United StatesEnvironmental ProtectionAgency

Off ice ofSolid Waste andEmergency Response

9375611EPA/540/F 95/002PB95-963223

Superfund

oEPA Guidance on Deferral of NPLListing Determinations WhileStates Oversee Response Actions

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON DC 20460

MAT* ' 3 1995 OFFICE OFSOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY

RESPONSE

9375 6-11

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT Transmittal of the "Guidance on Deferral of NPLListing Determinations While States Oversee ResponseActions" (OSWER Directive 9375 6-11)

FROM Stephen D Luftig Acting DirectorOffice of Emergency and Remedial Response

TO Director Waste Management DivisionRegions I IV V VII

Director Emergency and Remedial Response DivisionRegion II

Director Hazardous Waste Management DivisionRegions III VI VIII IX

Director Hazardous Waste DivisionRegion X

Director Environmental Services DivisionRegions I VI VII

PURPOSE

This memorandum transmits the Environmental ProtectionAgency's "Guidance on Deferral of NPL Listing DeterminationsWhile States Oversee Response Actions "

BACKGROUND

Based on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)June 23 1993 "Superfund Administrative Improvements FinalReport" (OSWER Directive 9200 0-14-2), EPA established aninitiative to "Enhance State Role " To implement thisinitiative EPA established a work group in August 1993 todevelop the deferral guidance and has worked with several Statesto pilot the deferral concept at selected sites prior to issuingfinal guidance The work group includes representatives from allEPA Regions as well as representatives from several HeadquartersOffices Additionally several States participating in thedeferral pilot effort as co-implementors of the deferral programhave offered their input to the work group

Recy I d/Rocy ! bl P tedwmVeg table Oil Based I Its o 100/ Recyded P pe (40 / Postco m

The guidance also includes an appendix presented in a"question and answer" format that responds to several questionsthat arose during development of the guidance A second appendixprovides instructions regarding the use of CERCLIS and othercodes to allow for the tracking of deferral activities andcooperative agreements

DISCUSSION

Components

The deferral guidance provides a framework for RegionsStates and Federally-recognized Tribes to determine the mostappropriate effective and efficient means to address more sitesmore quickly than EPA otherwise would address them The Agencyalso recognizes that several States already have fully developedcleanup programs in place while others are continuing tostrengthen their capabilities Therefore EPA expects toimplement the guidance in a flexible manner to account fordiffering capabilities of participating States and Tribes As aresult of site-specific circumstances or differing but equallyeffective State or Tribal program practices Regions may chooseto act at variance from certain provisions of the guidanceUnder the deferral program

• Deferral may be implemented on either an area-wide or site-specific basis

• Response actions will be conducted under State or Tribalauthority

• Viable and cooperative PRPs will agree to pay for andconduct response actions—Superfund Trust funds generallywill not be made available for conducting response actions

• Response actions must be protective of human health and theenvironment and meet State or Tribal and Federal applicablerequirements

• A site may not be deferred if the affected community hassignificant valid objections

• The level of EPA oversight of States and Tribes will benegotiated with the Region and

• Once a deferral response is complete EPA will remove thesite from CERCLIS and will not consider the site for the NPLunless the Agency receives new information of a release orpotential release that poses a significant threat to humanhealth or the environment

Changes Based On Comments

In March 1994 a draft guidance was circulated to Regionsand Headquarters Offices for concurrence Based on commentsreceived as well as subsequent work group efforts, severalsubstantive changes were made to the guidance A final draft ofthe guidance was distributed to the States in February 1995 anda number of additional changes have been made based on newinsights contributed by States and Regions

• The guidance conforms with the Agency's recognition thatpilot projects currently underway are at various stages inthe listing process

• Regions should notify Headquarters before deferring a sitefor which an HRS package has been initiated (notificationbefore deferring any site is not required)

• States and Tribes should inform affected communities of aproposed deferral 30 days prior to requesting deferral fromthe Region seek community affirmation for the deferral anddocument their interactions with communities

• Regions and States or Tribes should agree to a six monthtimeframe (with an extension of up to a year) to conduct PRPnegotiations and should agree to schedules for conductingresponse actions at each site

• States may use removal resources at deferred sites wherePRPs become recalcitrant or bankrupt

• Deferral sites at which cleanups are successfully completedwill be removed from CERCLIS

Main Work Group Issues

The changes to the guidance do not reflect work groupconsensus they represent a compromise among different views thatworks to maintain the balance between program flexibility andaccountability Work group members raised concerns about severalaspects of the guidance the most significant of which arediscussed below

• comment The deferral option should be available for finalNPL sites as well as non-NPL sites

Response The purpose of the deferral program is to addresssites more quickly than would otherwise be addressed—sitesfor which an HRS package has been initiated have alreadyentered the response process Under the deferral program,EPA encourages PRPs to settle earlier to avoid NPL listing,

which results in more sites being addressed more quicklyFinal NPL sites must be addressed under the Agency'sdeletion policy

• comment EPA oversight and reporting requirements maydiscourage the participation of States and Tribes whoalready have strong cleanup programs and would find theserequirements unnecessary

Response The deferral guidance is meant to be flexible toaccommodate a wide range of oversight and reportingconditions and still provide a minimal level of informationto maintain accountability For most States the negotiatedlevel of EPA oversight will provide incentive to PRPs to becooperative as well as give the PRPs some comfort that EPAhas confidence in State responses

• Comment States and Tribes will not have an interest in thedeferral program without having access to Superfundresources to conduct response actions thus such resourcesshould be made available

Response A fundamental expectation of the deferral programis that viable and cooperative PRPs will pay for and conductresponse actions Sites that require the use of Superfundresources to conduct response actions are not appropriatecandidates for this program However at deferral siteswhere PRPs become recalcitrant or bankrupt removalcooperative agreements may be awarded as appropriate toconclude a response action

• Comment Although community involvement should be animportant factor in deciding to initiate and implementdeferrals this factor may become an overriding determinantand impede implementation of the program

Response EPA is working continually to strengthen itscommitment to inform and involve the public in decisionsregarding hazardous waste cleanup Response actions willnot be effective efficient or fair if community interestsare not represented EPA's intention to encourage publicinvolvement is in no way lessened at sites that are deferredto States If an affected community expresses significantvalid objections to deferral or the deferral process at anysite EPA will take appropriate action including rejectinga deferral proposal or terminating a deferral that isunderway

Through these and numerous additional comments work groupmembers and others have suggested that specific components of theguidance are overly-prescriptive However while this guidancepresents EPA's view of the national program, we reemphasize our

I

intent that a flexible approach be taken in implementing thedeferral program Consequently although the Agency has declinedto make certain changes recommended by Regions and States werecognize the Regions' need to vary from the guidance as theoccasion warrants in order to best serve the public and theenvironment

ACTION

The deferral program is an excellent administrativemechanism to enable States and Tribes under their own laws torespond at sites that EPA would otherwise not soon addressUnder this program the Agency anticipates that responses may bequick and efficient yet still protective of the environment andof communities' rights to participate in the decision-makingprocess PRPs who are willing to do cleanups also will benefitfrom reduced response costs and fewer layers of governmentoversight I encourage you to support and assist the States andTribes in your Regions to take opportunities to enter intodeferral agreements with EPA Furthermore Regional DecisionTeams and other Regional assessment teams should work togetherwith States and Tribes to identify these opportunities as part ofthe site prioritization process, rather than wait until aftersite assessment has commenced

If you would like further information regardingimplementation of the deferral program contact Steve CaldwellActing Chief of the Site Assessment Branch Hazardous SiteEvaluation Division (703-603-8850) or Murray Newton Chief ofthe State and Local Coordination Branch Hazardous Site ControlDivision (703-603-8840)

Attachment

OSWER Directive 9375 6-11EPA/540/F-95/002

PB95-963223

GUIDANCE ON DEFERRAL OF NFL LISTING DETERMINATIONSWHILE STATES OVERSEE RESPONSE ACTIONS

Office of Emergency and Remedial ResponseU S Environmental Protection Agency

Washington DC 20460

The policies set forth in this directive are intendedsolely as guidance They are not intended, nor canthey be relied upon to create any rights enforceableby any party in litigation with the United States EPAofficials may decide to follow the guidance provided inthis directive, or to act at variance with thedirective, on the basis of an analysis of specificcircumstances The Agency also reserves the right tochange this directive at any time without publicnotice

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PURPOSE 1

INTRODUCTION 1

IMPLEMENTATION 2

1 Criteria for a State Deferral Program 2a Statutory Regulatory or Administrative

Provisions 3b Program Capability 3

i Resources 311 Monitoring and Oversight 3111 Community Participation 3

2 Sites Eligible for Deferral 4a State Interest 4b CERCLIS Listing 4c NPL Caliber 4d Viable and Cooperative PRPs 5e Timing 5f Community Acceptance 5g Sites Involving Tribal Lands 6h Federal Facilities 6i Complicating Factors 6

3 Cleanup Levels 7a Protectiveness 7b Standards 7

4 Procedural Requirements 7a Roles and Responsibilities 8b Schedule for Performance 8c Documentation 8d Cleanup Level 8e Community Participation 8f Natural Resource Trustees 8

5 EPA Oversight of States 8a Review Deferral Program Criteria 9b Report on State-EPA Agreement Conditions 9c Annual Review 9

6 Financial Assistance to States 9a Core Program and Site-Specific Response Funding 10b Subpart O Requirements 10

7 Community Participation 11a Comparability with the NCP 11b Information Assistance for Communities 11

111

8 Completion of State Response Action 11a Certification and Confirmation 11b Termination of Site Deferral Status 12

APPENDIX A Question and Answer Supplement A-l

APPENDIX B Instructions on Financial Tracking B-l

APPENDIX C Policy Announcement No 94-07 C-l

IV

GUIDANCE ON DEFERRAL OF NPL LISTING DETERMINATIONSWHILE STATES OVERSEE RESPONSE ACTIONS

PURPOSE

This directive provides guidance on the EnvironmentalProtection Agency's (EPA) Superfund State and Tribal deferralprogram, under which EPA may defer consideration of certain sitesfor listing on the National Priorities List (NPL) whileinterested States Territories Commonwealths or Federally-recognized Indian Tribes compel and oversee response actionsconducted and funded by potentially responsible parties (PRPs)Once the necessary response actions at a site are completedsuccessfully the site will be removed from the ComprehensiveEnvironmental Response Compensation and Liability InformationSystem (CERCLIS) and EPA will have no further interest inconsidering the site for listing on the NPL unless it receivesnew information of a release or potential release that poses asignificant threat to human health or the environment

INTRODUCTION

The "Superfund Administrative Improvements Final Report" ofJune 23 1993 (OSWER Directive 9200 0-14-2) identified numerousinitiatives to improve the Agency's implementation of theComprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and LiabilityAct (CERCLA) as amended The deferral program developed underthe initiative to "Enhance State Role " was intended to"encourage qualified interested States to address under Statelaws the large number of sites now in EPA's listing queuethereby accelerating cleanup, minimizing the risk of duplicativeState/Federal efforts and offering PRPs a measure of confidencethat only one agency will address the site " Although theprimary goal of the deferral program is to accelerate the rate ofresponse actions by encouraging a greater State or Tribal rolethe priority for increasing this rate must be balanced with twoother crucial Agency priorities 1) maintaining protectivecleanup levels at sites and 2) ensuring that the public's rightto participate in the decision-making process is well supported

This directive is divided into sections that addresscriteria that a State Territory Commonwealth, or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe (hereafter the term "State" also includesTerritories Commonwealths and Tribes) should meet toparticipate in the program criteria for determining which sitesare eligible for deferral procedural requirements andprovisions for site cleanup levels to be achieved at deferredsites oversight financial assistance community participationand response action completion or termination Although theseprovisions establish a framework for a national deferral program

EPA recognizes that State cleanup programs have differingcapabilities and methods of implementation To best accommodatethese differences and achieve response actions most quickly andeffectively the Agency expects to implement the provisions ofthe guidance in a flexible manner Regional implementation ofthis guidance may vary based on site-specific circumstances orthe established capabilities and practices of a State program

This guidance also includes two appendices Appendix Aresponds to several questions that arose during development ofthe guidance and is presented in a "question and answer" formatAppendix B provides specific instructions regarding the use ofCERCLIS and other codes to allow for the tracking of deferralactivities and cooperative agreements Throughout this guidanceand its appendices the terms "State deferral" and "deferring toa State" are defined as EPA's deferring consideration of a sitefor NPL listing in favor of State action

IMPLEMENTATION

1 Criteria for a State Deferral Program

A State may participate in the deferral program on an area-wide or site-specific basis Under the area-wide program theState and Region will agree to certain generic procedural andother requirements (e g roles and responsibilities cleanuplevels public participation) and address site-specific concerns(e g site eligibility and selection requirements responseschedules EPA oversight) through separate documentation Underthe site-specific approach the State and Region will negotiateseparate terms and conditions for the deferral of individualsites (see below) A State hazardous waste management orremedial program should meet the following general criteriaregarding statutory and administrative authority and programicapability to participate in the area-wide deferral program

State-Funded Response Alternatively the State maypropose to conduct the response actions at a deferred site usingits own funds In these cases the State additionally will needto demonstrate that it has the technical capability andsufficient resources to conduct and complete the response Ifthe state desires to use CERCLA section 107 authority, ratherthan its own authorities to recover response action costs thecosts incurred in order to be recoverable must not beinconsistent with National Oil and Hazardous Substances PollutionContingency Plan (NCP) requirements

i Statutory, Regulatory, or Administrative ProvisionsThe State program should have statutory, regulatoryor administrative provisions which ensure thatremedies at deferred sites are protective of humanhealth and the environment The program also shouldhave the statutory authority and administrativeprovisions to pursue all necessary enforcement actionsat a site ranging from mechanisms to identify viableliable parties to authority to compel PRPs to conduct"CERCLA-protective cleanups" (as defined in SectionIII) The evaluation of these provisions andauthorities is not limited to comparing the State'slaw to CERCLA but may consider when relevant theState's past and current ability to select protectiveremedies and to enter into and enforce consentagreements or orders with PRPs

> Program Capability The State program should havesufficient capabilities resources and expertise toensure that a CERCLA-protective cleanup is conductedas well as coordinate with EPA other interestedagencies and the public on the various phases ofimplementation Estimates of the State's capabilitymay consider any significant past response actions theState has undertaken through the Federal Superfundprogram or its own program the effectiveness of theState's program to achieve a protective cleanup andthe State's projected workload The State should havethe following capabilities

i Resources The State should have adequate capablestaff funds and other resources to conductenforcement actions including PRP searches,negotiations with PRPs monitoring oversight andlitigation

11 Monitoring and Oversight The State should havethe capability to maintain adequate supervision ofresponse actions including but not limited toassuring and controlling the quality of datasampling and analysis risk characterizations orassessments and design and implementation ofremedies monitoring project progress andcommunicating with EPA program managers

111 Community Participation The State should be ableto involve affected communities in a manner thatfosters appropriate community participation (asdescribed in Section VII) in decisions regardingresponse actions at deferred sites

To establish a clear understanding between the State and EPAthat the State has the authority and capability to participate inan area-wide deferral program the State program director andRegional Superfund program director should enter into a genericdeferral Memorandum of Agreement certifying these criteria aremet As reasonable and appropriate the Region may require theState to provide specific information to confirm EPA's basis forentering into the deferral agreement Upon request the Regionshould provide the basis for any decision declining to defer tothe State

If a State is interested in deferral and does not meet allof the criteria for establishing an area-wide deferral programthe Region and State may at the Region's discretion enter intosite-specific deferral agreements provided that site eligibilitycriteria are met For example a site at which the State entersinto an enforceable agreement with a PRP to conduct a CERCLA-protective cleanup even though the State does not have thestatutory authority to compel response actions, may beappropriate for deferral The Region may determine as neededthat closer oversight and the application of other conditions arenecessary to ensure a successful response action

2 Sites Eligible for Deferral

Under the area-wide approach the Region and State shouldmutually determine generally based on an annual submission ofdeferral site candidates proposed by the State which sitesshould be deferred The Region and State should determine theeligibility of sites for deferral using the following criteria

a State Interest The State must express interest inhaving the site deferred to it The State and EPAalso should agree that the State will address thedeferred site sooner than and at least as quickly asEPA would expect to respond (See Appendix A )

b CERCLIS Listing The site proposed for deferral mustbe included in the CERCLIS inventory

c NPL Caliber The deferred site should be "NPLcaliber" as defined in the October 12 1993 OSWERDirective "Additional Guidance on 'Worst Sites' and'NPL Caliber Sites' to Assist in SACM Implementation"(OSWER Directive 9320 2-07A) or the December 1992 factsheet "Assessing Sites Under SACM—Interim Guidance"(OSWER Directive 9203 1-051 Vol 1 No 4) Sitesthat are less than NPL caliber are generally not ofFederal interest and the deferral program requirementsneed not apply at these sites However such sitesmay be deferred should a State desire this option

Viable and Cooperative PRPs Under the deferralprogram viable and cooperative PRPs generally must beavailable to conduct the response actions at adeferred site The PRPs at a deferred site should bewilling to enter into an enforceable agreement withthe State to conduct all response actions (includingproviding for operation and maintenance) at the siteand repay any State and Fund-financed response costsrelated to the deferral Except under limitedcircumstances (i e where PRPs become recalcitrant orbankrupt as described in Section VI) a State shouldnot be using Superfund resources to conduct responseactions at deferred sites If the State is a PRP atthe site the Region should consider carefully theimplications of deferring the site before making adecision At sites where no viable PRPs exist orwhere a State is willing to agree to settle for lessthan the full cost of the response action, the Statemust demonstrate that it has adequate resources of itsown or viable agreements with other parties (eg,prospective purchasers) to pay the necessary costs forthe response action (See Appendix A )

Timing Generally a site is eligible for deferraluntil a State or contractor has been tasked to developa site-specific Hazard Ranking System (HRS) packagefor it If however the Region or State has alreadyissued a task or work assignment to develop thepackage the Region should defer the site only wherethe State provides a compelling argument why thelisting process should be halted In such cases theRegion should consider carefully the history of theState's involvement at the site and communityacceptance of the deferral in making the determinationwhether to defer the site In rare instances, sitesproposed for the NPL or sites for which an HRSpackage has been submitted to Headquarters may beeligible for deferral Sites on the final NPL are noteligible deferral candidates though the Region maythrough a cooperative agreement assign to the Statethe lead for response at such sites The Regionshould consult with the Office of Emergency andRemedial Response before deferring any site for whichan HRS package has been initiated (See Appendix A )

Community Acceptance Community acceptance of adeferral to the State is an important site eligibilitycriterion, and the State should work to gain andmaintain community acceptance of the site's deferralto the State The State should take appropriate stepsto inform the affected community and other affectedparties (eg, communities downstream from the site,

PRPs Natural Resource Trustees) of the proposeddeferral 30 days prior to requesting that the Regiondefer the site and should seek affirmation from thecommunity of its proposal As appropriate the Statealso should explain to the community and other partiesany differences between a response under the deferralprogram and a response conducted under the NationalOil and Hazardous Substances Pollution ContingencyPlan (NCP) including but not limited to anydifferences in cleanup levels and public involvementAdditionally the State should document all of itsinteractions with the community and inform the Regionof possible opposition to the deferral

If at any time before a site is deferred to theState the Region after consulting with the Statedetermines that the community or other parties havesignificant valid objections to the deferral thatcannot be resolved the Region should not defer thesite If at any time after a site is deferred to theState the Region determines that the community orother parties have significant valid unresolvableobjections to the deferral the Region shouldterminate the deferral status of the site (describedin Section VIII) The Region should provideappropriate explanation to the community and otherparties of decisions that do not favor the community'sor other parties' objections (See Appendix A )

g Sites Involving Tribal Lands A site on or involvingland or other resources under Tribal jurisdiction maybe deferred to a Federally-recognized Tribe if theappropriate criteria are met EPA will not defer sucha site to a State unless the affected Tribe(s) agreesto the deferral through a three-party agreement withthe State and the Region

h Federal Facilities Consistent with EPA's currentlisting policy for Federal facilities such sites areineligible for deferral from NPL listing

i Complicating Factors The Region in consultationwith the State should consider factors which maypresent significant obstacles to successful responseactions at the proposed deferral site Such factorsinclude but are not limited to complexity and degreeof the environmental threat posed by thecontamination site history current or anticipatedFund-financed activity the PRPs involved at the siteand environmental justice and other communityconcerns

3 Cleanup Levels

Section 121(b)(1) of CERCLA sets general standards forremedial actions carried out under CERCLA section 104 or securedunder CERCLA section 106 These standards have been elaboratedfurther in the NCP Under section 300 430(f) a remedy conductedpursuant to the NCP must be protective of human health and theenvironment and must comply with applicable or relevant andappropriate requirements Under the deferral program althoughthe State will oversee the response action at an NPL caliber siteusing its own authorities the quality of the response actionconducted still should be substantially similar to a responserequired under CERCLA i e it should be a "CERCLA-protectivecleanup " The following criteria define a CERCLA-protectivecleanup

a Protectiveness A CERCLA-protective cleanup at adeferred site should be protective of human health andthe environment as defined generally by a 10 * to 10risk range and a hazard index of 1 or lessGenerally the State also should consider givingpreference to solutions that will be reliable over thelong term

b Standards The remedy selected at a deferred sitemust comply with all applicable Federal and Staterequirements Additionally the State shouldgenerally select a remedy which provides a level ofprotectiveness comparable to relevant and appropriateFederal requirements for the site (See Appendix A )

4 Procedural Requirements

Procedural requirements for the deferral program should notbe burdensome Once the State and Region agree on which sites todefer to the State the Regional Superfund program directorshould identify to the State program director in writing whichsites EPA is deferring to the State The Region also shouldindicate in CERCLIS that a site has been deferred to allow forappropriate tracking (See Appendix B )

The State and the Region should also agree to clarify mutualexpectations for State-EPA interaction and each party'sresponsibilities at deferred sites As mentioned in Section Isuch expectations may be incorporated into a generic deferralmemorandum with documentation regarding site-specificinformation being added to the agreement or provided separatelyas appropriate Minimally the State and Region should agree tothe following provisions in either an area-wide or a site-specific agreement

a Roles and Responsibilities The Region and Stateshould agree on the relationship between and theroles and responsibilities of EPA and the State forall phases of the response action at deferred sitesAt a minimum the agreement should address the degreeto which EPA will provide oversight document review(including review of the selected remedy) andtechnical or financial assistance

b Schedule for Performance The State and Region shouldagree to a timeframe for commencing and conductingactions including negotiating settlements with PRPsfor each site State negotiations with PRPs generallyshould be completed within six months of initiationalthough the Region may allow the State up to sixadditional months to conclude its negotiations asappropriate All schedules should identify majormilestones by which EPA can track reasonable progressat each deferred site

c Documentation The State should agree to makeavailable risk assessment data remedy selectiondecision documentation and supporting analyses foreach site to allow for adequate public involvement andEPA oversight

d Cleanup Level The State should agree to provide fora CERCLA-protective cleanup (as described in SectionIII) at each deferred site

e Community Participation The State should agree toinvolve affected communities in decisions regardingthe response action (as described in Section VII) ateach deferred site

f Natural Resource Trustees The State should agree tonotify promptly the appropriate State and Federaltrustees for natural resources of discharges orreleases that are injuring or may injure naturalresources related to a deferred site The State alsoshould include the trustees as appropriate innegotiations with PRPs

5 EPA Oversight of States

At all deferred sites the State has responsibility withminimal EPA involvement to provide for a timely and CERCLA-protective cleanup and to support the public's right ofparticipation in the decision-making process The Region shouldwork with the State to determine the appropriate level ofoversight that the Region should exercise at each site The

8

Region may choose to conduct more or less oversight of the Stateat any particular site depending on the State's experience thecomplexity of the site or other factors The Region also shouldconsider its assessment of the progress being made at deferredsites during any consideration of new proposals for sites todefer Finally the Region and State should considerincorporating the following practices as appropriate in anyagreement between the Region and State regarding oversight

a Review Deferral Program Criteria As needed theRegion should reconfirm the status of the State'sauthority and program capability to ensure thecontinuing success of response actions at current andanticipated deferral sites

b Report on State-EPA Agreement Conditions The Stateshould report to the Region at least annually onwhether the conditions agreed upon in the State-EPAagreements are being met The State also shouldreport to the Region at least semi-annually anydifficulties it is having meeting agreement conditionsat any deferred sites including negotiatingsettlements with PRPs

c Annual Review The Region should meet at leastannually with the State to discuss the State'sprogress at deferred sites which should include areview of reports submitted by the State performanceschedules attainment of milestones in site-specificagreements data quality assurance and controlcooperativeness of the PRPs cost recovery of site-specific funds awarded to the State under cooperativeagreements with EPA and participation of the affectedcommunity Any State deferral events that are trackedin CERCLIS should be coded appropriately (SeeAppendix B )

6 Financial Assistance to States

As noted above the State is responsible for acquiring theresources to conduct all response actions at deferred sites underthe deferral program A fundamental expectation of the deferralprogram is that viable PRPs will reach settlements with the Stateto respond at deferred sites except as described in thisSection, the deferral program generally does not anticipate thatFund resources will be used to conduct response actions at

deferred sites Consequently PRPs or some other non-Federalsource should provide the resources for site-specific activityincluding enforcement and PRP oversight

In some cases, the State may need resources to conductcertain activities or supplement or strengthen its deferralprogram As described below the Region may enter intocooperative agreements with the State to provide funding to theState for certain purposes Generally the State should agree toseek to recover site-specific funds awarded to it, either fromthe PRP through an enforceable agreement or from anotheridentified source The State and Region also should agree inadvance on how to allocate recovered costs If the Regionintends to provide deferral funds to the State the Region shouldidentify its resource needs for the deferral program in itsannual budget development process

a Core Program and Site-Specific Response Funding TheRegion may award to the State non-site-specificresources under a Core Program Cooperative Agreementto develop or enhance its overall deferral programimplementation capability The Region may also awardfunds to the State to conduct enforcement andoversight/administrative-related activities through adeferral site-specific enforcement or support agencycooperative agreement or provide deferral site-specific funding for site assessment where anassessment has not been conducted or completed Inthe event that PRPs at a deferred site becomeuncooperative or bankrupt the Region may asappropriate enter into a cooperative agreement withthe State for non-time-critical removal or preremedialactivity until settlements with PRPs are reached theresponse action is completed or until the deferralstatus of the site is terminated (See Appendix A )

b Subpart O Requirements A State receiving fundsthrough a cooperative agreement must meet allapplicable requirements of 40 CFR Part 35 Subpart OThe terms of the cooperative agreement will be subjectto all appropriate Regional oversight Cooperativeagreement awards for deferred sites should use thesub-object class number 41 90 and use appropriateactivity codes (See Appendix B )

If a site's deferral status is terminated Fund resourcesalso may be available for use in accordance with appropriateregulations and policy

10

7 Community Participation

Effective community involvement is a crucial aspect ofresponse actions at NPL sites and is no less important forresponse actions at deferred sites As described above theState should assure that it will involve the affected communityin the decision-making process at a deferred site and that theaffected community does not have significant valid objections todeferring the site to the State The following conditions alsoshould be met at a deferred site

a Comparability with the NCP The Region should beconfident that the principles of public involvementembodied in the NCP are maintained at deferred sitesThe State must ensure that the impact of its effortsto involve the public especially during the remedyselection and response action completion phases willbe substantially similar to the intended effect ofimplementing the procedures required by the NCP (SeeAppendix A )

b Information Assistance for Communities EPA does nothave the authority to award Technical AssistanceGrants at sites that are not on or proposed to theNPL However at each NPL caliber site that EPAdefers to the State the affected community should beable to acquire assistance to interpret informationwith regard to the nature of the hazardinvestigations and studies conducted andimplementation decisions at the site As appropriatethe State should provide resources or directassistance to the affected community at the site forthese purposes If funds are necessary to provideassistance to the community the State should seeksuch funding from the PRPs at the site if the Statecannot provide funding itself

8 Completion of State Response Action

a Certification and Confirmation Once the Stateconsiders the response action at a deferred site to becomplete, the State should certify to the Region andthe affected community that it has successfullycompleted its response and achieved its intendedcleanup levels As part of the certification theState should submit to the Region response actioncompletion documentation substantially similar to thatdescribed in the June 1992 OSWER Directive "RemedialAction Report Documentation for Operable UnitCompletion" (OSWER Directive 9355 0-39FS)

11

Upon receiving the State's certification, theRegion should confirm in writing that the siteresponse has been completed Alternatively within 90days after receipt of the certification the Regionmay initiate a deferral completion inquiry to validatethe certification As part of the inquiry the Regionshould work with the State to address any deficiencieshindering the confirmation and agree to a timeframefor completion of the inquiry Upon completing theinquiry the Region should either confirm completionof the response or terminate the deferral status ofthe site (described below) If the Region does notconfirm the response completion terminate thedeferral or initiate an inquiry within 90 days of itsreceipt of the State certification, the status of thesite will be recorded in CERCLIS as a deferralcompletion (See Appendix B ) Once the response atthe site is recorded as complete the site will beremoved from CERCLIS and will not be evaluated furtherfor NPL listing or another response unless EPAreceives new information of a release or potentialrelease at the site that poses a significant threat tohuman health or the environment

Termination of Site Deferral Status Pending 30 daysnotice to the State the Region should terminate thedeferral status of the site if at any time during orupon completion of a response action the Regiondetermines that the response is not CERCLA-protectiveis unreasonably delayed or inappropriate or does notadequately address the affected community's concernsThe Region also should terminate the deferral ifsignificant PRPs breach their agreements with theState and the State is unable to enforce compliance orprovide other sources of funding to complete theresponse action In addition the Region mayterminate the deferral and implement emergency ortime-critical response action without 30 days noticeto the State if the Region determines such action isnecessary The State may also choose at any timeafter 30 days notice to terminate the deferral forany reason

Upon terminating the deferral status of the sitethe Region should immediately consider taking anynecessary response actions and should initiateconsideration of the site for NPL listing The Regionand State should coordinate efforts to notify thecommunity and PRPs of the termination of the deferralThese actions will assure the public that EPA willcontinue to respond at a site where response actionshave begun and will encourage PRPs to forge and

12

fulfill successful agreements with the State At theRegion's request the State should provide to theRegion all information in its possession regarding thesite for which the deferral status has beenterminated

13

APPENDIX A Question and Answer Supplement

Question and Answer Supplement to theGuidance on Deferral of NPL Listing Determinations While

States Oversee Response Actions

PURPOSE

This appendix supplements the "Guidance on Deferral of NPLListing Determinations While States Oversee Response Actions"(OSWER Directive 9375 6-11) This appendix provides responses tosignificant questions that arose during development of theguidance and is presented in a 'question and answer" format

BACKGROUND

Following the June 23 1993 ' Superfund AdministrativeImprovements Final Report " the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) established a work group to develop the Superfund Statedeferral guidance This guidance intends to enable Regions andStates to determine the most appropriate effective andefficient means to address more sites more quickly than the sitesotherwise would be addressed As the guidance was drafted workgroup members and others raised numerous implementationquestions While many questions have been resolved in the finalguidance this appendix provides clarifying responses toremaining significant questions The questions are not dividedby category but roughly follow the outline of the guidanceThroughout this document the term "State" also includesTerritories Commonwealths and Federally-recognized IndianTribes

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1 How will EPA determine whether a State can address a site"sooner than and at least as quickly as," EPA7

The deferral program is intended to enable States toconduct responses at sites where EPA would not otherwiserespond in the near future Deferral should notindefinitely postpone commencement of site response norprolong the expected duration of a response hence theguidance states that a State should agree to addressdeferred sites sooner than EPA would expect to commenceresponding and at least as quickly as EPA would expect toimplement its response This objective assures thatdeferred sites will be addressed and not merely be shiftedfrom the Federal queue to a State queue If a Regionalready has developed a schedule for conducting response

A-l

activity at a site this schedule may serve as a basis forsetting expectations for the State's response Site-specific response schedules including PRP-negotiationtimeframes should be incorporated into deferral agreementsestablished between the State and the Region

What particular factors should the Region consider beforedeferring a site at which the State is a potentiallyresponsible party (PRP)7

Although a State may be best able to conduct a responseat a site at which it is a significant PRP the Region andthe State need to consider carefully the potential forconflict of interest or the appearance of conflict ofinterest Any such appearance could diminish thecredibility of the State program with the public and couldthus threaten its effectiveness Close coordination withthe affected community at such a site will be critical toensure that the public does not perceive any conflict ofinterest and agrees that a State response is mostappropriate

What factors constitute a "compelling argument' to defer asite for which an Hazard Ranking System (HRS) package hasbeen developed7

Although a site will generally be ineligible for deferralafter a State or contractor has been tasked to prepare anHRS package the Region may defer such a site if the Stateprovides a compelling argument why the listing processshould be halted The Region ultimately will determinewhether the State proposal is viable but any proposal todefer such a site should be documented and contain thefollowing information an explanation of the benefit of thedeferral an enforceable agreement with the PRPs (or othernon-Fund sources) a time table providing for a response atleast as timely as that proposed by EPA and assurances thatall costs of the response including preparation of the HRSpackage will be borne by the PRPs (or other non-Fundsources)

When and how should a State inform the community of aproposed deferral7 Who should be informed9

Under the deferral program a State must demonstrate ona State-wide basis or on a site-specific basis, that it hasthe capability to fully involve affected communities indecisions regarding response actions at sites both beforeand after the sites have been deferred Furthermore aState should notify the affected community 30 days prior torequesting the Region to defer a site and should seek thecommunity's affirmation of a deferral proposal

A-2

However, the January 1992 EPA directive, "CommunityRelations in Superfund A Handbook" (OERR Directive 9230 0-03C) recognizes "there can be no universal approach forcommunity relations" and that the "issues of importance tothe public the level of concern the history of publicinvolvement and the social structure of the community willvary from site to site " Thus although the deferralguidance offers some provisions to ensure that communitiesat deferral sites are adequately involved the guidance doesnot prescribe a particular means that a State must use toachieve this end Rather the State will generally have thediscretion and the responsibility to determine the mostappropriate means to identify notify and continue toinvolve communities affected at deferral sites

How will the Region determine what are significant validcommunity objections that would deny or terminate adeferral7

Characterizing community concern at a deferred site oftenwill be a difficult process Different and changing levelsof community awareness interest or comprehensiondifferences in the capabilities of various community membersto make themselves heard or wield political influence evenattempts to precisely define the affected community at asite will preclude decision-making based on quantitativeanalysis Full community unanimity is rare and invirtually every community dissenting opinions will persistTherefore while community acceptance is a critical aspectof the deferral program community consensus is not requiredfor deferral

The State and the Region must rely on their bestprofessional judgment to determine the composition of theaffected community and who represents it the validity ofthe concerns that the community expresses the opportunityto accommodate community concerns and the potential impactof proceeding without community consensus However, whenconsidering who represents the affected community the Stateand Region should take particular care to be cognizant ofpopulations that may be downwind or downstream of the siteas well as be aware of environmental justice issues that mayhave bearing at the site If community objections that theRegion determines to be significant and valid cannot beresolved between the community State and EPA the Regionshould reject or terminate the deferral Also to assurethat community concerns are addressed fairly the State,with EPA involvement as necessary should document theresponse to the community's objections

A-3

How might environmental justice considerations affectresponse action at a deferred site7

Because sites that are deferred should receive attentionmore quickly than they otherwise would effective deferralresponses may provide a useful mechanism for resolving someenvironmental justice concerns At sites whereenvironmental justice is an issue a State must show extrasensitivity to the special needs of the community bytailoring its outreach efforts to the community as well asfacilitating access to and enabling interpretation ofinformation Establishing a positive rapport with thecommunity at a deferral or any other site should result inwider acceptance of a proposed response

Additionally because the Agency is committed toaddressing environmental justice issues in all its programsthe State should expect the Region to be especiallyinterested in sites associated with environmental justiceconcerns The Region should consider playing a greater rolein communicating with the community during consideration ofsuch a site for deferral review State interaction with thecommunity during the response and coordinate with the Stateto respond directly to concerns raised by the community

What must a State do to ensure that the impact of itscommunity involvement program is "substantially similar" tothe intended effect of implementing the procedures requiredby the National Oil and Hazardous Substances PollutionContingency Plan (NCP)'

The 1992 OERR Directive "Community Relations inSuperfund A Handbook" (Directive 9230 0-03C) identifiesthree overall objectives or principles upon which theimplementation of the Superfund community relations programis founded These principles are

• Provide the public the opportunity to express commentson and provide input to technical decisions

• Inform the public of planned or ongoing actions and

• Identify and resolve conflicts

These principles though not identified specifically inthe NCP encompass the community involvement procedureswhich the NCP describes While State adherence to thespecific procedures of the NCP is not required for thedeferral program a State community relations program shouldembrace similar principles and be able to demonstrate itsability to implement such principles at deferred sites

A-4

8 Are mixed-ownership (Federal/non-Federal) sites eligiblecandidates for deferral7

Federal facilities currently are not eligible for thedeferral program Sites of mixed Federal and non-Federalownership however may be eligible deferral candidatesdepending on site-specific circumstances The Region shouldconsult with the Office of Emergency and Remedial Responsein making this determination

9 Must a risk assessment be performed at every deferred site7

May a State allow PRPs to perform risk assessments'

As appropriate to the circumstances at each deferredsite the State should characterize the nature of, andthreat posed by the hazardous substances and materials atthe site and should gather data necessary to support theanalysis and design of potential response actions In someinstances, the State may prefer to have a PRP conduct thischaracterization In either case the State should havedemonstrated its ability to conduct or oversee riskcharacterizations or assessments in accordance with thecapability criteria identified in Section I of the guidance

10 Will EPA assist States in identifying applicable or relevantand appropriate requirements at deferred sites7

Upon request from the State the Region should provideassistance to the State in interpreting CERCLA requirementsincluding identification of Federal applicable requirementsand Federal relevant and appropriate requirements TheState retains the responsibility and discretion to identifyand implement State applicable or relevant and appropriaterequirements at a deferred site including those that aremore stringent than Federal standards

11 Can deferred sites be exempted from obtaining permits foractivities conducted on-site7

The Agency has determined that CERCLA does not authorizepermit exemptions for response actions carried out under thedeferral program CERCLA section 121(e) exempts on-siteremedial action which is selected and carried out incompliance with CERCLA section 121 from Federal State, andlocal permit requirements Deferral response actionshowever will be conducted under State authority andtherefore cannot use the exemption provision

A-5

12 Can Federal funds pay for State-lead removal actions'

Under the deferral program PRPs are generally expectedto conduct all appropriate responses at deferred sites TheRegion should not defer sites at which the State anticipatesusing Fund resources to conduct removal activitiesHowever should PRPs at a deferral site become recalcitrantor bankrupt the State may receive a removal cooperativeagreement provided "a planning period of more than sixmonths is available" (40 CFR 35 6205) and pursuant to other40 CFR Part 35 Subpart O requirements

13 Must States document expenditures of Federal funds atdeferred sites'

Any funds that a State receives through a cooperativeagreement with EPA are subject to all applicablerequirements identified in 40 CFR Part 35 Subpart O Forsite-specific expenditures incurred by a State under acooperative agreement including any site assessmentactivity or HRS scoring that takes place after a site isdeferred the State is required to track expenses by siteactivity and operable unit as applicable according toobject class Non-site-specific funds awarded to a Statethrough a Core Program cooperative agreement also aresubject to the applicable requirements in 40 CFR Part 35Subpart O but are not expected to be recovered by theState

14 Under what conditions would site assessment activities beperformed at a deferred site'

At many sites that will be deferred a site assessmentwill have already taken place the results of which willindicate that a site is NPL caliber In some caseshowever a Region may agree to defer a site that the Stateand Region suspect is NPL caliber even though a siteassessment has not been completed At such sites theRegion and State may determine that completing a siteassessment is appropriate Generally however the PRPs ata deferred site should agree to pay for the site assessmentif one has not already been conducted (See also Question16 )

15 Who will recover the costs of site-specific cooperativeagreements that EPA awards to States under the deferralprogram' What will happen to recovered funds'

Because the value of cooperative agreements at deferredsites typically will be very low EPA will generally notexpect to attempt to recover these costs However anysite-specific cooperative agreement for deferral into which

A-6

the Region enters with the State should stipulate that theState will seek to recover from the PRPs recoverable costsincurred under the cooperative agreement Regions alsoshould make clear to States that EPA does not expect toaward funding indefinitely to States under the deferralprogram rather the Agency expects that sums recovered bythe States will be used to build the State capability tofully implement deferral programs without EPA funding in thefuture

16 Would a response action be considered complete if waste hadbeen removed off-site but a complete cleanup had not beenconducted7

Response actions at deferred sites should be CERCLA-protective as described in Section III of the guidance Ifa response action does not meet this criterion the Regionshould terminate the deferral immediately consider takingnecessary response actions and initiate consideration ofthe site for NPL listing

EPA expects that partial cleanup of an NPL caliber sitewould not reduce the site's HRS score below the thresholdfor eligibility for NPL listing However if the Regionbelieves that a partial response could preclude a deferredsite's eligibility for NPL listing where a site assessmenthad not been completed the Region should have a siteassessment conducted before any deferral response isundertaken At a terminated deferral site where a siteinspection was not commenced prior to the response actionthe Region should refer to the September 1993 OERRPublication "The Revised Hazard Ranking System EvaluatingSites After Waste Removals" (OERR Directive 9345 1-03FS) toevaluate the site's eligibility for NPL listing

A-7

APPENDIX B Instructions on Financial Tracking

Instructions on CERCLIS/WasteLAN and GICS/IFMS Financial Trackingfor the Guidance on Deferral of NPL Listing Determinations

While States Oversee Response Actions

PURPOSE

This appendix provides instructions on how to useinformation management systems to track site progress andfinancial management information for NPL caliber sites that havebeen deferred to States under the Guidance on Deferral of NPLListing Determinations While States Oversee Response Actions"(OSWER Directive 9375 6-11)

BACKGROUND

The Superfund State deferral guidance provides direction toRegions for implementing the State deferral program and includescriteria for establishing State capabilities selecting sitesand entering into agreements with States to compel and implementPRP response actions The guidance requires minimal EPAoversight and provides Regions and States flexibility tonegotiate agreements that reflect State- and site-specificcircumstances The Agency nevertheless will be expected to beable to demonstrate the deferral program's accomplishments and toensure EPA and State accountability Consequently Regions needto report certain information into CERCLIS/WasteLAN Regions mayalso wish to take advantage of CERCLIS/WasteLAN to conduct theirown tracking of progress at sites

Also to ensure that information regarding awards to Statesfor site- or non-site-specific deferral activity Regions need touse appropriate sub-ob]ect class codes in awarding cooperativeagreements and track these obligations in CERCLIS or CERHelp asappropriate

IMPLEMENTATION

New CERCLIS lead event qualifier and sub-eventdefinitions to enable tracking of key information regardingdeferred sites will be included in the FY95 Superfund ProgramManagement Manual and the CERCLIS data element dictionary

In addition a new sub-object class code (41 90) has beenestablished to track resources awarded to States under site-specific deferral cooperative agreements The attached Office ofthe Comptroller Policy Announcement No 94-07 describes thiscode

B-l

New LEAD 8D (C2117 and C1707) STATE DEFERRAL

Definition LEAD SD is a PRP- or State-financed responseaction at an NPL caliber or proposed NPL site overseen orconducted by the State pursuant to a deferral agreement with theRegion as described in OSWER Directive 9375 6-11 With limitedexceptions Fund-financing for deferral response actions will notbe available

The LEAD SD will be used in conjunction with the new STATEDEFERRAL EVENT (C2101 = SD) and associated qualifiers andsubevents (see below) to track start and completion dates ofresponses at deferred sites Other response or enforcementaccomplishments and/or reports may be tracked using the LEAD SD(C2117 or C1707) and current CERCLIS response event orenforcement activity codes, as appropriate at the Region'sdiscretion

New EVENT SD (C2101) STATE DEFERRAL

Definition EVENT SD indicates that the Region has enteredinto an agreement with a State to defer from listing on the NPLan NPL caliber or proposed NPL site while the State uses its ownauthority to compel and oversee PRP response or implements aresponse using its own resources This event is located in the00 operable unit

The SD START DATE (C2140) is the signature date of thedocument sent from the Regional Superfund program directorto the State program director that defers the site to theState under the terms established in the deferral guidanceFor sites that were deferred under the deferral pilotprogram (prior to the issuance of the guidance), the SDSTART DATE will be the date that EPA Headquarters formallyconfirmed the pilot status of these sites

The SD COMPLETION DATE (C2141) is

• The signature date of the formal Regional document thateither confirms that the deferral has been completedsuccessfully or terminates the status of the deferralQualifiers (see below) must be used to indicate whetherthe deferral has been successfully completed (C2103 = S)or has been terminated (C2103 = T)

OR

• The date 90 days after the date EPA receives Statecertification that the deferral has been completed (seeSC SUBEVENT below) if the Region neither formallyconfirms the deferral completion nor initiates a deferralinquiry (see SE SUBEVENT below) within 90 days of

B-2

receiving the State certification The qualifierindicating that the deferral has been successfullycompleted (C2103 = S) must be used (see below)

If upon agreement with the State the Region formallyconfirms the State's certification after the 90 day periodthe SD COMPLETION DATE may be updated to reflect the date ofthe formal confirmation Figure 1 provides a flowchart fordetermining the SD completion date

New QUALIFIERS (C2103 = S or T) FOR EVENT = SD

Definition QUALIFIER C2103 = S signifies that the Regioneither has confirmed formally that the State deferral has beencompleted successfully or that the Region has not respondedwithin 90 days of receipt of the State's certification that ithas completed the deferral successfully Sites at which adeferral has been successfully completed are eligible for removalfrom CERCLIS pursuant to Agency policy for removing sites fromCERCLIS

Definition QUALIFIER C2103 = T signifies that the Regionhas terminated the status of the deferral This qualifier isused when the Region terminates the deferral during the course ofthe response or in conjunction with a deferral inquiry (seeSUBEVENT SE below) conducted at the completion of the responsethat results in termination of the deferral

New SUBEVENT SC (C3101) state completion certification

Definition SUBEVENT SC is the date the Region receives theState's submission of response action completion documentationcertifying that it has completed successfully its selected remedyat the site and has achieved its intended cleanup levels Within90 days of receipt of the documentation the Region must confirmsuccessful completion of the deferral formally (SD COMPLETIONDATE) or initiate an inquiry to confirm the certification (seeSUBEVENT SE below) If an inquiry is not initiated within 90days of the SUBEVENT SC date and the Region has not confirmed thedeferral completion formally, the EVENT SD COMPLETION DATE willbe the date 90 days after the SUBEVENT SC date

New SUBEVENT SE (C3101) State Deferral Inquiry

Definition SUBEVENT SE is the date that the Regioninitiates a deferral inquiry to confirm the State's certificationthat it has completed its selected remedy successfully Theinquiry must be initiated within 90 days of EPA's receipt of theState's certification that the remedy has been completed(SUBEVENT SC) or the SD COMPLETION DATE will be the date 90 daysafter the SUBEVENT SC date Once the Region completes a deferralinquiry (which may be after the 90 day period) the Region must

B-3

issue a document which either confirms successful completion ofthe deferral or terminates the deferral status of the site TheSD COMPLETION DATE is the signature date of this document andthe appropriate qualifiers (C2103 = S or C2103 = T) must be used

Financial Tracking in CERCLIS/CERHelp

Cooperative agreements may be awarded to States to assistimplementation of the deferral program on a site- or non-site-specific basis Site-specific cooperative agreements should betracked under the C2101 = SD event and non-site-specific (CoreProgram) cooperative agreements should be tracked in CERHelpunder C304 BA-TYPE = CG

B-4

SD START DATE

SC DATE

- SD COMPLETION DATE2103 = T

(Date of TerminationOccurs Before Response

Is Completed)

WITHIN 90 DAYS CONFIRMCOMPLETION TERMINATEINITIATE INQUIRYOR TAKE NO ACTION

SD COMPLETION DATE2103 = C

(Date of Confirmationor Date 90 Days After SCIf No Action Is Taken) *

SE DATE(Initiate Inquiry)

SD COMPLETION DATE2103 = T

(Date of Termination)

UPON COMPLETION OF INQUIRYCONFIRM COMPLETION OR

TERMINATE

SD COMPLETION DATE2103 = C

(Date of Confirmation)

SD COMPLETION DATE2103 = T

(Date of Termination)

Figure 1 Flowchart for Determining SD Completion Date

B-5

APPENDIX C Policy Announcement No 94-07

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYWASHINGTON, DC 20460

(Signed) June 08, 1994OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER

POLICY ANNOUNCEMENT NO 94-07

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT New Sub-object Class Code for Deferral ProgramCooperative Agreements

FROM Kathryn s SchmollComptroller (3301)

TO Assistant Regional AdministratorsManagement Division DirectorsRegional ComptrollersSenior Budget OfficersFinancial Management Officers

PURPOSE

This Policy Announcement (PA) establishes a new sub-objectclass code for deferral program cooperative agreements

POLICY

The new sub-object class code to be used for the deferralprogram cooperative agreements is described below

41 90 Deferral Program Cooperative Agreements Awards toStates Territories Commonwealths or IndianTribes to conduct site-specific activities atNational Priority List (NPL) caliber sites whichhave been deferred from NPL listing considerationwhile recipients compel and oversee PotentiallyResponsible Party (PRP) response actions May notbe used to conduct or support Fund-financedremedial action at a deferred site Awards aresubject to 40 CFR Part 35 Subpart O [Assistanceprogram code "V" (CFDA number 66 802)]

EFFECTIVE DATE

This new sub-object class code is available for immediateuse It will be included in the next revision of ResourcesManagement Directives System 2590, Part IV Object Class Codes

C-l

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Should you have any questions on this P A please contactCharles Young of the Superfund Accounting Branch on 202-260-6890

cc David J O'ConnorDavid OstermanElizabeth CraigFMD Branch Chiefs

C-2