Document ID: EPA-HQ-SFUND-2003-0016-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2003-04-07T04:00Z

INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
(
ICR
#
1488.05)
FOR
SUPERFUND
SITE
EVALUATION
AND
HAZARD
RANKING
SYSTEM
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response
Office
of
Emergency
and
Remedial
Response
State,
Tribal
and
Site
Identification
Center
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
N.
W.
Washington,
DC
20460
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
FINAL
i
June
26,
2003
1
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1(
a)
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1(
b)
Short
Characterization/
Abstract
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
of
the
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
3
NON­
DUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3(
a)
Non­
duplication
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3(
b)
Public
Notice
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3(
c)
Consultations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
3(
f)
Confidentiality
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4(
a)
Respondent's
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(
SIC)
Codes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4(
b)
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
5
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
­
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
5(
a)
EPA
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
6
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
22
6(
d)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
6(
e)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
6(
f)
Burden
Statement
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
7
REFERENCES
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
Appendix
A:
CERCLA
Documentation
Appendix
B:
HRS
LIST
OF
EXHIBITS
June
26,
2003
ii
FINAL
Exhibit
1
Major
Components
of
EPA's
Superfund
Site
Assessment
Process
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
Exhibit
2
Use
and
Users
of
Site
Assessment
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
Exhibit
3
Detailed
Site
Assessment
Activities
and
Data
Collected
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
Exhibit
4
EPA's
Integrated
Assessment
Process
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
Exhibit
5
Annual
Respondent
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
Exhibit
6
Site
Assessment
Screening
Process
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
Exhibit
7
Annual
Respondent
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
Exhibit
8
Annual
Agency
Burden
and
Cost
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
22
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
1
55
Federal
Register
51532
(
12/
14/
90)
as
codified
in
40
CFR
Part
300,
Appendix
A.
2
USEPA,
Improving
Site
Assessment:
Pre­
CERCLIS
Screening
Assessments,
OSWER
9375.2­
11FS,
October
1999.
3
USEPA,
Guidance
for
Performing
Site
Inspections
Under
CERCLA,
Interim
Final,
OSWER
9345.1­
05,
September
1992.

FINAL
1
June
26,
2003
1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
1(
a)
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
This
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
is
number
1488.05
and
is
entitled,
"
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System."
It
is
a
revised
version
of
the
current
ICR
for
the
Superfund
site
assessment
process.

1(
b)
Short
Characterization/
Abstract
In
1980,
Congress
enacted
the
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation,
and
Liability
Act
(
CERCLA)
to
address
threats
posed
to
human
health
and
the
environment
by
uncontrolled
releases
of
hazardous
substances
into
the
environment.
Section
105
of
CERCLA
required
EPA
to
establish
criteria
for
determining
priorities
among
releases
or
threatened
releases
of
hazardous
substances
for
the
purpose
of
taking
remedial
action.
In
response,
EPA
developed
a
model
to
systematically
rank
hazardous
waste
sites
with
regard
to
their
relative
threat
to
human
health
and
the
environment.
This
model,
the
Hazard
Ranking
System
(
HRS),
was
adopted
by
EPA
in
1982
and
later
revised
in
December
1990.
Uniform
application
of
the
HRS
by
the
EPA,
States,
Tribes,
and
their
contractors
enables
EPA
to
identify
and
prioritize
hazardous
waste
sites
that
warrant
further
investigation.
1
EPA
uses
a
multi­
phase
evaluation
to
determine
and
implement
the
appropriate
responses
to
releases
of
hazardous
substances
to
the
environment.
Each
site
undergoes
a
minimal
screening
process
(
CERCLIS
pre­
screening)
2
to
determine
whether
the
CERCLA
site
assessment
process
is
appropriate
for
the
site
or
if
another
option
is
more
appropriate.
Once
a
hazardous
waste
site
is
identified
as
appropriate
for
the
site
assessment
process,
EPA
enters
information
about
the
site
in
a
database
called
the
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation
and
Liability
Information
System
(
CERCLIS).
Sites
listed
in
CERCLIS
generally
go
through
the
site
assessment
process.
During
the
site
assessment
process,
EPA
and
States
collect
data
to
identify,
evaluate,
and
rank
hazardous
waste
sites
based
on
HRS
criteria.

Throughout
the
site
assessment
process,
the
HRS
is
used
as
a
screening
tool
for
determining
whether
a
site
should
be
included
on
the
National
Priorities
List
(
NPL).
The
NPL
is
a
list
of
those
sites
that
are
priorities
for
long­
term
evaluation
and
remedial
response.
Sites
scoring
28.50
or
greater
are
eligible
for
placement
on
the
NPL.
3
A
more
detailed
explanation
of
how
data
collected
during
the
site
assessment
process
are
used
by
the
Superfund
program
is
provided
in
Section
2.2,
Use
and
Users
of
the
Data.

The
site
assessment
process
includes
three
primary
screening
activities:
Preliminary
Assessment
(
PA),
Site
Inspection
(
SI),
and
HRS
scoring
package
development.
During
the
PA,
EPA
collects
and
reviews
readily
available
information
(
i.
e.,
site
history,
drinking
water
sources,
surrounding
populations)
about
a
site
to
determine
whether
a
threat
or
potential
threat
exists
and
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
4
USEPA,
Hazard
Ranking
System
Guidance
Manual,
Interim
Final,
OSWER
9345.1­
07,
November
1992.

June
26,
2003
2
FINAL
Major
Components
of
EPA's
Superfund
Site
Assessment
Process
Pre­
CERCLIS
Screen/
Site
Discovery
Preliminary
Assessment
(
PA)
Site
Inspection
(
SI)
Hazard
Ranking
System
(
HRS)
National
Priorities
List
(
NPL)

Removal
Actions
May
Occur
At
Any
Time
NFRAP
and
Deferred
(
Information
provided
to
states
&
other
regulatory
agencies)
to
decide
if
further
investigation
is
needed.
During
an
SI,
EPA
further
evaluates
the
extent
to
which
a
site
presents
a
threat
to
human
health
or
the
environment
by
performing
fieldwork
to
determine
whether
hazardous
substances
are
present
at
the
site
and
are
migrating
to
the
surrounding
environment.
There
also
is
an
effort
to
review
data
when
it
first
comes
to
EPA's
attention.
Through
pre­
CERCLIS
screening
EPA
can
ensure
that
uncontaminated
or
lightly
contaminated
sites
are
not
arbitrarily
entered
into
CERCLIS
for
Superfund­
financed
cleanup,
evaluation,
or
oversight
activities.
Low­
cost
mechanisms
are
used
to
determine
whether
the
site
is
already
being
addressed
by
another
party
and
to
define
EPA's
role/
potential
role
at
the
site.
At
the
conclusion
of
each
phase
of
the
site
assessment
process,
EPA
applies
the
HRS
model
to
derive
a
preliminary
site
score.
The
site
score
is
used
to
determine
whether
further
investigation
is
necessary
or
whether
the
site
should
receive
a
"
No
Further
Remedial
Action
Planned"
(
NFRAP)
designation.
A
NFRAP
designation
means
that
further
remedial
assessment
under
the
Federal
Superfund
program
is
not
planned,
although
Superfund
removal
assessment
and/
or
action
may
still
take
place.
Aside
from
the
NFRAP
designation,
sites
are
subject
to
several
other
outcomes.
Sites
that
present
an
immediate
danger
to
human
health
and
the
environment
may
be
referred
to
the
removal
program
for
emergency
response.
Sites
can
also
be
referred
to
the
State
or
to
other
programs
for
further
consideration
(
i.
e.,
deferral
to
RCRA
Corrective
Action
Authorities).
4
Exhibit
1
outlines
the
major
components
of
the
site
assessment
process
from
pre­
CERCLIS
screening/
site
discovery
to
NPL
listing.
More
detailed
information
on
the
general
activities
performed
and
data
collected
during
the
Superfund
site
assessment
process
is
provided
in
Section
3.2,
Data
Items
and
Respondent
Activities.

Exhibit
1.
Major
Components
of
EPA's
Superfund
Site
Assessment
Process
Sites
investigated
by
EPA
range
in
complexity,
therefore
the
site
assessment
process
is
designed
to
adapt
investigations
to
expedite
site
decisions.
Some
sites
may
require
that
specialized
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
5
USEPA,
Guidance
for
Performing
Site
Inspections
Under
CERCLA,
Interim
Final,
OSWER
9345.1­
05,
September
1992.
6
USEPA,
Site
Inspection
Prioritization
Guidance,
OSWER
9345.1­
15FS,
August
1993.
7
Section
104
of
CERCLA
can
be
found
in
Appendix
A
FINAL
3
June
26,
2003
field
data
gathering
techniques
such
as
ground
water
monitoring
well
installation
be
used
to
adequately
assess
the
risks.
In
such
cases,
an
Expanded
Site
Inspection
(
ESI)
may
be
needed
to
produce
reliable
HRS
data.
ESIs
test
hypotheses
developed
during
the
SI
by
collecting
additional
data
beyond
that
collected
in
the
SI.
5
A
Site
Inspection
Prioritization
(
SIP)
was
established
by
EPA
as
a
temporary
intermediate
step
in
the
site
assessment
process
to
collect
additional
information
for
sites
that
were
placed
on
hold
prior
to
publication
of
the
HRS
final
rule
in
December
1990.
Additional
information
was
needed
for
these
sites
in
order
to
meet
the
data
requirements
of
the
revised
HRS.
6
EPA
authorized
SIPs
only
for
sites
that
had
an
SI
performed
prior
to
August
1992.

In
an
effort
to
reduce
the
amount
of
time
and
money
spent
on
a
given
site,
some
phases
of
the
site
assessment
process
may
be
combined.
For
example,
a
single
combined
PA/
SI
investigation
instead
of
the
two
separate
investigations
may
be
performed.
In
some
cases,
removal
site
evaluation
activities
can
be
coordinated
with
site
assessment
activities
to
form
a
single
investigation
called
an
Integrated
Removal
and
Remedial
Site
Evaluation
(
Integrated
Assessment).
When
applicable,
Integrated
Assessments
reduce
duplicative
efforts,
saving
both
time
and
money
for
all
parties
involved.
In
addition,
an
ESI/
Remedial
Investigation
(
RI)
may
be
performed
on
a
site.
An
ESI/
RI
combines
the
data­
gathering
activities
that
are
common
to
both
the
ESI
and
the
RI
and
are
recommended
at
sites
where
conditions
indicate
that
the
HRS
score
will
be
above
28.50.
ESI/
RIs
do
not
necessarily
replace
RIs
because
the
characteristics
of
a
site
may
not
be
known
prior
to
completion
of
an
ESI/
RI.
Occasionally,
new
information
on
sites
previously
assessed
is
identified.
In
these
cases,
a
Site
Reassessment
may
be
performed
as
a
supplement
to
the
previous
assessment
work.

State
and
Tribal
involvement
in
the
Superfund
program
has
grown
over
time.
States
are
now
involved
in
virtually
every
phase
of
the
Superfund
decision­
making
process.
CERCLA
requires
EPA
to
coordinate
with
States
and
Tribes
when
the
Federal
government
leads
or
oversees
the
site
response.

The
annual
burden
incurred
by
States
and
Tribes
for
collecting
information
necessary
to
move
a
site
through
the
site
assessment
process
is
a
function
of
the
average
estimated
hours
per
site
assessment
activity
multiplied
by
the
average
number
of
sites
assessed
per
year.
In
order
to
calculate
the
burden
for
this
ICR,
EPA
Regions
provided
information
on
the
burden
of
site
assessment
activities
on
State
and
Tribal
respondents.

Projected
FY01
data
provided
by
EPA
Headquarters
and
Regional
information
from
the
States
and
Tribes
show
that
the
estimated
annual
hour
and
cost
burden
to
State
and
Tribal
respondents
for
performing
site
assessment
activities
is
approximately
230,533
hours
and
$
18,376,362,
respectively.
One
hundred
percent
of
the
respondent
cost
($
18,376,362)
is
reimbursed
by
the
EPA
through
cooperative
agreements
(
CAs)
as
set
forth
by
Section
104(
d)
of
CERCLA.
7
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
June
26,
2003
4
FINAL
Section
6.0
of
this
document,
Estimating
the
Burden
and
Cost
of
Collection,
provides
a
more
detailed
discussion
of
the
burden
to
respondents.

This
ICR
is
prepared
using
the
guidance
contained
in
the
Office
of
Policy,
Planning,
and
Evaluation's
(
OPPE's)
February
1999
ICR
Handbook.
This
document
is
the
most
recent
document
for
preparing
an
ICR
and
follows
the
provisions
of
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
44
U.
S.
C.
§
1320)
and
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
guidelines.
It
can
be
found
on
the
EPA
website
at
www.
epa.
gov/
icr.

2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
CERCLA's
passage
in
1980
launched
the
Superfund
program
that
provided
EPA
the
authority
needed
to
respond
to
threats
posed
by
the
uncontrolled
releases
of
hazardous
substances
into
the
environment.
The
fundamental
purpose
of
the
Superfund
program
is
to
address
threats
and
protect
human
health
and
the
environment
from
releases
or
potential
releases
of
hazardous
substances
from
abandoned
or
uncontrolled
hazardous
waste
sites.
The
HRS
is
a
crucial
part
of
EPA's
Superfund
program
because
its
application
enables
EPA
to
evaluate
the
relative
threats
of
hazardous
waste
sites.
Collecting
uniform
information
during
the
site
assessment
process
enables
EPA
to
consistently
apply
the
HRS
model.
Consistent
application
of
HRS
by
respondents
enables
EPA
to
identify
and
classify
those
releases
or
threatened
releases
of
hazardous
substances
that
warrant
further
investigation
in
anticipation
of
corrective
actions.

CERCLA
establishes
the
legal
authority
to
perform
site
assessment
and
NPL
listing
activities.
Specifically:

Section
105
of
CERCLA
required
that
the
National
Oil
and
Hazardous
Substance
Contingency
Plan
(
NCP)
be
amended
to
include
the
following:

"[
C]
riteria
for
determining
priorities
among
releases
throughout
the
United
States
for
the
purpose
of
taking
remedial
action...
Criteria
and
priorities...
shall
be
based
upon
relative
risk
or
danger
to
public
health,
welfare,
or
the
environment...
taking
into
account...
the
population
at
risk,
the
hazard
potential
of
the
hazardous
substances...
the
potential
for
contamination
of
drinking
water
supplies,
the
potential
for
direct
human
contact,
the
potential
for
destruction
of
sensitive
ecosystems...
and
other
appropriate
factors."

To
meet
these
requirements,
the
HRS
was
adopted
and
enacted
as
part
of
the
revised
NCP
in
July
1982.
Section
105(
8)(
B)
of
CERCLA
requires
the
NCP
to
include
a
"
list....
of
national
priorities
among
the
known
releases
or
threatened
releases
throughout
the
United
States..."
Application
of
the
HRS
determines
whether
an
uncontrolled
hazardous
waste
site
should
be
included
on
the
National
Priorities
List
(
NPL).
Each
State
is
also
required
to
"
establish
and
submit
for
consideration
by
the
President
priorities
for
remedial
action
among
known
releases
and
potential
releases
in
that
State
based
upon
the
criteria"
in
Section
105(
8)(
A).
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
FINAL
5
June
26,
2003
In
1986,
CERCLA
was
amended
by
the
Superfund
Amendments
and
Reauthorization
Act
(
SARA).
EPA
modified
the
HRS
in
1990
so
that,
"
to
the
maximum
extent
feasible,
[
it]
accurately
assesses
the
relative
degree
of
risk
to
human
health
and
the
environment
posed
by
sites
and
facilities
subject
to
review."
Section
105
of
SARA
mandates
that
the
HRS
take
into
account,
to
the
extent
possible,
the
following:

Human
health
risks
associated
with
the
contamination
or
potential
contamination
of
surface
water
that
is
or
can
be
used
for
recreation
or
potable
water
consumption;

Damage
to
natural
resources
that
may
affect
the
food
chain;

Contamination
or
potential
contamination
of
the
ambient
air,
which
is
associated
with
the
release
or
threatened
release.

Section
118
of
CERCLA
requires
that
a
high
priority
be
given
to
facilities
where
the
release
of
hazardous
substances
or
pollutants
has
resulted
in
the
closing
of
drinking
water
wells
or
a
principal
drinking
water
supply.

Section
125
of
CERCLA
requires
the
HRS
to
assess
sites
containing
a
substantial
volume
of
waste
as
described
in
Section
3001(
b)(
3)(
A)(
I)
of
the
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Act.
These
wastes
include
fly
ash
wastes,
bottom
ash
wastes,
slag
wastes,
and
flue
gas
emission
control
wastes
generated
primarily
from
the
combustion
of
coal
or
other
fossil
fuels.
Section
125
of
CERCLA
requires
EPA
to
consider
each
of
the
following
site­
specific
characteristics:

Degree
of
risk
to
human
health
and
the
environment

Quantity,
toxicity,
and
concentrations
of
hazardous
constituents

Extent
of
and
the
potential
for
the
release
of
hazardous
constituents
into
the
environment.

The
specific
sections
of
CERCLA
cited
above
can
be
found
in
Appendix
A.

2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
Of
The
Data
The
data
collected
through
the
site
assessment
process
described
in
this
ICR
are
used
to
support
a
site
decision
regarding
the
need
for
further
Superfund
action.
The
various
data
elements
gathered,
which
relate
to
the
HRS
criteria,
are
used
to
complete
the
HRS
score.
All
of
this
information
is
used
within
the
Superfund
program
to:

Identify
sites
that
pose
a
potential
threat
to
human
health
and
the
environment;

Determine
if
sites
pose
a
potential
hazard
and
whether
further
action
is
necessary;

Respond
to
sites
where
removal
actions
are
warranted;

Rank
sites
based
on
the
HRS;

Set
priorities
for
further
assessment
work;

Allocate
resources
(
e.
g.,
money,
staff);
and

Evaluate
Superfund
program
performance
Several
scoring
tools
can
be
used:
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
June
26,
2003
6
FINAL
E
P
A
H
E
A
D
Q
U
A
R
T
E
R
S
°
L
is
t
N
P
L
s
i
t
e
s
°
Q
A
H
R
S
p
a
c
k
a
g
e
s
°
P
r
e
p
a
r
e
s
it
e
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
g
u
id
a
n
c
e
m
a
t
e
r
ia
ls
°
M
a
in
t
a
in
C
E
R
C
L
I
S
°
E
s
t
a
b
lis
h
n
a
t
io
n
a
l
S
u
p
e
r
f
u
n
d
b
u
d
g
e
t
°
T
r
a
c
k
R
e
g
io
n
a
l
a
n
d
S
t
a
t
e
S
u
p
e
r
f
u
n
d
p
e
r
f
o
rm
a
n
c
e
°
R
e
s
p
o
n
d
to
C
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
°
R
e
s
p
o
n
d
to
in
f
o
rm
a
t
io
n
in
q
u
ir
ie
s
(
F
O
IA
)
E
P
A
R
E
G
IO
N
S
°
O
v
e
r
s
e
e
s
it
e
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
°
R
e
v
ie
w
H
R
S
s
c
o
r
e
s
°
S
u
p
p
ly
in
p
u
t
to
C
E
R
C
L
I
S
°
T
r
a
c
k
s
i
t
e
s
t
a
t
u
s
°
C
o
o
r
d
in
a
t
e
w
ith
o
t
h
e
r
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
°
M
a
in
t
a
in
s
it
e
f
ile
s
°
R
e
s
p
o
n
d
to
in
f
o
rm
a
t
io
n
in
q
u
ir
ie
s
(
F
O
IA
)
S
T
A
T
E
S
°
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
s
it
e
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
°
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
H
R
S
s
c
o
r
e
s
°
T
r
a
c
k
s
i
t
e
s
t
a
t
u
s
°
C
o
o
r
d
in
a
t
e
w
ith
o
t
h
e
r
e
n
v
ir
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
°
M
a
in
t
a
in
s
it
e
f
ile
s
°
R
e
s
p
o
n
d
to
in
f
o
rm
a
t
io
n
in
q
u
ir
ie
s
(
F
O
IA
)
In
addition,
EPA
Headquarters'
staff
use
the
information
collected
to
aid
in
the
general
management
and
oversight
of
the
Superfund
program.
Currently,
EPA
uses
the
information
to
assess
resource
needs;
allocate
funds;
prepare
site
assessment
guidance
materials;
list
NPL
sites;
conduct
quality
assurance
(
QA)
reviews
of
HRS
packages;
and
track
Regional
and
State
Superfund
performance.
Headquarters
also
uses
the
information
to
maintain
the
CERCLIS
database,
respond
to
information
requests,
and
perform
analyses
for
EPA
management,
OMB,
Congress,
and
the
general
public.

Staff
at
the
ten
EPA
Regions
use
Superfund
site
assessment
data
for
purposes
similar
to
Headquarters
­
to
develop
operating
budgets
and
program
plans;
allocate
resources;
track
State­
by­
State
performance;
respond
to
information
inquiries
under
the
Freedom
of
Information
Act
(
FOIA);
and
supply
input
to
CERCLIS.
Regions
must
also
respond
to
inquiries
by
EPA
Headquarters.
As
a
function
of
their
program
authority,
EPA
Regions
also
have
the
responsibility
for
overseeing
site
assessments
and
generating
HRS
scores.

State
and
Tribal
use
of
site
assessment
data
is
more
site­
specific.
States
use
the
data
to
perform
site
assessments;
generate
HRS
scores;
maintain
site
files;
track
site
status;
and
respond
to
information
inquiries
under
FOIA.
States
also
use
the
information
gathered
to
maintain
their
own
State
files.

Exhibit
2
summarizes
the
use
and
users
of
site
assessment
and
HRS
information.

Exhibit
2.
Use
and
Users
of
Site
Assessment
Data
3.
NON­
DUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
FINAL
7
June
26,
2003
3(
a)
Non­
duplication
The
primary
sources
data
required
to
complete
site
assessments
and
prepare
HRS
packages
are
Federal,
State,
and
local
government
agencies
and
private
parties.
Data
are
gathered
through
the
performance
of
actual
on­
site
investigations
(
e.
g.,
samples,
on­
site
measurements).
Much
of
the
information
(
i.
e.,
site
history,
population
surrounding
the
site,
location
of
drinking
water
supplies)
is
collected
from
readily
available
public
information
sources,
thereby
minimizing
the
amount
of
collection
of
this
primary
information.

Except
for
federal
facilities,
the
field
data
gathered
during
the
site
assessment
process
are
not
generally
collected
by
any
other
Federal
agency.
In
the
case
of
federal
facilities,
the
appropriate
federal
agency
collects
the
necessary
data,
prepares
the
assessment
report
(
e.
g.,
PA,
SI),
and
submits
the
report
to
EPA
for
review.
Since
EPA
only
reviews
these
reports,
there
is
no
duplication
of
effort.

Generally,
the
SI
is
the
first
investigation
to
collect
and
analyze
waste
and
environmental
samples.
In
instances
where
prior
sampling
has
been
completed
and
analytical
data
has
been
collected,
performance
of
additional
sampling
may
not
be
necessary.

3(
b)
Public
Notice
A
notice
stating
this
ICR
was
up
for
renewal
was
published
in
the
Federal
Register
on
April
26,
2001
(
66
FR
20987).
This
initiated
a
60­
day
comment
period
which
closed
on
June
25,
2001.
No
comments
were
received
during
the
comment
period.

3(
c)
Consultations
In
order
to
calculate
the
burden
of
site
assessment
activities
on
the
States
and
Tribes
and
present
the
results
in
this
report,
State
and
Tribal
burden
information
was
based
on
FY
2001
site
assessment
projections.
As
part
of
obtaining
the
State
and
Tribal
burden
information,
EPA
Regional
offices
were
contacted
to
determine
the
nature
of
site
assessment
activities
performed
by
States
and
Tribes
in
that
Region
and
the
costs
(
dollars
and
hours)
associated
with
these
activities.

3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
Yearly
collection
activities
associated
with
the
site
assessment
process
are
based
on
the
number
of
sites
discovered
and
the
number
of
sites
in
the
CERCLIS
inventory
needing
assessment
work.
The
application
of
various
guidance
documents
and
other
directives
allows
for
the
combination
of
several
stages
of
the
site
assessment
process
that
result
in
a
minimization
of
the
data
collection
burden.
In
addition,
pre­
CERCLIS
screening
avoids
the
discovery
of
sites
that
are
not
appropriate
for
the
CERCLA
site
assessment
process.

3(
e)
General
Guidelines
The
reporting
frequency
guideline
set
forth
in
5
CFR
1320.6
of
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
Guidelines
may
not
be
met
due
to
the
following
circumstances:
frequency
of
site
discoveries;
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
8
As
stated
in
the
Office
of
Policy,
Planning,
and
Evaluation's
(
OPPE's)
February
1999
ICR
Handbook,
sensitive
questions
are
those
concerning
sexual
behavior,
attitudes,
religious
beliefs,
or
matters
usually
considered
private.

June
26,
2003
8
FINAL
time
required
for
site
evaluation
and
scoring;
and
the
number
of
NPL
update
proposals
performed
during
a
given
year.
Collection
of
information
occurs
continually
as
new
sites
are
identified.
EPA
is
currently
operating
NPL
development
activities
so
that
as
sites
with
higher
priorities
are
identified,
the
information
is
forwarded
to
the
appropriate
office
for
review
and
validation.

3(
f)
Confidentiality
Application
of
the
HRS
does
not
typically
require
collection
of
information
that
is
considered
confidential.
EPA
handles
instances
where
confidentiality
claims
are
asserted
by
private
parties
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis.
States
and
Tribes
(
the
respondents)
have
been
informed
that
any
confidential
information
submitted
to
document
an
HRS
score
must
be
marked
clearly
as
such
and
sent
under
separate
cover
so
that
it
is
properly
handled.

3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
Sensitive
questions
are
not
associated
with
the
information
collection
activities
performed
during
site
assessment
and
HRS
score
preparation.
8
4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
4(
a)
Respondents
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(
SIC)
Codes
Activities
conducted
as
part
of
the
Superfund
site
assessment
process
require
that
information
be
gathered
from
Federal,
State,
and
local
government
agencies.
While
the
performance
of
the
various
phases
of
site
assessment
will
require
the
involvement
of
State
and
local
agencies,
identification
of
the
particular
State
or
local
agency
involved
is
not
possible
until
a
site
has
been
identified.
SIC
codes
associated
with
Government
Environmental
Protection
Agencies
fall
under
the
two­
digit
Environmental
Quality
SIC
code
95
and
under
the
three­
digit
Housing
SIC
code
951.

4(
b)
Information
Requested
The
data
collection
requirements
associated
with
the
various
phases
of
the
site
assessment
process
are
designed
to
enable
the
consistent
application
of
the
HRS.
Information
gathering
activities
are
intended
to
help
EPA
determine
whether
hazardous
substances
are
present
at
the
site,
and
whether
they
are
migrating
to
the
surrounding
environment.
Data
required
for
the
site
assessment
process
and
HRS
score
preparation
are
often
collected
from
readily
available
public
information
sources
such
as
State
and
local
government
offices,
Regional
EPA
offices,
and
potentially
responsible
parties
(
PRPs).
The
amount
of
data
collected
during
the
site
assessment
process
and
the
activities
associated
with
collection
vary
from
site
to
site
depending
on
the
level
of
proposed
threat.
Data
collection
activities
also
vary
from
phase
to
phase
of
the
site
assessment
process
based
on
the
type
of
information
needed
to
satisfy
the
HRS
requirements
such
as
waste
characterization
and
target
assessments.
Although
reporting
activities
(
i.
e.,
data
collection,
report
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
9
Based
on
actual
LOE
and
clerical
figures
related
to
site
evaluation
activities
over
a
five­
year
period.

FINAL
9
June
26,
2003
preparation)
comprise
the
majority
of
the
site
assessment
effort,
approximately
13
percent
of
the
total
effort
can
be
attributed
to
recordkeeping
activities
(
e.
g.,
developing
and
maintaining
databases,
entering
data,
and
filing).
9
This
section
provides
a
detailed
description
of
the
type
of
data
that
needs
to
be
collected
to
complete
a
site
assessment
and
the
activities
associated
with
this
collection
process.
It
also
provides
estimates
of
the
annual
burden
incurred
by
States
and
Tribes
for
collecting
information
necessary
to
move
a
site
through
the
site
assessment
process.
In
order
to
determine
this
burden,
the
EPA
Regions
provided
information
about
State
and
Tribal
site
assessment
activities
and
FY01
projections
of
number
of
activities,
average
hours,
and
average
dollars.

Collection
activities
are
discussed
for
the
major
phases
of
site
assessment
­
Pre­
CERCLIS
Screening,
Preliminary
Assessment,
Site
Inspection,
and
HRS
Package
Preparation.
Other
assessment
activities
are
also
described,
including:
Combined
Preliminary
Assessment/
Site
Inspection,
Integrated
Removal/
Remedial
Evaluation,
Site
Inspection
Prioritization,
Expanded
Site
Inspection,
and.
Expanded
Site
Inspection/
Remedial
Investigation.

Exhibit
3
provides
an
overview
of
the
activities
performed
and
data
items
collected
for
the
various
phases
of
site
assessment
and
illustrates
where
the
sub­
phases
may
be
utilized
and
the
various
outcomes.
Section
6.0,
Estimating
the
Burden
and
Cost
of
Collection,
provides
the
estimated
average
hours
associated
with
each
of
the
phases
of
the
site
assessment
process.

Pre­
CERCLIS
Screening
Pre­
CERCLIS
screening
is
the
process
of
reviewing
data
on
a
potential
hazardous
waste
site
brought
to
EPA's
attention
to
determine
whether
it
should
be
entered
into
CERCLIS
for
further
evaluation
or
response
action.
Pre­
CERCLIS
screening
is
intended
to
be
a
low­
cost
effort
to
ensure
uncontaminated
or
lightly
contaminated
sites
are
not
arbitrarily
entered
into
CERCLIS
for
Superfund­
financed
evaluation,
cleanup,
or
oversight
activities.
The
process
can
be
initiated
through
the
use
of
several
mechanisms,
such
as
a
phone
call
or
referral
by
a
State
or
other
Federal
agency.
Following
notification
of
a
potential
site
to
EPA,
Regions
generally
contact
State,
Tribal,
or
other
appropriate
Federal
staff
to
determine
whether
the
site
is
already
being
addressed
by
another
party
and
to
define
EPA's
role
at
the
site.
In
FY01,
EPA
projects
that
768
Pre­
CERCLIS
screenings
will
be
performed,
of
which
approximately
730
will
be
State/
Tribal­
lead
(
a
State
or
Tribe
is
conducting
the
activity).

Exhibit
3.
Detailed
Site
Assessment
Activities
and
Data
Collected
Preliminary
Assessment
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
June
26,
2003
10
FINAL
Pre­
CERCLIS
Screening
Assessment
PA
SI
Combined
PA/
SI
SIP
Integrated
Remov
al
Assessment/
Remedial
Ev
aluation
ESI
HRS
Package
Preparation
ESI/
RI

Non­
sampling
data
colllection

Report
Preparation

Work
Plan
Preparation

Non­
Sampling
data
collection

Site
Reconnaissance

PA­
Scoresheets
completion

PA­
Score
generation

Report
peneration

Work
plan
preparation

Sample
plan
preparation

Health
and
saf
ety
plan
preparation

Non­
sampling
data
collection

Site
reconnaissance

Sample
Collection

Data
Validation

SI­
Scoresheet
completion

SUPER­
Sreen
generation

Report
preparation
Site
Reassessment

Work
plan
preparation

Sample
plan
preparation

Non­
sampling
data
collection

Focused
sample
collection

Score
update

Report
generation

File
rev
iew

Draf
t
score

Revise
score

Prepare
Docket

Site
name,
location

Superf
und
eligibility

CERCLIS
entry
decision

Site
name,
location
and
mailing
address

Historical
site
information

Current/
past
owners
&
operators

Identif
ication
of
potential
sources

Location
of
drinking
water
supplies

Samples

Additional
site
history

Inf
ormation
on
env
ironmental
setting

Samples

Additional
f
ield
data

Pathway
s

Likelihood
of
release

Waste
characteristics

Targets
AUTHORITY/
REGULATION
CERCLA
/
NCP
(
HRS
RULE)
SITE
ASSESSMENT
RESPONDENT
SITE
ACTIVITIES
DATA
ITEMS
The
PA
is
a
relatively
rapid,
low­
cost
compilation
of
readily
available
information
pertaining
to
the
site
and
its
surroundings.
In
FY01,
EPA
projected
that
343
PAs
will
be
performed,
of
which
approximately
221
will
be
State/
Tribal­
lead.
Data
collection
activities
performed
during
the
PA
emphasize
identifying
target
populations
and
other
targets
that
may
be
affected
by
contamination
at
the
site.
The
scope
of
the
PA
investigation
must
be
sufficient
to
complete
several
activities:

Reviewing
existing
information
about
the
site

Conducting
a
site
and
environmental
reconnaissance

Collecting
information
about
the
site,
with
the
emphasis
on
target
information
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
10
USEPA,
Guidance
for
Performing
Preliminary
Assessments
Under
CERCLA,
OSWER
9345.0­
01A,
September
1991.
11
USEPA,
Improving
Site
Assessment:
Abbreviated
Preliminary
Assessments,
OSWER
9375.2­
09FS,
October
1999
12
USEPA,
Guidance
for
Performing
Site
Inspections
Under
CERCLA,
Interim
Final,
OSWER
9345.1­
05,
September
1992.

FINAL
11
June
26,
2003

Evaluating
all
information
and
developing
a
preliminary
HRS
score

Preparing
a
brief
site
summary
report
and
site
characteristics
form.

Data
collected
during
PA
activities
include:
site­
specific
data,
historical
site
information,
potential
contamination
sources,
types
of
hazardous
waste,
target
information,
and
location
of
drinking
water
supplies.
10
Sampling
activities
are
not
performed
during
this
phase
of
site
assessment.

In
certain
situations,
an
Abbreviated
PA
(
APA)
11
may
be
conducted
in
lieu
of
a
full
PA.
APAs
are
appropriate
when
the
following
conditions
exist:

°
A
site
has
been
inappropriately
listed
in
CERCLIS
because
it
is
either
not
eligible
or
it
could
be
deferred
to
another
response
program;
°
Available
information
allows
EPA
to
make
an
early
decision
to
undertake
a
Combined
PA/
SI,
and
SI,
or
another
Superfund
investigation;
or
°
A
NFRAP
designation
can
be
made
without
completing
a
full
PA.

For
such
sites,
the
typical
PA
reporting
requirements
are
abbreviated.

Site
Inspection
SIs
build
upon
and
supplement
the
information
collected
during
the
PA.
The
primary
purpose
of
the
SI
is
to
gather
enough
information
to
determine
whether
further
Superfund
action
is
warranted
as
a
result
of
a
significant
threat
to
human
health
and
the
environment.
Looking
ahead
to
FY01,
256
SIs
are
projected
to
be
performed
nationally,
of
which
approximately
123
will
be
State/
Tribal­
lead.
During
the
SI,
the
respondent
will
collect
data
to
determine
whether
the
site
is
an
NPL
candidate
or
if
it
should
receive
a
NFRAP
or
other
decision
(
i.
e.,
deferral
to
RCRA,
further
assessment
needed).
The
SI
consists
of
five
major
activities:

Reviewing
available
information
including
analytical
data

Organizing
the
project
team
and
developing
an
SI
work
plan,
sample
plan,
health
and
safety
plan,
and
investigation­
derived
wastes
(
IDW)
plan

Performing
field
work
to
visually
inspect
the
site
and
collect
samples

Evaluating
all
information
and
developing
a
site
score
based
on
the
HRS

Preparing
a
site
summary
report.

Data
collected
during
the
SI
could
include
additional
non­
sampling
data
(
e.
g.,
field
observations,
site­
specific
information)
and
sampling
data
collected
during
the
on­
site
reconnaissance.
12
Combined
PA/
SI
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
13
USEPA,
Improving
Site
Assessment:
Combined
PA/
SI
Assessments,
OSWER
9375.2­
10FS,
October
1999
14
USEPA,
Site
Inspection
Prioritization
Guidance,
OSWER
9345.1­
15FS,
August
1993.
15
USEPA,
Improving
Site
Assessment:
Integrating
Removal
and
Remedial
Site
Evaluations,
OSWER­
9360.0­
39FS,
April
2000.

June
26,
2003
12
FINAL
If
site
conditions
warrant,
these
two
site
assessment
processes
(
PA
and
SI)
may
be
performed
simultaneously
as
a
Combined
PA/
SI13.
The
product
will
be
one
report
that
incorporates
all
the
requirements
of
PAs
and
SIs.
In
FY01,
EPA
projects
that
80
Combined
PA/
SIs
will
be
performed,
and
of
those
28
will
be
State/
Tribal­
lead.
As
with
the
separate
PA
and
SI
assessments,
a
combined
PA/
SI
is
performed
to
determine
what
steps,
if
any,
need
to
occur
next
at
the
site.

Site
Inspection
Prioritization
A
SIP
is
a
temporary
intermediate
step
in
the
site
assessment
process
designed
to
update
SIs
that
were
performed
before
publication
of
the
September
1992
Guidance
for
Performing
Site
Inspections
Under
CERCLA.
Changes
in
SI
guidance
were
made
in
response
to
revisions
to
the
HRS
in
December
1990.
During
the
SIP,
additional
data
are
gathered
to
make
screening
decisions
on
the
discrete
universe
of
sites
using
minimal
resources.
Data
gathering
activities
conducted
for
a
SIP
depend
on
the
amount
of
additional
information
necessary
to
update
existing
SIs
in
accordance
with
current
guidance
and
the
revised
HRS.
Typical
SIP
activities
include:

Reviewing
available
information
including
analytical
data

Organizing
the
project
team
and
developing
a
SIP
work
plan

Collecting
non­
sampling
data

Performing
limited
sampling
if
needed

Evaluating
all
information
and
updating
the
SI
score
based
on
the
revised
HRS

Preparing
a
brief
site
summary
report
(
usually
in
the
form
of
a
memo).

Data
gathered
during
the
SIP
may
include
correcting
additional
site
information
(
e.
g.,
historical
site
use)
and
target
information
(
e.
g.,
wells
within
four
miles,
surface
water
intakes,
fisheries
and
sensitive
environments
within
15
miles
downstream).
Limited
samples
may
also
be
collected
during
the
SIP
if
it
is
required
for
a
screening
decision.
14
While
the
SIP
backlog
has
been
essentially
completed,
this
activity
may
be
appropriate
at
some
older
sites
requiring
reassessment
if
and
when
new
information
is
identified.
In
FY01,
EPA
projects
that
41
SIPs
will
be
performed,
with
none
of
those
being
State/
Tribal­
lead.

Integrated
Removal/
Remedial
Evaluations
Site
assessment
and
removal
assessment
activities
may
be
combined
into
a
single
Integrated
Assessment
activity
if
the
appropriate
site
conditions
exist.
15
Integrated
Assessments
further
reduce
repetitive
tasks
and
costs
on
site
characterization.
The
three
most
common
types
of
Integrated
Assessments
include:
Integrated
removal
assessment
&
PA;
Integrated
removal
assessment
&
SI;
and
Integrated
removal
assessment
&
Combined
PA/
SI.
Looking
ahead
to
FY01,
EPA
projects
that
86
Integrated
Removal/
Remedial
Evaluations
will
be
performed,
and
of
those
65
will
be
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
16
USEPA,
Superfund
Program
Implementation
Manual
Fiscal
Year
2002/
2003,
EPA
9200.3­
14­
1G­
P,
April
2001.
17
USEPA,
Guidance
for
Performing
Site
Inspections
Under
CERCLA,
Interim
Final,
OSWER
9345.1­
05,
September
1992.
18
USEPA,
Superfund
Program
Implementation
Manual
Fiscal
Year
2002/
2003,
EPA
9200.3­
14­
1G­
P,
April
2001.

FINAL
13
June
26,
2003
State/
Tribal­
lead.
The
stand­
alone
requirements
from
the
site
assessment
and
removal
assessment
activities
must
be
met
even
though
the
data
will
be
integrated.
16
Expanded
Site
Inspection
The
ESI
further
investigates
critical
hypotheses
proposed
in
the
SI
regarding
the
nature
and
extent
of
contamination
at
a
site.
ESIs
typically
include
additional
site
sampling,
which
in
some
cases,
may
require
specialized
techniques
or
equipment
(
e.
g.,
installation
of
monitoring
wells,
geophysical
surveys).
Data
generated
are
used
to
modify
the
preliminary
HRS
score
developed
during
the
SI.
An
ESI
report
is
the
final
product
of
this
phase.
ESI
activities
should
include:

Organizing
the
project
team
and
developing
ESI
work
plan,
sample
plan,
health
and
safety
plan,
and
IDW
plan;

Investigating
and
documenting
critical
new
hypotheses
or
assumptions;

Collecting
samples
to
attribute
hazardous
substances
to
site
operations;

Collecting
samples
to
establish
representative
background
levels;

Collecting
other
missing
non­
sampling
data
for
pathways
of
concern;
and

Preparing
a
site
summary
report.

The
data
collected
during
the
ESI
may
be
used
to
support
previous
documentation
or
references,
and
fulfill
remaining
HRS
data
requirements
for
pathways
of
concern.
17
In
FY01,
EPA
projects
that
156
ESIs
will
be
performed,
and
of
those
61
will
be
State/
Tribal­
lead.

Expanded
Site
Inspection/
Remedial
Investigation
The
ESI
may
be
combined
with
a
remedial
investigation
to
produce
an
ESI/
RI.
An
RI
uses
site
characterization
data
to
develop
and
evaluate
effective
remedial
alternatives.
It
also
provides
assessments
of
risk
to
human
health
and
the
environment.
During
the
ESI/
RI,
site
characterization
data
common
to
both
ESI
and
RI
activities
are
collected.
It
is
recommended
to
perform
ESI/
RIs
on
sites
where
conditions
indicate
that
the
HRS
score
will
be
greater
than
28.50
and
remediation
will
be
necessary.
In
FY01,
EPA
projects
that
3
ESI/
RIs
will
be
performed,
with
none
of
those
being
State/
Tribal­
lead.
A
separate
RI
is
performed
subsequent
to
this
step,
however
the
RI
can
now
be
more
specific
and
accurate
by
utilizing
the
site
characterization
data
obtained
through
the
ESI/
RI.
18
Site
Reassessment
The
Site
Reassessment
represents
the
gathering
and
evaluation
of
new
information
on
a
site
previously
assessed
under
the
Federal
Superfund
Program
to
determine
whether
further
Superfund
attention
is
needed.
The
scope
of
work
for
a
Site
Reassessment
activity
is
flexible,
but
will
usually
represent
a
component
of
a
traditional
site
assessment
action.
As
such,
it
serves
as
a
supplement
to
previous
assessment
work,
and
not
as
a
replacement
for
traditional
assessment
activities
(
e.
g.,
PA,
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
19
USEPA,
Superfund
Program
Implementation
Manual
Fiscal
Year
2002/
2003,
EPA
9200.3­
14­
1G­
P,
April
2001.

June
26,
2003
14
FINAL
SI).
19
In
FY01,
EPA
projects
that
1,172
Site
Reassessments
will
be
performed,
and
of
those
249
will
be
State/
Tribal­
lead.

HRS
Package
Preparation
The
final
phase
in
the
site
assessment
process
is
HRS
package
preparation.
It
is
projected
that
72
sites
will
have
HRS
packages
prepared
in
FY01;
of
those,
8
will
be
State/
Tribal­
lead.
The
primary
activities
associated
with
this
phase
of
site
assessment
are:

File
review

Determining
site
score

Revising
site
score

Preparing
the
documentation
record
and
supporting
information.

After
completion
of
the
site
evaluation,
compiled
data
are
used
to
score
a
site
using
scoresheets
based
on
the
HRS
model.
Under
the
HRS,
numerical
values
are
assigned
to
a
site
based
on
various
aspects
of
the
site
and
its
immediate
surroundings
through
the
evaluation
of
four
pathways:
(
1)
ground
water
migration;
(
2)
surface
water
migration;
(
3)
soil
exposure;
and
(
4)
air
migration.
The
scoring
system
for
each
pathway
is
based
on
a
number
of
individual
factors
grouped
into
three
factor
categories:
(
1)
likelihood
of
release
or,
for
the
soil
exposure
pathway,
likelihood
of
exposure;
(
2)
waste
characteristics;
and
(
3)
targets
(
i.
e.,
potentially
affected
populations,
etc.).
Individual
factors
are
evaluated
and
the
factor
values
are
calculated
to
produce
four
category
values.
An
example
of
the
scoresheets
used
during
HRS
package
preparation
can
be
found
in
Appendix
B.

Federal
Facility
Reviews
EPA
plays
an
advisory
role
when
it
comes
to
PAs,
SIs,
and
ESIs
at
Federal
Facilities.
EPA
is
limited
to
reviewing
PA,
SI,
and
ESI
reports
developed
and
submitted
by
the
Federal
Agencies
responsible
for
a
given
Federal
Facility.
Upon
reviewing
the
PA,
SI,
or
ESI
for
completeness,
and
working
with
the
other
Federal
Agency
to
address
any
deficiencies,
EPA
then
determines
what
next
steps
are
appropriate
with
respect
to
NPL
listing.
It
is
projected
that
52
sites
will
have
Federal
Facility
reviews
in
FY01,
of
which
20
reviews
will
be
State/
Tribal
lead.

5.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
­
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
5(
a)
EPA
Activities
The
EPA
Regions
conduct
site
assessment
activities,
as
well
as
providing
oversight
for
State
and
Tribal
site
assessment
cooperative
agreements.
The
EPA
Regions
utilize
contractors
to
support
the
completion
of
the
site
assessment
activities
specified
in
Exhibit
3.
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
FINAL
15
June
26,
2003
In
addition
to
overseeing
the
activities
of
the
Regional
and
State
offices,
EPA
Headquarters
performs
the
following
functions
in
conjunction
with
the
activities
associated
with
site
assessment
and
HRS
score
generation:

Audits
and
reviews
data
submissions

Maintains
CERCLIS
database

Answers
respondent
questions.

EPA
Headquarters
is
responsible
for
ensuring
national
consistency
for
site
assessment
and
placement
of
sites
on
the
NPL.
A
quality
assurance
review
is
conducted
by
EPA
Headquarters
on
each
HRS
package
prepared
by
the
Regions,
States
or
Tribes.
EPA
Headquarters
uses
a
contractor
to
support
activities
relating
to
site
assessment,
HRS
scoring,
and
NPL
listing.

5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
Data
gathered
during
the
site
assessment
process
fall
into
three
main
categories:
historical;
field
related;
and
HRS
related.
At
each
phase
of
assessment,
data
from
these
broad
categories
are
collected
and
analyzed
in
order
to
screen
out
sites
that
do
not
need
to
be
addressed
by
the
Superfund
program.
As
a
site
moves
from
one
phase
to
another
in
the
site
assessment
process,
it
must
satisfy
an
increasing
number
of
data
requirements
for
the
HRS
model.
Sites
may
be
screened
out
of
the
site
assessment
process
based
on
a
Pre­
CERCLIS
screening
to
determine
whether
a
potential
hazardous
waste
site
should
be
added
into
CERCLIS
for
further
evaluation
or
response.
In
addition,
sites
may
also
be
screened
out
based
on
the
HRS
score
generated;
a
referral
to
other
Federal
and
State
programs;
or
a
referral
to
the
removal
program.

Following
entry
of
a
site
discovery
into
CERCLIS,
the
PA
process
is
initiated.
During
the
PA,
professional
judgment
is
used
to
make
assumptions
for
unavailable
data.
Information
collection
at
this
phase
is
accomplished
mostly
from
the
desktop
by
reviewing
historical
documents
and
conducting
telephone
interviews.
The
majority
of
the
data
collected
is
historical
information
and
target
information
for
the
HRS
model.
A
site
drive­
by
may
also
be
conducted
to
verify
the
site
location
and
status.
During
the
PA,
the
HRS
is
applied
through
the
use
of
PA­
Score
Sheets,
PAScore
software,
or
other
suitable
methods
to
generate
a
preliminary
HRS
score.
A
PA
report
is
the
final
product
of
this
phase.
Information
collected
during
the
PA
is
incorporated
into
subsequent
work.

A
site
that
is
recommended
for
continued
Superfund
evaluation
after
PA
completion
proceeds
to
the
SI
phase.
Data
collection
goals
for
this
phase
are
similar
in
scope
to
the
PA
with
the
addition
of
detailed
field
data
(
e.
g.,
site
samples).
During
this
phase,
a
field
team
conducts
an
on­
site
visit
and
sampling.
Site
sampling
is
limited
in
scope;
generally,
about
15
samples
are
collected
per
site.
The
media
selected
for
sampling
depends
on
the
perceived
threat
and
may
include
all
or
some
of
the
following:
ground
water,
surface
water,
sediment,
soil,
and
air.
Source
samples
may
also
be
taken
when
deemed
necessary.
Detailed
chemical
analysis
and
data
validation
is
performed
on
each
sample
taken.
During
the
SI,
the
HRS
model
is
applied
through
the
use
of
SI
Scoresheets
or
the
SUPERScreen
software
package
generating
a
preliminary
HRS
score.
An
SI
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
20
USEPA,
Superfund
Program
Implementation
Manual
Fiscal
Year
2002/
2003,
EPA
9200.3­
14­
1G­
P,
April
2001.
21
Ibid.

June
26,
2003
16
FINAL
report
is
the
final
product
of
this
phase.
Information
collected
during
the
SI
is
incorporated
into
subsequent
assessment
work.

Regions
can
combine
PA
and
SI
activities
where
warranted
by
site
conditions
to
reduce
repetitive
tasks
and
ultimately
costs.
The
combining
of
PA
and
SI
activities
is
known
as
a
Combined
PA/
SI
Assessment.
A
Combined
PA/
SI
may
be
contained
in
one
physical
report,
as
long
as
it
contains
all
of
the
elements
that
would
have
been
addressed
under
separate
PA
and
SI
reports.
As
with
the
separate
PA
and
SI
assessments,
a
Combined
PA/
SI
is
performed
to
determine
what
steps,
if
any,
need
to
occur
next
at
the
site.
20
A
site
that
is
recommended
for
continued
investigation
may
have
an
ESI
performed.
At
this
stage,
specific
information
is
usually
gathered
for
the
pathway
of
greatest
concern.
The
goal
of
this
investigation
is
to
test
remaining
theories
about
the
nature
and
extent
of
contamination
proposed
in
the
SI.
Additional
field
data
that
are
collected
usually
require
specialized
techniques
or
equipment
(
e.
g.,
installation
of
monitoring
wells,
geophysical
surveys).
Data
generated
are
used
to
modify
the
preliminary
HRS
score
developed
during
the
SI.
An
ESI
report
is
the
final
product
of
this
phase.
Information
collected
during
the
ESI
is
incorporated
into
subsequent
assessment
work.

When
site
conditions
indicate
that
it
is
likely
to
score
28.50
or
above
and
an
RI
will
be
needed,
an
ESI/
RI
may
be
performed
to
save
the
time
and
cost
of
characterizing
the
site
on
different
occasions.
An
ESI/
RI
is
an
integrated
assessment
consisting
of
an
ESI
and
an
RI.
The
ESI/
RI
is
used
to
expedite
remedial
response
by
gathering
site
characterization
data
common
to
both
ESI
and
RI
activities
in
one
step.
21
A
site
that
generates
a
preliminary
HRS
score
of
28.50
or
greater
after
all
assessment
work
is
complete
is
eligible
for
proposal
to
the
NPL,
although
additional
factors
are
considered
before
EPA
moves
forward
with
proposing
a
site.
To
propose
a
site,
a
detailed
and
defensible
HRS
Scoring
Package
must
be
prepared.
This
phase
of
data
collection
brings
together
all
of
the
information
collected
during
the
site
assessment
process.
The
HRS
Package
is
thoroughly
and
meticulously
referenced.
The
final
product
of
this
phase
is
the
final
HRS
score.
A
public
docket
for
a
proposed
site
is
maintained
by
EPA
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
all
interested
parties
to
examine
and
comment
on
the
HRS
Package
before
it
is
finalized
in
the
Federal
Register.

In
order
to
expedite
the
data
management
effort
and
minimize
the
burden,
EPA
has
developed
an
automated
site
scoring
tool
for
the
revised
HRS,
called
"
SUPERScreen"
(
formerly
known
as
PREScore).
SUPERScreen
includes
a
user's
manual,
help
screens,
HRS
scoresheet
calculation
package,
and
documentation
for
the
Quality
Assurance
process.
SUPERScreen
assists
individuals
who
perform
site
assessments
by
providing
a
computerized
option
for
site
score
generation.
A
second
computer
program,
"
PA­
Score,"
is
available
to
facilitate
application
of
the
HRS
at
the
PA
stage.
PA­
Score
uses
a
number
of
default
values
for
information
not
normally
available
at
the
PA
stage
of
the
site
assessment
process
so
that
a
preliminary
assessment
of
the
threats
posed
by
the
site
can
be
determined.
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
FINAL
17
June
26,
2003
In
addition,
EPA
has
sought
to
minimize
the
burden
of
data
collection
requirements
by
making
substantial
resources
available
to
the
respondents
through
the
use
of
EPA
contractors.
EPA
will
continue
to
provide
training
to
States
on
a
yearly
basis
through
a
national
training
program.
To
facilitate
the
HRS
scoring
effort,
EPA
has,
wherever
possible,
included
tables
to
minimize
the
level
of
effort
necessary
for
data
collection.

EPA's
assessment
process
allows
for
the
integration
of
traditional
site
assessment
activities
to
facilitate
continuous
assessment
for
high­
priority
sites
until
all
the
necessary
data
are
collected.
Combining
some
phases
of
the
site
assessment
process
will
often
reduce
the
level
of
effort
expended
on
the
duplication
of
similar
data­
gathering
activities.
Exhibit
4
presents
EPA's
Integrated
Assessment
process.
This
integrated
approach
provides:

Prompt
risk
reduction
through
early
action
(
removal
or
clean­
up
activities)

Continuous
process
for
assessing
site­
specific
conditions
and
the
need
for
action

Appropriate
cleanup
of
long­
term
environmental
problems

Cross­
program
coordination
of
response
planning

Early
initiation
of
enforcement
activities

Early
public
notification
and
participation.

The
Site
Reassessment
represents
the
gathering
and
evaluation
of
new
information
on
a
site
previously
assessed
under
the
Federal
Superfund
Program
to
determine
whether
further
Superfund
attention
is
needed.
The
scope
of
work
for
a
Site
Reassessment
activity
is
flexible,
but
will
usually
represent
a
component
of
a
traditional
site
assessment
action.
As
such,
it
serves
as
a
supplement
to
previous
assessment
work,
and
not
as
a
replacement
for
traditional
assessment
activities
(
e.
g.,
PA,
SI).

All
data
collection
activities
require
the
maintenance
of
file
information.
The
final
report
for
each
phase
of
the
site
assessment
process
is
only
part
of
the
documentation
of
a
site.
All
relevant
site
information
collected
or
generated
during
the
investigations
should
be
securely
stored
and
accurately
tracked
for
future
reference.
This
information
is
critical
for
the
preparation
of
any
final
HRS
packages
and
for
future
site
disposition.
Each
agency
performing
site
assessments
or
involved
in
the
decision­
making
process
of
a
site
should
maintain
a
file
of
site
data.

Exhibit
4.
EPA's
Integrated
Assessment
process.
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
22
Section
116
of
CERCLA
as
amended
by
SARA
can
be
found
in
Appendix
A.

June
26,
2003
18
FINAL
Report
Received/
Release
Identified
Initial
Screening
for
Emergency
Eligibility
File
Search
(
if
time
allows)
Initial
Field
Investigation
(
Recon)
Review
Data/
Decision
on
Further
Action
Complete
the
PA
and
Report
Classic
Emergency
Response
Do
Removal
Time
Critical
Removal?
Sampling
Needed?
Integrated
Sampling
Plan
SI/
Removal
Assessment
sampling
Report
Do
Removal
Regional
Decision
Team
No
Further
Action
Sample
(
Optional)
No
Further
Action
<
28.50
Definitely
>
28.50
May
be
>
28.50
No
>
28.50
5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
Except
in
circumstances
where
a
small
business
is
a
potentially
responsible
party
(
PRP)
or
may
provide
some
original
information
about
a
specific
site,
small
businesses
are
not
burdened
by
the
collection
of
data
for
this
program.

5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
The
site
assessment
process
is
intended
to
be
a
flexible
method
for
determining
priorities
among
releases
or
threatened
releases
of
hazardous
substances
for
the
purpose
of
determining
if
further
investigation
is
necessary.

Site
assessment
information
collection
does
not
occur
on
a
regularly
scheduled
basis.
The
frequency
of
collection
is
driven
by
the
schedule
established
in
Section
116(
b)
of
CERCLA.
Section
116(
b)
requires
an
HRS
evaluation
(
if
warranted)
within
four
years
of
the
site's
entry
into
CERCLIS.
22
For
sites
brought
to
EPA's
attention
via
a
citizen's
petition,
Section
105(
d)
of
CERCLA
requires
completion
of
a
PA,
or
an
explanation
of
why
a
PA
is
not
appropriate,
within
one
year
after
receiving
the
petition.

6.
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
The
annual
burden
for
respondents
is
a
function
of
the
number
of
State­
lead
activities
performed
per
year.
The
estimated
annual
burden
for
State
and
Tribal
authorities
for
site
evaluation
activities
is
approximately
230,533
hours.
This
estimate
was
calculated
by
multiplying
the
estimated
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
23
Figure
provided
by
EPA
Headquarters.

FINAL
19
June
26,
2003
number
of
State/
Tribal
activities
projected
for
FY01
by
the
average
hours
needed
to
perform
each
activity
and
summing
the
totals
for
all
Regions.
Exhibit
5
provides
detailed
information
on
the
estimated
annual
respondent
burden
(
calculated
as
a
weighted
average).

Exhibit
5.
Annual
Respondent
Burden
Respondent
Activities
Estimated
Hours
Per
Activity
1
No.
FY2001
State/
Tribal
Lead
Activities1
Total
Annual
National
Hours
by
Activity
Pre­
CERCLIS
Screening
44
730
32,120
PA
134
221
29,614
SI
448
123
55,104
Combined
PA/
SI
499
28
13,972
Integrated
Removal
Assessment
&
PA
143
29
4,147
Integrated
Removal
Assessment
&
SI
507
8
4,056
Integrated
Removal
Assessment
&
Combined
PA/
SI
589
28
16,492
ESI
725
61
44,225
Site
Reassessment
99
249
24,651
HRS
Package
Preparation
519
8
4,152
Federal
Facility
PA
Review
60
10
600
Federal
Facility
SI
Review
140
10
1,400
TOTAL
1,505
230,533
1
Weighted
average
based
on
activity
hours
provided
by
the
EPA
Regions
To
reduce
the
burden
on
respondents,
EPA
has
streamlined
the
process
of
screening
sites
to
ensure
that
sites
are
assessed
as
efficiently
and
inexpensively
as
conditions
allow.
Sites
not
requiring
Federal
action
are
screened
out
of
the
process
early,
thus
avoiding
lengthy
and
more
expensive
evaluations.

For
example,
only
about
five
percent
of
the
sites
in
the
site
assessment
process
are
currently
listed
on
the
NPL.
23
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
June
26,
2003
20
FINAL
Pre­
CERCLIS
Screenings
Preliminary
Assessments
(
PA)

Site
In
spec
tion
s
(
S
I)

HRS
Scoring
Packages
NPL
L
isting
*
Exhibit
6
provides
an
illustration
of
the
site
assessment
screening
process.
The
process
is
portrayed
as
a
funnel
to
show
how
the
number
of
respondent
activities
performed
decreases
as
sites
progress
down
the
funnel
and
are
screened
out
of
the
process.
Depending
upon
how
far
a
particular
site
progresses
through
the
site
assessment
process,
the
burden
per
site
may
range
on
average
from
44
hours
(
average
for
conducting
pre­
CERCLIS
screening
and
no
other
work)
to
1,870
hours
(
cumulative
average
for
conducting
pre­
CERCLIS
screening,
PA,
SI,
ESI
and
HRS
package
work).

Exhibit
6.
Site
Assessment
Screening
Process
*
Historically
includes
five
percent
of
the
total
sites
in
the
CERCLIS
inventory.

6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
The
costs
incurred
by
States
and
Tribes
respondents
for
conducting
site
assessment
activities
equals
the
estimated
average
cost
per
activity
(
including
laboratory
costs)
multiplied
by
the
number
of
State/
Tribal
lead
activities.
In
addition
to
activity­
specific
costs,
the
States
and
Tribes
incur
infrastructure
costs
associated
with
developing
and
maintaining
a
State
or
Tribal
site
assessment
program.
These
infrastructure
costs
include
such
items
as
training,
developing
standard
operating
procedures,
administrative
support,
and
computers
and
automated
data
processing
(
ADP)
support.
Both
activity­
specific
costs
and
infrastructure
costs
are
reimbursed
by
the
EPA.
The
total
estimated
annual
respondent
cost
is
$
18,376,362.
Exhibit
7
provides
detailed
information
on
the
estimated
annual
respondent
burden
and
costs
as
calculated
based
on
projected
FY01
activity
data.
Depending
upon
how
far
a
particular
site
progresses
through
the
site
assessment
process,
the
respondent
cost
per
site
may
range
from
$
2,741
(
average
for
conducting
pre­
CERCLIS
screening
and
no
other
work)
to
$
123,269
(
cumulative
average
for
conducting
pre­
CERCLIS
screening,
PA,
SI,
ESI
and
HRS
package
work).

Exhibit
7.
Annual
Respondent
Burden
and
Costs
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
24
Based
on
information
provided
by
EPA
Headquarters
and
EPA
Regions.

FINAL
21
June
26,
2003
Respondent
Activities
Estimated
Cost
per
Activity1
No.
FY2001
State/
Tribal
Lead
Activities
Total
Annual
National
Cost
by
Activity
Pre­
CERCLIS
Screening
$
2,741
730
$
2,000,930
PA
$
10,435
221
$
2,306,135
SI
$
37,375
123
$
4,597,125
Combined
PA/
SI
$
32,860
28
$
920,080
Integrated
Removal
Assessment
and
PA
$
6,746
29
$
195,634
Integrated
Removal
Assessment
and
SI
$
24,864
8
$
198,912
Integrated
Removal
Assessment
&
Combined
PA/
SI
$
30,178
28
$
844,984
ESI
$
47,030
61
$
2,868,830
Site
Reassessment
$
11,072
249
$
2,756,928
HRS
Package
Preparation
$
25,688
8
$
205,504
Federal
Facility
PA
Review
$
3,600
10
$
36,000
Federal
Facility
SI
Review
$
8,400
10
$
84,000
State/
Tribal
Infrastructure
$
1,361,300
TOTAL
1,505
$
18,376,362
1
Weighted
average
based
on
activity
costs
provided
by
the
EPA
Regions
6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
EPA
Regional
offices
conduct
site
evaluation
and
HRS
package
preparation
activities
for
EPA­
lead
sites
parallel
to
those
conducted
by
State/
Tribal
respondents
for
State/
Tribal­
lead
sites.
Based
on
FY01
projections,
the
estimated
annual
burden
to
the
EPA
for
site
assessment
activities
is
690,606
hours.
24
Based
on
Regional
projections,
estimated
annual
cost
to
the
EPA
is
$
44,887,200.
Exhibit
8
provides
detailed
information
on
the
estimated
annual
Agency
burden
and
costs
as
calculated
based
on
projected
FY01
activity
data.

Exhibit
8.
Annual
Agency
Burden
and
Cost
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
25
Based
on
information
provided
by
EPA
Headquarters.

June
26,
2003
22
FINAL
Respondent
Activity
Estimated
Hours
per
Activity
1
Estimated
Cost
per
Activity1
Estimated
No.
FY2001
EPA­
Lead
Activities
Total
Hours
by
Activity
Total
Costs
by
Activity
Pre­
CERCLIS
Screening
33
$
1,840
38
1,254
$
69,920
PA
138
$
8,907
122
16,836
$
1,086,654
SI
514
$
44,712
133
68,362
$
5,946,696
Combined
PA/
SI
518
$
38,201
52
26,936
$
1,986,452
SIP
529
$
53,512
41
21,689
$
2,193,992
RV/
PA
241
$
11,797
8
1,928
$
94,376
RV/
SI
714
$
49,890
4
2,856
$
199,560
RV/
PA­
SI
724
$
58,633
9
6,516
$
527,697
ESI
1,071
$
94,772
95
101,745
$
9,003,340
ESI/
RI
3,400
$
260,000
3
10,200
$
780,000
Site
Reassessment
33
$
2,196
923
30,459
$
2,026,908
HRS
625
$
44,964
64
40,000
$
2,877,696
Fed
Fac
PA
Review
96
$
8,295
19
1,824
$
157,605
Fed
Fac
SI
Review
133
$
11,513
8
1,064
$
92,104
Fed
Fac
ESI
Review
102
$
7,020
5
510
$
35,100
Other
Costs
358,427
$
17,809,100
TOTAL
1,524
690,606
$
44,887,200
1
Weighted
average
based
on
activity
hours
and
costs
provided
by
the
EPA
Regions
The
total
burden
includes
costs
for
Regional
contractors
for
each
of
the
site
assessment
activities
and
Other
Costs.
Other
Costs
includes
Headquarters
HRS
contractor
costs,
EPA
Headquarters
and
Regional
staffing
costs,
and
lab
costs
associated
with
EPA's
Contract
Laboratory
Program.
Approximately
20
full­
time
equivalents
(
FTE)
at
EPA
Headquarters
and
94
FTE
at
EPA
Regional
offices
perform
oversight
and
quality
assurance
activities
for
all
State,
Tribal,
and
EPA­
lead
sites.
25
Oversight
activities
include:
reporting
and
recordkeeping
activities
such
as
establishing
and
maintaining
a
master
database;
answering
respondent
questions;
auditing
and
reviewing
data
submissions;
recording
and
entering
data
submissions;
analyzing
requests
for
confidentiality
and
providing
confidentiality
protection;
reformatting
and
distributing
data;
and
storing
data.

6(
d)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Costs
The
estimated
annual
burden
to
State
and
Tribal
respondents
for
performing
site
assessment
activities
is
approximately
230,533
hours
and
costs
approximately
$
18,376,362.
One
hundred
percent
of
the
respondent
cost
($
18,376,362)
is
reimbursed
by
the
EPA
through
cooperative
agreements.

6(
e)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
FINAL
23
June
26,
2003
The
estimated
respondent
burden
presented
in
this
ICR
represents
an
adjustment
from
the
burden
estimates
of
the
previous
ICR.
Respondent
burden
increased
by
27,160
hours
(
13%)
and
by
$
3.5
million
(
24%).
The
increase
is
largely
due
to
Site
Reassessment
activities
that
will
be
conducted
by
States
and
Tribes.
These
activities
were
not
generally
being
conducted
during
development
of
the
previous
ICR.

6(
f)
Burden
Statement
Depending
on
the
number
and
type
of
activities
performed,
burden
for
the
collection
of
site
assessment
information
is
estimated
(
as
an
average)
to
range
from
44
to
1,870
hours
per
site.
The
number
of
hours
required
to
assess
a
particular
site
depends
on
how
far
a
site
progresses
through
the
site
assessment
process.
Sites
where
only
a
pre­
CERCLIS
screening
is
performed
will
on
average
require
approximately
44
hours
(
average
for
conducting
pre­
CERCLIS
screening
and
no
other
work),
while
sites
that
progress
to
NPL
listing
may
require
approximately
1,870
hours
(
cumulative
average
for
conducting
pre­
CERCLIS
screening,
PA,
SI,
ESI
and
HRS
package
work).
This
burden
estimate
includes
reporting
activities
and
minimal
recordkeeping
activities.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
maynot
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
and
OMB
control
number
in
any
correspondence.

7.
REFERENCES
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Office
of
Emergency
and
Remedial
Response.
Guidance
for
Performing
Preliminary
Assessments
Under
CERCLA.
OSWER
9345.0­
01A.
EPA/
540/
G­
91/
013.
September
1991.
Superfund
Site
Evaluation
and
Hazard
Ranking
System
ICR
#
1488.05
June
26,
2003
24
FINAL
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Office
of
Emergency
and
Remedial
Response.
Guidance
for
Performing
Site
Inspections
Under
CERCLA,
Interim
Final.
OSWER
9345.1­
05.
EPA
540­
R­
92­
021.
September
1992.

United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response.
Hazard
Ranking
System
Guidance
Manual.
Interim
Final.
Publication
9345.1­
07.
PB92­
963377.
EPA
540­
R­
92­
026.
November
1992.

United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response.
Site
Inspection
Prioritization
Guidance.
Directive
9345.1­
15FS.
EPA/
540/
F­
93/
037.
August
1993.

United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response.
Superfund
Program
Implementation
Manual
Fiscal
Year
2002/
2003,
Volume
1.
Directive
9200.3­
14­
1G­
P.
EPA
540­
R­
01­
004.
April
2001.
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
superfund/
action/
process/
spim.
htm)

42
US
Code,
Chapter
103,
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation,
and
Liability.
January
1999.
(
http://
uscode.
house.
gov/
DOWNLOAD/
42C103.
DOC)

United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response.
Improving
Site
Assessment:
Pre­
CERCLIS
Screening
Assessments.
9375.2­
11FS,
October
1999.
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
superfund/
programs/
siteasmt/
prefin.
pdf)

United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response.
Improving
Site
Assessment:
Abbreviated
Preliminary
Assessments.
9375.2­
09FS,
October
1999.
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
superfund/
programs/
siteasmt/
apa.
pdf)

United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response.
Improving
Site
Assessment:
Combined
PA/
SI
Assessments.
9375.2­
10FS,
October
1999.
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
superfund/
programs/
siteasmt/
pasifin.
pdf)

United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response.
Improving
Site
Assessment:
Integrating
Removal
and
Remedial
Site
Evaluations.
9330.0­
39FS,
April
2000.
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
superfund/
programs/
siteasmt/
intrem.
pdf)
Appendix
A
CERCLA
Documentation
CERCLA
Section
104
42
USC
Sec.
9604
01/
05/
99
TITLE
42
­
THE
PUBLIC
HEALTH
AND
WELFARE
CHAPTER
103
­
COMPREHENSIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSE,
COMPENSATION,
AND
LIABILITY
SUBCHAPTER
I
­
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES
RELEASES,
LIABILITY,
COMPENSATION
Sec.
9604.
Response
authorities
­
STATUTE­
(
a)
Removal
and
other
remedial
action
by
President;
applicability
of
national
contingency
plan;
response
by
potentially
responsible
parties;
public
health
threats;
limitations
on
response;
exception
(
1)
Whenever
(
A)
any
hazardous
substance
is
released
or
there
is
a
substantial
threat
of
such
a
release
into
the
environment,
or
(
B)
there
is
a
release
or
substantial
threat
of
release
into
the
environment
of
any
pollutant
or
contaminant
which
may
present
an
imminent
and
substantial
danger
to
the
public
health
or
welfare,
the
President
is
authorized
to
act,
consistent
with
the
national
contingency
plan,
to
remove
or
arrange
for
the
removal
of,
and
provide
for
remedial
action
relating
to
such
hazardous
substance,
pollutant,
or
contaminant
at
any
time
(
including
its
removal
from
any
contaminated
natural
resource),
or
take
any
other
response
measure
consistent
with
the
national
contingency
plan
which
the
President
deems
necessary
to
protect
the
public
health
or
welfare
or
the
environment.
When
the
President
determines
that
such
action
will
be
done
properly
and
promptly
by
the
owner
or
operator
of
the
facility
or
vessel
or
by
any
other
responsible
party,
the
President
may
allow
such
person
to
carry
out
the
action,
conduct
the
remedial
investigation,
or
conduct
the
feasibility
study
in
accordance
with
section
9622
of
this
title.
No
remedial
investigation
or
feasibility
study
(
RI/
FS)
shall
be
authorized
except
on
a
determination
by
the
President
that
the
party
is
qualified
to
conduct
the
RI/
FS
and
only
if
the
President
contracts
with
or
arranges
for
a
qualified
person
to
assist
the
President
in
overseeing
and
reviewing
the
conduct
of
such
RI/
FS
and
if
the
responsible
party
agrees
to
reimburse
the
Fund
for
any
cost
incurred
by
the
President
under,
or
in
connection
with,
the
oversight
contract
or
arrangement.
In
no
event
shall
a
potentially
responsible
party
be
subject
to
a
lesser
standard
of
liability,
receive
preferential
treatment,
or
in
any
other
way,
whether
direct
or
indirect,
benefit
from
any
such
arrangements
as
a
response
action
contractor,
or
as
a
person
hired
or
retained
by
such
a
response
action
contractor,
with
respect
to
the
release
or
facility
in
question.
The
President
shall
give
primary
attention
to
those
releases
which
the
President
deems
may
present
a
public
health
threat.
(
2)
Removal
Action.
­
Any
removal
action
undertaken
by
the
President
under
this
subsection
(
or
by
any
other
person
referred
to
in
section
9622
of
this
title)
should,
to
the
extent
the
President
deems
practicable,
contribute
to
the
efficient
performance
of
any
long
term
remedial
action
with
respect
to
the
release
or
threatened
release
concerned.
(
3)
Limitations
on
Response.
­
The
President
shall
not
provide
for
a
removal
or
remedial
action
under
this
section
in
response
to
a
release
or
threat
of
release
­
(
A)
of
a
naturally
occurring
substance
in
its
unaltered
form,
or
altered
solely
through
naturally
occurring
processes
or
phenomena,
from
a
location
where
it
is
naturally
found;
(
B)
from
products
which
are
part
of
the
structure
of,
and
result
in
exposure
within,
residential
buildings
or
business
or
community
structures;
or
(
C)
into
public
or
private
drinking
water
supplies
due
to
deterioration
of
the
system
through
ordinary
use.
(
4)
Exception
to
Limitations.
­
Notwithstanding
paragraph
(
3)
of
this
subsection,
to
the
extent
authorized
by
this
section,
the
President
may
respond
to
any
release
or
threat
of
release
if
in
the
President's
discretion,
it
constitutes
a
public
health
or
environmental
emergency
and
no
other
person
with
the
authority
and
capability
to
respond
to
the
emergency
will
do
so
in
a
timely
manner.
(
b)
Investigations,
monitoring,
coordination,
etc.,
by
President
(
1)
Information;
studies
and
investigations
Whenever
the
President
is
authorized
to
act
pursuant
to
subsection
(
a)
of
this
section,
or
whenever
the
President
has
reason
to
believe
that
a
release
has
occurred
or
is
about
to
occur,
or
that
illness,
disease,
or
complaints
thereof
may
be
attributable
to
exposure
to
a
hazardous
substance,
pollutant,
or
contaminant
and
that
a
release
may
have
occurred
or
be
occurring,
he
may
undertake
such
investigations,
monitoring,
surveys,
testing,
and
other
information
gathering
as
he
may
deem
necessary
or
appropriate
to
identify
the
existence
and
extent
of
the
release
or
threat
thereof,
the
source
and
nature
of
the
hazardous
substances,
pollutants
or
contaminants
involved,
and
the
extent
of
danger
to
the
public
health
or
welfare
or
to
the
environment.
In
addition,
the
President
may
undertake
such
planning,
legal,
fiscal,
economic,
engineering,
architectural,
and
other
studies
or
investigations
as
he
may
deem
necessary
or
appropriate
to
plan
and
direct
response
actions,
to
recover
the
costs
thereof,
and
to
enforce
the
provisions
of
this
chapter.
(
2)
Coordination
of
investigations
The
President
shall
promptly
notify
the
appropriate
Federal
and
State
natural
resource
trustees
of
potential
damages
to
natural
resources
resulting
from
releases
under
investigation
pursuant
to
this
section
and
shall
seek
to
coordinate
the
assessments,
investigations,
and
planning
under
this
section
with
such
Federal
and
State
trustees.
(
c)
Criteria
for
continuance
of
obligations
from
Fund
over
specified
amount
for
response
actions;
consultation
by
President
with
affected
States;
contracts
or
cooperative
agreements
by
States
with
President
prior
to
remedial
actions;
cost­
sharing
agreements;
selection
by
President
of
remedial
actions;
State
credits:
granting
of
credit,
expenses
before
listing
or
agreement,
response
actions
between
1978
and
1980,
State
expenses
after
December
11,
1980,
in
excess
of
10
percent
of
costs,
item­
by­
item
approval,
use
of
credits;
operation
and
maintenance;
limitation
on
source
of
funds
for
O&
M;
recontracting;
siting
(
1)
Unless
(
A)
the
President
finds
that
(
i)
continued
response
actions
are
immediately
required
to
prevent,
limit,
or
mitigate
an
emergency,
(
ii)
there
is
an
immediate
risk
to
public
health
or
welfare
or
the
environment,
and
(
iii)
such
assistance
will
not
otherwise
be
provided
on
a
timely
basis,
or
(
B)
the
President
has
determined
the
appropriate
remedial
actions
pursuant
to
paragraph
(
2)
of
this
subsection
and
the
State
or
States
in
which
the
source
of
the
release
is
located
have
complied
with
the
requirements
of
paragraph
(
3)
of
this
subsection,
or
(
C)
continued
response
action
is
otherwise
appropriate
and
consistent
with
the
remedial
action
to
be
taken
(
FOOTNOTE
1)
obligations
from
the
Fund,
other
than
those
authorized
by
subsection
(
b)
of
this
section,
shall
not
continue
after
$
2,000,000
has
been
obligated
for
response
actions
or
12
months
has
elapsed
from
the
date
of
initial
response
to
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
hazardous
substances.
(
FOOTNOTE
1)
So
in
original.
Probably
should
be
followed
by
a
comma.
(
2)
The
President
shall
consult
with
the
affected
State
or
States
before
determining
any
appropriate
remedial
action
to
be
taken
pursuant
to
the
authority
granted
under
subsection
(
a)
of
this
section.
(
3)
The
President
shall
not
provide
any
remedial
actions
pursuant
to
this
section
unless
the
State
in
which
the
release
occurs
first
enters
into
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
with
the
President
providing
assurances
deemed
adequate
by
the
President
that
(
A)
the
State
will
assure
all
future
maintenance
of
the
removal
and
remedial
actions
provided
for
the
expected
life
of
such
actions
as
determined
by
the
President;
(
B)
the
State
will
assure
the
availability
of
a
hazardous
waste
disposal
facility
acceptable
to
the
President
and
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
subtitle
C
of
the
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Act
(
42
U.
S.
C.
6921
et
seq.)
for
any
necessary
offsite
storage,
destruction,
treatment,
or
secure
disposition
of
the
hazardous
substances;
and
(
C)
the
State
will
pay
or
assure
payment
of
(
i)
10
per
centum
of
the
costs
of
the
remedial
action,
including
all
future
maintenance,
or
(
ii)
50
percent
(
or
such
greater
amount
as
the
President
may
determine
appropriate,
taking
into
account
the
degree
of
responsibility
of
the
State
or
political
subdivision
for
the
release)
of
any
sums
expended
in
response
to
a
release
at
a
facility,
that
was
operated
by
the
State
or
a
political
subdivision
thereof,
either
directly
or
through
a
contractual
relationship
or
otherwise,
at
the
time
of
any
disposal
of
hazardous
substances
therein.
For
the
purpose
of
clause
(
ii)
of
this
subparagraph,
the
term
''
facility''
does
not
include
navigable
waters
or
the
beds
underlying
those
waters.
In
the
case
of
remedial
action
to
be
taken
on
land
or
water
held
by
an
Indian
tribe,
held
by
the
United
States
in
trust
for
Indians,
held
by
a
member
of
an
Indian
tribe
(
if
such
land
or
water
is
subject
to
a
trust
restriction
on
alienation),
or
otherwise
within
the
borders
of
an
Indian
reservation,
the
requirements
of
this
paragraph
for
assurances
regarding
future
maintenance
and
cost­
sharing
shall
not
apply,
and
the
President
shall
provide
the
assurance
required
by
this
paragraph
regarding
the
availability
of
a
hazardous
waste
disposal
facility.
(
4)
Selection
of
Remedial
Action.
­
The
President
shall
select
remedial
actions
to
carry
out
this
section
in
accordance
with
section
9621
of
this
title
(
relating
to
cleanup
standards).
(
5)
State
Credits.
­
(
A)
Granting
of
credit.
­
The
President
shall
grant
a
State
a
credit
against
the
share
of
the
costs,
for
which
it
is
responsible
under
paragraph
(
3)
with
respect
to
a
facility
listed
on
the
National
Priorities
List
under
the
National
Contingency
Plan,
for
amounts
expended
by
a
State
for
remedial
action
at
such
facility
pursuant
to
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
with
the
President.
The
credit
under
this
paragraph
shall
be
limited
to
those
State
expenses
which
the
President
determines
to
be
reasonable,
documented,
direct
out­
of­
pocket
expenditures
of
non­
Federal
funds.
(
B)
Expenses
before
listing
or
agreement.
­
The
credit
under
this
paragraph
shall
include
expenses
for
remedial
action
at
a
facility
incurred
before
the
listing
of
the
facility
on
the
National
Priorities
List
or
before
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
is
entered
into
under
subsection
(
d)
of
this
section
for
the
facility
if
­
(
i)
after
such
expenses
are
incurred
the
facility
is
listed
on
such
list
and
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
is
entered
into
for
the
facility,
and
(
ii)
the
President
determines
that
such
expenses
would
have
been
credited
to
the
State
under
subparagraph
(
A)
had
the
expenditures
been
made
after
listing
of
the
facility
on
such
list
and
after
the
date
on
which
such
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
is
entered
into.
(
C)
Response
actions
between
1978
and
1980.
­
The
credit
under
this
paragraph
shall
include
funds
expended
or
obligated
by
the
State
or
a
political
subdivision
thereof
after
January
1,
1978,
and
before
December
11,
1980,
for
cost­
eligible
response
actions
and
claims
for
damages
compensable
under
section
9611
of
this
title.
(
D)
State
expenses
after
december
11,
1980,
in
excess
of
10
percent
of
costs.
­
The
credit
under
this
paragraph
shall
include
90
percent
of
State
expenses
incurred
at
a
facility
owned,
but
not
operated,
by
such
State
or
by
a
political
subdivision
thereof.
Such
credit
applies
only
to
expenses
incurred
pursuant
to
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
under
subsection
(
d)
of
this
section
and
only
to
expenses
incurred
after
December
11,
1980,
but
before
October
17,
1986.
(
E)
Item­
by­
item
approval.
­
In
the
case
of
expenditures
made
after
October
17,
1986,
the
President
may
require
prior
approval
of
each
item
of
expenditure
as
a
condition
of
granting
a
credit
under
this
paragraph.
(
F)
Use
of
credits.
­
Credits
granted
under
this
paragraph
for
funds
expended
with
respect
to
a
facility
may
be
used
by
the
State
to
reduce
all
or
part
of
the
share
of
costs
otherwise
required
to
be
paid
by
the
State
under
paragraph
(
3)
in
connection
with
remedial
actions
at
such
facility.
If
the
amount
of
funds
for
which
credit
is
allowed
under
this
paragraph
exceeds
such
share
of
costs
for
such
facility,
the
State
may
use
the
amount
of
such
excess
to
reduce
all
or
part
of
the
share
of
such
costs
at
other
facilities
in
that
State.
A
credit
shall
not
entitle
the
State
to
any
direct
payment.
(
6)
Operation
and
Maintenance.
­
For
the
purposes
of
paragraph
(
3)
of
this
subsection,
in
the
case
of
ground
or
surface
water
contamination,
completed
remedial
action
includes
the
completion
of
treatment
or
other
measures,
whether
taken
onsite
or
offsite,
necessary
to
restore
ground
and
surface
water
quality
to
a
level
that
assures
protection
of
human
health
and
the
environment.
With
respect
to
such
measures,
the
operation
of
such
measures
for
a
period
of
up
to
10
years
after
the
construction
or
installation
and
commencement
of
operation
shall
be
considered
remedial
action.
Activities
required
to
maintain
the
effectiveness
of
such
measures
following
such
period
or
the
completion
of
remedial
action,
whichever
is
earlier,
shall
be
considered
operation
or
maintenance.
(
7)
Limitation
on
Source
of
Funds
for
O&
M.
­
During
any
period
after
the
availability
of
funds
received
by
the
Hazardous
Substance
Superfund
established
under
subchapter
A
of
chapter
98
of
title
26
from
tax
revenues
or
appropriations
from
general
revenues,
the
Federal
share
of
the
payment
of
the
cost
of
operation
or
maintenance
pursuant
to
paragraph
(
3)(
C)(
i)
or
paragraph
(
6)
of
this
subsection
(
relating
to
operation
and
maintenance)
shall
be
from
funds
received
by
the
Hazardous
Substance
Superfund
from
amounts
recovered
on
behalf
of
such
fund
under
this
chapter.
(
8)
Recontracting.
­
The
President
is
authorized
to
undertake
or
continue
whatever
interim
remedial
actions
the
President
determines
to
be
appropriate
to
reduce
risks
to
public
health
or
the
environment
where
the
performance
of
a
complete
remedial
action
requires
recontracting
because
of
the
discovery
of
sources,
types,
or
quantities
of
hazardous
substances
not
known
at
the
time
of
entry
into
the
original
contract.
The
total
cost
of
interim
actions
undertaken
at
a
facility
pursuant
to
this
paragraph
shall
not
exceed
$
2,000,000.
(
9)
Siting.
­
Effective
3
years
after
October
17,
1986,
the
President
shall
not
provide
any
remedial
actions
pursuant
to
this
section
unless
the
State
in
which
the
release
occurs
first
enters
into
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
with
the
President
providing
assurances
deemed
adequate
by
the
President
that
the
State
will
assure
the
availability
of
hazardous
waste
treatment
or
disposal
facilities
which
­
(
A)
have
adequate
capacity
for
the
destruction,
treatment,
or
secure
disposition
of
all
hazardous
wastes
that
are
reasonably
expected
to
be
generated
within
the
State
during
the
20­
year
period
following
the
date
of
such
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
and
to
be
disposed
of,
treated,
or
destroyed,
(
B)
are
within
the
State
or
outside
the
State
in
accordance
with
an
interstate
agreement
or
regional
agreement
or
authority,
(
C)
are
acceptable
to
the
President,
and
(
D)
are
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
subtitle
C
of
the
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Act
(
42
U.
S.
C.
6921
et
seq.).
(
d)
Contracts
or
cooperative
agreements
by
President
with
States
or
political
subdivisions
or
Indian
tribes;
State
applications,
terms
and
conditions;
reimbursements;
cost­
sharing
provisions;
enforcement
requirements
and
procedures
(
1)
Cooperative
Agreements.
­
(
A)
State
applications.
­
A
State
or
political
subdivision
thereof
or
Indian
tribe
may
apply
to
the
President
to
carry
out
actions
authorized
in
this
section.
If
the
President
determines
that
the
State
or
political
subdivision
or
Indian
tribe
has
the
capability
to
carry
out
any
or
all
of
such
actions
in
accordance
with
the
criteria
and
priorities
established
pursuant
to
section
9605(
a)(
8)
of
this
title
and
to
carry
out
related
enforcement
actions,
the
President
may
enter
into
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
with
the
State
or
political
subdivision
or
Indian
tribe
to
carry
out
such
actions.
The
President
shall
make
a
determination
regarding
such
an
application
within
90
days
after
the
President
receives
the
application.
(
B)
Terms
and
conditions.
­
A
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
under
this
paragraph
shall
be
subject
to
such
terms
and
conditions
as
the
President
may
prescribe.
The
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
may
cover
a
specific
facility
or
specific
facilities.
(
C)
Reimbursements.
­
Any
State
which
expended
funds
during
the
period
beginning
September
30,
1985,
and
ending
on
October
17,
1986,
for
response
actions
at
any
site
included
on
the
National
Priorities
List
and
subject
to
a
cooperative
agreement
under
this
chapter
shall
be
reimbursed
for
the
share
of
costs
of
such
actions
for
which
the
Federal
Government
is
responsible
under
this
chapter.
(
2)
If
the
President
enters
into
a
cost­
sharing
agreement
pursuant
to
subsection
(
c)
of
this
section
or
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
pursuant
to
this
subsection,
and
the
State
or
political
subdivision
thereof
fails
to
comply
with
any
requirements
of
the
contract,
the
President
may,
after
providing
sixty
days
notice,
seek
in
the
appropriate
Federal
district
court
to
enforce
the
contract
or
to
recover
any
funds
advanced
or
any
costs
incurred
because
of
the
breach
of
the
contract
by
the
State
or
political
subdivision.
(
3)
Where
a
State
or
a
political
subdivision
thereof
is
acting
in
behalf
of
the
President,
the
President
is
authorized
to
provide
technical
and
legal
assistance
in
the
administration
and
enforcement
of
any
contract
or
subcontract
in
connection
with
response
actions
assisted
under
this
subchapter,
and
to
intervene
in
any
civil
action
involving
the
enforcement
of
such
contract
or
subcontract.
(
4)
Where
two
or
more
noncontiguous
facilities
are
reasonably
related
on
the
basis
of
geography,
or
on
the
basis
of
the
threat,
or
potential
threat
to
the
public
health
or
welfare
or
the
environment,
the
President
may,
in
his
discretion,
treat
these
related
facilities
as
one
for
purposes
of
this
section.
(
e)
Information
gathering
and
access
(
1)
Action
authorized
Any
officer,
employee,
or
representative
of
the
President,
duly
designated
by
the
President,
is
authorized
to
take
action
under
paragraph
(
2),
(
3),
or
(
4)
(
or
any
combination
thereof)
at
a
vessel,
facility,
establishment,
place,
property,
or
location
or,
in
the
case
of
paragraph
(
3)
or
(
4),
at
any
vessel,
facility,
establishment,
place,
property,
or
location
which
is
adjacent
to
the
vessel,
facility,
establishment,
place,
property,
or
location
referred
to
in
such
paragraph
(
3)
or
(
4).
Any
duly
designated
officer,
employee,
or
representative
of
a
State
or
political
subdivision
under
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
under
subsection
(
d)(
1)
of
this
section
is
also
authorized
to
take
such
action.
The
authority
of
paragraphs
(
3)
and
(
4)
may
be
exercised
only
if
there
is
a
reasonable
basis
to
believe
there
may
be
a
release
or
threat
of
release
of
a
hazardous
substance
or
pollutant
or
contaminant.
The
authority
of
this
subsection
may
be
exercised
only
for
the
purposes
of
determining
the
need
for
response,
or
choosing
or
taking
any
response
action
under
this
subchapter,
or
otherwise
enforcing
the
provisions
of
this
subchapter.
(
2)
Access
to
information
Any
officer,
employee,
or
representative
described
in
paragraph
(
1)
may
require
any
person
who
has
or
may
have
information
relevant
to
any
of
the
following
to
furnish,
upon
reasonable
notice,
information
or
documents
relating
to
such
matter:
(
A)
The
identification,
nature,
and
quantity
of
materials
which
have
been
or
are
generated,
treated,
stored,
or
disposed
of
at
a
vessel
or
facility
or
transported
to
a
vessel
or
facility.
(
B)
The
nature
or
extent
of
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
a
hazardous
substance
or
pollutant
or
contaminant
at
or
from
a
vessel
or
facility.
(
C)
Information
relating
to
the
ability
of
a
person
to
pay
for
or
to
perform
a
cleanup.
In
addition,
upon
reasonable
notice,
such
person
either
(
i)
shall
grant
any
such
officer,
employee,
or
representative
access
at
all
reasonable
times
to
any
vessel,
facility,
establishment,
place,
property,
or
location
to
inspect
and
copy
all
documents
or
records
relating
to
such
matters
or
(
ii)
shall
copy
and
furnish
to
the
officer,
employee,
or
representative
all
such
documents
or
records,
at
the
option
and
expense
of
such
person.
(
3)
Entry
Any
officer,
employee,
or
representative
described
in
paragraph
(
1)
is
authorized
to
enter
at
reasonable
times
any
of
the
following:
(
A)
Any
vessel,
facility,
establishment,
or
other
place
or
property
where
any
hazardous
substance
or
pollutant
or
contaminant
may
be
or
has
been
generated,
stored,
treated,
disposed
of,
or
transported
from.
(
B)
Any
vessel,
facility,
establishment,
or
other
place
or
property
from
which
or
to
which
a
hazardous
substance
or
pollutant
or
contaminant
has
been
or
may
have
been
released.
(
C)
Any
vessel,
facility,
establishment,
or
other
place
or
property
where
such
release
is
or
may
be
threatened.
(
D)
Any
vessel,
facility,
establishment,
or
other
place
or
property
where
entry
is
needed
to
determine
the
need
for
response
or
the
appropriate
response
or
to
effectuate
a
response
action
under
this
subchapter.
(
4)
Inspection
and
samples
(
A)
Authority
Any
officer,
employee
or
representative
described
in
paragraph
(
1)
is
authorized
to
inspect
and
obtain
samples
from
any
vessel,
facility,
establishment,
or
other
place
or
property
referred
to
in
paragraph
(
3)
or
from
any
location
of
any
suspected
hazardous
substance
or
pollutant
or
contaminant.
Any
such
officer,
employee,
or
representative
is
authorized
to
inspect
and
obtain
samples
of
any
containers
or
labeling
for
suspected
hazardous
substances
or
pollutants
or
contaminants.
Each
such
inspection
shall
be
completed
with
reasonable
promptness.
(
B)
Samples
If
the
officer,
employee,
or
representative
obtains
any
samples,
before
leaving
the
premises
he
shall
give
to
the
owner,
operator,
tenant,
or
other
person
in
charge
of
the
place
from
which
the
samples
were
obtained
a
receipt
describing
the
sample
obtained
and,
if
requested,
a
portion
of
each
such
sample.
A
copy
of
the
results
of
any
analysis
made
of
such
samples
shall
be
furnished
promptly
to
the
owner,
operator,
tenant,
or
other
person
in
charge,
if
such
person
can
be
located.
(
5)
Compliance
orders
(
A)
Issuance
If
consent
is
not
granted
regarding
any
request
made
by
an
officer,
employee,
or
representative
under
paragraph
(
2),
(
3),
or
(
4),
the
President
may
issue
an
order
directing
compliance
with
the
request.
The
order
may
be
issued
after
such
notice
and
opportunity
for
consultation
as
is
reasonably
appropriate
under
the
circumstances.
(
B)
Compliance
The
President
may
ask
the
Attorney
General
to
commence
a
civil
action
to
compel
compliance
with
a
request
or
order
referred
to
in
subparagraph
(
A).
Where
there
is
a
reasonable
basis
to
believe
there
may
be
a
release
or
threat
of
a
release
of
a
hazardous
substance
or
pollutant
or
contaminant,
the
court
shall
take
the
following
actions:
(
i)
In
the
case
of
interference
with
entry
or
inspection,
the
court
shall
enjoin
such
interference
or
direct
compliance
with
orders
to
prohibit
interference
with
entry
or
inspection
unless
under
the
circumstances
of
the
case
the
demand
for
entry
or
inspection
is
arbitrary
and
capricious,
an
abuse
of
discretion,
or
otherwise
not
in
accordance
with
law.
(
ii)
In
the
case
of
information
or
document
requests
or
orders,
the
court
shall
enjoin
interference
with
such
information
or
document
requests
or
orders
or
direct
compliance
with
the
requests
or
orders
to
provide
such
information
or
documents
unless
under
the
circumstances
of
the
case
the
demand
for
information
or
documents
is
arbitrary
and
capricious,
an
abuse
of
discretion,
or
otherwise
not
in
accordance
with
law.
The
court
may
assess
a
civil
penalty
not
to
exceed
$
25,000
for
each
day
of
noncompliance
against
any
person
who
unreasonably
fails
to
comply
with
the
provisions
of
paragraph
(
2),
(
3),
or
(
4)
or
an
order
issued
pursuant
to
subparagraph
(
A)
of
this
paragraph.
(
6)
Other
authority
Nothing
in
this
subsection
shall
preclude
the
President
from
securing
access
or
obtaining
information
in
any
other
lawful
manner.
(
7)
Confidentiality
of
information
(
A)
Any
records,
reports,
or
information
obtained
from
any
person
under
this
section
(
including
records,
reports,
or
information
obtained
by
representatives
of
the
President)
shall
be
available
to
the
public,
except
that
upon
a
showing
satisfactory
to
the
President
(
or
the
State,
as
the
case
may
be)
by
any
person
that
records,
reports,
or
information,
or
particular
part
thereof
(
other
than
health
or
safety
effects
data),
to
which
the
President
(
or
the
State,
as
the
case
may
be)
or
any
officer,
employee,
or
representative
has
access
under
this
section
if
made
public
would
divulge
information
entitled
to
protection
under
section
1905
of
title
18,
such
information
or
particular
portion
thereof
shall
be
considered
confidential
in
accordance
with
the
purposes
of
that
section,
except
that
such
record,
report,
document
or
information
may
be
disclosed
to
other
officers,
employees,
or
authorized
representatives
of
the
United
States
concerned
with
carrying
out
this
chapter,
or
when
relevant
in
any
proceeding
under
this
chapter.
(
B)
Any
person
not
subject
to
the
provisions
of
section
1905
of
title
18
who
knowingly
and
willfully
divulges
or
discloses
any
information
entitled
to
protection
under
this
subsection
shall,
upon
conviction,
be
subject
to
a
fine
of
not
more
than
$
5,000
or
to
imprisonment
not
to
exceed
one
year,
or
both.
(
C)
In
submitting
data
under
this
chapter,
a
person
required
to
provide
such
data
may
(
i)
designate
the
data
which
such
person
believes
is
entitled
to
protection
under
this
subsection
and
(
ii)
submit
such
designated
data
separately
from
other
data
submitted
under
this
chapter.
A
designation
under
this
paragraph
shall
be
made
in
writing
and
in
such
manner
as
the
President
may
prescribe
by
regulation.
(
D)
Notwithstanding
any
limitation
contained
in
this
section
or
any
other
provision
of
law,
all
information
reported
to
or
otherwise
obtained
by
the
President
(
or
any
representative
of
the
President)
under
this
chapter
shall
be
made
available,
upon
written
request
of
any
duly
authorized
committee
of
the
Congress,
to
such
committee.
(
E)
No
person
required
to
provide
information
under
this
chapter
may
claim
that
the
information
is
entitled
to
protection
under
this
paragraph
unless
such
person
shows
each
of
the
following:
(
i)
Such
person
has
not
disclosed
the
information
to
any
other
person,
other
than
a
member
of
a
local
emergency
planning
committee
established
under
title
III
of
the
Amendments
and
Reauthorization
Act
of
1986
(
42
U.
S.
C.
11001
et
seq.),
an
officer
or
employee
of
the
United
States
or
a
State
or
local
government,
an
employee
of
such
person,
or
a
person
who
is
bound
by
a
confidentiality
agreement,
and
such
person
has
taken
reasonable
measures
to
protect
the
confidentiality
of
such
information
and
intends
to
continue
to
take
such
measures.
(
ii)
The
information
is
not
required
to
be
disclosed,
or
otherwise
made
available,
to
the
public
under
any
other
Federal
or
State
law.
(
iii)
Disclosure
of
the
information
is
likely
to
cause
substantial
harm
to
the
competitive
position
of
such
person.
(
iv)
The
specific
chemical
identity,
if
sought
to
be
protected,
is
not
readily
discoverable
through
reverse
engineering.
(
F)
The
following
information
with
respect
to
any
hazardous
substance
at
the
facility
or
vessel
shall
not
be
entitled
to
protection
under
this
paragraph:
(
i)
The
trade
name,
common
name,
or
generic
class
or
category
of
the
hazardous
substance.
(
ii)
The
physical
properties
of
the
substance,
including
its
boiling
point,
melting
point,
flash
point,
specific
gravity,
vapor
density,
solubility
in
water,
and
vapor
pressure
at
20
degrees
celsius.
(
iii)
The
hazards
to
health
and
the
environment
posed
by
the
substance,
including
physical
hazards
(
such
as
explosion)
and
potential
acute
and
chronic
health
hazards.
(
iv)
The
potential
routes
of
human
exposure
to
the
substance
at
the
facility,
establishment,
place,
or
property
being
investigated,
entered,
or
inspected
under
this
subsection.
(
v)
The
location
of
disposal
of
any
waste
stream.
(
vi)
Any
monitoring
data
or
analysis
of
monitoring
data
pertaining
to
disposal
activities.
(
vii)
Any
hydrogeologic
or
geologic
data.
(
viii)
Any
groundwater
monitoring
data.
(
f)
Contracts
for
response
actions;
compliance
with
Federal
health
and
safety
standards
In
awarding
contracts
to
any
person
engaged
in
response
actions,
the
President
or
the
State,
in
any
case
where
it
is
awarding
contracts
pursuant
to
a
contract
entered
into
under
subsection
(
d)
of
this
section,
shall
require
compliance
with
Federal
health
and
safety
standards
established
under
section
9651(
f)
of
this
title
by
contractors
and
subcontractors
as
a
condition
of
such
contracts.
(
g)
Rates
for
wages
and
labor
standards
applicable
to
covered
work
(
1)
All
laborers
and
mechanics
employed
by
contractors
or
subcontractors
in
the
performance
of
construction,
repair,
or
alteration
work
funded
in
whole
or
in
part
under
this
section
shall
be
paid
wages
at
rates
not
less
than
those
prevailing
on
projects
of
a
character
similar
in
the
locality
as
determined
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor
in
accordance
with
the
Davis­
Bacon
Act
(
40
U.
S.
C.
276a
et
seq.).
The
President
shall
not
approve
any
such
funding
without
first
obtaining
adequate
assurance
that
required
labor
standards
will
be
maintained
upon
the
construction
work.
(
2)
The
Secretary
of
Labor
shall
have,
with
respect
to
the
labor
standards
specified
in
paragraph
(
1),
the
authority
and
functions
set
forth
in
Reorganization
Plan
Numbered
14
of
1950
(
15
F.
R.
3176;
64
Stat.
1267)
and
section
276c
of
title
40.
(
h)
Emergency
procurement
powers;
exercise
by
President
Notwithstanding
any
other
provision
of
law,
subject
to
the
provisions
of
section
9611
of
this
title,
the
President
may
authorize
the
use
of
such
emergency
procurement
powers
as
he
deems
necessary
to
effect
the
purpose
of
this
chapter.
Upon
determination
that
such
procedures
are
necessary,
the
President
shall
promulgate
regulations
prescribing
the
circumstances
under
which
such
authority
shall
be
used
and
the
procedures
governing
the
use
of
such
authority.
(
i)
Agency
for
Toxic
Substances
and
Disease
Registry;
establishment,
functions,
etc.
(
1)
There
is
hereby
established
within
the
Public
Health
Service
an
agency,
to
be
known
as
the
Agency
for
Toxic
Substances
and
Disease
Registry,
which
shall
report
directly
to
the
Surgeon
General
of
the
United
States.
The
Administrator
of
said
Agency
shall,
with
the
cooperation
of
the
Administrator
of
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
the
Commissioner
of
the
Food
and
Drug
Administration,
the
Directors
of
the
National
Institute
of
Medicine,
National
Institute
of
Environmental
Health
Sciences,
National
Institute
of
Occupational
Safety
and
Health,
Centers
for
Disease
Control
and
Prevention,
the
Administrator
of
the
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration,
the
Administrator
of
the
Social
Security
Administration,
the
Secretary
of
Transportation,
and
appropriate
State
and
local
health
officials,
effectuate
and
implement
the
health
related
authorities
of
this
chapter.
In
addition,
said
Administrator
shall
­
(
A)
in
cooperation
with
the
States,
establish
and
maintain
a
national
registry
of
serious
diseases
and
illnesses
and
a
national
registry
of
persons
exposed
to
toxic
substances;
(
B)
establish
and
maintain
inventory
of
literature,
research,
and
studies
on
the
health
effects
of
toxic
substances;
(
C)
in
cooperation
with
the
States,
and
other
agencies
of
the
Federal
Government,
establish
and
maintain
a
complete
listing
of
areas
closed
to
the
public
or
otherwise
restricted
in
use
because
of
toxic
substance
contamination;
(
D)
in
cases
of
public
health
emergencies
caused
or
believed
to
be
caused
by
exposure
to
toxic
substances,
provide
medical
care
and
testing
to
exposed
individuals,
including
but
not
limited
to
tissue
sampling,
chromosomal
testing
where
appropriate,
epidemiological
studies,
or
any
other
assistance
appropriate
under
the
circumstances;
and
(
E)
either
independently
or
as
part
of
other
health
status
survey,
conduct
periodic
survey
and
screening
programs
to
determine
relationships
between
exposure
to
toxic
substances
and
illness.
In
cases
of
public
health
emergencies,
exposed
persons
shall
be
eligible
for
admission
to
hospitals
and
other
facilities
and
services
operated
or
provided
by
the
Public
Health
Service.
(
2)(
A)
Within
6
months
after
October
17,
1986,
the
Administrator
of
the
Agency
for
Toxic
Substances
and
Disease
Registry
(
ATSDR)
and
the
Administrator
of
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(''
EPA'')
shall
prepare
a
list,
in
order
of
priority,
of
at
least
100
hazardous
substances
which
are
most
commonly
found
at
facilities
on
the
National
Priorities
List
and
which,
in
their
sole
discretion,
they
determine
are
posing
the
most
significant
potential
threat
to
human
health
due
to
their
known
or
suspected
toxicity
to
humans
and
the
potential
for
human
exposure
to
such
substances
at
facilities
on
the
National
Priorities
List
or
at
facilities
to
which
a
response
to
a
release
or
a
threatened
release
under
this
section
is
under
consideration.
(
B)
Within
24
months
after
October
17,
1986,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
and
the
Administrator
of
EPA
shall
revise
the
list
prepared
under
subparagraph
(
A).
Such
revision
shall
include,
in
order
of
priority,
the
addition
of
100
or
more
such
hazardous
substances.
In
each
of
the
3
consecutive
12­
month
periods
that
follow,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
and
the
Administrator
of
EPA
shall
revise,
in
the
same
manner
as
provided
in
the
2
preceding
sentences,
such
list
to
include
not
fewer
than
25
additional
hazardous
substances
per
revision.
The
Administrator
of
ATSDR
and
the
Administrator
of
EPA
shall
not
less
often
than
once
every
year
thereafter
revise
such
list
to
include
additional
hazardous
substances
in
accordance
with
the
criteria
in
subparagraph
(
A).
(
3)
Based
on
all
available
information,
including
information
maintained
under
paragraph
(
1)(
B)
and
data
developed
and
collected
on
the
health
effects
of
hazardous
substances
under
this
paragraph,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
prepare
toxicological
profiles
of
each
of
the
substances
listed
pursuant
to
paragraph
(
2).
The
toxicological
profiles
shall
be
prepared
in
accordance
with
guidelines
developed
by
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
and
the
Administrator
of
EPA.
Such
profiles
shall
include,
but
not
be
limited
to
each
of
the
following:
(
A)
An
examination,
summary,
and
interpretation
of
available
toxicological
information
and
epidemiologic
evaluations
on
a
hazardous
substance
in
order
to
ascertain
the
levels
of
significant
human
exposure
for
the
substance
and
the
associated
acute,
subacute,
and
chronic
health
effects.
(
B)
A
determination
of
whether
adequate
information
on
the
health
effects
of
each
substance
is
available
or
in
the
process
of
development
to
determine
levels
of
exposure
which
present
a
significant
risk
to
human
health
of
acute,
subacute,
and
chronic
health
effects.
(
C)
Where
appropriate,
an
identification
of
toxicological
testing
needed
to
identify
the
types
or
levels
of
exposure
that
may
present
significant
risk
of
adverse
health
effects
in
humans.
Any
toxicological
profile
or
revision
thereof
shall
reflect
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR's
assessment
of
all
relevant
toxicological
testing
which
has
been
peer
reviewed.
The
profiles
required
to
be
prepared
under
this
paragraph
for
those
hazardous
substances
listed
under
subparagraph
(
A)
of
paragraph
(
2)
shall
be
completed,
at
a
rate
of
no
fewer
than
25
per
year,
within
4
years
after
October
17,
1986.
A
profile
required
on
a
substance
listed
pursuant
to
subparagraph
(
B)
of
paragraph
(
2)
shall
be
completed
within
3
years
after
addition
to
the
list.
The
profiles
prepared
under
this
paragraph
shall
be
of
those
substances
highest
on
the
list
of
priorities
under
paragraph
(
2)
for
which
profiles
have
not
previously
been
prepared.
Profiles
required
under
this
paragraph
shall
be
revised
and
republished
as
necessary,
but
no
less
often
than
once
every
3
years.
Such
profiles
shall
be
provided
to
the
States
and
made
available
to
other
interested
parties.
(
4)
The
Administrator
of
the
ATSDR
shall
provide
consultations
upon
request
on
health
issues
relating
to
exposure
to
hazardous
or
toxic
substances,
on
the
basis
of
available
information,
to
the
Administrator
of
EPA,
State
officials,
and
local
officials.
Such
consultations
to
individuals
may
be
provided
by
States
under
cooperative
agreements
established
under
this
chapter.
(
5)(
A)
For
each
hazardous
substance
listed
pursuant
to
paragraph
(
2),
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
(
in
consultation
with
the
Administrator
of
EPA
and
other
agencies
and
programs
of
the
Public
Health
Service)
shall
assess
whether
adequate
information
on
the
health
effects
of
such
substance
is
available.
For
any
such
substance
for
which
adequate
information
is
not
available
(
or
under
development),
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR,
in
cooperation
with
the
Director
of
the
National
Toxicology
Program,
shall
assure
the
initiation
of
a
program
of
research
designed
to
determine
the
health
effects
(
and
techniques
for
development
of
methods
to
determine
such
health
effects)
of
such
substance.
Where
feasible,
such
program
shall
seek
to
develop
methods
to
determine
the
health
effects
of
such
substance
in
combination
with
other
substances
with
which
it
is
commonly
found.
Before
assuring
the
initiation
of
such
program,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
consider
recommendations
of
the
Interagency
Testing
Committee
established
under
section
4(
e)
of
the
Toxic
Substances
Control
Act
(
15
U.
S.
C.
2603(
e))
on
the
types
of
research
that
should
be
done.
Such
program
shall
include,
to
the
extent
necessary
to
supplement
existing
information,
but
shall
not
be
limited
to
­
(
i)
laboratory
and
other
studies
to
determine
short,
intermediate,
and
long­
term
health
effects;
(
ii)
laboratory
and
other
studies
to
determine
organ­
specific,
site­
specific,
and
system­
specific
acute
and
chronic
toxicity;
(
iii)
laboratory
and
other
studies
to
determine
the
manner
in
which
such
substances
are
metabolized
or
to
otherwise
develop
an
understanding
of
the
biokinetics
of
such
substances;
and
(
iv)
where
there
is
a
possibility
of
obtaining
human
data,
the
collection
of
such
information.
(
B)
In
assessing
the
need
to
perform
laboratory
and
other
studies,
as
required
by
subparagraph
(
A),
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
consider
­
(
i)
the
availability
and
quality
of
existing
test
data
concerning
the
substance
on
the
suspected
health
effect
in
question;
(
ii)
the
extent
to
which
testing
already
in
progress
will,
in
a
timely
fashion,
provide
data
that
will
be
adequate
to
support
the
preparation
of
toxicological
profiles
as
required
by
paragraph
(
3);
and
(
iii)
such
other
scientific
and
technical
factors
as
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
may
determine
are
necessary
for
the
effective
implementation
of
this
subsection.
(
C)
In
the
development
and
implementation
of
any
research
program
under
this
paragraph,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
and
the
Administrator
of
EPA
shall
coordinate
such
research
program
implemented
under
this
paragraph
with
the
National
Toxicology
Program
and
with
programs
of
toxicological
testing
established
under
the
Toxic
Substances
Control
Act
(
15
U.
S.
C.
2601
et
seq.)
and
the
Federal
Insecticide,
Fungicide
and
Rodenticide
Act
(
7
U.
S.
C.
136
et
seq.).
The
purpose
of
such
coordination
shall
be
to
avoid
duplication
of
effort
and
to
assure
that
the
hazardous
substances
listed
pursuant
to
this
subsection
are
tested
thoroughly
at
the
earliest
practicable
date.
Where
appropriate,
consistent
with
such
purpose,
a
research
program
under
this
paragraph
may
be
carried
out
using
such
programs
of
toxicological
testing.
(
D)
It
is
the
sense
of
the
Congress
that
the
costs
of
research
programs
under
this
paragraph
be
borne
by
the
manufacturers
and
processors
of
the
hazardous
substance
in
question,
as
required
in
programs
of
toxicological
testing
under
the
Toxic
Substances
Control
Act
(
15
U.
S.
C.
2601
et
seq.).
Within
1
year
after
October
17,
1986,
the
Administrator
of
EPA
shall
promulgate
regulations
which
provide,
where
appropriate,
for
payment
of
such
costs
by
manufacturers
and
processors
under
the
Toxic
Substances
Control
Act,
and
registrants
under
the
Federal
Insecticide,
Fungicide,
and
Rodenticide
Act
(
7
U.
S.
C.
136
et
seq.),
and
recovery
of
such
costs
from
responsible
parties
under
this
chapter.
(
6)(
A)
The
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
perform
a
health
assessment
for
each
facility
on
the
National
Priorities
List
established
under
section
9605
of
this
title.
Such
health
assessment
shall
be
completed
not
later
than
December
10,
1988,
for
each
facility
proposed
for
inclusion
on
such
list
prior
to
October
17,
1986,
or
not
later
than
one
year
after
the
date
of
proposal
for
inclusion
on
such
list
for
each
facility
proposed
for
inclusion
on
such
list
after
October
17,
1986.
(
B)
The
Administrator
of
ATSDR
may
perform
health
assessments
for
releases
or
facilities
where
individual
persons
or
licensed
physicians
provide
information
that
individuals
have
been
exposed
to
a
hazardous
substance,
for
which
the
probable
source
of
such
exposure
is
a
release.
In
addition
to
other
methods
(
formal
or
informal)
of
providing
such
information,
such
individual
persons
or
licensed
physicians
may
submit
a
petition
to
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
providing
such
information
and
requesting
a
health
assessment.
If
such
a
petition
is
submitted
and
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
does
not
initiate
a
health
assessment,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
provide
a
written
explanation
of
why
a
health
assessment
is
not
appropriate.
(
C)
In
determining
the
priority
in
which
to
conduct
health
assessments
under
this
subsection,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR,
in
consultation
with
the
Administrator
of
EPA,
shall
give
priority
to
those
facilities
at
which
there
is
documented
evidence
of
the
release
of
hazardous
substances,
at
which
the
potential
risk
to
human
health
appears
highest,
and
for
which
in
the
judgment
of
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
existing
health
assessment
data
are
inadequate
to
assess
the
potential
risk
to
human
health
as
provided
in
subparagraph
(
F).
In
determining
the
priorities
for
conducting
health
assessments
under
this
subsection,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
consider
the
National
Priorities
List
schedules
and
the
needs
of
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency
and
other
Federal
agencies
pursuant
to
schedules
for
remedial
investigation
and
feasibility
studies.
(
D)
Where
a
health
assessment
is
done
at
a
site
on
the
National
Priorities
List,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
complete
such
assessment
promptly
and,
to
the
maximum
extent
practicable,
before
the
completion
of
the
remedial
investigation
and
feasibility
study
at
the
facility
concerned.
(
E)
Any
State
or
political
subdivision
carrying
out
a
health
assessment
for
a
facility
shall
report
the
results
of
the
assessment
to
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
and
the
Administrator
of
EPA
and
shall
include
recommendations
with
respect
to
further
activities
which
need
to
be
carried
out
under
this
section.
The
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
state
such
recommendation
in
any
report
on
the
results
of
any
assessment
carried
out
directly
by
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
for
such
facility
and
shall
issue
periodic
reports
which
include
the
results
of
all
the
assessments
carried
out
under
this
subsection.
(
F)
For
the
purposes
of
this
subsection
and
section
9611(
c)(
4)
of
this
title,
the
term
''
health
assessments''
shall
include
preliminary
assessments
of
the
potential
risk
to
human
health
posed
by
individual
sites
and
facilities,
based
on
such
factors
as
the
nature
and
extent
of
contamination,
the
existence
of
potential
pathways
of
human
exposure
(
including
ground
or
surface
water
contamination,
air
emissions,
and
food
chain
contamination),
the
size
and
potential
susceptibility
of
the
community
within
the
likely
pathways
of
exposure,
the
comparison
of
expected
human
exposure
levels
to
the
short­
term
and
long­
term
health
effects
associated
with
identified
hazardous
substances
and
any
available
recommended
exposure
or
tolerance
limits
for
such
hazardous
substances,
and
the
comparison
of
existing
morbidity
and
mortality
data
on
diseases
that
may
be
associated
with
the
observed
levels
of
exposure.
The
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
use
appropriate
data,
risk
assessments,
risk
evaluations
and
studies
available
from
the
Administrator
of
EPA.
(
G)
The
purpose
of
health
assessments
under
this
subsection
shall
be
to
assist
in
determining
whether
actions
under
paragraph
(
11)
of
this
subsection
should
be
taken
to
reduce
human
exposure
to
hazardous
substances
from
a
facility
and
whether
additional
information
on
human
exposure
and
associated
health
risks
is
needed
and
should
be
acquired
by
conducting
epidemiological
studies
under
paragraph
(
7),
establishing
a
registry
under
paragraph
(
8),
establishing
a
health
surveillance
program
under
paragraph
(
9),
or
through
other
means.
In
using
the
results
of
health
assessments
for
determining
additional
actions
to
be
taken
under
this
section,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
may
consider
additional
information
on
the
risks
to
the
potentially
affected
population
from
all
sources
of
such
hazardous
substances
including
known
point
or
nonpoint
sources
other
than
those
from
the
facility
in
question.
(
H)
At
the
completion
of
each
health
assessment,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
provide
the
Administrator
of
EPA
and
each
affected
State
with
the
results
of
such
assessment,
together
with
any
recommendations
for
further
actions
under
this
subsection
or
otherwise
under
this
chapter.
In
addition,
if
the
health
assessment
indicates
that
the
release
or
threatened
release
concerned
may
pose
a
serious
threat
to
human
health
or
the
environment,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
so
notify
the
Administrator
of
EPA
who
shall
promptly
evaluate
such
release
or
threatened
release
in
accordance
with
the
hazard
ranking
system
referred
to
in
section
9605(
a)(
8)(
A)
of
this
title
to
determine
whether
the
site
shall
be
placed
on
the
National
Priorities
List
or,
if
the
site
is
already
on
the
list,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
may
recommend
to
the
Administrator
of
EPA
that
the
site
be
accorded
a
higher
priority.
(
7)(
A)
Whenever
in
the
judgment
of
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
it
is
appropriate
on
the
basis
of
the
results
of
a
health
assessment,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
conduct
a
pilot
study
of
health
effects
for
selected
groups
of
exposed
individuals
in
order
to
determine
the
desirability
of
conducting
full
scale
epidemiological
or
other
health
studies
of
the
entire
exposed
population.
(
B)
Whenever
in
the
judgment
of
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
it
is
appropriate
on
the
basis
of
the
results
of
such
pilot
study
or
other
study
or
health
assessment,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
conduct
such
full
scale
epidemiological
or
other
health
studies
as
may
be
necessary
to
determine
the
health
effects
on
the
population
exposed
to
hazardous
substances
from
a
release
or
threatened
release.
If
a
significant
excess
of
disease
in
a
population
is
identified,
the
letter
of
transmittal
of
such
study
shall
include
an
assessment
of
other
risk
factors,
other
than
a
release,
that
may,
in
the
judgment
of
the
peer
review
group,
be
associated
with
such
disease,
if
such
risk
factors
were
not
taken
into
account
in
the
design
or
conduct
of
the
study.
(
8)
In
any
case
in
which
the
results
of
a
health
assessment
indicate
a
potential
significant
risk
to
human
health,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
consider
whether
the
establishment
of
a
registry
of
exposed
persons
would
contribute
to
accomplishing
the
purposes
of
this
subsection,
taking
into
account
circumstances
bearing
on
the
usefulness
of
such
a
registry,
including
the
seriousness
or
unique
character
of
identified
diseases
or
the
likelihood
of
population
migration
from
the
affected
area.
(
9)
Where
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
has
determined
that
there
is
a
significant
increased
risk
of
adverse
health
effects
in
humans
from
exposure
to
hazardous
substances
based
on
the
results
of
a
health
assessment
conducted
under
paragraph
(
6),
an
epidemiologic
study
conducted
under
paragraph
(
7),
or
an
exposure
registry
that
has
been
established
under
paragraph
(
8),
and
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
has
determined
that
such
exposure
is
the
result
of
a
release
from
a
facility,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
initiate
a
health
surveillance
program
for
such
population.
This
program
shall
include
but
not
be
limited
to
­
(
A)
periodic
medical
testing
where
appropriate
of
population
subgroups
to
screen
for
diseases
for
which
the
population
or
subgroup
is
at
significant
increased
risk;
and
(
B)
a
mechanism
to
refer
for
treatment
those
individuals
within
such
population
who
are
screened
positive
for
such
diseases.
(
10)
Two
years
after
October
17,
1986,
and
every
2
years
thereafter,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
prepare
and
submit
to
the
Administrator
of
EPA
and
to
the
Congress
a
report
on
the
results
of
the
activities
of
ATSDR
regarding
­
(
A)
health
assessments
and
pilot
health
effects
studies
conducted;
(
B)
epidemiologic
studies
conducted;
(
C)
hazardous
substances
which
have
been
listed
under
paragraph
(
2),
toxicological
profiles
which
have
been
developed,
and
toxicologic
testing
which
has
been
conducted
or
which
is
being
conducted
under
this
subsection;
(
D)
registries
established
under
paragraph
(
8);
and
(
E)
an
overall
assessment,
based
on
the
results
of
activities
conducted
by
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR,
of
the
linkage
between
human
exposure
to
individual
or
combinations
of
hazardous
substances
due
to
releases
from
facilities
covered
by
this
chapter
or
the
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Act
(
42
U.
S.
C.
6901
et
seq.)
and
any
increased
incidence
or
prevalence
of
adverse
health
effects
in
humans.
(
11)
If
a
health
assessment
or
other
study
carried
out
under
this
subsection
contains
a
finding
that
the
exposure
concerned
presents
a
significant
risk
to
human
health,
the
President
shall
take
such
steps
as
may
be
necessary
to
reduce
such
exposure
and
eliminate
or
substantially
mitigate
the
significant
risk
to
human
health.
Such
steps
may
include
the
use
of
any
authority
under
this
chapter,
including,
but
not
limited
to
­
(
A)
provision
of
alternative
water
supplies,
and
(
B)
permanent
or
temporary
relocation
of
individuals.
In
any
case
in
which
information
is
insufficient,
in
the
judgment
of
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
or
the
President
to
determine
a
significant
human
exposure
level
with
respect
to
a
hazardous
substance,
the
President
may
take
such
steps
as
may
be
necessary
to
reduce
the
exposure
of
any
person
to
such
hazardous
substance
to
such
level
as
the
President
deems
necessary
to
protect
human
health.
(
12)
In
any
case
which
is
the
subject
of
a
petition,
a
health
assessment
or
study,
or
a
research
program
under
this
subsection,
nothing
in
this
subsection
shall
be
construed
to
delay
or
otherwise
affect
or
impair
the
authority
of
the
President,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR,
or
the
Administrator
of
EPA
to
exercise
any
authority
vested
in
the
President,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
or
the
Administrator
of
EPA
under
any
other
provision
of
law
(
including,
but
not
limited
to,
the
imminent
hazard
authority
of
section
7003
of
the
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Act
(
42
U.
S.
C.
6973))
or
the
response
and
abatement
authorities
of
this
chapter.
(
13)
All
studies
and
results
of
research
conducted
under
this
subsection
(
other
than
health
assessments)
shall
be
reported
or
adopted
only
after
appropriate
peer
review.
Such
peer
review
shall
be
completed,
to
the
maximum
extent
practicable,
within
a
period
of
60
days.
In
the
case
of
research
conducted
under
the
National
Toxicology
Program,
such
peer
review
may
be
conducted
by
the
Board
of
Scientific
Counselors.
In
the
case
of
other
research,
such
peer
review
shall
be
conducted
by
panels
consisting
of
no
less
than
three
nor
more
than
seven
members,
who
shall
be
disinterested
scientific
experts
selected
for
such
purpose
by
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
or
the
Administrator
of
EPA,
as
appropriate,
on
the
basis
of
their
reputation
for
scientific
objectivity
and
the
lack
of
institutional
ties
with
any
person
involved
in
the
conduct
of
the
study
or
research
under
review.
Support
services
for
such
panels
shall
be
provided
by
the
Agency
for
Toxic
Substances
and
Disease
Registry,
or
by
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
as
appropriate.
(
14)
In
the
implementation
of
this
subsection
and
other
health­
related
authorities
of
this
chapter,
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
assemble,
develop
as
necessary,
and
distribute
to
the
States,
and
upon
request
to
medical
colleges,
physicians,
and
other
health
professionals,
appropriate
educational
materials
(
including
short
courses)
on
the
medical
surveillance,
screening,
and
methods
of
diagnosis
and
treatment
of
injury
or
disease
related
to
exposure
to
hazardous
substances
(
giving
priority
to
those
listed
in
paragraph
(
2)),
through
such
means
as
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
deems
appropriate.
(
15)
The
activities
of
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
described
in
this
subsection
and
section
9611(
c)(
4)
of
this
title
shall
be
carried
out
by
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR,
either
directly
or
through
cooperative
agreements
with
States
(
or
political
subdivisions
thereof)
which
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
determines
are
capable
of
carrying
out
such
activities.
Such
activities
shall
include
provision
of
consultations
on
health
information,
the
conduct
of
health
assessments,
including
those
required
under
section
3019(
b)
of
the
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Act
(
42
U.
S.
C.
6939a(
b)),
health
studies,
registries,
and
health
surveillance.
(
16)
The
President
shall
provide
adequate
personnel
for
ATSDR,
which
shall
not
be
fewer
than
100
employees.
For
purposes
of
determining
the
number
of
employees
under
this
subsection,
an
employee
employed
by
ATSDR
on
a
part­
time
career
employment
basis
shall
be
counted
as
a
fraction
which
is
determined
by
dividing
40
hours
into
the
average
number
of
hours
of
such
employee's
regularly
scheduled
workweek.
(
17)
In
accordance
with
section
9620
of
this
title
(
relating
to
Federal
facilities),
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
shall
have
the
same
authorities
under
this
section
with
respect
to
facilities
owned
or
operated
by
a
department,
agency,
or
instrumentality
of
the
United
States
as
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
has
with
respect
to
any
nongovernmental
entity.
(
18)
If
the
Administrator
of
ATSDR
determines
that
it
is
appropriate
for
purposes
of
this
section
to
treat
a
pollutant
or
contaminant
as
a
hazardous
substance,
such
pollutant
or
contaminant
shall
be
treated
as
a
hazardous
substance
for
such
purpose.
(
j)
Acquisition
of
property
(
1)
Authority
The
President
is
authorized
to
acquire,
by
purchase,
lease,
condemnation,
donation,
or
otherwise,
any
real
property
or
any
interest
in
real
property
that
the
President
in
his
discretion
determines
is
needed
to
conduct
a
remedial
action
under
this
chapter.
There
shall
be
no
cause
of
action
to
compel
the
President
to
acquire
any
interest
in
real
property
under
this
chapter.
(
2)
State
assurance
The
President
may
use
the
authority
of
paragraph
(
1)
for
a
remedial
action
only
if,
before
an
interest
in
real
estate
is
acquired
under
this
subsection,
the
State
in
which
the
interest
to
be
acquired
is
located
assures
the
President,
through
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
or
otherwise,
that
the
State
will
accept
transfer
of
the
interest
following
completion
of
the
remedial
action.
(
3)
Exemption
No
Federal,
State,
or
local
government
agency
shall
be
liable
under
this
chapter
solely
as
a
result
of
acquiring
an
interest
in
real
estate
under
this
subsection.

­
SOURCE­
(
Pub.
L.
96­
510,
title
I,
Sec.
104,
Dec.
11,
1980,
94
Stat.
2774;
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
title
I,
Sec.
104,
110,
title
II,
Sec.
207(
b),
Oct.
17,
1986,
100
Stat.
1617,
1636,
1705;
Pub.
L.
99­
514,
Sec.
2,
Oct.
22,
1986,
100
Stat.
2095;
Pub.
L.
102­
531,
title
III,
Sec.
312(
h),
Oct.
27,
1992,
106
Stat.
3506.)

­
REFTEXT­
REFERENCES
IN
TEXT
The
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Act,
referred
to
in
subsecs.
(
c)(
3),
(
9)(
D)
and
(
i)(
10)(
E),
is
title
II
of
Pub.
L.
89­
272,
Oct.
20,
1965,
79
Stat.
997,
as
amended
generally
by
Pub.
L.
94­
580,
Sec.
2,
Oct.
21,
1976,
90
Stat.
2795,
which
is
classified
generally
to
chapter
82
(
Sec.
6901
et
seq.)
of
this
title.
Subtitle
C
of
the
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Act
is
classified
generally
to
subchapter
III
(
Sec.
6921
et
seq.)
of
chapter
82
of
this
title.
For
complete
classification
of
this
Act
to
the
Code,
see
Short
Title
note
set
out
under
section
6901
of
this
title
and
Tables.
Title
III
of
the
Amendments
and
Reauthorization
Act
of
1986,
referred
to
in
subsec.
(
e)(
7)(
E)(
i),
probably
means
title
III
of
the
Superfund
Amendments
and
Reauthorization
Act
of
1986,
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Oct.
17,
1986,
100
Stat.
1728,
known
as
the
Emergency
Planning
and
Community
Right­
To­
Know
Act
of
1986,
which
is
classified
generally
to
chapter
116
(
Sec.
11001
et
seq.)
of
this
title.
For
complete
classification
of
title
III
to
the
Code,
see
Short
Title
note
set
out
under
section
11001
of
this
title
and
Tables.
The
Davis­
Bacon
Act,
referred
to
in
subsec.
(
g)(
1),
is
act
Mar.
3,
1931,
ch.
411,
46
Stat.
1494,
as
amended,
which
is
classified
generally
to
sections
276a
to
276a­
5
of
Title
40,
Public
Buildings,
Property,
and
Works.
For
complete
classification
of
this
Act
to
the
Code,
see
Short
Title
note
set
out
under
section
276a
of
Title
40
and
Tables.
Reorganization
Plan
Numbered
14
of
1950,
referred
to
in
subsec.
(
g)(
2),
is
set
out
in
the
Appendix
to
Title
5,
Government
Organization
and
Employees.
The
Toxic
Substances
Control
Act,
referred
to
in
subsec.
(
i)(
5)(
C),
(
D),
is
Pub.
L.
94­
469,
Oct.
11,
1976,
90
Stat.
2003,
as
amended,
which
is
classified
generally
to
chapter
53
(
Sec.
2601
et
seq.)
of
Title
15,
Commerce
and
Trade.
For
complete
classification
of
this
Act
to
the
Code,
see
Short
Title
note
set
out
under
section
2601
of
Title
15
and
Tables.
The
Federal
Insecticide,
Fungicide,
and
Rodenticide
Act,
referred
to
in
subsec.
(
i)(
5)(
C),
(
D),
is
act
June
25,
1947,
ch.
125,
as
amended
generally
by
Pub.
L.
92­
516,
Oct.
21,
1972,
86
Stat.
973,
which
is
classified
generally
to
subchapter
II
(
Sec.
136
et
seq.)
of
chapter
6
of
Title
7,
Agriculture.
For
complete
classification
of
this
Act
to
the
Code,
see
Short
Title
note
set
out
under
section
136
of
Title
7
and
Tables.

­
MISC2­
AMENDMENTS
1992
­
Subsec.
(
i)(
1).
Pub.
L.
102­
531
substituted
''
Centers
for
Disease
Control
and
Prevention''
for
''
Centers
for
Disease
Control''.
1986
­
Subsec.
(
a)(
1).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
a),
substituted
provisions
authorizing
the
President
to
allow
owner
or
operator
of
facility
or
vessel
or
any
other
responsible
party
to
carry
out
action,
conduct
the
remedial
investigation,
or
conduct
feasibility
study
under
section
9622
of
this
title,
specifying
conditions
under
which
a
remedial
investigation
or
feasibility
study
would
be
authorized,
providing
for
treatment
of
potentially
responsible
parties,
and
requiring
President
to
give
primary
attention
to
those
releases
which
the
President
deems
may
present
a
public
health
threat,
for
'',
unless
the
President
determines
that
such
removal
and
remedial
action
will
be
done
properly
by
the
owner
or
operator
of
the
vessel
or
facility
from
which
the
release
or
threat
of
release
emanates,
or
by
any
other
responsible
party.''
Subsec.
(
a)(
2).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
b),
amended
par.
(
2)
generally.
Prior
to
amendment,
par.
(
2)
read
as
follows:
''
For
the
purposes
of
this
section,
'
pollutant
or
contaminant'
shall
include,
but
not
be
limited
to,
any
element,
substance,
compound,
or
mixture,
including
disease­
causing
agents,
which
after
release
into
the
environment
and
upon
exposure,
ingestion,
inhalation,
or
assimilation
into
any
organism,
either
directly
from
the
environment
or
indirectly
by
ingestion
through
food
chains,
will
or
may
reasonably
be
anticipated
to
cause
death,
disease,
behavioral
abnormalities,
cancer,
genetic
mutation,
physiological
malfunctions
(
including
malfunctions
in
reproduction)
or
physical
deformations,
in
such
organisms
or
their
offspring.
The
term
does
not
include
petroleum,
including
crude
oil
and
any
fraction
thereof
which
is
not
otherwise
specifically
listed
or
designated
as
hazardous
substances
under
section
9601(
14)(
A)
through
(
F)
of
this
title,
nor
does
it
include
natural
gas,
liquefied
natural
gas,
or
synthetic
gas
of
pipeline
quality
(
or
mixtures
of
natural
gas
and
such
synthetic
gas).''
Subsec.
(
a)(
3),
(
4).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
c),
added
pars.
(
3)
and
(
4).
Subsec.
(
b).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
d),
designated
existing
provisions
as
par.
(
1),
inserted
par.
(
1)
heading,
and
added
par.
(
2).
Subsec.
(
c)(
1).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
e)(
1),
substituted
''$
2,000,000''
for
''$
1,000,000''
and
''
12
months''
for
''
six
months''.
Subsec.
(
c)(
1)(
C).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
e)(
2),
added
cl.
(
C).
Subsec.
(
c)(
3).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
f),
207(
b),
substituted
text
of
cl.
(
C)(
ii)
and
sentence
providing
that
''
facility''
does
not
include
navigable
waters
or
beds
underlying
those
waters
for
''(
ii)
at
least
50
per
centum
or
such
greater
amount
as
the
President
may
determine
appropriate,
taking
into
account
the
degree
of
responsibility
of
the
State
or
political
subdivision,
of
any
sums
expended
in
response
to
a
release
at
a
facility
that
was
owned
at
the
time
of
any
disposal
of
hazardous
substances
therein
by
the
State
or
a
political
subdivision
thereof.
The
President
shall
grant
the
State
a
credit
against
the
share
of
the
costs
for
which
it
is
responsible
under
this
paragraph
for
any
documented
direct
out­
of­
pocket
non­
Federal
funds
expended
or
obligated
by
the
State
or
a
political
subdivision
thereof
after
January
1,
1978,
and
before
December
11,
1980,
for
cost­
eligible
response
actions
and
claims
for
damages
compensable
under
section
9611
of
this
title
relating
to
the
specific
release
in
question:
Provided,
however,
That
in
no
event
shall
the
amount
of
the
credit
granted
exceed
the
total
response
costs
relating
to
the
release.''
and
inserted
provisions
relating
to
remedial
action
to
be
taken
on
land
or
water
held
by
an
Indian
tribe,
held
by
the
United
States
in
trust
for
Indians,
held
by
a
member
of
an
Indian
Tribe
(
if
such
land
or
water
is
subject
to
a
trust
restriction
on
alienation),
or
otherwise
within
the
borders
of
an
Indian
reservation.
Subsec.
(
c)(
4).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
g),
amended
par.
(
4)
generally.
Prior
to
amendment,
par.
(
4)
read
as
follows:
''
The
President
shall
select
appropriate
remedial
actions
determined
to
be
necessary
to
carry
out
this
section
which
are
to
the
extent
practicable
in
accordance
with
the
national
contingency
plan
and
which
provide
for
that
cost­
effective
response
which
provides
a
balance
between
the
need
for
protection
of
public
health
and
welfare
and
the
environment
at
the
facility
under
consideration,
and
the
availability
of
amounts
from
the
Fund
established
under
subchapter
II
of
this
chapter
to
respond
to
other
sites
which
present
or
may
present
a
threat
to
public
health
or
welfare
or
the
environment,
taking
into
consideration
the
need
for
immediate
action.''
Subsec.
(
c)(
5).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
h),
added
par.
(
5).
Subsec.
(
c)(
6).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
i),
added
par.
(
6).
Subsec.
(
c)(
7).
Pub.
L.
99­
514
substituted
''
Internal
Revenue
Code
of
1986''
for
''
Internal
Revenue
Code
of
1954'',
which
for
purposes
of
codification
was
translated
as
''
title
26''
thus
requiring
no
change
in
text.
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
i),
added
par.
(
7).
Subsec.
(
c)(
8).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
j),
added
par.
(
8).
Subsec.
(
c)(
9).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
k),
added
par.
(
9).
Subsec.
(
d)(
1).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
l),
amended
par.
(
1)
generally.
Prior
to
amendment,
par.
(
1)
read
as
follows:
''
Where
the
President
determines
that
a
State
or
political
subdivision
thereof
has
the
capability
to
carry
out
any
or
all
of
the
actions
authorized
in
this
section,
the
President
may,
in
his
discretion,
enter
into
a
contract
or
cooperative
agreement
with
such
State
or
political
subdivision
to
take
such
actions
in
accordance
with
criteria
and
priorities
established
pursuant
to
section
9605(
8)
of
this
title
and
to
be
reimbursed
for
the
reasonable
response
costs
thereof
from
the
Fund.
Any
contract
made
hereunder
shall
be
subject
to
the
cost­
sharing
provisions
of
subsection
(
c)
of
this
section.''
Subsec.
(
e)(
1).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
m),
added
par.
(
1),
and
struck
out
former
par.
(
1)
which
provided
for
access
to,
and
copying
of,
records
relating
to
covered
substances,
and
entry
by
officers,
employees
or
representatives
of
the
President
or
a
State
into
places
where
hazardous
substances
were
or
had
been
generated,
stored,
treated
or
disposed
of,
or
transported
from,
and
inspection
and
obtaining
of
samples
of
such
substances
and
samples
of
containers
or
labeling
for
such
substances.
Subsec.
(
e)(
2)
to
(
6).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
m),
added
pars.
(
2)
to
(
6).
Former
par.
(
2)
redesignated
(
7).
Subsec.
(
e)(
7).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
m),
(
n),
redesignated
par.
(
2)
as
(
7),
aligned
margin
of
par.
(
7)
with
pars.
(
1)
through
(
6),
and
added
par.
heading
and
subpars.
(
E)
and
(
F).
Subsec.
(
i).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
110,
designated
existing
provisions
as
par.
(
1),
redesignated
former
pars.
(
1)
to
(
5)
as
subpars.
(
A)
to
(
E),
respectively,
of
par.
(
1),
in
introductory
provisions
of
par.
(
1),
struck
out
''
and''
after
''
Health
Administration,''
and
inserted
''
the
Secretary
of
Transportation,
and
appropriate
State
and
local
health
officials,''
in
par.
(
1)(
D),
inserted
''
where
appropriate'',
and
added
pars.
(
2)
to
(
18).
Subsec.
(
j).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
104(
o)(
1),
added
subsec.
(
j).
COORDINATION
OF
TITLES
I
TO
IV
OF
PUB.
L.
99­
499
Any
provision
of
titles
I
to
IV
of
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
imposing
any
tax,
premium,
or
fee;
establishing
any
trust
fund;
or
authorizing
expenditures
from
any
trust
fund,
to
have
no
force
or
effect,
see
section
531
of
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
set
out
as
a
note
under
section
1
of
Title
26,
Internal
Revenue
Code.

­
SECREF­
SECTION
REFERRED
TO
IN
OTHER
SECTIONS
This
section
is
referred
to
in
sections
6924,
6939a,
6939b,
6972,
9601,
9607,
9609,
9611,
9613,
9617,
9618,
9619,
9620,
9621,
9622,
9626,
9660,
9661
of
this
title;
title
10
section
2704;
title
26
section
198.

CERCLA
Section
105
42
USC
Sec.
9605
01/
05/
99
TITLE
42
­
THE
PUBLIC
HEALTH
AND
WELFARE
CHAPTER
103
­
COMPREHENSIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSE,
COMPENSATION,
AND
LIABILITY
SUBCHAPTER
I
­
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES
RELEASES,
LIABILITY,
COMPENSATION
Sec.
9605.
National
contingency
plan
(
a)
Revision
and
republication
Within
one
hundred
and
eighty
days
after
December
11,
1980,
the
President
shall,
after
notice
and
opportunity
for
public
comments,
revise
and
republish
the
national
contingency
plan
for
the
removal
of
oil
and
hazardous
substances,
originally
prepared
and
published
pursuant
to
section
1321
of
title
33,
to
reflect
and
effectuate
the
responsibilities
and
powers
created
by
this
chapter,
in
addition
to
those
matters
specified
in
section
1321(
c)(
2)
(
FOOTNOTE
1)
of
title
33.
Such
revision
shall
include
a
section
of
the
plan
to
be
known
as
the
national
hazardous
substance
response
plan
which
shall
establish
procedures
and
standards
for
responding
to
releases
of
hazardous
substances,
pollutants,
and
contaminants,
which
shall
include
at
a
minimum:
(
FOOTNOTE
1)
See
References
in
Text
note
below.
(
1)
methods
for
discovering
and
investigating
facilities
at
which
hazardous
substances
have
been
disposed
of
or
otherwise
come
to
be
located;
(
2)
methods
for
evaluating,
including
analyses
of
relative
cost,
and
remedying
any
releases
or
threats
of
releases
from
facilities
which
pose
substantial
danger
to
the
public
health
or
the
environment;
(
3)
methods
and
criteria
for
determining
the
appropriate
extent
of
removal,
remedy,
and
other
measures
authorized
by
this
chapter;
(
4)
appropriate
roles
and
responsibilities
for
the
Federal,
State,
and
local
governments
and
for
interstate
and
nongovernmental
entities
in
effectuating
the
plan;
(
5)
provision
for
identification,
procurement,
maintenance,
and
storage
of
response
equipment
and
supplies;
(
6)
a
method
for
and
assignment
of
responsibility
for
reporting
the
existence
of
such
facilities
which
may
be
located
on
federally
owned
or
controlled
properties
and
any
releases
of
hazardous
substances
from
such
facilities;
(
7)
means
of
assuring
that
remedial
action
measures
are
cost­
effective
over
the
period
of
potential
exposure
to
the
hazardous
substances
or
contaminated
materials;
(
8)(
A)
criteria
for
determining
priorities
among
releases
or
threatened
releases
throughout
the
United
States
for
the
purpose
of
taking
remedial
action
and,
to
the
extent
practicable
taking
into
account
the
potential
urgency
of
such
action,
for
the
purpose
of
taking
removal
action.
Criteria
and
priorities
under
this
paragraph
shall
be
based
upon
relative
risk
or
danger
to
public
health
or
welfare
or
the
environment,
in
the
judgment
of
the
President,
taking
into
account
to
the
extent
possible
the
population
at
risk,
the
hazard
potential
of
the
hazardous
substances
at
such
facilities,
the
potential
for
contamination
of
drinking
water
supplies,
the
potential
for
direct
human
contact,
the
potential
for
destruction
of
sensitive
ecosystems,
the
damage
to
natural
resources
which
may
affect
the
human
food
chain
and
which
is
associated
with
any
release
or
threatened
release,
the
contamination
or
potential
contamination
of
the
ambient
air
which
is
associated
with
the
release
or
threatened
release,
State
preparedness
to
assume
State
costs
and
responsibilities,
and
other
appropriate
factors;
(
B)
based
upon
the
criteria
set
forth
in
subparagraph
(
A)
of
this
paragraph,
the
President
shall
list
as
part
of
the
plan
national
priorities
among
the
known
releases
or
threatened
releases
throughout
the
United
States
and
shall
revise
the
list
no
less
often
than
annually.
Within
one
year
after
December
11,
1980,
and
annually
thereafter,
each
State
shall
establish
and
submit
for
consideration
by
the
President
priorities
for
remedial
action
among
known
releases
and
potential
releases
in
that
State
based
upon
the
criteria
set
forth
in
subparagraph
(
A)
of
this
paragraph.
In
assembling
or
revising
the
national
list,
the
President
shall
consider
any
priorities
established
by
the
States.
To
the
extent
practicable,
the
highest
priority
facilities
shall
be
designated
individually
and
shall
be
referred
to
as
the
''
top
priority
among
known
response
targets'',
and,
to
the
extent
practicable,
shall
include
among
the
one
hundred
highest
priority
facilities
one
such
facility
from
each
State
which
shall
be
the
facility
designated
by
the
State
as
presenting
the
greatest
danger
to
public
health
or
welfare
or
the
environment
among
the
known
facilities
in
such
State.
A
State
shall
be
allowed
to
designate
its
highest
priority
facility
only
once.
Other
priority
facilities
or
incidents
may
be
listed
singly
or
grouped
for
response
priority
purposes;
(
9)
specified
roles
for
private
organizations
and
entities
in
preparation
for
response
and
in
responding
to
releases
of
hazardous
substances,
including
identification
of
appropriate
qualifications
and
capacity
therefor
and
including
consideration
of
minority
firms
in
accordance
with
subsection
(
f)
of
this
section;
and
(
10)
standards
and
testing
procedures
by
which
alternative
or
innovative
treatment
technologies
can
be
determined
to
be
appropriate
for
utilization
in
response
actions
authorized
by
this
chapter.
The
plan
shall
specify
procedures,
techniques,
materials,
equipment,
and
methods
to
be
employed
in
identifying,
removing,
or
remedying
releases
of
hazardous
substances
comparable
to
those
required
under
section
1321(
c)(
2)(
F)
and
(
G)
and
(
j)(
1)
of
title
33.
Following
publication
of
the
revised
national
contingency
plan,
the
response
to
and
actions
to
minimize
damage
from
hazardous
substances
releases
shall,
to
the
greatest
extent
possible,
be
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
the
plan.
The
President
may,
from
time
to
time,
revise
and
republish
the
national
contingency
plan.
(
b)
Revision
of
plan
Not
later
than
18
months
after
the
enactment
of
the
Superfund
Amendments
and
Reauthorization
Act
of
1986
(
October
17,
1986),
the
President
shall
revise
the
National
Contingency
Plan
to
reflect
the
requirements
of
such
amendments.
The
portion
of
such
Plan
known
as
''
the
National
Hazardous
Substance
Response
Plan''
shall
be
revised
to
provide
procedures
and
standards
for
remedial
actions
undertaken
pursuant
to
this
chapter
which
are
consistent
with
amendments
made
by
the
Superfund
Amendments
and
Reauthorization
Act
of
1986
relating
to
the
selection
of
remedial
action.
(
c)
Hazard
ranking
system
(
1)
Revision
Not
later
than
18
months
after
October
17,
1986,
and
after
publication
of
notice
and
opportunity
for
submission
of
comments
in
accordance
with
section
553
of
title
5,
the
President
shall
by
rule
promulgate
amendments
to
the
hazard
ranking
system
in
effect
on
September
1,
1984.
Such
amendments
shall
assure,
to
the
maximum
extent
feasible,
that
the
hazard
ranking
system
accurately
assesses
the
relative
degree
of
risk
to
human
health
and
the
environment
posed
by
sites
and
facilities
subject
to
review.
The
President
shall
establish
an
effective
date
for
the
amended
hazard
ranking
system
which
is
not
later
than
24
months
after
October
17,
1986.
Such
amended
hazard
ranking
system
shall
be
applied
to
any
site
or
facility
to
be
newly
listed
on
the
National
Priorities
List
after
the
effective
date
established
by
the
President.
Until
such
effective
date
of
the
regulations,
the
hazard
ranking
system
in
effect
on
September
1,
1984,
shall
continue
in
full
force
and
effect.
(
2)
Health
assessment
of
water
contamination
risks
In
carrying
out
this
subsection,
the
President
shall
ensure
that
the
human
health
risks
associated
with
the
contamination
or
potential
contamination
(
either
directly
or
as
a
result
of
the
runoff
of
any
hazardous
substance
or
pollutant
or
contaminant
from
sites
or
facilities)
of
surface
water
are
appropriately
assessed
where
such
surface
water
is,
or
can
be,
used
for
recreation
or
potable
water
consumption.
In
making
the
assessment
required
pursuant
to
the
preceding
sentence,
the
President
shall
take
into
account
the
potential
migration
of
any
hazardous
substance
or
pollutant
or
contaminant
through
such
surface
water
to
downstream
sources
of
drinking
water.
(
3)
Reevaluation
not
required
The
President
shall
not
be
required
to
reevaluate,
after
October
17,
1986,
the
hazard
ranking
of
any
facility
which
was
evaluated
in
accordance
with
the
criteria
under
this
section
before
the
effective
date
of
the
amendments
to
the
hazard
ranking
system
under
this
subsection
and
which
was
assigned
a
national
priority
under
the
National
Contingency
Plan.
(
4)
New
information
Nothing
in
paragraph
(
3)
shall
preclude
the
President
from
taking
new
information
into
account
in
undertaking
response
actions
under
this
chapter.
(
d)
Petition
for
assessment
of
release
Any
person
who
is,
or
may
be,
affected
by
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
a
hazardous
substance
or
pollutant
or
contaminant,
may
petition
the
President
to
conduct
a
preliminary
assessment
of
the
hazards
to
public
health
and
the
environment
which
are
associated
with
such
release
or
threatened
release.
If
the
President
has
not
previously
conducted
a
preliminary
assessment
of
such
release,
the
President
shall,
within
12
months
after
the
receipt
of
any
such
petition,
complete
such
assessment
or
provide
an
explanation
of
why
the
assessment
is
not
appropriate.
If
the
preliminary
assessment
indicates
that
the
release
or
threatened
release
concerned
may
pose
a
threat
to
human
health
or
the
environment,
the
President
shall
promptly
evaluate
such
release
or
threatened
release
in
accordance
with
the
hazard
ranking
system
referred
to
in
paragraph
(
8)(
A)
of
subsection
(
a)
of
this
section
to
determine
the
national
priority
of
such
release
or
threatened
release.
(
e)
Releases
from
earlier
sites
Whenever
there
has
been,
after
January
1,
1985,
a
significant
release
of
hazardous
substances
or
pollutants
or
contaminants
from
a
site
which
is
listed
by
the
President
as
a
''
Site
Cleaned
Up
To
Date''
on
the
National
Priorities
List
(
revised
edition,
December
1984)
the
site
shall
be
restored
to
the
National
Priorities
List,
without
application
of
the
hazard
ranking
system.
(
f)
Minority
contractors
In
awarding
contracts
under
this
chapter,
the
President
shall
consider
the
availability
of
qualified
minority
firms.
The
President
shall
describe,
as
part
of
any
annual
report
submitted
to
the
Congress
under
this
chapter,
the
participation
of
minority
firms
in
contracts
carried
out
under
this
chapter.
Such
report
shall
contain
a
brief
description
of
the
contracts
which
have
been
awarded
to
minority
firms
under
this
chapter
and
of
the
efforts
made
by
the
President
to
encourage
the
participation
of
such
firms
in
programs
carried
out
under
this
chapter.
(
g)
Special
study
wastes
(
1)
Application
This
subsection
applies
to
facilities
­
(
A)
which
as
of
October
17,
1986,
were
not
included
on,
or
proposed
for
inclusion
on,
the
National
Priorities
List;
and
(
B)
at
which
special
study
wastes
described
in
paragraph
(
2),
(
3)(
A)(
ii)
or
(
3)(
A)(
iii)
of
section
6921(
b)
of
this
title
are
present
in
significant
quantities,
including
any
such
facility
from
which
there
has
been
a
release
of
a
special
study
waste.
(
2)
Considerations
in
adding
facilities
to
NPL
Pending
revision
of
the
hazard
ranking
system
under
subsection
(
c)
of
this
section,
the
President
shall
consider
each
of
the
following
factors
in
adding
facilities
covered
by
this
section
to
the
National
Priorities
List:
(
A)
The
extent
to
which
hazard
ranking
system
score
for
the
facility
is
affected
by
the
presence
of
any
special
study
waste
at,
or
any
release
from,
such
facility.
(
B)
Available
information
as
to
the
quantity,
toxicity,
and
concentration
of
hazardous
substances
that
are
constituents
of
any
special
study
waste
at,
or
released
from
such
facility,
the
extent
of
or
potential
for
release
of
such
hazardous
constituents,
the
exposure
or
potential
exposure
to
human
population
and
the
environment,
and
the
degree
of
hazard
to
human
health
or
the
environment
posed
by
the
release
of
such
hazardous
constituents
at
such
facility.
This
subparagraph
refers
only
to
available
information
on
actual
concentrations
of
hazardous
substances
and
not
on
the
total
quantity
of
special
study
waste
at
such
facility.
(
3)
Savings
provisions
Nothing
in
this
subsection
shall
be
construed
to
limit
the
authority
of
the
President
to
remove
any
facility
which
as
of
October
17,
1986,
is
included
on
the
National
Priorities
List
from
such
List,
or
not
to
list
any
facility
which
as
of
such
date
is
proposed
for
inclusion
on
such
list.
(
4)
Information
gathering
and
analysis
Nothing
in
this
chapter
shall
be
construed
to
preclude
the
expenditure
of
monies
from
the
Fund
for
gathering
and
analysis
of
information
which
will
enable
the
President
to
consider
the
specific
factors
required
by
paragraph
(
2).

­
SOURCE­
(
Pub.
L.
96­
510,
title
I,
Sec.
105,
Dec.
11,
1980,
94
Stat.
2779;
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
title
I,
Sec.
105,
Oct.
17,
1986,
100
Stat.
1625.)

­
REFTEXT­
REFERENCES
IN
TEXT
Section
1321(
c)(
2)
of
title
33,
referred
to
in
subsec.
(
a),
was
amended
generally
by
Pub.
L.
101­
380,
title
IV,
Sec.
4201(
a),
Aug.
18,
1990,
104
Stat.
523.
Prior
to
general
amendment,
subsec.
(
c)(
2)
related
to
preparation
of
a
National
Contingency
Plan.
Provisions
relating
to
a
National
Contingency
Plan
are
contained
in
section
1321(
d)
of
Title
33,
Navigation
and
Navigable
Waters.
Such
amendments
and
the
amendments
made
by
the
Superfund
Amendments
and
Reauthorization
Act
of
1986,
referred
to
in
subsec.
(
b),
are
the
amendments
made
by
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Oct.
17,
1986,
100
Stat.
1613.
For
complete
classification
of
this
Act
to
the
Code,
see
Short
Title
of
1986
Amendment
note
set
out
under
section
9601
of
this
title
and
Tables.

­
MISC2­
AMENDMENTS
1986
­
Subsec.
(
a).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
105(
a)(
1),
designated
existing
provisions
as
subsec.
(
a)
and
added
heading.
Subsec.
(
a)(
8)(
A).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
105(
a)(
2),
inserted
''
the
damage
to
natural
resources
which
may
affect
the
human
food
chain
and
which
is
associated
with
any
release
or
threatened
release,
the
contamination
or
potential
contamination
of
the
ambient
air
which
is
associated
with
the
release
or
threatened
release,''
after
''
ecosystems,''.
Subsec.
(
a)(
8)(
B).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
105(
a)(
3),
struck
out
''
at
least
four
hundred
of''
after
''
To
the
extent
practicable,'',
substituted
''
one
hundred
highest
priority
facilities''
for
''
one
hundred
highest
priority
facilities
at
least'',
and
inserted
''
A
State
shall
be
allowed
to
designate
its
highest
priority
facility
only
once.''
Subsec.
(
a)(
9).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
105(
a)(
4),
inserted
''
and
including
consideration
of
minority
firms
in
accordance
with
subsection
(
f)
of
this
section''.
Subsec.
(
a)(
10).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
105(
a)(
5),
added
par.
(
10).
Subsecs.
(
b)
to
(
g).
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
Sec.
105(
b),
added
subsecs.
(
b)
to
(
g).

­
SECREF­
SECTION
REFERRED
TO
IN
OTHER
SECTIONS
This
section
is
referred
to
in
sections
9601,
9604,
9607,
9611,
9616,
9620,
9622,
9626,
9651,
11003
of
this
title;
title
26
sections
198,
468;
title
33
section
2701;
title
49
sections
5102,
5115.
CERCLA
Section
116
42
USC
Sec.
9616
01/
05/
99
TITLE
42
­
THE
PUBLIC
HEALTH
AND
WELFARE
CHAPTER
103
­
COMPREHENSIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSE,
COMPENSATION,
AND
LIABILITY
SUBCHAPTER
I
­
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES
RELEASES,
LIABILITY,
COMPENSATION
Sec.
9616.
Schedules
(
a)
Assessment
and
listing
of
facilities
It
shall
be
a
goal
of
this
chapter
that,
to
the
maximum
extent
practicable
­
(
1)
not
later
than
January
1,
1988,
the
President
shall
complete
preliminary
assessments
of
all
facilities
that
are
contained
(
as
of
October
17,
1986)
on
the
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation,
and
Liability
Information
System
(
CERCLIS)
including
in
each
assessment
a
statement
as
to
whether
a
site
inspection
is
necessary
and
by
whom
it
should
be
carried
out;
and
(
2)
not
later
than
January
1,
1989,
the
President
shall
assure
the
completion
of
site
inspections
at
all
facilities
for
which
the
President
has
stated
a
site
inspection
is
necessary
pursuant
to
paragraph
(
1).
(
b)
Evaluation
Within
4
years
after
October
17,
1986,
each
facility
listed
(
as
of
October
17,
1986)
in
the
CERCLIS
shall
be
evaluated
if
the
President
determines
that
such
evaluation
is
warranted
on
the
basis
of
a
site
inspection
or
preliminary
assessment.
The
evaluation
shall
be
in
accordance
with
the
criteria
established
in
section
9605
of
this
title
under
the
National
Contingency
Plan
for
determining
priorities
among
release
for
inclusion
on
the
National
Priorities
List.
In
the
case
of
a
facility
listed
in
the
CERCLIS
after
October
17,
1986,
the
facility
shall
be
evaluated
within
4
years
after
the
date
of
such
listing
if
the
President
determines
that
such
evaluation
is
warranted
on
the
basis
of
a
site
inspection
or
preliminary
assessment.
(
c)
Explanations
If
any
of
the
goals
established
by
subsection
(
a)
or
(
b)
of
this
section
are
not
achieved,
the
President
shall
publish
an
explanation
of
why
such
action
could
not
be
completed
by
the
specified
date.
(
d)
Commencement
of
RI/
FS
The
President
shall
assure
that
remedial
investigations
and
feasibility
studies
(
RI/
FS)
are
commenced
for
facilities
listed
on
the
National
Priorities
List,
in
addition
to
those
commenced
prior
to
October
17,
1986,
in
accordance
with
the
following
schedule:
(
1)
not
fewer
than
275
by
the
date
36
months
after
October
17,
1986,
and
(
2)
if
the
requirement
of
paragraph
(
1)
is
not
met,
not
fewer
than
an
additional
175
by
the
date
4
years
after
October
17,
1986,
an
additional
200
by
the
date
5
years
after
October
17,
1986,
and
a
total
of
650
by
the
date
5
years
after
October
17,
1986.
(
e)
Commencement
of
remedial
action
The
President
shall
assure
that
substantial
and
continuous
physical
on­
site
remedial
action
commences
at
facilities
on
the
National
Priorities
List,
in
addition
to
those
facilities
on
which
remedial
action
has
commenced
prior
to
October
17,
1986,
at
a
rate
not
fewer
than:
(
1)
175
facilities
during
the
first
36­
month
period
after
October
17,
1986;
and
(
2)
200
additional
facilities
during
the
following
24
months
after
such
36­
month
period.

­
SOURCE­
(
Pub.
L.
96­
510,
title
I,
Sec.
116,
as
added
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
title
I,
Sec.
116,
Oct.
17,
1986,
100
Stat.
1653.)

CERCLA
Section
118
42
USC
Sec.
9618
01/
05/
99
TITLE
42
­
THE
PUBLIC
HEALTH
AND
WELFARE
CHAPTER
103
­
COMPREHENSIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSE,
COMPENSATION,
AND
LIABILITY
SUBCHAPTER
I
­
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES
RELEASES,
LIABILITY,
COMPENSATION
Sec.
9618.
High
priority
for
drinking
water
supplies
For
purposes
of
taking
action
under
section
9604
or
9606
of
this
title
and
listing
facilities
on
the
National
Priorities
List,
the
President
shall
give
a
high
priority
to
facilities
where
the
release
of
hazardous
substances
or
pollutants
or
contaminants
has
resulted
in
the
closing
of
drinking
water
wells
or
has
contaminated
a
principal
drinking
water
supply.

­
SOURCE­
(
Pub.
L.
96­
510,
title
I,
Sec.
118,
as
added
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
title
I,
Sec.
118(
a),
Oct.
17,
1986,
100
Stat.
1655.)

CERCLA
Section
125
42
USC
Sec.
9625
01/
05/
99
TITLE
42
­
THE
PUBLIC
HEALTH
AND
WELFARE
CHAPTER
103
­
COMPREHENSIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSE,
COMPENSATION,
AND
LIABILITY
SUBCHAPTER
I
­
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES
RELEASES,
LIABILITY,
COMPENSATION
Sec.
9625.
Section
6921(
b)(
3)(
A)(
i)
waste
(
a)
Revision
of
hazard
ranking
system
This
section
shall
apply
only
to
facilities
which
are
not
included
or
proposed
for
inclusion
on
the
National
Priorities
List
and
which
contain
substantial
volumes
of
waste
described
in
section
6921(
b)(
3)(
A)(
i)
of
this
title.
As
expeditiously
as
practicable,
the
President
shall
revise
the
hazard
ranking
system
in
effect
under
the
National
Contingency
Plan
with
respect
to
such
facilities
in
a
manner
which
assures
appropriate
consideration
of
each
of
the
following
site­
specific
characteristics
of
such
facilities:
(
1)
The
quantity,
toxicity,
and
concentrations
of
hazardous
constituents
which
are
present
in
such
waste
and
a
comparison
thereof
with
other
wastes.
(
2)
The
extent
of,
and
potential
for,
release
of
such
hazardous
constituents
into
the
environment.
(
3)
The
degree
of
risk
to
human
health
and
the
environment
posed
by
such
constituents.
(
b)
Inclusion
prohibited
Until
the
hazard
ranking
system
is
revised
as
required
by
this
section,
the
President
may
not
include
on
the
National
Priorities
List
any
facility
which
contains
substantial
volumes
of
waste
described
in
section
6921(
b)(
3)(
A)(
i)
of
this
title
on
the
basis
of
an
evaluation
made
principally
on
the
volume
of
such
waste
and
not
on
the
concentrations
of
the
hazardous
constituents
of
such
waste.
Nothing
in
this
section
shall
be
construed
to
affect
the
President's
authority
to
include
any
such
facility
on
the
National
Priorities
List
based
on
the
presence
of
other
substances
at
such
facility
or
to
exercise
any
other
authority
of
this
chapter
with
respect
to
such
other
substances.

­
SOURCE­
(
Pub.
L.
96­
510,
title
I,
Sec.
125,
as
added
Pub.
L.
99­
499,
title
I,
Sec.
125,
Oct.
17,
1986,
100
Stat.
1689.)
Appendix
B
HRS
Scoresheets
TABLE
3­
1
GROUND
WATER
MIGRATION
PATHWAY
SCORESHEET
Factor
Categories
and
Factors
Likelihood
of
Release
to
an
Aquifer
Maximum
Value
Value
Assigned
1.
Observed
Release
550
2.
Potential
to
Release
2a.
Containment
10
2b.
Net
Precipitation
10
2c.
Depth
to
Aquifer
5
2d.
Travel
Time
35
2e.
Potential
to
Release
[
lines
2a
x
(
2b
+
2c
+
2d)]
500
3.
Likelihood
of
Release
(
higher
of
lines
1
and
2e)
550
Waste
Characteristics
4.
Toxicity/
Mobility
a
5.
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
a
6.
Waste
Characteristics
100
Targets
7.
Nearest
Well
50
8.
Population
8a.
Level
I
Concentrations
b
8b.
Level
II
Concentrations
b
8c.
Potential
Contamination
b
8d.
Population
(
lines
8a
+
8b
+
8c)
b
9.
Resources
5
10.
Wellhead
Protection
Area
20
11.
Targets
(
lines
7
+
8d
+
9
+
10)
b
GROUND
WATER
MIGRATION
SCORE
FOR
AN
AQUIFER
12.
Aquifer
Score
[(
lines
3
x
6
x
11)/
82,500]
c
100
GROUND
WATER
MIGRATION
PATHWAY
SCORE
13.
Pathway
Score
(
S
gw),
(
highest
value
from
line
12
for
all
aquifers
evaluated)
c
100
aMaximum
value
applies
to
waste
characteristics
category.
bMaximum
value
not
applicable.
cDo
not
round
to
nearest
integer.
TABLE
4­
1
SURFACE
WATER
OVERLAND/
FLOOD
MIGRATION
COMPONENT
SCORESHEET
Factor
Categories
and
Factors
Maximum
Value
Value
Assigned
DRINKING
WATER
THREAT
Likelihood
of
Release
1.
Observed
Release
550
2.
Potential
to
Release
by
Overland
Flow
2a.
Containment
10
2b.
Runoff
25
2c.
Distance
to
Surface
Water
25
2d.
Potential
to
Release
by
Overland
Flow
(
lines
2a
x
[
2b
+
2c])
500
3.
Potential
to
Release
by
Flood
3a.
Containment
(
Flood)
10
3b.
Flood
Frequency
50
3c.
Potential
to
Release
by
Flood
(
lines
3a
x
3b)
500
4.
Potential
to
Release
(
lines
2d
+
3c,
subject
to
a
maximum
of
500)
500
5.
Likelihood
of
Release
(
higher
of
lines
1
and
4)
550
Waste
Characteristics
6.
Toxicity/
Persistence
a
7.
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
a
8.
Waste
Characteristics
100
Targets
9.
Nearest
Intake
50
10.
Population
10a.
Level
I
Concentrations
b
10b.
Level
II
Concentrations
b
10c.
Potential
Contamination
b
10d.
Population
(
lines
10a
+
10b
+
10c)
b
11.
Resources
5
12.
Targets
(
lines
9
+
10d
+
11)
b
Drinking
Water
Threat
Score
13.
Drinking
Water
Threat
Score
([
lines
5
x
8
x
12]/
82,500,
subject
to
a
maximum
of
100)
100
Factor
Categories
and
Factors
Maximum
Value
Value
Assigned
HUMAN
FOOD
CHAIN
THREAT
Likelihood
of
Release
14.
Likelihood
of
Release
(
same
value
as
line
5)
550
Waste
Characteristics
15.
Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
a
16.
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
a
17.
Waste
Characteristics
1,000
Targets
18.
Food
Chain
Individual
50
19.
Population
19a.
Level
I
Concentrations
b
19b.
Level
II
Concentrations
b
19c.
Potential
Human
Food
Chain
Contamination
b
19d.
Population
(
lines
19a
+
19b
+
19c)
b
20.
Targets
(
lines
18
+
19d)
b
Human
Food
Chain
Threat
Score
21.
Human
Food
Chain
Threat
Score
([
lines
14
x
17
x
20]/
82,500,
subject
to
a
maximum
of
100)
100
ENVIRONMENTAL
THREAT
Likelihood
of
Release
22.
Likelihood
of
Release
(
same
value
as
line
5)
550
Waste
Characteristics
23.
Ecosystem
Toxicity/
Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
a
24.
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
a
25.
Waste
Characteristics
1,000
Targets
26.
Sensitive
Environments
26a.
Level
I
Concentrations
b
26b.
Level
II
Concentrations
b
26c.
Potential
Contamination
b
26d.
Sensitive
Environments
(
lines
26a
+
26b
+
26c)
b
27.
Targets
(
value
from
26d)
b
ENVIRONMENTAL
THREAT
(
Concluded).

Factor
Categories
and
Factors
Maximum
Value
Value
Assigned
Environmental
Threat
Score
28.
Environmental
Threat
Score
([
lines
22
x
25
x
27]/
82,500,
subject
to
a
maximum
of
60)
60
SURFACE
WATER
OVERLAND/
FLOOD
MIGRATION
COMPONENT
SCORE
FOR
A
WATERSHED
29.
Watershed
Scorec
(
lines
13
+
21
+
28,
subject
to
a
maximum
of
100)
100
SURFACE
WATER
OVERLAND/
FLOOD
MIGRATION
COMPONENT
SCORE
30.
Component
Score
(
S
of)
c,
(
highest
score
from
line
29
for
all
watersheds
evaluated,
subject
to
a
maximum
of
100)
100
aMaximum=
value
applies
to
waste
characteristics
category.
bMaximum
value
not
applicable.
cDo
not
round
to
nearest
integer.
TABLE
5­
1
SOIL
EXPOSURE
PATHWAY
SCORESHEET
Factor
Categories
and
Factors
Maximum
Value
Value
Assigned
RESIDENT
POPULATION
THREAT
Likelihood
of
Exposure
1.
Likelihood
of
Exposure
550
Waste
Characteristics
2.
Toxicity
a
3.
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
a
4.
Waste
Characteristics
100
Targets
5.
Resident
Individual
50
6.
Resident
Population
6a.
Level
I
Concentrations
b
6b.
Level
II
Concentrations
b
6c.
Resident
Population
(
lines
6a
+
6b)
b
7.
Workers
15
8.
Resources
5
9.
Terrestrial
Sensitive
Environments
c
10.
Targets
(
lines
5
+
6c
+
7
+
8
+
9)
b
Resident
Population
Threat
Score
11.
Resident
Population
Threat
(
lines
1
x
4
x
10)
b
NEARBY
POPULATION
THREAT
Likelihood
of
Exposure
12.
Attractiveness/
Accessibility
100
13.
Area
of
Contamination
100
14.
Likelihood
of
Exposure
500
Waste
Characteristics
15.
Toxicity
a
16.
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
a
17.
Waste
Characteristics
100
Factor
Categories
and
Factors
Maximum
Value
Value
Assigned
NEARBY
POPULATION
THREAT
(
Concluded)

Targets
18.
Nearby
Individual
1
19.
Population
Within
1
Mile
b
20.
Targets
(
lines
18
+
19)
b
Nearby
Population
Threat
Score
21.
Nearby
Population
Threat
(
lines
14
x
17
x
20)
b
SOIL
EXPOSURE
PATHWAY
SCORE
22.
Soil
Exposure
Pathway
Scored
(
S
s),
(
lines
[
11
+
21]/
82,500,
subject
to
a
maximum
of
100)
100
aMaximum
value
applies
to
waste
characteristics
category.
bMaximum
value
not
applicable.
cNo
specific
maximum
value
applies
to
factor.
However,
pathway
score
based
solely
on
terrestrial
sensitive
environments
is
limited
to
maximum
of
60.
dDo
not
round
to
nearest
integer.
TABLE
6­
1
AIR
MIGRATION
PATHWAY
SCORESHEET
Factor
Categories
and
Factors
Likelihood
of
Release
Maximum
Value
Value
Assigned
1.
Observed
Release
550
2.
Potential
to
Release
2a.
Gas
Potential
to
Release
500
2b.
Particulate
Potential
to
Release
500
2c.
Potential
to
Release
(
higher
of
lines
2a
and
2b)
500
3.
Likelihood
of
Release
(
higher
of
lines
1
and
2c)
550
Waste
Characteristics
4.
Toxicity/
Mobility
a
5.
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
a
6.
Waste
Characteristics
100
Targets
7.
Nearest
Individual
50
8.
Population
8a.
Level
I
Concentrations
b
8b.
Level
II
Concentrations
b
8c.
Potential
Contamination
b
8d.
Population
(
lines
8a
+
8b
+
8c)
b
9.
Resources
5
10.
Sensitive
Environments
10a.
Actual
Contamination
c
10b.
Potential
Contamination
c
10c.
Sensitive
Environments
(
Lines
10a
+
10b)
c
11.
Targets
(
lines
7
+
8d
+
9
+
10c)
b
AIR
MIGRATION
PATHWAY
SCORE
12.
Pathway
Score
(
S
a),
[(
lines
3
x
6
x
11)/
82,500]
d
100
aMaximum
value
applies
to
waste
characteristics
category.
bMaximum
value
not
applicable.
cNo
specific
maximum
value
applies
to
factor.
However,
pathway
score
based
solely
on
sensitive
environments
is
limited
to
maximum
of
60.
dDo
not
round
to
nearest
integer.