EP 1110-1-18
24 Apr 00
c. Evaluation of Response Action Alternatives. Once the cleanup objectives have been
established for a site, the various response action alternatives developed in the EE/CA must be
evaluated in terms of how well they will meet these objectives.
(1) Three general evaluation categories are used to evaluate the proposed response action
alternatives: effectiveness, implementability, and cost. The following paragraphs and Table 9.2
provide criteria which should be considered in the evaluation of each response action alternative.
(a) Effectiveness. The effectiveness of each response action alternative is evaluated based
on its level of protection of human health and the environment, compliance with ARARs, and its
ability to achieve the response action objectives. The effectiveness category is divided into four
evaluation criteria:
Overall Protection to Human Health and the Environment.
Compliance with ARARs.
Long-Term Effectiveness.
Short-Term Effectiveness.
(b) Implementability. The implementability of each response action alternative is evaluated
based on the following evaluation criteria including:
Technical Feasibility.
Administrative Feasibility.
Availability of Services and Materials.
Stakeholder Acceptance.
(c) Cost. The cost of each response action alternative is based on:
Capital Costs.
Post Removal Site Control Costs.
d. Comparative Analysis of Response Action Alternatives. Those alternatives which still
appear feasible after the evaluation described above are then compared to each other using the
same evaluation criteria described above. During this comparative analysis, the alternatives are
ranked and the recommended response action alternative is selected.
9-15
Previous Page
