Office of Site Remediation 

Enforcement (2271A) December 2005 

Issue #23 

cleanupnews 

Printed on recycled paper 

Administrator 2 

Capturing Superfund 3 

In Their Own Words - 4 

Helen Keplinger 

Katrina Efforts 5 

Brownfields Conference 

In the Courts 6 

Rehearing Rejected 

Appeals Board Denial 

Tidbits 7 

Protocol Finalized 

Environmental Indicator Goals 

Waste Management Meeting 

Calendar 8 

Glossary 

CleanupNews is a quarterly 

newsletter highlighting hazardous 

waste cleanup cases, policies, 

settlements and technologies. 

th 

On December 11, 1980, President Jimmy Carter signed the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 

and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Superfund), creating 

the Federal government’s program to clean up the nation’s uncontrolled 

hazardous waste sites. Through the Superfund program, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its partners addresses abandoned, accidentally spilled, or illegally dumped hazardous waste that 

pose current or future threats to human health or the environment. 

There is at least one Superfund site in every State. 

Congress passed the statute, but it was up to EPA to create the 

Superfund program. When national media brought attention to such 

sites as the Valley of the Drums in Kentucky and a chemical explosion 

in Elizabeth, New Jersey, EPA took immediate action. Drums were collected and removed. Fires were extinguished. Leaks from tanks and 

waste ponds were stopped. 

However, responding to emergencies was not EPA’s only challenge. 

Over the next twenty-five years, EPA developed new and innovative 

ways to conduct cleanups. Important research examined how contamination migrated into groundwater, and new technologies provided iminside 

continued on page 3

 continued on page 2 

EPA continues to achieve significant results in enforcement 

and Superfund cleanups, as indicated by the fiscal year 2005 

accomplishments data released in November. EPA releases 

data about the past fiscal year to demonstrate EPA achievement of its 

goals of protecting human health and the environment. 

Washington, DC 20460 

New Deputy Assistant 

Superfund’s 25

Anniversary: Capturing 

the Past, Charting the 

Future 

EPA Reduced Pollution 

by Over One Billion 

Pounds in FY2005 

By Jennifer M. Browne, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
FY05 Results, continued from page 1 

Highlights

Office of Enforcement Compliance and Assurance 

As a result of enforcement actions 

taken during FY 2005, OECA estimates that 1.1 billion pounds of pollution will be reduced, and an estimated 28.2 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and 1.6 billion cubic 

yards of contaminated water will be 

cleaned up. Violators have agreed to 

pay a record $10 billion to reduce pollution and achieve compliance, more 

than double the amount of injunctive 

relief in the previous fiscal year. 

Criminal defendants will pay roughly 

$100 million in fines and restitution 

and serve more than 186 years in jail. 

Violators agreed to perform $57 million worth of supplemental environmental projects, projects violators voluntarily undertake as part of an enforcement settlement. 

There were a number of significant 

civil enforcement cases in FY 2005. 

Through a consent decree for the 

Hudson River PCBs Superfund Site, 

GE agreed to begin the first phase of 

dredging PCB-contaminated sedi- Enforcement Numbers at a 

ments, valued at Glance 

$100-150 million, 

and to reimburse • 1.1 billion pounds of pollution will be reduced as EPA roughly $78 a result of FY 05 enforcement actions

million. EPA en- • Private parties have committed to spend $1.1 tered into a con- billion ($857 million promised for future sent decree with responses and $248 million to reimburse EPA Atlantic Richfield past costs) Company and • Violators have agreed to spend $10 billion in NorthWestern En- injunctive relief ergy Corporation • Violators have agreed to complete Supplemental for the Milltown Environmental Projects (SEPs) worth $57 million Reservoir Sediments/Clark Fork

River Superfund

Site in Missoula, Montana valued at Details about OECA’s FY2005 ac-

$102 million; the responsible parties complishments, including the “Numagreed to remove Stimson Dam and to bers at a Glance” and results charts,

remove and stabilize contaminated are available on OECA’s Compliance

sediments. Kerr-McGee agreed to com- and Enforcement Annual Results -

plete the process of removing radioac- FY2005 Web site at: http://epa.gov/

tive contamination from the Rare compliance/data/results/annual/

Earths Facility in Chicago, Illinois and fy2005.html.

to restore the ecosystem, at an estimated cost of $74 million. For additional information, contact 

Rocky Kennedy of OECA, (202) 264-

9968. 

On January 2, 2006, Catherine McCabe will begin serving as Deputy 

Assistant Administrator of the Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance (OECA). Since 2001, McCabe has served as Deputy Chief of 

the Environmental Enforcement Section of the Department of Justice’s 

Environment and Natural Resources Division. She has worked at DOJ 

since 1983. Before joining DOJ, she was Assistant Attorney General 

in the New York State Environmental Protection Bureau. 

McCabe received her law degree from Columbia and an undergraduate degree from Barnard College. 

New Deputy Assistant

OECA 

Administrator to Join 

2 cleanupnews

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

In OSWER, the Office of Superfund 

Remediation and Technology Innovation reported that construction was 

completed at 40 sites in FY 2005. 

Overall, 966 sites on the National Priorities List (NPL) are now construction complete. Eighteen new sites 

were added to the NPL, and 12 were 

proposed for listing. A list of accomplishments is available on 

Superfund’s FY05 National Accomplishments Summary Web site at: 

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/action/ 

process/numbers05.htm. 

For additional information, contact 

Jennifer Browne of OSRTI, (703) 603-

8922. 
Capturing Superfund

The following photos were among the final selections in the 25th Anniversary Photo History Project. All the final 

photos can be viewed on the Superfund Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund. MATTHEW T. MELLON, EPA REGION 3 

MARC CALLAGHAN,

EPA REGION 10

Superfund at 25

A fish with a tumor from exposure to Testing drums at the Columbia American 

environmntal toxins at the Koppers Co., Inc. Plating site, Portland, Oregon. 

site, in Newport, Delaware. 

Superfund, continued from page 1 

proved methods to treat, store, and 

dispose of wastes. EPA took steps to 

ensure that communities near hazardous sites had a strong, meaningful voice in cleanup decisions, including determining how to reuse 

Center and Pentagon Attacks, the 2001 

Anthrax Attacks, the Columbia Space 

Shuttle Disaster, and Hurricanes 

Katrina and Rita. Through Superfund’s 

Redevelopment Initiative, today, 

land after a cleanup. Finally, Since 1980, EPA’s enforcement 

the Superfund program pio- program has secured private 

neered methods to ensure party funding commitments of

that the parties responsible nearly $24 billion.

for contamination were held 

responsible for the cleanup as 

well. Since 1980, EPA’s enforcement 

program has secured private party 

funding commitments of nearly $24 

billion. 

Over time, Superfund evolved into a 

strong and effective construction program. Today, construction work is 

complete at 966 or 62% of Superfund 

private and federal sites, and work is 

underway at an additional 422 sites. 

Strong partnerships ensure that Federal properties are addressed and that 

communities are part of the process. 

Superfund’s emergency response program has taken action at thousands 

of sites to reduce the immediate 

threats to human health, including 

substantial roles in the World Trade 

Superfund sites are model airplane 

fields, airports, major department 

stores, soccer fields, golf courses, wildlife refuges and much more. 

However, work remains. Even today, 

1 in 4 Americans live within 3 miles of 

a Superfund site. Each year, Superfund 

assesses potentially hazardous waste 

sites and finds previously unknown 

chemicals and wastes that require research and new technologies to properly address potential threats to human 

health and the environment. 

EPA undertook two activities to commemorate Superfund’s 25th Anniversary. The 25th Anniversary Photo History Project visually captures the people 

and places of Superfund, the human 

and environmental impacts of 

Superfund sites, and the changes in 

communities resulting from site 

cleanups. The photos, two from each 

EPA Region, were selected from 

300 submissions, and were first 

displayed at the National Museum of Natural History December 10 – 12, 2005, in Washington, DC. The photos can also be 

viewed on Superfund’s website at 

http://www.epa.gov/superfund. 

EPA also developed the 25th Anniversary Oral History Project. The 

project will serve as a permanent, 

accessible record of interviews with 

almost 40 people who have shaped 

the Superfund program, including 

crafters of the legislation, community 

members who live near hazardous 

waste sites, people who implemented 

the program at the Federal, State, 

Tribal and local levels, and industry 

representatives. The transcripts from 

these interviews will also be available on Superfund’s website once they 

are all completed. 

cleanupnews 3
A Staff Attorney Looks Back at 25 

Years of Superfund 

In Their Own Words

by Helen Keplinger, Office of Site Remediation Enforcement 

Helen Keplinger has been doing 

Superfund Enforcement since 

1981. She conducted interviews for 

the Superfund 25th Anniversary 

Oral History Project, and her comments below reflect ideas gathered 

during those interviews, but are her 

views and do not reflect EPA 

policy. 

Today, twenty five years after Superfund became law, 

the concept of “Enforcement 

First” is well known. And, because of 

the twenty five year history of EPA 

enforcing the Superfund liability 

scheme with strict joint and several, 

as well as retroactive liability, those 

legal theories are also well known. 

But at the very beginning, things were 

much different. First, joint and several was not actually written 

lief to force polluters to perform 

cleanup. The concept of the “polluter 

pays” was also not well known at 

the beginning, and even today, while 

it is a “mantra” for EPA enforcers, 

those words still upset some of the 

regulated community who believe 

that they began to act responsibly 

dressed by federal funding, but they 

are saying that especially in the beginning, sites may have been placed 

on the list for the wrong reasons. 

There are even some people who say, 

when asked if there will be a time 

when Superfund will no longer be 

needed, well, probably, but not any 

time soon, and probably we’ll always 

need emergency response authority 

with cleanup funds, but, NPL listing——maybe it will eventually no 

longer be necessary. 

When asked if Superfund was inevitable, many people say, yes, it was 

because the nation and Congress 

were becoming aware of the problems 

posed by uncontrolled hazardous 

waste sites and past disposal practices. These people say that whether 

it was Love Canal in upwords joint and several out of in 1980.”

the Superfund law, with the understanding that such an approach already being used under the Clean Water Act would somehow carry over into 

Superfund enforcement. It took early 

litigation to establish precedent for 

strict, joint and several liability that 

is today well understood. 

Then there were the early efforts to 

begin implementing the new law 

which, for the first time in EPA experience (bear in mind that EPA itself 

was only ten years old when Superfund 

became law) gave EPA a Fund to spend 

to perform cleanup. This freed up enforcement resources that might otherwise have been spent in labor intensive litigation seeking injunctive reinto the law. There seems to be “And enforcement--where is enforcement state New York, or Times 

consensus among the pioneers today. The answer is, enforcement is still Beach in the St. Louis, 

of Superfund that legislative doing what it started doing in 1980, and Missouri area, both early 

compromises agreed to leave the probably doing things it never contemplated Superfund buy-outs of enwhen Superfund appeared, and who 

believe that the original tax that 

partly funded Superfund targeted 

some industries to the benefit of 

others. So to say that Superfund 

was controversial at the beginning 

is only to acknowledge that it remains controversial even today. 

But, where are we on Superfund 

enforcement today. The Fund is 

shrinking because the tax expired a 

decade ago. There are still many 

sites on the National Priorities List, 

but there are some voices that question the continued need for such a 

list. These voices aren’t saying that 

there aren’t sites that need to be adtire communities necessitated by hazardous waste 

disposal practices, the problems exemplified by those sites were playing out across the country. So the 

consensus seems to be that even 

though Superfund was passed in the 

waning days of one administration, 

and a new administration assumed 

the task of implementing the fledgling Superfund law, the national sentiment to do something about hazardous waste problems was too 

strong to be ignored any longer. 

We’re still negotiating consent decrees with potentially responsible 

parties to perform RD/RA at NPL 

sites. We’re still issuing removal orders, and building cost recovery cases 

continued on page 6 

4 cleanupnews 
EPA Continues Katrina Efforts

On November 17, 2005, 

EPA Administrator 

Steve Johnson visited 

Louisiana to meet with EPA Regional 

Administrator Richard Greene and 

Secretary Mike McDaniel from the 

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ). During his 

visit, the Administrator also toured 

several of the sites where EPA staff 

is working along with other federal, 

state and local officials to manage the 

potential or real threat posed by hazardous materials. Sites visited included the Murphy Oil spill in St. Bernard Parish and a household hazardous waste collection site in Jefferson 

Parish. 

Cleanup work is ongoing at the 

Murphy Oil Meraux Refinery in St. 

In the large scale devastation to entire towns and the significant impact to the environment, it is easy to overlook the suffering (and triumphs) of individual survivors. EPA 

employee Seth Low shared the story of 

his mother, an 84-year-old resident of 

Slidell, Louisiana—one of the towns 

hardest hit by Katrina. She lost almost everything but was grateful for 

the hot meals provided every day by 

the Red Cross. She found her American flag among her belongings, and 

Seth reports that she flew it “as a symbol of her faith in America and the 

American people who came to help her 

in her time of need.” 

Seth Low of EPA’s Federal Facilities 

Restoration and Reuse Office is currently 

on detail with the National Treasury 

Employees Union. 

The Personal Side 

Bernard Parish, LA. Flooding damaged an above ground storage tank 

spilling approximately 25,110 barrels 

of mixed crude oil into the surrounding 

area. The spill dumped oil into adjacent canals and a 1,700 home residential neighborhood. The US Coast 

Guard (USCG) and EPA are working 

together to monitor the oil spill 

cleanup. The USCG is monitoring 

Murphy Oil’s efforts to clean oil from 

canals, the tank containment area and 

from residential streets and storm 

drains. EPA and the LDEQ are working with Murphy Oil to cleanup public 

parks, school yards and other residential areas with public access. As of 

December 2005, approximately 18,000 

barrels of oil have been collected. 

Murphy Oil sampling in affected residential areas has shown polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in concentrations above acceptable limits for 

long-term exposure set by the LDEQ. 

Efforts to collect household hazardous waste continue. Almost 20,000 

electronic devices have been processed 

through the site. On December 3, 2005, 

EPA, Dell, Inc., and other partners in 

the recycling effort held a free drop-off 

event in the New Orleans area at the 

Pontchartrain Center. 

In the Spotlight

Brownfields Conference Draws More 

than 5,600 to Denver 

On November 2, 2005, EPA Administrator Steve Johnson spoke to Brownfields 2005 attendees in Denver, 

Colorado. He announced the final “All Appropriate Inquiries” rule, which was published in the Federal 

Register on November 1, 2005; the rule will become effective November 1, 2006. The rule establishes 

requirements for conducting all appropriate inquiries into previous ownership and property use when seeking Superfund 

liability protection. Johnson praised the collaboration of the diverse group of stakeholders (including realtors, bankers, 

and environmental interest groups) that helped craft the rule. The final rule, a fact sheet, and other information are 

available on the Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment’s “All Appropriate Inquiries” Web site at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/brownfields/regneg.htm. 

A number of OSRE staff participated in the conference. Several served as panelists on panels about the recent US 

Supreme Court eminent domain decision in Cooper v. Aviall, institutional controls, Ready for Reuse, and other enforcement-related subjects. OSRE also had a booth and distributed outreach materials. 

For additional information, contact Tony Raia, OBCR, (202) 566-2758. 

cleanupnews 5 
In The Courts 

Third Circuit 

Rejects Exide’s 

Rehearing

Request 

On November 4, 2005, the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Third 

Circuit denied Exide Corporation’s 

petition for rehearing and rehearing 

en banc in United States v. Exide Corp. 

(No. 03 - 3515). In its September 6, 

2005 decision, the Third Circuit upheld the February 27, 2002 ruling of 

the U.S. District Court which found 

that Exide, a successor to Price Battery, was liable for response costs at 

the Hamburg Lead Superfund Site in 

Berks County, Pennsylvania. The district court agreed with the government 

that federal common law governing 

successor liability should be used to 

determine Exide’s potential liability, 

not state law, and that Exide was liable as a successor under the “de 

facto” merger test. 

From the 1930s until 1966, Price 

Battery Corporation operated a manufacturing plant in Pennsylvania which 

produced lead acid batteries. Battery 

casings containing lead and arsenic 

were disposed at various locations 

around Hamburg. General Battery 

Corporation purchased the site in 

1966 and merged with Exide Corporation in 2000. 

Exide has 90 days from the issuing 

of the Third Circuit’s decision to appeal the decision to the United States 

Supreme Court. 

For additional information, contact 

Clarence Featherson, OSRE, (202) 

564-4234. 

Grand Pier 

Center’s 

Reimbursement 

Petition is Denied 

by Appeals Board 

On October 28, 2005, EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) released its Final Decision denying 

Grand Pier Center’s CERCLA 106 (b) 

Petition. Grand Pier Center was seeking reimbursement from the Agency 

for $200,000 in response costs the 

company incurred complying with an 

EPA amended unilateral administrative order (UAO) requiring it to clean 

up an off-site sidewalk area adjacent 

to property owned by Grand Pier Center. Grand Pier Center agreed that it 

was responsible for costs incurred 

cleaning up contamination on its own 

property, but it argued that it was not 

responsible for cleanup costs for the 

sidewalk area, since it was not the 

owner. EPA Region 5 argued that the 

“facility” encompasses all areas where 

the thorium contamination had come 

to be located, including both Grand 

Pier Center’s property and the adjacent off-site sidewalk area. EAB determined that Grand Pier Center had 

failed to demonstrate it was not liable for the response costs as a present 

owner under CERCLA Section 107(a). 

Early in the 20th century, Lindsey 

Light Company produced incandescent gas lights at facilities in Chicago, 

Illinois. In the 1990s, EPA identified 

thorium radionuclide contamination 

on many properties in the 

Streeterville neighborhood that resulted from Lindsey Light’s production activities. In December 1999, 

Grand Pier Center was preparing the 

site for construction of some buildings; 

during the site excavation, some soils 

removed from the site were deposited 

on property owned by Grand Pier Center and an adjacent off-site sidewalk. 

EPA issued an amended UAO requiring Grand Pier Center to clean up the 

off-site sidewalk area, and Grand Pier 

Center complied. 

For additional information, contact 

Clarence Featherson, OSRE, (202) 564-

4234. 

Superfund, continued from page 4 

after the Fund has addressed contamination. But, we’re doing things we 

never dreamed of in 1980. Since the 

passage of the Brownfields Amendments in 2002, we are dealing with a 

whole new class of parties beyond the 

original set of PRPs who had only three 

defenses to liability——act of war, act 

of God, act of a third-party with no contractual relationship to the PRP. Today, we are spending time dealing with 

brownfields sites, and parties with liability protections afforded bona fide 

prospective purchasers, contiguous 

owners, and to a lesser extent the innocent landowner. It is no longer just 

a question of who is a potentially responsible party, but rather, in addition, a question of who is not a potentially responsible party and what is 

that person doing at a Superfund Site. 

Just like at the beginning, there is a 

whole new world of legal issues posed 

by the Brownfields Amendments of 

2002, and the enforcement office, unlike at the beginning where organizationally it was bounced back and forth 

between Enforcement and Program 

several times in as many years, is well 

organized to take on the challenges of 

the next twenty five years of 

Superfund. Happy Birthday 

Superfund, and Good Work Enforcers! 

6 cleanupnews
Protocol Finalized 

for Prioritizing

Responses at 

Munitions 

Response Sites 

On October 5, 2005, the Department 

of Defense (DoD) published a final rule 

establishing the Munitions Response 

Site Prioritization Protocol (herein 

after called, the Protocol) as part of 

the Military Munitions Response Program (70 FR 58016). The Protocol, 

which was initially proposed on August 22, 2003, has been finalized after consideration of public comments. 

The DoD was required by the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2002 to develop, in consultation 

with representatives of the States and 

Indian Tribes, a protocol for assigning 

defense sites containing military munitions a priority for response activities. In response to this requirement, 

DoD developed the Protocol as the 

methodology for prioritizing sties 

known or suspected to contain 

unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, and/or munitions constituents for response actions DoD 

will be offering training on the Protocol starting early Spring 2006. The 

training is intended for DoD personnel and contractors, as well as environmental regulators, tribal members, and other stakeholders. 

The MMRP is part of the Defense 

Environmental Restoration Program 

(DERP) which was initially established by the Superfund Amendments 

and Reauthorization Act of 1986. The 

DERP is charged with identifying and 

addressing contamination at DoD installations and formerly used defense 

sites. 

For additional information, contact Doug Maddox, FFRRO, 

maddox.doug@epa.gov or Vic 

Wieszek, Department of Defense, 

victor.wieszek@osd.mil.

EPA Surpassed 

Two 

Environmental 

Indicator Goals 

In September 2005, EPA exceeded 

its RCRA Corrective Action Environmental Indicator goals to control the 

migration of contaminated groundwater at 70 percent of contaminated facilities and control human exposures 

at 95 percent. The two Environmental Indicators are stabilization measures used to reduce risk—to both human health and natural resources— 

until final cleanups can be achieved. 

The 2005 Environmental Indicator 

goals measure progress toward meeting EPA’s long-term corrective action 

goals of achieving final cleanups at 

all 1,714 facilities. EPA surpassed 

the 2005 goals by successfully controlling human exposures at 1,649 of 

1,714 facilities and the migration of 

contaminated groundwater at 1,341 

of the 1,714 facilities. “By embracing 

comprehensive reforms that promote 

flexible and creative solutions,” said 

Tom Dunne, Acting Assistant Administrator for the Office of Solid Waste 

and Emergency Response, “EPA has 

shifted the focus from process to outcomes and measurably expedited 

cleanups.” 

RCRA requires hazardous waste 

management facilities to take responsibility for cleaning up leaks, spills 

and other environmental damage at 

their sites. Working closely with EPA 

and state environmental agencies, facility operators take an important 

step toward final cleanups when they 

satisfy both Environmental Indicators. 

For more information, please visit 

EPA’s corrective action Web site at: 

http://www.epa.gov/correctiveaction/. 

Attend the 2006 

Waste 

Management

Meeting:

Learning From the 

Past—Preparing

for the Future 

EPA is celebrating more than a quarter century of effective waste management and disposal at the 2006 Waste 

Management National Meeting. 

Please join the Air and Waste Management Association and the EPA on 

January 18-20, 2006, at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City, Arlington, VA for 

this important meeting. 

The conference will feature discussions covering a variety of technical, 

policy, regulatory and economic topics 

related to RCRA and CERCLA. It will 

review accomplishments and chart a 

path for how issues under these laws 

will be addressed in the future. 

For more information, including 

schedule and registration details, visit 

the Air and Waste Management 

Association’s Website at http:// 

www.awma.org/. 

Brownfields 2006 is set for November 13-15, 2006 at the Boston 

Convention and Exhibition Center 

in Boston, Massachusetts. The call 

for presentations will go live on the 

Brownfields 2006 Web site, http:// 

www.brownfields2006.org, in December. 

cleanupnews 7

Tidbits
calendarJanuary 18-20, 2006 

RCRA National Meeting Glossary 

Arlington, VA CD Consent decree MRSPP Munitions Response Site Prioritization 

Protocol 

January 26 and 27, 2006 

2nd Waste Management


Finance Forum


http://


www.euromoneyenergy.com/


default.asp?Page=11&eventid=


ECK122&site=energy


London, England


February 13-17, 2006 

Groundwater Pollution and 

Hydrology Course 

http://www.wastenews.com/elib/ 

event_details.html?id=239 

Orlando, FL 

March 20-23, 2006 

Joint Services Environmental 

Management Conference & 

Exposition 

http://www.wastenews.com/elib/ 

event_details.html?id=304 

Denver, CO 

June 21-23, 2006 

Waste Management 2006: Third 

International Conference on 

Waste Management and the 

Environment 

http://www.wessex.ac.uk/ 

conferences/2006/waste06/ 

Malta 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental


Response, Compensation, and NPL National Priorities List


Liability Act 

OBCR Office of Brownfields Cleanup and ` 

Redevelopment DERP Defense Environmental Restoration


Program


OECA Office of Enforcement Compliance


DoD Department of Defense and Assurance 

DOJ Department of Justice OSRE Office of Site Remediation Enforcement 

EAB Environmental Appeals Board OSW Office of Solid Waste 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency 

Response 

FFRRO Federal Facilities Restoration and


Reuse Office PAHs Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons


MMRP Military Munitions Response Program PCBs Polychlorinated biphenyls 

cleanupnews http://www.epa.gov/compliance/about/offices/osre.html 

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 comment on the newsletter contact Richard W. Popino, PhD REM, at MC-2271A, U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, email:popino.rick@epa.gov. 

To be added or deleted from the subscriber list, contact Christine Rueter at: christine.rueter@dpra.com 

To receive CleanupNews by email, subscribe at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/listserv/ 

cleanup.html. 

Richard W. Popino, PhD REM, editor-in-chief 

EPA Review Board; Diane Bartosh, Sandra 

Connors, Karen Ellenberger, Elliott Gilberg, Jeff 

Heimerman, Kenneth Patterson, Neilima Senjalia, 

Suzanne Wells 

Christine Rueter and Cheryl Mueller 

DPRA Inc., writers 

Mary Spencer, 

DPRA Inc., designer