PROTECTING & RESTORING LAND 

Making a Visible Difference in Communities 

OSWER FY13 END OF YEAR ACCOMPLISHMENTS REPORT 
Cover image credits: USEPA 
 

 

 

 

 

Message from the Assistant Administrator for the
 

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
 

I am pleased to present the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response’s (OSWER) Fiscal Year 2013 

(FY13) Accomplishments Report. OSWER in partnership with other federal agencies, states, tribes, local 

government, and communities, works to protect land, preserve resources, and cleanup contaminated 

properties and facilities to create a safer environment for all Americans. In partnership with our 

stakeholders, we ensure proper management of hazardous waste and petroleum products, and help 

prevent and prepare for oil spills, chemical accidents, and other emergencies to protect the health of 

communities. Through a variety of cleanup programs we assess and cleanup contaminated land to set 

the stage for redevelopment or facilitate the continued 

use of the facility. 

In FY13, we helped communities recover from Hurricane 

Sandy; completed our first Climate Adaptation Plan; and 

collaborated with the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA) and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to issue an advisory on the 

hazards of ammonium nitrate to improve chemical risk 

management. These are just some of the achievements 

highlighted in the report. Throughout the report you will 

find examples of how OSWER’s work touches on key 

priorities of the Administration including clean energy 

and domestic fossil fuel energy development, climate 

change, job creation and training, and manufacturing 

and economic development. I hope this report gives you 

an idea of the variety of ways that OSWER, working collaboratively with other federal agencies, states, 

tribes, and communities helped create a safer environment this past year. 

I am proud of OSWER’s dedicated and talented work force and our accomplishments in FY13 and look 

forward to applying our expertise and energy to address the complex environmental issues facing our 

country. 

Assistant Administrator Stanislaus 

speaking at a public meeting 
(This page intentionally left blank) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
 

PRESERVING LAND AND RESOURCES 5
 

Preserving Land and Resources: Managing Materials Sustainably 7
 

Preserving Land and Resources: Managing Hazardous Waste 10
 

Preserving Land and Resources: Preventing Oil & Petroleum Releases 13
 

Preserving Land and Resources: Reducing Chemical Risks & Releases 17
 

RESTORING LAND 19
 

Restoring Land: Preparing for & Responding to Emergencies 25
 

Restoring Land: Starting Cleanups 29
 

Restoring Land: Advancing Cleanups 33
 

Restoring Land: Completing Cleanups & Reusing Sites 36
 
 

 

 

(This page intentionally left blank) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Executiv Executiv e Summary e Summary 

In FY13, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Solid Waste and Emergency 

Response (OSWER) continued to advance the protection and restoration of land. As Administrator Gina 

McCarthy noted in her themes for the Agency: 

“EPA must work each and every day - hand-in-hand with other federal agencies, states, 

tribes and local communities - to improve the health of American families and protect the 

environment one community at a time, all across the country.” 

OSWER programs and their regional colleagues regularly work in communities across America –cleaning 

up Superfund sites; responding to emergencies; assisting tribes, state and local governments in the 

cleaning up and redeveloping brownfield sites and underground storage tanks; and establishing 

protections for the management of hazardous waste. 

OSWER’s Accomplishments Report includes highlights from across the country of the many on-theground activities that are performed every day in communities, under the two broad goals of OSWER’s 

work, Preserving Land and Resources and Restoring Land. OSWER’s FY13 accomplishments include new 

program initiatives and activities of note in long-term programs. These initiatives and activities must 

involve and engage our partners at all levels of government in order to reach their full potential. For 

example, climate change is a national challenge with significant local impacts. In FY13, OSWER 

completed its first Climate Change Adaptation Plan to identify the climate change impacts to our 

programs and develop a plan for integrating consideration of climate change impacts into our work. In 

the Plan, OSWER identified 26 priority actions to begin over the next three years, including, but not 

limited to, reviewing remedy effectiveness, management of storm debris, and emergency management 

planning. EPA also has an opportunity to make a difference at the local level by helping communities 

capture new, job-generating manufacturing investment in an environmentally responsible way. In FY13, 

OSWER participated in the Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership to promote new 

manufacturing activity in U.S. communities. OSWER has a keen interest in encouraging new 

manufacturing investment and enhancing the ability of communities of all sizes to recycle vacant and 

abandoned properties for new, productive reuses in ways that build on local economic advantages. 

Preserving Land and Resources 

Land is a finite resource. As a result, preventing the contamination of this land and preserving critical 

resources is vital to creating healthy and vibrant communities and ecosystems. When contaminants and 

pollutants are released or wasted, communities and ecosystems are threatened. For example, 

discharges of oil into U.S. waters from facilities; accidents at chemical facilities; or improperly stored or 

treated wastes, all may threaten human health, result in injury and death or result in environmental 

damage and financial loss. Furthermore, some projections predict by 2050, our global population will 

grow 50 percent, economic activity will grow 500 percent, and energy and materials use will grow 300 

1
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

percent.1 As a result of this growth and as we strive to meet the associated demand, there will be 

greater pressure on these finite resources underscoring the need to preserve and reuse these resources. 

OSWER, in partnership with our state co-regulators, currently oversees and manages permits for 20,000 

hazardous waste units at 6,600 facilities, and set standards for approximately 580,000 federallyregulated underground storage tanks in order to prevent potentially dangerous releases. OSWER 

conducts prevention, preparedness, 

compliance assistance, and 

enforcement activities for 

approximately 13,000 chemical 

facilities subject to Risk 

Management Program facilities, 

which handle highly toxic and 

flammable chemicals, and provides 

guidance to state and local response 

organizations to assist them in their 

management and implementation of 

the Emergency Planning and 

Community Right to Know Act at 

over 390,000 facilities. 

In FY13, OSWER took many actions that helped advance its mission to preserve land and resources. 

OSWER worked with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Bureau of 

Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to issue an advisory, as part of an ongoing federal 

effort to improve chemical risk management, advance safety, and protect human health and the 

environment. This advisory contains information on recent and past accidents involving ammonium 

nitrate, its hazards, and appropriate steps for community emergency planning and proper emergency 

response. OSWER also made progress implementing three national strategies that are part of the 

Sustainable Materials Management (SMM) framework to encourage approaches that consider the 

human health and environmental impacts associated with the full life cycle of the materials. In 2012 

alone, the most recent year with data, more than 36 million tons of food waste was generated, with less 

than five percent diverted from landfills and incinerators. In FY13, the U.S. Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) and EPA jointly announced the launch of the USDA - U.S. Food Waste Challenge, enabling 

targeted work to reduce food waste at school meal programs and inspection labs, in addition to other 

locations where food waste is generated. In FY13, OSWER revised the Spill Prevention and 

Countermeasures (SPCC) Guidance for inspectors and increased SPCC training and targeted outreach to 

improve compliance and help oil facilities, the public, and EPA inspectors prevent, prepare for and 

respond to oil spills. In FY13, OSWER continued to see an increase in the number of underground 

storage tanks that are in compliance with leak prevention and detection requirements which directly 

contribute to the protection of America’s drinking water supply. 

These are just a few examples of OSWER’s continued success in preventing future environmental 

contamination and protecting the health of communities. The Preserving Land and Resources section 

gives additional illustrations of how OSWER is considering the full life cycle of materials, ensuring 

1 World Resources Institute, The Weight of Nations: Material Outflows from Industrial Economies (Washington, DC, 

2000). 

2
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

appropriate management of generated wastes and petroleum products, and preventing and preparing 

for accidental chemical releases at industrial facilities. 

Restoring Land 

Accidents, spills, leaks, releases and past improper disposal and handling of hazardous materials and 

wastes have resulted in tens of thousands of contaminated sites in the United States. 

OSWER’s land cleanup programs track over 530,000 sites and almost 23 million acres. Contaminated 

sites addressed by OSWER programs exist in thousands of communities across the United States ranging 

from remote to large urban settings. Approximately 51 percent of the total U.S. population lives within 

three miles of a Superfund, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action, or 

Brownfields site. While there is no single way to characterize communities located near the sites, census 

data shows that the population within three miles of OSWER sites is more minority, lower income, 

linguistically isolated, and less likely to have a high school education than the U.S. population as a whole. 

These communities may have fewer resources with which to address concerns about their health and 

environment. 

Contaminated land can threaten human health and the environment, and potentially hamper economic 

growth and the vitality of local communities. Substances commonly found on contaminated sites have 

been linked to a variety of human health problems, such as birth defects, cancer, and changes in neurobehavioral functions. Recent academic research demonstrated that investment in Superfund cleanups 

reduces the incidence of congenital abnormalities by roughly 20-25 percent for those living within 5,000 

meters (3.2 miles) of a site.

2 In FY13, the Superfund and Brownfields Programs exceeded their site 

assessment targets, setting the stage for protective cleanups and redevelopment, as well as providing 

communities with valuable information regarding the environmental condition of sites. The two cleanup 

programs most often involved in long-term cleanups - RCRA Corrective Action and Superfund -addressed 

any unacceptable exposures and have eliminated acute risks at more than 80 percent of sites, while 

continuing to pursue long-term permanent cleanups. 

Contaminated land is often unused, resulting in missed 

opportunities for reuse, as well as potential economic opportunities, 

such as jobs for local residents. In addition, contaminated land 

located on an operating facility may hinder other activities on site. 

At the end of FY13, OSWER and its partners made over 2.3 million 

acres (over 440,000 sites) available for commercial, industrial, 

ecological, recreational, residential and other purposes. Once a 

property is cleaned up and redeveloped, the reuse or continued use, 

results in new income to the community in the form of taxes, jobs to 

local residents or provides recreational or other services to make the 

community a better place to live. A 2012 study found an increase in 

property values between 5.1 and 12.8 percent at homes located 

within one kilometer (0.6 miles) of Brownfields sites where cleanup 

was completed.3 A study conducted by researchers at Duke and the 

2 Currie, Janet, Michael Greenstone, and Enrico Moretti. 2012. “Superfund Cleanups and Infant Health.” American 

Economic Review, 101(3):435-441.
 3 Haninger, Kevin, Lala Ma, and Christopher Timmins. 2012. Estimating the Impacts of Brownfield Remediation on
 

Housing Property Values. Working Paper EE 12-08. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.
 

3
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

University of Pittsburgh found that property values within three miles of sites where Superfund cleanups 

were completed increased approximately 20 percent.4 In FY13, the Brownfields Program’s funding for 

cleanup and redevelopment activities leveraged $1.5 billion dollars and over 10,000 jobs, significant 

increases from FY12. 

OSWER also plays a critical role in responding to emergencies and acts as a safety net for all levels of 

government during these crises. There are national 

and regional EPA emergency operations centers 

with 24-hour per day capability for reporting of 

hazardous materials or other releases. Each year, 

more than 30,000 emergencies involving the 

release (or threatened release) of oil and hazardous 

substances are reported in the United States. 

Natural disasters, such as hurricanes and tornados, 

may be occurring more frequently and on a larger 

scale. In general, responsibilities during these 

events are spread across federal, state, local and 

tribal governments, depending upon the size and 

type of the emergency and involve the environmental, emergency management, and public health 

agencies of all levels of government, as well as local responders such as firefighters and police. In FY13, 

OSWER completed or oversaw the completion of more than 300 removal actions, typically immediate 

short-term responses intended to protect people from threats posed by hazardous substances or 

pollutants and contaminants. OSWER also participated in a variety of Hurricane Sandy preparations and 

response activities. 

The Restoring Land section of this document gives many more examples to describe OSWER’s progress 

assessing and cleaning up contaminated sites to maintain or put them back into productive use and 

demonstrates how EPA is using the relevant tools available in each of the cleanup programs, including 

enforcement and emergency response, to better leverage resources. 

http://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/environmentaleconomics/estimating-the-impacts-of-brownfield-remediationon-housing-property-values 4 Gamper-Rabindran, Shanti and Christopher Timmins. 2013. "Does cleanup of hazardous waste sites raise housing 

values? Evidence of spatially localized benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 65(3): 345-

360, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2012.12.001. 

4
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preserving Land and Resources

The Challenge 

Land is a finite resource. As a result, preventing the contamination of this land and preserving critical 

resources is vital to creating healthy and vibrant communities and ecosystems. When contaminants and 

pollutants are released or wasted, communities and ecosystems are threatened. For example, 

discharges of oil into U.S. waters from facilities; the release of gasoline; accidents at chemical 

facilities; or improperly stored or treated wastes, all may threaten human health, result in injury 

and death or result in environmental damage and financial loss. Furthermore, some projections predict 

by 2050, our global population will grow 50 percent, economic activity will grow 500 percent, and 

energy and materials use will grow 300 percent.5 As a result of this growth and as we strive to meet the 

associated demand, there will be greater pressure on these finite resources and the resulting waste 

could increase significantly. 

What is EPA doing? 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) works collaboratively with states, local governments, other 

federal agencies, and communities to preserve land and resources. EPA works to ensure that materials, 

both hazardous and non-hazardous, are controlled and managed responsibly. In order to accomplish 

this, EPA permits, inspects and monitors facilities or requires proper planning to ensure that anyone 

who generates, recycles, transports, treats, stores or disposes of potential contaminants is meeting 

necessary standards to protect human health and the environment. For example, the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program and Underground Storage Tanks (UST) Program help 

prevent incidents at operating facilities, including, but not limited to, manufacturing plants and gas 

stations. The Oil Spill Program, in cooperation with the Coast Guard, protects land and water bodies 

from oil and petroleum spills and leaks. Each of these programs utilizes a unique set of regulatory and 

non-regulatory tools to accomplish its goals. With rigorous prevention activities, EPA can reduce the 

creation of Superfund, Brownfield, RCRA Corrective Action, and other contaminated sites. 

In addition, EPA works to preserve resources whenever possible and encourage responsible 

consumption and usage. This includes advancing sustainable, lifecycle waste and material management 

approaches. By applying lifecycle principles, EPA has integrated more holistic resource and material 

management concepts into the program. 

EPA’s work on these challenges and solutions to these problems, however, is far from complete – new 

products and chemicals are continually being introduced; emerging technologies are constantly being 

developed; and unpredictable and unusual consequences from an increasing number of natural and 

manmade disasters are becoming more prevalent. As a result EPA will need to continue to innovate and 

learn in order to prepare for the long-term. 

5 World Resources Institute, The Weight of Nations: Material Outflows from Industrial Economies (Washington, DC, 

2000). 

5
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OSWER PREVENTION & PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMS

RCRA Solid Waste Program The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) solid waste program
 

encourages states to develop comprehensive plans to manage nonhazardous industrial solid waste and
 

municipal solid waste, sets criteria for municipal solid waste landfills and other solid waste disposal facilities,
 

and prohibits the open dumping of solid waste. This program also looks for more sustainable ways to manage
 

our materials, prolonging the life of materials as usable commodities for as long as possible.
 

RCRA Hazardous Waste Program The RCRA Hazardous Waste program issues comprehensive, national
 

regulations that define solid and hazardous wastes, and imposes strict standards on anyone who generates,
 

recycles, transports, treats, stores or disposes of hazardous waste to ensure proper management of waste. 

This program also monitors the movement of hazardous waste in and out of U.S. borders and works to ensure 

the waste that is exported is properly recycled or disposed of.
 

UST Program The Underground Storage Tank (UST) program works with state, tribal and interagency partners
 

to set and implement standards which prevent and detect releases from USTs, thereby reducing cleanup costs
 

while protecting human health and the environment.
 

Oil Spill Program The Oil Spill Program, authorized under Section 311 of the Clean Water Act and the Oil 

Pollution Act of 1990, protects U.S. waters by preventing, preparing for and responding to oil spills. 

The EPA Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Program is the national regulatory framework to
 

prevent, prepare for and respond to catastrophic accidental chemical releases at industrial facilities 

throughout the United States.
 

How is this chapter structured? 

EPA conserves resources and prevents land contamination by: 

 Managing Materials Sustainably;

 Managing Hazardous Waste;

 Preventing Petroleum Releases; and

 Reducing Chemical Risks and Releases.

This section will review our programs, including enforcement efforts as appropriate, and demonstrate 

how they have achieved significant strides in preserving land and preventing releases to the 

environment. 

6
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preserving Land and Resources: Managing Materials 

Sustainably 

Historically, much of the nation’s resource conservation efforts have focused on decisions to reuse or 

recycle materials that would otherwise be disposed as waste. While these remain important resource 

conservation practices, they only represent a fraction of all the opportunities available to conserve 

resources. Conserving resources requires attention at every step of the manufacturing or production 

process to prevent the unnecessary use of materials, decrease the use of toxins and prevent materials 

from going to landfills. 

Figure 1
 

The Life Cycle of Materials
 Benefits from 

Sustainable Materials Management 

•	 It is estimated that approximately 42 percent of

greenhouse gas emissions are attributable to

materials management activities and

approximately 16 percent are related to land

management choices.

•	 Making an aluminum can from recycled

aluminum requires 95 percent less energy than

making a can from virgin feedstocks.

•	 Recycling 50 plastic bottles saves enough energy

to power a laptop computer for over 127 hours.

Through a Sustainable Materials Management (SMM) approach, EPA is helping change the way our 

society protects the environment and conserves resources for future generations. Building on the 

familiar concept of Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, SMM is a systemic approach that seeks to reduce materials 

use and their associated environmental impacts over their entire life cycle, starting with extraction of 

natural resources and product design and ending with decisions on recycling or final disposal. This 

approach changes how we think about environmental protection and recognizes the impacts of the vast 

amount of materials we consume. Integrating SMM into the business practices of our stakeholders, on a 

broad, national level is a critical means for the U.S. to conserve its own natural resources and stay 

competitive globally. 

EPA is currently promoting three national strategies, the Federal Green Challenge, the Electronics 

Challenge, and the Food Recovery Challenge. EPA is working with other federal agencies, state and tribal 

governments, and non-governmental organizations to promote sustainability goals through these and 

other initiatives. While EPA is striving for sustainable materials management, we also ensure that when 

materials reach the true end of life, they are disposed of properly and safely throughout the country. 

FY13 Accomplishments 

Partnering with other Federal Agencies to Promote SMM 

On June 4, 2013, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and EPA jointly announced the launch of 

the USDA - U.S. Food Waste Challenge. In 2012 alone, more than 36 million tons of food waste was 

7
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

generated, with less than five percent diverted from landfills and incinerators. The goal of the U.S. Food 

Waste Challenge is to lead a fundamental shift in how we think about and manage food and food waste 

in this country. The Challenge expands upon the efforts in EPA’s Food Recovery Challenge, increasing 

food recovery efforts to reach additional producer groups, processors, manufacturers, retailers, 

communities, and other government agencies. This partnership also enables targeted work with school 

meal programs, imported food issues, and food waste at inspection labs. 

Expanding the Federal Green Challenge 

The Federal Green Challenge is a national effort encouraging EPA and other federal agencies throughout 

the country to lead by example in reducing the federal government's environmental impact. In FY12, the 

Federal Green Challenge efforts to reduce waste, water and electricity usage resulted in an estimated 

cost savings of $31 million and over 900,000 metric tons of GHG reductions. With 126 new federal 

facilities joining in FY13 (exceeding the goal of 50 and bringing the total number of participants to 365) 

the cost savings and greenhouse gas reductions are likely to increase significantly. EPA itself is a major 

participant in the Challenge. The number of EPA facilities participating in the Challenge increased to 21, 

including the main offices in all ten EPA Regions. 

Moving Forward on the Electronics Challenge 

With an ever increasing supply of new electronics, Americans 

discard more than two million tons of obsolete electronics 

annually.6 One way EPA is addressing this growing number of 

discarded electronics is through the Electronics Challenge. By 

participating in the Challenge, original equipment 

manufacturers and retailers promote responsible electronics 

recycling. Challenge participants are increasing the number of 

electronics being collected and sending 100 percent of their 

used electronics to a recognized third-party certified 

recycler by the third year of participation. The SMM Electronics

Challenge was launched September 20, 2012 with ten national 

participants. These participants represent some of the nation’s 

largest retailers and manufacturers of electronics.7 During 

FY13, extensive assistance was provided to the existing ten participants on interpreting the Challenge 

requirements as they relate to each company’s unique business structure and processes. EPA also 

collected participant baseline data; developed electronics portion of the SMM Data Management 

System; and developed a narrative awards process and criteria. 

Advancing Beneficial Use 

The generation of power by the combustion of coal currently represents over 40 percent of the U.S. 

electricity usage and generates over 130 million tons of coal combustion residues (CCR) annually. EPA 

undertook the development of a methodology to evaluate potential uses of this enormous waste stream 

and subsequently applied this methodology to the two most common beneficial uses of CCRs – uses in 

concrete and wallboard. Not only were these products useful to ensure reuse of CCRs is appropriate but 

they can be valuable tools for EPA, states, and other stakeholders in evaluating future beneficial uses of 

6 USEPA, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery. 2011. Electronics Waste Management in the United States 

Through 2009.

7 The ten participants are Best Buy, Dell, LG Electronics, Nokia, Panasonic, Samsung, Sharp, Sony, Sprint Nextel and 

Staples. 

8
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

industrial materials. Overcoming these issues will move the science and practice of beneficial use 

forward. 

MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN COMMUNITIES 

Cupertino, California: In November 2012, EPA recognized the City of Cupertino as a winner of the 2012 Food 

Recovery Challenge Award for Innovation. Cupertino teamed up with its waste hauler, Recology, and EPA's 

Food Recovery Challenge program to work with local grocers and food markets to reduce food waste. In 

2010, Cupertino and Recology agreed to add a stipulation to its franchise agreement to keep 75 percent of 

community-generated waste out of landfills by 2015, a 10 percent increase from 2010 levels. More than 

2,000 tons of food waste has been diverted from landfills since the city amended its franchise agreement. 

Reducing food waste is a key component of this plan. Also, the city has made significant progress toward its 

75 percent goal and has seen a six percent increase of material reused, recycled, or composted, rather than 

sent to landfills. As a member of EPA’s Food Recovery Challenge, the City of Cupertino has created a 

foundation of innovation and achievement that can serve as a model for other cities across the nation as 

they pursue their own sustainable food management goals. 

Measures 

To help assess EPA progress in advancing materials management, EPA used two annual performance 

measures in FY13 that track the amount of material that is managed. FY13 results will be available in 

February 2015 for both measures.8 

EPA also tracked improvements in tribal capacity to manage solid waste in FY13 by measuring the 

number of open dumps cleaned up in Indian Country and number of tribes with an integrated solid 

waste management plan. Both of these measures were met in FY13. 

 

 

 

Status Measure FY13 Target FY13 Value 

Increase in percentage of coal combustion ash that is beneficially used instead of disposed 1.4 NA 

Tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin resources through sustainable materials 

management 8,549,502 NA 

Number of closed, cleaned up or upgraded open dumps in Indian Country or on other tribal 

lands. 45 106 

Number of tribes covered by an integrated solid waste management plan. 3 26 

Legend: Data Unavailable Goal Met Goal Not Met 

8 The coal ash measure was originally established to track EPA’s progress in supporting the beneficial use of coal 

combustion residuals under EPA’s Coal Combustion Products Partnership (C2

P2). EPA decided to suspend the 

Partnership in 2010, and as a result in FY14 we will no longer report this measure. Because there is no C2

P2, insight 

to expected results for FY13 is very limited. Elements of the sustainable materials management measure are based 

on calculations of national recycling and waste disposal rates, which require data generated from other data 

sources, including other Federal Agencies. 

9
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preserving Land and Resources: Managing Hazardous Waste 

Hazardous wastes are potentially harmful to human health and the environment if they are not properly 

managed. In the U.S. more than 34 million tons of hazardous waste was generated in 2011 by over 

16,400 large quantity generators.9 EPA protects human health, communities and the environment 

through a comprehensive regulatory framework implemented in partnership with states which guides 

the safe management of hazardous waste and prevents their release. EPA’s hazardous waste 

management activities also play a key role in supporting U.S. industries and small businesses. 

National regulations define hazardous waste, and impose strict standards on anyone who generates, 

recycles, transports, treats, stores or disposes of hazardous waste. Some key aspects of the hazardous 

waste management program include: controlling transportation of hazardous waste through a manifest 

system; ensuring the safe treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes by establishing specific 

requirements/permits that must be followed when managing those wastes; and inspecting facilities to 

ensure compliance with regulations. 

In addition, new technologies, waste streams and new Clean 

Air Act and Clean Water Act regulations have meant the 

RCRA program must evolve to address new challenges, 

including incorporation of these advances into the current 

regulatory structure in a lasting and effective manner. 

EPA and its state partners have issued new or updated 

permits and other approved controls for 20,000 hazardous 

waste units (such as incinerators and landfills) at 6,600 

treatment, storage and disposal facilities in the permitting 

universe. With these permits and other enforceable 

controls, the RCRA program actively protects the 

environment and the health of communities near hazardous 

waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs), including an estimated 62.5 million people living 

within three miles of these facilities.

10 

Furthermore, EPA promotes the management of waste in more environmentally beneficial and costeffective ways. It is important for EPA to strike a balance between recovering valuable materials and 

preventing loopholes that could lead to unsafe disposal under the guise of recycling. EPA is working to 

provide regulatory flexibilities designed to encourage hazardous materials recycling with adequate 

safeguards. In order to protect human health and the environment, EPA must ensure materials are 

destined for legitimate recycling. 

9 EPA collects information on the hazardous waste generated by large quantity generators (LQGs) every two years. 

The total number of LQGs includes generators that do not meet the federal definition because some states can 

have different regulations where the threshold for an LQG is lower than the federal threshold or additional state 

wastes are counted as hazardous waste. In addition, there are hundreds of thousands of smaller generators in the 

country who are not required to report every 2 years. At the end of calendar year 2013, reporting had begun for 

the next biennial report and will be available December 2014.

10 Data collected includes: site information as of the end of FY11 from RCRAInfo and census data from the 2007-

2011 American Community Survey (ACS). Facility site data from FY11 was chosen to correspond most closely to the 

census data in the 2007-2011 ACS. In FY11 this included 1,795 hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal 

facilities in the 50 U.S. states with accurate locational data. A three mile ring was placed around each facility’s 

lat/long and census data was collected for the block groups whose centroid fell within the three mile area. 

10
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FY13 Accomplishments 

Solvent-Contaminated Wipes Final Rule 

In August 2013, EPA finalized the Solvent-Contaminated Wipes Rule modifying the hazardous waste 

management regulations under RCRA to conditionally exclude solvent-contaminated wipes from 

hazardous waste regulations provided that businesses clean or dispose of them properly. This rule uses 

the latest science to provide a regulatory framework that is appropriate to the level of risk posed. The 

rule is based on EPA’s final risk analysis that concluded wipes contaminated with certain hazardous 

solvents do not pose significant risk to human health and the environment when managed properly. 

Wipes are used in conjunction with solvents for a variety of purposes by thousands of facilities, including 

many small businesses, such as printers, automobiles repair shops, and manufacturing. EPA estimates 

the final rule will result in a net savings of $21.7 - $27.8 million per year and was effective on January 31, 

2014. 

Modernizing Hazardous Waste Reporting Processes 

EPA has made several significant steps in moving from paper-based to electronic reporting of hazardous 

waste handler activity. In FY13, EPA successfully deployed a new application, myRCRAid, providing a 

web-based alternative to the current paper-based RCRA site identification (ID) application process for 

facilities that have an existing EPA ID. By enabling electronic submissions, myRCRAid will save in mailing 

costs; improve data quality; increase efficiency of the notification process by allowing facilities to easily 

submit updates of past submissions; and enable states and EPA to receive the updated data faster. 

In addition, EPA continued system planning under the October 2012 Hazardous Waste Electronic 

Manifest (e-Manifest) Establishment Act. The planned e-Manifest system will allow for the electronic 

reporting of hazardous waste shipments. Webinars and information gathering sessions were held across 

the country to solicit information about system requirements. The well attended sessions included 

industry, state representatives, and non-governmental organizations. The e-Manifest program is the 

vanguard of the EPA’s e-Enterprise initiative and it is estimated it will ultimately reduce the burden 

associated with preparing shipping manifests by between 300,000 and 700,000 hours and result in 

savings of more than $75 million for states and industry. 

Updating Waste Characterization Methods 

EPA developed and revised 23 analytical procedures for inclusion in SW-846, RCRA’s methods guidance 

document for waste characterization. The development of updated analytical procedures ensures the 

regulated community can accurately identify their waste, which is the first step to ensuring proper 

management. 

Using Evidence Based Evaluation to Improve our Programs 

In an effort to improve the EPA’s Hazardous Waste regulations and to increase compliance, EPA worked 

with a third party evaluator to review the regulatory requirement for generators to determine if their 

waste materials are hazardous. EPA published the final Hazardous Waste Determination Program 

evaluation in April 2013. Major findings of this evaluation included a desire to clarify and simplify some 

of the regulations and substantial difficulties in generators making required waste determinations. 

These findings support many of the in development proposed revisions to the generator regulations and 

are one of the follow-up actions that came out of this effort. 

11
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Measures 

EPA measured its FY13 progress in this area with an annual performance measure that tracks the 

number of RCRA hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls in place to prevent releases of 

contaminants into the environment. This measure was exceeded in FY13. 

 

 

Status Measure FY13 Target FY13 Value 

Number of hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls. 100 114 

Legend: Data Unavailable Goal Met Goal Not Met 

Continuing Progress and Trends 

Hazardous Waste Generation and Management 

Hazardous waste poses potential environmental impacts if not properly treated, stored, and disposed 

of. In addition, the total quantity and type of hazardous waste reflects a component of the total 

materials a society creates and uses, which is an important aspect of sustainability. In partnership with 

the states, EPA collects extensive data on the RCRA hazardous waste generation and management 

practices of treatment, storage and disposal facilities and large quantity generators. Since 2001, the 

quantity of RCRA hazardous waste generated in the U.S. ranged from 20.1 million tons in 2003 to 28.8 

million tons in 2005.11 From 2001 to 2009, the quantity of RCRA hazardous waste ultimately disposed to 

the land ranged from 16.1 to 24.3 million tons. 

11 Note that because some wastes can go through multiple management steps, the individual management 

categories do not sum to the total quantity of RCRA hazardous waste generated. “Other” includes stored, bulk, 

transferred, material recovery, energy recovery and treated. 

12
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preserving Land and Resources: Preventing Oil & Petroleum 

Releases 

EPA has two primary programs that work to protect our land and water bodies from oil and petroleum 

spills and leaks. 

EPA’s Underground Storage Tanks (UST) Program helps prevents petroleum releases by developing 

federal regulations governing the program; providing needed 

funds and oversight to state and tribal partners to support their 

programs; providing technical information/guidance,

12 forums 

for information exchanges and training opportunities to states, 

tribes and intertribal consortia to encourage program 

development and/or implementation; and implementing the 

program in Indian country. In the UST program the states are 

the front-line implementers conducting the majority of 

inspections, enforcement and site-specific compliance 

assistance. The greatest potential hazard from leaking 

underground storage tanks is that petroleum or other 

hazardous substances can seep into soil and contaminate 

groundwater, the source of drinking water for nearly half of all 

Americans. 

EPA‘s Oil Spill Program and the Coast Guard protects U.S. waters by preventing, preparing for and 

responding to oil spills.13 The Oil Pollution Prevention regulations apply to certain non-transportationrelated facilities that could discharge oil into navigable waters of the United States. This regulation 

require each owner or operator of a regulated facility to prepare a Spill Prevention, Control, and 

Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan addressing the facility's design, operation and maintenance procedures 

established to prevent oil spills, as well as countermeasures to control, contain, clean up and mitigate 

the effects of an oil spill that could affect navigable waters. In addition, some facility owners and 

operators are also required to prepare Facility Response Plans (FRPs) addressing response actions for 

discharges of oil that present the potential for substantial environmental harm. EPA’s FRP regulation 

requires plans to be consistent with Area Contingency Plans (ACPs) under the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. 

FY13 Accomplishments 

Updating Guidance for Regional Inspectors and Outreach 

In August 2013, EPA revised the SPCC Guidance for Regional Inspectors, to assist inspectors in reviewing 

a facility's implementation of the SPCC rule. This guidance document is also available to owners and 

operators of facilities and the public and provides a consistent national policy on several SPCC-related 

issues. EPA also developed outreach and held a series of webinars related to the revised SPCC Guidance. 

These webinars and other in-person outreach sessions resulted in more than 2,500 stakeholders 

receiving online training from EPA staff and several hundred more being trained in person. EPA also 

12 For example, EPA provides national guidance for emerging issues, such as the impact of alternative fuels on tank 

infrastructure and cleanup of higher blend releases.

13 Section 311 of the Clean Water Act and the Oil Pollution Act provide EPA with the authority to establish a 

regulatory program for preventing, preparing for and responding to oil spills that occur in navigable waters of the 

United States. 

13
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

presented sector-specific guidance training for the electrical power industry, military, and construction 

industry stakeholders. EPA continues to use such innovative and cost effective outreach tools to 

promote SPCC compliance. 

Providing SPCC Guidance for Agriculture 

EPA developed specialized materials for farm owners to help them address the unique circumstances 

the agriculture community faces so that they can comply with the SPCC rule. Outreach materials, 

including frequently asked questions, factsheets, and webinars were created in order to help farm 

owners determine if their farm is covered under SPCC and prepare an SPCC plan to prevent oil spills on 

their land. 

Developing Guidance for Dispersant Use 

During the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in 2010, dispersant was applied using novel techniques and in 

amounts never seen in U.S. waters. For the first time, dispersant was injected at the source of the 

release at depths of nearly a mile, and in quantities approximating three quarters of a million gallons. In 

addition, aircraft and vessels deployed dispersant to the surface at volumes topping 1,000,000 gallons 

over the course of the response, quantities unsurpassed in North America. Such atypical uses of 

dispersant during a response were neither envisioned nor incorporated into existing Regional Response 

Team (RRT) dispersant use plans. To address this gap, the National Response Team, which is chaired by 

EPA, developed guidance called Environmental Monitoring for Atypical Dispersant Operations to assist 

On-Scene Coordinators and RRTs in making incident-specific decisions regarding atypical dispersant use. 

The guidance is envisioned to continue addressing monitoring challenges as they become necessary, and 

as resources allow other atypical dispersant applications. 

Implementing Delivery Prohibitions 

EPA’s UST program began implementing the delivery prohibition policy in FY13, which describes EPA’s 

process for prohibiting delivery of regulated substances to federally regulated USTs. Many states 

already use delivery prohibition and indicate it is a very successful enforcement option in improving 

compliance. This enforcement option allows EPA to use fewer resources while helping violators return 

to compliance quickly and effectively. 

Increasing State Operator Training 

EPA and states are now implementing underground storage tank operator training, which is the last 

requirement of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. At the end of 2013, most states have fully implemented 

this important program and are already seeing positive results. For example, Colorado reported that 

their operator training program has been very successful and is positively impacting operational 

compliance statistics. Since rolling out this initiative, Colorado inspectors are finding owners/operators 

who are more engaged, knowledgeable and wanting to learn more about their systems. Suspected 

releases are being detected and addressed earlier, resulting in smaller impacts to the environment and 

quicker cleanup timelines, while significantly reducing cleanup costs. 

14
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Measures 

Ensuring that high risk facilities that store large amounts of oil are compliant with EPA’s SPCC and FRP 

regulations is a crucial part of preventing oil spills. To help assess EPA’s progress in this area, EPA 

reported two performance measures in FY13 that track the percentage of facilities brought into 

compliance with the regulations. Over the past several years, EPA has exceeded its yearly targets for 

these two measures, helping to improve facility oil spill preparedness and prevent oil spills. 

To help assess EPA’s progress in reducing petroleum releases into the environment from USTs, EPA 

collects state data for two key performance measures that track reductions in the number of confirmed 

UST releases across the country, and increases in the percentage of UST facilities that are in compliance 

with release detection and prevention regulations. EPA exceeded both of these targets in FY13. 

Status Measure FY13 Target FY13 Value 

% of all FRP inspected facilities found to be non-compliant which are brought into 

compliance. 

% of all SPCC inspected facilities found to be non-compliant which are brought into 

compliance. 

Reduce the number of confirmed releases at UST faciliti es to 5% fewer than previous year. 

Increase the % of UST facilities that are in significant operati onal compliance with both 

release detection and release prevention requirements by 0.5% over the previ ous year's 

target. 

Legend: Data Unavailable Goal Met Goal Not Met 

40 

40 

7,715 

67 

78 

69 

6,128 

71.6 

Continuing Progress and Trends 

Focus on UST Confirmed Releases 

Because of the increased emphasis on inspections and release prevention requirements, since FY05, EPA 

has consistently met our yearly goal to reduce the number of confirmed releases. This has resulted in a 

general downward trend in the number of confirmed releases. However, in FY13 the number of 

releases did trend upward for the first time since FY08. 

Since the beginning of the UST program, over 514,000 confirmed released from leaking underground 

storage tanks have been discovered. Given that remediation costs average between $100,000 and 

$400,000 per release (depending on the presence of ground water contamination), a robust prevention 

program also saves resources in the long run. 

In addition, fewer sites are entering the backlog of UST sites awaiting cleanup. The EPA’s backlog study 

completed in FY12 found that almost half of the releases yet to be addressed were 15 years old or older, 

and that groundwater was contaminated at more than 75 percent of releases. 

While EPA and its partners have made major progress in reducing the number of new releases, 

thousands of releases are still discovered each year (about 6,128 in FY13). A main cause of releases from 

USTs is the lack of proper operation and maintenance of UST systems. Approximately 30 percent of the 

federally regulated UST systems still need to come into and stay in compliance. At the end of FY13, 

there were approximately 77,700 open releases still in the cleanup process or waiting to be cleaned up. 

15
 
 

 

 

Number of Confirmed Releases 

Figure 3 

UST Confirmed Releases 

8,000 

7,000 

6,000 

5,000 

4,000 

3,000 

2,000 

1,000 

0 

7,364 7,168 

6,328 5,998 5,674 

6,128 

FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 

16
 

 

Figure 4 

102,798 100,165 93,123 87,983 82,903 77,717 

0.0% 

5.0% 

10.0% 

15.0% 

20.0% 

25.0% 

0 

20,000 

40,000 

60,000 

80,000 

100,000 

120,000 

Percentage of Sites 

Number of Sites 

Tanks Cleanup Backlog 

FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 

Sites Remaining Percent Backlog Remaining 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preserving Land and Resources: Reducing Chemical Risks & 

Releases 

EPA’s Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Program is the national regulatory framework 

to prevent, prepare for and respond to catastrophic accidental chemical releases at industrial facilities 

throughout the United States. This program includes the Clean Air Act Section 112(r) Risk Management 

Program and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) program. 

Together, the Risk Management Program and EPCRA establish a structure within which federal, state, 

local and tribal partners work together to protect the public and the environment from chemical risks. 

They also play an important role in increasing transparency and communication among facilities, 

governments and communities to facilitate the prevention of accidents when possible and plan for 

effective emergency response actions when they are necessary. 

Under the Clean Air Act, EPA regulations require that facilities handling more than a threshold quantity 

of certain extremely hazardous substances implement a risk management program and submit a risk 

management plan (RMP) to EPA. The RMP describes the approach the facility is taking to prevent and 

mitigate chemical accidents. The plan addresses the hazards of the chemicals used by the facility, the 

potential consequences of worst case and other accidental chemical release scenarios, the facility’s fiveyear accident history, the chemical accident prevention program in place at the site and the emergency 

response program used by the site to minimize the impacts on the public and environment should a 

chemical release occur. 

The EPCRA program requires facilities to report their chemical accidents and inventories of chemicals to 

the local communities and emergency responders in order for those officials to develop a local 

community emergency response plan to mitigate the effects of a chemical accident. 

In addition, these programs also collect and share data to assist other stakeholders in preventing and 

responding to releases of all types, and as such, RMP provides the foundation for community and 

hazards response planning. RMPs are currently available to local emergency planning committees 

(LEPCs) and members of the local community’s access to them is limited through either the LEPC or by 

visiting a federal risk management plan reading room. The RMP regulation requires facilities to 

coordinate facility emergency response plans with the community emergency response plan developed 

under EPCRA, and facilities must have a means of notifying local community responders in the event of 

an accident. During inspections of RMP facilities, in addition to verifying compliance with accident 

prevention requirements, EPA checks with the LEPC to ensure that the facility has adequately 

coordinated its emergency plan with community responders. 

FY13 Accomplishments 

Safeguarding Communities from Chemical Accidents and Spills 

EPA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) issued an advisory as part of an ongoing federal effort to improve 

chemical risk management and to advance safety and protect human health and the environment. Part 

of an Executive Order issued in August 2013 titled Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security, this 

advisory contains information on recent and past accidents involving ammonium nitrate, its hazards, 

and appropriate steps for community emergency planning and proper emergency response. It is focused 

primarily on safe handling and storage of higher density, solid ammonium nitrate pellets and prills used 

in fertilizers. This advisory is intended to broadly disseminate lessons learned from recent incidents 

involving ammonium nitrate so that such incidents can be prevented in the future. Since the EO was 

17
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

issued, the Working Group has launched a pilot program in the New York and New Jersey regions to 

evaluate best practices and test innovative methods for interagency collaboration on chemical facility 

safety and security. In addition, listening sessions and webinars have been held to collect suggestions 

and comments from stakeholders. 

Measures 

EPA identified approximately 13,000 RMP facilities nationwide, of which approximately 1,900 facilities 

have been designated as high risk. To help assess EPA’s progress in inspecting these facilities, EPA tracks 

the annual number of both regular and high risk RMP facility inspections it conducts. In FY13, EPA 

surpassed its target for number of risk management plan inspections completed with 539 inspections. 

 

Status Measure FY13 Target FY13 Value 

Number of risk management plan audits and inspections conducted. 500 539 

Legend: Data Unavailable Goal Met Goal Not Met 

Continuing Progress and Trends 

Risk Management Facility Accident Reports 

There has been a significant decrease in accidents reported at RMP facilities since FY96.

14 Overall 

accident reductions could be attributed to a number of factors including those actions taken by facilities 

to prevent spills. EPA has continued its work to increase inspection activities at high-risk facilities, 

continues to evaluate RMPs that have been submitted, and carries out regulatory enforcement actions 

where appropriate. These activities, along with consistent outreach with regulated communities, 

advancing technologies, and improved safety systems, have helped to maximize the effectiveness of 

prevention and preparedness at chemical facilities. 

Figure 5
 

Accidents at RMP Facilities
 

500 463 473

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

407 

335 

263 252

293 284 268 286 

237 

210 

237 

204 

153 136

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

Number of Accidents 

81 

14 These data are current as of March 2013. The FY12 number may slightly change due to a six-month deadline for 

reporting accidents. 

18
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Restoring Land

The Challenge 

Accidents, spills, leaks, releases and past improper disposal and handling of hazardous materials and 

wastes have resulted in tens of thousands of contaminated sites in the United States. Each year, more 

than 30,000 emergencies involving the release (or threatened release) of oil and hazardous substances 

are reported in the United States. Contaminated land can threaten human health and the environment, 

and potentially hamper economic growth and the vitality of local communities. 

Substances commonly found on contaminated 

sites have been linked to a variety of human 

health problems, such as birth defects, cancer, 

and changes in neuro-behavioral functions. 

Contaminated land is often unused, resulting in 

missed opportunities for reuse, as well as 

potential economic opportunities, such as jobs for 

local residents. In addition, contaminated land 

located on an operative facility may hinder other 

activities on site. 

What is EPA doing? 

Together with our federal, state, and tribal 

partners, EPA reduces risk to human health and 

the environment through emergency response 

activities, site assessment and cleanup, and 

restores them for productive use. Recent 

academic research demonstrated that investment 

in Superfund cleanups reduces the incidence of congenital abnormalities by roughly 20-25 percent for 

those living within 5,000 meters of a site.

15 

Cleaning up land, whether for commercial, industrial, residential, recreational, greenspace or other 

productive use may result in new income to the community in the form of taxes, jobs to local residents 

or it may provide recreational or other services to make the community a better place to live. Property 

values may also increase after EPA completes a site cleanup. A 2012 study found an increase in property 

values between 5.1 and 12.8 percent at homes located within one kilometer of Brownfields sites where 

cleanup was completed.16 A study conducted by researchers at Duke and the University of Pittsburgh 

15 Currie, Janet, Michael Greenstone, and Enrico Moretti. 2012. “Superfund Cleanups and Infant Health.” American 

Economic Review, 101(3):435-441. 16 Haninger, Kevin, Lala Ma, and Christopher Timmins. 2012. Estimating the Impacts of Brownfield Remediation on 

Housing Property Values. Working Paper EE 12-08. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. 

http://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/environmentaleconomics/estimating-the-impacts-of-brownfield-remediationon-housing-property-values 

19
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

found that property values within three miles of sites where Superfund cleanups were completed 

increased approximately 20 percent.17 

EPA has six major land cleanup programs: Superfund Remedial and Federal Facilities Programs, 

Superfund Emergency Response and Removal Program, the Brownfields and Land Revitalization 

Program, the RCRA Corrective Action (CA) Program, the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) 

Program and the Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Cleanup Program. The EPA cleanup program which 

becomes involved at a particular site or release is based on the level and type of contamination. Some 

contaminated sites pose little risk to human health and the environment, because the level of 

contamination is low, as is the chance of exposure to toxic or hazardous contaminants. Other 

contaminated sites are of greater concern because of the chemicals that may be present and their 

propensity to persist in or move through the environment, exposing humans or the plants and animals 

in the ecosystem to hazards. For emergency response, there is a complex system of responsibilities. In 

general, responsibilities are spread across federal, state and local governments, depending upon the size 

and type of the emergency and involve the environmental, emergency management, public safety, and 

public health agencies of the three levels of government. In addition, industry has a very important role 

to play in preparing for and responding to such emergencies. 

Throughout this work, EPA engages with communities so that they may meaningfully participate in 

cleanup decisions and have a say in how contaminated areas are reused. Community engagement helps 

to ensure transparent and accessible decision-making processes, to deliver information that 

communities can use to participate effectively, and to improve EPA responsiveness to community 

perspectives. 

OSWER CLEANUP PROGRAMS 

Superfund Emergency Response and Removal Program The Superfund Removal Program functions as 

the backbone federal response to many contamination events; providing response support to state, 

local, tribal and potentially responsible parties when their response capabilities are exceeded; and 

managing risks to human health, the environment, and the economic viability of communities. Removal 

actions are typically immediate short-term responses intended to protect people from threats posed by 

hazardous waste sites. 

Superfund Remedial Programs The Superfund Remedial and Federal Facilities Program addresses longterm risks to human health and the environment resulting from releases of hazardous substances at the 

nation’s highest priority sites. Superfund sites are found across the country. The Federal Facilities 

Program works with federal entities to ensure fast and effective cleanup at federally-owned sites, and 

facilitates partnerships between the other federal agencies and the surrounding communities. The 

Superfund Remedial Program works on non-federally owned sites. 

Brownfields Program The Brownfields Program addresses environmental site assessment and cleanup 

of abandoned and potentially contaminated sites that are not Superfund sites, through grants, 

cooperative agreements, and technical assistance to communities, states, and tribes. Funding to states 

and tribes helps develop and enhance their voluntary cleanup programs. In addition, the program 

provides environmental workforce development and job training funding to recruit, train and place 

local, unemployed residents of solid and hazardous waste-affected communities with the skills needed 

17 Gamper-Rabindran, Shanti and Christopher Timmins. 2013. "Does cleanup of hazardous waste sites raise housing 

values? Evidence of spatially localized benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 65(3): 345-

360, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2012.12.001. 

20
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

to secure full-time employment in the environmental field. 

RCRA Corrective Action Program An essential element of EPA’s hazardous waste management program 

is the statutory requirement that facilities managing hazardous wastes must clean up releases of 

hazardous constituents that could adversely impact human health and the environment. A cleanup 

under RCRA is referred to as Corrective Action (CA). The RCRA Program directly implements the CA 

program in 13 states and territories, and performs as lead regulator at an increasingly significant 

number of facilities undergoing CAs in 42 states across the country that are authorized for the RCRA CA 

Program. The CA program is critical to preventing Superfund sites and the associated resources and 

expenditures. 

PCBs Cleanup Program The national Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) cleanup and disposal program is 

implemented by EPA, and works closely with other EPA cleanup programs and state and local 

governments to ensure cleanups are conducted efficiently and that human health and the environment 

are protected. Prior to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), PCBs were widely used across many 

commercial industries and significant PCB contamination resulted from spills, releases and from 

products. 

LUST Program The Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) program works with state and tribal 

partners to clean up releases from LUST sites, many of which impact ground water resources. States are 

the primary implementing agencies. EPA provides resources to support the infrastructure of state LUST 

programs so that private and state resources can directly finance the field work necessary to address 

contamination at federally- regulated tank releases. EPA also provides regulations, guidance and policy 

to support cleanup of tank releases. 

How is this chapter structured? 

EPA restores land by: 

♦ Preparing for and responding to emergencies; 

♦ Starting cleanups; 

♦ Advancing cleanups; and 

♦ Completing cleanups and reusing sites. 

This section will review the three stages of the cleanup process, referred to as the cleanup continuum, 

as well as EPA’s emergency response functions. 

21
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Profile of Sites and Communities 

EPA tracks more than 520,000 sites representing almost 23 million acres. The number of sites and acres 

for which four of EPA’s cleanup programs are or were involved in is provided below. 18 The universe as 

of FY13, which includes all sites along the cleanup continuum from assessment to cleanup, translates to 

23 percent of all developed land in the United States.19 The number of sites and acres tracked in the 

universe changes over time as more sites are identified and/or brought under the jurisdiction of the 

different programs (e.g., when a community addresses a site with a Brownfields’ grant). 

Sites Acres 

Figure 6 

Sites and Acres by Program 

Tanks Superfund Brownfields RCRA CA 

Sites and Acres by Program 

(% of Universe) 

Tanks Superfund Brownfields RCRA CA Total 

Sites 514,123 

(96.6%) 

1,739 

(0.3%) 

12,718 

(2.4%) 

3,747 

(0.7%) 

532,327 

Acres 514,123 

(2.2%) 

4,281,604 

(18.7%) 

177,356 

(0.8%) 

17,951,871 

(78.3%) 

22,924,954 

To help understand the communities EPA is working in, EPA collected data on the population within 

three miles of our Superfund, RCRA CA, and Brownfields sites. UST sites were not included because 

there are over 500,000 typically small acreage sites (i.e. gas stations) making them present in most 

communities. The three mile area surrounding sites was used because it is a good representation of the 

18 Acres and sites are not collected for the PCB program or the Superfund Emergency Response and Removal
 

Program.

19 Developed land accounts for 102.5 million acres or 5 percent of total land in the U.S. EPA’s 2008 Report on the
 

Environment. Chapter 4, Exhibit 4-2.
 

22
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

geographic area where people in a community live most of their lives – where they shop, work, go to 

school, go out to restaurants, and participate in outdoor activities.20 

 

Figure 7 

Approximately 51% of the total U.S. 

Population lives within three miles of a 

Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, or 

Brownfields site. 

Approximately 156 million people live within three miles of these sites (roughly 51 percent) of the U.S. 

population) including approximately: 

• 52% of all children in the U.S. under the age of 5 

• 50% of all children in the U.S. under 18 

• 65% of all blacks in the U.S. 

• 61% of all Hispanics in the U.S. 

• 62% of all minorities in the U.S. 

• 58% of all households in the U.S. below the poverty level 

• 54% of all people with less than a high school education in the U.S. 

• 65% of the linguistically isolated people in the U.S. 

20 Data collected includes: site information as of the end of FY11 from CERCLIS, RCRAInfo, and ACRES and census 

data from the 2007-2011 American Community Survey. Data from FY11 was chosen to correspond most closely to 

the census data in the 2007-2011 American Community Survey. In FY11 this included 1,393 Superfund sites, 3,689 

RCRA Corrective Action sites and 11,568 Brownfields sites. This universe of sites is not the same universe as in 

Figure 6. A circular site boundary, equal to the site acreage, was modeled around the latitude/longitude for each 

site and then a 3 mile buffer ring was placed around the site boundary. Census data was then collected for each 

block group whose centroid fell within the three mile area. 

23
 
 

 

 

 

Figure 8
 

Percent of Total U.S. Population Living Within 3 Miles of
 

OSWER Sites
 

All Sites 

Brownfields 

RCRA CA 

Superfund 16% 

35% 

(49 

30% (91 million) 

51% 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 

million) 

(106 million) 

(156 million) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contaminated sites addressed by EPA programs exist in thousands of communities across the U.S. 

ranging from remote to large urban settings. Many of them are located in economically distressed 

communities that suffer from disproportionate and adverse environmental exposures. While there is no 

single way to characterize communities located near our sites, looking at the census data we found that 

the population within three miles of our sites is more minority, low income, linguistically isolated, and 

less likely to have a high school education than the U.S. population as a whole. These communities may 

have fewer resources with which to address concerns about their health and environment. It is 

important to note that proximity to a site does not necessarily represent risk of adverse health effects. 

The risk of exposure varies significantly across all the different types of contaminated sites. 

Proportions of Key Demographics in the Total Near Site Population 

Compared with the Proportions Among the Total U.S. Population 

Demographic Characteristic Population within 3 miles of Total US Population 

sites (approx) (approx) 

Minority 44% 36% 

Below Poverty Level 15% 13% 

Linguistically Isolated 11% 9% 

Less than a High School Education 16% 15% 

24
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Restoring Land: Preparing for & Responding to Emergencies 

The Superfund Emergency Response and Removal Program trains, equips and deploys resources in order 

to contain and remove contaminants. Under this Program, EPA personnel have responded to or 

overseen responsible parties clean ups of thousands of releases, regardless of their cause. The 

Program's first priority is to eliminate dangers to the public. EPA manages and/or provides support for 

emergency responses, removal assessments and cleanup response actions at National Priorities List 

(NPL) and non–NPL sites. 

A 24-hour per day capability is a cornerstone of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan, more commonly called the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The NCP is the federal 

government's blueprint for responding to both oil spills and hazardous substance releases. EPA 

maintains national and regional emergency operations centers for reporting of hazardous material or 

petroleum releases and other emergencies. EPA deploys many advanced technologies and other assets 

during disaster responses, such as the Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Consequence 

Management Advisory Team, the portable laboratories or the airborne sensor platform called ASPECT. 

In addition, OSWER supports EPA’s Homeland Security Emergency Preparedness and Response Program 

through multiple efforts including participating in the National Incident Coordination Team, response 

training and exercises, and providing technical assistance. 

FY13 Accomplishments 

Participating in Hurricane Sandy Preparations and Response 

On October 29, 2012, Hurricane Sandy made landfall near Atlantic City, New Jersey. The hurricane 

caused untold damage and hardship in the New York and New Jersey region. All forms of commerce and 

infrastructure were impacted, including facilities with underground storage tanks and Superfund 

sites. As a result, offices throughout EPA 

participated in Sandy preparation and response. 

EPA’s ASPECT was deployed by Region 2 to provide 

aerial situational awareness along the entire New 

Jersey and New York coastlines and to conduct 

chemical surveys over targeted areas. ASPECT made 

four flights between November 4-9, 2012, collecting 

more than 3,000 aerial photos and hundreds of 

oblique photos that were geo-rectified (aerial) or 

geo-referenced (oblique) and made available to view 

using a free version of GoogleTM Earth. This was the 

largest photo mission ever conducted by ASPECT, 

and it yielded 21 terabytes of data. 

On the ground in New York, EPA’s response activities included collection, staging, and disposal of 

household hazardous waste (HHW) and orphan containers as well as segregating hazardous waste from 

the general debris stream. EPA supported debris management, recovery operations, and collection of 

HHW in affected New York counties. Primary response activities in New Jersey were assessment for 

orphan containers and assistance in bringing wastewater treatment plants back on-line. EPA provided 

assistance restoring the wastewater treatment plant to pre-storm service levels, hazmat and water 

assessment operations, and recovery of hazmat and HHW in affected New Jersey counties. 

25
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the aftermath of Sandy, EPA evaluated the storm’s effects on Superfund sites through response 

actions, sampling and analysis and other activities to ensure the remedies of sites in the storm’s path 

continued to protect affected communities. After the hurricane, EPA assessed 105 sites at which 

removal activities had been performed and 142 long-term remedial sites in the storm’s path. 

Hurricanes also can have devastating effects on UST systems and remediation equipment, causing or 

exacerbating releases which threaten groundwater and drinking water. As such, EPA partnered closely 

with New York, New Jersey, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to investigate 

more than 1,000 UST sites for potential damage. In addition, EPA worked with Congress to acquire 

nearly $5 million in supplemental funds dedicated to responding to the UST-related impacts of 

Hurricane Sandy. Working in close partnership with the states, EPA developed practical yet 

comprehensive grant guidance, and distributed the funding before the end of the fiscal year to ensure 

UST sites are adequately assessed and remediated. 

Enhancing Cooperation among Federal and Local Responders 

In FY13, EPA helped to update the National Response Framework (NRF), including Emergency Support 

Function (ESF) #10 – Oil and Hazardous Materials Response Annex, and the new Response Federal 

Interagency Operational Plan. The updated NRF and ESF #10 now contain more detailed information on 

EPA’s response authorities under the NCP. The goal of these updates is to help educate the federal, 

state, local, and private sector response community about NCP authorities. 

MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN COMMUNITIES 

Paulsboro, New Jersey: In November and December 2013, 13 freight cars were transporting 

chemicals and other goods when they overturned at a creek bridge crossing in Paulsboro, New 

Jersey. Three cars fell into the creek, one of which released approximately 23,000 gallons of 

vinyl chloride into the air as vapor. EPA’s Superfund Environmental Response Team provided 

expertise and advanced tools to support first responders in the safe management of the 

significant releases including activating an air monitoring system and collecting vinyl chloride air 

samples. 

Poplar Bluff, Missouri: In 2012, EPA responded to a citizen’s tip that there were leaking drums 

at a facility operated by the Southern Machine and Tool Company (SMT) that was later left 

unattended for years. EPA tracked down the current owner of the property and found more 

than 600 bulging and leaking drums and containers of hazardous substances. In addition, sheds 

that once protected the drums had fallen, creating additional hazards. As EPA’s cleanup began 

in June 2012, crews spent a lot of effort removing debris and decaying structures just to get to 

the hazardous materials. Once the containers were accessed, EPA removed and consolidated 

the contaminated liquids they contained. EPA then crushed the empty drums for disposal as 

solid waste. By the end of July, the liquid and solid wastes were removed from the site for safe 

disposal. With the waste removed, the next step was to investigate the underlying soil for more 

contamination. EPA collected soil and water samples from the surface and below the surface, 

and determined that soil needed to be excavated up to two feet in six areas. As a result, more 

than 60 tons of contaminated soil and approximately 20,000 gallons of hazardous materials 

were removed from the site. By February 2013, EPA completed the disposal of soil and restored 

the site to nearly original conditions with clean soil. 

26
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Measures 

In FY13, EPA used three performance measures to help assess its work in responding to environmental 

emergencies and preparing for disasters. Two measures track the number of Superfund removal actions 

completed to protect communities from releases that posed an imminent threat to public health or the 

environment. Often, these cleanups are of varying complexity and contain a wide variety of 

contaminants. EPA missed its target for Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) removals in FY13. Removal 

targets are hard to predict since the responses are usually for short, immediate, and emergency-based 

cleanups. Eighty percent of PRP-led removals are emergencies (e.g., a tanker truck accident on a 

highway). EPA is reviewing data and exploring a variety of reasons to determine why we are 

accomplishing less of these types of removals. In FY15, EPA is implementing a new measure “number of 

Superfund removals completed” to track the total number of removals completed each year for both 

PRP-lead and Superfund-lead removals. 

The third performance measure in this area tracks EPA’s score on the annual CORE NAR (National 

Approach to Response), which is intended to assess EPA’s level of preparedness for preventing, limiting, 

mitigating on containing hazardous materials during a manmade or natural disaster in the United 

States.21 EPA met the CORE NAR goal in FY13. 

 

Status Measure FY13 Target FY13 Value 

Number of Superfund lead removal actions completed annually 170 179 

PRP removal completions overseen by EPA 170 125 

Score on annual Core National Approach to Response 72 82.2 

Legend: Data Unavailable Goal Met Goal Not Met 

Continuing Progress and Trends 

The number and type of sites needing emergency response is constantly changing. It can include a small, 

contained area of land or an entire region of the country. Over the past ten years, EPA has performed or 

overseen an average of approximately 350 cleanup actions a year, some of which are on sites that are 

on the NPL. The cleanups range from quick-clean ups to longer efforts that often involve complicated 

contaminants and coordination with state and local officials and potentially responsible parties. EPA 

emergency responders have to account for a number of variables when performing cleanup 

actions. One of these key variables is the kind of contaminant that is being removed. EPA collects and 

analyzes data on the type of contaminant involved in removal actions because this information 

contributes to our understanding of how and why a given removal became necessary, and helps ensure 

that we are using our limited funding to perform the most critical emergency and removal actions. Over 

time, we expect this analysis to support both preventive actions and response planning and resource 

allocation. 

21 Annually, EPA reviews its response and removal preparedness via the Core National Approach to Response (Core 

NAR) assessment. The Core NAR addresses day-to-day preparedness for removal actions for Regions, Special 

Teams and Headquarters, as well as national preparedness for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear 

incidents. Core NAR is also an opportunity to evaluate progress on addressing lessons learned in recent incidents 

and exercises. The Core NAR score is intended to measure our level of emergency preparedness for various types 

of incidents. 

27
 
61 

25 

13

18 

28 

20

18 

6

7 

61 

48 

24 

31 

14

18 

10 

18 

25 

8 

61

62 

43

38 

19 

27

32 

25 

1 

9 

47

52 

26 

19

17

16

15

14

12

10 

Figure 9
 

Commonly Occuring Removal Contaminants
 

70 

60 

66

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

Contaminant 

2010 2011 2012 2013 

# of Removals 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN COMMUNITIES 

Adapting to Climate Change: The global climate is changing and the impacts of these changes 

are being felt in communities across the United States. Communities throughout the U.S. have 

encountered unprecedented hurricanes, wildfires, and tornados. A changing climate, however, 

may not just cause more frequent and severe storms, but also may cause sustained higher 

temperatures, increased drought, and sea level rise. Many of these impacts will directly affect 

OSWER’s ability to fulfill its mission. In FY13, OSWER drafted a Climate Change Adaptation Plan 

to identify the climate change impacts to our programs and develop a plan for integrating 

consideration of climate change impacts into our work. This plan will enable OSWER to work 

with states, communities and tribal nations to continue to protect human health and the 

environment in the face of the challenges of climate change. OSWER identified 26 priority 

actions to begin over the next 3 years, including, but not limited to, reviewing remedy 

effectiveness, management of storm debris, and emergency management planning. For 

example, the RCRA program has proposed working with states to determine how climate change 

impacts might be incorporated in to permitting programs and working with other federal 

agencies to determine how to manage waste from extreme events. OUST has proposed working 

with states to evaluate a range of possible impacts, affecting assessment to remediation. 

Superfund will work to determine how climate change may impact remedy effectiveness at 

various stages of the cleanup process. The Brownfields program has included language that 

encouraged grantees to consider resiliency related to climate change in cleanup grants terms 

and conditions. Finally, because we anticipate an increased frequency and intensity of storms, 

actions are identified to ensure Emergency Operations Center (EOC) staff are provided with the 

most accurate and comprehensive information that takes into consideration changes in climate. 

28
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Restoring Land: Starting Cleanups 

Assessment activities under all six of the land cleanup programs are intended to determine the extent 

and degree of contamination at these sites, to resolve the degree of uncertainty regarding any 

contamination and to determine the need for additional environmental work. This represents an 

important milestone in the overall cleanup process. 

EPA’s involvement in the site investigation and cleanup process begins with notification of potential 

contamination. EPA can be notified by states, tribes, community members, other federal agencies, or 

other sources of a potential hazardous waste site or incident. 

EPA, the implementing state, tribe, local government or 

regulated entity assesses releases at sites to determine 

whether there is in fact a release and, if so, the extent of 

the contamination. If contamination is found, a series of 

progressively more complex assessments may be 

conducted to determine whether cleanup is needed and 

design appropriate cleanup and reuse strategies for the 

site. Additionally, as noted in the preceding section, a 

removal action may be completed to reduce the 

immediate threat to human health or the environment. 

A removal may occur along any part of the cleanup 

continuum. 

States and tribes are essential partners in screening sites for contamination. For example, in FY13, 

states and tribes through funding from EPA completed 367 superfund remedial site assessments or 48 

percent of the total Superfund assessments. A study by the Association of State and Territorial Solid 

Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO) of 28 states found that close to 40 percent of sites assessed in 

those states with federal funding are ultimately cleaned up through state programs. Therefore, limited 

federal site assessment resources leverage state and other resources in order to achieve protective 

cleanups. 

FY13 Accomplishments 

Assessing Lead Smelter Sites 

EPA’s Superfund program, in cooperation with its state partners, has been implementing a lead smelter 

assessment strategy to evaluate the 464 lead smelter sites identified in the 2001 report “Discovering 

Unrecognized Lead-Smelting Sites by Historical Methods” published in the American Journal of Public 

Health. Assessment work has been performed at all 464 sites. By the end of FY13, EPA determined that 

88 sites require no further federal Superfund involvement, 11 sites need cleanup attention (these sites 

have been placed on the NPL or have been referred to other state/federal cleanup programs) and 1 site 

requires further assessment work before making a final decision. The intent of the strategy is to ensure 

successful completion of remaining Superfund site assessment work at the 464 sites, with the goal of 

protecting the health of communities located at or near these sites. 

RCRA Lean 

In FY13, EPA Region 7 and Region 3, in partnership with Missouri, Virginia, ASTSWMO and 

representatives from industry and consultants, used Lean techniques to evaluate the RCRA Facility 

Investigation (RFI) phase of corrective action. The Region 7/3 team selected the RFI process for 

streamlining because these investigations require the most time to complete and have not been revised 

29
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

in a significant amount of time. The goal was to eliminate non-value added activities and redundancies 

in the investigation phases. As an initial step, a Corrective Action Framework Agreement (CAFA) 

template was developed to serve as a guiding document clarifying the facility-specific goals and 

expectations for the RFI. Regions 3 and 7 have both selected pilot facilities at which to implement a 

CAFA and the rest of the Regions are in the process of identifying facilities for the pilot. Based on 

preliminary estimates, the new process reduces the time required to complete an investigation by 73 

percent. 

Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership 

The Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP) promotes new manufacturing activity 

in U.S. communities by taking advantage of emerging in-shoring opportunities, as well as, encouraging 

new investment in expanding domestic operations. EPA has a keen interest in encouraging new 

manufacturing investment and enhancing the ability of communities of all sizes to recycle vacant and 

abandoned properties for new, productive reuses in ways that build on local economic advantages. The 

following activities are highlights of the Partnership: 

•	 Convening a series of community roundtables/workshops to help communities lay out a blueprint to 

advance their manufacturing prospects, engage local stakeholders, and define implementation 

strategies that focus on land revitalization. 

•	 Providing a “preference and priority” for manufacturing sites and activities, through the Brownfield 

Area Wide Planning (AWP) and Targeted Brownfield Assessment programs, and using our 

experiences to encourage other agencies to better align their resources to support manufacturing 

activities (a total of 37 programs across 12 agencies have been identified so far). 

•	 Using experiences from AWP to inform the development of the U.S. Economic Development 

Administration’s Federal Funding Opportunities for its planned IMCP Challenge Grants and enhance 

the national value of the manufacturing effort by linking potential IMCP designees to other federal 

programs via a preference-and-priority strategy. 

•	 Leading interagency efforts to synthesize and analyze the results of the IMCP roundtables, and also 

develop a technical assistance "play book" for communities seeking to attract new manufacturing 

investment. 

Measures 

EPA has two measures to gauge the progress in starting cleanups and completing assessment activities. 

The Superfund Program and the Brownfields Program each have an assessment measure, and each have 

a different role in the assessment process. For both programs, however, assessments are an important 

stage in the cleanup process. In FY13, both assessment measures exceeded their targeted levels. 

30
 

 

Status Measure FY13 Target FY13 Value 

Number of Superfund remedial site assessments completed 650 772 

Brownfield properties assessed 1,200 1,528 

Legend: Data Unavailable Goal Met Goal Not Met 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN COMMUNITIES
 

Del Amo, Los Angeles, California: Hundreds of commercial and industrial businesses operate 

within the Del Amo site in Los Angeles, California. Since 2007, EPA has been partnering with site 

potentially responsible parties (PRPs), the State of California, and the City of Los Angeles to 

ensure that a thorough environmental review takes place before any business upgrades occur 

or expansions involving soil excavation are undertaken. This process allows commercial and 

industrial operations across the site to proceed in a way protective of both human health and 

the environment. As of FY13, 315 on-site businesses had been identified, providing an 

estimated 6,815 jobs with an estimated wage income of nearly $400 million. On-site property 

values are estimated to be nearly $600 million with property tax revenue of approximately $8.7 

million. 

Passamaquoddy Tribe, Maine: The Passamaquoddy Tribe used Section 128(a) Response 

Program funding to conduct assessment activities on two properties. A Phase I and Phase II 

Environmental Site Assessment were conducted at the Passamaquoddy Public Works Garage, 

used to store and maintain public works vehicles and the tribe’s winter road-salt pile, which is 

located immediately upslope of traditional shell-fishing grounds. The Phase II assessment 

indicated that concentrations of semi-volatile organic compounds are present in adjacent 

freshwater sediments, as well as high salinity concentrations in surface and ground water. As a 

result of the investigation, the tribe will consider further evaluation of the adjacent shell-fishing 

grounds and determine the feasibility of constructing a fixed structure over the salt pile. A 

Phase I assessment was also conducted at a potentially impacted property on Penknife Lake 

which will be dedicated to the development and enrichment of tribal youth through traditional 

activities such as hunting, fishing and camping. 

Superfund Job Training Initiative: The Superfund Remedial Program provided environmental 

remediation job readiness training at two Superfund sites through its Superfund Job Training 

Initiative (SuperJTI) program. At the Lower Duwamish and Couer d’Alene sites, SuperJTI 

graduates gained the technical skills to work on a broad range of projects in environmental 

remediation and construction, as well as the cleanup of Superfund sites. Twenty-eight 

community members were trained in FY13, the majority of whom found jobs in the hazardous 

waste cleanup field. EPA’s goal is to help communities develop job opportunities and 

partnerships, which remain long after a Superfund site is cleaned up. 

Jacksonville, Florida: The Brownfields Program provided funding to Florida State College at 

Jacksonville (FSCJ) to administer an environmental workforce development and job training 

program serving individuals with a myriad of significant employment barriers, including: 

displaced workers, ex-offenders, single mothers, those recovering from substance abuse, 

homeless residents, low-income, and minority individuals. Through this grant, to date, FSCJ has 

trained 102 unemployed and severely under-employed, local residents of Jacksonville, and of 

those, 82 have been placed in full-time, sustainable employment within the environmental field, 

including brownfields assessment and cleanup activities. 

31
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUPPORTING THE CITIZEN SCIENTIST
 

Jackpile Uranium Mine: EPA strives to cultivate strong tribal relationships. One such 

example is EPA’s five-year plan for an area-wide investigation of legacy contamination from 

uranium mining and milling operations within the Grants Mineral Belt area of New 

Mexico. In coordination with the Laguna Pueblo, the Superfund program has proposed the 

Jackpile Uranium Mine to the National Priorities List, assessed over 500 properties for 

elevated radiation levels, excavated soils at 21 properties and installed 21 abatement 

systems. The partnership between EPA and the Pueblo has been particularly successful due 

to the leadership of Pueblo resident, Amy Garcia. Ms. Garcia was instrumental in helping 

EPA obtain access to start cleanup of the Pueblo’s more than 500 contaminated residential 

properties. She ensured EPA and its contractors worked in a manner consistent with tribal 

customs, protocols and procedures. Her role as a liaison between EPA and the Pueblo greatly 

improved the success of EPA’s cleanup by keeping tribal members and homeowners 

informed during every step of the assessment and cleanup process. In FY13, the Superfund 

program recognized Ms. Garcia as the winner of the national 2013 Citizen Excellence in 

Community Involvement Award. 

Technical Assistance Services for Communities: In FY13, the Superfund program initiated 

Technical Assistance Services for Communities (TASC) support for the Town of Ayer, MA. 

Ayer town officials were seeking technical and community outreach assistance on potential 

groundwater contamination impacts on private wells associated with Shepley’s Hill Landfill, 

located on the former Fort Devens military base’s property now a Superfund site. The town’s 

goal was to pass a private groundwater well ordinance to restrict approximately 40 

residences’ well-water use; the residences are in close proximity to the landfill. The town 

officials were seeking to prevent any exposure to contaminated groundwater from the 

landfill. Through the TASC program, EPA provided education and outreach assistance to the 

town. With TASC support, the Town of Ayer successfully passed the groundwater well 

moratorium in May 2013. 

In FY13, using TASC support, the Upper Columbia River Superfund site along the U.S./Canada 

border community was successful in its efforts to work with EPA and the responsible party to 

have site-related samples reanalyzed. Specifically, the community was concerned about 

how a portion of the site’s beach sediment samples were analyzed. EPA met with the 

community group, their technical advisor, and the responsible party to work out what 

reanalysis could be done to ensure community comfort with the data and more importantly, 

the decisions to be made based on the data. 

32
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Restoring Land: Advancing Cleanups 

After a site has been assessed and it is determined that cleanup is required, there is often a substantial 

amount of work that occurs before the cleanup is completed. The length and complexity of cleanups 

across cleanup programs can vary widely, and some sites can take a significant amount of time to clean 

up. Many Superfund sites and RCRA CA facilities are highly contaminated, technically challenging, and 

cover large areas. Sites can require decades to clean up. Therefore, during the cleanup process, when a 

potential pathway for human exposure (air, water, soil) is identified, a process is normally initiated for 

exposure to be minimized or eliminated as soon as possible. EPA cleanup programs, or authorized 

delegated state programs, undertake or oversee interim site specific actions (e.g., fencing, capping of 

source areas, providing alternate water supplies, or constructing containment walls, etc.) and cleanup 

activities (e.g., excavation and ground water treatment, etc.) to reduce or eliminate exposure, 

protecting people and the environment from the acute threats posed by uncontrolled hazardous wastes 

or contaminated ground water while cleanup is ongoing. EPA also engages local communities in 

decision-making, and selecting and designing the 

cleanup remedy. 

EPA works collaboratively with other federal 

agencies, states, tribes, local governments, 

communities and the regulated entities to clean up 

contaminated sites. For example, through the 

utilization of CERCLA 128(a) state and tribal response 

program grant funding, state and tribal programs 

oversee assessment and cleanup activities at the 

majority of brownfield sites across the country. 

FY13 Accomplishments 

Increasing Efficiency and Effectiveness 

The Superfund Remedial Program recently undertook a critical internal review—the Superfund Program 

Review (SPR)—which included evaluations of cleanup processes and program operations to minimize 

negative impacts on the program’s effectiveness in a challenging budget environment. The SPR is 

helping lay the groundwork for sound program management of resources beyond FY13. 

Measures 

EPA established five measures related to advancing cleanup. EPA uses two performance measures that 

track the number of Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action sites at which human exposures are under 

control. This helps EPA to assess progress in preventing human exposures to harmful chemicals at sites, 

while longer term cleanup progresses. Actions taken to achieve this critical milestone include, but are 

not limited to: providing alternative water supplies to affected communities; removing lead 

contaminated soil around homes with children; and/or installing migration systems in homes with 

indoor air contaminated by harmful chemical vapors. EPA exceeded both of these measures in FY13. 

EPA uses two additional annual performance measures to specifically assess its progress in ensuring that 

groundwater contamination at Superfund and RCRA sites is protective and not migrating into nearby 

surface water or drinking water supplies. The fifth measure tracks Superfund remedial action project 

completions to measure ongoing progress and risk reduction at superfund sites. In FY13, EPA met or 

exceeded all of its annual targets for these measures. 

33
 
Status Measure FY13 Target FY13 Value 

Number of Superfund sites with human exposures under control 

Number of Superfund sites with contaminated ground water mitigation under control 

Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with human exposures to toxins under control 

Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with mitigation of contaminated groundwater 

under control 

Number of remedial projects completed at Superfund NPL sites 

10 

15 

85 

73 

115 

14 

18 

85 

76 

121 

 Legend: Data Unavailable Goal Met Goal Not Met 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN COMMUNITIES 

Omaha, Nebraska: At the Omaha Lead Superfund site in Nebraska, EPA completed its 11,425th 

residential yard cleanup to protect children from lead poisoning in June 2013. The percentage of 

eastern Omaha children tested with elevated blood-lead levels have been reduced from nearly 33 

percent prior to 1998, to less than two percent today. EPA expects the cleanup of the remaining 2,000 

or so properties to be completed by 2015. 

Camden and Gloucester City, New Jersey: At the Welsbach & General Gas Mantle Superfund site in 

New Jersey, EPA continued its cleanup efforts in FY13 to address radiological contamination, including 

thorium and other radioactive materials, in residential properties. As a result of these materials’ 

radioactive decay, elevated levels of gamma radiation and radon gas are present. Residents directly 

exposed to radiation or who inadvertently ingest radioactive particles from the site may suffer adverse 

health effects. As of September 2013, EPA had investigated nearly 950 properties, completed the 

cleanup of almost 150 of the nearly 200 properties identified as contaminated, and excavated and 

disposed of more than 275,000 tons of radiologically contaminated soils and waste materials. 

New York, New York: In December 2012, EPA released its proposed plan for the cleanup of one of the 

nation's most extensively contaminated water bodies, the Gowanus Canal Superfund site in Brooklyn, 

New York. The Canal, historically lined with manufactured gas plants, mills, tanneries, and chemical 

plants, is contaminated with PCBs, coal tar wastes, heavy metals and volatile organics. The cleanup 

plan for the Gowanus Canal site includes controls to prevent raw sewage overflows and other landbased sources of contamination from compromising the cleanup. Prior to listing the site on the 

National Priorities List in 2010, the Superfund program worked extensively with the affected 

community including holding several public meetings and extending the plan comment period, to 

ensure the Gowanus Canal community has a clear voice in the cleanup decisions. EPA provided neutral 

third-party support to help the community establish and maintain a community advisory group (CAG). 

The Gowanus Canal CAG is the largest in the U.S. and is made up of over 50 representatives from civic, 

environmental, business and community organizations as well as individual citizen-members who are 

stakeholders in the affected community. EPA also maintains a site-specific open group Facebook page 

with over 500 members as another means to keep the affected community informed and engaged. 

34
 
 

 

Continuing Progress and Trends 

Protecting Human Health 

EPA is making significant progress in assuring that prior to completion of cleanups, unacceptable human 

exposures are eliminated or controlled as soon as possible. Both the RCRA CA and Superfund programs 

have made significant progress in stabilizing exposure, while longer-term cleanup progresses. As of 

FY13, both RCRA CA and Superfund had at least 80 percent of their sites with human exposures under 

control. At these sites, EPA has taken action to address any unacceptable exposures and eliminate acute 

risks, protecting human health and the environment, while continuing to pursue long-term, permanent 

cleanups. 

35
 

 

Figure 10. Annual Number and Percentage of Superfund and 

RCRA CA Sites with Human Exposure Under Control
 

546 

242 

189 170 143 

14 

18 

10 13 

14 

65% 

72% 

77% 

81% 85% 

76% 78% 78% 

79% 82% 

0% 

10% 

20% 

30% 

40% 

50% 

60% 

70% 

80% 

90% 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

Cumulative Percentage of Sites 

Number of Sites 

FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 

 

Figure 11. Annual Number and Percentage of Superfund and 

RCRA CA Sites with Groundwater Migration Under Control 

531 

191 159 171 155 

16 

18 

21 18 18 

58% 

63% 

67% 

72% 76% 

59% 60% 61% 62% 63% 

0% 

10% 

20% 

30% 

40% 

50% 

60% 

70% 

80% 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

Cumulative Percentage of Sites 

Number of Sites 

FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 

RCRA CA Superfund 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Restoring Land: Completing Cleanups & Reusing Sites 

One of EPA’s top priorities is to support sustainable, thriving communities by cleaning up sites and 

returning them to productive reuse or maintaining the viability of the operating facility. During the final 

phase of the cleanup continuum, cleanup activities are completed. 

For some sites, however, removing or destroying all of the contamination is not possible. Some 

remaining contamination must be managed on-site, creating the need for site-specific long-term 

stewardship activities. EPA employs several different types of controls at these sites, including 

institutional controls and engineering controls, to assure that any contamination is contained and 

stabilized, and that human or environmental exposure to contamination is limited. Significant attention 

is given to these activities to ensure long-term protection of human health and the environment. 

In addition to cleaning up sites and making them protective of human health and the environment, EPA 

is working with communities and other partners in considering future use opportunities and integrating 

appropriate reuse options into the cleanup process. The partnerships fostered between EPA, 

communities, state and local governments, developers and other stakeholders, not only ensure site 

stakeholders have a voice in how previously contaminated land is reused/redeveloped but they also 

generate economic benefits for communities. 

FY13 Accomplishments 

RE-Powering recognized as top innovation 

In FY13, EPA’s RE-Powering America’s Land Initiative: Siting Renewable Energy on Potentially 

Contaminated Land and Mine Sites was selected by Harvard as one of the 25 finalists for the Innovation 

in American Government Award. The RE-Powering Initiative targets potentially contaminated lands, 

landfills, and mines as sites for renewable energy installations (e.g., siting wind turbines, solar panels, 

etc.). EPA is aware of over 85 renewable energy installations in 26 states on contaminated sites, mines, 

or landfills since RE-Powering’s inception. Mining wastes have been converted into solar arrays, 

abandoned industrial sites into wind farms, and closed landfills into solar farms. The Innovation in 

American Government award program identifies and promotes excellence in the public sector at the 

federal, state, and local level. 

36
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN COMMUNITIES
 

Jacksonville, Florida: In FY13, the Superfund Redevelopment Initiative (SRI) provided reuse 

support, including planning and other support, at 14 sites across the country, including the 

Fairfax Street Wood Treaters site. The Fairfax Street Wood Treaters site is a former wood 

treater facility located in an environmental justice neighborhood in Jacksonville, Florida. 

Bordered by an elementary school and residential community, this 12-acre site has tremendous 

potential to become a future community amenity. In 2010, the site owner filed for bankruptcy 

and ceased operation. SRI funded a reuse planning process to identify reasonably anticipated 

future land uses and potential stewardship options for the site. A design charrette was held on 

September 20, 2012, with community stakeholders to identify likely reuse stewardship 

scenarios. The reuse framework, distributed in May 2013, has generated interest from a local 

community development corporation that is developing a mixed-use housing proposal for the 

site. 

East Rutherford, New Jersey: Starting in the mid-2000s, EPA, New Jersey Department of the 

Environment, New Jersey Transit, and the New Jersey Sports & Exposition Authority worked 

together with the site owner to clean up a portion of the site to accommodate a new rail line 

that would connect to a commuter rail line associated with the nearby MetLife Stadium, home 

to the New York Giants and New York Jets. Today, use of the Meadowlands Rail Line replaces an 

estimated 170,000 vehicle miles traveled per football game. As of FY13, 16 on-site businesses 

had been identified, providing an estimated 254 jobs with an estimated wage income of nearly 

$400 million. On-site property values are estimated to be nearly $600 million with property tax 

revenue of approximately $8.7 million. 

Aurora, Colorado: In March 2013, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and EPA 

published a Feasibility Study on the Tower Road Site in Aurora, Colorado. The study determined 

that the site, which EPA considers to be a brownfield because its redevelopment is complicated 

by historic contamination from the nearby air force base, could potentially support a solar 

energy system based on resource availability, site conditions, and incentives available. In 

November 2013, the Tower Road site went online as a successful community solar project. It is a 

498 kW system comprising 1,684 solar panels, and built on a 4.5-acre brownfield owned by the 

City of Aurora Water Department. Citizens and businesses can subscribe to “portions” of the 

array and receive credit for an equivalent amount of the electricity generated. 

Henderson, Nevada: The Tronox Henderson Facility, located 13 miles outside of Las Vegas, NV, 

is the source of the nation’s largest perchlorate release, and affects drinking water for 15 million 

people. In 1997, due to site investigations required by the RCRA Corrective Action program, it 

was discovered that perchlorate-contaminated groundwater traveled three miles off-site, 

entered the Las Vegas Wash, and reached the Lake Mead and Colorado River. Measures were 

quickly taken to address the potential for major human health issues, with more advanced 

treatment remedies being installed in 2001. As of November 2012, nearly 3,600 tons of 

perchlorate had been removed from the environment and perchlorate levels were too low to 

measure in most samples of the plant’s discharge water. 

37
 
Making a Difference in Communities:

 

 

 

lt of a Superfund cleanup, 

 

 

 

Measures 

EPA established nine measures related to completion of cleanups and site reuse. These measures 

demonstrate EPA’s progress in cleaning up sites and returning them to productive use, so that they can 

return value to local communities. Six measures – representing the RCRA CA, Superfund, LUST and 

Brownfields programs – describe progress toward meeting the completion of cleanup goals. Two of 

these measures were not met this year: Superfund sites construction complete and LUST cleanups in 

Indian Country. 

Status Measure FY13 Target FY13 Value 

Annual number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed 19 14 

Number of properties cleaned up using Brownfields funding 120 122 

Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with final remedies constructed 51 51 

Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human 10,100 11,582 exposure and ground water migration 

Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human 42 18 exposure and ground water migration in Indian country 

 Legend: Data Unavailable Goal Met Goal Not Met 

Four measures representing the Superfund and Brownfields Programs support site reuse and 

redevelopment goals. Three of the measures were met in FY13; the measure for Superfund sites ready 

for anticipated use site-wide was not met in FY13. 

Status Measure FY13 Target FY13 Value 

Acres of Brownfields properties made ready for reuse 3,000 4,643.57 

Jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities 5,000 10,141 

Billions of dollars of cl eanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at Brownfields sites 1.2 1.54 

Number of Superfund sites ready for anticipated use site -wide 60 56 

Legend: Data Unavailable Goal Met Goal Not Met 

Continuing Progress and Trends 

Making Sites Ready for Anticipated Use 

EPA’s authority and control over contaminated sites varies depending on the statutory authority under 

which the site is being addressed. In some cases, states are authorized to operate cleanup programs, 

while in others they are partners. Where other federal agencies are designated as the lead for the 

cleanup actions at their sites, EPA's environmental cleanup goals are subject to, and reliant on, the lead 

federal agencies' cleanup budgets, execution, and site cleanup performance. EPA recognizes the need 

to work with our co-regulators to build tools and strategies that enhance coordination and manage 

resources effectively. 

There are multiple benefits associated with cleaning up contaminated sites and making them ready for 

reuse: reducing mortality and morbidity risk; preventing and reducing human exposure to contaminants; 

38
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

making land available for commercial, residential, industrial, or recreational reuse; and promoting 

community economic development. 

Ready for anticipated use (RAU) is an indicator that the local, state, or federal agency has determined 

that cleanup goals and engineering and institutional controls have been implemented for the media that 

affects current and reasonably anticipated future use so the sites are available for communities to use or 

reuse. EPA’s Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, LUST and Brownfields cleanup programs all set 

individual annual targets for the number of sites made RAU. However, EPA also established an Agency 

Priority goal that includes all four cleanup programs to encourage them to work together to identify 

lessons learned, potential efficiencies, and opportunities to advance site cleanup. 

At the end of FY13, an additional 441,333 sites were made RAU. 22 These sites represent over 2.3 million 

acres of land for ecological, recreational, commercial, residential and other productive purposes. 

Figure 12
 

Cumulative Sites RAU as a Percentage of all Sites
 

Tanks 

Brownfields 

24% 

38% 

26% 

85% 

76% 

62% 

74% 

15% 

RAU 

SF 

Non RAU 

RCRA CA 

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 

Annual Number of Sites RAU 

FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 

Tanks 12,768 12,944 11,591 11,169 10,927 11,582 

Brownfields 987 300 381 677 437 577 

Superfund 85 66 66 65 66 56 

RCRA CA 68 118 133 92 125 134 

Total 13,908 13,428 12,171 12,003 11,555 12,349 

22 Brownfields’ data are self-reported by grantees and the RCRA corrective action and LUST data are reported by 

states. For the LUST program, data as to whether institutional controls are in place are unavailable. EPA is 

exploring with states whether the data can be made available. 

39
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAKING A DIFFERENCE IN COMMUNITIES
 

Indianapolis, Indiana: Indianapolis' first permanent supportive housing for homeless veterans 

opened on the site of a former iron foundry brownfield remediated by the City. The Lincoln 

Apartments are fully furnished apartments located at 530 Holmes Avenue and will serve 75 

formerly homeless veterans. The project is within a mile of the Roudebush Veterans Affairs 

Medical Center and adjacent to a community health center. The City of Indianapolis donated 

the land for this project after remediating environmental problems by utilizing grants from the 

EPA, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the State’s brownfield 

program. EPA Brownfield grants, like the one used for the Lincoln Apartments, have been used 

by hundreds of cities and towns throughout the country to revitalize their communities. 

Waterbury, Connecticut: Approximately 10.75 acres of a remediated brownfield industrial site 

was purchased at the Waterbury Industrial Commons to build a new manufacturing facility. King 

Industries will build the $50 million facility over 10 years and it is expected to generate $1.4 

million a year in property taxes. The construction of an 80,000-square-foot manufacturing 

complex will create an estimated 180 construction jobs and upon completion over 50 

permanent manufacturing jobs. When all phases of construction are completed, the new stateof-the-art plant will consist of several buildings totaling 80,000 square feet. 

San Francisco, California: In FY13, the San Francisco Parks Alliance (SFPA) completed their EPA 

Brownfields Area-Wide Planning (AWP) pilot project activities, throughout which they 

effectively and innovatively engaged the community around six brownfield sites that could be 

cleaned up and reused for open space and parks development in a manner that connects the 

gaps in the Blue Greenway Trail. The Blue Greenway is a 13-mile network of trails and parks 

along San Francisco’s southeastern waterfront, weaving through predominantly environmental 

justice communities in a historically low-income, African-American and industrial part of the 

City. SFPA established partnerships with community and neighborhood groups, the City of San 

Francisco, non-profit organizations, and private partners – many of whom have already invested 

in developing the Blue Greenway trail, using a variety of public and private resources. 

Reading, Pennsylvania: The Exide Technologies site, northeast of Reading Pennsylvania, was 

home to decades of lead smelting which resulted in contamination of off-site soil and adverse 

impacts to communities within a mile radius of the site, including residential properties and a 

nearby 40 acre park. Sampling detected soil lead levels as high as 10,000 parts per million (ppm) 

in residential yards adjacent to the facility. For over a decade EPA, the State of Pennsylvania and 

the Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) worked with Exide and local 

residents on this $20 million cleanup. More than 200 yards have been remediated, with priority 

placed on yards with high concentrations and those with young children – the population group 

most sensitive to lead’s toxic effects. In 2013, the nearby park was reopened. 

40
 
 

 

 

APPENDIX A: ACRONYM GLOSSARY 

ACP – Area Contingency Planning 

ATF – Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms 

ATSDR – Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 

ASTSWMO – Association of State and Tribal Waste Management Officials 

AWP – Area-Wide Planning 

CA – Corrective Action 

CAFA – Corrective Action Framework 

CAG – Community Advisory Group 

CERCLA – Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 

CCR – Coal Combustion Residues 

EPA – Environmental Protection Agency 

EPCRA – Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act 

ESF – Emergency Support Function 

FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency 

FRP – Facility Response Plan 

HHW – Household Hazardous Waste 

LUST – Leaking Underground Storage Tank 

NAR – National Approach to Response 

NCP – National Contingency Plan 

NPL – National Priorities List 

NREL – National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

OSHA – Occupational Health and Safety Administration 

OSWER – Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

PCB – Polychlorinated Biphenyls 

PFP – Protective for People 

PRP – Potentially Responsible Party 

RAU – Ready for Anticipated Use 

RCRA – Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

RFI – RCRA Facility Investigation 

RMP – Risk Management Plan 

RRT – Regional Response Team 

SMM – Sustainable Materials Management 

SPCC – Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure 

SPR – Superfund Program Review 

SRI – Superfund Redevelopment Initiative 

TASC – Technical Assistance Services for Communities 

TSCA – Toxic Substances Control Act 

TSDF – Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility 

USDA – United States Department of Agriculture 

UST – Underground Storage Tanks 

41