UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYWASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

A 2 1QQ1 ' SOLID WASTE AND EMenoeNcv RESPONSETre o : v r thi-s\fcfernofahaumw>l's'"to^provi-i£-: - -t jrcier* " '' ""• vl-nce on how to use rn= baselin- risk OSWER DIRECTIVE 9355.0-30•.rffient decisions "sue;- ;-s detarr. iniftcj ' - -ri'athi t r^r-sdiii vc^ir- ' - " "

-•y gl;atMBMQSSN;DQM use a: cne DcrS-e'line -risx

Don R. ClayAssistant Admlnistrc- - -

TO: Directors, Waste Management Division- ? ^ iohsf:iy i^t v;- vn, viii

' : t3a,; T Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Divisiont'He-r*&" I:s a* r*e 1 -Region ' ''

'5!' ha ' i- ti?''%xfbs:t:S{£:"f0irectors-> Hazardonsn Waste Management Division<5a't-' of" r l a"s¥'vintb "tHe" eiSeg±ons3!ia:i9t VI,piX . l:.^\ or'aM'irria tr7%7Ki:W fe i-JEexstor 'h Hazsardoas" Waste' ' Division , — r - p i i i l f t ' e ' » ' F 6 ^ ^ Y e T U " ] R ! O i f i 1-0:4 fk}^' c r, CEFCLA - -

Hazsardoas" Waste' ' Division ,1-0:4 fk}^' c r, CEFCLA

t V^ ' tt5; t S-k'e"3 i a n y"; % e s L w n s a a u i c nvir'n Tne "Natri:D"na-i- ''Cbntindehdy'Tian" -i f '/'ee. .- -'."t-^iAr--

..•& Purpose- r ne^rtr or wei£are~or me env^ : . -.-.e:. . ,=^v. i -^ t/r^A- grants EP.A" '•ch'e 'autfiority to recfu'i'r pocert_^i_,

jn*i>-. Le p^Jjeipprpose-ofetbjLstmemorandtimr-ds to clarify; the role of theoris k&sj&ifife,. rstsfe assegsmentrdn i develop ing; Super fund remedial

" management decisions.> e^ ••. = ?\ed

in the memorandum:

risk -to an individualma3fimujsee3fposure for both -current and

" and the'-non^carcinogenic-l action jgenerally^is not

m treirs environmental timpacts .aT-'fe ^ SQJ 5f§&,s4frMCL§sQrpnQns2er,o..M<SLGStare exceeded, action

.Other chemieal?sp§sif ic $ARARs, _may also be used ito determine

s remediation, _ c. .-j;..sox-• • - - - _ .• ;. &-. . . • -• ••A- risk manager may also decide that a baseline risk levelless than 10"* is unacceptable due to site specific reasonsand^that remedial act ion *is warranted.

an Recycled Paper

icO-.cjr Qompiian,cejyith alchemical-specific ARAR generally will be«s w a & tCJ3n,?£d%:£eji protective even if it is outside the risk range

-vcr.ai £ C JJiliSJ:there are extenuating circumstances such as exposure3'cess t. Qi %u tipjke: contajnijiarit.? or pathways of exposure).

,t defies, aranganis'. mdtr:afcdiscrete 1 ine

fe w Laith ugh l ESfcrgenerallyvusesp-il »x aia'foin makingfcmjt geiaenl5aiecisJ.Qn c FA specific1 risk estimate around

if^justified based on..conditi-onSit -. ncertaJ_nt.ies >~r cae r : :. -

Heppras or Da.<fL3ion for remeaial' " .the) us&: of

remedial action if

\-%itu:t esr~'aa'!a:?ri-<arn

<ass"*saJtent.

"

COnCe'Rl-am -tNCPV

remedial investigation (Section 300.430(d)(1)). Specifically,the-NCP^states that the baseline risk assessment should

.cujCirJaataand --potential -threats to-human healthb. posed :by*san~taffiinants - migr a t ing

releasing^to air, leaching:j-soil, andabioaccumulating in the(4).}:» ^^rheL primary* purpose of the

' tton -' l selijjf r-is i ass«supent-/ is ? to-- providearisk -managers with an•-- ers an ingrPfntfe Actual and potential risks to human health

isth' enyirbrtihent/posed by the site and any uncertaintiesus u . _.« ^. _ asgessme ^ g fh:is gisnf.armat ion-cway be use f ul

ier r.a- curafflinto orap©tenfeia1Pr threat' to humaniI| @i eifei ?irpniB t e eisl thatrwarrmn s remedial action... ——,-_, .-i. *»*.-*>-. K, .j- ? : -,q .e j.ence. f.or, cleanvipfi^i-

isessmentas tdanceafor Super fund:** Volume I,Luftt iqBE5-If aftuaaoBrl tartTA'fe BHEW.)3 &( EPA/ 540/1-

Risk« Super f-undVo^hea'IErtvironmental Evaluation

^ ^ manual, "Ecologicald Waatf . Sitesfts LA; Field . and Laboratory

on conducting thenfnYi,tonro® t.4teportioh60fitheci43aselineerisk- assessment. Othercpfrtinen-t guidance includes the "Guidance for Conducting Remedialarlnvestigationsvand Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA" (RI/FS-.; guidance, EPA/540/G-89/004) , which describes how the baselinerisk assessment fits into the overall RI/FS process. "Guidance

n#on Preparing Super fund Decision Documents" (ROD guidance)si anHsaca**1 3e- r as si accec^^--r ---/^ .3-

AR301383

( EPA/ 6 2°4/ 1-3 T/'Wi)"" provides information* brr how to document theresults of~ the baseline risk assessment" in the" ROD.- •-T*i"jas55'C"ancas._2uc; .--..-_ .., -,^«-,--r -.-, MM ;-,-.-

e v-. -- - a -•n.a.v cte .igpj,ne. t^hac ris&a-.JL ess--"• ffii SBffetive%f lh ss<memorahaum-i§ !:on provide^ further ' 'guidance on 'how to use the baseline risk assessment to make riskmanagement decisions such as determining "whether remedial actionunder"1 Clf?C :SWc 3n Ir04' or;T06"iis-fie ess'ary. This memorandun--also* cl rxfl sr-%fi:e4isev'c5f -the Basel ine risk- -assessment in

promotessTter-specif'tcP' risk- assessments , and

^ frbfti1 '

--conaisiereds-iaa c~afir ,cc- 'tenons": racethreat of releasea release or

pollutant oralfd" substantial danger

f C'ESCLA

*consl'steht3Wtfff%he a ibnal 1:bWti.;ngShcyT?Pl¥h2 it deems necessaryto p*fo€Sct "ptiblti'cu-'ixe :hx'4bTr w'e'l fa"r blf :th"e environment. Section106 of CERCLA grants EPA the authority to require potentiallyresponsible parties (or others) to perform removal or remedial

i, r€Ke 'P eslLdVnt cfeVerrfiliesr7 •that' tliere may be an

'skBIta ee f forf a?¥«. jw-jcs ;a $£>:. j3»7l*.- -*"'<a " "f*£Sjsi 1 f -A-TJ r .HV-!.. = i - -i-. - i-csci -iv-eri -- s .£3~;*3£Stg5 j; iA2r*4--*<% jf-3?*.***' £*LS4,*Q .-M*Ov . >» - M sVjC-' j «5* ~i.! _.

fejfey-affb? rdfe:r %<f; op ate - a uni;f ied-E A e'riera"!"! 'ifses 'th -' reS'ults of tne baseline

"rrfsJr%¥slssipe1l%?Cfresl biri'stf tKi1 ffs fb¥l5taking;- a remediala*c i %slL'n%1'<¥it'h*er Slibtidh 1C?4~ br *106 authority. EPA may usethe results of the baseline risk assessments to determine whethera i eleas o*J?'"tthxeia"ten"e fere'als e, 'p s es ti lfhajcc'eptab'le" risk toThxnnarf Tfeal tlf oif *tt&'ejn iroTifteii "£h*t w'afrants" remedial action andto d ermine iTf'-aj sxte presents :afif immfhent a'nd substantialeridan erme:nt.~*"'*The jrisk; a sse ssm*e>ft: *Taethodolbgy for all sitesshoulcf b"e' t: e"rs ajffe_£feg rdlessi;of'whether the'-RI/FS or remedialdesign '-aricf 'reMed"£al action is 'performed by TEPA or potentiallyresponsible parties. - -- ---

f- i . w i i*- "

"Where the baseline risk assessment indicates thata cumulative site risk to an individual using reasonable maximumexposure assumptions for either current or future land useexceeds the 10"4 lifetime excess cancer risk end of the risk

"'•AR30138U

_action under"CERCLA is generally warranted-at the site.

^For siteV'where^thevcumulative site risk to an individual based^nea^tlj on reasonable maximum exposure for'both current and future landas-'Wefc-iause is less-thah= 10~«4 tfction generally- is not warranted, but may

. ' d tfeEbi warraRfeectcifaasche^ical. speeiS'lc standard that defines"'• - let-erini 'ac-ceptabl rf sktisavi'olatedJbr-uM§si^^here^are' nnca1 rcinogenicf -fj£5a& fff;ect*fe6 ratfuaavi sft-'1 eftvirortmentalu-ifepact 'that" warrants action.

7-J$ pi-cflA' ris'kflanaie -lMfSalsa deeide-ythat & lo'wgr"level"of/risk to"r?%h - g't];3U is

in the riskRecords of Decision^for remedial actions ^i

_• tasks' within*the' it)"4 to 10"6 risk range 33 .remedial action Is warranted. 'JJTJ itStsit-Fvt feMrifl'-siftparl'i'o'n of ,. -,,-.« .

"media' ^ih^icates are' -j xsp'r

tfiaSn institutional tif'ff isk

3 :fa tv^ef'<ES invCKed. Of course" ' =s y.-it (£}v?arr ;nGheTii «l: e£f£5&itandar.Ss§€-hat define acceptable risk•f p l - f® ^ rffollS rb CLCaSjT M<3§s J"3al§6'3i5ay'-be us d'to determine.t he€her a'ft' xpi ti#€""is'~5ss6criStid'Twith*"Sn"unacceptable risk toV2 man,;hea iib . or*the_environment and whether remedial action underSection'104 or ibl is warranted. For ground water actions, MCLs

rsSan€-'non-!!<e& -M xl -ili f ene'rllly be sed'to Sflge -whetherROC The"

ct a^rante=assmc"target^manage risks as part of

)f|ce a" decision/p"as~blehc made to take anpIM xpfis's d a prer,e|'i ce for cleanups.protective, end/of the range (i.e., 10 ),mtte ' aie lis actle iftf c-fSdMdtions in siteliirf W is »«ftge aVWel4ffem€a: Sedeptable by"""""" - • - • • • • • • •- - of the

ps? Si «§lsfc *&&&*&ms ji rMrete lfn t vf "k ll fcsra n ugh EPA- • pp.fp-r5 g"ehe:ra-i .tis s" [:i ;lff ririf making'5risk manig€merit 'decisions.. A

"——"fie risk estimate around 10"4 may be considered acceptableH&x&j&dt"bated o% ite- spetiif tic Rc6rid'ftfarts / SiSisiuding any

remaining uncertainties on the nature and extent of contaminationand associated risks. Therefore, in certain cases EPA may4cpnsider risk estimates slightly greater-than 1 x 10"4 to be

.y,,. protective^ ' .:k-2T--------"1 -- -• - r. "?.--.-.-?• 5 r^r-tc- --=. * ,. •' 'tl?- liii-" $aF*-~~el .C Ls -!l -*S~' -ti hXlTHSH f fc-5 r tl exilC. '-11?' ••sri"v .; .; i-ii-.'-fe ,-

*»l rrr?--a«- whert an ARAR for a specific chemical (or in some cases a-ocess grr«up of che'micals) defines an acceptable "level of exposure,

S P J V - .n&R30l385

. > compliance with the. _ARAR_ wilJL generally be considered protectiveeven if it is outside Jbhe-jrisk range (:unless there are

-,.. ..extenuating circumsta.nces s.uch• ~as .exposure to multiplecontaminants.,,o_r;: pathways tof exposure) . ..Conversely,,, in certain

t _ _ _ _ _

10" _are i.nLc j u.ff G' ijfel rpEotectly.e'iafld wascanfe -remedial' patny»y:-» action. ... i . _,,ndij-7ate" t:K¥;. Keed.-f^i' mere 'or'lasso'str-int;:•^leTanuc -- ' fch^yser l ijcialiv' de'rs • or-2-d ?s "r^-iTKir-r-r"-'

Where current-,tsbjjdifeLojnA-have not. es-ujyseji -in *a release.in- posing ri.skjbi faja,tj a rja jcajB4t oA-rbu -A&SreJ/ Si. i significant

;, i.v ari, uAacj epJ .blfiiirj J ejti iA Thein

and the

RISKS CONSIDERED IN RISK MANAGEMENT DECISIONS/a'rlV -oeraBie^ unit- actions i'.e~ g~. -:.hot- spot removal ana

n-As- noted abjDy ^ ot urcejil /xm4 -likely futureneedvAftvbe :;co.nsdhd,ereoarin,j3rdejctdt5oa demonstrate that a site

.its i-hrsdoeSijEiot: present:\anviinacceptabl%dEisk,rtp«-human health and the,ion. f 3 -environment^ rAn adeguate considieratApn =P:f -futiire risk mayxamons nfi.ces.siia.te it&e Jas_se.ssme,ntc &£.-. riis.ks. sas sjLunijig. airland :use different^ri-v ir- from feafeMhiefe. <aS^d^^i^^s^A R i ^ &aThQ potential land

:and: risk thatcjiras beataddressjed in the

baseline rifki-ji-ssessmjeivt |cFu,rj:her7, thJLsr-ljtnd iu:se tand theseexposure a'ssymptiojisiiShiOiil i. Jae; used, in develioping remediationgoals. ---•-• -iq' cie''aloped,, . ,._~g , •„_

-c_, --The preambles,tQ, taxe:, CP, states -thaitt. EPA:Midi,-consider future.jne land" use3-avSs*SiSidenl:4;a3iic n anyj' caseSrvrmsDnv-general ,b>residential

residentlalts and;s.undevelopedt:J4heacfiuJ2Ure unless sites

i:n-.-a-r.eaflsarhftref asasidreJitiajbiL-and usres iBb-jan eas-onable. oftenout the exposure ijSffejxa i land^arte us.e? provideat:|ie; g-cwt-feesfri3rj. Jc.=estrimatejsn i(-Sacg.r>urieeaLSonable maximum. n5€. Scpbsurersci|hai:ip) jiiidr' arje important-. s:oinS;i'd,erBJ:ip.as in deciding

^qt -discussion s'h'dXTK7- "accornpa'ny these aairinc -h Howey^er^othe NfiP_ also states thatiJ'ithe;assumption of future-s residential viand useamay notr be, justiciable ,irf the probability:~Athat the,s,iteiwil.l,jsupport .retsidential-, use:In,.the future is,,_, small." Sites, that- are:, surrounded, bys copera ting industrial*•'- facilities can-be. assumed to remain tas,.Industrial, areas unlessthere is annindication that this is not appropriate. Other landuses, such as recreational or agricultural, may be used, ifappropriate. When exposures based on reasonable future land useare used to,estimate risk, the, NCP preamble states that the ROD"should include a qualitative assessment of the likelihood thatthe assumed^ future land use will occur" (55 Fed. Reg. at 8710).

AR301386

' " t ^ PO'JrfeiOP T. . ~. .« - ~f-f- • 7 *"*•<* i nr&rji . ...•- > ,,- cj/sf. f. ..-,_. „ . , . ,-,, ejnons in?6 131® ,f.nvirqnmental,,tisks^also^ may _prompt remedial'- the^i j.fr..a -"------ - '-"-'- ; igl hj|ats"-tovlehsitive habitats, such

s 32rspiSies protected under the' • 'w NTl B S- All1 ?ftf-sRM;i??FflSf§ ai H i0 Ba 5 t?oRon when5-^ lN etelmrhing whetner^ta lak^SB-actio^tihder^CERCLA^Section 104 or

:er Quality Criteria for aquatic organisms areJ^lsEai- aGsrt-SG .c.r-. ^ °< * v-'-f1benc6nrs'idered

sou. -to--, po*_an-t,s! and I"SflSSrBtff*¥ft aa"54»5ti cis.<:iMv?lV: : cE:i2n5su?"l^ • ,env±ro:: ^ilium {IVgT-,r

M-i^^^^ of "'indicates.-*

thumaffnifeai^hu^r the 3_ _flwv____rfr_ ------ __ ___n!:id, then the -Jcfelfup3slah&ards for selection of a Superfunti

ent,to meet Applicable or relevant

actions that "or ... 106

hl a Wct ll tcessarfr -ne rfeitiemm action must", .unless a Waiver is invoked. Of course, sites thatnt~actipn under. CERCLA_ sections..104_pr.l06 may

_ - _ _ _ _ _. , such asBroprTate losure of a

-,-_j3^ - ut^ is, ., Q V", •—* * —- -. - — „as sOLectigii,l4c»?sibft" sitVunder section

~., R'oS aiid "ev'.eh'tua iiV' a closeout_jkB« l€ide f a rfite.-.cin f" : iri;2 i-^ie^J^---3elected

•«wm:P^tectiQnand

f e rranted, _

.IPSS f gpRg l Waa a?em°dlfYDa?seiof'o% R itf%ria}'ther?l'os*' cancer risk

MODIFY PRELIMINARY REMEDIATIONGOALS. • -VltSa naoiics j . peg;. - -: ?riaa.a ir-i.cr- -•!-€••,£&_ anc":! j4|e%TatTo;ncg%%ls-de ^ 121 are

generally0 mediula-sjp cif is ''chemicar conceritrations rthat will poseno"J§ij|;|:ep'table tlir%at rto huian Health and thei?Ienvironment.Preliminary remediation goals are developed early in the RI/FSprocess based on ARARs and other readily available information,

LflR30'1387

such as concentrations associated with .10"6 cancer risk or ahazard quotient equal to one 'fbrj'noricarcinogens calculated fromEPA *to~xicity information. THesV preliminary goals may bemodified based on results of the baseline risk assessment, whichr t" ja '~*J~i ar1.- ,i->= H - t " . * - - 'f \ % "i "" '. -»i»o •]. ct -a n fl ." ~ r " ~.= •" • -inn T r> r- x < c: » u ' . v " -1:1— * '- lf'§exPosure pathways 'ana?:jnW identifysTtuatibT-idP\Khere

e ris'lc oY m: ^ f i€ } t 6surBat the s'itV irio ca l ee lribte, 'o itfss stringen

p levels than' thos -fh'i'tf l developed as'pretlminarygoals. In addit.ib'h licf belhg modified based on the

-:umna-r>' baseTine risk assessmentr; jprliimlliarV" remediation1: goals and theecisioi4^onding cleaiiWrleWlsn1nafJti;Lsb be mbdified:'bKsed^onf^he

*5 e-n waste management strategy selected at the time of" remedyelection that is based o

id P Early operkBle unit actiolis (e.g., hot spot removal and"trelitmentf "and- inter ISP a§'taon¥;4 e.g.', temporary storage or ground

- ^ ' ^ e . n ^ t o respond t o a n immediate"

.^Gtiite threat "ofn to t'ake adyantkge'o an'" opportunity toDhsighificantly" reduce risk' quickly (55 Fed. Reg. at 8705). Forexample, an interim containment action may be particularly useful

aaaearlyr'in-"theaprbcess""for' cbmpltick%ed"'; ground water remedialc tctibhi,-wRSfejaonc'eRtrations"griater'iiahTMCLs provide a good

indication that remediation of a potential drinking water sourceis necesSary; such^quick remedial action^ is important to preventfurther .spread^of the^cibntaminant^plume while" a final groundwater remedy is being developed. ^ , _"

...- ,. ^ A- &n- i, iiS a^-Mi^-i- a r -55

,_r-on6- Early and" interim action. RODS do not require a completed"BlsSlinl'rislc assessment,1' Although enough information must beavailable to demonstrate^the potential for risk and the need to

Ui€akifac€iBh:'~?"Dl€S'~iuf£icientb'io Sup|Srt the interim action^decision can be extracted from the ongoing RI/FS for the site and- Sit-ou in a focused^feasibility• stu$y or other appropriate3CdSeiimtn€T'€hat?indludis'"a'?shSrt analysis of a limited number of' ^ s ^ f S S ^ F e i l ^ R e g . at 8704) . These data should include a

-'6bnt'aiiJiiafi€s,oCx §rtS6rn, concentrations and relevant. " A discussion should accompany these data

explaining the need for immediate remedial action based on theprgsefice of contamination that, if left unaddressed in the short-term, either contributes immediate risk or is likely tocontribute to increased site risk or^degradation,of theenvironment/natural resources;" The"e"arly and intTerim action RODsshould note that some "exposure"pathways at the'site may not beaddressed by the action.

An interim action ROD eventually must be followed by asubsequent ROD for that operable unit based on the completeRI/FS, that includes the baseline risk"assessment, in order todocument long-term protection of human Tiealth arid the environment

AR301389w ..< , --

3••*•= --'• •_-—..;, •• ^ »

,, _ _,-_, .. --~Lr_~ -- the site. The interim action ROD, however,houlcTUemonstrate qualitatively (and quantitatively if possible)that, there is a risk or potential for risk and explain how the*.——u -i- . -. .—_ selected will address a portion 5bf this risk.

~ " " '% - "" - x " -'BASELlNE"~RISK|5sSESSMENTf REsfLTS ff|r THE ROD

"*" - ~t .._ «• *»* "|1 * 4T -'; '-The Summary of Si£» Risksa dH l

"i eiction off^e^RODifsfiould includeisbussibn bf the ris,cs asso<| a,ted with current|a|id future landand a table ..presenting thefi

"an ihd"be e poi djtp f j

to suiiaarizing?•-•=5=i*t'-'SM: ••-* - ——1"1'. i • —?i

risk levels for fach exposurelum (e.gv>Vdirect contact wi; h soil by potentials future^^___ -»_£-_.» ..j.- i tl jsoiOngfstion a.3&£ dermal

^-'-";- isks f rom?exp<isur^ ia more,--th-an«',ing waterj "'WiJjl aBf^ct the samet^theisamft^tifle. "rSKJ: is */??#£&.•

combinevths risl s from the 'l of otaf r iak* that

~a site." ™ . 2•

T f- * ' £ a'.the b ise.lin e* riskga'ssessmentinformatibn, Cne' Robr' ccipiE n ciioh vROt)s);• itrau%6| include howremedial alternatives will redule risks by •• achieving £ cleanupi——%- thrwgh treatment bjr by jmliminating expbsufe s-j through

, _*& -^ -;+** *,__ _-_j. fntaminint: of iincern; in each

bf the nine criteria; consider

2; -' - * w «The Comparative Analysis islould include a discussion of each

ion of :risk is ^part of thediscussion of several bf the c:-|teria\ : The dis'cussion of overall

ift heklth and he environment fshould include a^_ wi-j^ eliminate, reolice,Jqr controlttie'basfeliiil risk assessment posed 'through

/5 2 a|tdh.9pa x«a] c ;nd ^ t|her ixposMe levels will~b>v, reduced to"acbeptaBlP-leve f Pol| exaiiplf| if"idl?e ct hXiman, conta.<§: withcprrtaminateol oi - s iiientified|as at jsfgnificant" ris a : a site,_th« ROD jCf-x ept g-act|bn ODspshould"indicate libw th& selected

~ ^ "~ "* |sr Spntrbi exposiiifes to|4hsire protect ionJ.s£ussioB of "long-terms fTflct-i eness and

^» -^ra.jr--^ ^e> whe: § 'appropriate,},apt assess|nent ofth|B residualtri c frQm:.;untreati i 'reslduair waste jr$ma3.nfeg at the'siiwa. The 'short-'term|.4ffectrSriess xiisjciissi§i| houlf .Bdress__(• _ % _ _ _ _ * . _ _ _ * . _ _ * _ . _ — _ s _ f _ « el''** »_ 3' ._ A_ *^ j_«_ _ '" _— "•« _ ~ _ • j_ _ -.. -_**j» __ _""*_ - •J i _>risks during remedial action t ai those? dn-siteK and nearkw: * - * ^' 'tiil :!$U ItTtie;cisibn Summaf? in the IROD thatc p •„ g Finally, , thai: j>arp| of thefocuses on the selected! remedy! should/ show:*< t,.-:. •*,'••¥ j . , •• .:

t- :•' - " - r f T - - 5-trT ; :r/o the chemical-specific remediation level and'" -

corresponding chemical-specific risk"level~(s)~ to be: attained at the conclusion of the response action and

• 3 the points (or area) of compliance for the media being- - addressed; and < I

-. AR30I389

o The lead agency's basis for the remediation levels(e.g., risk calculation, ARARs).

vi:t:H The attached^table, "Remediation Levels and Corresponding Risks,"-'-"sracus S p'r i e - il'ec means of displaying this information for health-,r- / N^.rth K xl ks fa-rfor,t where appropriate, environmental protection (Table if.'"'Kes~Barr:Thep'babTe0"should be completed for all media for which the ROD-.,,,

selects £inal cleanup levels. The table should serve as a4 ~" stimmary '~o¥ IfexV in the selected remedy section of the ROD __ ,

, Decision Summary. For interim action RODs, only qualitative, f^ .:.-•-.-r -c-b: statements may be possible. "-" " " . Tj r v ft-v l

_ Enclosed P- <ia!itiori£f"guidance afie€hea§§sei|8gl:&isktas§essmefr&^apf>«.rsr RI/.-ES--f fi3 re"medy^-jWfectfSfifiiiavSSSailldfr6m^-severa'lui6urcesV 'appreciate""•d danBe"rbif €h"e t"*aselii!ltr£§R0aSs¥ssm4ht3-Soritagt :> "rs aeli'/arv " "-, -xi.- -itf jfps- ' " ar ..-. i: request thar. .feh i report. -~.\ iewea fc- -.<; ^ rx a/ onnetl?''"'chief ~r -"tats I-JlARs."" " Should 2h

^ •_ *2- •,

vcur r-; • piaY fdfous !s£te Evaluation" bivislonvSressed bv", u t e r 7 '' Office" of '"Emergency ana-Remedial7 Respoftse" -1- -

f 1 . if.' •}" t"\ f?- - .* -^-i-A O V— j—t V* ^ "?» f -9*1 •"- *•• r** -*~-»-**^^-.:4-1*i - "

475-9486. '' "'" '' -•,?!

f ii£i t _ t- — csi* •?- .-•--—>-*/-! -?= «-- »w^ »,* ,* .-. ^ / * -j £•- t -_• r-. -3 = Q r* ri t ^ - «j - - . •• ;-*•-"-•;-'FoY additional guidance on the interaction of the baseline risk

' assessment "and ' Super f urid "f eSiidy"" sllecti n ,° contact :- , . . .David Cooper . . , _ . . . . - * /Remedial Operations and Guidance Branch /(OS-220W)Hazardous Site Control Division "Office of Emergency, ..and Remediphone: (FTS) 398-8361 V(commercial phone: (7oW' 308"-8361).„,.. lr pr,^--~.-r Mand

For guidance on enforcement-lead sites contact:

e - - - - - ---sn-rFGuidance -and Evaluation Branch (OS-510)CERCIA Enforcement DivisionOffice of Waste Programs Enforcementphone: (FTS) or (202) 475-9803.

NOTICE: The policies set out in this memorandum are intendedsolely as guidance. They are not intended, nor can they berelied upon, to create any rights enforceable by any party inlitigation with the United States. EPA officials may decide tofollow the guidance provided in this memorandum, or to act atvariance with the guidance, based on an analysis of specific sitecircumstances. Remedy selection decisions are made and justifiedon a case-specific basis. The Agency also reserves the right tochange this guidance at any time without public notice.

AR3QI390

^H 3