The Removals Focus Group developed this report as an update to their 2010 report “Transition Issues Analysis”. One area that needed additional review was Post Removals Site Controls (PRSCs). Timely input from the State is needed throughout the removal decision making process. The document includes Institutional, Proprietary and Government Controls, as well as zoning, groundwater use restrictions, fish consumption advisories, and more.
In Benefits of Flexibility During Pre CERCLA Screening, this project relies upon feedback from States, EPA OSRTI data and case studies to examine the States’ use of Pre-CERCLA Screening Assessments and how they can be applied most effectively. This report focuses on the PCS process and the beneficial outcomes obtained by States through use of the PCS tool. This report furthers the work of the May 2014 research findings by focusing on States’ use of the PCS process. The goals of this report are to:
- Obtain additional information about States’ use of PCSs and whether additional flexibility in use of federal funds during the PCS process would be beneficial;
- Report on number of PCSs performed and their outcomes; and
- Provide recommendations about the PCS process with supportive, illustrative case studies.
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.
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
State IC Tool
The Association’s State Superfund Focus Group developed a Marginally Contaminated Soils Paper to highlight how States manage soils that do not meet a State’s unrestricted use criteria or standards for organic or inorganic contaminants.
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.
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.