UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D C. 20460
DEC 2 1 r™
»	l-'w/ uc
MEMORANDUM
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
OSWER Directive 9272.0-22
SUBJECT: Improving RCRA/CERCLA Coordination at Federal Facilities
FROM: Thomas P. Dunne
Acting Assistant Administrator
TO:
Regional Administrators, Regions I-X
This memorandum reemphasizes EPAs Policy regarding coordination of Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and Comprehensive Environmental Response
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) site cleanup activities at federal facilities, and
encourages early and continued coordination between the facilities and the regulatory agencies
including authorized states. Policies issued previously by the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER) were designed to promote coordination of the two
response/cleanup programs and minimize or eliminate duplication. (See Attachments 1 & 2).
Although reforms aimed at improving the CERCLA program and streamlining the RCRA
corrective action program have been successfully implemented during the past decade, issues
sometimes have arisen relating to duplicative RCRA and CERCLA procedural requirements at
federal facilities where both regulatory regimes are applicable.
Under the One Cleanup Program Initiative launched in 2003, the Federal Environmental
Work Group (Work Group) identified improved RCRA/CERCLA coordination between states
and EPA at federal facilities, including National Priorities List (NPL) sites and non-NPL sites, as
one of the top ways to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of cleanups.1 In keeping with the
Work Group's recommended solution, OSWER is restating its policy to ensure a full
understanding of the Agency's perspective on how best to achieve RCRA/CERCLA integration.
During Work Group deliberations on this topic, both federal and state participants gained
increased knowledge and sensitivity to each other's perspectives. In addition, outside of the
Work Group, EPA, states and the Department of Defense have taken steps to educate each other
on the topic. For example, the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management
Officials (ASTSWMO) sponsored a session on RCRA/CERCLA coordination during its annual
1 Because the Federal Environmental Work Group focus was on potentially overlapping state and EPA requirements,
this policy focuses on EPA and states, but not tribes, To the extent that tribes are also regulating or involved in
cleanups at federal facilities, all parties are encouraged to provide effective coordination with the tribes.
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (40% Posteonsumer)

-------
meeting in October 2004 and again at its November 2004 Federal Facilities Conference. The
Federal Environmental Work Group will continue to research solutions and share information to
improve RCRA/CERCLA integration at Federal Facilities. As appropriate, additional
information will be disseminated among states, federal agencies and EPA on this topic.
EPA continues to stress that, generally, cleanup conducted pursuant to RCRA corrective
action or CERCLA will substantively satisfy the requirements of both programs. We encourage
program implementers to focus on whether the end results of remedial activities are substantively
similar regardless of which cleanup authority is used. In integrating the programs, a primary goal
should be to minimize duplication of effort and second-guessing of cleanup decisions. To this
end, EPA Regions, States and Federal agencies are encouraged to coordinate early and
throughout the response process regarding actions, documentation and public participation.
Background
The two primary federal cleanup statutes (RCRA and CERCLA) and associated
regulations addressing releases or threats of releases of hazardous waste or constituents from
solid waste management units, hazardous substances and pollutants, and contaminants, have
specific procedural requirements that may cause redundant or additional efforts when both are
applied at a site. Additionally, the RCRA program is a federal program that allows States to be
authorized to implement the program "in lieu of the federal government. Under RCRA, such
authorized states may impose requirements that are more stringent than the federal requirements,
and they are responsible for making specific permit decisions and other types of regulatory
determinations within the scope of their authority. Unless efforts are made to identify all
requirements of RCRA and CERCLA that are applicable to a facility and to minimize
duplication, the process requirements of both programs have the potential to add time and costs
to the response.
RCRA/CERCLA integration clauses for Federal Facilities Agreements (FFAs) and
similar state-federal agreements were crafted specifically to address this potential problem.
Recently a few states, referencing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) February
25, 2003 Final Guidance on Completion of Corrective Action at RCRA Facilities (68 Federal
Register 8757, February 25, 2003), have sought to require corrective action closeout steps in
addition to those being conducted by federal agencies under CERCLA.2 A few states have
expressed the opinion that their RCRA process provides for more public involvement
opportunities in the context of property transfer. The RCRA closeout process recommended in
the RCRA completion guidance, in particular, provides for final review and approval of
implementation that includes a public review period.
2 It is important to note that the Final Guidance does not consider whether a CERCLA response is underway and,
thus, does not discuss how the CERCLA response and public participation processes could be used to satisfy RCRA
corrective action requirements. As noted infra, the goal should be to promote consistency and eliminate duplication,
when possible.
2

-------
Depending on the specific state, this process may be considered especially important in
the property transfer context, where, under CERCLA. a state's involvement may be more limited.
For example, some states have asked that RCRA permits be modified and RCRA corrective
actions be closed out in accordance with approaches recommended in state and EPA guidance
even where the response actions were conducted under CERCLA, In some cases, this has
delayed planned property transfers because of the uncertainty related to the status of the RCRA
permit. On the other hand, when a facility's RCRA closeout process is identified and integrated
with the facility's site closeout and property transfer processes under CERCLA (e.g., Finding of
Suitability to Transfer), concerns about potential added costs and delays associated with separate
review and/or separate public notification can be minimized or eliminated.
Addressing RCRA Permit Obligations
EPA is committed to the principle of parity between the RCRA Corrective Action and
CERCLA programs and to the idea that the programs should generally yield similar remedies in
similar circumstances. The facility and the EPA Region or authorized State should agree early
on an exit strategy in the cleanup process that allows a facility where appropriate, to be released
from the RCRA permit once the cleanup is completed. Although this applies to all federal
properties, it is especially critical for federal properties that may be subject to property transfer.
If a final remedy will be selected that will leave some contamination in place, any issues about
how this might affect property transfer after corrective action is complete should also be
addressed up front in the planning process.
As stated in the September 1996 Policy on Coordinating RCRA and CERCLA (see
Attachment 1), program implementers can use several approaches to reduce inconsistency and
duplication of effort. For example, deferral from one program to another is often the most
efficient and desirable way to address overlapping requirements. Another way to coordinate
RCRA and CERCLA might be for one program to accept the decisions made under the authority
of the other program. This is what was envisioned by the RCRA/CERCLA integration clause in
the model EPA/DoD Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) for NPL facilities.3 As called for in the
1996 policy, we encourage EPA Regions, State environmental programs and federal agencies to
periodically review existing RCRA requirements, permits and corrective action orders or
CERCLA IAG/FFA requirements or other federal response actions under CERCLA but not in an
IAG/FFA. The goal of such a review is to identify opportunities for integrating cleanup activities
and regulatory requirements to ensure the activities proceed as expeditiously and efficiently as
possible.
3 For example, the cleanup actions for a CERCLA operable unit that physically encompasses a RCRA regulated unit
could be structured to provide for concurrent compliance with CERCLA and RCRA closure and post-closure
requirements,
3

-------
requirements may not be adequately addressed by deferring to another cleanup program. 4
The facts regarding a specific contaminant or situation need to be considered in relation to
statutory and regulatory authorities. Again, all parties should work together to ensure continued
coordination and communication.
Please note that this memorandum is not a regulation itself, nor does it change or
substitute for any regulations. Thus, it does not impose legally binding requirements on EPA,
States, or the regulated community. This memorandum does not confer legal rights or impose
legal obligations upon any member of the public. Interested parties are free to raise questions
and objections about the substance of this memorandum and the appropriateness of the
application of this memorandum in a particular situation. EPA and other decision makers retain
the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from those described in this
memorandum. The use of the word "should" or "may" in this document means that something is
suggested or recommended, but not required.
Questions about this Policy should be addressed to Dianna Young (703-603-0045) in the
Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office, Mike Fitzpatrick (703-308-8411) in the Office
of Solid Waste or Robin Anderson (703-603-8747) in the Office of Superfund Remediation and
Technology Innovation.
Attachments
1)	1996 RCRA/CERCLA Integration Policy
2)	Lead Regulator Policy
cc: Superfund National Program Managers, Regions I - X
RCRA National Program Managers, Regions I - X
James Woolford, FFRRO
Matt Hale, OSW
Mike Cook, OSRTI
David Kling, OECA/FFEO
Scott Sherman, OGC
Dianna Young, FFRRO
Mike Fitzpatrick, OSW
Robin Anderson, OSRTI
Terry Gray, ASTSWMO
Tom Kennedy, ASTSWMO
Federal Facilities Leadership Council
OCP Federal Environmental Work Group
4 RCRA does not address certain contaminants, such as radionuclides, so in these instances, it is appropriate to use
CERCLA authority.
4

-------