Presented
9/
02
The
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response
State
and
Tribal
Role
in
Superfund
A
Background
Briefing
for
the
National
Advisory
Committee
for
Environmental
Policy
and
Technology
(
NACEPT)
Presented
9/
02
Sources:
1.
Grant
Cope,
USPIRG,
testimony,
April
10,
2002.
2.
Environmental
Law
Institute,
An
Analysis
of
State
Superfund
Programs:
50­
Stat
e
Study,
2000
Update,

Table
IV­
4
3.
E­
Facts
as
of
6/
6/
02,
1
EPA
Superfund
is
a
Small
Portion
of
Known
Site
Cleanups
*
Current,
Proposed,
and
Deleted
NPL
Sites:
1,553*

(
NPL
Mega­
Sites:
119*)

OCA
Sites:
1525
Removal­
only
Sites:
1190
CERCLIS
Sites
Needing
Assessment:

4,349
Final
Decisions:
35,792
44,409
Site
Universe
°
There
are
"
600,000
suspected
waste
sites.
1
°
Close
to
30,000
sites
have
been
addressed
by
States
or
EPA
removal
action.
2
°
Another
44,409
have
come
to
EPA
for
assessment/
action.
3
°
The
NPL
has
1553
sites,
current,

proposed
and
deleted.
Presented
9/
02
2
Role
of
States
under
CERCLA
CERCLA
as
amended
in
1986
(
PL
96­
510,
SARA)

°
Section
121
(
f)

°
Provides
for
substantial
and
meaningful
state
involvement
in
decision­
making.

°
Compliance
with
ARARs(
or
waivers)

°
Section
104
°
Provides
State
cost
share
on
fund
financed
remedial
actions
and
assumption
of
Operation
and
Maintenance
(
O&
M)

°
Requires
other
state
assurances
related
to
real
property,
a
20year
waste
capacity,
and
where
needed,

availability
of
a
disposal
facility.

°
Provides
funding
for
participation
in
CERCLA
response
actions.

°
Section
128
°
Support
for
State
response
programs
°
Bars
CERCLA
Enforcement
for
certain
sites
with
eligible
response
under
State
program
if
public
record
is
maintained.

°
Clarifies
NPL
deferral
program
CERCLA
as
amended
in
2002
(
PL
107­
118,
SBLRBRA)
Presented
9/
02
Funding
to
States/
Tribes
Has
Diversified
in
the
Last
7
Years
Source:
IFMS
as
of
5/
08/
02
Cumulative
Funding
to
States
and
Tribes,

FY
1988
 
FY
1995:
$
377M
3
Total
Funding:
$
857M
Note:
These
charts
reflect
funding
provided
through
the
following
Cooperative
Agreement
types:
Preliminary
Assessment/
Site
Investigation
(
PA/
SI);
Enforcement;
Support
Agency;
Core
Program;
Consolidated
Funding;
and
Other.

PA/
SI:
$
202M
Support
Agency,

Management
Assistance,
Core
Program,
Other:

$
128M
Enforcement:

$
47M
PA/
SI:
$

97MBrownfields:

$
170M
Core
Program:

$
106M
22%
20%

36%

54%

34%
12%
Support
Agency:

$
41M
Consolidated
Funding:
$
29M
5%
Other:
4%
Enforcement:

$
17M
4%

FY
1988
 
FY
1995FY
1996
 
FY
2002
9%

Cumulative
Funding
to
States
and
Tribes,

FY
1996
 
FY
2002:
$
480M
$
20M
Presented
9/
02
State
Role
in
Getting
Sites
to
the
NPL
°
States
have
conducted
close
to
half
the
assessments
for
possible
NPL
sites.

°
Consultation
with
States
and
Governors
on
NPL
listing
has
occurred
since
FY
1996.

°
Worksharingagreements
 
formal
and
informal
deferrals
(
The
Brownfieldslaw
clarifies
deferral).

4
Presented
9/
02
5
The
Initiation
of
State
Cleanup
Programs
Has
Accelerated
Over
the
Last
Ten
Years
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Pre
1980
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Superfund­
like
Programs
Voluntary
Cleanup
Programs
Brownfield
Programs
Number
of
programs
begun
that
year
Source:
Environmental
Law
Institute,
An
Analysis
of
State
Superfund
Programs:
50­
State
Study,
2000
Updates
Presented
9/
02
State
Role
in
Getting
Sites
to
the
NPL
°
Many
VCP'swere
developed
with
Superfund
seed
money.

°
State
GIS
systems
are
funded
by
EPA.

°
Enhanced
State
Role
pilots
were
designed
to
pick
up
interest
wherever
States
wanted
joint
work
teams
(
ex.
SC).

6
Presented
9/
02
*
2000
Fund
and
Bond
amounts
were
estimated
based
on
the
percentage
of
change
of
expenditures
from
1998
to
2000
7
$
0.00
$
0.20
$
0.40
$
0.60
$
0.80
$
1.00
$
1.20
$
1.40
$
1.60
19911993199519982000*

Total
State
Bond
Amount
Total
State
Expenditures
Total
State
Fund
Balance
Billions
of
Dollars
Source:
Environmental
Law
Institute,
An
Analysis
of
State
Superfund
Programs:

50­
State
Study,
1989,
1990,
1991,
1993,
1995,
1998,
2000
Updates
Changes
to
States
Superfund
Program
Funds
and
Expenditures
1991
­
2000
Presented
9/
02
Source:
IFMS
as
of
5/
08/
02
Cooperative
Agreement
Distribution:
Response
Program
1988
­
2002
*
Suggested
Parensaround
the
dollar
amounts
have
not
been
included
since
Parensmean
a
negative
number
in
accounting.
8
Note:
These
charts
reflect
funding
provided
through
the
following
Cooperative
Agreement
types
:
Remedial
Investigation/
Feasibility
Study;
Remedial
Design;

Remedial
Action/
Post
Construction;
and
Removal
Actions.

Cumulative
Cooperative
Agreement
Response
Funding,

1988
 
2002:
$
1,007,061,638
Remedial
Action
$
794M
Remedial
Investigation/

Feasibility
Study
$
129M
Remedial
Design
$
68M
Removal
Action
$
16M
RI/
FS
Sites:
442
RD
Sites:
249
RA
Sites:
204
Removal:
22
Number
of
Sites
in
Each
Category
1988
­
2002
Presented
9/
02
*
Activity
types
include
RI/
FS,
RD,
RA,
Long­
term
Remedial
Actions,
and
Non­
time
Critical
Removals
#
Includes
Proposed,
Current,
and
Deleted
NPL
sites
Number
of
NPL
Sites
with
State­
lead
Activities
Initiated,
by
Fiscal
Year
9
State­
lead
Activities
Initiated
at
Sites
1980
­
1992
Year
Number
of
Sites
with
a
State­
Lead
Response
Activity
Initiated*
Number
of
NPL
Sites
Added
#

1980
2
0
1981
11
0
1982
21
4
1983
30
540
1984
62
0
1985
55
273
1986
28
44
1987
39
59
1988
35
213
1989
37
63
1990
19
23
1991
13
21
1992
8
27
Subtotal
360
(
28%)
1267
State­
lead
Activities
Initiated
at
Sites
1993
­
2002
Year
Number
of
Sites
with
a
State­
Lead
Response
Activity
Initiated*
Number
of
NPL
Sites
Added
#

1993
6
49
1994
10
34
1995
6
9
1996
5
23
1997
4
18
1998
7
34
1999
6
35
2000
7
40
2001
7
42
2002
1
2
Subtotal
93­
02
59
(
20%)
286
Subtotal
80­
92
360
(
28%)
1267
Overall
Total
419
(
27%)
1553
Presented
9/
02
Key
Policies,
Guidance,
and
Regulations
June
5th,
1990
 
40
CFR
Part
35,
Subpart
O,
"
Cooperative
Agreements
and
Superfund
State
Contracts
for
Superfund
Response
Actions"
 
This
regulation
codifies
recipient
requirements
for
administering
CERCLA­
funded
Cooperative
Agreements.
This
regulation
also
codifies
requirements
for
administering
Superfund
State
Contracts
(
SSCs)
for
non­
State­
lead
remedial
responses
undertaken
pursuant
to
section
104
of
CERCLA.
This
regulation
is
currently
under
revision
to
provide
greater
flexibility
and
a
greater
role
in
the
Superfund
program
to
states
and
tribes.

March
1995
 
Consolidated/
Block
Funding
 
This
Superfund
reform
offers
ways
for
States
and
Tribes
to
realize
greater
flexibility
in
their
use
ofCooperative
Agreement
(
CA)
resources
by
allowing
States
and
Tribes
to
direct
CA
funds
between
sites
and
activities
to
the
extent
allowed
by
the
Advice
of
Allowance,
by
providing
for
the
transfer
of
funds
from
among
sites
and
activities,
within
the
approved
tasks
for
the
cooperative
agreement,
without
prior
EPA
approval,
and
by
reducing
specific
administrative
budget
and
reporting
requirements,
where
appropriate,
which
can
produce
resource
saving
for
both
levels
of
government.
2
July
27,
1995
Governor
Concurrence
for
Site
Listing
 
Public
Law
104­
19,
directed
EPA
to
obtain
a
letter
of
concurrence
from
the
governor
of
a
state
prior
to
listing
a
site
in
that
state
on
the
National
Priorities
List.
Public
Law
104­
19
expired
three
years
later,
but
EPA,
as
a
matter
of
policy
to
further
enhance
the
role
of
states
in
the
Superfund
program,
continued
to
require
a
governor's
letter
of
concurrence
prior
to
NPL
listing.
3
Sources:
1.
http://
www.
access.
gpo.
gov/
nara/
cfr/
cfrhtml_
00/
Title_
40/
40cfr35_
00.
html2.
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
oerrpage/
superfund/
programs/
reforms/
reforms/
2­
12.
htm
3.
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
superfund/
sites/
npl/
f950929.
htm
10
Presented
9/
02
November
14,
1996
­
Interim
Approaches
for
Regional
Relations
with
State
Voluntary
Cleanup
Programs­
This
reform
supports
effective
State
and
Tribal
voluntary
cleanup
programs
and
promotes
cooperation
between
States,
Tribes,
and
Regions.
To
support
this
initiative,
EPA
has
published
guidance
on
drafting
Memoranda
of
Agreement
(
MOAs)

between
Regions
and
States.
MOAsallow
parties
to
work
together
to
support
protective
cleanups
and
sustainable
redevelopment.
4
March
12,
1998
­
The
Plan
to
Enhance
the
Role
of
States
and
Tribes
in
the
Superfund
Program
­
The
purpose
of
the
Superfund
Enhanced
State
and
Tribal
Role
Initiative
(
STROLE)
was
to
develop
a
comprehensive
plan
that
EPA
can
implement
to
share
Superfund
Program
responsibilities
with
interested
and
capable
states
and
tribes,
to
enable
cleanup
of
more
sites.
EPA
intends
for
this
plan
to
promote
flexibility
in
the
management
of
contaminated
sites
consistent
with
the
overall
goal
of
protecting
human
health
and
the
environment.
5
Key
Policies,
Guidance,
and
Regulations
Sources:
4.
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
superfund/
programs
/
reforms/
reforms/
2­
10.
htm5.
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
superfund/
states/
strole/
index.
htm
11
