EPA Needs to Improve the Verification of Land-Use Controls at Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Facilities


The EPA Needs to Improve
the Verification of
Land-Use Controls at
Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act
Corrective Action Facilities

September 23, 2024 | Report No. 24-E-0066

r~K

-------
Report Contributors

Gabby Fekete
Steve Hanna
Sam Henkels
Lauretta Joseph
Barry Parker
Naomi Rowden

Abbreviations

EPA	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

OIG	Office of Inspector General

ORCR	Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

RCRA	Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

U.S.C.	United States Code

Key Definitions

Land-use control

RCRA corrective action facility

According to the EPA, this is "[a]ny restriction or control,
including institutional controls and engineering controls, arising
from the need to protect human health and the environment,
such as the restriction of access or limitation of activities at a site
that has residual contamination."

Any site or facility that implements RCRA corrective actions,
meaning that the facility cleans up hazardous materials such as
waste, waste constituents, and contaminants that it released in
the soil, groundwater, surface water, or air.

Cover Image

Removal of contaminated soil at a RCRA corrective action facility. (EPA photo)

Are you aware of fraud, waste, or abuse in an
EPA program?

EPA Inspector General Hotline

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2431T)
Washington, D.C. 20460
(888) 546-8740
OIG.Hotline@epa.gov

Learn more about our OIG Hotline.

EPA Office of Inspector General

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (241OT)
Washington, D.C. 20460
(202) 566-2391
www.epaoiq.gov

Subscribe to our Email Updates.

Follow us on X (formerly Twitter) @EPAoig.
Send us your Project Suggestions.

-------
At a Gla

24-E-0066
September 23, 2024

The EPA Needs to Improve the Verification of Land-Use Controls at
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Facilities

Why We Did This Evaluation

To accomplish this objective:

The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Office of Inspector General
conducted this evaluation to determine
the extent to which the EPA verifies that
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act corrective action land-use controls
remain in place to prevent human
exposure and groundwater
contamination at facilities where
contamination remains in place.

The Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976, as amended, is
the primary law governing the
management of solid and hazardous
waste. The 1984 Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments to the Act expanded
the EPA's authority to require corrective
action at treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities.

Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act Corrective Action Program Goal 4
indicates that regions and states will
have approaches in place by 2025 to
ensure that key elements of long-term
stewardship, such as overseeing and
tracking controls, are implemented.

To support these EPA mission-related
efforts:

• Cleaning up and revitalizing land.

• Partnering with states and other
stakeholders.

• Operating efficiently and effectively.

To address this top EPA management
challenge:

• Safeguarding the use and disposal
of chemicals.

Address inquiries to our public affairs
office at (202) 566-2391 or
OIG.PublicAffairs@epa.gov.

What We Found

The EPA does not have a national process in place to track or verify the status of
land-use controls at Resource Conservation and Recovery Act corrective action facilities.
Land-use controls are measures that the EPA and a facility take to control how
contaminated land is used to protect human health and the environment. These controls
can take both physical and nonphysical forms and can include engineering controls such
as fences and non-engineering controls such as deed restrictions.

The EPA has not identified standard methods for long-term oversight of land-use controls
at corrective action facilities. Additionally, the EPA regions vary in their progress toward
attainment of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Program
Goal 4. Further, EPA information systems that can be used to access program
information contain data issues, and the EPA is not using its information systems to track
the status of land-use controls. Specifically, the systems contain illogical data and data
discrepancies. Without adequate monitoring and tracking, the EPA cannot determine
whether land-use controls operate as intended.

If land-use controls do not operate as intended, there is an increased
risk that humans and the environment will be exposed to
contaminants. Further, land-use control data issues can undermine
public confidence and impair the EPA's analyses and decision-making.

Recommendations and Planned Agency Corrective Actions

We make eight recommendations to improve the verification of land-use controls at
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act corrective action facilities. Our
recommendations include reconciling existing discrepancies in publicly available land-use
controls databases by implementing effective database business rules and developing
oversight tools to annually monitor land-use control status at the national level.

The EPA agreed with our recommendations and provided appropriate corrective actions
with completion dates. All recommendations are resolved with corrective actions pending.

List of OIG reports.

-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

September 23, 2024

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: The EPA Needs to Improve the Verification of Land-Use Controls at Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Facilities
Report No. 24-E-0066

FROM: Sean W. O'Donnell, Inspector General

/iTtfAii

TO:

Barry Breen, Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator
Office of Land and Emergency Management

This is our report on the subject evaluation conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General. The project number for this evaluation was OSRE-FY23-010Q. This report
contains findings that describe the problems the OIG has identified and corrective actions the OIG
recommends. Final determinations on matters in this report will be made by EPA managers in
accordance with established audit resolution procedures.

The Office of Land and Emergency Management is responsible for the issues discussed in this report.

In accordance with EPA Manual 2750, your office provided acceptable planned corrective actions and
estimated milestone dates in response to OIG recommendations. All recommendations are resolved,
and no final response to this report is required. If you submit a response, however, it will be posted on
the OIG's website, along with our memorandum commenting on your response. Your response should
be provided as an Adobe PDF file that complies with the accessibility requirements of section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The final response should not contain data that you do not want
to be released to the public; if your response contains such data, you should identify the data for
redaction or removal along with corresponding justification.

We will post this report to our website at www.epaoig.gov.

To report potential fraud, waste, abuse, misconduct, or mismanagement, contact the OIG Hotline at (888) 546-8740 or OIG.Hotline@epa.gov.

-------
Table of Contents

Purpose	1

Background	1

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Corrective Action Program	1

Land-Use Controls at RCRA Corrective Action Facilities	3

The EPA's Role in the RCRA Corrective Action Program	4

EPA Information Systems	5

RCRA Corrective Action Program Goals for 2030	5

Elements of Long-Term Stewardship for Corrective Action	6

Responsible Offices	8

Scope and Methodology	9

Prior Report	10

Results	10

The EPA Does Not Track or Verify the Status of Land-Use Controls Nationally	10

EPA Information Systems Contain Data Issues	15

Conclusions	17

Recommendations	17

Agency Response and OIG Assessment	18

Status of Recommendations	19

A Agency Response to Draft Report	20

B Distribution	23

-------
Purpose

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General initiated this evaluation to
determine the extent to which the EPA verifies that Resource Conservation and Recovery Act corrective
action land-use controls, later referred to simply as "land-use controls/' remain in place to prevent
human exposure and groundwater contamination at facilities where contamination remains in place.

Top management challenge addressed

This evaluation addresses the following top management challenge for the Agency, as
identified in OIG Report No. 24-N-0008. The EPA's Fiscal Year 2024 Top Management
Challenges, issued November 15, 2023:

• Safeguarding the use and disposal of chemicals.

Background

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Corrective Action Program

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended, known as RCRA, is the primary law
governing the management of solid and hazardous waste. In 1982, the EPA established the base RCRA
program to manage hazardous waste. The 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments to RCRA
expanded the EPA's authority to require corrective action at facilities that treat, store, and dispose of
hazardous waste. This means that these facilities must clean up hazardous materials they release in the
soil, groundwater, surface water, and air. The EPA implements these requirements through its RCRA
Corrective Action Program policies and guidance rather than regulations.

States and territories may obtain EPA authorization to administer the base RCRA program if the state
program is equivalent to and at least as stringent as the federal program.1 Once a state has been
authorized for the base RCRA program, it may be required to update its program to reflect changes to
the federal RCRA program and obtain EPA authorization to administer new components. For example,
the EPA can authorize states to implement the RCRA Corrective Action Program after the states have
revised their RCRA programs to include corrective action components that are equivalent to and as
stringent as the EPA's. The EPA awards grants to authorized states to help them develop or implement
the RCRA hazardous waste programs.

For the purposes of this report, we refer to any site that implements RCRA corrective actions as a RCRA
corrective action facility. An EPA analysis from July 2023 found that approximately 31 million people, or
roughly nine percent of the U.S. population, live within one mile of a RCRA corrective action facility, and
approximately 118 million people, or roughly 35 percent of the U.S. population, live within three miles

1 RCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 6903(31), defines states as "any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands." For the remainder of this report, we use the term "states" to refer to states and
territories, as defined by RCRA.

-------
of a RCRA corrective action facility. Improper storage of hazardous waste might cause spills, leaks, fires,
and contamination of soil and drinking water. Without proper cleanup, hazardous materials in
contaminated soil, sediments, groundwater, surface water, and air can adversely affect the health of
people nearby.

What are RCRA corrective action facilities?

According to the EPA "Learn about Corrective Action" webpage, "RCRA [corrective [a]ction
facilities vary significantly. They include current and former chemical manufacturing plants, oil
refineries, lead smelters, wood preservers, steel mills, commercial landfills, federal facilities,
and a variety of other types of entities." The "[s]ize, type and extent of contamination, media
affected, environmental characteristics, and geology also differ greatly between facilities."

Photos of locations where RCRA corrective action is being implemented are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Photos of locations with implemented RCRA corrective actions

Top row from left to right: A steel facility, slag piles, a wastewater treatment system, and a grizzly bear by a
monitoring well. Bottom row from left to right People constructing a biowall, people collecting samples, a facility
nearby waters of Lake Mead, and an intertidal marsh along San Francisco Bay.

Source: EPA photos.

Figure 2 shows the RCRA corrective action process. The EPA corrective action webpage states that
"[f]acilities are generally brought into the RCRA corrective action process when: 1. there is an identified
release of hazardous waste or hazardous constituents, or 2. when [the] EPA is considering a treatment,
storage and disposal facility (TSDF) RCRA permit application." These facilities must obtain a RCRA permit
to operate. The permit establishes the technical conditions and waste management activities that the
facility can conduct, and the permit can include RCRA corrective action requirements. The facility works
with the EPA, states, and territories to perform the corrective action or cleanup according to federal and
state requirements.

-------
Figure 2: OIG summary of a typical RCRA corrective action process



RCRA Facility
Assessment

Gather inital
information on
site conditions
and determine
whether a
cleanup is needed

RCRA Facility
Investigation

Characterize the
nature and
extent of
contamination

Corrective
Action Measures
Study

Evaluate
advantages and
disadvantages of a
range of cleanup
actions

Implement
Corrective
Measures

Design and
construct the
remedy and
conduct operation
and maintenance

Track Progress

Track cleanup
progress and
major corrective
action milestones
using RCRAInfo
event codes

Long-Term
Stewardship

Limit exposure to
remaining hazardous
waste by establishing

institutional and
engineering controls

Control or lessen ongoing risks to human
health and the environment before the
final remedy selection

Note: Corrective action event codes are nationally defined values for specific corrective action steps that track RCRA
corrective action facility cleanup progress in the EPA's RCRAInfo system. The highlighted "Long-Term Stewardship"
step is the focus of this report.

Source: OIG summary of EPA information. (EPA OIG image)

Land-Use Controls at RCRA Corrective Action Facilities

Sometimes contaminants at a RCRA corrective action facility are left in place, and the EPA and the
facility take measures to control how the contaminated land is used to protect human health and the
environment. These land-use controls prevent exposure to the contaminants left in place, can take both
physical and nonphysical forms, and can include engineering and institutional controls. Engineering
controls are mechanisms, including physical barriers, designed to prevent human exposure by limiting
direct contact with contaminated areas or controlling the migration of contaminants.2 Examples of
engineering controls include fences, groundwater pump-and-treat systems, and controls for soil and
spillage such as contamination caps, covers, and impermeable liners. Institutional controls are
non-engineered administrative and legal controls that minimize potential human exposure to
contamination by limiting land or resource use.3 Examples of institutional controls are easements,
zoning restrictions, and restrictive covenants. Engineering and institutional controls function to protect

2	Institutional And Engineering Controls Data, EPA, https://rcrapublic.epa.gov/rcrainfoweb/action/modules/
cor/caindex (last visited Aug. 20, 2024).

3	EPA, Institutional Controls: A Site Manager's Guide to Identifying, Evaluating and Selecting Institutional Controls
at Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action Cleanups (2000).

3

-------
the public, and the facility must operate and monitor these land-use controls for as long as the risks at
the facility are present.

The EPA's Role in the RCRA Corrective Action Program

At the national level, the EPA is responsible for overseeing the RCRA Corrective Action Program; this
includes developing goals, monitoring progress toward those goals, and providing guidance and
technical assistance. At the regional level, the EPA is responsible for implementing the RCRA Corrective
Action Program for states that are not authorized to implement the base RCRA program, as well as for
those that are authorized to implement the base RCRA program but are not authorized to implement
the RCRA Corrective Action Program. Additionally, at the regional level, the EPA is responsible for
overseeing and working with authorized states' RCRA Corrective Action Programs to ensure that the
programs adhere to national standards.

As of December 2023, the EPA had authorized 50 states to implement the base RCRA program. Further,
the EPA had authorized 45 states to implement the RCRA Corrective Action Program, as shown in
Figure 3.

Figure 3: The states with EPA authorization to implement the RCRA Corrective Action Program

Note: Alaska and Iowa are not authorized to implement any component of the base RCRA program.
Source: OIG analysis of EPA information on state authorization. (EPA OIG image)

4

-------
EPA Information Systems

The EPA has multiple information systems that can be used to access RCRA Corrective Action Program
information. These systems include RCRAInfo, RCRAInfo Web, Enforcement Compliance History Online,
and Cleanups in My Community. Table 1 describes these systems.

Table 1: RCRA program information systems

Information
system name

Description

Access

RCRAInfo

Information system in which the EPA and EPA-authorized states enter,
access, and track RCRA information, including RCRA corrective action
facility cleanup progress.

EPA and
authorized states

RCRAInfo Web

Public website that allows users to access and download selected
RCRAInfo data such as institutional and engineering controls for RCRA
corrective action facilities.

Public

Enforcement
Compliance History
Online

Public website that provides information on compliance inspections,
violations, enforcement actions, penalties assessed, and other information
for multiple EPA programs. This system uses data from RCRAInfo for RCRA
corrective action facilities.

Public

... Web application that provides maps and lists of hazardous waste cleanup
Cleanups in My

locations and allows users to drill down to access details. This system uses Public
ommuni y RCRAInfo for RCRA corrective action facilities.

Source: OIG summary of EPA RCRA program information systems. (EPA OIG table)

Using RCRAInfo, the EPA can track RCRA corrective action facility cleanup progress through nationally
defined event codes for specific corrective action steps. State and regional staff can enter these event
codes, in addition to other codes that they can define for their own purposes, with associated
completion dates in RCRAInfo to document their cleanup progress. Sample event codes include those
for creating and terminating engineering and institutional controls, as well as those related to human
exposure and groundwater contamination. Information from RCRAInfo is shared to the public through
RCRAInfo Web, Enforcement Compliance History Online, and Cleanups in My Community.

RCRA Corrective Action Program Goals for 2030

In September 2020, the EPA Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, or ORCR, issued the RCRA
Corrective Action Program Vision/Mission/Goals for 2030 fact sheet. The mission statement highlights
the program goal:

[The] EPA, states, and tribal partners work together to ensure that owners and
operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities conduct
effective and efficient cleanups to protect human health and the environment,
support continued use, and make land ready for reuse including, if necessary,
placement of controls to protect communities into the future.

Highlights from the 2030 goals for the RCRA Corrective Action Program, including the long-term
stewardship goal addressed in this report, are as follows:

-------
1.	"Through 2030, the RCRA Corrective Action Program will ensure that RCRA cleanups are initiated
and completed efficiently and expeditiously."

2.	"By 2030, the RCRA Corrective Action Program will eliminate or control adverse impacts beyond
facility boundaries at RCRA Corrective Action facilities wherever practicable and the program
will focus attention on cleanups that will not meet this target."

3.	"By 2030, the RCRA Corrective Action Program will ensure or confirm that land within facility
boundaries at RCRA Corrective Action facilities will be safe for continued use or reasonably
foreseeable new uses wherever practicable and the program will focus attention on cleanups
that will not meet this target."

4.	"By 2025, the RCRA Corrective Action Program will identify the key elements of effective Long
Term Stewardship for Corrective Action cleanups, and regions and states will have approaches
in place to ensure implementation of the key elements." (Emphasis added.)

5.	"By 2022, program procedures will be in place to regularly adjust the universe of facilities in the
cleanup pipeline to reflect current program priorities."

Elements of Long-Term Stewardship for Corrective Action

The EPA uses the phrase "long-term stewardship" in reference to RCRA corrective action facilities,
including those with engineering and institutional controls, that require long-term management of
contamination to protect human health and the environment. In June 2022, the ORCR issued a
memorandum. Key Elements of Effective Long-Term Stewardship for RCRA Corrective Action, to all EPA
regions to address the first part of Goal 4, which is referenced in the previous section. The
memorandum defined nine key elements of long-term stewardship. According to the memorandum, the
key elements are not requirements but factors for the EPA and authorized states "to consider when
establishing and implementing processes to address long-term stewardship at RCRA corrective action
facilities." We focused on three key elements relevant to our evaluation objective. We summarize these
elements in Table 2.

Table 2: OIG summary of three of the nine key elements of effective long-term stewardship

Element 2
Information about the controls

Element 3
Oversight of the controls

Element 4
Tracking of the controls

The EPA and authorized states
"should have internal practices to
assure that accurate and updated
information" regarding land-use
controls, including any issues with
the controls, "is readily available" to
program managers involved in
overseeing RCRA corrective action
remedies.

At facilities where the corrective
action cleanup remedy relies on
land-use controls, the EPA and
authorized states should perform
"periodic oversight and monitoring
[of facilities] to verify the continued
effectiveness" of land-use controls.

The EPA and authorized states
should track significant events
related to land-use controls "as
necessary to enable effective
oversight," typically beginning with
implementation of the controls and
continuing "until the controls are no
longer needed."

Source: OIG summary of three key elements from the EPA's Key Elements of Effective Long-Term Stewardship for
RCRA Corrective Action memorandum. (EPA OIG table)

6

-------
Long-term stewardship is essential because, over time, issues may arise that affect the operation or
effectiveness of controls needed to protect human health and the environment. For example, a tree
may fall on a fence, a land-use control, intended to keep people out of a facility. With the fence down,
people can access the facility, meaning that the land-use control does not operate as intended, or is
nonoperational. When the EPA and authorized states are monitoring a facility and identify a failure or
potential failure of a control, they can require the facility to take steps to ensure that the control
performs as required. For example, they can require a facility to repair a damaged fence, making the
land-use control operational again. Figure 4 provides reasons for long-term stewardship, and Figures 5
and 6 provide examples of operational and nonoperational land-use controls.

Figure 4: Reasons for long-term stewardship

To address unreported releases at RCRA
corrective action facilities with a remedy in place.

To enforce existing
J?* land-usecontrols.

^ To address concerns regarding remedy

maintenance.

To monitor and protect
Q groundwaterand drinking water.

To reevaluate the remedy
and accelerate cleanup.

To address changes in
the intended land use.

To assure local, state, and federal oversight of RCRA
corrective action facilities with land-use controls.

To protect public and
worker safety.

To assure property maintenance after owner bankruptcy or a change in the owner
or operator.

Source: OIG summary of EPA presentation, Long Term Stewardship RCRA Corrective Action, dated March 7, 2018.
(EPA OIG image)

-------
Figure 5: Examples of fencing land-use controls

Note: The image on the left shows an intact fence with a warning notice, an operational land-use control. The image
on the right shows a damaged fence, a nonoperational land-use control.

Source: EPA photos (top left image with OIG alteration to obscure identifying information on warning notice).

Figure 6: Examples of groundwater monitoring wells

Note: The image on the left shows a monitoring well with a cap and lock, an operational control. The images in the middle
and on the right show a well without a cap or lock and a well with no lock, respectively—two nonoperational controls.

Source: EPA photos.

Responsible Offices

The ORCR, within the Office of Land and Emergency Management, is primarily responsible for
implementing the EPA's resource conservation, recovery, and waste management goals under RCRA.
The ORCR's principal responsibility is to build a national waste management program, implemented
through EPA regional offices and authorized state programs. The ORCR Cleanup Programs Branch is
responsible for developing and directing the national implementation of the RCRA Corrective Action
Program. The Cleanup Programs Branch is responsible for creating training initiatives to assist the
regions and states in implementing the RCRA Corrective Action Program; providing technical assistance

8

-------
to regions and states; and developing national regulations, policies, and guidance to support RCRA
cleanup activities. The ORCR Information Collection and Analysis Branch is responsible for the collection
and analysis of data related to the EPA's implementation of RCRA. The branch is responsible for the
design, development, analysis, and maintenance of the national RCRAInfo information system.

Each of the ten EPA regions has a RCRA corrective action office. The regional RCRA corrective action
offices assist and monitor authorized states' RCRA Corrective Action Programs and implement programs
in states that are not authorized for corrective action.

The EPA RCRA Corrective Action Program had a fiscal year 2023 enacted budget of $40,512,000.

Scope and Methodology

We conducted this evaluation from September 2023 to June 2024 in accordance with the Quality
Standards for Inspection and Evaluation published in December 2020 by the Council of the Inspectors
General on Integrity and Efficiency. Those standards require that we perform the evaluation to obtain
sufficient and appropriate evidence to support our findings.

We interviewed ORCR program and RCRAInfo staff and RCRA Corrective Action Program managers in all
ten EPA regions. To understand variations of approaches throughout the different regions, we
interviewed EPA regional staff about mechanisms they use to verify the continuing effectiveness of
land-use controls, actions they take if a control is found to be nonoperational, their approach to long-
term stewardship, guidance from EPA headquarters, and authorized states' approaches to data
collection and management of RCRA corrective action facilities in long-term stewardship.

We analyzed land-use control data from the EPA's publicly accessible "RCRAInfo Web" website, internal
land-use control information from RCRAInfo, and inspection information from Enforcement Compliance
History Online. We also evaluated the information on RCRA corrective action facilities from Cleanups in
My Community. Additionally, we visited one RCRA facility and viewed two others in the Seattle,
Washington area, and we spoke with Washington state program staff about their approach to managing
land-use controls. Further, we reviewed the EPA's Open Government Plan 5.0 and the ORCR's
2016 memorandum Financial Assurance Data Quality and the Importance of Maintaining Data in the
RCRAInfo National Database to understand the expectations for data in the EPA's information systems
and public websites.

To obtain an understanding of the EPA's long-term goals for the RCRA Corrective Action Program, we
reviewed the EPA's Key Elements of Effective Long-Term Stewardship for RCRA Corrective Action in the
2030 Vision/Mission/Goals for the RCRA Corrective Action Program memorandum issued in 2020. We
focused on Goal 4 and Elements 2, 3, and 4 of the nine key elements of effective long-term stewardship.

In addition, to obtain an understanding of the EPA's compliance monitoring, long-term stewardship
standards, and approach to engineering and institutional controls, we reviewed EPA guidance

-------
documents on institutional controls, the EPA's Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle C Core Program, and the EPA's RCRA Orientation Manual 2014.

Prior Report

The OIG previously reported on RCRA facilities in OIG Report No. 21-P-0114, EPA Does Not Consistently
Monitor Hazardous Waste Units Closed with Waste in Place or Track and Report on Facilities That Fall
Under the Two Responsible Programs, published March 29, 2021. The report found that the EPA did not
inspect about half of the nonoperating RCRA facilities with units closed with waste in place within the
three-year time frame established by the EPA's enforcement policy. The report also identified overlap
and discrepancies among facilities identified in both the RCRA Corrective Action and Superfund
programs. The report made six recommendations, which are all completed.

Results

The EPA does not have a national process in place to track or verify the operational status of land-use
controls at RCRA corrective action facilities. The EPA does not use RCRAInfo to track the status of
land-use controls and has not identified standard methods for long-term oversight of these controls at
corrective action facilities. RCRA Corrective Action Program Goal 4 indicates that regions and states will
have approaches in place by 2025 to ensure that key elements of long-term stewardship, such as
overseeing and tracking controls, are implemented. The EPA regions vary in their progress toward
attainment of RCRA Corrective Action Program Goal 4. Additionally, there are land-use control data
discrepancies across the EPA's information systems. These discrepancies can undermine public
confidence in land-use control information and can impair EPA analyses and decision-making. Without
tracking, the EPA has limited information on whether land-use controls remain effective. If land-use
controls do not operate as intended, there is an increased risk that humans and the environment will be
exposed to contaminants from a facility.

The EPA Does Not Track or Verify the Status of Land-Use Controls Nationally

The EPA does not have a national process in place to track or verify the status of land-use controls at
RCRA corrective action facilities. RCRA Corrective Action Program Goal 4, identified in the EPA RCRA
Corrective Action Program Vision/Mission/Goals for 2030 fact sheet, indicates that regions and states
will have approaches in place by 2025 to ensure that key elements of long-term stewardship, such as
overseeing and tracking controls, are implemented. While the EPA does not have a national process,
eight regions have their own processes to track land-use controls, but the processes vary. In addition,
the EPA has limited knowledge of how authorized states track land-use controls.

Using RCRAInfo, we identified 4,470 land-use controls at 1,761 facilities as of September 30, 2023. About
half of these land-use controls had been in place for more than 20 years, as shown in Figure 7.

-------
Figure 7: The number of land-use controls by calendar year

4500

4000
3500
3000

2500

MMOOMCOraOOfflfflfflOiaiaiaifflffiaiOOOOOOOOOOriririHHrlriririHtMNNfM

e^cricyicricyicncncftcricyicricyicncriCTicncftoooooooooooooooooooooooo

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHviHHNNNCMfMfMfMNNNNNNfMfMtMfNfMNfMNfMfMN

Cl.

Note'. The red bars with a pattern represent land-use controls that have been in place more than 20 years. These
represent 48 percent, or about half, of the total land-use controls. Pre-1984 data represent illogical data issues,
discussed later in this report, as these controls would have been in place before the RCRA Corrective Action
Program was established in 1984.

Source: OIG analysis of EPA data. (EPA OIG chart)

The number of land-use controls and the length of time many of the controls have existed without
documented verification in RCRAInfo of their operational status illustrate a need for land-use control
oversight. Overtime, some land-use controls may become ineffective at preventing human exposure to
and environmental contamination from hazardous materials at a RCRA corrective action facility. For
example, engineered controls may become damaged through weather events or human activity.
Additionally, institutional controls may be forgotten over time or may need to be updated based on
changes to how land is used in the area. If the EPA and states monitor the status of land-use controls,
they can identify issues like these and correct them.

The EPA Regions Vary in Progress Toward the Long-Term Stewardship Goal

According to RCRA Corrective Action Program Goal 4, by 2025, "regions and states will have approaches
in place to ensure implementation of the key elements [of effective long-term stewardship]." The ORCR
is responsible for monitoring progress toward this goal, yet ORCR staff had limited knowledge of
regional and state progress in implementing the key elements of long-term stewardship. Without

-------
information on each region and state's implementation of the key elements of long-term stewardship,
the ORCR cannot monitor progress towards this goal.

The EPA regions were at various stages of implementing the key elements of long-term stewardship.
Six regions said they felt confident that they and the states within their region were already
implementing the key elements, while four regions did not know whether their states had the key
elements of long-term stewardship in place. Additionally, the EPA's memorandum on key elements of
long-term stewardship received mixed opinions from regional staff. Six regions said that they felt the
memorandum was sufficient for regions and states to get started, but three regions said that they would
like to see more guidance and policy come from the national level rather than each region figuring it out
for themselves. Finally, one region suggested that the EPA could designate a lead region for long-term
stewardship to create models for others to use.4

The EPA Is Not Fully Using RCRAInfo for Information Regarding Engineering and
Institutional Controls

As previously noted, RCRAInfo has event codes to track the creation and termination of land-use
controls, along with comment fields that can be used to enter information about land-use controls.
However, these fields are not used consistently and sometimes lack enough information about the
controls to verify that the controls are still in place, as illustrated by the two examples in Figure 8. The
project manager in the example on the left included significant detail about the controls, whereas the
project manager in the example on the right simply noted the existence of a covenant with no
corresponding detail.

Figure 8: Examples of comments on institutional controls in RCRAInfo

Project manager 1

Internal Comments

This institutional control is an environmental covenant with	which includes the following activity

and use limitations: The Property is subject to the following activity and use limitations, which the then
current owner of the Property, and its tenants, agents, employees and other persons under its control,
shall abide by: -No occupied subgrade spaces, such as basements, are allowed at the site. -The
consumptive use (drinking or vegetable garden watering) of site groundwater is prohibited. -A Protective
Cap shall be required and maintained. -Prior to excavation a Soils Management Plan and Health and
Safety Plan shall be required. Any damage to the witness barrier during such excavation shall be repaired
or the witness barrier shall be replaced.

Project manager 2

Internal Comments

Environmental Covenant

Source: OIG-redacted image of two different RCRAInfo comment fields. (EPA OIG image)

4 According to the EPA's "Lead Region Process" webpage, the EPA formed its Lead Region System in 1984 to ensure
that Agency decision-making "considers and reflects regional perspectives." In the long-term stewardship scenario,
the EPA would work with the lead region to "communicate significant actions, rollouts, and programmatic
activities" across all ten regions.

12

-------
The EPA identified the second key element of an effective long-term stewardship program as having
"internal practices to assure that accurate and updated information" about land-use controls readily
available to program managers. Two regions said that regional and state staff sometimes do not enter
land-use controls information into RCRAInfo. These two regions said that the states may have this
information outside of RCRAInfo. One of these regions noted that sometimes regional and state staff
enter the information in different places within RCRAInfo, such as in the "Remedy Construction" section
instead of in the "Corrective Action" section. The two regions said that they are correcting these issues,
but the lack of consistent information means that the ORCR does not have complete or easily retrievable
information on land-use controls at RCRA corrective action facilities.

If the EPA regions and authorized states used RCRAInfo consistently and kept the land-use controls data
up to date, the information would be readily available to the ORCR, federal and state staff, and the
public. This would allow the regions and states to use an existing system to meet the second key
element of long-term stewardship and would provide the ORCR with the data needed for effective
program oversight.

The EPA Has Not Identified Standard Methods for Long-Term Facility Oversight

The ORCR has not identified standard methods that the regions and states can use to verify that land-use
controls remain in place or defined how often the regions and states should verify the controls. Seven
regions conduct long-term stewardship assessments of facilities with land-use controls. Four regions said
that typical EPA RCRA enforcement inspections generally do not include verifying land-use controls.
Examples of the oversight methods that the states use to verify land-use controls include annual site
visits or inspections and facility-reported information.

The third key element of effective long-term stewardship is EPA regions and authorized states
performing long-term oversight, monitoring, and maintenance of facilities with land-use controls in
place. The ORCR could provide guidance on the methods that the regions and states should use to verify
land-use controls, whether through document reviews, on-site activities, or other long-term stewardship
assessments. This could include identifying effective methods that some regions already have in place so
that other regions can learn from them. Minimum standards for how often regions and authorized
states should verify land-use controls would create national consistency for the RCRA Corrective Action
Program while allowing for more frequent assessment as needed.

The EPA Is Not Fully Using RCRAInfo to Track Land-Use Control Status

The ORCR has not established national methods to track the status of land-use controls. RCRAInfo has
nationally defined event codes to track the creation and the termination of land-use controls but lacks
nationally defined event codes to track follow-up activities, such as ongoing monitoring and status of
land-use controls.

The fourth key element of long-term stewardship is tracking and recordkeeping of land-use controls.
Regions generally rely on authorized states to track land-use control status. Seven of the ten EPA regions

-------
had knowledge of the methods that their states used to track land-use controls, while the other regions
were unaware of how their states tracked land-use controls. Some regions track land-use controls
because the regions directly implement the RCRA Corrective Action Program for their states that are not
authorized to implement the program. For example, Regions 3 and 7 track land-use controls for three
and one states, respectively, because the states do not have EPA authorization to implement the RCRA
Corrective Action Program.

Region 7 has an internal system to track land-use controls for Iowa, and Region 3 developed a system
that uses RCRAInfo to track land-use control status for three of its six states using Region 3-defined
event codes. The region defined three codes: pass, need minor maintenance, or further evaluation
needed, as shown in Table 3. The use of these codes allows the region to track when the control was last
verified and what the status was. If the project manager selects "need minor maintenance" or "further
evaluation needed," the land-use control is tracked until the issue is resolved and the event code is
changed to "pass." Region 3 staff said that having the data in RCRAInfo helped them prioritize facilities
with land-use controls for review at the beginning of each year.

Table 3: Region 3's land-use control status event codes

Event code I	Description

CAS88P(X) Long-Term Stewardship - Pass. "This event signifies that a Long Term Stewardship assessment
[was] completed and determined that all [land-use controls] are in place, maintained and
operated in the manner envisioned when EPA/State selected the remedy, and with current
policies and practices."

CAS88N(X) Long-Term Stewardship - Need Minor Maintenance. "This event signifies that a Long Term
Stewardship assessment was performed and additional information or changes in operation,
maintenance of the [land-use controls] are needed to make a CAS88PX determination."

CAS88F(X) Long-Term Stewardship - Further Evaluation Needed. "This event signifies that a Long Term
Stewardship assessment was performed and that selected [land-use controls] are not in place,
operated or maintained, or other issues are identified that suggest that the integrity and/or the
protectiveness of the selected remedy (or elements of the selected remedy) is questionable,
therefore a comprehensive remedy compliance assessment is required." (Emphasis in original.)

Source: OIG summary of the EPA Region 3 Defined Values for Corrective Action Event Codes. (EPA OIG table)

The ORCR said that before defining the tracking requirements, it needs to have a long-term stewardship
program in place. The ORCR is in the program construction phase, so it had not yet defined data
elements. Regional RCRA Corrective Action Program managers explained how the program has evolved
over time. The managers said that early on the program focused on selecting and implementing
remedies and meeting initial milestones. The workload and focus have changed because more facilities
have a remedy in place and are in the long-term stewardship phase. Because of the early focus on
implementing remedies, the EPA did not initially emphasize long-term stewardship as it now does in
RCRA Corrective Action Program Goal 4.

If the ORCR modified RCRAInfo to include nationally defined event codes on land-use control activities and
statuses, this could assist the regions and states in meeting the fourth key element of long-term stewardship
and make the land-use control information available to federal, state, and public stakeholders.

14

-------
EPA Information Systems Contain Data Issues

RCRAInfo and Cleanups in My Community contain land-use controls data issues that could mislead the
public. According to the EPA's 2018 Open Government Plan 5.0:

Data is central to implementing the Agency's mission. It is used in every facet of
Agency operations including developing and enforcing regulations, conducting studies
on environmental issues, and publishing information to inform the public about EPA
activities.

Data discrepancies can undermine public confidence in land-use control information and can impair the
EPA's analyses and decision-making.

Issues with RCRAInfo Data on Land-Use Controls

We identified four issues with illogical data in RCRAInfo. These include facilities identified as needing
controls but without any controls listed; facilities identified as not needing any controls but with
controls listed; land-use control dates that are before the establishment of the RCRA Corrective Action
Program in 1984, including some in the 1960s and 1970s and one in 1935; and land-use controls
established after the completion of RCRA corrective action for the facility. Table 4 describes these issues.

Table 4: RCRAInfo data issues

Data issue

Description I

Illogical land-use control dates

The RCRAInfo dates for 86, or about 2 percent, of the 4,470 land-use
controls are illogical because they are before the establishment of the
RCRA Corrective Action Program in 1984.

Performance standards attained;
controls required

There are 1,131 RCRA corrective action facilities that have attained
performance standards with land-use controls required. However, 168 of
these, or about 15 percent, have no controls identified in RCRAInfo.

Performance standards attained; no
controls

There are 160 RCRA corrective action facilities that have attained
performance standards with no land-use controls required. However,
13 of these, or about 8 percent, have land-use controls identified in
RCRAInfo.

Land-use controls issued after
performance standards attained or
RCRA corrective action terminated

RCRAInfo has 184 instances of land-use controls implemented after
performance standards have been attained or RCRA corrective action
has been terminated.

Source: OIG analysis of EPA RCRAInfo data. (EPA OIG table)

-------
In 2016, the ORCR highlighted the importance of data accuracy and the EPA's oversight responsibility
regarding the RCRA Program in a memorandum. Financial Assurance Data Quality and the Importance of
Maintaining Data in the RCRAInfo Database, that stated:

Although the responsibility for maintaining the accuracy of data in RCRAInfo
primarily resides with states authorized to implement the RCRA program, it is EPA's
responsibility to ensure national oversight of the program. Our data are increasingly
being relied on by many stakeholders for a wide variety of purposes. It is our
obligation as a national program to ensure that data collected, stored, and reported
are of the utmost quality in order to support sound analyses and decisions.

Information systems such as RCRAInfo use business rules to ensure the correctness of all data
submitted. If an individual enters data that does not meet a business rule, the individual will receive an
error message that prevents them from submitting the data. People often encounter these rules in
information systems and online applications. An example of a business rule is that a person cannot enter
a travel departure date prior to an arrival date.

While the EPA defines some business rules for RCRAInfo corrective action, these are generally limited to
defining which data elements must be entered and the allowed values for those data elements—for
example, requiring an individual to enter a date and requiring the individual to format the date in
numeric format. However, other business rules do not exist, which allows for events to be entered out
of their logical sequence. RCRAInfo documentation states that the application enforces business rules to
ensure the correctness of all data entered. However, the RCRAInfo business rules defined for RCRA
corrective action only address the presence of minimum information that must be entered. There are no
RCRAInfo business rules to address the data discrepancies that we identified.

Issues with Other Public Information on Land-Use Controls

As noted in the "Background" section of this report, the EPA uses RCRAInfo Web and Cleanups in My
Community to communicate information about RCRA corrective action facilities to the public. However,
not all RCRA corrective action facilities with land-use controls that are found in RCRAInfo Web are found
in Cleanups in My Community. This appears to be due to differing criteria for listing facilities in the two
information systems. Cleanups in My Community indicates that it contains only RCRA corrective action
facilities that are on the EPA progress track,5 while RCRAInfo Web contains any RCRA corrective action
facility that has at least one land-use control in RCRAInfo. Of the 1,771 facilities with land-use controls,
169, or about 10 percent, cannot be found in the Cleanups in My Community progress track information.

5 According to the EPA, the 2030 Goal 5 created a dynamic "progress track" of corrective action facilities to which
facilities could be added or subtracted as needed. As of January 2024, there are 3,961 facilities on the EPA's
progress track of RCRA corrective action facilities.

-------
Additionally, there are inconsistencies in how RCRAInfo information is displayed in Cleanups in My
Community. One format indicates that the RCRAInfo data are refreshed nightly and includes a standard
description of environmental indicators, performance measures, and land-use controls, while another
does not include that information. Without a nightly automated refresh of RCRAInfo data, the information
for some of the facilities may be out of date. Further, without a standard format of environmental
indicators, performance measures, and land-use controls, the information may not be consistent.

Since the public may use both RCRAInfo Web and Cleanups in My Community to access RCRA corrective
action facility information, illogical data and data discrepancies could potentially cause confusion for the
public and result in a lack of public trust in the EPA's data. The public should be able to find consistent,
current, and accurate information about land-use controls in Agency information systems.

Conclusions

Lack of oversight and monitoring of land-use controls increases risks to human health and the
environment. Without comprehensive and consistent national-level tracking of the status of land-use
controls, the EPA has limited information on whether land-use controls remain effective. Additionally,
without this information, the EPA is unable to determine whether it is achieving its mission to protect
human health and the environment at RCRA corrective action facilities. Moreover, community members
may not have accurate and up-to-date information on land-use controls at contaminated facilities near
them via the EPA's information systems, potentially affecting their exposure to contaminants if the
controls do not operate as intended.

Recommendations

We recommend that the assistant administrator for Land and Emergency Management:

1.	Provide guidance to EPA regions and authorized states on methods that they can use to verify
land-use control status, such as reporting or on-site assessments.

2.	Define the minimum frequency for region and state verification that land-use controls remain
operational—for example, verification every one, three, or five years.

3.	Update RCRAInfo to capture data on the operational status of land-use controls. This could be
achieved by establishing national event codes for land-use control activities in RCRAInfo—for
example, using Region 3's event codes as nationally defined event codes.

4.	Provide training to help regions and authorized states input and maintain land-use control data
in RCRAInfo.

5.	Implement mechanisms to monitor land-use control status at the national level, such as annual
reports from RCRAInfo that identify land-use controls that have not been verified at the
minimum frequency to ensure they remain operational.

17

-------
6. Implement business rules to address the identified issues with illogical RCRA Corrective Action
Program data in RCRAInfo.

7. Implement a standard format for all regions to use when entering data into Cleanups in My
Community.

8. Address the discrepancies between the RCRA corrective action facilities listed in RCRAInfo Web
and those listed in Cleanups in My Community.

Agency Response and OIG Assessment

Appendix A includes the Office of Land and Emergency Management's August 15, 2024 response to our
draft report. The office also provided technical comments, which we considered as we finalized this
report. The Office of Land and Emergency Management concurred with our recommendations and
proposed acceptable corrective actions with planned completion dates. All recommendations are
resolved with corrective actions pending.

In its response, the Agency noted that the RCRA Corrective Action Program has a Long-Term
Stewardship Workgroup with ORCR and regional membership that is working on RCRA Corrective Action
Program Goal 4. The Agency stated that the recommendations in this report will inform the workgroup's
outputs and the program's work over the next year and a half. According to the Agency, the workgroup
will develop corrective actions for Recommendations 1-3; the ORCR will address the RCRAInfo issues
identified in Recommendations 4-6 and 8; and Regions 2 and 3 will address Recommendation 7. Where
the Agency notes that they plan to use "approaches" to meet our recommendations, we will follow up
to ensure that these suffice in lieu of our requested actions.

-------
Status of Recommendations

Rec.
No.

Page
No.

Recommendation

Status*

Action Official

Planned
Completion
Date

Provide guidance to EPA regions and authorized states on methods that
they can use to verify land-use control status, such as reporting or on-
site assessments.