|From:||Peter Strauss <email@example.com>|
|Date:||Thu, 31 Aug 1995 21:36:19 -0700 (PDT)|
|Subject:||EE\CAs: Info. Request|
This is another rrequest for information. As many of you can ascertain, I am a technical advisor to several community groups that have recieved Technical Assistance Grants from the EPA, to help them with with technical issuesinvolving cleanup at NPL sites. Two of the sites have recently proposed using removal actions to speed up cleanup and avoid some of the documentation that is involved in normal cleanup actions (i.e., feasibility study, proposed plan draft ROD, etc.). Rather, the "removal action" requires developing one document called an Engineering Evaluation\Cost Analysis (EE\CA). The National Contingency Plan requires that there be public notification of an EE\CA and an opportunity to comment. There is no requoirement for a public hearing, a response to comments, or a ROD. I have a few questions that some one may help me with: 1) Has anyone had experience with this mechinism? 2) What has been your experience regarding public particpation? 3) Do you have recommendations about how to improve public parrticpation? 4) Have there been other downsides to using EE\CAs rather than going the full nine yards? All comments would be very much appreciated. Thanks, Peter
Prev by Date: Center for Defense Information Web|
Next by Date: $100 MILLION DOD CLEANUP ...
Prev by Thread: Re: Center for Defense Information Web|
Next by Thread: $100 MILLION DOD CLEANUP ...