EPA’s superfund program

Sampling/Analysis Checklist. This module of Risk Assistant, developed specifically for the review of Superfund risk assessments, prompts the user to consider key issues in quality assurance and quality control for sampling conducted at a waste site. It provides a concise summary of whether the standards developed under EPA s Superfund program have been met. 

Tier 2 EPA s Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTVs)—The Office of Research and Development/National Center for Environmental Assessment/Superfund Health Risk Technical Support Center (STSC) develops PPRTVs on a chemical-specific basis when requested by EPA s Superfund program. 

The U S EPA Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) is a national network of EPA personnel, commercial laboratories and support contractors. The CLP supports the EPA s Superfund program, created under the 1980 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Corqtensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and currently under the 1986 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). The CLP s primary service is the provision of anal34ical data of known and documented quality, through its routine analytical services, to its customers. All analytical services are performed by EPA-approved contract laboratories that must meet stringent requirements and standards in order to be a part of the CLP. 

EPA. 1986. Superfund programs. Reportable quantity adjustments Final rule. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Federal Register 40 CFR Parts 117 and 302. 

In April, 1988, DSM technology was demonstrated under the Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA s) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program. Since that... 

The patented Dual Auger system has been accepted into the Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA s) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration program. The technology has also been approved by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and demonstrated by the Department of Energy (DOE). Dual Auger is commercially available and has been used in full-scale applications. 

In 1997, MBS technology was demonstrated for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA s) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program at the Midvale Slag Superfund site in Utah. For this demonstration, an estimate was prepared of the total costs to treat the approximately 2 million tons of waste at the site. This estimate was based on a full-scale facility capable of treating 10,000 tons per day. Based on a scale-up from the demonstration, and on information supplied by the vendor, costs were estimated to be 16 per ton (D176710, p. 2). 

All estimated costs for the full-scale VRU are based on results from the pilot-scale unit tested at the U.S. EPA s Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program, and aU costs are given in 1993 U.S. dollars. At this demonstration, the unit treated 100 lb of soil per hour. The full-scale unit is expected to have a treatment capacity of 10 tons per hour (tph). 

A pilot-scale CMS unit was evaluated by the U.S. EPA s Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Emerging Technology Program in 1994. During the demonstration, 5000 lb of soil contaminated with arsenic, lead cadmium, and chromium were processed (D17201A). The vendor stated that the treatment costs for the evaluation were 100 per ton (D13902G, pp. 15, 30). 

The opposition to the use of incineration is described in detail in a prior NRC report (NRC, 2002). Reasons for it include the perceived instability of the process, the potential for explosion, and the potential for unplanned releases of undesirable compounds. This public opposition to incineration is also evident in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency s Superfund program for cleanup of hazardous waste sites, where both on-site and off-site incineration were selected less frequently as treatment technologies as the years passed (EPA, 2004). For example, on-site incineration was selected four, seven, six, and four times in 1987, 1988, 1989, and 1990, respectively, for source control for remedial... 

In 1984, the total worldwide production of PCP was 35 400 to 40 000 tons, 80% of which was used for wood preservation (Korte, 1987). CPs are widely distributed in the environment and many contaminated sites have been selected for cleanup in Europe and are on theNational Priorities List of the Superfund Program in theUS. (U.S.EPA, 1993). Some CPs are listed as priority pollutants by the U.S. EPA (Keith Telliard, 1979). 

In 1987, hazardous heavy metal wastes were produced in California at an annual rate of 140,000 ton/yr.1 Through April, 1989 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had identified over 900 acutely dangerous hazardous waste disposal sites that required immediate cleanup through the Superfund program, and another 27,000 sites that may potentially qualify.2 Ultimately, the U.S. General Accounting Office believes that up to 425,000 waste sites will require cleanup in the next 50... 

According to the VIEW Database (1989), silver has been found at 27 sites on the National Priority List of 1,177 sites. The frequency of these sites within the United States can be seen in Figure 5-1. EPA s Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) statistical database indicates that silver has been detected at 100% of the 2,783 Superfund hazardous waste sites that have had samples of all media analyzed by the CLP (CLP 1988). 

---