Analysis of Superfund Site Assessment Program Cooperative Agreements with States: Benefits of Effective State and Federal Partnerships

In this Analysis of Site Assessment Program Cooperative Agreements with States report, the Focus Group is following up on the findings of the Superfund Site Assessment Program: Benefits Beyond NLP Listing reports.  The previous reports collected and reported the numbers of non-NPL outcomes on a national scale, however, their scope did not include investigating how these beneficial outcomes occur.  The goals of this report include showing how States leverage CERCLA Site Assessment work products to achieve cleanup outcomes, both NPL and non-NPL.  Additional goals included gathering and analyzing information on how States:

  • Use their Site Assessment Cooperative Agreement funding;
  • Employ efficiencies and best practices to improve the Site Assessment program; and
  • Track non-NPL beneficial outcomes of sites evaluated with their Site Assessment Cooperative Agreement funding.

This Analysis paper reports on the Focus Group’s research methods and shows how States use Site Assessment work products to achieve both NPL and non-NPL cleanup outcomes, multiplying the benefits of the Site Assessment Program. The report also describes: trends in the Site Assessment Program; State’s recommendations for improving the Site Assessment Program; availability of State programs to address NPL-caliber sites; and tracking non-NPL outcomes.

128(a) Successes Checklist

The Checklist and Defintions below are meant to summarize the work accomplished during the reporting period that is not captured by ACRES and PALS.  It is not meant to be a comprehensive compilation unless defined as such but rather a “snapshot taken” during that period.  We realize that programs and needs vary from State to State (and territories) and therefore accomplishments will also vary so the Checklist not meant to be a “to do” list or goal to complete a task to obtain a number in every box but rather an improved manner to report accomplishments and to provide a means to easily summarize what is being done on a national level.
Introduction and Definitions of the 128(a) Successes Checklist (PDF)
128(a) Successes Checklist (Excel)

Sediment Remedy Effectiveness and Recontamination

The ASTSWMO Sediments Focus Group has produced this document that discusses causes and issues related to recontamination. Discussion topics include new contamination of sediment sites from both known sources and newly identified sources, including contamination from new chemicals or those not addressed in previous assessments, and identification of pollutants most commonly found in areas where recontamination has occurred. Also included are case studies at sediment remediation sites where inadequate source control and/or recontamination have been documented after remedy efforts have commenced.

Community Gardening Toolbox

The Toolbox is designed to assist States by providing a reference guide for State environmental staff on community gardening on brownfield sites. States are encouraged to personalize the toolbox by adding their own State-specific and other regulatory information to increase the documents applicability and usefulness. The final Toolbox is presented in Microsoft Word so States are able to reformat the document for their own specific needs.
Community Gardening Toolbox 
Appendix A: References
Appendix B: Site Model

State Conceptual Framework to Estimate Associated Cost

Building upon previously funded EPA research conducted by the Environmental Law Institute, the ASTSWMO Long-Term Stewardship Focus Group chose to develop an institutional controls costing tool that represents a State perspective, especially for those States currently in the development or implementation stage of a State LTS program. Rather than focusing narrowly on site-specific IC costs, the Focus Group conducted a broad evaluation of all of the costs associated with LTS. From this analysis, the Focus Group has developed a spreadsheet tool to assist States in establishing or enhancing an existing ICs or LTS program and determining the costs associated with those activities.
State Conceptual Framework to Estimate Associated Cost
Costing Observations
State IC Tool

Phase II Report

The Association’s Site Evaluation Focus Group developed this Phase 2 report to highlight the beneficial outcomes not traditionally captured (e.g., State site cleanups that result from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Site Assessment Program, commonly known as the Superfund Site Assessment (SA) Program). This report shows that funds spent on Superfund site assessments result in benefits that go beyond National Priorities List (NPL) listing and that the overall success of the Superfund program should not be measured solely by the number of NPL listings or cleanups.

ASTSWMO Comments on U.S. EPA’s upcoming proposal for regulations promulgated under §108(b) of CERCLA

On behalf of the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO), I would like to thank you for the time you and your staff have invested in considering our concerns on EPA’s upcoming proposal for regulations promulgated under §108(b) of CERCLA. We really appreciate the many updates, meetings, and conference calls where you have provided useful information and listened to our concerns and the concerns of State hardrock mining regulators. We will seek to continue these cooperative efforts as EPA develops the first rule under CERCLA §108(b) to address hardrock mining sites.

Superfund Site Assessment Program: Benefits Beyond NPL Listing

The Association’s Site Evaluation Focus Group developed this report to highlight the beneficial outcomes not traditionally captured, e.g., State site cleanups that result from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Site Assessment Program, commonly known as the Superfund Site Assessment (SA) Program.  This report shows that funds spent on Superfund site assessments result in benefits that go beyond National Priorities List (NPL) listing and that the overall success of the Superfund program should not be measured solely by the number of NPL listings or cleanups.