CERCLA and Brownfields Publications by Task Force/Focus Group
128(a) Successes Checklist (May 2014)
The Checklist and Defintions below are meant to summarize the work accomplished during the reporting period that is not captured by ACRES and PALS. It is not meant to be a comprehensive compilation unless defined as such but rather a “snapshot taken” during that period. We realize that programs and needs vary from State to State (and territories) and therefore accomplishments will also vary so the Checklist not meant to be a “to do” list or goal to complete a task to obtain a number in every box but rather an improved manner to report accomplishments and to provide a means to easily summarize what is being done on a national level.
»Introductionand Definitions of the 128(a) Successes Checklist (PDF)
»128(a) Successes Checklist (Excel)
Community Gardening Toolbox (October 2012)
The Toolbox is designed to assist States by providing a reference guide for State environmental staff on community gardening on brownfield sites. States are encouraged to personalize the toolbox by adding their own State-specific and other regulatory information to increase the documents applicability and usefulness. The final Toolbox is presented in Microsoft Word so States are able to reformat the document for their own specific needs.
»Community Gardening Toolbox
»Appendix A: References
»Appendix B: Site Model
Compendium of State Land Revitalization Indicators (May 2009)
This Compendium illustrates the types of socioeconomic data being collected by States to measure the effectiveness of their state programs in facilitating the investigation, remediation and redevelopment of contaminated sites, including brownfields.
»Compendium of State Land Revitalization Indicators
Toolbox for Cleanup and Redevelopment of Contaminated Sites in Small Cities and Rural Communities (March 2007)
The Toolbox is designed to assist States in educating rural communities and small cities about State and federal programs and processes for cleaning up contaminated waste sites with redevelopment potential. It can also help States market their response programs. States are encouraged to add their own State-specific and other regulatory information to the document, to increase the applicability and usefulness of it for local government entities. A State-specific example of the document has been included for reference, and a version of the final Toolbox in Microsoft Word is also included for States to use in reformatting the document for their own specific needs.
»Toolbox final (in PDF) (3.9 MB)
»Toolbox final (in MS Word) (179 KB)
»Toolbox final cover letter (179 KB)
»Toolbox State specific example (605KB)
State Conceptual Framework to Estimate Associated Cost (August 2012)
Building upon previously funded EPA research conducted by the Environmental Law Institute, the ASTSWMO Long-Term Stewardship Focus Group chose to develop an institutional controls costing tool that represents a State perspective, especially for those States currently in the development or implementation stage of a State LTS program. Rather than focusing narrowly on site-specific IC costs, the Focus Group conducted a broad evaluation of all of the costs associated with LTS. From this analysis, the Focus Group has developed a spreadsheet tool to assist States in establishing or enhancing an existing ICs or LTS program and determining the costs associated with those activities.
»State Conceptual Framework to Estimate Associated Cost
»State IC Tool
Framework for Long-Term Monitoring of Hazardous Substances at Sediment Sites (January 2009)
This document was created by the ASTSWMO Sediments Focus Group. The purpose of this guide is to address the components of a successful monitoring plan. It is designed to provide state project managers with information sources and examples of issues related to the establishment of successful long-term monitoring programs for sediment remediation sites.
»Framework for Long-Term Monitoring of Hazardous Substances at Sediment Sites
Update of: Analysis of State Operation and Maintenance Costs at Superfund Sites (November 2008)
This report is an update to the June 2007 report of the same name and incorporates data from a follow up research effort to support conclusions on a more robust data set.
»final OM report-11072008.pdf
Analysis of State Strategies for Funding O&M at Superfund Sites (November 2008)
The ASTSWMO Long-Term Stewardship (LTS) Focus Group prepared this report which examines the methods that States are using to plan for handling the financial aspects of LTS activities at Superfund sites, including estimating the costs, budgeting, and ensuring sufficient funds exist for long-term O&M.
Analysis of State Operation and Maintenance Costs at Superfund Sites (June 2007)
As Superfund matures, a number of NPL sites have reached the stage of Post Construction Completion and States have assumed the obligation for long-term monitoring and maintenance of the remedial actions. The ASTSWMO Long-Term Stewardship Focus Group has prepared an analysis of State Operation and Maintenance (O&M) costs at several NPL sites, to include some of the factors affecting actual State costs at these sites.
»Final draft OM report-062207.pdf (in PDF) (2.2 MB)
»om-data-tool.xls (in Excel) (75 KB)
»om-data.pdf (in PDF) (340 KB)
Sediment Remedy Effectiveness and Recontamination (April 2013)
The ASTSWMO Sediments Focus Group has produced this document that discusses causes and issues related to recontamination. Discussion topics include new contamination of sediment sites from both known sources and newly identified sources, including contamination from new chemicals or those not addressed in previous assessments, and identification of pollutants most commonly found in areas where recontamination has occurred. Also included are case studies at sediment remediation sites where inadequate source control and/or recontamination have been documented after remedy efforts have commenced.
»Sediment Remedy Effectiveness and Recontamination (5.25 MB)
Guide to the Assessment and Remediation of State-Managed Sediment Sites (June 2007)
The ASTSWMO Sediments Focus Group has developed this paper which presents issues related to State sediment sites, which are typically smaller than those listed on the NPL. State sediment sites can offer unique and complex challenges, such as limited resources of the State remedial programs and smaller, less financially viable responsible parties. This paper highlights issues and provides references for States to motivate and cooperatively accomplish cleanup.
»Guide to the Assessment and Remediation of State-Managed Sediment Sites.pdf (959 KB)
»Appendices-A-B-sediment.pdf (83 KB)
Analysis of Superfund Site Assessment Program Cooperative Agreements with States: Benefits of Effective State and Federal Partnerships (May 2014)
In this Analysis of Site Assessment Program Cooperative Agreements with States report, the Focus Group is following up on the findings of the Superfund Site Assessment Program: Benefits Beyond NLP Listing reports. The previous reports collected and reported the numbers of non-NPL outcomes on a national scale, however, their scope did not include investigating how these beneficial outcomes occur. The goals of this report include showing how States leverage CERCLA Site Assessment work products to achieve cleanup outcomes, both NPL and non-NPL. Additional goals included gathering and analyzing information on how States:
- Use their Site Assessment Cooperative Agreement funding;
- Employ efficiencies and best practices to improve the Site Assessment program; and
- Track non-NPL beneficial outcomes of sites evaluated with their Site Assessment Cooperative Agreement funding.
This Analysis paper reports on the Focus Group’s research methods and shows how States use Site Assessment work products to achieve both NPL and non-NPL cleanup outcomes, multiplying the benefits of the Site Assessment Program. The report also describes: trends in the Site Assessment Program; State’s recommendations for improving the Site Assessment Program; availability of State programs to address NPL-caliber sites; and tracking non-NPL outcomes.
»Analysis of Superfund Site Assessment Program Cooperative Agreements with States: Benefits of Effective State and Federal Partnerships
Phase II Report (March 2012)
The Association's Site Evaluation Focus Group developed this Phase 2 report to highlight the beneficial outcomes not traditionally captured (e.g., State site cleanups that result from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Site Assessment Program, commonly known as the Superfund Site Assessment (SA) Program). This report shows that funds spent on Superfund site assessments result in benefits that go beyond National Priorities List (NPL) listing and that the overall success of the Superfund program should not be measured solely by the number of NPL listings or cleanups.
»Phase II Report
Superfund Site Assessment Program: Benefits Beyond NPL Listing (March 2011)
The Association's Site Evaluation Focus Group developed this report to highlight the beneficial outcomes not traditionally captured, e.g., State site cleanups that result from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Site Assessment Program, commonly known as the Superfund Site Assessment (SA) Program. This report shows that funds spent on Superfund site assessments result in benefits that go beyond National Priorities List (NPL) listing and that the overall success of the Superfund program should not be measured solely by the number of NPL listings or cleanups.
»Superfund Site Assessment Program: Benefits Beyond NPL Listing
State Management and Potential Reuse of Marginally Contaminated Soils (May 2012)
The Association's State Superfund Focus Group developed a Marginally Contaminated Soils Paper to highlight how States manage soils that do not meet a State’s unrestricted use criteria or standards for organic or inorganic contaminants.
»State Management and Potential Reuse of Marginally Contaminated Soils
State Approaches to Monitoring and Oversight of Land Use Controls (October 2009)
This document was created by the ASTSWMO State Superfund Focus Group. The purpose of this companion document is to serve as a resource for the States, EPA, local officials, and other parties interested in monitoring and oversight of LUCs. The document presents the results of research on approaches taken by a number of States across the country to monitor and oversee LUCs in their State. This resource document discusses a variety of issues and methods that States have developed related to monitoring and oversight of LUCs, including: identifying who is responsible for ensuring compliance; monitoring and oversight approaches; how oversight of LUCs is funded; and lessons learned by States that have developed and implemented oversight and monitoring programs.
»State Approaches to Monitoring and Oversight of Land Use Controls
»Appendix 1: Interview Questions
»Appendix 2: Contacts
»Appendix 3: Question 15 Responses
State Status in the Implementation of Institutional Controls: Summary of Inventory Findings (June 2007)
The ASTSWMO State Superfund Focus Group has conducted an inventory of the States and Territories to determine how they are approaching the subject of Institutional Controls (ICs). The objective of this research focused on learning "who's doing what" relative to the use, management, tracking, and enforcement of ICs, and any perceived barriers to their implementation, in order to share this information with all the States, Territories, and EPA.
»IC Report_Final.pdf (in PDF) (137 KB)
»Attachment A_Research Tool.doc (in Word) (101 KB)
»Attachment B_All Potential Answers.xls (in Excel) (31 KB)
»Attachment C_Final Compilation of Results.xls (in Excel) (530 KB)
Superfund and the States: A Compendium of Success Stories in State Involvement (October 2006)
This compendium of case studies highlights examples of how the overall Superfund process has benefited from significant State involvement and strong US EPA/State partnerships.
»Superfund and the States: A Compendium of Success Stories in State Involvement (748 KB)
Transition Issues Analysis (February 2013)
The purpose of the research was to gather information on issues relating to the transition of removal sites to and from the State and federal programs. The purpose was also to identify approaches, concerns, strengths and weaknesses related to these transitions.
»Transition Issues Analysis Paper (255 KB)
»Emergency Response Matrix (32 MB)
»Non-TCRA Matrix (34 KB)
»TCRA Matrix (31 KB)
»Removal Action Process Timeline Schematic (1.1 MB)
State Emergency Response Preparedness: State Emergency Response Programs Analysis (April 2009)
This document was created by the ASTSWMO Removal Action Focus Group. The purpose of this guide is to address the components of a successful monitoring plan. This document describes core State program elements, protocols, strategies, and methodologies that aided and enhanced their abilities to prepare for and respond to the release of hazardous substances during large-scale emergencies. These protocols differ based on the nature of the emergency, contamination, and media effected.
»State Emergency Response Preparedness: State Emergency Response Programs Analysis
Clandestine Drug Laboratory Remediation: A Guide to Post-Emergency Response (October 2006)
This document was created by the ASTSWMO Removal Action Focus Group and focuses on the environmental issues and available reference resources for State hazardous waste remediation and removal programs as related to clandestine drug lab response.
»Drug-Lab-Paper-final.pdf (1 MB)
»Drug-Lab-References-Resources.doc (52 KB)
»Drug-Lab-State-Response-final.xls (3 MB)
»EPIC-form.doc (291 KB)
»EPIC-instructions.doc (41 KB)
»example-placards.pdf (929 KB)
Updated Guide: Coordination of Federal Removal Actions with State Remedial Activities (June 2007)
In 2001, the Removal Action Focus Group published the "Guide for Coordination of Federal Removal Actions with State Remedial Activities". Since that time, State programs have progressed and the Focus Group, in consultation with EPA, has developed this report which documents the current status of the relationship between the States and EPA during the transition of removal sites to State jurisdiction. Some of the primary topics for this update include: the current status of the State-EPA relationship and any changes since 2001; the impact of the Brownfields law on the transition of removal sites to State remedial programs; property reuse considerations; and the role of other federal agencies (non-EPA).
» CG-final.pdf (in PDF) (297 KB)
» Att-A-B-Questions-Responses.pdf (in PDF) (124 KB)
» Att-C-J-State-Agreements.pdf (in PDF) (1.1 MB)
» Att-K-BFPP.pdf (in PDF) (2.2 MB)
» Att-L-P-Issues-Summaries-Contacts.pdf (in PDF) (79 KB)
Guide for Coordination of Federal Removal Actions With State Remedial Activities (November 2001)
»Coordination Guide (1 MB)
»EPA Cover Memo (227 KB)
CERCLA and Brownfields Subcommittee Policies and Publications
ASTSWMO Position Paper on 128(a) Funding (May 2014)
»ASTSWMO Position Paper on 128(a) Funding
All Appropriate Inquiries Final Rule: Effects on State Site Assessment Practices (January 2009)
This report has been temporarily removed for updating.
»All Appropriate Inquiries Final Rule
Accomplishing Restoration: A Reference Guide for Restoring Natural Resources Under CERCLA, OPA, and Federal and State Laws (July 2006)
This paper identifies some of the considerations that lead to timely and cost-effective restoration of natural resources and builds upon the extensive experience to date in restoring natural resources. The paper was prepared by the ASTSWMO NRD Focus Group in consultation with Industry representatives and is intended to be a reference that can assist companies and Trustees in site-specific situations.
»Accomplishing Restoration: A Reference Guide for Restoring Natural Resources Under CERCLA, OPA, and Federal and State Laws (191KB)
Report of State Action Levels (June 2006)
This research provides a resource summarizing existing State/Territorial standards and guidelines that can be readily used by States and Territories in developing or modifying cleanup criteria.
»Report of State Action Levels (556 KB)
»Attachment A: Compilation of Responses by State (686 KB)
»Attachment B: Compilation of Responses by Exposure Medium (786 KB)
»Action Levels Project (13 KB)
»Action Levels Instructions (34KB)