EP 1110-1-19
30 Jun 01
An FS may address a specific site problem, OU, or an entire site.2 Following the preliminary
screening of alternatives, a reasonable number of possible alternatives undergo a detailed
analysis using the nine evaluation criteria listed in the NCP.
c.
Remedy Selection
(1)
The preferred alternative remedy
for a site or OU is discussed in detail and
Potentially Responsible Parties
presented for public comment in the proposed
plan. The proposed plan briefly summarizes
Under CERCLA 104, a person or an entity
the alternatives that were studied in detail
potentially responsible for a release of hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants into the
during the RI/FS, and highlights the key factors
environment (i.e., a potentially responsible party
that lead to the selection of the preferred
(PRP)) may be allowed to conduct certain
alternative.
response actions in accordance with CERCLA
122, if a lead agency determines that the PRP, or
(2)
Following the public comment
the PRP's contractor, is qualified and capable.
For a PRP-lead response action, either EPA or the
period associated with the proposed plan, the
state agency oversees the PRP's work and
ROD documents the selected remedy.3 The
develops the ROD.* PRPs may participate in the
ROD introduces the significant facts, presents
remedy selection process by submitting
an analysis of these facts, states the site-
comments on the proposed plan during the formal
specific policy determinations, and explains
public comment period, held prior to the final
remedy selection. However, PRPs generally
how the nine evaluation criteria were
should not be permitted to write or amend a
considered in the remedy selection process.
ROD.
The remedy selection process must be carried
* For detailed information regarding PRP oversight,
out in accordance with CERCLA and, to the
refer to Guidance on Oversight of Potentially
extent practicable, with the NCP.
Responsible Party Remedial Investigations and
Feasibility Studies, Volumes 1 and 2 (EPA 540-G-
(3)
The
ROD
provides
the
91010a and b, July 1991).
framework for the transition into the next phase
of the remedial process.
Recommended
content and format for the ROD can be found in A Guide to Preparing Superfund Proposed
Plans, Records of Decision, and Other Remedy Selection Decision Documents (EPA 540-R-98-
031, July 1999). The ROD describes the remedy's technical parameters, specifying the methods
selected to protect human health and the environment, including the treatment, engineering,
institutional control components, and remedial action objectives/cleanup goals. The ROD also
provides a consolidated summary of the site or OU and the chosen remedy, including the
rationale behind the selection.
2
The RI/FS can be performed for the site as a whole, or for a particular portion of the site. The NCP defines an OU as a
"discrete action that comprises an incremental step toward comprehensively addressing site problems. This discrete portion of a
remedial response manages migration, or eliminates or mitigates a release, threat of a release, or pathway of exposure" (NCP
300.5). Hence, an OU can be a certain geographic portion of a site or a specific environmental medium at the site (e.g.,
groundwater or soil). The OU may also consist of a comprehensive but temporary remedy (e.g., a temporary cap over a site) that
provides interim protection of human health and the environment before final remediation. The cleanup of a site can be divided
into a number of OUs, depending on the complexity of the problems associated with the site.
3
For pre-SARA sites, the selected remedy may be detailed in other reports (e.g., a consent decree or an administrative order).
2-3
Previous Page
