FRIDAY January 15, 1993 Part V Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 310 Reimbursement to Local Governments for Emergency Response to Hazardous Substance Releases; Final Rule (This reprint was prepared from the electronic file that accompanied the original signed documents transmitted to the Office of the Federal Register. This file was certified to be a true copy of the original.) (This document appeared at 58 FR 4815-4838.) Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 1993 / Rules and Regulations ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 310 [FRL - 4102 - 8] RIN 2050--ACII Reimbursement to Local Governments for Emergency Response to Hazardous Substance Releases AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing a final rule to provide reimbursement to local governments for costs of temporary emergency measures taken to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the environment. This reimbursement program is authorized under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended. This regulation should help to alleviate significant financial burden on local governments for costs incurred in responding to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants. CERCLA requires, however, that reimbursement must not supplant local funds normally provided for response. EPA believes that this final rule is both consistent with the intent of Congress and appropriate for effective emergency response at the local level. EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation is effective October 14, 1992. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this regulation is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of January 15, 1993. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on specific aspects of this final rule for reimbursement to local governments contact: Elizabeth Zeller, (703) 603 - 8780, Local Governments Reimbursement (LGR) Project Officer, Emergency Response Division (5202 - G), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic Availability: This document is available as an electronic file on the Federal Bulletin Board at 9:00 a.m. on the date of publication in the Federal Register. By modem dial (202) 512 - 1387. This file is also available in Postscript, Wordperfect and ASCII. Index to Preamble I. Statutory Authority II. Background A. Overview of the Superfund Program B. Congressional Intent III. Approach to This Rulemaking IV. Overview of the Local Governments Reimbursement Program A. Intent of the Reimbursement Regulation B. Basis of Reimbursement Decisions C. State Role D. Reimbursement Process 1. Response to Release 2. Contact with the Federal Government 3. Decision to Pursue Reimbursement 4. Reimbursement Request 5. Preliminary Screening 6. Evaluation of Requests V. Summary of Changes to the Interim Final Rule VI. Section-by-Section Analysis A. Subpart A--General 1. Section 310.05 Purpose, Scope and Applicability a. Interim final rule. b. Response to comments and clarifications. c. Final rule. 2. Section 310.10 Abbreviations and 310.11 Definitions a. Interim final rule. b. Response to comments and clarifications. (1) Federally permitted releases. (2) Emergency response hazardous substance releases. c. Final rule. 3. Section 310.12 Penalties a. Interim final rule. b. Response to comments and clarifications. c. Final rule. B. Subpart B--Reimbursement 1. Section 310.20 Eligibility for Reimbursement a. Interim final rule. b. Response to comments and clarifications. c. Final rule. 2. Section 310.30 Requirements for Requesting Reimbursement a. Effective date for response. (1) Interim final rule. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. (3) Final rule. b. Federal contact requirement. (1) Interim final rule. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. (3) Final rule. c. Consistency requirement. (1) Interim final rule. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. (3) Final rule. d. Restriction on supplanting local funds. (1) Interim final rule. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. (3) Final rule. e. Attempt to recover costs. (1) Interim final rule. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. (a) Clarification of cost recovery requirements. (3) Final rule. f. Emergency planning. (1) Interim final rule. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. (a) Clarification of LEPC participation. (3) Final rule. 3. Section 310.40 Allowable and Unallowable Costs a. Interim final rule. b. Response to comments and clarifications. (1) Equipment replacement. (2) Evacuation costs. (3) Unallowable costs. (4) Medical expenses. c. Final rule. C. Subpart C--Procedures for Filing and Processing Reimbursement Requests 1. Section 310.50 Filing Procedures a. Interim final rule. (1) Number of requests. (2) Standard form. (3) Temporary emergency measures. (4) Cost recovery. (5) Certification. (6) Filing deadline. (7) Signature authority. b. Response to comments and clarifications. (1) Change in filing deadline. (2) Change to signature requirement. (3) Clarification of application package. (4) Clarification of temporary emergency measures. c. Final rule. 2. Section 310.60 Verification and Reimbursement a. Interim final rule. b. Response to comments and clarifications. c. Final rule. 3. Section 310.70 Records Retention a. Interim final rule. b. Response to comments and clarifications. c. Final rule. 4. Section 310.80 Payment of Approved Reimbursement Requests a. Interim final rule. b. Response to comments and clarifications. c. Final rule. 5. Section 310.90 Disputes Resolution a. Interim final rule. b. Response to comments and clarifications. c. Final rule. VII. Regulatory Analyses A. Executive Order No. 12291 B. Regulatory Flexibility Act C. Paperwork Reduction Act I. Statutory Authority Section 123 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) directs the EPA Administrator to develop a regulation containing procedures for reimbursing local governments for expenses incurred in carrying out temporary emergency measures in response to hazardous substance threats. These measures must be necessary to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the environment from a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance or a pollutant or contaminant. Temporary emergency measures may include such activities as erecting security fencing to limit access, responding to fires and explosions and other measures that require immediate response at the local level. CERCLA specifically limits reimbursement to $25,000 per single response and requires that reimbursement not supplant local funds normally provided for response. Any general purpose unit of local government that incurs costs in response to a release or threatened release at a facility within its jurisdiction may apply for reimbursement. Section 111 of CERCLA specifies that not more than 0.1 percent of the total amount appropriated from the Fund may be used for local governments reimbursement. Approximately, $5.1 million is authorized for the three year period beginning October 1, 1991. The responsibility for promulgating today's final rule rests with the president, who has delegated it to the Administrator for EPA. The authority to receive, evaluate, and make determinations regarding requests for reimbursement and to issue payments to qualified applicants was delegated to the Assistant Administrator (AA) for the Office of Sold Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER). The AA for OSWER redelegated local governments reimbursement authority to the Director of the Emergency Response Division within the office of Emergency and Remedial Response. Today's rulemaking responds to public comments, discusses issues arising from three years of administering the interim final rule (IFR), and clarifies how the reimbursement program works. II. Background A. Overview of the Superfund Program CERCLA was originally enacted in 1980 and established the authority to tax the chemical and petroleum industries to finance a $1.6 billion response trust fund (the Superfund or Fund). CERCLA provides broad Federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances and pollutants or contaminants that may endanger public health or welfare or the environment. EPA is primarily responsible for implementing the Superfund program. On October 17, 1986, the President signed into law the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986. These Amendments added $8.5 billion to the Superfund Trust Fund and broaden the Federal Government's response authority. Congress has extended that authority through September 1995, with funding of $5.1 billion through September 1994. Under the Superfund program, EPA may take legal action to force those responsible for hazardous substance releases to clean them up or to reimburse EPA for the costs of cleanup. EPA also can pay for the cleanup of hazardous waste releases when those responsible for such releases cannot be found or are unwilling or unable to conduct a cleanup themselves. Response actions may be taken to address such incidents as illegal disposal of hazardous substances, improper handling or disposal of hazardous substances at landfills or industrial areas, spills of hazardous substances when a truck or train overturns, or discharges of hazardous substances into the air or water during a fire or other accident. Response actions may include, but are not limited to: removing hazardous substances from the release site to an EPA-approved, licensed hazardous waste facility for treatment, containment or destruction; constructing fences, posting warning signs or taking other security precautions necessary to control access; providing a temporary alternate water supply to local residents; temporarily relocating affected residents; or containing the hazardous substance on site so that it can safely remain there and present no further problem. CERCLA responses usually are joint efforts by Federal, State and local agencies. As State and local public safety and health organizations are normally the first government representatives at the scene of a hazardous substance release, they play a critical role in providing temporary emergency measures. These temporary emergency measures may include security, control of the release source, containment of the substances released, control of contaminated runoff and similar activities that must be performed immediately to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the environment. The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (National Contingency Plan or NCP, found at 40 CFR part 300), the main Federal regulation that guides the Superfund program, outlines the roles and responsibilities of each Federal agency involved in responding to releases of hazardous substances, and describes State and local participation in hazardous substance releases. In addition, the NCP establishes procedures that are to be followed in conducting appropriate response actions. B. Congressional Intent The original Superfund law did not provide reimbursement to local governments for costs incurred in conducting temporary emergency measures. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) added a new section to the law that specifically allows such reimbursement, although the Conference Report makes it clear that ``reimbursement under this provision shall not include reimbursement for normal expenditures that are incurred in the course of providing what are traditionally local services and responsibilities, such as routine emergency firefighting.'' With the specific requirement in section 123 that reimbursement not supplant local funds normally provided for response, Congress intends that local governments continue to bear some share of expenses for providing temporary emergency measures. However, Congress recognized that in the past, conducting such response activities has placed a significant financial burden on some local governments. Reimbursement under section 123 can provide some financial relief (limited to $25,000 per single response) to local governments most seriously affected by costs above and beyond those incurred routinely and traditionally. This $25,000 cap on individual responses plus the limited availability of funds for the program may not allow EPA to reimburse local governments for all responses that may qualify. III. Approach to This Rulemaking On October 21, 1987, EPA published an interim final rule in the Federal Register (40 CFR part 310) for reimbursing local governments for temporary emergency measures taken in response to hazardous substance releases or threats of releases. This rule was promulgated in interim final form to allow the Agency to implement the reimbursement program immediately. This approach made reimbursement money available quickly and afforded EPA the benefit of implementation experience before finalizing the rule. Public comments on the interim final rule were accepted for 60 days after its publication date. Thirteen commenters provided comments on the interim final rule. These commenters represented six local governments in four States, three agencies in two States, two Federal agencies and two private firms. Public comments were separated into four major categories: (1) clarification of the financial burden formula; (2) effective date for reimbursable responses; (3) State role in application evaluation; and (4) clarification of eligible costs. In considering these comments, the Agency determined that some of the specific requirements of the interim final rule needed clarification. Consequently, EPA's approach to preparing this final rule is to expand and clarify in the preamble explanations of reimbursement application requirements and Agency policy regarding the reimbursement process. The preamble to today's final rule also contains an overview of the local governments reimbursement program. This overview presents information on the intent of the reimbursement program, basis of reimbursement decisions, State role, and the reimbursement process. The purpose of including this information in the preamble to the final rule is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the local governments reimbursement program and a context for reviewing the changes presented in today's rule. The section-by-section analysis in the preamble of today's final rule is organized into four subsections: content of interim final rule; response to comments; areas of clarification, as applicable; and content of final rule. The majority of public comments on the interim final rule and procedural areas requiring clarification are addressed in this preamble. Only minor changes have been made to the regulatory text of the interim final rule. Since the promulgation of the interim final rule, EPA has received 90 applications for reimbursement. These requests have come from local governments in 28 States. EPA has approved a total of $449,443 in reimbursements to 36 eligible applicants. IV. Overview of the Local Governments Reimbursement Program A. Intent of the Reimbursement Regulation The overall purpose of the reimbursement program is to provide some financial relief to local governments in conducting temporary emergency measures in response to releases or threats of releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. This response may be conducted entirely by a local government or may be a response involving State or Federal assistance. The intent of today's final rule is to alleviate financial burden on a local government. EPA believes that this approach achieves the intent of section 123 of CERCLA to channel the small pool of reimbursement monies to the most deserving applicants; therefore, local governments must demonstrate that a response has created expenses that exceed the funds normally available for temporary emergency response activities. This approach also is consistent with the overall policies and goals of the Superfund program. The Agency wishes to emphasize, however, that reimbursement under section 123 does not eliminate the requirement to try to identify potentially responsible parties (PRPs) and attempt cost recovery, but is available as a measure of financial relief when PRP search and cost recovery actions have not proven successful. B. Basis of Reimbursement Decisions As discussed above, EPA has determined that reimbursement money should be distributed to applicants who demonstrate the greatest financial burden from conducting emergency response actions that adhere to the overall policies and goals of the Superfund program. However, due to the limited funds available for the reimbursement program (a maximum of 0.1 percent of the total amount appropriated for the Superfund, or approximately $5.1 million for the three-year period beginning October 1, 1991), not all applicants may actually receive reimbursement monies. For this reason, the Agency needs criteria for determining which requests to reimburse. EPA has written today's final rule so that reimbursement decisions are based primarily on the ratio of eligible response costs to the applicant locality's per capita annual income adjusted for population with consideration given to other relevant financial information provided at the applicant's discretion. (For example, such information might include cost data for other hazardous substance responses if the locality has conducted numerous responses over a short period of time.) The intention of this approach is to ensure that communities with limited resources will receive priority in the reimbursement program. Basing reimbursement decisions primarily on per capita income statistics provides an objective method for deciding among requests. Allowing special consideration of other relevant data, such as frequency of recent emergency responses, recent local economic changes or other financially catastrophic events, provides flexibility. Per capita income statistics are readily available through the Bureau of Census. EPA uses the Current Population Reports, Local Population Estimates, Series P - 26, ``1988 Population and 1987 Per Capita Income Estimates for Counties and Incorporated Places,'' published in June 1990 by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. This series will be used for the reimbursement program unless and until superseded by more recent data. Additional financial information provided by the applicant should provide the opportunity to consider economic factors that may not be represented accurately in the available income statistics. For example, if significant population shifts have occurred since the last census, the applicant may wish to supply relevant financial data demonstrating the economic effects of that shift upon the community. C. State Role Section 123 authorizes reimbursement to local governments for costs incurred in conducting temporary emergency measures related to hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants. The law does not authorize reimbursement to States. Today's rule precludes States from requesting reimbursement under section 310.20(b) either for themselves or on behalf of political subdivisions within the State. EPA believes this approach helps eliminate the potential for two parties to request reimbursement for the same response. D. Reimbursement Process The reimbursement process comprises six steps; each is described below. The roles and responsibilities of EPA and the local government in the process are discussed as well. 1. Response to Release The reimbursement process begins with a local government's response to a release or threatened release of hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants. (Unlike responses to hazardous substances, which cover threats both to human health and to the environment, responses to releases of pollutants or contaminants must specifically address the imminent and substantial threats to human health or welfare in order to qualify for possible reimbursement [see CERCLA section 104(a)(1)]). This response may be conducted by the local government solely or in conjunction with State or Federal responders. To be eligible for reimbursement, the response must be consistent with CERCLA, the National Contingency Plan and, if applicable, the local emergency plan prepared under section 303 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986, title III of Public Law 99 - 499. The Agency believes that reimbursement may be appropriate for activities such as security, control of the release source, containment of the substances released, control of runoff that would contaminate drinking water sources and similar activities that must be performed within minutes or hours of the release to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the environment. EPA also believes that actions such as ground-water decontamination, ongoing sampling and analysis programs, construction of water treatment facilities or installation of new water lines are outside the scope of the reimbursement program because they do not constitute temporary emergency measures. EPA wishes to make clear that costs of such projects are not reimbursable under this program. Instead, the local government may want to contact the EPA Regional office or the State to determine whether a Cooperative Agreement with the Agency would be appropriate for preforming long-term response projects. EPA does not intend that reimbursement monies be used for emergency response activities that are eligible for funding from other sources. In addition, the Agency believes that PRPs should be identified and costs of temporary emergency response measures recovered from them, whenever possible. This program expressly requires that local governments demonstrate efforts to recover costs prior to submitting the request for reimbursement. Reimbursement is intended only as a last resort when funds are not available from other sources. 2. Contact With the Federal Government Contact with a Federal response authority is a necessary condition for reimbursement under today's final rule. The purpose of this contact requirement is to give EPA or the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) an opportunity to ascertain if Federal response action is appropriate in this instance. For this reason, contact is required as soon as possible, but not later than 24 hours after response initiation. Contact must be made in one of two ways. The local government can use normal response communication channels to alert EPA or the USCG to the release. Normal channels include notification to the National Response Center (NRC) or established Regional networks that link local agencies with State agencies and ultimately with EPA and/or the USCG. Notification of the release through normal response communication networks satisfies the contact requirement in this rule. Alternatively, if the locality is not part of an established communication network, the local government can contact the EPA Regional office or the NRC directly for purposes of satisfying this requirement. (Appendix I of today's rule identifies the EPA Regional office for each State and Territory and notes their and the NRC telephone numbers.) Contact must be made by telephone or radio as soon as possible, but not more than 24 hours after response initiation, to meet the Federal contact requirement for reimbursement. 3. Decision to Pursue Reimbursement If the response has imposed significant financial burden on the community and appears to meet the basic requirements for reimbursement, as specified in 310.30 of today's final rule, the local government may choose to seek reimbursement and proceed to the next step. 4. Reimbursement Request The local government should obtain a reimbursement application package by calling the RCRA/CERCLA Hotline at 1 - 800 - 424 - 9346 (toll free) or, in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, at 202 - 382 - 3000. The package contains the forms and detailed instructions for preparing and submitting reimbursement requests. Local governments are encouraged to obtain complete application packages rather than using photocopied forms to ensure that applications are filled out properly. Application packages will be mailed to the locality upon request. The completed application must be returned to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emergency Response Division, Attn: LGR Project Officer, (5202 - G), 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20460, within one year of completion of the response. Local governments are encouraged to complete the application for reimbursement promptly to facilitate complete and accurate documentation of costs and cost recovery efforts and to expedite processing of the application by EPA. PRP search and contact activities should begin as soon as possible. Cost recovery efforts should begin no later than the date of response completion. Local governments should allow at least 60 days for PRP response prior to submitting the Local Governments Reimbursement application. Only one request for reimbursement will be accepted for response to any single incident. When more than one local government (e.g., a city and county) has participated in such a response, those governments must determine which one of them will submit the application on behalf of them all. If more than one request is received for a single incident, all will be returned with appropriate written explanation and instructions for resubmitting a single, coordinated application. 5. Preliminary Screening Initially, EPA will screen the request to make sure that it meets three preliminary screening criteria: (1) the request meets basic reimbursement criteria, as stated in today's final rule; (2) it complies with the procedures for filing, as defined in this rule; and (3) it is complete. A request that does not meet the requirements for reimbursement stipulated in 310.30 will be returned to the local government with a written explanation of why the application has been rejected. An application that meets the basic criteria but that has not compiled with the filing procedures specified in 310.50 or that is incomplete will be returned to the local government with an explanation of its deficiencies. If the application has missed the filing deadline, an explanation for lateness must accompany the application. EPA will determine the eligibility of late applications on a case-by-case basis. Other filing or completeness deficiencies may be corrected and resubmitted to EPA within 60 days. If all reimbursement criteria and filing requirements have been met, and the application is complete, EPA will notify the local government in writing that the request meets the preliminary screening criteria and will be considered for reimbursement. Such a notice in no way implies that reimbursement is assured. It means only that EPA will consider this request along with all other requests that also have satisfied this initial screening. 6. Evaluation of Requests All requests for reimbursement will be evaluated on their own merits and with respect to the other requests concurrently under review. Because reimbursement monies are limited to 0.1 percent of the Superfund appropriation (or a maximum of $1.7 million for each fiscal year beginning October 1, 1986), the Agency will rank the requests and distribute the monies accordingly until available funds are disbursed. The Agency will rank requests on the basis of significant financial burden incurred by the locality in performing the single response for which reimbursement is being sought. The financial burden for the individual applicant is defined as the ratio of the project cost to a locality's aggregate income and is computed as follows: C B = ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ Y x P Where: B=burden on applicant C=total eligible response costs minus reimbursement from responsible parties, States, or other sources Y=per capita annual income for the locality P=population of locality The Agency will use U.S. Census Bureau ``Local Population Estimates'' Series P - 26 in conjunction with response cost data supplied by the applicant to compute financial burden on the locality. Responses with higher costs proportionate to local aggregate income (i.e., the larger fraction resulting from the financial burden calculation) will be ranked higher than responses with proportionately lower costs. In general, EPA expects that financial burden will be computed on the basis of the single response for which reimbursement is requested. In exceptional cases, however, the Agency may consider other financial data demonstrating financial hardship incurred by the community in responding to hazardous substance threats. For example, a small community with limited resources that has had to respond to numerous hazardous substance emergencies over a short period of time may choose to supply additional information demonstrating the cost impacts of those multiple responses. As another example, a community in a declared disaster area may want to supply economic impact data associated with the disaster along with the financial information for the hazardous substance response. Any requests not reimbursed because of limited availability of funds will be considered for up to one year, at EPA's discretion, after the initial approval of the LGR Review Panel. After that time, an unreimbursed request will no longer be considered and the applicant will be notified that the request will not be reimbursed. V. Summary of Changes to the Interim Final Rule Changes have been made in the following sections of the interim final rule to address public comments or reflect program experience: (1) Section 310.40(a)(10) has been added to include containerization, transport, and disposal of hazardous wastes as allowable costs; (2) Section 310.50(a) has been modified to clarify that only one LGR applicant is allowed per incident; (3) Section 310.50(d) has been changed to extend the deadline for filing an application from six months to one year from the date of response completion; and (4) Section 310.50(e) has been changed to clarify the application signature authority. VI. Section-by-Section Analysis A. Subpart A--General Subpart A discusses the purpose, scope and applicability of the local government reimbursement final rule. It also provides definitions necessary for the proper interpretation and implementation of the rule and outlines penalties applicable to false statements or claims made as part of an application for reimbursement under section 123 of CERCLA. 1. Section 310.05 Purpose, Scope and Applicability a. Interim Final Rule The purpose of the local government reimbursement program is to alleviate significant financial burden imposed on a local government as a result of conducting temporary emergency measures to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the environment, as authorized under section 123 of CERCLA. This purpose is consistent with the statutory requirement that reimbursement not supplant funds normally provided for response. Reimbursement only applies to local governments (e.g., a county, parish, city, municipality, township, Federally-recognized Indian tribe or other general purpose unit of local government). States are not eligible for this program. In keeping with the statutory limits on the use of the Superfund set forth in sections 111 and 123 of CERCLA, the maximum possible reimbursement award is limited to $25,000 per single response and the amount of money available to the overall reimbursement program is restricted to 0.1 percent of the total amount appropriated from the Superfund. Due to the limited amount of money authorized for reimbursement, some requests for reimbursement may never be paid even though they meet all the requirements of this rule. b. Response to Comments and Clarifications One commenter suggested that the maximum reimbursement be placed on a sliding scale based on population because larger cities typically have more frequent and more expensive hazardous substance emergencies. Because unpredictability is the nature of hazardous substance releases, the Agency believes it would be inappropriate to limit the maximum reimbursement for small locales to less than the $25,000 per response authorized by CERCLA. Large scale hazardous substance releases can occur anywhere, and the intent of this regulation is to alleviate significant financial burden on local governments with limited resources for funding emergency response to such releases. c. Final Rule No change in section 310.05 of the interim final rule. 2. Section 310.10 Abbreviations and Section 310.11 Definitions a. Interim Final Rule Section 310.10 explains the acronyms used in this rule. Section 310.11 defines key terms used in the rule. In an effort to be consistent with the requirements and objectives of the overall Superfund program, most of the definitions contained in section 310.11 of this rule are taken from CERCLA and the NCP either verbatim or with minor wording changes. EPA developed the definitions of ``General Purpose Unit of Local Government,'' ``Single Response'' and ``Date of Completion'' specifically for this rule. b. Response to Comments and Clarifications Several commenters requested more precise definitions of terms such as ``traditionally local services and responsibilities'' and ``temporary emergency measures.'' This regulation offers guidelines and examples of the meanings of such terms but does not attempt to include exhaustive lists that might limit the Agency in determining the eligibility of highly variable response activities. (1) Clarification of Federally-permitted releases. One commenter requested clarification of whether costs associated with responding to a federally permitted release were eligible for reimbursement. Releases of CERCLA hazardous substances that are federally permitted, as defined in CERCLA section 101(10), are exempt from CERCLA reporting requirements under section 103 and from CERCLA liability under section 107. Nevertheless, a Federally permitted release may be subject to a response action undertaken pursuant to sections 104, 106, or 122. Thus, a local government may obtain reimbursement for temporary emergency measures taken at the site of a Federally permitted release during either Federal-lead or non-Federal-lead responses, if the requirements included in today's regulation are met. However, CERCLA section 107(j) indicates that recovery for response costs and damages resulting from a Federally permitted release must be sought under laws other than CERCLA. Thus, for emergency response measures taken at the site of a Federally permitted release, efforts to obtain reimbursement from all known PRPs must rely on laws other than CERCLA. The commenter expressed the concern that a local community may believe that a substantial threat of release of a pollutant or contaminant exists at the site of a Federally permitted release, and so the community may respond to that threat and seek reimbursement from the Superfund. To avoid this situation, the commenter suggests deleting ``substantial threat of release'' from the definition of release and excluding Federally permitted releases from the same definition. The commenter's concern appears to reflect some confusion regarding certain CERCLA definitions and the scope of this regulation. Under CERCLA section 104, the Federal government may respond to a release or substantial threat of release into the environment of a hazardous substance or pollutant or contaminant. What is considered a ``pollutant or contaminant'' is defined in CERCLA section 101(33); this regulation simply incorporates that definition. The definition of release contained in this regulation is also taken from CERCLA (section 101(22)), with the addition of the final sentence indicating that release also means substantial threat of release. This addition is consistent with the definition included in the recent revisions to the National Contingency Plan (NCP) (40 CFR part 300). It also might be noted that section 104 limits response in the case of pollutants or contaminants to situations that may present an imminent and substantial danger to the public health or welfare. These definitions thus extend to this regulation the full scope of situations where CERCLA response activities may be undertaken. However, under today's rule, local communities may seek reimbursement for temporary emergency measures only, and reimbursement may not exceed $25,000 per single response. Further, local actions must be consistent with CERCLA and the NCP. Local governments are not eligible under this regulation for reimbursement for all CERCLA-eligible response costs incurred, which appears to be the scenario suggested by this comment. The final issue raised by this commenter is the relationship of this rule to Federally permitted releases. As clarified in the preamble to this final rule, Federally permitted releases may be the subject of a response action under CERCLA, thus a local community may seek reimbursement under this regulation for temporary emergency measures taken during Federally-lead or non-Federal-lead responses at the site of such releases. (2) Clarification of criteria for emergency response to hazardous substance releases. Clarification was requested in public comment regarding the conditions under which a hazardous substance release constitutes an emergency response situation. Under CERCLA section 104, an emergency situation exists whenever immediate response is required to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the environment. c. Final Rule No change in 310.05 of the interim final rule. 3. Section 310.12 Penalties a. Interim Final Rule Section 310.12 imposes penalties for any person who knowingly gives or causes to be given any false statement or claim as part of any application for reimbursement under section 123 of CERCLA. EPA has included these penalties, under the authority of the False Statement Act, 18 U.S.C. 1001, and False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. 3729, to prevent fraudulent or abusive use of the Fund. Failure to abide by the requirements found in these two laws when filing a reimbursement application may result in fines and/or imprisonment. b. Response to Comments and Clarifications The Agency received no comments on this section of the interim final rule. c. Final Rule No change in 310.12 of the interim final rule. B. Subpart B--Reimbursement Subpart B of this rule establishes conditions that must be met for reimbursement under CERCLA section 123. Three types of conditions are set forth: Eligibility of the applicant to receive reimbursement, requirement for reimbursement, and allowable and unallowable costs. These conditions are included to ensure that (1) the intent of Congress is carried out in reimbursing local governments; (2) reimbursement is consistent with, and complementary to, the rest of the Superfund program; and (3) expenditures from the Superfund are warranted and appropriate. 1. Section 310.20 Eligibility for Reimbursement a. Interim Final Rule This section limits eligibility for reimbursement to general purpose units of local government. These may include cities, counties, municipalities, parishes, townships, or other official political subdivisions designated by a particular State, or Federally-recognized Indian tribes. This restriction is consistent with section 123(a) of CERCLA, which limits applicability to ``(a)ny general purpose unit of local government for a political subdivision which is affected by a release or threatened release . . .'' Section 123 of CERCLA specifically designates local governments as recipients of reimbursement monies and does not indicate that this provision applies in any way to States. Therefore, State governments are not eligible for reimbursement under 310.20(b). States also are precluded from requesting reimbursement on behalf of political subdivisions within the State. This restriction is designed to avoid any question of eligibility when reimbursement requests are reviewed by EPA. b. Response to Comments and Clarifications The Agency received no comments on this section of the interim final rule. c. Final Rule No change in 310.20 of the interim final rule. 2. Section 310.30 Requirements for Requesting Reimbursement The purpose of 310.30 is to ensure consistency with the requirements, policies and practices of the Superfund program, to lend support to related initiatives, and to encourage the use of established procedures in conducting responses. EPA has established requirements to ensure an equitable distribution of funds to the most deserving applicants. a. Effective Date for Response (1) Interim final rule. Section 310.30(a) restricts reimbursement to responses initiated on or after the effective date of the interim final rule, October 21, 1987. In order to qualify for reimbursement a local government must meet the requirements of CERCLA, the NCP, and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA or Title III), and, in addition, contact the Federal government within 24 hours after response initiation to ensure that these requirements are understood and can be met. This notice requirement is discussed in greater detail in subsection 2(b) below. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. The majority of commenters that addressed this issue concurred that the October 21, 1987, effective date for eligible responses is an appropriate means of ensuring fair evaluation of all applications. One commenter maintained that the effective date should be retroactive to SARA. EPA is aware that limiting reimbursement to responses occurring after promulgation of the interim final rule precludes reimbursement of some otherwise valid and deserving requests. However, the Agency believes that the mission of the Superfund program, and specifically the local government reimbursement program, is best served if all requests are subject to the same requirements, thereby helping to ensure uniform management of limited reimbursement funds. (3) Final Rule. No change in interim final rule. October 21, 1987 remains the effective date for eligible responses. b. Federal Contact Requirement (1) Interim final rule. Section 310.30(b) requires the local government to contact EPA or the National Response Center (NRC) as a condition of reimbursement. Contact for purposes of reimbursement is to be made as soon as possible, but not more than 24 hours after response initiation, unless EPA or the USCG has been informed of the response through a release notification to the NRC or other established response communication channels. Because EPA seeks to ensure safe and appropriate responses and appropriate use of the Fund, the Agency believes that it is appropriate for EPA or the USCG to be aware of a response for which a local government seeks reimbursement. Timely contact is useful in several respects. First, it can help EPA or the USCG assess local response capabilities relative to this response, ascertain the effectiveness of local actions, and determine whether Federal technical assistance or action is appropriate or necessary. Second, it allows EPA or the USCG to make sure the local responder understands EPA criteria and requirements, such as that response actions must be consistent with the NCP. Finally, it provides an opportunity to determine whether a response might be a candidate for reimbursement. This can prevent a locality from preparing an application for a response that is not eligible for reimbursement (e.g., an oil spill). (2) Response to comments and clarifications. The majority of commenters supported the 24-hour contact requirement. One commenter on the interim final rule, however, suggested including notification of State and local agencies, as promoted under EPCRA (Title III of SARA), as a requirement for reimbursement. Title III emergency notification (section 304) requirements are not germane to this rule and exist independently of it, although they also may be triggered by the release. The LGR regulation concerns a federally administered program for providing reimbursement to local governments for extraordinary expenses incurred by providing emergency response to a hazardous substance threat. While this rule requires that local governments be a part of the Title III Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) and respond to emergencies accordingly, no specific State or local agency notification if necessary for its proper administration. However, the appropriate Federal authority (EPA, USCG, or NRC) must be notified within the required 24-hours to insure that LGR requirements are being met and to determine if other Federal response is needed. (3) Final rule. No change in 310.30(b) of the interim final rule. c. Consistency Requirement (1) Interim final rule. Section 310.30(c) of this rule stipulates that response actions for which reimbursement is sought must not be inconsistent with CERCLA, the NCP, and, if applicable, the local emergency response plan required under section 303(a) of the EPCRA. Responses must comply with the provisions of CERCLA even to be eligible for this use of the Fund. In addition, section 104(a)(1) of CERCLA calls for ``response measure(s) consistent with the National Contingency Plan * * *.'' The NCP provides for efficient, coordinated and effective responses to actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants. Local government should consult the NCP for specific procedures to follow in conducting temporary emergency measures to satisfy this consistency requirement. The NCP also specifies the division of responsibility among the Federal, State and local governments during response actions and appropriate roles for private entities (NCP 300.21 through 300.25). Because the NCP stipulates the basic requirements for CERCLA-funded responses, a response for which reimbursement is requested must conform to the NCP. Likewise, because the Title III local emergency response plan outlines methods and procedures for responders that are specific to the community, EPA expects local agencies to comply with that plan. (2) Responses to comments and clarifications. The Agency received no comments on this section of the interim final rule. (3) Final rule. The final rule changed ``are not inconsistent'' to ``are consistent'' in 310.30(c) of the interim final rule. This change was made to make the final rule language uniform and consistent. d. Restriction on Supplanting Local Funds (1) Interim final rule. Section 310.30(d) specifies that reimbursement monies may not supplant non-Federal funds normally provided for emergency response programs. As required by section 123(b)(2) of CERCLA, local governments may be reimbursed for the costs of temporary emergency measures only if reimbursement would supplement, not supplant, non-Federal (State and local) funds that would otherwise be made available. Compliance with this requirement entails certification and demonstration that reimbursement does not supplant local funds normally provided for response. (This certification is stipulated in 310.50(c)(3) of this rule). In addition, EPA may request reimbursement applicants to submit line-item budgets for the fiscal year in which the incident for which reimbursement is requested occurred as well as response cost information. Since only limited funds are available for this program, EPA expects that the possibility of being reimbursed will not provide adequate incentive for local governments to intentionally decrease non-Federal funding for response programs. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. The Agency received no comments on this section of the interim final rule. (3). Final rule. No change in 310.30(d) of the interim final rule. e. Attempt to Recover Costs (1) Interim final rule. Section 310.30(e) of this rule requires applicants to seek other funding sources before requesting reimbursement from the Fund. Local governments must make a good faith effort to recover costs from PRPs. This section also requires that local authorities pursue all other sources of funds, such as insurance or State reimbursement monies, before seeking reimbursement from the Superfund under section 123 of CERCLA. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. The Agency received no comments on this section of the interim final rule. (a) Clarification of cost recovery requirements. EPA recognizes that PRP searches can become extensive and costly; therefore, the Agency will be satisfied with evidence of a reasonable attempt at recovering costs. Such evidence might include documents such as copies of return-receipt letters requesting payment, with certification that payment has not been received, or copies of letters from PRPs stating refusal to pay or sworn statements from local officials that no PRP has been or can be identified, see Subpart C.1. on ``Cost Recovery.'' These documents constitute sufficient evidence of good faith efforts to recover costs from PRPs. The evidence of attempt to recover costs must indicate that, where a PRP was identified, the PRP was given at least 60 days to satisfy the demand for cost recovery. This certification is discussed in VI.C.1. of this preamble and stipulated in 310.50 of the rule. In general, EPA expects documentation of cost recovery efforts described above to accompany all applications for reimbursement. The inclusion of such documentation will speed the reimbursement process by eliminating the need for repeated Agency contact with the applicant to verify that costs could not be recovered from other sources. Furthermore, including documentation of the attempt to identify a PRP ensures that the applicant is not responsible for the hazardous substance threat. EPA has denied at least one request for reimbursement on the grounds that the local government was responsible for the release. The eligibility of other applications is in question until applicants can demonstrate that no department or agency of local government was responsible for the release. Local governments should note that a signed application certifies, in good faith, that applicants have met the requirement to pursue all other sources of cost recovery to the best of their ability. EPA will generally accept this certification at face value, provided that it is clear that the applicant is not the responsible party, but the Agency may request appropriate documentation of these efforts. The cost recovery requirement is achieving its goal. Two local governments that submitted applications for reimbursement under the interim final rule have recovered costs from the liable parties as a result of cost recovery efforts undertaken in accordance with the reimbursement application requirements. These cost recovery successes have preserved funds available for this program and provide excellent examples of the way that CERCLA and the local government reimbursement program are intended to function. (3) Final rule. No change in 310.30(e) of the interim final rule. f. Emergency Planning (1) Interim final rule. Section 310.30(f) of this rule requires that after October 17, 1988, the applicant's jurisdiction be included in the comprehensive emergency response plan completed by the LEPC, as stipulated by section 303(a) in Title III of SARA. Because establishment of an LEPC is the responsibility of the State government, EPA will waive this requirement for localities where the State emergency response commission has not yet established a committee responsible for the geographic area in which the applicant is located. (2) Response to comments and clarifications. The Agency received no comments on this section of the interim final rule. (a) Clarification of LEPC participation. Under Title III of SARA, local governments are required to participate in State-established emergency response committees. To be eligible for reimbursement, a local government must be included in the comprehensive emergency response plan and participate in the LEPC responsible for the geographic area in which the local government is located, if the State has established a LEPC. To date, EPA has denied one reimbursement request for failure of the local government to participate in the State-established emergency response committee. If an applicant was denied reimbursement due to nonparticipation, the applicant may reapply after satisfying this requirement. (3) Final rule. No change in 310.30(f) of the interim final rule. 3. Section 310.40 Allowable and Unallowable Costs a. Interim Final Rule To be allowable for reimbursement, all costs for temporary emergency measures for which reimbursement is being sought must be consistent with Section 111 of CERCLA (``Uses of Fund'') and with the Federal cost principles outlined in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A - 87, ``Cost Principles for State and Local Governments.'' These standard requirements apply to all Superfund programs involving State and/or local governments where monies from the Trust Fund are spent. In making its cost determinations, EPA also considered the types of temporary emergency measures typically undertaken during a response, with special consideration given to the limited funds available for the reimbursement program relative to the number of potential applicants. b. Response to Comments and Clarifications One commenter raised a question regarding whether general revenues used for temporary emergency responses to hazardous substance releases, in the absence of funds budgeted specifically for such situations, are allowable for reimbursement. This regulation stipulates that reimbursement will not supplant funds normally provided for response. Because many localities do not budget funds specifically for emergency responses to hazardous substance threats, general revenues expended for temporary emergency response measures are eligible for reimbursement. These expenditures must meet allowable cost requirements, and the application should state that the local government has no hazardous substance emergencies budget. In addition, costs associated with the prevention of a hazardous substance release in a non-emergency situation (i.e., when immediate response is not required to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the environment) are not eligible for reimbursement. These costs would supplant funds normally provided for prevention and maintenance in such activities as fixing roads or storage facilities. Several commenters also requested more specific guidelines as to when a cost is allowable. For example, one commenter suggested that costs to containerize, transport, and dispose of hazardous wastes be included as allowable costs. The Agency provided general examples and guidelines for determining the eligibility of costs to maintain flexibility in considering the circumstances of each response, see 310.40 of the rule. The allowable cost list provided in the rule is not inclusive and does not disallow such costs. Since packaging and disposing of hazardous wastes is not one of the ``traditionally local services and responsibilities'' for which local governments are expected to budget funds, this cost would most likely be eligible for reimbursement despite the fact that it was not specifically stated to be an allowable cost. In addition one commenter suggested allowing medical costs ``where adequate coverage does not exist.'' The Agency maintains that reimbursing medical expenses would supplant funds normally provided by employee health insurance and Workmen's Compensation benefits. (1) Clarification of equipment replacement. In developing the interim final rule, the Agency addressed the issue of replacement of equipment, because the potential for abuse is significant and because reimbursement monies are limited. EPA determined that there are potential response situations where such costs should be considered for reimbursement. For example, the loss of breathing apparatus and hoses due to irreversible contamination and contamination of other essential response equipment represents a considerable loss to local governments. EPA will allow replacement costs for equipment contaminated beyond reuse or repair, if the applicant can demonstrate that the equipment was a total loss and that the loss occurred during the response for which reimbursement is being sought. It should be noted that since the maximum reimbursement amount is limited to $25,000, it is likely that large-scale equipment replacement will not be reimbursed in full. Purchase and routine maintenance of equipment for response, however, are not allowable costs. EPA views these as costs for which local funds are normally provided. (2) Clarification of evacuation costs. Costs associated with the services, supplies and equipment procured for a specific evacuation are included as allowable costs. EPA considers evacuation to be a temporary emergency measure and evacuation costs incurred that exceed services and costs normally provided by the local government may be eligible for reimbursement. (3) Clarification of unallowable cost. Certain costs are unallowable for purposes of the reimbursement program. Disposable materials and supplies already owned by a local government, but consumed during response, constitute items normally provided for response by the local governments and, therefore, are not allowable costs. Employee fringe benefits, administrative costs for filing reimbursement applications, employee out-of-pocket expenses normally provided for in the applicant's operating budget, and legal expenses that may be incurred as a result of response activities are additional unallowable costs. EPA has determined that fringe benefits, certain employee out-of-pocket expenses, and legal expenses are costs normally provided for in a local government's operating budget. EPA considers administrative costs associated with filing a request for reimbursement not allowable, since it is the responsibility of the local government to determine whether or not to pursue reimbursement under this program. (4) Clarification of medical expense. EPA has not included medical expenses as an allowable cost because reimbursement for such costs normally should be covered by insurance or Workmen's Compensation. Determination of what constitutes adequate medical coverage is outside the scope of EPA and of this program. Therefore, in keeping with the Congressional intent for this regulation, medical costs are considered unallowable because reimbursement for such costs normally should be covered by insurance or Worker's Compensation. c. Final Rule Section 310.40(a)(10) has been amended to include ``containerization or packaging cost including transportation and disposal of hazardous wastes.'' C. Subpart C--Procedures for Filing and Processing Reimbursement Requests Subpart C establishes the procedures for preparing and processing reimbursement applications. The purpose of defining these procedures is to give applicants a clear understanding of what information EPA needs in considering an application, to provide a consistent basis on which to evaluate reimbursement requests, and to improve processing efficiency by making all forms and procedures standard. 1. Section 310.50 Filing Procedures a. Interim Final Rule (1) Number of requests. Section 310.50(a) of this rule limits local governments to filing only one request for reimbursement for a given response to a release even though multiple agencies (and possibly jurisdictions) may have participated. This requirement is needed to ensure that the statutory maximum of $25,000 per single response is not exceeded and that payments are not duplicated. EPA expects that local officials will work together to determine total response costs, the relative share borne by each local agency and jurisdiction, and the appropriate official who will assume responsibility for preparing the application. (2) Standard form. Under 310.50(b) of this rule, applicants must use the standard application form illustrated in Appendix II of the rule for filing their requests for reimbursement. EPA has decided to use a standard form because it reduces confusion about what information is to be supplied, helps ensure that all applicants are evaluated on the basis of comparable information and enables reviewers to check applications for completeness and consistency quickly. The form requests five basic pieces of information: (1) identification of the local government requesting reimbursement; (2) information about the incident; (3) information about the response, including the specific temporary emergency measures for which reimbursement is being sought; (4) cost data; and (5) certifications and signature of the authorized representative who is the highest ranking official of the local government. Detailed instructions for completing the form and examples are included in the application package provided by EPA to potential requesters. (3) Temporary emergency measures. Section 310.50(b)(1) requires that the applicant demonstrate that costs were incurred for temporary emergency measures necessary to protect human health and the environment. The Agency has not attempted to explicitly define ``temporary emergency measures,'' owing to the unpredictability and variability of hazardous substance releases, but actions that may qualify include security, source control, release containment, control of contaminated runoff and similar steps to protect human health and the environment from imminent threats. Costs must be identified with specific actions, as indicated in Table 1 of the application form. The applicant should briefly state the specific temporary emergency measure for which reimbursement is being sought and indicate which local agency (e.g., fire department, sheriff's office) incurred the cost for performing this measure. Each cost element for performing this measure should be specified in detail (e.g., overtime, decontamination services, equipment rental) and matched to the specific amount expended. Estimated amounts will not be considered for reimbursement. (4) Cost recovery. Section 310.50(b)(2) requires the applicant to demonstrate that a reasonable effort has been made to obtain reimbursement from sources other than the Superfund. This filing requirement is intended to document the effort to recover costs (see 310.30(e) of this rule). Acceptable demonstrations that cost recovery has been attempted include copies of letters from PRPs stating their inability or refusal to pay, or copies of dated letters (with return-receipt requested) from the local government to the PRP requesting payment, with a statement certifying that the PRP has failed to respond to such letters within at least 60 days. A summary of the cost recovery information must be included in Table 2 of the application. Sworn statements attesting to the fact that no PRP could be found and that insurance monies or State funds are not available to cover the costs for those temporary emergency measures also will suffice. (5) Certification. Section 310.50(c) requires the applicant to certify that: (1) costs were incurred specifically for this response and are accurate; (2) the contact requirement in 310.30(b) was met; (3) this reimbursement does not supplant local funds normally required for response; (4) PRP cannot be identified or is unwilling or unable to pay; and (5) it is understood that if the local government later recovers costs from responsible parties, States or insurance after those costs have been reimbursed from the Superfund, the local government is required to return the reimbursement monies to the Fund in the amount of the recovery up to the amount of the reimbursement. All five certification requirements are necessary to ensure that the Superfund is used appropriately and that the provisions of section 123(b)(2) of CERCLA are met. (6) Filing deadline. Section 310.50(d) stipulates that the local government's request for reimbursement must be received by EPA within one year of the date of completion. For purposes of this rule, ``date of completion'' is defined as the date when all field work has been completed and all project deliverables have been received by the local government for the specific response. (7) Signature authority. Section 310.50(e) stipulates that the application be signed by the authorized representative who is the highest ranking local government official (e.g., chief executive officer, mayor, town supervisor, chairperson of county board, city manager, etc.) or his or her delegate. A letter of delegation must accompany the application if authority has been delegated. The highest ranking official (or delegate) of the local government, by signing the application, is certifying that information contained in the request for reimbursement is complete and accurate to the best of his or her knowledge. b. Response to Comments and Clarifications The Agency received no comments on this section of the interim final rule. (1) Change in filing deadline. The application deadline has been extended from 6 months to one year from the date of response completion to encourage applicants to complete cost recovery efforts and assemble all the required supporting documentation prior to submitting a request for reimbursement. Most applications received to date have seriously inadequate cost recovery documentation. The extension in the deadline should ensure that applications are complete when initially submitted. (2) Change to signature requirement. It is particularly important that applicants for reimbursement pay close attention to the signature requirements when preparing applications for reimbursement. The interim final rule required applications to be signed by the chief executive officer. In the final rule, EPA has changed ``chief executive officer'' to ``highest ranking local government official'' to ensure that the appropriate governmental entity is certifying the application. More than half of the applications received by EPA since the promulgation of the interim final rule have been returned because the signature was not appropriate (e.g., fire chief, hazardous materials specialist). Although these applications were not considered ineligible, and applicants were given the opportunity to comply with filing procedures, application processing time has been substantially lengthened due to this application inadequacy. The certification requirement (i.e., signature of the highest ranking local government official) protects the local government from unauthorized or improper attempts to obtain reimbursement that might later preclude a legitimate request. It also provides EPA with assurance that the request is legitimate, and thus an appropriate use of the Superfund, and can be considered for reimbursement. (3) Clarificaton of application package. Potential applicants are advised to obtain the entire application package rather than using photocopied forms without accompanying instructions. Applicants also may find it helpful to review this regulation in preparation for completing the application form to ensure that all requirements and filing procedures are met. Proper completion of the form expedites application processing and reimbursement. (4) Clarification of temporary emergency measures. The application form includes a section for explaining exactly what temporary emergency measures were taken and why they were necessary. For example, an acceptable demonstration might be: ``Erected berms to prevent migration of pesticides leaking from ruptured drums into Fast River, the drinking water source for the City of Middletown.'' By contrast, an assertion along the lines of ``source control needed to protect human health'' would not constitute an acceptable demonstration. c. Final Rule Section 310.50(d) has been amended to extend the filing deadline from 6 months to one year from the date of response completion and 310.50(e) has been amended to change ``chief executive officer'' to ``highest ranking official of the local government'' as the signature requirement. 2. Section 310.60 Verification and Reimbursement a. Interim Final Rule Section 310.60 specifies the verification and reimbursement procedures EPA follows in evaluating and processing requests for reimbursement. The verification procedures are intended to ensure that all requests are complete and adequately documented. Thus, 310.60(a) allows EPA to return an incomplete request to the applicant with written notice of the deficiencies and 310.60(b) gives the applicant 60 days in which to respond. Under 310.60(c), EPA notifies the applicant when the Agency has determined that the request meets all requirements for reimbursement and complies with all filing procedures. At that point, the request is considered complete and can be evaluated for reimbursement. Under 310.60(d), if documentation is not adequate to demonstrate the reasonableness of the costs claimed, EPA can make adjustments accordingly, including asking for additional information. Reimbursement procedures are specified in 310.60 (e), (f) and (g). Upon reviewing a completed request, EPA will compute the financial burden borne by the community in conducting the response and rank the request relative to the financial burden associated with other requests. Financial burden will be computed as B = C/(Y x P), where B = financial burden on applicant, C = total eligible response costs minus reimbursement from responsible parties, States or other sources, Y = per capita annual income for the locality, and P = population of the locality. Depending upon the ranking of the request and the funds available for reimbursement, EPA will either reimburse the request, deny it, or hold it for reconsideration. Section 310.60(f) limits EPA to reimbursing local governments only for (1) costs that are allowable, reasonable and necessary, and (2) the extent that the temporary emergency measures conform to the hazardous substance response criteria set forth in CERCLA, the NCP and the local emergency response plan. EPA will notify the applicant, in writing, of the Agency's decision. b. Response to Comments and Clarifications Commenters on the interim final rule suggested that applications be directed to the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) under SARA Title III for preliminary evaluation before submission to EPA to ensure that responses have met the requirement for consistency with the local emergency response plan. Further, some States have expressed an interest in receiving copies of reimbursement requests in order to identify local areas in need of financial assistance. In the interest of streamlining and expediting the application review process, EPA will continue the present system of Agency review of applications. Local officials and most State officials who offered comments to EPA in developing the interim final rule believed that there should be no administrative role for States in the reimbursement process. Some local officials, however, indicated that States might assist EPA in evaluating reimbursement requests since they may be familiar with the hazardous substance incident and local government response. EPA routinely notifies the appropriate SERCs of applications for local government reimbursement to request information regarding the applicant's participation in and consistency with a local emergency response plan. As a result of SERC response, the agency has denied one request for reimbursement due to noncompliance with this program requirement. EPA believes that, in keeping with the expressed intent of this regulation, the primary burden of proof of response eligibility and the degree of financial burden resulting from the response rests with the local government. The reimbursement application was designed so that sufficient information for a fair evaluation by the Agency is available in a properly completed application. For these reasons, the State maintains no formal or routine role in the administration of this reimbursement program. However, EPA does not intend for this rule to preclude or interfere with existing State and local response procedures. The Agency received several comments which suggested that aggregate income (i.e., per capita income multiplied by population) is not a reliable indicator of the size of a local government's budget. The population factor is included in the denominator of that formula to ensure that, when a large locale and a small locale with similar per capita incomes are being considered for reimbursement concurrently, priority will be given to the applicant with a smaller budget proportionate to the eligible costs of the response. The Agency believes that the Congressional intent of the rule is to favor small local governments. However, relevant financial data and other factors are considered when making reimbursement decisions. In combination with additional financial data provided by applicants, EPA will use the present ranking to distribute reimbursements first to local governments with the most limited resources. It should be noted that the Agency's expectation that some applications may not be reimbursed due to the limited availability of funds has not been realized. In two years of implementing the local government reimbursement program, no applicant has been denied reimbursement because of the lack of available funds. This is due, in part, to the fact that many applications have documented allowable costs totalling considerably less than the $25,000 per response limit. Comments on the interim final rule also suggested considering reimbursing on the basis of a local government's total annual response expenditures. The Agency considered this approach carefully during development of the interim final rule and maintains its position. Experience with screening reimbursement requests has shown that many applicants have difficulty documenting the costs associated with a single response that occurred recently. Information on annual expenditures would have to be for the previous year so that applicants could meet the filing deadline for the specific response for which reimbursement is requested. The Agency believes that requiring local governments to compile and document expenditures for hazardous substance responses occurring over the entire previous year would be inordinately burdensome and would discourage them from submitting applications. Furthermore, not all responses occurring in a year are eligible for reimbursement under this program. It would not be consistent with the intent of this regulation to consider the costs of ineligible responses. Information on the frequency and magnitude of previous responses is the kind of additional supporting data that EPA currently considers in determining reimbursement priority. c. Final Rule Section 310.60(e) has been amended to clarify that larger burden formula fractions represent a greater burden than smaller fractions. 3. Section 310.70 Records Retention a. Interim Final Rule This section stipulates that an applicant receiving a reimbursement must maintain cost documentation and other relevant records, and must provide EPA access to these materials for ten years from the date of reimbursement. This requirement ensures the availability of pertinent information if EPA pursues cost recovery for this response. Once the ten years has expired, the applicant must notify EPA of any intention to destroy these records. If EPA chooses not to take possession of them, the local authority may dispose of the materials. The requirements of this section do not apply to requests that have been denied and are not being disputed under 310.90. b. Response to Comments and Clarifications The Agency received no comments on this section of the interim final rule. c. Final Rule No change in 310.70 of the interim final rule. 4. Section 310.80 Payment of Approved Reimbursement Requests a. Interim Final Rule This section stipulates that reimbursement payments can be made only when an appropriation in the Superfund is available and that payments will be in the order in which approved requests are ranked, according to financial burden on the applicant. This provision is consistent with Section 111(e)(1) of CERCLA, which restricts payment of claims against the Superfund ``in excess of the total money in the Fund.'' b. Response to Comments and Clarifications The Agency received no comments on this section of the interim final rule. c. Final Rule No change in 310.80 of the interim final rule. 5. Section 310.90 Disputes Resolution a. Interim Final Rule This section specifies EPA's procedures for reviews of a denial of reimbursement and reviews of the amount of reimbursement, either of which the requester may choose to dispute. The applicant has 60 days from the date of the reimbursement decision to request a review, otherwise that decision constitutes a final Agency action. The request for review includes a discussion of the issue involved and a statement of the applicant's objection. After filing for review, the applicant is entitled to an informal conference with the EPA disputes decision official. The requester may be represented by counsel and submit evidence for inclusion in a written record. The Agency will provide the requester with a written decision specifying the outcome of the review. This decision constitutes final EPA action on the matter. b. Response to Comments and Clarifications One commenter noted that the dispute resolution process may be inadequate because it considers disputed requests after all other requests have been received. Dispute decisions, therefore, might be made on the basis of availability of funds rather than merit. As soon as the Agency receives a request for review, funds in the amount of the total reimbursement requested may be set aside until a final determination is made. The Agency intends to process disputes expeditiously and thus does not anticipate that a set aside of funds will ordinarily be necessary. c. Final Rule No change in 310.90 of interim final rule. VII. Regulatory Analyses A. Executive Order No. 12291 Under Executive Order No. 12291, the Agency must judge whether a regulation is ``major'' and thus subject to the requirement of a Regulatory Impact Analysis. The notice published today is not major because the rule will not result in an effect on the economy of $100 million or more, will not result in increased costs or prices, will not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity and innovation and will not significantly disrupt domestic or export markets. Therefore, the Agency has not prepared a Regulatory Impact Analysis under the Executive Order. This regulation was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review as required by Executive Order No. 12291. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires that a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis be performed for all rules that are likely to have ``significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' This regulation involves reimbursement of the costs of local governments for responding to a hazardous substance release. This is a benefit authorized by CERCLA, and does not adversely affect the private sector economy or small entities, which may include local governments, and in fact provides a benefit to local governments in the form of reimbursement to offset financial hardship incurred from responses to hazardous substances and pollutants or contaminants. EPA, therefore, certifies that this regulation will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. C. Paperwork Reduction Act The information collection requirements contained in this rule have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and have been assigned OMB control number 2050 - 0077. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 18.25 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data soruces, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Chief, Information Policy Branch, PM - 223y, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.'' List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 310 Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Local governments, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund. Dated: October 14, 1992. William K. Reilly, Administrator. For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended by revising Part 310 to read as follows: PART 310--REIMBURSEMENT TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE TO HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE RELEASES Subpart A--General Sec. 310.05 Purpose, scope and applicability. 310.10 Abbreviations. 310.11 Definitions. 310.12 Penalties. Subpart B--Reimbursement 310.20 Eligibility for reimbursement. 310.30 Requirements for requesting reimbursement. 310.40 Allowable and unallowable costs. Subpart C--Procedures for Filing and Processing Reimbursement Requests 310.50 Filing procedures. 310.60 Verification and reimbursement. 310.70 Records retention. 310.80 Payment of approved reimbursement requests. 310.90 Disputes resolution. Appendix I to Part 310--EPA Regions and NRC Telephone Lines Appendix II to Part 310--Application for Reimbursement to Local Governments for Emergency Response to Hazardous Substance Releases Under CERCLA Section 123 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9611(c)(11), 9623. Subpart A--General 310.05 Purpose, scope, and applicability. (a) Purpose. Through this part, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is establishing the procedures for reimbursing local governments for temporary emergency measures to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the environment, as authorized under section 123 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA). This program is intended to alleviate significant financial burden on local governments for response to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances or pollutants or contaminants and will not supplant local funds normally provided for response. Reimbursement does not apply to expenditures incurred in the course of providing what are traditionally local services and responsibilities, such as routine firefighting. (b) Scope. Applications for reimbursement for temporary emergency measures may be submitted only through the procedures established in this part. Any general purpose unit of local government for a political subdivision may request reimbursement. States are not eligible for this program. Under this part, local governments may apply for reimbursement for temporary emergency measures performed subsequent to October 21, 1987. Reimbursement may be made for temporary emergency measures conducted during either Federal-lead or non-Federal-lead responses. (c) Applicability. Reimbursement to local governments for temporary emergency measures may not exceed $25,000 per single response, nor may reimbursement supplant local funds normally provided for response. Because CERCLA specifies that no more than 0.1% of the amount appropriated from the Hazardous Substance Superfund (Superfund or the Fund) may be allocated to the reimbursement program for the five fiscal years beginning October 1, 1986, some requests may not ever be reimbursed even though they meet all requirements of this part. 310.10 Abbreviations. CERCLA--The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96 - 510, 42 U.S.C. 9601 - 75), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, also known as Superfund. EPA or the Agency--Environmental Protection Agency NCP--National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan also known as the National Contingency Plan. OMB--Office of Management and Budget. SARA--The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99 - 499, 42 U.S.C. 9601). USCG--U.S. Coast Guard. 310.11 Definitions. For purposes of this part except when otherwise specified: (a) Date of completion means the date when all field work has been completed and all deliverables (e.g., lab results, technical expert reports) have been received by the local government; (b) Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986 means Title III--Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (EPCRA) (Pub. L. 99 - 499, 42 U.S.C. 960); (c) General purpose unit of local government means the governing body of a county, parish, municipality, city, town, township, Federally-recognized Indian tribe or similar governing body; (d) Hazardous substance, as defined by section 101(14) of CERCLA, means: (1) Any substance designated pursuant to section 311(b)(2)(A) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; (2) Any element, compound, mixture, solution, or substance designated pursuant to section 102 of CERCLA; (3) Any hazardous waste having the characteristics identified under or listed pursuant to section 3001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (but not including any waste the regulation of which under the Solid Waste Disposal Act has been suspended by Act of Congress); (4) Any toxic pollutant listed under section 307(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; (5) Any hazardous air pollutant listed under section 112 of the Clean Air Act; and (6) Any imminently hazardous chemical substance or mixture with respect to which the Administrator has taken action pursuant to section 7 of the Toxic Substances Control Act. The term does not include petroleum, including crude oil or any fraction thereof that is not otherwise specifically listed or designated as a hazardous substance under paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(6) of this section, and the term does not include natural gas, natural gas liquids, liquefied natural gas, or synthetic gas usable for fuel (or mixtures of natural gas and such synthetic gas); (e) Local emergency response plan means the emergency plan prepared by the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) as required by section 303 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986 (SARA Title III) (EPCRA); (f) National Contingency Plan means the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (40 CFR part 300); (g) National Response Center means the national communications center located in Washington, DC, that receives and relays notice of oil discharge or releases of hazardous substances to appropriate Federal officials; (h) Pollutant or contaminant, as defined by section 104(a)(2) of CERCLA, includes, but is not limited to, any element, substance, compound, or mixture, including disease-causing agents, which after release into the environment and upon exposure, ingestion, inhalation, or assimilation into any organism, either directly from the environment or indirectly by ingestion through food chains, will or may reasonably be anticipated to cause death, disease, behavioral abnormalities, cancer, genetic mutation, physiological malfunctions (including malfunctions in reproduction) or physical deformations, in such organisms or their offspring. The term does not include petroleum, including crude oil and any fraction thereof that is not otherwise specifically listed or designated as a hazardous substance under section 101(14) (A) through (F) of CERCLA, not does it include natural gas, liquefied natural gas, or synthetic gas of pipeline quality (or mixtures of natural gas and such synthetic gas); (i) Release, as defined by section 101(22) of CERCLA, means any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging, injection, escaping, leaching, dumping, or disposing into the environment, but excludes: any release that results in exposure to persons solely within a workplace, with respect to a claim that such persons may assert against the employer of such persons; emissions from the engine exhaust of a motor vehicle, rolling stock, aircraft, vessel, or pipeline pumping station engine; release of source, by-product or special nuclear material from a nuclear incident, as those terms are defined in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, if such release is subject to requirements with respect to financial protection established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission under section 170 of such act, or, for the purpose of section 104 of CERCLA or any other response action, any release of source, by-product, or special nuclear material from any processing site designated under section 122(a)(1) or 302(a) of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978; and the normal application of fertilizer. For the purposes of this part, release also means threat of release; (j) Single response means all of the concerted activities conducted in response to a single episode, incident or threat causing or contributing to a release or threatened release of hazardous substances of pollutants or contaminants. 310.12 Penalties. Any person who knowingly gives or causes to be given any false statement or claim as part of any application for reimbursement under section 123 of CERCLA, upon conviction, may be fined or imprisoned subject to the False Statement Act (Pub. L. 97 - 398, 18 U.S.C. 1001) and the False Claims Act (Pub. L. 99 - 562, 31 U.S.C. 3729). Subpart B--Reimbursement 310.20 Eligibility for reimbursement. (a) Any general purpose unit of local government may request reimbursement for temporary emergency measures if all requirements under 310.30 are met. (b) States are not eligible for reimbursement for temporary emergency measures and no State may request reimbursement on its own behalf or on the behalf of political subdivisions within the State. 310.30 Requirements for requesting reimbursement. (a) Response must have been initiated on or after October 21, 1987, the effective date of the interim final rule which governed the reimbursement process prior to the effective date of this part. (b) The local government must inform EPA or the National Response Center (NRC) of the response as soon as possible, but not later than 24 hours after the start of a response, unless EPA or the USCG has been contacted via the NRC or other established response communication channel. EPA Regional offices and NRC telephone numbers are listed in Appendix I of this part. (c) Requests for reimbursement must demonstrate that response actions are consistent with CERCLA, the NCP and, where applicable, the local comprehensive emergency response plan completed under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA). (d) Requests for reimbursement must provide assurance that reimbursement for costs incurred for temporary emergency measures does not supplant local funds normally provided for response. (e) Applicants for reimbursement must first present requests for payment of incurred costs to all known potentially responsible parties (PRPs) and permit at least 60 days for payment or for expression of intent to pay or willingness to negotiate prior to submitting a reimbursement request to the Agency. Local governments also must pursue all other sources of reimbursement (e.g., insurance, reimbursement from the State) before seeking reimbursement from EPA under this part. (f) After October 17, 1988, the applicant's jurisdiction must be included in the comprehensive emergency response plan completed by the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) as required by section 303(a) of EPCRA. This requirement does not apply if the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) has not established an LEPC responsible for the emergency planning district(s) encompassing the applicant's geographic boundaries. (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2050 - 0077) 310.40 Allowable and unallowable costs. To be allowable, costs for which reimbursement is sought must be consistent with CERCLA and with Federal cost principles outlined in the OMB Circular A - 87, ``Cost Principles for State and Local Governments.'' The local government may also seek assistance from the EPA Regional Office in determining which costs may be allowable. Final determination of the reasonableness of the costs for which reimbursement is sought will be made by EPA. (a) Allowable cost. In general, allowable costs are those project costs are eligible, reasonable, necessary and allocable to the project. Costs allowable for reimbursement may include, but are not limited to: (1) ``Disposable materials and supplies'' acquired, consumed, and expended specifically for the purpose of the response for which reimbursement is being requested (hereafter referred to as ``the response''); (2) Compensation for unbudgeted wages of employees for the time and efforts devoted specifically to the response that are not otherwise provided for in the applicant's operating budget (e.g., overtime pay for permanent full-time and other than full-time employees); (3) Rental or leasing of equipment used specifically for the response (e.g., protective equipment or clothing, scientific and technical equipment) (Note: reimbursement for these costs will not exceed the duration of the response); (4) Replacement costs for equipment owned by the applicant that is contaminated beyond reuse or repair, if the applicant can demonstrate that the equipment was a total loss and that the loss occurred during the response (e.g., self-contained breathing apparatus irretrievably contaminated during the response); (5) Decontamination of equipment contaminated during the response; (6) Special technical services specifically required for the response (e.g., costs associated with the time and efforts of technical experts/specialists not otherwise provided for by the local government); (7) Other special services specifically required for the response (e.g., utilities); (8) Laboratory costs for purposes of analyzing samples taken during the response; (9) Evacuation costs associated with the services, supplies, and equipment procured for a specific evacuation; and (10) Containerization or packaging cost including transportation and disposal of hazardous wastes. (b) Unallowable costs. Unallowable costs for reimbursement include, but are not limited to: (1) Purchase or routine maintenance of equipment of a durable nature that is expected to have a period of service of one year or more after being put into use without material impairment of its physical condition, except as provided in paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) of this section; (2) Materials and supplies not purchased specifically for the response; (3) Employee fringe benefits; (4) Administrative costs for filing reimbursement applications; (5) Employee out-of-pocket expenses normally provided for in the applicant's operating budget (e.g., meals, fuel); (6) Legal expenses that may be incurred as a result of response activities, including efforts to recover costs for potentially responsible parties; and (7) Medical expenses incurred as a result of response activities. (c) Detailed cost documentation. Detailed cost documentation must be provided by the local government and ensure that costs incurred are substantiated and that cost documentation is adequate for an Agency audit. Documentation of response costs must include at a minimum. (1) Specification of the temporary emergency measures for which reimbursement is requested; (2) Specification of the local agency incurring the cost; (3) Detailed breakdown of actual costs, by cost element such as overtime, equipment rental; (4) Supporting documents such as invoices, sales receipts, rental or leasing agreements; and (5) Generally accepted accounting practices consistently applied. (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2050 - 077) Subpart C--Procedures for Filing and Processing Reimbursement Requests 310.50 Filing procedures. (a) Only one request for reimbursement will be accepted for each hazardous substance emergency requiring immediate response at the local level. When more than one local agency or government has participated in such a response, those agencies and governments must determine which single entity will submit the request on behalf of them all. (b) A request for reimbursement must be submitted on EPA form 9310 - 1, illustrated in Appendix II of this part, and must demonstrate that: (1) Costs for which reimbursement is sought were incurred for temporary emergency measures taken by the local government to protect human health and the environment from releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants; temporary emergency measures may include security, source control, release containment, neutralization or other treatment methods, contaminated runoff control and similar activities mitigating immediate threats to human health and the environment; (2) Reasonable effort has been made to recover costs from the responsible party and from any other available source and that such effort has been unsuccessful; and (3) Response actions were not inconsistent with CERCLA, the NCP and, if applicable, the local emergency response plan required under Title III of SARA. (c) Applicants must certify that: (1) All costs are accurate and were incurred specifically for the response for which reimbursement is being requested: (2) The local government complied with the requirement to inform EPA or the USCG of the response, as specified in 310.30(b); (3) Reimbursement for costs incurred for response activities does not supplant local funds normally provided for response; (4) The Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) cannot be identified or is unwilling or unable to pay; and (5) If costs subsequently are recovered from responsible parties or other sources after the local government has received reimbursement from the Superfund, the local government agrees to return to EPA the reimbursement monies for which costs have been recovered. (d) Reimbursement requests must be received by EPA within one year of the date of completion of the response for which reimbursement is being requested. Late applications must include an explanation of the delay and will be considered on a case-by-case basis. (e) A request for reimbursement must be signed by the authorized representative who is the highest ranking official of the local government or his or her delegate. (f) Completed application and supporting data should be mailed to the LGR Project Officer, Emergency Response Division (5202 - G), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460. (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2050 - 0077) 310.60 Verification and reimbursement. (a) Upon receipt of a reimbursement request, EPA will verify that it complies with all requirements. Where the request is incomplete or has significant defects, EPA will return the request to the applicant with written notification of its deficiencies. (b) A request returned to the applicant for correction of deficiencies must be resubmitted to EPA within 60 days. (c) For purposes of this part, a reimbursement request is deemed complete when EPA determines that the request complies fully with all requirements for reimbursement and with all filing procedures. When the request is complete, a notice will be provided to the applicant of EPA's receipt and acceptance for evaluation. (d) If EPA determines that it cannot complete its evaluation of a request because the records, documents and other evidence were not maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices consistently applied, or were for any reason inadequate to demonstrate the reasonableness of the costs claimed, EPA may reject the request or make adjustments, if possible. Further consideration of such amounts will depend on the adequacy of subsequent documentation. Any additional information requested by EPA must be submitted within 60 days unless specifically extended by EPA. The failure of the applicant to provide in a timely manner the requested information without reasonable cause may be cause for denial of the reimbursement request. (e) When the reimbursement request is completed, EPA will rank the request on the basis of financial burden. Financial burden will be based on the ratio of eligible response costs to the applicant locality's annual per capita income adjusted for population, with larger fractions representing greater burden than smaller fractions. Per capita income and population statistics used to calculate financial burden shall be those published by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, in Current Population Reports, Local Population Estimates, Series P - 26, ``1988 Population and 1987 Per Capita Income Estimates for Counties and Incorporated Places,'' Vols. 88 - S - SC, 88 - ENC - SC, 88 - NE - SC, 88 - W - SC, 88 - WNC - SC, March 1990. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies are available from the Bureau of the Census, Office of Public Affairs, Department of Commerce, Constitution Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20230 (1 - 202 - 763 - 4040). Copies may be inspected at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC, or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 N. Capitol Street NW., 7th Floor, suite 700, Washington, DC. In ranking requests on the basis of financial burden, EPA also will give consideration to other relevant financial information supplied by the applicant. Once the request is ranked, EPA will: (1) Reimburse the request or; (2) Decline to reimburse the request; or (3) Hold the request for reconsideration if funding for the current review period has been exceeded. (f) Reimbursement will be made: (1) Only for costs that are allowable, reasonable and necessary; and (2) Only to the extent that the temporary emergency measures conformed to response criteria established by CERCLA, the NCP and the local emergency response plan, if applicable. (g) The EPA reimbursement official will provide the requester with a written final decision. Payment of approved requests will be made according to 310.80. (h) Requests that are not reimbursed after initial consideration remain open for reconsideration, at the EPA reimbursement official's discretion, for one year. EPA will notify the requester in writing if the request is held for later review. After that time, an unreimbursed request will no longer be considered and EPA will notify the requester in writing that the request has been denied. 310.70 Records retention. An applicant receiving a reimbursement from the Superfund is required to maintain all cost documentation and any other records relating to the reimbursement request and to provide EPA with access to such records. If, after ten years from the date of the reimbursement from the Superfund, EPA has not initiated a cost recovery action, the applicant need retain the records no longer. The applicant must provide EPA with a 60 day notice on its intent to destroy the records. This notification will allow EPA the opportunity to take possession of these records before they are destroyed. 310.80 Payment of approved reimbursement requests. A reimbursement from the Superfund can be paid only when Superfund monies are available. An approved request in excess of Superfund appropriations available to EPA may be paid only when additional money is appropriated. As appropriations in the Superfund become available, reimbursements will be made in the order in which approved requests are ranked, according to relative financial burden. 310.90 Disputes resolution. The procedures in this section apply to reviews of denial of reimbursement and reviews of amount of reimbursement. (a) The EPA reimbursement official's decision constitutes final Agency action unless the requester files a request for review by registered mail within 60 calendar days of the date of decision to the address given in 310.50(f). (b) The request for review of the EPA reimbursement official's final written decision must be filed with the disputes decision official identified in the final written decision. (c) The request for review must include: (1) A copy of the EPA reimbursement official's final decision; (2) A statement of the amount in dispute; (3) A description of the issues involved; and (4) A concise statement of the requester's objection to the final decision. (d) After filing for review, the requester: (1) Is entitled to an informal conference with the EPA disputes decision official; (2) May be represented by counsel and may submit documentary evidence and briefs for inclusion in a written record; and (3) Is entitled to a written decision by the disputes decision official within 45 days from receipt of the request. BILLING CODE 6560 - 50 - M BILLING CODE 6560 - 50 - C Appendix I to Part 310.--EPA Regions and NRC Telephone Lines ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ EPA Regional Office Telephone States in Region ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ I--Boston.............. (617) 223-7265 ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT II--New York........... (908) 548-8730 NJ, NY, PR, VI III--Philadelphia...... (215) 597-9898 PA, DE, MD, DC, VA, WV IV--Atlanta............ (404) 347-4062 NC, SC, TN, MS, AL, GA, FL, KY V--Chicago............. (312) 353-2318 OH, IN, IL, WI, MN, MI VI--Dallas............. (214) 655-2222 AR, LA, TX, OK, NM VII--Kansas City....... (913) 236-3778 IA, MO, KS, NE VIII--Denver........... (303) 293-1788 CO, UT, WY, MT, ND, SD IX--San Francisco...... (415) 744-2000 AZ, CA, NV, AS, HI, GU, TT X--Seattle............. (206) 553-1263 ID, OR, WA, AK National Response Center: 1-800-424-8802 (National--toll free) 202-267-2675 (Washington, DC) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ BILLING CODE 6560 - 50 - M BILLING CODE 6560 - 50 - C Attachement 1.--Cost Element Codes and Comments ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ Code Cost category Cost element Comments ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ PC.......... Personnel Compensation..... PC1: Overtime--for services in excess Compensation of overtime costs of the local agency's standard work incurred specifically for a day or work week. response will be considered only if overtime is not otherwise provided for in the applicant's operating budget. PC2: Experts and consultants--for services rendered on a per diem or fee basis or for services of an intermittent, advisory nature. TR.......... Transportation............. TR1: Passenger vehicle rental--for Passenger and nonpassenger vehicle transportation of persons during rental costs will be considered for evacuation. private vehicles not owned or operated by the applicant or other unit of local government. TR2: Nonpassenger vehicle rental--for transportation of equipment or supplies. RC.......... Utilities.................. RC1: Utilities--for power, water, Utility costs will be considered for electricity and other services private utilities not owned or exclusive of transportation and operated by the applicant or other communications. unit of local government. OS.......... Other Contractual Services. OS1: Contracts for technical or May include such items as scientific analysis--for tasks specialized laboratory analyses and requiring specialized hazardous sampling. substance response expertise. OS2: Decontamination services--for specialized cleaning or decontamination procedures and supplies to restore clothing, equipment or other serviceable gear to normal functioning. SM.......... Supplies and Materials..... SM1: Commodities--for protective gear May include such items as chemical and clothing, cleanup tools and foam to suppress a fire; food supplies and similar materials purchased specifically for an purchased specifically for, and evacuation; air purifying canisters expended during, the response. for breathing appartus; disposable, protective suits and gloves; and sampling supplies. EQ.......... Equipment.................. EQ1: Replacement--for durable Equipment replacement costs will be equipment declared a total loss as a considered if applicant can result of contamination during the demonstrate total loss and proper response. disposal of contaminated equipment. EQ2: Rents--for use of equipment Equipment rental costs will be owned by others considered for privately owned equipment not owned or operated by the applicant or other unit of local government. ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ BILLING CODE 6560 - 50 - M [FR Doc. 93 - 995 Filed 1 - 14 - 93; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560 - 50 - C