Bush Appoints Skinner Acting Assistant 

Administrator of OECA 

On April 2, 2004, the White House announced that Thomas V. Skinner, Regional 

Administrator for EPA Region 5, will serve as Acting Assistant Administrator for the 

Office of Environmental Compliance and Assurance. Phyllis Harris, who has served as 

Acting Assistant Administrator since the departure of JP Suarez in January 2004, will 

continue to serve as Deputy Assistant Administrator. 

EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt praised Skinner’s selection, indicating that his expertise 

“will add strength to our work to motivate compliance by applying consistent and certain 

enforcement.” Skinner has served as Regional Administrator for EPA Region 5 since 

2001. He was director of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) from 

1999 to 2001. Prior to his work with IEPA, Skinner was a partner in the environmental 

law department of a Chicago firm, Winston & Strawn, and he served as a special assistant 

to Illinois Governor James Thompson from 1988 to 1991. Skinner holds degrees from 

Lawrence University and Northwestern University School of Law. 

While serving as Acting Assistant Administrator, Skinner will continue to head the Great 

Lakes National Program, a federal program that seeks to protect, maintain, and restore the 

Great Lakes through lake monitoring; federal, state, and industry partnerships; habitat 

protection and restoration; pollution prevention programs; and stakeholder involvement. 

For additional information, contact Dr. Richard W. Popino, OSRE, (202) 564-5136. 

Marianne Lamont Horinko, Assistant 

Administrator of OSWER, Resigns 

Effective June 1, 2004, Marianne Lamont Horinko will step down from her position as 

the Assistant Administrator of the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

(OSWER). 

Ms. Horinko’s tenure at OSWER saw many successes for environmental response and 

cleanup. From EPA’s implementation of the Brownfields Revitalization Act to the 

Resource Conservation Challenge, she challenged the environmental community to form 

partnerships to promote flexible and innovative approaches to environmental 

improvements. A skilled political leader, she was successful in doubling the budget for 

the Brownfields program and boosting funds for Superfund to meet the demands of a 

shifting program. 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 1 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

Perhaps the greatest test of Ms. Horinko’s leadership occurred following September 11, 

when she managed the EPA’s role in the cleanup activities at Ground Zero and the 

Pentagon. She also oversaw EPA activities after the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster, 

and at the U.S. Capitol following the anthrax contamination incident. 

Ms. Horinko is resigning from her position in order to spend more time with her family. 

For additional information contact Dr. Richard W. Popino, OSRE, (202) 564- 5136. 

Atlas Tack Consent Decree Entered 

On March 1, 2004, the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts entered a consent decree for 

the Atlas Tack Corporation Superfund Site in Fairhaven. The agreement requires 

Hathaway-Braley Wharf Company, Inc. to reimburse EPA $501,575 and the 

Commonwealth $51,125 for past and future response costs and reimburse the Department 

of the Interior $4,990 and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration $510 

for damage assessment costs. Hathaway-Braley owns a three-acre unimproved parcel 

within the 24-acre Atlas Tack site and is just one of several potentially responsible 

parties. 

Through the consent decree, Hathaway-Braley has also agreed to have two easements 

placed on its property. The first easement is a Conservation Easement and Restrictions 

(CER) granted to a government entity or a non-profit corporation or trust for the purpose 

of conserving and protecting the natural habitat and scenic value of the property. The 

second easement, an Environmental Restriction and Easement (ERE), grants EPA a right 

of access to the property for performing and monitoring the selected remedy at the entire 

Atlas Tack site. The ERE also grants EPA the authority to enforce the land and water use 

restrictions imposed by the easement on the property. The CER also imposes land and 

water use restrictions on the property, but these restrictions are subordinate to restrictions 

set forth in the ERE. The restrictions imposed by both easements are legally binding on 

all current and future owners of the property. 

From 1901 to 1985, the Atlas Tack Corporation manufactured steel nails, wire tack, and 

other fasteners at the facility. The Hathaway-Braley property served as a disposal area, 

receiving approximately 4000 cubic yards of manufacturing wastes. The soils and debris 

on the Atlas Tack site are contaminated with volatile organic compounds, pesticides, 

PCBs, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from manufacturing processes. Cyanide 

and toluene in an onsite lagoon leached into the groundwater. 

Atlas Tack was added to the National Priorities List in 1990 and a Record of Decision for 

the entire site was released in March 2000. The selected remedy includes excavation, 

treatment and disposal of soils and sediments; monitored natural attenuation of 

groundwater; and monitoring and institutional controls. 

For more information, contact Stacy Greendlinger, EPA Region 1, (617) 918-1403. 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 2 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

Demolition of 47 Homes Complete at Escambia 

On March 4, 2004, EPA announced the completion of a three-month cooperative 

demolition project near the Escambia Treating Company Superfund Site in Pensacola, 

Florida. EPA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Escambia County, and the City of 

Pensacola began removing vacant homes in December 2003 as part of the selected 

interim remedial action at the site. An additional 114 residential structures and a 200-unit 

apartment complex will be torn down during Phase II of the remedial action. 

Escambia was placed on the National Priorities List in December 1994. In 1995, when it 

was evident that residents would need to be relocated, EPA selected Escambia as a 

national relocation evaluation pilot. As a pilot, Escambia provided EPA with valuable 

information about the process of permanently relocating residents that has helped inform 

a national interim CERCLA relocation policy for the Superfund program. Once 

finalized, the relocation policy will provide clear guidelines for when to consider 

relocation a viable site remedy. The interim policy has been in place since 1999. 

The permanent relocation of residents was among the selected interim remedial actions 

outlined in the Record of Decision for the site, issued in February 1997. The selected 

interim remedy includes: permanently relocating approximately 358 households; 

demolishing the vacated homes; and establishing institutional controls to limit land use to 

industrial and commercial uses only. A number of factors led to the relocation decision 

including health risks posed by the presence of dioxin and benzo(a)pyrene in soils at and 

around the site and community concern over unknown health risks posed by a large 

onsite stockpile of contaminated soil. The contaminated soil stockpile resulted from an 

emergency removal begun by EPA in 1991 and completed in 1992. The removal 

involved excavating and securing 225,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil on-site under 

a high-density polypropylene cover. 

Contamination at and around the site resulted from wood preservation operations 

conducted by the Escambia Wood Treating Company. From 1942 to 1963, coal-tar 

creosote was used as the main wood preservative. In 1963, the company began using 

pentachlorophenol, which became the only preservative used from 1970 until the 

company ceased operations in 1982. Wastes from preservation operations were diverted 

into unlined earthen pits and into impoundments constructed from concrete and treated 

wood. In addition to dioxin and benzo(a)pyrene, arsenic and lead have been detected at 

the site. 

The final remedy will address groundwater contamination and contaminated soils at the 

site and in the former residential areas. 

For additional information, contact Laura Niles, EPA Region 4, (404) 562-8353. 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 3 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

EPA Completes Cleanup at Stillwater Facility 

In March 2004, EPA completed its removal of hazardous wastes and chemical drums 

from the Saratoga Radar Station in Stillwater, New York. The cleanup included 

disposing of 137 drums of hazardous material, 77 electrical transformers, 2000 gallons of 

PCB fluid, and asbestos insulation and floor tiles. In addition, EPA recycled 

approximately 6000 gallons of petroleum products from 16 storage tanks. 

The history of the facility includes use as a U.S. Air Force radar base from the 1950s 

until the 1970s. In the 1970s, the General Services Administration sold the facility to the 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Recently, Laquidara Construction Incorporated 

of Ballston Spa, NY acquired the majority of the property from FAA. FAA still owns 

small portions of the property that have communication towers. Currently, the Town of 

Stillwater and a development company are seeking to purchase the property from the now 

bankrupt Laquidara Construction Inc. There are approximately 30 buildings on the 

property, 10 of which contained hazardous wastes such as gasoline, waste oil, and 

asbestos. 

In the fall of 2002, a chemical fire at the facility prompted the State of New York to 

request Superfund assistance for the cleanup. The facility qualified for assistance in 

December 2002, and removal activities began in October 2003. The New York State 

Department of Environmental Conservation has agreed to continue the cleanup of oilcontaminated soils and groundwater at the facility now that EPA-lead removal activities 

have been completed. Initial samples of the local water supply have not detected any 

volatile organic compounds. 

Currently, EPA is determining which property owners are responsible for the hazardous 

materials left at the facility. EPA intends to seek reimbursement of $675,000 for cleanup 

costs from the parties responsible for the contamination. 

For additional information, contact Leo Rosales, EPA Region 2, (518) 747-4389. 

A River Runs Through It – ADR Supports the 

Success of River Sediment Cleanups 

By David Batson, Conflict Prevention and Resolution Center 

Stretching for miles through once, and sometimes still, heavily industrialized areas, our 

nation’s rivers are the final resting places for all varieties of hazardous substances and 

debris. This stark reality of modern life has created an increasing front in the effort to 

address areas of contamination – the cleanup of river sediment sites. Covering huge 

areas, affected by the continuous addition and movement of new contamination from 

sources potentially spread over an entire river’s watershed, and requiring the efforts of 

multiple federal and state agencies, the cleanup of these sites creates a level of 

complexity for Agency staff and PRPs unprecedented in the history of Superfund. 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 4 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

In the Winter 1998 issue of CleanupNews, an article on a settlement providing for 

cleanup of the Housatonic River by GE recounted the important role that alternative 

dispute resolution (ADR) played in achieving the long-sought agreement. Brought in 

when settlement efforts were at an impasse, mediators not only helped the parties to 

negotiate the historic settlement, they also created and facilitated an innovative process 

allowing representatives of citizen, environmental and business groups to present their 

concerns to the negotiators. In addition, ADR professionals assisted in the formation of a 

Citizens Advisory Council that provides an opportunity for continued community input in 

cleanup efforts. 

The effective and timely use of ADR is proving critical to the success of the many river 

sediment cleanups initiated over the past few years. Of particular importance to the 

success of Superfund efforts has been the use of ADR professionals by PRP groups to 

resolve the complex allocation issues raised by these sites. The allocation of financial 

responsibility for the cleanup of sediment river sites raises unique legal and factual issues 

that stretch traditional Superfund practices. Fortunately, PRP groups have been able to 

turn to the experience of ADR professionals to assist them in reaching allocation 

agreements. Typical of these efforts is the work of the PRPs at the Hylebos Waterway 

site. An operable unit of the Commencement Bay Superfund Site in Region 10, the 

Hylebos Waterway presented many of the difficulties faced by PRPs in agreeing on an 

allocation at river sediment sites. The area had been heavily industrialized for over 120 

years with many of the industrial contributors to the contamination no longer in existence 

or viable. The character of the waterway had changed over the years from a meandering 

stream and tidal basin to a dredged shipping channel for commercial use. A variety of 

conveyances for contaminants and daily tidal flows created an overlapping pattern of 

contamination. The installation of a municipal sewer system in the early 20th Century 

added drainage from a large developed community to the waterway. The costs of 

cleaning up the waterway and addressing the damage to natural resources were 

substantial. 

The Hylebos Waterway PRP Group utilized the services of an ADR professional to help 

them in successfully reaching an agreement on the allocation of site costs. As for many 

complex Superfund sites, the PRPs were assisted in organizing and selecting an 

allocation specialist by ADR professionals of the EPA ADR Program. The allocation 

specialist designed a process for obtaining and evaluating information on historic 

industrial activities that could have impacted the waterway. This process allowed the 

PRPs to narrow the substantial number of contributors to the list of viable parties capable 

of participating in cleanup efforts. In addition, this allowed the PRPs to provide EPA 

staff with information for its determination of parties for additional enforcement action. 

The result was agreement on an allocation of responsibility which provided the basis for a 

RD/RA settlement with EPA and restoration agreement with federal and state trustees. 

Experience shows that the success of future river sediment cleanups will be greatly 

increased by the effective and timely use of ADR by PRPs and government agencies. 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 5 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

For further information on ADR, contact the EPA Conflict Prevention & Resolution Center 

(http://www.epa.gov/adr/) or any of the regional EPA ADR Specialists. Contact information for 

CPRC staff and regional ADR Specialists is available on the website. 

In The Courts 

D.C. Circuit Rules Facial Constitutional 

Challenges Allowed Under CERCLA 113(h) in GE 

vs. EPA, No. 00CV02855 (D.C. Cir. March 2, 

2004) 

By Clarence E. Featherson, Office of Site Remediation Enforcement 

On March 2, 2004, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (D.C. Circuit) held that CERCLA’s Section 113(h) Pre-enforcement bar does not 

prevent judicial review of facial constitutional challenges to the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). The D.C. Circuit 

also stated that site specific “challenges” to EPA’s administration of the statute [a 

systemic or an “as applied constitutional challenge”] may be subject to CERCLA Section 

113(h)’s pre-enforcement bar. 

However, the D.C. Circuit held that in this case, GE’s claim did not challenge a specific 

removal or remedial action selected under CERCLA Section 104, or an order issued 

under CERCLA Section 106(a). Therefore, GE’s amended claim set forth a facial 

constitutional challenge to CERCLA as a statute. Such challenges are not precluded from 

judicial review by CERCLA Section 113(h). The D.C. Circuit reversed the district 

court’s decision (discussed below) and remanded the case back to the district court, for 

the district court to decide whether the administrative order provisions of Section 106, 

Section 107(c)(3) and Section113(h) of CERCLA violate the Due Process Clause of the 

Fifth Amendment because they do not allow pre-enforcement review of administrative 

orders issued by the EPA. 

Background 

In 2002, GE filed an amended complaint in the District Court for the District of Columbia 

alleging that the administrative order provisions of Section 106, Section 107(c)(3) and 

Section113(h) of CERCLA violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. On 

March 31, 2003, the district court dismissed GE’s complaint for lack of subject matter 

jurisdiction. The district court held it was barred by CERCLA’s Section 113(h)’s preenforcement review bar from addressing the merits of GE’s case. GE appealed the 

district court’s decision. On appeal, the D.C. Circuit reversed the district court’s decision 

and remanded the case back to the district court to decide the merits of GE’s facial due 

process claim challenging CERCLA’s administrative order provisions. 

For further information, contact Clarence E. Featherson, (202) 564-4234. 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 6 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

Consent Decree Lodged for San Gabriel Valley 

Superfund Site 

On March 5, 2004, a consent decree for the El Monte operable unit (OU) of San Gabriel 

Valley Area 1 Superfund Site was lodged with the U.S. District Court for the Central 

District of California. The consent decree settles the cost recovery case between EPA, 

the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and 38 settling parties. 

The parties have agreed to implement the approximately $44 million in remedies 

specified in the 1999 Interim Record of Decision (IROD) and the 2002 Explanation of 

Significant Differences (ESD), which modified the IROD. The 2002 ESD was necessary 

after additional contaminants (e.g., perchlorate and hexavalent chromium) were 

discovered; these contaminants require different remedies than those outlined in the 

IROD, therefore treatment options for these contaminants were proposed in the ESD. In 

addition to implementing the remedies recommended in the IROD and ESD, the parties 

have agreed to reimburse EPA approximately $2 million and DTSC $50,000 for past 

response costs and to pay for future response costs. 

San Gabriel Valley Area 1 Superfund Site is located in Los Angeles County, a densely 

populated area with some industrial activity. The El Monte OU, one of eight OUs within 

the San Gabriel Valley Area 1 Superfund Site, covers a 10-square-mile area in the south 

central section of the San Gabriel basin. The remedy includes pumping out and treating 

approximately 2.4 million gallons a day of contaminated groundwater and constructing 

new extraction wells and treatment facilities. The goal is to prevent migration of the 

contamination and protect downstream wells. 

San Gabriel Valley Areas 2-4 are separate Superfund sites that also address groundwater 

contamination within the 170-square-mile valley. The contamination, primarily from 

volatile organic compounds used by the settling parties for degreasing, metal cleaning, 

and other purposes, was first discovered in the valley in 1979. All four sites were added 

to the National Priorities List in 1984. 

The groundwater underlying the San Gabriel Valley basin is the primary drinking water 

source for over 1 million people. There are nine active production wells at the El Monte 

OU that draw groundwater from the deep aquifer for the municipal water supply. 

For additional information, contact Francisco Arcaute, EPA Region 9, (213) 452-3378. 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 7 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

Tidbits 

Proposal to Reduce Toxic Air Emissions from 

Hazardous Waste Combustors 

By Diane Bartosh, Office of Solid Waste 

On March 31, 2004, Administrator Leavitt signed a notice proposing national emission 

standards for hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) from hazardous waste combustors. The 

combustors affected by this rule detoxify or recover energy from hazardous waste, and 

include incinerators, cement kilns, lightweight aggregate kilns, boilers and process 

heaters, and hydrochloric acid production furnaces. The proposed standards will 

implement section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act by requiring hazardous waste combustors 

to meet HAP emission standards reflecting the application of the maximum achievable 

control technology (MACT). Currently, the Agency estimates 150 facilities operate 276 

devices that burn hazardous waste. 

By proposing technology-based standards for these devices, EPA aims to reduce 

emissions of hazardous air pollutants, including lead, mercury, arsenic, dioxin and furans, 

and hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas. In conjunction with these pollutants, emissions 

of particulate matter will also be reduced. Better control over air pollutants from these 

devices will result in fewer cases of chronic bronchitis, reduced hospitalizations for 

severe respiratory conditions and cardiovascular problems in adults and children, and 

fewer cancer cases. Populations residing near hazardous waste combustion facilities– 

especially children and minority groups–may benefit the most from these proposed 

standards. 

The proposed rule includes a compliance alternative provided for in the Clean Air Act 

(section 112(d)(4)) for hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas, whereby sources can comply 

with risk-based emission levels rather than levels determined by performance of 

technology. These risk-based emission levels must be protective of human health with an 

ample margin of safety. 

This proposal is part of EPA’s effort to comply with a settlement agreement reached over 

the first MACT standards promulgated for incinerators, cement kilns, and lightweight 

aggregate kilns that combust hazardous waste. According to that agreement, the Agency 

must finalize all the MACT standards by June 14, 2005. 

EPA is accepting comments on this proposal for 75 days following publication in the 

Federal Register. 

More information on the MACT rule is available at: 

http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/combust/newmact/hazmact.htm 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 8 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

11 Sites Proposed for National Priorities List 

On March 8, 2004, EPA proposed adding 11 sites to its list of Superfund priorities, the 

National Priorities List (NPL). These sites present an array of cleanup challenges. At the 

Jacobsville Neighborhood Soil Contamination site, lead-contaminated soils were 

identified in a residential area 10 years after soils were removed from a former plating 

facility. Lead levels on some residential properties were as high as 6,150 mg/kg. 

At Devil’s Swamp Lake, located just 10 miles from Baton Rouge, a commercial 

hazardous waste disposal facility released PCBs and other contaminants to an outfall 

ditch. The contamination entered the lake and impacted onsite wetlands and fisheries. 

The Louisiana Department of Environmental Protection issued fish consumption 

advisories for Devil’s Swamp Lake after fish tissue analysis found significant levels of 

PCBs and other contaminants. 

At the Diaz Chemical Corporation site in New York, a long history of releases to the air 

and soils left the groundwater and soil contaminated with volatile organic compounds and 

semivolatile organic compounds. In 2002, Diaz accidentally released 2-chloro-6-

fluorophenol to the air, a release which necessitated the temporary relocation of 15-20 

families. In addition to the soil and groundwater contamination, Diaz abandoned many 

onsite chemical tanks and drums when it declared bankruptcy in 2003; EPA is addressing 

the tanks and drums through a removal action. 

EPA promulgated the original NPL of 406 sites in 1983 to give priority to hazardous 

waste sites where human health and the environment were most at risk. Today, there are 

1,240 final sites on the NPL including 148 federal facilities. Construction has been 

completed at 892 sites and is currently in progress at 360 sites. 

The sites proposed for listing are: 

• Jacobsville Neighborhood Soil Contamination, Evansville, Indiana 

• Devil’s Swamp Lake, Scotlandville, Louisiana 

• Annapolis Lead Mine, Annapolis, Missouri 

• Picayune Wood Treating, Picayune, Mississippi 

• Grants Chlorinated Solvents Plume, Grants, New Mexico 

• Diaz Chemical Corporation, Holley, New York 

• Peninsula Boulevard Groundwater Plume, Hewlett, New York 

• Ryeland Road Arsenic, Heidelberg Township, Pennsylvania 

• Cidra Ground Water Contamination, Cidra, Puerto Rico 

• Pike Hill Copper Mine, Corinth, Vermont 

• Ravenswood PCE Ground Water Plume, Ravenswood, West Virginia 

More information is available at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/newnpl.htm 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 9 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

Earth Day Resources Every Day 

Earth Day was celebrated in late April with observances across the country. In 

Washington, DC, federal agencies sponsored a variety of events including an electronics 

recycling event, and a volunteer-driven Anacostia Watershed cleanup effort. The Federal 

Aviation Administration held an old shoe recycling event where old shoes were collected 

for recycling as playground blacktop. In other parts of the country, EPA Region 5 cosponsored the Earth Day celebration in Cincinnati, and EPA Region 6 partnered with 

other organizations to host “EarthFest 2004,” an Earth Day event in Dallas with exhibits 

demonstrating environmentally-friendly practices. 

EPA’s Earth Day website, http://www.epa.gov/earthday/, demonstrates that “every day is 

Earth Day” through tips and resources on energy efficiency, saving water, recycling, 

reducing waste, and conserving gasoline. And just in time for summer, there are tips for 

“greenscaping” lawns and gardens through more environmentally-friendly practices (e.g., 

grasscycling, mulching, and composting of yard waste). EPA’s Earth Day site also points 

to a variety of other online resources including the federal government’s main Earth Day 

site at http://www.earthday.gov, a list of international Earth Day events through the Earth 

Day network, and volunteer opportunities. 

Calendar 

May 11-12, 2004 

2004 National Corrective Action Conference 

Orlando, FL 

Contact: Lael Butler, (404) 562-8453 or 

Karen Tomimatsu, (703) 605-0698 

http://www.nationalcaconf.com

July 12-14, 2004 

ASTSWMO 2004 State Hazardous Waste Managers Conference 

Washington, DC 

Contact: Jocelyn Scott, (202) 564-4795 

http://www.astswmo.org

September 20-22, 2004 

Brownfields 2004: Gateway to Revitalization 

St. Louis, MO 

http://www.brownfields2004.org 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 10 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

Glossary 

ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act 

CER Conservation Easement and Restrictions 

DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

ERE Environmental Restriction and Easement 

ESD Explanation of Significant Difference 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant 

IROD Interim Record of Decision 

MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology 

NPL National Priorities List 

OSRE Office of Site Remediation Enforcement 

OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

OU Operable Unit 

OUST Office of Underground Storage Tanks 

PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls 

PRPs Potentially Responsible Parties 

UST Underground Storage Tank 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 11 
cleanupnewsII May 2004 

Subscription Information 

Richard W. Popino, PhD REM, editor 

EPA Review Board: Diane Bartosh, Paul Connor, Karen Ellenberger, Jeff Heimerman, 

Kenneth Patterson, Neilima Senjalia, Suzanne Wells 

Anne Politis, Sarah Heberling, DPRA, Inc., writers 

Lauren Grantham, DPRA, Inc., designer 

To comment on the newsletter contact Richard W. Popino, PhD REM, at MC-2271A, US 

EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, 

email:popino.rick@epa.gov. 

CleanupNews is a quarterly publication of EPA’s Office of Site Remediation 

Enforcement, in cooperation with the Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology 

Innovation, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, and Office of Emergency Prevention, 

Preparedness and Response. Past issues of CleanupNews can be found at 

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/newsletters/cleanup/cleanupnews.html

To receive CleanupNews by email, join the listserv at 

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/listserv/cleanup.html. 

“We have developed an electronic supplement to the CleanupNews print edition called 

CleanupNews II. The print issue will still be available four times a year, and the 

newsletter will be delivered electronically eight times a year (four issues consisting of the 

print edition text and four issues consisting of supplemental news).” 

CleanupNewsII Issue 16S - 12