reports are pulled from CERCLIS that provide national information on Superfund planning and
progress. These reports must be consistent with the SCAP data. It is essential that end-of-month CERCLIS data be
up-to-date as of the close of business on the fifth working day of the following month. (Specific dates are listed in
the Manager's Schedule of Significant Events found at the beginning of this Manual.) This is the day that data will
be pulled from CERCLIS. It is strongly recommended that planning and accomplishment data be entered into
CERCLIS as events, activities, and slippage occur.
September 27, 1996 11-16
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The following sections provide a brief description of the reports available to support Superfund program
management.
Superfund Management Reports
The implementation of an integrated CERCLIS data base and the improvement of CERCLIS data quality led to
the development of a series of senior management reports. These management tools are designed to supplement
conventional quarterly SCAP accomplishment reporting by providing a more comprehensive examination of
program activity. The format and content of the reports package has evolved over time to address a variety of
project needs. Using data that is downloaded from CERCLIS, the INSITE II system provides EPA senior
managers with summary graphic reports and backup site detail information.
The FY 97 packages provide graphical representations of the status of SCAP targets and accomplishments, as well
as analytic summaries of key aspects of the program including: status and duration of events; trend analysis of
PRP involvement; cost recovery candidates; and the current status of negotiations, settlements, and litigation.
The reports, produced semi-annually, illustrate the progress being made by the Agency in both the movement of
projects through the Superfund pipeline and in the trend toward increased involvement by PRPs. The semi-annual
packages produced by OERR are divided into three distinct sections:
• Report I: SCAP Estimates and Accomplishments - This section graphically displays specific SCAP program
targets and accomplishments by Region, the percent of annual targets achieved in the major response and
enforcement program areas, and annual target and accomplishment totals by SCAP activity for each Region.
* Report II: Trends Analysis - These graphs present the duration analyses of pipeline events, including RI/FS,
RD, and RA durations, durations from proposed to final listing, and proposed listing to first RI/FS start, first
RD start, and first RA start, for both fund and enforcement. Users can request that the duration reports be
run for a given FY or Region.
« Report III: Superfund Historical Performance - These reports provide graphical presentations of progress
made at NPL and non-NPL sites. Various information, including site, enforcement, budget, and project data.
are used to present an overall picture of the Superfund program activities.
Additional management reports produced by OSRE include:
* SOL Management Report (ENFR-I7) - This report lists all planned and actual completion dates for removals.
site assessments, and remedial activities by FY quarter. Planned and actual obligations for each activity are
linked with cost recovery actions.
« Negotiation Master Report (ENFR-59) - This report lists all negotiations to-date. Data are divided by
negotiation category and summarized by FY, Region, milestones, completed negotiations, and ongoing
negotiations.
Annual Reporting Requirements
The Chief Financial Officer's (CFO) Act of 1990 requires all agencies with a trust fund program to submii, in
addition to an annual financial statement, a report on program performance measures. Agencies have been
directed to establish long-term goals and develop measures that are understandable to the general public. HQ
relies heavily on SCAP data to develop and report on these measures. The FY 97 measures are presented in
Exhibit 11.10.
II-17 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SCAP TARGET AND DEFINITION CHANGE REQUESTS
After targets have been finalized and funding levels developed, the SCAP process provides the flexibility to
modify plans during the year. Modifications to planned targets are termed SCAP target and definition change
requests. Regional requests for target changes must be provided in writing to the appropriate HQ office.
Target changes require HQ concurrence and approval. Target changes do not require HQ approval, but
may require HQ notification. Any exceptions to the SCAP accomplishment definitions contained in the
Appendices to this Manual are considered target definition changes.
These exceptions will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Regions should note that changes made in
CERCLIS to site schedules and other planning data will not automatically result in changes to SCAP targets.
EXHIBIT n.10
CFO PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Number of sites on the NPL where the first cleanup investigation has started compared to the total number
of sites on the NPL
Number of non-NPL sites with hazardous releases where EPA has begun a cleanup action
Number of sites on the NPL where a decision has been made about how to proceed with the cleanup of at
least a significant portion of the site compared to the total number of sites on the NPL
Number of sites on the NPL where remedial action has been completed for at least a significant portion of
the site compared to the total number of sites on the NPL
Number of sites on the NPL where cleanup construction is completed compared to the total number of sites
on the NPL
Number of enforcement actions taken at NPL sites to have potentially responsible parties (PRPs) conduct
or participate in response activities compared to the total number of sites on the NPL, and the percentage
and estimated value of PRP commitments for response activities at non-Federal facilities sites on the NPL
The total value of cost recovery settlements and judicial actions achieved and past costs considered
recoverable
The amount of money EPA has collected from PRPs compared to the total amount achieved in cost
recovery settlements and judicial actions
The estimated amount of money PRPs have committed legally to site cleanup compared to the total amount
of funds obligated by the Superfund enforcement program
The number of de minimis settlements, potential value of these settlements, and the estimated number of
settlors
Target or definition changes that modify the Region's ADA require a change request. In these situations, the
change request becomes the SCAP "amendment." Chapter III outlines the change request procedures. Exhibit II. 11
lists the major types of Superfund changes and adjustments. Exhibit 11.12 describes the procedures that must be
followed when processing these changes.
SCAP target changes should contain the following information:
* Site name and Site/Spill Identification number (S/S ID);
* Event/activity affected;
September 27, 1996 II-18
-------
EXHIBIT 11.11
CHANGES AND ADJUSTMENTS
V)
n
12
&
I
Cl!
*-!
to
Situation
Increase Annual Budget
Decrease Annual Budget
Increase Total (OSRE and FARM) AOA After Issuance
Within Annual Budget
Decrease Total (OSRE and FARM) AOA After Issuance
Increase/Decrease RA or Early Action (Remedial Authority)
Funding Before AOA Issued
Decrease RA or Early Action (Remedial Authority)
Funding After AOA Issued
Increase RA or Early Action (Remedial Authority)
Funding After AOA Issued
Shift Funds Within Allowance After AOA Issued
Shift Funds Between Allowances After AOA Issued
Change Annual SCAP Target
Target Site Substitutions
Definition Exceptions
Change or
Adjustment
Change
Adjustment
Change
Adjustment
Adjustment
Adjustment
Change
Adjustment
Adjustment
Change
Adjustment
Change
Change Request
Required
Yes, if
Approved
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Procedures
See Exhibit 0.12 or Chapter HI, Exhibit III.4
Revise CERCLIS; Notify HQ FARM Staff, or
OSRE/OECA or OFFE or FFRRO
See Exhibit 11.12 or Chapter III, Exhibit III.4
See Chapter III, Exhibit III.4
Revise CERCLIS
See Chapter III, Exhibit III.4
See Exhibit 0.12 or Chapter III, Exhibit III.4
Revise CERCLIS
See Chapter III, Exhibit III.4
See Exhibit II. 12
Revise CERCLIS
See Exhibit II. 12
o
GO
70
q
3
a
IS
o
o
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT n. 12
SCAP TARGET AND DEFINITION CHANGES
TARGET AND DEFINITION CHANGES
E-mail from Regional
Branch Chief to HQ
Director FARM or Director
PPED, or Director FFRRO
or FFEO explaining
reason for change
Director FARM or Director
PPED, or Director FFRRO or
FFEO approves/disapproves
amendment request
Region is notified of
outcome
E-mail from Regional Branch
Chief to Director FARM, or
Chief PECB, or Director
FFRRO or FFEO.
Copy sent to the Regional
finance office and HQ,
FARM, PPED, FFRRO
or FFEO staff
AA SWER or Director OSRE,
or Director FFRRO reviews
request and, if approved,
sends E-mail to Regional
program and finance offices
and HQ Office of the
Comptroller (OC)
Regional finance office
updates IFMS
HQ OC approves revised
AOA in IFMS
SCAP Target
or Definition Exceptions
Increase Total AOA
or Increase Funding of
RAs/Early Actions Remedial
Authority After
AOA Issued
E-mail from IMC to HQ,
FARM, PECB, FFRRO,
or FFEO staff. Copy sent to
AA SWER or Director
FFRRO and Regional
finance office
AA SWER or Director OSRE,
or Director FFRRO approves
SCAP amendment/change
request and sends E-mail
to Regional program and
finance offices and HQ OC
Regional finance office
updates IFMS
HQ OC approves revised
AOA in IFMS
September 27, 1996
11-20
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
» Justification/purpose;
* Funding amount (if the request is an increase in the annual budget or is a change request);
• Allowance that is being increased and/or allowance that is being decreased, if it is a change request; and
• Program element (GBX-enforcement, FAX-response, and YPX-Federal facilities), if it is also a change request.
The Planning, Analysis, and Resource Management (PARM) coordinates these requests for the program office
in OERR. PARM, the Policy and Program Evaluation Division (PPED) of the Office of Site Remediation (OSRE)
in OECA, Federal Facilities Enforcement Office (Federal facilities enforcement related issues), and FFRRO (Federal
facilities non-enforcement related issues) provide input on SCAP change approval decisions.
Although Regions have the flexibility to alter plans, they are still accountable for meeting the targets negotiated
at the beginning of the FY. Changes to SCAP commitments should not be made simply because targets will not be
met. However, in some cases, changes to targets may be necessary and may be revised under the following
conditions:
• Major, unforeseen contingencies arise that alter established priorities (i.e., Congressional action, natural
disasters);
• Major contingencies arise to alter established Regional commitments (i.e., State legislative action);
• Measure or definition in system is creating an unanticipated negative impact;
• Major shifts in project approach associated with SACM and the need to conduct early response actions; or
• Need to address newly identified site which represents a significant human health or ecological risk.
OSWER and OECA require that all SCAP target and definition changes be submitted to HQ by April 15. SCAP
target changes must be approved by the Directors of PARM, FFEO, FFRRO, and the chief of PPED.
AH changes should be recorded in CERCLIS as an "approved" action after the Region issues the change request
or memorandum to OERR, OSRE, FFEO, or FFRRO. Regions should not initiate any obligations against change
requests until the HQ Office of the Comptroller (OC) and the Directors of the appropriate office approve the revised
AOA in IFMS. The site back-up in CERCLIS should be revised by the Region if the change is approved. If the
change is not approved, HQ will notify the Region and the "approved" record in CERCLIS will have to be revised.
Maintaining the Targets and Accomplishments File
HQ is responsible for entering the preliminary and final negotiated SCAP targets in the Targets and
Accomplishments file in CERCLIS. During the FY, HQ will also be responsible for changing the targets if
amendments are approved. Regions are responsible for updating the Targets and Accomplishments file to reflect
SCAP adjustments. The Appendices to this Manual contain tables that show which targets and measures require site
specific backup in CERCLIS.
Following are guidelines for Regional maintenance of the Targets and Accomplishments file.
• Regions are allowed to add to or delete sites from the Targets and Accomplishments file only in the case of site
substitutions. However, the site specific CERCLIS records should be updated at the time a SCAP amendment
is requested.
11-21 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-1C
• The number of approved sites named in the Targets and Accomplishments file must be at least equal to the
numerical target. If a Region has a target of eight long-term action starts, for example, eight approved sites must
be named in the Targets and Accomplishments site back-up.
» If "To Be Determined" (TBD) sites are used instead of real sites in the Targets and Accomplishments file, there
must be enough candidate sites in CERCLIS that can be used to replace the TBD sites as soon as possible. TBDs
are not allowed for site assessment activities.
• Regions must ensure that a site and its associated actions that are planned site-specifically be recorded in
CERCLIS before they are recorded in the CERCLIS Targets and Accomplishments file.
• It is the Region's responsibility to keep the list of sites that support the targets up-to-date and current. Regional
SCAP adjustments must be reflected in CERCLIS. This includes site substitutions and changes in schedules that
do not affect SCAP targets.
ARCHIVING CERCLIS SITES
Of the 40,500 sites that have come to the attention of the Federal Superfund program, less than five percent have
been listed on the final NPL. Most sites have been evaluated and determined not to warrant placement on the NPL
and have been referred to the States or deferred to other Federal authorities such as the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) program for any further action. However, the perceived potential threat of Superfund liability
historically remained for these sites since they were still listed in the general inventory of sites, known as CERCLIS.
In response to growing concerns about this unintended stigma associated with sites listed in CERCLIS, EPA
introduced the CERCLIS archiving effort in early 1995 as part of the Agency's Brownfields initiative on economic
redevelopment. Specifically, CERCLIS archiving is an ongoing effort that addresses this stigma by removing those
sites with no further interest under the Federal Superfund program from the CERCLIS inventory. Archiving
CERCLIS sites is a key measure of Superfund accomplishments and is being added as a GPRA pilot measure of
success for FY 97.
Progress to Date
To date, the archive effort has included:
* Initially identifying 24,000 sites that had "No Further Remedial Action Planned" site assessment decisions with
no removal or other apparent federal Superfund interest;
» Adding an archive flag and archive date field to CERCLIS and updating these for the more than 27,000 sites
identified above;
• Separating the List-8 standard FOIA report into two separate reports: one for archived sites and one for the
remaining CERCLIS sites;
• Removing the archived sites from the public FOIA CERCLIS database and distributing archive data sets through
NTIS;
• Providing archive guidelines in June, 1995 along with site listings;
» Reporting regional progress on archiving additional sites for the EPA Administrator's address to the U.S.
Conference of Mayors in January, 1996; and
• Providing access to archived sites via EPA's web server accessible through the Internet.
September 27, 1996 11-22
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-I4-IC
Definition
CERCLIS archiving represents a site-wide decision or status indicating that no further interest exists at the site
under the federal Superfund Program based on available information. It is a comprehensive decision in that archive
status means that there is no further site assessment, remedial, removal, enforcement, cost recovery, or oversight
activities being planned or conducted at the site. Please note that archive is not the same as no further remedial action
planned (NFRAP). A NFRAP decision is made only at the conclusion of a site assessment event, and does not take
into account any other Superfund programmatic activity that may be going on at a site such as removal actions or cost
recovery.
EPA currently houses archived sites within the same physical database (CERCLIS) as the remaining CERCLIS
sites. As mentioned above, efforts have been taken to segregate these sites on products distributed to stakeholders.
Compliance with this strategy is tantamount to ensuring recognition among stakeholders that archived sites are not the
same as remaining CERCLIS sites. To assist in this effort, Headquarters and Regions should suppress references to
CERCLIS when distributing archived information. The remaining active sites should be referred to as the
"CERCLIS" inventory in outreach materials. Archived sites will be stored as a separate, and appropriately named,
data set within the CERCLIS environment. EPA will maintain information on the archived sites for historical analyses
and to ensure that new sites entered into CERCLIS were not previously addressed (unless warranted by new
information as discussed below).
In addition, archived and CERCLIS sites should not be merged together on outreach materials since it defeats the
purpose of segregating these sites. In response to requests for information on Superfund sites, EPA's verbal, and now
written, policy is to provide information on only the CERCLIS (active) inventory of sites unless the requestor
specifically asks for information on the archived sites. In these situations, Regions should provide archive data but
must distribute it as a separate product (i.e., do not merge the CERCLIS inventory and archived sites on the same
report).
Information Management
An archive decision is recorded in CERCLIS at the site level. To receive credit for an archive decision, the
"Archive IND" must be checked, and the "Archive Date" entered. Archive designation should be documented by
a note to the site file identifying that no further Federal Superfund interest exists at the site based on available
information. The date of this document should serve as the date entered in the "Archive Date" field.
The public FOIA version of the CERCLIS database is currently comprised of those sites where the archive flag
has no value (i.e., not Archive IND). Similarly, standard FOIA reports available from the mainframe such as the
List-8T, List-8E, and List-9 are all based on the archive flag value. The archive flag will also be the basis for moving
archived sites into a separate data set in CERCLIS.
Archive flag and action information in CERCLIS should be consistent before a site is designated as archived.
This means an archived site should not have information indicating that further work is required (e.g., on a backlog,
in-process, or undergoing cost recovery). Events with actual start dates and no completion dates must be updated or
corrected prior to assigning an archive status since data on these sites indicates that work is still ongoing or in-process.
Automating update of the archive flag/date fields based on action data may not be feasible since there may be reasons
the Regions do not want a site archived that are not reflected in existing database fields.
Eligible Sites
Although the underlying basis for archiving a site is whether or not federal Superfund interest exists, several
categories of sites are used to generate lists of potential archive candidate sites. Based on review of sites in these
categories, Regions should update the archive flag and date Fields as appropriate in a timely fashion. These categories
are:
H-23 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• Sites that have gone only through the site assessment process and have either been given a NFRAP or Deferred
decision at the conclusion of the last completed site assessment event, and no other federal Superfund activity is
anticipated (including confirmation by the RCRA Program or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for sites
deferred to those authorities that they are aware of these sites and no further work under the federal Superfund
program is required);
• Sites that have had both removal and site assessment work completed, or have had only removal work performed
with no site assessment work required (removal-only sites) that have completed any related cost recovery and have
no further federal Superfund activity anticipated;
• Sites removed from the proposed NPL, or final NPL (e.g., as a result of a lawsuit) that have no further federal
Superfund activity anticipated;
• Sites deleted from the Final NPL that have no further federal Superfund activity anticipated; and
• Sites that have been entered into CERCLIS. that have not had any work started and, based on cursory review, do
not warrant expenditure of site assessment or removal funding (i.e., sites that have been recorded in CERCLIS
that should never have been entered in the first place), A discovery date and abbreviated preliminary assessment
(PA) may be appropriate for these sites prior to designating archive status. An abbreviated PA is appropriate
when initial information indicates the site does not warrant a full scale PA (see p. 145, Preliminary Assessment
Guidance, September, 1991).
Through July 1996, EPA has designated approximately 27,500 sites as archived. About half of the remaining
CERCLIS inventory of 13,000 sites are being evaluated under the site assessment program and many of these have
been given NFRAP or deferred site assessment decisions, but have no yet been given an archive designation. These
"potential archive" candidate sites presently number over 3,000. In addition, typical Superfund activities add between
500 and 1,000 sites per year to these candidate archive groups of sites. It is imperative that Regions determine on
a timely basis whether further federal Superfund interest exists at these sites, and make archive decisions as
appropriate. If research indicates that further assessment work is required, Regions should update event decisions
as appropriate (e.g., change the NFRAP decision at the last site to a low or high priority for further assessment, if
appropriate). Reports identifying potential archive candidate sites are available from Headquarters and are being
modified to include sensitive cost recovery data to assist Regions in determining federal Superfund interest. The
reports are also being converted for use in the new CERCLIS environment.
Business Process
Due to Regional variations in administering Superfund processes, Headquarters is not establishing a business
process each Region must follow when designating archive status. This process is left to each Region to implement
in a manner that makes sense and is most effective within their operational structure. The archive criteria described
above must be considered in whatever process a Region implements. Within the business process of archiving sites,
Regions must also include coordination with the RCRA program to ensure that both federal programs are in agreement
on which sites each program is responsible.
Returning Sites to CERCLIS
Finally, CERCLIS archiving may be a dynamic process. Archive decisions are made based on information known
at the time of the decision. If new information warrants, EPA may return an archived site back into the CERCLIS
inventory. This can be accomplished within the CERCLIS-2 environment by simply deleting the "NFA" value and
related date from the archive flag/date fields. A process for returning sites to the CERCLIS inventory will be
provided within the new CERCLIS environment, but the technical procedures have not been identified as of this
writing. When determined, these procedures will be discussed in related CERCLIS information management
documentation.
September 27, 1996 11-24
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
PARTIAL DELETION OF NPL SITES
On November 1, 1995, EPA revised its policy on deleting sites listed on the NPL. With State concurrence, EPA
may delete sites from the NPL when it determines that no further Superfund response is appropriate. In making that
decision, the following issues are typically considered. The policy introduces guidelines on partial deletions of
releases/sites listed on the NPL, which will more fully communicate successful cleanup of portions of these sites.
Historically, EPA policy has been to delete releases only after evaluation of the entire site. However, total site
cleanup may take many years, while portions of the site may have been cleaned up and may be available for
productive use. Potential investors or developers may be reluctant to undertake economic activity at even a "cleaned
up" portion of real property that is pan of a site listed on the NPL. Therefore, EPA will consider partial deletion for
portions of sites when no further response is appropriate for that portion of the site. Such portion may be a defined
geographic unit of the site, perhaps as small as a residential unit, or may be a specific medium at the site, e.g.,
groundwater, depending on the nature or extent of the release(s). The criteria for partial deletion are the same as for
final deletion. Given State concurrence, EPA considers:
* Whether responsible or other parties have implemented all appropriate and required response actions;
* Whether all appropriate Fund-financed responses have been implemented and EPA has determined that no further
cleanup by responsible parties is appropriate; or
• Whether the release of hazardous substances poses no significant threat to the public health, welfare, or the
environment, thereby eliminating the need for remedial action.
EPA will delete portions of sites, as appropriate, and will consider petitions to do so. Petitions may be submitted
by any person, including individuals, business entities, States, local governments, and other Federal agencies. Partial
deletion will also be governed by 40 CFR 300.425{e). Therefore, State concurrence will continue to be a requirement
for any partial deletion.
The primary purpose of the NPL is to serve as an informational and management tool. Whether property is part
of an NPL site is unrelated to CERCLA liability because neither NPL listing nor deletion assigns liability to any party
or to the owner of any specific property. Liability under CERCLA is determined by CERCLA Section 107, which
makes no reference to NPL listing or deletion. Listing or deleting a site from the NPL does not create CERCLA
liability where it would not otherwise exist. As with entire sites, deleted portions of sites remain eligible for further
Fund-financed remedial actions should future conditions warrant such action. Whenever there is a significant release
from a site or portion of a site deleted from the NPL, the site or portion may be restored to the NPL without
application of the Hazard Ranking System.
Guidance on how to report partial deletions in CERCLIS is included in Appendix B for non-Federal facility sites
and Appendix D for Federal facility sites.
II-25 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter III: Superfund Financial Management
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter HI
Superfund Financial Management
Table of Contents
CHAPTER m SUPERFUND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT III-l
Introduction , III-l
Brownfields III-l
Reinventing Site Assessment III-l
Outyear Budget Development III-2
FY 98 Budget Development III-2
Development of the FY 97 National Budget III-6
FY 97 Regional Budget III-6
Response Budget HI-7
Enforcement Budget III-8
Federal Facilities Budget III-8
Relationship Between SCAP and the Annual Regional Budget III-8
Initial Annual Regional Budget Development III-9
Site-Specific Travel 01-9
Regional Analytical Budgets 111-10
ADA Utilization III-lO
Advice of Allowance Procedures and Financial Reporting Requirements Ill-11
Regional Allowances III-l 1
The AOA Process 111-12
AOA Flexibility 01-14
RA Allowance 111-15
Flexibility in the Other Allowances 111-15
AOA Change Request Procedures 111-16
Relationship Between SCAP and the AOA 111-18
Superfund Financial Management 10-27
Financial Management Tools and Systems 01-28
"OZZ" and "OWQ" Accounting Information 111-30
Regional Financial Management Responsibilities 111-30
HQ Financial Management Responsibilities 111-30
Financial Management and Funding Processes 111-30
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter III
Superfund Financial Management
Table of Contents (cont'd)
Financial Management Funding Mechanisms 111-30
Contracts , IH-3Q
Interagency Agreements (lAGs) 111-31
Cooperative Agreements (CAs) IH-31
Superfund State Contracts (SSCs) 111-31
Cost Recovery/Cost Documentation 111-45
Handling Financial Data in the CERCLIS Environment 111-45
Entering Response and Federal Facility Data into CERCLIS 111-48
Entering Enforcement Extramural Budget Data into CERCLIS 111-48
Correcting Financial Data HI-49
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter HI
Superfund Financial Management
List of Exhibits
EXHIBIT III.l BUDGET TIMELINE III-4
EXHIBIT III.2 OPERATING PLAN CATEGORIES , 111-10
EXHIBIT III.3 THE ADVICE OF ALLOWANCE PROCESS 111-13
EXHIBIT III.4 CHANGE REQUEST REQUIRED , 111-17
EXHIBIT III.5 AOA CHANGE PROCESS PROCEDURES 111-18
EXHIBIT III.6 SITE- VERSUS NON-SITE SPECIFIC PLANNED OBLIGATIONS 10-20
EXHIBIT III.7 BUDGET SOURCES 111-21
EXHIBIT III.8 WHO PAYS FOR WHAT 111-21
EXHIBIT III.9 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CONTACTS , . . . : 111-27
EXHIBIT III. 10 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT TOOLS AND SYSTEMS 111-28
EXHIBIT III.ll ACCOUNT NUMBER STRUCTURE 111-29
EXHIBIT III.12 REGIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES 111-32
EXHIBIT III. 13 DESCRIPTION OF REGIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT STAFF , 01-33
EXHIBIT III. 14 RESPONSIBILITIES OF REGIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE
FINANCIAL STAFF 111-34
EXHIBIT III. 15 FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF HQ MANAGEMENT OFFICES HI-35
EXHIBIT III.16 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND FUNDING PROCESSES 111-36
EXHIBIT III. 17 HANDLING FINANCIAL DATA IN THE CERCLIS ENVIRONMENT 111-38
EXHIBIT 10.18 EPA FORMS COMMONLY USED FOR SUPERFUND PROCUREMENTS 111-39
EXHIBIT III. 19 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF SITE-SPECIFIC CONTRACTS 01-40
EXHIBIT 10.20 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF NON-SITE SPECIFIC CONTRACTS 01-41
EXHIBIT 10.21 DISBURSEMENT IAG FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 10-42
EXHIBIT 111.22 ALLOCATION TRANSFER IAG FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 10-43
EXHIBIT 111.23 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 10-44
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Chapter III
Superfund Financial Management
List of Exhibits (cont'd)
EXHIBIT 111.24 SSC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 111-46
EXHIBIT 111.25 COST RECOVERY REFERRAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IIM7
EXHIBIT III.26 CORRECTIONS TO FINANCIAL INFORMATION 111-49
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
CHAPTER ffl
SUPERFUND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the impact of the Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishments Plan (SCAP) process on
the development of the outyear budget, the Regional operating plan and the quarterly Advice of Allowance (AOA)
process, outlines Superfund financial management responsibilities, and provides an overview of the Full-time
Equivalency (FTE) distribution process. General information on the Fiscal Year (FY) 97 response, enforcement, and
Federal facility budgets, as well as a general discussion of each program's workload model, is provided in this
chapter.
The following offices are responsible for budget formulation:
• Program Analysis and Resources Management (PARM) Center in the Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response (OERR) - Response;
• Program Operations Staff (POS) in the Office of Site Remediation Enforcement (OSRE); and
• Federal facilities.
There will be differences in the way financial management information is reported by the Regions during FY 97.
During FY 96, actual financial information from the Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS) was
downloaded to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System
(CERCLIS) on a nightly basis; the information will no longer be manually entered, OERR and the Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) implemented the transfer within the WasteLAN/CERCLIS 2 environment
in all Regions, and then began to implement the transfer within the CERCLIS 3 environment on a Region-by-Region
basis thereafter. The transfer is being implemented for extramural transactions, and will expand to include intramural,
Superfund State Contract (SSC), and Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) transaction types in FY 97. For a more
detailed discussion of the IFMS transfer and related changes to current financial management processes, see the
section of the chapter entitled, "Handling Financial Data in the CERCLIS Environment."
BROWNFIELDS
EPA has awarded 60 pilot cooperative agreements using CERCLA Section 104 investigative authorities. The
deadlines and requirements for applications were published in the Federal Register. EPA held five rounds of
selections and received between 100 and 160 applications for review during each round. Panels of Regional
representatives, Headquarters (HQ) representatives, and representatives from other Federal agencies made the
preliminary review. Final awardees were selected by senior OSWER officials. The Regions then negotiated a work
plan with the awardees and the commitment documents were sent to HQ for signature and distribution of funds.
Additionally, there is now an action code in CERCLIS that can be used to track dollars for Brownfields (Action Name
= Brownfields). The code allows for both site- and non-site specific entry of financial information associated with
Brownfields activities.
REINVENTING SITE ASSESSMENT
In addition to conventional EPA-funded site assessment activities (PA, SI, ESI, HRS and integrated assessment),
it is appropriate to use some site assessment resources for innovative approaches. Among these are efforts to assess
readily available information to "prescreen" sites for potential CERCLIS entry, conduct streamlined assessments of
non-CERCLIS sites in support of Brownfields, and streamlined risk assessments of CERCLIS sites. Past guidance
limited assessments at non-CERCLIS sites. We believe flexibility is appropriate, given the direction and needs of the
program. As a result, we will not specify a cost limit, but will require, for those limited but more expensive
IH-1 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
assessments (i.e., those where costs exceed a PA or ASTM Phase I), a greater accounting and tracking, sufficient to
justify expenditures under audit conditions. At a minimum, there needs to be a description of the assessment work
being conducted and the expected benefits of this work available for review upon request. Given the various priorities
and constrained site assessment resources, a careful balancing of activities is important.
OUTYEAR BUDGET DEVELOPMENT
The preliminary outyear budget request is developed in June, approximately 18 months before the operating year
begins. This means that SCAP data existing in the third quarter of FY 97 is used to formulate the FY 99 budget
request. The schedules for all response, enforcement, and Federal facilities activities, and the planned obligations
for Remedial Actions (RAs) and early actions (remedial authority) reflected in CERCLIS serve as the foundation for
determining the dollar levels to be requested in the budget and the total level of FTEs to be made available for
distribution. Following are the procedures for developing the outyear budget:
* In June, the OSWER and OECA strategic plans are updated and the FY 99 goals and priorities are presented to
the Administrator. The Administrator may change the priorities based on overall Agency goals;
• Once a decision is made by the Administrator on the final Superfund goals, the site data in CERCLIS are re-
evaluated to ensure that the dollar levels accurately reflect these goals;
• Budget requests that reflect both the OSWER and OECA strategic plans and the data in CERCLIS are prepared
and sent to the Administrator in July;
* The Administrator makes any changes to the budget requests and passes them back to the program offices;
» The budget requests are revised and submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in September;
• OMB makes any changes to the budget requests and passes them back to EPA in November;
• If the program offices do not agree with the budgets that are passed back from OMB, EPA initiates an appeals
process in December; and
• In mid-January, EPA prepares and submits the President's budget request.
FY 98 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT
The process for developing the FY 98 budget is essentially the same as the process being followed for the
development of the outyear budget. The base budget process that is being used to develop the FY 98 budget consists
of the following phases, and builds on the budget that was developed for FY 97, the Agency's strategic plans, and
investments for the future.
• Program Characterization — The first phase consists of a thorough program characterization by the HQ program
offices with the participation of the lead Region. This characterization groups related activities within each
program area. It identifies the statutory basis for the activities, the associated resources, the type and number
of outputs, the environmental results derived from these activities, and the major strategic choices facing each
program.
The program offices also summarize the FY 97 resource distribution by function (e.g., regulation development,
enforcement, research) and major statutes. This phase is completed in mid-May.
• Review Phase — During the second phase, HQ program offices meet with the Administrator to discuss the
program, strategies, and goals. There also are small group meetings of Office/Division Directors and the
September 27, 1996 III-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Planning and Budgeting Workgroup to review FY 97 budget information and make recommendations on issues
that should be considered in developing the FY 98 budget. This phase is completed at the end of May.
Budget Formulation — The third phase is the actual development of the budget. This phase is a multi-step
process that begins in June with an Assistant Administrator (AA)/Regional Administrator forum to discuss FY
97 budgeting, recommend Agency priorities for FY 98, and set long-term Agency direction.
The Administrator then provides guidance on investment priorities for FY 98 and overall policy guidance for
budget formulation. Using this guidance, the program offices develop and submit the budget to the Office of the
Comptroller (OC) at the end of June.
The program offices and lead Regions make presentations to the Administrator/Deputy Administrator on the
program priorities in mid-July. The Administrator passes back the budget at the end of July, and the program
offices begin development of the budget for submission to OMB.
Based on the Administrator's priorities and results of the budget formulation process, a strategy for presenting
the Agency's budget to OMB is developed. The focus is on describing the Agency's long-term goals and how
the FY 98 request will, or will not, support them. The budget is submitted to OMB in October.
Budget Approval - Congress appropriates dollars to the Agency during the first quarter of the FY. EPA then
submits the Agency Operating Plan to Congress for approval. Once approved by Congress, the operating plan
is implemented by the Agency.
Exhibit III.l provides a timeline of the FY 99, FY 98, and FY 97 budget/financial activities.
III-3 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT m.l
BUDGET TIMELINE
October 1996
November 1996
December 1996
January 1997
February 1997
March 1997
April 1997
May 1997
• OMB passback of
budget request
• HQ appeal of the OMB
budget passback
• Budget request
submitted to the
President
• HQ prepares
preliminary Regional
operating plan based on
past three years
obligating/tasking
averages
• HQ allocates 90% of
budget to the Regions
• Regions generate their
plan
* HQ meets with the
Administrator to review
program goals
• Congress appropriates
dollars to the Agency
« EPA submits Agency
Operating Plan to
Congress for approval
» AAs and OC approve a
portion of the first
quarter AOA
• Enforcement
extramural budget
carryover calculated
« Second quarter AOA
calculated
» AAs and OC approve
the second quarter
AOA
• Third quarter AOA
calculated
» AAs and OC approve
third quarter AOA
• HQ summarizes
resource distribution by
function and statutes
» Regions with low
obligation and tasking
rate prepare
enforcement site
specific spending plan
September 27, 1996
III-4
-------
EXHIBIT ffl.l (cont'd)
BUDGET TIMELINE
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
June 1997
July, 1997
August 1997
September 1997
iSiS^iftii^iSiiil^iSfKV^^i^S
•s£$&&&g&*&£&**$yfpm'>!w*7K*'3?y?fatt'-
» HQ pulls financial
planning information
from CERCLIS
• HQ presents
investments to the
Administrator/Regional
Administrators
» Administrator and OC
provide HQ with policy
for budget formulation
« HQ submits Superfund
investment summaries
to the Administrator and
budget proposal to OC
« HQ and lead Region
make presentation to
Administrator/Deputy
Administrator (DA) on
program priorities
• Administrator passback
» HQ pulls data from
CERCLIS for the
development of the
budget for submission to
OMB
» HQ develops strategy
for presenting the
budget to OMB
• HQ submits budget to
OMB
« Regions generate their
plan
• HQ pulls financial
planning information
from CERCLIS
• HQ presents goals and
priorities to the
Administrator/Regional
Administrators
* HQ reviews and
analyzes Regional
budget request
* HQ/Regional
negotiations on
operating plan
• First quarter AOA
calculated
» Fourth quarter AOA
calculated
* HQ pulls financial data
from CERCLIS for
analysis of Regional
obligation/commitment
rate
• AAs and OC approve
fourth quarter AOA
III-5
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
DEVELOPMENT OF THE FY 97 NATIONAL BUDGET
Over the past three years, the Superfund budget has experienced significant reductions. In order to identify where
Superfund resources (FTE and dollars) currently exist and whether there are adequate resources to meet Program goals
and priorities, a Superfund base budget review was conducted. A unified priorities list was developed from a variety
of sources, including the January 1994 memo, "Fiscal Year 1994 National Superfund Program Priorities" (OSWER
Directive No. 9201.0-02), Administrative Improvements initiatives, and the Agency's proposed Reauthorization bill.
The Base Review Workgroup identified where Superfund resources existed in FY 94, how these resources met the
unified program priorities, and how, or if the priorities could be better met by shifting the resources. To measure
the adequacy of resources to meet priorities, the cost associated with the established quantifiable goals of each priority
was estimated. Each priority was analyzed individually and in conjunction with the others to determine what role it
plays in overall resource needs.
Based on the results of the Superfund Base Review, and in keeping with the tenets of the Superfund
Administrative Reforms, resources are being distributed in FY 97 to meet the following goals:
• Economic redevelopment (Brownfields, environmental justice);
• Community involvement/relations (information access, environmental justice);
• Remedy reform (expanded removal authority);
• Cleanup pace/allocations/expedited settlements;
• Worst sites first;
• State program development;
• Maximize PRP Participation;
• Enforcement Fairness/Reduce Transaction Costs; and
• Information management.
FY 97 REGIONAL BUDGET
To help offset the Superfund budget, Regions should actively pursue deobligation of prior year funds. Projects
prime for deobligation include Interagency Agreements (lAGs) with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USCOE)
where the projects have been completed, Fund-lead Remedial Actions (RAs) taken over by the PRPs, and Fund-lead
RAs where the actual construction contract award and oversight costs will be significantly less than the funds
obligated. Regions may request that deobligated funds be recertified and returned to the Region to address budget
shortfalls. HQ will work with the OC to ensure that any funds deobligated are returned to the Region through the
recertification process. Additionally, a Superfund Deobligation Task Force, consisting of representatives from each
of the Regions, OC, OERR, the Office of Site Remediation Enforcement (OSRE), and the Office of Administration
and Resource Management (OARM) was formed to facilitate the recovery of unliquidated obligations. The OC will
forward deobligation candidate reports to the Regions on a quarterly basis for their review and follow-up action. The
Task Force also will hold monthly conference calls to discuss deobligation/recertification status and issues. By
deobligating prior year funds, the Agency shows that it is fiscally responsible for its obligations (See the January 1995
memo from OC budget division outlining deobligating procedures for more information).
September 27, 1996 III-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Response Budget
The FY 97 President's Budget for the Superfund Program is $1.394 billion. Of this amount, the FY 97 response
budget contains $902.3 million. Within this budget, the Agency has set aside funds to be used for time-critical and
non-time critical (NTC) early actions (removal authority) and early actions (remedial authority). Specifically,
resources will be provided for:
• Early actions (removal authority) to address the Region's highest priority response actions [at both National
Priorities List (NPL) and non-NPL sites] to ensure that worst sites are being addressed first;
• Ongoing RA projects to construction completion;
* Long-term actions and early actions (remedial authority) at NPL sites;
• Oversight of all RP-lead Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS), Remedial Design (RD), Remedial
Action (RA), and removal projects;
• Ongoing RI/FS and RD projects;
• Five-year reviews;
» Integrated/combined assessments to eliminate the SI backlog; and
• Priority Regional resource needs.
To the greatest extent possible, the following activities will be supported:
• New RAs;
• New, first, and subsequent Expanded Site Inspection (ESI)/RI/FS projects;
• New RDs;
• Listing of new sites on the NPL;
• New removals above base removal budget; and
• Support activities, such as the laboratory support.
The first priorities for response funding are classic emergencies and activities at sites that will be used to meet
the national construction completion goals. Ongoing RAs, mixed funding, and mixed work projects receive priority
for funding over new cleanup work. New Fund-financed cleanup work (with the exception of emergency and time-
critical removal actions) will be subject to priority ranking by the National Risk-Based Priority Panel. The Panel
consists of representatives from each Region and HQ (OERR and OSRE) and utilizes a risk-based environmental
priority setting approach. All new cleanup work is funded in sequence of national ranking, unless the AA SWER
grants an exemption. Determination on whether a project represents new or existing work will be made by the Panel.
New cleanup work consists of large removal actions that exceed funding levels available within a Region's baseline
removal budget, as well as cleanup activities at sites where no previous actions have taken place. In addition,
activities at sites are considered new work if they constitute "separable and discrete" elements of existing site
activities. "Separable and discrete" implies an element of work associated with the overall cleanup of a site that may
be considered on an independent pathway with regard to timing and implementation. The Panel is scheduled to meet
in October 1996 to rank new work scheduled to begin in FY 97.
III-7 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Enforcement Budget
The enforcement extramural budget for FY 97 is approximately $171.2 million. Approximately 95 percent of
the budget has been allocated to the Regions; 5 percent has been held back in anticipation of additional requests for
Mega-sites and the Superfund Administrative Reforms.
The budget provides support for enhanced PRP searches, response negotiations, litigation, referrals,
administrative and judicial cost recovery actions, and program management support activities. The following activities
are priorities:
• Negotiating PRP response actions;
• Compliance enforcement of all PRP response actions;
• Negotiating settlements with collateral PRPs, including de. minimis and municipal solid waste contributors;
• Maintaining ongoing litigation for response and cost recovery; and
• Referring removal and remedial cost recovery cases greater than $200,000, with SOLs that will expire during
the budget year.
Within this context, it is important to consider that the enforcement program has changed significantly to take into
account a greater PRP participation, dealing with recalcitrant PRPs, and addressing collateral PRPs, with an emphasis
on dg minims and de micromis parties and municipalities. Therefore, activities that reinforce these criteria need to
be supported to the maximum extent possible within available resources.
Federal Facilities Budget
The Federal facilities response budget for FY 97 is approximately $13 million (This $13 million is part of the
$902.3 million FY 97 response budget). This budget provides support for response work at all NPL Federal facilities.
The following activities are priorities:
• Involving communities in the cleanup decision process;
• Maintaining ongoing oversight activities; and
• Expediting response where possible.
No funds are available for projects at non-NPL sites. Oversight activities at non-NPL sites are the
responsibility of the State. For Fast Track cleanup of non-NPL BRAC sites where oversight is needed, extramural
funds can be used.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SCAP AND THE ANNUAL REGIONAL BUDGET
The SCAP process is the planning mechanism used by the Superfund program to identify site screening and
assessment, early action, long-term action, enforcement, and Federal facility funding needs for the FY. The final
annual Regional operating plan and the associated budget are a result of the August HQ and Regional negotiations on
the proposed outputs and program budgets. Though Regions are required to operate within their final negotiated
annual operating budgets, adjustments within this budget can be made during the FY.
A Region will not receive funds above its annual Regional budget unless a SCAP amendment/change request has
been approved by HQ. The "approved" Regional budget must balance with the sum of actual obligations, open
September 27, 1996 III-8
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
commitments to date, and remaining planned resources (see Regional SCAP Reports 4R and 4E) or the entire AOA
will not be approved. In the case of enforcement, the Regional budget refers to new current year operating plan funds
plus prior year enforcement support contract carryover.
The actual allocation of funds is accomplished through the Agency's Phase III Operating Plan. This plan is
submitted to OMB prior to the start of the FY for apportionment of funds. After the OMB review and concurrence,
the Operating Plan is submitted to Congress for approval of significant reprogramming of funds. At this time,
Congress also may modify the Operating Plan. Changes made by Congress may affect the Regional budget negotiated
in the previous August negotiations.
Initial Annual Regional Budget Development
Prior to the beginning of the FY, each Region will be given a proposed budget operating plan allocation for
removal,'remedial, enforcement, and Federal facility programs. Exhibit III.2 lists the categories contained within
the response, enforcement and Federal facilities operating plans. The criteria discussed below were used to develop
the budgets in prior years and will be used to develop the FY 98 budgets.
The FY 98 Regional response budgets will be allocated as follows:
» 90 percent of a Region's budget is based on its FY 94, FY 95, and FY 96 averages of actual response obligations;
and
* The remaining 10 percent will be allocated to the Region based on the final negotiated targets.
For enforcement, FY 98 initial operating plans will be based on the relative percentage of the FY 97 operating
plan and will be adjusted in first quarter FY 98 based on FY 97 utilization rate, including Enforcement Support
Services (ESS) contract carryover. Regional targets/accomplishment estimates should be developed consistent with
initial operating plans.
Regions are required to plan their obligations within the program-specific allocations. Final budgets will be
developed upon completion of the fourth quarter negotiations between HQ and the Regions. For enforcement, the
operating funds will be adjusted in first quarter of the FY based on utilization rates at the end of FY 96, including
consideration of ESS carryover. Planned obligations for Regional activities must fall within the total identified budget
levels, and should be shown by selecting "approved" from the Funding Status drop down list associated with the
appropriate AOA category on the Budget Allowance Detail Backup screen. Funding needs above the HQ proposed
total budget level must be designated as "alternate". This will allow HQ to see the Regional funding priorities, the
activities the Region would like to conduct with the budget reserve, the activities that will not be performed as a result
of lack of funds, and provide the information needed for any supplemental funding requests. HQ will not initiate
negotiations with a Region until the "approved" funds requested are within the proposed total Regional budget levels.
Site-Specific Travel
Beginning with the FY 94 appropriations, line item activities in the Superfund budget were categorized as
programmatic or administrative. Examples of programmatic expenses are contracts for site assessment and
cleanup, regulation development support, and Congressionally directed reports. Examples of administrative
expenses are staff related costs, overhead, and contracts for program evaluation support and data analysis. In
the new structure, site-specific travel is considered a programmatic expense. As such, extramural dollars can
be used to fund site-specific travel. Regions can use up to $150,000 or 0.5 percent (whichever is greater) of their
total allowance to support site-specific travel. Regions need to prioritize their extramural funding needs since
dollars for site-specific travel must come out of the Regional budget allocation. HQ will not increase a Region's
budget or AOA to replace extramural funds used for site-specific travel.
III-9 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT OI.2
OPERATING PLAN CATEGORIES
Removal
Removal Action
Removal Oversight
Removal Analysis
Site Characterization
Fund-Financed RI/FS
RI/FS Oversight
Stan Contract (Rem/Rvl)
Remedial Analysis
Site Assessment (State)
Regional Analytic Budget
Fund-Financed RD
RP RD Oversight
RP RA Oversight
New Start Response Actions
Ongoing Response Actions
Mixed Funding/ Mixed Work
Support
TAG
Core Grants
ARCS Management
Other/Tech Assistance
ERCS Management
Removal
Pre-RI/FS
RI/FS Oversight
State Enforcement
Program Implementation
RI/FS
Remedial Design
Remedial Action
Program Support
Early Actions
Removal Actions
Regional Analytical Budgets
Beginning in the fourth quarter of FY 94, Regions are responsible for the procurement of Special Analytical
Services (SAS) laboratory sample analyses. Routine Analytical Services (RAS)still will be handled by the
Contract Laboratory Program (CLP); however efforts must be made to coordinate with the Budget
Coordinators/IMCs. In cases where the RAS budget may exceed its distribution, the Region will be responsible
for deciding whether to shift funds from other priority areas to purchase additional RAS services. Regions will
estimate their SAS analytical needs as part of the SCAP development process and funds will be placed in the site
characterization AOA. The allocation of funds will be based on the average number of samples collected during
the site assessment, RD, and RA phases, the historical percentage of the samples that require SAS, and the
average cost per sample for SAS.
AOA Utilization
In the past, the AOA obligation rate through the first two quarters of the FY has been low. As a result, HQ has
implemented the following measures to improve performance:
• Regions will not receive their third quarter AOA for a specific response category unless the
commitment/obligation rate is 50 percent or greater in that AOA category. For example, if the
commitment/obligation rate for one response allowance (i.e., site characterization) is 35 percent while the rate
for another (i.e., removals) is 65 percent, the third quarter removal AOA would be issued, but the site
characterization AOA would not be issued.
September 27, 1996
111-10
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
* Regions must obligate and task 60-65 percent of the enforcement Regional extramural funds received in
their first and second quarter AOA. If a Region does not receive its third quarter enforcement AOA due to
such an obligation shortfall, it is required to produce.a site-specific spending plan in CERCLIS for both the third
and fourth quarters by mid-May. To receive the full fourth quarter AOA, a 75 percent utilization rate is required.
The undistributed third and fourth quarter AOA funds will be allocated to Regions that demonstrate a need.
HQ will continue to assist the Regions to facilitate the prompt obligation of funds. An effort will be made to
increase the obligation rate by providing third quarter allowances to Regions in advance. Depending on whether a
Region has achieved the above-cited criteria, Regions can request advances on their fourth quarter AOAs. HQ will
provide Allowance/Obligation Comparison reports to the Regions for review on a monthly basis.
For those Regions that continue to have a low rate of commitment/obligation/tasking, OSWER and OECA will
renegotiate the Region's operating plan for the remainder of the year in July. This negotiation could potentially
result in a reduction in the Region's annual budget.
ADVICE OF ALLOWANCE PROCEDURES AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
The planned obligations identified through the SCAP process are the basis for the AOA approved by the OC and
the Assistant Administrator for the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (AA SWER) or the Assistant
Administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (AA OECA). No money will be issued to
the Regions through the AOA process unless the appropriate project-specific obligation and open commitment
data are reflected in CERCLIS (SCAP-4E/4R Reports).
Regional Allowances
In FY 94, OERR restructured the response AOAs by combining the RD, RI/FS, and site characterization
allowances into one allowance. Based on this restructuring, the OC will issue the following allowances to the Regions
in FY 97:
• Site Characterization (non-site specific "site" allowance), which includes funds for:
Preliminary Assessment (PA), Site Inspection (SI), ESI, START Contract, RI, FS, and RD projects,
treatability studies, risk assessments, Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA), design assistance,
community relations, support agency assistance, technical assistance, groundwater monitoring, aerial surveys.
topographical mapping, Brownfields-related site characterization activities (e.g., Phase I and Phase II
environmental assessments);
Oversight of RI/FS, RD, RA, Groundwater monitoring, five-year review, Operation and Maintenance
(O&M), and Long-Term Response Action (LTRA) projects; and
Regional analytic budgets and funding for SAS budgets (RAS budgets managed and funds held at HQ);
* RA (site-specific "site" allowance), which includes funds for RAs, early actions (remedial authority), LTRA,
five-year reviews, and mixed funding/mixed work arrangements;
• Removal (non-site specific "site" allowance), which includes funds for emergencies, time-critical and NTC early
actions, removal investigations, removal assessments, and oversight of removals at NPL and non-NPL sites;
III-11 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
* Other Response (non-site specific "regular" allowance), contains funds for response program and project support
including: Alternative Remedial Contracting Strategy (ARCS), Response Action Contract (RAC), or Emergency
Response Cleanup Services (ERCS) program management; Technical Assistance Grants (TAG); Core Program
Cooperative Agreement (CPCA); pollution liability insurance; and Brownfields-related activities (e.g., developing
systems to identify the Brownfields Pilots or conferences);
• Enforcement (non-site specific "regular" allowance); and
• Federal Facilities (non-site specific "regular" allowance).
The "site" allowance is an event-specific allowance. It is issued on a site- or non-site specific basis. The "regular"
allowance includes site- and non-site specific events or activities, and is issued non-site specifically. The following
sections explain how these allowances are developed and the flexibility available in the AOA structure.
The AOA Process
The AOA is based on the Phase III Operating Plan which identifies projected obligations for each quarter of the
FY. The Phase III Operating Plan for FY 97 is based on the final SCAP plans developed in the fourth quarter of FY
96. Regional enforcement operating plans are adjusted after the start of the FY based on prior year obligation and
ESS contract utilization and carryover. Funds available for obligation, however, are limited to projected needs for
the upcoming quarter. Where Regional ESS carryover exists, only the funds necessary to cover the non-ESS needs
will be issued in the AOA until the Region has tasked 65 percent of its ESS obligated untasked carryover.
Oo the monthly pull date prior to the end of each quarter, HQ will generate AOA reports (SCAP-4R, SCAP-4E,
and SCAP-4F) that reflect the approved planned obligations in CERCLIS. If the planned and actual obligations and
commitments in CERCLIS exceed the Regional budget, the Region will be contacted. CERCLIS must be revised to
match the Regional budget before HQ will proceed with the AOA process in the Region (illustrated in Exhibit III-3).
After discussions with the Regions to clarify questions or issues and ensure that the Regional budget was not exceeded,
HQ will enter the AOAs into CERCLIS two weeks before the end of the quarter. Regions must pull these reports
from CERCLIS and enter these amounts into IFMS. The one exception to this process pertains to first quarter
allowances. Because first quarter allowances are entered into IFMS by HQ, Regional personnel do not have to pull
the reports from CERCLIS or enter the amounts into IFMS for the first quarter.
The AAs and their staff, in conjunction with the OC, review the funding levels entered into IFMS by the Region
and compare them to the AOA amounts generated by the HQ program offices. If the two agree within three working
days after the start of the quarter, the HQ OC Budget Division, and the AAs and their staff approve the AOA in
IFMS, and the funds are available for obligation. If the AOA entered into IFMS by the Regions does not agree with
the AOA entered in CERCLIS by HQ, IFMS will not be approved. Only projects planned in CERCLIS can be funded
by the AOA. Regional Budget Coordinators should work closely with their Regional finance office on the entry of
the correct AOA into IFMS. These schedules may be revised if the third quarter AOA is issued early, or, if the
Region requests, and HQ approves, an advance on their fourth quarter AOA.
The HQ program offices and OC Budget Division review weekly IFMS obligations against the AOA. If a Region
exceeds any of the allowances, or a site-specific RA or early action (remedial authority) allocation, the HQ OC Budget
Division will notify the Region and request resolution of the overcommitment/overobligation. The Region then has
until the end of the current month to rectify the overcommitment/overobligation or shut down procedures will be
initiated. If the Region does not submit a change request, decommit or deobligate funds, or effect corrections in IFMS
as necessary, the HQ Budget Division will initiate reprogramming from the Region's regular allowance. Repeated
violations of site or allowance allocations may result in partial or total withdrawal of the Region's site allowance.
September 27, 1996 III-12
-------
EXHIBIT IIL3
THE ADVICE OF ALLOWANCE PROCESS
Regions enter
actual financial
Information on
commitments,
obligations,
and tasking into
IFMS is
downloaded to
CERCLIS on a
nightly basis.
HQ reviews
planned/actual
commitments,
obligations, and
tasking data and
compares them
to annual
Regional
Program
budgets.
If data is within
budgets, HQ
program
offices enter L AOA data
\CERCLIS. AOA | CERCLIS.
Week 9 Week 11 Week 13
CURRENT QUARTER
We
ek 9 Wee
(11 Week 13
Weekl
NEXT QUARTER
Weekl
V)
n
"S
n
3
If all agree,
OCandAAs
approve AOA,
o
V)
*
tfl
73
q
3'
o
n
M3
f"1
O
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
As is standard Agency policy, if a Region exceeds either the regular or site allowance, the HQ OC Budget Division
will withdraw obligation authority in accordance with existing procedures. During the last quarter of the year, the
HQ OC Budget Division will work with the Regions, OSWER, and OECA as necessary to ensure that all allowances
and obligations are aligned prior to year-end closing.
If a Region receives funds in their AOA which were not obligated during the quarter received, the relevant planned
obligation data in CERCLIS must be changed, or the amount must be placed in the contingency account. At the end
of each quarter, HQ wDl review the AOA funds' remaining commitments and obligations, the contingency account,
and planned obligation data. If AOA funds were not committed or obligated and the planned obligation data were not
changed, HQ will take the following actions:
• Reduce the next quarter's AOA for other response, site characterization, enforcement, or Federal facility by the
amount that was not committed or obligated; or
• Request that Regions follow the OC's change request procedures to return early action (remedial authority) or
RA funds to HQ.
The Financial Reports (SCAP-4R, SCAP-4E, and SCAP-4F) and the Budget Control Reports (SCAP-21 and
SCAP-21E) will be used to evaluate the status of the allowances.
To the maximum extent possible, Regions should plan for mixed funding/mixed work requirements prior to the
development of the annual Regional budget.
The transfer of financial information from IFMS to WasteLAN/CERCLIS that began in FY 96 eliminates the need
for manual entry of actual financial data, as well as the need to reconcile the data contained in the IFMS and
CERCLIS databases. For more details on the impact of the IFMS transfer, see the section of the chapter entitled,
"Handling Financial Data in the CERCLIS Environment."
AOA Flexibility
Some flexibility exists within the AOA structure to shift funds both within and between allowances. Regions can
shift funds between projects within the other response, site characterization, removal, enforcement, or Federal facility
allowances without HQ approval. With HQ approval, funds can also be shifted between the site characterization and
enforcement allowances, out of (but not into) the other response allowance, into (but not out of) the removal
allowance, and into (but not out of) the site-specific RA allowance. Funds cannot be shifted into or out of the Federal
facility allowance.
Shifting funds between projects within the other response, site characterization, removal, enforcement, or Federal
facility allowance is a SCAP adjustment. It does not require HQ approval or a change request, but CERCLIS must
be revised to reflect the shift. Allowable shifts between allowances are also SCAP adjustments, however, HQ
approval of a change request is required. The change must be reflected in CERCLIS prior to HQ approval. Federal
facility funds cannot be shifted to another allowance.
Based on Regional priorities, funds also may be reprogrammed between the response and enforcement allowances.
These shifts require a change request and Congressional notification if the funds proposed for reprogramming exceed
$500,000. Any movement of funds into the removal or RA allowances also must be reported to Congress on a
quarterly basis. Federal facility funds cannot be reprogrammed.
September 27, 1996 IH-14
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
RA Allowance
To receive RA funds, the site must be on the NPL, The funding for RAs and early actions (remedial authority)
are held in a reserve account for national distribution and issued site-specifically when sites are ready for funding
[RD 95 percent complete, Superfund State Contract (SSC) signed). As previously stated, the RA funding
priorities are established by the priority setting panel.
Funding for ongoing projects, LIRA, and five-year reviews may be reprogrammed by the Regions. RA or early
action (remedial authority) funds made available as a result of bids coming in below expected amounts will be
returned to HQ for funding of other priority RA projects or early actions (remedial authority). In some cases,
HQ may recommend that the Region retain the funds to support unanticipated cost escalations for RAs or early
actions (remedial authority).
In situations where the PRPs settle after the AOA is issued, Regions may retain the funds needed for oversight.
The remaining funds in the AOA must be sent back to HQ through a change request. RA funds cannot be moved
into the site characterization AOA. If the site lead changes from Fund- to PRP-lead, the Region should deobligate
funds from the RA AOA; separate provisions should be made to make adjustments to the site characterization
allowance. The RA funds that are deobligated will be returned to HQ. In the situation where the PRPs take over
after the obligation of funds for an RA or early action (remedial authority), the program office will need to work
with the Regional Financial Management Office (FMO) to revise the Account Number (AN), since the Agency
is acting in an oversight role instead of performing the response action.
Flexibility in the Other Allowances
Regions may redirect funds within the other response, removal, site characterization, enforcement, and Federal
facility allowances to meet site or activity priorities. Additionally, funds in the other response allowance can be
moved to the removal, site characterization, or RA allowance. However, it is important to note that, generally,
funds cannot be shifted out of the removal allowance. Regions may shift funds more easily into the removal
allowance from other non-site specific allowances (e.g., Other Response). Funds also cannot be shifted into or
out of the Federal facility allowance.
Funds saved within the site characterization allowance as a result of a settlement or where actual costs are lower
than estimated will generally stay within the Region. These funds may be used within the allowance for other
site characterization projects. In addition, Regions may retain and redirect non-RA response funds made available
as a result of the following actions:
• PRP takeovers or settlements;
• ESI/RI/FS or RD bids that are less than planned amounts; and
* Actual obligations that are less than planned obligations.
HQ approval generally will be given for the redirection of unused funds for Agency priorities. For further
information on the National Budget/Agency priorities, see "Development of the FY 97 National Budget" earlier
in this chapter.
A change request must be approved by HQ before funds can be reprogrammed to activities outside the allowance.
Response funds may be used to address deficient PRP projects. Regions are allowed to redirect funds in the site
characterization AOA to accommodate this need. Regions also may shift funds for a Fund-financed RD to RD
oversight when a CD is referred to HQ or the Department of Justice (DOJ) for lodging, or when PRPs indicate
in writing that they will comply with a UAO.
Ill-15 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
ID FY 90, HQ established a non-site specific remedial contingency account in CERHELP. The remedial
contingency account cannot be used for developing Regional budgets. It can only be used during the operating
year for "holding" remedial response funds made available:
• As a result of PRP takeovers or lead changes between remedial phases;
• By RD bids coming in under projected amounts; or
• In situations where the actual obligations were less than planned obligations.
As the Region identifies uses for these funds, the contingency account must be reduced and the site-specific
planned/actual obligations must be entered into CERCLIS. The funds in the contingency account will be reviewed
by HQ at mid-year and throughout the third and fourth quarters.
If a Region has a funding request during the year that was unplanned, the following approach should be followed
in identifying funding sources:
• As a first step, Regions should determine if funds are available in the contingency accounts that can be
redirected within or between allowances to perform the action;
• If no contingency funds are available, funds planned for obligation in future quarters (within the Region's
annual budget) that will not be used as originally planned should be tapped;
• After mid-year, funds made available within the annual Regional budget as a result of the mid-year or
third/fourth quarter adjustment process should be used; and
• If necessary, Regions may request an increase in their annual budget through the redirection of funds made
available as a result of mid-year or third/fourth quarter adjustments in other Regions.
AOA Change Request Procedures
Regions are required to operate within their quarterly AOA and their annual Regional budget. The funding for
RAs and early actions (remedial authority) are held in a reserve account for national distribution and issued site-
specifically when the schedules hi CERCLIS indicate the site is ready for funding. Regions are responsible for
managing the funds issued in the AOA, and for operating within budget ceilings, floors, and other restrictions.
Consistent with the flexible funding initiatives discussed earlier in this chapter, Regions may:
• Shift funds between projects within the other response, site characterization, removal, Federal facility or
enforcement allowances (HQ approval is not required); or
* Shift existing funds between allowances (other response, site characterization, and enforcement). HQ approval
of a change request is required. Funds cannot be shifted into the other response allowance, out of the RA or
removal allowance, or into or out of the Federal facility allowance; or
• Move future planned obligations to the current quarter (increase total allowance after issuance within the annual
budget). HQ approval of a change request/SCAP amendment is required.
In some situations, a change request is required as a result of Regional changes to SCAP. Exhibit III.4 identifies
flexible funding and other situations where an AOA change request is required. Exhibit III.5 describes the procedures
to be followed in each of these situations. HQ will not approve a change request unless CERCLIS is revised to reflect
the change.
September 27, 1996 III-16
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Under IFMS, change requests are electronically transferred to HQ. The following information should be provided
for a change request:
* Purpose/justification;
• Amount;
• Site name and Site Spill Identification (S/S ID) if allowance is issued site-specifically;
• Program element(s) (GBX-enforcement, FAX-response or YPX-Federal facility); and
» Allowance that is being increased and/or allowance that is being decreased.
If the change request is a reprogramming of funds between allowances, the net change should equal zero. The
change request must be transmitted by authorized personnel in the Region's financial office. The site-specific record
in CERCLIS should be revised when the change request is transmitted. Regions should not initiate any obligations
against the change until the OC and AA SWER or AA OECA approve the revised AOA. Change requests generally
take two weeks to process and approve. There is a $500,000 limit for reprogramming between program elements (per
action), and the request must be approved by the OC.
EXHIBIT m.4
CHANGE REQUEST REQUIRED
Request Sftuation
• Allocation transfer lAGs
» Transfer funds to other entities within EPA
• Shifting funds (where allowable) between
allowances after issuance
• Increase total quarterly allowance after
issuance (within annual budget)
• Decrease total quarterly allowance after
issuance
» Increase RA or early action (remedial
authority) funding after allowance is issued
• Decrease RA or early action (remedial
authority) funding after allowance is issued
» Decrease RA or early action (remedial
authority) funding as a result of PRP takeover
• New RA or early action (remedial authority)
funding after allowance is issued
• Decrease allowance after issuance
• Decrease allowance after issuance
• Shifting funds between allowances after
issuance
• Increases total allowance after issuance
(within annual budget)
• Decrease allowance after issuance
• Increase total allowance after issuance (within
annual budget)
• Decrease allowance after issuance
Decrease allowance after issuance
Increase total allowance after issuance within
annual budget
111-17
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT m.5
ADA CHANGE PROCESS PROCEDURES
(^ AOA Changes "y
Decrease Allowance 1
after Issuance 1
i
Increase Total Allowance
After Issuance Within
Annual Budget
i \
IMC sends E-mail j
change request to the
Regional finance office,
with copies to applicable
OSWER or OECA staff
t. J
i
Shifting Funds Between j
Allowances After
Issuance j
' i
r \
IMC sends E-mail
change request to
applicable OSWER or
OECA staff with copies
to the AAs' and Regional
k finance offices j
* \
Revise
CERCLIS J
i
'
IMC sends E-mail
change request to the
Regional finance office,
with copies to applicabli
OSWER and/or OECA
V staff and the AAs' office
' '
Revise
CERCLIS
r i
• Change request is \
electronically
transmitted to HQ
through IFMS
• AOA in IFMS is
revised to reflect the
change
AAs send E-mail
approval memorandum
to Regional program and
finance office and HQ
OC
v. J
t
Revise
CERCLIS
i •
f ^\
• The change request is electronically transmitted to HQ through IFMS
• AOA in IFMS is revised to reflect the change
• OSWER and/or OECA staff and the OC review the request
^- Revised AOA is approved in IFMS by the HQ OC and AAs ^
^
y
N
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SCAP AND THE AOA
Within the SCAP process, obligations are planned either site-, project-, OU-, or non-site specifically. Some
planned obligations are associated with specific site activities, while other planned obligations are estimates of total
funding required for an activity within a Region (i.e., contract bulk funding). The CERCLIS database has been
designed to accommodate site- and non-site specific planning. Exhibit III.6 lists the actions for which obligations are
planned on a site-, project-, or OU-specific basis versus those that are planned on a non-site specific basis. Regions
should be certain all their extramural funding needs are reflected in CERCLIS such that there is a crosswalk between
the CERCLIS planned financial data and the Regional AOA.
In addition to the site- and non-site specific planning, obligations also are planned and budgets developed on a
program-specific basis. The "Budget Source" field identifies which program pays for the planned action. Exhibit
III.7 presents the budget sources associated with each program. It is important that Regions accurately identify the
September 27, 1996
IH-18
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
budget source, since each program develops an annual budget and has a separate AOA process. It also is important
that the Regions maintain this budget source to eliminate potential impacts on the Regional AOA.
Exhibit III.8 identifies the major actions and the appropriate budget source (depending on the project/event lead)
for planned obligations, as well as the AOA category under which each action falls. Funds for temporary or
permanent relocations conducted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) should be given a budget
source of 'HQ Removal' or 'HQ Remedial' after the IAG is signed and funds are transferred to HQ using the change
request procedures. Funds for project support activities that are being conducted by Environmental Monitoring
Systems Laboratory (EMSL), the Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC), or other intra-agency
assistance are allocated in the Regional budget. Once the change request transferring the funds to the odier entity is
processed, the budget source in CERCLIS should be changed to a HQ budget source.
In prior years, both planned and actual financial information could be recorded for the actions listed below.
However, beginning in FY 97 the following actions no longer have a corresponding IFMS code. This means that
financial information for actual commitments and obligations cannot be entered into IFMS for these actions.
As a result, no financial information associated with these actions will be transferred to CERCLIS via the IFMS
transfer. Any actual financial information that is associated with these actions must be entered directly into
CERCLIS via the screens in the Cost/Financial view.
» ERRS Contract Mgt;
• Federal Interagency Agreement;
• Litigation (Generic);
» Negotiation (Generic);
• Records Management;
• Reg ERCS Contract Mangmt;
• Removal Contingency;
• RD Contingency;
» RD Oversight and CR;
• RI/FS Contingency; and
• RI/FS Oversight and CR.
In addition, the following actions are no longer contained in Exhibit III.6 and III.8 because they are either not
enterable in IFMS, not currently tracked by any of the SCAP-4 reports, or have been deemed historical.
• Comm Relations Tech Assistance;
• Design Assistance;
• Forward Planning;
• Other; and
• Treatability Studies.
111-19 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT m.6
SITE- VERSUS NON-SITE SPECIFIC PLANNED OBLIGATIONS
Admin/Voluntary Cost Recovery
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Brownfields**
Combined RI/FS
Deletion from NPL
Engineering Eval/Cost Analysis
Expanded Site Inspection**
ESI/RI (including ESI/RI oversight)**
Feasibility Study
Federal Interagency Agreement
Five Year Remedy Assessment
Geophysical Support/Mapping
Human Health Risk Assessment
Integrated Assessment**
Litigation
- Litigation (Generic)
- Section 104(e) Ref Litigation
- Section 106 Litigation
- Section 107 Litigation
- Section 106 & 107 Litigation
Long Term Response
Negotiations
- Negotiation (Generic)
- Removal Negotiations**
- RI/FS Negotiations**
- RD/RA Negotiations
- LAG Negotiations
- Cost Recovery Negotiations
Non-Binding Allocation of Resp
Federal Facilities Actions
- FF Removal**
- FF RI/FS
- FFRD
- FF RA [including early actions (remedial authority)]
PRP Actions
- PRP Removal**
- PRP RI/FS
- PRPRD
- PRP RA [including early actions (remedial
authority)]
Preparation of Cost Docm Pkge
Remedial Action [including early actions (remedial
authority)]
Remedial Design
Remedial Investigation
Removal**
Removal Assessment**
Site Inspection**
Underground Storage Tank Remov
Administrative Records**
Aerial Surveys
- Pre-Rem/Rem Aerial Survey**
- Removal Aerial Survey**
Community Relations
- FF Community Relations**
- PRP Community Relations**
- Remedial Community Relations**
- Removal Community Relations**
Contingency
- Other Remed Contingency**
- Removal Contingency
- RI/FS Contingency
- RD Contingency
Contract Management
- ARCS Contract Mgt
- ERRS Contract Mgt
- RAC Contract Mgt
- Reg ERCS Contract Mangmt
- START Contract Mgt
- Zone/Reg ERCS Contract Mngmt
Contract Program Mgt
Generic PA/SI
Health Assessment**
Hydro/Geological Support**
Information Mgt Support
Laboratory Support**
Management Assistance**
Multi-Site Coop Agreement
NSI-SARA Capacity
Operations and Maintenance**
Oversight and CR
- RI/FS Oversight and CR
- RD Oversight and CR
Preliminary Assessment**
Pre Natural Res Survey
PRP Searches
- NPL RP Search**
- Non-NPL PRP Search**
Records Management
SEE Program
Special Studies
State Core Grant
State Enf Manag Assistanc
Technical Assistance**
Technical Assistance Grant**
TES/ESS Generic Obligation
TES/ESS Program Management
Topographical Mapping**
Training
For these activities. Regions must enter the number of sites involved and the contract vehicle.
These activities may be planned site- or non-site specifically.
September 27, 1996
HI-20
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT m.7
BUDGET SOURCES
HQ Removal
HQ Remedial
HQ Enforcement
Federal Facility Response
and Federal Facility
Enforcement
Enforcement
Removal
Reimbursable
Remedial
Other
EXHIBIT m.8
WHO PAYS FOR WHAT
Admin/Voluntary Cost Recovery
Alternative Dispute Resolution
ARCS Contract Mgt
Brownfields
Deletion from NPL
Early Action (Remedial Authority)
Remedial Action
Early Action (Remedial Authority)
Oversight
PRPRA
FFRA
Engineering Eval/Cost Analysis
ERCS Contract Management
Reg ERCS Contract Mangmt
Zone/Reg ERCS Contract Mngmt
lllpilll
PfifiBf
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
sli^iiPlI
^im*
:;:Slti6$Eiil
•
•
•
•
il|||i||||;
FE
FE
*
FF
*
*
FF
F,S,TR,MR
RP.PS
FF
F,S,TR,MR
*
FF
*
FF
liljisiiiilli
Enforcement
Enforcement
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Removal
Federal Facility
Removal
Federal Facility
Illlllllllllll
Enforcement
Enforcement
Other Response
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Other Response
Federal Facility
Remedial Action
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Removal
Federal Facility
Removal
Federal Facility
' Lead left to the Regions' discretion
111-21
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT DDLS
WHO PAYS FOR WHAT (cont'd)
l^^Pl^^^^^^Pl|ii
'.•:v.::.:::;:4:fe-i ;j.;x;:v : XvX: ¥Yx*:tf:*;x>;':v':; ;-: ;xxV::;*:*x* x*.:.:-: :-: :
xxvxy yivx-: ivX-x^ . . .: x:XxXx:x" :vx- : XxXxXyX:XvX- xxx-x •/•
ERRS Contract Mgt
Expanded Site Inspection
ESI/TU
Feasibility Study
Federal Interagency Agreement
Five Year Remedy Assessment
Generic PA/SI
Health Assessment
Integrated Assessment
Litigation
Litigation (Generic)
Section 104(e) Ref Litigation
Section 106 Litigation
Section 107 Litigation
Section 106 & 107 Litigation
Illiaiillll
xiBieiiifl
Six¥S¥:;;ra;x':i¥fflS.x
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
liO;siiilii
iitsilixfi;
lliiiiSiEi
•
•
•
•
•
•
|l|i||illl
#
FF
F,S,TR,MR,
RP.PS
FF
F.S.TR.MR,
RP.PS
FF
F.S.TR MR
FF
FF
F.S.TR.MR,
RP.PS
FF
F.S.TR.MR
FF
#
FF
F,S,TR,MR,
RP.PS
FF
FE
FE
FE
FE
FE
Illiilic^iil
IlilMiii
Removal
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
||||^p||^|i|
Removal
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
* Lead left to the Regions* discretion
September 27, 1996
111-22
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT DJ.8
WHO PAYS FOR WHAT (cont'd)
%iii§MiiiiiiiiSiSj^^m
;:; : i Mi^^^'^iiisi^sii^
Long Term Response
Negotiations
Negotiation (Generic)
Removal Negotiations
RJ/FS Negotiations
RD/RA Negotiations
IAG Negotiations
Cost Recovery Negotiations
NSI-SARA Capacity
Operations and Maintenance
Other Remed Contingency
Preliminary Assessment
Project Support
Administrative Records
Contract Program Mgt
FF Community Relations
IIIiiiiB
llBplll
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
fliOPlii
«;:siSilP
Isjifeiiiil
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
PlilllPlif
|t:|iglD>:;il|
F,S,TR,MR
RP.PS
FF
FE
FE
FE
FE
FE
FF
FE
*
FF
F,S,TR,MR,
RP.PS
FF
*
FF
F,S,TR,MR
FF
*
FF
FE
FF
ilijii^SSSiSiillf
siiimjiwiE^ii-
;|i||ei||iii|||
Remedial
Remedial
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Federal Facility
i|i||!;|i|||il|
Remedial Action
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Other Response
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Other Response
Federal Facihrv
Site Characterization
Federal Facilit)
Site Characterization
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Federal Facility
* Lead left to Regions' discretion
111-23
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT ra.8
WHO PAYS FOR WHAT (cont'd)
yiWt^§iii9iiimmS
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT ra.8
WHO PAYS FOR WHAT (cont'd)
Project Support {cont'd)
SEE Program
Special Studies
State Enf Manag Assistanc
Technical Assistance
Technical Assistance Grant
TES/ESS Generic Obligation
TES/ESS Program Management
Topographical Mapping
Training
PRP Searches
NPL RP Search
Non-NPL PRP Search
RAC Contract Mgt
Records Management
Remedial Action (RA)
RA Oversight
PRPRA
FFRA
lliiiiffli
fg^sief
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
mMMm
ilfiiiiei
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
liltl
:::;-!v-':::-:-'-: ::-x>'«.: :'•:•:!!;::>;;••
*
*
FF
FE
*
FF
*
FF
FE
FE
*
FF
*
FF
FE
FE
*
FF
*
FF
F,S,TR,MR
RP.PS
FF
:Sn!;S^iGSBS|il:i:i:
Remedial
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Remedial
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Enforcement
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Enforcement
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Remedial
Federal Facility
Other Response
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Other Response
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Site Characterization
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Other Response
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Enforcement
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Other Response
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Enforcement
Enforcement
Other Response
Federal Facility
Other Response
Federal Facility
Remedial Action
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
* Lead left to the Regions' discretion
111-25
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT in.8
WHO PAYS FOR WHAT (cont'd)
C6RCOS ACTION NAIMK
Remedial Design (RD)
RD Oversight
PRPRD
RD Oversight and CR
FFRD
RD Contingency
Remedial Investigation
Combined RI/FS
RI/FS Contingency
RI/FS Oversight
PRP RI/FS
RI/FS Oversight and CR
FF RI/FS
Removal
Removal Contingency
Removal Oversight
PRP Removal
FF Removal
Removal Assessment
Site Inspection
START Contract Mgt
State Core Grant
Underground Storage Tank Remov
StlE-
•
"
*
•
"
•
-
•
'
•
NON-
SHE
SPECJHC
-
•
•
-
•
•
-
•
'
•
•
LEAD
F,S,TR,MR
RP.PS
*
FF
FF
*
F,S,TR,MR,
RP.PS
FF
F,S,,TR,MR
*
RP.PS
*
FF
FF
F,S,TR,MR
*
RP.PS
FF
F.S.TR.MR
F.S.TR
FF
FF
S,TR
*
BUDGET
SOURCE
Remedial
Remedial
Remedial
Federal Facility
Federal Facility
Remedial
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Remedial
Remedial
Remedial
Federal Facility
Federal Facility
Removal
Removal
Removal
Federal Facility
Removal
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Federal Facility
Remedial
Removal
AOA CATEGORY
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Federal Facility-
Federal Facility
Removal
Removal
Removal
Federal Facility
Removal
Site Characterization
Federal Facility
Other Response
Federal Facility
Other Response
Removal
* Lead left to Regions' discretion
September 27, 1996
111-26
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SUPERFUND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
The purpose of this section is to assist Regional program offices in carrying out their financial management
responsibilities. It discusses the financial management tools and systems used by HQ and the Regions to enter and
track financial information. It also details specific HQ and Regional financial management responsibilities. Finally,
this section discusses the various financial management funding mechanisms available to EPA to support Superfund
cleanup work.
Exhibit HI.9 provides a list of financial management contacts to assist the Regions in resolving or clarifying any
financial management issues or difficulties that are encountered.
EXHIBIT ra.9
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CONTACTS
^^lijiifl^^ill^^^R
HQ
Region I
Region II
Region III
Region IV
Region V
Region VI
Region VII
Region VIII
Region IX
Region X
Research Triangle Park
Charles Young
Mary Ellen Stanis
Troy Brown
Richard Manna
Joann Velez
Steve Pandza
Diane Malancone
Connie Crumley
Noey Berrera
Kristy Dickens
Mary Ellen Ryan
Darius Taylor
Cindy Brown
John Eagles
Ina Square
Judy Novak
Philip Elbeck
Judy Lehmann
Tiffanie Pang
Yvonne Fong
Gary Hansen
Kathy Tsing
Joe Safadi
Betty Hamilton
ISwS^^BiiJSWIiilllt
&m~^fi*&m!f-m!tztK%mi---i!m
(202) 260-6890
(617)565-3341
(617)565-3778
(212) 637-3465
(212) 637-3462
(215) 566-5178
(215) 556-5172
(404) 347-3278
(404) 347-3278
(404) 347-3278
(312)353-6268
(312)353-3241
(214) 665-7480
(214) 665-6535
(913)551-7357
(913)551-7360
(303)312-6360
(303)312-6166
(415)744-1742
(415) 744-1742
(206)557-2901
(206) 553-4688
(919) 541-4387
(919)541-4280
HI-27
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Financial Management Tools and Systems
Exhibit III. 10 describes the financial management tools and systems used by HQ and the Regions.
EXHIBIT m.10
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT TOOLS AND SYSTEMS
Integrated Financial
Management System
(IFMS)
The Agency's official automated accounting, funds control, and monitoring
system. Encompasses all of the Agency's financial systems for planning, budget
formulation and execution, program and administrative accounting, and auditing.
Maintained by the Administrative Systems Division of the Office of Information
Resources Management.
Management and
Accounting
Reporting System
(MARS)
IFMS application that identifies the status of commitments, obligations, and
payments for a site. MARS can select any data element maintained in IFMS,
arrange those elements in any desired format, and print a report. Regional
program office staff can request MARS reports from the Regional Servicing
Finance Office (SFO).
Account Number
(AN)
In FY 96, the AN was expanded from a 10-digit number to a 6-field, 4I-character
number that identifies costs associated with a specific site and activity. EPA
documents and records its direct and indirect costs for each cleanup action and
tracks costs through IFMS.
Document Control
Number (DCN)
A 6-digit number assigned by the Regional SFO to Procurement Requests (PRs)
and Commitment Notices (CNs). This same number is carried over from the PR
or CN to the obligating document. Identifies the spending action in IFMS, just as
a check number identifies a check.
Automated
Document Control
Register (ADCR)
Allowance holder's mechanism for maintaining a running balance of all funds
available to the allowance holder. Maintained in the SFO. Funds Certifying
Officer (FCO) checks the ADCR balance when certifying availability of funds,
then assigns a DCN and records it in the ADCR.
Site/Spill
Identification
Number (S/S ID)
3-digit number that identifies costs associated with a specific site. Established by
the Regional officer. Before assigning a S/S ID, an EPA Identification Number
(EPA ID) must exist. Also need to ensure that the site is not listed under another
name. There should be only one S/S ID for each EPA ID. Sites should receive
identifiers in CERCLIS if it appears that more than $5,000 will be spent on a
response action.
September 27, 1996
111-28
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Exhibit III. 11 details the new 6-field, 41-character Account Number. It identifies the new fields, what should be
entered in each position of each field, and provides a sample entry for each of the six fields that comprise the Account
Number.
EXfflBITin.il
ACCOUNT NUMBER STRUCTURE
IS:;.
Budget Fiscal Year
(4 characters)
The first two positions in this field identify the
budget fiscal year (e.g., '96'). The third and
fourth positions in this field identify the ending
fiscal year, but these positions are not used by the
Superfund program, and should be left blank.
26_.
Appropriation
(6 characters)
The type of appropriation is entered in this field,
(e.g., 'TR'). If the appropriation is billed or
received (for cost recovery), valid entries can be
up to 4 characters in length (e.g., 'HSCR'), with
the last two positions left blank.
TR
Program Element
(9 characters)
The program element value is either TAX' for the
site assessment and removal programs, 'GBX' for
enforcement, or 'YPX' for Federal facilities. The
remaining six positions in this field should be left
blank.
EAX.
Budget Organization
(7 characters)
The Budget Organization field is the Allowance
Holder/Responsibility Center (AHRC) code (e.g.,
'02H'). The AHRC code can be between 3 and 6
characters in length.
0.2H.
Site/Project
(8 characters)
The unique site identifier (S/S ID) should be
entered in positions 1, 3 and 4, e.g., '0_23'. The
Region number should be entered in position 2,
e.g., '7' for Region 7 (For Region 10, a '0'
should be entered in this position; for Region 1
and HQ a ' 1' is entered hi this position). The
action code is entered in positions 5 and 6 (e.g.,
'AN' for RD/RA Negotiations). The Operable
Unit is entered in positions 7 and 8 (e.g., '01' for
Operable Unit number 01),
Q721ANOI
Cost Organization
(7 characters)
The leading 'C' is the CERCLIS identifier used by
IFMS. It is system generated in the first position
of the Cost Organization field for CERCLIS
actions. The numerical characters in the second,
third and fourth positions represent the action
sequence number, e.g., '002' for the second
occurrence of an action at a site. The remaining
positions should be left blank.
£002
111-29
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
"OZZ" and "OWQ" Accounting Information
When committing or obligating funds at sites where a S/S ID has not been assigned yet, the Region may use
"OZZ" in the S/S ID position of the Account Number for PAs and Sis only. "OWQ" should be used for
committing or obligating funds for all other activities at sites where a S/S ID has not been assigned. The "OZZ"
and/or "OWQ" should be used only if a site does not have a S/S ID. When "OWQ" or "OZZ" is used in the S/S
ID position, funds are obligated non-site specifically. However, when the funds are paid out/disbursed, they must
be associated with a site. Once a S/S ID has been established for the site, Regions must revise all the financial
accounting information (in IFMS and on the obligating document) with the correct S/S ID. The "OZZ" and/or
"OWQ" should not be used for future obligations once a S/S ID has been established at the site. (Information on
changing IFMS data can be found later in this chapter.)
Regional Financial Management Responsibilities
Due to the complexities of the Superfund program, numerous organizational units within the Regional EPA offices
have responsibility for Superfund financial management. These organizations and their responsibilities are detailed
in Exhibits III. 12 through HI. 15.
For the purposes of this document, the Regional Management Division is the organization in which financial
management, budgetary, accounting, planning and assistance agreements, and administration functions are carried out.
The Regional Servicing Finance Office (SFO) and the Contracting Officers (CO) for the ARCS, RAC, ERCS,
Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START), Response Oversight Contract (ROC) and ERRS
contracts are considered to be a part of this division,
HQ Financial Management Responsibilities
Selected program offices in HQ also have Superfund financial management responsibilities. The main point of
contact for technical program area specific financial management issues is the applicable Regional center. Contact
HQ's PARM with any issues pertaining to the AOA or overall budget resources. Exhibit III. 14 identifies the
responsibilities of the HQ management offices.
Financial Management and Funding Processes
Regional financial authority consists of three distinct but interrelated parts: approvals, commitments, and
obligations. The payment and deobligation processes result in drawdowns from obligated funds. Due to limited
resources to fund FY 97 activities, it is essential that Regions deobligate unneeded prior year funds so they can be used
to close the funding gap. The funding processes are outlined in Exhibit III. 16. Exhibit III. 17 indicates the process
by which the Regions commit and obligate funds in the CERCLIS environment.
Financial Management Funding Mechanisms
EPA uses a variety of funding mechanisms to carry out CERCLA-funded response actions. These include the
following:
Contracts
The Agency's Long-Term Contracting Strategy (LTCS) identifies the long-term contracting needs of the
Superfund program and provides a portfolio of Superfund contracts to meet those needs over the next ten years.
During FY 97, implementation of the strategy will continue.
Superfund contracts are awarded through standard procurement procedures (see the OC's Resources Management
Directives Systems 2550C, Chapter 2 of this document, and the EPA Contracts Management Manual, or refer
directly to the directives prepared for each contract). Exhibit III. 18 contains information on the procurement
September 27, 1996 111-30
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
forms used for most Superfund contracts. The unique aspect of Superfund contract processing and financial
tracking stems primarily from the need to associate contractor costs incurred with specific Superfund sites and
OUs to support the cost recovery process. Cost recovery negotiations with PRPs, or court actions, require careful
documentation of Federal costs incurred at each site/spill. Exhibits III. 19 and III.20 describe key financial
management processes for each of the primary categories of Superfund contracts, both site- and non-site specific.
Interagency Agreements (lAGs)
An IAG is a written agreement between Federal agencies under which goods and services are provided. The
Superfund program uses Disbursement lAGs and Allocation Transfer lAGs to request Federal agencies" assistance
with site cleanups and associated activities, and to provide ongoing support or services. The Regional program
office initiates and manages site-specific lAGs. U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)-lead removal lAGs and DOJ lAGs
are negotiated, approved, awarded, and managed at HQ. The IAG specifies the services required, and identifies
the method of payment. Exhibits 111.21 and 111.22 discuss IAG financial management.
Cooperative Agreements (CAs)
A CA transfers property, funds, and/or services from EPA to States, political subdivisions, or Tribal governments
to undertake the lead for a site-specific response, to defray the costs associated with participation in Federal-lead
responses, or to build State or Tribal capability to implement CERCLA responses. CAs provide funding
assistance to the State, political subdivision, or Tribal government, document responsibilities, and obtain State
assurances. CAs must be approved by the Regional Administrator or designee. The steps for developing and
managing the financial aspects of a CA in the Region are outlined in Exhibit IIL23.
For additional information on the financial management of CAs, refer to the Resources Management Directives
Systems 2550D, Chapter 9.
Superfund State Contracts (SSCs)
When EPA or a political subdivision has the lead for an early action (remedial authority) or RA, a SSC is used
to describe the State's role. A SSC is a legally binding agreement that provides the mechanism for obtaining
required State cost share and other assurances, outlines the statement of work for the response action, and
documents responsibilities for implementation of response activities at a site. When a political subdivision has
the lead, the SSC is signed by EPA, the State, and the political subdivision.
The SSC does not obligate funds. Funds for Federal-lead projects must be obligated through an EPA PR with
a contractor, or through an IAG with another agency. Funds for response actions conducted by a political
subdivision are provided through a CA (see previous section).
The SSC must be signed prior to the obligation of funds for a RA or early action (remedial authority). EPA may
obligate RD funds to initiate the RA or early action (remedial authority) procurement process, up to the point of
soliciting for construction bids. In cases of extreme urgency, a solicitation [for bids on RA or early actions
(remedial authority) work] may be issued before a SSC is signed. The solicitation must notify prospective bidders
that the availability of funds for the contract is contingent on EPA and the State concluding a SSC. If the SSC
is not signed before the bid opening, one of the following decisions must be made:
• The solicitation may be canceled; or
• The bid opening date may be postponed (giving bidders an opportunity to withdraw, modify, or submit new
bids).
IH-31 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT m.12
REGIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
• Approves cleanup actions
under removal authority
* Approves consistency
exemptions at NPL sites
where the removal costs are
more than $2 million
• Awards CAs
• Awards lAGs
Enters into SSCs
• Initiates response planning
activities
» Awards TAGs
* All of these authorities may be
re-delegated with the exception
of removal actions deemed
"nationally significant,"
consistency exemptions.
Provides technical support to
the CO
Reviews vouchers and/or
financial reports
Manages CAs and lAGs
Prepares CNs and PRs
Develops SSCs
Negotiates CAs
Issues S/S IDs or requests
that they be issued
Manages the Region's
allowances
Approves Request for
Proposals (RFPs) or Request
for Bids and contracts
developed by the States
Participates in pre-award
financial management system
reviews
Enters financial data on
contracts, lAGs, and CAs
into CERCLIS
Maintains Superfund
document files on Regional
work performed
Submits change requests
Initiates and manages
deobligations
Assigns AN, DCN, and CA
identification numbers
Enters quarterly AOA into
IFMS, controls Regional
allowance, maintains
ADCR, and reconciles
transactions
Issues S/S IDs
Sets up Regional account
numbers in IFMS
Processes PRs, lAGs, and
CAs
Enters commitments,
obligations, and drawdowns
into IFMS
Reviews invoices, monthly
financial reports, and
payment requests
Obligates Regional contracts
and modifications
Assists Regional program
office in the pre-application
phases of the CA
development
Maintains Superfund
document files on Regional
costs, and supports the
preparation of
documentation for cost
recovery
Maintains accounts
receivable for cost recovery,
cash outs, SSC cost share,
and oversight billings, and
maintains billing and
collection system
Provides Regional program
office with financial data
September 27, 1996
111-32
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT m.13
DESCRIPTION OF REGIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT STAFF
:•?! % OS^M^Sy^ttSlsx?
« Employee of
EPA or U.S.
Coast Guard
(USCG)
• Reacts to
hazardous
substance
spills and
releases, or
threats of
release
» Initiates and
manages
cleanup actions
under removal
authority
• Aware of, in
control of, and
responsible for
site charges
• Ensures costs
are reasonable
and necessary
| ;;||;g:||:;::||)|;;l|B|i
• Typically an
OSC
• Must have a
written
"Delegation of
Procurement
Authority"
signed by a
Senior
Procurement
Manager
••---•- :-:-.•;-:•;.,:•,•;•:•:•:•::;• :::•::-:-.-:-:-:-:•:•:-;- .-:-:•:•:•:•
>:-: :.: .-_:-:- •:•'.•/_ • ••• ; ;¥;';':::"x-: x'x::::::":-:':-:*;v:';:Xv:'
• Employee of
EPA
* Initiates and
manages early
actions
(remedial
authority) and
long-term
actions
• Manages
enforcement
costs and
activities
* Aware of in
control of, and
responsible for
site charges
» Ensures costs
are reasonable
and necessary
» Employees of
EPA
• Manages
remedial,
enforcement,
removal, and
general site
support
contracts
• Established in
each Regional
program office
• Staffed with
EPA staff
(the non-
government
functions may
be performed
by a
contractor)
• Provides
administrative
support to the
OSC/RPM
• Provides
liaison
between
OSC/RPM
and other
groups
involved in
administrative
matters
• Provides
support to
Regional
program
management
IH-33
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT m. 14
RESPONSIBILITIES OF REGIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE
FINANCIAL STAFF
osc
• Prepares site
budgets and
contract
action
requests
• Completes
Action
Memoranda
• Prepares
delivery
orders and
PRs
• Establishes
and maintains
official site
file
« Reviews and
approves
cleanup
contractors'
charges on a
daily basis
• Tracks site
costs against
the
established
site ceiling
• Approves
contractor
invoices
• Acquires
services using
warrant for
up to
$250,000
Ordering
Officer
» Obligates a
maximum of
$250,000 for
removal
actions
• Develops
statements of
work and
cost ceilings
for removals
BPM
* Reviews
contractor
invoices and
financial
reports
* Establishes
and maintains
official site
files
• Initiates
Work
Assignments
(WAs), CAs,
lAGs, and
contracts
* Approves
site-specific
1AG invoices
BK»/»PO
« Evaluates and
designates
contractor
award fees
• Monitors
contractors'
activities
* Reviews
monthly
contractor
reports and site-
specific
attachments
* Initiates WAs,
CAs, lAGs, and
contracts
« Approves site-
specific IAG
invoices
» Identifies
Regional and
site-specific
contract
requirements
« Reviews
invoices
• Provides
general contract
management
support
ASU
• Assists
OSC/RPM in
administrative
duties
• Assists in
developing
removal site
budgets and
Action
Memoranda
« Assists in
daily cost
monitoring
via daily
contractor
reports
• Maintains the
Removal Cost
Management
System
(RCMS)
• Sets up and
maintains
active site
files
« Completes
PRs and CNs
• Reviews
IFMS reports
September 27, 1996
111-34
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT m. 15(1 of 2)
FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF HQ MANAGEMENT OFFICES
Financial Management Division
Grants Administration Division
Collects HQ's Superfund
cost documentation for cost
recovery
Oversees annual site-specific
reporting process
Issues financial policies and
procedures
Provides general accounting
support
Records transfer allocations
Notifies Trust Fund to invest
cost recoveries, fines, and
penalties
Establishes Superfund ANs
inlFMS
Conducts Superfund
contracting program
Negotiates, awards,
monitors, modifies, and
terminates contracts
Provides technical guidance
on contract administration
Provides cost and price
analysis
Issues policies, regulations,
and guidance for processing,
awarding, and managing
financial assistance
agreements and lAGs
Issues identification numbers
for all lAGs
Processes and awards HQ
lAGs
EXHIBIT 111.15(2 of 2)
FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF HQ MANAGEMENT OFFICES
Financial Management Center-
(RTF)
Allocates Superfund
allowances among HQ and
Regions
Approves Regional
allowances
Monitors obligations against
regular and site allowances
Processes transfer
allocations
Processes change requests
Reprograms allowances
Provides accounting support
for all Superfund lAGs
Processes disbursement
requests from other agencies
Processes billings for
reimbursable activities
Enters IAG obligations and
disbursements into IFMS
Provides accounting support
for all Superfund contracts
Enters contract award and
obligation data into IFMS
Processes contractor invoices
Enters payments into IFMS
via the Contract Payment
System
Hl-35
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXfflBITin.16
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND FUNDING PROCESSES
Discussloa
Approvals
An approval by the AAs, Regional Administrator or official designee is authorization
to undertake a CERCLA-funded response action.
Early Actions (Removal Authority):
— Regional Administrator approves actions costing up to $2 million, grants
exemptions up to twelve months and $2 million statutory limits based on consistency
with the long-term action, and may re-delegate to the OSC the authority to approve
actions costing up to $50,000 in emergency situations.
— Before taking action, an Action Memorandum must be approved, except in
emergency situations. The Action Memorandum documents whether the release
meets the criteria of CERCLA and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), and includes an estimated total project ceiling.
The OSC uses the estimate of duration and cost in order to determine the proper
approval authority.
— In extreme emergencies, the OSC may initiate activities without preparing the
necessary documentation in advance. The OSC must document the decision within
24 hours of initiating the response.
Early Actions (Remedial Authority), RD, RA, Site Screening and Assessment,
Enforcement, and Federal facilities:
— Planning is accomplished through SCAP. Funds cannot be committed or obligated
unless the project is in SCAP.
— Obligation planned and executed on an OU or site basis. Outlays (payments) should
be attributed to the appropriate OU.
— A Record of Decision (ROD) is required for all early actions (remedial authority)
and long-term actions. The ROD is signed by the Regional Administrator/Deputy
Regional Administrator, or the AA SWER. It documents the alternative decision-
making process, demonstrates that the requirements of CERCLA and the NCP have
been met, and provides the basis for future cost recovery actions.
Commitments
Commitments are a reservation of funds but not a legal promise to pay a supplier.
Once the Regional FCO certifies the availability of funds, a spending action becomes a
commitment. Funds that are committed but not obligated are called open
commitments.
There are two types of commitment documents: PRs and CNs. PRs commit funds for
contracts; CNs commit funds for CAs and reimbursable lAGs.
September 27, 1996
111-36
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT ffl.16 (cont'd)
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND FUNDING PROCESSES
Obligations
Obligations legally bind the government to pay a supplier for goods or services.
Obligated funds can no longer be used for any other purpose.
A contractor, another Federal agency, or State cannot start work until funds have been
obligated. Funds can be used only for the purpose for which they were obligated,
unless they are deobligated.
Obligating documents must be processed in accordance with guidance issued by OAM,
GAD, and FMD. Some contracts are awarded by OAM and entered into IFMS by the
SFO/RTP; others are handled by the Regions. Obligations for CAs are entered into
IFMS by the Regions; lAGs are entered by the FMC-Cincinnati.
Payments
(Outlays)
Invoices from contractors/suppliers are submitted to the proper SFO for payment.
Before payment, there must be an obligating document and a receiving report to verify
that the work was completed, or that the goods received were satisfactory. Unpaid
obligations remain in IFMS until paid, or until the allowance holder or obligating
official notifies the SFO that no further payments will be made.
Deobligations
Handled similarly to obligations. Same commitment and obligation documents and
procedures are used, except that the dollar amount is a reduction. Availability of
funds after deobligating depends on when the funds were obligated. Current year
funds are available as soon as the deobligation is effective. Prior year funds revert
back to HQ for redistribution. In order to reuse prior year funds, allowance holders
must request a recertification of funds to their allowance.
Regions should regularly review the status of all contracts, lAGs, and CAs. If all
activities have been completed, remaining funds should be deobligated immediately to
make them available for other activities. Regions should hold 15 percent to fund site
closeout activities.
111-37
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT in.17
HANDLING FINANCIAL DATA IN THE CERCLIS ENVIRONMENT
Funding Document prepared by
Program Office in appropriate area
(Site Assessment, Remedial, Removal,
Federal Facilities, Enforcement)
Approval of Funding Document
FMO reviews the Funding
Document, and enters
commitment information into
IFMS
Commitment information is
transferred from EFMS into
CERCLIS
CAs signed by Regional I
Administrator I
Contracts signed by CO
lAGs signed by
Participating Parties
FMO reviews the Funding
Document, assigns the
appropriate account information
(AN/DCN) and enters Regional
obligation into IFMS
Obligation data is transferred from IFMS
into CERCLIS
September 27, 1996
10-38
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT ffl.18
EPA FORMS COMMONLY USED FOR SUPERFUNB PROCUREMENTS
Cotnments
1900-8
Procurement
Request/Purchase
Order
The Agency's basic form for
requesting the procurement of
any goods or services. Used to
commit funds before obligating
funds on any of these
documents. Must be certified
by FCO.
This form is the basis for
entering a commitment in
IFMS. The FMO enters an
obligation only upon receiving
a contract document or
purchase order.
1900-48
Order for Services-
Emergency
Response to
Hazardous
Substance Release
Used by OSCs to obligate funds
and contract for services (up to
$2,500) from commercial firms
or a State or local government
(if site not owned by State or
subdivision at time wastes were
disposed of) to respond to a
release.
Results in a firm, fixed-price
contract. No price adjustment
may be made for work stated
in contract. Contractor may
submit only one invoice. FMO
will process contract as an
obligation.
1900-49
Notice to Proceed
with Emergency
Response to
Hazardous
Substance Release
Used by OSC to authorize a
contractor to begin work on an
emergency response (up to
$10,000 per incident).
Negotiation of definitive
contract and any modifications
performed by CO.
A preliminary contractual
instrument that must be made
final by a designated CO.
FMO will process notice as an
obligation.
1900-56
Letter contract for
State, Tribal
Government, or
Local Government
Response to
Emergency
Hazardous
Substance Release
Used by OSC to procure
services from a State, local or
Tribal government to begin
work on an emergency response
(up to $10,000 per incident) if
site was not owned by State or
subdivision at time of hazardous
waste disposal. Negotiation of
definitive contract and any
modifications performed by
CO.
Results in a cost
reimbursement type agreement
with a State, local, or Tribal
government. It is a
preliminary contractual
instrument that must be made
final by a CO. The
appropriate FMO will process
a letter or contract as an
obligation.
1900-59
Delivery Order for
ERCS and ERRS
Used by OCSs to order services
(up to $250,000) from the
ERCS or ERRS contractor to
respond to a release. All
modifications and obligations
greater than $250,000 will be
processed by the CO.
Has time and material
provisions but uses fixed rates
negotiated in ERCS or ERRS
contract. Order must be made
final by a designated CO.
FMO will process orders as an
obligation.
111-39
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT ffl.19
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF SITE-SPECIFIC CONTRACTS
lillSls;iiy:%:¥;:siljiiliiP;
• Obligated and
tracked on a site-
specific basis.
• Includes ARCS,
ERCS, RAC,
START, and ERRS.
• PR is used to commit
funds.
« Usually prepared in
advance of the
obligating document
except in emergency
situations when they
are prepared
simultaneously or out
of sequence.
• Regional program
office (OSC,
Ordering Officer,
RPM, RPO) prepares
the PR for site-
specific activities,
obtains the necessary
Regional office
approvals, and
forwards the
document to the SFO
for certification of
funds and addition of
accounting
information (AN and
DCN).
» SFO enters the
commitment into the
IFMS.
• Obligated by the
Regional CO, the
Regional Ordering
Officer (OSC), or
HQOAM.
Obligational authority
is determined by the
type and amount of
contract .
• In emergency
situations, OSCs
have contractual
authority to obligate
up to $250,000 via a
delivery order under
an existing contract.
Regions have limited
this authority to
$50,000.
• SFO/RTP enters the
obligation into IFMS.
• OSCorDPO
reviews contractor
invoices for early
actions (removal
authority) and signs
statement indicating
the services have
been provided.
• CO and RPM review
contractor invoices
for early actions
(remedial authority)
and long-term
actions. RPM
"informs the Project
Officer (PO) if the
invoice accurately
reflects contractors'
activities.
• Invoices must be
reviewed within 5
days.
• If the OSC disallows
or disputes charges,
a copy of the invoice
is sent to the CO
with an explanation.
OSC sends original
voucher with a copy
of the explanation to
RTP.
• If the RPM identifies
a problem, it should
be reported to the
PO for resolution.
• Certified copies of
the invoices are sent
to SFO/RTP for
processing and
payment.
September 27, 1996
IIWO
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT ra.20
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF NON-SITE SPECIFIC CONTRACTS
Diseassion
General Site Support
Not obligated on a site-specific
basis
Capable of providing broad
technical and planning support
on an "as needed" basis
Includes START, CLP, and
Environmental Services
Assistance Team (ESAT)
Contractors submit site-
specific attachment that
includes invoiced costs for:
— Each site with a S/S ID
— All other sites
— Program management
— Base and award fee
— Non-site activities
(e.g., training)
Contractors submit original
invoice to RTP and copies to
HQPO
PO reviews invoice
RPOs and DPOs may conduct
concurrent reviews
Enforcement Support Services
(ESS)
Combination of general site
support and site-specific
contracts; however, not
obligated on a site-specific
basis
Regions issue WAs against the
contract on a site-specific basis
Site-specific WAs are not
entered into IFMS
Contractors submit site-
specific attachment that
includes invoiced costs for:
— Each site with a S/S ID
— All other sites
— Cost plus/fixed/award fee
— Non-site activities
(e.g., training)
Contractors submit original
invoice to RTP and copies to
RPO
RPO reviews invoice
RPOs and WAMs may
conduct concurrent reviews
General Program Support
Contracts
Provides support to HQ and
Regional program offices
Not for site-specific work
Not obligated site-specifically
Administered totally by HQ
111-41
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT IH.21
DISBURSEMENT IAG FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
||y§|g|plp^|||ll|
• Regional program
office initiates
« Regional SFO
determines
availability of funds
• Program office
prepares IAG
funding package,
including CN,
transmittal memo,
EPA Form 1610-1,
and Decision Memo
that verifies legal
authority
• Decision Official in
Region approves
• Administrative
Assistance Unit
(AAU) conducts
administrative
review
» SFO adds accounting
data and enters
commitment into
ADCR and IFMS
* AAU obtains IAG
number from GAD
» Action Official signs
IAG
» AAU sends IAG to
other Federal agency
for signature
• AAU distributes
executed IAG to
program office,
GAD, and FMC-
Cincinnati, where
obligation is
recorded in IFMS
txf'f. : >3?#VZ*&i:**XyfSfi$:% • S^SKiftfcv J
||p||||^^PI|||l|l||
• If other agency does
not have
reimbursable
authority, FMC-
Cincinnati pays
before activities
begin
• If other agency has
reimbursable
authority, service is
provided first
• If the Simplified
Interagency Billing
and Collection
system (SIBAC) or
the On-line Payment
and Collection
system (OP AC) is
used, payment is
made before Region
certifies. Region
may request
adjustments
• If paying by check,
voucher submitted to
FMC -Cincinnati
— FMC-Cincinnati
forwards voucher
to Region
— Region reviews
and certifies
— FMC-Cincinnati
pays voucher
* USCOE direct site
payment process
allows EPA to
directly pay for long-
term actions with
USCOE certification
• Regional program
office accepts final
report
• AAU queries
Regional program
office when project
period expires or
when no project
activity is shown for
two quarters
* Regional program
office determines
whether IAG should
remain open or be
closed. Notifies
AAU
• Regional program
office prepares
closeout request.
Sends it to AAU
• AAU determines
from FMC-
Cincinnati that IAG
is closed
• AAU sends closeout
letter to other
agency, and notifies
GAD and Regional
program office
September 27, 1996
111-42
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT m.22
ALLOCATION TRANSFER IAG FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
fjjjjjj^i^im^il^^jjiijjil
• Regional program
office initiates
* Develop preliminary
cost estimate with
other agency
• Regional program
office prepares
funding package,
including EPA Form
1610-1, transmittal
memo, and Decision
Memo
• Decision Official
reviews and
approves funding
package and submits
to AAU
:S:$:::$:$:$:^
• AAU obtains IAG
number from GAD
• GAD enters IAG
data into Grants
Information Control
System (GICS)
• Action Official signs
IAG package
• AAU submits IAG to
other agency for
signature
• AAU distributes IAG
to program office,
GAD, and OC
» Program office
submits change
request to the Budget
Formulation and
Control Branch
• OC withdraws funds
from Region's
allowance and
transfers them to the
EPA transfer
allocation account
• Financial Reports
and Analysis Branch
executes transfer
^^j^^^^^^Mi^^:
• Obligational
authority is
transferred to other
agency, EPA
monitors
expenditures
• Other agency
submits monthly SF
133, Budget
Execution reports on
obligations and
expenditures to FMD
• Other agency
submits periodic
status reports to
program office and
HQ Superfund
Budget Branch
• Other agency
maintains records
and documentation,
submits to EPA upon
request
• Program office
reviews progress
reports
lifllS:pi^^ill:lill!l
* Same as
disbursement IAG;
however, AAU asks
EPA Office of
Inspector General
(OIG) to request the
other agency's OIG
to determine
financial status of
the IAG
111-43
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
EXHIBIT m.23
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
::i:i:::^'3p^reit'i'ijl'Mi*'fit:*:^:-:
i^M:^m^MAfmmm
• Regional
Program
Office
prepares CN
and obtains all
necessary
program
approvals
• Regional
Management
Division
certifies
availability of
funds, assigns
accounting
data, sets
aside the funds
on the ADCR,
and enters
commitment
into IFMS
* AAU assigns
CA
identification
number
XiXxOirixij^j^l^i^^Si^i::::::::::::1:;:::::
• Regional
Administrator
or his/her
designee signs
CA
• Regional
Management
Division
processes
obligation in
accordance
with OAM,
GAD, and
FMD
requirements
• Regional
Management
Division enters
obligation into
ADCR and
IFMS
-:-:-.:>::>>;;.': ^'-^-IpSlVfriiijtt^-S^1: : ''•'•--• ''•'-'-'- '•
i-SfV :-r-> ::::::,::::::::::::::-:::::-:-!r:':::':::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::: '<:•'-', >:-x->: •
-:%.;.; •:•-•: *;-:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:-:-:-.-. .vXyMvXvXvXv:;:;; •*•!;'•>'•'.•,*'
• By EPA-Automated
Clearing House
(EPA-ACH)
Payment System
« Uses Department of
Treasury electronic
payment
mechanism
* Payment request
submitted to SFO
• SFO reviews to
determine if:
— Budget period is
valid
— EPA-ACH AN
and summary
detail are
correct
— Project numbers
valid
— Funds available
— Reports received
— Balance on hand
not excessive
» All or part of
request may be
approved
• SFO notifies
recipient of
modified or
rejected payment
» If approved, EPA
transfers to
recipient's financial
institution
• Region monitors
monthly
:::::::::::::::f^jyK||oSiHiiH^:^:^:-:^:^
£5:?:^: :'/:::fe>v:^::>S:i;>::S^S
• Handled same
as obligation,
except dollar
amount is
reduction
« Availability of
funds after
deobligation
depends on
when they
were originally
obligated
* Currently, FY
funds are
available as
soon as
deobligation is
effective
• Prior year
funds revert to
HQfor
redistribution
• Regions should
regularly
review status
y:$S$:$SP^^«eil^iti:::^J^::':^:$:::::
• Under multi-
site CA, funds
can be
transferred
from one site
to another site
or one
response phase
response phase
at the same
site
• Called a
transwitch
* Requires
formal CA
amendment
* CA
amendment
shows transfer
of funds by
changing
accounting
information
September 27, 1996
111-44
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
To ensure that Fund monies are effectively used, procurement activities should be initiated with RD funds only
when the Region is confident the SSC will be signed before bids are opened.
Exhibit 111.24 explains the SSC financial management requirements. For additional information on financial
management responsibilities related to SSCs, refer to the Resources Management Directives Systems 2550D,
Chapter 9.
Cost Recovery/Cost Documentation
CERCLA, as amended, imposes liability on responsible parties for the cost of responding to releases or threatened
releases of hazardous substances from hazardous waste sites or spills. When these PRPs fail to clean up sites on
their own, EPA may perform the cleanup and later attempt to recover the cleanup costs from the parties.
Obtaining reimbursement for these costs through negotiation or judicial action is one of the primary goals of the
Superfund program.
Cost recovery documentation is performed by a case development team composed of representatives from the
ORC, the Regional program office, and the Regional SFO. The involvement and distribution of responsibilities
of each of these offices during the cost recovery process does vary within each Region, and may be defined by
a Regional Inter-Office Memorandum of Understanding. Exhibit 111.25 is provided as a brief guide to the cost
recovery case development process.
HANDLING FINANCIAL DATA IN THE CERCLIS ENVIRONMENT
This section discusses the process for entering response and enforcement extramural budget data into CERCLIS.
During FY 96, an automated link for downloading IFMS data into WasteLAN/CERCLIS was initiated. Transfer of
financial information from IFMS to CERCLIS will eliminate the need for manual entry of actual financial data
(commitments and obligations) into CERCLIS. Planned financial data must still be entered into CERCLIS by the
Region; the procedures for entering planned financial data remain the same.
Note; The procedures for handling financial data in CERCLIS is in the process of being revised by the IFMS Data
Transfer Team in support of the implementation of the full transfer into CERCLIS 3. It will be detailed via change
pages to this Manual when final procedures are in place.
111-45 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT ffl.24
SSC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
Requirements
In place before EPA or political subdivision begins Fund-financed early action
(remedial authority), RA, or NTC removal where the State is sharing the cost
If USCOE is performing the action, SSC must be signed before construction
contract is signed
Assures State will pay its cost share of 10% of an early action (remedial
authority), RA, or NTC early action (removal authority) for privately operated
sites or 50% of the ESI/RI/FS, RD, RA, and early action for publicly operated
sites. At the time of the early action (remedial authority) or RA start, the State
is required to pay 50% of all prior Superfund response activities
Contains program assurances and payment schedule
Developed by Regional program office
State may be required to provide cash payments to EPA
RPM/RPO forwards copy of SSC to Regional Management Division for
accounts receivable processing
RPM/RPO forwards SSC modifications to Regional Management Division
Payment Schedule
State payment schedules are negotiated and may be either lump-sum or
incremental
State cost share is available and should be considered when requesting funding
30 days prior to SSC payment schedule, Regional Management Division will
send notice of amount required and due date to State
Payment is sent to Regional Superfund lockbox address
Regional Management Division will reference SSC, including site name and
identifier on invoice
State must include a copy of the invoice with any remittance
If funds not received when due, Regional Management Division follows up with
RPM/RPO
RPM/RPO follow up with State and advise Management Division
No interest will accrue on invoiced amount if State dollars are provided before
EPA obligates funds for an early action (remedial authority) or RA. In this
case, the Region deposits money in Trust Funds and receives a reimbursable
allowance
RPM/RPO is responsible for notifying Regional Management Division to close
out SSC
Regional Management Division reconciles financial data
September 27, 1996
111-46
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT ffl.25
COST RECOVERY REFERRAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Initiation of Cost
Recovery Process
Regional program office prepares and submits cost recovery checklist through
Regional Cost Recovery Coordinator (RCRC) to Regional SFO. Checklist
identifies date through which costs are to be documented and date
documentation is required.
RCRC requests site-specific reports generated by the Superfund Cost
Organization and Recovery Enhancement System (SCORES) to provide cost
basis for negotiations with PRPs.
Cost Documentation
and Reconciliation
Involves collecting and reviewing documentation to ensure accounting and
cost information are recorded correctly, costs are properly charged, ANs
refer to the appropriate site, and costs on documents are accurately reflected
in IFMS.
SFO documents Regional Superfund costs and prepares cost summary,
computes indirect costs, provides expert and factual financial witness
testimony, and interprets financial documents and SCORES reports.
ORC reviews final cost summary and documentation in preparation for
litigation and takes appropriate action pursuant to the Privacy Act and
Confidential Business Information requirements.
Work Performed
Documentation and
Reconciliation
Involves collecting and reviewing documentation to ensure that costs are being
pursued for appropriate site activities.
RCRC assembles copies of any task creating document (WA, Purchase Order,
Delivery Order, etc.) as well as amendments or modifications, progress
reports and close-out reports for the tasks included in the cost recovery
referral.
RCRC works with the SFO to ensure correspondence between the cost and
work performed documentation.
ORC reviews final work performed documentation package and takes
appropriate action pursuant to the Privacy Act and Confidential Business
Information requirements.
Site File
Maintenance
Diligent maintenance is crucial to cost recovery and is a Regional
responsibility.
Financial files maintained by the FMO until 2 years after all cost recovery
litigation is complete.
Work performed files maintained by contracts officials or RCRC in
accordance with Agency disposal guidance.
Disposal of files is permitted after 20 years.
Cost recovery documentation should be maintained by the RCRC until
required by the litigation team.
IH-47
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Entering Response and Federal Facility Data into CERCLIS
Once the funding document has been processed by the Region, and actual commitment or obligation data are
entered into IFMS and transferred to CERCLIS, the planned financial data must be deleted from CERCLIS. If a
Region wants to retain planned financial data, it must enter the planned obligation into CERCLIS with a Regional
Financial Type. The "Planned" Financial Type cannot remain in the system once the funds are committed or
obligated. Failure to replace the Planned Financial Type could cause the Region to exceed its annual budget, which
will result either in withholding AOA approval, or a reduction in next quarter's AOA.
As a result of the IFMS transfer, Regions will no longer enter actual commitments and obligations into CERCLIS
for most actions (see "Note" below). Although planned financial data will still be entered into CERCLIS by the
Regions, actual commitments and obligations for most actions will now be entered solely into IFMS by the Regional
FMO. From IFMS the data will be downloaded into CERCLIS on a nightly basis. This new process will save time
and should eliminate data errors associated with the double-entry and subsequent reconciliation of data between IFMS
and CERCLIS.
Note: At the time of this printing, not all actions tracked in CERCLIS have a corresponding IFMS code. This means
that actual financial information cannot be entered into IFMS for these actions. As a result, no financial information
associated with these actions will be transferred to CERCLIS via the IFMS transfer. Any actual financial information
that is associated with these actions must be entered directly into CERCLIS via the screens in the Cost/Financial view.
Please refer to the discussion of Exhibit III.6 and III.8 earlier in this chapter under the section titled, "Relationship
Between SCAP and the AOA," for a list of actions that are not part of the IFMS transfer and for which actual
financial information will still need to be entered manually in CERCLIS.
Entering Enforcement Extramural Budget Data into CERCLIS
After the implementation of the IFMS transfer, Regional personnel will no longer be responsible for entering
obligations/tasking [Work Assignment (WA)] amounts into CERCLIS for the majority of CERCLIS enforcement
actions. Although Regions are still responsible for entering planned financial data into CERCLIS, actual commitments
and obligations for most enforcement actions will now be entered solely into IFMS by the Regional FMO. From
IFMS, the data will be downloaded into CERCLIS on a nightly basis.
Note: At the time of this printing, not all actions tracked in CERCLIS have a corresponding IFMS code. This means
that actual financial information cannot be entered into IFMS for these actions. As a result, no financial information
associated with these actions will be transferred to CERCLIS via the IFMS transfer. Any actual financial information
that is associated with these actions must be entered directly into CERCLIS via the screens in the Cost/Financial view.
Please refer to the discussion of Exhibit III.6 and III.8 earlier in this chapter under the section titled, "Relationship
Between SCAP and the AOA," for a list of actions that are not part of the IFMS transfer and for which actual
financial information will still need to be entered manually in CERCLIS.
To ensure that all appropriate financial data are reflected in CERCLIS, the following information should appear
on obligation documents: EPA identification number (EPA-ID), S/S ID, CERCLIS action or subaction codes and OU
number, WA number, amendment number, and amount.
ANs must be established for each transaction before commitment and obligation. A CA is considered obligated
when it is signed by the Regional Administrator. An IAG is considered obligated when it is signed by the other
agency. Contracts are considered obligated when the CO signs the obligating document or, in the case of an ESS WA,
when the CO signs the WA. Regions also are responsible for reviewing and recommending payment of the
invoice/voucher (outlays) for these mechanisms. Once invoices are paid, these dollars are entered into IFMS. If the
obligation is generic and the invoice is site-specific, IFMS shows the funds deobligated from the generic account and
obligated and disbursed from the site-specific account.
September 27, 1996 111-48
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Correcting Financial Data
The IMC or Regional Superfund Budget Coordinator can request, on a regular basis, a report from the Regional
financial office that contains all Superfund financial transactions in IFMS. The information in this report can be
compared with the funding documents and the information in CERCLIS, If there is a discrepancy between the
financial data in CERCLIS and IFMS, the funding document should be used to verify the information in both systems.
There are three kinds of corrections which may be needed on financial information in IFMS, as shown in Exhibit
III.26.
Upon determining that the data on the funding document are correct, the IMC should give the Regional FMO a
copy of the funding document, and any other relevant documentation showing that the IFMS data has been entered
incorrectly. The Regional IFMS administrator is then responsible for correcting any data errors in IFMS, The IFMS
administrator is the only person authorized to correct data entry errors or change financial information in the IFMS
database. The OC has issued standard procedures for correcting IFMS data. The IMC or designee should work with
the Regional FMO on a regular basis to make sure that all IFMS errors are corrected.
Errors in AN/DCN or other information on the original funding document can only be corrected by the same
process used to initially create the financial record (by a contract/PR or by amendment of the IAG or CA).
EXHIBIT m.26
CORRECTIONS TO FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Data entry errors in IFMS
Changing ANs or DCNs that were initially entered into IFMS
Correcting errors in the source funding document or making
other amendments to existing commitments or obligations
111-49
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Index
Acronyms, xxii
Advice of Allowance (AOA), III-11
Change Request Procedures, IH-16
Flexibility, 111-15
Process, III-12
Regional Allowances, III-11
SCAP, Relationship to, HI-18
AOA (see Advice of Allowance)
Archiving CERCLIS Sites, II-22
Business Process, 11-24
Definition, 11-23
Eligible Sites, 11-23
Information Management, 11-23
Returning Sites to CERCLIS, 11-24
Brownfields, 1-6, D-l
FY 97 Budget Request, 1-7
History of, 1-6
Pilots, 1-6
Prospective Purchaser Agreements, 1-7
Tax Incentives, 1-7
Budget, III-l
AOA Procedures and Financial Reporting
Requirements, HI-11
CERCLIS Financial Data, 111-45
Enforcement, III-8
Federal Facilities, IH-8
FY 97 National Budget, HI-6
FY 97 Regional Budget, HI-6
FY 98 National Budget, HI-2
Outyear Budget Development, IH-2
Response, III-7
SCAP and Annual Regional Budget, III-8
Superfund Financial Management, HI-27
Change Request Procedures, IH-16
CERCLIS Financial Data
Entry, 111-45
Correcting Financial Data, 111-49
Enforcement Extramural Budget
Data, 111-48
Response and Federal Facility Data, 111-48
Construction Completions, 1-3
Deletion of NPL Sites, Partial, H-25
Early and Long-Term Actions
Targets and Measures, Appendix B
Enforcement
Budget, III-8
Extramural, Entry into CERCLIS, 111-48
Targets and Measures, Appendix C
Environmental Indicators, 1-8, Appendix B
Federal Facilities
Budget, III-8
Program Priorities, 1-4, II-l
Targets and Measures, Appendix D
Financial Data, HI-45
CERCLIS Environment, 111-45
Correcting Financial Data, IH-49
Entering Enforcement Extramural Budget
Data into CERCLIS, 111-48
Entering Response and Federal Facility data
into CERCLIS, 111-48
Financial Management, 111-28
Account Number Structure, New, 111-29
Contacts, 111-27
Contracts, HI-30
Cooperative Agreements (CAs), 111-31
Correcting Financial Data, IH-49
Enforcement Extramural, 111-48
Headquarters Responsibilities, II1-30
Interagency Agreements (lAGs), 111-31
"OZZV'OWQ" Accounting Information,
HI-30
Regional Responsibilities, HI-30
Superfund State Contracts (SSCs), 111-31
Tools and Systems, IH-28
CERCLIS, HI-45
Financial Tools and Systems, IH-28
Account Number, New, 111-29
Contracts, 111-30
Cooperative Agreements (CA), III-31
Interagency Agreements (IAG), Hl-31
"OZZ'VOWQ" Accounting Information,
HI-30
Superfund State Contracts (SSCs), II1-31
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Index
FY 97 National Budget Development, III-6
FY 97 Regional Budget, III-6
Enforcement Budget, III-8
Federal Facilities Budget, III-8
Response Budget, HI-7
FY 98 Budget Development, III-2
Approval, IH-3
Formulation, HI-3
Outyear, III-2
Program Characterization, HI-2
Review Phase, HI-2
Timeline, III-4
Government Performance Results Act (see
GPRA)
GPRA, 1-13
Annual Performance Plan, 1-16
Appendix G
Description, 1-13
Program Performance Reports, 1-16
Strategic Plan Requirements, 1-14
Integrated Financial Management Systems (see
IFMS)
DMS
AOA Process, III-12
AOA Change Request Procedures, 111-16
Financial Management Tools, IH-28
Entering Enforcement Extramural Budget
Data, 111-48
"OZZT'OWQ" Accounting Information,
111-30
CERCLIS, Handling Financial Data, 111-45
Manager's Schedule of Significant Events,
xvii
Oil Program, Appendix F
Organizational Charts, xxviii
Outyear Budget Development, III-2
Partial Deletions, NPL Sites II-25
Program Goals and Priorities, 1-2
Accelerated Cleanup, I-11
Base Closures, 1-8
Brownfields, 1-6 (see also, Brownfields)
Construction Completions, 1-3
Contract Management, I-10
Cost Recovery, I-10
Enforcement Fairness, 1-9
Environmental Indicators, 1-8
Federal Facilities, 1-4
Innovative Technologies, I-11
Performance Partnership Grants, 1-5
Reduce Transaction Costs, 1-9
Risk Based Priorities, 1-13
Site Assessment, Reinventing, 1-4
State Remedy Selection, 1-5
State/Tribal Role, Enhancement, 1-4
Worst Sites First, 1-3
Program Planning and Reporting
Requirements, II-1
Annual Target Setting, II-9
Archiving CERCLIS Sites, II-22
Brownfields, 1-6, II-1
HQ Evaluation of Regional Performance,
11-14
Integrated Planning, II-1
Negotiations, II-9
Partial Deletion of NPL Sites, II-25
SCAP, Relationship to Other Management
Tools, II-3
Site Assessment, Reinventing, II-1
Regional Accomplishment Reporting, 11-11
Regional Allowances, II1-11
Regional Budget Development, III-9
Regional Analytical Budgets, III-10
Site Specific Travel, IH-9
Regional Map, xxxii
Regional Performance, HQ Evaluation of,
11-14
End-of-Year Assessment, II-16
Management Reporting, 11-16
Mid-Year Assessment, II-15
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Index
Regional Performance, HQ Evaluation of,
(cont'd)
Regional Reviews, 11-16
SCAT
Adjustments and Amendments, II-19
CERCLIS Reports, 11-12
Change Control, II-6
Change Requests, 11-18
Introduction to, II-2
Maintaining in CERCLIS, II-7
Maintaining Targets/Accomplishments, 11-21
Other Management Tools, Relationship to,
II-3
Overview of Process, 11-5
Roles and Responsibilities, HQ/Regional,
II-7
Target Setting, Annual, II-9
Screen And Assess Sites
Program Priorities, 1-2
Reinventing, 1-4, II-1
Targets and Measures, Appendix A
Site Assessments, 1-2, 1-4, II-1, Appendix A
Superfund
Current Program Priorities, (see Program
Priorities)
GPRA, 1-13, Appendix G
History of, 1-1
Reforms, 1-12
September 27, 1996
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Program Implementation Procedures
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix A: Site Screening and Assessment/Regional Decisions
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3- 14-1C
Appendix A
Site Screening and Assessment/Regional Decision
Targets and Measures
Table of Contents
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION
FY 97 TARGETS AND MEASURES . A-l
Reinventing Site Assessment A-l
Overview of FY 97 Site Screening and Assessment/Regional Decision Targets and Measures A-l
Supe'rftind Durations A-2
Site Screening and Assessment/Regional Decision Definitions A-4
SSA-1 • Site Characterization Starts A-4
SSA-2 • Site Screening and Assessment Decisions A-4
SSA-3 • Sites Archived A-7
Site Discovery A-8
Preliminary Assessments (PA) A-9
Site Inspections (SI) A-l 1
Site Inspection Prioritizations (SIPs) A-12
Expanded Site Inspections (ESI) A-14
Integrated Expanded Site Inspection/Remedial Investigation (ESI/RI) A-15
Hazard Ranking System Package (HRS) . A-16
Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation A-17
Regional Decisions A-19
Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) A-20
Community Relations A-20
Support Agency Assistance A-21
Technical Assistance A-21
Technical Assistance Grants (TAGs) A-22
Remedial Investigation (RI) Starts A-22
Feasibility Study (FS) Starts A-24
Combined RI/FS Start A-25
Start of Public Comment Period (FS Report to Public) A-26
RI/FS Duration ; A-27
RDT-1 • Decision Document Developed A-27
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix A
Site Screening and Assessment/Regional Decision
Targets and Measures
List of Exhibits
EXHIBIT A.I SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION ACTIVITIES ....... A-3
EXHIBIT A.2 SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL
DECISION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS A-29
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
APPENDIX A
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION
FY 97 TARGETS AND MEASURES
REINVENTING SITE ASSESSMENT
The current site assessment process consists of completion of the Preliminary Assessment (PA), Site Inspection
(SI), and Hazard Ranking System (MRS) documents, and placement on the National Priorities list. This data is
entered into Superfund's information management system, the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS), for planning and accomplishment reporting purposes.
The purpose behind site assessment has been to identify sites for the NPL, not to identify the most appropriate means
for cleanup. Several developments have led EPA to consider redesigning the process including the need to encourage
Brownfields redevelopment; the unintended stigma associated with adding a site into CERCLIS; and the increased
expertise of State and some Tribal programs. EPA has begun various site assessment pilots to aid in developing a
more efficient and effective Superfund site assessment program. Key goals are to give States increased responsibility,
encourage early/more efficient cleanups, reduce costs, and promote environmental recovery and economic
revitalization. Regions should follow the traditional site assessment process for sites listed in CERCLIS unless sites
are being addressed through approved pilots.
OVERVIEW OF FY 97 SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION
TARGETS AND MEASURES
The Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishments Plan (SCAP) is used by the Assistant Administrator for the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (AA SWER), Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance (AA OECA), and senior Superfund managers to monitor the administrative progress each
Region is making towards achieving its Superfund goals. Superfund cleanup results are tracked through targets and
measures at the SCAP level as well as internal reporting measures. Those Superfund activities not tracked at the
SCAP level are monitored for internal management purposes by Headquarters (HQ).
The Superfund program will continue to serve as a pilot performance plan project under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA), which was discussed in Chapter I. SCAP will serve as the mechanism through
which the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR) will track GPRA progress. As such, the program
will set national goals based on historical performance and performance expectations within a limited budget for the
four performance goals in GPRA and track accomplishments in the activities contributing to those goals, HQ will
not establish specific Regional targets and measures for GPRA. Regions should continue to plan and report
accomplishments in CERCLIS as they have traditionally. There are no additional GPRA-related reporting
requirements for the Regions in FY 97.
The differences between SCAP targets and measures remain the same (i.e., a pre-determined numerical goal
versus an activity deemed essential to tracking overall program progress, respectively). OERR will continue to track
site assessment activities to document and evaluate administrative program progress and to analyze program trends.
SCAP accomplishments will be pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Planning measures are used to project
the number of events and activities that each Region expects to perform during the year using anticipated resources.
Reporting measures simply track the number of events and activities that occur throughout the year and are used to
evaluate overall progress through the cleanup pipeline. Planning measures also report accomplishments.
The following pages contain, in pipeline order, the definitions of the FY 97 site screening and
assessment/Regional decision SCAP targets and measures (with the prefix SSA or RDT), internal management
planning and reporting measures, and site screening and assessment project support activities. Exhibit A.I displays
the full list of site screening and assessment and Regional decision activities defined in this Appendix. Exhibit A.2,
at the end of this Appendix, identifies planning requirements for all site screening and assessment/Regional decision
A-l September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
activities.
SUPERFUND DURATIONS
The Superfund program has tracked remedial pipeline durations for several years in the Superfund Senior
Management Reports as part of Superfund progress evaluation. As program management emphasis shifts from
administrative progress to more comprehensive measurement of program progress, OERR will track additional
durations besides the remedial pipeline durations. These durations include: Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis
(EE/CA) duration; Expanded Site Inspection/Remedial Investigation (ESI/RI) duration; removal duration; average
proposed listing to first removal or remedial action; and average duration from action memorandum to first removal
completion. In FY 97, OERR will track the average event and site durations presented below. These durations are
not SCAP measures; they are presented here for informational purposes only. HQ is responsible for calculating and
publishing the durations in the Superfund Senior Management Reports; however, Regions are responsible for entering
and maintaining accurate data from which durations can be derived.
The durations only cover non-Federal facility actions and are calculated based on actual dates. In addition, they
do not include takeovers (within actions) or phased actions.
• Average Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) Duration
• Duration from ROD to RD Start
• Duration from ROD to RA Start
September 27, 1996 A-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT A.I
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION ACTIVITIES
^^ii^p?'-^^^.'^^^»^^l:^Mi.^:^g^^^':j^^^^^!^:1::MteBa
:::ft€?:FJ:¥:FI3*i :: ''• '• : : : : - fA-xtf^iSffff^-'iK: m^ttm* $•;&&•;•%•!#&•& ts&y-'s • ¥• •AWSWSy-Sftw «:.;:;.: -XSirnKm
SSA-1 Site Characterization Starts
SSA-2 Site Screening and Assessment Decisions
SSA-3 Sites Archived
Site Discovery
Preliminary Assessment (PA) Starts
PA Completions
Site Inspection (SI) Starts
SI Completions
Site Inspection Prioritization (SIP) Starts
SIP Completions
Expanded Site Inspection (ESI) Starts
ESI Completions
Integrated ESI/RI Starts
Integrated ESI/RI Completions
Hazard Ranking System (MRS) Package Starts
HRS Package Completions
Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation Starts
Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation Completions
Regional Decisions
Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA)
Community Relations
Support Agency Assistance
Technical Assistance
Technical Assistance Grants (TAGs)
RI Starts
FS Starts
Combined RI/FS Starts
Start of Public Comment Period (FS Report to Public)
RI/FS Duration
RDT-1 Decision Document Developed
•ymiy-KSfMafxmm:
Measure
Measure
Measure
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Target
?•¥: ftlSgEfcRraaiff-yx
-
-
-
Reporting
Reporting
Planning
Reporting
Planning
Reporting
Planning
Planning
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
Planning
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
Planning
-
-
-
-
Planning
Planning
Planning
Reporting
Reporting
-
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Internal measures are planned and
reported quarterly.
A-3
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION DEFINITIONS
SSA-1 • SITE CHARACTERIZATION STARTS
Definition of Target/Measure:
Site characterization involves the collection of field data from a hazardous substance site for the purpose of
characterizing the magnitude and severity that the hazard at the site poses to human health and the environment, A
site characterization start is defined as the first Superfund financed SI, combined PA/SI, Removal Investigation, ESI,
or Integrated ES1/RI at a site. Site characterization starts are tracked for non-Federal facilities only.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The Region will receive credit for a site characterization start when EPA or the State signs a letter, memo or form
approving the work plan or a Technical Direction Document (TDD) is issued to the contractor at a site and the actual
start date (Actual Start) is reported in CERCLIS for the first:
• SI (Action Name = Site Inspection); or
• Combined PA/SI (Action Name = Preliminary Assessment and Action Name = Site Inspection); or
* Removal Investigation (Action Name = Removal Investigation ); or
• ESI (Action Name = Expanded Site Inspection); or
Integrated ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI).
Regions only will receive credit for the first site characterization event started at a site. Regions cannot receive credit
if a site characterization event began or was conducted at the site in a previous year. Credit is given for the first
activity started. A site only can receive credit once.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. Accomplishments are reported site-specifically in CERCLIS as the actual start
date of the appropriate event. This is a SCAP measure. Funds for PAs, Sis, SIPs, ESIs, and ESI/RIs are contained
in the site characterization Advice of Allowance (AOA); funds for Removal Investigations are contained in the
removal AOA.
If a combined PA/SI is being performed, Regions must enter the same start date for both the PA and SI actions. If
an integrated ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI) is being performed, Regions should not enter an ESI start date.
SSA-2 • SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT DECISIONS
Definition of Target/Measure:
Site screening and assessment decisions are made at Superfund sites upon completion of all site assessment actions.
These decisions identify how to proceed with site response and are recorded in CERCLIS as event qualifiers
(Qualifier). These decisions include:
* (H) High - Higher priority for further assessment; or
September 27, 1996 A-4
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
» (L) Low - Lower priority for further assessment; or
• (G) - Recommended for MRS Scoring [i.e., development of MRS package, (Action Name = Hazard Ranking
System Score Determi)]; or
• (N) - No further remedial action planned (NFRAP); or
• (D) - Deferred to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (Subtitle C) or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC). Note: Federal Facilities cannot have deferred ('D') event qualifiers for site assessment events; or
• (A) - Site is being addressed as part of an NPL site. A site having an event qualifier of 'A' should have an NPL
Status Indicator (Site NPL Status) of 'A' and a Parent Site ID (Site Parent ID) as well; or
• (F) - Referred to the removal program with further remedial assessment needed; or
• (W) - Referred to the removal program with no further remedial assessment needed.
Note: Not all decisions are applicable to each site assessment event. See Definition of Accomplishment for further
information.
This is a SCAP measure.
Definition of Accomplishment;
Since the site assessment process consists of several discrete evaluation stages, sites may receive credit for multiple
decisions. For example, sites with both a PA and SI completed during a given fiscal year would reach a decision point
upon completion of the PA as well as upon completion of the SI. This measure is designed to capture the number of
decisions made so a given site may receive credit for more than one decision during the same fiscal year. Credit is
given for each of the following site screening and assessment decisions made at a site:
NFRAP
Superfund site assessment activities are suspended when the appropriate Regional official signs a letter, form, or
memo approving the site assessment report (PA, SI, SIP, ESI, ESI/RI, or MRS Package) and makes a determination
that no further remedial action is planned (NFRAP) or required. No further Superfund remedial assessment work
will be taken at a site with a NFRAP determination unless new information warranting such action is presented to
EPA. The date of the NFRAP determination must be entered in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the appropriate site assessment action along with a valid lead (Lead) and appropriate action qualifier
[Qualifier = (N) No Further Remedial Action Planned/Site Evaluat].
NFRAP decisions should not be confused with CERCLIS archiving. NFRAP decisions are made from a site
assessment perspective only; they simply denote that further Superfund remedial assessment work is not required based
on currently available information. In contrast, the archival of CERCLIS sites is made only when no further
Superfund interest exists at a site. This means that sites are not archived if there are planned or ongoing removal or
enforcement activities, or if other Superfund interest still exists, even for sites which have had NFRAP decisions made
at them during site assessment activities.
Note: If the NFRAP decision is reached at the conclusion of the site inspection prioritization (SIP) subaction, the
existing action qualifier (Qualifier) for the related site inspection action must be deleted and replaced with the NFRAP
determination [Qualifier = (N) No Further Remedial Action Planned/Site Evaluat].
A-5 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-I4-1C
Further Evaluation
Upon completion of each site assessment action, the Region may determine that additional, more complex evaluation
activities are required to determine whether or not the site should be pursued for placement on the NPL. This decision
is effective when the appropriate Regional official signs a letter, form, or memo indicating further evaluation is
required. A decision to conduct further evaluations at a site is recorded differently in CERCLIS depending on what
site assessment activity is being performed.
For PAs, Sis, and SIPs, further evaluation is denoted by either making a decision of higher priority [Qualifier = (H)
High] , or lower priority [Qualifier = (L) Low] for further evaluation, and recording this as the action qualifier in
CERCLIS,
For ESIs and ESI/RIs, further evaluation is denoted by the decision to recommend the site for HRS Scoring [Qualifier
= (G) Recommended for HRS Scoring],
Further evaluation activities upon completion of an HRS Package consist of HQ quality assurance and ultimately a
decision on whether to propose the site to the NPL. This need for further evaluation is denoted in CERCLIS by
recording an actual completion date (Actual Complete) for the HRS Package (Action Name = Hazard Ranking System
Score Determi) and leaving the event qualifier field blank.
Note: If the further evaluation decision is reached at the conclusion of a SIP subaction, the existing action qualifier
at the related site inspection action qualifier must be deleted and replaced with the further evaluation decision
[Qualifier = (H) High or (L) Low or (G) Recommended for HRS Scoring],
Perform an Early Action
Upon completion of PAs, Sis, SIPs, ESIs, or ESI/RIs, the Region may determine that a time-critical or non-time
critical (NTC) early action (removal authority) is necessary. This decision is effective when the appropriate Regional
official signs a letter, form, or memo approving the related site assessment report documenting completion of the
assessment activity and the need for early action. The decision is recorded for these events in CERCLIS by entering
either an 'F' [Qualifier = (F) Referred to Removal, Needs Further Remedial] or a 'W [Qualifier = (W) Referred
to Removal, No Further Remedial] as the event qualifier.
Note: If the decision to perform an early action is reached at the conclusion of a SIP subaction, the existing action
qualifier for the related site inspection event must be deleted and replaced with the decision to perform an early action
[Qualifier = (F) Referred to Removal, Needs Further Remedial or (W) Referred to Removal, No Further Remedial].
Aggregate the Site into Another "Parent" NPL Site
Upon completion of PAs, Sis, SIPs, ESIs, or ESI/RIs, the Region may decide to collapse or combine a site into an
existing "parent" NPL site. This would be done when contamination at a non-NPL site is being addressed by cleanup
actions at an existing NPL site. This most frequently occurs at Federal facilities and sites with an area-wide
groundwater contamination problem resulting from multiple sources. The decision to aggregate a site into an existing
NPL site requires additional data handling requirements as follows:
• Upon completion (Actual Complete) of the site assessment activity that led to the decision to aggregate the site,
the Region should enter an 'A' (addressed as part of an existing NPL site) in the Action Qualifier data field
[Qualifier = (A) Site Being Addressed as Part of an NPL Site] in CERCLIS. This decision should be
documented in the letter, form, or memo approving the site assessment report; and
• The EPA ID number of die parent site must be entered into the Parent Site ID field in CERCLIS (Site Parent ID)
for the site which has been aggregated; and
September 27, 1996 A-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• The NPL Status (Site NPL Status) for the site being aggregated must be changed to 'A' (Addressed as part of an
existing NPL site); and
• After a site is aggregated into the parent site, no further work should be recorded at the aggregated site. Instead,
any further response work performed at the aggregated site should be recorded under the existing parent NPL
site, possibly as a separate operable unit.
Note: If the decision to aggregate the site is reached at the conclusion of a SIP subaction, the existing action qualifier
for the related SI event (Action Name = Site Inspection) must be deleted and replaced by the decision to aggregate
the site [Qualifier = (A) Addressed as Part of an Existing NPL Site].
Defer the Site to RCRA (Subtitle Q or the NRC
Upon completion of PAs, Sis, or SIPs at non-Federal facilities, die Region may determine that the site is excluded
from Superfund consideration under policy, regulatory, or legislative restrictions and defer it to either the RCRA
program or to the NRC. The date the decision is documented in a letter, form, or memo signed by the appropriate
Regional official approving the site assessment report should be entered into CERCLIS as the actual completion date
(Actual Complete) of the appropriate site assessment action, along with a valid event lead (Lead), and an action
qualifier [Qualifier = (D) Deferred to RCRA (Subtitle C) or NRC].
Note: If the decision to defer the site is reached at the conclusion of a SIP subaction, die existing action qualifier
(Qualifier) for the related SI action (Action Name = Site Inspection) must be deleted and replaced by the decision
to defer the site [Qualifier = (D) Deferred to RCRA (Subtitle C) or NRC].
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. Accomplishments are reported site specifically in CERCLIS. This is a SCAP
measure. A NFRAP decision does not automatically equate to CERCLIS archival of a site. (See Chapter II for more
information on archiving sites.)
SSA-3 • SITES ARCHIVED
Definition:
Archiving represents a site-wide decision or status indicating that no further interest exists at the site under the federal
Superfund program based on available information. It is a comprehensive decision in that archive status means that
there are no further site assessment, remedial, removal, enforcement, cost recovery, or oversight activities being
planned or conducted at the site.
Definition of Accomplishment:
An archive decision is recorded in CERCLIS at the site level. To receive credit for an archive decision, the "Archive
IND" must be checked, and the "Archive Date" entered. Archive designation should be documented by a note to the
site file explaining dial no further Federal Superfund interest exists at the site based on available information. The
date of the note should be the date entered in the "Archive Date" field. Although the underlying basis for archiving
a site is wherner or not federal Superfund interest exists, several categories of sites are used to generate lists of
potential archive candidate sites. Based on review of sites in these categories, Regions should update die "Archive
IND" and "Archive Date" fields as appropriate in a timely fashion. These categories are:
A-7 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
« Sites that have only completed the site assessment process and have either been given a NFRAP or Deferred
decision at the conclusion of the last completed site assessment event, and no other federal Superfund activity is
anticipated;
• Sites that have completed both the removal and site assessment process, or have completed only the removal
process with no site assessment work required (removal-only sites), or which have completed any related cost
recovery and have no further federal Superfund activity anticipated;
• Sites removed from the proposed NPL, or final NPL (e.g., as a result of a lawsuit) that have no further federal
Superfund activity anticipated;
• Sites deleted from the final NPL that have no further federal Superfund activity anticipated; and
• Sites that have been entered into CERCLIS that have not had any work started and, based on cursory review, do
not warrant expenditure of site assessment or removal funding (i.e., sites that have been recorded in CERCLIS
which should never have been entered in the first place). A discovery date and abbreviated preliminary
assessment (PA) may be appropriate for these sites prior to designating archive status.
Sites Archived is an internal reporting measure for both non-Federal and Federal facilities.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This is a new measure for FY 97.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. Planning dates are not required. It is important to note that archive is not the
same as no further remedial action planned (NFRAP). A NFRAP decision is recorded as an action qualifier and is
made only at the conclusion of a site assessment action, and does not take into account any other Superfund
programmatic activity that may be going on at a site such as removals or cost recovery.
SITE DISCOVERY
Definition:
Site discovery is the process by which a potential hazardous waste site is entered into CERCLIS. The process can
occur through the use of several mechanisms, such as a phone call or referral by a State or another government
agency. All sites moving through the remedial assessment process must have a discovery event and actual completion
date recorded in CERCLIS.
The entry of a discovery action and date into CERCLIS initiates the remedial site assessment process and places the
site on the backlog of sites needing preliminary assessments. Site discovery completions are an internal reporting
measure.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The completion of a site discovery action is the date the Region is notified of a potential hazardous waste release/site
and it is entered into CERCLIS. Site discovery is documented by a letter, form, or memo to the file signed by the
appropriate Regional official that a site has been identified as a potential hazardous waste site. Valid site discovery
actions require that die discovery action (Action Name = Discovery) and actual completion date (Actual Complete)
be entered into CERCLIS.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
September 27, 1996 A-8
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Actual start and planning dates are not required for site discovery actions. Multiple discovery events are not allowed.
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENTS (PA)
Definition:
A Preliminary Assessment (Action Name = Preliminary Assessment) is the first phase of the site assessment that
determines whether a site should be recommended for further Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) action. Federal, State, and local government files, geological
and hydrological data, and data concerning site practices are reviewed to complete the PA report. An on- or off-site
reconnaissance also may be conducted, although it is not required.
Regions may combine PA and SI activities where warranted by site conditions to reduce repetitive tasks and ultimately
costs. The combining of PA and SI activities is known as a "Combined Assessment."
With the implementation of Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model (SACM), Regions also have been encouraged to
further reduce repetitive tasks and costs by combining site assessment and removal evaluation activities where
warranted by site conditions. Terminology for this work has been changed from "Removal/Site Assessment Integrated
Assessment" to "Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation" (Action Name = Integrated Assessment), and is further
discussed in a separate section, below. Please note that when PAs are performed as part of an EA, information should
be entered for both the EA and PA events. Special reporting requirements also apply to PA actions when they are
performed as part of a combined assessment, as noted below.
PA Starts is an internal reporting measure. PA Completions is an internal planning measure.
Definition of Accomplishment:
PA Starts - A PA (Action Name = Preliminary Assessment) is started when the Region begins collecting data and
performing other tasks related to development of the PA report; or when the Region signs a letter, form, or memo
to the contractor or State (where, applicable), requesting performance of a PA at a specific site or group of sites; or
when EPA receives written confirmation from a State that the State will conduct the PA; and CERCLIS contains the
actual PA start date (Actual Start) and valid event lead (Lead). PA start dates are not required but are used by HQ
as an internal reporting measure.
PA Completions - A Preliminary Assessment (Action Name = Preliminary Assessment) is completed when:
• A PA Report has been developed by EPA; or received by the Region from the Alternative Remedial Contracts
Strategy (ARCS), or Superfund Technical Assistance and Response Team (START) contractor; or received from
the State; and the appropriate Regional official signs a letter, form, or memo approving the PA report; and
« CERCLIS contains the actual PA completion date (Actual Complete), a valid event lead (Lead), and a "decision"
on whether further activities are necessary in the Event Qualifier Field (Qualifier).
Valid decisions upon PA completion to be recorded in the CERCLIS event qualifier field (Qualifier) include:
• (H) High - Higher priority for further assessment Note: The next stage of assessment would typically be a SI
(Action Name = Site Inspection); or
• (L) Low - Lower priority for further assessment; or
» (N) - No further remedial action planned; or
A-9 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
(D) - Deferred to RCRA (Subtitle C) or the NRC. Note: Federal facilities cannot have deferred ('D') event
qualifiers for site assessment events; or
• (A) - Site is being addressed as part of an NPL site. A site having an event qualifier of 'A' should have an NPL
Status Indicator (Site NPL Status) of 'A' and a Parent Site ID (Site Parent ID) as well; or
• (F) - Referred to the removal program with further remedial assessment needed; or
• (W) - Referred to the removal program with no further remedial assessment needed.
If the PA is part of a combined assessment, the same physical report may be used for both the PA and SI, as long as
it contains all of the elements that would have been addressed under separate PA and SI reports. The report should
state specifically that it covers both the PA and SI. The decision to move forward to conduct a SI as part of a
combined assessment is documented in the task assignment provided to the contractor [e.g., TDD or Interagency
Agreement (IAG)], by correspondence between EPA and the State, or by a form or memo to the file. PA
Completions is an internal planning measure for both non-Federal and Federal facilities.
There are, however, instances when an abbreviated PA, as opposed to a full PA, is necessary. Sites in the CERCLIS
inventory determined ineligible for Superfund response by Regional EPA site assessment personnel, and purported
sites that are determined not to actually exist, do not undergo a complete PA. For such sites, the typical PA reporting
requirements are abbreviated. The narrative report remains a requirement; however, it may be limited to the
"Introduction," "Site Description, Operational History, and Waste Characteristics," and "Summary and Conclusions"
sections. The narrative should present and fully support all of the information that led to EPA's decision to cease PA
investigation at the site. As with a full PA report, factual statements within the narrative must be documented, and
appropriate references of excerpts must be attached.
Only the first two pages of the PA data and site characteristics form are required for abbreviated PA sites. These
pages provide necessary administrative information and general descriptive information about the site and associated
wastes (if any). In addition, PA scoresheets or computerized PA-Score site scoring need not be completed for
abbreviated PA sites.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
There are no programmatic changes in definition for PAs this year. The definition and documentation requirements
associated with abbreviated PAs have been added to provide a more complete representation of PA activities.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Although actual start and planning dates are not required for PAs, actual start dates are useful in identifying PA event
durations and the status of sites within the site assessment pipeline. Current HQ site assessment status reports,
including those scheduled for implementation in CERCLIS 3, are designed to make use of PA start dates, when
available. Note: If the PA is performed as part of a combined assessment, SI start dates are still required, even
though PA start dates are not.
Also for combined assessments, the PA completion date (Actual Complete) entered into CERCLIS must be the same
as the SI completion date (Actual Complete). Do not enter the PA completion date until there is a combined PA/SI
report, even though a determination has already been made that a SI is needed. PAs performed as pan of a combined
assessment should receive an event qualifier [Qualifier = (H) High] which represents a high priority for further
assessment.
September 27, 1996 A-10
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
For budget and resource allocations, separate projections must be made for EPA versus State PA completions. PA
completions (Actual Complete) are reported site-specifically in CERCLIS. Only the first PA completion at a site will
be given credit for SCAP funding purposes. For Federal facilities, EPA does not conduct the full scope of work for
PAs. Instead, EPA reviews PAs prepared and submitted by the Federal agency responsible for the site. However,
the same data is still required for both non-Federal and Federal facility PAs in CERCLIS. Federal facility PA reviews
are estimated, based on national averages, to take about one-third as long as a normal, full-scale PA at a non-Federal
facility.
SITE INSPECTIONS (SI)
Definition:
The SI (Action Name = Site Inspection) involves the collection of field data from a hazardous substance site for the
purpose of characterizing the magnitude and severity of the hazard posed by the site and/or to support enforcement.
A SI should provide adequate data to determine the site's MRS score.
Regions may combine PA and SI activities where warranted by site conditions to reduce repetitive tasks and ultimately
costs. The combining of PA and SI activities is known as an "Integrated Assessment." With the implementation of
SACM, Regions have also been encouraged to further reduce repetitive tasks and costs by combining site assessment
and removal evaluation activities where warranted by site conditions. Terminology for this work has been changed
from "Removal/Site Assessment Integrated Assessment" to "Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation" (Action Name
= Integrated Assessment) and is further discussed in a separate section below. Please note that when Sis are
performed as part of an EA, information should be entered for both the EA and SI events. Special reporting
requirements also apply to SI events when they are performed as part of an integrated assessment, as noted below.
SI Starts is an internal reporting measure. SI Completions is an internal planning measure for non-Federal facilities
and an internal reporting measure for Federal facilities.
Definition of Accomplishment:
SI Starts - A SI (Action Name = Site Inspection) start date is defined as the date when EPA approves the site-specific
SI work plan (refer to OSWER Publication #9345.1-03 FS for further guidance on defining SI starts) and CERCLIS
contains the actual SI start date (Actual Start) and valid event lead (Lead). SI start dates are required and are used
by HQ as an internal reporting measure.
SI Completions - A SI (Action Name = Site Inspection) is completed when:
• A SI Report has been generated by EPA; or received by the Region from the ARCS, or START contractor; or
received from the State; and the appropriate Regional official signs a letter, form, or memo approving the SI
report; and
• CERCLIS contains the SI report approval date as the actual SI completion date (Actual Complete), a valid event
lead (Lead), and a "decision" on whether further activities are necessary in the Event Qualifier Field (Qualifier).
Valid decisions upon SI completion to be recorded in the event qualifier field (Qualifier) include:
• (H) High - Higher priority for further assessment Note: The next stage of assessment could be an ESI (Action
Name =Expanded Site Inspection), an integrated ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI), or preparation of an HRS
package (Action Name = Hazard Ranking System Score Determi); or
• (L) Low - Lower priority for further assessment; or
• (N) - No further remedial action planned; or
A-ll September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• (D) - Deferred to RCRA (Subtitle C) or the NRC. Note: Federal facilities cannot have deferred ('D') event
qualifiers for site assessment events; or
• (A) - Site is being addressed as pan of an NPL site. A site having an event qualifier of 'A' should have an NPL
Status Indicator (Site NPL Status) of 'A' and a Parent Site ID (Site Parent ID) as well; or
• (F) - Referred to the removal program with further remedial assessment needed; or
• (W) - Referred to the removal program with no further remedial assessment needed.
If the SI is part of a combined assessment, the same physical report may be used for both the PA and SI, as long as
it contains all of the elements that would have been addressed under separate PA and SI reports. The report should
state specifically that it covers both the PA and SI.
SI Completions is an internal planning measure for non-Federal facilities only. For Federal facilities, SI Completions
are tracked as an internal reporting measure.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Planning dates are not required for Sis. Actual start and completion dates are required for Sis.
For combined assessments, the SI completion date (Actual Complete) entered into CERCLIS must be the same as the
PA completion date (Actual Complete). Do not enter the PA completion date until there is a combined PA/SI report,
even though a determination has already been made that an SI is needed. Note: PAs performed as pan of combined
assessments should receive an event qualifier of 'H" which represents a high priority for further assessment.
For budget and resource allocations, separate projections must be made for EPA versus State SI completions. SI starts
(Actual Start) and completions (Actual Complete) are reported site-specifically in CERCLIS. Only the first SI
completion at a site will be given credit for SCAP funding purposes. Federal facility Sis (starts and completions) are
tracked as an internal reporting measure. No funding is provided by HQ for Sis at Federal facilities.
SITE INSPECTION PRIORITIZATIONS (SIPs)
Definition:
SIPs (Subaction Name = Site Inspection Prioritization) require the gathering of additional information at sites that
were evaluated under the original HRS and still require NPL Listing decisions. The SIP is used to determine whether
further site evaluation work is necessary at these sites. SIPs should be performed only at sites that had a SI
completion prior to August 1, 1992. For most Regions, the original SIP backlog should have been completed in FY
95 with a few remaining in FY 96 and FY 97. SIPs are recorded in CERCLIS as subactions (Subaction Name = Site
Inspection Prioritization) to the last completed site inspection event (Action Name = Site Inspection).
SIP Starts is an internal reporting measure. SIP Completions is an internal planning measure for non-Federal facilities
and an internal reporting measure for Federal facilities.
Definition of Accomplishment:
SIP Starts - A SIP start is defined as the date the Region signs a letter, form, or memo requesting a SIP be performed
at a specific site. The date should be entered into CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of die SIP
subaction. SIP start dates are not required, but are used by HQ as an internal reporting measure.
September 27, 1996 A-12
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SIP Completions - A SIP (Subaction Name = Site Inspection Prioritization) is complete when:
• A SIP Report has been developed by EPA; or received by the Region from the ARCS or START contractor; or
received from the State; and the appropriate Regional official signs a letter, form, or memo approving the SIP
report; and
« CERCLIS contains the SIP report approval date as the actual SIP completion date (Actual Complete), and a
"decision" on whether further activities are necessary in the action qualifier field (Qualifier) for die appropriate
Site Inspection event (Action Name = Site Inspection Prioritization).
Valid decisions at the conclusion of a SIP, which should replace the existing SI event qualifier (Qualifier), include:
» (H) High - Higher priority for further assessment Note: The next stage of assessment could be an expanded site
inspection (Action Name = Expanded Site Inspection), an integrated ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI), or
preparation of an HRS package (Action Name = Hazard Ranking System Score Determi); or
• (L) Low - Lower priority for further assessment; or
* (N) - No further remedial action planned; or
• (D) - Deferred to RCRA (Subtitle C) or the NRC. Note: Federal facilities cannot have deferred ('D') event
qualifiers for site assessment events; or
• (A) - Site is being addressed as part of an NPL site. A site having an event qualifier of 'A' should have an NPL
Status Indicator (Site NPL Status) of 'A' and a Parent Site ID (Site Parent ID) as well; or
• (F) - Referred to die removal program with further remedial assessment needed; or
* (W) - Referred to the removal program with no further remedial assessment needed.
SIPs are typically performed as stand-alone events. That is, they are not integrated with removal assessments or
removal investigations.
SIP Completions is an internal planning measure for non-Federal facilities only. For Federal facilities. SIP
Completions are tracked as internal reporting measures only.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Actual start and planning dates are not required for SIPs. Actual completion dates are required for SIPs.
SIP starts (Actual Start) and completions (Actual Complete) are reported site-specifically in CERCLIS. Only the first
SIP completion at a site will be given credit for SCAP funding purposes. Federal facility SIPs (starts and completions)
are tracked as an internal reporting measure. No funding is provided by HQ for SIPs at Federal facilities.
A-13 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXPANDED SITE INSPECTIONS (ESI)
Definition:
The ESI (Action Name = Expanded Site Inspection) collects additional data beyond that collected in the SI to evaluate
the site for MRS scoring. ESIs are reserved for more complex sites that cannot be adequately characterized using
standard SI methodologies. Installation of groundwater monitoring wells is typical of activities performed under the
ESI.
ESI Starts is an internal planning measure for non-Federal facilities. ESI Completions is an internal reporting measure
for both non-Federal and Federal facilities.
With the implementation of SACM, Regions also have been encouraged to further reduce repetitive tasks and costs
by combining site assessment and removal evaluation activities where warranted by site conditions. Terminology for
this work has been changed from "Removal/Site Assessment Integrated Assessment" to "Integrated Removal/Remedial
Evaluation" (Action Name = Integrated Assessment) and is further discussed in a separate section below. Please note
that when ESIs are performed as part of an EA, information should be entered for both the EA and ESI events.
Definition of Accomplishment:
ESI Starts - An ESI (Action Name = Integrated Assessment) start is defined as the date when EPA approves the site
specific ESI work plan and CERCLIS contains the actual ESI start date (Actual Start) and valid event lead (Lead).
ESI start dates are used by HQ as an internal planning measure for non-Federal facilities only. ESI start dates for
Federal facilities are used by HQ as an internal reporting measure.
ESI Completions - An ESI (Action Name = Integrated Assessment) is complete when:
• An ESI Report has been developed by EPA; or received by the Region from the ARCS or START contractor;
or received from the State; and the appropriate Regional official signs a letter, form, or memo approving the ESI
report; and
• CERCLIS contains the ESI report approval date as the actual ESI completion date (Actual Complete), a valid
event lead (Lead), and a "decision" on whether further activities are necessary in the Event Qualifier Field
(Qualifier).
Valid decisions upon ESI completion to be recorded in the event qualifier field (Qualifier) include:
• (G) - Recommended for HRS Scoring (i.e., development of HRS package, Action Name = Hazard Ranking
System Score Determi); or
• (N) - No further remedial action planned; or
* (A) - Site is being addressed as part of an NPL site. A site having an event qualifier of 'A' should have an NPL
Status Indicator (Site NPL Status) of 'A' and a Parent Site ID (Site Parent ID); or
• (F) - Referred to the removal program with further remedial assessment needed; or
• (W) - Referred to the removal program with no further remedial assessment needed.
ESI Completions is an internal reporting measure for both non-Federal and Federal facilities.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
September 27, 1996 A-14
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Planning dates are not required for ESIs, Actual start and completion dates are required for ESIs,
ESI starts (Actual Stan) and completions (Actual Complete) are reported site-specifically in CERCLIS. Only the first
ESI start at a site will be given credit for SCAP funding purposes. Federal facility ESIs (starts and completions) are
tracked as an internal reporting measure only. No funding is provided by HQ for ESIs at Federal facilities.
INTEGRATED EXPANDED SITE INSPECTION/REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (ESI/RI)
Definition:
The integrated ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI) is a SACM-initiated integrated assessment consisting of an ESI
(Action Name = Expanded Site Inspection) and a RI (Action Name = Remedial Investigation). The ESI/RI is used
to expedite remedial response by characterizing the magnitude and severity of a hazardous waste site in one stage as
opposed to subsequent stages under the traditional ESI-NPL Listing-RI approach. ESI/RIs should be performed at
sites where conditions indicate that the HRS score will be above 28.5 and a remedial response will be needed.
ESI/RIs may not always be feasible given known site conditions and activities completed to date. In some cases, it
may be more prudent to conduct a separate ESI or RI. RI activities may be conducted as part of an integrated ESI/RI,
a combined RI/FS or as a separate RI. The definitions for RI/FS Completion and RI Completion (see definitions later
in this appendix) are different from the definition for ESI/RI Completion. The definition of an ESI/RI Completion
is the same as that of an ESI Completion, If an ESI/RI event is recorded in CERCLIS, a stand-alone ESI event
(Action Name =Expanded Site Inspection) should not be recorded at that site. With the implementation of SACM,
Regions have also been encouraged to further reduce repetitive tasks and costs by combining site assessment and
removal evaluation activities where warranted by site conditions. Terminology for this work has been changed from
"Removal/Site Assessment Integrated Assessment" to "Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation" (Action Name
=Integrated Assessment) and is further discussed in a separate section below. Please note that when ESI/RIs are
performed as part of an EA, information should be entered for both the EA and ESI/RI events.
ESI/RI Starts and Completions are internal reporting measures.
Definition of Accomplishment:
ESI/RI Starts - An ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI) start date is defined as the date when EPA approves the site-
specific ESI/RI work plan and CERCLIS contains the actual ESI/RI start date (Actual Start) and valid event lead
(Lead). ESI/RI start dates are used by HQ as an internal reporting measure and are required.
ESI/RI Completions - An ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI) is complete when:
* An ESI/RI Report has been reviewed and accepted by the Region and the appropriate Regional official signs a
letter, form, or memo approving the ESI/RI report; and
• The following has been recorded in CERCLIS; the ESI/RI report approval date as the actual ESI/RI completion
date (Actual Complete); a valid event lead (Lead); and a "decision" on whether further activities are necessary
in the Event Qualifier Field (Qualifier).
Valid decisions upon ESI/RI completion to be recorded in the event qualifier field (Qualifier) include:
• (G) - Recommended for HRS Scoring (i.e., development of HRS package, Action Name = Hazard Ranking
System Score Determi); or
• (N) - No further remedial action planned; or
A-15 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
• (A) - Site is being addressed as part of an NPL site. A site having an event qualifier of 'A' should have an NPL
Status Indicator (Site NPL Status) of 'A' and a Parent Site ID (Site Parent ID); or
» (F) - Referred to the removal program with further remedial assessment needed; or
• (W) - Referred to the removal program with no further remedial assessment needed.
ESI/RI Completions is an internal reporting measure for both non-Federal and Federal facilities,
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Planned start and completion dates are not required for ESI/RIs. Actual start and completion dates are required for
ESI/RIs.
ESI events (Action Name = Expanded Site Inspection) should not be recorded separately in CERCLIS if they are
conducted as part of an ESI/RI.
HAZARD RANKING SYSTEM PACKAGE (HRS)
Definition:
The HRS Package (Action Name = Hazard Ranking System Score Determi) documents a numeric score of the
relative severity of a hazardous substance release or potential release based on: (1) the relative potential of substances
to cause hazardous situations; (2) the likelihood and rate at which the substances may affect human and environmental
receptors; and (3) the severity and magnitude of potential effects. The HRS Package also includes references and
documentation in support of the score. The score is computed using the revised Hazard Ranking System (rHRS).
HRS Package Starts are not required but are tracked by HQ as an internal reporting measure. HRS Package
Completions is an internal planning measure.
Definition of Accomplishment:
HRS Package Starts - An HRS Package (Action Name = Hazard Ranking System Score Determi) start is defined
as the date when EPA signs a memo, form, or letter requesting development of an HRS Package for a specific site
and CERCLIS contains the actual HRS Package start date (Actual Start) and valid event lead (Lead). Although HRS
Package start dates are not required, when available, they are used by HQ as an internal reporting measure,
specifically for identifying the status of sites in the site assessment pipeline and for measuring activity durations.
HRS Package Completion - An HRS Package (Action Name = Hazard Ranking System Score Determi) is completed
when an appropriate Regional official signs a letter, form, or memo approving the HRS Package for a site, thereby
indicating the HRS Package is ready for HQ quality assurance. Submission of HRS Packages to HQ for technical
assistance does not represent an HRS Package completion. Since HRS Packages are pre-decisional, entry of HRS
Package completion dates in CERCLIS may be delayed until after the HRS Package has completed HQ qualify
assurance, or is proposed to the NPL. Entry of an HRS Package completion date (Actual Complete) into CERCLIS
must be accompanied by a valid lead (Lead) and a valid "decision" on whether further listing activities are necessary
in the Event Qualifier Field (Qualifier). Valid decisions upon HRS Package completion to be recorded in the event
qualifier field include:
• (O) - Site is being considered for proposal to the NPL; and
September 27, 1996 A-16
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• (N) - No further remedial action planned.
HRS Package Completions is an internal planning measure for both non-Federal and Federal facilities.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Regional staff are currently responsible for entering HRS Package event information into CERCLIS including actual
start (Actual Start) and completion (Actual Complete) dates, event leads (Lead), and event qualifiers (Qualifier). HQ
staff are responsible for maintaining site characteristics data presented in the HRS Package following HQ quality
assurance activities. This information is currently recorded hi the Superfund NPL Assessment Program (SNAP)
system maintained at HQ. Effective with CERCLIS 3, HQ staff will be responsible for entering HRS Package event
qualifiers since these decisions are made after HQ quality assurance activities.
Planned start and completion dates are not required for HRS Packages. Actual start and completion dates are required
for HRS Packages.
Entry of HRS event data into CERCLIS may be delayed until after the HRS Package has completed HQ quality
assurance, or is proposed to the NPL.
INTEGRATED REMOVAL/REMEDIAL EVALUATION
Definition:
Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluations (Action Name = Integrated Assessment), formerly termed "Removal/Site
Assessment Integrated Assessments," are SACM-originated events integrating both site assessment (Preliminary
Assessment, Site Inspection, Expanded Site Assessment, or ESI/RI) and removal (removal investigation or removal
assessment) activities to reduce the overall time and money spent characterizing site conditions. (The old event code
RS has been revised to represent Removal Investigations at both non-NPL and NPL sites.) The scope of the Integrated
Assessment will depend on which activities are being jointly conducted. Although the Integrated Assessment action
is intended to track integrated removal and site assessment actions, it should not take the place of coding individual
site assessment and removal actions. In other words, if an Integrated Assessment is conducted, it should be coded
in CERCLIS along with the actions represented by that Integrated Assessment, such as a Removal Investigation and
a Site Inspection. Integrated Assessments are tracked by HQ as an internal reporting measure. The individual events
represented by Integrated Assessments are tracked separately under each respective category (i.e., Remedial
Investigation and Site Inspection), which are then used as internal planning or reporting measures.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Starts - An Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation (Action Name = Integrated Assessment) start date is defined
as the date when EPA approves the site-specific Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation work plan and CERCLIS
contains:
• The actual Integrated Assessment start date (Actual Start) and valid event lead (Lead); and
• The actual start date and action lead for the related site assessment action (Preliminary Assessment, Site
Inspection, Expanded Site Assessment, or ESI/RI) equal to that recorded for the Integrated Assessment action;
and
• The actual start date and action lead for the related removal action (Removal Investigation or Removal
Assessment) equal to that recorded for the Integrated Assessment action.
A-17 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Start dates are required and are used by HQ as an internal reporting measure.
Completions - An Integrated Removal/Remedial Evaluation (Action Name = Integrated Assessment)is complete when:
« The Integrated Assessment report has been reviewed and accepted by the Region and an appropriate Regional
official signs a letter, form, or memo approving the Integrated Assessment report. The report must contain all
of the information required for the related site assessment event and must document the completion of a Removal
Assessment or Removal Investigation to determine whether a removal action is necessary. A note to the site file
must also be prepared indicating that the Integrated Assessment report meets all the requirements for the related
site assessment event(s); and
• The Integrated Assessment report approval date is entered into CERCLIS as the actual Integrated Assessment
completion date (Actual Complete) with a valid event lead (Lead); and
• An actual complete date and event lead for the related site assessment event (Preliminary Assessment, Site
Inspection, Expanded Site Assessment, or ESI/RI) equal to that recorded for the Integrated Assessment action
is entered into CERCLIS; and
• An actual start date and event lead for the related removal event (Removal Investigation or Removal Assessment)
equal to that recorded for the Integrated Assessment action is entered into CERCLIS; and
• A "decision" on whether further activities are necessary is entered into CERCLIS in the Action Qualifier field
for the related site assessment event (Preliminary Assessment, Site Inspection, Expanded Site Assessment, or
ESI/RI). Note that action qualifiers are allowed for Integrated Assessment actions but are not required. If
entered, an Integrated Assessment action qualifier should be the same as that entered for the related site
assessment action. Valid Integrated Assessment action qualifiers, or decisions, include:
(H) High - Higher priority for further assessment. Note: The next stage of assessment could be an SI
(Action Name = Site Inspection), expanded site inspection (Action Name = Expanded Site Inspection), an
integrated ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI), or preparation of an HRS package (Action Name = Hazard
Ranking System Score Determi); or
(L) Low - Lower priority for further assessment; or
(N) - No further remedial action planned; or
(D) - Deferred to RCRA (Subtitle C) or the NRC. Note: Federal facilities cannot have deferred CD') event
qualifiers for site assessment events; or
(A) - Site is being addressed as part of an NPL site. A site having an event qualifier of 'A* should have an
NPL Status Indicator (Site NPL Status) of 'A' and a Parent Site ID (Site Parent ID).
Note: "Referred to the removal program" decisions are feasible from a programmatic perspective since a decision
following completion of an Integrated Assessment may be to conduct an early action. However, these decisions are
not allowed at EA, ESI, or ESI/RI events in the current version of CERCLIS. They will be allowed in CERCLIS
3. These decisions include:
• (F) - Referred to the removal program with further remedial assessment needed; or
• (W) - Referred to the removal program with no further remedial assessment needed.
September 27, 1996 A-18
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
In addition, recommendation for HRS scoring is a feasible decision if the EA represents a joint removal assessment
or removal investigation and an ESI or ESI/RI, Although it is not allowed currently in CERCLIS, CERCLIS 3 also
will enable the use of the action qualifier *G' to represent the decision to recommend a site for HRS scoring [i.e.,
development of HRS package (Action Name = Hazard Ranking System Score Determi)]. This specific qualifier
should be used only when the site assessment portion of an EA consists of an ESI or ESI/RI.
EA Completions is an internal reporting measure.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Planning dates are not required for Integrated Assessments. Actual start and completion dates are required for
Integrated Assessments EAs.
Integrated Assessment action qualifiers are allowed for EA actions but are not required. If entered, an Integrated
Assessment action qualifier should be the same as that entered for the related site assessment event.
REGIONAL DECISIONS
Definition:
This measure will track decisions made by the Region [including the Regional Decision Team (RDT)J on whether to
perform site assessment, enforcement, and early and long-term actions. The RDT is empowered by the Region to
make those decisions that are delegated to its level. This body serves as a tool to ensure early and effective
communication and should provide input for the traditional line decision-making authorities. Though the structure
and responsibilities of the RDT vary from Region to Region, the RDT generally should provide policy and strategic
direction to designated site managers.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The Regional decisions are reported in CERCLIS as a subaction (Subaction Name = RDT Decision) to the point in
the assessment or response pipeline where the decision was made (i.e., PA, SI, ES, SS, or EA) to perform additional
site assessment activities, early or long-term actions, or take enforcement action [e.g.. Potentially Responsible Party
(PRP) negotiations]. These decisions are documented in a letter, form, or memo to the file.
The dates of the Region's decisions (Subaction Name = RDT Decision) are entered as the actual subaction completion
dates (Actual Complete). Each decision must be documented in a memo to the file and reported separately. HQ will
link the events/activities the Region decided to perform to the Regional decision based on the subaction (Subaction
Name = RDT Decision) completion date (Actual Complete) and the start dates (Actual Start) of subsequent actions.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is an internal reporting measure. This definition is for regional tracking purposes only. See Definition of
Accomplishment for information on the CERCLIS reporting requirements.
A-19 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
ENGINEERING EVALUATION/COST ANALYSIS (EE/CA)
Definition:
The EE/CA identifies objectives for a NTC response action, and includes an analysis of cost, effectiveness, and
implementability of the various alternatives that may be used to satisfy these objectives.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The actual start date of an EE/CA is the date that the appropriate Regional official signs the EE/CA Approval
Memorandum. This information should be recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of the EE/CA
(Action Name =Engineering/Eval Cost Analysis). The actual completion date of an EE/CA is the date that the
appropriate Regional official signs the Action Memorandum, This information should be recorded as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the EE/CA (Action Name =Engineering/Eval Cost Analysis).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
EE/CAs is an internal planning and reporting measure. They are planned and reported site-specifically in CERCLIS.
Funds for EE/CAs are contained in the site characterization AOA.
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
Definition:
Community Relations are the activities conducted in accordance with Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act of 1986 (SARA), the National Contingency Plan (NCP), and the Community Relations Handbook to involve the
community in response activities conducted at a site.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The start of Community Relations (Action Name = Remedial Community Relations) is the obligation or tasking of
funds for the development of the Community Relations Plan (CRP) or when EPA initiates work on the CRP. For RP-
lead or Federal facility sites where the PRP or other Federal agency is preparing the CRP in accordance with an
Administrative Order (AO), Consent Decree (CD), or 1AG, the start of CR is defined as EPA's written approval of
the CRP. When EPA is preparing the CRP at RP- or EP-lead sites, CR begins when EPA initiates work on the CRP.
The completion of Community Relations is the deletion of the site from the NPL or the conclusion of an early action
(removal authority) at non-NPL sites.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Community Relations activities at Federal facilities are paid for by the Federal facility budget. Planned and actual
start and completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds may be planned site- (Action Name = Remedial
Community Relations) or non-site specifically; however, they must be obligated or tasked site-specifically. Once
funds are obligated, the non-site specific amount must be reduced. Funds for CR activities are in the Federal facility
or site characterization AOAs.
September 27, 1996 A-20
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SUPPORT AGENCY ASSISTANCE
Definition:
Support agency assistance are the activities performed by another entity in support of EPA, The support agency
furnishes necessary data to EPA, reviews response data and documents, and provides other assistance to EPA.
EPA may provide States, political subdivisions, and Indian Tribes with funding to carry out a variety of management
responsibilities via a support agency Cooperative Agreement (CA) to ensure the meaningful and substantial
involvement in response activities.
Unless otherwise specified in the CA, all support agency costs, with the exception of RA or early action (remedial
authority) support agency costs, may be planned under a single Superfund account number designated specifically for
support agency activities. RA or early action (remedial authority) support agency activities must be planned site-
specifically and require cost share provisions.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The start of support agency assistance is the signature of the CA by the Regional Administrator or his designee. The
completion of support agency assistance is the completion of all remedial activities at the site.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Support agency assistance is paid for by the response program and is contained in the site characterization AOA.
Planned and actual start and completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds may be planned or obligated site-
Action Name = Management Assistance) or non-site specifically; however, they must be outlayed site-specifically.
Support agency assistance is paid for by the response program and is contained in the site characterization AOA.
Planned and actual start and completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds may be planned site- (Action
Name = Management Assistance)or non-site specifically; however, they must be obligated site-specifically. Once
funds are obligated, the non-site specific amount must be reduced.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Definition:
Technical assistance is support provided by a third party to EPA to conduct response activities. Third parties that may
provide assistance include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USCOE), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and
ARCS, Response Action Contracts (RAC), or START contractors.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The start of technical assistance is the obligation of funds for technical assistance. The completion is defined as the
completion of the response activities for the stage at which technical assistance was requested.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
A-21 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Technical Assistance is paid for by the response program and is contained in the site characterization AOA. Planned
and actual start and completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds must be planned or obligated site- (Action
Name = Technical Assistance) or non-site specifically; however, they must be outlayed site-specifically. Once funds
are obligated, the non-site specific amount must be reduced.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS (TAGs)
Definition:
TAGs are provided under SARA to a community for technical assistance in dealing with Superfund issues at NPL
sites.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The start of the TAG is the signature of the CA to the community group, which is the obligation of funds for the TAG.
The completion of the TAG is the completion of the final RA or early action, or the deletion of the site from the NPL.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Planned and actual start and completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds may be planned site-(Action
Name = Technical Assistance Grants) or non-site specifically; however, they must be obligated site-specifically.
Once funds are obligated, the non-site specific amount must be reduced. Funds for TAGs at non-Federal facility sites
are contained in the response budget and found in the other response AOA. Funds for TAGs at Federal facility sites
are contained in the Federal facility budget and found in the Federal facility AOA.
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (RI) STARTS
Definition:
The RI is an investigation designed to characterize the site, assess the nature and extent of the contamination and
evaluate potential risk to human health and the environment.
The RI may be conducted alone, or as part of an integrated ESI/RI assessment, or a combined RI/Feasibiliry Study
(FS). The start of an ESI/RI is captured in the SCAP measure, SSA-1 Site Characterization Starts. The start of an
RI/FS is an internal planning and reporting measure. The RI start and RI/FS start definitions are the same. Regions
are not required to enter the RI start date if the RI is being conducted as part of an ESI/RI, RI/FS, or ESI/RI/FS.
Obligation of funds for forward planning, community relations and/or other support activities do not constitute a RI
start.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Fund-financed (Including F-, MR-, and S-lead actions) - Credit for a Fund-lead RI start is received when funds are
obligated and the actual start date (Actual Start) has been recorded in CERCLIS. Funds are obligated when:
• The contract modification for the RI has been signed by the EPA Contracting Officer (CO); or
• An IAG has been signed by the other Federal agency [or Bureau of Reclamation (BUREC)]; or
• A CA has been signed by the Regional Administrator or designee to conduct a RI.
September 27, 1996 A-22
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
If a subsequent RI is initiated without a new obligation of funds, the start date is defined as EPA's written approval
of the work plan for the subsequent RI.
PRP-ftnanced (Includes RP-, and PS-lead actions) - Credit for a PRP-lead (RP) RI start is received when one of the
following enforcement actions occurs:
• An Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), in which the potentially responsible parties (PRPs) agree to conduct
the RI, is signed by the Regional Administrator. The RI start date is the AOC completion date (Regional
Administrator signature date); or
• A CD, in which the PRPs agree to conduct the RI, is referred by the Region to Department of Justice (DOJ) or
HQ. The RI start date is the date the Regional Administrator signs the memo transmitting the CD to HQ or DOJ.
Credit for a PS-lead RI start is received when a State order or comparable enforcement document, in which the PRPs
agree to conduct the RI, is signed by the last appropriate State official or party and the site is covered by one of the
following:
• State enforcement CA signed by the Regional Administrator; or
• Superfund Memorandum of Agreement (SMOA) signed by the appropriate State and Regional official containing
a schedule for RI work at the site; or
• A general SMOA signed by the appropriate State and Regional officials covering remedial work to be undertaken
with schedules defined before work commences; or
• Other State/EPA agreement signed by the appropriate State and Regional official.
If a subsequent RI is initiated without a new or amended AOC, CD, State order, or other comparable State
enforcement document, the start date for the RI is documented by a letter, form, or memo from EPA or the State
approving the work plan for the subsequent RI.
If an AOC, State order, or other comparable State enforcement document is amended for die subsequent RI, the start
date is the date the last State official or Regional Administrator signs the amendment. If an EPA CD is amended, the
start date is the date on which the memo transmitting the CD to HQ or DOJ is signed by die Regional Administrator.
In-house (EP-lead action) - Credit for an EP-lead RI start is received on the date that the Region conducts the initial
RI scoping meeting. The start is documented by a memo to file containing the minutes from the meeting.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Regions are not required to enter the RI start date if the RI is being conducted as part of an ESI/RI, RI/FS, or
ESI/RI/FS. The RI (Action Name = Remedial Investigation), combined RI/FS (Action Name = Combined RI/FS),
or combined ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI) actual start date (Actual Start) is reported site-specifically in CERCLIS.
For PRP-financed RIs, both the RI start (Actual Start) and the CD start (Actual Start) or AO completion dates (Actual
Complete) must be entered into CERCLIS. These dates should be the same. Funds for RIs and RI oversight are
found in the site characterization AOA.
A-23 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FEASIBILITY STUDY (FS) STARTS
Definition:
The FS is used to develop and evaluate all potential remediation alternatives to clean a hazardous waste site.
The FS may be conducted alone, as part of an integrated ESI/RI/FS or a combined RI/FS. The start of an ESI/RI
is tracked by the SCAP measure, SSA-1 Site Characterization Starts. Combined RI/FS starts is an internal reporting
measure. Regions are not required to enter the FS start date if the FS is being conducted as part of a combined RI/FS
or ESI/RI/FS.
Obligation of funds for forward planning, community relations and/or other support activities does not constitute a
FS start.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Fund-financed (Including F-, MR-, and S-lead actions) - Credit for a Fund-lead FS start is received when funds are
obligated and the actual start date (Actual Start) is entered into CERCLIS. Funds are obligated when:
• The contract modification for the FS has been signed by the EPA Contract Officer (CO); or
• An IAG has been signed by the other Federal agency (USCOE or BUREC); or
• A CA has been signed by the Regional Administrator or his designee to conduct a FS.
If a first or subsequent FS is initiated without a new obligation of funds, the start date is defined as the date of EPA's
written approval of the work plan for the FS.
PHP-financed (Includes RP-, and PS- lead actions ) - Credit for a responsible party-lead (RP) FS is received when
one of the following enforcement actions occurs:
• An AOC that addresses FS activities is signed by the Regional Administrator. The FS start date is the AOC
completion date (Regional Administrator signature date); or
• A CD that addresses FS activities is referred by the Region to DOJ or HQ. The FS start date is the date of
signature by the Regional Administrator on the memo transmitting the CD to DOJ or HQ.
A PS-lead FS starts when a State order or comparable enforcement document that addresses FS activities is signed
by the last appropriate State official or party, and the site is covered by one of the following:
• State enforcement CA signed by the Regional Administrator; or
• SMOA signed by the appropriate State and Regional official containing a schedule for FS work at the site; or
• Other State/EPA agreement signed by the appropriate State and Regional official.
If a first or subsequent FS is initiated without a new or amended AOC, CD, State order, or other comparable State
enforcement document, the start date of the FS is documented by a letter, form, or memo from EPA or the State
approving the work plan for the subsequent FS.
If an AOC, State order, or other comparable State enforcement document is amended for the first or subsequent FS,
the actual start date is the date die last State official or the Regional Administrator signs the amendment. If an EPA
CD is amended, the start date is the date the Regional Administrator signs the memo transmitting the CD to HQ or
DOJ.
September 27, 1996 A-24
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
In-house (EP-lead action) - Credit for an EP-lead FS start is received on the date that the Region conducts the initial
FS scoping meeting. The start date is documented by a memo to file containing the minutes from the meeting.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Regions are not required to enter the FS start date if the FS is being conducted as part of a combined RI/FS or
ESI/RI/FS. The FS (Action Name = Feasibility Study) or combined RI/FS (Action Name = Combined RJ/FS) actual
start date (Actual Start) is entered into CERCLIS site-specifically. For a PRP-financed FS, both the FS start date
(Actual Start) and the CD (Action Name = Consent Decree) start date (Actual Start), or the AO (Action Name =
Admin Order) completion date (Actual Complete) must be entered into CERCLIS. These dates should be the same.
Funds for FS and FS oversight are contained in the site characterization AOA.
COMBINED RI/FS START
Definition:
The RI/FS is an investigation designed to characterize the site, assess the nature and extent of the contamination,
evaluate potential risk to human health and the environment, and develop and evaluate potential remediation
alternatives.
RI/FS activities may be conducted separately, as part of the combined RI/FS, or as part of an integrated ESI/RI or
integrated ESI/RI/FS. The ESI/RI start is tracked by the SCAP measure, SSA-1 Site Characterization Starts.
Obligation of funds for.forward planning, community relations and/or other support activities do not constitute a RI/FS
start.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Fund-financed (Including F-, MR-, and S-lead actions) - Credit for a Fund-lead RI/FS start is received when funds
are obligated and the actual RI/FS start date (Actual Start) is reported in CERCLIS. Funds are obligated when:
• The contract modification for the RI/FS has been signed by the EPA CO; or
• An IAG has been signed by the other Federal agency (USCOE or BUREC); or
• A CA has been signed by the Regional Administrator or designee to conduct a RI/FS.
If a first or subsequent RI/FS is initiated without a new obligation of funds, the start date is defined as the date of
EPA's written approval of the work plan for the RI/FS.
PRP-financed (Includes RP-, and PS-lead actions) - Credit for a PRP-lead (RP) RI/FS start is received when one
of the following enforcement actions occurs:
• An AOC that addresses RI/FS activities is signed by the Regional Administrator. The RI/FS start date is the
AOC completion date (Regional Administrator signature date); or
• A CD that addresses RI/FS activities is referred by the Region to DOJ or HQ. The RI/FS start date is the date
the Regional Administrator signs the memo transmitting the CD to HQ or DOJ.
A-25 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
A PS-lead RI/FS starts when a State order or comparable enforcement document that addresses RI/FS activities is
signed by the last appropriate State official or party and the site is covered by one of the following:
• State enforcement CA signed by the Regional Administrator; or
• SMOA signed by the appropriate State and Regional official containing a schedule for RI/FS work at the site; or
* Other State/EPA agreement signed by the appropriate State and Regional officials.
If a first or subsequent RI/FS is initiated without a new or amended AOC, CD, State order, or other comparable State
enforcement document, the start date of the RI/FS is documented by a letter, form, or memo from EPA or the State
approving the work plan for the subsequent RI/FS.
If an AOC, State order, or other comparable State enforcement document is amended for the first or subsequent
RI/FS, the start date is the date on which the last State official or Regional Administrator signs the amendment. If
an EPA CD is amended, the start date is the date on which the memo transmitting the CD to HQ or DOJ is signed
by the Regional Administrator.
In-house (EP-tead action) - Credit for an EP-Iead RI/FS start is received when the Region has the initial RI/FS
scoping meeting. The start is documented by a memo to file containing the minutes from the meeting.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Regions are not required to report a combined RI/FS start if an ESI/RI or separate RI and FS are being conducted.
The combined RI/FS (Action Name = Combined RI/FS), or ESI/RI (Action Name = ESI/RI), or RI (Action Name
= Remedial Investigation) and,FS (Action Name = Feasibility Study) actual start dates (Actual Start) are entered into
CERCLIS site-specifically. For a PRP-finaneed RI/FS, the RI/FS start date (Actual Start) and the CD (Action Name
= Consent Decree) start date (Actual Start), or AO (Action Name = Admin Order) completion date (Actual
Complete) must be entered into CERCLIS. These dates should be the same. Funds for RI/FS and RI/FS oversight
are contained in the site characterization AOA. Combined RI/FS starts is an internal planning and reporting measure.
START OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD (FS REPORT TO PUBLIC)
Definition:
The FS or RI/FS report is released to the public when the contamination at the site has been characterized and
alternatives for remediation have been evaluated.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The start of public comment (FS report to public) is accomplished either (I) on the date the appropriate Regional
official signs a letter transmitting RI/FS reports and the proposed plan to the site repository for public review, or (2)
when the first page of the approved proposal plan, which lists the dates the public comment period starts and ends,
is included in the site file. This date must be recorded in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete)
of the FS or combined RI/FS subevent, 'CF,' start of public comment period (Action Name = Feasibility Study or
Combined RI/FS and Subaction Name = Start of Public Comment).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Documentation requirements have been clarified.
September 27, 1996 A-26
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Accomplishments are based on the first proposed plan released to the public for each FS or RI/FS, regardless of lead,
Start of public comment period (FS report to public) is an internal reporting measure.
RI/FS DURATION
Definition:
The RI/FS is an investigation designed to characterize the site, assess the nature and extent of contamination, evaluate
potential risk to human health and the environment, and develop and evaluate potential remediation alternatives.
The RI/FS starts with the obligation of Fund monies or the signature of an AO for the RI or combined RI/FS and
culminates with the signature of the ROD.
The objective of this measure is to focus on good project management of critical portions of the traditional remedial
pipeline and establish a methodology which accurately assesses program performance. Duration trends provide
indicators of areas that require attention.
Only RI/FS projects that started post-SARA will be used for comparison and evaluation purposes.
Definition of Accomplishment:
This measure includes all combined RI/FS projects that have a targeted completion date in FY 97. The RI/FS duration
will be calculated based on the RI or combined RI/FS Start and Decision Document Developed (FS or RI/FS
completion) definitions specified in this Manual. Regional performance in FY 97 will be compared to:
• The Regional and national average duration of RI/FS projects completed in FY 95 and FY 96;
* The Regional and national average duration of RI/FS projects completed in previous quarters of FY 97.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
CERCLIS will automatically look at actual RI or combined RI/FS start dates and actual ROD completion dates. HQ
will perform the analysis of the average durations. Fund and PRP durations will be tracked, RI/FS duration is an
internal reporting measure.
RDT-1 • DECISION DOCUMENT DEVELOPED
Definition of Target/Measure:
A "Decision Document" is developed to identify each decision (at NPL, non-NPL, and NPL caliber sites) to:
« Perform an emergency or time-critical early action (removal authority); or
• Perform a NTC early action (remedial or removal authority); or
• Perform a long-term action.
A-27 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment:
Early Actions (Removal Authority) (Emergency, Time Critical, or NIC) - The date the On-Scene Coordinator (OSC),
AA SWER, or designated Regional official signs the first or original Action Memorandum for each early action
(removal authority). (Regions will not receive credit for subsequent Action Memos, e.g., ceiling increases at the
same removal.) The date of the signature is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete)
of the removal subaction, Approval of Action Memo (Action Name = Removal Action and Subaction Name =
Approval of Action Memo or Remedial Action Master Plan). If a presumptive remedy is used at the site, it must be
recorded in the Response Action Type field (Selected Response Action) in CERCLIS.
Early or Long-Term Actions under Remedial Authority - The date the Regional Administrator/Deputy Regional
Administrator or the AA SWER signs the ROD for each early or long-term action under remedial authority. This
date must be reported in CERCLIS as the actual RI/FS (Action Name = Combined RI/FS) or FS (Action Name =
Feasibility Study) and ROD (Action Name = Record of Decision) completion date (Actual Complete). Final RODs
will be tracked as a component of this target. If a presumptive remedy is used at the site, it must be recorded in the
Response Action Type field (Selected Response Action) in CERCLIS. If a presumptive remedy is not used, the
Response Action Type field (Selected Response Action) must be entered into CERCLIS.
For State-lead, State-signed RODs, where the ROD also is signed by EPA, accomplishments are reported as the date
the State signs the ROD (as long as the date of the EPA signature precedes or is the same as the date of the State
signature).
These decisions will be tracked separately but reported on a combined basis.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. Accomplishments are reported site-specifically in CERCLIS. This is a SCAP
target.
September 27, 1996 A-28
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT A.2 (I OF 8)
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planning Requirements
SCAP Target or
Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-Site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
.|;;iiiESjie^iiKt|
?s*fft:.??i:xS^|i§S:;^-s:;';:'-:;-«
|||||;;;||M|^||:|:L:s;
Measure
-
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site- or Non-Site
Plans
mswzsijm
llillill
iiiiiiii
li|||in1eiKt:;
;;|;)Di|K|ias::;|:
Measure
-
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
i^iiiii
Measure
-
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
iiiifci
i^^^^ii
-
Reported
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
|ll^s|^i|l
*::': ,.•,'• :, '.•:•:' :•:':•:•:•:•:•:• :•:•:-:-:•:-'-•-•- - :':':':'-:::;:
• : ••:•:•:•;•' :•:•:-:•;-:-:-:•:•:•:-- -.-.:.:.:•:•:.:•>:•:•
-
Reported
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
EXHIBIT A.2 (2 OF 8)
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
|^!H^^iitegp»5t!||WB^pi^
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-site Specific
portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
jj|^|@^l^ejSiBiis::
-
Planned
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
jll|l|iililS:;:::l!;;p
-
Reported
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
|^;^fflBi1tp^j|e^;:y
-
Planned
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
?iis^g^fii
-
Reported
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Internal measures are planned and
reported quarterly.
A-29
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT A.2 (3 OF 8)
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Iffiiii^^^^^^iHS
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
!|p||liiilii8i'
-
Planned
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
lilllilSilll
-
Planned
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
ESI Completions
-
Reported
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
-
Reported
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
EXHIBIT A.2 (4 OF 8)
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
•'•*•:•" .:;/::; .vx^ivx Xvx-^ivivivivyv*'!' •:'• '.•:>',<-',•:•' .»>»•;•;••!
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
:^:imj?crfrr%*mmm
'jj^ji^^jiKjf
-
Reported
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
ililRlijiaafeiilll
-
Planned
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
||||8|iiai||||il
ili^BlSilll
-
Planned
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
N/A
N/A
-
Reported
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Internal measures are planned and
reported quarterly.
September 27, 1996
A-30
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT A.2 (5 OF 8)
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
f^lanning Requirements
yX&'Wm^^W&imlfM'^
^}ym^*-:-^*:±m^ff^vfvK>«f^~
SCAT Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
EA Completions
I:;Mf:O;Mll «;•;:!
-
Reported
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
; tvt yy ; v : v o*wt;X:' v* * • •:x>x- x • :* :•:•:•:• :•: •:•:-• •.
:S':j*r:s:KefHiBal;:;:;r ':;•;.;
\;3j||Bii?liiinSlil|
-
Reported
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
-
Planned
Yes
Operable unit
Site-Specific
Site
Characterization
Site
Characterization
Site-Specific
Plans
lliiiiiiilii
lll||^j*i|fe;;|ll
-
-
Not Required
Operable Unit
Not Required
Site
Characterization
Site
Characterization
or Federal
Facility
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
EXHIBIT A.2 (6 OF 8)
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
jpliililli^
;!S^SS?s^^Pi;ls^^^:PII-iP;sil;
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on Operable
Unit or Whole Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically or in
Non-site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
||||ll|ipj||i|j;;;ii|^|^i||
|||||||||^fi|i||l|p;:
-
-
Not Required
Whole Site
Not Required
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
Tecfamcai Assistance
-
-
Not Required
Operable Unit
Not Required
Other Response
Site Characterization
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
Technical Assistance
m^mm^MiMmmm;
-
-
Not Required
Whole Site
Not Required
Other Response
Other Response or
Federal Facility
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Internal measures are planned and
reported quarterly.
A-31
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-IC
EXHIBIT A.2 (7 OF 8)
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Illiiij^
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on Operable
Unit or Whole Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically or in
Non-site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
-
Planned
Yes*
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site-Specific Plans
lliiiiiii^iiiiiiilili
-
Planned
Yes*
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site-Specific Plans
-
Planned
Yes*
Operable unit
Site-Specific
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site-Specific Plans
EXHIBIT A.2 (8 OF 8)
SITE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT/REGIONAL DECISION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
^^tt^^;||(^i|i^B^^y5|||||l|
iPj^§:^?!;U^::^&^:4^i^^^^|y;
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on Operable
Unit or Whole Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically or in
Non-site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
illiipl|Kll^s«l
lilliiiffilSl!:i^(St:|ii§;J
-
Reported
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
||^|^iiiip|ti;|;
-
Reported
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
:f|:p^l::!B:!^Qlt::;:;f
ili^^^i^^i^p^
Target
-
Yes
Operable unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
*"To be determined" sites are allowed for first starts.
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Internal measures are planned and
reported quarterly.
September 27, 1996
A-32
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix B: Early/Long-Term Actions
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix B
Early and Long-Term Action
Targets and Measures
Table of Contents
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION FY 97 SCAP TARGETS AND MEASURES , B-l
Overview of FY 97 Early And Long-Term Action Targets/Measures . , B-l
Superfund Durations . B-l
Early And Long-Term Action Definitions B-4
Community Relations B-4
Support Agency Assistance B-4
Technical Assistance B-5
Technical Assistance Grants B-5
Treatability Studies B-6
Design Assistance B-6
Remedial Design (RD) Start B-7
RD Completion B-8
Remedial Action (RA) Start B-8
RA Contract Award B-9
ACT 5 » Sites Addressed Through Early or Long-Term Action On-Site
Construction Starts B-10
ACT-6 • Early or Long-Term Action Completions B-12
ACT-7 • NPL Site Construction Completions Through Early Actions,
Long-Term Actions, or RODs B-15
Operational And Functional (O&F) B-23
Long Term Response Action (LTRA) B-23
NPL Site Completions B-24
Groundwater Monitoring B-32
Operation And Maintenance (O&M) B-33
Five-Year Reviews B-33
Partial NPL Deletion B-34
Final NPL Deletion B-35
EI-1A • Progress Through Environmental Indicators
(Addressing Immediate Threats at NPL And Non-NPL Sites) B-36
El-IB » Progress Through Environmental Indicators
(Achieving Permanent Cleanup Goals) B-38
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix B
Early and Long-Term Action
Targets and Measures
List of Exhibits
EXHIBIT B.I EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION ACTIVITIES B-3
EXHIBIT B.2 LONG-TERM ACTION FLOW CHART B-40
EXHIBIT B.3 EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
APPENDIX B
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION
FY 97 SCAP TARGETS AND MEASURES
OVERVIEW OF FY 97 EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION TARGETS/MEASURES
The Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishments Plan (SCAP) is used by the Assistant Administrator for the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (AA SWER), Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance (AA OECA), and senior Superfund managers to monitor the administrative progress each
Region is making towards achieving its Superfund goals. Superfund cleanup results are tracked through targets and
measures at the SCAP level as well as internal reporting measures. Those Superfund activities not tracked at the
SCAP level are monitored for internal management purposes by Headquarters (HQ).
The Superfund program will continue to serve as a pilot performance plan project under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA), which was discussed in Chapter I. SCAP will serve as the mechanism through
which the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR) will track GPRA progress. As such, the program
will set national goals based on historical performance and performance expectations within a limited budget for the
four performance goals in GPRA and track accomplishments in the activities contributing to those goals. HQ will
not establish specific Regional targets and measures for GPRA. Regions should continue to plan and report
accomplishments in CERCLIS as they have traditionally. There are no additional GPRA-related reporting
requirements for the Regions in FY 97.
The differences between SCAP targets and measures remain the same (i.e., a pre-determined numerical goal
versus an activity deemed essential to tracking overall program progress, respectively). OERR will continue to track
site assessment activities to document and evaluate administrative program progress and to analyze program trends.
SCAP accomplishments will be pulled from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS) on a quarterly basis. Planning measures are used to project the number of events
and activities that each Region expects to perform during the year using anticipated resources. Reporting measures
simply track the number of events and activities that occur throughout the year and are used to evaluate overall
progress through the cleanup pipeline. Planning measures also report accomplishments.
The following pages contain, in pipeline order, the definitions of the FY 97 early and long-term action activities,
SCAP measures (with the prefix ACT), internal management planning and reporting measures, and early and long-
term action project support activities. Exhibit B.I displays the full list of early and long-term action activities defined
in this Appendix. Exhibit B.2, at the end of this Appendix, illustrates the long-term action process. Exhibit B.3, also
at the end of this Appendix, identifies planning requirements for all early and long-term action activities.
SUPERFUND DURATIONS
The Superfund program has tracked remedial pipeline durations for several years in the Superfund Senior
Management Reports as part of Superfund progress evaluation. As program management emphasis shifts from
administrative progress to more comprehensive measurement of program progress, OERR will track additional
durations besides the remedial pipeline durations. These durations include: Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis
(EE/CA) duration; Expanded Site Inspection/Remedial Investigation (ESI/RI) duration; removal duration; average
proposed listing to first removal or remedial action; and average duration from action memorandum to first removal
completion. In FY 97, OERR will track the average event and site durations presented below. These durations are
not SCAP measures; they are presented here for informational purposes only. HQ is responsible for calculating and
publishing the durations in the Superfund Senior Management Reports; however, Regions are responsible for entering
and maintaining accurate data from which durations can be derived.
B-l September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The durations only cover non-Federal actions and are calculated based on actual dates. In addition, they do not
include takeovers (within actions) or phased actions. These durations are tracked by the response and enforcement
programs.
» Average Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) Duration
• Duration from ROD to RD Start
« Duration from ROD to RA Start
September 27, 1996 B-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT B.I
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION ACTIVITIES
iiiiiftf]^^
8SS3S2M2 " '.iff f-y;if;:*:;;^::~*::Mt:':ffmttV»*fMtK tXi^vSiS-^-vv'SKKSSSiS^^
Community Relations
Support Agency Assistance
Technical Assistance
Technical Assistance Grants (TAGs)
Treatability Studies
Design Assistance
RD Start
RD Completion
RA Start
RA Contract Award
ACT-5 Sites Addressed Through Early or Long-Term Action On-Site
Construction Starts
ACT-6 Early and Long-Term Action Completions
ACT-7 NPL Site Construction Completions Through Early Actions, Long-
Term Actions, or RODs
Operational and Functional (O&F)
Long Term Response Action (LTRA)
NPL Site Completions
Groundwater Monitoring
Operation and Maintenance (O&M)
Five- Year Reviews
Partial NPL Deletion
Final NPL Deletion
El- 1 Progress Through Environmental Indicators (El)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Measure
Measure
Measure
-
-
Measure
-
-
Measure
-
-
Measure
-
-
-
*
-
-
Planning
Planning
Planning
Planning
-
-
-
-
*
-
*
*
-
*
*
-
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Those measures displayed in bold
type are program priorities for FY 97.
* These activities are planned for budgetary purposes.
B-3
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION DEFINITIONS
COMMUNITY RELATIONS (CR)
Definition:
CRs are the activities conducted in accordance with SARA, the National Contingency Plan (NCP), and the Community
Relations Handbook to involve the community in response activities conducted at a site,
Definition of Accomplishment:
The start of CR is the obligation or tasking of funds for the development of the Community Relations Plan (CRP) or
when EPA initiates work on the CRP. For RP-lead or Federal facility sites where the PRP or other Federal agency
is preparing the CRP in accordance with an Administrative Order (AO), Consent Decree (CD), or Interagency
Agreement (IAG), the start of CR is defined as EPA's written approval of the CRP. When EPA is preparing the CRP
at RP- or EP-lead sites, CR begins when EPA initiates work on the CRP.
The completion of CR is the deletion of the site from the NPL or the conclusion of an early action at non-NPL or NPL
caliber sites.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
CR activities at Federal facilities are paid for by the Federal facility budget (Action Name = FF Community
Relations). Planned and actual start and completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds may be planned site-
(Action Name = PRP Community Relations or Remedial Community Relations or Removal Community Relations)
or non-site specifically; however, they must be obligated or tasked site-specifically. Once funds are obligated, the
non-site specific amount must be reduced. Funds for CR activities are in the Federal facility or site characterization
Advice of Allowance (AOA).
SUPPORT AGENCY ASSISTANCE
Definition:
The activities performed by another entity in support of EPA comprise support agency assistance. The support agency
furnishes necessary data to EPA, reviews response data and documents, and provides other assistance to EPA.
EPA may provide States, political subdivisions, and Indian Tribes with funding to carry out a variety of management
responsibilities via a support agency Cooperative Agreement (CA) to ensure the meaningful and substantial
involvement in response activities.
Unless otherwise specified in the CA, all support agency costs, with the exception of RA support agency costs, may
be planned under a single Superfund account number designated specifically for support agency activities. RA support
agency activities must be planned site-specifically and require cost share provisions.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The start of support agency assistance is the signature of the CA by the Regional Administrator or his designee.
The completion of support agency assistance is the completion of all remedial activities at the site.
September 27, 1996 B-4
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Support agency assistance is paid for by the response program and is contained in the site characterization AOA.
Planned and actual start and completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds may be planned or obligated site-
(Action Name = Management Assistance) or non-site specifically; however, they must be outlayed site-specifically.
Once funds are obligated, the non-site specific amount must be reduced.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Definition:
Technical assistance is support provided by a third party to EPA to conduct response activities. Third parties that may
provide assistance include U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USCOE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alternative
Remedial Contracting Strategy (ARCS), Superfund Technical Assistance and Response Team (START) and Response
Action Contracts (RAC) contractors.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The start of technical assistance is the obligation of funds for technical assistance. The completion is defined as the
completion of the response activities for the stage at which technical assistance was requested.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Added START contractors to the list of third parties what may provide technical assistance.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Technical assistance is paid for by the response program and is contained in the site characterization AOA. Planned
and actual start and completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds may be planned or obligated site- (Action
Name = Technical Assistance) or non-site specifically; however, they must be outlayed site-specifically. Once funds
are obligated, the non-site specific amount must be reduced.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS (TAGs)
Definition:
The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) established the TAG program to provide
technical assistance to eligible communities. The technical assistance allows communities to improve the decision
making process at their sites.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The start of the TAG is the signature of the CA to the community group which is the obligation of funds for the TAG.
The completion of the TAG is the completion of the final RA or early action, or the deletion of the site from the NPL.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
B-5 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Planned and actual start and completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds may be planned site- (Action
Name = Community Relations TA Grants) or non-site specifically; however, they must be obligated site specifically.
Once funds are obligated, the non-site specific amount must be reduced. Funds for TAGs at non-Federal facility sites
are contained in the response budget and found in the other response AOA. Funds for TAGs at Federal facility sites
are contained in the Federal facility budget and found in the Federal facility AOA.
TREATABILITY STUDIES
Definition:
Treatability studies are laboratory or field tests used to evaluate and implement one or more remedial alternatives.
This definition also covers post-ROD treatability studies.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Fund-financed - If unexpended ESI/RI, FS, or RD funds are used for the treatability study, the start date is the date
of EPA's written approval, as reflected in CERCLIS, of the treatability study work plan. The completion is the
written approval of the report on the results of the treatability study.
PRP-financed - The treatability study starts when EPA approves, in writing, the treatability study work plan submitted
by the Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs). The completion is the approval of the report on the results of the
treatability study.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Deleted the definition obligation of funds for treatability studies.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Treatability study (Action Name = Treatability Studies) planned and actual start (Planned Start and Actual Start) and
completion (Planned Complete and Actual Complete) dates are not required in CERCLIS. Treatability studies are
funded as part of an ESI/RI, RI/FS, or RD. Dollars are not budgeted, planned, or obligated separately.
DESIGN ASSISTANCE
Definition:
Design assistance activities are undertaken by the USCOE in preparation for initiating RD activities. This includes:
• Synopsizing RD requirements in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD); and
* Developing architect/engineer (A/E) firm pre-selection list; and
* Contacting A/E firms on the pre-selection list to ascertain interest in project; and
* Developing A/E selection list; and
• Tentatively selecting A/E firm.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The initiation of design assistance is the signature of the IAG by USCOE (obligation of funds). The completion of
design assistance is the start of RD.
September 27, 1996 B-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Funds for design assistance should be obligated prior to the signature of the ROD. Planned and actual start and
completion dates are not required in CERCLIS. Funds may be planned site- (Action Name = Design Assistance) or
non-site specifically; however, they must be obligated site-specifically. Once funds are obligated, the non-site specific
amount must be reduced. Funds for design assistance are in the site characterization AOA.
REMEDIAL DESIGN (RD) START
Definition:
The RD converts the remedy selected in the ROD into a final design package for RA. The obligation of funds for
design assistance or technical assistance does not constitute a RD start.
Pre-design activities will not be counted as a RD start.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Fund-Financed (MR-, F-, or S-lead actions) - A Fund RD is started when funds are obligated. An obligation is made
when:
* The EPA Contracting Officer (CO) signs the contract modification for the RD; or
• A CA is signed by the Regional Administrator or his designee; or
• An IAG is signed by the other Federal agency.
In those instances where design assistance is conducted prior to ROD signature, and there is not a new obligation of
funds for a subsequent RD, the start of RD is defined as the written approval of the work plan to conduct these
activities. If there is a new obligation of funds, the start of RD is defined as the date funds are obligated. When a RD
has been prepared by other parties (e.g., water lines where the city already prepared plans and specifications) or plans
developed for a similar site will be used, the RD actual start date is the same as the RA actual start date.
PRP-financed (RP- or PS-lead actions) - For RP-lead, the start is credited on the date the earlier of the following
actions takes place:
• The enforcement document under which the RD is to be conducted:
For an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), this is the date of signature of the AOC for RD by the
Regional Administrator or his designee, or the date of signature of an amendment to an existing AOC to
include RD;
For a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO), this is the date of the PRP's written notice of intent to comply
with the UAO;
For a CD, this is either the date the CD is lodged by the DOJ, or the date the CD is entered with the court
(depending on the wording of the CD); or
• An official written notice to proceed is issued by EPA to the PRP.
B-7 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
For PS-lead sites, credit will be given based on the issuance or effective date of a State order or other comparable
State enforcement document for RD (or combined RD/RA). If the RD is covered by a pre-existing State order, credit
will be based on the notice to proceed date.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
The PRP-financed RD definition was revised to identify the effective date of each of the settlement tools.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The actual start date (Actual Start) of the RD (Action Name = Remedial Design or PRP RD) must be entered into
CERCLIS. Accomplishments are reported site-specifically in CERCLIS. Funds for RDs are in the site
characterization AOA. This is an internal planning measure.
RD COMPLETION
Definition:
The RD converts the remedy selected in the ROD into a final design package for RA.
Definition of Accomplishment:
A RD is complete when;
« Fund-financed (MR-, F-, or S-lead actions) - EPA approves, in writing, the final design package.
• PRP-financed (RP- or PS-lead actions) - EPA approves, in writing, the final design package. For State
enforcement-lead (PS) RDs, the RD is complete when the State approves the final design package.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the RD (Action Name = Remedial Design or PRP RD) must be
entered into CERCLIS. Accomplishments are reported site-specifically in CERCLIS. This is an internal planning
measure.
REMEDIAL ACTION (RA) START
Definition:
A RA is the implementation of the remedy selected in the ROD,
Definition of Accomplishment:
Fund-financed (MR-, F- or S-lead actions) - Credit for a RA start is given on the date a contract modification for
the RA is signed by the EPA CO or the IAG is signed by the other Federal agency or CA is awarded, and funds are
obligated.
Credit for a subsequent RA start under an existing IAG is given on the date the amendment to the IAG to include the
new work is approved.
The actual start date (Actual Start) is entered into CERCLIS with the RA (Action Name = Remedial Action),
September 27, 1996 B-8
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
PRP-financed (RP- or PS-lead actions) - Credit for a RA start is given when one of the following occurs and has been
recorded in CERCLIS:
• If work is performed by the PRPs under the same CD or UAO as the RD, the RA start is the date EPA approves,
in writing, the PRP RD package (RD completion); or
• If the PRP is doing work under a State order or comparable enforcement document, and the site is covered by
a State enforcement cooperative agreement or State Memorandum of Agreement (SMOA) (PS-lead) with a
schedule for long-term action work at the site, and EPA approved the ROD, the RA start is the date the State
approves, in writing, the PRP RD package; or
• Where the Fund performed the RD or the RD was done under a settlement/order for RD and the PRPs are doing
the RA under the terms of a CD, UAO or judgment for RA only, the RA start date (Actual Start) is the same as
the date (Action Complete) of the PRP's written notice of intent to comply with the UAO (Action Name =
Unilateral Admin Order) and (Subaction Name = PRPs Ntfy EPA, Intent to Comply) or the date the CD is
transmitted by the Regional Administrator to HQ or the DOJ [as recorded in CERCLIS as the actual CD (Action
Name = Consent Decree) start (Actual Start) and actual RA start (Actual Start)]. Where the PRP is in significant
non-compliance with the UAO, credit will be withdrawn.
For both Fund- and PRP-financed actions - The Region must enter the technology of the RA into the Response
Action Type field (Selected Response Actions) and whether the RA is an early action or long-term action (Critical
Indicator = Early Action or Long-Term Action).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is an internal planning measure. The actual start date Actual Start of the RA (Action Name = Remedial Action
or PRP RA) and the appropriate enforcement information must be entered into CERCLIS. The Region must enter
the remedial response actions (Selected Response Actions) associated with the RA into CERCLIS. Funds for Fund-
financed RAs are planned on a site-specific basis and are placed by name in the RA AOA. Funds for oversight of
RP-lead RAs are planned on a site-specific basis and are found in the site characterization AOA. See Long-Term
Action Flow Chan at the end of this Appendix (Exhibit B.2).
RA CONTRACT AWARD
Definition:
Award of RA contract is the date a contract for construction of the remedy is awarded.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Fund-financed (MR-, F-, or S-lead actions) - Date (recorded in CERCLIS as an actual completion date) when the
EPA, State, USCOE, or Bureau of Reclamation (BUREC) awards (signs) a contract to initiate a Fund-financed RA.
If the RAC or ARCS contractor is assigned RA responsibility, the award of RA contract is defined as the date the RA
subcontract is signed by the contractor. If the Emergency Response Cleanup Services (ERCS) or Emergency and
Rapid Response Services (ERRS) contractor will be performing the RA, award of RA contract is defined as the date
the contract modification for the RA is signed by the EPA CO.
PRP-financed (RP- or PS-lead actions) - Date (recorded in CERCLIS as an actual completion date) when the PRP
awards a contract to initiate the RA, as documented in a memorandum to the site file.
B-9 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
Changes m Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
PRP accomplishment definition was revised.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The actual completion date (Actual Complete) must be placed in CERCLIS with the RA subaction, Award of RA
Contract (Action Name = Remedial Action or PRP RA and Subaction Name = Award of Contract). See Long-Term
Action Flow Chart at the end of this Appendix (Exhibit B.2). This is an internal planning measure.
ACT 5 • SITES ADDRESSED THROUGH EARLY OR LONG-TERM ACTION ON-SITE
CONSTRUCTION STARTS
Definition of Target/Measure:
This measure counts all sites (NPL, non-NPL, or NPL caliber) where either early or long-term cleanup actions have
been initiated to address risks to human health and the environment.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Long-Term Action (RA On-Site Construction) - A site is addressed by a long-term action when the EPA, ARCS,
RAC, the USCOE, BUREC, State or PRP, or their contractors, have mobilized for on-site construction of the long-
term action remedy selected in the ROD. If groundwater monitoring is being performed using existing wells, the site
is addressed when the first sample is taken.
A memo to file documenting that the contractor has mobilized to begin construction or a report of mobilization from
the contractor is required or, when groundwater monitoring is being performed using existing wells, a report (or a
memo to the file) that documents that the first sample has been taken is required.
• Fund-financed (MR-, F-, Or S-lead actions) - The following data must be entered into CERCLIS:
The date of on-site construction as the RA on-site construction subaction (Action Name = Remedial Action
and Subaction Name = RA On-Site Construction) actual completion date (Actual Complete); and
A "final" NPL status indicator (NPL Status = Currently on the Final NPL); and
A Critical Indicator, classifying the RA as a Long-Term Action (Critical Indicator = Long-Term
Action); or
When groundwater monitoring is being performed using existing wells, the date that the first sample is
taken (Action Name = Groundwater Monitoring) as an actual start date (Actual Start); and
A "final" NPL status indicator (NPL Status = Currently on the Final NPL).
• PRP-financed (RP- or PS-lead actions) - The work must be in compliance with an AOC, UAO, CD, or judgment.
The date of on-site construction must be documented in a memorandum to the site file stating when the contractor
mobilized on site to commence substantial and continuous remedial activity. A copy of a report of mobilization
from the contracting party is also acceptable. The date of on-site construction must be entered into CERCLIS
as the RA on-site subaction (Action Name = PRP RA and Subaction Name = RA On-Site Construction) actual
completion date (Actual Complete). Also, the RA must be classified as a Long-Term Action (Critical Indicator
= Long-Term Action).
September 27, 1996 B-10
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
For both Fund- and PRP-financed action - The Region must enter the RA technology into the "Selected
Response Actions" field.
Early Action - A site is addressed by an early action when the EPA, RAC, ARCS, ERRS, ERCS, State, or PRP, or
dieir contractors, have mobilized for construction of the early action specified in the ROD or Action Memorandum.
• Early Action (Removal Authority) - A Pollution Report (POLREP) documenting that the contractor has mobilized
for construction of the removal (emergency, time-critical, or non-time critical) is required to document the
accomplishment. The following data must be entered into CERCLIS:
The date of on-site construction as the early action (removal authority) (Action Name = Removal Action or
PRP Removal) actual start date (Actual Start);
- The Critical Indicator, classifying the early action as (l)Time Critical, (2) Non-time Critical, or (3)
Emergency; and
- The NPL Status as Proposed for NPL, Currently Final on the NPL, or Not on the NPL.
If a PRP is doing the work, it must be in compliance with an AOC, UAO, CD, or judgment.
The following documentation is required:
A (POLREP documenting that the contractor has mobilized for construction of the removal; AND
An AOC signed by the PRPs and the designated Regional official; or
A UAO signed by the designated Regional official; or
A CD signed by the PRPs, the designated Regional official, and the Federal judge; or
A judgment signed by the Federal judge
• Early Action (Remedial Authority)
Fund-financed (MR-, F-, or S-lead actions) - A memorandum to the file or other documentation stating that the
contractor has mobilized for construction of the early action (remedial authority) is required to document the
accomplishment. The following data must be entered into CERCLIS:
The date of obligation of funds for the early action (remedial authority) as the RA (Action Name = Remedial
Action) actual start date (Actual Stan) funds are obligated when the CO signs the contract modification, the
IAG is signed by the other Federal agency, or a CA is signed by the Regional Administrator or his/her
designee; and
The date of early action under remedial authority on-site construction as the RA on-site construction
subaction (Action Name = Remedial Action and Subaction Name = RA On-site Construction) actual
completion date (Actual Complete); and
The Critical Indicator as (4) Early Action; and
- The NPL Status as Proposed for NPL or Currently on Final NPL.
B-ll September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
PRP-flnanced (RP- or PS-lead actions) - The work must be in compliance with an AOC, UAO, CD, or
judgment. The following information must be entered into CERCLIS:
The date of early action (remedial authority) on-site construction as the RA on-site construction subaction
(Action Name = PRP RA and Subaction Name = RA On-site Construction) actual completion date (Actual
Complete); and
The Critical Indicator as (4) Early Action.
The following documentation is also required:
Memo to the file documenting that the contractor has mobilized to being the early action (remedial authority);
or
Report of mobilization from the contractor; AND
A UAO signed by the designated Regional official; or
A CD signed by the PRPs, the designated Regional official, and the Federal judge; or
A judgment signed by the Federal judge.
For both Fund- and PRP- financed actions - the Region must enter the RA technology into the "Selected Response
Actions" field.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. Only the first early or long-term action will be counted in this measure. Regions
cannot receive credit if an early action (removal or remedial) or RA began or was conducted at the site in a previous
year. Funds for early actions (removal authority) may be planned or obligated site- or non-site specifically; however,
they must be reported into CERCLIS site-specifically. Credit is given for the first activity started, and a site can only
receive credit once. This is a SCAP reporting measure. Early and long-term action starts will be tracked separately
for internal management purposes. The date of mobilization for RA on-site construction (Action Name = Remedial
Action or PRP RA and Subactioa Name = RA On-site Construction) will be used for purposes of establishing the
statute of limitation (SOL) determination.
ACT-6 • EARLY OR LONG-TERM ACTION COMPLETIONS
Definition of Target/Measure:
Early actions (removal or remedial) are responses performed at NPL, non-NPL, or NPL caliber sites that eliminate
or reduce threats to public health or the environment from the release, or potential release, of hazardous substances.
These risk reduction activities can be conducted as emergency responses, time-critical or NTC removal actions, or
as early actions (remedial authority). An action qualifier (Qualifier) must be recorded to identify whether the early
action (removal authority) resulted in a "Total Site Cleanup," a "Partial Site Cleanup," or "Site Stabilization." This
measure tracks each early action completion at a site.
September 27, 1996 B-12
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Action qualifiers are defined as follows:
Total Site Cleanup: All threats have been addressed as defined in the Action Memo and the Region determines
that it has addressed all threats posed by the site (will not be returning for subsequent response activity). Also,
all removal obligations and related work have been completed.
Partial Site Cleanup: Removal action(s) have been completed that have taken specified waste(s) off site, or
permanent treatment technologies have been applied such that specified waste(s) will not have to be handled again.
Example: Contaminated drums are removed but soil contamination remains. Site is partially cleaned up.
Site Stabilization: AH threats identified in the Action Memo have been addressed and the Region may take
additional removal actions as new threats are identified/investigatory information is available.
Example: Site is fenced to preclude entry/exit and drams are segregated and overpacked to prevent a
release/contamination. Site is stabilized.
Long-term actions are cleanup responses intended to achieve the completion of more extensive site remediation such
as restoration of surface and groundwater resources. This measure tracks each long-term action completion at a
site.
Early and long-term action completions will be tracked separately but accomplishments will be reported on a combined
basis.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Early Action (Removal Authority)
• A Fund-financed early action (removal authority) is considered complete when the actions specified in the Action
Memorandum are met, OR when a ROD is signed which encompasses the actions specified in the Action
Memorandum, OR when the contractor has demobilized and left the site (as documented in the POLREP) and
recorded as the removal (Action Name = Removal Action) actual completion date (Actual Complete) in
CERCLIS.
« APRP-financed early action (removal authority) is considered complete when the Region has certified that the
PRPs have fully met the terms of an AOC, UAO, CD, or judgment and EITHER have completed the actions
specified in the Action Memorandum (as documented in the POLREP) and recorded as the removal (Action Name
= PRP Removal) actual completion date (Actual Complete) in CERCLIS OR a ROD (Action Name = Record
of Decision) is signed which encompasses the actions specified in the Action Memorandum.
The completion of all early actions (removal authority) are credited under this measure.
Exceptions:
Temporary demobilization and temporary storage on-site are not considered completions, unless temporary storage
is the only action specified in the Action Memorandum to mitigate threats to public health, welfare, and the
environment. Likewise, temporary off-site storage of hazardous substances at a Treatment, Storage, and Disposal
(TSD) facility other than the facility of ultimate disposal is a continuation of the action, not a completion, unless
temporary off-site storage at a TSD is the only action specified in the Action Memorandum. In addition, an early
action would not be considered complete if:
« The Action Memorandum requires the EPA contractor to monitor the hazardous substances stored on-site or
additional contractor expenditures are anticipated; or
B-13 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• Hazardous substances are being stored at an off-site facility, other than the ultimate TSD facility required in the
Action Memorandum.
An early action would be considered complete if:
* The scope of work for the action does not specify final off-site disposal of hazardous substances; the substances
have been stabilized and are stored on-site due to circumstances such as the unavailability of a final
treatment/disposal remedy; and no additional Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) removal authority funds are anticipated to be expended on this action. In this instance,
no CERCLA removal authority funds will be expended for long-term site O&M. Any long-term site O&M
(greater than 6 months) should be performed by the PRP or another agency (e.g., the State); or
• Hazardous substances are being stored off-site at the location of final disposal, and no additional contractor
expenditures are anticipated for this action.
A Lang-Term Action or Early Action (Remedial Authority)
These actions are considered complete (Fund- or PRP-financed) when:
• Construction activities are complete; and
» A final inspection has been conducted; and
• The remedy is O&F; or
» Groundwater monitoring using existing wells is complete and cleanup goals have been met; and
• The designated Regional or State (PS-lead) official (Branch Chief or above) signs a letter accepting the RA or
Early Action Report certifying that construction is complete or, when groundwater monitoring using existing wells
is complete, the designated official signs a letter accepting the final sampling report.
Accomplishments are credited based on the date the designated Regional (or State) official signs a letter accepting the
RA or Early Action Report. The date of the acceptance of the RA or Early Action Report must be entered into
CERCLIS as the long-term action (remedial activity) (Action Name = Remedial Action or PRP RA) or the early
action (remedial authority) (Action Name = Remedial Action or PRP RA) and Critical Indicators = [(4) Early
Action)]. The date must be entered as an actual completion date (Actual Complete) into CERCLIS. When
groundwater monitoring is performed using existing wells, the accomplishment is credited on the date of the
acceptance of the final sampling report, which must be entered in CERCLIS as the groundwater monitoring action
(Action Name = Groundwater Monitoring) actual completion date (Actual Complete).
The completion of all long-term actions or early actions (remedial authority) will be credited under this measure.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. Early and long-term action completions will be tracked separately but
accomplishments will be reported on a combined basis. For early actions (removal authority), an action Qualifier
must be recorded to identify whether the removal resulted in a "Total Site Cleanup," a "Partial Site Cleanup," or
"Site Stabilization." All early and long-term action completions will receive credit under this measure. See Long-
Term Action Flow Chart at the end of this Appendix (Exhibit B.2).
September 27, 1996 B-14
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
ACT-7 • NPL SITE CONSTRUCTION COMPLETIONS THROUGH EARLY ACTIONS,
LONG-TERM ACTIONS, OR RODS
Definition of Target/Measure:
Construction at a NPL site is considered complete when:
• Physical construction is complete for the entire site as a result of one or several early or long-term actions; or
• A ROD is signed for the only Operable Unit (OU) stating that no remediation is required; or
• A ROD is signed for the final OU stating that all necessary remediation was previously completed; or
• A ROD is signed for the final OU stating that the only remediation necessary is the implementation of an
institutional control(s).
When groundwater monitoring is being performed using existing wells, construction completion is defined as the date
that the Regional or State official signs a letter accepting the final sampling report indicating that the engineered
portion of the groundwater remedy is functional.
Sites that receive credit under this measure will have no further response actions, other than the ongoing "long-
term response action" (LTRA) component of the cleanup actions being performed. Regions receive credit for
construction completion only once per site.
Accomplishments under this measure will count toward the goal of 650 site construction completions by the end of
the year 2000.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The following tables have been added to more clearly depict coding and accomplishment requirements:
B-15 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Required
Construction activities at all
OUs are complete; and
A pre-final inspection for the
final OU has been conducted;
and
A Preliminary Site Close-Out
Report has been prepared*
OR
Groundwater monitoring using
existing wells is complete and
the remedy is functioning as
designed; and
A Preliminary Site Close-Out
Report has been prepared*
Date the designated Regional
official signs the Preliminary
or Final Superfund Site Close-
Out Report
The completion date of the report
must be entered into CERCLIS as the
actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Preliminary
Superfund Site Close-Out Report
[Action Name = Remedial Action or
PRP RA and Subaction Name =
Prelim Close-Out Rep Prepared OR
Action Name = Remedial Action or
PRP RA, Critical Indicator = (4)
Early Action, and Subaction Name =
Prelim Close-Out Rep Prepared OR
Action Name = Groundwater
Monitoring and Subaction = Prelim
Closeout Report Prepared], or the
actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report [Action Name =
Remedial Action or PRP RA and
Subaction Name = Close Out Report
OR Action Name = Remedial Action
or PRP RA, Critical Indicator = (4)
Early Action, and Subaction Name =
Close Out Report OR Action Name =
Groundwater Monitoring],
* A Preliminary Superfund Site Close-Out report is not required if the Region immediately prepares a Final
Superfund Site Close-Out Report (Action Name = Record of Decision and Subaction Name = Close Out
Report).
September 27, 1996
B-16
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Requirements
ROD for the only OU that states
that no remediation is required at
the site.
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD.
Regions must enter the following
into CERCLIS: The date of the
ROD signature as the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the ROD (Action
Name = Record of Decision); the
Alternative Name; the Media
Name; the Media Type
(Groundwater, Leachate, Liquid
Waste, Other, Sediment, Sludge,
Soil, Solid Waste, Surface
Water); the Selected Response
Action(s) (No Action or Natural
Attenuation); and the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final Superfund
Site Close-Out Report (Action
Name = Record of Decision and
Subaction Name = Close Out
Report). ^__
B-17
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Requirements
ROD for the final OU that states
that all necessary remediation is
complete at the site. The ROD
must include a construction
completion certification or a
separate Final Superfiind Site
Close-Out Report must be
prepared and signed by the
Regional Administrator.
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD or the date the
Regional Administrator signs the
Final Superfiind Site Close-Out
Report.
Regions must enter the following
into CERCLIS:
• RODs with a construction
completion certification - The
date of ROD signature as the
actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the ROD (Action
Name = Record of Decision);
the Alternative Name; the
Media Name; the Media Type
(Groundwater, Leachate, Liquid
Waste, Other, Sediment,
Sludge, Soil, Solid Waste,
Surface Water); the Selected
Response Action (No Further
Action); and the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report (Action Name = Record
of Decision and Subaction
Name = Close Out Report).
[Continued on Next Page]
September 27, 1996
B-18
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Requirements
[Continued From Previous Page]
ROD for the final OU that states
that all necessary remediation is
complete at the site. The ROD
must include a construction
completion certification or a
separate Final Superfund Site
C lose-Out Report must be
prepared and signed by the
Regional Administrator.
[Continued From Previous Page]
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD or the date the
Regional Administrator signs the
Final Superfund Site Close-Out
Report.
[Continued From Previous Page]
» RODs with separate Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report - the actual completion
date (Actual Complete) of the
ROD (Action Name = Record
of Decision); the Alternative
Name; the Media Name; the
Media Type (Groundwater,
Leachate, Liquid Waste, Other,
Sediment, Sludge, Soil, Solid
Waste, Surface Water); the
Selected Response Action (No
Further Action); and the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report (Action Name = Record
of Decision and Subaction
Name = Close Out Report).
B-19
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
m 'Mmm '.^^^^s^^^^^j^^^^s^^s^^Sj^i? w:;®Pis:: ; • msmmy \ ?®t%?m%%i& :•**; ; ; ; m '• ssi w&^xFVS&W&Z '3%%f&*$\ :gf
Definition of Accomplishment
ROD for the final OU that states
that the only necessary remediation
at the site is the implementation of
institutional control(s). The ROD
must include a construction
completion certification or a
separate Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report must be
prepared and signed by the
Regional Administrator.
Actual Completion Date
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD or the date the
Regional Administrator signs the
Final Superfund Site Close-Out
Report.
Coding Requirements
Regions must enter the following
into CERCLIS:
» RODs with a construction
completion certification - The
date of the ROD signature as the
actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the ROD (Action
Name = Record of Decision);
the Alternative Name; the
Media Name; the Media Type
(Air, Groundwater, Leachate,
Liquid Waste, Other, Residuals,
Sediment, Sludge, Soil, Solid
Waste, Surface Waste); the
Selected Response Action(s)
[Access Restriction, Deed
Restriction, Drilling Restriction,
Fishing Restriction, Institutional
Controls (N.O.S.), Land Use
Restriction, Monitoring,
Recreational Restriction,
Revegetation, Swimming
Restriction, Water Supply Use
Restriction]; and the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report (Action Name = Record
of Decision and Subaction
Name = Close Out Report).
[Continued on Next Page]
NOTE: A ROD that includes a construction completion certification is equivalent to a Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report.
September 27, 1996
B-20
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Requirements
[Continued From Previous Page]
ROD for the final OU that states
that the only necessary remediation
at the site is the implementation of
institutional control(s). The ROD
must include a construction
completion certification or a
separate Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report must be
prepared and signed by the
Regional Administrator
(continued).
[Continued From Previous Page]
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD or the date the
Regional Administrator signs the
Final Superfund Site Close-Out
Report (continued).
[Continued From Previous Page]
« RODs with separate Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report - the actual completion
date (Actual Complete) of the
ROD (Action Name = Record
of Decision); the Alternative
Name; the Media Name; the
Media Type (Air, Groundwater,
Leachate, Liquid Waste, Other,
Residuals, Sediment, Sludge,
Soil, Solid Waste, Surface
Waste); the Selected Response
Action(s) [Access Restriction,
Deed Restriction, Drilling
Restriction, Fishing Restriction,
Institutional Controls (N.O.S.),
Land Use Restriction,
Monitoring, Recreational
Restriction, Revegetation,
Swimming Restriction, Water
Supply Use Restriction]; and the
actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report (Action Name = Record
of Decision and Subaction
Name = Close Out Report).
B-21
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition or
Accomplishment
Actual Completion
Date
Coding Required
Fund-Financed:
Contractor demobilized
(recorded in POLREP)
PRP-Financed:
Region certifies PRPs or
their contractor have
completed the early actions
specified in the Action
Memorandum and fully met
the terms of AO, CD or
judgment
Both Fund- and PRP-
Financed;
A Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report has been
prepared and signed by the
Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional
Administrator, OR
A ROD that includes a
construction completion
certification is signed for the
final OU that states that all
necessary remediation is
complete.
Date Regional
Administrator/ Deputy
Regional Administrator
signs the ROD or Final
Superfund Site Close-
Out Report
The Region must enter the following into
CERCLIS:
• The removal (Action Name = Removal
Action or PRP Removal) actual completion
date (Actual Complete) (as reported in the
POLREP); and
• The early action Qualifier that indicates that
the site is Cleaned Up; and
• The actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final Superfund Site Close-
Out Report (Action Name = Removal
Action or PRP Removal and Subaction
Name = Close Out Report); OR
• The date of the ROD signature as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the
ROD (Action Name = Record of Decision );
the Alternative Name; the Media Name; the
Media Type; the Selected Response
Action(s); and the actual completion date
(Actual Complete) of the Final Superfund
Site Close-Out Report (Action Name =
Record of Decision and Subaction Name =
Close Out Report).
NOTE: A ROD that includes a construction completion certification is equivalent to a Final Superfund
Site Close-Out Report. There should be no further early or long-term actions conducted at the
site after this ROD or Close-Out Report is signed. Regions may receive credit under this
measure if LTRA is ongoing at another OU.
September 27, 1996
B-22
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The appropriate Critical Indicator must also be entered into CERCLIS for early
actions (removal or remedial) — (1) Emergency, (2) Time-Critical, (3) Non-Time Critical, or (4) Early Action. This
is a SCAP planning and reporting measure. Accomplishments under this measure will count toward the goal of 650
NPL Construction Completions by the end of the year 2000. Regions identified sites to meet the goal prior to the start
of the FY. Only the final early or long-term action or ROD at the site receives credit under this measure. Regions
may receive credit under both the NPL Site Completion and ACT-7, NPL Site Construction Completion measures,
as a result of the same long-term action, early action (remedial), or ROD. There is only one NPL construction
completion at a site.
OPERATIONAL AND FUNCTIONAL (O&F)
Definition:
O&F means the activities required to determine that the remedy is functioning properly and is performing as designed.
O&F activities are part of RA when a Fund-financed RA is conducted. Physical construction may be complete before
the start of O&F. EPA funds O&F activities for a period up to one year after the final inspection, or until EPA and
the State jointly determine that the remedy is functioning properly and is performing as designed, whichever is
earliest. EPA may extend the one-year period, as appropriate.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The completion of O&F is the date on which the lead and support agencies (F- or S-lead RA) or the EPA and/or State
official and PRPs (RP-, MR-, or PS-lead RA) agree through an inspection that the remedy is operating in accordance
with the standards contained in the ROD and RD. This documentation is presented in the RA Report. Normally,
O&F completion will occur within one year following completion of construction. The actual completion date (Actual
Complete) is reported as O&F (Action Name = Operational and Functional).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
O&F is now reported in CERCLIS 3 as an action and not as the subaction to an RA.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Although it is an action, O&F (Action Name = Operational and Functional) only has an actual completion date
(Actual Complete).
LONG TERM RESPONSE ACTION (LTRA)
Definition:
LTRAs are response actions undertaken for the purpose of restoring ground or surface water quality. These actions
require a continuous period of on-site activity before cleanup levels, specified in the ROD or Action Memorandum,
are achieved.
For Fund-financed RAs involving treatment or other measures to restore contaminated ground or surface water
quality, the operation of such treatment or measures for a period up to 10 years after the construction or installation
and commencement of operation will be considered pan of RA.
B-23 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 92Q0.3-14-1C
Activities required to maintain the effectiveness of such treatment or measures following the 10-year period, or after
RA is complete, whichever is earlier, shall be considered O&M. Ground or surface water measures initiated for the
primary purpose of providing drinking water, not for the purpose of restoring ground or surface water shall not be
considered treatment.
Definition of Accomplishment:
LIRA begins when EPA and the State (Fund-financed LIRA) or EPA and/or the State and the PRPs (RP- or PS-lead)
determine that the RA is O&F. (See definition of O&F.) Typically, this is when the letter accepting the RA Report
is signed by the designated Regional official. The completion date is the point at which the levels specified in the
ROD or Action Memorandum have been achieved and all necessary Superfund response required to protect human
health or the environment has been completed, or ten years after the remedy becomes O&F, whichever is earliest,
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97;
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
LTRA is planned on a site-specific basis (Action Name = Long-term Response) in CERCLIS and is used for resource
allocation purposes only. Funds for LTRA are issued site-specifically in the RA AOA. Funds for oversight of RP-
lead LTRA are contained in the site characterization AOA. See Long-Term Action Flow Chart at the end of the
Appendix (Exhibit B.2).
NPL SITE COMPLETIONS
Definition of Target/Measure:
An NPL site is completed when:
» Cleanup goals are reached as a result of one or several early or long-term actions; or
• A ROD is signed for the only OU at a site stating that no remediation is required; or
» A ROD is signed for the final OU at a site stating that all necessary remediation is complete; or
* A ROD is signed for the final OU stating that the only necessary remediation is the implementation of an
institutional control(s).
When groundwater monitoring is being performed using existing wells, site completion is defined as the date that the
Regional or State official signs a letter accepting the final sampling report.
Sites that receive credit under this measure will have achieved final cleanup goals or have no further response
actions, including LTRA. Regions receive credit for a site completion only once per site.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The following table has been added to more clearly depict coding and accomplishment requirements.
September 27, 1996 B-24
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Required
• Construction activities at all
OUs are complete; or
• LTRA at all OUs is complete;
and
« A pre-final inspection of the site
has been conducted; and
• A Preliminary Superfund Site
Close-Out Report has been
prepared and signed by the
designated Regional official*;
and
• A final inspection has been
conducted; and
• The remedy is O&F; and
« A letter accepting the RA or
Early Action Report has been
signed by the designated
Regional official (Branch Chief
or above); and
• A Final Superfund Site Close-
Out Report has been prepared.
[Continued on Next Page]
Date the Regional Administrator
signs the Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report.
The completion date of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Out Report
must be entered into CERCLIS as
the actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final Superfund
Site Close-Out Report [Action
Name = Remedial Action or PRP
RA and Subaction Name = Close
Out Report OR Action Name =
Remedial Action or PRP RA,
Critical Indicator = (4) Early
Action, and Subaction Name =
Close Out Report OR Action
Name = Groundwater
Monitoring].
B-25
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Required
[Continued From Previous Page]
OR
• Groundwater monitoring using
existing wells is complete; and
• LTRA at all OUs is complete;
and
• A Preliminary Superfund Site
Close-Out Report has been
prepared and signed by the
designated Regional official*;
and
• A letter accepting the RA or
Early Action Report has been
signed by the designated
Regional official (Branch Chief
or above); and
• A Final Superfund Site Close-
Out Report has been prepared.
[Continued From Previous Page]
Date the Regional Administrator
signs the Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report.
[Continued From Previous Page]
The completion date of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Out Report
must be entered into CERCLIS as
the actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final Superfund
Site Close-Out Report [Action
Name = Remedial Action or PRP
RA and Subaction Name = Close
Out Report OR Action Name =
Remedial Action or PRP RA,
Critical Indicator = (4) Early
Action, and Subaction Name =
Close Out Report OR Action
Name = Groundwater
Monitoring].
* A Preliminary Superfund Site Close-Out Report documents the completion of physical construction,
summarizes site conditions and construction activities, and, as appropriate, provides the schedule for the
joint final inspection (required before the start of the O&F phase), approval of the O&M workplan, and
establishment of institutional controls.
A Preliminary Superfund Site Close-Out Report is unnecessary if the Region immediately prepares a Final
Superfund Site Close-Out Report.
September 27, 1996
B-26
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
RODs Hat Document Site Completion
(There should be no future early or long-term actions, including LTRA, conducted at the site
tbis ROD is signed. If LTRA is ongoing at ano&er OU, tfae signature
of the ROD will not be credited as a site completion accomplishment.)
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Requirements
ROD for the only OU that states
that no remediation is required at
the site.
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD.
Regions must enter the following
into CERCLIS: The date of the
ROD signature as the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the ROD (Action
Name = Record of Decision); the
Alternative Name; the Media
Name; the Media Type
(Groundwater, Leachate, Liquid
Waste, Other, Sediment, Sludge,
Soil, Solid Waste, Surface
Water); the Selected Response
Action(s) (No Action or Natural
Attenuation); and the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final Superfund
Site Close-Out Report (Action
Name = Record of Decision and
Subaction Name = Close Out
Report).
B-27
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Requirements
ROD for the final OU that states
that all necessary remediation is
complete at the site. The ROD
must include a construction
completion certification or a
separate Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report must be
prepared and signed by the
Regional Administrator.
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD or the date the
Regional Administrator signs the
Final Superfund Site Close-Out
Report.
Regions must enter the following
into CERCLIS:
• RODs with a construction
completion certification - The
date of the ROD signature as the
actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the ROD (Action
Name = Record of Decision);
the Alternative Name; the
Media Name; the Media Type
(Groundwater, Leachate, Liquid
Waste, Other, Sediment,
Sludge, Soil, Solid Waste,
Surface Water); the Selected
Response Action (No Further
Action) and the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report (Action Name = Record
of Decision and Subaction
Name = Close Out Report).
[Continued on Next Page]
September 27, 1996
B-28
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
RODs That Document Site Completion (Cont'd)
:(There should be no future early or long-term actions, including LTRA, conducted at the site
after this ROI> is signed, if LTRA fe ongoing at anther OU, the signature
of the ROB will not be credited as a site completion accomplishment,}
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Requirements
[Continued From Previous Page]
ROD for the final OU that states
that all necessary remediation is
complete at the site. The ROD
must include a construction
completion certification or a
separate Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report must be
prepared and signed by the
Regional Administrator.
[Continued From Previous Page]
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD or the date the
Regional Administrator signs the
Final Superfund Site Close-Out
Report.
[Continued From Previous Page]
• RODs with separate Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report - the actual completion
date (Actual Complete) of the
ROD (Action Name = Record
of Decision); the Alternative
Name; the Media Name; the
Media Type (Groundwater,
Leachate, Liquid Waste, Other,
Sediment, Sludge, Soil, Solid
Waste, Surface Water); the
Selected Response Action (No
Further Action); and the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report (Action Name = Record
of Decision and Subaction
Name = Close Out Report).
B-29
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
•:-: ••'••:•:-:-.•:-,-:->:-:->:-: : : . :-:-'-.-:-:-:-'v:- '•:•:•*-" :-'--:-'.-:-.-'.-'.• '.-.• •'. >'•:•,•;•' •.-:•: :•:•: : :•:-*>:-:•-•: :-.-:-:-:-.-:-:-.-.•,- •.•;•;-"-:-:•:-:•:-:•:-:•:•:•:•.•; : ;:•**:•:•:•:•:-. : ; • -:-:•:•.-:•:•:-:•:•:-:-:•:•;•:•:•:•:- -.- -.-. .• ' '•.••-:•:-:•:•:•. : :•:-:-:-:•:??:•;•:•:•:-:-:•:-.;:-:<•;•:•. ; % :-..-: , ,•:•:•:-:-.•.•:•:-:•:•:•.•:-:•:-: :•:-;-:-:-:•:•:•,•:-. . :•:-..;•.-: : •••-..-* ' ;• <-. '-' .-:-:•:•.
Definition of Accomplishment
ROD for the final OU that states
that the only necessary remediation
at the site is the implementation of
institutional control(s). The ROD
must include a construction
completion certification or a
separate Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report must be
prepared and signed by the
Regional Administrator.
Actual Completion Date
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD or the date the
Regional Administrator signs the
Final Superfund Site Close-Out
Report.
Coding Requirements
Regions must enter the following
into CERCLIS:
» RODs with a construction
completion certification - The
date of the ROD signature as the
actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the ROD (Action
Name = Record of Decision);
the Alternative Name; the
Media Name; the Media Type
(Air, Groundwater, Leachate,
Liquid Waste, Other, Residuals,
Sediment, Sludge, Soil, Solid
Waste, Surface Waste); the
Selected Response Action(s)
[Access Restriction, Deed
Restriction, Drilling Restriction.
Fishing Restriction, Institutional
Controls (N.O.S.), Land Use
Restriction, Monitoring,
Recreational Restriction,
Revegetation, Swimming
Restriction, Water Supply Use
Restriction]; and the actual
completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Oui
Report (Action Name = Record
of Decision and Subaction
Name = Close Out Report).
[Continued on Next Page]
NOTE: A ROD that includes a construction completion certification is equivalent to a Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report.
September 27, 1996
B-30
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment
Actual Completion Date
Coding Requirements
[Continued From Previous Page]
ROD for the final OU that states
that the only necessary remediation
at the site is the implementation of
institutional control(s). The ROD
must include a construction
completion certification or a
separate Final Superfund Site
Close-Out Report must be
prepared and signed by the
Regional Administrator.
[Continued From Previous Page]
Date Regional Administrator/
Deputy Regional Administrator
signs the ROD or the date the
Regional Administrator signs the
Final Superfund Site Close-Out
Report.
[Continued From Previous Page]
« RODs with separate Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report - the actual completion
date (Actual Complete) of the
ROD (Action Name = Record
of Decision); the Alternative
Name; the Media Name; the
Media Type (Air, Groundwater,
Leachate, Liquid Waste, Other,
Residuals, Sediment, Sludge,
Soil, Solid Waste, Surface
Waste); the Selected Response
Action(s) [Access Restriction,
Deed Restriction, Drilling
Restriction, Fishing Restriction,
Institutional Controls (N.O.S.),
Land Use Restriction,
Monitoring, Recreational
Restriction, Revegetation,
Swimming Restriction, Water
Supply Use Restriction]; and the
actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the Final
Superfund Site Close-Out
Report (Action Name = Record
of Decision and Subaction
Name = Close Out Report).
B-31
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Changes In Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Revised measure to track only NPL site completions. Site completions through early actions (removal authority) are
tracked through the signature of a ROD stating that all necessary remediation is complete.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. See Long-Term Action Flow Chart at the end of this Appendix (Exhibit B.2).
Regions may receive credit under both the NPL Site Completion and ACT-7, NPL Site Construction Completion
measures, as a result of the same long-term action, early action (remedial), or ROD. There is only one site
completion at a site. Only the final ROD, long-term action, or early action (remedial authority) at the site receives
credit under this measure.
GROUNDWATER MONITORING
Definition:
Groundwater monitoring is defined as the collection and analysis of groundwater samples as a result of a ROD that
addresses groundwater contamination at a site. The ROD will specify that (1) groundwater monitoring is the only
action that will be taken at the site, or (2) groundwater monitoring is the only action that will be implemented during
a groundwater cleanup.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Credit is given for a groundwater monitoring (Action Name = Groundwater Monitoring) start (Actual Start) when:
• Fund-financed (MR-, F-, or S- lead actions) - Funds are obligated for the groundwater monitoring. Funds are
obligated when:
A contract modification for groundwater monitoring is signed by the EPA CO; or
A CA for groundwater monitoring is signed by the Regional Administrator or his/her designee; or
An IAG for groundwater monitoring is signed by the other Federal agency.
• PRP-financed (RP- or PS-lead actions) - PRP-financed groundwater monitoring starts when:
An AOC which includes groundwater monitoring is signed by the PRPs and the designated Regional official;
or
A UAO which includes groundwater monitoring is signed by the designated Regional official.
Groundwater monitoring completion is defined as the date (Actual Complete) of a memorandum that determines that
groundwater monitoring is no longer necessary. This memorandum should be included in the Final Superfund Close-
Out Report or five-year review report. If this memorandum is not included in these documents, credit will be given
on the date the memorandum is approved by EPA management. The date of the completion should be entered into
CERCLIS with the Groundwater Monitoring action (Action Name = Groundwater Monitoring).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. For PRP-financed groundwater monitoring, the actual start date (Actual Start)
of the monitoring and the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the AO must be entered into CERCLIS.
September 27, 1996 B-32
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O&M)
Definition:
O&M means the activities required to maintain the effectiveness or the integrity of the remedy, and, in the case of
Fund-financed measures to restore ground or surface waters, continued operation of such measures beyond a period
often years or when the remediation levels are achieved, which ever is earlier. Except for ground or surface water
actions covered under Section 300.435(f)(3) of the NCP, O&M measures are initiated after the remedy has achieved
the RA or early action (remedial authority) objectives and remediation goals in the ROD or CD, and is determined
to be O&F. The State or PRP is totally responsible for these activities for the time period specified in the ROD or
other appropriate documents.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The stan of O&M (Action Name = Operation and Maintenance) is defined as the date (Actual Start) upon which the
designated Regional official signs a letter accepting the RA or Early Action Report. This report documents that work
has been performed within desired specifications and that the remedy is O&F. The completion (where appropriate)
of O&M is defined as the date (Actual Complete) specified in a CA, Superfund State Contract (SSC), or CD.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
O&M is planned site-specifically (Action Name = Operation and Maintenance) in CERCLIS and is used for resource
allocation purposes only. Funds for oversight of O&M are contained in the site characterization AOA. See Long-
Term Action Flow Chart at the end of this Appendix (Exhibit B.2).
FIVE-YEAR REVIEWS
Definition of Target/Measure:
Five-year reviews are intended to evaluate whether the response action implemented at a NPL site remains protective
of public health and the environment, is functioning as designed, and necessary operation and maintenance is being
performed. EPA will conduct five-year reviews of any site at which a remedy, upon attainment of the ROD or Action
Memorandum cleanup levels, will not allow unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. Five-year reviews generally
involve a site visit or documentation of conditions noted through ongoing presence at the site.
EPA is responsible for conducting five-year reviews at all sites where required. Consistent with relevant settlement
agreements, a lead agency may authorize PRPs to visit sites for five-year review purposes and to conduct studies and
investigations for EPA. Five-year reviews are conducted on a site-wide basis.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Five-Year Review Starts - Credit is given for a five-year review start when:
• Fund-financed (MR-, F-, S-, or EP-lead actions) - EPA or the State begins any of the tasks discussed in the five-
year review guidance, "Structure and Components of Five-Year Reviews, " OSWER Directive 9355.7-02 (May
23, 1991) or its first supplement, OSWER Directive 9355.7-02A (July 24, 1994). This action may be
documented by a memo to the file or EPA approval of a workplan for the five-year review.
• PRP-financed (RP- or PS-lead actions) - EPA approves the five-year review workplan submitted by the PRPs
under the terms of a settlement agreement.
B-33 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The actual start date (Actual Start) for the five-year review (Action Name = Five-Year Remedy Assessment) must
be entered into CERCLIS.
Five-Year Review Completions
The five-year review is complete on the date the EPA division director signs a determination stating whether the
remedy is, or is not, protective of human health and the environment. The actual completion date (Actual Complete)
for the five-year review (Action Name = Five-Year Remedy Assessment) must be entered into CERCLIS.
The five-year review should start within five years of the first RA or early action (remedial authority) start (as defined
in ACT-5, Sites Addressed Through Early or Long-Term Action On-Site Construction Starts) that results in any
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remaining at the site. The five-year review must be complete within
five years of the start of on-site construction.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Combined five-year review starts and completes into one definition. Fund-lead starts were changed from the site visit
to tasks specified in the five-year review guidance. PRP-lead starts changed from mobilization to EPA approval of
the workplan. Completions changed from five-year review report to the division directors determination whether the
remedy is protective of human health and the environment. In addition, completions are no longer tracked by lead.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Five-Year Review Starts only is a SCAP reporting measure. Five-year review starts and completes must be planned
and reported site-specifically (Action Name = Five-Year Remedy Assessment) in CERCLIS. Funds are allocated
in the RA AOA. See Long-Term Action Flow Chart at the end of this Appendix (Exhibit B.2).
PARTIAL NPL DELETION
Definition:
Partial deletions of releases/sites listed on the NPL were introduced during FY 96 to more fully communicate
successful cleanup of portions of these sites. Historically, EPA policy has been to delete releases only after evaluation
of the entire site. However, total site cleanup may take many years, while portions of the site may have been cleaned
up and may be available for productive use. EPA will consider partial deletion for portions of sites when no further
response is appropriate for that portion of the site. Such portion may be a defined geographic unit of the site, perhaps
as small as a residential unit, or may be a specific medium at the site, e.g., groundwater, depending on the nature or
extent of the release(s). The criteria for partial deletion are the same as for final deletion. Given State concurrence,
EPA considers:
* Whether responsible or other parties have implemented all appropriate and required response actions;
• Whether all appropriate Fund-financed responses under CERCLA have been implemented and EPA has
determined that no further cleanup by responsible panics is appropriate; or
• Whether the release of hazardous substances poses no significant threat to the public health, welfare, or the
environment, thereby eliminating the need for remedial action.
A new action code (Action Name = Partial Deletion from NPL) is being added to CERCLIS to specifically record
and track partial deletions. The partial deletion event should only be used when the deletion does not address the
remaining release listed on the NPL. If a deletion does cover the remaining release listed on the NPL, the event
should be treated as a Final NPL Deletion (Action Name = Final Deletion from NPL), discussed below.
September 27, 1996 B-34
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment:
The partial NPL deletion process (for a portion of a site on the NPL) starts when a Notice of Intent to Delete is
published in the Federal Register for that specified portion of the site.
The partial NPL deletion process (for a portion of a site on the NPL) is complete when the Notice of Deletion is
published in the Federal Register for that specified portion of the site.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The actual start (Actual Start) and completion (Actual Complete) dates are to be reported in CERCLIS for partial NPL
deletions (Action Name = Partial Deletion from NPL). Partial site deletions are tracked separately from entire site
deletions. Partial site deletions should be used if a portion, or portions of the release remain listed on the NPL
following completion of the partial deletion. An entire site deletion event (Action Name = Final Deletipn from NPL)
should be used if the deletion activity addresses the remaining release listed on the NPL (either as a one-time deletion
event for the entire site as originally listed, or as the last deletion activity associated with a site subject to previous
partial deletions).
FINAL NPL DELETION
Definition:
With State concurrence, EPA may delete sites from the NPL when it determines that no further response is
appropriate under CERCLA (Action Name = Final Deletion from NPL). In making that determination, EPA
considers:
• Whether responsible or other parties have implemented all appropriate and required response actions;
• Whether all appropriate Fund-financed responses under CERCLA have been implemented and EPA has
determined that no further cleanup by responsible parties is appropriate; or
• Whether the release of hazardous substances poses no significant threat to the public health, welfare, or the
environment, thereby eliminating the need for remedial action.
EPA will consider deleting the entire site or portions of sites from the NPL, as appropriate. EPA will consider partial
deletion for portions of sites when no further response is appropriate for that portion of the site. Such portions may
be a defined geological unit of the site, or may be a specific medium at the site. State concurrence will be required
for any partial deletion.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The deletion process for either the entire site or a portion of the site starts when a Notice of Intent to Delete is
published in the Federal Register.
The deletion process for either the entire site or a portion of the site is complete when the Notice of Deletion is
published in the Federal Register.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
B-35 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The actual start date (Actual Start) and completion (Actual Complete) dates for entire site or partial site deletions are
to be reported in CERCLIS with the deletion action (Action Name = Final Deletion from NPL). Additional guidance
for coding partial deletions will be developed and distributed at a later date. Until new coding guidance is developed,
Regions should indicate in the SCAP Note whether the deletion action encompasses the entire site or is a partial site
deletion. HQ is reviewing the tracking of partial deletions.
EI-1A • PROGRESS THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS
(ADDRESSING IMMEDIATE THREATS AT NPL AND NON-NPL SITES)
Note: At the time this draft of the FY 97 Superfund Program Implementation Manual was developed, development
of data entry screens for El reporting in CERCLIS 3 had not yet been completed. Therefore, the CERCLIS 3 data
element names are not included in this draft; the current CERCLIS data element names remain as "placeholders" for
the CERCLIS 3 names once screens are completed.
Definition of Target/Measure:
This measure tracks how often acute threats to human health have been eliminated at NPL, NPL caliber, and non-NPL
sites by preventing exposure to contaminated materials. This reduction will be measured in four areas: 1) sites with
immediate (early) actions; 2) sites where an alternate water supply was provided; 3) sites where affected populations
were relocated; and 4) sites where security was provided. Progress recorded by this indicator should reveal success
in addressing immediate threats.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Sites with immediate (early) actions
All sites with a completed early actions under removal authority (C2101 = RV) will be counted. (See ACT-6 for
early action under removal authority definition, coding and documentation requirements.)
Sites where an alternate water supply was provided - The following data must be entered into CERCLIS:
• The medium is land (C1571 = LA); and
* The material is soil (C2501 = SO); and
* Drinking water was provided in any of the following ways (enter all that apply):
Permanent water supply (C3401 = Wl); or
Temporary water supply (C3401 = W2); or
Water supply reinstated (C3401 = W3); and
* The receptor type is:
Residential population (C3441 = R); or
Industrial population (C3441 = I); and
» The number of people protected (C3442); and
September 27, 1996 B-36
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• The population protection date (C3426).
Regions must document in a memo to the file or POLREP that an alternate drinking water source was supplied.
Sites where affected populations were relocated - The following data must be entered into CERCLIS:
The medium is land (C1571 = LA); and
The material is soil (C2501 = SO); and
• The population was relocated in any of the following ways (enter all that apply):
Permanent relocation (C3401 = Ul); or
Temporary relocation (C3401 = U2); or
Population returned (C3401 = U3); and
• The receptor type is:
Residential population (C3441 = R); or
Industrial population (C3441 = I); and
• The number of people protected (C3442); and
• The population protection date (C3426).
Regions must document in a memo to the file or POLREP that affected populations were relocated.
Sites where security was provided - The following data must be entered into CERCLIS:
• The medium is land (C1571 = LA); and
• The material is soil (C2501 = SO); and
• Site security was provided in any of the following ways (enter all that apply):
Fence constructed (C3401 = SI); or
Guards posted (C3401 = S2); or
Other measures (e.g., deed restriction) (C3401 = S3); and
• The receptor type is:
Residential population (C3441 = R); or
Industrial population (C3441 = I); and
• The population protection date (C3426) is recorded.
B-37 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Regions must document in a memo to the file or POLREP that site security measures were implemented,
Changes In Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. Accomplishment data will be reported through the El module in CERCLIS.
El-IB • PROGRESS THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS
(ACHIEVING PERMANENT CLEANUP GOALS)
Definition of Target/Measure:
This measure tracks cleanup progress at NPL sites by measuring the level of cleanup goal attainment. Goal attainment
levels are tracked as follows: 1) goals fully achieved; 2) goals partially achieved; 3) cleanup underway; and 4) media
affected. Goal attainment levels are tracked at the media level for each NPL site.
This measure also tracks whether a direct contact threat exists and/or has been eliminated as a result of cleanup
actions,
Definition of Accomplishment:
Progress toward final cleanup goals
Full achievement of site goals for a medium at a NPL site (groundwater = 'GW,' surface water = 'SW,'
land = 'LA,' and air = 'AI'):
* All cleanup actions for a given medium (C1571 = GW or SW or LA or AI) are complete; and
• All ROD cleanup goals for that medium have been achieved; and
• No further cleanup work is expected for that medium.
The level of goal attainment .must be entered into CERCLIS as "Fully Achieved" (C1572 = F). Regions must
document in a RA or Early Action Report, POLREP or a memo to the file that all cleanup goals for a given medium
have been achieved. (For specific coding and documentation requirements for cleanup action completions, see ACT-6,
Early and Long-Term Action Completions.)
Partial achievement of goals for a medium at a NPL site:
* At least one cleanup action has been completed for a medium (C1571 = GW or SW or LA or AI); and
• At least one ROD cleanup goal for that medium has been achieved.
The level of goal attainment must be entered into CERCLIS as "Partially Achieved" (C1572 = P). Regions must
document in a RA or Early Action Report, POLREP or memo to the file that one or more cleanup goals for a given
medium have been achieved. (For specific coding and documentation requirements for cleanup action completions,
see ACT-6, Early and Long-Term Action Completions.)
Cleanup underway at a NPL site:
• At least one cleanup action has been initiated for a medium (C1571 = GW or SW or LA or AI).
September 27, 1996 B-38
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The level of goal attainment must be entered into CERCLIS as "Cleanup Underway" (C1572 = U). Regions must
document in an Action Memorandum or memo to the file that cleanup actions for a given medium have begun. (For
specific coding and documentation requirements for cleanup action starts, see ACT-5, Sites Addressed through Early
and Long-Term Action On-Site Construction Starts.)
Medium Affected at a non-NPL or NPL site:
• A medium (C1571 = GW or SW or LA or AI) has been affected at a NPL site, but no cleanup work has begun;
or
• A removal was performed at a NPL site prior to the establishment of long-term cleanup goals; or
• An affected medium has been identified at an on-NPL site.
The level of goal attainment must be entered into CERCLIS as "Medium Affected" (C1572 = A). Regions must
document in a POLREP or a memo to the file that a given medium meets one of these criteria.
Direct contact threats - The following data must be entered:
• The medium island (C1571 = LA); and
• The direct contact threat is:
- Eliminated (C1573 = Y); or
Remains (C1573 = N); or
Does not exist (C1573 = Z).
Regions must document in a POLREP, ROD, RA or Early Action Report, or memo to the file that a given direct
contact threat meets one of these criteria.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. Accomplishment data will be reported through the El module in CERCLIS.
B-39 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT B.2
LONG-TERM ACTION FLOW CHART
RA Supporting Activities
Are all
Construction
Activities at the
site complete,
including
LTRA2
Is this the
Final RA at
the Site?
Site-wide Activities
1
NPL Site Completion/
Final Superfiind Site
Close-Out Report
^
MI
Dele
ACT-7
' NOTE: A Preliminary Close-Out Report is no! required if the Region immediately
prepares a Final Superfiind Site Close-Out Report.
September 27, 1996
B-40
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT B.3 (1 OF 7)
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planning Requirements
SCAP Planning or Reporting
Measure?
Internal Planning or Reporting
Measure?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on Operable
Unit or Whole Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically or in
Non-site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-Financed?
AOA Category for Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
Community Relations
-
-
Not Required
Operable Unit
Not Required
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
Support Agency
Assistance
-
-
Not Required
Whole Site
Not Required
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
technical Assistance
Grants CTA<3s}
-
-
Not Required
Operable Unit
Not Required
Other Response
Other Response or
Federal Facility
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
EXHIBIT B.3 (2 OF 7)
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planning Requirements
SCAP Planning or Reporting
Measure?
Internal Planning or Reporting
Measure?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on Operable
Unit or Whole Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically or in
Non-site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-Financed?
AOA Category for Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
Technical Assistance
-
-
Not Required
Operable Unit
Not Required
Other Response
Site Characterization
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
'JVeatebflity Stwiy
-
-
Not Required
Operable Unit
Not Required
Site Characterization
N/A
Included with RI/FS
or RD Funds
Design Assistance
-
-
Not Required
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Site Characterization
N/A
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis.
B-41
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 92Q0.3-14-IC
EXHIBIT B.3 (3 OF 7)
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
PJannlng Rcqmreaveots ; :
SCAP Planning or
Reporting Measure?
Internal Planning or
Reporting Measure?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or to Non-site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
ADA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
'. JliwdsitarBi:!:*! i*i
-
Planning
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site-Specific Plans
illllpfiiil
|d|;;i;?iiMn|i^iiis.illl
-
Planning
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
-
Planning
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Remedial Action
Site
Characterization
Site-Specific Plans
jggj§tjjm
|;|lpiirlc|;iiipr:B:f
-
Planning
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A-
EXHIBIT B.3 (4 OF 7)
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planning Requiremfinfe
!l Li ! -If 1 i € If \ !!!! !i§ii§B::i;;i
W&^M3MiiKMi-&iif
^*w^^^li;llli^i;5lil
SCAP Planning or
Reporting Measure?
Internal Planning or
Reporting Measure?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
^^^^^^|^i|^||j|
:.^^P^B^p|Ǥ||^
ll^lPifi^iisll^P
Reporting
-
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Removal or Remedial
Action
Site Characterization
Site- or Non-Site Specific
Plans
|f||i|||||^:i^:!ii|i||
|i|i^^^|p«|i|^|^l
Reporting
-
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
||||ipF|?^^PXSite
Constructiwi Completions
;:i^iijhcSi$|jni:fe8riy Action,
I:;'ili^i!®;;r1fiigift;Actioas, or
l|ll|^?|f;»«0S
Planning and Reporting
-
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
NOTE:
Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis.
September 27, 1996
B-42
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT B.3 (5 OF 7)
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planning Requirements
SCAP Planning or
Reporting Measure?
Internal Planning or
Reporting Measure?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole Site
Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically or
in Non-site Specific Portion
of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
Operational and
FjmetionaMQ&F)
-
-
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
Long«Term Response
Actions &.TRA}
-
-
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Remedial Action
Site Characterization
Site-Specific Plans
NPL Site Completions
-
-
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
EXHIBIT B.3 (6 OF 7)
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planning Retirements
SCAP Planning or Reporting
Measure?
Internal Planning or
Reporting Measure?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole Site
Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically or
in Non-site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
Groundwater Monitoring
-
-
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Site Characterization
Site Characterization
Site-Specific Plans
Operation and
Maintenance (O&M)
-
-
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
Site Characterization
Site-Specific Plans
flve-Year Reviews
Started
Reporting
-
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Remedial Action
Site Characterization
Site-Specific Plans
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis.
B-43
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT B.3 (7 OF 7)
EARLY AND LONG-TERM ACTION PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
•ii;*::':': : :': Z:«:>±^:«:*tf •<<-:'«: *•::*:•: .' ':%::*
Plawning Reqfun-ements :
SCAP Planning or
Reporting Measure?
Internal Planning or
Reporting Measure?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if
Fund-Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
IliW^iiiiil
llili^iilliiilil!
-
-
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
-
-
Yes
Portion of Site as
Identified
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
;:|i|||;|||||i||ii!£i
||||i|t^^i||i|||l|
-
-
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
Illlllflfllilglx
lillllliii^llll;
iiEma^nffiieBitlii
||||:pal§|i||ll
Reporting
-
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis.
September 27, 1996
B-44
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix C: Enforcement
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1 C
Appendix C
Enforcement
Table of Contents
ENFORCEMENT FY 97 TARGETS AND MEASURES C-l
Overview C-l
Enforcement Target and Measures Definitions C-3
Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) Search Starts C-3
PRP Search Completions C-3
Section 104(e) Letters Issued C-4
Section 104(e) Referrals and Orders Issued C-5
Issuance of General Notice Letters (GNLs) C-5
Issuance of Special Notice Letters (SNLs) C-5
ENF-1 » Duration from Regional Decision or ROD to PRP Cleanup
Negotiation Completion C-6
ESI/RI/FS Negotiation Starts C-8
RD/RA Negotiation Starts C-8
ENF-2 • Cleanup Negotiation Completions C-9
State Order for ESI/RI/FS C-ll
State Consent Decree for RD/RA C-ll
ENF-3 • Settlements for Cleanup Actions C-12
ENF^t • Section 122(g) Settlements and Number of PRPs C-13
ENF-5 * Percentage of PRP Lead Cleanup Actions to All Cleanup
Actions C-15
Section 106, 106/107, 107 Case Resolution C-16
Administrative Record Compilation C-17
Issue Demand Letter C-18
Cost Recovery Actions/Decisions < $200,000 C-18
ENF-6 » Past Costs Addressed iS200,000 C-20
ENFORCEMENT MEASURES OF SUCCESS - FY 97 C-22
Overview of Superfund Reforms Measures of Success C-22
Enforcement Measures of Success Definitions C-22
Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) C-22
Settlements Where EPA Settled Based on Ability-to-Pay Determinations C-24
Recoverable Past Costs That Have Been Addressed Program to Date C-24
Prospective Purchaser Agreements (PPA) C-26
Number and Amount of CERCLA Penalties Assessed Via Judgement C-27
Number and Amount of Supplemental Environmental
Projects (SEPs) Agreed Upon Under CERCLA C-27
Noncompliance with Consent Decrees, Administrative Orders on Consent, and
Unilateral Administrative Orders C-28
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix C
Enforcement
Table of Contents (cont'd)
Noncompliance with Consent Decrees, Administrative Orders on Consent, and
Unilateral Administrative Orders That Have Been Addressed C-30
Superfund Reform (October 1995) Enforcement Measures of Success Definitions C-32
EPA Compensation of a Portion of the Orphan Share C-32
Use of Interest Bearing Special Accounts C-33
Issue Cleanup Orders to Parties in an Equitable Manner C-35
De Micromis Settlements and Number of Parties C-36
Oversight Cost Savings C-36
EPA Adoption of Allocations Proposed by Parties Including Compensation of a Portion of the
Orphan Share C-37
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix C
Enforcement
List of Exhibits
EXHIBIT C.I ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES C-2
EXHIBIT C.2 ENFORCEMENT PLANNING REQUIREMENTS C-38
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
APPENDIX C
ENFORCEMENT
FY 97 SCAP TARGETS AND MEASURES
OVERVIEW
The Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishments Plan (SCAP) is used by the Assistant Administrator for the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (AA SWER), Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance (AA OECA), and senior Superfund managers to monitor the administrative progress each
Region is making towards achieving its Superfund goals. Superfund cleanup results are tracked through targets and
measures at the SCAP level as well as internal reporting measures. Those Superfund activities not tracked at the
SCAP level are monitored for internal management purposes by Headquarters (HQ).
The differences between SCAP targets and measures remain the same (i.e., a pre-determined numerical goal
versus an activity deemed essential to tracking overall program progress, respectively). SCAP accomplishments will
be pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Planning measures are used to project the number of events and
activities that each Region expects to perform during the year using anticipated resources. Reporting measures simply
track the number of events and activities that occur throughout the year and are used to evaluate overall progress
through the cleanup pipeline. Planning measures also report accomplishments.
The following pages contain, in pipeline order, the definitions of the FY 97 enforcement SCAP measures, internal
management planning and reporting, and enforcement project support activities. Exhibit C.I displays the full list of
enforcement activities defined in this Appendix. Exhibit C.2, at the end of this Appendix, identifies planning
requirements for these enforcement activities.
This appendix has been expanded to include the enforcement Measures of Success that were devised by HQ in
consultation with the Regions. These measures, which can be found following the description of the existing SCAP
measures, have been developed to respond to an increasing demand for information that is not currently tracked or
reported through the SCAP process. By supplementing the existing SCAP targets and measures with these Measures
of Success, the program hopes to produce a more complete picture of enforcement-related successes and
accomplishments at Superfund sites than is currently available. In FY 97, new "Measures of Success" have been
added to address compliance monitoring and the October 1995 Superfund Reforms. Specific enforcement Measures
of Success definitions and reporting requirements are contained in this appendix.
In addition to the measures in this manual, the Regions should continue to provide information regarding PRPs
and Compliance Monitoring as requested in OSWER directives. Upon implementation of CERCLIS 3. this
information should be entered into that system.
C-l September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT C.I
ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
:::x-::: :•: -C::S>>^^:$:^">:'>:j:^:$:':v-.' 1 '_' '• :;>:;! '•':• ''^f^'^: :': •••^k^jrAirnn^ i;.*::?::*?
Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) Search Starts
PRP Search Completions
Section I04(e) Letters Issued
Section 104(e) Referrals and Orders Issued
Issuance of General Notice Letters (GNLs)
Issuance of Special Notice Letters (SNLs)
ENF-1 Duration from Regional Decision or Record of Decision (ROD)
to PRP Cleanup Negotiation Completion
Expanded Site Inspection/Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
(ESI/RI/FS) Negotiation Starts
Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) Negotiation Starts
ENF-2 Cleanup Negotiation Completions
State Orders for ESI/RI/FS
State Consent Decree for RD/RA
ENF-3 Settlements for Cleanup Actions (including dollar value)
ENF-4 Section 122(g) Settlements and Number of Parties
ENF-5 Percentage of PRP Lead Cleanup Actions to All Cleanup
Actions
Section 106, 106/107, 107 Case Resolution
Administrative Record Compilation Completion
Issue Demand Letter
Cost Recovery Actions/Decisions < S200K
ENF-6 Past Costs Addressed > $200,000
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Measure
Target
-
-
Measure
Target
Measure
Measure
-
-
-
Target
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
-
-
Reporting
Reporting
-
-
-
-
Reporting
Reporting
Reporting
-
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Internal measures are planned and
reported quarterly.
September 27, 1996
C-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
ENFORCEMENT TARGET AND MEASURE DEFINITIONS
Note: CERCLIS coding requirements contained in the definitions are only for key data elements. For a full list of
requirements and suggested data elements, see the SCAP Quick Reference Coding Guide and the Enforcement Data
Quality Manual.
POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY (PRP) SEARCH STARTS
Definition:
A PRP search identifies PRPs at the site. At all sites, the PRP search activities should be initiated as soon as possible
after the Region decides that a response (removal or remedial) action is likely to be required at the site. For remedial
sites it should be initiated in time to send a GNL, which should be approximately two months before the SNL date
and at least 90 days prior to the obligation of funds for an ESI/RI, or RI/FS, or early or long-term action,
Definition of Accomplishment:
If the National Priorities List (NPL) PRP search (Action Name = NPL RP Search) or non-NPL PRP search (Action
Name = Non-NPL PRP Search) is being conducted by a contractor, the actual start date (Actual Start) is considered
to be the date the work assignment is signed by the Contracting Officer (CO). If it is conducted by EPA in-house,
the actual start date (Actual Start) is the date EPA staff develop the PRP search plan. The start is documented by the
written work plan. For non-NPL removal PRP search, the start is the initiation of title search through procurement
request or Work Assignment.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Added additional information on non-NPL removal PRP searches.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
PRP searches (Action Name = Non-NPL PRP Search or NPL RP Search) are planned and funds requested on a site
or non-site specific basis. Non-site specific projections for PRP searches are entered through the Program
Management, NSI screens. PRP search starts is an internal reporting measure.
PRP SEARCH COMPLETIONS
Definition:
A PRP search completion constitutes the completion of the activities taken by the Region to identify PRPs at a site.
In conducting the PRP search, the Region must consider which of the criteria outlined below are cost effective and
reasonable to meet relative to the anticipated overall cleanup costs at the site. Upon completion, Regions should
document to the site file that they have met all reasonable achievable criteria. Criteria 1 is mandatory for all PRP
search completions. The PRP search should ideally be completed prior to completion of cleanup negotiations;
however, it is recognized that this may not be achievable in all situations.
The recommended criteria for a thorough PRP search are:
1. Initiate a dialogue with early identified PRPs for the purpose of cooperative development of PRP search plans;
2. Collect the financial data and contribution data needed to perform equitable share settlement;
3, Follow-up on all leads as a way to identify parties to the site;
C-3 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
4. Make de minimis and de micromis determinations for all parties at the site;
5. Categorize all parties [e.g., Generator/Transporter, Owner/Operator, Small Business ($2 million or less gross
annual revenue and 25 or less employees), Municipal Solid Waste Contributor, etc.]; and
6. Perform a financial viability determination on all recalcitrant parties and PRPs asserting ability-to-pay problems.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The PRP search (Action Name = NPL RP Search or Non-NPL PRP Search) is complete when all applicable activities
described in the Agency's PRP Search Manual (revised FY 96) have been completed, a PRP search outcome report
with a list of PRPs has been prepared, and the actual completion date (Actual Complete) and the outcome (Qualifier)
of the search have been entered into CERCLIS. If no PRPs are found, the actual completion date (Actual Complete)
and the outcome of the search (Qualifier) also are entered into CERCLIS. This definition applies to both Phase I
(single owner, operator site) and Phase II (multi-generator site) PRP searches.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Language added to Definition clarifying the criteria for a thorough PRP search.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
PRP search completions (Action Name = Non-NPL PRP Search or NPL RP Search) are planned on a site- or non-
site specific basis. The search outcome (Qualifier) is to be entered into CERCLIS. The number of PRPs found is
system generated by entering and associating PRPs with sites and selecting an Identification Source of "PRP Search."
Non-site specific projections for PRP searches are entered through the Program Management, NSI screens. PRP
search completions is an internal reporting measure.
SECTION 104(E) LETTERS ISSUED
Definition:
This is a letter issued under Section 104(e) of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA).
It requests information from PRPs on matters such as: the nature and extent of a release or threatened release at a site;
the nature and quantity of hazardous materials at the site; financial indemnification; and financial ability of the PRP
to pay for possible response actions.
Definition of Accomplishment:
This activity is accomplished on the date the information request letter is signed by the appropriate EPA official and
entered into CERCLIS as a subaction [Subaction Name = Issue Req Ltrs - (104e)] to an applicable enforcement action
(Action Name = Non-NPL PRP Search or NPL RP Search,) with an actual subaction completion date (Actual
Complete).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Issuance of 104(e) letters will continue to be recorded at the subaction level [Subaction Name = Issue Req Lttrs -
(104e)] under the PRP Search enforcement action (Action Name = Non-NPL PRP Search or NPL PRP Search), with
a subaction actual completion date (Actual Complete). Section 104(e) letters issued is an internal reporting measure.
September 27, 1996 C-4
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-IC
SECTION 104(E) REFERRALS AND ORDERS ISSUED
Definition:
Section 104(e) referrals/orders are enforcement actions to compel PRPs to respond to EPA requests for information
or to obtain site access.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The date of the memo from the Regional Administrator transmitting the Section 104(e) referral to HQ or to the
Department of Justice (DOJ) is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of the Section 104(e)
referral (Action Name — Section 104(e) Ref. Litigation). The date a Section 104(e) order [generally under the
auspices of a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO)] is signed by the Regional Administrator is recorded in
CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the UAO (Action Name = Unilateral Admin Order).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The actual start date (Actual Start) of the referral (Action Name = Section 104(e) Ref. Litigation) or the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the order (Action Name = Unilateral Admin Order) is entered into CERCLIS
site-specifically. The Law/Section reported in CERCLIS should be "CERCLA 104E" (Law/Section = CERCLA
104E). This is an internal reporting measure.
ISSUANCE OF GENERAL NOTICE LETTERS (GNLs)
Definition:
Letter sent by EPA under Section 122 of SARA informing recipients of their potential liability for cleanup actions at
the site. It is usually sent out during the PRP search or during preparation for negotiations.
Definition of Accomplishment:
This activity is accomplished on the date the GNL is signed by the appropriate EPA official and entered into CERCLIS
as a subaction (Subaction Name = Notice Letters Issued) to a PRP Search or Negotiation action with an actual
subaction completion date (Actual Complete).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
General Notice Letters are recorded at the subaction level. They are an internal reporting measure.
ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL NOTICE LETTERS (SNLs)
Definition:
A SNL is a letter from EPA to the PRPs informing them of their potential liability and inviting them to offer to
conduct the planned response action(s) at the site. This letter, under Section 122(e) of SARA, triggers a negotiation
moratorium allowing the PRPs to consider EPA's invitation to negotiate. The moratorium period varies depending
on the response action (ESI/RI/FS, RD, RA, early action under remedial authority, groundwater monitoring/
institutional controls) and can be extended if necessary.
C-5 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment:
This activity is accomplished on the date the SNL is signed by the appropriate EPA official and entered into CERCLIS
as a subaction (Subaction Name = Special Notice Issued) to a PRP Search or Negotiation action with an actual
subaction completion date (Actual Complete). The date of issuance of the SNL also constitutes the start of cleanup
negotiations, including RD/RA negotiations [Action Name = RI/FS Negotiations, RD/RA Negotiations, Negotiations
(Generic), or Removal Negotiations].
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
SNLs are recorded at the subaction level. Issuance of SNLs is an internal reporting measure.
ENF-1 • DURATION FROM REGIONAL DECISION OR ROD TO PRP CLEANUP
NEGOTIATION COMPLETION
Definition of Target/Measure:
This measures the duration from the Regional decision to proceed with a time-critical or Non-Time Critical (NTC)
early action (removal authority), or a ROD for an early action (remedial authority) (for NPL and non-NPL sites) or
long-term action, to negotiation completion.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Early Action (Removal Authority)
The duration is measured from the date of a memo to the file documenting the Regional decision to perform an early
action under removal authority to the negotiation completion date.
* The following information must be reported in CERCLIS for the Regional decision:
The actual completion date of the Regional decision (Subaction Name = RDT Decision) as a subaction to
the point in the pipeline where the decision was made (Action Name = Preliminary Assessment, Site
Inspection, Expanded Site Inspection, Integrated Assessment, or ESI/RI) ; and
The qualifier of "(W) Referred to the removal program for response" or "(F) Referred to the removal
program but remedial response still required."
• Negotiations [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or Removal Negotiations] for early actions (removal
authority) are considered complete (Actual Complete) when:
An Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) or a UAO is signed by the Regional Administrator; or
A Consent Decree (CD) is referred to DOJ or HQ under Section 106 or 106/107; or
Funds are obligated for a Fund-financed removal. Funds are obligated when a contract modification is signed
by the CO; or a Cooperative Agreement (CA) is signed by the designated Regional official; or an Interagency
Agreement (IAG) is signed by the other Federal agency. If funds are not available and the Region
determines a UAO is not appropriate, and HQ concurs in writing, the negotiation [Action Name =
Negotiation (Generic) or Removal Negotiation] actual completion date (Actual Complete) is the date of the
HQ memorandum concurring with the Regional decision.
September 27, 1996 C-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Note: The "Response Action Sought" under the negotiations should be one of the removal actions planned at the
site.
Long-Term Action or Early Action (Remedial Authority)
The duration is measured from the date the ROD (Action Name = Record of Decision) is signed (Actual Complete)
by the Regional Administrator or the AA OSWER to the negotiation completion date.
Negotiation [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or RD/RA Negotiations] or the long-term action or early action
(remedial authority) are complete (Actual Complete) when:
• A memo is signed by the Regional Administrator transmitting the signed CD under Section 106 or Section
106/107 and a 10-point analysis to DOJ or HQ; or
• A UAO for an early action (remedial authority), RD, RA, or groundwater monitoring/institutional controls is
signed by the Regional Administrator; or
» A memo is signed by the Regional Administrator transmitting the Section 106 or 106/107 injunctive referral to
DOJ or HQ to compel the PRPs to perform the cleanup [early action (remedial authority), RD, RA, groundwater*
monitoring/institutional controls] as specified in a UAO to DOJ or HQ; or
• EPA and the PRPs are notified by a memo from DOJ of the date on which they will proceed to trial under an
existing case; or
• Funds are obligated through contract modification signed by the CO, the 1AG signed by the other Federal agency,
or CA signed by the appropriate Regional official for Fund-financed early action (remedial authority), RD, RA,
or groundwater monitoring/institutional controls. If funds are not available and the Region determines a UAO
is not appropriate, and HQ concurs in writing, the negotiation completion date is the date of the HQ memorandum
concurring with the Regional decision.
Note: The applicable remedial "Response Actions Sought" under the negotiations are to be entered into
CERCLIS.
Durations will be calculated for all PRP cleanup negotiations completed in FY 97. The durations for NPL and non-
NPL sites will be tracked separately but recorded as a combined total.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This changed from a SCAP measure to an internal reporting measure.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Data on duration will be developed using CERCLIS. The durations will be calculated using the ROD (Action Name
= Record of Decision) actual completion date (Actual Complete) or the Regional decision (Subaction Name = RDT
Decision) actual completion date (Actual Complete) and the cleanup negotiation [Action Name = Negotiation
(Generic), RD/RA Negotiations, or Removal Negotiations] actual completion date (Actual Complete). In addition
to the negotiation activity and the actual completion date, Regions also must enter the outcome (Outcome) of the
negotiations, the "Response Actions Sought" through negotiations, and if applicable the "Response Actions Achieved"
through the settlement. HQ will conduct the duration analysis.
Duration trends will continue to focus on good project management of critical events, and address the need for
continuous improvement relative to meeting the program's goal of accelerating cleanup and reducing risks. Duration
data will be coupled with specific analyses of problem factors to determine the causes of delays. This measure will
C-7 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
not be used for performance evaluation purposes. For additional reporting requirements, see the Definition of
Accomplishment, This is an internal reporting measure.
ESI/W/FS NEGOTIATION STARTS
Definition:
ESI/RI/FS negotiations are discussions between EPA and the PRPs on their liability, willingness, and ability to
conduct the ESI/RI/FS.
Definition of Accomplishment:
ESI/RI/FS negotiations start when:
• The first SNL is signed by the appropriate EPA official. This date is reported in CERCLIS as the start (Actual
Start) of negotiations [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or RI/FS Negotiations) and the completion (Actual
Complete) of the SNL subaction (Subaction Name = Special Notice Issued); or
• A Section 122(a) waiver of SNL is signed by the appropriate EPA official with the intent to pursue negotiations
without moratorium procedures. This date is reported in CERCLIS as the start (Actual Start) of negotiations
[Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or Rl/FS Negotiations] and the completion (Actual Complete) of the SNL
waiver subaction (Subaction Name = Notice of S 122 Waiver Issued).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
If the Region does not plan to perform ESI/RI/FS negotiations at a site, negotiation dates should not be placed in
CERCLIS. The start of ESI/RI/FS negotiations [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or RI/FS Negotiations]
should be planned site-specifically. The "Response Actions Sought" and "Response Actions to be Reimbursed" (if
applicable) are to be entered into CERCLIS. ESI/RI/FS negotiation starts is an internal reporting measure.
RD/RA NEGOTIATION STARTS
Definition:
RD/RA negotiations are discussions between EPA and the PRPs on their liability, willingness, and ability to
implement the long-term remedy selected in the ROD for the site or Operable Unit (Oil).
Definition of Accomplishment:
RD/RA negotiations start when:
• The first SNL is signed by the appropriate EPA official. This date is reported in CERCLIS as the start (Actual
Start) of negotiations [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or RD/RA Negotiations] and the completion
(Actual Complete) of the SNL subaction (Subaction Name = Special Notice Issued); or
• A Section 122(a) waiver of SNL is signed by the appropriate EPA official with the intent to pursue negotiations
without moratorium procedures. This date is reported in CERCLIS as the start (Actual Start) of negotiations
[Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or RD/RA Negotiations) and the completion (Actual Complete) of the
SNL waiver subaction (Subaction Name = Notice of S 122 Waiver Issued).
September 27, 1996 C-8
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This changed from an internal planning and reporting measure to a SCAP measure.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
If the Region does not plan to conduct RD/RA negotiations, dates should not be entered into CERCLIS. The start
of RD/RA negotiations [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or RD/RA Negotiations] is planned site-specifically.
The "Response Actions Sought" and "Response Actions to be Reimbursed" (if applicable) are to be entered into
CERCLIS. RD/RA negotiation starts is a SCAP measure.
ENF-2 • CLEANUP NEGOTIATION COMPLETIONS
Definition of Target/Measure:
Cleanup negotiations are discussions between EPA and the PRPs on their liability, willingness, and ability to conduct
the cleanup. Negotiations are complete (for NPL and NPL caliber sites) when a decision has been made as to how
the Region will proceed with the cleanup.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Credit is given at NPL sites when:
• A signed CD under Section 106 or Section 106/107 and a 10-point analysis for RD, RA, groundwater
monitoring/institutional controls, early action (remedial authority), or a tune-critical or NTC early action
(removal authority) is referred by the Regional Administrator to either DOJ or HQ. The negotiation [Action
Name = Negotiations (Generic), RD/RA Negotiations, or Removal Negotiations] actual completion date (Actual
Complete) is the date of the Regional Administrator's signed transmittal memo, which is the CD (Action Name
= Consent Decree) actual start date (Actual Start); or
• An UAO for RD, RA, groundwater monitoring/institutional controls, early action (remedial authority), or a time-
critical or NTC early action (removal authority) is signed by the Regional Administrator. The negotiation [Action
Name = Negotiations (Generic), RD/RA Negotiations, or Removal Negotiations] actual completion date (Actual
Complete) is the date (Actual Complete) the UAO (Action Name = Unilateral Admin Order) is signed; or
• A Section 106 or Section 106/107 injunctive referral to compel the PRP to perform the cleanup (RD or RA) as
specified in a UAO is referred by the Regional Administrator to DOJ or HQ. The negotiation [Action Name =
Negotiations (Generic) or RD/RA Negotiations] actual completion date (Actual Complete) is the date of the
Regional Administrator's transmittal memo, which is the litigation [Action Name = Litigation (Generic), Section
106 & 107 Litigation, or Section 106 Litigation] actual start date (Actual Start); or
• A Prospective Purchaser Agreement (PPA) implementing the remedy is signed by the Regional Administrator.
The negotiation [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic), Removal Negotiations or RD/RA Negotiations] actual
completion date (Actual Complete) is the date the AOC or CA (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent or
Consent Agreement and Enf. Instrument Category = Prospective Purchaser Agreement) is signed by the Regional
Administrator.
• EPA and PRPs are notified by a memo from DOJ of the date on which they will proceed to trial under an existing
case. The negotiation [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or RD/RA Negotiations] actual completion date
(Actual Complete) is the same as the date (Actual Complete) the trial begins (Subaction Name = Trial Started);
or
• An AOC for RD only or an AOC for groundwater monitoring/institutional controls is signed by the Regional
Administrator. Where an AOC for RD only is issued, no credit will be given for the subsequent RA negotiation
C-9 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
starts and completions. Credit will be given under ENF-3, Settlements for Cleanup Actions, for the referral of
a CD for RA to DOJ or HQ. The negotiation [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or RD/RA Negotiations]
actual completion date (Actual Complete) is the date the AOC is signed by the Regional Administrator, which
becomes the new AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent) actual completion date (Actual Complete).
For amended AOCs, the "Amended Instrument" flag must be checked and the amendment date tracked under the
AOC subaction, Enforcement Action Amended, with an actual completion date (Actual Complete); or
• An AOC for a time-critical or NIC early action (removal authority) is signed by the Regional Administrator.
Both the start and completion dates of the negotiation action are required to get credit for the completion. The
negotiation [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or Removal Negotiations] actual start date (Actual Start) is
the date the written or verbal notice of potential liability is provided to the PRPs. The negotiation [Action Name
= Negotiations (Generic) or Removal Negotiations] actual completion date (Actual Complete) is the date the
AOC is signed by the Regional Administrator, which is the AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent)
actual completion date (Actual Complete); or
• Funds are obligated through a contract modification signed by the CO, an IAG signed by the other Federal
agency, or a CA signed by the designated Regional official for a Fund-financed time-critical or NTC early action
(removal authority), early action (remedial authority) or long-term action. The negotiation [Action Name =
Negotiations (Generic), Removal Negotiations, or RD/RA Negotiations] actual completion date (Actual Complete)
is the date funds are obligated. If funds are not available and the Region decides a UAO is not appropriate and
HQ concurs (in writing), the negotiation [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic), Removal Negotiations, or
RD/RA Negotiations] actual completion date (Actual Complete) is the date of the HQ memorandum concurring
with the decision not to issue the UAO.
Credit is given at NPL caliber sites when:
• A signed CD under Section 106 or Section 106/107 and a 10-point analysis for RD, RA, groundwater
monitoring/institutional controls, early action (remedial authority), or a time-critical or NTC early action
(removal authority) is referred by the Regional Administrator to either DOJ or HQ. The negotiation [Action
Name = Negotiations (Generic), RD/RA Negotiations, or Removal Negotiations] actual completion date (Actual
Complete) is the date of the Regional Administrator's memo transmitting the CD to HQ, which is the CD (Action
Name = Consent Decree) actual start date (Actual Start); or
• A UAO or an AOC to initiate a time-critical or NTC early action (removal authority) is signed by the Regional
Administrator. Both the start and completion dates of the negotiation action are required to get credit for the
completion. The negotiation [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic) or Removal Negotiations] actual completion
date (Actual Complete) is the date the order is signed by the Regional Administrator, which is the AOC [Action
Name = Admin Order on Consent] actual completion date (Actual Complete) or the UAO (Action Name =
Unilateral Admin Order) actual completion date (Actual Complete); or
• Funds are obligated through contract modification signed by the CO, an IAG signed by the other Federal agency,
or a CA signed by the designated Regional official for a Fund-financed time-critical or NTC early action (removal
authority). The negotiation [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic), or Removal Negotiations] actual
completion date (Actual Complete) is the date funds are obligated. If funds are not available and the Region
decides a UAO is not appropriate and HQ concurs (in writing), the negotiation [Action Name = Negotiations
(Generic) or Removal Negotiations] actual completion date (Actual Complete) is the date of the HQ memorandum
concurring with the decision not to issue the UAO.
This measure will track and report NPL and NPL caliber sites separately.
September 27, 1996 C-10
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Negotiation completion credit will be given for Prospective Purchaser AOCs and CAs if the PPA is implementing the
remedy.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP Target. Cleanup negotiation completions are planned site-specifically. The negotiation completion
date is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of either generic negotiations , RD/RA
negotiations, or removal negotiations [Action Name = Negotiations (Generic), RD/RA Negotiations, or Removal
Negotiations]. The "Response Actions Sought," the outcome of the negotiations [Outcome(s) Selected or Outcome
Actions Selected], and the "Law/Section Selected" also must be reported in CERCLIS. Negotiation completion credit
will be given for Prospective Purchaser AOCs and CAs if the PPA is implementing the remedy.
STATE ORDER FOR ESI/RI/FS
Definition:
Administrative Order (AO) or CD signed by the State and the PRPs for the PRPs to conduct the ESI/RI/FS.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The date the last State official signs the order or CD. All CERCLIS coding requirements for AOs and CDs apply.
The enforcement action type should be State decree or State order (Action Name = State Consent Decree or State
Order) and the actual completion date should be entered in the "Actual Complete" field in CERCLIS. The "Response
Actions Achieved" and "Response Actions to be Reimbursed" (if applicable) also must be reported in CERCLIS.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. Projections for AOs for ESI/RI/FS are made site-specifically. State orders for
ESI/RI/FS is an internal reporting measure.
STATE CONSENT DECREE FOR RD/RA
Definition:
Judicial agreement between the State and the PRPs fully or partially settling a claim under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The settlement may be for response work,
or both response and cost recovery work.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Date the State CD is signed by the PRPs and all appropriate State officials. All CERCLIS coding requirements for
CDs apply. The enforcement action should be State decree (Action Name = State Consent Decree) and the actual
completion date should be entered in the "Actual Complete" field in CERCLIS. In addition, the "Response Actions
Achieved" field must denote that the CD was issued for RD and/or RA or groundwater monitoring.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
C-ll September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 920Q.3-14-1C
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. State CD for RD/RA is an internal reporting measure,
ENF-3 • SETTLEMENTS FOR CLEANUP ACTIONS
Definition of Target/Measure:
Settlements are the enforcement actions through which the PRP agrees to conduct the cleanup work. This measure
will require reporting of both the number of settlements as well as the estimated value of the response work for each
of those settlement.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Settlements at NPL, NPL caliber, and non-NPL sites include:
* A CD signed by the Regional Administrator and PRPs and 10-point analysis is transmitted by the Regional
Administrator to DOJ and HQ, under Section 106 or 106/107 for PRPs to conduct or pay for the response action
[ESI/RI, FS, RD, RA, groundwater monitoring/institutional controls, time-critical or NTC early action (removal
authority) or early action (remedial authority)]. Credit for the CD referral (Action Name = Consent Decree)
is given on the date on which the Regional Administrator's transmittal memo is sent to HQ or to DOJ as recorded
in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start). This includes CDs for mixed funding and cashout settlements.
The appropriate Enforcement Instrument Category (Enf Instrument Category = Cashout, or Mixed
Work/Preauthorization, or Preauthorization, or Mixed Funding) also must be entered into CERCLIS; or
« A UAO is signed by the Regional Administrator for RD, RA, groundwater monitoring/institutional controls, time-
critical or NTC early action (removal authority) or early action (remedial authority), and PRPs provide written
notice of intent to comply with the UAO. Credit for UAOs is given on the date of the PRP's written notice of
intent to comply with the order. This is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete)
of the notice of intent to comply subaction (Subaction Name = PRPs Ntfy EPA, Intent to Comply). The actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the order (Action Name = Unilateral Admin Order) is the date it is signed;
or
• If a PRP initially complies with a UAO, and later a CD is agreed to for the same work, credit will be given for
the UAO when the PRPs provide written notice of intent to comply. Credit will be given for the CD when it is
referred by memo to HQ or DOJ. At this point the UAO is converted to a CD and Regions will receive credit
for the CD only and not the UAO.
The compliance status (Compliance Status) for the UAO should be changed to "Converted to Consent Decree."
The Region must revise the estimated value of work to be performed (Estimated Present Worth Value) to the
actual value or estimated value of the work actually performed by the PRPs under the UAO (Estimated Present
Worth Value). If the PRPs did not conduct any work under the UAO, the dollars associated with the "Estimated
Present Worth Value" should be "0."
The Region also must report the estimated value of the work to be performed by the PRPs under the CD
(Estimated Present Worth Value). The total estimated value of the PRP work is the sum of the dollars associated
with the UAOand the dollars associated with the CD. To signify that the CD was the result of a UAO, the
Region must check the converted UAO flag (Converted UAO?) when entering the CD. The Region also should
enter the date on which the UAO was converted to a CD (Converted Date) and specify the UAO that was
converted (Converted to Consent Decree or AOC); or
* A Section 106 or 106/107 injunctive referral to compel the PRP to perform the cleanup [RD, RA, early action
(remedial authority), or NTC early action (removal authority)] as specified in a UAO is transmitted by the
September 27, 1996 C-12
-------
OSWER Directive 92Q0.3-14-1G
Regional Administrator to DOJ or HQ. Credit for the referral [Action Name = Section 106 Litigation, or Section
106 & 107 Litigation, or Litigation (Generic)] is based on the date the Regional Administrator signs the
transmittal letter as recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start), The "Response Actions Sought"
under the litigation should be the same as the "Response Actions Achieved" for the UAO; or
* An AOC is signed by the Regional Administrator for an ESI/RJ, FS, time-critical or NTC early action (removal
authority) or RD, or an existing AOC for ESI/RI, or FS is amended for RD only. The Region must notify HQ
in writing of its intent to issue SNLs to initiate cleanup negotiations within a specified period after the AOC
signature date. The date the Regional Administrator signs the new AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on
Consent) is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete). For amended AOCs, the
amendment date should be reported as the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the subaction
"Enforcement Activity Amended." To signify that the AOC has been amended, the Region must check the
amended instrument flag (Amended Instrument?). The Region also should indicate the "Response Actions
Added" under the AOC.
• At NPL sites, settlement credit is given when a Prospective Purchaser Agreement (PPA) AOC or CA which
implements the remedy is signed. The actual completion date (Actual Complete) is the date the AOC or CA
(Action Name = Admin Order on Consent or Consent Agreement and Enf Instrument Category = Prospective
Purchaser Agreement) is signed by the Regional Administrator. Amended AOCs will NOT receive settlement
credit for PPAs.
Settlements will be reported as a combined total for CDs, AOCs, and UAOs (where the PRPs have provided written
notice of their intent to comply).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Settlement credit will be given for a Prospective Purchaser AOC or CA if the PPA is implementing the remedy.
Amended AOCs will not receive settlement credit for PPAs.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The applicable "Response Actions Sought," under the injunctive referral,
"Response Actions Achieved," under the settlement and "Response Actions to be Reimbursed" if the settlement
includes cost recovery are to be reported in CERCLIS. For each settlement, the Region must enter the "Estimated
Present Worth" of the response actions the PRPs are performing and, if necessary, the "Enf Instrument Category."
If the settlement also includes cost recovery, the "Past Costs Achieved" and/or "Cashout Funds Achieved" should
be entered in CERCLIS. This is a SCAP measure. Settlement credit will be given for a Prospective Purchaser AOC
or CA if the PPA is implementing the remedy. Amended AOCs will not receive settlement credit for PPAs.
ENF-4 • SECTION 122(g) SETTLEMENTS AND NUMBER OF PRPs
Definition of Target/Measure:
This measure reports the total number of administrative or judicial settlements that are reached solely under Section
122(g) of SARA, with PRPs qualified as de minimis or de micromis under Section 122(g). This type of settlement
results in PRPs paying a minor portion of the estimated response costs at the site, and is embodied in a CD or an
AOC. If the total response costs at the site exceed $500,000 (excluding interest), the AOC can only be signed (issued)
by the Regional Administrator after prior written approval from DOJ. If DOJ does not approve or disapprove the
order within 30 days, the order is considered approved and can then be signed by the Regional Administrator. The
DOJ and the Regional Administrator can agree to extend the 30-day period if necessary.
This measure counts the total number of de minimis and de micromis settlements under Section 122(g). The number
of PRPs offered the settlement and those who settle also are tracked under this measure.
C-13 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment:
Credit is given for de minimis and de micromis Section 122(g) settlements in the following two categories. Only the
de minimis settlements (Category 1) are targeted.
Category la: Total de minimis settlements and number of parties offered as well as signatories to each settlement:
• When an AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent) is signed by the Regional Administrator, as reported
in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete).
" When the Regional Administrator signs the memorandum transmitting the CD (Action Name = Consent Decree),
signed by the de minimis parties to DOJ, as reported in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start).
« The number of signatories to the settlement will be system generated in CERCLIS from the identification of the
PRPs associated with the settlement. The number of parties offered the settlement will be system generated from
the number of de minimis PRPs that received a Special Notice Letter.
Category lb: Early de minimis settlements and number of panics offered as well as signatories to each settlement:
« When an AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent) is signed by the Regional Administrator prior to the
first remedy selection (ROD ) at the site, or prior to a subsequent ROD in which response costs are addressed
by the settlement. The date the AOC is signed is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual
Complete) of the AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent).
» When the Regional Administrator signs the memorandum transmitting the CD (Action Name = Consent Decree),
signed by the de minimis parties and the Regional Administrator, to DOJ prior to the first remedy selection (ROD)
at the site, or prior to a subsequent ROD in which response costs are addressed by the settlement. The date the
CD is signed is reported in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of the CD (Action Name = Consent
Decree).
• The number of signatories to the settlement will be system generated in CERCLIS from the identification of the
PRPs associated with the settlement. The number of parties offered the settlement will be system generated from
the number of de minimis PRPs that received a Special Notice Letter.
Category 2: Total de micromis settlements and number of parties offered as well as signatories to each settlement:
• When an AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent) is signed by the Regional Administrator, as reported
in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete).
• When the Regional Administrator signs the memorandum transmitting the CD (Action Name = Consent Decree),
signed by the de micromis parties and the Regional Administrator, to the DOJ, as reported in CERCLIS as the
actual start date (Actual Start).
» The number of signatories to the settlement will be system generated in CERCLIS from the identification of the
PRPs associated with the settlement. The number of parties offered the settlement will be system generated from
the number of de micromis PRPs that received a Special Notice Letter.
The following information should be entered into CERCLIS for both Category 1 and Category 2 settlements:
• Type of settlement (Enf Instrument Category = De minimis, De minimis/Cashout, De micromis, or De
micromis/Cashout); and
September 27, 1996 C-14
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-1C
• Law/Section (Law/Section Selected = CERCLA 122G); and
• PRPs or PRP group that signed settlement (PRP Name or PRP Group Selected); and
• PRP involvement status (PRP Involvement Status = De minimis Party, or De micromis Party); and
* PRP Involvement Type (Owner, Generator, or Transporter); and
* Dollar amount that will be used for future or past work covered by the settlement [Past Costs Achieved and/or
Cashout Funds Achieved (as applicable)].
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Revised language to specify that only the number of de minimis and/or de micromis parties be reported. The previous
definition allowed for reporting of all parties to the settlement. Added requirements for determining de minimis or
de micromis parties that signed the settlement or received SNLs.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. Category 1 settlements are a SCAP target. Category 2 accomplishments count
toward the Superfund Reform "Measures of Success" for de micromis settlements. While EPA will enter into 4s.
micromis settlements when requested, the ultimate measure of success of this policy will be that de micromis parties
are no longer pursued and there is no need to enter into such settlements.
Since many de minimis and de micromis settlements are cashouts, Regions also must enter the Enforcement Instrument
Category for "Cashout" (Enf Instrument Category = De minimis/Cashout or De micromis/ Cashout) and the Past
Costs Achieved or Cashout Funds Achieved, where applicable.
The number of signatories to the settlement will be system generated hi CERCLIS from the identification of the PRPs
associated with the settlement. The number of parties offered the settlement will be system generated from the
number of de minimis or de micromis PRPs that received a Special Notice Letter.
ENF-5 • PERCENTAGE OF PRP LEAD CLEANUP ACTIONS TO ALL CLEANUP
ACTIONS
Definition of Target/Measure:
This measure calculates the percentage of RP-lead cleanup actions (early and long-term) to all cleanup actions (early
and long-term).
A RP-lead cleanup action is defined as those actions where PRPs or their contractors) have mobilized for
implementation of the time-critical or NTC early action (removal authority) (Action Name = RP Removal Action and
Action Critical Indicator = Time-Critical or Non-Time Critical) selected by the Region and reflected in the Action
Memorandum (Action Name = RP Removal Action and Subaction Name = Approval of Action Memo or Removal
Decision Doc); or early action (remedial authority) (Action Name = RP RA and Action Critical Indicator = Early
Action), RD/RA (Action Name = RP RD or RP RA) or groundwater monitoring/institutional controls [Action Name
= Grndwtr Monitor (Post-ROD) and Lead = RP or PS or MR] documented in a ROD (Action name = Record of
Decision). The cleanup action must be performed in compliance with a Federal AOC, UAO, CD or judgement, or
a State (PS-lead only) order or decree. A cleanup action dial is taken over by the Fund due to substantial non-
compliance will not be counted as a RP-lead cleanup action.
C-15 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
"All cleanup actions" is defined as those actions where EPA or EPA contractors, a State or State contractors, or PRP
or PRP contractors have mobilized for construction of the time-critical or NTC early action (removal authority)
(Action Name = Removal Action or RP Removal and Action Critical Indicator = Time Critical or Non-Time
Critical) specified in the Action Memorandum (Subaction Name = Approval of Action Memo or Removal Decision
Doc), or the response actions specified in the ROD (Action Name = Record of Decision) for early actions (remedial
authority) (Action Name = Remedial Action or RP RA and Action Critical Indicator = Early Action), RD/RA (Action
Name = Remedial Design, RP RD, Remedial Action or RP RA), or groundwater monitoring/institutional controls
[Action Name = Grndwtr Monitoring (Post-ROD) and Lead = RP or PS or MR],
Accomplishments will be based on the start date (Actual Start) of the response action [time-critical or NTC early
actions (removal authority), RD, RA, early action (remedial authority), or groundwater monitoring/institutional
controls].
The percentage of RP-lead early and long-term actions will be tracked separately (by removal and remedial categories
as well as by NPL and NPL caliber) but reported as a combined total.
Definition of Accomplishment:
See Definition of Target/Measure.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Target/Measure. Data for this measure will be obtained using CERCLIS. HQ will perform the
analysis.
This is a SCAP measure.
SECTION 106, 106/107, 107 CASE RESOLUTION
Definition:
Case resolution is the conclusion of a Section 106, 106/107, or 107 judicial action by full settlement, final judgment,
case dismissal, or case withdrawal.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Credit for case resolution is given when:
* A CD is entered in the court and signed by the judge fully addressing the complaint with all parties; or
« The Region receives a memo or letter from DOJ, withdrawing the case; or
* A decision document is submitted by the judge dismissing the case; or
• A trial has concluded and a judgment rendered and signed by the judge fully addressing the complaint.
September 27, 1996 C-16
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The Litigation or case resolution (Action Name = Litigation (Generic), Section 106 & 107 Litigation, Section 107
Litigation, or Section 106 Litigation) actual completion date (Actual Complete) is defined as follows:
• Date full settlement CD is entered. This is the CD (Action Name = Consent Decree), Entered by the Court
(Subaction Name = Entered by Court), and the litigation actual completion date (Actual Complete);
• Date case is withdrawn (Subaction Name = Case Withdrawn) as the subaction completion and litigation actual
completion date (Actual Complete);
» Date case is dismissed (Subaction Name = Case Dismissed) as the subaction and litigation actual completion date
(Actual Complete); or
* Date judgment is entered (Action Name = Judicial/Civil Judgment) as the judgment and the litigation actual
completion date (Actual Complete).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This changed from an internal reporting measure to a SCAP measure.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The Outcome Actions Selected or Outcome(s) Selected, "Response Actions
Sought" or "Response Actions Achieved" with "Estimated Present Worth Value" and "Response Actions to be
Reimbursed," with Future Costs Achieved arid Past Costs Achieved or Amount Sought and Anticipated Future Costs)
also must be entered into CERCLIS. This is a SCAP measure.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD COMPILATION
Definition:
An administrative Record (AR) is a compilation of all documents EPA used to make a specific decision on the
appropriate response action to be taken at a Superfund site, whether the document supports or opposes the Agency's
selected action, SARA specifies that ARs be compiled at sites where responses under remedial or removal authority
are planned or are occurring, or where EPA is issuing a UAO or initiating litigation.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The AR compilation (Action Name = Administrative Records) begins when the letter is signed transmitting the AR
to the site repository and the actual start date (Actual Start) is entered into CERCLIS. The AR compilation is
complete when the certification of completion memo is signed by the program office and the actual completion date
(Actual Complete) is entered into CERCLIS.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The start and completion of the compilation of the AR must be reported site-specifically (Action Name =
Administrative Record) in CERCLIS. An Action Qualifier must be reported to indicate whether the AR is for a
remedial or a removal activity [Qualifier = (E) Admin Record Compiled For a Remedial Event, or (V) Admin Record
Compiled For a Removal Event]. The completion of the Administrative Record Compilation is an internal reporting
measure.
C-17 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
ISSUE DEMAND LETTER
Definition:
A Section 122(e) letter issued pursuant to Section 107 from EPA to the PRP requesting that the PRP reimburse the
Fund for a specific amount associated with one or more response activities. Demand letters are typically sent for each
separate response activity.
Definition of Accomplishment;
This subaction is accomplished on the actual completion date (Actual Complete) the demand letter is signed by the
appropriate EPA official and recorded in CERCLIS as a subaction (Subaction Name = Demand Letters Issued) under
Negotiation Actions or the Administrative/Voluntary Cost Recovery,
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Demand letters are recorded at the subaction level (Subaction Name = Demand Letters Issued), This is an internal
reporting measure.
COST RECOVERY ACTIONS/DECISIONS < $200,000
Definition:
Cost recovery actions/decisions taken are decisions to take cost recovery action by use of administrative cost recovery
settlement, Section 106/107 or 107 judicial referral for cost recovery, preparation of a decision document or 10-point
settlement analysis document not to pursue cost recovery, bankruptcy filing, cash out settlement that includes recovery
of past costs, or initiation of debt collection procedures.
This category only includes cost recovery actions (at NPL and non-NPL sites) for reimbursement of Trust fund
amounts of less than $200,000.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Administrative Settlements - Credit is given on the date that the Regional office or DOJ receives payment from the
PRPs in direct response to a demand letter for voluntary cost recovery or the date the Regional Administrator signs
the AOC for cost recovery. The date must be reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete)
of the administrative/voluntary cost recovery (Action Name = Admin/Voluntary Cost Recovery), AOC (Action Name
= Admin Order on Consent), or Consent Agreement (Action Name = Consent Agreement).
Section 107 or 106/107 Judicial Referrals - Credit is given on the date of the Regional Administrator's memo
transmitting the referral to HQ or DOJ [Action Name = Section 106 & 107 Litigation, Litigation (Generic), or
Section 107 Litigation] as recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start). This includes CD settlements
(Action Name = Consent Decree) for RD/RA with a cost recovery component. CD settlements that are for cost
recovery only and result from a previous litigation referral do not count towards the measure. The start date (Actual
Start) for these actions is not reported in CERCLIS. Only the lodged (Subaction Name = Lodged by DOJ) and
entered (Subaction Name = Entered by Court) subactions, their actual subaction completion dates (Actual Complete),
and the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the CD are recorded. The actual completion date of a CD
settlement is the date it is entered by the court.
Decision Documents Prepared not to Pursue Cost Recovery - Credit is given when the decision document (Action
Name = Cost Recvry Decsn Docmt - No Sue) is signed by the Regional office and recorded in CERCLIS as the actual
September 27, 1996 C-18
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
completion date (Actual Complete). The decision not to pursue cost recovery also may be documented in a 10-point
settlement analysis. This decision is coded in CERCLIS with the enforcement instrument by checking the Cost
Written Off flag and entering the Cost Write-Off information on the Cost Write-Off screen. The dollars that will not
be recovered (Past Costs and Future Costs), and the "Response Action Costs Written Off should be reported in
CERCLIS on the Cost Write-Off screen.
Bankruptcy Filing - Credit is given based on the date that the bankruptcy strategy package is prepared or on the date
of the first creditor committee meeting as documented by a summary of the meeting. These dates are reported in
CERCLIS as the actual completion dates (Actual Complete) of the claim in bankruptcy action (Action Name = Claim
in Bankruptcy and Subaction Name = Creditors Committee Meeting or Bankruptcy Strategy Package).
Cashout Settlements - Credit is given on the date of the Regional Administrator's memo transmitting the cashout CD
to HQ or DOJ or when the Regional Administrator signs the AOC for the cashout settlement with a cost recovery
component. The CD (Action Name=Consent Decree) actual start date (Actual Start) or the AOC (Action Name =
Admin Order on Consent) actual completion date (Actual Complete) and the Enforcement Instrument Category of
"Cashout" (Enf Instrument Category = Cashout) must be entered into CERCLIS. For each settlement, the Region
must enter the following information into CERCLIS: "Past Costs Achieved," and/or "Cashout Funds Achieved," as
well as "Response Actions to be Reimbursed," and/or "Other Activities for Cost Recovery."
Initiation of Debt Collection Procedures - Credit is given on the date the initial demand letter is signed by an EPA
official invoking use of debt collection procedures. The date the letter is signed is reported in CERCLIS as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the demand letter (Subaction Name = Demand Letters Issued) and the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the administrative/voluntary cost recovery (Action Name=Admin/Voluntary
Cost Recovery). Debt collection subactions in CERCLIS are: "Collection Services," "Administrative Offset," and
"Tax Refund Offset" (Subaction Name). These subactions are valid only for the action "Admin/Voluntary Cost
Recovery" (Action Name). The Law/Section reported in CERCLIS should be "Debt Collection Act DCA"
(Law/Section Selected).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
All dates must be entered into CERCLIS. Credit for referrals is based on the referral package, not on the number of
sites. Credit will be withdrawn if a case is returned to the Region by HQ or DOJ for additional work, but will be
reinstated upon re-referral. For each settlement, the Region must enter the following information into CERCLIS:
"Past Cost Achieved," and/or "Cashout Funds Achieved," or "Amount Sought" and/or "Anticipated Future Costs"
as well as "Response Actions to be Reimbursed" and/or "Other Activities for Cost Recovery" flag, or "Past Costs"
(Costs Written Off) and/or "Future Costs" (Costs Written Off) and "Response Action Costs Written Off". This is
an internal reporting measure.
ENF-6 • PAST COSTS ADDRESSED * $200,000
Definition of Target/Measure:
Past costs addressed a $200,000 is the decision to take cost recovery action by use of administrative cost recovery
settlement, Section 106/107 or 107 judicial referral for cost recovery, settlement for past costs under a CD (with no
prior litigation referral), preparation of a decision document or 10-point settlement analysis document not to pursue
cost recovery, bankruptcy filing, cashout settlement that includes recovery of past costs, or initiation of debt collection
procedures.
C-19 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
completion date (Actual Complete). The decision not to pursue cost recovery also may be documented in a 10-point
settlement analysis. This decision is coded in CERCLIS with the enforcement instrument by checking the Cost
Written Off flag and entering the Cost Write-Off information on the Cost Write-off screen. The dollars that will not
be recovered (Past Costs and Future Costs), and the "Response Action Costs Written Off" should be reported in
CERCLIS on the Cost Write-Off screen.
Bankruptcy Filing - Credit is given based on the date that the bankruptcy strategy package is prepared or on the date
of the first creditor committee meeting as documented by a summary of the meeting. These dates are reported in
CERCLIS as the actual completion dates (Actual Complete) of the claim in bankruptcy action (Action Name = Claim
in Bankruptcy and Subaction Name = Creditors Committee Meeting or Bankruptcy Strategy Package).
Cashout Settlements - Credit is given on the date of the Regional Administrator's memo transmitting the cashout CD
to HQ or DOJ or when the Regional Administrator signs the AOC for the cashout settlement with a cost recovery
component. The CD (Action Name=Consent Decree) actual start date (Actual Start) or the AOC (Action Name =
Admin Order on Consent) actual completion date (Actual Complete) and the Enforcement Instrument Category of
"Cashout" (Enf Instrument Category = Cashout) must be entered into CERCLIS. For each settlement, the Region
must enter the following information into CERCLIS: "Past Costs Achieved," and/or "Cashout Funds Achieved," as
well as "Response Actions to be Reimbursed," and/or "Other Activities for Cost Recovery."
Initiation of Debt Collection Procedures - Credit is given on the date the initial demand letter is signed by an EPA
official invoking use of debt collection procedures. The date the letter is signed is reported in CERCLIS as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the demand letter (Subaction Name = Demand Letters Issued) and the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the admimstrative/voluntary cost recovery (Action Name=Adinin/Voluntary
Cost Recovery). Debt collection subactions in CERCLIS are: "Collection Services," "Administrative Offset," and
"Tax Refund Offset" (Subaction Name). These subactions are valid only for the action "Admin/Voluntary Cost
Recovery" (Action Name). The Law/Section reported in CERCLIS should be "Debt Collection Act DCA"
(Law/Section Selected).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
All dates must be entered into CERCLIS. Credit for referrals is based on the referral package, not on the number of
sites. Credit will be withdrawn if a case is returned to the Region by HQ or DOJ for additional work, but will be
reinstated upon re-referral. For each settlement, the Region must enter the following information into CERCLIS:
"Past Cost Achieved," and/or "Cashout Funds Achieved," or "Amount Sought" and/or "Anticipated Future Costs"
as well as "Response Actions to be Reimbursed" and/or "Other Activities for Cost Recovery" flag, or "Past Costs"
(Costs Written Off) and/or "Future Costs" (Costs Written Off) and "Response Action Costs Written Off". This is
an internal reporting measure.
ENF-6 • PAST COSTS ADDRESSED * $200,000
Definition of Target/Measure:
Past costs addressed a $200,000 is the decision to take cost recovery action by use of administrative cost recovery
settlement, Section 106/107 or 107 judicial referral for cost recovery, settlement for past costs under a CD (with no
prior litigation referral), preparation of a decision document or 10-point settlement analysis document not to pursue
cost recovery, bankruptcy filing, cashout settlement that includes recovery of past costs, or initiation of debt collection
procedures.
C-19 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This measure includes cost recovery actions (at NPL and non-NPL sites) for reimbursement of Trust funds amounts
of greater than or equal to $200,000. It is vital to the management of the cost recovery program that sites with
upcoming Statute of Limitations (SOLs) be addressed prior to the expiration of the SOL. Therefore, Regions will not
be allowed to substitute FY 97 targeted sites that have SOLs occurring in FY 97 or before.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Administrative Settlements - Credit is given on the date the Regional office or DOJ receives payment from the PRPs
in direct response to a demand letter for voluntary cost recovery, or the date the Regional Administrator signs the
AOC or CA that recovers 100 percent of the Trust Fund expenditures or settles a claim where the total response cost
are less than $500,000. The accomplishment of the administrative settlement is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the administrative/voluntary cost recovery (Action Name = Admin/Voluntary
Cost Recovery,) AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent,) or CA (Action Name = Consent Agreement).
If the settlement is compromised and total response costs are more than $500,000, the AOC must be sent to DOJ for
approval prior to signature by the Regional Administrator.
Section 107 or 106/107 Judicial Referrals - Credit is given on the date of the Regional Administrator's memo
transmitting the referral to HQ or DOJ [Action Name = Litigation (Generic), Section 107 Litigation, or Section 106
& 107 Litigation] as recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start). This includes CD settlements
(Action Name = Consent Decree) for RD/RA with a cost recovery component. CD settlements that are for cost
recovery only and result from a previous litigation referral do not count towards this target. The start date (Actual
Start) for these actions is not reported in CERCLIS. Only the lodged (Subaction Name = Lodged by DOJ) and
entered (Subaction Name = Entered by Court) subactions, the subaction actual completion date (Actual Complete),
and the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the CD are recorded. The actual completion date of a CD
settlement is the date it is entered by the court.
Decision Documents Prepared not to Pursue Cost Recovery - Credit is given when the decision document (Action
Name = Cost Recvry Decsn Docmt - No Sue) is signed by the Regional office and recorded in CERCLIS as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete). The decision not to pursue cost recovery also may be documented in a 10-point
settlement analysis. This decision is coded in CERCLIS with the enforcement instrument by checking the Cost
Written Off flag and entering the Cost Write-Off information on the Cost Write-Off screen. The dollars that will not
be recovered (Past Costs and Future Costs), and the "Response Action Costs Written Off should be reported in
CERCLIS on the Cost Write-Off screen.
Bankruptcy Filing - Credit is given based on the date that the bankruptcy strategy package is prepared or on the date
of the first creditor committee meeting as documented by a summary of the meeting. These dates are reported in
CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the claim in bankruptcy action (Action Name = Claim
in Bankruptcy and Subaction Name = Creditors Committee Meeting, or Bankruptcy Strategy Package).
Cashout Settlements - Credit is given on the date of the Regional Administrator's memo transmitting the cashout CD
to HQ or DOJ or when the Regional Administrator signs the AOC for the cashout settlement with a cost recovery
component of greater than or equal to $200,000 as recorded in CERCLIS. The CD (Action Name=Consent Decree)
actual start date (Actual Start) or the AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent) actual completion date (Actual
Complete) and the Enforcement Instrument Category of "Cashout" (Enf Instrument Category = Cashout) must be
entered into CERCLIS. The AOC must be sent to DOJ for approval if the total site cost exceeds $500,000. Credit
is given for only those cashout settlements which include a cost recovery component recovering $200,000 or more
in past costs. For each settlement, the Region must enter the following information into CERCLIS: "Past Costs
Achieved," and/or "Cashout Funds Achieved," as well as "Response Actions to be Reimbursed," and/or "Other
Activities for Cost Recovery."
September 27, 1996 C-20
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Initiation of Debt Collection Procedures - Credit is given on the date the initial demand letter is signed by an EPA
official invoking use of debt collection procedures. The date the letter is signed is reported in CERCLIS as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the demand letter (Subaction Name = Demand Letters Issued) and the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the administrative/voluntary cost recovery (Action Name=Admin/Voluntary
Cost Recovery). Debt collection subactions in CERCLIS are: "Collection Services," "Administrative Offset," and
"Tax Refund Offset" (Subaction Name). These subactions are valid only for the action "Admin/Voluntary Cost
Recovery" (Action Name). The Law/Section reported in CERCLIS should be "Debt Collection Act DCA"
(Law/Section Selected).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. All dates must be entered into CERCLIS. Credit for referrals is based on the
referral package, not on the number of sites. Credit will be withdrawn if a case is returned to the Region by HQ or
DOJ for additional work, but will be reinstated upon re-referral. For each settlement, the Region must enter the
following information into CERCLIS: "Past Costs Achieved" and/or "Cashout Funds Achieved," or "Amount
Sought" and/or "Anticipated Future Costs" as well as "Response Actions to be Reimbursed" and/or "Other Activities
for Cost Recovery" flag, or "Past Costs" (Costs Written Off) and/or "Future Costs" (Costs Written Off) and
"Response Action Costs Written Off." This is a SCAP target.
C-21 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
ENFORCEMENT MEASURES OF SUCCESS
FY97
OVERVIEW OF SUPERFUND REFORMS MEASURES OF SUCCESS
Over the past several years, EPA's Superfund Enforcement Program has been very successful in reaching
settlements with PRPs. As a result of these efforts, PRPs now conduct the majority of cleanups throughout the United
States, and Trust Fund monies have been highly leveraged. PRP site cleanup commitments have exceeded $1 billion
per year for three of the past five years.
Despite this success, however, the Superfund program has been criticized in the past by the Inspector General
(IG), Government Accounting Office (GAO), the PRP community, and the general public for failing to have a
successful program. To improve the Superfund program prior to reauthorization by the U.S. Congress, EPA has
issued three rounds of administrative reforms. These rounds highlight enforcement reforms, improved cleanup
effectiveness and efficiency, expanded community involvement and environmental justice, and enhanced State and
local government roles in the Superfund program. In October 1995, EPA issued the third round of Superfund
Reforms. These reforms were intended to assist Regions, State and local governments, communities, and private
parties involved in Superfund cleanups. In the enforcement area, the main emphasis was to increase fairness in the
enforcement process and to reduce transaction costs.
The initial Measures of Success (MOS) were developed in FY 96 to address these reform requirements.
Additional measures are being added in FY 9? to address the third round of reforms. The Measures of Success will
eventually supplement and possibly replace some of the existing SCAP targets/measures. These measures seek to
provide a more complete picture of enforcement-related successes and accomplishments at Superfund sites.
Note: Information that is in bold, and italicized, type is currently being translated into discrete, reportable data
elements. It cannot be reported in CERCLIS 3 at the time of distribution of this manual, but all reporting
requirements will be met by die time CERCLIS 3 is implemented in all Regions.
ENFORCEMENT MEASURES OF SUCCESS DEFINITIONS
USE OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)
Definition:
This measure reports the number of sites where ADR techniques are employed in an attempt to reach settlement under
CERCLA. ADR is a tool that is being used to increase enforcement fairness. This measure will report site-specific
use of ADR.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Sites using ADR tools are divided into two categories:
• Sites where the Agency employs and funds ADR hi the CERCLA process; and
• Sites where the Agency supports private party use of ADR in the CERCLA process.
September 27, 1996 C-22
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Valid ADR activities include:
• Allocation of shares of Responsibility - Credit is given on the date that the parties involved choose a neutral
allocator. The date on which the allocator is chosen is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start)
of the Alternative Dispute Resolution action. The ADR Type of "Allocation" should be entered into CERCLIS.
• Arbitration- Credit is given on the date that the parties involved in binding or advisory negotiation (in a judicial
setting) choose an arbitrator. The date on which the arbitrator is selected is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual
start date (Actual Start) of the Alternative Dispute Resolution action. The ADR Type of "Arbitration" should be
entered into CERCLIS.
• Convening- Credit is given on the date that a neutral third party is selected to organize disputants for negotiations,
assist them in the decision to use ADR, and assist in the selection of an ADR professional. The date on which the
neutral third party is selected is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of the Alternative
Dispute Resolution action. The ADR Type of "Convening" should be entered into CERCLIS.
• Fact Finding - Credit is given on the date that a specialized neutral party with subject matter expertise is selected
to resolve technical or factual issues. The date that the specialized neutral party is selected is recorded in CERCLIS
as the actual start date (Actual Start) of the Alternative Dispute Resolution action. The ADR Type of "Fact
Finding" should be entered into CERCLIS.
• Mediation - Credit is given on the date that the parties select a neutral third party with no decision-making authority
to assist during non-binding negotiations. The date on which the neutral party is selected is recorded in CERCLIS
as the actual start date (Actual Stan) of the Alternative Dispute Resolution action. The ADR Type of "Mediation"
should be entered into CERCLIS.
• Mini-Trial- Credit is given on the date that the involved parties begin the mini-trial. The date on which the mini-
trial begins is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of the Alternative Dispute Resolution
action. The ADR Type of "Mini-Trial" should be entered into CERCLIS.
• Neutral Evaluation - Credit is given on the date that a neutral party is selected to assist a negotiation team in
evaluating the potential for settlement or use of ADR professionals. The date on which the neutral party is selected
is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of the Alternative Dispute Resolution action. The
ADR Type of "Neutral Evaluation" should be entered into CERCLIS.
• Settlement Judge - Credit is given on the date that a settlement judge (other than the one hearing the case) is
selected (or agreed upon) to act as a mediator during the negotiation and settlement discussions of the parties. The
date on which the settlement judge is selected is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of the
Alternative Dispute Resolution action. The ADR Type of "Settlement Judge" should be entered into CERCLIS.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The following information must be reported in CERCLIS to receive credit for this measure. This is a Federal-
enforcement lead (FE) activity with an action name of "Alternative Dispute Resolution" (Action Name). The
appropriate "Response Actions Selected" indicating the actions being discussed during the ADR process should be
entered into CERCLIS.
C-23 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Credit will be based on the start date (Actual Start) of the ADR (Action Name = Alternative Dispute Resolution).
Regions also should enter the ADR Type of "Allocation," "Arbitration," "Convening," "Fact Finding," "Mediation,"
"Mini-Trial," "Neutral Allocation," or "Settlement Judge."
SETTLEMENTS WHERE EPA SETTLED BASED ON ABILITY-TO-PAY
DETERMINATIONS
Definition:
The measure will help assess the extent to which EPA is using ability-to-pay determinations to achieve its goal of
Enforcement Fairness. The measure will report the percentage of administrative or judicial settlements that are
reached under CERCLA with Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) qualified as limited ability-to-pay parties. This
type of settlement results in: (1) PRPs paying less than their respective portion of the cost for site cleanup based on
an ability-to-pay determination; (2) Payment over time for parties with limited ability to raise annual revenues; or (3)
Parties providing in-kind service in lieu of cash payments.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Total ability-to-pay settlements are counted as follows:
• When an AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent) with the ability-to-pay PRPs is signed by the Regional
Administrator as reported in CERCLIS with the actual completion date (Actual Complete).
• When the Regional Administrator signs the memorandum transmitting the CD (Action Name = Consent Decree)
signed by the ability-to-pay parties (and the Regional Administrator) to DOJ as reported in CERCLIS as the actual
start date (Actual Stan).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
To receive credit for this measure, the Enforcement Instrument Category of "Ability to Pay" (Enf Instrument
Category = Ability to Pay) must be entered into CERCLIS.
Since many ability-to-pay settlements are cashouts, Regions must enter the Enforcement Instrument Category for
"cashout" (Enf Instrument Category = Ability to Pay/Cashout). The settlement dollars that will be used for future
(Cashout Funds Achieved) work or recovery of past costs (Past Costs Achieved) and the "Response Actions to be
Reimbursed also must be entered into CERCLIS.
RECOVERABLE PAST COSTS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED PROGRAM TO DATE
Definition:
This measure supports the goal of Trust Fund Stewardship by reporting the amount and percentage of recoverable past
costs that were addressed versus all recoverable past costs (i.e., past costs eligible for recovery, program-to-date).
The measure encourages addressing all of the recoverable past costs through enforcement activities so that the
maximum amount of recoverable funds can be obtained to support Superfund cleanups.
Recoverable past costs are past costs that are considered potentially recoverable. These costs include EPA direct and
indirect costs, plus contractor program management costs which are allocated to sites annually.
September 27, 1996 C-24
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Some Superfund past costs are considered unrecoverable, including funds expended at orphan sites, Federal facilities
costs, costs that were compromised during previous cost recovery efforts, and costs that were previously written off.
Indirect costs over and above those that are recoverable under the current indirect rates are also considered not
recoverable.
Past Costs Addressed are costs addressed through administrative settlements (Action Name = Admin/Voluntary Cost
Recovery, or Consent Agreement, or Admin Order on Consent), Section 107 or 106/107 judicial referrals [Action
Name = Litigation (Generic), Section 107 Litigation, or Section 106 & 107 Litigation], decision documents not to
pursue cost recovery (Action Name = Cost Recvry Decsn Docmt - No Sue), settlement under a CD (Action Name
= Consent Decree), bankruptcy filing (Action Name = Claim in Bankruptcy), or the past cost component of cashout
settlements (Action Name = Consent Decree or Admin Order on Consent and Enf Instrument Category = Cashout).
The "Past Costs Achieved" "Past Costs Written Off," or "Past Costs Sought" must be entered into CERCLIS.
Recoverable Past Costs include all past costs at the site, regardless of cost recovery status or previous cost recovery
efforts. Recoverable costs include direct response costs, indirect costs allocated to the site using the applicable indirect
rates, an estimate of contractor program management costs as allocated to the site, and any other costs charged to the
site, as indicated by the Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS) or the Superfund Cost Organization and
Recovery Enhancement System (SCORES). For this measure, estimated total recoverable past costs will come from
an IFMS data set that will be integrated with CERCLIS enforcement data and displayed on screen as "Total IFMS
Costs to Date" or "Total Site Costs to Date (Direct and Indirect)." The actual past costs however, can only be
determined through an audit of all of the site documentation.
The percentage of recoverable past costs addressed is the amount of past costs addressed compared to the estimated
total amount of recoverable past costs.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Administrative Settlements - Credit is given on the date: 1) the Regional office or DOJ receives payment from the
PRPs in direct response to a demand letter for voluntary cost recovery; or 2) the date the Regional Administrator signs
the AOC or CA that settles a claim where the total response costs are less than $500,000. The accomplishment of
the administrative settlement is recorded in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the
administrative/voluntary cost recovery (Action Name = Admin/Voluntary Cost Recovery,) AOC (Action Name =
Admin Order on Consent,) or CA (Action Name = Consent Agreement). If the settlement is compromised and total
response costs are more than $500,000, the AOC must be sent to DOJ for approval prior to signature by the Regional
Administrator. For each settlement, the Region must enter the following information into CERCLIS: "Past Costs
Achieved," "Response Actions to be Reimbursed," and/or the "Other Activities for Cost Recovery" flag.
Section 107 or 106/107 Judicial Referrals - Credit is given on the date of the Regional Administrator's memo
transmitting the referral to HQ or DOJ [Action Name = Litigation (Generic), Section 107 Litigation, or Section 106
& 107 Litigation] as recorded in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start). This includes CD settlements
(Action Name = Consent Decree) for RD/RA with a cost recovery component. For CD settlements that are for cost
recovery only and result from a previous litigation referral, the start date (Actual Start) for these actions is not
reported in CERCLIS. Only the lodged (Subaction Name = Lodged by DOJ) and entered (Subaction Name =
Entered by Court) subactions with the subaction actual completion date (Actual Complete), and the actual completion
date (Actual Complete) for the CD (Action Name = Consent Decree) are recorded. The actual completion date of
a CD settlement is the date it is entered by the court.
Decision Documents Prepared not to Pursue Cost Recovery - Credit is given when the decision document (Action
Name = Cost Recvry Decsn Docmt - No Sue) is signed by the Regional office and recorded in CERCLIS as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete). The decision not to pursue cost recovery may also be documented in a 10-point
settlement analysis. This decision is coded in CERCLIS with the enforcement instrument by checking the Cost
Written Off flag and entering the Cost Write-Off information on the Cost Write-Off screen. The dollars that will not
C-25 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
be recovered (Past Costs and Future Costs) and the "Response Actions to be Cost Written Off" also should be reported
in CERCLIS on the Cost Write-Off screen,
Bankruptcy Filing - Credit is given based on the date that the bankruptcy strategy package is prepared or on the date
of the first creditor committee meeting as documented by the summary of the meeting. These dates are reported in
CERCLIS as the subaction "Creditors Committee Meeting" and/or "Bankruptcy Strategy Package" actual completion
dates (Actual Complete). These subactions are entered with the Claim in Bankruptcy action. For each settlement,
the Region must enter the following information into CERCLIS: "Past Costs Achieved," "Response Actions to be
Reimbursed," and/or the "Other Activities for Cost Recovery" flag,
Cashout Settlements - Credit is given on the date of the Regional Administrator's memo transmitting the cashout CD
to HQ or DOJ or when the Regional Administrator signs the AOC for the cashout settlement with a cost recovery
component as recorded in CERCLIS. The CD (Action Name = Consent Decree) actual start date (Actual Start) or
the AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent) actual completion date (Actual Complete) and the Enforcement
Instrument Category of "Cashout" (Enf Instrument Category = Cashout) must be entered into CERCLIS. The AOC
must be sent to DOJ for approval if total site costs exceed $500,000. For each settlement, the Region must enter the
following information into CERCLIS: "Past Costs Achieved," and/or "Cash out Funds Achieved," and "Response
Actions to be Reimbursed." If appropriate, the Region also must enter the "Other Activities for Cost Recovery" flag.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition and Definition of Accomplishment.
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER AGREEMENTS (PPAs)
Definition:
This measure will report progress toward the goals of enforcement fairness and redevelopment of contaminated
properties. Redevelopment of contaminated properties is accomplished by providing protection from CERCLA
liability to prospective purchasers of contaminated property.
This measure counts the total number of Prospective Purchaser AOCs or CAs.
For EPA to consider entering into a PPA, the agreement must result in: (1) A substantial direct benefit to the Agency
in terms of cleanup or funds for cleanup; or (2) A substantial indirect benefit to the community coupled with a lesser
direct benefit to the Agency.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Credit is given for PPA based on the date (Actual Complete) the AOC or CA (Action Name = Admin Order on
Consent or Consent Agreement) is signed by the Regional Administrator. Regions also must enter the Enforcement
Instrument Category to indicate a PPA (Enf Instrument Category = Prospective Purchaser Agreement).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
For each settlement, the Region must enter the following information into CERCLIS to receive credit for the
accomplishment: "Estimated Present Worth Value" and "Response Actions Achieved," and/or "Past Cost Achieved,"
September 27, 1996 C-26
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
"Cashout Funds Achieved," "Response Actions to be Reimbursed," and/or "Other Activities for Cost Recovery"
and/or "Other Relief Sought."
NUMBER AND AMOUNT OF CERCLA PENALTIES ASSESSED VIA JUDGMENT
Definition:
This measure supports the goal of Trust Fund Stewardship by providing information on the amount and number of
final CERCLA penalties assessed via judgment. The measure identifies monies that are provided for the Trust Fund
as a result of penalties assessed for violations of the CERCLA statute. The measure also supports the systematic
reporting on the programmatic impacts of compliance and enforcement.
This measure is expressed as the dollar amount of the final assessed penalty via judgment under CERCLA. For civil
judicial cases, this amount is the penalty assessed against the defendant(s) as specified in the Consent Decree, or Court
Order entered by the court. For administrative cases, it is the penalty assessed in the final AOC or UAO.
The number of CERCLA penalties assessed is the number of civil, judicial, or administrative enforcement actions
where a penalty was assessed under a CERCLA statute.
Definition of Accomplishment:
• The number of CERCLA penalties assessed is the total number of enforcement actions where a penalty was
assessed under a CERCLA statute, including actions that are only for CERCLA or multi-media actions that
contain a CERCLA component.
• The value of CERCLA penalties assessed is the total dollar amount of penalties assessed under the CERCLA
statute for violations of requirements contained in civil, judicial, and administrative enforcement actions. If the
enforcement action consists of multi-media actions, this measure will only include the amount that is assessed
under the CERCLA statute, to the extent that it can be specified.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The following information should be entered into CERCLIS with the enforcement instrument or referral action:
"Penalty" flag and "Penalty Assessed Amount." The number and value of CERCLA penalties will be obtained from
the Office of Compliance using information reported on Case Conclusion Data Sheets until a linkage between
CERCLIS 3 and EPA Docket is implemented.
NUMBER AND AMOUNT OF SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS (SEPs)
AGREED UPON UNDER CERCLA
Definition:
SEPs are environmentally beneficial projects which a violator agrees to undertake in settlement of an enforcement
action, but which the violator is not otherwise legally required to perform. The SEP could be for public health,
pollution prevention, pollution reduction, environmental restoration and protection, assessments and audits,
environmental compliance promotion, emergency planning and preparedness, or other program-specific projects.
This measure supports the goal of Trust Fund Stewardship by measuring the number and value of SEPs under
CERCLA. The measure provides the opportunity for the violator to undertake environmentally beneficial projects
C-27 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
that will potentially prevent the creation of additional Superfund sites, thus avoiding the need for using Trust Fund
monies for future cleanups. The measure also supports the systematic reporting on the programmatic impacts of
compliance and enforcement.
Definition of Accomplishment:
• The number of CERCLA SEPs is the total number of cases where a SEP was agreed upon under a CERCLA
statute, including cases that are only for CERCLA or multi-media cases that contain a CERCLA component.
• The value of the CERCLA SEPs agreed upon is the estimated value of the SEP under the CERCLA statute for
civil, judicial, and administrative enforcement actions. If the action is a multi-media action, the SEP will be the
total value for all media not just media covered under CERCLA.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The following information should be entered into CERCLIS with the enforcement instrument or referral action:
"Penalty" flag, and the SEP "EPA Estimated Value," and "Category." The number and value of SEPs agreed upon
under CERCLA will be obtained from the Office of Compliance using the information reported on the Case
Conclusion Data Sheet until a linkage between CERCLIS 3 and EPA Docket is implemented.
NONCOMPLIANCE WITH CONSENT DECREES, ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS ON
CONSENT, AND UNILATERAL ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
Definition:
This measure identifies the number and percentage of cases where PRPs have not complied with a requirement of
an enforcement instrument. Enforcement instruments include CDs, AOCs, and UAOs with a response action
component. "Noncompliance" is defined as the PRP's failure, or refusal, to comply with a provision of an
enforcement instrument, or a provision of an incorporated reference document such as a work plan. AD "appropriate
enforcement response" is defined as:
• Documentation of the violation, and notice in the file of the prospect for future enforcement action if additional
violations are documented; or
• Other informal actions such as issuing warning letters or engaging in discussions with the PRPs; or
• Formal enforcement actions such as issuing demands for stipulated penalties or filing judicial actions for statutory
penalties; or
• A combination of formal and informal responses.
Definition of Accomplishment:
This measure is to be reported for each type of formal enforcement instrument, as follows:
• Consent Decrees - The number of active lodged CDs (Action Name = Consent Decree) that contain response
action provisions (Response Actions Achieved) where the settling PRP has failed or refused to comply with one
or more provisions of the CD, or with provisions of any other document incorporated by reference (Compliance
Status = In Violation - No Action Planned, or In Violation - Action Planned, or hi Violation - Action Taken). The
actual date (Actual Complete) the CD is lodged (Subaction Name = Lodged by DOJ) is the earliest date that could
September 27, 1996 C-28
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
trigger the settling PRP's response action obligation. The measure will be reported by fiscal year and quarter
(Current FY/Q).
The percentage is the number of active signed CDs containing response action provisions for which there is
noncompliance (as defined above) divided by the total number of active signed CDs containing response action
provisions. (Compliance Status = In Compliance, or In Violation - No Action Planned, or In Violation - Action
Planned, or hi Violation- Action Taken). The measure will be reported by fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q).
» Administrative Orders on Consent (AOCs) - The number of active signed AOCs (Action Name = Admin Order
on Consent) that contain response action provisions (Response Actions Achieved) where the PRP has failed or
refused to comply with any provision of the AOC, or provisions of any other document incorporated by reference
(Compliance Status = In Violation - No Action Planned, or In Violation - Action Planned, or hi Violation - Action
Taken). The date the Regional Administrator signs the AOC is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date
(Actual Complete). The measure will be reported by fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q).
The percentage is the number of active signed AOCs containing response action provisions for which there is
noncompliance (as defined above) divided by the number of AOCs containing response action provisions.
(Compliance Status = In Compliance, or In Violation - No Action Planned, or In Violation - Action Planned, or
In Violation - Action Taken). The measure will be reported by fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q).
« Unilateral Administrative Orders (UAOs) - The total number of active UAOs (Action Name = Unilateral Admin
Order) that contain response action provisions (Response Actions Achieved) for which the PRP has failed or refused
to comply with any provision of the UAO, or provisions of any other document incorporated by reference
(Compliance Status = In Violation - No Action Planned, or hi Violation - Action Planned, or hi Violation - Action
Taken, or the UAO does not have an associated subaction of "PRPs Ntfy EPA, Intent to Comply" with an actual
complete date). The date of the signed UAO is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual
Complete). The measure will be reported by fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q).
The percentage is the number of UAOs containing response action provisions for which there is noncompliance (as
defined above) divided by the number of UAOs containing response action provisions.(Compliance Status = In
Compliance, or In Violation - No Action Planned, or In Violation - Action Planned, or In Violation - Action
Taken). The measure will be reported by fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q).
An enforcement instrument is active until the last provision of the instrument or of another document incorporated
by reference is completed (The AOC, UAO, or CD does not have an associated subaction of Closed Order or
Settlement with an Actual Complete date.) In addition, a UAO that is converted to a CD is no longer active
(Compliance Status = Converted to Consent Decree).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This is a new measure for FY 97.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Regions must enter the current fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q) and the overall compliance status (Compliance
Status) for all enforcement instruments on a quarterly basis. The overall compliance status is based on the compliance
status (Compliance Status) of the individual milestones (Milestone/Action) of the enforcement instrument.
The "Response Actions Achieved" and "Law/Section Selected" for the enforcement instrument must be entered into
CERCLIS.
CERCLIS 3 will not be operational in all Regions at the beginning of FY97. Until CERCLIS 3 is operational in all
Regions, this measure can only be tracked manually or through Regional systems.
C-29 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
NONCOMPLIANCE WITH CONSENT DECREES, ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS ON
CONSENT, AND UNILATERAL ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS THAT HAS BEEN
ADDRESSED
Definition:
This measure reports the number and percentage of formal response action enforcement instruments where an
"appropriate enforcement response" was taken to address PRP noncompliance with provisions of the instruments.
Response action enforcement instruments include CDs, AOCs, and UAOs that require a PRP to conduct response
activities, "Noncompliance" is defined as the PRP's failure or refusal to comply with a provision of an enforcement
instrument, or provisions of any document, such as a work plan, that might be incorporated by reference. An
"appropriate enforcement response" is defined as:
• Documentation of the violation, and notice in the file of the prospect for future enforcement action if additional
violations are documented;
* Other informal actions such as issuing warning letters or engaging in discussions with the PRPs;
• Formal enforcement actions such as issuing demands for stipulated penalties or filing judicial actions for statutory
penalties; or
• A combination of formal and informal responses.
Definition of Accomplishment:
This measure is to be. reported for each type of formal enforcement instrument, as follows:
• Consent Decrees - The number of active lodged CDs (Action Name = Consent Decree) that contain response
action provisions (Response Actions Achieved) for which an "appropriate enforcement response" was taken in
response to PRP noncompliance with any provision of the CD, or provisions of any other documents incorporated
by reference (Compliance Status = In Violation - Action Taken). The actual date (Actual Complete) the CD is
lodged (Subaction Name = Lodged by DOJ) is the earliest date that could trigger the settling PRP's response action
obligation. The measure will be reported by fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q).
The percentage is the number of active CDs containing response action provisions where an appropriate
enforcement response was taken (as defined above) divided by the total number of active CDs containing response
action provisions for which there is PRP noncompliance (Compliance Status = In Violation - No Action Planned,
or In Violation - Action Planned, or In Violation - Action Taken). The measure will be reported by fiscal year and
quarter (Current FY/Q).
* Administrative Orders on Consent (AOCs) - The total number of active signed AOCs (Action Name = Admin
Order on Consent) that contain response action provisions (Response Actions Achieved) for which an appropriate
enforcement response was taken in response to PRP noncompliance with any provision of the AOC, or provisions
of any other document that might be incorporated by reference (Compliance Status = In Violation - Action Taken).
The date the Regional Administrator signs the AOC is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual
Complete). The measure will be reported by fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q).
September 27, 1996 C-30
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The percentage is the number of active AOCs containing response action provisions where an appropriate
enforcement response was taken (as defined above) divided by the number of active AOCs containing response
action provisions for which there is PRP noncompliance (Compliance Status = In Violation - No Action Planned,
or In Violation - Action Planned, or In Violation - Action Taken). The measure will be reported by fiscal year and
quarter (Current FY/Q).
• Unilateral Administrative Orders (UAOs) - The number of active signed UAOs (Action Name = Unilateral Admin
Order) that contain response action provisions (Response Actions Achieved) for which an enforcement response
was taken in response to PRP noncompliance with any provision of the UAO, or provisions of any other documents
that might be incorporated by reference (Compliance Status = In Violation - Action Taken). The date the UAO
is signed is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete). The measure will be reported
by fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q).
The percentage is the number of signed active UAOs containing response action provisions where an appropriate
enforcement response was taken (as defined above) divided by the number of active UAOs containing response
action provisions for which there is PRP noncompliance (Compliance Status = In Violation - No Action Planned,
or In Violation - Action Planned, or In Violation - Action Taken). The measure will be reported by fiscal year
quarter (Current FY/Q).
An enforcement instrument is active until the last provision of the instrument including all work plans or of another
document incorporated by reference is completed (The AOC, UAO, or CD does not have an associated subaction of
Closed Order or Settlement with an Actual Complete date.) In addition, a UAO that is converted to a CD is no longer
active (Compliance Status = Converted to Consent Decree).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This is a new measure for FY 97.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Regions must enter the current fiscal year and quarter (Current FY/Q) and the overall compliance status (Compliance
Status) for all enforcement instruments on a quarterly basis. The overall compliance status is based on the compliance
status (Compliance Status) of individual milestones (Subaction Name) of the enforcement instrument. In addition,
an appropriate enforcement response (EPA Action Selected List) must be entered when a compliance status of In
Violation - Action Taken has been entered for the milestone (Milestone/Action).
The "Response Actions Achieved" and the "Law/Section Selected" for the enforcement instrument must be entered
into CERCLIS.
CERCLIS 3 will not be operational in all the Regions at the beginining of FY97. Until CERCLIS 3 is operational
in all Regions this measure can only be tracked manually or through Regional developed systems.
C-31 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SUPERFUND REFORM (OCTOBER 1995) ENFORCEMENT MEASURES OF SUCCESS
DEFINITIONS
EPA COMPENSATION OF A PORTION OF THE ORPHAN SHARE
Definition:
This measure reports on EPA efforts to compensate parties for the portion of the response costs attributable to
insolvent and defunct parties (orphan share). For negotiations that include RD/RA or NTC or time-critical early
actions (removal authority), this measure will report: 1) the number of negotiations where EPA offered to compensate
for a portion of the orphan share; 2) the estimated dollar amount of the orphan share at those sites; and 3) the amount
of orphan share compensation offered by EPA.
When settling parties agree to perform the RD/RA, or NTC or time-critical early action (removal authority), this
measure will report: 1) the number of settlements where EPA compensated for a portion of the orphan share; 2) the
estimated total dollar amount of the orphan share at those sites; and 3) the actual dollar amount of the orphan shares
compensated by EPA.
Orphan share compensation offers are subject to the adequacy of cleanup program funding. The method for
determining the appropriate compensation to be offered by EPA is provided in the "Interim Guidance on Orphan Share
Compensation for Settlers of Remedial Design/Remedial Action and Non-Time-Critical Removals" dated June 3,
1996.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Credit is given at sites for negotiations where EPA offered to compensate for a portion of the orphan share as follows:
• The General Notice Letter (GNL) (for removals), first Special Notice Letter (SNL), or Letter of Eligibility for
Orphan Share Compensation (for on-going negotiations) is signed by the appropriate EPA official. This date is
reported in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of negotiations [Action Name = RD/RA Negotiations,
Removal Negotiations, or Negotiations (Generic)] and the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the
appropriate subaction (Subaction Name = General Notice Issued, Special Notice Issued, or Eligibility Letter
Issued); or
• A Section 122(a) waiver of SNL signed by the appropriate EPA official with the intent to pursue negotiations
without moratorium procedures. This date is reported in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of
Negotiations [Action Name = RD/RA Negotiations, Negotiations (Generic), or Removal Negotiations] and the
actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the SNL waiver (Subaction Name = Notice of S 122 Waiver Issued).
Credit is given at sites where EPA compensated for a portion of the orphan share as follows:
• A CD (Action Name = Consent Decree) and a 10-point analysis for a NTC or time-critical early action (removal
authority), RD, or RA is signed under Section 106, 106/107, 104(a), or 104(b). The date when the Regional
Administrator signs the memorandum transmitting the CD, signed by the parties and the Regional Administrator,
to DOJ is reported in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start); or
• An AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent) for a NTC or time-critical early action (removal authority)
is signed by the Regional Administrator. The date on which the Regional Administrator signs the AOC is reported
in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete). For amended AOCs, the subaction "Enforcement
Activity Amended" and the subaction actual completion date (Actual Complete) must be entered into CERCLIS.
To signify that the AOC has been amended, the amended instrument flag (Amended Instrument?) must be checked.
September 27, 1996 C-32
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The applicable "Response Actions Achieved," and "Law/Section Selected" must be entered into CERCLIS. The
existence of an orphan share at a site, as well as whether or not an orphan share package was offered or
compensated by EPA, should be reported in CERCLIS.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Settlement only is a proposed new SCAP target for FY 97.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Orphan share compensated settlement is a proposed target for FY 97. Regions must also enter the minimum and
maximum total cost estimates for the orphan share (costs attributed to insolvent and defunct parties), the total costs
of the orphan share that EPA offered to compensate, the past costs compensated by EPA, and the future costs to
be compensated by EPA into CERCLIS. For the total cost estimate of the orphan share, enter the minimum and the
maximum of the cost range. Enter the same number for the minimum and the maximum if the estimate is a single
number.
Note: The above logic also will be used to describe the orphan share and orphan share compensated at sites with PRP
proposed allocations.
CERCLIS 3 will not be operational in all Regions at the beginining of FY 97. Until CERCLIS 3 is operational in all
Regions, this measure can only be tracked manually or through Regional systems.
USE OF INTEREST BEARING SPECIAL ACCOUNTS
Definition:
This measure will help assess the extent to which EPA is able to use Special Accounts in its efforts to increase fairness
and promote PRP settlements. Special accounts became interest-bearing in FY 96. EPA is able to retain and apply
the interest from these accounts to clean up the site at which the settlement occurred. Funds deposited in Special
Accounts are immediately accessible for response costs, but may only be used to support response actions at the site
covered by the settlements. This type of arrangement gives EPA more flexibility in settling the response costs that
performing PRPs are required to pay and promotes fairness by providing a way for non-performing parties, especially
small parties, to contribute to the response without long-term involvement.
For all CERCLA settlements where PRPs agree to make cash payments toward future response costs at a site
(cashout), the measure will report the following:
• The total number of settlements, and the amount of future response costs achieved;
• The number of settlements which designate funds to Special Accounts;
• The percentage of settlements that also require funds to be deposited in Special Accounts;
• The amount of funds deposited in Special Accounts; and
• the percentage of the dollars dedicated to future work that are deposited in Special Accounts.
C-33 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment:
This measure counts all settlements where any part of a PEP cash settlement is for future costs as follows:
• A signed CD (Action Name = Consent Decree) under Section 107 or 106/107 that includes a cashout provision.
The date on which the Regional Administrator signs the memorandum transmitting the CD, signed by the parties
and the Regional Administrator, to DOJ is reported in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start); or
• An AOC or CA (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent or Consent Agreement) that includes a cahsout
provision. The date when the Regional Administrator signs the AOC or CA is reported in CERCLIS as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete).
Data that must be entered into CERCLIS for these settlements include:
• Cash out Funds Achieved;
• Date (Actual Complete) the Special Account is established (Subaction Name = Special Account Established) as
a subaction to the CD, AOC or CA (not for use in SCAP reporting);
• Cash out funds designated to a special account;
* Enforcement Instrument Category (Enf Instrument Category = Cash out, De rainimis/Cash out, or De
micrornis/Cash out);
• Response Actions to be Reimbursed; and
• Law/Section Selected.
The percentages will be calculated as follows:
* The percentage of cash settlements that contain provisions for payment of future response costs that also require
these funds to be deposited in Special Accounts is the number of settlements that designate future response costs
to Special Accounts divided by the number of settlements that contain provisions for payment of future response
costs.
• The percentage of dollars dedicated to future work that are deposited in Special Accounts is the total dollars in
Special Accounts under all settlements divided by the total cash out dollars achieved under all settlements that
contain provisions for payment of future response costs.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This is a new measure for FY 97.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Regions must enter the Cash out Funds Achieved as well as the amount deposited to the special account as specified
in the enforcement instrument or 10-point settlement analysis submitted to Headquarters.
CERCLIS 3 will not be operational in all Regions at the beginining of FY97. Until CERCLIS 3 is operational in all
Regions, this measure can only be tracked manually or through Regional systems.
September 27, 1996 C-34
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
ISSUE CLEANUP ORDERS TO PARTIES IN AN EQUITABLE MANNER
Definition;
This measure shall support the Superfund Reform goal of enforcement fairness by seeking to ensure reasonable and
fair issuance of unilateral administrative orders (UAOs) in accordance with the CERCLA Section 106 memorandum
on UAOs of August 2, 1996. The Agency's policy on who should receive UAOs remains that: UAOs should be issued
to the "largest manageable number" of PRPs, following consideration of the three specific factors listed below. The
memorandum of August 2, 1996 established procedures to ensure that the Regions document their reasons for
excluding certain PRPs from UAO issuance based on the consideration factors. The factors are:
- There is insufficient evidence of the PRP's potential liability,
- The PRP is not financially viable,
- The Party's contribution to the site (e.g., volumetric contribution or contribution in the form of prior work).
Definition of Accomplishment:
This measure will include both NPL and non-NPL sites and will report:
• The number of Unilateral Administrative Orders issued at the site. Credit is given on the date a UAO is signed by
the Regional Administrator for RD, RA, groundwater monitoring/institutional controls, time-critical or NTC early
action (removal authority) or early action (remedial authority). This date is reported in CERCLIS as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the order (Action Name = Unilateral Admin Order).
• The total number of parties identified in each UAO package.
* The number of parties in each UAO package identified to be excluded from the UAO.
The percentage of parties that were not issued a UAO will be calculated from the total number of parties in each UAO
package identified to be excluded (numerator) and the total number of PRPs associated with the UAO [all PRPs
included and those that were excluded (denominator).]
The following information must be entered into CERCLIS:
• PRPs that were issued the UAO (PRP Name or PRP Group);
• Response Actions Achieved under the UAO; and
• PRPs that were excluded from the UAO (PRP Name or PRP Group).
In addition, one or more of the following must be entered for each PRP associated with the site that was not issued
a UAO:
• Party status of "Non-Viable confirmed";
• Not PRP Determination Made flag; and/or
* Involvement status of de minimis. de micromis or de minimis/de micromis.
C-35 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-1C
Parties that have contributed to the site in the form of prior work will be identified by looking at their involvement
with other settlements at the site.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This is a new SCAP measure for FY 97.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP measure. "Response Actions Achieved" must be reported in CERCLIS. This measure will be
manually reported until CERCLIS 3 is operational.
DE MICROMIS SETTLEMENTS AND NUMBER OF PARTIES
(Contained in measure, ENF-4 • Section 122(g) Settlements and Number of PRPs, as a category 2 settlement.)
OVERSIGHT COST SA VINGS
Definition:
This measure reflects on EPA's efforts to reduce oversight costs where this can be accomplished without reducing
the level of protection at a site. The potential for reducing oversight costs should be evaluated at every site where
a cooperative PRP is performing the RI/FS, the RD/RA, the engineering evaluation/cost analysis (EE/CA), or NTC
removal. Any oversight reductions should be balanced with the need to maintain the quality of the remediation. This
measure will report the number of bills where the oversight was estimated to be reduced.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Accomplishment occurs on the date a memo is sent to the Regional finance office requesting that an oversight bill be
sent to the PRPs. The memo contains the amount to be billed and indicates the oversight activities that were not
performed.
This measure will be included in end-of-year reports and will indicate the number of qualifying oversight bills issued
during the report year.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This is a proposed new SCAP target for FY 97.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Because CERCLIS 3 will not be operational in all Regions at the beginning of FY 97, it may be necessary for some
Regions to track this measure manually or through Regionally developed systems. Headquarters will work with the
Regions during FY 97 in an effort to develop tools for estimating the costs saving of reduced oversight.
The following data are to be entered into CERCLIS:
• The actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the Oversight BUI to Finance subaction;
• Oversight billed amount proposed in the memo;
• Oversight reduction flag; and
September 27, 1996 C-36
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• Name of PRP being billed.
The actual billed amount, the date of the billing, and the PRP billed will be transferred from IFMS.
EPA ADOPTION OF ALLOCATIONS PROPOSED BY PARTIES INCLUDING
COMPENSATION OF A PORTION OF THE ORPHAN SHARE
Definition:
This measure reports on EPA efforts to gauge the number of allocations proposed by PRPs as the basis for settlement
and adopted by the Agency where standards for allocation determination have been followed. Agency compensation
for a portion of the response costs attributable to insolvent and defunct parties (orphan share) may be provided in these
situations, subject to adequacy of funding.
When the settling panics agree to perform the RD/RA, NTC removal, or TC removal, this measure will report: 1)
the number of settlements where allocation agreements (conforming with Agency standards) were proposed by PRPs;
2) the estimated total dollar amount of the orphan share at those sites; and 3) the dollar amount of the orphan share
compensated by EPA.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Credit is given at sites for settlements where allocation agreements (conforming with Agency standards) were proposed
by PRPs and EPA may have provided compensation for a portion of the orphan share as follows:
• A CD (Action Name = Consent Decree) and a 10-point analysis for a NTC removal, or time-critical early action
(removal authority), RD, or RA with an allocation agreement is signed under Section 106, 106/107, or I04(a) or
104(b). The date when the Regional Administrator signs the memorandum transmitting the CD, signed by the
parties and the Regional Administrator, to DOJ is reported in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start); or
» An AOC (Action Name = Admin Order on Consent) for a NTC or time-critical early action (removal authority)
is signed by the Regional Administrator. The date when the Regional Administrator signs the AOC is reported in
CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete). For amended AOCs, the AOC must be coded as
amended (Subaction Name = Enforcement Activity Amended) and the subaction actual completion date (Actual
Complete) must be entered into CERCLIS. To signify that the AOC has been amended, the amended instrument
flag (Amended Instrument) must be checked.
The applicable "Response Actions Achieved," and "Law/Section Selected" must be entered into CERCLIS. The date
of an allocation agreement (Subaction Name = PRP Allocation Agreement) conforming with Agency standards that
was proposed by PRPs must be reported in CERCLIS as a subaction to the CD or AOC. In addition, the existence
of an orphan share package, as well as whether the orphan share package was compensated by EPA, should be
reported in CERCLIS.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This is a new SCAP measure for FY 97.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Where an orphan share exists, Regions must enter information into CERCLIS on the minimum and maximum total
cost estimates for the orphan share (costs attributed to insolvent and defunct parties), the past costs compensated
by EPA, and the future costs to be compensated by EPA. For the total estimate of the orphan share, enter the
minimum and maximum of the cost range. Enter the same number for the minimum and the maximum if the estimate
is a single number,
C-37 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-I4-1C
EXHIBIT C.2(l of 5)
ENFORCEMENT PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
l|l6||^^pt||&iBJ§^
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-Site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
lllpRE|ip||illl
illliiilK
'?::x-!'* :':-:*:f:: :%K ^ $:::$*x'tf •'•<-. *£>xX*
-<:":::*: :'::-:::::::i:::x:i-x:: *': -:::::::1::-:'; S'::::' x'*:
-
Reporting
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site-Specific
Plans
Illliililliiii
|||i|^||f||||||ii|| |
-
Reporting
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
illlleiiiJiliiiiill
lllllllllililllll
-
Reporting
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
||l||i|i|jiiii||ii|;i
llliiiiiiiiliiiill
-
Reporting
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
EXHIBIT C.2 (2 of 5)
ENFORCEMENT PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
iSJllllHli t»l;;i:x;::-:>€i
xtRlilllli 'I lli.:i:HllI:liiil
Illllllil iill llllllll
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-Site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
: Hf Vp^||i|;|!:;ii|l|l|
|; i|^ip|i|||||||§
li^p^iiii^p
-
Reporting
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
Sii?iJ^iSteiKei^lfl
mss^AiimVtL ffi:--:4K!?s?*--i>:
-
Reporting
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
|||l^|Sa||iilll
lll|ii|i||lijiillll
-
Reporting
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
IflllegotiaikMi
;:f[;>;:;:;iStarts
-
Reporting
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site-Specific
Plans
September 27, 1996
C-38
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
EXHIBIT C.2 (3 of 5)
ENFORCEMENT PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planning Requirements
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-Site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
SJD/RA
Negotiation
Starts
Measure
-
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site-Specific
Plans
ENF-2 Cleanup
Negotiation
Completions
Target
-
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
State Orders for i
_ .ESJ/RJ/IS
-
Reporting
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
Stale Consent
Decrees for
RB/RA
-
Reporting
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plants
EXHIBIT C.2 (4 of 5)
ENFORCEMENT PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
::; :•:•;':•: ;-:-:::':::::-:::::-::x-:::::-::::"::::::-::::.- -••.:::.:::::.".-:-:::::::-:":1:':-" ::'.:•: :•;":
::::::::: :::::'::::::::x-r:-:v:-'":"::;":::::-::;::-:::-S:;:;;:::x:; ;-~ ;":-:-i;:Y:Yi : •.•-""":•' '<
:'::'-:-,:'-:''->':x-:":-'-:- : ••-•••• : • v v*;::':':'::* "'";:;:;-;>iv;';'x-: ; ; r'::::;:;::".-:
.;.-.-..- .,;.-.-. ;..-.- .-.v.y - • •-• x-X-X : ' '.-'.-'.-'.' ''.•'.:•'.•'.•'.•'••• "-:-:-:-:-:-' •
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-Site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
||SjHEtlEiiii|i§;;i||!||
Cleanup Actions
Measure
-
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site-Specific
Plans
|iiii|iiiiWi||l
|||ii|i||^!Bf|^|
Target
-
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site-Specific
Plans
piiMiilli^llI
Cieamip Actions
;;i;|ll|||||ii^|ll||l
Measure
-
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
Measure
-
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
N/A
C-39
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT C.2 (5 of 5)
ENFORCEMENT PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planmng Requirements
1
SCAP Target or Measure?
Internal Management?
Planned Site-Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-Specifically
or in Non-Site Specific
Portion of CERCLIS?
AOA Category, if Fund-
Financed?
AOA Category for
Oversight?
Basis for AOA?
|i^(i|BJB8||c|B||||l|
ii'lill^iisillil
l|piiiil|i|p||||
jjn:-^^€iwjpiiiii|||l
-
Reporting
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
Enforcement or
Other Response
N/A
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
! f |iisaj§1lS^|||l:if :!
^ Kx$t^3££(&£&t>K '•< *>
S:SS^-8*RwB?l>?: »?::•: :*H?i
-
Reporting
No
Operable Unit or
Whole Site
Site-Specific
N/A
N/A
Site- or Non-Site
Specific Plans
||^^^:||i^ji^^pf§
^ction/Decisiom :
-
Reporting
No
Operable Unit or
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site-Specific
Plans
liiMiiWliiiiiiii
Target
-
Yes
Operable Unit or
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Enforcement
N/A
Site-Specific
Plans
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis. Internal measures are planned and
reported quarterly.
September 27, 1996
C-40
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix D; Federal Facilities
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix D
Federal Facilities
Table of Contents
FEDERAL FACILITIES PRIORITIES D-l
Overview D-l
Superfund Federal Facility Goals And Priorities D-4
Strategic Federal Facility Goals D-4
Streamlining Federal Facilities Cleanup and Oversight , . D-5
RCRA Activities at Federal Facility NPL Sites , D-7
BRAC Budget And Financial Guidance D-7
Resources and Tracking Mechanisms D-7
Accountability for Resources D-8
FEDERAL FACILITIES FY 97 TARGETS AND MEASURES D-10
Overview of FY 97 Federal Facilities Targets And Measures D-10
Reporting of Non-NPL Federal Facilities Data at BRAC Fast Track Sites D-10
Federal Facilities Definitions D-12
FF-1 • Base Closure Decisions D-12
FF-2 • Federal Facility Agreement (FFA)/interagency Agreement (IAG) Starts D-12
FF-3 • FFA/IAG Completion D-13
FF-4 • Federal Facility Dispute Resolution D-13
FF-5 • Remedial Investigation/feasibility Study (RI/FS) or RCRA
Facility Investigation (RFI) Starts — First And Subsequent , D-l4
FF-6 » Feasibility Study (FS), Corrective Measure Study (CMS) or EE/CA Starts D-15
FF-7 * Timespan From Final NPL Listing to RI/FS or RI/FS Start D-15
FF-8 • Decision Documents — First And Subsequent D-16
FF-9 • RI/FS or RFI/CMS Duration , D-16
FF-10 • Remedial Design (RD) or RCRA Corrective Measure Design (CMD) Starts —
First And Subsequent D-17
FF-11 • Remedial Design (RD) or Corrective Measure Design (CMD) Completions —
First And Subsequent D-18
FF-12 • Remedial Action (RA) or RCRA Corrective Measure Construction (CMC) Starts —
First And Subsequent , D-18
FF-13 • Timespan From ROD Signature to RA Start , D-18
FF-14 » RA or CMC Completions — First And Subsequent D-19
FF-15 • Final RA or CMC Completion D-20
FF-16 • RA Duration D-21
FF-17 • Timespan From RI/FS Start to RA Complete D-21
FF-18 » Removal, Early Actions, or RCRA Interim/stabilization Measure (ISM) —
Starts And Completions D-22
FF-19 • Federal Facility Partial NPL Deletion D-22
FF-20 • Federal Facility Final NPL Deletion D-23
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix D
Federal Facilities
List of Exhibits
EXHIBIT D. 1 FEDERAL FACILITIES PROFILE D-2
EXHIBIT D.2 FEDERAL FACILITIES ACTIVITIES D-II
EXHIBIT D.3 FEDERAL FACILITIES PLANNING REQUIREMENTS D-25
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
APPENDIX D
FEDERAL FACILITIES PRIORITIES
OVERVIEW
To manage the Superfund Federal facilities program, the Federal Facilities Enforcement Office (FFEO) and the
Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office (FFRRO) use the Federal Facilities Leadership Council (FFLC). The
FFLC is comprised of Regional Superfund and/or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program
and enforcement/counsel representatives from all Regions, as well as representatives from the Federal facilities
Headquarters (HQ) offices. The FFLC is co-chaired by FFEO, FFRRO, and Region 3, (lead region for Superfund
Federal facilities). The FFLC provides a forum for policy advice and direction on various Federal facility program
issues. There are also a number of other HQ/Regional groups providing advice including the "Federal Facilities
Esquires," the "Base Closure Esquires," and the "Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Conference Call Group."
Federal agencies conducting the cleanups have seen their budgets level out or reduced over the last few years.
The Department of Defense's (DoD) cleanup budget is approximately $2.1 billion—not accounting for work at Base
Closing installations, and the Department of Energy's (DOE) environmental management budget is about $6.1 billion.
Cleanups performed under the authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) comprise about 25% of DOE's budget, while Waste Management activities—many of which are
CERCLA-like—encompass greater than 50% of DOE's budget. Other Federal agencies' budgets are considerably
smaller. Exhibit D.I presents a "Federal Facilities Profile" of the challenges facing the Federal government, which
have been reproduced from a report from the Federal Facilities Policy Group (FFPG), co-chaired by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and Council on Environmental Quality.
Although the last five years have seen a marked increase in the environmental budgets for Federal agencies, there
also has been substantial criticism. Common themes include, for example: too much being spent on studies; not
enough sites cleaned up; too many sites being cleaned up to residential use levels; and the regulatory process too
burdensome. These themes also are encountered on non-Federal facility Superfund cleanups. The most recent
installment of this debate is found in the Federal Facilities Policy Group's Report, Improving Federal Facilities
Cleanup, released in October 1995.
The FFPG's report highlights the need for statutory reform, administrative and regulatory reform, management
reform, the development and implementation of cost-effective technologies, and budget process reform. EPA is
pursuing an aggressive agenda to facilitate cleanups at both Federal facilities and non-Federal facilities sites.
Since the last update of this manual, new, significant responsibilities have been assumed by the Federal facilities
Regional and HQ programs. Most notably is the Base Closure Program (BCP), a five-part program to mitigate
economic dislocation and speed economic recovery of communities near military bases scheduled for realignment or
closure, announced by President Clinton on July 2, 1993.
With the latest round of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC 95), there are now approximately 108 Fast Track
Cleanup Bases where EPA supports the DoD cleanup and transfer process. For FY 96, DoD has provided funding
for 148 FTE—approximately $13.1 million to fund these positions and related support. Comparatively speaking, this
program is 75% the size of the Superfund Federal facilities program, excluding the contracts base. While FFRRO
has provided specific program implementation guidance for EPA's BRAC Fast Track Program, several of these
program management components are reiterated below.
D-l September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT D.I
FEDERAL FACILITIES PROFILE
CHALLENGE
Nature of Contamination
Estimated Number of Potentially
Contaminated Sites and Major Site
Types
Number of Potentially
Contaminated Facilities
Number of Active Sites
Current Estimate to Complete
Cleanup*
Estimate Being Revised
Estimate of Years to Finish
Cleanup
Annual Budget**
1995 Actual
1996 Enacted
1997 President's Budget
Current Funding Source
Responsibility for Contamination
Maturity of Program
FY 95 Full-time Equivalent (FTE)
(Cleanup)
Federal
Contractor
DOE
Radioactive, hazardous, and
mixed waste and fissile material
10,000 sites
- former weapons production
facilities
137
10,000
$200 to $350 billion
Released March 1995
30-75+ years
$5.8 billion
$6. 1 billion
$6. 1 billion
Federal
Agency
Adolescence
3,108
44,000
Dal>
Fuels and solvents, industrial
waste, and unexploded
ordinance
21,425
- underground storage tanks
- landfills
- spill areas
- storage areas
1,769 .
11,785
$26.2 billion
Yes
20 years
$2.1 billion
$2.1 billion
$2.1 billion
Federal
Agency
Mature
N/A
N/A
* DOE includes many unique operational, safety, and national security costs
** DoD includes only Defense Environmental Security Cleanup budgets
September 27, 1996
D-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT D.I
FEDERAL FACILITIES PROFILE (Cont'd)
Nature of Contamination
Estimated Number of
Potentially Contaminated
Sites and Major Site Types
Number of Potentially
Contaminated Facilities
Number of Active Sites
Current Estimate to
Complete Cleanup
Estimate Being Revised
Estimate of Years to Finish
Cleanup
Annual Budget
1995 Actual
1996 Enacted
1997 President's Budget
Current Funding Source
Responsibility for
Contamination
Maturity of Program
FY 95 FTEs (Cleanup)
Federal
Contractor
Mining, municipal, and
industrial wastes
26,000 sites
- abandoned mines
- oil and gas production
- landfills
N/A
26,000
$3.9 to $8.2 billion
None scheduled
N/A
$65 million
$66 million
TBD
Federal
Agency, private parties,
and local governments
Infancy
N/A
N/A
Hazardous, mining, and
chemical waste
3,000 sites
- abandoned mines
- landfills
N/A
3,000
$2.5 billion
Yes, due FY 96
10 years - landfills
40 years - mines
50 years - NRD***
$16 million
$45 million
$46.5 million
Federal
Agency, private parties,
and local governments
Adolescence
82
N/A
silBiiSiRSli^
Fuels, solvents, and
industrial waste
730 sites
- underground storage
tanks
- spill areas
17
575
$1 .5 to 2 billion
Yes, due FY 96
25 years
$21 million
$28 million
$25.6 million
Federal
Agency
Mature
25
160
Natural Resources Damage
D-3
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SUPEKFUND FEDERAL FACILITY GOALS AND PRIORITIES
Strategic Federal Facility Goals
Superfund Federal facilities activities have high visibility because of the significant threats posed by military and
weapons sites, the impact of military base closings, the resources needed to implement DoD/DOE cleanup efforts at
facilities listed on the NPL and other non-NPL facilities, and heightened State and stakeholder interest. Federal
facilities program goals for FY 97 are based on a number of related factors, including overall Superfund program
community involvement goals, anticipated resource constraints, Congressional interest, and statutory requirements.
Program activities and resources should be planned to achieve the following goals of the Federal facilities program's
strategic plan:
• Involving Citizens in Environmental Decision Making - The publication of the Final Report of the Federal
Facilities Environmental Restoration Dialogue Committee in April 1996 was a watershed event for public
involvement in Federal facility cleanups. As a result of the report, Federal agencies are now actively forming
Restoration Advisory Boards (RABs) at DoD installations and Site Specific Advisory Boards (SSABs) at DOE
facilities. Other Federal agencies are also starting to form advisory boards. EPA Regional and HQ programs
need to continue to promote the formation of citizen advisory boards at NPL facilities and support, where
requested, the boards. As facility circumstances vary, the level of support will vary as well. Regional staff and
management are expected to be especially sensitive to the requests at NPL facilities and at the BRAC Fast Track
facilities. Because of resource constraints, participation and support for non-NPL facilities is expected to be
minimal. In addition, since many of the communities surrounding the Federal facilities are communities of color,
low-income, and have been historically politically and economically disenfranchised, Regions should give close
scrutiny to environmental justice issues at the NPL Federal facilities. Regions need to work closely with State
agencies and their Federal counterparts to ensure that the President's Executive Order on Environmental Justice
is successfully carried out (E.G. 12898).
• Enforcing the Laws - The public needs to know that it will be protected from environmental hazards through
vigorous enforcement by the EPA and the States for violations of environmental laws and situations that put
people and natural resources at risk. EPA intends to use its Federal facility enforcement authorities not only to
compel compliance, but also to promote long-term policy objectives such as greater citizen involvement, pollution
prevention, technology development, and natural resource management.
• Preventing Pollution - Focus on pollution prevention solutions at the source instead of "at the end of the pipe."
Investing in pollution prevention saves money, minimizes environmental liability, and provides legitimate relief
from operating under onerous pollution control regulation. Executive Order 12856, signed by President Clinton
on August 3, 1993, requires Federal agencies to develop comprehensive pollution prevention strategies and seek
to reduce by 50% their emissions of toxic chemicals or toxic pollutants by 1999.
• Implementation of the Base Closure Five Point Plan - Pursuant to the Congressional mandate, numerous military
bases are undergoing realignment or complete closure, with the potential for severe economic impacts on the
affected local communities. Rapid redevelopment and job creation are the top goals of this community
reinvestment program, commonly referred to as the "Five Point Plan." The program calls for the Federal
government to give priority to local economic redevelopment, provide transition and redevelopment assistance
to workers and communities, put cleanup on a Fast Track, provide transition coordinators at major bases
scheduled for closure or substantial realignment, and allocate more funds for economic development planning
grants.
September 27, 1996 D-4
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-iC
• Establishing BRAC Cleanup Teams - Environmental experts from EPA, DoD, and the State, working as a team,
will be assigned to BRAC bases identified by DoD as Fast Track Cleanup sites, i.e., bases with environmental
contamination where property will be available for transfer to a community. Decision making authority will be
placed at the lowest practical level within each organization, and team members will be empowered to make
decisions to expedite the process. The teams will conduct "bottom-up" reviews of the environmental conditions
of the base, with the objective of accelerating cleanup while integrating base reuse priorities.
« Making Parcels Available for Reuse - The Fast Track Cleanup Program strives to make parcels available for
reuse as quickly as possible, either by transfer of uncontaminated or remediated parcels, or lease of contaminated
parcels where cleanup is underway. Coordination between the cleanup efforts and reuse efforts is a key factor
in making parcels available for reuse. Parcels with the potential for reuse should be identified as early in the
process as possible and given priority in the cleanup process where appropriate.
* Accelerating the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Process - DoD is required to apply NEPA during
the process of property disposal and reuse. Under NEPA, DoD must define the environmental impact of the
proposed action, document adverse effects that cannot be avoided, and identify alternatives to the proposed action.
The NEPA process and all documents required by NEPA (scoping report, draft Environmental Impact Statement,
and final Environmental Impact Statement) should be completed within 12 months from the date a community
submits its final reuse plan.
Streamlining Federal Facilities Cleanup and Oversight
Considerable progress has been made in streamlining the cleanup and oversight processes at Federal facilities.
FY 97 will see additional efforts in this area. It is anticipated that policies on RCRA/CERCLA integration or parity,
variable oversight, establishing a lead regulator for oversight at NPL sites, and prioritization of cleanup activities will
be issued. In addition, there are other Superfund Administrative Reforms, announced in FY 95, that will be
implemented at Federal sites as well as private sites—among the more important ones Regions need to consider are
those associated with risk assessment and remedy selection. To adequately address environmental issues while
continuing downsizing activities, the following directions were formed to aid in appropriate program management:
• RCRA/CERCLA Integration - Expected in FY 96, the purpose of this policy will be to generally establish that
work conducted for RCRA corrective action is essentially equivalent to work that would have been conducted
under a CERCLA cleanup and visa-versa. It is intended to establish "parity" between these activities so that EPA
will not be imposing overlapping regulatory authorities on cleanup activities. Also associated with this guidance
is the so-called "lead regulator" initiative and revisions to RCRA Subpart S.
» Lead Regulator - This guidance is expected by the end of FY 96. It is intended to compliment RCRA/CERCLA
integration guidance and will provide that EPA Regions work closely with their State counterparts to eliminate
or minimize overlapping regulatory jurisdictions (RCRA or CERCLA) and establish, to the extent practicable,
a lead or sole regulator at a site.
Because the overall goal of the Administration is to build partnerships with the States and have them assume a
greater role in protecting human health and environment, Regions should work closely with their States to have
them assume a greater lead at Federal facility NPL sites where they have the capacity, desire, and the ability
to do so. We recognize that each facility has a unique set of circumstances, but we are expecting Regional
program offices to make a bona fide effort to work through the lead regulator and oversight issues with their State
counterparts.
D-5 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
» Streamlined Oversight - As EPA resources are expected to continue to shrink while the Federal program stays
at a generally a steady state, Regions should be implementing a process to provide for streamlining oversight of
the remedial process. Guidance to be issued by the end of FY 96 will advise the Regions that they should be
streamlining oversight for their NPL sites. This will involve tailoring the oversight requirements (i.e., what
enforceable documents will be required as well as what is to be included in such documents) to a particular project
or operable unit.
The guidance will recommend that the process should focus on up-front scoping and identification of what is
actually needed and a bias for document reduction. In general, less documentation should be required at sites that
are less complicated, sites that are using presumptive remedies, and sites where EPA, the States and external
stakeholders believe that less oversight is required.
« Prioritizatum - DoD and DOE will soon have cleanup commitments that exceed their budgetary authorities. DoD
Services and DOE have developed schemes to prioritize site activities based on risk and other factors. EPA needs
to work with other Federal agencies, States and outside stakeholders to ensure that the most important sites are
being addressed. As budgets are established on an annual basis, Regions should begin to develop approaches for
annual review and consider adjusting milestones based on Federal budget constraints, new site information,
cleanup progress, and other factors.
EPA nor the States are bound to absolutely follow the results of DoD's relative risk model or DOE's
qualitative risk evaluation model in establishing milestones; they should only be used to consider the outcomes
in setting priorities. There is an important caveat to prioritization. Both DOE's and DoD's approaches for priority
setting call for active regulatory and stakeholder involvement. They also call for the explicit consideration of other
factors such as existing enforceable agreements, community interest, environmental justice, and project
implementation efficiencies. If a particular facility or installation is championing a "lock-step" adherence to their
model's outcome, Regions should first work to resolve the issue at the site level; however, if there is no progress.
Regions need to bring such situations to the attention of HQ. Based on Regional information, we have identified bases
that have misinterpreted DoD guidance and corrections have been made.
Some DOE faculties are engaged in what they are calling "workouts" to find time and cost savings. Both EPA
Regional program offices and HQ offices should actively participate in and support these efforts. For example, the
result of the Hanford "workout" sessions from FY 95 were approximately $1 billion in savings, while not impacting
existing milestones. While carrying out EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment, we must also
remember that we also are stewards for the taxpayer's dollars and should work with the lead Federal agency to ensure
funds are spent wisely.
Regions should continue to strive to place these priorities and project milestones in enforceable FFAs'IAGs at
NPL sites. FFAs and lAGs should be viewed as living, dynamic documents reflecting not only the best judgments
by all parties of cleanup priorities and milestones at the time of agreement, but also that reflect the changing
circumstances of environmental cleanup. Regions should consider adding into either existing or new FFAs/lAGs the
process for annual review and consider adjusting enforceable milestones.
The Superfund program has achieved substantial progress in cleaning up hazardous waste sites and protecting
human health and the environment during its 16 year existence. However, there have been serious proposals for
improvement of the statute and the program to make it faster, fairer, and more efficient. Since 1993, EPA has
launched three rounds of reforms to Superfund to address criticisms raised by affected parties and to improve the pace,
cost, and fairness of the program. Each set of reforms consists of various initiatives and pilots focusing on changes
to the program that can be implemented within the existing statutory framework. These reforms were intended to
accomplish different goals, ranging from strengthening of the program prior to reauthorization to testing concepts
developed during Congressional debate on actual legislation. As a result of all the new and continuing reforms,
Superfund is a dramatically different program today than it was at its inception.
September 27, 1996 D-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EPA and other Superfund stakeholders have worked since the inception of the program to reduce risks posed by
abandoned and uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Since 1980, EPA has evaluated more than 40,000 sites, conducted
over 4,200 early action, and has completed construction on approximately 350 of the more than 1,300 sites on the
National Priorities List in an effort to protect human health and the environment. Much has changed in the Superfund
program since 1980. Not only did the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 produce
significant legislative changes, but EPA also instituted a substantial number of administrative changes.
In October 1995, EPA Administrator Carol Browner, announced the third and final round of "Superfund
Reforms." This third round of "common sense" reforms was intended to assist State and local governments,
communities, and industries involved in cleanups to more easily: 1) make cost-effective cleanup choices that protect
public health and the environment; 2) reduce litigation so more time and money can be spent on cleanup and less on
lawyers; and 3) help communities become more informed and involved so that cleanup decisions make the most sense
at the community level. These reforms apply to all parts of the Superfund program, including Federal facilities.
RCRA ACTIVITIES AT FEDERAL FACILITY NPL SITES
e
EPA has long recognized that since most of the Federal facilities sites are also active facilities, RCRA
requirements may also apply to certain site cleanup activities. Regions must strive to eliminate RCRA/CERCLA
duplications wherever appropriate. To get a better overall picture of a facility's cleanup activities, FFRRO is
introducing into the SCAP measures several RCRA activities that are generally analogous with CERCLA activities.
They include: RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI); Corrective Measures Study (CMS); Corrective Measure Design
(CMD); Interim/Stabilization Measure; and Corrective Measure Construction. FFRRO is engaging in a pilot effort
to merge data from CERCLIS and Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) to accomplish
this. (Note: This will be added as an element of CERCLIS 3.) FFEO has already accomplished a similar exercise
through the Federal Facility Tracking System.
BRAC BUDGET AND FINANCIAL GUIDANCE
Resources and Tracking Mechanisms
Program management guidance is included in the BRAC Fast Track guidance. Beginning in FY 94, DoD
provided EPA, via an interagency funding agreement, with reimbursable resources to support EPA's cleanup
activities. DoD, EPA, and OMB worked together to develop the details of this agreement, which included 100
additional reimbursable work years for EPA and $7 million starting in FY 94. In early FY 96, EPA reached
agreement with DoD to fund EPA support for BRAC 4 (1995) installations designated as Fast Track Cleanup sites.
As a result, interagency funding agreement for BRAC rounds 1, 2, 3 and 4 extends from FY 94 through FY 2000,
and totals for FY 96 $12.6 million to fund 146 workyears.
The majority of EPA's Fast Track resources (92%) are invested in the Regions. Regional personnel provide
technical assistance and guidance to DoD and States at Fast Track Cleanup sites. EPA uses Base Closure funding for
EPA personnel that participate on BRAC Cleanup Teams as either the EPA designated team member or as technical
experts and support personnel that assist the teams. EPA relies upon in-house expertise; no BRAC funds are used
for contractor support.
Regions are allocated via a workload model work years and personnel, travel, and administrative funding. The
level of EPA support varies depending on Regional and base specific circumstances. (EPA's base closure workload
model takes into account relevant data to assess the environmental condition and economic status of a Fast Track site.)
D-7 September 27, 19%
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The Agency monitors these DoD reimbursable resources via the Office of the Comptroller's (OC) Integrated
Financial Management System (IFMS), which tracks HQ and Regional expenditures separately for each BRAC round.
EPA utilizes site-specific charging to track resource utilization back to actual site work. This separate tracking of
BRAC round expenditures is required by BRAC legislation. EPA reports quarterly on their utilization to DoD and
annually to the OMB. [OC, Financial Management Division (FMD), Cincinnati, Ohio invoices DoD on actual
program obligations incurred by EPA.]
HQ receives regular program activity reports from the Regional offices, every two months, on the progress of
work at all Fast Track installations. These reports are generated by the EPA Regional BRAC Cleanup Team
personnel and provide HQ and DoD with pertinent program and personnel information related to cleanup and reuse.
The OC Budget Division also provides to OSWER's FFRRO a monthly "BRAC Utilization Report" generated from
their agency-wide Resource Management Integration System (RMIS).
This RMIS report details the status of expenditures by the Regional Base Closure resources, work years,
personnel, travel, and administrative funding. This reporting is done for overall program management purposes and
to track resource expenditures in each BRAC round. Regional Waste Management Directors will be provided copies
of the reports and are expected to monitor the use of all BRAC resources within their respective Region.
Accountability for Resources
BRAC reimbursable work years and funding must be used only for EPA related military Base Closure activities.
Military Base Closure activities are activities related to Fast Track Cleanup of specific bases identified by the Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) (in consultation with DoD). These activities include: accelerating
the identification of clean parcels under the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA);
developing BRAC Cleanup Plans; promoting community involvement in cleanup decision-making; preparing and
reviewing site documents [e.g., BCP, Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS), RI/FS, RODs, RD, and RAs] and
RCRA documents (e.g., RFI Starts, CMD Starts, and IMS Starts and Completions); studying and sampling field data;
NEPA review and analysis; assisting DoD or States with BRAC site issues; and support activities related to the
performance of the EPA personnel participating in Fast Track Cleanup. These activities are outlined in the
Memorandum of Understanding between EPA and DoD dated February 3, 1994, and subsequent memorandums and
guidance related to EPA BRAC resources.
As the signatory and executing agent for the reimbursable agreement with DoD, the Assistant Administrator for
OSWER (AA SWER) will rely on Regional Administrators and, as the primary focus of the EPA BRAC resources,
the Regional RCRA/Superfund National Policy Managers to ensure reimbursable costs are accurate and appropriate.
Each Region should identify an individual in the appropriate division that will coordinate the Regional BRAC program
and resources, and can act as a day-to-day liaison with OSWER and DoD. FFRRO, within OSWER, will provide
the AA SWER with programmatic and financial reviews of specific Regions. Reprogramming of funds submitted to
the OC require notification of FFRRO for their approval.
HQ and Regional personnel utilizing BRAC resources should receive authorization from their appropriate EPA
HQ or Regional senior management and use the established BRAC budget program. The EPA Remedial Project
Manager (RPM) and the support team are empowered to make decisions locally to the maximum extent possible. EPA
has delegated certain authorities to the Regional Administrators (e.g., CERFA concurrence), who have in turn
redelegated the authorities to other levels within their organizations. Regional personnel should be familiar with their
internal delegation of authorities. Should the need arise, the RPM and support team will have the ability to raise
issues immediately to senior EPA officials for resolution.
September 27, 1996 D-8
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EPA Regional Superfund or RCRA Divisions, in conjunction with the Office of Regional Counsel, Regional
NEPA teams, State environmental regulatory agencies, and DoD, will form a BRAC Cleanup Team (BCT) for each
base designated by DoD as a Fast Track base. The BCT will be comprised of one representative from the EPA
Region, one representative from the State, and one representative from DoD, The BCT will serve as the primary
forum in which issues affecting the execution of cleanup to facilitate reuse will be addressed,
Note: Additional specific BRAC can be found in the Fast Track Program Guidance.
D-9 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FEDERAL FACILITIES
FY 97 TARGETS AND MEASURES
OVERVIEW OF FY 97 FEDERAL FACILITIES TARGETS AND MEASURES
The Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishments Plan (SCAP) is used by the Assistant Administrator for OSWER
(AA SWER), Assistant Administrator for OECA (AA OECA), and senior Superfund managers to monitor the progress
each Region is making towards achieving its Superfund goals. Superfund cleanup results are tracked through targets
and measures at the SCAP level as well as internal reporting measures. Those Superfund activities not tracked at the
SCAP level are monitored for internal management purposes by HQ.
The Superfund program will continue to serve as a pilot performance plan project under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA), which was discussed in Chapter I. SCAP will serve as the mechanism through
which OSWER will track GPRA progress. As such, the program will set national goals based on historical
performance and performance expectations within a limited budget for the four performance goals in GPRA and track
accomplishments in the activities contributing to those goals. HQ will not establish specific Regional targets and
measures for GPRA. Regions should continue to plan and report accomplishments in CERCLIS as they have
traditionally. There are no additional GPRA-related reporting requirements for the Regions in FY 97.
The differences between SCAP targets and measures remain the same (i.e., a pre-determined numerical goal
versus an activity deemed essential to tracking overall program progress, respectively). OERR will continue to
include Federal facilities activities to document and evaluate program progress and to analyze program trends, SCAP
accomplishments will be pulled from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS) on a quarterly basis. Planning measures are used to project the number of events
and activities that each Region expects to perform during the year using anticipated resources. Reporting measures
simply track the number of events and activities that occur throughout the year and are used to evaluate overall
progress through the cleanup pipeline. Planning measures also report accomplishments.
The following pages contain, in pipeline order, the definitions of the FY 97 Federal facilities SCAP targets and
measures (with the prefix FF). Exhibit D.2 displays the full list of Federal facilities activities that are defined in the
remainder of the Appendix, and identifies the FY 97 SCAP targets and measures. Exhibit D.3, at the end of this
Appendix, describes the planning requirements for Federal facilities activities.
Reporting of Non-NPL Federal Facilities Data at BRAC Fast Track Sites
In the past, Regions have not been requested to provide information at non-NPL Federal facility sites. However,
beginning in FY 96, Regions have been requested to provide such information for BRAC Fast Track sites only because
of the considerable presence of EPA at such sites. A series of BRAC SCAP reports is under development.
September 27, 1996 D-10
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT D.2
FEDERAL FACILITIES ACTIVITIES
^^Svlii^S]lPSSll S!^ :^^S3 tlfPlil
FF-1 Base Closure Decision
FF-2 FFA/IAG Starts
FF-3 FFA/IAG Completions
FF-4 Federal Facility Dispute Resolution
FF-5 RI/FS or RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) Starts
(First and Subsequent)
FF-6 FS or Corrective Measure Study (CMS) Start
FF-7 Timespan from Final NPL Listing to RI/FS or RFI
Stan
FF-8 RI/FS Completions (ROD) or CMS Remedy
Selection (First and Subsequent)
FF-9 RI/FS or RFI/CMS Duration
FF-10 RD or RCRA Corrective Measure Design (CMD)
Starts (First and Subsequent)
FF-11 RD or CMD Completions (First and Subsequent)
FF-1 2 RA or Corrective Measure Construction Starts (First
and Subsequent)
FF-13 Timespan from ROD Signature to RA Stan
FF-14 RA or Corrective Measure Construction Completion
(First and Subsequent)
FF-15 Final RA or Corrective Measure Construction
Completion
FF-1 6 RA Duration
FF-1 7 Timespan from RI/FS or RFI/CMS Start to RA
Complete
FF-1 8 Removal, ERA, or RCRA Interim/Stabilization
Measure (IMS) Starts & Completions
FF-1 9 Federal Facility Partial NPL Deletion
FF-20 Federal Facility Final NPL Deletion
fSljfSlll
Measure
Measure
Measure
Measure
Measure
Measure
Measure
Target
Measure
Measure
Measure
Measure
Measure
Target
Target
Measure
Measure
Measure
Measure
Measure
-.*>-':*x : : •<<--- • :•:•:<: : • : !-::-'- :•'•'•' '
" :::::v::!i?A:Py^'fc^iWT|
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
-
X
X
X
-
X
X
-
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a quarterly basis.
D-ll
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FEDERAL FACILITIES DEFINITIONS
FF-1 • BASE CLOSURE DECISIONS
Definition:
A base closure action occurs when EPA is involved in either a CERFA Section 120(h)(4) uncontaminated parcel
determination, a Finding of Suitability to Transfer (POST), a Finding of Suitability to Lease (FOSL), or a
determination is made by EPA that an approved remedy is operating properly and successfully at BRAC locations
pursuant to CERFA/CERCLA Section 120(h)(3). Under CERFA/CERCLA Section 120(h)(4), the military service
must designate, and EPA/State is required to concur, property that is uncontaminated. A POST documents the
conclusion that real property made available through the BRAC process is environmentally suitable for transfer by
deed under Section 120(h) of CERCLA. A FOSL documents that property at a BRAC location is environmentally
suitable for lease, i.e., that the reuse does not impede the environmental response at the location and that the use of
the property is limited to a manner which will protect human health and the environment. Under CERCLA section
I20(h)(3), before property can be transferred by deed, the military service must demonstrate to EPA that the approved
remedy is operating properly and successfully.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Base Closure Decision Start Date: Date that a document is received by EPA that identifies a facility or a parcel as
a candidate to be transferred by deed or lease (e.g., EBS submitted); or a clean parcel determination is received by
EPA for concurrence as required by CERFA; or the date of the written request submitted by the other Federal agency
for concurrence on suitability to transfer or lease; or the date on which a written request for EPA concurrence is
received that a 120(h)(3) remedy is operating properly and successfully.
Base Closure Decision Completion Date: The date the appropriate Regional official signs a letter, form, or memo
stating that EPA has completed its review and provided comments or concurrence on the POST or FOSL; or the date
the appropriate Regional official signs a letter, form, or memo stating that EPA has completed its review of the
demonstration that a remedy is operating properly and successfully for purposes of CERCLA section 120(h)(3); or
the date the appropriate Regional official signs a letter concurring on a clean parcel identified under CERFA.
Changes in Definition FT 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
CERCLIS 3 will have capability to report this measure. However, at this time, this information cannot be collected
through CERCLIS. Regions should submit a memo to the Director of FFRRO outlining Base Closure Decision
accomplishments at the end of the second and fourth quarter. This is a SCAP reporting measure.
FF-2 • FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT (FFA)/INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT (IAG)
STARTS
Definition:
FFAs/IAGs are legal agreements between Federal agencies responsible for cleanup, EPA, and sometimes States that
set forth detailed requirements for performance of site response activities as well as appropriate enforcement responses
to non-compliance with the FFA/IAG. FFA/IAG requirement is set forth in Section 120(e) of CERCLA.
Definition of Accomplishment:
FFA/IAG Start Date: Date notice letter is sent by EPA to the Federal facility, reported in CERCLIS as the actual start
date (Actual Start) of FFA/IAG negotiations (Action Name = IAG Negotiation).
September 27, 1996 D-12
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
FFA/IAG starts will be tracked as IAG negotiations (Action Name = IAG Negotiation). This is a SCAP reporting
measure.
FF-3 • FFA/IAG COMPLETION
Definition:
FFAs/IAGs are legal agreements between Federal agencies responsible for cleanup, EPA, and sometimes States that
set forth detailed requirements for performance of site response activities as well as appropriate enforcement responses
to non-compliance with the FFA/IAG. FFA/IAG requirement is set forth in Section 120(e) of CERCLA.
Definition of Accomplishment:
FFA/IAG Completion Date: Latter of the dates that the Federal agency, EPA, and/or State sign die IAG, or die date
the Letter of Intent to sign an IAG is signed by all parties. This date must be reported in CERCLIS as the actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the FFA/IAG negotiations (Action Name = IAG Negotiation) and die actual
completion date (Actual Complete) of the FFA/IAG (Action Name = Federal Interagency Agreements).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
FFA/IAG completions will be tracked as both the completion (Actual Complete) of IAG negotiations (Action Name
= IAG Negotiation) and die completion (Actual Complete) of the FFA/IAG (Action Name = Federal Interagency
Agreement). For those FFAs/IAGs that are elevated for dispute resolution, record the date elevated as the milestone
date, Civil Litigation Referred to HQ (Action Name = Federal Interagency Agreement and Subaction Name = IAG
Dispute Admin Referral) and not as the FFA/IAG completion date. Regions do not receive credit for an FFA/IAG
completion when the FFA/IAG is elevated to HQ for dispute resolution. This is a SCAP reporting measure.
FF-4 • FEDERAL FACILITY DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Definition:
When the Federal agency, State, and/or EPA make an effort to formally or informally resolve an FFA/IAG dispute
after the FFA/IAG is signed.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Dispute Resolution Start Date: Date that any party to the FFA/IAG sends a letter to the odier parties notifying them
as to the issue in dispute. This is reported in CERCLIS as die actual start date (Actual Start) of dispute resolution
(Action Name = Alternative Dispute Resolution).
Dispute Resolution Completion Date: Date die document resolving the issue is signed (e.g., letter of agreement,
agreement document). This is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual complete) of dispute
resolution (Action Name = Alternative Dispute Resolution).
D-13 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Federal Facility Dispute Resolution is reported in CERCLIS as Alternative Dispute Resolution (Action Name =
Alternative Dispute Resolution). This is a SCAP reporting measure.
FF-5 • REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY (RI/FS) OR RCRA
FACILITY INVESTIGATION (RFI) STARTS — FIRST AND SUBSEQUENT
Definition:
The RI/FS is a CERCLA investigation designed to characterize the site, assess the nature and extent of contamination,
evaluate potential risks to human health and the environment, and develop and evaluate potential remedial alternatives.
An RFI is a RCRA investigation designed to evaluate thoroughly the nature and extent of the release of hazardous
wastes and hazardous constituents and to gather necessary data to support the Corrective Measure Study (CMS) and/or
Interim/Stabilization Measure (ISM).
For an RI/FS or RFI to be counted as a first start, the site must not have had previous RI/FS or RFI activity. A
subsequent RI/FS or RFI is any RI/FS or RFI that starts after the first one.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The RI/FS (Action Name = FF RI/FS or Remedial Investigation) or RFI (Action Name = RCRA Facility
Investigation) start is defined as follows:
• Sites where there has been no RI/FS or RFI work started prior to the effective date of the FFA/IAG, the actual
start date (Actual Start) is the EPA or State receipt of a draft workplan; or
• Sites where RI/FS or RFI work has been started prior to the FFA/IAG effective date and there has been
substantial EPA or State involvement (EPA or the State has reviewed and commented, approved/concurred, or
accepted the workplan); the actual start date (Actual Start) is also the date of receipt of a draft RI/FS or RFI
workplan (Note: this date will be prior to IAG completion date); or
• Sites where RI/FS or RFI work starts prior to the FFA/IAG effective date and there has been limited EPA or
State involvement, the date of the RI/FS or RFI actual start date (Actual Start) is the latter date that EPA or the
State and the other agency sign the FFA/IAG.
The actual start (Actual Start) of a subsequent RI/FS or RFI is the date a workplan which addresses the subsequent
RI/FS or RFI is received. When the subsequent RI/FS or RFI is described in the same workplan as the first RI/FS
or RFI start, the subsequent RI/FS or RFI actual start date (Actual Start) is the same as the first RI/FS or RFI actual
start date.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP planning measure.
September 27, 1996 D-14
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FF-6 • FEASIBILITY STUDY (FS), CORRECTIVE MEASURE STUDY (CMS), or EE/CA
STARTS
Definition:
The FS, a CERCLA study, is used to develop and evaluate all potential remediation alternatives to clean a hazardous
waste site. The CMS, a RCRA study, is used to develop and evaluate corrective measure alternatives and to
recommend the final corrective measure. The EE/CA identifies objectives for non-time critical (NTC) response
action, and includes an analysis of cost, effectiveness, and implementability of the various alternatives that may be
used to satisfy these objectives.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The FS (Action Name = Feasibility Study), CMS (Action name = Corrective Measure Study), or EE/CA start is
defined as follows:
• Sites where there has been no FS or CMS work started prior to the effective date of the FFA/IAG, the actual start
date (Actual Start) is the EPA or State receipt of a draft workplan; or
« Sites where FS or CMS work has been started prior to the FFA/IAG effective date and there has been substantial
EPA or State involvement (EPA or the State has reviewed and commented, approved/concurred, or accepted the
workplan), the actual start date (Actual Start) is also the date of receipt of a draft FS or CMS workplan (Note:
this date will be prior to the IAG completion date); or
• Sites where FS or CMS work starts prior to the FFA/IAG effective date and there has been limited EPA or State
involvement, the FS or CMS actual start date (Actual Start) is the latter date that EPA or the State and the other
agency sign the FFA/IAG; or
• EPA concurrence/approval of the EE/CA workplan.
The actual start (Actual Start) of a subsequent FS or CMS is the date a workplan which addresses the subsequent FS
or CMS is received. When the subsequent FS or CMS is described in the same workplan as the first FS or CMS start,
the subsequent FS or CMS actual start date (Actual Start) is the same as the first FS or CMS actual start date.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
EE/CA added to the Definition of Accomplishment.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. FS, CMS, or EE/CA start dates are reported site specifically (Action Name =
Feasibility Study, Corrective Measure Study, or EE/CA) in CERCLIS.
FF-7 • TIMESPAN FROM FINAL NPL LISTING TO RI/FS OR RFI START
Definition:
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Section 120(e) stales "not later than six months after the
inclusion of any facility on the NPL, the department, agency, or instrumentality shall ... commence a RI/FS [or RFI]
for such facility." This measure calculates the days and the timeframe from final NPL Listing to the first RI/FS or
RFI start. Sites with timeframes greater that 180 days will be deemed not to have met this requirement.
D-15 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment:
This measure will calculate, by site, the interval between final NPL listing (publication of final listing in the Federal
Register) and the actual date for the first RI/FS or RFI start. The timespan will be calculated based on the RI/FS start
definition outlined in FF-5 RI/FS or RFI Starts - First and Subsequent, and the final NPL listing (Action Name =
Final Listing on NPL) actual completion date (Actual Complete).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Added RFI (Action Name = RCRA Facility Investigation) as a valid event entry. The measure's title was modified,
and language was added clarifying the definition. This measure was formerly FF-6.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. Data in CERCLIS will be used to calculate the timespan on an annual basis. HQ
will perform the analysis.
FF-8 • DECISION DOCUMENTS - FIRST AND SUBSEQUENT
Definition:
Upon completion of a Federal facility RI/FS, CMS, or EE/CA, the Federal agency selects a remedy for the Operable
Unit (OU) that is presented in a cleanup decision document (i.e., ROD or RCRA corrective measure decision
document). EPA or the State may either approve or concur on the remedy selection or, in the case of a dispute, they
may select the remedy. For EPA, this authority has been delegated to the Regional Administrator or her/his designee.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Date the ROD, the appropriate RCRA corrective measure decision document, or appropriate EE/CA Action Memo
is signed by the Regional Administrator/Deputy Regional Administrator or designee, or the date of EPA
concurrence/approval on the clean-up decision document pursuant to an FFA/IAG or other enforceable decision
document, or the date of EPA's letter of concurrence.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
EE/CA added to the Definition of Accomplishment.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. This is a SCAP target.
FF-9 • RI/FS OR RFI/CMS DURATION
Definition:
The RI/FS is a CERCLA investigation designed to characterize the site, assess the nature and extent of contamination,
evaluate potential risks to human health and the environment, and develop and evaluate potential remediation
alternatives. RFIs are RCRA investigations designed to evaluate the nature and extent of hazardous releases and to
gather necessary data to support a CMS. The CMS uses this data to develop and evaluate alternative cleanup
approaches and ultimately recommend a final corrective measure.
The objective of this measure is to focus on good project management of a critical portion of the remedial pipeline
and assess program performance. Duration trends provide indicators of areas that may require attention.
September 27, 1996 D-16
-------
OSWER Directive 92003-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment:
The RI/FS or RFI/CMS duration is calculated based on the RI/FS or RFI start and RI/FS or CMS completion
definitions specified in FF-5, FF-6, and FF-7, Sites where an RI/FS is actually completed in FY 96 will be used in
the analysis. Performance will be assessed by comparing:
* The Regional and national average duration of RI/FS projects completed in FY 92, FY 93, FY 94, and FY 95;
with
• The Regional and national average duration of RI/FS projects completed in FY 96.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. Data in CERCLIS will be used to calculate durations on an annual basis. HQ
will perform the analysis.
FF-10 • REMEDIAL DESIGN (RD) OR RCRA CORRECTIVE MEASURE
DESIGN (CMD) STARTS — FIRST AND SUBSEQUENT
Definition:
The RD is a CERCLA design that establishes the general size, scope, and character of a project, and details and
addresses the technical requirements of the RA selected in the ROD. The RD may include, but is not limited to,
drawings, specification documentation, and statement of bidability and constructability. The CMD is a RCRA design
that establishes the general size, scope, and character of a project, and details and addresses the technical requirements
of the RA selected in the ROD. The CMD may include, but is not limited to, drawings, specification documentation,
and statement of bidability and constructability.
Subsequent RD or CMD starts occur at NPL sites where previous RD or CMD activity has occurred.
Definition of Accomplishment:
If post-ROD, the RD (Action Name = FF RD) or CMD (Action Name = Corrective Measure Design) start date
(Actual Start) is the date of submission of the RD or CMD work plan or other appropriate documents or statement
of work (reported in CERCLIS as an actual start). If work begins prior to the ROD, the RD or CMD actual start date
(Actual Start) will be the submission date of RD or CMD work plan or any other major deliverable (e.g., 30% design
complete),
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. RD or CMD starts are reported site specifically (Action Name = Corrective
Measure Design) in CERCLIS.
D-17 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FF-11 • REMEDIAL DESIGN (RD) OR CORRECTIVE MEASURE DESIGN (CMD)
COMPLETIONS — FIRST AND SUBSEQUENT
Definition:
A RD or CMD is complete when the plans and specifications for the selected remedy are developed and approved,
Definition of Accomplishment:
RDs and CMDs are considered complete the date a letter is signed by the appropriate Regional official approving the
entire final RD or CMD package. If EPA does not approve the final RD or CMD package, the RD or CMD is
considered complete the date of the Commerce Business Daily (CBD) or other appropriate publication requesting bids
on the final RD or CMD package. This date is reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete)
of the RD or CMD (Action Name = FF RD or Corrective Measure Design),
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. RD or CMD completions are reported site-specifically (Action Name = FF RD
or Corrective Measure Design) in CERCLIS.
FF-12 • REMEDIAL ACTION (RA) OR RCRA CORRECTIVE MEASURE
CONSTRUCTION (CMC) STARTS — FIRST AND SUBSEQUENT
Definition:
A RA or CMC is the implementation of the remedy selected in the ROD or appropriate RCRA corrective measure
decision document at NPL sites to ensure protection of human health and the environment.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Date on which substantial, continuous, physical, on-site, remedial actions begin pursuant to SARA Section 120(e) as
documented by a memo or letter to EPA. This date is reported in CERCLIS as the actual RA (Action Name = FF
RA) or CMC (Action Name = Corrective Measure Construction) start date (Actual Start).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP planning measure. RA or CMC starts are reported site specifically (Action Name = FF RA or
Corrective Measure Construction) in CERCLIS,
FF-13 • TIMES?AN FROM ROD SIGNATURE TO RA START
Definition:
The objective of this measure is to focus attention on the statutory requirement for an RA start within 15 months of
the ROD signature.
SARA Section 120(e) states that "substantial, physical, on-site remedial action shall be commenced at each Federal
facility no later than 15 months after completion of the investigation and study." This measure tracks compliance
against the CERCLA Section 120 statutory requirements.
September 27, 1996 D-18
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Definition of Accomplishment:
This measure will look at Federal agency performance by comparing the average timespan from ROD signature to
RA stan for all sites where an RA actually started in FY 96.
The corresponding ROD and sites exceeding the 15 month requirement will be identified. Comparisons will be made
to previous Agency performance to determine trends.
The durations will be calculated using the actual ROD (Action Name = Record of Decision) completion dates (Actual
Complete) and the actual RA (Action Name = FF RA) stan dates (Actual Stan) in CERCLIS. The ROD signature
(RI/FS Completion) and RA start definition contained in FF-8 RJ/FS Completions (ROD) or CMS Remedy Selection -
First and Subsequent and FF-11 RA or Corrective Measure Construction Starts - First and Subsequent will be used
in the analysis.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. Data in CERCLIS will be used to calculate the timespan on an annual basis. HQ
will perform the analysis.
FF-14 •BAOR CMC COMPLETIONS — FIRST AND SUBSEQUENT
Definition:
A first and subsequent RA or CMC is complete when construction activities are complete, a final inspection has been
conducted, and a RA Report or appropriate CMC reporting vehicle has been prepared and approved by EPA for a
specific OU. This report summarizes site conditions and construction activities for the OU. Note: this date may be
later than 120(h)(3) BRAC requirements for base closure.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The RA or CMC is complete the date that the designated Regional official signs a letter accepting the RA Report or
appropriate CMC reporting vehicle for the first or subsequent RA or CMC or the date the Federal facility's
construction manager submits a signed RA Report or appropriate CMC reporting vehicle that documents the
completion of all construction activities for that OU, and that the remedy is Operational and Functional (O&F). In
lieu of a report from the contractor's construction manager, the Region must prepare a report to document the
completion. The appropriate date must be recorded in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of
the RA (Action Name = FF RA) or CMC (Action Name = Corrective Measure Construction).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP target. RA or CMC (Action Name = FF RA or Corrective Measure Construction) completions are
reported site specifically in CERCLIS.
D-19 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FF-/5 • FINAL RA OR CMC COMPLETION
Definition:
A final RA is complete when:
• Construction activities at all OUs are complete; and
• LTRA at all OUs is complete; and
• A pre-final inspection of the site has been conducted; and
• A Preliminary Superfund Site Close-Out Report has been prepared and signed by the designated Regional official.
This report documents the completion of physical construction, summarizes site conditions and construction
activities, and, as appropriate, provides the schedule for the joint final inspection (required before the start of the
O & F phase), approval of the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) work plan, and establishment of institutional
controls. The date of the Preliminary Superfund Site Close-Out Report should be reported in CERCLIS as the
actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the RA subaction, Prelim Close-Out Rep Prepared (Action Name
= FF RA and Subaction Name = Prelim Close-Out Rep Prepared); and
• A final inspection has been conducted; and
• The remedy is O&F, and the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the O&F action (Action Name =
Operational and Functional) has been entered into CERCLIS; and
• A letter accepting the RA Report has been signed by the designated Regional official (Branch Chief or above).
The date the letter is accepted must be entered into CERCLIS as the RA (Action Name = FF RA) actual
completion date (Actual Complete); and
• A Final Superfund Site Close-Out Report has been prepared.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The final RA is complete the date the Regional Administrator signs the Final Superfund Site Close-Out Report
documenting completion of the RA. The appropriate date must be recorded in CERCLIS as the actual completion
date (Actual Complete) of the RA subaction, "Close Out Report" (Action Name = FF RA and Subaction Name =
Close Out Report). An actual completion date (Actual Complete) must be entered to document completion of the final
CMC (Action Name = Corrective Measure Construction).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Clarifying language was added to make the definition of accomplishment for Federal Facility Final RA completions
consistent with the definition of accomplishment for non-Federal Facility Final RA completions at NPL sites (covered
under the measure "NPL Site Completions" in Appendix B).
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
Regions are required to plan the completion of the Close-Out Report prior to the FY. This is a SCAP target.
September 27, 1996 D-20
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FF-16 • RA DURATION
Definition:
The objective of this measure is to assess the success, as well as the complexity, of the Federal Facility Superfund
program. The measure will also enable management to focus on sites where additional emphasis may need to be
placed on enhancing the pace of response activities. Duration trends provide a basis for evaluating the progress
Federal agencies are making in performing RAs in as timely a manner as possible.
Definition of Accomplishment:
This measure will look at Regional performance by analyzing the average duration from RA start to RA completion
for sites scheduled for RA completion in FY 96. Durations will be calculated using the actual RA start dates (Actual
Start) and the actual RA completion dates (Actual Complete) in CERCLIS. The RA start and RA completion
definitions are contained in FF-11 and FF-13.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. CERCLIS will be used to calculate RA durations on an annual basis. HQ will
perform the analysis.
FF-17 • TIMESPAN FROM RI/FS START TO RA COMPLETE
Definition:
The objective of this measure is to focus on the timespan of essential components of the remedial pipeline. This
measure reflects success in reducing the length of time needed to complete remedial activities at Federal facilities.
Trends analyses will address the need for continuous improvements relative to meeting Agency goals.
Definition of Accomplishment:
This measure will look at Regional performance by analyzing the average duration from RI/FS or RFI start to RA
completions for Federal facility OUs scheduled for RA completion in FY 96. The timespan will be calculated using
the actual RI/FS (Action Name = FF RI/FS or Remedial Investigation) start date (Actual Stan) and the RA (Action
Name = FF RA) actual completion date (Actual Complete) in CERCLIS. The RI/FS start and RA completion
definitions contained in FF-5 and FF-14 will be used in the analysis.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
This is a SCAP reporting measure. Data from CERCLIS will be used to calculate the timespan on an annual basis.
HQ will perform the analyses.
D-21 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FF-18 • REMOVAL, EARLY ACTIONS, OR RCRA INTERIM/STABILIZATION
MEASURE (ISM) — STARTS AND COMPLETIONS
Definition:
Removal actions and early actions (removal authority) are defined as the cleanup or removal of released hazardous
substances from the environment, and the necessary actions taken in the event of the threat of release of hazardous
substances into the environment. ISMs are defined as RCRA removal actions that are intended to abate threats to
human health and the environment from releases and/or to prevent or minimize the further spread of contamination
while long-term remedies are pursued. Regions need to report removal actions conducted in response to emergency,
time-critical, and non-time critical (NIC) situations at BRAC Fast Track non-NPL or NPL sites. Early actions are
conducted in response to NTC situations. Under the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP), DoD is
required to notify EPA of its removal actions. Long-term O&M should not be conducted under the removal.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Removal/Early Action/ISM Start Date: Date the Federal agency begins actual on-site removal work, or the date of
Action Memorandum signature, or the date the lead Federal agency provides notice to EPA, or other decision
document signature/approval. The date must be reported in CERCLIS as the actual start date (Actual Start) of the
removal (Action Name = FF Removal), Early Action [Action Name = RA and Critical Indicator = (4) Early
Action], or ISM (Action Name = Interim/Stabilization Measure).
Removal/Early Action/ISM Completion Date: Actual date the Federal agency has demobilized and notified EPA,
completing the scope of work delineated in the Action Memorandum or other decision document. The date must be
reported in CERCLIS as the actual completion date (Actual Complete) of the removal (Action Name = FF Removal),
Early Action [Action Name = RA and Critical Indicator = (4) Early Action] , or ISM (Action Name =
Interim/Stabilization Measure).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
ERAs are not tracked in CERCLIS 3; the definition has been modified to track early actions (removal authority)
instead.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. Removal actions and early actions (removal authority) at Federal facilities are
to be coded in CERCLIS as removals (Action Name = FF Removal), Early Action [Action Name = RA and Critical
Indicator = (4) Early Action], or ISM (Action Name = Interim/Stabilization Measure). This is a SCAP reporting
measure.
FF-19 • FEDERAL FACILITY PARTIAL NPL DELETION
Definition:
Partial deletions of releases/sites listed on the NPL are being introduced during FY 96 to more fully communicate
successful cleanup of portions of these sites. Historically, EPA policy has been to delete releases only after evaluation
of the entire site. However, total site cleanup may take many years, while portions of the site may have been cleaned
up and may be available for productive use. EPA will consider partial deletions for portions of sites when no further
response is appropriate for that portions of the site. Such portion may be a defined geographic unit of the site, perhaps
as small as a residential unit, or may be a specific medium at the site, e.g., groundwater, depending on the nature or
extent of the release(s).
September 27, 1996 D-22
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The criteria for partial deletion are the same as for final deletion. Given State concurrence, EPA considers:
• Whether responsible or other parties have implemented all appropriate and required response actions;
« Whether all appropriate Fund-financed responses under CERCLA have been implemented and EPA has
determined that no further cleanup by responsible panics is appropriate; or
• Whether the release of hazardous substances poses no significant threat to the public health, welfare or the
environment, thereby eliminating the need for remedial action.
A code (Action Name = Partial Deletion from NPL) has been added to CERCLIS to specifically record and track
partial deletions. The partial deletion event should only be used when the deletion does not address the remaining
release listed on the NPL. If a deletion does cover the remaining release listed on the NPL, the event should be
treated as a Federal Facility Final NPL Deletion (Action Name = Final Deletion from NPL), discussed below.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The partial NPL deletion process (for a portion of a site on the NPL) starts when a Notice of Intent to Delete is
published in the Federal Register for that specified portion of the site.
The partial NPL deletion process (for a portion of a site on the NPL) starts when a Notice of Notice to Delete is
published in the Federal Register for that specified portion of the site.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The actual start (Actual Start) and completion (Actual Complete) dates are to be reported in CERCLIS for partial NPL
deletions (Action Name = Partial Deletion from NPL). Partial site deletions are tracked separately from entire site
deletions (Action Name = Final Deletion from NPL). Partial site deletions should be used if a portion, or portions,
of the release remain listed on the NPL following completion of the partial deletion. An entire site deletion event
(Action Name = Final Deletion from NPL) should be used if the deletion activity addresses the remaining release
listed on the NPL (either as a one-time deletion event for the entire site as originally listed, or as the last deletion
activity associated with a site subject to previous partial deletions). This is a SCAP reporting measure.
FF-20 • FEDERAL FACILITY FINAL NPL DELETION
Definition:
With State concurrence, EPA may delete sites from the NPL when it determines that no further response is
appropriate under CERCLA. In making that determination, EPA considers:
» Whether responsible or other parties have implemented all appropriate and required response actions;
• Whether all appropriate Fund-financed responses under CERCLA have been implemented and EPA has
determined that no further cleanup by responsible parties is appropriate; or
• Whether the release of hazardous substances poses no significant threat to the public health, welfare or the
environment, thereby eliminating the need for remedial action.
D-23 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EPA will consider deleting the entire site or portions of sites from the NPL, as appropriate. This measure (Final NPL
Deletions) would apply when an entire site as originally listed on the NPL is deleted through a one-time process, or
upon deletion of the final component of a site that has been subject to previous partial deletions. Please note the "final
component" in this case would represent the entire site/release at the time of final deletion.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The final NPL deletion process for the entire site starts when a Notice of Intent to Delete is published in the Federal
Register.
The final NPL deletion process for the entire site is complete when the Notice of Deletion is published in the Federal
Register.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
Revised language to reference "final" NPL deletion to differentiate this measure from partial NPL deletion.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
The actual start (Actual Start) and completion (Actual Complete) dates for entire site deletions are to be reported in
CERCLIS (Action Name = Final Deletion from NPL). This is a SCAP reporting measure.
September 27, 1996 D-24
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT D.3(l of 5)
FEDERAL FACILITIES PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
•::i^'i::::::::::::::::ji:^
j;|^3»l|||jg;§|||l|i|l^^|||
SCAP Target or
Measure?
Planned/Reported Semi-
Annually, Annually, or
Both?
Planned Site-
Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-
Specifically or in Non-
Site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
i]:; ::'i : :.:|: : : : :;:-::;oij< : :i: : :'" :'iv:;:::C: '.•: '.
%•& : : :$:*: : '&$&$£* : : : :-::::::i- • ft.
IlliS^Siiil ! 1
iSlfflllfeiSil 1 1
ilit^iS^Sisiifeii \ ?*
Measure
Both
No
Operable Unit
or Parcel
Site-Specific
iiiiiiiSiiiiiii
iiiilliliiiiisi
m^mtm^;;fmmm:Sfm
Measure
Both
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Oll^llisgiliiiiiiii
Measure
Both
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
Siiwia^Pilf:
ipi^siiiimiii
Measure
Both
No
OU-Specific
Site-Specific
EXHIBIT D.3 (2 of 5)
FEDERAL FACIUTIES PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
illllSllIllIill
ipll^^^^^i^isiii
^:J^^i^;||{^!5^(|^
SCAP Target or
Measure?
Planned/Reported Semi-
Annually, Annually, or
Both?
Planned Site-
Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-
Specifically or in Non-
Site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
||iliiil||iiiill
|||pi|:;||||::|||||
Measure
Both
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
ililliHiilill
siiliiiiliiill
l|||||i|ii|iill||
li;;;|i|||i|i|Bi:|i|
Measure
Both
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
illllilillilll
l^piKppslllDTOl;
liSiiiipiil
Measure
Annual
No
Whole Site
Site-Specific
:-:WS:::::::':*^0lSlC®l':':-:>;/:':.':''X
'Wxy.^xWxWxy^'^.'-v*-:1--:::: :";':::-:-.••
f ||iliipisija|Srl;.. ;-;;
||||||i||^||i
lf|:i||iisi|^nt":i|
1s:::;vSi§:: xVlss; ' : « .; s
Target
Both
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a biannual basis.
D-25
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT D.3 (3 of 5)
FEDERAL FACILITIES PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planning Requirements
SCAP Target or
Measure?
Planned/Reported Semi-
Annually, Annually, or
Both?
Planned Site-
Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-
Specifically or in Non-
Site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
FF-9
RI/FSorKFl
Duration
Measure
Annual
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
FF-fO
RDorCMD
Starts - First and
Subsequeot
Measure
Both
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
JFF-11
R»«?CMJ>
Completions - :
First and
Subsequent
Measure
Both
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
FF-12
RAStaits-
First and
Subsequent
Measure
Both
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
EXHIBIT D.3 (4 of 5)
FEDERAL FACILITIES PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
Planning Requirements
SCAP Target or
Measure?
Planned/Reported Semi-
Annually, Annually, or
Both?
Planned Site-
Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-
Specifically or in Non-
Site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
FF-13
Timespan From
ROB Signature
to RA Start
Measure
Annual
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
EF-14
RA Completions
-First and
Subsequent
Target
Both
Yes
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
FF-15
Final RA
Completions
Target
Both
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
FF-16
RA Duration
Measure
Annual
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a bi-annual basis.
September 27, 1996 D-26
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-IC
EXHIBIT D.3 (5 of 5)
FEDERAL FACILITIES PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
:|^i^i||i^^^fi|^l|
SCAT Target or
Measure?
Planned/Reported Semi-
Annually, Annually, or
Both?
Planned Site-
Specifically?
Planned/Reported on
Operable Unit or Whole
Site Basis?
Reported Site-
Specifically or in Non-
Site Specific Portion of
CERCLIS?
il$ll|p;*P$^P
•;:>>X',V»;»f^*»%..::.:-:-'jgi!i:
lliiiiiipliiiiilii
•mmm;^?Wmyi:^9m
Measure
Annual
No
Operable Unit
Site-Specific
'::::::-:;:iK'::;;:::::Tt?i^:::i:iff>r^:::::^::^^
:;i::W^s:a*^**»4j:;;?gK;5s;
litiiKiiiii^ii
::-:':X::^^:::::::::-x:::::::::v:::::::::::::::;..::;:;:;:^>':.;-
|||«^pK|||BS||*:
Measure
Both
No
Based on
Individual
Incident
Site-Specific
^liliii^llisciiipi
Measure
Both
Yes
Portion of Site as
Identified
Site-Specific
liililiifiiiiiip::
|||i|ii||||il
Ill^li^e^iWIif^l::
Measure
Both
Yes
Whole Site
Site-Specific
* CERCLIS modification to record partial NPL deletions pending.
NOTE: Accomplishments are pulled from CERCLIS on a bi-annual basis.
D-27
September 27, 19%
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix E: Superfund Information Systems
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix E
Superfund Information Systems
Table of Contents
SUPERFUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS E-l
Overview E-l
CERCLIS 3 E-2
Data Architecture E-2
Site Assessment and Project Management Personnel E-4
Enforcement Personnel E-4
Community Involvement Personnel E-4
Risk Assessment Personnel E-5
IMCs and Regional Management Personnel E-5
Program Analysis and Resource Personnel E-5
Reporting Superfund Information E-6
Applicability of the Freedom of Information Act E-7
CERCLIS Reports Releasable under Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) E-7
Sensitive Information Not Releasable under FOIA E-7
Ad Hoc Reporting E-10
Accessing FOIA Information E-10
Data Owners/Sponsorship E-l 1
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1 C
Appendix E
Superfund Information Systems
List of Exhibits
EXHIBIT E.I CERCLIS 3 DEVELOPMENT PROCESS E-2
EXHIBIT E.2 CERCLIS 3 DATA ARCHITECTURE E-3
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
APPENDIX E
SUPERFUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
OVERVIEW
The information required to effectively manage the Superfund program has grown increasingly complex in recent
years. New program initiatives have sparked increases in data requirements, and data demands on EPA from
Congress, outside interest groups, and the public continue to escalate. As the Agency approaches reauthorization,
it is particularly important that the information supporting the program be consistent, easily accessible, and, most
importantly, accurate.
Supporting the business processes of the Superfund program requires a broad range of information. Regional
project managers require accurate and reliable information to manage and keep track of cleanup activities at Superfund
sites. Regional and Headquarters managers require comprehensive information for program and budget planning and
analysis, developing policies and procedures to enhance the program's effectiveness, and tracking Potentially
Responsible Party (PRP) compliance with Agency enforcement actions.
Superrund's information systems have evolved with the program's expansion over time. In the mid-1980s,
separate databases supported each program area. Maintaining separate databases made it difficult to obtain a
comprehensive view of activities and progress at specific sites, and created obstacles for program-wide planning and
accomplishments tracking efforts. In an effort to integrate Superfund information, CERCLIS, the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System, was developed.
CERCLIS 2, a mainframe system, has served as the official, central repository of Superfund data containing
national site assessment, remedial, removal, enforcement, and financial information. HQ Centers have relied heavily
on the CERCLIS 2 database to generate official national reports and to carry out program management, analysis,
evaluation, and reauthorization activities. A local area network (LAN) version of the system, WasteLAN, has
provided the Regions with a means of accessing the information stored in CERCLIS 2. The Regions responsibility
has been to maintain current site, project, and regional program management information in WasteLAN and regularly
upload the information to the centralized CERCLIS 2 data base.
Although CERCLIS/WasteLAN succeeded in centralizing Superfund information once stored in separate
databases, an increased need for cleanup information spurred aggressive systems development strategies across the
program. New and existing program and project management systems were integrated into CERCLIS/WasteLAN,
and multiple systems tools were developed to enhance them, including CleanLAN, RP2M, NPL-PAD, SMARTech,
SMRS, and RELAI. The development of this vast network of support systems, which also included specialized
Regional systems and "homegrown" databases, presented problems—each system required specialized knowledge
and maintenance, and Superfund data were still not fully integrated.
Today, the future of Superfund information systems is being developed and tested according to requirements and
guidelines established by Superfund personnel across the country. CERCLIS 3, the third generation of CERCLIS,
is an integrated information system that has been designed to support the evolving business needs of the Superfund
program. CERCLIS 3 will enable Superfund staff to share comprehensive and reliable data across the program,
across EPA and, eventually, with other Federal partners and the public.
Superfund information will no longer be maintained across a vast network of regional and national systems and
databases. CERCLIS 3 provides a single source for Superfund program information, linking site managers with
program managers, community involvement personnel with enforcement officials, Regions with Headquarters, and
Superfund staff with Congress and the general public. The information in CERCLIS 3 is divided by program area;
however, information is shared across program areas, eliminating duplicate data entry and promoting program
consistency.
E-l September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The remainder of this Appendix will provide examples demonstrating how CERCLIS 3 will support each
Superfund program area, both in the Regions and at Headquarters. Also included in this Appendix is a discussion of
CERCLIS 3 reporting capabilities and an explanation of the Data Sponsorship program designed to ensure high quality
Superfund data stored in CERCLIS 3.
CERCLIS 3
The concept behind the development of CERCLIS 3 is to re-engineer the flow of Superfund information.
CERCLIS 3 was designed to satisfy specific goals set out during Regional data collection trips, joint requirements
planning sessions, and Management Advisory Committee meetings. Some of the goals defined for CERCLIS 3
include: capturing information only once, at its source; automating and streamlining the data collection process;
integrating with other support systems and tools, such as the Agency's Integrated Financial Management System
(IFMS) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS); and supporting the day-to-day and long-term work of Superfund
personnel. Exhibit E.I shows the development methodology and process for CERCLIS 3.
EXHIBIT E.I
CERCLIS 3 DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Fall Subject
Matter Expert
(SUE)
Interviews
Subject Areas:
•Site Assessment
•Enforcement
•Community
Involvement
• Remedy Selection
•Cleanup Actions
• Removal
• Cost/Financial
• Program
Management
• Project
Management
• Federal Facilities
•Risk
Region
SME Joint
Requirements
Planning (JRP)
Sessions
Measures of
Success
Workgroup
Meetings
Analysis:
•Areas of
Agreement
•Issues to
Resolve
•Streamining
Opportunities
HO and
Regional .
SME Issue
Resolution
Joint
Application
Design (JAD)
Sessions
National
Implementation!
Fall 1996
Data Architecture
CERCLIS 3's Data Architecture has been designed so that all Superfund personnel will have access to accurate,
up-to-date information. Information from Regional CERCLIS 3 users will be uploaded nightly to the national database
at EPA Headquarters; in parallel, comprehensive national information will be downloaded each night to the Regional
Production databases (see Exhibit E.2).
September 27, 1996
E-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT E.2
CERCLIS 3 DATA ARCHITECTURE
Regional CERCLIS 3
Oracle Server
HQ CERCLIS 3
OERR/OSRE
Server #2
HQ CERCLIS 3
OERR/OSRE
Server #1
Frozen I
i Data
The weekly "backwards conversion" from CERCLIS 3 to CERCLIS 2 will allow Regions that are not on-line
with CERCLIS 3 in the early stages of the system's implementation to access current Superfund information.
Information entered into CERCLIS 2 by those same Regions will be uploaded quarterly to CERCLIS 3. CERCLIS
3 will also make national IFMS data available to both Regional and Headquarters users.
As the need arises, National CERCLIS 3 databases will be "frozen;" a copy of the database will be captured and
stored at Headquarters as a record of Superfund information in the system at that time. In addition, information on
Superfund sites will be archived annually,
CERCLIS 3 will benefit all Superfund personnel, both in the Regions and at Headquarters, in a number of ways.
For example, CERCLIS 3 provides for greater control of the program evaluation process. It conveys reliable program
and site information while eliminating redundant data collection and entry activities. CERCLIS 3 makes more
data—including technical data not available in the past—available from a single "corporate" information system in
creative formats that support decision making. Most importantly, CERCLIS 3 facilitates communication among
Superfund personnel and promotes program consistency.
To illustrate some of the ways CERCLIS 3 will enhance the business activities of Superfund personnel, the
following is a description of how the system will support specific user groups in the Regions and at Headquarters.
For each user group, it describes how certain business processes will be refined and made more efficient by the
implementation of CERCLIS 3.
E-3
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Site Assessment and Project Management Personnel
CERCLIS 3 will track site discovery information, and will improve the quality of technical site data available.
CERCLIS 3 will allow Site Assessment Managers (SAMs) to enter, store, and retrieve basic site discovery
information, from site name and address to latitude/longitude, spill source, and discovery method, as well as a textual
descriptions of the site. Two copies of this information will be saved; one copy will be "frozen" as a permanent
record of original site discovery, while the other copy will be available for use in other site assessment phases and
throughout the pipeline. This national sharing of information will benefit site managers by eliminating redundant data
collection and entry activities, and will improve the quality and consistency of data reported to HQ managers for
program analysis, budgeting, and reauthorization purposes.
CERCLIS 3 will help manage site activities and will support reauthorization analyses. Regional Project Managers
(RPMs) and On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) will be able to track national, Regional, and user-defined
Actions/Sub Actions in a comprehensive schedule that incorporates Gantt charts and calendars. These site schedules
will be available to both Regional and Headquarters managers and will keep managers up-to-date on changes in the
program's status. Furthermore, by sharing and reusing data nationwide, informed, consistent program decisions will
be promoted.
Enforcement Personnel
CERCLIS 3 will help attorneys search for and track PRPs, and will facilitate monitoring PRP compliance.
CERCLIS 3 will allow Superfund attorneys to associate PRPs with sites and enforcement actions with which they may
have been involved. It will give attorneys the opportunity to document a particular PRP's enforcement history and
share this information with enforcement personnel in other Regions. CERCLIS 3 will allow the HQ enforcement team
to monitor the percentage of PRP response actions in compliance with Consent Decrees (CDs), Administrative Orders
(AOs), and Unilateral Administrative Orders (UAOs), as well as the amount of penalties assessed and collected.
CERCLIS 3 will assist in determining the effectiveness of enforcement actions in pursuing PRPs. CERCLIS 3 will
enable enforcement personnel to determine when PRP searches are beginning and the level of PRP involvement at
Superfund sites. Enforcement managers will be able to track the different enforcement mechanisms used to obtain
PRP involvement, and analyze how these mechanisms have affected negotiation durations.
Community Involvement Personnel
CERCLIS 3 will allow community involvement personnel to access information on public meeting locations,
community organizations, and public officials. Community involvement personnel will be able to record and retrieve
information on public meeting locations, including directions to the meeting. They will also be able to record
information on community organizations that have expressed interest in a particular site, and identify citizens who are
members of a particular organization. CERCLIS 3 will also provide screens for entering information on elected
officials, including phone and fax numbers, date elected to office, and party affiliation.
CERCLIS 3 will make technical data available to Headquarters community involvement personnel, and will assist
the community involvement team in communicating information to interested parties. The Headquarters community
involvement team will have access to a wide variety of site information, including contaminant and cleanup data from
RI/FSs and RODs and national information on Technical Assistance Grants (TAGs) and Community Advisory Groups
(CAGs). CERCLIS 3 will provide a "public" view of technical site data in summarized formats, as well as tools for
both the Regions and Headquarters to develop and customize the NPL Site Fact Sheets to support the community
involvement program.
September 27, 1996 EA
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Risk Assessment Personnel
CERCLIS 3 will assist in performing contamination assessments and data evaluations, and will make project
planning more efficient. CERCLIS 3 will provide the ability to record, review, and reuse information from the
Preliminary Assessment (PA), Site Inspection (SI), Expanded Site Inspection (ESI), removal evaluation, and the
Hazard Ranking Score (MRS). For each environmental medium, risk assessment personnel will have the opportunity
to review and edit all contaminants of concern versus relevant standards, as well as access a summary of the
contaminant-specific risks and hazards. CERCLIS 3 will also identify the risk assessment documentation available
for each risk assessment performed at a site and provide a summary, for each document, of the uncertainties involved
with the assessment.
CERCLIS 3 will promote the use of risk assessment data in evaluating overall program progress. CERCLIS 3
will support current program evaluation systems, such as Environmental Indicators (El), SCAP, and the Government
Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) pilot, and will bolster the effectiveness of these systems by
incorporating performance measures that are focused on risk. By using risk-based data stored in CERCLIS 3, the risk
assessment team will be able to ensure that the highest-risk sites are being addressed quickly and efficiently.
IMCs and Regional Management Personnel
CERCLIS 3 will help IMCs establish regional planning estimates/targets. CERCLIS 3 will provide IMCs with
on-line access to site planning data for each target/measure activity. IMCs will be able to view planning data,
summarized at the Region- or section-level, and access site-specific schedules. IMCs will be able to revise site
schedules to update summary data without affecting the RPM's schedule. Furthermore, IMCs will be able to identify
the primary candidate sites for each target/measure activity to form the basis for negotiations.
CERCLIS 3 will help track the status of funds against the Regional budget, and will assist Headquarters managers
in promoting consistency across the program. Regional managers will be able to review all financial records
associated with a particular allowance and perform "what if* scenarios on Regional spending plans by revising
financial data and then reviewing the effect of the revisions on the Regional budget. Headquarters managers will
benefit from standard data collection activities and reporting processes by having access to national data, allowing
them to more easily analyze national trends and identify future initiatives that will promote program consistency.
Program Analysis and Resource Personnel
CERCLIS 3 will support current program evaluation processes as well as new performance measures. Because
CERCLIS 3 was designed to incorporate current program evaluation tools, El and SCAP processes will be seamlessly
transitioned to the CERCLIS 3 environment. CERCLIS 3 will also have the flexibility to support a wide new range
of program evaluation tools, like GPRA Pilot Measures and Measures of Success, in addition to enhancements to El
and SCAP. CERCLIS 3 will promote consistency in Superfund evaluation processes by providing program managers
with a wide range of site data from each Region.
CERCLIS 3 will help the Program Analysis and Resource team develop annual budgets and track expenditures.
CERCLIS 3 will provide Headquarters program managers with the information they need to determine Regional
spending plans and develop annual Advices of Allowance (AOAs). CERCLIS 3 will also allow program managers
to compare Regional spending plans to annual Regional negotiated budgets, and to track expenditures within each
allowance category.
E-5 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
REPORTING SUPERFUND INFORMATION
A Reports Library is currently being developed in CERCLIS 3, The Reports Library will be accessible by all
CERCLIS 3 users, and will contain both nationally- and Regionally-defined reports. The reports are categorized by
the following program areas: Enforcement, Federal Facilities, Program Management, Accomplishment, Remedy
Selection, Removal Action, Risk Assessment, and Site Assessment.
Reports in the CERCLIS 3 Reports Library are being developed from a Select Logic Database (SLDB). The
SLDB is a warehouse of select logic queries; because each query has been created using pieces of reusable code (RC),
the select logic stored in the SLDB can be reused across multiple reports. The SLDB approach to developing reports
has many benefits. By reusing select logic queries that have already undergone testing and validation, the SLDB
approach promotes consistency and accuracy in reporting program-wide. In addition, because all select logic queries
reside in one location, the effort required to maintain the Reports Library is significantly reduced.
The SLDB will store nationally- and Regionally-defined queries. Queries that are nationally defined and used
in national reports will be tested and validated by third-party testers. National queries will be sponsored by query
owners at Headquarters. Query owners are responsible for updating queries in a timely manner when new system
requirements are established to ensure that queries remain consistent with programmatic changes.
The Regions will be able to use national queries from the SLDB for Regional reporting purposes. The Regions
will also be able to develop and store Regionally-defined queries in the SLDB. Regionally defined queries and reports
will be managed and maintained by the Regions themselves. The CERCLIS 3 Reports Steering Committee is
currently discussing the process for and development of sharing queries and reports between Regions.
The Regions have submitted reports to Headquarters for analysis to determine if there are overlaps across the
reports from each Region. If a particular report is similar in several Regions, that report may be identified as a
candidate for a national report. Also, if a Regional query is identified for national implementation, the query will be
validated, tested, and released as a national query. National queries and reports will be managed by the Headquarters
Reports Librarian.
The Reports Librarian role has been expanded to include the coordination and management of all national queries
and reports. The Reports Librarian will continue to coordinate with query and report owners and developers, ensuring
that reports and queries are developed consistently, in accordance with standards, and third-party tested. It is also
the Reports Librarian's responsibility to see that all national queries and reports are unique (but reused when
appropriate) and released to the user community on schedule.
CERCLIS 3 also will offer the capability to create, run, and save ad hoc reports. The ad hoc reporting utility
will give CERCLIS 3 reports users the ability to create and tailor reports to their own specific business processes,
using report writing tools like InfoMaker and select logic from the SLDB.
Until Superfund personnel in all Regions and at Headquarters are using CERCLIS 3, and until the CERCLIS 3
Reports Library is fully developed, tested, and approved, official SCAP reports will be run from CERCLIS 2.
However, because CERCLIS data will soon be entered in CERCLIS 3, the data required to generate official SCAP
reports will need to be converted back into CERCLIS 2. This "backwards conversion" of data from CERCLIS 3 to
CERCLIS 2 will serve as a temporary bridge between the systems for reporting Superfund information to program
managers, Congress, and the public.
September 27, 1996 E-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
APPLICABILITY OF THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
CERCLIS Reports Releasable under Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
There is a set of CERCLIS-generated reports that have sensitive information (records or information that are
protected under FOIA and cannot be released to the public) removed and may be released under FOIA, These reports
include:
SCAP 11 (Site Summary Report for NPL Sites);
• SCAP 12 (Site Summary Report for Non-NPL Sites);
• List 8T (Site/Event Listing, Archived Sites);
• List 9 (Site Comprehensive Listing);
• Enforcement 10 (The Settlements Master Report— Public Version); and
• Enforcement 25 (Administrative and Unilateral Orders Issued).
The Records of Decision System (RODS) provides the justification for the remedial action (treatment) chosen
under the Superfund program. Additionally, RODS stores information on the technologies being used to clean up
sites. This information may be released under FOIA.
Sensitive Information Not Releasable under FOIA
FOIA is intended as a disclosure law, not a withholding law. In handling all FOIA requests, there should be a
presumption in favor of releasing information. There are certain types of information, particularly enforcement
information, that have been designated as confidential and therefore not releasable to the public because disclosure
could cause significant harm to the Agency. The following information fits into this category:
• Section 106 and 107 litigation and Consent Decrees (CD) and all related information where the planning
information indicates that the action has or will be referred to Headquarters (HQ) or to the Department of
Justice (DOJ). If the case is filed, the information may be released.
• Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) lead Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) projects and all
related information where only planning data exist. If there is an actual PRP RI/FS start, the planned
completion date (Fiscal Year/Quarter) can be released. However, no subsequent response dates are
releasable,
» Remedial Design (RD)/Remedial Action (RA) - Administrative Order/CD and all related information where
only planning data exist. This information is only releasable where an actual completion date exists.
• Planned obligation amounts related to Regional enforcement extramural budget activity associated with the
following activities:
Litigation (106, 106/107, 107) support;
Removal Negotiations;
Non-NPL and NPL PRP search;
E-7 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
RI/FS negotiations;
RD/RA negotiations; and
Cost recovery negotiations.
• RD and RA planned events where the lead is the RP with no actual starts. When there is an actual start, the
planned completion can be released.
• RI/FS and RD/RA negotiations planned start and completion dates. When there is an actual start, the planned
completion can be released.
• Planned removal/remedial obligations.
• All planned activities for sites that have not been designated as final or proposed NPL sites in the Federal
Register.
• Information pertaining to the financial viability of PRPs.
This information is protected from mandatory disclosure by the following FOIA exemptions and provisions:
• EXEMPTION 7: Records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes. Specifically,
EXEMPTION 7 (a) - could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.
Exemption 7 - Records or Information Compiled For Law Enforcement Purposes
This exemption provides that records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes need not be
disclosed in six specific instances. Even though a document falls under Exemption 7, the Agency, in its
discretion, encourages release of the document unless release would significantly harm the Agency. Under
this section, records or information can be withheld from disclosure if:
Exemption 7 (a) -r- Disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.
Harm to the government's case in court by premature release of evidence or information or damage to
the Agency's ability to conduct an investigation constitutes interference under the exemption.
Exemption 7 (b) - Disclosure would deprive a person of a right to fair trial.
Exemption 7 (c) - Disclosure could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy.
Exemption 7 (d) - Disclosure could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential
source. This includes protection of information provided by the source on a criminal law enforcement
investigation.
Exemption 7 (e) - Disclosure would reveal a special technique or procedure for law enforcement
investigations or prosecutions.
Exemption 7 (f) - Disclosure could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or safety of any person.
As a result of 1986 Amendments to FOIA Exemption 7, the general coverage of Exemption 7 is no longer
investigatory records but records of information compiled for law enforcement purposes. As long as some
law enforcement authority exists and the record meets the threshold test for exemption 7, the record need
no longer reflect or result from specifically focused inquiries by the Agency.
September 27, 1996 E-8
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXEMPTION 5: Privileged Interagency or Intra-Agency Memoranda, Specifically, EXEMPTION 5,
Privilege 1 - Deliberate Process Privilege, and EXEMPTION 5, Privilege 4 - Government Commercial
Information Privilege,
Exemption 5 - Privileged Interagency or Intra-Agency Memoranda
Intra-agency records include reports prepared by outside consultants at the request of the agency.
Recommendations from State officials to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may be considered intra-
agency records when EPA has solicited State comments, has a formal relationship with the State, and the
records concern a specific deliberative process.
This exemption allows the Agency to withhold from disclosure interagency or intra-agency memoranda or
letters which fall under the following privileges:
« The Deliberative Process Privilege protects the quality of the Agency's decision-making process (i.e.,
to protect against premature disclosure of proposed policies before they are adopted), to encourage
candid discussions among Agency officials, and to avoid premature disclosure which could mislead the
public.
Only pre-decisional, deliberative documents may be withheld. These are written prior to the Agency's
final decision, and are not likely to be those that are written by a person with final decision-making
authority. Drafts of documents usually fall under this category, and documents transmitted between the
government and third parties during settlement negotiations are occasionally protected under this
privilege.
The deliberative process privilege does not allow the withholding of purely factual portions of
documents. These portions must be released if they can be segregated from the remainder of the
document (partial denial). This requirement presents a problem where the facts themselves reflect on
the Agency's deliberative process; in this instance, the factual portions may be withheld.
* The Attorney-Work Product Privilege allows the withholding of documents prepared in anticipation of
possible litigation. Litigation need not have commenced but it must be reasonably contemplated. This
privilege does not extend to purely factual documents unless they reflect the results of an attorney's
evaluation.
• The Attorney-Client Privilege applies to confidential communications between attorney and client,
including communications between an Agency attorney and Agency employee.
» The Government Commercial Information Privilege is available to the government for information it
generates in the process leading up to the award of a contract. This privilege expires once the contract
is awarded or upon withdrawal of the contractual offer. An example of this privilege is cost estimates
prepared by the government and used to evaluate the construction proposals of private contractors,
* The Expert Witness Privilege is commonly invoked to allow the withholding of records generated by an
expert witness.
• The Confidential Witness Statement Privilege allows statements obtained from confidential witnesses to
be withheld.
The Agency encourages the discretionary release of documents falling under any of the privileges, unless
release would significantly harm the Agency's decision-making process. All of the privileges may be waived
if the Agency has disclosed the document to third parties.
E-9 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
The sensitive information listed above covers the information restricted from public disclosure as of the
compilation of this Manual. Additional information may be added to this category and information may be restricted
in specific instances (though the prior disclosure rule must be satisfied). If requested information is potentially able
to be restricted under a FOIA provision (in this case, under Exemptions 5, or 7), the official receiving the request
should contact the appropriate FOIA office to determine whether the information should be restricted. Recently, a
letter was sent to the Regions requesting their input as to what information should be considered enforcement sensitive
and, thus, non-FOIAable. After Regional feedback has been analyzed, and guidance has been finalteed, more detailed
information will be provided.
Ad Hoc Reporting
In general, all Regional requests for ad hoc reporting— a special request for records or information that is not
part of the approved public SCAP reports— should be referred to the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE)
CERCLA Enforcement Division Director immediately. The Regional official receiving the request should inform the
requestor of this policy and advise the requestor to contact HQ for a decision on whether this information may be
released. If the requested information is only available from a specific Region, and HQ has decided to release this
information, HQ will inform the responsible Region that the information should be compiled and disclosed to the
requestor.
Ad hoc reporting requests should be treated like FOIA requests. And the following guidlines apply:
» If the information is protected under one of the FOIA exemptions, the information will not be disclosed
(except in cases of discretionary release).
• Absent FOIA exemption protection, the information will be disclosed if it can be compiled or obtained in a
reasonable amount of time by an Agency employee familiar with the subject area.
* Fees for ad hoc reporting requests will be charged in accordance with the fee structure used for FOIA
requests.
Accessing FOIA Information
There are several methods to access FOIA reports.
* On the Internet, via the World Wide Web, several standard CERCLIS reports can be downloaded from the
Superfund Information home page (http://www.epa.gov/superfund/), accessed under the header "Standard
Site Reports." To view downloaded reports, use the CERCLIS Report Browser, a DOS-based browsing tool,
also available from the home page. Standard reports include:
List 8T- CERCLIS Archive Listing. All sites that were previously listed as contaminated or were
suspected of being contaminated, but have subsequently been cleared of contamination or are no longer
suspected of contamination. Previously called the "Transition Site/Event Listing."
List 9- Site Location/Alias/Event Description Listing. All Superfund sites/incidents, addresses, and
Congressional districts, and the remedial, removal, and community relations events associated with each
site/incident.
SCAP 11- Site Summary Report for NPL Sites. Detailed information on certain Superfund
sites/incidents on the NPL. Only the sites/incidents that have planned or actual remedial/removal
activities are selected for inclusion on the report.
September 27, 1996 E-10
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SCAP 12- Site Summary Report for Non-NPL Sites. Detailed information on certain Superfund
sites/incidents that are not on the NPL. Only the sites/incidents that have planned or actual
remedial/removal activities are selected for inclusion on the report.
• The Superfund Automated Phone and Fax Information System (1-800-775-5037) is an interactive phone/fax
system that provides information about CERCLIS and the Record of Decisions System (RODS). By
following voice prompts, the Superfund Automated Phone System allows users to request List 8T, List 9,
SCAP 11, and SCAP 12 reports on diskette. Paper copies of these reports may also be requested using the
Superfund Automated Phone System. Some products can be delivered immediately by fax; other products
must be mailed.
« FOIA requests may also be submitted to a Regional or HQ office for any one of the FOIA reports. FOIA
report requests should include the state, zip code, county, and/or city they are requesting, as well as which
FOIA report they want.
» Enforcement 10 (The Settlements Master Report— Public Version) and Enforcement 25 (Administrative and
Unilateral Orders Issued) are available by contacting OSRE. These reports are not available from
Superfund's World Wide Web site or the Superfund Automated Phone and Fax Information System.
DATA OWNERS/SPONSORSHIP
HQ Centers are taking an active role in ensuring the quality of data stored in CERCLIS 3 by acting as data
sponsors. Data sponsors ensure that the information necessary for supporting Superfund's business
processes—including program analysis, management, and evaluation—is captured and stored properly in CERCLIS
3. To meet this goal, HQ data sponsors identify their data needs, develop data field definitions, and prepare coding
guidance for entering data into the system. Data sponsors also determine data acquisition strategies for each data field.
Part of this task is the responsibility of data sponsors to provide contract language to support the requirements for
electronic data submission (EDS).
Data sponsorship promotes consistency and communication across the Superfund program. HQ data sponsors
communicate and gain consensus from data owners on data collection and reporting processes. Periodically, data
sponsors will verify the data entered and maintained by the Regions through audit reports and focused data studies,
ensuring that coding guidance is being properly followed. Data sponsors will then work directly with the Regional
IMC or HQ Center to identify and correct data errors.
HQ data sponsors assist data owners in maintaining and improving the quality of Superfund program data. Data
sponsorship provides team support for data evaluation and reporting. It helps promote consistency in both national
and Regional reporting. In addition, it ensures that data quality will continue as CERCLIS 3 evolves; for example,
the coding guidance being developed by HQ data sponsors will eventually be available from CERCLIS 3's On-Line
Guidance utility.
E-ll September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix F: Oil Pollution Prevention and
Response Program
DRAFT September 19, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 19, 1996 DRAFT
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix F
Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Program
Table of Contents
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM PRIORITIES F-l
Overview F-l
Oil Program Initiatives , F-l
Addressing Above-Ground Storage Facility (ASF) Leakage and Contamination F-l
Implementing FRPs F-l
Implementing the NCP , F-2
Developing and Maintaining Data Systems F-3
Improving the SPCC Program F-3
Coordinating with Other Agencies F-4
Oil Spill Prevention and Cleanup Activities F-4
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM PLANNING AND
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS . . . F-5
Overview F-5
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan F-5
Regional Contingency Plans F-5
Area Contingency Plans F-5
Federal Response Plan F-5
Communications Requirements Associated with a Release F-7
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT , . . F-9
Overview F-9
Budget Formulation F-9
Operating Plan Development F-9
Budget Execution F-9
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM FY 97 MEASURES F-l 1
Overview F-11
Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Program Definitions F-12
Prevention/Preparedness Measures F-12
OIL-1 » Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Inspections and Plan Reviews . , F-12
OIL-2 » Oil Facility Response Plans Reviewed and Approved F-12
OIL-3 • Area Contingency Plans F-13
OIL-4 * Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) Area Drills F-14
Response Measures F-14
OIL-5 • OU Spill Notifications F-14
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix F
Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Program
Table of Contents (cont'd)
OIL-6 • Oil Spill Investigations/Preliminary Assessments F-15
OIL-7 • Oil Spill Cleanups F-15
OIL-8 • Oil Spill PRP Monitoring/Directing F-16
OIL-9 • Cost Documentation F-16
Enforcement Measures F-17
OIL-10 • Administrative Penalty Enforcement Actions for Spill Violations and
Prevention Regulation Violations F-17
OIL-11 • Judicial Penalty Enforcement Actions for Spill Violations And
Prevention Regulation Violations F-17
OIL-12 • Orders for Removal Issued to a Responsible Party F-17
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix F
Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Program
List of Exhibits
EXHIBIT F.I RELATIONSHIP OF OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE
PROGRAM PLANS F-6
EXHIBIT F.2 FY 97 OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM ACTIVITIES . . F-l 1
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Left
Intentionally Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
APPENDIX F
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE
PROGRAM PRIORITIES
OVERVIEW
The Agency shares responsibility with the United States Coast Guard (USCG) for implementing major provisions
of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA). EPA will review Area Contingency Plans
(ACPs), issue regulations for Facility Response Plans (FRPs) for non-transportation related offshore facilities,
implement recommendations from a report to Congress on liners, inspect removal equipment at facilities, and address
liability issues. The Agency has recently published regulations for non-transportation related onshore FRPs, and a
major revision to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The Agency will
approve certain FRPs and conduct area drills. In addition, Regional offices will assist State Emergency Response
Commissions (SERCs), Tribes, and Local Emergency Planning Commissions (LEPCs) in coordinating and linking
FRPs with Community Response Plans (CRPs) developed pursuant to the Emergency Planning and Community Right
Act of 1986 (EPCRA).
OIL PROGRAM INITIATIVES
In Fiscal Year (FY) 97, the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) will focus on addressing
the following: above-ground storage tank/facility leakage and contamination; overseeing the continued implementation
of FRPs through review, approvals, and inspections; overseeing implementation of the oil spill response provisions
of the revised NCP; developing and maintaining data systems; improving the Spill Prevention Control and
Countermeasures (SPCC) Program; and enhancing coordination within and between government agencies. These
initiatives, which will improve response and enforcement activities related to oil spills and leaks, are described in more
detail in the remainder of this section,
Addressing Above-Ground Storage Facility (ASF)
Leakage and Contamination
In FY 96, the Agency completed a study to determine whether liners or other secondary containment means will
help prevent and detect leaks at above-ground storage facilities. As a result of this study and related research, the
Agency will initiate a cooperative program for industry, States, and environmental groups to investigate existing
contamination, current facility design and procedures, and possible initiatives for contamination prevention and
cleanup.
Implementing FRPs
The OPA of 1990 requires that certain facility owners and operators prepare plans to respond to worst-case
discharges of oil or a substantial threat of such a discharge. Owners/operators of such "substantial harm facilities"
must submit their plans or stop handling, storing, or transporting oil. To ensure that such plans are implemented and
response readiness maintained, OSWER will engage in the following activities:
• Implement FRP Regulation for Offshore Facilities — Through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with
the USCG signed on February 3, 1994, EPA has been delegated the responsibility to regulate certain offshore
facilities inside the continental coastline (including the Great Lakes, rivers, coastal wetlands, and Gulf Coast
barrier islands).
F-l September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• Develop Guidance on FRP Rule — To ensure comprehensive plan development, the Oil Program Center (OPC)
will take the lead in developing a FRP guidance document. The document will contain such elements as the types
of facilities that must prepare response plans, which plans must be approved, and what information should be
contained in these plans.
• Coordinate with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) on Oil Program Enforcement
of the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC)/FRP Rule — The primary goal of this initiative
is to ensure that program regulations, policy, implementation, and enforcement are consistently applied and
support the same basic program objectives.
• Develop and Implement Inspector Training to Ensure Consistent Implementation and Enforcement of the SPCC
Prevention and Response Program — The goal is to develop a national inspector's training program pilot in
conjunction with OECA and give training to all Regions.
• Develop Preparedness Response Exercise Program (PREP) Guidance/Scheduling — To ensure that facilities
are able to fully implement their FRPs, the OPC will provide guidance on procedures and scheduling of periodic
sessions during which a facility puts into practice its FRP and ensures its effectiveness.
• Continue to Review FRPs and Inspect Facilities — Inspections of facilities and FRPs will continue. FRPs
submitted after 2/18/93 will have to be reviewed, inspected, and approved. The 5-year cycle of review and
approval of the FRP also will continue. The OPC also may observe internal facility drills/exercises.
Implementing the NCP
The revised NCP of 1994 implements several new regulations that directly affect the policies and procedures
governing the Oil program. The NCP also redefines the roles and responsibilities of several program offices within
the Oil program. These new regulations include a revision of Subpart J, which outlines technical requirements for
chemical countermeasures, approval, and use on oil spills. They also include requirements for ACPs that ensure
efficient responses to potential worst-case oil spills or discharges. The OPC will have an integral role in the
implementation of Subpart J and the monitoring of ACPs, and will be assisted by several other offices in these efforts.
The following activities will be implemented as a result of the revised NCP:
• Subpart J — Subpart J of the NCP requires EPA to prepare a product schedule of dispersants, chemicals, and
other spill mitigating devices and substances, if any, that may be used in carrying out the NCP. Regional
Response Teams (RRTs) and Area Committees (ACs), whose members are appointed by the President and consist
of personnel from qualified Federal State and local agencies, will address as part of their planning activities the
desirability of using dispersants, surface washing agents, surface collecting agents, bioremediation agents, or
miscellaneous spill control agents such as those listed on the NCP product schedule. This effort requires
effectiveness and toxicity testing for all product categories currently listed on the NCP product schedule. The
Oil Program conducts validation testing for all dispersants.
The OPC is responsible for coordination, correspondence, and product review in support of Subpart J initiatives.
In addition to this role, the OPC provides outreach to vendors, RRTs, and the general public regarding the use
of chemical countermeasures. The OPC also continues to oversee research efforts on surface washing agents and
dispersants. Furthermore, because of the breadth of chemical countermeasures research and field activities, the
OPC coordinates extensively with the Office of Research and Development (ORD) and the Environmental
Response Team (ERT).
September 27, 1996 F-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• Enhance the OPC's Involvement in Area Planning — The OPC works with the Chemical Emergency
Preparedness and Prevention Office (CEPPO) by monitoring area contingency planning efforts to ensure that they
are providing the necessary link between the FRPs and the NCP, and that all contingency plans are coordinated
to control a worst-case discharge of any size. OPC and CEPPO will ensure that plans are integrated and
compatible, to the greatest extent possible, with all appropriate response plans of State, local, and non-Federal
entities, and especially with Title III local emergency response plans.
Developing and Maintaining Data Systems
The availability of complete and comprehensive data on oil spill incidents and facilities is an integral component
of the Oil program's planning and response efforts. During the upcoming year, the Oil program will focus its efforts
in this area on the further development of pilot projects that will lead to a new comprehensive Oil program database
that records and tracks information on incidents (spills) and facilities. The program also will continue to maintain the
current Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS), so that release notification information on oil and
hazardous substances can be accessed quickly and efficiently. To achieve these goals, the Oil program will engage
in the following activities:
• Collection of Environmental Data — OPC will continue to assist the Regions in gathering spatial data for area
contingency planning purposes. This data will include environmentally sensitive areas, such as wetlands, drinking
water intakes, endangered species locations and similar areas. OPC also will work with the Regions to
incorporate this data and other spatial data, such as facility locations and spill locations, into a useable geographic
information system (GIS) format, for both planning and response support purposes.
* Develop Oil Database — The Oil program database will be developed for the purpose of recording and tracking
information on Oil program actions at a site-specific level. The database will be divided into two functional
categories: incidents and facilities. The incident portion of the database will record all spills and the
corresponding response actions at each site, while the facility portion of the database will be the medium for
recording normal facility operations data. The database will interface with CERCLJS as necessary, and will be
used primarily by the Regions to facilitate the flow of information within and between Regions. The database
also will likely interface with some of the GIS applications described above.
» Enhance and Maintain ERNS — ERNS provides the most comprehensive data compiled on release notification
of oil and hazardous substances nationwide. Information should be recorded in ERNS when a release is initially
reported; when more specific data is verified, more detailed data on the spill should be entered into the system.
Improving the SPCC Program
The owners/operators of any facility subject to oil pollution prevention regulations are required to prepare and
implement a SPCC plan. Plans must detail the procedures put into place to prevent and control oil spills. To ensure
that such plans are developed and adhered to, the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR) will engage
in the following activities:
• Define Regional Coordination Roles Between the OPC and the Regional Centers — This initiative was
established to promote open communication, prevent duplication of SPCC program efforts, and clearly define
the roles of the OPC and Regional Coordination Centers.
• Facilitate Regional Consistency — The Oil program is working to facilitate consistency among the Regions in
their implementation of SPCC inspections. (See the discussion on FRPs earlier in the chapter.)
• Provide Regional Outreach — Regional outreach efforts will be in the form of Headquarters (HQ) support of the
Regions' efforts to successfully implement their oversight of the SPCC program.
F-3 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
• Provide team-building opportunities — To assist Regional coordination implementation teams, team-building
activities such as matrix management will be used to better manage administrative processes and activities,
• Reduce Paperwork Burden — The Agency will propose revisions to significantly reduce the SPCC paperwork
burden. In a 1995 report to the President, EPA committed to an Agency-wide 25% reduction.
• Implementing a Cooperative Program — HQ will work with Regions, States, industry, and environmental groups
to implement a program whereby facOities upgrade equipment, monitor as necessary, and clean up contamination.
Coordinating with Other Agencies
The success of the Oil program relies heavily on the continued cooperation of several different agencies including
the USCG, the Department of Transportation (DOT), the Minerals Management Service (MMS), the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Department of the Interior (DOI). Cooperation among these
agencies ensures the efficient implementation of the NCP and FRP rule. To better instill this cooperation, a national
bulletin board that will provide a means to share information on oil spill prevention and responses will be developed,
a MOU with the USCG will be prepared, and model MOUs for Regions/States will be developed.
OIL SPILL PREVENTION AND CLEANUP ACTIVITIES
HQ and the Regions will continue to work to decrease the environmental damage caused by oil spills. The
following measures will be taken in an effort to prevent oil spills:
* Targeting Inspections at the Higher Risk Facilities — Where inspections disclose violations, enforcement actions
will be taken in an effort to prevent problems before they occur.
• Increasing the Amount of Cost Recovery Documentation submitted to NPFC following completion of spill
response efforts.
• Planning and Conducting Responses to Oil Spills — Response actions will be conducted with the goal of
minimizing pollution and subsequent environmental damage, including increasing the number of removal orders
issued.
• Increasing the Number of Enforcement Penalty Actions taken as a result of oil or hazardous substances
discharge.
• Evaluating the Agency's Response to Spills to determine the most appropriate response to spills of varying
severity.
• Improving the Science of Oil Spill Response Through Efforts with Other EPA Offices and Industry Groups to
Sponsor Such New Technologies as /n-Site OH Burning and Surface Cleaning Agents — The Oil program will
work through the National Response Team (NRT) to address national oil issues including participation in the
Science and Technology, Preparedness, and Response Committees. The OPC will participate in special
projects/reports such as a proposal for the review and approval of response plans to be done by the Federal On-
Scene Coordinator (OSC) with jurisdiction for response.
September 27, 1996 F-4
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM PLANNING AND
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
OVERVIEW
In FY 97, the Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Program will continue to work on the further refinement
of its planning, prevention, and response activities and incorporation of these activities into the existing National
Response System (NRS) framework.
NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN
The cornerstone of the Oil program's planning activities is the revised NCP, which outlines procedures and
responsibilities for addressing potential oil and hazardous substance spills and discharges. This plan coordinates with,
and is bolstered by, a number of similar Federal contingency plans, all of which are capable of handling "worst case
discharges" of varying sizes and magnitudes. Exhibit F. 1 displays the relationship of the Oil Pollution Prevention
and Response Program plans and their relationship with the NCP.
REGIONAL CONTINGENCY PLANS
The Regions' plans for oil and hazardous waste spill responses are outlined in Regional Contingency Plans
(RCPs). RCPs are developed by Regional Response Teams (RRTs) in conjunction with the States, and provide for
timely, effective, and coordinated responses to oil and hazardous waste spills by various Federal agencies and other
governmental organizations. In addition, RCPs must follow the format and the intent of the NCP and be coordinated
with State Emergency Response Plans (SERPs), ACPs, and the Local Emergency Response Plans (LERPs) provided
for under Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA).
AREA CONTINGENCY PLANS
ACPs are locality-specific oil and hazardous waste spill response plans. All ACPs are under the supervisory
authority of a federally appointed OSC, and are formulated by a body known as an Area Committee (AC). The ACs
work in conjunction with the appropriate RRTs, Coast Guard District Response Groups (DRGs), the National Strike
Force Communication Center (NSFCC), Scientific Support Coordinators (SSCs), LEPCs, SERCs, and Tribes to
ensure consistency and prevent duplication of response efforts and responsibilities. The ACP also should be
implemented in conjunction with provisions of the NCP and be effective in responding to a worst case discharge and
mitigating or preventing a substantial threat of such a discharge from a vessel or facility operating within or near the
area. The OSC may conduct emergency response drills to ensure that existing contingency plans and mechanisms are
effective in dealing with a potential worst case discharge.
FEDERAL RESPONSE PLAN
If and when an oil or hazardous material spill is declared a national disaster by the President, the Federal
Response Plan is the instrument used to ensure effective response and cleanup. The Federal Response Plan is an
agreement signed by the 27 Federal departments and agencies responsible for responding to oil and hazardous waste
spills. It is implemented only when an existing discharge is beyond the capabilities of the State and local authorities
and/or the statutory authority of Federal agencies. Interagency Agreements (lAGs) may be utilized when necessary
to ensure that Federal resources will be available for a timely response to a discharge or release.
F-5 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EXHIBIT F.I
RELATIONSHIP OF OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM PLANS
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan (NCP)
International Joint
Plans
Federal Response
Plan
Regional
Contingency Plans
(RCPs)
Federal Agency
Internal Plans
Area Contingency
Plans (ACPs)
Facility Response
Plans (FRPs)
r Vessel Response^"N
-^Plans CVKPs)^/
' Plans of the NRS
• Points of Coordination with the NRS
• Plans Integrated with the ACP
There are also several smaller governmental plans and organizations that play an integral role in the NRS. SERCs
are responsible for designating emergency planning districts, appointing LEPCs for each district, and supervising the
creation of LERPs in accordance with Title III, Section 303 of SARA. LERPs should be reviewed and updated at
least once a year to ensure their accuracy and effectiveness. The SERCs and LEPCs also are responsible for receiving
and processing information requests from the public regarding discharges or subsequent response actions. CRPs set
forth provisions and guidelines for communication within and between communities in the event of a spill or
discharge. These plans should be coordinated as closely as possible with other response plans and ensure fluid transfer
of necessary information from the lead agency to the members of the local community.
The final components of the NRS are the SPCC Plans, FRPs, and Vessel Response Plans (VRPs), produced by
owners or operators of facilities or vessels that are subject to the OPA. All owners and operators of OPA regulated
facilities must produce and implement a SPCC plan, which outlines procedures for preventing and controlling oil
spills. FRPs, which focus on reactive measures, such as how facility personnel are to respond to a discharge, are not
required unless it is deemed that a specific facility could cause "substantial and or significant harm" to the surrounding
environment. FRPs must be consistent with the NCP as well as with the appropriate RCPs and ACPs, and must be
updated periodically to ensure effective response. Finally, all "tank vessels," as defined by section 31 l(j)(5) of the
Clean Water Act (CWA) (as amended), must prepare and submit a VRP for responding to a worst case discharge,
or to a substantial threat of such a discharge of oil or hazardous substances.
September 27, 1996
F-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
An NCP product schedule must be kept for all dispersants, surface washing agents, surface collecting agents,
bioremediation agents, and miscellaneous oil spill control agents that may be used in mitigating oil and hazardous
substance spills. Under Subpart J of the NCP, dispersant and bioremediation effectiveness testing and revised toxicity
testing are required for all product categories listed on the NCP product schedule.
COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH A RELEASE
The National Response Center (NRC), located at USCG HQ, is the national communications center for handling
activities related to oil response actions. It acts as the single point of contact for all pollution incident reporting, and
as the NRT communications center. Any oil spills or discharges must be reported by telephone to the NRC. The
NRC is responsible for notifying the appropriate Federal OSC and any participating NRT member agencies of the
release, and communicating all of the information that it has received to ensure that an appropriate response may be
implemented. All of the information received from the initial notification report also must be entered into ERNS.
This information can then be used by decision makers to solve emergency response and release prevention issues.
When notification information is verified, more detailed data on the release should be added to ERNS. ERNS also
can be accessed by enforcement personnel to determine whether or not timely notification of spills have been reported.
Specific reporting requirements must be met to ensure efficient communication and coordination during response
actions. The Federal OSC must report any significant developments that occur during response actions to the RRT
and other appropriate agencies through communications networks or other pre-approved channels. This information
should be made available to the trustees of affected natural resources so that they remain informed during the course
of the response action. The OSC also is required to produce (if the RRT or NRT deems it beneficial) a more detailed
report on the removal actions taken, resources committed (financial and manpower), and problems encountered in
responding to the spill or discharge. This report should be submitted first to the RRT, and then subsequently to the
NRT within 30 days of its initial submission. In addition, Title III of SARA requires the reporting of information,
as it becomes available, to community representatives that have a stake in the response actions. Two of the more
commonly used mechanisms for ensuring compliance with Title III requirements are the establishment of a Joint
Information Center, and/or an on-scene news office to report important developments as they occur. Finally, after
the appropriate response action has been implemented, the lead agency is responsible for preparing a report that details
the source of the release, PRP involvement, and the impacts or potential impacts on human health, welfare, and the
environment posed by the discharge or spill.
F-7 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Left
Intentionally Blank
September 27, 1996 F-8
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
OVERVIEW
The CWA as amended by the OPA established a dedicated trust fund for EPA to use for implementing many OPA
provisions. The USCG administers the trust fund. The oil budget, which includes oil spill prevention, preparedness,
and response is (like the Superfund budget) multi-year money that conforms to the Agency's administrative and
programmatic budget structure.
BUDGET FORMULATION
The Oil program's budget formulation process begins approximately 20 months before the budget execution year.
Currendy, the Oil program establishes and defines goals and initiatives for the budget year in support of the Agency's
strategic plan. In line with Agency guidance, the Oil program also develops a budget strategy to achieve these goals
and establishes outputs for measuring success. Examples of outputs include the number of oil spill cleanups, oil spill
administrative enforcement actions, and oil spill FRP reviews,
OPERATING PLAN DEVELOPMENT
Once the Agency receives the Oil program appropriation, development of the finalized operating plan begins.
The appropriated resources are allocated to Oil program activities, including response and regulatory support,
enforcement, emergency response teams, and prevention.
BUDGET EXECUTION
During the budget execution year, Regions request programmatic funds for specific oil spill activities including:
• Responding to oil spills, monitoring private party responses, and investigating oil spill notifications;
• Conducting SPCC inspections including plan reviews, site visits, and follow-up;
• Reviewing FRPs to ensure safety and compliance, and to provide early identification of potential oil spill dangers;
• Providing technical assistance to the USCG in response to coastal oil spills; and
Performing ACP drills through PREP.
HQ reprograms the funds for Regional expenditure based on required requests. Oil spill activities also are
performed by and funded directly out of HQ for such purposes as:
• Promoting bioremediation implementation with the Regions.
As the budget execution year closes, the Oil program uses actual obligations as the framework for developing the
next year's budget to ensure that the formulation process most closely reflects program trends.
F-9 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Left
Intentionally Blank
September 27, 1996 F-10
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM
FY 97 MEASURES
OVERVIEW
The following pages contain the definitions of the FY 97 Oil Pollution Prevention and Response Program
measures. The measures are grouped under the following three program areas: Prevention/Preparedness; Response;
or Enforcement. Exhibit F.2 displays these Oil program activities and indicates the program area grouping under
which each measure falls. All oil program measures are reported semi-annually on a site- or facility-wide basis. Oil
program measures are not reported site-specifically.
EXHIBIT F.2
FY 97 OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
OIL-I: Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
(SPCC) Inspections and Plan Reviews
OIL-2: Oil Facility Response Plans Reviewed and
Approved
OIL-3: Area Contingency Plans
OIL-4: PREP Area Drills
OIL-5: Oil Spill Notifications
OIL-6: Oil Spill Investigations/ Preliminary Assessment
OIL-7: Oil Spill Cleanups
OIL-8: Oil Spill PRP Monitoring/Directing
OIL-9: Cost Documentation
OIL-10: Administrative Penalty Enforcement Actions
for Spill Violations and Prevention Regulation
Violations
OIL-I1: Judicial Enforcement Actions for Spill
Violations and Prevention Regulation Violations
OIL-I2: Orders for Removal Issued to a Responsible
Party
mmmtmmxm&^wmmmmmzmim^;:*
^P^SPl^^;fP^if?'i^^^S
Prevention/
Preparedness
Prevention/
Preparedness
Prevention/
Preparedness
Prevention/
Preparedness
Response
Response
Response
Response
Response
Enforcement
Enforcement
Enforcement
F-ll
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PROGRAM DEFINITIONS
PREVENTION/PREPAREDNESS MEASURES:
O1L-1 • SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND COUNTERMEASURE (SPCC)
INSPECTIONS AND PLAN REVIEWS
Definition:
For this measure, SPCC inspections include site inspections and SPCC plan reviews performed by EPA and/or the
support contractors. For both activities listed below, each separate facility or SPCC plan will count as a single credit,
no matter how extensive or complex the facility is.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Two activities are counted separately for SPCC inspections (Action Name = SPCC Inspections/Reviews):
• Site inspection, which may include separate counts for an initial visit and for a follow-up compliance inspection;
or
• The submittal of correspondence to a facility regarding the review of the SPCC plan.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of inspections and plan reviews are reported non-site specifically
in CERCLIS.
OIL-2 • OIL FACILITY RESPONSE PLANS REVIEWED AND APPROVED
Definition:
Under the OPA, facilities that store oil and have the potential to cause "substantial harm" to the environment must
prepare a response plan for a worst-case discharge. The subset of those facilities that have the potential to cause
"significant and substantial harm" to the environment require review and approval by EPA, although all facilities may
be reviewed by EPA. This measure counts the number of oil Facility Response Plans (FRPs) reviewed and approved
by the Region.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The initial evaluation, detailed review, site inspection, and approval of one response plan will each be counted
separately (Action Name = Facility Response Plan Review).
Initial Evaluation: Date of the first piece of correspondence from EPA to the facility that includes an initial
determination of whether the plan is complete and identification of "significant and substantial harm" facilities.
Regions will receive credit for an initial evaluation only once for each plan received.
Detailed Review: Date of the first piece of correspondence from EPA to the facility after completion of a review
checklist or equivalent level of review. Regions will receive credit for detailed review of each plan once for each
approval cycle or each material change and subsequent resubmission.
September 27, 1996 F-12
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
FRP Site Inspections: Date of each site visit made as part of a FRP review, as recorded in site files or inspection
report. Regions will receive credit for each separate site visit as part of a FRP review.
Final Approval: Date of the letter from EPA to the facility approving the response plan. Regions will receive credit
for each new approval during each review cycle.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of response plans evaluated, reviewed, and approved are reported
non-site specifically in CERCLIS.
OlL-3 • AREA CONTINGENCY PLANS
Definition:
Under the OPA, Regions are required to work with Area Committees (ACs) and develop Area Contingency Plans
(ACPs). Regions vary as to whether they will publish a single plan with several sub-area annexes, or several separate
ACPs. A Region that publishes one ACP with four sub-area annexes will receive the same credit as a Region that
publishes four separate ACPs.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Regions will receive credit for each publication of a contingency plan for an area or sub-area within that Region.
Publication consists of submission to the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) for public distribution, or
an equivalent level of finalization for distribution (Action Name = Area Contingency Plans).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of ACP publications are reported non-site specifically in CERCLIS.
F-13 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
OIL-4 • PREPAREDNESS FOR RESPONSE EXERCISE PROGRAM (PREP)
AREA DRILLS
Definition:
OPA requires periodic drills and exercises of ACPs and FRPs. To satisfy this requirement, EPA in conjunction with
other Federal agencies helped establish PREP. Area Drills, a key part of the PREP program, bring together one or
more industry groups (e.g., facilities, vessels) and usually several Federal and State agencies on complex drill
scenarios. Each year, six inland (one EPA-lead) and fourteen coastal area drills will be scheduled.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Two activities are counted separately for PREP Area Drills (Action Name = PREP Area Drills):
• EPA-lead PREP Area Drills, which will typically be one per year nationally; and
• Participation in non-EPA lead PREP Area Drills, which can include industry-lead drills or drills led by other
Federal agencies. Region receives credit the date a letter, form, or memo is transmitted documenting the drill.
EPA's role will likely include some level of participation during drill preparation as well as participation during
the actual drill.
Changes in Definition FT 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of PREP Area Drills are reported non-site specifically in CERCLIS.
RESPONSE MEASURES:
OIL-5 • OIL SPILL NOTIFICATIONS
Definition:
An oil spill notification is defined as a report to EPA of an oil discharge into the environment. This measure includes
the number of sites or incidents where an oil spill notification is received.
Definition of Accomplishment:
A release notification is counted when a report of an oil spill is received, processed, and logged by EPA through
ERNS (Action Name = Oil Spill Notification).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of oil spill notifications is reported non-site specifically in CERCLIS.
September 27, 1996 F-14
-------
OSWER Directive 92Q0.3-14-1C
O1L-6 • OIL SPILL INVESTIGATIONS/PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENTS
Definition:
An Oil Spill Investigation is the process of collecting field data on an actual or potential oil release for the purpose
of characterizing the magnitude and severity of the hazard. This Preliminary Assessment is typically related to
"mystery spills." It is geared towards determining the source of such spills and potential impacts prior to actually
taking a response action (if one is needed).
Definition of Accomplishment:
Regions will receive credit for the site visit to investigate and conduct a Preliminary Assessment of a spill or potential
spill. Oil Spill Investigations/Preliminary Assessments (Action Name = Oil Spill Investigations) are documented by
a letter, form, or memo to the file recording the site visit.
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of oil spill investigations is reported non-site specifically in
CERCLIS.
OIL-7 • OIL SPILL CLEANUPS
Definition:
This measure is defined as an oil spill cleaned up by EPA using OPA funds. A single incident should be counted only
once regardless of how many times an EPA OSC goes back on-scene or how many phases the response entails.
Definition of Accomplishment:
For this measure, oil spill cleanup starts and completions will serve as two separate counts.
Oil Spill Cleanup Start Date: Date the contract modification, delivery order, or Pollution Reimbursement Funding
Authorization for an oil spill cleanup at a site is signed (Action Name = Oil Spill Cleanup Starts).
OH Spill Cleanup Completion Date: Date the final Pollution Report (POLREP) is issued (Action Name = Oil Spill
Cleanup Completions).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of oil spill cleanups started and completed are reported non-site
specifically in CERCLIS.
F-15 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
OIL-8 • OIL SPILL PRP MONITORING/DIRECTING
Definition:
EPA may use OPA funds to provide oversight and technical assistance to PRP oil spills.
Definition of Accomplishment:
The issuance of the first POLREP at a spill where the PRPs are performing a response will be considered the start
of a monitoring/directing activity (Action Name = Oil Spill PRP Monitoring/Directing).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of spills where EPA is providing oversight and technical assistance
is reported non-site specifically in CERCLIS.
OIL-9 • COST DOCUMENTATION
Definition:
In conducting responses to oil spills, the Agency can access the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund's (OSLTF) emergency
response allocation, which is managed by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG). Based on EPA's agreements with USCG,
the Agency must submit cost documentation packages within a reasonable amount of time after the completion of the
oil spill response, and sometimes interim reports based on the duration of the response and the ends of fiscal years.
This measure counts two activities: how many times the Region accessed the OSLTF [based on federal project
numbers (FPNs) issued]; and how many cost documentation packages the Region prepared and submitted to the
Cincinnati financial office. Although the account numbers established and cost documentation packages may not
match the FPNs issued one-for-one, this measure will provide a good indicator of progress toward submitting the
required documentation.
Definition of Accomplishment:
For this measure, two activities are counted:
• Number of FPNs issued to the Region (date FPN issued) (Action Name to be determined); and
• Number of cost documentation packages the Region prepared and submitted to the Cincinnati financial office
(date package submitted) (Action Name = Preparation of Cost Docm Pkge).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
This is a new measure.
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of FPNs issued and cost documentation packages submitted are
reported non-site specifically in CERCLIS.
September 27, 1996 F-16
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
ENFORCEMENT MEASURES:
OIL-10 • ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR SPILL
VIOLATIONS AND PREVENTION REGULATION VIOLATIONS
Definition:
Administrative enforcement actions are taken by the Region as a result of violations of Section 311(b)(3) and 311(j)
of the Clean Water Act.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Date that the complaint is filed in the administrative docket (Action Name = Administrative Penalty Enforcement
Actions for Spill Violations and Prevention Regulation Violations).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of complaints filed is reported non-site specifically in CERCLIS.
OIL-11 • JUDICIAL PENALTY ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR SPILL VIOLATIONS
AND PREVENTION REGULATION VIOLATIONS
Definition:
Judicial enforcement cases are initiated by the Regions in response to violations of Section 311(b)(3) and 31 l(j) of the
Clean Water Act.
Definition of Accomplishment:
Date of the letter or memo referring the case to the Department of Justice (DOJ) (Action Name = Judicial Penalty
Enforcement Actions for Spill Violations and Prevention Regulation Violations).
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of judicial referrals is reported non-site specifically in CERCLIS.
OIL-12 • ORDERS FOR REMOVAL ISSUED TO A RESPONSIBLE PARTY
Definition:
This measure counts the number of Administrative Orders (AO) for removal issued to a party under Section 311 of
the Clean Water Act.
Definition of Accomplishment:
An order is counted on the date it is signed by the appropriate Regional official (Action Name = Orders for Removals
Issued to a Responsible Party).
F-17 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Changes in Definition FY 96 - FY 97:
None
Special Planning/Reporting Requirements:
See Definition of Accomplishment. The number of orders issued is reported non-site specifically in CERCLIS.
September 27, 1996 F-18
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix G: GPRA Referenced Material
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Appendix G
GPRA Referenced Material
Table of Contents
GPRA REFERENCED MATERIAL - PILOT MEASURES G-l
GPRA G-l
Environmental Goals For America With Milestones For 2005 G-l
Performance Goals And Strategies G-l
I. Screen and Assess Sites G-l
II. Early and/or Long-Term Action Completions G-2
III, Complete Construction at NPL Sites G-3
IV. Conduct Outreach and Provide Assistance to Foster Increased State, Tribal, and Community
Involvement in Superfund G-3
Superfund Reform Measures of Success G-4
I. New Initiatives G-4
II. Enhanced and Continuing Initiatives . G-5
EPA Goals G-6
Office of Solid Waste & Emergency Response (OSWER) Goals G-6
Superfund Reforms Measures of Success (OERR & OECA) G-7
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
APPENDIX G
GPRA REFERENCED MATERIAL — PILOT MEASURES
GPRA
Superfund's program planning and reporting requirements have evolved and matured from intricate, internally
focused measures, to aligning and measuring resources with activities, and reporting the environmental outcomes of
the work undertaken at hazardous waste sites. The National Goals Project of 2005 and the Chief Financial Officers
(CFO) Act are legislative and administrative initiatives that have guided the evolution of Superfund program
management by gradually shifting the focus from administrative program success to a results-oriented future (e.g.,
Superfund environmental indicators) in which the program is held accountable for its actions. These various initiatives
will be the starting point for finalizing the congressionally-mandated GPRA, which provides the overarching principles
for Superfund program management now and in future years.
The Superfund response program was a GPRA performance measurement pilot in FY 96. The GPRA Pilot
measures detailed in FY 96 will be carried over into FY 97. A workgroup has been formed that is in the process of
revising the existing pilot measures. Additional guidance will be provided after the FY 97 Superfund Focus Forum
Meeting. For additional information regarding GPRA strategic plan requirements, annual performance plans, and
program performance reports, see Chapter I: Program Goals and Priorities.
The following is provided as reference material for informational purposes only. This material may be changed at a
later time. Users of this data are urged to ensure with appropriate sources that this information is still current.
ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS FOR AMERICA WITH MILESTONES FOR 2005
Goal: Places currently contaminated by hazardous or radioactive materials will no longer endanger public
health and the natural environment, and they will be restored to uses desired by the community,
Milestone 1: By 2005, long-term health threats will be eliminated and cleanup will be completed at 70 percent
of the 1374 contaminated sites on the 1995 NPL.
Milestone 2: By 2005, immediate health threats will be eliminated and long-term cleanup will be underway at 80
percent of the estimated sites that are expected to require cleanup.
PERFORMANCE GOALS AND STRATEGIES
I. Screen and Assess Sites
EPA's goal for the front-end of the program is to promptly assess sites and make sound decisions about any
needed response action. For the majority of sites raised to EPA's attention (the CERCLIS Inventory), EPA and/or
the State assesses the site and determines that No Further Response Action is Planned (NFRAP). A minority of sites
are found to pose emergency or time-critical threats to human health and an Early Action response is conducted.
Others are found to pose potential risks and require more in-depth studies [ESI/RI (Expedited Site Inspection/Remedial
Investigation), EE/CA (Environmental Engineering/Cost Analysis), or RI/FS (Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study)]. Upon completing these studies, EPA documents the need for a response, the alternative responses
considered, and the response decision in a Record of Decision (ROD) or Action Memorandum.
G-l September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
A main thrust of the Superfund program in 1997 is to continue streamlining the cleanup process through the
application of the Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model (SACM) in conjunction with remedy reform measures. The
SACM approach involves a continuous process for assessing site-specific conditions and the need for action using
cross-program response planning. A key aspect of SACM is to increase the use of Early Action responses for
contamination problems that can be effectively addressed without the traditional remedial process. The activities that
will be tracked towards this goal are the number of:
NFRAP sites;
• Action Memos;
• ESI/RIs, RI/FSs, EE/CAs (combined); and
• RODs.
II. Early and/or Long-Term Action Completions
Once the appropriate response action is determined at non-Federal facility sites, EPA either reaches agreement
with Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) to implement the remedy or conducts a Fund-financed response. It is
through the construction of early and long-term response action projects that risks to human health and the
environment are reduced. The program's goal is to address the worst risks first at Superfund sites and achieve the
response goals established in RODs and Action Memos.
The Agency will continue to streamline long-term cleanup for media restoration activities through remedy reform
initiatives such as establishing cleanup standards, developing risk protocols, and implementing presumptive remedies.
By streamlining the cleanup process, sites will be ready for use sooner, promoting the economic redevelopment of
the restored land. The activities that will be tracked towards this goal are:
• Number of Removal Completions (NPL/non-NPL)
Population Protection Measures (population protection, permanent/temporary; alternate water supply,
permanent/temporary; site security measures)
• Other current Environmental Indicators (El) Measures
Non-Time Critical Goal Attainment
• Number of NPL Site Remedial Actions Complete
Volumes Handled or Treated
Population Protection Measures
Media Goals Achieved (Soil, Groundwater, Surface Water)
• Risk Reduction
Case studies will be performed on various sites showing risk levels of contaminants before and after
remediation. These case studies will be the basis for the development of more complete risk reduction
measures. Draft will be submitted separately.
• Time from response Decision to Completion of Early/Long-Term Action.
September 27, 1996 G-2
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
Related Goal: Restoration of Contaminated Sites - Benchmark 2
By 2005, cleanup actions will be completed at 80% of the approximately 5,000 abandoned waste sites that
currently are under assessment or listed on the NPL.
m. Complete Construction at NPL Sites
To ensure sites are continuing through the remedial pipeline through completion and eventual deletion from the
NPL, the Agency has established a goal of reaching 650 construction completions by the year 2000 at Federal and non-
Federal facility sites. The program is continuing to support this goal through remedial design (RD) and remedial
action (RA) funding for sites scheduled to complete in this time frame. Remedy reform initiatives will enhance our
ability to reach the 650 goal. In addition, project completions contribute to the potential for economic redevelopment
of the surrounding area. The activities that will be tracked towards this goal are:
• Number of Construction Completions
Achieving Permanent Cleanup Goals
• Methods of Protection and Risk Reduction
Related Goal: Restoration of Contaminated Sites - Benchmark 1
By 2005, 70% of the abandoned hazardous waste sites currently on the NPL will be cleaned up.
IV. Conduct Outreach and Provide Assistance to Foster Increased State, Tribal, and Community
Involvement in Superfund.
The goals of the program's environmental justice and community involvement and outreach efforts are to address
concerns pertaining to the societal equity of EPA's responses at Superfund sites and enhance communities' access and
input to site information. The Agency will enhance information access and outreach, increasing the communities'
understanding of site response plans and actions. The communities will then have the additional information needed
to take an active and informed role in the remediation process. EPA will put increased emphasis on using existing
Technical Assistance Grant (TAG) authorities to assist the affected communities. These grants will provide
communities the means to hire technical experts to assist in their understanding of issues related to site cleanup. As
the citizens increase their involvement in site cleanup, they are able to play an active role in the economic
redevelopment of their communities. The activities that will be tracked towards this goal are:
• Number and Value of TAGs Awarded
• Community Advisory Groups Established
• Number and Value of Core Co-op Agreement
• State, Tribal Involvement
• State Lead Co-op.
A formal evaluation of Citizen Information and Access Offices (CIAOs) and Community Work Groups (CWGs)
will be done at the end of the pilot period.
Additional information on how these activities will be reported will be forthcoming.
G-3 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SUPERFUND REFORM MEASURES OF SUCCESS:
The following are provided for informational purposes and are not finalized:
I. New Initiatives
A. Enforcement
1. Facilitate PRP Searches
Improve the quality of PRP searches, make information obtained more accessible, and conduct PRP
searches sufficient for an allocation process at certain sites.
2. Foster Expedited Settlements
Identify and offer eligible parties expedited settlements including nomination of additional parties
[i.e., ability-to-pay settlements and early de minimis (pre-ROD) settlements at pilot sites],
3. Pilot Allocations
Implement a process for allocation of responsibility for response costs at selected pilot sites.
B. Economic Redevelopment
4. Brownfields Initiatives
Implement the Agency's Brownfields initiatives related to beneficial reuse of Superfund sites,
including: (a) expanding the number of Brownfields pilots to 50 by the summer of 1996; (b)
community outreach, involvement of Federal, State, Tribal and local stakeholders, financial
assistance to political subdivisions (e.g., Brownfields grants), financial assistance to States/Tribes
(e.g., limited financial assistance to encourage States/Tribes to develop Voluntary Cleanup
Programs), and data collection; (c) issuing guidance that eliminates from the inventory of Superfund
sites (CERCLIS) properties determined no longer of Federal interest; (d) issuing guidance that
authorizes the Regions to clarify areas on or adjacent to NPL sites (including Federal facilities)
determined to be uncontaminated; and (e) issuing guidance which identifies options to remove
liability-based barriers to property transfers at certain sites (e.g., prospective purchaser guidance),
and describes the circumstances under which the Agency will issue comfort/status letters and
possibly, no action assurances.
C. Community Involvement and Outreach
5. Community Advisory Groups (CAGs) and TAGs
Issue guidance encouraging the Regions to establish CAGs, implement early community
involvement at more sites, and amend the TAG rule to facilitate community involvement (e.g.,
authorize training and earlier funding of community groups).
6. Community Involvement in the Enforcement Process
Identify and pilot enhanced, innovative approaches to community involvement in technical settlement
issues.
September 27, 1996 G-4
-------
OSWER Directive 9200,3-14-lC
D. Environmental Justice
7. Training and Health Services Assistance to Communities
Implement, in coordination with Health and Human Services (HHS), a pilot program that provides
health services assistance to citizens in proximity to Superfund sites, and develop interagency pilots
to train and employ community residents.
E. Consistent Program Implementation
8. Guidance for Remedy Selection
Issue the Soil Screening Guidance and Land Use Guidance, initiated under Administrative
Improvements, and complete additional presumptive remedy guidance for groundwater, wood
treater sites, PCB sites, Manufactured Gas Plants (MGPs), and grain storage sites.
9. Risk Sharing In Implementing Innovative Technology
Explore programs to share risks associated with implementing innovative technologies by: (a)
agreeing to share the risk for a limited number of approved projects by "underwriting" the use of
certain promising, innovative approaches; and (b) exploring and identifying concerns that are
affecting the selection and use of innovative technologies by contractors.
F. State/Tribal Empowerment
10. Voluntary Cleanup Program
Issue guidance which promotes State/Tribal Voluntary Cleanup Programs, encourages other States
to create such programs, and, in conjunction with the Brownfields Initiative, authorizes limited
financial assistance to such programs.
11. Integrated Federal/State Site Management Program
Issue the State Deferral Guidance, initiated under Administrative Improvements, and continue and
expand the current projects.
12. State Superfund Block Funding Options
Explore States'/Tribes' interest in a pilot program which would develop options using a single
cooperative agreement to finance for all Superfund activities within a State/Tribe [e.g., Preliminary
Assessment/Site Inspection (PA/SI), Core Program, site-specific enforcement, and cleanup
activities].
II. Enhanced and Continuing Initiatives
De Minimis Settlements
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Continuation of Limited Number of Mixed Funding Pilots
Environmental Justice Initiative
Construction Completions
Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model
Military Base Closure Initiative
Strengthening Contracts Management
G-5 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
EPA Goals:
The following is provided for informational purposes only:
1. Clean Air: Every American city and community will be free of air pollutants at levels that cause cancer or
respiratory and other health problems. The air will be clearer in many areas, and life in damaged forests
and polluted waters will rebound as acid rain is reduced.
2. Clean Water: America's rivers, lakes, and coastal waters will support healthy communities of fish, plants,
and other aquatic life, and will support uses such as fishing, swimming, and drinking water supply for
people. Wetlands will be protected and rehabilitated to provide wildlife habitat, reduce floods, and improve
water quality. Groundwater will be uncontaminated.
3. Healthy Terrestrial Ecosystems: America will safeguard its ecosystems to promote the health and diversity
of natural and human communities and to sustain America's environmental, social, and economic potential.
4. Safe Drinking Water: Every American public water system will provide water that is safe to drink all the
time.
5. Safe Food: All foods Americans produce or consume will continue to be safe for all people to eat.
6. Safe Homes, Schools, and Workplaces: All Americans will live and work in safe and healthy
environments.
7. Toxic Free Communities: By relying on pollution prevention in the way we produce, consume, reuse, and
recycle materials, all Americans will live in toxic free communities.
8. Preventing Accidental Releases: Accidental releases of substances that endanger our communities and
wildlife will be reduced to as near zero as possible. Those which do occur will cause only negligible harm
to people, animals, and plants.
9. Safe Wastes: Wastes produced by every person and business in America will be stored, treated, and
disposed of in ways that prevent harm to people and other living things.
10. Restoration of Contaminated Sites: Places in America currently contaminated by hazardous or radioactive
materials will not endanger public health, and the natural environment will be restored to uses desired by the
surrounding communities.
11. Reducing Global Environmental Risks: The United States and other nations will eliminate significant risks
to human health and ecosystems arising from climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, and other
environmental problems of global concern.
12. Empowering People with Information and Education: Americans will be informed and educated
participants in improving the environment.
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE & EMERGENCY RESPONSE (OSWER) GOALS:
Please refer to the "ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS for AMERICA, WITH MILESTONES FOR 2005," for the
most current goals.
September 27, 1996 G-6
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
SUPERFUND REFORMS MEASURES OF SUCCESS (OERR & OECA)
(From Round 3 of REFORMS):
1. Number of proposed cleanup decisions reviewed by the National Remedy Review Board and the estimated
impact of reviews (e.g., percentage of recommendations for different alternative, dollar impact + or -).
2. Number of existing records of decision for site cleanups updated based on the latest in scientific information
and technological advancements and the estimated dollar savings as a result of reviews.
3. Of the new RI/FS starts this year, the number (and percentage) of risk assessments designed by stakeholders
(e.g., communities) or conducted by PRPs.
4. Of the new RI/FS starts this year, the number (and percentage) of risk assessments performed using the
generic risk assessment statement of work and the number utilizing standard risk data reporting tables.
5. Number of EPA sites ranked as low priority when post-Si cleanup activities were considered, and the number
of partial site deletions (Federal facility and other NPL sites) initiated by EPA to return property to
productive uses.
6. Number of Federal Facility Agreements revised to reflect changes in priority activities within DoD and DOE
facilities (i.e., number of agreements and number of milestones revised).
7. Number of non-Federal facility, NPL sites ranked (prioritized and funded) under the Superfund Risk-Based
Priority Setting System.
8. Number of negotiations where EPA offered to compensate a portion of the orphan share and the total dollar
amount offered; and number of settlements where EPA compensated for a portion of the orphan share and
the total dollar amount compensated.
9. Number of settlements establishing interest-bearing special accounts for future site costs and the total dollar
amount set aside in such accounts.
10. Number of sites where preparation of documentation of reasons why UAOs for RD/RA were not issued to
special notice letter recipients.
11. Number of settlements with de micromis parties and number of de micromis parties entering into such
settlements.
12. Number of sites where PRPs submitted proposed allocations as a basis for settlement and the total dollar
amount where EPA offered to compensate a portion of the orphan share.
13. Number of sites at which EPA has reduced oversight activities, and thereby oversight costs, for cleanups
conducted by cooperative and capable potentially responsible parties.
14. Number of NPL sites where the State (or Tribe) or community "selected" the cleanup remedy, consistent
with the NCP.
15. Percentage of concerns addressed (i.e., referred, resolved, pending) by the Superfund Ombudsman.
G-7 September 27, 1996
-------
OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1C
This Page Intentionally
Left Blank
September 27, 1996
------- |