TRANSCRIPT
Public Hearing
on Proposed Rules
for Notification .of Hazardous Waste Activities
August 18, 1978, Cleveland, Ohio
This hearing was sponsored by EPA, Office of Solid Waste,
and the proceedings (SW-44p) are reproduced entirely as transcribed
by the official reporter, with handwritten corrections.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1978
-------
1 PANEL MEMBERS:
2 Jack Lehman, Director
Hazardous Waste Management Division
3 EPA
Washington,
4
Joe Boyle
5 Region V
Air and Hazardous Materials Division
6
Bill Sanjour, Chief
7 Assessment & Technology Branch
Hazardous Waste Management Division
Tim Fields, Program Manager
9 Technology Program
Hazardous Waste Management Division
10
Bill Snyder
Technology Program
Hazardous Waste Management Division
12
Amy Schaffer
13 Office of Enforcement
EPA
14
AnnAllen, Attorney
15 Management and Information Staff
OSW, EPA
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1 PROCEEDINGS
2 MR. LEHMAN: Good afternoon,
3 ladies and gentlemen. I am Jack Lehman, Director
4 of the Hazardous Waste Management Division in EPA's
Office of Solid Waste in Washington, D.C..",
I would like to welcome you to EPA's
first public hearing on the Proposed Regulations for
8 Preliminary Notification of Hazardous Waste Activities
9 under Section 3010 of the Resource Conservation and
10 Recovery Act of 1976.
11 I would like to introduce the Panel
12 members to you now. They are composed of members of
13 OSW's Hazardous Waste Management Division and Manage-
14 ment and Information Staff, the Office of Enforcement
15 in Washington, p.C,, , and a representative of EPA's
16 Region V office in Chicago. These people specialize
17 in certain subject areas related to this issue. The
Panel is as follows:
19 On my right, Bill Sanjour, Chief,
20 Assessment and Technology Branch, Hazardous Waste
91 Management Division, OSW.
,„ Next is Amy Schaffer, Toxic Substances
2g Branch, Pesticides and Toxic Substances Enforcement
,4 Division, Office of Enforcement.
On my le£"t is Tim Fields, Program
-------
4
Manager, Technology Program, Assessment and Technology
Branch, Hazardous Waste Management Division, OSW and
principal author of the 3010 Regulations.
3
Next is Bill Snyder, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Technology Program, Assessment
5
and Technology Branch, HWMD, OSW.
6
Last but not least, Ann Allen,
7
attorney/adviser. Management and Information staff,
8
OSW.
9
The Resource Conservation and Recovery
10
Act of 1976 amended the Solid Haste Disposal Act.
11
It includes a new Section 3010, which provides in
12
Subsection (a), and I quote:
13
"Section 3010. (a) Preliminary
14
Notification. Not later than 90 days after promulga-
15
tion or revision of regulations under Section 3001
16
identifying by its characteristics or listing any
17
substance as hazardous waste subject to this subtitle,
18
any person generating or transporting such substance
19
or owning or operating a facility for treatment,
20
storage, or disposal of such substance shall file
21
with the Administrator (or with States having author-
22
ized hazardous waste permit programs under Section
23
3006) a notification stating the location and general
24
description of such activity and the identified or
25
-------
5
listed hazardous wastes handled by such person. Not
2
more than one such notification shall be required to
3
be filed with respect to the same substance. No
4
identified or listed hazardous waste subject to this
subtitle may be transported, treated, stored, or dis-
posed of unless notification has been given as
required under this subsection."
O
EPA proposed regulations to implement
9 this section of the Act in the Federal Register
10 on July 11, 1978. Copies of the proposed regulations
11 and the Act are available on the table at the back of
12 the room. I am also submitting a copy of the proposed
13 regulations for the record.
14 These proposed rules specify who must
15 file notification of hazardous waste activities,
16 when and where notification must be filed, and what
17 information such notification must contain. A sample
18 of the form suggested for use in this process is
19 also included.
20 These proposed rules also contain
21 provisions whereby states may obtain authorization
22 to receive and manage this initial notification program
23 The Resource Conservation and Recovery
24 Act of 1976 provides that regulations shall be
95 promulgated only after notice and opportunity for
-------
6
1 public hearings. So let me now lay the groundwork
2 and rules for the conduct of this hearing.
3 The focus of a public hearing is on
the public's response to a regulatory proposal of the
Agency. The purpose of this hearing, as announced
in the July 11, 1978 Federal Register, is to solicit
comments on the proposed regulations, including any
background information used to develop the regula-
9 tions.
10 This public hearing is being held
11 not primarily to inform the public nor to defend a
12 proposed regulation, but more to obtain the public's
13 response to EPA's proposed regulation, and, there-
14 after, revise the regulation as may seem appropriate.
15 All major substantive comments made
16 at the hearing will J>e addressed at the time of
17 final promulgation. The anticipated date of final
18 promulgation is spring 1979.
jg This will not be a formal adjudica-
20 tory hearing with the right to cross examination.
The members of the public are to present their views
on the proposed regulation to the Panel, and the
,,3 Panel may ask questions of the people presenting
statemeits to clarify any ambiguities in their presen-
tations .
-------
i If any member of the audience wants a
2 question asked of another member of the public,
3 he will be allowed to write the question and pass
4 it to the Panel, at which time the Panel may ask the
5 question of the appropriate person, and that person
6 will be given the opportunity to respond accordingly.
7 As you noticed, blank cards are
available and will be passed out. So we ask you to
9 list your questions on these cards, and then the
10 Panel will ask them if they are relevant to the state-
ments presented.
12 Due to time limitations, the Chairman
13 reserves the right to limit lengthy questions,
14 discussions or statements. We would ask that those
15 of you who have prepared statements to make orallyj
16 to please limit your presentation to a maximum of
10 minutes, so that we can get to all statements in
,„ a reasonable time. The written statements will be
lo
included in their entirety in the record.
Written prepared statements will be
accepted at the end of the hearing. And so,if
you wish to provide a statement but not present it
orally, that can be accomplished.
2o
Persons wishing to make an oral
statement who have not made an advance request by
-------
1 telephone or in writing should indicate their interest
2 on the registration card. And if you have not indi-
3 cated your intent to give a statement and you decide
4 to do so, please return to the registration table,
5 fill out another card and give it to one of the staff.
6 As we call upon an individual to make
7 a statement, he should come up to the lectern and,
after identifying himself for the court reporter,
deliver his statement. At the beginning of the state-
ment, I will inquire as to whether the speaker is
u willing to entertain questions from the Panel and
12 the audience. The speaker is under no obligation to
13 do so, although within the spirit of this information
14 sharing meeting, it would be of great assistance to
15 the Agency if questions were permitted.
Anyone wishing to make statements
will have an opportunity to do so, even if we have to
run the hearing into the evening. We will recess
18
for a 15-minute break at about 3:30. The hearing is
scheduled to break for dinner at 6:00 p. m., if we
20
have not concluded before. The hearing will continue
into the evening, if necessary.
We have a few housekeeping announce-
ments here. Our restrooms are out the door to the
24
right. Phones are out the door to your left.
-------
9
Unfortunately, we don't have facili-
2
ties to take phone messages at our registration desk.
All copies of statements should be
4
presented to the court reporter who is located here
on ray right in the front of the room.
6 The smoking section is on my right,
and the nonsmoking section is to my left. There is
8 water at the rear of the room.
9 As I mentioned, a court reporter is
10 present here today. Statements, questions, and
11 comments will become part of the public record, and
12 this record will be available for public inspection
13 in the docket section, Room 2111, Hazardous Waste
14 Management Division, Office of Solid Waste, U.S.
15 Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street,
16 Southwest, Washington, D. C. 20460. A copy of the
transcript will be available on request to all
18 registrants here today in about two to three months.
19 Also, I would like to point out that
20 if you wish to be added to our mailing list for
21 future regulations, draft regulations or proposed
regulations, please leave your card or name and
23 address on a 3 x 5 card at the registration desk.
24 In addition to the public hearing
here in Cleveland today, two other identical hearings
-------
will be held, one in Charleston, South Carolina, on
August 21st and one in San Francisco, California,
3
4 a statement today may send a written statement to the
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
Thursday, August 24th. Persons not wishing to deliver
address noted in the Federal Register before the
closing of that docket, which is September 11, 1978.
Now I would like to turn the hearing
over to Bill Sanjour, who will give you an overview
of the Subtitle C regulations on hazardous waste
management, how they function and how the proposed
regulations for preliminary notification of hazardous
waste activities fit into this framework.
MR. SANJOUR: Thank you. Jack.
Before I give you an overview of the interrelation-
ships of the various sections of the Act, please note
that each of the sections I am about to describe is
a separate regulation, and that public hearings will be
held on each of these regulations as it is proposed.
I would ask that you please keep in
mind that we are here today to address only the pro-
posed Federal regulations defining procedures for
notification of hazardous waste activities, and proced-
ures whereby states may receive a special authorization
to manage this notification program.
You will have the opportunity to
-------
11
1 comment on the other sections of the Act, which deal
2 with the definition of hazardous wastes and the
3 detailed standards regarding generation, treatment,
4 storage, and disposal of these wastes as each of the
5 other regulations is proposed.
6 Therefore, it would insure the most
7 effective use of everyone's time here today if you
8 would mentally review and edit your statements and
9 questions accordingly in order to minimize the involve-
10 ment of these other sections and to maximize our focus
11 on the proposed regulations for notification of
12 hazardous waste activities.
13 Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal
M Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and
,g Recovery Act of 1976, creates a regulatory framework
,„ to control hazardous waste.
lb
17 Congress has found that such waste
presents special dangers to health and requires a
18
greater degree of regulation than does nonhazardous
solid waste. Because of the seriousness of this
problem. Congress intended that the states develop
programs to control it. In the event that states
do not choose to operate this program, EPA is man-
dated to do so.
24
Seven guidelines and regulations are
25
-------
12
1 being developed and proposed under Subtitle C to
o
implement the national hazardous waste management
o
regulatory program.
4 It is important to note that the defini
5 tion of solid waste in the Act encompasses garbage,
6 refuse, sludges and other discarded materials, includ-
7 ing liquids, semi-solids and contained gases, with
8 a few exceptions, from both municipal and industrial
9 sources.
10 Hazardous wastes, which are a sub-set
11 of all solid wastes,and which will be defined by
12 regulations under Section 3001, are those which have
13 particularly significant impacts on public health and
14 the environment.
is Subtitle C creates a management con-
16 trol system, which, for those wastes defined as
17 hazardous, requires a cradle-to-grae-s cognizance,
18 including appropriate monitoring, record keeping and
19 reporting throughout the system.
20 Section 3001 requires EPA to define
21 criteria and methods for identifying and listing
hazardous wastes. Wastes identified as hazardous
are then included in the management control system
constructed under Sections 3002 through. 3006 and
Section 3010, the section we will be discussing here
-------
13
today.
Those that are excluded will be sub-
ject to the requirements for nonhazardous solid waste,
which are being carried out by states under Subtitle D,
5
under which open dumping is prohibited and environ-
mentally acceptable practices are required. Section
3001 regulations should be published as proposed
rules in December 1978.
9
Section 3002 addresses the standards
10
applicable to generators of hazardous waste. EPA's
regulations under this section describe the classes
12
of generators for whom some requirements may vary;
13
for example, the Agency does not interpret the intent
14
of Congress to include regulation of individual home
owners due to small quantities of hazardous wastes
1 which they may generate.
17 Section 3002 also requires the
18 creation of a manifest system which will track wastes
from the point of generation to their ultimate dis-
20 position. Section 3002 should be published as a
21 proposed rule in December 1978.
22 Section 3003 addresses standards
23 affecting transporters of hazardous waste to assure
24 that the waste is carefully managed during the
25 transport phase.
-------
14
The Agency explored opportunities for
n
meshing closely with the proposed and current U.S.
Department of Transportation regulations to avoid
4 duplication in the transportation area. Section 3003
5
regulations were published in the Federal Register
6 as proposed rules on April 28, 1978, and a public
hearing on them was held on June 20, 1978. Additional
hearings will be scheduled in the future.
Q
Section 3004 addresses standards
affecting owners and operators of hazardous waste
11 storage, treatment, and disposal facilities. These
12 standards define the levels of public health and
13 environmental protection to be achieved by these
14 facilities, and provide the criteria against which
15 EPA will measure applications for permits.
16 Facilities on a generator's property,
17 as well as off-site facilities, are covered by these
18 regulations, and do require permits; generators and
19 transporters do not otherwise need permits.
20 I would like to reemphasize that.
21 The only people who require permits are those who
treat/ store and dispose of hazardous wastes, not
generators and not transporters, unless they also
treat, store or dispose. Section 3004 should be
published as a proposed rule in December 1978.
-------
15
1 Section 3005 regulations describe
2 the scope and coverage of the actual permit granting
3 process for facility owners and operators. Require-
4 ments for the permit application, as well as for the
5 issuance and revocation process, are to be defined
6 by these regulations.
7 It should be noted that Section 3005
8 (e) provides for an interim status during the time
9 period that the Agency or the States are reviewing
10 the pending permit application.
11 Section 3005 regulations should be
12 published as proposed rules in December 1978.
13 Section 3006 requires EPA to issue
14 guidelines for State hazardous waste programs, and
15 procedures by which States may seek both full and
16 interim authorization to carry out the hazardous
n waste program in lieu of the EPA-administered pro-
is gram.
19 States seeking authorization in
20 accordance with Section 3006 guidelines are not
91 required to adopt in entirety all Federal hazardous
92 waste management regulations promulgated under
23 Subtitle C in order to receive EPA authorization.
94 Such a state regulatory program need
9. only demonstrate that their hazardous waste management
-------
16
i regulations are consistent with and equivalent in
2 effect to these EPA regulations, and that adequate
3 enforcement exists, in order to receive EPA
4 authorization under Section 3006 to operate and
5 impose a hazardous waste management program.
6 Section 3006 guidelines were pub-
7 lished in the Federal Register as proposed rules
on February 1, 1978. Final rules are scheduled to
o
be promulgated during December 1978.
Section 3010 regulations define
procedures by which any person generating, transport-
ing, owning or operating a facility for storage,
treatment, and/or disposal of hazardous wastes must
lo
notify EPA of this activity within 90 days of
promulgation of the regulations! which define hazardous
waste, that is, the regulations promulgated under
16
section 3001.
17
EPA has made provision in these
18
regulations for states to be delegated this notifica-
19
tion function upon application to the appropriate
20
EPA Regional Administrator. It is significant to
21
note that no hazardous waste subject to Subtitle C
22
regulations may be legally transported, treated,
23
stored, or disposed unless this timely notification
24
is given to EPA or a designated state.
25
-------
17
The Agency intends to propose draft
2
regulations during December 1978 for the remaining
o
sections of Subtitle C. Final regulations will be
4 promulgated in 1979.
However, it is important for the
regulated communities to understand that the regula-
7 tions under Sections 3001 through 3005 do not take
8 effect until six months after promulgation.
9 Thus, there will be a time period afte
10 final promulgation during which public understanding
11 of the regulations can be increased.
12 During this same period, notifications
13 required under Section 3010 are to be submitted,
14 facility permit applications required under Section
15 3005 will be distributed for completion by applicants
16 and state programs will be authorized by EPA.
1" Now, for a more detailed look at
18 the Section 3010 regulations, which we are here
19 today to discuss, I am going to turn the hearing over
20 to Tim Fields, who will discuss the Section 3010
21 proposed rules in detail.
22 MR. FIELDS: Thank you, Bill.
Section 3010 of RCRA requires that all persons
°4
generating, transporting, treating, storing or
-------
18
\ disposing of a hazardous waste which has been iden-
2 tified or listed in the Section 3001 regulations,
3 or revisions thereof, on the date of their promulga-
4 tion to notify.
5 Persons who initiate such activities
after the date of promulgation of the Section 3001
regulations or revision thereof are not required to
notify pursuant to these rules.
However, these new entrants will be
required to notify EPA or an authorized state of their
hazardous waste activities pursuant to the Section
12 3002 (generator), 3003 (transporter), and 3005
(permit) regulations.
Lo
Briefly, this means that persons
14
who begin to treat, dispose, or store (for more than
90 days) hazardous waste must apply for a permit in
16
accordance with Section 3005 regulations, and persons
who generate and/or transport hazardous waste have
responsibility for preparing and handling a manifest
pursuant to Section 3002 and 3003 regulations,
20
respectively, which serves to notify EPA or the
authorized state of such activity. All new entrants
will be assigned a unique identification number.
23
The statutory intent of these pro-
posed regulations is to assure that all persons
-------
19
generating, transporting, treating, storing, or
2
disposing hazardous wastes identified or listed under
Q
Section 3001 regulations notify EPA or an authorized
state of such activities.
The regulations under Sections 3001,
6 3002, 3003, 3004, and 3005 become effective 180 days
7 after they are promulgated. The date of promulgation
8 of the Section 3001 regulations begins the notifica-
9 tion period.
10 This notification period extends for
11 90 days, during which time all persons subject to
12 these regulations must notify either EPA or an
13 authorized state as specified in these regulations.
14 Within the six-month period following the promulga-
15 tion of Section 3001 regulations, those persons
16 required to obtain a facility permit pursuant to
n Section 3005 regulations must apply for that permit.
18 Owners or operators of existing
19 facilities requiring such a permit, who satisfactorily
20 comply with two requirements, these being to notify
21 pursuant to these regulations, and submit an
22 application for a permit, will be qualified for
23 interim status until a full permit is issued.
24 Failure to satisfy both of these
25 requirements will jeopardize interim status, and
-------
20
will prevent such persons from legally treating,
disposing, or storing (for more than 90 days)
hazardous waste after the six-month period.
There are several special cases
which I would like to bring to your attention. These
special cases are as follows:
1. Corporations. A responsible
individual of the corporation shall file notification.
9 (i) A group of establishments,
10 plants, transportation terminals, etc., located at
11 a single site under the ownership or operation of one
12 person may file a single notification.
0V-
13 (ii) A person owning *» operating
14 more than one place of operation may file a single
notification for all facilities provided:
(a) All required information is
17 clearly stated separately for each place of operation,
18
19 (b) Copies of the pertinent information
20 in this single notification are sent to each EPA
91 Regional Office (or authorized state) having jurisdic-
tion over the area in which the places of operation
2S are located.
,,4 2. Highway Transporters. A respon-
sible individual shall file notification for each
-------
21
terminal the transporter owns and utilizes for
n
vehicles transporting hazardous wastes.
o
3. Railroad or Pipeline Companies.
A responsible individual may file a single notifica-
tion for the entire rail line or pipeline, provided
that copies of this notification are sent to each
7 EPA Regional Office (or authorized state) having
8 jurisdiction over the area in which the railroad or
9 pipeline is located.
10 4. Federal agencies conducting
11 hazardous waste activities must comply with all
12 notification requirements in the same manner as other
13 persons.
14 5. These regulations do not apply
15 to persons who transport hazardous materials which
16 have been spilled.
17 Section 3001 regulations will probably
18 be revised from time to time to identify or list
19 additional hazardous waste. These regulations re-
20 quire that generators, transporters, treaters,
21 storers, and disposers of hazardous waste notify EPA
22 or an authorized state 90 days after such revision.
23 Those persons who are unaffected by
24 a revision to Section 3001 regulations need not
25 submit additional notification. In addition, persons
-------
22
i who are affectedly such a revision to Section 3001
2 regulations may also be required to apply for either
3 a new or a revised facility permit before the revised
4 Section 3001 regulations become effective (six months
5 after promulgation).
6 To reduce the burden of notification,
7 consideration is being given to allowing those per-
8 sons who must both notify and apply for a new or a
9 revised facility permit to accomplish notification
j0 with their application for a new or a revised facility
tl permit, provided the application is submitted within
12 the first 90 days after promulgation of the revised
13 Section 3001 regulations.
14 Any person conducting hazardous
waste activities at the time of promulgation or
lu
revision of Section 3001 regulations who does not
ID
file notification of such activity within 90 days
of the date of this promulgation or revision is in
18
violation of these notification regulations, and
may be subject to the penalties described under
Section 3008 of the Act.
21
No hazardous waste may be legally
22
transported, treated, stored, or disposed unless
23
notification has been made. It should be noted that
24
late notification is a violation of Section 301C and
25
-------
23
1 subjects such person to possible enforcement action.
2 Notification must be filed with the
3 appropriate EPA Regional Administrator, or state
4 which has been granted authorization to manage the
5 notification program.
6 Copies of the pertinent notification
v information shall be sent to each EPA Regional
Administrator or designated state agency in which the
9 person's place of operation is located.
10 AUTHORIZATION OF STATES FO MANAGE
11 THE NOTIFICATION PROGRAM.
12 These proposed rules also establish
13 procedures for authorizing states to manage the
notification program. These rules will be promulgated
15 before the Section 3001 regulations are promulgated
in order to give the states an opportunity to obtain
17 this special authorization before promulgation of the
Section 3001 regulations starts the 90-day notifica-
19 tion period.
20 EPA and the authorized states must be
ready to receive notifications when the Section 3001
,2 regulations are promulgated. A list of the names
23 and addresses of state agencies authorized to receive
,4 notifications will be published in the Federal Register
prior to or at the time of promulgation of the
-------
24
Section 3001 regulations or revisions thereof.
-------
25
of the Section 3001 regulations.
2
If a state which has been granted
Q
limited interim authorization fails to apply for, or
receive, interim or full authorization, EPA must
5 assume responsibility for managing the subsequent
6 regulatory requirements of Subtitle C. This dis-
7 jointed program administration can create problems,
8 e.g., in efficient processing of applications for
9 facility permits which are received during the six-
10 month period following promulgation of the Section
11 3001 regulations.
12 To minimize such potential problems,
13 these proposed rules impose requirements upon states
14 in order to obtain this limited interim authorization.
15 These requirements include the following:
16 1. The state must declare its intent
n to apply for an interim or full authorization pur-
is suant to Section 3006 guidelines before or during
19 the 90-day period following the promulgation of the
20 Section 3001 regulations.
21 2. The state must agree to provide,
22 upon EPA request, any information received in
23 response to notification tothe Agency.
24 3. The state must provide a plan
25 for making facility permit application forms available
-------
26
to prospective permittees identified in the notifica-
2 tion process.
3 Further, the authorized states will
be encouraged to operate and manage the notification
program in the same or an equivalent manner to that
employed by EPA in order to achieve as much national
uniformity as possible.
This will simplify the notification
burden on those persons who may have to notify for
hazardous waste activities conducted in two or more
states. The manner in which the state intends to
carry out the notification program will be articulated
in the plan that a state submits as part of its re-
quest for limited interim authorization.
14
The degree of equivalency with EPA's
management of the notification process will be one of
the criteria used by the EPA Regional Administrator to
determine whether to grant authorization.
18
The state agency has 60 calendar days
19
from the date of promulgation of these regulations to
20
apply for limited interim authorization. If the
21
Regional Administrator determines that a state applica-
tion is unsatisfactory, he or she shall inform that
23
state in writing of the reasons within 15 working days
24
of receipt of the application.
-------
27
The Regional Administrator may then
c\
allow that state to submit another application within
15 working days for EPA consideration.
4 If the Regional Administrator finds
5 a state application acceptable, he or she shall
6 execute an agreement with that state, signed by the
7 Regional Administrator and an official of the
8 responsible state agency, granting limited interim
9 authorization to implement Section 3010 requirements.
10 All such agreements shall be effective
11 no later than 120 calendar days after promulgation
12 of these preliminary notification regulations and
13 shall terminate on the date six months after promul-
14 gation of the Section 3001 regulations.
15 HAZARDOUS WASTE DEFINITIONS
16 If a state is granted interim
17 authorization by EPA to manage the notification
18 program, all persons conducting hazardous waste
19 activities in that state will be required to notify
20 that state. If a state hazardous waste definition
21 is more stringent than that promulgated under Section
22 3001 regulations, then the appicable state agency
23 could use this definition for -the purpose of notifi-
24 cation by affected persons in that state.
25 State hazardous waste definitions
-------
28
1
which are less stringent than that promulgated pur-
2
suant to Section 3001 regulations cannot be used for
3
notification purposes.
4
CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISIONS
5
With respect to notifications sub-
6
mitted to EPA, these proposed rules would allow
affected persons to make confidentiality claims in
8
three areas in their notification responses:
9
(a) Types of hazardous waste handled,
as identified by criteria under Section 3001 regula-
11 tions.
12
(b) Description of hazardous wastes
13 handled, as identified by listing under Section 3001
regulations, or by general type.
15 (c) Estimated amount of hazardous
16 wastes handled annually (optional item).
17 Comments are requested from interested
18 parties as to which notification items should provide
19 for a confidentiality claim, and reasons why each
20 such item should be considered confidential.
21 EPA is considering requiring affected
22 persons to provide substantiation of their confiden-
23 tiality claims at the time of initial notification.
24 There art two options :
•2f> The first option is the one in these
-------
29
proposed rules. Affected persons would be allowed to
2
make confidentiality claims without providing sub-
stantiation at the time of initial notification.
4
If a request for information submitted was made later,
EPA would then request that the affected person(s)
provide substantiation of confidentiality claim(s)
in accordance with the confidentiality of business
information regulations.
9 If there are a large number of
10 requests from the public for copies of notification
11 responses, there will be a burden on the EPA regional
12 office resources to request substantiation from each
13 submitter.
14 The second option is designed to
15 avoid that problem by requiring submission of sub-
16 stantiation at the time of initial notification.
EPA would not have to go back to submitters again if
18 requests were received by EPA for notification
19 responses containing confidentiality claims. However,
20 this would place an additional initial reporting bur-
21 den upon affected persons.
Comments are requested on these or
23 other options for the confidentiality provisions.
In addition, suggestsions on ways of making the
25 notification items reasonably accessible to the public
-------
1
would be appreciated.
2
It should be noted that EPA plans
3
to provide for separation of potentially confidential
4
and non-confidential notification items in the final
5
regulations.
6
SAMPLE FORM
7
These proposed rules also contain a
sample form for use in filing notif iceition. Use of
the form is not mandatory, but its use is encouraged
to facilitate the notification process.
To assist in complying with these
12
rules, EPA intends to mail the sample form and instruc
13
tions to all known persons who may be required to
14 notify.
15 EPA will also encourage states manag-
ing the notification program to use a similar proced-
17 ure. Failure of the Agency or the authorized state
18 to reach any affected person will not, however, reliev
19 that person of the legal requirement to notify.
20 If a person fully and accurately
21 completes and returns the form presented in these
regulations for each place of operation, the person
23 will have complied with the requirements of these
24 regulations. Persons utilizing this form may
submit additional information or documents as a part
-------
31
of the notification submission.
NOTIFICATION ITEMS
g
If a person chooses not to use the
form, that person must file a written notification
stating clearly and legibly the following information
(for each place of operation):
7
1. The name of the organization
Q
and place of operation.
«
2. The mailing address and location
10 of the place of operation.
11 3. The principal activity of the plac
12 of operation, either by four-digit Standard Industrial
13 Classification (SIC) code or by other description
14 (e.g., inorganic chemical manufacturing, petroleum
15 refining, et cetera).
16 4. An identification number for
17 the place of operation.
18 (i) If a person has an Internal
19 Revenue Service employer identification number (EIN),
20 this number shall be provided.
21 (ii) A person who operates more than
22 one place of operation, each having the same EIN,
23 shall designate a separate suffix to the EIN to
24 distinguish each place of operation (e.g., (EIN No. )-
25 2, (EIN No. ) -3) .
-------
32
j (iii) Federal facilities shall provide
2 the General Services Administration acjency and facility
3 number.
4 (iv) Transporters shall provide their
Interstate Commerce Commission number; however, if a
O
transporter does not have such a numbeir, he or she
b
shall provide his or her Public Utilities Commission
number, or other permit number (as assigned by State
8
Health Department, etc) .
(v) All notifiers shall state the
specific sources (IRS, ICC, et cetera) of the
identification number.
12
(vi) If a person does not have an
13
already assigned identification number, this fact
14
shall be stated. fln identification number will then be
15
assigned by EPA (or the designated state agency).
16
5. The name, telephone number and
17
address of a responsible individual at the place of
18
operation who could be contacted for clarification
19
of information submitted in the notification.
20
6. A certification that the informatiofi
21
submitted is complete and accurate.
22
7. The type(s) of hazardous waste
23
activity conducted by the person, i.e., generation,
24
transportation, treatment, storage, or disposal of
-------
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
33
1
hazardous waste. Treatment, storage, or disposal
2
activities conducted at the site of waste generation
3
shall be indicated as "on-site treatment," et cetera.
4
Persons who transport hazardous waste shall indicate
5
the mode (air, rail, highway, water, et cetera) of
6
transportation.
7
The types of hazardous wastes
handled by the person, as identified by characteris-
tics under Section 3001 regulations. All wastes which
are ignitable, reactive, infectious, radioactive, or
corrosive must be described as such.
However, persons who cannot^in the
90-day period allowed^ definitively determine whether
their wastes are toxic may so indicate.
If, after the 90-day period, it is
determined that a waste is non-toxic, a statement to
this effect must be filed no later than 180 days
after promulgation of Section 3001 regulations.
Otherwise, the person will be considered, for notifi-
cation purposes, to be conducting hazardous waste
activities.
If, at some future date, a person
determines that his waste is not hazardous pursuant
to Section 3001 regulations, or if he ceases to
•
handle hazardous waste, he may file a statement to
-------
34
this effect, and he will no longer be considered
o
to be conducting hazardous waste activities.
3 9. A description of the hazardous
4 waste handled as identified by listing under the
5 Section 3001 regulations, orb/ general type and
specific contents (where known) using the best
7 available information (e.g., "wastewater treatment
8 sludge containing lead compounds").
9 10. A statement indicating what
10 information, if any, is to be considered confidential
11 business information.
12 11. Optional; An estimate of the
'3 annual amount of hazardous waste handled based on the
14 period from January 1, 1977 to December 31, 1977.
15 For affected persons not conducting hazardous waste
16 activities during any or all of that period, the
n annual volume should be estimated in the best prac-
18 tical manner.
19 I would now like to turn the hearing
20 over to Ms. Amy Schaffer, who will address the
21 enforcement aspects.
22 MS. SCHAFFER: Good afternoon.
23 I would like to speak very briefly on the enforcement
24 of Section 3010. The goal of the Environmental
25 Protection Agency is to insure that the regulated
-------
35
hazardous waste community complies with the RCRA
2
Hazardous Waste Regulations.
Q
EPA views the notification process as
4 the first step in obtaining overall compliance with
the regulations -- learning who will be subject to
6 the regulations and what and how much waste they
7 handle.
8 We have attempted to maximize com-
9 pliance with Section 3010 regulation in three ways:
10 First, we have tried to simplify the
11 regulation to make it easy to notify and to relieve
12 some of the reporting burden from the regulated
13 community.
14 Second, the Agency is planning to
15 inform the regulated community of the notification
16 requirement and the advantages of voluntary compliance
n This dispersal of information is an ongoing activity
18 which has already begun.
19 Finally, EPA plans on taking strong
20 enforcement action against those who do not comply.
21 Violation of the notification requirement is con-
22 sidered very serious because those people who do not
23 notify evade the entire control system and frustrate
24 our efforts to build a data base defining the scope
25 of the hazardous waste community.
-------
I
36
EPA will not hesitate in taking action
against any person who attempts to evade the system.
The kinds of questions I would like
3
for you to answer today, or in your written comments
4
are :
5
How can we insure the quality of the
6
information coming into the Agency is high enough to
7
provide us with an accurate picture of the hazardous
8
waste community? How stringent should EPA be in
9
assessing penalties to non-notifiers? How can
10
EPA inform all hazardous waste handlers of their
11
requirement to notify?
12
I look forward to hearing your com-
13
ments and answers to these and other questions this
14
afternoon.
15
MR. LEHMAN: I might just point
16
out that those who settled down in back, this is not
17
a church. There are spaces up in front, if you prefer
18
to get a little closer. You might be able to hear
19
the hearing statements a little better.
20
There may be questions from the
audience about other parts of Subtitle C, so after
all of the statements, comments and questions regarding
the proposed Section 3010 regulations have been re-
ceived and discussed, we will close the formal section
-------
37
t 3010 public hearing. But if there is sufficient
2 interest, we will attempt to answer any other ques-
tions you have on further subjects.
Now I would like to call for oral
4
statements to the Panel. Speakers will be calledinHe
5
chronological order that EPA received their request
6
to speak at this hearing,either by mail or at the
desk before the hearing.
8
So at this time I would like to call
9
Mr. Chris Stotter, Chief, Division, Planning and T.A.,
Ohio EPA. Is Mr. Stotter in the audience?
11
Mr. Chris Stotter of the Ohio EPA,
12
Columbus, Ohio. Evidently, he is not here. I will
13
come back and call for him after we have run through
14
the list.
15
Next I would like to call Mr. E. R.
16
Shuster, Vice President, NEWCO Chemical Waste
17
Systems, Inc., Niagara Falls, New York.
18
Is Mr. E. R. Shuster, Vice President oi
19
NfcWCO Chemical Waste Systems, Inc., Niagara Falls,
20
New York present? Apparently not.
21
Next I would like to call Dr. Charles
22
A. Johnson, Technical Director, National Solid Waste
23
Management Association from Washington, D. C.
24
Is Dr. Charles A. Johnson of the
25
-------
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
38
National Solid Waste Management Association of
Washington, D. C. present? Apparently not.
Next Mr. James R. Hulrn, General Mana-
ger, Solvents Recovery Service of New Jersey, Inc.,
t
Linden, New Jersey.
Mr. James R. Hulm of Solvents Recovery
Service of New Jersey, Inc., Linden, New Jersey?
Is he present? Apparently not. We will come back.
I might point out that two individuals
indicated1, originally indicated^that they wanted time
to speak here, but have since notified us that they
will submit their comments in writing. So I am going
to skip over those individuals.
Next I would like to call Mr. Eugene
Bailey, Vice President of Dolio and Metz, Ltd., of
Chicago, Illinois. Mr. Bailey, would you please give
your name and address to the court reporter and also
indicate whether you would accept questions?
MR. BAILEY: I would be glad to
accept questions, sir. My identification is enclosed
in my comments.
My name is Eugene C. Bailey. I am a
registered professional engineer in the' State of
Illinois and vice president of Dolio and Metz Limited,
a consulting engineering organization in Chicago.
-------
39
I am testifying at this joint hearing
2
on behalf of our client, American Admixtures Corpora-
3
tion and several midwestern utility companies.
4
I served Commonwealth Edison Company
in various engineering capacities for more than 40
years. I was an ex officio member of the Illinois
Commission on Atomic Energy for more than 10 years
Q
and vice chairman of the Illinois Boiler Board for
10 years.
1 Nationally, I have been very active
in the development of the American Society of Chemical
Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Codes relating
to nuclear power plant components, their design,
14 maintenance and in-service inspection.
15 One of the major goals in my work as
16 an engineer dealing with regulatory agencies of the
17 Federal and State governments has been to achieve
18 simplicity, avoid redundancy and prevent contradictory
19 overlapping of laws, regulations, codes, and standards
20 Looking for the Illinois Atomic
21 Energy Commission, I demonstrated that the public
22 interest could best be served by the State of Illinois
23 adopting the federal regulations relating to the
24 transportation of hazardous materials in their entire-
2S ty, but the statutory reference, without any changes.
-------
40
i as laws for the State of Illinois.
2 This action reduced the problems of
3 compliance by industry in the same manner as has been
4 achieved by the majority of the States and the
5 Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the United States
6 by adopting the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Codes
7 Sections III, "Nuclear Power Plant Components," and
g Section XI, "Rules for In-Service Inspection of
„ Nuclear Power Plant Components" as their law.
I am testifying at this hearing on
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's proposed
rules "Preliminary Notification of Hazardous Waste
Activities" -- 40 CFR Part 250, to continue my efforts
lo
to establish the fact that the byproducts of combus-
14
tion of coal for power generation are not wastes
when they are used beneficially.
16
When these coal combustion byproducts,
17
ily ash, bottom ash, slag and sludges resulting from
18
scrubbing combustion gases with lime-water mixtures
are used beneficially, they should be recognized as
20
"recoverable resources."
21
Demonstration of the beneficial use
22
of these "recoverable resources" resulting from the
23
combustion of coal should relieve their generators,
24
transporters, storers and users from the need to
25
-------
41
1
establish a management and control system for them as
2
wastes.
3
Also, the requirement for "preliminary
4
notification of hazardous waste activities," which is
5
the subject of this hearing, will not exist, and it
6
should not be imposed upon them.
The thrust of my comments at the EPA/
DOT Joint Public Hearing on "Proposed Regulations
for the Transportation of Hazardous Wastes and
10 Materials," on June 20th 1978 in Alexandria, Va .
11 and at the Illinois Pollution Control Board Hearing
1 9
on "Liquid and Hazardous Waste Hauling Regulations"
13 and "errata" on February 2nd, 1977 in Chicago,
1 Illinois has been that the naming of hazardous wastes
15 by the U.S. EPA would eliminate a great deal of
16 concern and confusion in American industries affected
17 by the U.S. and State EPA rules and regulations.
18 Further, continuation of the present
19 practice of writing rules and regulations about
20 materials which are defined but not named, places a
21 burden upon American industry, which is not necessary
and is not needed.
23 The material concerning the hearing
of February 2nd, 1977 in Chicago, Illinois, which was
submitted as a part of my comments at the hearing of
-------
42
June 20th, 1978 in Alexandria, Virginia, describes
2
the confusion which is caused by the U.S. EPA
3
failing to name hazardous wastes as required by the
4
"Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976."
5
In my written comments on the June
£•
20th hearing, I included a list of 25 references
demonstrating that fly ash, slag, bottom ash and flue
o
gas scrubber sludge are "recoverable resources."
9
At this time, I wish to add to the
list the fact that there have been four industrial
ash utilization symposiums held in this country in
12 1967, 1970, 1973, and 1976. They have been well
13 attended by representatives from foreign countries
14 such as Australia, Germany, and Hungary.
15 More than 40 papers have been presents
16 at each meeting. The meetings were arranged by
17 the National Ash Association. They were sponsored
18 by U.S.-ERDA, the Ediscn Electric Institute, the
19 National Coal Association, and the American Public
20 Power Association.
21 Summarizing, my comments are:
22 Publication of a list of hazardous wastes by U.S.-
23 EPA would eliminate the confusion caused by the
i
24 State EPAS interpreting the published definitions
and criteria in different ways, and the byproducts
-------
43
1 of coal combustion for power generation that are used
2 beneficially should be considered recoverable re-
3 sources.
4 They are not discarded materials, so
5 they should not be called wastes, and, in particular,
6 the generators, transporters, storerSjand users of
7 these recoverable resources should not be required to
8 comply with the U.S.-EPA proposed procedures for
9 preliminary notification of hazardous waste activities
10 I thank you.
11 MR. LEHMAN: Thank you, Mr. Bailey
12 for your remarks. Are there any questions from the
13 Panel?
14 Apparently not. Are there any from
ift the audience?
16 (No response.)
17 Next I would like to call on Mr.
18 Charles B. Brush, environmental affairs specialist
19 of Koppers.
20 MR. BRUSH: I am Charles P. Brush
21 environmental affairs specialist, environmental re-
22 sources and occupational'health, the Koppers Company,
23 Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. I will welcome a
24 chance to answer any questions you may have.
25 An unreasonable and unnecessary
-------
44
reporting burden is being placed upon the regulated
community by the Agency because of its inconsistent
approach to identifying production sites. The
3
Environmental Protection Agency p resently collects
4
data from pesticide producing establishments on the
5
basis of an EPA assigned plant number.
6
The EPA has received the Toxic Sub-
7
stances Control Act inventory of chemicals with
8
production sites identified by the Dun & Bradstreet
9
number. The Agency now proposes to identify sites
10
using the BIN number with a corporate!-/ added suffix
n
to locate each plant.
12
Although the Economic and Environmental
13
Impacts statement of the Summary Information Section
14
of the July 11, 1978 notice states that the notifica-
15
tion is required only once and is primarily an ad-
16
minlstrative procedure, we believe that the reporting
17
system has in it the basis of all future plant permit
18
and reporting numbers.
19
If the EPA does, in fact, plan for
20
a cradle-to-grave approach for the control of toxics,
21
we urge you to use one identification system for
22
production sites. We expect reports and permits
23
required under FIFRA amended, TSCA and .RCRA to be
24
generated within one internal control system and by
25
one specific group of individuals. We know that
-------
45
we will be able to do the job better and less expen-
sively if we can keep our data under one set of
3 controls.
4 Another matter of lesser importance,
but of significance in the handling of information,
is the apparent conflict between paragraph 250.801(i).
the definition of a responsible individual; paragraph
250.823 (b) (5) , the responsible individual at the pla<".
of operation; and Table 1, the Specific Instructions
request that the principal technical contacts at each
place of operation be listed.
The problem is that neither the
responsible individual making the report nor the
principal technical contact may be at the place of
14
operation. You should note that the TSCA Inventory
Reports did not require that the principal technical
16
contacts be at the place of manufacture.
17
In this age of specialization, many
18
of the smaller operating sites do not have the staff
19
or technical experts physically present. They are
20
often located in the corporate headquarters or division!
21
research and development centers. If a. local contact
is desired, why not request the facilities' manager's
23
name.
24
We further suggest that some form of
-------
46
l
receipt be used when notification is made. This
2
reporting is the basis of a. very long affair between
3
corporations and regulator. We should have good
4
records to start with. Thank you.
5
MR. LEHMAN: Thank, you, Mr.
6
Brush. Does the Panel have any questions?
7
MR. SANJOUR: I think you raised
8
the issue in which you would like to see an acknow-
ledgment. I believe it is our plans to do that.
10
MS. SCHAFFER: Do you have any
specific numbering system that you would like to use
12
with respect to identification numbers? Which one
13 , , ,
would you prefer?
14 MR. BRUSH: The TSCA numbering
looks reasonable. Dun & Bradstreet numbers seems
1 to work, but the BIN numbers seem to be an irrational
numbering in that each manufacturer has assigned
18
suffix himself to the location, and that would give
19 you no clue at all.
20 MS. SCHAFFER: Thank you.
21 MR. LEHMAN: Are there any other
22 questions or comments from the Panel?
23 MR. FIELDS: I agree with your
24 assessment in the identification of numbers. We are
25 working internally for all Subtitle C regulations
-------
47
trying to work out some sort of uniform system for
assigning ID numbers. So the ID numbers received in
response to notification will be utilized as input,
but they will not be -- it might not be the number
5 we assign to an affected person. we are trying to
6 work out some sort of uniform system for assigning
7 numbers. That is a problem.
MR. LEHMAN: Any other comments
9 from the Panel? Apparently not. Thank you again,
10 Mr. Brush.
Next I would like to call Mr. Mark
12 Bergman from the Northeast District of the Ohio EPA,
MR. BERGMAN: I am here represent-
ing some of the other people. My name is Mark Bergman.
I work for the Northeast District of the Ohio EPA,
16 and I am in the office of Land Pollution Control,
17
and I was requested by Mr. Jim Michael of our office
to go on the record stating in regards to the notifica-
lo
tion of hazardous waste activity Form No. 1, Section C,
concerning the SIC number in which the Ohio EPA
wishes to go on record stating that the SIC number
should be mandatory for all manufacturing industries.
MR. LEHMAN: Since Mr. Bergman
indicated he didn't feel comfortable in answering
questions, we will press on.
-------
48
1 Ladies and gentlemen, that is the
2 bottom of the list of people who have indicated a
3 desire to speak. Let me go back over those individ-
4 uals, which we had received indications that they
5 wished to speak and go over that just one more time,
6 so that we make sure we allow them all the oppor-
7 tunities we can for them to present a statement.
8 We will get to the questions here in at minute.
9 I would like to call Mr. Chris Stotter
10 of the Ohio EPA from Columbus, Ohio. Mr. Stotter?
ll Okay. Mr. Stotter apparently is not
12 here today, and we feel we gave him an ample oppor-
13 tunity to speak. So that will be the last time we
14 call on him.
15 Next I would like to call Mr. E. R.
16 Shuster, Vice President of NEWCO Chemical Waste System
of Niagara Falls, New York. Is Mr. Shuster here?
Apparently not.
lg Next I would like to call Dr. Charles
20 A. Johnson, Technical Director of National Solid
Waste Management Association, Washington, D. C.
Is Dr. Johnson present? Apparently not.
,23 Next I would like to call Mr. James
R. Hulm, General Manager of Solvents Recovery Service
of New Jersey, Linden, New Jersey. Is Mr. Hulm in
-------
49
1 the audience? Apparently not.
2 We have received a request for an
3 individual who had not registered to speak, but he
4 now wishes to speak, so I would like to call him at
5 this time, Mr. David E. Breed, Director of Independence
6 Liquid Terminals Association.
7 MR. BREED: I would like to
8 bring up a question that comes up in a group of
9 companies like ours, and I will give you a brief run-
10 down of the Independent Liquid Terminals Association
u and what they do. I am director at large and head
12 up the technical committee of the Independent Liquid
13 Terminals Association, a national trade association
14
which represents commercial operators of bulk liquid
terminal and tank storage facilities located on the
Id
east coast, gulf coast, west coast, Great Lakes and
inland waterways of the United States.
ILTA members operate a total of 150
18
deepwater and barge terminals in 32 states with a
capacity at any given tine to hold 147 million barrels
of bulk liquid commodities. It is estimated that
these ILTA terminals handle annually over 588 million
22 *
barrels of bulk liquid commodities essential to Ameri-
23
can business, and, hence, the American consumer.
24
These terminals interconnect with
-------
50
l and provide services to the various modes of bulk
2 liquid carriers, namely tankers, tank barges, tank
3 trucks, tank rail cars, and pipelines.
4 The commodities handled include a
5 wide variety of chemicals, crude oil, refined petroleuir
6 products, animal fats and oils, molasses and vegetable
7 oils.
Terminal facilities, as committee
members are probably well aware, consist of docks for
tankers and tank barges, pumps and equipment for
loading and unloading ttie vessels, pipelines to and
from storage tanks, sometimes pipelines to purchasers
and users of products, and loading and unloading
lo
facilities for rail tank cars and tank trucks.
14
ILTA members own waterside terminal
and storage tanks, but largely do not own the products
16
stored in the tanks. The products are usually owned
by major oil and chemical companies, commodity brokers
18
manufacturers and utilities. ILTA members provide
19
and sell a handling service at the terminal for
20
onloading or offloading bulk liquids, and they will
21
store the product for a fee until the owner needs it
or sells it.
23
At the present time, we are confronted
24
with lists of hazardous materials, explosive, et cetera
-------
51
i We are also confronted with similar lists promulgated
2 by the United States Coast Guard under 33 CFR and a
3 number of changes that are in the works that relate
4 to that.
5 We also are governed by the transpor-
6 tation of hazardous materials lists which are under
49 CFR, Part 171 through 177.
8 The three aforementioned lists that
9 I mentioned do not agree with one another. By defini-
10 tion, the lists are not the same.
At the present time, we have no idea,
12 as the first speaker mentioned, exactly what we are
13 going to be confronted with in the proposed rules
and regulations that we are going to run into dis-
15 cussion here today. They have been defined, but not
16 named as the first Chicago speaker mentioned.
Many of these terminals who are
.„ members of the ILTA are small operations, less than
lo
$200,000 of storage. Some of them may store, let's
say, leaded gasoline, for instance.
, Occasionally they have to clean those
tanks. There are rules and regulations governing the
cleaning fluids.
We are uncertain whether we have a
source of the generation of these hazardous materials
-------
52
whose names are yet unpublished, but who are defined.
2 We know they are hazardous. We
3 feel that generally speaking as long as -- we are
not basically in the transportation or disposal
business. This comes about as byproduct, because we
operate terminals. It is almost impossible to state
accurately or even at a wild guess as to what the
degree of generation of these hazardous products may
9 be over a period of time, because something goes off
10 spec, and you have to clean a tank.
Now, it may not go off spec for four or
five or 10 years, and, suddenly, you get a period
of time that you have to clean the tank three times
lo
in a year. We might honestly believe that we are not
in violation of the reporting system as it is now
15
proposed, but then we find out that somebody says
16
you have to clean the tank. You generated a hazara-
dous material.
18
I am in some doubts as to how to
19
handle this with the members of ILTA. We don't
20
oppose the regulations, but there is a very gray area
21
as to whether or not it does or does not apply to
22
someone who basically is in the storage business.
23
Mr. Sanjour, in his opening comments,
24
said that he, as I interpreted what he said, thac
-------
53
it did not necessarily apply to someone who is storing.
Is this true, or could he amplify that a little fur-
ther? I think it was Section 3003.
MR. LEHMAN: Can we hold that
answer until you are finished with your statement?
MR. BREED: Sure. That is the
main thrust of our questions here. We feel that we
really don't understand what is going to be required
of companies that basically are not in the manufac-
turing of selling or generation of this type of
hazardous materials, but there is an interim group of
companies, such as pipelines, who, at times, or
bigger pipelines, who may have leaded products or
motor gasoline products and other things in them.
Where do terminals and pipeline opera-
tors and the like fit in? There are occasions when
somebody will come alongside and pick up the results
of tank cleaning and something of that sort. They
use our facilities as a means of getting the product
off the barge or the ship, but they are not something
that we generated or expect to generate.
They come by nature of our business
at times. We are sort of in the position -- I wish
I could comment more specifically on these proposed
2-1
rules, but it is hard to hit a moving target that is
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
-------
19
20
21
22
23
24
54
forever changing in shape and color. I would be
quite willing to answer any questions! from the
audience or from the Panel here who would be inter-
3
ested in the terminal aspect of this question.
4
MR. LEHMAN: Thank you for your
5
remarks, Mr. Breed. ^r. Sanjour, would you like to
6
comment?
7
MR. SANJOUR: I will make several
8
comments. Your questions go to an awful lot of the
9
issues. First of all, in storage, I believe, the
10
current storage of the current 3002 proposed regula-
11
tions read that if a person is a generator of a
12
hazardous waste and stores only for the purpose of
13
transportation for a period of less than 90 days,
14
and one of the other panelists may correct me if I am
15
wrong, if it is less than 90 days, that he does not
16
require a storage permit. Does that answer one of
17
your questions?
18
MR. BREED: Most of our member
companies store on an ongoing basis. Sometimes we have
products that only turn over four times a year, so
they might sneak into the 90-day rule.
MR. SANJOUR: Then you would need
a storage permit, if it is hazardous waste.
MR. BREED: I don"t intend to
-------
55
generate any waste, but there comes —
2 MR. SANJOUR: We are talking about
o
transporters who store, not generators. Then, I
believe, the current version is that they would
5 require a permit.
6 MR. LEHMAN: May I make a comment
7 here? I think from the gist of your remarks, Mr.
8 Breed, there appears to be a confusion here between
9 the storage of hazardous commodities and hazardous
10 waste.
11 The type of operation that you have
12 described where you merely hold materials that really
13 belong to somebody else, I presume that these are
14 valuable commodities that are not wastes, necessarily,
'5 at the time you are holding them?
16 MR. BREED: Correct.
17 MR. LEHMAN: They would not come
18 under the purview of Subtitle C of the hazardous
19 waste regulations, because they are not defined as a
20 waste. In other words, there is a big difference
21 between hazardous commodities and hazardous waste.
22 So in that aspect, you wouldn't be part of the system
23 at all.
04 However, the part you mentioned about
25 now and then getting a problem or just a routine
-------
56
cleaning out of your tank bottoms or something --
2 MR. BREED: That's correct.
3 MR. LEHMAN: -- in that case,
4 presuming the materials that were stored in that tank
were hazardous commodities, one could presume that
the tank bottoms or the cleaning is probably hazardous
wastes in which case each facility that is responsible
8 for cleaning those tanks and sending the material away
9 becomes a generator of hazardous waste.
10 MR. BR.TED: For the most part,
11 our companies do not do their own cleaning, their
12 own tank cleaning, nor do they collect the material,
13 nor do they arrange the transportation or the final
14 disposal of it.
15 In other words, this is done by con-
15 tractors. We don't have any real handle on how much
17 we generate, because it is not really something that
18 is in our control. A leaded gasoline tank may go for
19 years without being cleaned, but when we do clean it,
20 there is no question that it is hazardous.
91 This reporting system that you propose
to establish requires a licensing or the announcement
that you have this on hand. But we have really no
knowledge, generally, of the degree of the amounts,
big tanks or little tanxs.
-------
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
57
MR. LEHMAN: I can appreciate
the point you are making in the sense that assuming
that this is not a routine thing that you have a
specific schedule where you are going to clean specific
tanks or something like that, nor do you know in
advance what the makeup of that waste material might
be, because of what was stored in that tank. And
that may vary from month to month or year to year.
I can appreciate that, but, nevertheless, when the tank
is clean, the responsibility for assuring that
a manifest for the transportation of that waste mater-
ial is completed --
MR. BREED: We would not object
to that at all. It is a question of could we report
as we generate, since it is on such a rare and random
basis.
MR. LEHMAN: I think here again
we are confusing the notification requirements under
Section 3010 and the manifest requirements under
Section 3002. Just as an opinion at this stage, I
would say to advise members of your association that
if they believe that at some time in the past and
probably in the future they will, in fact, be
generating hazardous waste because of the cleaning
of tanks, which contain hazardous commodities, that
-------
58
1
they should notify EPA or the authorized estate that
2
they from time to time do generate a hazardous waste.
3
They should indicate that you are not
4
able to identify in advance v*nat the nature of those
5
wastes are going to be at any particular moment nor
6
the quantity, nor the time that it will take place,
but that, in fact, from time to time you generate
hazardous waste. This would cover you legally to
satisfy the notification requirement.
Now, as far as the 3002 goes, each
shipment of waste off your property would require a
12 manifest, but only if it is a waste and only at the
13 time that you do, in fact, ship it off.
So if you make no shipments for nine
15
months, you have no responsibilities as generator
16 under 3002.
17 MR. BREED: If we have assured
18 ourselves that the contractors who the individual
19 member is dealing with has reported to you people,
20 EPA, that he is a licensed or authorized conveyor of
21 this material, must the source of this, namely, the
22 terminal, also report?
23 MR. LEHMAN: I believe the answer
24 to that is yes, because the philosophy of the whole
25 Subtitle C is that the generator of the waste is
-------
59
responsible for the proper disposal of that waste,
and not the person who transports it. So a quick
3
4 responsible under Section 3002.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
answer to that is yes. You probably would be
Do we have any other comments?
A VOICE: I am in the disposal
business, so we get his wastes. Now, we make the
reports to the Ohio EPA. Does that generator also
have to make the reports? I think that's a question.
MR. LEHMAN: The question was:
Does the disposal and the generator have to make a
report to the regulatory authority?
That, of course, may vary from state
to state. In the federal program, we have defined
the generator makes the report, but not the trans-
porter. In the Ohio EPA, there is a different system
where both have to report. But in the federal system,
the transporter is not required.
I are sure if you have other questions,
we would be happy to handle it. We do have a number
of other questions that had been passed up to us
that we would like to get to. Thank you, Mr. Breed.
At this time, I would like to move on
to the questions that have been passed up to us.
What we will do is the individuals who have had a
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
60
chance to look at these questions, we will read the
questions and then provide an answer or, at least, a
comment.
Tim Fields, would you like to start?
MR. FIELDS: It says, "Federal
agencies must report as any other person, which
includes by definition corporations. May a federal
agency with more than one site submit one notification
as permitted in the special case of corporations?"
As the regulation said before, a
person may file a notification for each of its
individual facilities, even though they might be
located in different states. That same regulation
does apply to federal agencies.
Maybe we can clarify that in the
regulation. But federal agencies may submit a
single notification for each of his individual facili-
ties, as long as the same notification response,
that is, or the sample form is submitted to EPA
or an authorized state for each of those individual
federal facilities. The same rule applies whether
we are talking about federal facilities or private
facilities.
MR. LEHMAN: Another question:
"Are there any procedures for integration of
-------
61
notification procedures with Subtitle D (4001 et seq.)
Regional Solid Waste Management Planning? If not,
why not? Please explain."
Well, the comment I would make here
is that Subtitle D of RCRA, as those of you are
familiar with, RCRA is essentially a state operated
program, whereas Subtitle C is a state program if the
£tate desires^ but becomes a Federal program if the
9
£tate chooses not to operate it
Furthermore, there are no modification
requirements in Subtitle D, only in Subtitle C.
19
At the present time, we have not considered it neces-
sary to integrate these two programs together, but,
I believe, the thrust of the question raises a good
15 point; namely, whatever notification one receives
16 under Subtitle C might serve as perhaps a lead-in
17 to some of the inventory work under Subtitle D, or
18 perhaps vice versa.
19 While we have not done such integra-
20 tion to date, I think this raises a new issue, and
21 we will look into that when we get back.
Another question which I have not had
an opportunity to Dead yet, so I will read it and
answer it with you, it is actually, I believe, two
questions :
-------
62
No. 1, due to the lack of ability to
2
review the proposed regulations for Sections 3001,
n
-4 and -5, it would be appropriate to defer comments
on Section 3010 until the other proposed regulations
5 are promulgated.
Okay. This sane basic issue was
7 touched on by some of the speakers here today and
8 was also touched on in some of our previous public
9 hearings on Section 3003 and 3006.
10 In other words, how can one intelli-
11 gently comment on a regulation concerning various
12 aspects of the hazardous waste program when the
13 definitions of hazardous wastes has not yet been
i* promulgated or even proposed. The answer to this is
is that we feel constrained to proceed with, for example,
16 this regulation on 3010 notification. Due to the
17 timing of the law, as I believe Mr. Fields pointed
18 out, we must have a list of all of the States that
19 are going to be authorized to receive notifications
20 available and published in the Federal Register at
21 or before the time we promulgated Section 3001.
22 If you read the regulation carefully,
23 you will see there is approximately a 12 0-day period
24 that is set aside for-EPA to receive applications
95 from the gtates who wish to carry out this notificatio
-------
63
j program.
2 So we have to have these regulations
3 filed and in the Federal Register at least 120 days
before 3001, and, more particularly, more than six
months before 3001 to allow this application and
review and authorization to take place before, so
we will be able to publish an explicit list in the
Federal Register, giving people who are required to
8
notify explicit instructions as to whether they
should notify EPA or notify the State.
So it is, therefore, a timing problem
here. We have to get this regulation moving in
advance of the main body of the regulations.
The second question, Section 3010,
14
reporting impact -- since the economic impact statemen
15
is not complete or available, how can the statement
16
be made that "Most of the requested information will
17
be on hand" for reporting purposes?
18
Here again, we are faced with this
19
timing problem here. We want to go forward with the
20
regulations. We are attempting, basically for the
21
first time it has been tried, to develop an environ-
22
mental impact statement and an economic analysis for
23
all seven regulations simultaneously.
24
We are doing it for all seven
-------
64
1
simultaneously. Unfortunately, due to the delays
2
we have had in the other regulations, we are not able
3
to put out a complete EIS or a complete economic
4
impact statement in parallel with the time for
5
proposal of this regulation.
6
I believe, though, to address the main
substance of this is that we are attempting to make
o
this notification process as sufficiently clear and
9
easy, so that most people will be able to identify
and be able to respond for the notification purposes
without extensive new demands on them for informa-
12
tion about hazardous waste.
13 So we do believe that that statement
is accurate; that most of this requested information
15 will already be on hand. This also gets into how
16 the current thinking is within the agency concerning
17 how we are going to define that hazardous waste.
18 As I mentioned earlier, we will get
19 into that if you are interested after we close this
20 particular hearing on 3010.
21 I have some more questions. I guess,
22 Bill, do you want to handle the next one?
23 MR. SANJOUR: The question is:
24 "what disadvantages are there for a 5tate which
25 chooses not to opt for preliminary interim status
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
65
for notification purposes, but plans to apply for
interim status and full status later?
The whole concept of preliminary
status, the reason we have gone into that in such
great depth is because of several States that felt
very strongly about it. They were to have interim
status and take over the program. They did not want
the Federal Government handling the notification,
because there would be too big a disruption in the
program to deal with the Federal Government and then
switch to the State.
This was especially true in 5tates
that already had an ongoing hazardous waste program.
They felt switching would be a bad
disruption and not be very good for the regulations
with their industry. That's why we went to great
lengths to have this, so that the States wishing to
handle the program and are handling it can.
The other question is: "If the mater-
ials left in the bottom of a tank are recoverable
(example: crude oil bottoms), must they be recovered
under the Subtitle C regulations, and must the tank
owner notify an authorized £tate or EPA?"
That all depends on whether or not that
material is a hazardous waste as defined in Section
-------
66
1 3001, which has not yet been published. What we
2 are doing now is treading on a borderline case.
3 I believe the most current draft the way 3001 is
4 written, such materials if recovered would not be
5 considered a waste, but I think the final determina-
e tions are going to have to wait for the specific
7 language that appears in 300.1.
g MR. LEHMAN: Thank you. Bill.
9 We are back to the same issue again. How can one
10 deal intelligently with 3010 without knowing what
3001 says? The docket is open for comment here.
12 The 3010 docket, while we call for
remarks by September llth, will remain open. We
would like to have comments in by then, but it will
14
remain open beyond that time until 3001 is proposed
and 90 days thereafter. So you will have an oppor-
16
tunity to comment officially on 3010 after you have
seen what the proposed 3001 looks like.
I have another question here. In
19
one of the definitions of 3010, solid waste is
20
defined to mean "sludge from a waste treatment plant"
21
but does not include "solid or dissolved material
22
in domestic sewage."
23
The question is: "Which publicly
24
owned waste treatment plants do not have to submit
25
-------
67
notification?"
2
Again, this is partially a question
3
of how 3001 defines what hazardous waste is. If
4
the sludge from a municipal wastewater treatment plant
is not hazardous as defined under 3001, then the
f*
publicly owned treatment works would not have to
submit a notification.
In the draft of 3001, which by the
way, is available on the registration desk, the
latest draft, one aspect of it is that sewage sludge
11 which has not been stabilized is considered a
hazardous waste, whereas stabilized sludge might
not be, depending on other parameters.
So, ift»publicly owned waste treatment
15 plant does not stabilize their sludge at all, then
16 the implication would be that they would be generat-
17 ing a hazardous waste. Another aspect of this whole
18 question revolves around the passage of the Clean
Water Act amendments of 1977, Section 405(D) and
20 405(E), which are new provisions of the Clean Water
21 Act.
These call for EPA, under the Clean
23 Water Act, to regulate sewage sludge. So Congress
24 has, therefore, provided the EPA with what amounts
to overlapping authority. We have authority under
-------
68
RCRA, and we have authority under the Clean Water Act,
2 Section 405. There is a proposal now which is being
3 discussed to consolidate the rule making concerning
4 publicly owned, sewage treatment operations, the
5 sludge.
6 I am referring to only publicly
7 owned, not industrial} 405 under the Clean Water
Act only refers to publicly owned; that the Agency
may adopt a plan whereby all ELTW sludge is regulated
and controlled under the provision of the Clean
Water Act, rather than under RCRA.
11
If that proposal is approved, then
no publicly owned treatment works would be required
13
to notify under the provision of 3010, because
14
they v/ould be controlled through Section 405 of the
15
Clean Water Act, which is, in turn, keyed to the
16
NPDES permit program on which applies at all levels
17
of operations. I hope that clarifies that to some
18
degree.
19
I believe that's all of the questions
20
we have from the audience. Does anyone have any
21
oral questions they would like to ask concerning
Section 3010 of the proposed regulation on 3010?
Would you please step to the
microphone and identify yourself, give us your name.
-------
69
1 MR. FACIN: Craig Facin. I
2 asked the question about what disadvantages there are
3 for a State that does not opt for the temporary interim
4 status. I sort of wanted to ask it one more time,
5 because I didn't quite get the answer. The point
6 I am making for a lot of 5tates is tnat it is diffi-
7 cult for them to get organized very quickly to handle
8 this program, and my particular 5tate — I won't
9 mention its name -- is taking the attitude that it
might be better to just sit back and wait and let
the EPA handle it; let the EPA absorb all the costs.
12 There has to be some drawback.
13 Everything I have read says that EPA
does not want to administer the program. The idea
5 is to pass as much onto the State as you can. Who
is going to pay for the EPA administering the interim
program?
MR. LEHMAN: The conduct by a
18
/tate of this limited interim authorization program
for 3010 notification is an allowable expense under
20
the State program grants that are under 3011 of RCRA.
If the S.tate chooses to take on this
program, they would be supported to the extent of
their match by the State program grant itself, so
there is a Federal financial assistance available to
-------
70
l States who choose to take this on.
2 MR. FACIN: If a State doesn't
3 choose to take it over -- say in my particular -State
4 the estimate is there are 10 or 15 thousand generators
5 How is the EPA going to handle the program physically?
6 X don't see it being very realistically done. I
7 think the States are going to have to do the program
is my own point.
MR. LEHMAN: Is that a comment
10 or a question?
MR. FACIN: You have my sympathy.
MR. LEHMAN: There will no doubt
be, we hope not too many, but, some States which,
13
for one reason or anothejr, do not wish to take on
14
this notification program. The EPA does intend to
15
carry out this program in those States that do not
16
wish to do it.
17
We have indicated the outline of how
18
we intend to do it early on in terms of computer
19
mailings to parties who we feel will be impacted in
20
both generators and storers, treaters, transporters
21
and generators.
22
We have been assembling over the past
23
several months computerized sources, some from states,
24
some from census of manufacturing, so we believe
25
-------
71
1 we have a fairly substantial data base here where
2 we would be, in this mailing, be touching upon
3 most of the people who would be impacted upon third-
4 hand.
5 So that is our plan.
6 MR. WATKINS: George Watkins,
7 and I wonder if there is any minimize size waste
8 generation that is not required to notify. If someone
9 has a rather small amount, does he still -- is he
10 still required to notify?
n MU. LEHMAN: Sir, that's a good
12 question, and we are covering that point in the
13 Section 3002 standards for generator of hazardous
!4 wastes. Our draft regulations to date indicate that
15 anyone who generates and disposes of amounts less
16 than 100 kilograms of hazardous waste per month is
17 exempted from the program, from the notification
ig program and from the manifest program.
ig So that the 100 kilograms is roughly
20 what, 220 pounds, roughly, say, half of a drum, a
91 55-gallon drum per month.
m The key words are "generated" and
"disposed of" during the month. We do not allow
., people to generate small amounts and accumulate a
large amount before they dispose of them.
-------
72
MR. WATKINS: Now, in that instance,
2 then, and with respect to the answer that you gave to
3 the fellow who asked the question about the sewage
treatment plants, it seems to me that septic systems,
by and large, have unstabilized sludge. I would
guess that some of them, at least, would fall within
the category that you are suggesting.
„ Now, would everybody who is on a
O
9 septic system have to file a notification?
1Q MR. LEHMAN: No, sir. Again,
this gets back to Section 3002, where the definition
of who is a generator is stated. In our preliminary
drafts, we have taken the position, our interpretation
13
of Congressional intent was that individual house-
14
holds from which septic systems generally originate
are not intended to be covered under this law.
16
So we intend to exempt individual
17
home owners from this.
18
MR. HOWELL: Ray Howell with
19
Rockwell International. Just a question of clarity.
20
On Item 7 in the proposed form, it states that this is
21
optional. You mean whether I tell you the amount I
generate a year and so forth is optional? What is
23
the meaning of "optional"?
MR. LEHMAN: That's exactly what
-------
73
l it means. We can come to the conclusion that, here
2 again, getting back to one of the other questions
3 about what degree will the information be on hand to
4 simplify notification, one of the concerns is that
5 people will really not know how much waste they have
6 generated in the past, nor have they any real good
7 basis for estimating that when they have not had the
g benefit of knowing what the official definition of
9 "hazardous waste" is.
0 So we would like to know that informa-
tion if you have it available, but we decided to make
that an optional item, in other words, not require
that information to be supplied for the purposes of
notification, because later on under Section 3002,
14
again, there is a requirement for record keeping
and reporting on a routine basis once the system
16
starts to roll.
17
MR. HOWELL: Thank you.
18
MR. PETROLLI: Joe Petrolli,
19
Illinois EPA. If a ->tate has limited interim
20
authorization, can it ask for more information, or
21
are those particular points that you have indicated,
22
must they be answered and, of course, would have to be
23
part of our form?
24
MR. SANJOUR: You can make the
25
-------
74
optional ones required. You can't go the other way.
2 MR. PETROLLI: Okay. One other
g comment. I think most other States, and I know
Illinois for one, we have offered comments when
necessary, and having been quick to criticize Sub-
title C and D, and whatever else submitted, I think
6
this particular section has been very well done.
Something that has been done well I think should be
8
noted.
9
I feel it should be stated that you
10 *
have done a good job. Thank you.
MR. LEHMAN: Thank you very much.
12
That's very refreshing.
13
MR. SHEIL: Bill Sheil of the
14
Department of Environmental Control from Nebraska.
15
I want to second that remark. I feel this is one
16
that has been well done, but a point, and maybe a
17
quick concern, if somebody is generating less than
18
100 pounds of hazardous waste per month, he is not in
19
the system. Then how do we control that 100 pounds,
20
if it goes to a regular landfill, not a secure chemi-
21
cal landfill?
22
There are people out here generating
23
100 pounds a month going 'co one landfill. Is that a
24
concern that you have, or is it in there?
25
-------
75
1 MR. LEHMAN: Okay. It certainly
2 is a concern. Let me just comment: It is 100
3 kilograms, not 100 pounds. That was one of the
4 issues that had to be addressed when we were dealing
5 with this quantity exemption.
6 It turned out that approximately.
7 and I forget the exact number, but one would exempt
8 approximately 50 per cent of all industrial generators
9 and 90 per cent of all farmers, if one adopted this
exemption, but only lose less than one-half of one
per cent of the total amount of hazardous waste
12 being generated in this country by doing that.
So it is a tradeoff situation.
You drive the regulations all the way down to zero,
or do you lift this a little bit to allow a somewhat
special treatment for the small people?
ifa
MR. SHEIL: Then under Subtitle C
or Subtitle D,if it is not here in Subtitle C, then
it is under Subtitle D?
19
MR. LEHMAN: Exactly.
20
Let me comment on that. One of the reasons we felt
21
that we could, with good conscience, lift this limit
to 100 kilograms was the companion effort under way
under Subtitle D, which at the same time we are Impos-
ing a new regulatory program on hazardous waste.
-------
76
i There is going to be requirements for
2 substantial upgrading of normal landfills, non-
3 hazardous landfills, as a result of Subtitle D.
4 So we felt that small amounts of hazardous waste
5 could be handled properly in a landfill which meets
6 the new requirements under Subtitle D.
7 MR. SHEIL: Thank you.
8 MR. LEHMAN: Any other questions
9 about 3010?
10 MR. LIENS: Bradley Liens from
11 Illinois. What's going to happen if your 3001 mater-
12 ials are challenged in court and they are suspended?
13 Will the 90-day reporting period still start?
14 MR. LEHMAN: Anne, would you like
15 to address that?
16 MS. ALLEN: I would think not.
_ If, indeed, your regulations or guidelines or whatever
are in dispute, then they are not technically taking
place, so that would be suspended until that issue
was solved.
MR. LEHMAN: We don't anticipate
that, but one always has to be prepared for any
eventualities.
Are there any other questions on 3010?
Okay. As I indicated earlier, we will be happy to
-------
77
1 answer any other questions about other parts of sub-
2 titles. We started to do some of that already, and
3 I think you begin to understand that for this dis-
4 cussion that there is a substantial crossing between
5 the various parts. It is difficult to discuss one
6 part without discussing the other part.
7 For the reasons stated, we felt
8 constrained to proceed with 3010.
At this time, I will close the formal
10 hearing on the proposed 3010 regulations, and we
11 will go off the record. We will take a break, and
12 when we come back, we will be open for written or
13 verbal questions about other parts of Subtitle C.
14 Thank you very much for attending this hearing, and
15 we will take a 15-minute break and return at 3:15.
16 (At 3:00 p. m. the hearing was
n closed.)
18
19
20
21
-------
1 State of Ohio, )
2 '
County of Cuyahoga, )
78
CERTIFICATE
This certifies that the foregoing is a
true and correct transcript of the
proceedings had
at (Place:) Windsor Room
Cleveland Plaza Hotel
on (Date:) Cleveland, Ohio
Friday- August 18, 1978
In the Matter of:
Proposed Rules for Notification of Hazardous
Waste Activities RCRA - Section 3010
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
REPOBTFR
17
18
FINCUM-MANCINI COURT REPORTFRS
19 1037 Union Commerce Building
Cleveland, Ohio 44115
20 (216) 696-2272
21
23
24
25
-------
Statement o£ the Independent Liquid Terminals Association
Mr. Chairman, members of Che Committee, we appreciate very much your invitation
J , i , . ,. • • t ,'.'•• h. '••*'
to appear at this hearing. I am John-£col«jp^—£cfiL&iU*n* of the Independent Liquid
Terminals Association, a national trade association which represents commercial opera-
tors of bulk liquid terminal and tank storage facilities located on the East Coast,
Gulf Coast, West Coast, Great Lakes, and Inland Waterways of the United States,
ILTA Members operate a total of 150 deepwater and barge terminals in 32 states with
a capacity at any given time to hold 147,000,000 barrels of bulk liquid commodities.
It is estimated that these ILTA terminals handle annually over 588,000,000 barrels of
bulk liquid commodities essential to American business and hence, the American consumer.
These terminals interconnect with and provide services to the various modes of bulk
liquid carriers, namely tankers, tank barges, tank trucks, tank rail cars, and pipelines.
The commodities handled include a wide variety of chemicals, crude oil, refined petro-
leum products, animal fats and oils, molasses, and vegetable oils.
Terminal facilities, as Committee members are probably well aware, consist of
docks for tankers and tank barges, pumps and equipment for loading and unloading the
vessels, pipelines to and from storage tanks, sometimes pipelines to purchasers and
users of products, and loading and unloading facilities for rail tank cars and tank
trucks.
ILTA Members own waterside terminal and storage tanks, but largely do not own
the products stored in the tanks. The products are usually owned by major oil and
chemical companies, commodity brokers, manufacturers, and utilities. ILIA Members
provide and sell a handling service at the terminal for onloading or offloading bulk
liquids, and they will store the product for a fee until the owner needs it or sells
it.
-------
My name is Eugene C. Bailey. I am a legistered professional engineer in
the State of Illinois and Vice President of Dolio and Metz Ltd., a consult-
ing engineering organization in Chicago. I am testifying at this joint
hearing in behalf of our client, American Admixtures Corp, and several
midwestern utility companies.
I served Commonwealth Edison Company in various engineering capacities for
more than 40 years. I was an ex officio member of the Illinois Commission
on Atomic Energy for more than 10 years and Vice Chairman of the Illinois
Boiler Board for 10 years. Nationally, I have been very active in the
development of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Codes relating to Nuclear Power Plant Components, their
design, maintenance and inservice inspection. One of the major goals in
my work as an engineer dealing with regulatory agencies of the Federal and
State governments has been to achieve simplicity, avoid redundancy and
prevent contradictory overlapping of laws, regulations, codes and standards.
Working for the Illinois Atomic Energy Commission, I trrred-*to- demonstrate-"!
that the public interest could best be served by the State of Illinois
adopting the Federal Regulations relating to the transportation of hazardous
materials in their entirety, by statutory reference, without any changes,
as laws for the State of Illinois.
S-fS,-/// *V/7
This action "Would simplify: the problem of compliance by industry in the
same manner as has been achieved by the majority of the states and the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the United States by adopting the ASMH
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Codes Sections III, "Nuclear Power Plant Com-
ponents" and Section XI, "Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power
Plant Components" as their law.
-------
' /,'(('-*
/
,
(/
(7
-i
tet c
-------
-------
¥''7?f
yC~>
,(' f'/l / :' f/T '
/(/
.>•-
<-
-------
'/
-------
-w
-f
'
-------
•V^
& TV--
/^^••f ; /C'A,/-;/i
ft)
4
{/
(. ,
y
-V --'V-
^•••^'"r
-------
C <3> ~
-------
-------
ATTENDEE LIST: EPA PUBLIC HEARING CLEVELAND, OH
Allensworth, Ray
Manager
Quincy Adams Company
R.R. 1
Oernry, IL 62301
Amber, Jerome
Facility Environmental Control
Ford Motor Company
Parklane Towers West #628
Dearborn, MI 48126
Arentson, Robert
Research Associate
Hammermill Paper Company
PO Box 1440
Erie, PA 16533
Bailey, J.B.
Administrator
Republic Steel Corporation
PO Box 6778
Cleveland, OH 44101
Bailey, Eugene
Dolio & Metz Ltd.
208 S. LaSalle St.
Chicago, IL 60604
Balikov, Henry
Environmental Counsel
J.M. Huber Corporation
Thornall St.
Edison, NJ 08817
Barnes, Roy
Liquid Industrial Control
Association
199 Pierce St.
Birmingham, MI 48011
Barta, J.W.
Chemical Project Leader
Huntington Alloys
PO Box 1958
Huntington, WV 25700
Berg, Deborah
Environmental Scientist
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
2110 E. Aurora Road
Twinsburg, OH 44087
Bergman, Mark
Environmental Technician
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
2110 E. Aurora Road
Twinsburg, OH 44087
Bhatla, M.N.
Vice President
Roy Weston, Inc.
Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380
Bickell, Kent
Corporate Ecologist
Bell Corporation
PO Box 5000
Muncie, IN 47302
Bloomgren, Harold
Northwest Engineering, Inc.
Route 62
Tidoute, PA 16351
Boehm, Louis
Manager-Environmental Engineering
Armco, Inc.
PO Box 600
Middletown, OH 45042
Boltz, David
Senior Pollution Control Engineer
Bethlehem Steel Corporation
Martin Tower #B252
Bethlehem, PA 19016
Bourke, R.C.
Supervisor-Environmental Sciences
Detroit Diesel Allison
PO Box 894-S-20
Indianapolis, IN 46206
Branand, David
Senior Counsel
American Mining Congress
1200 18th St NW
Washington, DC 20036
Breed, David
Vice President
New Haven Terminal, Inc.
PO Box 1914
New Haven, CT 06509
-------
Bresland, J.
Manager-Environmental Services
Allied Chemical
PO Box 1086R1
Morristown, NJ 07960
Brubaker, Bruce
Attorney
Diamond Shamrock Corp.
1100 Superior Ave.
Cleveland, OH 44114
Brush, Charles
Environmental Affairs Specialist
Koppers Company, Inc.
2818 Koppers Building
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Burk, Dennis
Project Engineer
A.P. Green Refractories Company
Green Blvd.
Mexico, MO 65265
Burke, Gail
Environmental Engineer
Commonwealth Edison Company
PO Box 767
Chicago, IL 60690
Cohen, Howard
Senior Management Planner
Northeast Ohio Planning Agency
1501 Euclid Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44115
Clere, Larry
Environmental Engineer
Sun Petroleum Products Company
Toledo, OH 43693
Connor, J.R.
President
Chem-Technics, Inc.
895 Club Road
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
Cunningham, Howard
Manager-Regulatory Compliance
Witco Chemical Corporation
277 Park Ave.
New York, NY 10017
Cunningham, Elizabeth
Senior Environmental Specialist
Standard Oil Company
1748 Guildhall Bldg.
Cleveland, OH
Coburn, D.E.
Technical Director
Rockside Reclamations, Inc.
4100 Brookpoint Road
Cleveland, OH 44135
Cummings, John
Legal Counsel
Owens-Illinois, Inc.
PO Box 1035
Toledo, OH 43666
Danilowicz, Leonard
City Council Ward 15
3594 Beyerle Road
Cleveland, OH 44105
Detering, William
Design Engineer
TRW, Inc.
23555 Euclid Ave.
Euclid, OH 44117
Eichozn, Robert
Purchasing Manager
TRW, Inc.
23555 Euclid Ave
Euclid, OH 44117
Ericksen, Lee
Adminis trator
Stauffer Chemical Company
Westport, CT 06880
Fawkes, Emerson
Staff Engineer
Union Carbide Corporation
12900 Snow Road
Parma, OH 44130
Firestone, Craig
Assistant Manager
Witco Chemical Corporation
277 Park Ave.
New York, NY 10017
Fehsenfeld, Fred
I.L.W.D., Inc.
7901 W. Morris St.
Indianapolis, IN 46231
Frase, Ronald
Physicist
General Tire & Rubber Company
1 General St.
Akron, OH 44329
-------
Galchas, Solon
Coordinator-Solid Waste
BF Goodrich
6100 Oaktree Blvd.
Independence, OH 44131
Galmarini, Armond
Assistant Plant Engineer
Crucible Steel Corp.
8401 Almira Ave
Cleveland, OH 44102
Garmon, J.J.
Environmental Engineer
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
1144 E. Market St.
Akron, OH 44316
Gaugush, F.c.
Director-Environmental Control
Sherwin Williams Company
101 Prospect Ave.
Cleveland, OH 44115
Gillen, Art
Environmental Protection Engineer
BASF-Wyandotte
PO Box 181
Parsippany, NJ 07054
Gunsel, Steven
Manager Pollution Control
Harshaw Chemical Company
1945 E. 97th St.
Cleveland, OH 44106
Hamilton, Jim
Chemist
Ace Oil Service, Inc.
876 Otter Creek Road
Oregon, OH 43616
Hanna, Joan
Natural Resources Committee
Women's League of Voters
26631 Lake Shore Road
Euclid, OH 44132
Hayman, Edward
Squire, Sanders & Dempsey
1800 Union commerce Bldg.
Cleveland, OH 44115
Houke, Rae
Manager-Environmental Control
Rockwell International
600 Grant St.
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
lannone, Donald
Management Planner
NOACA
1501 Euclid Ave
Cleveland, OH 44125
Ito, T.
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company
1144 E. Market St.
Akron, OH 44316
Japwage, Mary
Reporter
Cleveland Plains Dealer
1801 Superior Ave
Cleveland, OH 16046
Jones, Robert
Director-Solid Waste
Floyd Browning & Associates
181 S. Main St.
Marion, OH 43302
Karam, A.J.
Director-Government Relations
Central Foundry Division
77 W. Center St.
Saginaw, MI 48605
Katona, Dr. Alex,
Corporate Manager
Hooker chemical Company
222 Rainbow Blvd. North
Niagra Falls, NY 14302
Keister, Forest
Republic Steel Corporation
PO Box 6
Buffalo, NY 14220
Kerns, B.A.
Manager-Environmental Control
Westinghouse'Electric Corp.
1601 Westinghouse Bldg.
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
-------
Komoroski, Kenneth
Environmental Engineer
PPG Industries
1 Gateway Center
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Koski, Frank
President
Reserve Environmental Service
5841 Woodman Ave
Ashtabula, OH 44004
Knight, Bruce
Technical Coordinator
Marathon Oil Company
539 S. Main
Findlay, OH 45840
Krasker, Bruce
Assistant Council
Defense Property Disposal Svc.
Federal Center
Battle Creek, MI 49016
Kunkle, George
Jones & Henry Engineers Ltd.
2000 W. Central Ave
Toledo, OH 43606
Laman, J.R.
Corporate Manager
Firestone Tire S. Rubber Co.
1200 Firestone Parkway
Akron, OH 44301
McCauley, Ruth
Environmental Quality
Euclid League of women Voters
23780 Hartland Ave
Euclid, OH 44123
McHugh, Gerard
Project Engineer
General Refractories Co.
600 Grant St. #3000
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Machol, Scott
Junior Engineer
Cleveland Electric Illuminating
PO Box 5000
Cleveland, OH 44114
Manchen, Kenneth
Environmental Engineer
Eaton Corporation
32500 Chardon Road
Willoughby Hills, OH 44095
Mattes, Edward
Special Projects Analyst
J.M. Huber Corporation
Thornall St.
Edison, NJ 08817
Mauer, Kenneth
Environmental Analyst
Toledo Edison
300 Madison Ave
Toledo, OH 43652
Mullen, Hugh
Director-Government Relations
IU Conversion Systems, Inc.
3624 Market St.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Parker, Dr. Hampton
Environmental Affairs
Union Carbide Corporation
270 Park Ave.
New York, NY 10017
Piantanida, Lillian
Assistant Manager
Intl. Lead Zinc Research Organization
292 Madison Ave
New York, NY 10017
Pincura, Paul
Senior Management Planner
NOAZA
1501 E. Euclid Ave
Cleveland, OH
Poland, Virgil
Quality Control Manager
SCA Services, Inc.
1550 Balmer Road
Model City, NY 14107
Prendergast, J.
Attorney
Republic Steel Corporation
PO Box 6778
Cleveland, OH 44212
-------
Samuels, John
Senior Project Engineer
General Motors-Environmental Act.
GM Technical Center
Warren, Ml 48090
Saverino, Joseph
Chemical Engineer
American Insurance Association
85 John St.
New York, NY 10038
Shell, M.W.
Chief-Solid Waste
Nebraska Dept. Environmental Control
Lincoln, NE
Sheridan, John
Associate Editor
Industry Week Magazine
Penton Plaza
Cleveland, OH 44114
Schmitt, Robert
Hazardous Materials Specialist
Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
1200 Firestone Parkway
Akron, OH
Scott, Michael
Corporate Counsel
Mooney Chemicals, Inc.
2301 Scranton Road
Cleveland, OH
Simmons, Donald
Engineer
National Steel Corp.
2800 Grant Building
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Smith, Michael
Environmental Manager
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
1144 E. Market St.
Akron, OH 44316
Smith, Dr. Hugh
Sun Chemical Company
4526 Chickering
Cincinnati, OH 45232
Spearing, E.A.
Environmental Coordinator
DuPont
2981 Independence Road
Cleveland, OH 44115
Statham, Haywood
Regional Planning Commission
415 The Arcade
Cleveland, OH 44114
Suzuki, Robert
Senior Engineer
Mobay Chemical Corporation
Penn-Lincoln Parkway W.
Pittsburgh, PA 15205
Taylor, Jack
Chemist
State Department of Health
1800 Washington St. East
Charleston, WV 25304
Toothaker, Anne
Specialist-Regulatory Affairs
General Electric Company
Bldg. 36 Room 120
Schenectedy, NY 12345
Vaughters, Alans
Waste Management Specialist
Monsanto Research Corp.
Mound Facility
Miamisburg, OH 45242
Waliguran, Thomas
Environmental Control
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp.
Duvall Center
Wheeling, WV 26003
Watkins, George
Lake Erie Watershed Conservation
Foundation
1204 Superior Bldg.
Cleveland, OH 44114
Weiss, Helen
Women Speak Out For Peace & Justice
2020 Taylor Road #715
E. Cleveland, OH 44112
Wertz, Russell
Engineer
Havens & Emerson Inc.
745 Craig Road
St. Louis, MO 63141
-------
Wiens, Bradley
Water Treatment & Lubrication
Owens-Illinois
PO Box 1035
Toledo, OH 43666
Williams, H.B.
Director-Environmental Services
Sherwin Williams, Inc.
101 Prospect Ave
Cleveland, OH 44115
Wojcik, Stanley
Division Manager
Dow Chemical Company
PO Box 36000
Strongsville, OH 44136
ya!737a
-------
TRANSCRIPT
Public Hearing
on Proposed Rules
for Notification of Hazardous Waste Activities
August 21, 1978, Charleston, South Carolina
This hearing was sponsored by EPA, Office of Solid Waste,
and the proceedings (SW-44p) are reproduced entirely as transcribed
by the official reporter, with handwritten corrections.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1978
-------
-------
1 PROCEEDINGS OF A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED
2 RULES FOR NOTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE ACTIV-
3 ITIES HELD ON MONDAY, AUGUST THE 21ST, 1978 IN
4 THE AZALEA ROOM, HOLIDAY INN (AIRPORT), CHARLESTON,
5 SOUTH CAROLINA
6
7 Panel Members
8 Jack Lehman, Director, Hazardous Waste Manage-
ment Division, EPA, Washington, D.C.
9
George Harlow, Acting Director, Air and
10 Hazardous Materials Division, EPA,
Region IV
11
John Dickinson, Region IV, Air and Hazardous
12 Materials Division
13 Bill Sanjour, Chief, Assessment & Technology
Branch, Hazardous Waste Management Division
14
Tim Fields, Program Manager, Technology Program,
15 Hazardous Waste Management Division
16 Bill Snyder, Technology Program, Hazardous
Waste Management Division
17
Amy Schaffer, Office of Enforcement, EPA
18
Anne Allen, Attorney, Management and Information
19 Staff, OSW, EPA
20 THE HEARING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 1:00 p.m.
21 MR. HARLOW: Good afternoon, ladies and gen-
22 tlemen. My name is George Harlow and I am Director of
23 the Air and Hazardous Materials Division Office, EPA,
24 Atlanta, Georgia. It is my pleasure to welcome you
25 to Region IV on behalf of the Regional Administrator,
-------
1 Mr. John C. White. We want to thank you for your
2 interest in this meeting and I am looking forward to
3 your participation in the EPA's ruleYAoXxw^ for the
4 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976.
5 It is EPA's belief that broad public participation
6 is needed in developing our regulations so that they
^ will be understandable, practical, effective, and
8 efficient. I want to especially thank the State Solid
9 Waste Directors who have participated in the develop-
10 ment of the proposed rules to be discussed here this
11 afternoon. We place high priority on developing State
12 environmental programs in Region IV and we will empha-
13 size development of strong, safe, hazardous programs
14 under the Act.
15 This hearing is the second of three public hear-
16 ings being held to receive comments on proposed regula-
1' tions to implement some of the provisions of the
18 Resource Conservation Recovery Act. These proposed
19 rules set forth the procedures for a preliminary
20 notification of hazardous waste activities. They
21 define administrative procedure under which States may
22 be granted limited interim authority to receive notifi-
23 cation of generation, transportation, and disposal of
24 hazardous waste, and to specify the procedures for
25 filing such notification by persons conducting hazardous
-------
1 waste activities.
2 Jack Lehman, Director of the Hazardous Waste
3 lAftosft.c^mtrd' Division, EPA, in Washington will conduct
4 the hearing and I turn the meeting over to him now to
5 set the ground rules for individual panel members and
6 for further discussion of the proposed regulations.
7 MR. LEHMAN: Thank you, George. I would
8 like to introduce the panel members to you now. The
9 panel here with me is composed of members of the Office
10 of Solid Waste/Hazardous Waste Management Division,
11 -^he Management and Information Staff of the Office of
12 Solid Waste, "Vhe Office of Enforcement - all of these
13 in Washington, D.C., and as you can tell, representa-
14 tives of EPA's Region IV office in Atlanta. These
15 people specialize in certain subject areas related to
16 this issue.
17 On my left is Bill Sanjour, Chief of the Assessment
18 and Technology Branch of the Hazardous Waste Management
i
19 Division of the Office of Solid Waste. Next to him is
20 John Dickinson of the Air and Hazardous Materials
21 Division of the Region IV office in Atlanta; and on my
22 far left is Amy Schaffer of the Toxic Substances Branch
23 of the Enforcement Division, Office of Enforcement, in
24 Washington,D.C. On my right, you already have met
25 George, and on his right is Tim Fields, who is the
-------
1 Program Manager of our Technology Program in the
2 Assessment and Technology Branch in the Hazardous
3 Waste Management Division, and also I might mention
4 the principle author of the 3010 regulations which
5 we will discuss here today. And next to him is Bill
6 Snyder of our Technology Program in the Assessment and
ftax\
-------
1 more than one such notification shall be required to
2 be filed with respect to the same substance. No
3 identified or listed hazardous waste subject to this
4 Subtitle may be transported, treated, stored, or dis-
5 posed of unless notification has been given as re-
»
6 quired under this Subsection.
7 The EPA proposed regulations implements this sec-
8 tion of the Act in the Federal Register on July llth
9 of 1978. Copies of the proposed regulations and the
10 Act are available at the registration table. I'm also
11 presenting a copy of the proposed regulations for the
12 record.
13 These proposed rules specify who might file
14 notification of hazardous waste activity, when and
15 where the notification must be filed, and what infor-
16 mation such notification must contain.
17 An example of the forms suggested for use in
18 this process is also included. These proposed rules
19 also contain provisions whereby States may obtain
20 authorization to receive and manage this initial
21 notification program.
22 The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of
23 1976 provides that regulations shall be promulgated
24 only after notice and opportunity for public hearing.
25 So, let me lay the groundwork on rules for the
-------
1 conduct of this hearing. The focus of a public hear-
2 ing is on the public's response for a regulatory pro-
3 posal by the agency. The purpose of the hearing,
4 as announced in the July llth Federal Register is to
5 solicit comments on the proposed regulations, including
6 any background information used to develop the regula-
7 tions.
8 This public hearing is being held, not primarily
9 to inform the public or to defend a proposed regula-
10 tion, but more to obtain the public's response to EPA's
11 proposed regulations and thereafter revise the regula-
12 tions as may be deemed appropriate.
13 All major substantive comments made at the hearing
14 will be addressed at the time of final promulgation.
15 The anticipated date of final promulgation is the Spring
16 of 1979.
17 This will not be a formal adjudicatory hearing
18 with the right to cross-examination. The members of
19 the public are to present their views on the proposed
20 regulations to the panel, and the panel may ask ques-
21 tions of the people presenting statements to clarify
22 any ambiguities in their presentation.
23 if any member of the audience wants a question
24 asked of another member of the public, he will be
25 allowed to write the question and pass it to the panel,
-------
7
1 at which time the panel may ask the question of the
2 appropriate person, and that person will be given the
3 opportunity to respond accordingly.
4 Now, during registration, blank cards were passed
5 out to you and we ask that you list your questions on
6 these cards,and then the panel will ask them if they
7 are relevant to the statement presented.
8 Due to time limitation the Chairman reserves the
9 right to limit lengthy questions, discussions, or state-
10 ments. We would ask that those of you who have prepared
11 statements to make orally, please limit your presenta-
12 tion to a maximum of ten minutes so that we can get to
13 all statements in a reasonable time. The written state-
I4 ments will be included in their entirety in the record.
'5 Written prepared statements will be accepted at the
16 end of the hearing, and so if you wish to provide a
17 statement, but do not present it orally, that can be
18 accomplished.
'" Persons wishing to make an oral statement who have
2" not made an advanced request by telephone or in writing^
2' should indicate their interest on the registration card.
22 If you have not indicated your intent to give a state-
23 ment and then decide to do so, please return to the
24 registration table, fill out another card, and give it
25 to one of the staff.
-------
1 As we call upon an individual to make a statementj
2 he should come up to the lectern and after identifying
3 himself for the court reporter, deliver his statement.
4 At the beginning of the statement I'll inquire as to
5 whether the speaker is willing to entertain questions
6 from the panel and the audience. The speaker is under
7 no obligation to do so, although within the spirit of
8 this information sharing meeting it would be of great
9 assistance to the Agency if questions were permitted.
10 Anyone wishing to make a statement will have an
11 opportunity to do so, even if we have to run the hear-
12 ing in the evening.
13 We will recess for about fifteen minutes around
14 three-thirty and trie hearing is scheduled to break for
15 dinner at lt> o'clock, if we have not completed before.
16 The hearing will continue into the evening, if necessary
17 Messages will be received at the registration desk,
18 so you can check there for messages. Restrooms are
19 straight out the door straight ahead. When you come
20 forward to make a statement we suggest you give a copy
21 of that statement ro the court reporter.
22 if you wish to be added to our mailing list for
23 future regulations, draft regulations, or proposed
24 regulations, please leave your business card or mailing
25 address on a three by five card at the registration
-------
1 desk.
2 The court reporter is present here today. The
3 statements, questions, and comments will become part
4 of the public record and this record will be available
5 for public inspection in the Docket Section, Room 2111,
6 of the Hazardous Waste Management Division, Office of
7 Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
8 401 M Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20460. A copy of the
9 transcript will be available on request to all regis-
10 trants here today in about two or three months.
11 In addition to the public hearing in Charleston
12 today, an identical hearing was held in Cleveland, Ohio
13 on this last Friday, August 18th, and one will be held
14 in San Francisco on Thursday, August the 24th. Persons
15 not wishing to deliver a statement today may send a
16 written statement to the address noted in the Federal
17 Register before the closing of that Docket, which is
18 September llth, 1978.
19 Now, I would like to turn the hearing over to Bill
20 Sanjour, who will give you an overview of the Subtitle
21 C Regulation on Hazardous Waste Management, how they
22 function and how the proposed regulation on preliminary
23 notification on hazardous waste activities fits into
24 this framework. Bill!
25 MR. SANJOUR: Thank you, Jack. Before I give
-------
10
1 you an overview on the interrelationships of the various
2 sections of the Act,please note that each of the sectiors
3 I am about to describe is a separate regulation and
4 that public hearings will be held on each of these
5 regulations as is proposed.
6 I would ask that you please keep in mind that
7 we are here today to address only the proposed Federal
8 regulations defining procedures for notification of
9 hazardous waste activities, and procedures whereby
10 States may receive special authorization to manage
11 this notification program.
12 You will have the opportunity to comment on the
13 other sections of the Act which deal with the definitior
14 of hazardous waste and the detailed standards regarding
15 generation, treatment, storage, and disposal of these
16 wastes as each of +-ht other regulations is proposed.
17 Therefore, it would ensure the most effective use of
18 everyone's time here today if you would mentally review
19 and edit youi" statements and questions accordingly in
20 order to minimize the involvement of these or other
21 sections and to maximize our focus on the proposed
22 regulations for notification of hazardous waste
23 activity.
24 Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
25 amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
i
-------
11
1 of 1976 creates a regulatory framework to control
2 hazardous waste. Congress has found that such waste
3 presents special dangers to the health, to health that
4 requires a greater degree of regulations that does not j
1
5 have this solid waste.
6 Because of the seriousness of this problem, Congress}
7 intended that the States develop programs to control it.
8 in the event that States do not choose to operate this
9 program, EPA is mandated to do so. Seven guidelines
10 of regulations are being developed and composed on this
11 Subtitle C to implement the National Hazardous Waste
12 Management Regulatory Program.
13 it is important to note that the definition of
14 solid waste in the Act encompasses garbage, refuse,
15 sludges, and other discarded materials, including
16 liquids, semi-solids that contain gases, with a few
17 exceptions from both municipal and industrial sources.
18 Hazardous wastes, which are a subset of all solid
19 wastes, and which will be defined by regulation under
20 Section 3001, are those which have particularly signifi-
2i cant impacts on public health and the environment.
22 Subtitle C creates a management control system,
23 which for those wastes defined as hazardous,requires
24 a cradle-to-grave cognizance, including appropriate
2 monitoring, record keeping, and reporting throughout
-------
12
1 the system.
2 Section 3001 requires EPA to define criteria and
3 methods for identifying and listing hazardous waste.
4 Wastes identified as hazardous are then included in
5 the management control system constructed under Sections
6 3002, 3006, and Section 3010, the section we will be
7 discussing here today.
8 Those that are excluded will be subject to the
9 requirements of non-hazardous wastes which are being
10 carried out by States under Subtitle D, under which
11 open dumping is prohibited and environmentally
12 acceptable practices are required.
13 Section 3001 regulations should be published as
14 proposed rules in December of 1978. Section 3002
15 addresses the standards applicable to generators.
16 EPA's regulations under this section describes the
17 classes of generators for whom some requirements may
18 vary. For example, the Agency does not interpret the
19 intent of Congress to include regulation of individual
20 home owners due to small quantities of hazardous waste
21 which they may generate.
22 Section 3002 also requires the creation ot a
23 manifest system which will track waste from the point
24 of generation to the ultimate disposition.
25 Section 3002 should be published as a proposed
-------
13
1 rule in December of 1978.
2 Section 3003 addresses standards affecting trans-
3 porters of hazardous waste to assure that the waste is
4 carefully managed during the transport phase. The
5 Agency explored opportunities for mpshing closely with
6 the proposed and current U.S. Department of Transporta-
7 tion regulations to avoid duplication in the transports-
8 tion area.
9 Section 3003 regulations were published in the
10 Federal Register as proposed rules on April 28, 1978
11 and the public hearing on them was held on June 20th,
12 1978. Additional hearings will be scheduled in the
13 future.
14 Section 3004 addresses standards affecting owners
15 and operators of hazardous waste storage, treatment,
16 and disposal facilities. These standards define the
17 levels of public health and environmental protection
18 to be achieved by these facilities and provide the
19 criteria against which EPA will measure applications
20 for permits.
21 Facilities on a generator's property, as well as
22 offs'vte- facilities, are covered by these regulations
23 and do require permits. Generators and transporters
24 do not otherwise need permits. I would like to re-
25 emphasize that. The only people who require permits
-------
14
1 are those who treat, store, and dispose of hazardous
2 waste - not generators and not transporters, unless
3 they also treat, store, and dispose.
4 Section 3004 should be published as a proposed
5 rule in December of 1978.
6 Section 3005 regulations describe the scope and
7 coverage of the actual permit granting process for
8 facility owners and operators. Requirements for the
9 permit application, as well as for the issuance and
10 revocation process, are to be defined by these regula-
11 tions. It should be noted that Section 3005(e) provide:
12 for an interim permit during the time period that the
13 Agency or the State are reviewing the pending applica-
14 tions.
15 Section 3005 regulations should be published as
16 proposed rules in December of 1978.
17 Section 3006 requires EPA to issue guidelines for
18 State hazardous waste programs and procedures by which
19 States may seek both full and interim authorization
20 to carry out the hazardous waste program in lieu of the
21 EPA administered program. States seeking authorization
22 in accordance with Section 3006 guidelines are not
23 required to adopt in the entirety all Federal hazard-
24 ous waste management regulations promulgated under
25 Subtitle C in order to achieve EPA authorization. Such
-------
15
1 State regulatory program need only demonstrate that
2 their hazardous waste management regulations are con-
3 sistent with and equivalent, in effect, to those EPA
4 regulations and that adequate enforcement exists in
5 order to receive EPA authorization under Section 3006
6 to operate and impose a hazardous waste management pro-
7 gram.
8 Section 3006 guidelines were published in the
9 Federal Register as proposed rules on February 1st,
10 1978. Final rules will be promulgated by December of
11 1978.
12 Section 3010 regulations define procedures by
13 which any person generating, transporting, owning
14 or operating a facility for storage, treatment, and/or
15 disposal of hazardous waste must notify EPA of this
16 activity within 90 days of promulgation of the regula-
17 tions which define hazardous waste - that is, the regu-
18 lations promulgated under Section 3001.
19 EPA has made provision in these regulations for
20 States to be delegated this notification function upon
21 application to the appropriate EPA Regional Administra-
22 tor.
23 It is significant to note that no hazardous waste
24 subject to Subtitle C regulations may be legally
25 transported, treated, or stored, or disposed, unless
-------
16
1 this timely notification is given to EPA or a desig-
2 nated State. The Agency intends to propose draft
3 regulations during December of 1978 for the remaining
4 sessions of Subtitle C. Final regulations will be
5 promulgated in 1959. However, it is important for
6 the regulative community to understand that the regula-
7 tions under Section 3001 through 3005 do not take
8 effect until six months after promulgation. Thus,
9 there will be a time period after final promulgation
10 during which public understanding of the regulations
11 can be increased. During the same period, notifications
12 required under Section 3010 are to be submitted.
13 Facility permit applications required under Section
14 3005 will be distributed for completion by applicants
15 and State programs will be authorized by EPA.
16 Now, for a more detailed look at Section 3010
17 regulations, which we are here today to discuss, I'm
going to turn this meeting over to Tim Fields, who will
19 discuss the 3010 proposed rules.
20 MR. FIELDS: Thank you, Bill. Section 3010
21 of RCRA requires that all persons generating, trans-
22 porting, treating, storing, or disposing of the hazard-
23 ous wastes which have been identified under the Section
24 3001 regulations to notify.
25 Persons who initiate such activities after the
-------
17
1 date of the promulgation of Section 3001 regulations,
2 or revisions thereof, are not required to notify pur-
3 suant to these rules. However, these new entrants
4 into the hazardous waste arena will be required to
5 notify EPA, or an authorized State, pursuant to the
6 Section 3002, Generator Standards; Section 3003, Trans-
^ porter Standards; and 3005, Facility Permit Requirement;
8 The regulations under Section 3001, which is the
9 hazardous waste definition, 3002, 3003, 3004, and 3005,
10 become effective six months after they are promulgated.
11 The date of promulgation of the Section 3001 regulation;
12 begin the notification period. This notification
13 period extends for 90 days, during which time all per-
14 sons subject to these regulations must notify EPA, or
15 an authorized State. Within the six month period
16 following the promulgation of the Section 3001 regula-
17 tions, those persons required to obtain a facility per-
18 mit,required by the Section 3005 regulations, must apply
19 for that permit. Owners or operators of existing
20 facilities requiring such a permit who satisfactorily
21 comply with two requirements, these being to notify
22 pursuant to Section 3010 regulations and to apply for
23 a facility permit required by the Section 3005 regula-
24 tions - these two conditions will be qualified for
25 interim standards until the full permit is issued.
-------
18
1 Failure to satisfy both of these requirements will
2 jeopardize interim standards and will prevent such
3 persons from legally transporting, treating, storing,
4 or disposing of hazardous waste.
5 There are several special cases of which I'd like
g to bring to your attention regarding the Section 3010
7 regulations. These special cases are as follows: f\um-
8 ber one—in the case of corporations. A person owning
g and operating more than one place of operation may file
10 the single notification for all facilities providing-
^ a) that all required information is clearly stated
12 separately for each place of operation, and b) that
13 copies of the pertinent information in this single noti-
14 fication is sent to each EPA Regional Office or
15 authorized State having jurisdiction over the area in
ig which the place of operation is located.
17 Secondly, the case of highway transporters. A
18 responsible individual shall file notification for
19 each terminal the transporter owns and utilizes for
20 vehicles transporting hazardous wastes.
21 Thirdly, the case of railroad or pipeline companies
22 A responsible individual may file a single notification
23 for the entire rail line or pipe line provided that
24 copies of this notification are sent to the appropriate
25 EPA Regional Office or authorized State having juris-
-------
19
1 diction over the area in which the railroad or pipe-
2 line is located.
3 And, fourthly, in the case of Federal agencies^,
4 these rules regarding preliminary verification of
5 hazardous waste activities apply in the same manner
6 as other persons covered by these regulations.
7 Section 3001 regulations defining hazardous waste
8 will probably be revised from time to time to identify
9 or list additional hazardous wastes. These regulations
!0 require the generators, transporters, treaters, storers,
11 and disposers to notify the EPA or authorized States
12 90 days after such a revision. Those persons who are
13 unaffected by a revision of Section 3001 regulations
14 need not submit additional notification at the time
15 of this revision.
16 In addition, persons who are affected by such a
17 revision to the Section 3001 regulations may also be
required to apply for either a new or a revised
19 facility permit before the revised Section 3001 regula-
2" tions become effective, which is six months after they
21 are promulgated.
22 Notification must be filed with the appropriate
23 EPA Regional Administrator or State which has been
24 granted authorization for management of the notification
program.
-------
20
1 The second part of the regulations is the actual
2 authorization procedures for States. These proposals
3 establish procedures for authorizing States to manage
4 the notification program. These rules will be promul-
5 gated before the Section 3001 regulations are promul-
6 gated in order to give States an opportunity to obtain
7 this special authorization before promulgation of the
8 Section 3001 regulations initiates the 90 day notifica-
9 tion period.
10 The EPA and the authorized States must be ready
11 to receive notification when the Section 3001 regula-
12 tions become effective. A list of the names and
13 addresses of State agencies authorized to receive
14 notification will he published in the Federal Register
15 prior to or at the time of promulgation of the Section
16 3001 regulations or revisions thereof.
17 States will be authorized to receive notification
18 from affected persons pursuant to the provisions of
19 these regulations. This authorization will be called
20 "limited interim authorization," and, if granted,will
21 be granted separate and apart from the interim or full
22 authorization granted pursuant to the Section 3006
23 State Hazardous Waste Program Guidelines.
24 Few or many States will have the Section 3006
25 interim or full authorization before or during the 90
-------
21
1 day notification period. However, it is EPA's policy
2 to allow those States that are likely to be granted
3 such authorization to also be granted the authority
4 to manage the notification program. It is important
5 to note that notification required subsequent to this
6 initial notification period, which might occur as a
7 result of revisions to Section 3001 regulations, when
8 not administered by the EPA Region shall be conducted
9 only by States having the Section 3006 authorization.
10 Limited interim authorization, therefore, is a one
11 time authorization which terminates on the date six
12 months after the promulgation of the Section 3001
13 regulations. If a State which has been granted limited
14 interim authorization fails to apply for, or receives
15 interim or full authorization pursuant to Section 3006,
16 the EPA must assume responsibility for managing the
17 subsequent regulatory requirements of Subtitle C.
'8 This joint program administration can create problems -
i
19 for example, an efficient processing of applications
20 for facility permits which are received during the six
21 month period following promulgation of the Section 3001
22 regulations. To minimize such potential problems, these
23 proposed rules impose special requirements upon States
24 in order to obtain this limited interim authorization.
25 Further, the authorized States will be encouraged
-------
22
1 to operate and manage the notification program in the
2 same or an improved manner to that employed by EPA
3 in order to achieve as much national uniformity as
4 possible. This will simplify the notification burden
5 of those persons who may have to notify for hazardous
6 waste activities conducted in two or more States.
7 The manner in which the State intends to carry out the
8 notification program will be articulated in a plan
9 that a State submits as part of its request for limited
10 interim authorization. The degree of equivalency with
11 EPA's management of the notification process will be
12 one of the criteria in use by the EPA Regional Adminis-
13 trator to determine whether to grant authorization.
14 If the Regional Administrator finds the State applica-
15 tion acceptable, he or she shall execute an agreement
16 with that State ,signed by the Regional Administrator
1' and an official of the responsible State agencyj to
18 grant it limited interim authorization to implement
19 Section 3010 requirements. All such agreements shall
20 be effective no later than 120 calendar days after
21 promulgation of thess preliminary notification regula-
22 tions and shall terminate on a date, as I said before,
23 six months after promulgation of the Section 3001 regu-
24 lations.
25 if a State is granted limited interim authoriza-
-------
23
1 tion by the EPA to manage the notification program,
2 all persons conducting hazardous waste activities in
3 that State will be required to notify the responsible
4 State agency. If a State hazardous waste definition
5 is more stringent than that promulgated under Section
6 3001 regulations, then the applicable State agency
7 could use this definition for the purpose of notifica-
8 tion by affected persons in that State. State hazardous
9 waste definitions which are less stringent than that
10 promulgated under the Section 3001 regulations cannot
11 be used for notification purposes.
12 With respect to notification submitted to EPA,
13 these proposed rules would allow affected persons to
14 make confidentiality claims in three areas of their
15 notification responses. These are, first of all,
16 describing the types of hazardous waste handled, as
1? identified by characteristics under Section 3001
18 regulations; secondly, the case of describing hazardous
19 waste handled as identified by listing under Section
20 3001 regulations; and thirdly, in the estimate quantity
21 of hazardous wastes handled annually, which is an
22 optional item.
23 Comments are requested from interested persons as
24 to which notification items should provide for a
25 confidentiality claim, and reasons why each such item
-------
24
1 should be considered confidential.
2 The EPA is considering requiring affected persons
3 to provide substantiation of their confidentiality
4 claims at the time of initial notification. There are
5 two options in this area.
6 The first option is the one in these proposed
7 rules. Affected persons would be allowed to make con-
8 fidentiality claims without providing substantiation
9 at the time of initial notification. If a request for
10 information submitted was made later, EPA would then
11 request that the affected persons provide substantiatior
12 of confidentiality claims in accordance with the con-
13 fidentiality of business information regulations. If
14 there are a large number of requests from the public
15 for copies of notification responses, there will be a
16 burden on the EPA Regional Office resources to request
17 substantiation from each submitter.
18 The second option is designed to avoid that
19 problem by rfiQU\f HTV submission of substantiation of
20 such claims at the time of initial notification. EPA
21 would not have to go back to submitters again if re-
22 quests were received by EPA for notification responses
23 containing confidentiality claims. However, this would
24 place an additional initial reporting burden upon
25 affected persons.
-------
25
1 Comments are requested on these or other options
2 for the confidential information and for having con-
3 fidentiality claims. In addition, suggestions on ways
4 of making the notification items reasonably accepted
5 to the public will be appreciated.
6 These sample rules also contain a sample form
7 for use in filing notification. The use of this farm
8 is not mandatory, but its use is encouraged to facili-
9 tate the'notification process. To assist in complying
10 with these rules, the EPA intends to mail the sample
11 forms and instructions to all known persons who may be
12 required to notify. EPA will also encourage States
13 managing the notification program to use a similar
14 procedure.
15 Failure of the Agency or the authorized States to
16 reach any affected persons will not relieve that
17 person of the legal requirements to notify. If a person
18 fully and accurately completes and returns the form ,
i
19 presented in the back of these regulations for each |
20 place of operation, the person would have complied with
21 the requirements of these regulations.
22 if a person chooses not to use this suggested form,
23 that person must file the written notification stating
24 clearly and legibly the following information for each
25 place of operation:
-------
26
1 1) The nane of the organization and place
2 of operation.
3 2) The mailing address and the place of
4 operation.
5 3) The principal activity and the place of
6 operation.
7 4) An identification number for the place of
8 operation.
9 5} The name and telephone number and address
10 of the responsible individual at the place of
11 operation who can be contacted for clarification
12 of information submitted in the notification.
13 6) The certification of the information sub-
14 mitted as complete and accurate.
15 7) The types of hazardous waste activity
16 conducted by the person, i.e., generation, trans-
17 portation, treatment, storage, or disposal of
18 hazardous waste.
19 8) The types of hazardous waste handled by
20 the person, as identified by characteristics under
21 Section 3001 regulations. All wastes which are
22 ignitable, reactive, infectious, radioactive, or
23 corrosive must be described as such. However,
24 persons who cannot in the 90 day period allowed
25 definitively determine whether their wastes are
-------
27
1 toxic may so indicate. If, after the 90 day
2 period, it is determined that a waste is non-toxic
3 a statement to this effect must be filed no later
4 than 180 days after promulgation of the Section
5 3001 regulations. Otherwise, the person will be
6 considered for notification purposes to be con-
7 ducting hazardous waste activities. It should be
8 noted that there is a mistake in item number five
9 on the sample form in the regulations. We're not
10 allowing an undetermined response for the radio-
11 active and the corrosive characteristics. The
12 last item we're requiring in the notification
13 response iS their description of the hazardous
14 waste handled, as identified by listing under the
15 Section 3001 regulations, or by the general type
16 and specific content. For example, you could
1' indicate you have "wastewater treatment sludge
18 containing lead contents."
19 10) You must provide a statement indicating
20 what information, if any, is to be considered con-
21 fidential business information.
22 And, lastly, the last item is an option
23 item, you must provide, if available, an estimate
24 of the annual amount of hazardous waste handled
25 based on the period of January 1977, through
-------
28
1 December 1977. For affected persons not conduct-
2 ing hazardous waste activities during any or all of
3 that period, the annual volume should be estimated
4 in the best practical manner.
5 I would like to now turn the hearing over to Ms. Amy
6 Schaffer who will address the enforcement aspect of
7 these regulations.
8 MS. SCHAFFER: Good afternoon. I would like
9 to just speak very briefly concerning the enforcement
10 of Section 3010.
11 The goal of the Environmental Protection Agency is
12 to ensure that the regulated hazardous waste community
13 complies with the hazardous waste regulations.
14 EPA views the notification process as the first
15 step in obtaining overall compliance with the regula-
16 tions, learning who will be subject to the regulations
1? and what, and how much waste they handle.
'" We have attempted to maximize compliance with
19 Section 3010 regulations in three ways:
20 1) We have tried to simplify the regulations
21 to make it easy to notify and to relieve some of
22 the reporting burden from the regulative community.
23 2) The Agency is planning to inform the regu-
24 lated community, as Tim said, of the notification
25 requirement on tha advantage of the voluntary
-------
29
1 compliance. This dispersal of information is an
2 ongoing activity which has already started.
3 3t) Finally, EPA plans on taking strong enforce-
4 ment action against those people who do not comply.
5 Violation of the notification requirement is con-
6 sidered very serious, because those people who do
7 not notify evade the entire control system and
8 frustrate our efforts to build a data base de-
9 fining the scope of the hazardous waste community.
10 EPA will not hesitate in taking action against any per-
11 son who does attempt to evade the system.
12 The kinds of questions that I, as an enforcement
«\
13 representative, am interested are things such as, "How
14 stringent should EPA be in assessing penalties to non-
15 notifiers," and, "What are some ways that we can inform
16 hazardous waste handlers of their notification require-
17 ments." Thank you.
18 MR. LEHMAN: Thank you, Amy. I notice some
19 of you may have questions about other parts of Subtitle
20 c. After all of the statements, comments, and ques-
21 tions regarding Section 3010 have been received and
22 discussed we will close this formal Section 3010 public
23 hearing and if there is sufficient interest, we will
24 attempt to answer any other questions you have about
25 other Subtitle C regulations.
-------
30
1 Now, let's call for oral statements. Speakers
2 will be called in chronological order of. receiving
3 their request for time to speak at this hearing, either
4 by mail or by registration before the hearing.
5 At this time I would like to call Carey Stark,
6 Process Study Engineer, of the Mississippi Chemical
7 Corporation. Is Mr. Carey Stark present?
8 (No answer)
9 Evidently not at this time. We will proceed down
10 the list and come back. I might point out that one of
11 the individuals who registered for time to speak has
12 decided to submit a written statement to the record
13 rather than an oral statement at this time.
14 Next, I would Like to call Thomas Dwight Hinch,
15 Environmental Engineer of the Tennessee Department of
16 Public Health, Division of Solid Waste Management.
17 (Mr. Hinch came forward to the lectern)
18 MR. HINCH: My name is Dwight Hinch. I work
19 for the Tennessee Department of Public Health, Division
20 of Solid Waste Management, and I'm here today repre-
21 senting Tennessee's Hazardous Waste Management Program.
22 in May of 1977 Tennessee enacted its own companion
23 legislation to Subtitle C of the Federal Resource Con-
24 servation and Recovery Act of 1976. Our Hazardous
25 Waste Management Act provides for a Hazardous Waste
-------
31
1 Management Program, which we think is at least sub-
2 stantially equivalent to that set up in Subtitle C.
3 Like RCRA, our law requires a promulgation of final
4 regulations by last April, and like EPA, we didn't make
5 that deadline and still haven't finalized our regula-
6 tions.
7 We, at least, attribute much of our own delay to
8 EPA's delay. In our efforts to develop regulations
9 which are equivalent and consistent with EPA's, we have
10 had to wait at times to see what EPA's latest staff
11 regulations contain. However, I should also admit that
12 we waited because we knew we didn't know much about what
13 we were doing and we were kind of hoping EPA did. In
I4 any case, we're running way behind our legislative
15 schedule, and to our minds, at least, are running short
16 of time.
17 It is our devout intentions to have our regulations
18 finalized, our program operating, and notification of
19 hazardous waste activities rolling in by the time our
20 State Legislature reconvenes in February 1979, and
21 perhaps becomes inquisitive about our program and the
22 needed amendments to our law which we will be asking
23 them to consider.
24 We think that we will get our regulations finalized
25 and in effect by some time around the first of the year.
-------
32
1 At present we're working with the Tennessee Manu-
2 facturer's Association, which is an industry group
3 that represents the bulk of affected industry in
4 Tennessee, preparing an effective and final draft for
5 public review and public hearings in October or Novem-
6 ber of this year.
7 The latest estimate I have heard from EPA as to
8 the date they expect to have their hazardous waste
9 listings and criteria finalized, and thus their notifi-
10 cation period initiated, is April of 1979. We plan to
11 be in our 90 day notification period around that time.
12 Nonetheless, we also intend to operate a pre-
13 liminary notification program, which is fully ameniable
14 to authorization by EPA. Thus, our program must re-
15 quire essentially the same information from essentially
16 the same persons as will EPA's program.
17 The first requirement is simple. Our notification
18 forms will include all of the information required by
19 EPA. In fact, we will require more information from
20 the generator than will EPA. In addition to informa-
21 tion about the generated hazardous waste itself, our
22 law mandates that we also require information as to the
23 methods the generator intends to store, treat, or dis-
24 pose of the waste.
25 Our generator notification requirement will thus
-------
33
' supply us with the information to replace the hazardous
2 waste survey, which we have never done.
3 The second requirement, that of requiring notifica-
4 tion of essentially the same persons as will EPA, is
5 more difficult. To do so, we must have essentially
6 the same listings of and criteria for identifying
7 hazardous waste, as does EPA.
8 As I understand it, EPA plans to have another
9 draft of their 3001 standards ready by around mid-
10 September. We intend to use EPA's new draft to prepare
11 our own final draft listings and criteria. We will
12 probably essentially adopt EPA's listings of hazardous
13 waste and revise our criteria to be at least substan-
14 tially equivalent to EPA's.
15 We hope that this will satisfy EPA's requirements
16 for limited interim authorization as outlined in the
17 proposed rules being discussed today. However, if EPA's
18 3001 and 3010 standards requiring notification from
1' persons whom our own notification requirements overlooked
20 we will be happy to work with EPA to pick up those
21 notifications we missed.
22 In summary, we're going to proceed with the
23 development and implementations of our State Hazardous
24 Waste Management Program under our own State law with-
25 out any other unnecessary waiting on EPA's program.
-------
34
1 This should not be construed to mean that we're going
2 to disregard EPA's objectives in this process. We are
3 just as interested in obtaining EPA authorization as
4 anybody. We intend to work diligently with EPA to ob-
5 tain the desired or necessary authorization from
6 limited interim through interim to full. We simply
7 intend to implement an effective hazardous waste manage-
8 ment program in Tennessee as quickly as we can. This
9 is the Tennessee Legislature's intent. Thank you.
10 MR. LEHMAN: Thank you, Mr. Hinch. Are there
11 any questions or comments on Mr. Hinch's statement;
12 MR. HARLOW: Dwight, I would just like to
13 make a comment. That's a very good presentation and
14 this is the kind of effective implementation of a law
15 that we want to see, or want to encourage all of the
16 States to develop. I thank you very much for a good
17 presentation.
18 MR. HINCH: Thank you, sir.
19 MR. LEHMAN: I would like to remind the
20 audience that if you have questions concerning commen-
21 taries made, please write them on a card and get them
22 up here to the panel. I would like to call Jo Ann W.
23 Bennett, President of the Tennessee League of Women
24 Voters.
25 MRS. KELLY: Mr. Lehman, I'm on the list and
-------
35
1 have been skipped.
2 MR. LEHMAN: Excuse me. Are you Mary Kelly?
3 MRS. KELLY: Yes.
4 MR. LEHMAN: I'm sorry. I was informed that
5 you did not intend to give your statement orally. If
6 you would prefer to, that will be fine. I'm sorry.
7 That was our mixup here. I would now like to call
8 Mary Kelly, Administrative Vice President, League of
9 Women Voters of South Carolina, Columbia, South Caroline
10 MRS. KELLY: I am Mary T. Kelly, Adminstra-
11 tive Vice-President of the South Carolina League of
12 Women Voters. I am here today representing both the
13 League and the South Carolina Environmental Coalition.
14 Both of these groups have a proven record of activity
15 in the public interest. We feel that the Solid Waste
16 Disposal Act as amended by the Resource and Recovery
17 Act of 1976 and the South Carolina Hazardous Waste
18 Management Act of 1978 are significant steps forward I
19 in the cause of public health through the control of
20 hazardous substances in the environment. We strongly
21 support effective regulations for the implementation
22 of these laws and advocate that these regulations take
23 place at the earliest possible date.
24 We particularly urge that "the degree of equiva-
25 lency with EPA's management of the process" will not
-------
36
1 only be one of the criteria used to determine whether
2 or not to grant authorization, but an overriding one.
3 At the same time we urge the EPA and the authorized
4 agency, and in the case of South Carolina,the Depart-
5 ment of Health and Environment Control is that agency,
6 to coordinate efforts with other agencies and depart-
7 ments of government functioning under this and other
8 overlapping legislation to minimize replication of
9 effort and to attain the desired goals without
10 exhausting the patience of the regulated community.
11 We suggest that several changes be made in the
12 notification form. Under Item 7, we would like to
13 see the word "optional" deleted. The quantity of
14 hazardous waste is important and should not be optional.
15 Perhaps the permitted response could be made less
16 specific by permitting the answers to be "less than",
I7 "between (blank) and (blank)", "greater than", or
18 putting in some specific figures so that you would have
19 a good general idea, Some estimate of amount should be
20 included and required. In addition, an added question
21 as to whether a greater or lesser amount is expected
22 in the current year seems advisable.
23 The manner in which the confidentiality claim is
24 handled is evidently of concern to you. The form
25 seems to almost suggest that the responder take the
-------
37
1 easy way out with a blanket claim to confidentiality,
2 with or without justification. It cannot be disputed
3 that many industrialists are well justified in not
4 divulging details of their processes, yet the public
5 interest must also be served. We suggest that an
6 explanatory statement be included to the effect that
7 substantiation may be included, but must be provided
8 on request. A penalty could be imposed for flagrantly
9 untenable claims.
10 A serious oversight exists in that owners of
11 inactive hazardous waste treatment, storage, and dis-
12 posal facilities are not required to notify. In view
13 of proven problems, and the Hooker dump site at
14 Niagara Palls is the most recent and terrible example,
15 it is glaringly obvious that some inventory of such
16 sites is needed for public protection, and we thank
17 you for the opportunity to participate in this hearing.
18 MR. LEHMAN: I thank you, Mrs. Kelly. Will
19 you take questions?
20 MRS. KELLY: Yes.
21 MR. LEHMAN: Does anybody on the panel have
22 questions at this time?
23 MR. SANJOUR: First, a comment on the two
24 issues, one about the optional clause and the estimates
25 of amount. By way of explanation, those are both the
-------
38
1 way they are because our General Counsel advised us
2 that to do otherwise may exceed our authority. In
3 fact, the issue is whether or not a person has notified
if we were to demand certain information on a person
5 who doesn't supply it, the issue is has he legally
6 notified or not. And, the General Counsel has inter-
7 preted the law as saying that, in fact, the person
8 probably has notified even if we say it's not optional
9 and he doesn't suppl/ it; so, we would exceed our
10 authority, which is why it's not applicable.
11 That other thing on your question of inactive
12 sites, I would like -o solicit your opinion on how you
13 think that should be handled. The law only gives us
14 authority over owners. In the case of Hooker Chemical,
15 for example, EPA cannot hold Hooker responsible for
16 that because the law only gives authority to the person
17 who presently owns it, which in that case would be the
18 City of Niagara Falls, I believe.
19 MRS. SMITH: I can't say that I can tell you
20 how to solve that problem, but I do feel that it is
21 important that some of these massive dumping sites
22 be identified as -- Hooker may not be responsible any-
23 more, but still someone has to be and it needs to be
24 known that these things exist and where they are.
25 MR. HARLOW: Mary, on the first page of your
-------
39
1 statement you make the comment that in granting
2 authority to State agencies to run the program, that
3 our primary determination should be based on whether
4 or not that State program is equivalent to EPA's?
5 MRS. KELLY: Well, equivalent or better.
6 MR. HARLOW: Well, I think that the regula-
7 tions, as I understand them, and panel, correct me if
8 I'm wrong, that we're looking at a criteria as being
9 equivalent, in effect, if they can administer the
10 program and, in effect, accomplish the same purposes
11 that EPA is doing, which if EPA runs the program, is
12 that the criteria where you would be granting
13 authorization?
14 MRS. KELLY: If it turns out that those were
15 the results, yes. But', I think there's some feeling
16 in South Carolina that in the case of the Occupational
17 Safety and Health Act the authorization is with the
18 Department of Labor, but it could be somewhat more
19 zealously enforced.
20 MR. HARLOW: And your second comment in that
21 same paragraph, that EPA and the South Carolina Depart-
22 ment of Health and Environmental Control working to-
23 gether hopes to coordinate effbrts and to avoid dupli-
24 cation, I would hope that we're already doing this.
25 MRS. KELLY: Well, I hope, yes. Thank you.
-------
40
1 MR. LEHMAN: Thank you, Mrs. Kelly. Next, I
2 would like to call Jo Ann W. Bennett, President of the
3 Tennessee League of VIomen Voters.
4 (There was no answer)
5 MR. LEHMAN: Is Mrs. Bennett in the audience?
6 (There was no answer)
7 MR. LEHMAN: Apparently not; we'll come back.
8 Next, I would like to call Laurenthia Mesh, I believe
9 it is. Senior Engineer, DeKalb County, Georgia.
10 (Ms. Mesh came forward to the lectern)
11 MS. MESH: As an Environmental Engineer in
12 charge of industrial wastes in a highly political
13 Georgia community^ I prefer to speak as a public citizen
14 and a mother. I attack EPA's past and RCRA laws as
15 being long overdue. Contrary to industrial belief
16 with respect to tax exceptances, the health web is
17 more important than the economic web. Rather than
18 EPA reassessing their criteria,it seems more reasonable
19 that industry reassess theirs and pass on to the environ
20 merit.
21 Research is needed as to what effects chemicals
22 have on the human body. Of the seventy thousand
23 chemicals circulating on us, two hundred have been
24 studied and most of these are carcinogenic, mutagenic,
25 or teratogenic. Teratogenicity means producing monsters
-------
41
1 instead of babies. Short term solutions appear viable
2 for disposal of toxic wastes. I thank you for the
3 opportunity to speak here.
4 MR. LEHMAN: Will you accept questions from
5 the panel?
6 MS. MESH: Yes, I'd be happy to.
7 MR. LEHMAN: Any questions.
g MR. HARLOW: Is DeKalb County going to presen
g a written statement on the regulations?
10 MS. MESH: No, I'm speaking as a public
11 citizen and a mother.
12 MR. LEHMAN: Thank you, Ms. Mesh. Next I
13 would like to call Mr. Daniel Moon, Burlington Environ-
14 mental Services Incorporated out of Wilmington, Dela-
15 ware.
16 MR. MOON: Thank you, Jack. My name is
17 Daniel Moon from Burlington Environmental Services.
18 I have three areas that I would like to address in
19 development of the regulations. The first is concerned
20 with the notification activities as they apply to re-
21 visions in 3001. The second is the use of a State
22 definition of hazardous waste; and a third is regard-
23 ing confidentiality.
24 Regarding notification, I really must question
25 the need for notification as a result of revisions in
-------
42
1 3001. As it is, the notification of the revisions will
2 only apply to those people that are engaged in those
3 activities of crime or promulgation, and as the regu-
4 lations say, a mechanism has been established that
5 will allow people that start generating or transport-
6 ing or storing, et cetera, of wastes that are identi-
7 fied in the revisions by, one, poor treatment, storage,
8 and disposal facilities that they have to get a revision
9 in their permit, that they will have to apply for that
10 and so effectively notify EPA or the State. For genera--
11 tors or haulers that now need to be in the system,
12 they would have to start utilizing the manifest system
13 and they, too, would therefore be plugged into the
14 system and effectively notifying EPA or the State.
15 I think both of these activities would effectively
16 serve the requirements for notifying EPA or the State
17 of any revisions.
18 I think that by eliminating the revisions and the
!9 notification there would also be less of a burden on
20 those generators and haulers that are already in the
21 system. They would nc longer have to be concerned
22 with notifying EPA or the State. They would simply
23 adopt the necessary requirements the revisions
24 caused.
25 I also think that it's not necessary for EPA or
-------
43
1 the State programs that take over the regulatory
2 hazardous waste program, there's no need for them to
3 maintain a mechanism for this continued notification,
4 and especially when a lot of us are aware of the bur-
5 dens that are already placed on the Regional and State
6 offices.
7 Okay. The next thing I would like to comment on
8 is the State definition of hazardous waste. From
9 everything that I've read in thesoproposed regulations,
10 it would seem to be quite inappropriate. It conflicts
11 with prior statement in the regulations and the pro-
12 posed regulations regarding the need and the desire
13 for a national consistency.
1* Now, the States will be assuming 3010 prior to
15 the promulgation of the 3001 regulations and prior t-
16 the ability of the Regional offices to evaluate the
17 States dUfiv\\V\«#\ of hazardous waste. What would you
18 end up with if the situation were a multi-State firm
1g as being required to go by several different defini-
20 tions of hazardous waste across the country. And, as
21 was stated here earlier, it's okay for a corporation
22 to use the single notification. By allowing each
23 State, if the definition of hazardous waste vVfti more
24 stringent and a question of who is going to do that
25 evaluation at this very early stage, how would a large
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
10
11
12
13
44
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
multi-State company make a single notification? It
would become very difficult and probably very expen-
My final comments regard confidentiality. I
know that EPA is very concerned with confidentiality,
but there seems to be limited concern regarding the
State's ability to control information that is sub-
mitted to that State regarding confidentiality.
Now, there seems to be no assurance given that
the State, in fact, does have a law concerning con-
fidentiality. I think that as a minimunij perhaps EPA
should publish at the same time, as they publish with
the States, will run a notification program, that they
should publish which States also have a confidentiality
laWj or some mechanisn should be allowed to either
require that the States have a confidentiality law
before they're given any notification, or to allow
companies an exemption to submitting information that
they feel is confidential if a State does not have such
a law. Thank you.
MR. LEHMAN: Mr. Moon, would you answer any
*\
questions coming from the panel.
MR. FIELDS: One question. Dan, your first
two points anyway. We are working on a procedure
whereby we'd not have a notification requirement in
-------
45
1 the future due to revisions in Section 3001. We
2 don't want that either. We hope that when 3001 is
3 revised that the permit requirements, the manifest
4 requirements, the other requirements could be legally
5 mandated to satisfy notification requirements. And,
6 we concur with that approach. We are working on it
7 so that the notification will only apply initially
8 when 3001 is promulgated and future revisions will be
9 handled by these other sections of the Act. So, that's
10 where we plan to go.
11 The second point is on the area of State defini-
12 tions of hazardous waste. The discussion in the
13 preamble on State definitions is the way that our
14 legal people maintain that we have to go. If the
15 State definition is more stringent than the Section
16 3001 regulation, it is allowable for the purposes of
17 notification. It can't be less stringent. So, again,
18 our EPA lawyers have advised us that we legally have
19 to allow other de?inv^lC>n5 as I°n9 as they're as
20 stringent as the 3001 regulations.
21 MR. MOON: When will the evaluation be made
22 of their stringency, whether they're more stringent
23 or less stringent?
24 MR. FIELDS: The EPA Regional Office, the
25 Regional Administrator will have to make that
-------
46
1 evaluation as one of his considerations in granting
2 a State limited interim authorization. He will have
3 to review the whole State program for implementing
4 Section 3010. So, if the Regional Office calls in
5 that regard, then they will have to make that evalua-
6 tion.
7 MR. DICKINSON: One of the problems \ve've
8 had in Tennessee has asked this question, what do we
9 do if we've already notified our manufacturer and then
10 EPA comes out with different criteria. We would only
11 have 90 days at the Regional Office to evaluate what
12 they have done agaiast what EPA's definition is. And,
13 then within that 90 day period we've got to decide
1* if they're equivalent. If they're not,we've got to
15 decide whether the State is going to do something
16 else or whether the Regional Office is. So, it is —
17 I would say it is a real problem for the States that
18 have already notified, because the day that our Federal)
19 Regs are final we'11 be faced with a 90 day clock of
20 deciding what to do, what additional steps need to be
21 taken either by the State or by the Regional Office.
22 So, it is a problem, Tim.
23 MR. LEHMAN: Ladies and gentlemen, that's the
24 end of the list of the people who have indicated a
25 desire to speak. Let me check and make sure that two
-------
47
1 of the individuals that I called before cere., in fact,
2 not here. At this time I would like to call Carey
3 Stark, Process Study Engineer of the Mississippi
4 Chemical Corporation. Is Carey Stark in the audience?
5 (Pause) Let the record show that we called upon
6 him twice now without any response and that he was
7 not present. I would now call Jo Ann K. Bennett, Presi-
8 dent of the Tennessee League of Women Voters. Is
9 Ms. Bennett in the audience? (Pause) Apparently not.
10 Again, please let the record show that we gave two
11 opportunities for Ms. Bennett to speak at this hearing.
12 Are there any individuals in the audience who
13 wish to present written statements to the hearing?
14 (Pause) Apparently not.
15 Are there any members of the audience who have
16 questions, written questions, that would like to have
17 the panel or one of the speakers to answer? If so,
18 would you please get these questions up to us, please.
19 (There was a moment's pause)
20 MR. LEHMAN: Here's an easy one to answer.
21 Question: "Do you consider incineration of a hazardous
22 waste on the generation site as requring a disposal
23 permit?" The answer is yes and no. The answer is yes,
24 a permit is required; the answer is no, it's not a dis-
25 posal permit but a treatment permit, because we consider
-------
48
1 incineration to be treatment rather than disposal.
2 That's the way the law is written. But yes, a permit
3 definitely is required for an incinerator on a
4 generator's property, but it would be a treatment
5 permit rather than a disposal permit.
6 George, do you want to take the next one?
7 MR. HARLOW: I have a question here and it
**.
8 says, "Please explain^relationship of Section 402 of
9 the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to this pro-
10 posed regulation?"
11 Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control
12 Act establishes the National Pollutant Discharge
13 Elimination System, which is a national permit program
14 for controlling the discharges of municipal and indus-
15 trial wastes of the nation's streams.
16 The RCRA PrCji'am also sets up a permitting process
17 for the treatment and disposal of hazardous waste, and
18 there is a relationship, although at this time somewhat
19 vague. I can think of an example where a company may, j
20 at the same time, wiiile they're discharging treated
21 effluents to a receiving stream requiring an NPDES
22 permit, that they also may be disposing of; storing_,
23 or treating hazardous waste as defined under The
24 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. And, for those
25 companies who are doing these kinds of operations,it
-------
49
1 is very possible, and it is being considered seriously
2 within EPA, that this kind of operation could be per-
3 mitted under one permit which would provide both a
4 NPDES permit and the RCRA permit into one document.
5 (Unidentified person made statement from
6 the audience. Reporter could not understand
7 all of statement)
8 MR. HARLOW: Now, I can see many situations
9 where you would need both kinds of activities covered
10 under RCRA and under NPDES.
11 (Unidentified person made statement from
12 the audience. Reporter could not understand
13 all of statement)
14 MR. LEHMAN: As I mentioned earlier, we will
15 discuss cnipstions concerning other parts of Subtitle
16 c after we finish on 3010.
17 MR. FIELDS: One request is to repeat the
18 earlier announcement I made regarding the error in
19 the proposed draft regulations that you have a copy
20 of, the Section 3010 regulations. The sample form at
21 the back has six criteria or characteristics.
22 Well, as I indicated before, we are not allowing
23 an undetermined response for two of those three cri-
24 teria for which an undetermined response is indicated
25 in the draft regs. Item (c) which is radioactive,
-------
50
1 and item (e) which is corrosive - the only two applica-
2 ble responses to those two items is "yes" or "no".
3 We're not allowing an undetermined response within the
4 90 day period for any criteria, except for toxicity.
5 So, the first five characteristics, that is, "Ignitable
6 Reactive, Infectious, Radioactive, and Corrosive," the
7 only response would be "yes" or "no" as to whether
8 you're counting one of those five categories as waste.
9 We are allowing, as I indicated before, an unde-
!0 termined response, in addition to "yes" or "no", in
11 the case of toxicity.
12 MR. HARLOW: Let me get back to the previous
13 gentleman's question. I see what you're referring to.
14 Suppose EPA in its hazardous waste definition happens
15 to classify a substance, say cadmium - let's take it
16 for example, as a hazardous waste, and a company dis-
17 charges through its effluent, cadmium. There's a
18 method to regulate the discharge of cadmium to a
19 stream within NPDES. If it also happened to be storing
20 treating, or disposing of cadium through some other
21 way> then the appropriate regulatory mechanism for
22 entering that would be RCRA.
23 MR. LEHMAN: I have a question here that's
24 similar to that one. "It is not clear whether sludges
25 settled out from industrial wastewater is discharged
-------
51
' under a NPDES permit exempted when the effluent con-
2 taining some of those same solids is discharged with-
3 out further treatment?" We're getting a little far
4 afield from 3010, but let me say I can share your
5 concern. How can you discuss 3010 when you don't have
6 the final definition of hazardous waste; so, we recog-
7 nize the fact that there's a problem, and perhaps we
8 might take a minute aside here and address that point.
9 The reason 3010 is going forward before the
10 others are proposed is, as Tim Fields mentioned in
11 his presentation, we're going to need at least 120
12 days, and probably more than that, before 3001 can be
13 published in its final form, to get the States limited
14 interim authorization clarified and to publish a list
15 in the Federal Register at the time we finalize 3001,
16 and which States have such authority for notification
17 and which ones don't. So, 3010 is going forward. We
18 have to get these forms finalized; we have to get all
19 the forms printed; we have to have substantial com-
20 puterized mailing time, all signed and ready to go the
21 day we finalize the 3001 regulations. Now, that's the
22 reason why this regulation has to come out and we
23 recognize the difficulties.
24 But to answer this question, "It is not clear
25 whether industrial wastewater is discharged under a
-------
52
1 --I'm sorry, wastewater discharged unkev a NPDES permit
2 is exempted when the effluent containing some of those
3 same solids is discharged without further treatment."
4 I think the point here is that any sludges that
5 are generated as a result of industrial waste solid
6 treatment, which are a hazardous waste according to
7 the definition, and do fall under the purview of RCRA
8 and would require the control that are required under
9 RCRA, those sludges are disposed of on-site, or if
10 they're stored for longer than 90 days on-site, then
11 a RCRA permit is required to deal with those sludges.
12 If they are shipped off-site within 90 days, then a
13 RCRA permit is not necessarily required for those
14 sludges.
15 Now, this gets us into another area which has not
16 yet been settled within the Agency, and that is whether
17 or not the treatment of lagoons that are part of an
18 industrial waste treatment system are covered under
19 RCRA or not. The discharge to navigable waters is
20 certainly covered, but the lagoon itself has the
21 potential, at least, for reaching into ground water
22 and we're still trying to determine whether or not we
23 will attempt to regulate under RCRA. It's not clear
24 whether legislation has that intent to regulate those
25 as regards a treatment system. And, clearly, a holding
-------
53
1 pond of the lagoon which is used for storing of wastes,
2 that clearly is part of the RCRA program. I'm talking
3 about the ponds that are actually in the treatment
4 plan itself. Bill Sanjour.
5 MR. SANJOUR: "Will universities have to
6 meet the standards, the same standards for their re-
7 search laboratory wastes?" In a word, yes. The only
8 possible exemption is that there is a minimum quantity
9 in the 3002 standards, but that it would be very less
10 than the same quantity of hazardous waste per month.
11 100 kilograms per month on the average.
12 Another question is, "V7hat constitutes storage?
13 That is, how long could a generator have hazardous
14 waste on hand before requiring permitting for storage?"
15 The current version of this 3002 standards draft is
16 90 days. If the generator stores for less than 90 days
17 he must require a permit. That only applies to genera-
18 tors.
19 The next question, "Material produced is essen-
20 tially a by-product, some sold, but due to limited
21 demand,the remainder burned. Have air pollution per-
22 mits authorized use as fuels. Based on what Mr. Har-
23 low just said we would assume this is an air permit
24 matter and not an RCRA matter."
25 Well, if the material that is burned falls under
-------
54
1 the definition of a hazardous waste, then everything
2 that happens to it is a RCRA matter. So, the issue is
3 not so much as to whether or not the facility has an
4 air permit. The issue is whether or not the material
5 that's going through that facility is a hazardous
6 waste. If it is, then under the 3001 definition, then
7 any place it goes to must have a permit. Now, that's
8 in the law; that's not even our standards. But the
9 law says that only a permit facility, a facility per-
10 mitted under this Act can accept the hazardous waste.
11 So, therefore, if the waste at any one time became
12 hazardouSj then the incinerator on the site must have
13 a permit under RCRA. So, the real issue then is
14 whether or not the material is a hazardous waste.
15 MR. LEHMAN: Tim.
16 MR. FIELDS: I've got one question which re-
17 lates to items 5 and 6 on the sample notification
18 form. The first comment is, "The sample notification
19 form provides only one item for types of hazardous
20 waste handled." I guess the question is referring to
21 item #5 which talks about types of hazardous waste
22 as identified by criteria or characteristics under
23 Section 3001.
24 "Is it necessary for the generator, disposer,
25 et cetera, to classify each of the hazardous wastes
-------
55
1 listed in item #6, which is a description of the
2 hazardous wastes handled as identified by listings,
3 as corrosive, toxifc, et cetera, at the time of notifi-
4 cation under Section 3010." The answer is no. Item
5 #6 is to provide a list of hazardous wastes handled.
6 That means list as specified by 3001 regulations, or
7 any other description you might want to provide for
8 the hazardous waste to be handled. You do not have to
9 relate that to item #5. You do not have to say that
10 the waste that you've listed is toxic, or corrosive,
11 et cetera. So, we're not requiring that you provide
12 a characteristic associated with each waste that you
13 list in item #6.
14 MR. SANJOUR: I think the issue though is
15 suppose you have five different wastes then?
16 MR. LEHMAN: Well, let me make a comment on
17 this. I think the point about that is that there are
18 two ways to define hazardous wastes listed. One is by
19 criteria or characteristics, which is toxic, flammable,
20 or if you prefer - ignitable as we call it, or corrosiv
21 The other is by listings. The lists themselves and
22 when they will be published will indicate the reason
23 why they're on the list, because they're toxic or be-
21 cause they're corrosive, et cetera. So, we merely
25 respond by indicating which waste on a particular list
-------
56
1 that you deal with, we will already know whether it's
2 toxic or corrosive or whatever.
3 MR. SANJOUR: The question I'm hearing is
4 suppose you have five different wastes. Now, do you
5 have to identify these characteristics for each waste
6 separately or can you just lump them altogether on
7 the answer to question five. That's the way I under-
8 stood it.
9 MR. FIELDS: We have interpreted -- we be-
10 lieve that aggregate authority is satisfactory. We
n don't interpret — item #5 which says, "Types of
12 hazardous wastes handled, as identified by criteria
13 or characteristics under Section 3001," if a person
14 indicates the wastes they're handling are hazardous
15 due to -- maybe you check — maybe you've got three
18 different types of wastes. You may have six dif-
17 ferent wastes, but there are actually three different
18 types. You might have an ignitable waste, you might
19 have an infectious waste, you might have a toxic waste,
20 and you check those three boxes providing an aggragate
21 response to the types of hazardous wastes you're hand-
22 ling. That would satisfy EPA's interpretation of
23 responding to notification. So, in answer to those
24 questions, the person would not have to specify as to
25 each individual waste, which characteristics were
-------
57
1 associated with each of the five wastes to provide
2 an aggragate response. To make it even simpler, if
3 all five wastes were toxic and each said, "yes, toxic,"
4 that would be satisfactory for responding to item #5.
5 MR. DICKINSON: He would not then have to
6 list the five wastes in #6, right?
7 MR. FIELDS: That's his option.
8 MR. LEHMAN: We would, of course, prefer some
9 definition, or description of the wastes given, though.
10 There's still another variance on all this, if I may
11 muddy the water further. There are some wastes which
12 are ignitable, corrosive, possibly radioactive or toxic
13 all at the same time. And, of course, in that case
14 you would check all of the responses, all of the boxes
15 that apply to that particular waste.
16 Okay, there are several other questions. One of
17 them is, "Will there be an easy way to notify Of genera-
1" tors of hazardous waste after initial notification has
I
19 been completed?" "Of generation" it has. "Will there
20 be an easy way to notify of generation of hazardous
21 waste after initial notification has been completed?"
22 This point came up earlier. We are, as Tim indi-
23 cated, attempting to put the burden, basically, on the
24 other regulations of Subtitle C to handle this case,
25 where a person begins to generate hazardous waste after
-------
58
1 the initial notification. The requirements for that
2 case are contained in Section 3002, the generators
3 requirement, rather than 3010. In other words, we
4 are attributing 3010 to be primarily a one shot
5 notification at the beginning of the program, and
6 any new entrants into the field in generation, trans-
7 port, treatment, storage, and disposal would be re-
8 quired under other regulations to provide EPA with
9 essentially the same information as these requirements
10 of 3010, but we would not activate the entire notifica-
11 tion system again.
12 Okay, another question. "What is the relation-
13 ship between toxic limits in NPDES permits for primary
14 industries and regulations of the RCRA, Sections 3001
15 through 3006, and 3010? Will not separate controls
ig generate separate permits for the sane facility?"
17 Well, this ties in, would certainly agree with what
18 George mentioned earlier. The toxic limits that are
19 being generated now under the court ordered toxic
20 guidelines program to us, that they call for a new
21 set of restrictions on discharge of industrial waste
22 waters and navigable waters. And, when those regula-
23 tions are complete and when they are put into effect,
24 there will be a reopening on the RCRA permit, at which
25 time these new requirements would be imposed. Meanwhile,
-------
59
1 RCRA is coming along with another regulatory program fo
2 hazardous waste, and to the extent that both of these
3 will reply it is the Agency's intention, as best we
4 can, to integrate these two new requirements at the
5 same time.
6 My thinking is that we will — when the NPDES
7 permit reopens to apply the discharge requirement(
8 it will be at that time that the RCRA permitting will
9 also take place. So, what we have in mind here is
10 that each facility then would get one permit with two
11 parts, the new DAC toxic part and the new RCRA part.
12 We will try to avoid having two separate rounds, if
13 you will, of permitting for authority.
14 Okay, another question. "Draft criteria under
15 Section 3001 for hazardous solid waste is not compatible
16 with NPDES permit and Section 3011 of 92-500. Will
17 attempts be made to bring them in line?"
18 I'd be guessing what the questioner had in mind
19 here because I'm not sure of what aspect he believes
20 that the definition of hazardous waste is not compati-
21 ble with RCRA's under Section 3011. Now, first of
22 all, you should understand that Section 3011, for those
23 of you who are not aware of all of the hazardous fill
24 regulations under the Clean Water Act, and those list
25 approximately 285, I think it was, or 287, chemicals
-------
60
1 which are controlled for spill purposes and those in
2 the ocean are currently not in effect because of a
3 court ordered spill effect. Nonetheless, there were
4 a set of chemicals which were specified to be con-
5 trolled. For those of you who have read this Act, I'm
6 sure you have of Section 3001, you see that there are
7 very few, if any - there may be a few, specific
8 chemicals mentioned. Most of the definitions in the
9 listing area is in terms of a processed waste. It
10 doesn't say mercury; it doesn't say cadium. Now, this
11 is not necessarily inconsistent or not compatible with
12 the NPDES or spill regulations. All we're doing here
13 is saying that we have enough information in our file
14 to give us sufficient confidence that the processed
15 wastes of this list are hazardous and should be
16 brought under control under this new program. And,
17 we're doing it that way for a simple reason. One
18 is we feel that it is easier for the regulative
19 community to understand that. It also does not require
20 the regulated industry to go out and do a lot of test-
21 ing. If we were to specify, for example, that a waste
22 is hazardous, you can have more than 100 parts of
23 mercury, then for you to know whether or not a waste
24 is hazardous you would have to go out and test your
25 waste to find out whether it has more than 100 parts of
-------
61
1 mercury. So, to avoid all of that we are primarily
2 dealing in terms of descriptors of processed waste
3 and not just pure chemicals. Now, if that is the
4 nature of — if that's how you feel it's incompatibley
5 I've attempted to answer that question. If the
6 author of this question has a different point in mind,
7 perhaps you could clarify that for us.
8 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON FROM AUDIENCE: To give
9 you the example of an electroplating waste, let's
10 consider that the electroplating waste is listed in
11 the special chemicals category, or the hazardous waste
12 category, because of the mercury content. Now, if a
13 manufacturer changes his process so as to eliminate
14 that particular toxic chemical from his waste, accord-
15 ing to the criteria, the draft criteria, it still
16 would be considered as hazardous even though he has
17 removed or eliminated by process modification the
18 toxic content you were concerned with.
19 MR. LEHMAN: Okay, there is a way to handle
20 that situation. As a matter of fact, we encourage
21 process modifications to eliminate hazardous or toxic
22 contaminants in a waste and make it non-hazardous.
23 We will have, if it's not already in there - I thought
24 there was a section in there, but we will have a way
25 and clearly specify as to how you can prove that you
-------
62
1 do not have a. hazardous waste and, therefore, get out
2 of the control system. But given all the other alter-
3 natives it appears that it would be simpler for every-
4 body concerned to l^st them by process waste in the
5 manner that I mentioned. But, if you feel that you,
for example, on an electroplater do have a special
process, just using that example, does not produce a
hazardous waste, then there will be a way for you to
get out of the system.
The second part of your question dealt with
.. sludges and I believe we've covered that question.
Do we have any more questions?
(Additional questions brought forward to the
14 panel)
"Under Section 3002^ does the 100 kilograms a
16 month determine maximum each month, average each
17 month, or total material or hazardous components?"
18 The exemption for people who generate and dispose
19 of less than 100 kilograms a month originated in the
20 following way. I emphasize "and dispose of." In
21 other words, not that you generate less than a hundred
22 kilograms and save all of that for the year and then
23 dispose of it all at once - you have to generate and
24 dispose of less than a hundred kilograms to be exempted
25 Okay, that came about because of studies that we did
-------
63
1 which looked at generation data from a number of
2 State programs that were already in existence and
3 other information which led us to the conclusion that
4 there were a very large number of people who generated
5 wastes which will probably be considered hazardous in
6 very small amounts. And we did some calculations and
7 found that there's a cutoff point at about a hundred
8 kilograms per month, whereby one can eliminate from
9 this regulatory control system on the order of fifty
10 to sixty percent of all potential generators and about
11 ninety percent of all farmers if one exempts the people
12 who generate less than one hundred kilograms per
13 month.
14 At the same time one loses out of the control
15 system less than one-half of one percent of the total
16 amount of hazardous wastes that is out there. In
17 other words, there is a smaller number of people who
18 generate large amounts of hazardous waste, and then
19 there's a large number of people who generate small
20 amounts.
21 Another aspect of this whole thing is that -V\\«~
22 companion to Subtitle C is the new requirement for
23 disposal of non-hazardous wastes that are being
24 developed under Subtitle D. So, the requirements of
25 non-hazardous waste disposal are being substantially
-------
64
1 upgraded as the result of Subtitle D activities. So,
2 we felt that given these two items, these two aspects,
3 that we could in good conscience eliminate and remove
4 from all the notification and reporting and record
5 keeping burden a lot of these folks who generate a lot
6 less than a - small quantities of these wastes and
7 still achieve a reasonable amount of potential because
8 of the upgrading of the non-hazardous waste.
9 The type of people we're dealing with here are
10 probably, usually, small retail establishments like dry
|
11 cleaners who use percoethylene as a solvent, people
12 like that. There are literally tens of thousands of
13 these very small generators that we feel it wasn't
14 the intent of Congress to cover under this program.
15 As to the other parts of this maximum each month
16 or average each month - we're talking maximum each
17 month, not average, and as to the total of material
18 or hazardous components now, we're talking about the
19 wastes. If you have a hazardous waste, for example,
20 that is hazardous because it has a small amount of a
21 very toxic chemical in it it's not about a hundred
22 kilograms of a very toxic chemical we're talking about;
23 it's a hundred kilograms of the waste itself, the mix-
24 ture.
25 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON FROM AUDIENCE: Then
-------
65
1 your dry cleaners, for example, might well exceed the
2 criteria and be on your list?
3 MR. LEHMAN: It might, but ...
4 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON FROM AUDIENCE: Because
5 you've got to mix it with a hell of a lot of water?
MR. LEHMAN: Well, according to discussions
with the Dry Cleaning Institute}most retail dry
cleaner's establishements would not be affected by it.
At any rate, that's what we're talking about. We're
10 not talking about the components that makes it hazardous;
11 Any more questions?
12 MR. SANJOUR: If you have a residue from
13 solvent recovery which you have determined to be not
14 ignitable, must you report it and defend its exclusion
15 or not report it?"
16 Well, I guess the writer is assuming that if it's
i
not ignitable, therefore not a hazardous waste, although
18 my thinking is it could possibly be so because of
19 toxicity. But let's take that at face value and say
20 that we have material which is on the list identified
21 as a hazardous waste, but through the exclusion pro-
22 visions that Jack Lehman mentioned, would, in fact,
23 demonstrate that it is not a hazardous waste, and the
24 question is under those circumstances should it be
25 reported. Well, legally I'd say it's not required to
-------
66
1 be reported because it's not technically a hazardous
2 waste even though it's on the list. If it's not a
3 hazardous waste then EPA under this law has no
4 jurisdiction over you if you're not generating a
5 hazardous waste. However, you're kind of like in a
6 position of the man going into a restaurant with a
7 dog and it says "dogs excluded except Eyeing eye dogs,"
8 and if you walk ir there with a dog you're certainly
9 obeying the law, tut you ought to be prepared to show
10 that you're blind in case the issue ever comes up.
11 So, if you have a waste that is on the list of iden-
12 tified hazardous wastes, but you feel that it is ex-
13 eluded, then technically you don't have to report, but
14 for your own protection it might be good to deal with
15 EPA because it's kind of like waving a red flag if you
16 have a waste as identified as being on the list and
17 you're not in the system. I hope that answers the
18 question.
19 MR. LEHMAN: Well, as I mentioned earlier,
20 I think we will clarify that point in the draft of
21 3001 as to what you do if you're on the list and you're
22 sure you don't have; a hazardous waste;how do you get
23 off and how -- that will be made more clear.
24 MR. FIELDS: A comment and a question. The
25 comment is, "EPA's estimate for Section 3001 testing
-------
67
1 is 25 to 30K per sample." The question is, "Are we
2 required to do this testing prior to notification?"
3 And the answer is no, you're not required to do this
4 testing prior to notification to EPA or the States.
5 You can simply evaluate the hazardous waste and we're
6 not requiring you to test the waste, even though some
7 people will test their waste. But the answer is no,
8 we're not requiring a testing. I hope I've answered
9 the question.
10 MR. LEHMAN: Well, first of all, I don't know
'1 where the twenty-five to thirty thousand per K came
12 from. I think that might possibly be the case if
13 you tested a waste all the way through all of the
'4 potential testings that were listed in the March draft.
15 of course, you don't have to do that. If you have an
16 ignitable waste it's hazardous, period. You can stop
17 there if you wanted to. You don't have to go all the
^° way through it.
19 My second point is that we're in the process of
20 changing the methods by which one defines hazardous
21 waste, to a certain extent, and I will -- I'll get
22 into that right now as long as we're on it.
23 First of all, the Section 3001 as it was put out
24 in draft form in March has six criteria which deter-
25 mine ignitable, toxic, radioactive, et cetera. Our
-------
68
1 General Counsel informs us that a criteria for a
2 characteristic would be - let's say that you had
3 enough information about problems arising from ignitabl
4 wastes, a landfill fire or what have you. That would
5 be sufficient rationale or the criteria then for
6 selecting a characteristic for a hazardous waste
7 would be ignitable waste on fire and you cannot
8 adequately control it; so that's the criteria,
9 The characteristic is then that the waste has a flash
10 point of less than 140 degrees Fahrenheit, something
11 like that, which or: course is in the draft.
12 Point two is that there are a number of character-
13 istics, which we now call characteristics, which we
14 were having trouble with, particularly in the toxicity
15 area - in other words, not too much agreement, but we
16 have enough information to make certain test procedures
17 to form a national standard. So, while in the March
18 version toxicity was excluded, three different types
19 of toxicity, namely inorganic metal toxicity, organic j
20 toxicity, and the third variety being the carcinogen
21 biogenic radius genetic activity, is now broken up,
22 one characteristic in the three parts.
23 Our intention is to continue to have a
24 characteristic for Inorganic toxicity and to proceed
25 on through the safe drinking water standards which
-------
69
1 exist or which might exist in the future. And then to
2 take the other two parts, the organic and the carcinogeiji,
3 and so forth, and rather than put out a characteristic
4 to deal with those wastes which we know of to be
5 hazardous because of certain toxicity and list them
6 explicitly but not have a general characteristic
7 covering at this time, at the time of the final 3001
8 we would put out a request for information concerning
9 the development of more accurate, more nationally
10 acceptable protocols and so on in those areas that I
11 mentioned where we were having information problems
12 with.
13 This would, first of all, reduce the testing
14 requirements and we would still cover organic toxicity
15 and known carcinogens and known biogenetic changes
16 by RCRA, but not by characteristics, at this time.
17 So, that's where we're headedj in that particular
18 area. That's a long way to reply to a simple question.
19 Are there any other questions? (No answer)
20 Apparently not. Are there any questions from the floor
21 on 3010? (No answer) At this time then what I would
22 like to do is close the formal hearing on Section 3010
23 proposed regulations, take a short break, and then we
24 will return and throw the meeting open - we will be off
25 the record - and we will be happy to respond to written
-------
70
1 or oral questions aoout any part of Subtitle C. At
2 this time we will finish the formal hearing.
3 (The hearing closed at 2:51 o'clock,
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
~ jne^j/
a -fcjLT
-------
Dwiykt
S . C ,
(^ Dw^kt
v. I w'o<~k,
'[l\t I c»JKe.>v^c
of SclicL Waste.
I nt ci i"a.v^ ,
ht
trg.
c"
iilatu'V tt> jLLbfitlc C cT till TC(X>.".rT to H*"
law
up iw 5ul)1i"tU>. C. , Like. R.CRA
tKc
pt-cM.u.aiL
r rt'^
A^r, I, /Ul^ Ilk*. EPA, we cUjt Ava
N0- a^cL st|'|| nuA.t-'f Ti'vtxdiJ.ci 004- i^cci
-------
1-
We-. cJ Ic^-sTs QjrtYiouTij .'-*-uxJv oT
i r~nro II T t-F 4- 4- A \ \
TO tl n ? cf-clo-y. 1 y OD-IT eftovTs To oMvclop rcfju./a—
^3^ We. K^-l/t l\(xJL fo Wait o-t tlMe-5 TO SPC
l^KcL-T t I M ^ 'tX-lC*:? r £^M"Vt) » IfCQ^IivTi CM S C.C ^TCH. N G.dL i
.L s*V}iM
; L]-( l'!+-l 111
WX re. ru'X'ioiNQ Wau DeUiK,dL oup I£/II^IA.VC,C\. ^cKe.ivu.lo.
7 t 5 y
TT
AJctiTict'>-T|cw^ of rux.xa.rclc 0.5. U't
IN by tke. fiAA.e. oar St
-------
3
m
We. HiVfc fta't we nil" Q scAvoliVe, ^VCUNC[
\j e.tf-v~ . nT pye'jc'KjT we ct\re
u.2.>ots To
t
TOT public 'rtvi
or JVcvc-A*-l>f r.
TKe la-ie^t
CV3 tc t"Kc. cLc,t
J^Co-5 Wn-s"t«- li^
t"Kus tKcir
15 npril of
e e^f-
ry qr«ri.^r>
tlie. |MK of affetieX i^cU^-h'V 'N
c.TTc.ct|Ve TiNa.| ci.ve. pla.w to be,
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Public phones are located in the lobby on the first
floor. Please check with the registration desk for location
of our restrooms. There will be no smoking permitted during
these meeti ngs.
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
amended the Solid Waste Disposal Act. It includes a new
Section 3010, which provides in Subsection (a), and I quote,
that "Not later than 90 days after promulgation or revision of
regulations under Section 3001, identifying by its character-
istics or listing any substance as hazardous waste subject to
this subtitle, any person generating or transporting such
substance, or owning or operating a facility for treatment,
storage or disposal of such substance, shall file with the
Administrator, (or with States having authorized hazardous
waste permit programs under Section 3006), a notification
stating the location and general description of such activity
and the identified or listed hazardous wastes handled by such
person."
"Mot more than one such notification shall be re-
quired to be filed with respect to the same substance. No
identified or listed hazardous waste subject to this subtitle
may be transported, treated, stored or disposed of unless
notification has been given as required under this subsection,
end of quote.
EPA proposed regulations to implement this section
of the Act in the Federal Register on July 11, 1978. Copies
of the proposed regulations and the Act are available on the
tables as you enter the room. I am also submitting a copy of
-------
ike, secowJL re<{Uire.«».e»jTs — T^o-f o\
CS'j.i'jTifl.ll- (ltd 9XM«, er-scws ccs will
Kcu/e
-lcu , o (> "50
of
v Tng
for- /Ae^tifwiNici Ka-z^vicj-5 Was'tes. 0.5
n? I (^NCiLcr^tdxicC it". C-PA plavj 1c |\vnly aclc.pt
[nriMa? o' rvcxT^rcycL^ Vv-islfs aNci, vavi^'7. at !<2a.-5t 5^k?"taNt(a\lY Cflw.i.V^U^'t fo E" P/Ys -.
We. KcP£ Hc-T HiS will Saii^fv EPA5? rc.oairew.a^'t?
fair [iwirtA. iMl^iriM. aistncTi ZI<-UCN a_s OuJliNeci tsi
TiNe. pi"Dpo^?xL TM£<; bci^a <-it'5tv,«t>(2cL K'cUx\j , u '•«•<'. "'t*^
if EPA', 3001 OIX.A
-------
G
/^otlTl Ctv-tlfW TpoA/v pcr-jCKJS wko*^ 0<^V O^'M
reo u-ite/w.e.^'t''? OvcrlooKtA Ve- will be }\anp\i ~[
Vttk EPA to pick Up tbcve foctifi'c^tloKj 5 We
. we. °U"£ t'jtfi.N/ia To pr&c&ecL
tKe- JtaveloA«-tu T -dL iAvnl&.M.e.siTaVii,iw or our
c V
jl Orcgra'Vv — u.wtve.v-
Jta-Te I AW — V;iThcu-t -(A. EPA cliCcJiwr.? IN tKi? prtcc,^^ , We. CHXL
xy ixTcrvsTciL IN coTaiVn'^n tPp a.u-U\cri ^iLticn,1
utcAy , Wfc iijffcvA. l£< W'«r)v «.ry CLu-tlvcn
i -~ ~Frc'^ liVMtcA. iKTrdriA^- T'\r^u^'x ln/tc-lriAA. ""o
fu-ll . Wt "Simply I Mt^iA. Tc i/^plc.,w.^Ml (JM CTiCc|lv/€.
-------
1
Lou^ wWTe.
Of, c^u/tcMy as we caw — jVst
Itci'^ laiu-re -'.
tio
0.5
tie
-------
ATTENDEE LIST: EPA PUBLIC HEARING CHARLESTON, SC
Aiken, James
Chief-Environmental Office
U.S. Army Training & Doctrine Command
Attn: ATEN FE E
Fort Monroe, VA 23651
Anderson, David
Ecologist
Duke Power Company
Civil Environmental Section
Charlotte, NC
Anderson, James
Manager-Environmental Affairs
Olin Chemicals Group
PO Box 2896
Lake Charles, LA 70602
Barton, Bill
President
Barton Pumping & Sewer Service
1029 Forest Parkway
Forest Park, GA 30050
Easily, William
Plant Engineer
General Electric Company
PO Box 10167
Charleston, SC 29411
Biggerstaff, Betty
Analyst
Trident Labs
125 Wagon Trail Road
Ladson, SC 29456
Bowers, J.C.
Asst. to Vice President
Union Camp
Terpene & Aromatics Division
PO Box 6170
Jacksonville, FL 32205
Bowyer, Bruce
Environmental Engineer
Fiber Industries, Inc.
PO Box 4
Salisbury, NC 28114
Brehmer, Morris
Executive Manager
Virginia Electric & Power
PO Box 2666
Richmond, VA 23261
Brintle, Hal
Plant Engineer
SCM-Proctor Silex
511 Hay St.
Mount Airey, NC 27030
Brown, Carleton
Cooper Industries
Crescent Division
PO Box 2096
Sumter, SC 29150
Buck, Bill
Superintendent-Environmental Services
Allied Chemical
PO Box 1788
Columbus, SC 29202
Buffington, William
Environmental Quality Manager
Department Health & Environment
2084 East Main St.
Spartanburg, SC 29302
Busbin, Carey
Environmental Licensing Engineer
Southern Company Services
PO Box 2625
Birmingham, AL 35209
Campbell, Craig
South Carolina Department of
Health & Environmental control
Bull Street
Columbia, SC
Cannon, John
Cannons Engineering Corporation
350 Main St.
West Yarmouth, MA
Carter, Robert
North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources & Community Development
PO Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
Cash, Paul
Manager-Environmental control
Mobile Chemical Company
PO Box 26683
Richmond, VA 23261
-------
Coon, Richard
Environmental Control Supervisor
DuPont
PO BOX 10228
Charleston, SC 29411
Day, John
Director-Environmental Programs
ORH
N. Charleston, SC 29406
Dixon, R. Capers
Solid Waste Consultant
Dept. of Health and Environmental
Control
PO Box 1628
Sumter, SC 29150
Dotson, E.R.
Environmental Coordinator
Yara Engineering Corp.
PO Box 617
Sandersville, GA 31082
DuPre, Billy
Environmental Quality Manager
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
Park Plaza P-129
Greenwood, SC 29646
Duskin, Edgar
Executive Vice President
SAGA
PO Box 686
Dawson, GA 31742
Fanmine, Wayne
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
1000 Air Park Road
Charleston Heights, SC 29405
Furr, Keith
Virginia Polytech Institute
Building 356
Blacksburg, VA 24061
Godshall, E.F.
Manager-Environmental Engineering
Collins & Aikman Corp.
PO Box 1599
Charlotte, NC 28232
Gressang, Robert
Director-Environmental Affairs
Westvaco
PO Box 4795
Charleston Heights, SC 29405
Hall, M.E.
Senior Staff Engineer
Union Carbide Corporation
PO Box 2831
Charleston, WV 25330
Hall, Robert
Department of Health and Environmental
Control
605 N. Main St.
Greenville, SC 29601
Hall, William
Senior Environmental Engineer
Fiber Industries
PO Box 5457 Station B.
Greenville, SC 29606
Hardy, Warren
Associate Director
South Carolina Petroleum Council
716 Keenan Building
Columbia, SC 29201
Harris, John D.
Process Engineer
Amoco Chemicals Corporation
PO Box 987
Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
Harrod, James
Environmental Engineer
Charter Intl Oil Company
PO Box 5008
Houston, TX 77012
Heidt, Henry
Environmental Quality Coordinator
Babcock & Wilcox Corp.
PO Box 785
Lynchburg, VA 24505
-------
Hinch, Thomas
Division of Solid Waste
Tennessee Dept. of Public Health
1522 Cherokee Trail
Knoxville, TN 37920
Hogue, Gary
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
PO Box 100
Fort Lawn, SC 29714
Hudson, Carlton
Chief-Policy and Planning
Dept. of Natural Resources
PO Box 44156
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
Inabinet, John
Environmental Quality Manager
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
Jackson, Stan
Environmental Engineer
Mobil Oil Corporation
150 E. 42nd St.
New York, NY 10017
James, David
Environmental Supervisor
Fiber Industries, Inc.
PO Box 2000
Florence, SC 29501
Johnson, R.Li
Chemical Engineer
Kodak-Tennessee Eastman Co.
Kingsport, TN 37662
Johnstone, John
Corporate Technical Director
Knowlton Brothers
105 West 45th St.
Chatanooga, TN 37410
Kay, Charles
Director-Environmental Conservation
Atlantic Richfield Company
1500 Market St.
Philadelphia, PA 19101
Keeney, Lewis
Director-Facilities Engineering
Bigelow Sanford, Inc.
PO Box 3089
Greenville, SC 29602
Kelly, Charles
Environmental Quality Manager
Dept. of Health
117 Marion St. NE
Aiken, SC 29801
Kelly, Mary
Administrative Vice President
League of Women Voters
4018 Sandweod Drive
Columbia, SC 29206
Lense, Frederick
Vice President-Scientific Affairs
Texize Chemicals Company
PO Box 368
Greenville, SC 29602
Lillard, Kenneth
Senior Research Engineer
DuPont
Drawer A
Camden, SC 29020
Matthews, William
Reporter
Charleston News & Courier
134 Columbus St,
Charleston, SC
Mesh, I/aurenthia
Senior Engineer
DeKalb County
1580 Road Haven Drive
Stone Mountain, GA 30038
McClure, Jack
Acting Chief, Hazardous Materials
Natural Resources/Environmental
Protection
Pine Hill Plaza
Frankfort, KY 40601
-------
Moczydlowski, Harvey
Environmentalist
Dept. Health & Environmental Control
Magnolia St.
Sumter, SC 29150
Moon, Daniel
Corporate d evelopment
Rollins Environmental Services
1 Rollins Plaza
Wilmington, DE 19899
Moore, A.R.
Technical Service Engineer
Anchor Continental, Inc.
PO Drawer G
Columbia, SC 29250
Muntz, David
Project Engineer
Continental Forest Industries
Highway 56 South
PO Box 1425
Augusta, GA 30903
Murphy, James
Director of Engineering
W.R. Grace and Company
55 Hayden Ave
Lexington, MA 02140
Napowsa, C. Jan
Associate Attorney
North Carolina Dept. of Justice
PO Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602
Odom, Ralph
Superintendent
Spring Mills, Inc.
PO Box 111
Lancaster, SC 29720
Owen, Thomas
Director Environmental Protection
Union Camp Corporation
PO Box 570
Savanah, GA 31402
Perkins, Wes
Director Environmental Protection
Atlantic Richfield company
PO Box 1346
Houston, TX 77001
Rowley, James
Environmental Services
Westvaco, Inc.
North Charleston, SC
Schudel, J. George
Sandoz Colors & Chemicals, Inc.
Martin, SC 29836
Schulte, J. Herman
Senior Process Engineer
Mobil Chemical Company
PO Box 7368
Charleston Heights, SC 29405
Shade, Harmon
Engineer
DuPont
PO Box 10228
Charleston, SC 29411
Shearouse, Daniel
Environmental Engineer
Dept. Health & Environmental Control
Bull Street
Columbia, SC
Shevlin, Patrick
Environmental Technician
Texas Eastern Transmission
Houston, TX 77001
Sprayberry, Albert
Superintendent of Utilities
Dow Badische Company
Drawer 30 2-J
Anderson, SC 29621
Stachiw, Ken
Sanitary Engineer
U.S. AEHA
APG Maryland 21014
Tompkins, Christopher
Public Health Engineer
Virginia Department of Health
907 Governor St.
Richmond, VA
Town, William
Senior Engineer
Fiber Industries, Inc.
PO Box 15296
Charlotte, NC 28210
-------
Tuenge, Frank
Assistant Engineer
Department of Public Works
1352 Vega St.
Jacksonville, FL 32204
Turk, Frederick
Quality Assurance Supervisor
Fisher Scientific, Inc.
1 Reagent Lane
Fairlawn, NJ 07410
Turk, John
Vice President
Glass Packaging Institute
1800 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Vaughn, David
Specialist Environmental Affairs
Olin Corporation
120 Long Ridge Road
Stanford, CT
Vogel, William
Environmental Chemist
Bowater Carolina Corporation
Catawba, SC 29704
Vyas, Harshad
Manager-Ecology Department
Mobay Chemical Corporation
PO Box 385 Union Metropolitan Park
Union, NJ 07083
Williams, Earl
Environmental Engineer
Dept. Health & Environmental Control
2600 Bull St.
Columbia, SC 29201
Wolfe, Roger
Asst. to Director Government Affairs
Sterling Drug Company
90 Park Ave
New York, NY 10016
Woolen, T.H.
Systems Environmental Planning
Regional Electric Water & Sewer
Utilities Board
PO Box 490
Gainsville, FL 32602
-------
-------
TRANSCRIPT
Public Hearing
for Notification of Hazardous Waste Activities
August 24, 1978, San Francisco, California
This hearing was sponsored by EPA, Office of Solid Waste,
and the proceedings (SW-44o) are reproduced entirely as transcribed
by the official reporter, with handwritten corrections.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1978
-------
17
18
19
20
INDEX
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION IX
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
9
10
Sheila Prindiville, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region IX
12
13
PANEL MEMBERS
14
William Sanjour, Chief, Assessment & Technology Branch, HWMD, Office of
15
Solid Waste, EPA
16
Timothy Fields, Jr., Desk Officer, Assessment & Technology Branch, Office
of Solid Waste, EPA
Bill Snyder, Technology Prograir, HWMD, Office of Solid Waste, EPA
Amy Schaffer, Attorney, Office of General Counsel
James Channel^ Chief of Hazardous Materials Branch, Air and Hazardous
Materials Division, Region IX
22
23
Jonathon Gross, C.S.R., Court Reporter
24
25
26
27
28
-------
1 1:00 p.m.
2 MS. PRINDIVILLE: Good afternoon. My name is
3 Sheila Prindivi11e. I am the Deputy Regional Administrator of
4 EPA Region IX. Welcome to the Regional Office and to this
5 public hearing on the proposed regulation for preliminary n_p-
6 tification of hazardous waste activities.
•Z- %, "&•
1 This is the third public hearing on the subject to
8 be held this month, the other two having been held earlier in
9 Cleveland, Ohio and in Charleston, South Carolina.
10 A repeat session will be held in this room beginning
11 at 7:30 this evening. So, if you know of anyone missing this
12 afternoon who might want to attend the evening session, please
13 suggest it to them.
14 We are dealing only with Section 3010 of the
15 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act in these sessions.
16 Section 3010, as proposed, requires that any person
17 generating or transporting hazardous waste, and any person
18 owning or operating a facility for treatment, storage or dis-
19 posal of hazardous waste must notify the EPA Administrator or
20 the authorized State office no later than 90 days after prom-
21 ulgation or revision of Section 3001.
22 Now, Section 3001 requires the EPA to define
23 criteria and methods for identifying and listing hazardous
24 waste, and the question might arise as to why Section 3001,
25 identification of hazardous waste, is not dealt with first.
26 The answer is this: Section 3001 rules, as proposed,
27 also provide the procedures for States to obtain authorization
28 from EPA to handle the 3010 notification program.
-------
1 Since, as I stated before, the notification program
2 must be accomplished within 90 days after the promulgation of
3 the 3001 regulations, we are seeking the maximum amount of
4 time now to put the procedures or notification in place.
5 It is probably unnecessary for me to stress the im-
6 portance of these hearings on the proposed regulations. You
7 who are here know their importance or you would not be giving
8 your time to this meeting.
9 No doubt many o~ you are also aware of the current
10 problem in the area called Love Canal in the southeastern
11 section of the City of Niagara Falls, New York.
12 There, beginning in 1947, when there were no regula-
13 tions dealing with the disposal of hazardous waste, more than
14 80 different chemical compounds, 11 of them now known to be
15 capable of causing cancer, were dumped into the old Love
16 Canal and covered with clay.
17 People bought houses built adjacent to this land,
18 and today the long-buried chemicals are bubbling up through
19 the ground into their basements and backyards, posing a health
20 threat of dire proportion. This can be one result of inade-
21 quate disposal of hazardous waste.
22 RCRA provides strong statutory support for public
23 participation in the development, advising, implementation
24 and enforcement of any regulation, guideline, information or
25 program under the Act.
26 Consequently, we need to get down to the business of
27 hearing your views, both orally and as submitted in writing,
28 since they become a part of the official record of the
-------
l hearings, and will be taken into consideration before the
2 promulgation of the Section 3010 regulation.
3 Let me simply repeat my welcome, and thank you for
4 coming and giving your time and thought to the proposed regu-
5 1 a t i o n s .
6 I would like now to introduce your moderator for
7 the afternoon session; Mr. William Sanjour, of the Hazardous
8 Waste Management Division, Office of Solid Waste, EPA,
9 Washington.
10 Mr. Sanjour?
11 MR. SANJOUR: Thank you, Ms. Prindiville. Can you
12 all hear me back there? Let me first introduce the members
13 of the panel .
14 I am Bill Sanjour, with the Solid Waste Office in
15 Washington. Next to me is Tim Fields, also with the Solid
16 Waste Office; and Bill Snyder, with the Solid Waste Office;
17 and Amy Schaffer, with the Office of Enforcement; and Jim
18 Channel!, who is the Chief of the Hazardous Materials Branch
!9 here in Region IX.
20 Let me read a few announcements first. !Je would
21 appreciate your taking time to register at the desk located in
22 the back of the room. Also in the rear of the auditorium are
23 a few publications, including copies of these proposed regula-
24 tions, as well as copies of the draft standards on defining a
25 hazardous waste.
26 Copies of the transcript will be available for in-
27 spection here in the Regional Office Library, and at EPA
28 headquarters in Washington.
-------
f
, /VoVetHe.les? ^ gj^^Q j^tdwJL u> ope.r-w /w_ai-
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the proposed regulations for the record.
These proposed rules specify who must file notifica-
tion of hazardous waste activities, when and where notifica-
tion must be filed, and what information such notification
must contain. A sample of the form suggested for use in this
process is also included.
These proposed rules also contain provisions where-
by States may obtain authorization to receive and manage this
initial notification program.
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
provides that regulations shall be promulgated only after
notice and opportunity for public hearings. So, let me now
lay the groundwork and rules for the conduct of this hearing.
The focus of a public hearing is on the public's
response to a regulatory proposal of the Agency. The purpose
of this hearing, as announced in the July 11, 1978 Federal
Regi ster, is to solicit comments on the proposed regulations,
including any background information used to develop the reg-
ulations.
This public hearing is being held not primarily to
inform the public nor to defend a proposed regulation^ but
more to obtain the public's response to EPA's proposed regula-
tion, and thereafter revise the regulation as may seem approp-
riate.
All major substantive comments made at the hearing
will be addressed at the time of final promulgation. The
anticipated date of final promulgation is Spring of 1979.
This will not be a formal adjudicatory hearing with
-------
l the right to cross-examination. The members of the public are
2 to present their views on the proposed regulation to the panel:
3 and the panel may ask questions of the people presenting
statements to clarify any ambiguities in their presentations.
If any member of the audience wants a question asked
of another member of the public, he will be allowed to write
7 the question and pass it to the panel, at which time the panel
8 may ask the question of the appropriate person, and that per-
son will be given the opportunity to respond accordingly.
During this time, blank cards will be available and
11 will be passed out. So, we ask you to list your questions on
these cards, and then the panel will ask them if they are rel-
13 evant to the statements presented.
Due to time limitations, the chairman reserves the
15 right to limit lengthy questions, discussions or statements.
We would ask that those of you who have prepared statements
to make orally to please limit your presentation to a maximum
of 10 minutes so that we can get to all statements in a reas-
enable time. The written statements will be included in their
20 entirety in the record.
Written prepared statements will be accepted at the
22 end of the hearing. And so, if you wish to provide a state-
ment but not present it orally, that can be accomplished.
Persons wishing to make an oral statement, who have
made an advance request by telephone or in writing, should
indicate their interest on the registration card. And if you
27 have not indicated your intent to give a statement and you
28 decide to do so, please return to the registration table, fill
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
out another card and give it to one of the staff.
As we call upon an individual to make a statement,
he should come up to the lecturn and, after identifying him-
self for the Court Reporter, deliver his statement.
At the beginning of the statement I will inquire as
to whether the speaker is willing to entertain questions from
the panel and the audience. The speaker is under no obliga-
tion to do so, although within the spirit of this information
-sharing meeting, it would be of great assistance to the
Agency if questions were permitted.
Anyone wishing to make statements will have an op-
portunity to do so.
The Court Reporter is present here today. The
statements, questions and comments will become part of the
public record, and this record will be available for public
inspection in the Docket Section, Room 2111, Hazardous Waste
Management Division, Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmenta
Agency, 401 M Street, Southwest, Washington, D.C. 20460.
A copy of the transcript will be available on re-
quest to all registrants here today in about two or three
months .
In addition to the public hearing here in San
Francisco today, an identical meeting was held in Cleveland,
Ohio, on August 18th, and in Charleston, South Carolina on
August 21st.
Persons not wishing to deliver a statement today
may send a written statement to the address noted in the
Federal Register before the closing of that docket, which is
-------
l September 11 , 1978.
2 Now I will turn the meeting over to Tim Fields, who
3 will give you an overview of the Subtitle C regulations on
4 hazardous waste management, how they function, how the pro-
5 posed regulations for preliminary notification of hazardous
6 waste activites fit into this framework.
7 Tim?
8 MR. FIELDS: Thank you, Bill.
9 Before I give you an overview of the interrelation-
10 ships of the various Sections of the Act, please note that
11 each of the Sections 1 am about to describe is a separate
12 regulation, and that public hearings will be held on each of
13 these regulations as it is proposed.
14 I would ask that you please keep in mind that we are
15 here today to address only the proposed Federal.regulations
16 defining procedures for notification of hazardous waste activ-
17 ities, and procedures whereby states may receive a special
18 authorization to manage this notification program.
*9 You will have the opportunity to comment on the
20 other Sections of the Act, which deal with the definition of
21 hazardous wastes and the detailed standards regarding genera-
22 tion, treatment, storage and disposal of these wastes as each
23 of the other regulations is proposed.
24 Therefore, it would insure the most effective use of
25 everyone's time here today if you would mentally review and
26 edit your statements and questions accordingly, in order to
27 minimize the involvement of these other Sections and to maxi-
28 mize or focus on the proposed regulations for notification of
-------
l hazardous waste activities.
2 Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
3 amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976,
4 creates a regulatory framework to control hazardous waste.
5 Congress has found that such waste presents special dangers to
6 health, and requires a greater degree of regulation than does
7 nonhazardous solid waste.
8 Because of the seriousness of this problem, Congress
9 intended that the States develop programs to control it. In
10 the event that States do not choose to operate this program,
11 EPA is mandated to do so.
12 Seven guidelines and regulations are being developed
13 and proposed under Subtitle C to implement the national
14 hazardous waste management regulatory program.
15 It is important to note that the definition of solid
16 waste in the Act encompasses garbage, refuse, sludges and
17 other discarded materials, including liquids, semisolids and
18 contained gasses, with a few exceptions, from both municipal
19 and industrial sources.
20 Hazardous wastes, which are a subset of all solid
21 wastes, and which will be defined under regulations pursuant
22 to Section 3001, are those which have particularly significant
23 impact on public health and the environment.
24 Subtitle C creates a management control system which
25 for those wastes defined as hazardous, requires a cradle-to-
26 grave cognizance, including appropriate monitoring, record
27 keeping and reporting throughout the system.
28 Section 3001 reauires EPA to define criteria and
-------
1 methods for identifying and listing hazardous wastes. Section
2 3001 regulations should be published as proposed rules in
3 December, 1978. Those wastes which are identified as hazard-
4 ous by these means are then included in the management control
5 system constructed under Sections 3002 through 3006, and
6 Section 3010, the Section we will be disussing here today.
7 Those that are excluded will be subject to the re-
8 quirements for nonhazardous solid waste which are being car-
9 ried out by States under Subtitle D, under which open dumping
10 is prohibited and environmentally acceptable practices are re-
11 quired.
12 Section 3002 of the Act addresses the standards ap-
13 plicable to generators. EPA's regulations under this Section
14 describe the classes of generators for whom some requirements
15 may vary. For example, the Agency does not interpret the in-
16 tent of Congress to include regulation of individual home-
17 owners due to small quantities of hazardous wastes which they
18 may generate.
19 Section 3002 also requires the creation of a mani-
20 fest system which will track wastes from the point of genera-
21 tion to their ultimate disposition. Section 3002 should be
22 published as a proposed rule in December, 1978.
23 Section 3003 addresses standards affecting trans-
24 porters of hazardous waste to assure that the waste is care-
25 fully managed during the transport phase. The Agency explored
26 opportunities for meshing closely with the proposed and cur-
27 rent U.S. Department of Transportation regulations to avoid
28 duplication in the transportation area.
10
-------
1 Section 3003 regulations were published in the
2 Federal Register as propsed rules on April 28, 1978, and a
3 public hearing on them was held on June 20, 1978. Additional
4 hearings will be scheduled in the future.
5 Section 3004 addresses standards affecting owners
6 and operators of hazardous waste storage, treatment and dis-
7 posal facilities. These standards define the levels of public
8 health and environmental protection to be achieved by these
9 facilities, and provide the criteria against which EPA will
10 measure applications for permits.
II Facilities on a generator's property, as well as off
12 -site facilities, are covered by these regulations, and do re-
13 quire permits. Generators and transporters do not otherwise
14 need permits.
15 I would like to emphasize that again. The only
16 people who require permits are those who treat, store and
17 dispose of hazardous wastes, not generators and not trans-
18 porters, unless they also treat, store or dispose.
19 Section 3004 should be published as a proposed rule
20 in December, 1978.
21 Section 3005 regulations describe the scope and
22 coverage of the actual permit-granting process for facility
23 owners and operators. Requirements for the permit applicatior
24 as well as for the issuance and revocation process, are to be
25 defined by these regulations.
26 It should be noted that Section 3005 (e) provides
27 for an interim status during the time period that the Agency
28 or the States are reviewing the pending permit application.
11
-------
1 Section 3005 regulations should be published as
2 proposed rules in late December, 1978.
3 Section 3006 requires EPA to issue guidelines for
4 State hazardous waste programs and procedures by which States
5 may seek both full and interim authorization to carry out the
6 hazardous waste program in lieu of the EPA-admi m'stered pro-
7 gram.
8 States seeking authorization in accordance with
9 Section 3006 guidelines a"e not required to adopt in entirety
10 all Federal hazardous waste management regulations promul-
11 gated under Subtitle C in order to receive EPA authorization.
12 Such a State regulatory program need only demon-
13 strate that'their hazardous waste management regulations are
14 consistent with an equivalent in effect to these EPA regula-
15 tions, and that adequate enforcement exists, in order to re-
16 ceive EPA authorization urder Section 3006 to operate and
17 impose a hazardous waste management program.
18 Section 3006 guidelines were published in the
19 Federal Register as proposed rules on February 1, 1978. Final
20 rules are scheduled to be promulgated during December, 1978.
21 Section 3010 regulations define procedures by which
22 persons will have to notify, and Bill Snyder will get into
23 that in detail in a moment.
24 EPA has made provision in these regulations for
25 States to be delegated this notification function upon appli-
26 cation to the appropriate EPA regional administrator. It is
27 significant to note that no hazardous waste subject to
28 Subtitle C regulations may be legally transported, treated,
12
-------
1 stored or disposed unless this timely notification is given to
2 EPA or a designated State.
3 The Agency intends to propose draft regulations dur-
4 ing December, 1978 for the remaining Sections of Subtitle C.
5 Final regulations will be promulgated in 1979. However, it is
6 important for the regulated communities to understand that the
7 regulations under Sections 3001 through 3005 do not take
8 effect until six months after they are promulgated.
9 Thus,'there will be a time period after final prom-
10 ulgation during which public understanding of the regulations
11 can be increased. During this same period, notifications re-
12 quired under Section 3010 are to be submitted, facility permit
13 applications required under Section 3005 will be distributed
14 for completion by applicants, and State programs will be auth-
15 orized by EPA.
16 Now, for a more detailed look at the Section 3010
17 regulations, which we are here today to discuss, I am going to
18 turn the hearing over to Bill Snyder, who will discuss the
19 Section 3010 proposed rules in detail.
20 MR. SNYDER: Thank you, Tim.
21 The regulations which are the subject of this hearing
22 are those affecting the preliminary notification of hazardous
23 waste activities pursuant to Section 3010 of the Resource
24 Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976.
25 Section 3010 of RCRA requires that all persons gen-
26 erating, transporting, treating, storing or disposing of
27 hazardous waste which has been identified or listed in the
28 Section 3001 regulations, with their revisions, must notify.
13
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Persons who initiate such activities after the date
of promulgation of the Section 3001 regulations or the revis-
ions thereof are not required to notify pursuant to these
rules.
However, these new entrants will be required to
notify EPA or an authorized State of their hazardous waste
activities pursuant to the Section 3002 (generator), 3003
(transporter), and 3005 (permit) regulations.
The regulations jnder Sections 3001, 3002, 3003,
3004 and 3005 become effective six months after they are prom-
ulgated. The date of promjlgation of the Section 3001 regula-
tions begins the notification period. This notification
period extends for 90 days, during which time all persons sub-
ject to these regulations must notify either EPA or an author-
ized State.
Within the six month period those persons required
to obtain a facility permi" pursuant to Section 3005 regula-
tions must apply for that permit. Owners or operators of ex-
isting facilities requiring such a permit, who satisfactorily
comply with two requirements, these being to notify pursuant
to these regulations, and Z, to submit an application for a
permit, will be qualified for interim status until a full per-
mit is i ssued.
Failure to satisfy both of these requirements will
jeopardize interim status and will prevent such persons from
legally treating, disposing or storing (for more than 90 days
hazardous waste after the six month period.
There are several special cases which I would like
14
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
to bring to your attention. The first is a person owning and
operating more than one place of operation may file a single
notification for all facilities, provided that, A, all re-
quired information is clearly stated separately for each place
of operation and, B, copies of the pertinent information in
this single notification are sent to each EPA Regional Office
or authorized State having jurisdiction over the area in which
the places of operation are located.
Another special case is for highway transporters.
A responsible individual shall file notification for each
terminal the transporter owns and utilizes for vehicles trans-
porting hazardous wastes.
Railroad and pipeline companies: A responsible in-
dividual may file a single notification for the entire rail
line or pipeline, provided that copies of this notification
are sent to each EPA Regional Office or authorized State hav-
ing jurisdiction over the area in which the railroad or pipe-
line is 1 oca ted .
Federal agencies: Federal agencies conducting haz-
ardous waste activities must comply with all notification re-
quirements in the same manner as other persons.
Section 3001 regulations will probably be revised
from time to time to identify or list additional hazardous
waste. These regulations require that generators, transport-
ers, treaters, stores and disposers of hazardous waste notify
EPA or an authorized State 90 days after such revision.
Those persons who are unaffected by a revision to
Section 3001 regulations need not submit additional notifica-
15
-------
1 tion. In addition, persons who are affected by such a revis-
2 ion to Section 3001 regulations may also be required to apply
3 for either a new or a revised facility permit before the re-
4 vised Section 3001 regulations become effective, which will be
5 six months after their pronulgation.
6 These notifications must be filed with the approp-
7 riate EPA Regional Administrator or State which has been
8 granted authorization to manage the notification program.
9 Authorization of States to manage the notification
10 program: -Fhese proposed rules also establish procedures for
11 authorizing States to manage the notification program. These
12 rules will be promulgated before the Section 3001 regulations
13 are promulgated, in order ~:o give the States an opportunity to
14 obtain this special author-zation before promulgation of the
15 Section 3001 regulations begins the notification process.
16 EPA and the authorized States must be ready to re-
17 ceive notifications when the Section 3001 regulations are
18 promulgated. A list of the- names and addresses of State
19 agencies authorized to receive notifications will be published
20 in the Federal Register prior to or at the same time as prom-
21 ulgation of Section 3001 regulations or revisions thereof.
22 States will be authorized to receive notifications
23 from affected persons pursuant to the provisions of these
24 regulations. This authorization will be called "limited
25 interim authorization" and, if granted, will be granted separ-
26 ate and apart from the interim or full authorizations granted
27 pursuant to Section 3006 guidelines.
28 Few. if anv. Statps will have interim or full
16
-------
authorization before or during the 90 day notification period.
However, it is EPA's policy to allow those States that are
likely to be granted such authorization to also be granted the
authority to manage the notification program.
It is important to note that notification required
subsequent to this initial notification process, which might
occur as a result of revisions to Section 3001 regulations,
when not administered by the EPA regions, shall be conducted
only by States having a Section 3006 authorization.
10 Limited interim authorization, therefore, is a one-
11 time authorization which terminates on the date six months
12 after the date of promulgation of the Section 3001 regulation
13 If a State which has been granted limited interim
14 authorization fails to apply for or receive interim or full
15 authorization, EPA must assume responsibility for managing the
16 subsequent regulatory requirements of Subtitle C.
17 This disjointed program administration can create
18 problems; that is, inefficient processing of applications for
19 facility permits which are received during the six month per-
20 iod following promulgation of the Section 3001 regulations.
21 To minimize such potential problems, these proposed rules im-
22 pose requirements upon States in order to obtain this limited
23 interim authorization.
24 Further, the authorized States will be encouraged
25 to operate and manage the notification program in the same or
26 in an equivalent manner to that employed by EPA, in order to
27 achieve as much national uniformity as possible. This will
28 simplify the notification burden on those persons who may hav«
17
-------
l to notify for hazardous waste activities conducted in two or
2 more States. The manner ir which the State intends to carry
3 out the notification program will be articulated in the plan
4 that a State submits as part of its request for limited inter-
5 im authorization. The degree of equivalency with EPA's man-
6 agement of the notification process will be one of the cri-
7 teria used by the EPA Regional Administrator to determine
8 whether to grant authorization.
9 If the Regional Administrator finds a State applica-
1° tion acceptable, he shall execute an agreement with that
11 State. All such agreements shall be effective no later than
12 120 calendar days after promulgation of these preliminary
13 notification regulations, and shall terminate on the date six
14 months after promulgation of the Section 3001 regulations.
15 if a State is granted limited interim authorization
16 to manage the notification program, all persons conducting
17 hazardous waste activities in that State will be required to
18 notify that State.
19 if a State hazardous waste definition is more
20 stringent than that promulgated under Section 3001 regula-
21 tions, then the applicable State agency could use this defin-
22 ition for the purpose of notification by affected persons in
23 that State.
24 State hazardous waste definitions which are less
25 stringent than that promulgated pursuant to Section 3001 regu-
26 lations cannot be used for notification purposes.
27 With respect to notifications submitted to EPA,
28 these proposed rules would allow affected persons tn malcp
-------
1 confidentiality claims in three areas in their notification
2 responses. The first area would be in the types of hazardous
3 waste handled, as identified by characteristics under Section
4 3001 regulations; a second, the description of hazardous
5 wastes handled, as identified by listing under Section 3001
6 regulations or by general type; and third, an estimated amount
7 of hazardous wastes handled annually, which at this time is an
8 optional item.
9 Comments are requested from interested parties as to
10 which notification items should provide for a confidentiality
11 claim, and reasons why each such item should be considered
12 confidential.
13 EPA is considering acquiring affected persons to
14 provide substantiation of their confidentiality claims at the
15 time of initial notification.
16 There are two options. The first option is the one
17 in these proposed rules. Affected persons would be allowed to
18 make confidentiality claims without providing substantiation
19 at the time of initial notification. If a request for infor-
20 mation submitted was made later, EPA would then request that
21 the affected person provide substantiation of confidentiality
22 claims in accordance with the confidentiality of business in-
23 formation regulations. If there are a large number of re-
24 quests from the public for copies of notification responses,
25 there will be a burden on the EPA Regional Office resources to
26 request substantiation from each submitter.
27 The second option is designed to avoid that problem
28 by requiring submission of substantiation at the time of
19
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
initial notification. EPA would not have to go back to sub-
mitters again if requests were received by EPA for notifica-
tion responses containing confidentiality claims. However,
this would place an additional initial reporting burden upon
affected persons.
Comments are requested on these or other options for
the confidentiality provisions. In addition, suggestions on
ways of making the notification items reasonably accessible to
the public would be appreciated.
These proposed rules also contain a sample form for
use in filing notification. Use of the form is not mandatory,
but its use is encouraged to facilitate the notification
process.
To assist in complying with these rules, EPA intends
to mail the sample form and instructions to all known persons
who may be required to notify. EPA will also encourage States
managing the notification program to use a similar procedure.
Failure of the agency or the authorized State to reach any af-
fected person will not, however, relieve that person of the
legal requirement to notify.
If a person fully and accurately completes and re-
turns the form presented in these regulations for each place
of operation, the person will have complied with the require-
ments of these regulations.
The notification items: If a person chooses not to
use the form, that person must file a written notification
stating clearly and legibly the following information for each
20
-------
2
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The name of the organization and place of operation;
The mailing address and location of the place of
operation;
The principal activity of the place of operation,
either by 4-digit Standard Industrial Classification Code, the
SIC Code, or by other description; that is, inorganic chemical
manufacturing, petroleum refining;
An identification number for the place of operation;]
The name, telephone number and address of a responsi-
ble individual at the place of operation who could be contact-
ed for clarification of information submitted in the notifica-
21
ti on;
A certification that the information submitted is
complete and accurate;
The type or types of hazardous waste activity con-
ducted by the person, such as generation, transportation,
treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous waste; j
The types of hazardous waste handled by the person, j
as identified by characteristics under Section 3001 regula-
tions. All wastes which are ignitable, reactive, infectious,
radioactive or corrosive must be described as such. However,
persons who cannot, in the 90 day period allowed, definitively
determine whether their wastes are toxic may so indicate. If
after the 90 day period it is determined that a waste is non-
toxic, a statement to this effect must be filed no later than
180 days after promulgation of the Section 3001 regulations.
Otherwise, the person will be considered, for notification
ourposes, to be conducting hazardous waste activities.
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1}
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I want to point out that it should be noted that
there is a mistake in item 5 of the sample form. An unde-
termined response is only .allowed for the toxic characteristic
It is not allowed for the radioactive and corrosive character-
istic.
Continuing with notification items if a person
chooses not to use the forn: A description of the hazardous
waste handled as identified by listing under the Section 3001
regulations, or by general type and specific contents, where
known, using the best available information, such as waste
water treatment sludge containing lead compounds;
Another item: A statement indicating what informa-
tion, if any, is to be considered confidential business infor-
mati on;
And last, but certainly not least, the optional item
is an estimate of the annual amount of hazardous waste handled
based on the period from January 1, 1977 to December 31, 1977.
For affected persons not conducting hazardous waste activi-
ties during any or all of that period, the annual volume
should be estimated in the best practical manner.
I would now like to turn the hearing over to Ms. Amy
Schaffer, who will address the enforcement aspect.
MS. SCHAFFER: Thank you, Bill.
Good afternoon. I'd like to speak very briefly con-
cerning the enforcement of Section 3010. The goal of the
Environmental Protection Agency is to insure that the regulat-
ed hazardous waste community complies with the RCRA Hazardous
Waste Regulations.
22
-------
1 EPA views the notification process as the first
2 step in obtaining overall compliance with the regulations —
3 learning who will be subject to the regulations and what and
4 how much waste they will handle.
5 We have attempted to maximize compliance with
6 Section 3010 regulations in three ways. First, we have tried
7 to simplify the regulation to make it easy to notify, and to
8 relieve some of the reporting burden from the regulated com-
9 munity.
10 Second, the Agency is planning to inform the regu-
11 lated community, as Bill said, of the notification require-
12 ment and the advantages of voluntary compliance. This dis-
13 persal of information is an ongoing activity which has al-
14 ready begun.
15 Finally, EPA plans on taking strong enforcement
16 action against those people who do not comply. Violation of
17 the notification requirement is considered very serious be-
18 cause those people who do not notify evade the entire control
19 system and frustrate our efforts to build a data base defining
20 the scope of the hazardous waste community. EPA will not hes-
21 itate in taking action against any person who attempts to
22 evade the system.
23 The kinds of questions and comments that I, as a
24 representative of the Office of Enforcement, is interested in
25 hearing are things such as how stringent should EPA be in
26 assessing penalties to normotifiers, and how can we better in-
27 form all hazardous waste handlers of their requirement to
28 notify?
23
-------
l Thank you.
2 MR. SANJOUR: Back to me?
3 MS. SCHAFFER: Back to you, Bill.
4 MR. SANJOUR: I think we should now go to those per-
5 sons who have indicated that they would like to give prepared
6 statements. Let me say that after I have run through the list
1 of people who have indicated they wanted to give prepared
8 statements, I will allow anyone else speaking time.
9 First, Mr. T. A. Seeburger of Bethlehem Steel. Is
10 he here?
11 Mr. William F. Jopling of the California Department
12 of Health Services.
15 MR. JOPLING: Mr. Sanjour, is it?
14 MR. SANJOUR: That's good enough for government.
15 MR. JOPLING: Okay. Panel members and fellow
16 attendees, I am William F. Jopling, the Acting Assistant Chief
17 Hazardous Materials Management Section of the California State
18 Department of Health Services. We recently changed our name
19 from the State Health Department. I have copies here of the
20 statement, if you want to follow along.
21 MR. SANJOUR: Thank you.
22 MR. JOPLING: The Department of Health Services has
23 the authority and responsibility for the regulation of hazard-
24 ous waste activities in California, pursuant to State law.
25 Further, the Department has been designated in accordance with
26 the provisions of Section 4006 (b) of the Resource Conserva-
27 tion and Recovery Act as the State agency responsible for
2^ hazardous waste management nlannina and imnlpmpntatinn within
24
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the boundaries of the State of California.
We intend to seek limited interim authorization to
carry out the notification program required by Section 3010 of
RCRA, and have been authorized Federal grant funds to accom-
plish the regulatory agency portion of this activity.
The notification activity will require close cooper-
ation between the Department and Region IX of EPA in order to
prepare and carry out this program in an effective manner. We
look forward to a continuation of our close working relation-
ship with the Regional Office in this matter.
I have prepared a little sketch, which can't be seen
beyond the third row, of the two different elements under
3010. The first of these is obtaining limited interim author-
ization for the Department.
For those States seeking authorization, the regula-
tions call for the development of a notification plan by the
State agency, review and approval by the Regional Administra-
tor of EPA, and finally, agreement for limited interim author-
ization with four months of the promulgation of the Section
3010 regulations. And there are other requirements, but we
believe that these requirements for authorization are reason-
able, and that this can be accomplished in a fairly straight
forward fashion.
The time squeeze of major concern to us is this 90
day period immediately following the promulgation of 3001
regulations sometime late in 1978. In that period the State
will distribute notification forms and other pertinent mater-
ial, and will receive back the recorded information from
25
-------
1 parties involved in hazardous waste activities.
2 It is our understanding that EPA, through a separ-
3 ate contractor, has developed lists of parties to be notified.
Although we have no direct knowledge of the size and extent of
the California list, the EPA State Guidance Document for fis-
cal 1979, which guides the State in their program work, indi-
7 cated that there was something like 77,000 hazardous waste
8 generators in California. This was more than double the num-
ber in any other State.
10 This suggests that there may be substantial duplica-
11 tion or extraneous parties included in the list. If some ef-
12 fort could be given to screen and refine the lists prior to
the mail-out, it would certainly make events during the crit-
ical 90 day period much more manageable, and reduce unneces-
15 sary problems to those receiving notification forms.
Comments were requested on the advisability of
17 either distributing permit applications along with the noti-
18 fication forms or independently distributing applications
following the return of the notification forms to the agency.
We see some major problem either way.
21 The separate mailing will result in a significant
22 logistics problem involving the screening of returned forms to
identify parties which should receive permit applications, a
24 second distribution and return activity, and a major effort in
25 the recording of all these actions which must take place with-
2<> in a very limited time.
27 On the other hand, the combined mail-out will result
28 in a majority of oarties, that is, the waste generators who do
26
-------
l not store, treat or dispose of wastes on site, receiving in-
2 applicable permit applications.
3 We tend to support the single mail-out, provided
4 that a clear explanation is included as to who must fill out
5 and return the application, and who should ignore it. This
6 would be particularly important in the case of several hun-
7 dred hazardous waste facility operators who have already sub-
8 mitted State hazardous waste facility permit applications to
9 the Department of Health Services.
10 Several thousand waste generators, who have been
11 contacted through our Hazardous Waste Survey in recent years,
12 may be somewhat confused by what may appear to be duplication
13 or repetition of this survey effort. Again, an explanation
14 could correct this.
15 The notification requires the identification of the
16 types of hazardous wastes in accordance with the criteria of
17 the Section 3001 regulations. Inasmuch as many parties may
18 have no knowledge of the criteria, and this would be the firsl
!9 contact with the regulations, EPA might consider preparing a
20 one-sheet summary of the main points of the criteria for 1n-
21 elusion with the notification form, or including a list of
22 common name wastes, such as the list that California has de-
23 veloped of wastes which are generally considered to be hazard-
24 ous.
25 Then, this would assist the parties in determining
26 whether they handle these types of wastes, and whether or not
27 they should be considered as being hazardous.
28 Section 250.820 excludes owners of inactive
27
-------
l facilities from the notification process. Perhaps it is be-
2 yond the scope of the law to include inactive operations.
3 However, their inclusion could be a means to obtain informa-
4 tion which would be useful in preventing possible problems
5 associated with future uses of these areas, as Ms. Prindiville
6 has commented upon already.
7 It would be very beneficial to have some idea of
8 waste volume provided. Apparently, the law does not require
9 this information, and it is an optional item in the proposed
10 regulations. Perhaps, however, at least small volume opera-
11 tions could be strongly encouraged to provide some indication
12 of their size, and this would assist in setting priorities for
13 permit activities.
H With specific regard to the sample notification
15 form, many industries may treat and/or store wastes at on-sit£
16 facilities and eventually dispose of hazardous residues at
1? off-site operations. Under Item 4, if instructions were in-
18 eluded to circle the appropriate on-site activity, as is done
19 for the transport mode, this would give a clearer picture of
20 what is going on at the particular operation.
21 There has already been an explanation and comment
22 regarding the "undetermined" column, so I won't repeat that.
23 We have some questions regarding EPA's intention
24 that was touched on earlier, regarding the follow-up of noti-
25 fication violations, particularly if a significant percentage
26 do not respond. This could be a vast and major manpower ef-
27 fort.
28 Also, we have questions regarding the use of State
28
-------
1 criteria which may be more restrictive than EPA's criteria in
2 some aspects, and less restrictive in others.
3 There are also questions regarding permit applica-
4 tions for facilities which are not included in the State
5 hazardous waste permit requirements.
6 We will pursue these subjects with the Region IX
7 staff, and if we have further question, why, we will certainly
8 get back to EPA Washington on it.
9 I want to thank you very much for the opportunity to
10 comment on the proposed regulations. I am willing to answer
11 questions as best I can.
12 MR. SANJOUR: If anyone in the audience has any
13 questions of Mr. Jopling, please write them out on the cards
14 that will be handed out to you. If you don't have a card,
15 raise your hand and we will have someone trot out there.
16 Does anyone on the panel have any questions? Well,
17 I do. I think I will start them off, exercising my priority
18 as Chairman.
19 Bill, you talked about the inactive facilities.
20 Does California regulate inactive facilities? Do you require
21 notification and compliance with the regulations?
22 MR. JOPLING: As of now there is a bill in the leg-
23 islature which will require appropriate and proper disclosure,
24 equivalent somewhat to what EPA is requiring in their criter-
25 ia. But for past operations, I don't think there is a good
26 handle on what has been going on in the forties and fifties,
27 and so forth. There just wasn't a program at any particular
28 level of the government at that time.
29
-------
MR. SANJOUR: But does your law or your regulations
cover inactive facilities?
MR. JOPLING: No, it doesn't. I will check on that
further with you, but just off the top of my head, I can't re-
call that there is a section that is particularly directed at
that, and maybe it is generically covered in some.
7 MR. SANJOUR: Is it specifically excluded then?
8 MR. JOPLING: No. In our law it says that the Stat
Department of Health shall carry out a program for the manage-
10 ment of hazardous wastes in California. So, under those kinds
11 of broad terms, we could address abandoned facilities.
12 Let me back up a little. In California there are
perhaps three or four different agencies that are involved in
the management of land disposal facilities, one of these beinc
the State Water Resources Control Board. And they operate
under a Water Quality Control Act, which is very comprehensive
17 regarding the protection of surface and ground waters. It
18 goes beyond the EPA permit program.
Under that particular law there is provision for
20 clean up and correction of facilities that are causing prob-
21 lems, and an attempt to recover money from the violators in
22 previous years. There is a fund established in the State for
correction and clean up if it can't be accomplished in some
other manner.
That is being used, for example, as I understand it
in Southern California to clean up and control existing land
27 disposal operations that treat chemical wastes, and keep that
28 under control. So, in that particular area, under that law,
30
-------
l we do have a handle on it. But for the Hazardous Waste
2 Control Act, we haven't got the specific language in that as
3 yet.
4 MR. SANJOUR: Under the Hazardous Waste Control Act
5 is there something analagous to these notification provisions
6 that we have in the Federal Act?
1 MR. JOPLING: There is a provision in the law that
8 says the Department of Health shall determine trends in waste
9 generation and provide technical assistance, that kind of a
10 thing.
11 MR. SANJOUR: Persons who own or operate facilities,
12 are they required to notify the Health Department, under your
13 law, that they operate such facilities?
14 MR. JOPLING: I think we have the same authority and
15 responsibility under different language, in that if we have to
16 determine trends of generation rates, and so forth, this is
17 done through a survey program that we have conducted over a
!8 four or five year period. And what we do, we have the author-
19 ization to go out and inspect facilities, obtain information
20 on the types of wastes that are generated and where they are
21 going to.
22 so, we don't have the words "notification activity,"
23 but we have the same activity, on a county-by-county basis,
24 being carried out over the years.
25 MR. SANJOUR: I am raising all these points because
16 you said perhaps it's beyond the scope of the law, however,
27 you would like the inclusion. You have indicated you would
28 like us to include in our notification process some way to get
31
-------
1 inactive facilities to notify, and I just wondered how
2 California coped with the identical problem.
3 MR. JOPLING: Okay. Well, I think it's analagous to1
4 what we are attempting to do on the active facilities. We are
5 proceeding to identify active generators and storage opera-
6 tions, and so forth, under our Hazardous Waste Act, and we are
7 pursuing that at a pretty good rate, fairly intensively.
8 Now, EPA has the requirement, under RCRA, to carry
9 out this notification activity, and for active facilities. So,
10 essentially, we have gone the same way here. We are doing the
11 same thing. And although it may be considered partially a
12 duplication, it's getting us more and additional information,
13 and a very thorough job.
14 Now, what I am saying is for inactive facilities,
15 the State may be moving under the Porto-Cologne Act, to iden-
16 tify and correct inactive facilities and the problems they
17 create.
18 Similarly, I don't think it would hurt to have RCRA
19 also address this particular issue and attempt to see what
20 the problems are and where we are with regard to the inactive
21 facilities.
22 MR. SANJOUR: Thank you. Any other panel members
23 have any questions? Tim?
24 MR. FIELDS: One comment. The State directories
25 that we are developing are being screened for duplication and
26 extraneous entires. We have a contractor who,is preparing a
27 nationwide directory, and it should be available in September
28 And 77,000 generators is wav out of line. That number is way
32
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
too big. The estimate we will have for California is probably
around 15,000. So, that will be supplied to you.
MR. JOPLING: I am ver • happy to hear that. The
funds that we had scheduled for this activity would have just
about paid for the postage stamps on the first mail-out if
there were 77,000. So, good news.
MR. FIELDS: Yes. I think the comments are good
that you made regarding including some additional information
regarding 3001 in the notification mail-out. I think it migh
be appropriate. It's a good suggestion.
MR. JOPLING: Thank you.
MR. SANJOUR: Anyone else? Let me just add, for
clarification, since this point always cones up at these
meetings, about why the request for volume data is not manda-
tory, why it's optional in the form.
MR. JOPLING: Yes.
MR. SANJOUR: And, in fact, why the form itself is
optional. That's because the General Counsel has advised us
that since the Act itself does not call for this information,
and since the Act does not give any authority to the Adminis-
trator to call for this information, our General Counsel
thought we night be exceeding our authority to make that in-
formation mandatory. That's basically why it's not in there.
MR. JOPLING: Yes.
audience.
MR. SANJOUR: We have some questions from the
If a party has submitted an application to the
State, does this suffice as notification?
33
-------
l MR. JOPLING: I think probably you can answer that
2 better than I can.
3 MR. SANJOUR: Yes, probably I can. I think the an-
4 swer is no.
5 MR. JOPLING: I would think there are some differ-
6 ences in our permit application form.
7 MR. SANJOUR: I am not a lawyer, and perhaps we
8 would have to find out about this one by legal counsel, and we
9 will do so. But my amateur opinion is that a piece of paper
10 has to somehow notify an authorized place in that 90 day per-
il iod, not before, not after, but during that 90 day period
12 addressing application.
13 So, I think that if you have a permit application on
14 file prior to that, I don't think that would constitute appli-
15 cation. But that is just my guess.
16 Would anybody like to throw a verbal question,
17 without writing it down?
18 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Along the line of
19 your statement that enforcement of notification violations
20 will need excessive time and personnel, do you envision in
21 the future delegating some of your responsibility to local
22 agencies, with proper funding and guidelines, to relieve you
23 from this manpower limitation?
24 MR. JOPLING: As far as I understand 3010, it
25 reaches the point of the State notifying EPA of the violations
26 in terms of those that haven't notified, and then makes no
27 statement beyond that particular point.
28 MS. SCHAFFER: Bill, can I add something on to that?
34
-------
J That is true, that under limited interim authorization a
2 State does not have the authority to enforce the notification
3 requirement. That will be an EPA activity. Hopefully every-
4 body will comply so we don't have to worry about notifying.
5 MR. SANJOUR: Right.
6 MR. JOPLING: Would you want me to answer regarding
7 the State's activities in enforcement, very briefly on that?
8 MR. SANJOUR: Sure.
9 MR. JOPLING: Under separate authority, not 3010,
10 we have enforcement provisions and regulations and legislatio
11 and so forth. And with regard to passing this along to local
12 government, we see the need for local government to be in-
13 volved, and they are authorized to carry out and enforce the
14 State Hazardous Waste Control Act Provision. At least, the
15 County Health Officer is empowered to do that. And we want
16 to see those counties that have an interest in surveillance
17 and enforcement after State training programs, to become 1n-
18 volved in this particular activity.
19 MR. SANJOUR: Any other questions? Thank you
20 Mr. Jopling.
21 The next person who has requested time to speak is
22 Jean Siri, with the West Contra Costa Conservation League.
23 MS. SIRI: Mr. Sanjour, members of the panel, I am
24 also speaking for the Save San Francisco Bay Association and
25 for the West Contra Costa Grey Panthers. I have spoken with
26 Sierra Club, Friends of Earth, Citizens for a Better Environ-
27 ment, and if they can be present tonight, they will be, or
28 this afternoon. But we are in agreement on some of the
35
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
subjects that I wanted to speak to.
I have a few prcblems with this. Ms. Schaffer, I
think, will understand that one of the great problems, from
the public standpoint and from the citizen standpoint, is the
problem of regulation and enforcement. We have wonderful reg
ulations in California. You have wonderful regulations. But
if there is no enforcement, it doesn't matter what you have.
The fact that there is no enforcement by either of
you of abandoned sites gives us cause to pause, to say the
least.
I have been tolc by the EPA and Channel 9 that in
our area, for example, we have a Love Canal abrewing. We als
have one of the worst Class 1 sites in the United States, wit
the possible exception of one in New Jersey. And so, we take
enforcement very seriously, and we take abandoned sites very
seriously.
If we have 77,000 hazardous waste generators now in
the State, we must have had some in 1940, before there was an
enforcement at all. So, that will be a continuing problem to
the citizenry.
We find — and I must say that this is true of all
the organizations — we have trouble with the confidentiality
provisions. We don't find ourselves worrying about winning
the confidence of the regulated community with hazardous
waste, which we find a great threat both in the transporta-
tion of hazardous waste through the community and in the
dumping of hazardous waste with so-called but not working
impervious seals and barrels that rust through. We don't
36
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
find ourselves too excited about winning the confidence of the
regulated community as much as we do the safety and health of
the community, and we think that trade secrets just may not be
the way to go on that point.
The other item that we find missing in 250.11 defi-
nitions is that there is, for the purpose of this part, a
great discussion of the disposal of hazardous waste, what it
means, and it goes on to the site discharge, deposit, inject-
ion, et cetera. There is nothing there that states disposal
might mean recycling, resource recovery, matchmaking of waste
generators to provide raw material for further chemical pro-
cessing. And we think that that may be in the definition.
That' s all I have.
Oh, I have one more thing that I would like to add
to the enforcement problem. There was an article in the
San Francisco Examiner last week from the State Health Depart-
ment. There has been some criticism about enforcement, and
they have a budget of $750,000 for this year.
With $750,000 this year they have one full-time in-
spector to visit dump sites and industrial plants in 14
northern counties. So, this is why we find ourselves a little
hysterical on the subject of enforcement when we find it inad-
equate.
24 MR. SANJOUR: Jean, will you entertain questions?
MS. SIRI: Oh, yes.
MR. SANJOUR: Are there any from the panel?
MR. FIELDS: A comment on the definition of
of hazardous wastes. Mow, the problem with that is that we
27 MR. FIELDS: A comment on the definition of disposal
28
37
-------
l are using the definition of disposal that is in the Act, and
2 that is the definition that Congress gave us to work with.
3 The definition did not adcress recovery, whatever. So, that's
4 why the definition of disposal is the way it is. We are just
5 adopting the definition Congress gave us to work with regard-
6 ing treatment, storage, disposal.
7 MS. SIRI: Perhaps what we need here is a little
8 amendment to the Act by the Congress, both for abandoned sites
9 and for resource recovery, and that might be the way to go. I
10 think I brought this up with your panel once before.
11 MR. SANJOUR: Yes. It's a little far afield, I
12 guess, to talk about abandoned sites. But it is a hot issue.
13 I still have some questions for you.
14 Even though it's not terribly relevant to 3010, I
15 would be interested in your suggestions about how we can
16 handle the whole problem of abandoned sites within this cur-
17 rent law.
18 MS. SIRI: Well, I think the only thing I can ever
19 see that ever works is some kind of punitive action. You have
20 some sort of fine for people who do not report that they have
21 been dumping hazardous waste, or dumped it. And you will have
22 to have a cutoff date of some kind. But I think the really
23 heavy dumping of hazardous waste probably is since World War
24 ii.
25 For example, if you started then, and requested
26 that all dump operators and all people who knew of a site that
27 was used for anything that might be considered hazardous were
28 required to report or face a penalty — that is the onlv
38
-------
1 {possible way I can think of. Otherwise it's just going to
turn up when you have a health problem or a serious problem.
MR. SANJOUR: The way this law is worded is that th
only people that we can hold responsible are the owners of th
sites, not the people who dumped it there, if they no longer
6
7
10
13
14
15
19
20
21
22
24
25
26
27
own it.
For example, in the Love Canal it was Hooker
Chemical that put the stuff in the Canal, but Hooker Chemical
doesn't own that site. The City of Niagra Falls owns it. Yo
couldn't hold Hooker Chemical under this law.
11 1 With that limitation, then, I would like to rephras
12 the question. What can we do about it?
MS. SIRI: I don't know, but you will have to do
something. Unless the State takes over this kind of problem,
the Federal Government is going to be responsible, and is go-
ing to be responsible for cleaning up the mess and responsibl
17 for any health condition resulting from it.
So, I am not a legislator with this problem, but
someone is going to have to do something. And logically, it
should be OSHA, or it should be some health group, some group
that deals with public health threats and chemical hazards to
public health.
23 MR. SANJOUR: All right. Are there any questions
from the audience of Ms. Siri?
MR. CHANNELL: Bill, I have one. You made reference
to a Love Canal type situation brewing in California. Did
you have a particular site in mind?
28 I MS. SIRI: The EPA people the other day suggested
39
-------
5
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
that the old Antioch site, which was an industrial tank site
in Antioch, was a potential Love Canal because the City of
Antioch has allowed homes to be built surrounding it. Maybe
the City should be held responsible.
MR. SANJOUR: Any other questions? Thank you, Jean.
The next person requesting time to speak is a repre-
sentative of the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group in
Washington, D.C.
MR. WIEGMAN: Good afternoon. My name is Stephen A.
Wiegman. I am an Environmental Planning Engineer with the
Southern California Edison Company. I am appearing today as
representative of the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group,
known by the acronym USWAG, and the Edison Electric Institute.
With me today, also, is David Weinberg, of the law firm which
serves as counsel to USWAG.
USWAG is successor to the Solid Waste Group Task
Force of the Edison Electric Institute, the principal national
association of investor-owned electric light and power compan-
ies. EEI represents member companies who own and operate
about 75 percent of the nation's electrical capacity, and
service approximately 79 percent of the ultimate electric
service customers in the United States.
Our membership has actively participated in EPA's
efforts to date to develop regulations under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. This participation
reflects our recognition that portions of these regulations
will impact substantially upon our industry, and a commitment
to attempt to work cooperatively with EPA to see that this
40
-------
important statute is properly implemented.
With this background, I am pleased to offer a few
of USWAG's observations on EPA's proposed rules for prelimin-
ary notification of hazardous waste activities under Section
3010 of RCRA. Since USWAG will soon file more comprehensive
° comments on these proposed regulations, I will limit my re-
7 marks today to the high points of our thoughts.
First, I would like to repeat our fundamental con-
cern about the fragmented manner in which EPA is promulgating
regulations under RCRA. It simply is impossible to make a
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
28
fully comprehensive analysis of this or any other proposed
rule when vitally important pieces of the regulatory puzzle are
missing.
Therefore, we again request, as we have in previous
comments and testimony, that EPA keep the record open on these
and all forthcoming proposed RCRA rules until the entire pack-
age of proposals has been published.
Second, we are concerned that these regulations im-
properly revise the Federal-State relationships invisioned by
RCRA. These proposed regulations would allow a State to
adopt a more stringent definition of "hazardous waste" than
that promulgated by EPA under Section 3001, and would allow
use of this definition to invoke the notification procedures
of Section 3010.
Now, of course, we can't at this time be sure that
EPA's definition under Section 3001 will be reasonable and
7 appropriate. But the concept of two or more definitions of
"hfl7ardous waste" triggering notification requirements flies
41
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
in the face of the language of the statute, which clearly
states that a person is required to give notice only of those
wastes identified or listed by EPA under Section 3001.
Moreover, the possibility of inconsistent defini-
tions would subject companies operating in different States t
differing standards. This is a situation the statute seeks t
avoid.
We continue to believe that the consistency require
ments of RCRA preclude a State from adopting a more expansive
definition of hazardous waste than that promulgated by EPA.
We believe the purposes of RCRA demand a uniform an
appropriate definition of hazardous waste, and only under a
uniform definition will one State be prevented from, in effec
forcing wastes into other States.
We also submit that the so-called "limited interim
authorization" procedure established by Sections 250.010 and
250.811 of the proposed regulations is also inconsistent with
the Federal-State division of responsibility established by
UCRA. There, in fact, is nothing in the statute to indicate
that a State which has no-; received permitting authority un-
der Section 3006 may nonetheless receive notification under
Section 3010.
We do agree with EPA that the limited interim noti
fication procedure it proposes will create a, quote, "dis-
jointed program," unquote. And we would add that it will
create a lot of needless administrative confusion as well.
Moreover, what happens if this hybrid procedure is
someday declared illegal? Will companies who have filed with
42
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a State find themselves in violation of the obligations
created by Section 3010 to file a notification as required
under this subsection? This is particularly important to the
utility industry, since a frequent condition of our financing
arrangements is that no Federal statute be violated.
Thus, we urge the Agency to abandon the limited
interim authorization proposal and to adopt a procedure that
is consistent with the statute; namely, that notification
shall be given to the appropriate Regional Administrator or
to those States which have received authorizations as provided
by Section 3006.
Our third point: We disagree with the Agency's
statements that little time should be needed to prepare the
notification response, and that the economic impact of these
regulations will be negligible.
Because the Section 3001 regulations—which presum-
ably will define "hazardous waste" — have not yet been pro-
posed, it is simply too early to tell how much time or cost
will be required to provide the preliminary notification re-
quired by Section 3010.
If EPA seeks to require extensive testing procedures,
it may be very difficult to file an adequate, carefully pre-
pared response in 90 days. Most of the members of USWAG are
not currently staffed to collect the necessary samples, run
the tests, compile the information, and send the information
to EPA or the States in less than 90 days.
In many cases, outside firms may have to be hired to
accomplish some or all of these tasks. This will invnlvp
43
-------
1
2
3
4
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
considerable expense.
We submit that "he short time limit established by
Section 3010 mandates thai: EPA carefully evaluate the adminis-
trative burdens imposed by its procedures under Section 3001.
Of course, our members can be expected to meet all
the requirements of RCRA. Our concern, however, is that EPA
may be asking us to do more than the law requires.
In closing, I would like to mention briefly two ad-
ditional points that will be developed further in our written
submission. First, we again call to EPA's attention the crit-
ical distinction between trunicipal waste and utility waste, a
distinction to which the Agency has been insensitive in devel-
oping its regulations.
Second, we submit that definitions should be provid-
ed or existing definitions clarified for a number of terms
used in the proposed notification rules, including "transport-
er" and "hazardous waste activity."
USWAG appreciates the opportunity to testify today,
and we will continue to follow with great interest EPA's ef-
forts to implement the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
I will be happy to answer any questions, to the ex-
tent I can. I'd like to stress that I ara speaking represent-
ing a large number of companies today, and that I am only par-
ticularly familiar with what my own company does.
MR. SANJOUR: Thank you, Mr. Wiegman. Do the panel
members have any questions? Tim?
MR. FIELDS: The first comment I have is regarding
the Docket. There have been some inquiries about that in the
44
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
previous hearings, and maybe we ought to clarify it for the
benefit of everybody now.
The Section 3001 through 3005 regulations, 3001,
3002, 3004, and 3005, those regulations the only one that
hasn't been proposed thus far is Section 3003. The others
are scheduled to be proposed hopefully in December, 1978. The
Docket for those five sets of regulations, as will be stated
in the Federal Register, will remain open until 60 days after
the last of those five regulations is proposed in the Federal
Register.
We have gotten the same comment from a lot of peopl
that they want to have an opportunity to review all five sets
of those regulations at the same time, so they can see how
they fit together so they can comment. So, that is something
the Agency does plan to do.
The timetable for Section 3010 regulations closes
officially on September 11, 1978, 60 days after these regula-
tions were proposed. However, the Agency will continue to
receive comment on Section 3010 regulations. We don't plan to
promulgate these regulations until sometime in 1979.
So, comments that we do receive on Sections 3001
through 5 will be considered and utilized to revise the
Section 3010 regulations before we go file it. So, I want to
make sure we clarify that a little bit.
MR. WIEGMAN: Okay. Good.
MR. FIELDS: The second point I wanted to address is
your statement regarding the EPA adopting a different defini-
tion of a hazardous waste. We had to wrestle with the same
45
-------
1 issue internally, and our attorneys in the Washington office
2 of the General Counsel staff has advised us and the same
3 approach will be taken under Section 3006 that we cannot
4 forbid a State that is utilizing a more stringent definition
5 from utilizing that for the purposes of notification. So, we
6 are just taking the advice of our legal people.
7 We would appreciate written comment on that aspect,
8 but attorneys have advised us that more stringent definitions
9 can be utilized by States that manage the notification program
10 They can either have the choice of the more stringent defini-
11 tion or the Section 3001 definition of a hazardous waste.
12 So, we have merely stated, in the Preamble to these
13 regulations, the position of the Office of the General Counsel
14 MR. WIEGMAN: We will probably re-emphasize our
15 point in our written submittal.
16 MS. SCHAFFER: Section 3009 in Subtitle C says that
I7 a State can't promulgate less stringent requirements than the
18 Federal government. So, it's in the Act.
19 MR. SANJOUR: I think it would be most useful if
20 you were to submit not just the statements but to cite those
21 sections of the Act which you feel support your statement.
22 That might be the most relevant thing to do or any other
23 legislative history.
24 MR. FIELDS: My third comment is regarding your com-
25 ment on the limited interim authorization process that we have
26 established. Again, we would like to get your written com-
27 ment on those too, and why you think it's illegal or not ap-
28 propriate.
46
-------
A part of our basis for doing that is Section 2002
(a) of the Act, which says that the Administrator can promul-
gate such regulations as he deems appropriate to administer
this Act. Utilizing that in conjunction with Section 3006,
which clearly stated that it was the position of Congress tha
States be allowed to manage as much of this hazardous waste
program as was possible, taking those two sections of the Act
together, plus 3010, we have been advised that we can go for-
ward with this limited interim authorization, given that
10 authority, because the timing is not appropriate for States t
11 be given 3006 authorization, as indicated in Section 3010 (a)
12 of the Act.
We think there is some legal basis for us going for
ward with a limited interim authorization, although it's not
specifically called for in Section 3010. There are other pro
visions in the Act which we think give us the authority to
manage this special program.
18 MR. WIEGMAN: I think our primary feeling on that
point is it might not be worth the headaches it creates.
20 MR. FIELDS: Well, State governments have indicated
21 it's worth it to them.
22 Bill, you might want to address this last aspect.
23 MR. SANJOUR: I guess I don't understand what the
24 statement means. You said, "We again call to EPA's attention
25 the critical distinction between municipal waste and utility
waste, a distinction to which the Agency has been insensitive
27 in developing its regulations." Would you care to elaborate
28 on that?
47
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MR. WIEGMAN: Our primary point in that area is the
fact that utility wastes and many other industrial wastes can
be identified within pretty close bounds. They are fairly
consistent in what they include, and you can design facilities
to contain those, possibly with more precision than you can
municipal waste, where it can include almost anything.
Our concern is that we feel the regulations should
recognize that some kinds of waste are pretty closely identi-
fiable and can therefore be controlled in a knowing way.
MR. SANJOUR: I guess you wouldn't know about this
because we haven't published this in any form yet, but our
current intention is to revise the 3004 standards for several
different what we call "problem wastes," of which utility
wastes would be one of them, and these are the standards for
the treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste.
For several different categories of waste, includ-
ing utility wastes, we are going to write special standards
for those wastes for the very reason that you just cited.
Since we haven't done the appropriate research to do that in
the first, when we promulgate the 3004 standards we will have
reduced standards for utility wastes. That is, we will only
regulate the administrative aspects of its disposal until we
have done our research and developed disposal standards for
those wastes.
That is the current plan of procedure that has been
laid down to us. I guess this point of yours has already
been addressed.
MR. WIEGMAN: It sounds like you are taking that
48
-------
1 i nto account.
2 MR. SANJOUR: Some of the other wastes that are
3 falling into that category, phosphate products, cement, kiln
4 dust, zylene any others?
5 MR. FIELDS: Can't think of any.
6 MR. SANJOUR: Those are what we call our high volume
7 problem wastes. This category of wastes, as a point of infor-
8 nation, are wastes that were never anticipated at the time
9 this law was being written. These are wastes that were never
10 anticipated to be hazardous wastes because the efforts of
11 this office were concentrated on what you might call manufac-
12 turing byproduct waste, that are hauled around in vacuum
13 trucks and the like, and dumped in sites. Those are the kinds
14 of wastes we concentrated on.
15 What we call thses problem wastes are additional
16 wastes which we never thought of, which fell out of what we
17 thought was covered under the definition. Since they fall
18 under the Act then, they have to be regulated. The trouble is
19 we don't know how to regulate them. So, the regulations are
20 going to be delayed in those few categories of problem wastes.
21 Are there any questions from the panel?
22 MS. SCHAFFER: I have one comment. The comment
23 about defining a hazardous waste under 3001 the way that
24 the Agency is thinking of going now, instead of requiring
25 testing for every single waste, that an extensive list will
26 be included, under 3001. So, it will not require the testing,
27 and the notification will be much easier because you can look
28 down the list and see if your waste is on there, and if it is,
49
-------
l you can notify. So, it won't cost as much and take as much
2 time.
3 MR. WIEGMAN: Does that mean the list is going to
4 be specific, and if you are not on the list, then you are not
5 considered?
6 MS. SCHAFFER: No.
1 MR. WIEGMAN: I didn't think so.
8 MS. SCHAFFER: There has never been a requirement to
9 test. You can always say that your waste is hazardous and get
10 into the system. However, some of the lists will include
11 processes. Some of the lists will include specific chemicals.
12 Gut it's going to be pretty extensive. I think Bill Sanjour
13 can talk a little bit more precisely on what it's going to
14 say.
15 MR. SANJOUR: I don't think this is the right meet-
16 ing. Are there any questions from the audience? Why don't
17 we come on up to the microphone?
18 MR. STAUHAUGH: My name is Roger Stauhaugh. I rep-
!9 resent Exxon Company, U.S.A. Ms. Schaffer said, under
20 Section 3009---
21 MR. SANJOUR: Excuse me. We are talking about our
22 questions addressed to this gentleman.
23 MR. STAUHAUGH: Okay. I wanted to comment on a
24 statement she made regarding one of his questions. Is that
25 okay?
26 MR. SANJOUR: We are going to have a general
27 question session after all the speakers are through. Let's
28 just limit these questions now to questions for the speakers
50
-------
2
3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
themselves .
MR. STAUHAUGH: Okay.
MR. SANJOUR: Yes, sir? I don't think we can hear
you from back there. Why don't you come up here?
MR. SCHWARTZ: I have a very simple question. Carl
Schwartz, California State Health. I would like to know what
the definition of "utility wastes" is. My question is: What
would be considered utility wastes? I am really not familiar
with the term.
MR. SANJOUR: I think we are talking about, for the
most part, fly ash and bottom ash, and flue gas, desulphuri-
zation products, rubber sludge. Is that right?
MR. WIEGMAN: Those would probably be the largest
volume wastes involved.
MR. SANJOUR: We are talking about coal burning
utilities, is what we are talking about. I guess we tend to
get into our own jargon and tend to forget there are one or
two people who aren't in our group.
If there are no other questions, we will go on to
the next speaker. Thank you, sir.
Jim Greco of Browning-Ferris Industries.
MR. GRECO: My name is Jim Greco. I am an employee
of Browning-Ferris Industries, and my responsibilities are to
stay abreast, involved and aware of the Federal and State leg-
islation and regulations. Accompanying me' is Gus Berry, also
an employee of Browning-Ferris Industries, who is the com-
pany's environmental counsel.
Though I will make reference to it in my presenta-
51
-------
1 tion, perhaps it's informative for the audience to know that
2 Browning-Ferris Industries is a company which is involved in
3 the handling of hazardous wastes and other wastes, from col-
4 lection through disposal.
5 We have carefully reviewed the proposed procedures
6 for preliminary notification of hazardous waste activities,
7 and recognize that these proposed rules, when finalized, and
8 with the promulgation of the 3001 criteria for identification
9 and listing of hazardous wastes, will commence the cradle-to-
10 grave control concept for hazardous wastes.
11 Though the Federal regulatory program for abating
12 and controling the pollution potential of mismanaged wastes
13 has not yet been implemented, we have observed much activity
14 at the State level with the passage of hazardous waste manage-
15 ment laws, the promulgatior of regulations, and the upgrading
16 of permit programs for neeced treatment, storage and disposal
17 facilities.
18 Additionally, we and others have witnessed an in-
19 creased public concern and awareness regarding the disposal
20 of chemical wastes. As a result, the Resource Conservation
21 and Recovery Act of 1976 or, as many call it, RCRA and the
22 Agency's conscientious efforts to implement its mandates loom
23 more and more important day by day.
24 In this regard the general public needs to be more
25 aware that hazardous wastes can be managed safely, that
26 facilities for their treatment and disposal are needed, and
27 that the governmental framework for assuring environmentally
28 protective practices has been established.
52
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Failure to acknowledge these facts will likely en-
courage greater public misunderstanding, alarm, and a lack of
confidence, particularly when preliminary notification proced-
ures are instituted.
Since the enactment of RCRA, the Agency has con-
ducted numerous meetings for soliciting widespread input and
commentary from the general public and every conceivable
affected entity. Though lengthy and resource demanding, the
rule making process undertaken by the Agency has been commend-
able with the efforts for enhancing public participation being
exemplary.
An expanded public education and understanding ef-
fort, however, is needed to compliment public participation in
development, revision, implementation and enforcement of any
regulation, guideline, information, et cetera.
Browning-Ferris Industries is a publicly held com-
pany engaged in providing solid and liquid waste collection,
processing, treatment and disposal services to business,
government and the public. Using the terminology of RCRA, we
would be considered a transporter of hazardous waste as well
as an operator of facilities for treatment, storage and dis-
posal of hazardous wastes.
Briefly, our experience and capabilities derive
from the operation of approximately a dozen facilities which
handle industrial liquids, slurries, and sludges, spent
pickle liquors and other waste acids, neutralized acidic
sludges, organic and inorganic chemicals, and other wastes
which might be determined to be hazardous once the 3001
53
-------
1 criteria are finalized,
2 These wastes are managed by BFI in special sanitary
3 landfills, secure landfills, chemical fixation facilities,
4 neutralization plants or disposal wells located throughout the
5 country. Another 60 of ou" waste disposal sites, typically
6 for landfilling municipal, commercial and industrial solid
7 wastes, may conceivably be subject to the preliminary notifi-
8 cation requirements.
9 Pursuant to our review of the subject proposed rules
10 two particular areas concern us, one being the limited interiir
11 authorization considerations presented in Section 250.810, and
12 secondly, the information required in the notification and the
13 confidentiality aspects of that information identified in
14 Section 250.823.
15 Regarding the former, limited interim authorization,
16 we would concur with EPA's desire to allow as many States as
17 possible to participate in the preliminary notification pro-
18 gram. However, we question whether the program, as currently
19 delineated in Section 250.810, complies with Section 3006 of
20 RCRA, unless the program calls, at a minimum, for the State
21 to show two things:
22 That its legislature had passed enabling legislatior
23 and that an active hazardous waste control program had been
24 implemented or commenced pursuant to that legislation by
25 July 21st of this year. As we understand Section 3006 (c) of
26 RCRA, that date, July 21st, was determined as the date 90 day:
27 after the date required for promulgation of regulations under
28 Sections 3002, 3003, 3004 and 3005, which would be
54
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
April 21, 1978 or thereabouts.
Secondly, at a minimum, its hazardous waste program
must have a preliminary notification program substantially
equivalent to the EPA's program contained in 40 CFR Part 250
Subpart G, as it is finally promulgated.
Our reasons at this time for why we feel that
Section 250.810 is deficient because, one, the States are not
required to show that they had a program under State law in
effect on or about July 21, 1978, and secondly, the States a>-t
not required to show that their preliminary notification pro-
gram is substantially equivalent to the EPA's program. Par-
ticularly, the States are not required to show that they have
programs to protect proprietary information which is sub-
stantially equivalent to the EPA's program.
Substantial equivalency, with respect to the pro-
tection of proprietary information, is important since some
States may not have a statutory framework for handling and,
in certain instances, protecting one from public disclosure
proprietary information, whereas other States may. Owners or
operators of hazardous waste facilities may possibly incur *
competitive disadvantage, depending upon whether or not cer-
tain information in some States is protected and in other
States not protected.
I
Relative to our second primary concern that is, j
confidentiality claims as addressed in Section 250.823 (b)(10)[
and referenced in the supplementary information part of the
Federal Regi ster notice entitled "Confidentiality Provisions"
55
—we would concur with the first option identified, which is
-------
1 currently presented in the proposed rules.
2 If the second option were incorporated that is,
3 requiring submission of substantiation at the time of initial
4 notification the requirements would be very demanding on
5 both the affected entity and the EPA. In our estimation, in
6 some cases we likely could not possibly provide the kind of
7 information to substantiate any confidentiality claims and
8 still meet the 90 day deadline.
9 Additionally, Ef'A's waiting until a request for the
10 information has been filed to support the substantiation of
11 our proprietary claim doe;, not create a burden on the EPA
12 Regional Offices any greater than if the information is solic-
1} ited in the first instance, when the notice is filed. Also,
14 the overall cost impact, paperwork handling efficiency, and
15 best utilization of personnel resources would probably best
16 benefit the public if option 1 were retained.
17 Certain feature:, of the proposed rules are note-
is worthy, which we also concur with, and they namely are:
19 One, that authorized States will be encouraged to
20 operate and manage the notification process in the same or an
21 equivalent manner to that employed by EPA in order to achieve
22 as much national unifromity as possible;
23 Two, Section 250.810 (c), which cites that under
24 limited interim authorization States shall not grant exemp-
25 tions regarding who must file notifications, when notificatioi
26 must be filed, or what information this notification must con-
27 tain.
28 We also concur with Section 250.820 (a), Section
56
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
250.820 (b)(l)(ii), Section 250.820 (b)(6). And I would be
happy to reference these to the proposed rules, but they woul
be a little bit more reading. We can go back to it if anyone
desi res.
And we also concur with Section 250.823 (b)(ll),
which states that an estimate of the annual amount of hazard-
ous waste handled, based on the period from January 1, 1977 t
December 31, 1977, be an optional requirement.
Based on the increase and more uniform enforcement
of hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal regulation
and anticipated standards applicable to generators and trans-
porters of hazardous wastes, Browning-Ferris has undertaken a
more rapid expansion of its liquid and hazardous waste manage
ment waste service capability.
We view the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
of 1976 as the most significant Federal legislation to date
affecting the waste systems industry. Hopefully, as the man-
dates of this legislation are implemented, effective, practica
and economically wise practices for insuring the protection
of the public and the environment will be enhanced.
We are pleased to participate in this hearing, and
will likely submit additional comments for the official rule
making record prior to September llth, and are willing to
entertain any kind of questions the audience or the panel
might have.
MR. SANJOUR: Thank you, Jim. Any questions from
the panel?
MR. FIELDS: Jim, I guess in your comments you were
57
-------
saying that you think that limited interim authorization
should be based upon Section 3006 (c) of the Act?
MR. GRECO: That is our understanding. What we are
emphasizing is, as we understand 3006 (c) of the Act, States
should have in effect or passed the legislation, prior to
July 21st of this year, a hazardous waste management control
program. He think that that should be part of the limited
interim authorization application procedures the State sup-
plies to the EPA.
10 MR. FIELDS: So, you think these additional require-
11 ments should be added?
12 MR. GRECO: Yes.
13 MR. SANJOUR: No other questions from the panel?
14 A question from the audience let me try to read it.
15 "In reference to the last speaker" was this a
16 question of the last speaker or a question of Mr. Greco?
17 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: A question to anyone
18 on the panel.
19 MR. SANJOUR: Let's save those questions till all
20 the speakers have had their turn. Well, okay, I will read it
21 "In reference to the last speaker's concerns about
22 confidentiality protection if reporting is to States instead
23 of to EPA, could you comment on confidentiality provisions,
24 remarks about States' trade secret acts, or public"—why
25 don't you come up and ask this question?
26 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: In reference to the
27 last speaker's concerns about confidentiality protection if
28 reporting is to States instead of to EPA, could you comment
58
-------
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
on — and then, quoting from the Federal Regi ster, confidenti-
ality provisions, page 29910, first paragraph, remarks about,
quote, "States' trade secret acts or public records acts"and
the protection afforded therein —because there are remarks
in there that seem to go for protection, but I frankly wasn't
comfortable with it, and I gather these gentlemen aren't com-
fortable with it, but I gather you are comfortable with it,
and I would like to be comfortable with it.
MR. SANJOUR: What is your discomfort?
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: I am not familiar
with the States' trade secrets acts, and I am concerned that
we wouldn't be protected by confidentiality if we report to
the States in the same way as if we reported to the EPA.
MR. SANJOUR: Again, if anyone of the panel knows
better, correct me if I am wrong. I am, I think, talking in
an area where I am not terribly familiar personally. But I
believe that if a State has authorization, then it is the
State laws that will have to prevail, because the Federal law
specifically says that the State program is in lieu of the
Federal program.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Okay.
MR. SANJOUR: The Federal law does not require the
States to have the same kind of laws or the same kind of pro-
gram. So, therefore, if the State is implementing it, then
the State law would prevail, I think. Therefore, whatever
provision the State law would have for confidentiality would
apply, not the Federal laws. Is that correct, Amy?
MS. SCHAFFER: I think Anne Allen, who is an
59
-------
1 attorney for the Solid Waste Office, was going to do some re-
2 search on that and put her research into the Docket, because
3 I don't think it's been clearly delineated, who has authority
4 under what.
5 So, when you get your Docket, eventually or you
6 could probably write in anc find out if something like that
7 has been put into the Docket.
8 MR. FIELDS: I had a question for you. Are you say-
9 ing that you would want to make it a requirement that States
10 have a privacy act or some such act in order to handle a
11 notification program?
12 MR. GRECO: What we are saying is when a State
13 wishes to seek interim limited authorization that it should
14 meet the test of substantial equivalency. I think there are
15 three requirements now in the proposed rules. We are adding
16 two more, and the second pertains to confidentiality.
17 What we feel is, whether it requires a State act or
18 not, what the State does as far as to handle confidentiality
19 claims should be consistent with the Federal program, and
20 hopefully uniform with other States.
21 MR. SANGOUR: So, you are saying that the concept of
22 equivalency should include confidentiality?
23 MR. GRECO: Yes.
24 MR. SANOOUR: I see. It's a whole new concept. I
25 take it you are saying the same thing?
26 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yes. I think it
27 should afford the same protection, whichever right you choose.
28 MR. SANJOUR: In nv own mind. T have alwavs viewed
60
-------
equivalency of protection from hazardous waste, not protection
of trade secrets. It's a new concept. It will be taken into
account.
MR. FIELDS: That is a good comment. Like Amy said
our lawyers are looking into it.
One comment is the Regional Administrators and their
staffs are going to be reviewing the notification program ap-
plications from the various State entities. They will make
the ultimate decision regarding whether a State is given the
10 authority to administer a program. If a Regional Administra-
11 tor does not want to give them a program because he doesn't
12 think the State warrants it, he may not give them the program
13 We wanted to allow some flexibility in that area.
14 Right now we don't think it should be a mandatory
15 requirement for a State to handle a notification program.
16 But please make that comment and we will consider it.
17 MR. SANJOUR: Any other questions of Mr. Greco?
18 Thank you, Jim.
19 The next speaker on my schedule is Rebecca Beemer
20 of Dow Chemical.
21 MS. BEEMER: Mr. Sanjour and members of the panel,
22 I am Beckee Beemer, Environmental Specialist for the Western
23 Division of Dow Chemical Company, U.S.A.
24 These comments will reflect our concerns and
25 corporate philosophy in the proper management of hazardous
26 and solid wastes to provide adequate protection of human
27 health and the environment. They summarize our concerns for
28 Section 3010 of RCRA, as proposed, which pertain to, one, the
61
-------
l comment closure date. Our most immediate concern is the pre-
2 mature proposal of these regulations ahead of other intimately
3 related Sections, (3001, 3004 and 3005).
4 It was our understanding that the regulations for
5 the Agency planned to propose the Sections individually, and
6 hold open a collective comnent period at least until 60 days
7 after the last regulation had been formally proposed.
8 It was further understood that the anticipated draft
9 Environmental Impact Statement covering all of Subtitle C
10 would also be available for comment prior to closure of any
11 comment period. We understand this is so, and we thank you
12 very much.
13 Two, definition of hazardous waste: It was stated
14 within the supplemental information of the proposed rules that
15 quote, "It is important to note the definition of solid waste"
16 and "hazardous wastes, which are a subset of all solid wastes.
17 It is obvious to us that the definition of what
18 constitutes a hazardous waste under Section 3001 and what con-
19 stitutes a permitted hazardous waste management facility under
20 Sections 3004 and 3005 are crucial to the interpretation of
21 and comment upon preliminary notification under Section 3010.
22 It is impossible to determine at present what is a
23 hazardous waste. We appreciate that the Agency will defer
24 comment review of preliminary notification until after all
25 Sections have been proposed.
26 Three, interpretation of "place of operation",
27 "terminal", and "onsite" definitions: The definitions of
28 "place of operation" and "terminal" appear to
62
-------
warehouses and commercial establishments. The definition of
"onsite" should distinguish that the property can either be
owned or leased. These definitions should be clarified in
the final prenotification regulation.
Four, interpretation of "storage": We contend that
the interpretation of "storage" requiring notification and
permitting if for more than 90 days, as contained in the
supplemental information, is an unreasonably short period and
should be extended to about one year.
10 Five, information required: For identification
11 numbers we would like to propose the use of a consistent num-
12 ber among all air, water, waste water and solid waste regula-
13 tions. The census file number, which an eleven digit number,
14 for example, is already used extensively for enumeration of
15 products by manufacturing location.
16 About transport, we understand transport requires
17 manifesting, but we would like to emphasize that we under-
18 stand onsite transport is specifically excluded.
19 Types and descriptions of hazardous waste: The re-
20 quirement that, quote, "All wastes which are ignitable,
21 reactive, infectious, radioactive or corrosive must be des-
22 cribed as such," unquote, appears to imply testing for all
23 these criteria. This would also preclude assumed designation
24 of a waste as hazardous without test. We recommend that all
25 criteria have provisions for checking any of five categories:
26 A, yes by test; B, no by test; C, yes by list; D, assumed
27 hazardous; or E, undetermined hazard. Otherwise there is no
28 basis for distinction between actual testing and assumed
63
-------
1 hazard.
2 Six, the reporting impact: We commend the Agency
3 for simplifying notification and making some provisions for
4 reelassifying the waste as nonhazardous at some future date.
5 We strongly disagree, however, with the Agency's contention
6 that, quote, "Most of the requested information will be on
7 hand," and "Little time should be needed to prepare the noti-
8 fication response," unquote. This will be true only if the
9 Agency does not choose to arbitrarily overclassify all in-
10 dustrial wastes as supposedly hazardous.
11 The Agency further states that the greatest burden
12 would come in those instances where some analysis of waste
13 was required. It is our contention that unless all solid
14 wastes are assumed to be hazardous, such testing would be re-
15 quired for all other wastes contested to be nonhazardous by
16 their generators, but declared hazardous by the Agency by
17 either criteria or by listing.
18 There is substantial economic impact directly attrib
19 utable to such wholesale testing.
20 it would be virtually impossible for all solid
21 wastes in the United States to be tested, within the 90 day
22 notification period, for all criteria, even exclusive of
23 toxicity.
24 We recommend that provision be made to declare within
25 90 days any or all criteria as undetermined, subject to future
26 testing. This would serve the intent of RCRA in identifying
27 potentially hazardous wastes, and allow generators more ade-
28 quate time for testing.
64
-------
We further recommend that provision be made to con-
test the designation of any waste specifically listed by name
or by process under Section 3001 regulations, and declare it
to be nonhazardous as substantiated by actual testing results
from the generator.
Further, there should be ample opportunity for pub-
lic input to revision of the 3001 listing to remove misiden-
tified wastes as well as hazardous wastes.
9 Confidentiality: The Agency has also requested
10 comment on confidentiality. We agree with the first option
11 as proposed, that affected parties be allowed to make confi-
12 dentiality claims without providing substantiation at the
13 time of initial notification. We do not consider it a burden
14 for EPA to request substantiation at some future date, if
15 necessary.
16 The first option would conserve EPA resources.
17 The second option would require every claim be investigated.
18 We do not believe that a large number of specific requests
19 for such detailed technical information will be forthcoming.
20 We seriously question whether adequate protection of
21 confidential information can be assured. Information pertain-
22 ing to types of wastes, descriptions and volumes can be in-
23 valuable in a competitive market. All States seeking primary
24 responsibility should be required to provide protection at
25 least equivalent to the EPA confidentiality requirement.
26 in summary, we feel the Agency has made progress in
27 developing the notification requirements. We request consid-
28 eration of our comments, and appreciate that the comment
65
-------
1 period has been extended until all hazardous waste regula-
2 tions are proposed. Thank you.
3 MR. SANJOUR: Ms.. Beemer, will you entertain ques-
4 tions?
5 MS. BEEMER: Certainly, if I can answer them.
6 MR. SANJOUR: I have got one for you. You said,
7 "We recommend that provision be made to declare within 90 days
8 any or all criteria as undetermined." If EPA were to allow
9 all criteria to be designated as "undetermined" in the notifi-
10 cation scheme, is it part of your recommendation that any
11 waste so identified would still be treated as a hazardous
12 waste?
13 MS. BEEMER: Yes„ sir.
14 MR. SANJOUR: How would you square that with the
15 provision in the Act which requires let's see if I can find
16 the specific language.
17 MS. BEEMER: Whet that would just do, now, we
18 wouldn't have to perform all the tests within the 90 day
19 period, and that would give us time to make those tests in
20 adequate and accurate testing procedures.
21 MR. SANJOUR: How would that differ, since the
22 waste would be treated as a hazardous waste in any event? How
23 would that differ if you ;ust assumed that it was hazardous
24 and then checked it out?
25 MS. BEEMER: Because we haven't determined for cer-
26 tain whether it's toxic, corrosive, et cetera. We would like
27 to make sure that what we put on the form would be the actual
28 material.
66
-------
1 MR. SANJOUR: You could always submit a correction.
2 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: You certify under
3 oath that the information is correct.
4 MR. SANJOUR: To the best of your knowledge.
5 MS. BEEMER: But what this does is just make it mor
6 clear.
7 MR. SANJOUR: All right. Are there any other ques-
8 tions from the panel? Any questions from the audience of the
9 speaker?
10 Thank you very much.
11 Our next listed speaker is Mr. or Ms. H. M.
12 Schneider of the Romic Chemical Corporation.
13 MR. SCHNEIDER: Mr. Sanjour, my specific address is
14 on Section 3004, and since it is not subject to discussion, I
15 can really not debate it, unless you let me.
16 MR. SANJOUR: My intention here is to first go
17 through all the people who wish to address the 3010 regula-
18 tions.
19 MR. SCHNEIDER: All right.
20 MR. SANJOUR: And if there is any time remaining,
21 then to throw the discussion to anything else relating to any
22 part of Subtitle C, So, why don't you just stick around
23 awhile and we will get around to it.
24 MR. SCHNEIDER: Okay. Sounds good.
25 MR. SANJOUR: Our next listed speaker is H.
26 LaVerne Rosse of the Nevada Division of Environmental Pro-
27 tection.
28 MR. ROSSE: My comments have already been covered.
67
-------
l I would rather not repeat them again, and go on to someone
2 else.
3 MR. SANJOUR: You can, if you would like, give a
4 written statement, just submit it for the record.
5 MR. ROSSE: I will do that.
6 MR. SANJOUR: Thank you.
1 I have exhausted the list of persons who have asked
8 to speak. I will now open it to anyone else who cares to
9 speak on the subject of Section 3010. Anyone?
10 Then, I will open the floor to anyone who wishes to
11 ask any questions of the panel or a"»y questions of any previ-
12 ous speakers on the subject of Section 3010.
o UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Do you want these
14 written?
15 MR. SANJOUR: No, you can come up and give them, if
16 you prefer to.
17 MR. MILLET: My name is Ray Millet, with Shell Oil
l8 Company, and I am asking this primarily on behalf of the
!9 American Petroleum Institute.
20 Under the notification requirements, we'd like to
21 find out who is the responsible party in filing the notifica-
22 tion requirement in the case of, for example, service stations
23 where you have individual service stations who generate waste,
24 which may not be excluded, because they are a small generator,
25 when the person who is generating the waste may be a lessee
26 under contract with the lessor; and furthermore, the land may
27 not be owned by either par~y. Who is the one that has to
28 notify?
68
-------
1 MR. SANJOUR: I am reading the law now to see if I
2 can answer it.
3 MR. FIELDS: I have a canned response to your ques-
4 tion, which we are working on at headquarters. Anyway, this
5 is a comment from our division management.
6 Retail establishments are currently being evaluated
7 for special relief from reporting requirements, and we are de-
8 veloping streamlined notification procedures for, at least,
9 service stations.
10 A voluntary arrangement is being worked out. We are
11 working on this, anyway to allow the haulers, for example,
12 those associated with waste oil re-refiners, to assume the
13 obligations of the waste oil generator for the purposes of
14 notification. So, I don't know how it's going to work, but we
15 are working on a procedure now whereby we can allow the hauler
16 either via maybe the major oil companies or retail establish-
17 ments or retail associations, to serve as the generator who
18 will collectively notify all the individual service stations.
19 MR. WILLET: Okay. Much similar to the provision
20 that has been proposed in the State of Minnesota, where the
21 waste oil hauler, who represents either a disposal firm or a
22 re-refiner, goes around and collects it from multiple service
23 stations?
24 MR. FIELDS: Right.
25 MR. WILLET: I have a second part to this question,
26 very similar. With regards to the 77,000 number, which you
27 apparently say is in error, how is one to identify each indi-
28 vidual operating field from an exploration and production
69
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
facility, each platform? Does each individual platform need
a specific notification, because it may have waste from that
platform which may meet the criteria? These may be onsite
facilities, individual field locations, throughout the United
States. What about those?
MR. FIELDS: That's another problem we are looking
at. As you know, through API, you were gracious enough that
we visited some facilities in Wyoming. I guess there are
about 40,000 of these operations in Wyoming, or something like
that. Tens of thousands of these individual operations, and
the same question came up there. Three of our people spent a
week visiting these operations.
It is a problem, and I assure you we are looking at
it, as to how we are going to try to arrange some special
notification procedures for these people. I don't know how
it's going to finally come out, but that is something we are
aware of and are looking into.
MR. SANJOUR: I Em not sure that EPA is even rele-
vant to this discussion, because it's the law. The law
doesn't address EPA. The law addresses those who generate,
treat, store or transport hazardous waste, and requires them
to notify, right?
Now, EPA may write its interpretation of what the
law means. See, EPA is not authorized to write regulations.
EPA may write an interpretation, but the courts will finally
decide. I am not sure how much attention they will even pay
to EPA.
MR. WILLET: My concern is not whether or not EPA
70
-------
is making a special rule or not. My concern is if each indi-
vidual facility must file a notification, then this is a sub-
stantial burden on our industry which impacts your economic
impact analysis. It goes beyond just the sheer notification,
and this is all I am trying to bring across. We recognize we
° have some problems. We just want to get the system to recog-
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
27
28
nize what some of these shortcomings are as it's presently
proposed .
Is there any way we can streamline that notification''
MR. SANJOUR: Our current regulations have provis-
ions for national firms, for example, sending in one notifica-
tion, as long as they itemize and list every facility covered
by that notification.
So, if you have a lot of different wells in a field
you can send in one notification and just itemize all the
we!1s , perhaps .
MR. FIELDS: We would appreciate any comments you
might have on how we do this, if you can submit them.
MR. WILLET: We will be submitting some written
comments for the record. But I thought these were sufficient-
ly large numbers involved that it might be important. Thank
you.
MR. SANJOUR: Thank you. Are there any more
specific comments on 3010? Yes, I saw the hand. When I have
run out of comments for 3010, what I propose to do is take a
break for about 15 minutes and then come back and have just
kind of a free-for-all on anything on Subtitle C that anyone
wants to talk about or ask questions about or anything.
71
-------
So, with that, anymore questions on 3010 specif-
ically? Yes, sir?
MR. ROSSE: I am LaVerne Rosse, with the State of
Nevada .
Is there any problem if we add to the notification
forms some additional information that we feel is important
to us?
MR. SANJ0UR: I believe — correct me if I am wrong,
Tim — our thinking is that if a State implements the notifica-
10 tion system, they may indeed add anything to the form that
11 they want. Is that right?
12 MR. FIELDS: There is no problem with that.
13 MR. ROSSE: If we have legislative authority to add.
14 MR. SANJOUR: Right. That is your problem. You
15 can't take any questions off.
16 MR. FIELDS: Can't go the other way.
17 MR. SANJOUR: Yes, sir?
18 MR. ATHELICK: I am Glen Athelick with Hewlett-
19 Packard Company. My question is I understood in reading the
20 regulation 3010 that you are excluding household kinds of
21 chemicals from the Act. In the electronics business we have
22 a lot of labs that include lots and lots of chemicals in
2} their development work, where they have small quantities.
24 It seems to me v*e have got kind of a double law
25 here. Unless there is going to be minimum quantities speci-
26 fied in 3001—we are talking about things like, you know,
27 household ammonia and Drano and alcohol, and that kind of
28 thina. Are those going to be essentially storage facilities,
72
-------
1 all of our labs, under your definitions of holding of chemi- 73
2 cals?
3 MR. SANJOUR: There are two things we are talking
4 about here. First of all, households are exempt, period.
5 Again, correct me if I am wrong.
6 MS. SCHAFFER: That's right.
7 MR. SANJOUR: And the second thing is that genera-
8 tors, persons who generate below a certain quantity, which is
9 a hundred kilograms a month, generates and disposes of a
10 hundred kilograms a month, are exempt from the generator re-
11 quirements.
12 Now, does that exempt a generator from the notifi-
13 cation requirements?
14 MR. FIELDS: From notification, also.
15 MR. SANJOUR: Does that answer your question?
16 MR. ATHELICK: Sounds like it. Also from this
17 hoi di ng, storage?
18 MR.SNYDER: The chemicals would first have to be
19 disposed of and become a waste, if you were using them as
20 chemicals.
21 MR. SANJOUR: Well, that is not the question.
22 MR. ATHELICK: That is, though. This Act doesn't
23 take effect until they are a waste?
24 MR. FIELDS: That's right. It has to be a solid
25 waste.
26 MR. SANJOUR: No, no. Are you talking about chemi-
27 cals that you are holding for disposal or for use?
28 MR. ATHELICK: For use.
-------
1
2
3
4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MR. SANJOUR: We'll, that's not a waste.
MR. ATHELICK: Not a waste?
MR. SANJOUR: Yes.
MR. FIELDS: Our regulations don't come into being
until it's a waste, that's true.
MR. ATHELICK: The next question is on the treatment
or disposal onsite, where I have that as part of a process.
For example, cyanide treatment, where, for example, I am
electroplating and I have cyanide waste. As soon as it comes
out of the tank and it's out of the drain, it's cyanide waste.
Is that now part of my process, and I don't have to report
that as a treatment or disposal facility?
waste?
74
MS. SCHAFFER: Do you do anything to the cyanide
MR. ATHELICK: Yes, we completely decompose it.
MS. SCHAFFER: If it's part of the train of opera-
tion, then we probably will not consider it a waste, probably.
MR. ATHELICK: Okay.
MR. SANJOUR: If you never get into trouble, then we
certainly wouldn't. If you get into trouble, then it probably
comes in.
MR. ATHELICK: Okay.
MR. SANJOUR: Any more questions on 3010 specifical-
ly?
As I said, we will take a break and then reconvene
and throw the floor open to any questions regarding Subtitle C.
Fifteen minutes. And I have been told to announce there is a
coffee machine here.
-------
2 MR. SANJOUR: The floor is now open to any questions
or comments or discussion on any items in Subtitle C of RCRA
that anybody cares to discuss. Anybody?
MR. SCHNEIDER: Dear members of the board, ladies
and gentlemen, I am Michael Schneider. I am the principal
owner of Romic Chemical Corporation in Palo Alto, California.
I would like to make a presentation on 3004, financial re-
spons i bi 1 i ti es .
11
12
15
18
^
21
28
(Bri ef recess.
I would like to give you a little background. Romi
Chemical Corporation is a reclaimer of industrial solvents an
chemicals used in the greater San Francisco Bay Area, and has
been doing this work since 1953. We are one of three major
reclaimers on the West Coast. One of them is Oil & Solvent
Process Company in Azusa, California. We are in the Bay Area
and handling the greater San Francisco Bay Area. Chempro in
17 Seattle, Washington is probably the third one here on the
West Coast. They handle part of Oregon and almost everything
up in Washington.
We reclaim the solvents and liquid organic chemicals
by either simple or fractional distillation, to the required
degree of purity so that they can be used over again by the
same companies that originated them.
We also purchase contaminated chemicals, reclaim
them and resell them to other users.
We serve the following industries: Paint and
lacquer industry, recording tape, chemical manufacturers,
chemical wholesalers, chemical retailers, Department of
75
-------
1 Defense, ink, electronic, trucking-shipping , auto manufactur-
2 ers, railroad, adhesives, steel, pharmaceutical, tire manu-
3 facturers and airlines.
4 By definition, our company is a generator, trans-
5 porter, and storage and treatment facility for hazardous
6 wastes. We believe that our activity as processors of indus-
7 trial wastes help greatly in the conservation of resources and
8 energy, and in the decrease of the hazardous wastes that have
9 to be scheduled for disposal. As a matter of fact, many haz-
10 ardous wastes are rendered harmless through processing.
11 We agree that proper licensing is essential to in-
12 sure maximum compliance with the requirements set forth in
!3 the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Toxic Sub-
14 stances Control Act, and other applicable regulations designed
15 to improve the quality of the air we breathe, the water we
16 drink and the food we eat.
17 Although we accspt the provisions of Public Law
18 94-580 in principle, we fael that a very serious blow will be
19 dealt to the recycling industries if the current tentative
20 interpretation of financial responsibility becomes effective
21 in its present form.
22 The following i'5 a quotation of the section on fi-
23 nancial responsibilities, as contained in the Environmental
24 Protection Agency Preamble to draft proposed standards for
25 owners and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage
26 and disposal facilities, dated April 21, 1973.
27 The Section 3004 standards include requirements for
28 financial responsibility under 250.46. As now proposed, the j
76
-------
1 minimum level of financial responsibility is five million
2 dollars for claims arising out of injury to persons or proper-
3 ty from the release of hazardous wastes to the environment.
4 This requirement applies to all facilities.
5 In addition to the regulation presented in these
6 proposed rules, the following options were also considered:
7 Each owner or operator will maintain at least one
8 million dollars of financial responsibility during the opera-
9 tion of the site; a site-specific trust fund will be built up
10 during the operation of the site to provide protection to the
11 public for damages resulting from the escape of hazardous
12 waste to the environment after site closure;
13 Each owner or operator of a hazardous waste treat-
14 ment, storage or disposal facility shall have and maintain
15 financial responsibility in the minimum amount of ten million
16 dollars for injury resulting from release or escape of
I7 hazardous wastes to the environment;
18 An owner or operator would be required to establish
19 financial responsibility by obtaining liability coverage, to
20 include sudden and non-sudden occurrences, from a pool of i n -
2J surance companies.
22 A comment on that: My company, which is a fairly
23 good representative of the average reclaimer, grosses approx-
24 imately $1.5 million dollars per year. Up to the present
25 time, we have been in a continuous squeeze on our finances due
26 to constantly changing requirements by Air Pollution, Water
27 Pollution, Department of Transportation, Cal-OSHA, et cetera.
28 If we were required, as now nrnnospd. to oost a five million
77
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
dollar bond or, as proposed in Options 1 and 2, maintain a
minimum insurance of one to ten million dollars of financial
responsibility, we would not be able to survive, since the
cost of such coverage would completely consume any profit we
would be able to generate.
On the other hand, if we, as processors, tried to
pass on the added costs to the consumers of our reclaimed
materials, we would be unable to compete with the manufactur-
ers of virgin materials.
Added costs of cisposal in Class 1 dumps, which
already have increased from 25 to 30 percent over the past
two years, would encourage unethical people to dump their
waste with possible detriment to the environment and increased
hazards to health.
We do not deny that some type of financial provision
has to be made in order to care for human suffering and en-
vironmental damage occasioned by accidental spills, leaching
of hazardous materials from disposal sites, contamination of
water and soil. History shows that these occurrences have
taken place, and most probably will happen again, regardless
of how careful we are at the processing plants and disposal
sites. But if we are to require cradle-to-grave cognizance of
hazardous chemicals, we should try not to overcharge the grave
Thank you very mjch.
MR. SANJOUR: Thank you, sir. I am sorry that since
this subject is outside the scope of the purpose of these
meetings that we don't have the right people here to address
any of these issues. People who are working on these
78
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
financial responsibility regulations are not here today. So,
I don't think there is anything very intelligent that we can
say on that subject.
MR. SCHNEIDER: Well, I would like to ask one ques-
tion
MR. SANJOUR: We will see to it that it gets to the
right people.
MR. SCHNEIDER: Well, I thank you for giving me the
opportunity to say what I had to say, because sometimes we
are not able to go into Dallas or Washington, you see, just
by sheer workload factors. So, since I had the opportunity to
present it here, if we could expedite that and put it in the
proper channels, I would certainly appreciate it.
I"IR. SANJOUR: Yes, I will see it gets to the proper
channels. Also, I would like to invite you to come by when
we do have our public hearings on 3004, which, according to
the statement I gave this morning, should be toward the end of
this year.
MR. SCHNEIDER- Fine. Thank you very much.
MR. SANJOUR: Thank you. Any other questions,
comments, statements? Nobody? Okay, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Can you tell me
whether mining wastes will be included under the 3001 listing
that you provided?
MR. SANJOUR: The current thinking is that they will
not be specifically listed. The current thinking is that
the only mining waste that will be listed is uranium mill
tailings.- which is not, strictly speaking, mining waste It
79
-------
1 is a m-lling waste. However, any mining waste which fills the
2 characteristics of a hazardous waste is still a hazardous
3 waste, even if it's not listed.
4 Mining wastes in general will be among those cate-
5 gories of special wastes tnat I discussed earlier today, that
6 will have a special treatment under Section 3004, on the dis-
7 posal standards. That's ojr current thinking on mining
8 wastes.
9 Also, I think now there is a report to Congress that
10 is due on the subject.
H Yes, sir?
12 MR. MORRIS: My name is Jim Morris. I am an
13 attorney from Dallas, Texas.
14 On the subject o" problem waste that you mentioned
15 earlier, one of waste kiln dust, is it your intention to de-
16 velop guidelines similar to the effluent guidelines in water
17 pollution of these wastes, for disposal of these wastes, dis-
18 posal guidelines addressing the particular waste stream?
19 MR. SANJOUR: Sonething like that. I can't say we
20 worked out in great detail what our intention is at this time.
21 MR. MORRIS: My main question would be, then, will
22 they go to public comment?
23 MR. SANJOUR: Oh. sure.
24 MR. MORRIS: Ind-vidually , and not as part of 3004?
25 MR. SANJOUR: It would have to be as part of 3004,
26 but it wouldn't be during the first round of 3004. In other
27 words, in December the proposed regulations will not include
28 any specific standards for those problem wastes. Thev will
80
-------
1 be only very general type standards, and the specific stan-
2 dards will be postponed in the regulations. At the same time,
3 we will go out with an advance notice and proposed rule making
4 or even earlier than that, perhaps. These are all being
5 thought out.
6 What I am saying is nothing is very hard and fast.
7 But our current thinking is to come out with an advance notice
8 and proposed rule making for the disposed wastes, perhaps the
9 same time as the proposal goes out, or perhaps even earlier,
10 and soliciting comments.
11 MR. MORRIS: Under the Sections of RCRA and under
12 3004, EPA has been very good about submitting drafts well in
13 advance of the proposal. Will this be the case?
14 MR. SANJOUR: Oh, sure.
15 Yes, sir?
16 MR. STAUHAUGH: My name is Roger Stauhaugh from
17 Exxon Company. I haven't seen a draft of your proposed reg-
18 ulations on 3005. I was wondering, for a case, if you gener-
19 ate a hazardous waste, you are going to have to store it be-
20 fore having it hauled away. Would this require a permit under
21 3005, under storage facility?
22 MR. SANJOUR: The current draft of 3002---it's a
23 good thing I have got a staff here to hold up the right number
24 The current draft of 3002 is that generators who store for
25 less than 90 days do not require a storage permit.
26 MR. STAUHAUGH: Okay, great. I had one other ques-
27 tion. In your 3001 criteria will you identify wastes that
28 are not hazardous, as well as those that are?
81
-------
1 MR. SANJQUR: No.
2 MR. STAUHAUGH: Such that, you know, you can el inn n-
3 ate perhaps some types of construction wastes or, you know,
4 of lumber and stuff like tiat, that we might dispose of?
5 MR. SANOOUR: No.
6 MR. STAUHAUGH: Thank you.
7 MR. SANJOUR: Any other questions or comments? Yes,
8 sir, come on up. I don't think they can all hear you unless
9 you speak into a microphone. I know all you want to do is ask
10 me, "which way to the men'5 room?"
11 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: That's right. Just
12 before the break you mentioned a quoted figure of one hundred
13 kilograms as being that limit of hazardous waste which would
14 be exempted from notification requirements. My question is is
15 that per waste load or per compound?
16 MR. SANJOUR: That is the total waste, hazardous
I7 waste, generated by a facility.
!8 MS. SCHAFFER: And disposed of.
19 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: And for disposal?
20 MR. SANJOUR: It's generated and disposed of, per
21 month.
22 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Because somebody
23 mentioned the word "zylene" and I wondered if you meant that
24 by definition, per compound or the entire load.
25 MR. SANJOUR: Entire load, yes.
26 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you. Is that
27 one hundred or one thousand?
28 MR. SANJOUR: One hundred. One hundred kilograms a
-------
1 month, average, maximum.
2 Y e s , s i r .
3 MR. GRECO: I made mention in the early part of our
4 testimony about public education to compliment public partici-
5 pation. Is EPA considering an expanded public education pro-
6 gram? There is a lot of public misunderstanding.
7 MS. SCHAFFER: Yes. The Office of Enforcement, at
8 least, has been looking into doing what we call an outreach
9 program, and we are at the beginning stages of getting togeth-
10 er with the Office of Solid Waste to get a joint program going
11 to educate the public as well as industry as to what's going
12 on.
13 MR. SANJOUR: Yes, sir? Would you care to come up
14 here?
15 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Can you tell me where
16 that hundred kilogram figure is found in any of the documents?
17 MR. SANJOUR: The question is: Where is that hun-
18 dred kilogram figure mentioned?
19 MS. SCHAFFER: Under 3002.
20 MR. SANJOUR: I see. 3002 is the standards that
21 define a hazardous waste generator. That's where the exempt-
22 ion appears. In Section 3010 we require generators to notify.
23 Since they have been exempted in 3002, it's not necessary for
24 them to notify.
25 Any other questions? Okay. With that, I think we
26 will adjourn, and we will reconvene at 7:30 p.m., if anyone is
27 i nteres ted.
28
83
-------
1 7:30 p.m. SESSION
2 MS. PRINDIVILLE: Good evening. My name is Sheila
3 Prindiville. I am the Deputy Regional Administrator of EPA
4 Region IX. I would like to welcome you to our Regional Office
5 and to the hearing this evening.
6 As most of you krow, the hearings tonight will dis-
7 cuss the regulations that EPA is proposing to promulgate under
8 Section 3010 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
9 These regulations are applicable to those who generate hazard-
10 ous wastes, transport it, store it, treat it, or dispose of
11 it. The regulations also speak to the procedures whereby
12 States may assume responsibility for the notification process
13 under Section 3010.
14 The timeliness of these hearings is probably best
15 exemplified by the example of Love Canal. Most of you are
16 familiar with that situation, a tragic situation which oc-
17 curred or which had its origin at a time when there were no
18 regulations for the disposal of hazardous wastes.
19 He have with us a panel consisting of a Regional
20 Representative and staff from our Program Office in head-
21 quarters in Washington, D.C. The panel moderator for the
22 evening is Mr. William Sanjour, and he will introduce the rest
23 of the panel members.
24 MR. SANJOUR: Thank you, Ms. Prindiville.
25 I am Bill Sanjour, with the Solid Waste Office in
26 Washington, D.C. Next to me is Tim Fields, of the Solid
27 Waste Office; and Bill Snyder, also with the Solid Waste
28 Office; and Amy Schaffer, with the Office of Enforcement; and
-------
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Jim Channel!, with the Region IX Office of Air and Hazardous
Materials.
In fact, our schedule calls for several presenta-
tions by myself and the other panel members, explaining in
some detail the proposed standards under Section 3010. I
think I will suggest that because the panel is larger than the
audience this evening, that perhaps a less formal type of ar-
rangement might be appropriate.
What I propose to do is to perhaps dispense with
the presentations on what these proposed regulations are,
since the primary purpose of these hearings is not for us to
tell you what's going on, but for you to tell us what your
comments are, and just have kind of a round-table discussion
on anything that you care to bring up.
Is there anybody who would object to that kind of a
discussion this evening?
In that case, then, let's just launch right into •
I understand there was somebody who cared to give a presents
tion this evening. Is that true, Pat?
MS. EKLUND: Yes.
MR. SANJOUR: We will just open the floor to any-
body who has any statements to give or questions to ask.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: I did have a state-
ment I wanted to make.
85
phone?
MR. SANJOUR: Why don't you come up to the micro-
UMIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Maybe if we are go-
inn tn HP so informal—I am disappointed. Were there many
-------
1 people here earlier? 86
2 MR. SANJOUR: Yes, there were. But you have got to
3 remember, the people who come in the afternoon get paid to do
4 it. The people who come in the evening come on their own
5 time, their own money.
6 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: I would like some in-
7 formation, first. I was wondering what California has done,
8 as a State, since your proposal mandates a little bit the
9 States to get involved in part of the regulations.
10 MR. SANJOUR: I think Bill is the best person to
11 field that one Jim, I mean.
i: MR. SNYDER: Thank you.
13 MR. CHANNEL: Well, California's hazardous waste
14 program was ahead of EPA. They have had a program for sever-
15 al years. In fact, we have gotten a great deal of benefit
16 out of looking at their experience. We have funded a fair
17 amount of their program, bjt they have done quite well.
18 As far as this natification procedure that we are
19 discussing here, they don't have exactly a similar system.
20 Although they have a pretty good idea of most people, they
21 don't have a formal requirement that everybody notify them.
22 They are planning to apply to do the notification
23 for us when this comes out. So, they will be the ones that
24 are notifying, sending mail-outs to all the people in
25 California that are expected to be producers.
26 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: But up to this point
27 there is no systematic appraisal of producers of hazardous
28 wa <; t p<; 1
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MR. CHANMELL: That is correct, on a cross-the-board
basis. They have a pretty good idea of the major ones. They
have done more extensive surveys in several of your bigger
counties. And they do have a system of requiring control of
the waste from the point of generation to disposal.
But without a notification procedure like this,
where they can be more assured that they are getting every-
body, there is undoubtedly some stuff outside the system.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: When I took a look
at the sample notification form I was very much surprised. I
don't know why. Maybe I imagined that industries and compan-
ies had provided this information in a much more routine way
to government agencies, or that, say, locally, the City Healt
Department or the State Department of Health would have all
of this information on where hazardous wastes were going, how
much were going, et cetera.
I was completely baffled, I guess by my naivete,
that there would be included confidentiality claims. I was
amazed that there were three categories where notification
might be exempted.
To exempt the type of hazardous waste that is
handled, or the description or the estimated amount, seems
entirely foolish to me.
MS. SCHAFFER: It's an exemption from disclosure
by EPA or the State to the public. They are required to
notify us, to give us the information.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yes, I understand
that, but I am still completely baffled. It seems to
37
-------
1 circumvent the intention of the EPA, in protecting the environ
2 ment, to only let that information go so far. What is the EPA
3 going to do with it?
4 MR. SANJOUR: Tiere is a second Act that has to be
5 satisfied, not only RCRA. There is also the Freedom of Infor-
6 mation Act. These confidentiality provisions arise out of the
7 Freedom of Information Act.
8 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: I suppose I am ques-
9 tioning that, also, those premises. Much of my concern is
10 drawn from the fact that for the last couple years I have been
U working on the nuclear power controversy. So, I guess I feel
12 frustrated in coming befo-e you with a lot of information, a
13 lot of background studies that I have done on waste disposal
14 problems in that field, aid they need not be expressed here.
15 What I really wondered and wanted to express to the
16 EPA was my concern that a^e we going to allow every industry
17 to go to that extent of development, and cancerous overdevel-
18 opment, in production of such horrifying waste, and going as
19 far as it being in secrecy, without the public ever knowing
20 as to what kind of wastes are where, who is transporting it,
21 and who it's affecting, and how?
22 It's really a gjt level reaction, if you can under-
23 stand that, that I am hers to try and question. Are we going
24 to allow all of these wastes to fall in that kind of category,
25 to go that far?
26 MR. SANJOUR: I think there are only two questions
27 that are asked that can invoke the confidentiality provisions,
28 or three. Which three ars those?
-------
1 MR. FIELDS: Description by list, description by
2 criteria, and quantity.
3 MR. SANJOUR: Okay. The fact that someone is gener-
4 ating a hazardous waste cannot be kept confidential. The
5 specific description of it may possibly be confidential under
6 certain aspects. And I am not an expert in that at all, but
7 basically it's because the Freedom of Information Act allows
8 proprietary corporate information to be kept out of the pub-
9 lie.
10 If the government demands that information, then the
11 Freedom of Information Act allows provisions where it can't be
12 turned over to the public.
13 I see your point, and there is another side to the
14 picture too. Let me, not to dissuadeyou but
15 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Please.
16 MR. SANJOUR: At least show you what the other side
17 of the story is. Already, before this Act has even been im-
18 plemented, we are getting requests from corporations, people
19 who do business, to get this specific information because
20 they can turn a buck on it.
21 For example, people in the waste hauling business
22 want to know who is generating certain kinds of waste so that
23 they can get the waste hauling business. We have already
24 gotten requests for that kind of information. And industries
25 are getting very touchy about their competitors asking for
26 information on their wastes because it gives their competitor:
27 information about their business.
28 These are the kinds of things that are going on. S<
89
-------
1 on the one hand, there is the need for the public to know
2 information. On the other hand, there is the need for corpor-
3 ations to have a certain amount of proprietary rights, and
4 those two are attempted, : guess, to be balanced off here. I
5 am not sure whether it's being done correctly, but that's
6 what the attempt is.
7 UNIDEMTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: I guess that's where
8 I am directing my statement, that I feel the balance must go
9 much more toward the publ'.c. I am very glad to hear that
10 corporations are requesting this information. I hope I am not
11 excluding anybody in participating. These are terrible prob-
12 lems. I am optimistic that we can solve them, but I do feel
13 that we need much more freedom of information.
14 MR. FIELDS: As you can see by reading the Preamble
15 to the regulations, this "S an issue which has not been re-
16 solved. There are two sides to it. Even discussion has gone
17 on within the Agency about this issue.
18 The position we have taken regarding the sample forrr
19 does not mean that is tne way we are going to go on the final
20 regulations. There might not be any items in the final regu-
21 lations for which a confidentiality claim is allowed. All we
22 can say is get your comments in, and we will consider both
23 sides of the issue, and then we will have to make a final de-
24 ci s i on .
25 Right now the sample form and the confidentiality
26 provisions only represent a tentative decision of the Agency
27 at this point.
28 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Can I ask what other
90
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ways have been suggested for the public to be informed, say,
after corporations volunteer information or are mandated to
provide information, or maybe less formally, what is expected
for the public to obtain this information?
MR. SANJOUR: Persons who treat, store or dispose o
hazardous waste are required to apply for a permit, and the
granting of a permit, I think, upon request, can be subject
to public hearing. The public has to be informed that such a
request, that such a permit application has been made, and if
there is sufficient demand 1 don't know exactly how a decis
ion is made. A public hearing can be demanded for each permi
So, any people who treat, store or dispose of
hazardous waste can be subject to public scrutiny.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: How long has that
been going on?
MR. SANJOUR: It hasn't gone on yet. These regula-
tions haven't been implemented yet.
MS. SCHAFFER: The only way government now knows
about kinds of waste is through the water pollution, if they
need a permit, to get a water pollution permit to be able to
discharge pollution into the water. There are hearings that
go on for that, and they do require public notice. Just as
that we have a court reporter here, they require a court re-
porter .
We are trying to do this same thing, if not better,
for the permit hearings, and getting them to be efficient and
effective, and have the public know what's going on.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Well, I had expected
91
-------
1 more of an audience. I am kind of disappointed.
2 MR. SANJOUR: As I say, I am rather pleased, be-
3 cause, as I say, I think everyone who is here tonight is here
4 on his own time, rather than the people here in the afternoon
5 getting paid to be here.
6 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Since I am here to
1 comment from the public, jtst to express this, I have total
8 confidence in the EPA. I hope and wish that somehow the
9 standards that have been set for air quality and water quality!
10 would be met finally. I dcn't know maybe someone could
11 succinctly describe to me why it is that none of the standards]
12 are met, or how exactly the^y are evaded.
13 MR. SANJOUR: I em not sure you have the right
14 people on the panel to address that. We are all from the
15 Solid Waste Office unless Ms. Prindiville cares to address
16 that issue? It's really a bit out of line of what the scope
17 of these hearings is about, which is basically the Solid
18 Waste Act Section 3010.
19 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Well, I still think,
20 at least for my comments, that it's very, very important,
21 because that's really in the background of what we are talkincj
22 about. And if people aren't going to pay attention to what
23 the EPA says, and if it cones down to legislation and enforce-)
24 ment, I think it's vital for the public to understand that
25 poi nt, also.
26 What is holding up this stage of cleaning up the
27 environment, beyond enforcement? I guess I have expressed my-|
28 self. Maybe you understand my frustration.
-------
5
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MR. SANJOUR: As I say, once again, you are beyond
my area of expertise. I am in the Solid Waste Office and how
well or poorly the Air Act or the Water Acts are going is
really something that I don't think anybody at this table
knows much about.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Do you foresee a
similar problem with solid waste management?
MR. SANJOUR: Certainly not. I am not sure there
a problem in the air, you see.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Well, if these hear-
ings were held in Los Angeles, I am sure you would notice.
MR. SANJOUR: There can be problems with the air
without there being problems with the administration of the
Air Act. Those are not synonomous.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: True.
MR. SANJOUR: For example, for the most part, we
have to deal with the law that's passed We have gotten a lot
of questions today about why, for example, we don't do this,
that or the other thing, why we don't regulate sites on which
wastes have been abandoned, hazardous waste sites; why we
don't require additional kinds of information.
The answers are very simple. We have to live with-
in the scope of the law that was passed. We are not hired to
be environmentalists. We are hired to enforce the law. We
can be environmentalists within what the scope of that law
says we can do. Regardless of where our hearts may be, the
courts can throw us out.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Sure.
93
-------
1 MR. SANJOUR: So, I don't know to what extent
2 those comments would also apply to your comments about en-
forcement of other laws. I don't know to what extent these
laws are incapable of dealing with the problems, as you see
them.
Now, your question about whether or not we intend
to enforce the law. I intend to enforce the law, but I can
only speak for myself.
MS. SCHAFFER: Enforcement intends to enforce the
10 law.
11 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you.
12 MR. SANJOUR: Are there any other questions we want
' to pursue here? Come, now. Surely you didn't all come here
14 just to 1i sten.
15 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: I would like to hear,
if no one else has any requests, at least, maybe a summary of
what presentation might have been made on enforcement, since
18 that was my last line of questioning.
19 MS. SCHAFFER: The only thing that I spoke on was
20 concerning enforcement of the notification section and saying
21 that basically you see part of enforcement as being the
22 enticement for voluntary compliance with it.
The second thing is that we really feel notifica-
tion is an important part of the system, and that we will, to
5 our best ability, enforce the law.
26 The law allows us up to a $25,000-a-day fine. In
27 fact, I am sure that that will not be assessed for each
28
violation. But we do have a broad ranqe of violations and
94
-------
1 penalties that we can assess. That's basically what I said.
2 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: People had asked
3 questions of why there aren't guidelines for directly relating
4 to abandoned waste sites. Could you explain to me why these
5 proposed rules only discussed future notifications?
6 MS. SCHAFFER: Because the Act is silent on that.
7 MR. SANJOUR: The Act is silent on abandoned sites,
8 and so are the regulations.
9 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: And those are hope-
10 fully covered by another Act?
11 MS. SCHAFFER: Not yet.
12 MR. SANJOUR: Depends on who you ask, what their
13 interpretation of the law is. I would say there is consider-
14 able debate and ambiguity on that score.
15 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: It's unfortunate.
16 MR. SANJOUR: Yes, very unfortunate. I suspect
17 that Congress is going to have to pass another law if it want
18 to be serious about abandoned sites, because even if you do
19 interpret this law as having jurisdiction over abandoned
20 sites, the jurisdiction that it has is not really sufficient
21 to do much about it because the jurisdiction is only over the
22 owners of sites, not the people who put the waste there, but
23 the people who currently own it.
24 So, if the current owner of an abandoned site hap-
25 pens to own a house that was built on the abandoned site, he
2° is the only one we can do anything about under this law, and
27 he is incapable of doing anything about it.
28 So, I would say the whole area of abandoned sites
95
-------
1 is one that Congress is going to have to address, or something
2 There is a tremendous interest in it right now as a
result of the Canal incident. Since that incident, people are
finding out there are very similar sites all over the country,
with the same kind of properties, abandoned sites, where haz-
ardous wastes are getting into the whole environment.
7 VJhether or not this law was intended to apply to
8 abandoned sites, there really is no remedy under Federal law
at th i s moment.
10 MR. FIELDS: The Agency has taken a position that we
11 will use Section 7003 of the Act, the Imminent Hazards provis-
12 ions. If we identify some imminent hazard or danger to the
public, we will act against that site pursuant to the Section
7000 Act. So, there is some authority within the Act if we
15 do determine there is a problem.
MR. SANJOUR: But all that authority is the author-
17 ity to go to court and ask a judge to solve a problem.
18 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: I was puzzled a bit
by what I assumed was an exemption of some kind, where this
20 Act is superseded by the Atomic Energy Act of 1-954 for radio-
active waste.
22 MR. SANJOUR: That is written specifically in the
Act. It's in the definition of "solid waste" in the Act,
24 under the definitions. Wastes which are regulated by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission are exempt from this Act.
26 UNIDENTIFIED ALDIENCE MEMBER: So, obviously, that
27 would include abandoned sites.
28 MR. SANJOUR: It does not exempt uranium mill
96
-------
tailings. And the decision has recently been made to put
uranium mill tailings under this Act.
MR. CHANNEL!.: It doesn't include other radioactivity
ei ther.
5 MR. SANJOUR: Yes, sir?
6 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: What's been the re-
sponse at, like, the other public hearings? Were there simi-
n
lar type issues as were raised at this hearing this morning,
9 or this afternoon, to 3010?
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
97
MR. SANJOUR: Yes.
MR. FIELDS: I think there were a couple new ones
here today.
MR. SANJOUR: Most of these issues were raised, but
yes. Usually at these hearings the people we get are corpor-
ate representatives, and for the most part, people who are
regulated, who would come under the regulations.
The kind of questions that they usually ask are
the kind of questions that would affect them, like, "Do I
have to comply" or "Why do I have to comply" or "Is my waste
covered by the Act?" There is an awful lot of that sort of
thing.
The confidentiality provision, there was a great
deal of discussion about that. It seems that a lot of cor-
porations are concerned that if the States taken over this
program—and there are provisions for the States to run this
program that the State laws may not be as stringent as the
Federal law, as far as protecting their corporate confiden-
tiality, so that the public would have greater access to theiif
-------
confidential information. And they were very concerned that
that shouldn't be the case, that we should require the States
to have as stringent coverage of confidentiality before we
turn the program over to the States. There was a lot of that
5 opinion expressed today, which I hadn't heard a great deal of
i n the past.
7 There is a special provision in these regulations.
8 We call it "limited interim authorization," which is a provis
10
n
12
13
14
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
25
26
28
ion to allow the States to implement the notification aspects
of the law, because while Congress expressed an intent to
allow the States to run the program in fact, a desire very
strongly expressed, unambiguously expressed it also turns
out that the law was perhaps poorly drafted, in that it would
be very difficult for the States to take over the notificatio
program because of the timing involved.
So, we wrote our regulations, and several States
17 indicated to us, during the course of our developing these
regulations, that it was imperative that they do run the
notification program, because if they were to ultimately take
over the program, they didn't want the Federal government to
handle the notification and then have the States take over
the program, especially States that already have ongoing
" programs.
24
They felt that the interference of the Federal
government in their program at that stage would be very
detrimental to their program. So, they felt it was impera-
27 tive that those States that intend to take over the Federal
program also be able to handle the notification.
98
-------
So, we wrote into the regulations what we call this
"limited interim authorization," which was a means of greasing
the skids, if you like, for the States to take over the noti-
fication provisions.
Quite a few industry people this morning objected
to that provision of limited interim authorization. They did
not want the States taking over. One of the chief reasons
given was this confidentiality provision, because they felt
the States couldn't protect their confidentiality as well as
10 the Federal government could.
11 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: One person this af
12 ternoon, I think from the State of Utah, brought up the point
13 about could a State require additional information in the
notification than is required in the currently proposed 3010
15 rules?
MR. SANJOUR: And the answer to that was yes, they
17 could.
18 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Then, thinking about
19 that more, depending upon how much information is requested
20 and what kind of information is requested may delay the
21 ability of a company affected to respond within that period
22 of time, not knowing what type of information may be request-
23 ed. Has this been brought up?
24 MR. SANJOUR: A similar point was raised by several
25 industry people. Several people objected to the phrase we
26 used, that it would be fairly easy for industry to fill out
27 this notification and respond. They objected. They felt it
28 could be quite difficult.
99
-------
1 While that doesn't directly answer your question, I
2 think it pervaded that quite a few industry people thought
3 that filling out those hazardous waste notification forms
4 could, in fact, be very costly and time consuming.
5 So, your point about the States adding features
6 could make it even more costly and time consuming.
7 The Federal law requires certain items of notifica-
8 tion. EPA has no discretion on that. There are certain
9 specific items required in the law. On the other hand, if the
10 States were to add to that, and if we were to take a position
11 that notification on the Federal law is not satisfied unless
12 all those additional Sta-;e items are also included, I guess
13 the case could be made that we have exceeded our authority.
14 That's at least a possible argument that could be made. We
15 will have to think about it.
16 MS. SCHAFFER: Yes. If the State doesn't have the
17 legislative ability to collect the information, then I don't
18 think that they can ask for it, you know, unless they want to
19 go beyond the scope of their laws. We, as EPA, the Federal
20 EPA, will not enforce the collection of that additional i n -
21 formation. It's definitely on the list to be thought about
22 though.
23 MR. SANJOUR: Any other questions, statements?
24 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: I have another
25 question.
26 MR. SANJOUR: Sure.
27 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Regarding this docu-
28 ment, Words Into Deeds, it says on page 6 that "In view of
10
-------
1 the nature and complexity of the issues, the Act addresses
2 voluntary changes in institutional and personal habits and
3 attitudes, as intended to stimulate the direct and indirect
4 regulatory actions it describes, but successful implementation
5 depends on a high level of public understanding and participa-
6 tion."
7 Could someone comment on the voluntary changes in
8 institutional or especially personal habits and attitudes
9 surrounding the Act, or again, is that outside of your spec-
10 ialty?
11 MR. SANJOUR: I haven't read the document in ques-
12 tion. Why.don't you let me see the document, see if I can
13 comment intelligently?
14 MS. SCHAFFER: I think what they are talking about,
15 basically, is the reduction of production of hazardous waste
16 and wastes in general, you know. Don't throw away so many
17 things.
18 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Anticipating greater
19 recycling?
20 MS. SCHAFFER: Yes. I think, in the long run, the
21 way the regulations will go is that it will become too expen-
22 sive to dispose of wastes, and that people in industry will
23 try to recycle, which is the raison d'etre of the Act.
24 MR. SANJOUR: Perhaps we are getting a little far
25 afield, but the very fact of government looking at industries'
26 hazardous waste generation and disposal practices has already
27 considerably changed a great many industry practices, because
28 hitherto industry has never paid any money or many industries
101
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
haven't paid much money or pa^ much attention to what happens
to their waste. Once they find the government looking at it,
then they themselves look at it. They start putting high-
priced people to thinking about what they are doing and how
they are doing it.
People's attitudes change. Something becomes worth
looking into when somebody else is looking at it.
UNIDENTIFIED AU3IENCE MEMBER: Sure.
MR. SANJOUR: Bjt that's been mostly the case of
State action, not even Federal action. Federal government is
something of a Johnny-corn?-1ately in the whole hazardous
waste business. California is probably the leader in that
sort of thing.
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: How do you see
counties and city governments as continuing, say, their inter-
est management of hazardous wastes?
MR. SANJOUR: I don't think county and city govern-
ments have had much role in the past, and I don't see too
much really in the future. I 'think it's
MS. SCHAFFER: Mostly statewide.
MR. SANJOUR: Yes. I can't see much below the State
1evel .
MR. CHANNELL: Yes. The key point on that is that
there are not that many hazardous waste sites in practice that
the materials do travel regionally. So, for a particular
city to go its own way is not as effective.
It's also more difficult to try and control the
movement of it by the manifest system as you break it down
102
-------
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
below a State 1evel.
MR. SANJOUR: Any other comments, questions? Per-
haps we ought to call it a night.
here?
UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Where do we go from
MR. SANJOUR: Where do we go from here? I guess
that's one part of the statement that I really ought to get
into, and that is talking about the schedule of our regula-
tions.
Under Subtitle C of the Resource and Conservation
103
Recovery Act, we are writing something like a half dozen
different regulations, of which this is just one. Sections
3006, 3010 and 3003 have already been proposed. There are twc
stages to writing regulations in the Federal government, or
at least in EPA.
The first is to propose them formally, and then,
after you have a sufficient comment period, to promulgate
them finally. So, three have been proposed.
The more substantive ones have not yet been pro-
posed. These are the ones that deal with defining a hazardous
waste and the standards for the treatment, storage and dis-
posal of hazardous wastes. He intend to propose those
standards by the end of this year, and to promulgate them
finally sometime in 1979. That is hopefully where we go from
here.
Six months after they go final, they are implemented
Within that period, persons who generate, transport, treat,
store or dispose of hazardous wastes have a 90 day period
-------
1 where they are required to notify EPA that they do that, and
2 that's what these regulations are about.
3 And if they don't notify EPA, then they can no
4 longer transport, treat, store or dispose of hazardous wastes.
5 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: That was 90 days
6 after what date?
7 MR. SANJOUR: 90 days after we promulgate regula-
8 tions under Section 3001; that is, the regulations which de-
9 fine a hazardous waste.
10 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Which will be at
11 what date?
12 MR. SANJOUR: We presently anticipate that to happer
13 sometime in 1979.
14 UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Okay, thank you.
15 MR. SANJOUR: Any other questions?
16 Thank you for ccming.
17 Would you like tie to give your announcements > Pat?
18 MS. EKLUND: Sure, yes.
19 MR. SANJOUR: I forgot to do that this morning.
20 There are several upcoming public meetings which Pat Ekland
21 asked me to announce. On September 19th there is a public
22 meeting on Section 4002 (t) of the Resource Conservation and
23 Recovery Act, on guidelines for development and implementatior
24 of State solid waste management plans.
25 On September 21st there is a public meeting on pro-
26 posed water program public participation regulations. That
27 should interest you.
78 Thprp is also a public meeting on proposed
104
-------
1 regulations for national pollution discharge elimination
2 systems.
3 For more information, see Patricia Eklund, who is i
A the rear of the auditorium.
5 Thank you all, and good night.
6 MS. EKLUND: Thank you for coming.
7 ---oOo---
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
105
-------
-------
Statement on Proposed Federal Regulations for
Preliminary Notification of Hazardous Waste Activities*
I am William F. Jopling, Acting Assistant Chief, Hazardous Materials
Management Section of the California State Department of Health Services,
The Department has the authority and responsibility for ihe requlation of
hazardous waste activities in California pursuant to State law. Farther,
the Department has been designated in accordance with the provisions of
Section 4006(b) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) a,
the State agency responsible for hazardous waste management planning s^d
implementation within the boundaries of the State of California.
We intend to seek limited interim authorization to carry out the
program required by Section 3010 of the RCRA and have been authorized
federal grant funds to accomplish the regulatory agency portion of this
activity.
The notification activity will require close cooperation between the Der=ri
ment and Region IX of EPA in order to prepare and carry out this rrogrqm <•
effective manner. We look forward to a continuation of cur close ,jcr! '.r.-
relationship with the Regional Office in this matter.
For those States seeking authorization, the regulations call for n-.
development of c. notification plan by the State agency, review ar,J anprov, '
by the Regional Administrator of EPA, and agreement for limited interiir
authorization within four months of the promulgation of the Section 3010
regulations. We believe that the requirements for authr rization are
reasonable and that this can be accomplished in a straight-forward fashion.
* Statement presented by W. Joplino, California Department of Health
Services, at a public hearing held by EPA, Aug. 24, 1978, San Francisco,
-------
work cooperatively with EPA to see that this important statute
is properly implemented.
With this background, I am pleased to offer a few of
USWAG's observations on EPA's proposed rules for "Preliminary
Notification of Hazardous Waste Activities" under Section 3010
of RCRA. Since USWAG will scon file more comprehensive comments
on these proposed regulations, I shall confine my remarks today
to the high points of our submission.
First, I would like to repeat our fundamental concern
about the fragmented manner in which EPA is promulgating regu-
lations under RCRA. It simply is impossible to make a fully
comprehensive analysis of this or any other proposed rule when
vitally important pieces of the regulatory puzzle are missing.
Therefore we again request, as we have in previous comments and
testimony, that EPA keep the record open on these and all forth-
coming proposed RCRA rules urtil the entire package of proposals
has been published.
Second, we are concerned that these regulations
improperly revise the Federal-State relationships envisioned
by RCRA. These proposed regulations would allow a state to
adopt a more stringent definition of "hazardous waste" than
that promulgated by EPA under Section 3001, and would allow
use of this definition to invoke the notification procedures
of Section 3010. We of course cannot at this time be sure
that EPA's definition under Section 3001 will be reasonable
-------
-3-
importani in the case of several hundre,; '-.d^urucus waste facility operators
who have already submitted State hazardous waste facility Demit a^licaticrs
to the Department cf Health Services.
The notification requires the identification of the types of hazardous wast' s
in accordance with the criteria of the section 3001 regulations. Inasr ucn as
•T'any parties may have no knowledge of the criteria, EPA might considc1" prepa-
ring a one sheet summary of the main points 01 the criteria for incusion vvity,
the notification form or including a list of "common name" wastes such as the
list that California has developed of wastes which are yenerally considered
tn he hazardous. This might assist the parties in reaching a decision a- *•->
whether their wastes are hazardous or not.
Section 250.320 excludes owners of inactive facilities from the notification
process. Perhaps it is beyond the scope of" the law to include inactive
operations; however, their inclusion could be a means to obtain infornidtion
which would be useful in preventing possible problems associated with fu.i.:;'e
uses of these aress.
It would be very beneficial to have some idea of waste volume provided. The
law does not require this information and it is an optional item i'i the
prepared regulations. Perhaps small volume operations could be encouraged
to provide some indication of their size. This would assist in setting
priorities for penrit activities.
With specific regard to the sample notification form, many industries n^y
treat and/or store wastes at on-site facilities arc! eventually dispose ^
hazardous residues oft-s^te. Under Item 4, if instructions were included to
-------
-4-
circle the appropriate on-s1te activity as is done for the transport mode,
this would give a clearer picture of the operation.
Also, 1t might be clearer to those completina the form that the "undetermined"
colum in Item 5 is to be used only for the toxic category if the "undetermined"
boxes for radioactive and corrosive wastes could be blacked out or cross
hatched.
We have questions regarding EPA Irtentions regarding the follow-up of notiti -
cation violations, (particularly if a significant percentage do not respond),
use of State criteria which may be more restrictive than EPA criteria in
some aspects and less restrictive 1n others, and permit applications for
facilities which are not included in State permit requirements. We will
pursue these subjects if necessary after additional discussions with the
Region IX staff.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed regulations.
-------
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN A. WIEGHAN
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING ENGINEER
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY
ON BEHALF OF
THE UTILITY SOLID WASTE ACTIVITIES GROUP
EDISON ELECTRIC INSTITUTE
Before The U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency Public Hearing on Proposed Regula-
tions Implementing Section 3010 of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
San Francisco, California, August 24, 1978
Good afternoon. My name is Stephen A. Wiegman. I
am an Environmental Planning Engineer with the Southern Cali-
fornia Edison Company. I am appearing today as representa-
tive of the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group, known by
the acronym "USWAG," and the Edison Electric Institute.
USWAG is successor to the Solid Waste Group Task
Force of the Edison Electric Institute, the principal national
association of investor-owned electric light and power companies.
EEI represents member companies who own and operate about 75%
of the nation's electrical capacity and service approximately
79% of the ultimate electric service customers in the United
States.
Our membership has actively participated in EPA's ef-
forts to date to develop regulations under the Resource Conser-
vation and Recovery Act of 1976. This participation reflects
recognition that portions of these regulations will impact sub-
stantially upon our industry, and a commitment to attempt to
-------
The time squeeze of major concern to us is the 90-day pe"i'od Imnerh'ately
following the promulgation of 3001 regulations sometime late in 1978. In
that period, tf? State will distribute notification forms and other perii-
nent material. ?nd will receive back the reouirpd information from oarticr.
involved in hazardous waste activities. It is our understanding that ft-'A,
through a separate contrc-ctcr, h->s developed lists of parties to be notified.
Although we have no direct knowledge of the size and extent of the California
l^st, the EPA State Guidance Document for FY 1979 indicated that there '-ere
77,000 hazardous waste generators TI California - - more than double the
number for any other state. This "jggests that there May be substantial
duplication or extraneous parties deluded in the list. If some effort
could be given to screen and refine the lists prior to the mail-out it ',ouU'
ma!'t the event" during the critical 90-day period much more manfcieable anc
reduce unecessary problems to those receiving notification forms.
Ccraients were requested on the advisability of either distributing permit
applications along with the notification firms, or indenendectly distribution
applications following the return cf the notification forms. We ^°e some
major problems either way. The separate mailing will result in a sign1f1rani.
logistics problem involving thp ^creeninn o-f returned forms to identify
parties which should receive permit applications, a second distribution anr'
return activity, and a major effort in the recording of all these actions
which must take place within a very limited time period. On the other r>ar,d,
the combined mail-out will result in a majority of parties, i.t., the waste
generators who do not store, treat ?r dispose of wastes on-site, receiving
unapplicable permit anplications. Ke tend to support trie single rail-out
provided that a clear explanation is included as to who must fill out and
return the application and who should ignore it. This would be parti
-------
and appropriate. But the concept of two or more definitions
of "hazardous waste" triggering notification requirements
flies in the face of the language of the statute, which clearly
states that a person is required to give notice only of those
wastes identified or listed by EPA under Section 3001. More-
over, the possibility of inconsistent definitions would subject
companies operating in different states to differing standards
-- a situation the statute seeks to avoid.
We continue to believe that the consistency require-
ments of RCRA preclude a state from adopting a more expansive
definition of hazardous waste than that promulgated by EPA.
The purposes of RCRA demand a uniform -- and appropriate —
definition of hazardous waste. Only under a uniform defini-
tion will one state be prevented from in effect forcing wastes
into other states.
We also submit that the so-called "limited interim
authorization1' procedure established by Sections 250.850 and
250.811 of the proposed regulations is also inconsistent with
the Federal-State division of responsibility established by
RCRA. There in fact is nothing in the statute to indicate
that a state which has not received permitting authority under
Section 3006 may nonetheless receive notification under Section
3010.
We agree with EPA that the "limited interim" notifi-
cation procedure it proposes will create a "disjointed pro-
gram." We would add that it will create a lot of needless
-------
administrative confusion as well. Moreover, what happens if
this hybrid procedure is someday declared illegal? Will com-
panies who have filed with a state find themselves in viola-
tion of the obligations creatsd by Section 3010 to file a no-
tification "as required under this subsection"? This is
particularly important to the utility industry, since a fre-
quent condition of our financing arrangements is that no Fed-
eral statute be violated.
Thus, we urge the Agency to abandon the "limited
interim authorization" proposal and to adopt a procedure that
is consistent with the statute, namely, that notification shall
be given to the appropriate Regional Administrator or to those
states which have received authorizations as provided by Sec-
tion 3006.
Third, we disagree rfith the Agency's statements
that "little time should be needed to prepare the notification
response" and that the economic impact of these regulations will
be "negligible." Because the Section 3001 regulations — which
presumably will define "hazardous waste" — have not yet been
proposed, it is simply too early to tell how much time or cost
will be required to provide the preliminary notification re-
quired by Section 3010. If EFA seeks to require extensive
testing procedures, it may be very difficult to file an ade-
quate, carefully prepared response in 90 days. Most of the
-------
members of US'.'.'AG are not currently starfed to collect the nec-
essary samples, run the tests, compile the information, and
send the information to EPA or the states in less than 90 days.
In many cases, outside firms may have to be hired to accomplish
some or all of these tasks. This will involve considerable
expense. We submit that the short time limit established by
Section 3010 mandates that EPA carefully evaluate the adminis-
trative burdens imposed by its procedures under Section 3001.
Of course, our members can be expected to meet all the require-
ments of RCRA. Our concern, however, is that EPA may be ask-
ing us to do more than the law requires.
In closing, I would like to mention briefly two ad-
ditional points that will be developed further in our writ-
ten submission. First, we again call to EPA's attention the
critical distinction between municipal waste and utility waste,
a distinction to which the Agency has been insensitive in de-
veloping its regulations. Second, we submit that definitions
should be provided, or existing definitions clarified, for a
number of terms used in the proposed notification rules,
including "transporter" and "hazardous waste activity."
USWAG appreciates the opportunity to testify today,
and we will continue to follow with great interest EPA's efforts
to implement the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
-------
Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc.
FANNIN BANK BLDG • P.O BOX 3151 • HOUSTON, TEXAS 77001 • (713)790-1611
Presentation
of
3ames R. Greco
Director
Government and Industry Affairs
Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc.
on
August 2*, 1978
San Francisco, California
pertaining to the
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Preliminary Notification of Hazardous Waste Activities
Proposed Procedures
as published in the
Duly 11, 1978 Federal Register
Volume 43, Number 133, Pages 29908-29916
pursuant to
Section 3010
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Public Law 9^-580
-------
We have carefully reviewed the proposed procedures for preliminary notification
of hazardous waste activities and recognize that these proposed rules, when
finalized, and with the promulgation of the 3001 criteria for identification and
listing of hazardous wastes, will commence the "cradle to grave" control concept
for hazardous wastes. Though the Federal regulatory program for abating and
controlling the pollution potential of mis-managed wastes has not yet been
implemented, we have observed much activity at the state level with the passage
of hazardous waste management laws, the promulgation of regulations, and the
upgrading of permit programs for needed treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities. Additionally, we, and others, have witnessed an increased public
concern and awareness regarding the disposal of chemical wastes. As a result,
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 — RCRA — and the
Agency's conscientious efforts to implement its mandates loom more and more
important day by day.
In this regard the general public needs to be made more aware that hazardous
wastes can be managed safely, that facilities for their treatment and disposal are
needed, and that the governmental framework for assuring environmentally-
protective practices has been established. Failure to acknowledge these facts
will likely encourage greater public mis-understanding, alarm, and a lack of
confidence — particularly, when preliminary notification procedures are
instituted.
-2-
-------
Since the enactment of RCRA, the Agancy has conducted numerous meetings for
soliciting widespread input and commentary from the general public and every
conceivable affected entity. Though lengthy and resource demanding, the
rulemaking process undertaken by the Agency has been commendable with
efforts for enhancing public participat on being exemplary. An expanded "public
education and understanding" effort, however, is needed to complement "public
participation" in development, revision, implementation, and enforcement of any
regulation, guideline, information, etc.
Browning-Ferris Industries is a publicly-held company engaged in providing solid
and liquid waste collection, processing/recovery, and disposal services to
business, government, and the public. Using the terminology of RCRA, we would
be considered a transporter of hazardous waste as well as an operator of
facilities for treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes. Briefly, our
experience and capabilities derive from the operation of approximately a dozen
facilities which handle industrial liquids, slurries, and sludges, spent pickle
liquors and other waste acids, neutral! Jed acidic sludges, organic and inorganic
chemicals, and other wastes which might be determined to be hazardous once the
3001 criteria are finalized. These wastes are managed by BFI in special sanitary
landfills, secure landfills, chemical fixation facilities, neutralization plants, or
disposal wells located throughout the country. Another 60 of our waste disposal
sites, typically for landfilling municipal, commercial, and industrial solid wastes,
may conceivably be subject to the preliminary notification requirements.
-3-
-------
Pursuant to our review of the subject proposed rules, two particular areas
concern us: (1) the limited interim authorization considerations presented in
section 250.810 and (2) the information required in the notification and the
confidentiality aspects of that information, identified in section 250.823.
Regarding "limited interim authorization" we would concur with EPA's desire to
allow as many states as possible to participate in the preliminary notification
coUfker
program. However, we question the logalky of the program as currently
delineated in section 250.81 IHunless the program callsTat anrrtfurnufnT for the
A*
state to show:
(a) that its legislature had passed enabling legislation and that an
active hazardous waste control program had been implemented or
commenced pursuant to that legislation by Duly 21st of this year.
As we understand section 3006(c) of RCRA, that date July 21st was
determined as the date "90 days after the date required for
promulgation of regulations under sections 3002, 3003, 3004, and
3005..." which would be April 21st, 1978 or thereabout.
(b) At a minimum, its hazardous waste program must have a
preliminary notification program "substantially equivalent" to the
EPA's program contained in W CFR Part 250 Subpart G as it is
finally promulgated.
At this time, we feel that Section 250.810 is deficient because:
(I) The states are not required to show that they had a program "under
State law" in effect on or before July 21, 1978, and
-------
(2) The states are not required to show that their preliminary
notification program is substantially equivalent to the EPA's
program. Particularly, the states are not required to show that
they have programs to protect proprietary information which is
"substantially equivalent" to the EPA's program.
"Substantial equivalency" with respect to the protection of proprietary
information is important since some states may not have a statutory framework
for handling and, in certain instances, protecting one from public disclosure of
proprietary information whereas other states may. Owners or operators of
hazardous waste facilities may pojgthly incur a competitive disadvantage,
depending upon whether or not certain information in some states is protected or
not.
Relative to our second primary concern — confidentiality claims as addressed in
Section 250.823(b)(10) and referenced in the supplementary information part of
the Federal Register notice entitled "Confidentiality Provisions", we would
concur with the first option identified, which is currently presented in the
proposed rules. If the second option were incorporated — that is, requiring
submission of substantiation at the time of initial notification — the
requirements would be very demanding upon both the affected entity and the
EPA. In our estimation, in some cases we likely could not possibly provide the
kind of information to substantiate any confidentiality claims and still meet the
90 day deadline. Additionally, EPA's waiting until a request for the information
-5-
-------
has been filed to support the substantiation of our proprietary claim does not
create a burden on the EPA regional offices any greater than if the information
is solicited in the first instance when we file our notice. Also, the overall cost
impact, paperwork-handling efficiency, and best utilization of personnel
resources would probably best benefit the public if option 1 were retained.
Certain features of the proposed rules are noteworthy, which we also concur
with, namely:
(1) that authorized States will be encouraged to operate and manage
the notification process in the same or an equivalent manner to
that employed by EPA in order to achieve as much national
uniformity as possible.
(2) Section 250.810(c) which cites that "under limited interim
authorization, States shall not grant exemptions regarding who
must file notifications, when notification must be filed, or what
information this notification must contain."
(3) Section 250.820 (a)
(<*) Section 250.820(b)(l)(ii)
(5) Section 250.820(b)(6)
(6) Section 250.823(b)(ll) which states that "An estimate of the annual
amount of hazardous waste handled based on the period from
January 1, 1977 to December 31, 1977." be an ogtionai
requirement.
-6-
-------
Based on the increase and more uniform enforcement of hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal regulations and anticipated standards applicable
to generators and transporters of hazardous wastes, Browning-Ferris has
undertaken a more rapid expansion of ts liquid and hazardous waste management
service capability. We view the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of
1976 as the most significant Federal legislation to date affecting the waste
systems industry. Hopefully as the mandates of this legislation are implemented,
effective, practical, and economically-wise practices for ensuring the protection
of the public and the environment will be enhanced.
We are pleased to participate in this hearing and will likely submit additional
comments for the official rulemaking record prior to September llth.
-7-
-------
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
Proposed Procedures for Preliminary Notification
of Hazardous Waste Activities
PL 94-580, Section 3010 (40 CFR 250.800, Subpart G) as
proposed (43 FR 29907-16, July 11, 1978)
Comments by Dow Chemical U.S.A.
San Francisco, California
August 24, 1978
-------
Mr. Chairman: I am Beckee Beemer, Assistant Manager of
Environmental Services for the Western Division of Dow
Chemical U.S.A. I wish to present comments pertinent to
the Proposed Procedures for Preliminary Notification of
Hazardous Waste Activities.
These comments reflect our concerns and corporate philosophy
in the proper management of hazardous and solid wastes to
provide adequate protection of human health and the environment.
They summarize our concerns for Section 3010 of RCRA as
proposed which pertain to:
1. comment closure date
2. definition of hazardous waste
3. interpretations of "onsite", "place of operation", and
"terminal"; notification by a corporation
4. interpretation of "storage"
5. information required
6. reporting impact.
-------
1. Comment Closure Date
Our most immediate concern is the premature proposal of
these regulations ahead of other intimately related sections
(3001, 3004, and 3005). It was our understanding that the
regulations for the Agency planned to propose the sections
individually, and hold open a collective comment period
at least until 60 days after the last regulation had been
formally proposed. It was further understood that the
anticipated draft Environmental Impact Statement covering
all of Subtitle C would also be available for comment prior
to closure of any comment period. The Agency will circumvent
this trust by arbitrarily foreclosing the comment period
for Section 3010 on September 11, 1978. While we recognize
the sense of urgency exhibited by the Agency in preparing
and printing forms, we behoove the Agency to keep open the
ci //
collective comment period until at least 60 days after., sections
of the regulations have been proposed.
2. Definition of Hazardous Waste
It was stated within the supplemental information of the
proposed rules that "It is important to note the definition
of solid waste" and "Hazardous wastes, which are a subset
of all solid wastes ...". It is obvious to us that the definition
of what constitutes a hazardous waste under Section 3001 and
-------
what constitutes a permitted hazardous waste management
facility under Sections 3001 and 3005 are crucial to
the interpretation of and comment upon preliminary
notification under Section 3010.
It is impossible to determine at present what is a
"hazardous waste" based on tiie skimpy identification of
the six criteria provided in the proposed notification form,
or from the inferred "listing" under the as yet unproposed
Section 3001. We request that the Agency defer comment
review of preliminary notification until after Sections 3001,
3004, and 3005 have been proposed.
3. Interpretations of "Onsite", "Place of Operation",
and "Terminal"; Notification by a Corporation
The Agency has made some progress in the recognition of
onsite vs. off-side operations. The burden of notification
is reduced in part by allowing a single notification for
a "single site" [250.820 (b) (i)] or for more than one "place
of operation [250.820 (b ( (ii)1. We commend the Agency in
allowing flexibility in simultaneous notification and
application for permit.
-------
-4-
The definition of "place of operation" [250.801 (h)],
meaning "a manufacturing, processing, or assembly
establishment; a transportation terminal; of a treatment,
storage, or disposal facility operated by a person at
a single site," appears to exclude warehouses and
commercial establishments. This also is not evident from
the definition of "terminal" [250.801(m)]. The definition
of "onsite" [250.801(f)] meaning "on the same or geographically
continuous property", should distinguish that the property
can be owned or leased. These definitions should be
clarified in the final prenotification regulation.
4. Interpretation of "Storage"
The definition of "storage" incorporated within the
proposed regulations [250.801(1)] is consistent with the
RCRA. The interpretation of "storage" requiring notification
and permitting if "for more than 90 days" contained in the
supplemental information is not evident. We contend that
such a 90-day period is unreasonably short and should be
extended to one year.
-------
-5-
5. Information Required
Several comments pertain to information required for
/ ^^notification, particularly identification numbers
[250.823 (b) (4) ], typesof hazardous waste activity
[250.823(b)(7)], and types and descriptions of hazardous
waste handled [250.823 (b) (8), (9)].
The uses of the standard industrial classification (SIC) and
the Internal Revenue Service employees identification number
i/ (EIN) are oversimplifications/ in the proposed regulations,
particularly for large, interstate corporations which may
UWcA (=>,
have several dozen "place(s) of operation" and^ manufacturing
several hundred products. The use of a consistent number
among all air, water, wastewater, and solid waste regulations
would be preferable. The census file number (an ll-digit
number), for example, is already used extensively for enumeratior
of products by manufacturing location.
The types of hazardous waste activities are to be defined
under Sections 3002, 3003, and 3004. As yet, only 3003
has been formally proposed and meaningful comment cannot be
made except for transport. It should be emphasized that
onsite transport is specifically excluded from manifesting
-far'inUfhi'Aj)
and does not require approval as does,interstate commerce.
-------
-6--
Th e types and descriptions of hazardous wastes handled
is the most uncertain of all information proposed for
prenotification. Since the criteria and listings being
drafted under Section 3001 are not formally proposed,
we must object to several proposed inclusions. The
requirement that "all wastes which are ignitable, reactive,
infectious, radioactive, or corrosive, must be described
as such" appears to imply testing for all of these criteria.
This would also preclude assumed designation of a waste
as hazardous without test. We recommend that all criteria
have provision for checking any of five categories: (a) yes
by test, (b) no by test, (c) yes by list, (d) assumed hazardous,
or (e) undetermined hazard. Otherwise there is no basis for
distinction between actual testing and assumed hazard.
6. Reporting Impact
The Agency requested comment on the estimated impact of
reporting. We commend the Agency for simplifying notification
and making some provisions for reclassifying a waste as
nonhazardous at some future data [250.823 (b) (8)]. We strongly
disagree, however, with the Agency's contention that "most
of the requested information will be on hand" and "little
time should be needed to prepare the notification response."
This will be true only if the Agency does not choose to
arbitrarily overclassify all industrial wastes as supposedly
"hazardous" because of overly stringent and unrealistic criteria.
-------
-7-
The Agency further states that "the greatest burden would
come in those instances where some analysis of waste was
required." It is our contention that unless all solid
wastes_are assumed to be hazardous, such testing would be
required for all other wastes contested to be nonhazardous
by their generators, but declared hazardous by the Agency
by either criteria or by listing. There is ~&- substantial
SucJi c~nole,$ole'
economic impact directly attributable to^testing. Even
if testing was commenced, i; would be virtually impossible
for all solid wastes in the United States to be tested
within the 9Q(£j5.ay notification period for all criteria.
even exclusive of toxicity. The ISO^jHay period for toxicity
is further unreasonable since the tests presently under
contemplation are unproven, unvalidated, unreasonable, and
excessively costly.
Specific attention is directed to the ambiguities of
notification of a waste as having undetermined hazard.
prtf posed-
It appears within the text of the^regulation that all
criteria exclusive of toxicity must be declared within
90 days,and that toxicity must be declared within 180 days
after promulgation of Section 3001 regulations. This is
also stated within the specific instructions for the
notification form. There are provisions for undetermined
hazard designations however, for radioactive and corrosive
on the form itself. This appears contrary to the Agency's
stated intent and adds to the confusion.
-------
-8-
We recommend that provision be made to declare within
90 day s^ any or all criteria as undetermined subject to
future testing. This would serve the intent of the RCRA
:_n identifying potentially hazardous wastes and allow
generators more adequate time for testing. We further
recommend that provision be made under Section 3010
to contest the designation of any waste specifically
listed by name or by process under Section 3001 regulations
and declare it to be nonhazardous as substantiated by &*^u~*. '
-rrn*1
the generator. Further there should be ample
opportunity for public input to revision of the 3001 listing
-C-sU. WA*^ U^<«*
to remove misidentifc*w;-eJ«TrtJTers as^adds^ hazardous wastej.
As a specific example, the Agency has declared "wastewater
treatment sludge containing lead compounds" to be hazardous.
m no
This is scientifically bad nomenclature witfysubstantiation.
Is it municipal or industrial wastewater? What is the treatment?
What lead compounds? What are their quantity, concentration
and availability? What is_ the hazard?
-------
Confidentiality
The Agency has also requested comment on confidentiality. We
agree with the first option proposed, that affected parties be
allowed to make confidentiality claims without providing sub-
stantiation at the time of initial notification. We do not
consider it a burden for EPA to request substantiation at some
future date only as necessary. The first option would conserve
EPA resources. The second option would require every claim be
investigated. We do not believe that a large number of specific
requests for such detailed technical information will be forth-
coming. We seriously question whether adequate protection of
confidential information can be assured. Information pertain-
ing to types of wastes, descriptions, and volumes (optional at
present) can be invaluable in a competitive market. All states
seeking primary responsibility, should be required to provide
protection at least equivalent to the EPA confidentiality
requirement 40 CFR Part 2.
In summary, we feel the Agency has made progress in developing
the notification requirements. We request consideration of our
comments and particularly request that the comment period be
extended until all hazardous waste regulations are proposed.
Thank you.
-------
ST4TE OF NEVADA
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
AfJD NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
COMMENTS ON
ERA'S PROPOSED RULES
ON THE
PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION OF
HAZARDOUS HASTE ACTIVITIES
H, UVERNE ROSSE, P.E,
PROGRAM DIRECTOR
I'ASTE MANAGEMENT
-------
I AN VERNE ROSSE, REPRESENTING THE STATE OF ,'!EVADA, DIVISION
OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, I APPRECIATE HAVING THIS OPPORTUNITY
TO COMMENT ON THESE PROPOSED RULES FOR PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE ACTIVITIES, I HAVE ONLY A FEU COMMENTS,
:1Y FIRST COMMENT HAS TO DO UITH SECTION 251,320 "WHO MUST FILE
NOTIFICATION", THIS SECTION is ONE OF THE MORE IMPORTANT FOR THE
REGULATED COMMUNITY AND SHOULD BE CLEARLY WRITTEN, THERE IS A
SENTENCE IN THE MIDDLE OF SUBSECTION (A) WITH AT LEAST 80 WORDS IN
AriV \}t^t^
IT. I FOUND SUBSECTION (A) t&H- CONFUSING AND SUGGEST THAT IT BE
REWRITTEN, I BELIEVE NOTIFICATIONS BASED ON THE INITIAL 3001
REGULATIONS SHOULD EE SEPARATED FROM THOSE BASED ON REVISIONS OF
THE 5001 REGULATIONS. THESE DIFFERENT NOTIFICATIONS SHOULD BE MORE
CLEARLY EXPLAINED. TllE SECOND SENTENCE OF SUBSECTION (A) IS MISSING
SOMETHING, I1/HAT IS INTERIM STATUS FOR? MAYBE IT COULD READ, "THIS
n
NOTIFICATION IS REQUIRED AS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS FOR INTERIM AUTHOR- 3
IZATION FOR ALL PERSONS WHO TREAT, STORE, AND DISPOSE OF HAZARDOUS
WASTE TO LEGALLY CONTINUE THAT ACTIVITY UNTIL APPROPRIATE
ARE ISSUED," IN THE FOURTH SENTENCE (YOUR 30-WORDER), THERE NEEDS
TO BE MORE SEPARATION OF NOTIFICATIONS AND FACILITY PERMIT APPLI-
CATIONS. WHAT is A GENERATOR OR A TRANSPORTER IDENTIFICATION CODE?
I EXPECT IT COMES FROM OTHER REGULATIONS, BUT THEY ARE NOT AVAILABLE,
THIS NEEDS MORE EXPLANATION, UlTHOUT THE PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
AND THOUGHTS BEHIND THE WRITING OF THIS SUBSECTION I DON'T HAVE A
SUGGESTED REWRITE, BUT WOULD DISCUSS THIS WITH THE AUTHOR,
-------
ilY NEXT COMMENTS HAVE TO DO WITH THE NOTIFICATION FORM, FlRST,
I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IT BE REDONE TO FACILITATE KEYPUNCHING FOR
COMPUTER INPUT. IN SOME STATES THERE WILL BE A GREAT AMOUNT OF
DATA WITH LITTLE TIME AND MONEY FOR REVIEW. COMPUTERIZATION IS
IMPERATIVE, FINALLY, I RELIEVE THAT SUBSECTION 11 OF 250,823 SHOULD
NOT BE OPTIONAL BUT A REQUIREMENT, FURTHER, THERE SHOULD DC A
SUBSECTION REQUIRING THAT THE NOTIFICATION INDICATE WHAT IS DONE
WITH THE HAZARDOUS WASTE, SUCH AS DISCHARGE TO SEWERS, ON-SITE
, .off-v^
DISPOSAL, OFF-SITE DISPOSAL (WHERE), ETC, IT IS IMPORTANT FOR
SEVERAL REASONS TO HAVE THIS INFORMATION FOR A STATE OR FEDERAL
AGENCY, ONE REASON IS TO REDUCE THE EFFECT OF THE DELAY OF REGULA-
TION PROMULGATION AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, ANOTHER REASON IS TO
AID THE STATES TO DO THEIR INVENTORIES, ON WHICH THEY CAN BASE THEIR
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT,
THIS WILL GET STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES INTO "CRADLE TO tr- 'E"
CONTROL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MORE QUICKLY IF WE CAN GET THE INVEN" - ::S
OUT OF THE WAY AT THE SAME TIME THE NOTIFICATION IS DONE,
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT.
-------
ft
Hcuktf&Js
f /
a
4
a
S \Qndu s^Lt^)
-------
TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1978
PART IV
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
PRELIMINARY
NOTIFICATION OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE
ACTIVITIES
Proposed Procedures
-------
29908
PROPOSED RULES
[6560-01]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[40 CFR Port 250]
[FRL 896-8]
PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS
WASTE ACTIVITIES
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency,
ACTION- Proposed rules'
SUMMARY' These proposed rules set
forth the procedures for preliminary
notification of hazardous waste activi-
ties They define administrative proce-
dures under which States may be
granted the authority to receive notifi-
cations of hazardous waste activities,
and they specify the procedures for
filing such notifications by persons
conductvng hazardous waste activities
The Environmental Protection Agency
(KPA) is proposing rules in order to fa-
cilitate notification of hazardous waste
activities for both those persons who
must file notifications and those who
will receive them.
DATES' All comments received on or
before September 11, 1978, will be con-
sidered by the Agency before taking
action on the proposed rules.
HEARING
Oral or written comments may be
submitted at the public hearings on
these proposed rules.
The hearings are scheduled for
August 21, 1978, at the Holiday Inn-
Airport, 1-26 and West Aviation
Avenue, Charleston, S C , 803-744-
1621; August 18, 1978, at the Cleveland
Plaza Hotel, Euclid at East 12th
Street, Cleveland, Ohio. 216-696-6KOO,
and August 24, 1978, at the EPA Re-
gional Office, 215 Fremont Street, San
Francisco, Calif., 415 -556-6695 Re-
quests to participate in the public
hearings should be directed to Mrs
Gerri Wyer, Public Participation Offi-
cer, Office of Solid Waste (WH-562),
U S Environmental Pi election
Agency. Washington, DC. 20460, 202-
755-9157. Registration for each hear-
ing will be held between 1230 and 1
pm The hearings will be held from 1
to 6 p m There will also be an evening
session in San Francisco beginning at
1 30 p.m
ADDRESSES Comments should be
submitted to Deputy Assistant Ad-
ministrator for Solid Waste (WH-562),
U S Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C, 20460, Com-
munications should identify the legu-
latory docket or notice number, which
is 3010 for these proposed lules
The official record for this rulemak-
ing is located in Room 211 ID. US En-
vironmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street SW , Washington, D C. 20460.
and is ava lable for viewing from 9'
am to 4 p m, Monday through
Friday, excluding holidays
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT'
Mr Timothy Fields, Jr., Hazardous
Waste Managment Division, Office
of Solid Waste (WH-565\ U.S. Envi-
ronmenta Protection Agency, Wash-
ington, D C 20460. 202-755-9206.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Subtitle C cf the Solid Waste Disposal
Act, as amended by the Resource Con-
servation a id Recovery Act of 1976
(Pub L 94 580), creates a regulatory
framework to control hazardous waste.
Congress has found that such waste
presents "special dangers to health
and requires, a greater degree of regu-
lation than does nonhazardous solid
waste" (sec 1002(b)(5)) Because of
the seriousness of this waste problem,
Congress intended that the States de-
velop programs to control it. In the
event that Elates do not choose to op-
erate this progr^rn, EPA is mandated
to do so.
This rule s one of a series of seven
being developed and proposed under
Subtitle C to implement the hazard-
ous waste management program It is
important to note the definition of
solid waste (sec. 1004(27)) which en-
compasses garbage, refuse, sludges and
other discaided materials, including
liquids, semi-solids, and contained
gases (v. ith a few exceptions), from
both municipal and industiial sources.
Hazardous wastes, which are a subset
of all solid wastes and which will be
identified or listed by regulations pro-
mulgated uniler section 3001, are those
which have particularly significant im-
pacts on public health and the envi-
ronment
Subtitle C creates a management
control system which for those wastes
defined as hazardous, requires "cradle-
to-grave" cognizance, including appro-
priate monitoring, recordkeeping and
leporting thtoughout the system. Sec-
tion 3001 requurs EPA to d°fme crite-
ria and methods for identifying and
listing hazardous wastes Those wastes
which are identified or listed as haz-
ardous by those mrans are then in-
cluded in tie management control
system cons tructed undei sections
3002-3006 anj 3010 Those that are ex-
cluded will be subject to the tequire-
ments for nonhazardous solid waste
being carried out by States uider Sub-
title D undei which open aumpmg is
prohibited and environmentally ac-
ceptable practices are required
Section 3002 addresses the standards
applicable to generators EPA's regula-
tions under this section define gener-
ators to excljde individual homeown-
ers and othe-s who, due to the small
quantities of hazardous wastes which
they produce do not pose a significant
threat to human health or the envi-
ronment. These persons are not re-
quired to submit notifications under
section 3010 Section 3002 also re-
quires the creation of a manifest
system which will track wastes from
the point of generation to their ulti-
mate disposition.
Section 3003 addresses standards af-
fecting transporters of hazardous
wastes to assure that wastes are care-
fully managed during the transport
phase. The Agency is exploring oppor-
tunlties for meshing closely with pro-
posed and current U S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) regulations to
avoid duplication in this area
Section 3004 addresses standards af-
fecting owners and operators of haz-
ardous waste storages treatment, and
disposal facilities. These standards
define the levels of environmental pro-
tection to be achieved by these facili-
ties and provide the criteria against
which EPA (or State) officials will
measure applications for permits Fa-
cilities on a generator's property as
well as off-site facilities are covered by
these regulations and do require per-
mits, generators and transporters do
not otherwise need permits. It should
be noted that only active hazardous
waste treatment, storage, and disposal
facility owners and operators are re-
quired to notify.
Section 3005 regulations describe the
scope and coverage of the actual
permit-granting process for facility
owners and operators. Requirements
for the permit application as well as
for the issuance and revocation proc-
ess are to be defined by these regula-
tions. Section 3005(e) provides for in-
terim status during the tune period
that the Agency or the States are re-
viewing the pending permit applica-
tions
Section -3006 requires EPA to issue
guidelines for State programs and pro-
cedures by which States may seek
both full and interim authorization to
carry out the hazardous waste pro-
gram in lieu of the EPA-admirustered
program States seeking authorization
in accordance with .section 3006 guide-
lines need to demonstrate that their
hazardous waste management regula-
tions are consistent with and equiva-
lent in effect to EPA regulations as a
condition for receiving EPA authoriza-
tion under section 3006 to operate and
enforce a hazardous waste manage-
ment program
Section 3010 requues any person
geuerat mg, transporting, owning, or
operating a facility for storage, treat-
ment, nnd disposal of hazardous waste
to notify EPA of this activity within
90 days after promulgation or revision
of regulations identifying and listing a
hazardous waste pursuant to section
3001. No hazardous waste subject to
Subtitle C regulation may be legally
transported, treated, stored, or dis-
posed after the 90-day period unless
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 43, NO. 133—TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1978
-------
PROPOSED RULES
29909
this timely notification is given to
EPA or an authorized State during the
above 90-day period
Thp.se proposed rules define the pro-
cedures for Riving notification under
section 3010 and also establish proce-
dures /or authorizing thp States to re-
ceive such notifications
A cross reference of the numbered
sections of the act to the sub-part des-
ignations to be used in the regulations
is presented in Table A
U> Subpart A— Section 3001, Standards
for Criteria, Identification, and Listing of
Hazardous Waste
(2) Subpart B -Section 3002, Standards
Applirablo to Generators of Hazardous
Waste
(3) Subpart C— Section 3003, Standards
Applicable to Transporters of Hazardous
Waste
<4) Subpart D- Section 3004. Standards
Applicable to Owners and Operators of Haz-
ardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and Dis-
posal Facilities
(5) Subpart E— Section 3005, Permits for
Treatment, Storage, or Disposal of Hazard-
ous Waste
(6) Subpart P- Section 3006, Guidelines
for Authorized State Hazardous Waste Pro-
grams
(7) Subpart G- Section 3010. Preliminary
Notification of Hazardous Waste Activities
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER SUBTITLE C
REGULATIONS
The .statutory intent of these pro-
posed rules is to assure that all per-
sons who at (he time these regulations
are promulgat ed, are generating,
transporting, ti rating, storing, or dis-
posing of hazardous wastes identified
or listed under section 3001 regula-
tions notify EPA or an authorized
State of these activities The section
3001 regulations and the regulations
under sections 3002, 3003, 3004, and
3005 are scheduled to be promulgated
concurrently in late 1978 and will
become effectne 180 days after pro-
mulgation During the first 90 days of
this time period, all persons subject to
thfsr rulos must notify ctlhcr F.'PA or
an authorized State pursuant to these
rule1? Within the 180-day period, those
persons requned to obtain a facility
permit pursuant to the section 3005
regulations must appl.v to EPA or an
authonzed State for a permit. Satis-
faction of these two requirements by
persons owning or operating existing
facilities requiring a facility permit
will qualify them for interim status
until a permit is issued Failure to sat-
isfy both requirements will prevent
such persons from legally treating, dis-
posing. or storing (for more than 90
davs) hazardous waste after the 180-
day period Satisfaction of the notifi-
cation requirement by all other per-
sons subject to these rules will enable
them to legally transport or store (for
less than 90 days) hazardous waste
after the 180-day period. Accordingly,
notification pursuant to these rules Is
required by all persons who generate,
transport, treat, store, or dispose of
identified or listed hazardous waste.
Failure to comply with this regula-
tion can result in civil and/or criminal
penalties of as much as $25,000 a day
for each day of violation. Any person
who knowingly makes a false state-
ment or representation in filing notifi-
cation of hazardous waste activity
shall, upon conviction, be subject to a
fine of not more than $25,000, or to
imprisonment not to exceed 1 year, or
both.
Section 3001 regulations will prob-
ably be revised from time to time to
identify or list additional hazardous
waste. Section 250.821 of this regula-
tion requires that generators, trans-
porters, treaters, storers, and disposers
of these wastes notify EPA or an au-
thorized State 90 days after such revi-
sion. (Persons unaffected by a revision
need not submit additional notifica-
tion.) In addition, affected persons
may be required under section 3005 to
apply for a new or a revised facility
permit before the revised section 3001
regulation becomes effective (180 days
after promulgation). To reduce the
burden of notification, those persons
who must both notify and apply for a
new or a revised facility permit may
accomplish notification with their ap-
plication for a new or a revised facility
permit, provided the application is
submitted within the first 90 days
after promulgation of the revised sec-
tion 3001 regulations.
Generators and transporters who
must both notify and obtain an identi-
fication code pursuant to revisions in
section 3001 may accomplish notifica-
tion with their submission of the in-
formation required to obtain the iden-
tification code, provided that the In-
formation is submitted within the first
90 days after promulgation of the re-
vised section 3001 regulations.
Section 3010 requires an inventory
of all persons generating, transport-
ing, treating, storing, ur disposing of
hazardous waste identified or listed in
the section 3001 regulations or revi-
sions thereof on the date of their pro-
mulgation. Consequently, all persons
who carry out such activities on the
date of promulgation of the section
3001 regulations or revisions thereof
are required to not;fy. Persons who
initiate such activities after the date
of promulgation of the section 3001
regulations or revisions thereof are
not required to notify pursuant to
these rules, However, these persons
(new entrants) will be required to
notify EPA or an authorized State of
their hazardous waste activities pursu-
ant to the sections 3002, 3003, and
3005 regulations promulgated under
Subtitle C. Briefly, this moans that
persons who begin to treat, dispose, or
store (for more than 90 davs) hazard-
ous wastes, must apply for a permit In
accordance with section 3005 regula-
tions, and persons who generate and/
or transport hazardous waste have re-
sponsibility for preparing and han-
dling a manifest pursuant to sections
3002 and 3003, respectively, which
serves to notify EPA or the authorized
State of such activity. All new en-
trants will be assigned a unique identi-
fication number.
NOTIFICATION PBOCESS
These proposed rules specify who
must file notification of hazardous
waste activity, when and where notifi-
cation must be filed and what such no-
tification must contain. These pro-
posed rules also contain a suggested
sample form for use in filing notifica-
tion (see Table I). Use of the sample
form is not mandatory, but its use is
encouraged to facilitate the notifica-
tion process.
To assist in complying with these
rules, EPA Intends to mail a sample
form and instructions to all known
persons who may be required to
notify. EPA will also encourage au-
thorized States to use a similar proce-
dure Failure of the Agency or the au-
thorized State to reach any affected
person will not, however, relieve that
person of the legal requirement to
notify.
After receiving a notification, EPA
intends to mail a facility permit appli-
cation form to those persons believed
to require a facility permit under sec-
tion 3005. EPA will also encourage au-
thorized States to do the same. The
failure of the Agency or the author-
ized State to reach any of these affect-
ed persons will not, however, relieve
that person of the legal requirement
to apply for a permit. To alleviate the
second mailing, consideration is being
given to including the facility permit
application in the mailing of the
sample notification form and Instruc-
tions Those persons who are required
to both notify and apply for a facility
permit could therefore elect to comply
with both requirements simultaneous'
ly.
AUTHORIZATION OF STATES To RECEIVE
NOTIFICATIONS
These proposed rules establish pro-
cedures for authorizing States to re-
ceive notifications. These rules are
being proposed and will also be pro-
mulgated before the section 3001 and
other concurrent regulations in order
to give the States opportunity to
obtain authorisation before promulga-
tion of the section 3001 regulations
starts the 90-day notification period.
EPA and the authorized States must
be ready to receive notifications when
the section 3001 regulations are pro-
mulgated A list of the State agencies
authorized to receive notifications will
be published in the FEDERAL REGISTER
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 43, NO. 133—TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1978
-------
29910
PROPOSED RULES
prior to or at the time of promulgation
of the section 3001 regulations or revi-
sions thereof
States will be authorized to receive
notifications under the limited au-
thorization provisions of section 3010.
This will be called "limited interim au-
thorisation" and if granted, v. ill be
granted separate and apart from the
"interim or full authorizations" grant-
ed under section 3006, and without
regard to whether the State receives
an inteum or full authorization under
section 3006. These limited interim au-
thorizations are intended to enable
the States to receive the "initial" noti-
fications—those to be received during
the 90-days following the promulga-
tion of the section 3001 regulations-
even though they have not been
granted an interim or full authoriza-
tion under section 3006 Few, if any.
States will receive interim or full au-
thorization under section 3006 before
or during the said 90-day period, yet it
is EPA's policy to allow those States
that are likely to be granted such au-
thorization to also be granted the au-
thority to manage the notification
process
It is important to note that notifica-
tion required subsequent to this initial
notification process as a result of revi-
sions to section 3001 regulations, when
not administered by the EPA Regions.
shall be conducted only by States
having section 3006 authorization
Limited interim authorization, there-
fore, is a one-time authonzat ion whirh
terminates on the dale 6 months after
the date of promulgation of the sec-
tion 3001 regulations
If a State whirh has been granted
limited interim authorization fails to
apply for, or receive interim or full au-
thorization, EPA must assume respon-
sibility for managing the subsequent
regulatory requnements of subtitle C.
this disjointed program administration
can create problems, e g , in efficient
processing of applications lor facility
permits which are received during the
6-month period following piomulga-
tion of the section 3001 regulations
To minimise such potential prob-
lems, these proposed rules impose
three requirements upon Si airs in
order to obtain a limited interim au-
thorization. These requirements are as
follows
1 In its request foi limited interim
authorization, the Slate must declare
its Intent to apply for an interim or
full authorization before or during the
90-day period following the promulga-
tion of the section 3001 regulations
2. At EPA's request, the State must
provide EPA with the information re-
ceived through notification so that the
Agency, if necessary, can el fectively
carry out the subsequent regulatory
activities of subtitle C
3. In its request for limited interim
authorization, the State must provide
for making facility permit application
forms availab e to prospective permit-
tees identified in the notification proc-
ess
Further, th? authorized States will
be encouraged to operate and manage
the notificaticn process in the same or
an equivalent manner to that em-
ployed by EP\ in order to achieve as
much national uniformity as possible.
This will simplify the notification
burden on those persons who may
have to notify for hazardous waste ac-
tivities carried out in two or more
States The manner in which the State
intends to carry out the notification
process will be articulated in the plan
that a State submits as part of its re-
quest for limited interim authoriza-
tion. The degree of equivalency with
EPA's management of the process will
be one of the criteria used to deter-
mine whether to grant authorization.
HAZARDOUS WASTE DEFINITION
If a State is granted limited interim
authorization by EPA to manage the
notification piogram, all persons (gen-
erators, transporters, treaters, storers,
and disposers) that are affected by the
section 3001 regulations identifying
and listing ha2,ardous waste will be re-
quired to notily that State. If a State
hazardous waste definition is more
stringent than that promulgated
under section 3001 regulations, then
the applicable State agency could use
this definition for the purpose of noti-
fication by affected persons in that
State. State hazardous waste defini-
tions which are less stringent than
that promulgated pursuant to section
3001 regulations cannot be used for
notification purposes.
CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISIONS
The Freedom of Information Act (5
ILS.C. 552) includes a provision under
which trade secrets and commercial or
financial information may be exempt-
ed front public disclosure. The Agency
believes that similar provisions in
States' "Trade Secret Acts" or "Public
Records Acts" make a significant con-
tribution to securing the confidence of
t he regulated community since this
legislation assures th'at information
submitted to the State regulatory
agency will be adequately safeguarded.
State legislation of this type will not
be requn ed for authorization to
handle the notification program.
States should be aware, nevertheless,
that provisions for the safeguarding of
confidential information aie an impor-
tant part of an effective State regula-
tory program and that the protection
of this type of information may be es-
sential to winning the confidence of
the regulated community
With respect to notifications submit-
ted to EPA, these proposed rules
would allow affected persons to make
confidentiality claims in three areas of
their notification responses* (a) types
of hazardous waste handled, as identi-
fied by criteria under section 3001 reg-
ulations, (b) description of hazardous
wastes handled, and identified by list-
ing under section 3001 regulations, or
by general type, and (c) estimated
amount of hazardous wastes handled
annually (optional item).
Comments are requested from inter-
ested parties as to which notification
items should provide for a confiden-
tiality claim, and reasons why each
such item should be considered confi-
dential.
EPA is considering requiring affect-
ed parties to provide substantiation of
their confidentiality claims at the time
of initial notification. There are two
options.
The first option Is the one in these
proposed rules Affected parties would
be allowed to make confidentiality
claims without providing substantia-
tion at the time of initial notification.
If a request for information submitted
was made later, EPA would then re-
quest that the affected person(s) pro-
vide substantiation of confidentiality
claim(s) in accordance with 40 CFR
Part 2, Subpart B. If there are a large
number of requests from the public
for copies of notifications, there will
be a burden on the EPA regional
office resources to request substantia-
tion from each submitter.
The second option is designed to
avoid that problem by requiring sub-
mission of substantiation at the time
of initial notification EPA would not
have to go back to submitters again if
requests were received by EPA for no-
tification responses containing confi-
dentiality claims. However, this would
place an additional initial reporting
buidPn upon affected parties.
Comments are requested on these or
other options for the confidentiality
provisions In addition, suggestions on
ways of making the notification items
reasonably accessible to the public
would be appreciated
It should be noted that EPA plans to,
provide for separation of potentially
confidential and nonconfidential noti-
fication items in the final regulations.
Separate sheets of paper shall be sub-
mitted by affected persons for Inclu-
sion of confidential information.
REPORTING IMPACT
EPA considers the information re-
quired by these rules to be the mini-
mum necessary to effectively adminis-
ter the notification program. Since
most of the requested information will
be on hand, little time should be
needed to prepare the notification re-
sponse The greatest burden would
come in those instances where some
analysis of waste was required. Howev-
er, since this information is also re-
quired to comply with other regula-
tions under the act, it is not a report-
FEDEKAL REGISTER, VOL. 43, NO. 133—TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1978
-------
ing burden imposed bv these regula-
tions atone Comments from interested
parties on the estimated reporting
impact of the.se proposed regulations
will be appreriated A reporting
imi-act analysis is being conducted in
support of these and other subtitle C
regiUiiJioiis
ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
In accordance with Executive Orders
12044 and 11821. as amended by Ex-
fX'utivo Order 11949, and OMB Circu-
lar A-107 and EPA policy as stipulated
in 39 FR 37439, October 21. 1974, re-
spectively, analyses of economic and
environmental impacts are being per-
formed for the entirrt} of subtitle C.
hazaidous waste management, but are
not vet completed Any additional eco-
nomic impact on (he public resulting
from implementation of this regula-
tion is expected to be negligible since
notification is required only once, and
is primarily an administrative proce-
dure
Dalcd July 3, 1978
BARBARA Bi VM,
Acting Administrator
Title 40, CPU, Part 250 would be
amended by adding a suhpart G con-
sisting of § 250 800 250 823 as follows
PART 250— HAZARDOUS WASTE GUIDELINES
AND REGULATIONS
250 800 Sropr and purpose
250801 Definitions
250 810 Limited interim authon/^tion
250811 Application oioredlurs for Stales
250 812 Responsibilities and nulhontv of
ihr EPA Rcitional Administrator
250 820 Who must file notification
250 B21 When to file notification
250 822 Where to file notification
250 *23 Information required in notifica-
tion
AUTHORITY Re<- 2002(a)U\ Pub L 94-
5HO 90 Stat 2804<42USC 6912) and Soc
30JOi;u Pub L 94-580, 90 Stat 2812 <42
USC 6930)
§ 2r>0 800 Sropr and purpose
(a) Section 3010 of the Solid Wa-ste
Disposal Act. a* amended by the Rc-
souice Conset \ation and Recovery Act
of 1976 (42 U S C 6930). requires that
any pei son generating or transporting.
or owning or ope rat ing a facility for
treatment, stoiagc, or disposal of haz-
ardous waste, must notify the Admin-
istrator or authorised State not later
than 90 dajs after promulgation or ic-
vfion of regulations under section
3001
(b) These rules specify m more
detail v. ho must file notification of
hazardous w a Mr acl nrit v. \v hen and
where notification must be filed, and
what such notification must contain
(c) In addition, these rules establish
the means by which State govern-
PROPOSED RULES
ments that are developing and/or im-
plementing hazardous waste manage-
ment programs may receive notifica-
tion from affected persons within
their jurisdictions.
§2.">!)N01 Definitions
For the purpose of this part
(a) The term "disposal of hazardous
waste" means the discharge, deposit,
injection, dumping, spilling, leaking,
or placing of any hazardous waste into
or on any land or water so that such
waste or any constituent thereof may
enter the environment or be emitted
into the air or discharged into any
waters, including ground waters.
(b) The term "hazardous waste"
means any solid waste defined as haz-
ardous under subpart A of this part
(c) The term "ha/.ardous waste activ-
ity" means the handling of hazardous
waste vja the generation, transporta-
tion, treatment, storage, or disposal of
any hazardous waste
(d) The term "hazardous uaste gen-
eration" means the act or process of
producing a hazardous waste
-------
29912
PROPOSED RULES
such authorisations end on the date
six months after regulations are first
promulgated under section 3001 of the
act
§ 25ft.HI 1 Application procedures for
State*.
(a) Slates -seeking limited interim au-
thorization for section 3010 must
make a written application to the ap-
propriate EPA Regional Administrator
containing the following items
(DA statement of the State's intent
to apply for interim or full authoriza-
tion under section 3006 before or
during the 90 day period following the
promulgation of the section 3001 regu-
lations
(2) A plan for implementation by the
State, in coordination with the EPA
Region, of section 3010 requirements,
including plans for informing affected
persons of the notification require-
ments, for furnishing to the EPA
names and addresses of persons whom
the State reasonably believes have
failed to comply with notification reg-
ulations and for analyses of the data
received from affected persons.
(3) A statement of agreement to
maintain files and any information re-
ceived from notification for 3 years
af(,er receipt of notification, and to
make available any such notification
information to the EPA in accordance
with requests from the EPA Regional
Administrator,
(4) A plan of implementation by the
State, in coordination with the EPA
Region, for providing notice to the
public and to those prospective per-
mittees identified in the notification
process of the facility permit require-
ments and of the availabthtv of the fa-
cility permit applications forms The
plan shall include provisions for the
State's receipt and processing of all
permit applications submitted
(b) States seeking limited interim
authorization must file the above writ-
ten applications not later than sixtv
(60) calendar days after promulgation
of these notification regulations.
§ 250 812 Responsibilities and authority of
the EPA Hopnin.il Administrator.
(a) The EPA Regional Administrator
shall have the authority to grant or
withhold limited interim authoriza-
tion
(b) The EPA Regional Administrator
shall consider each State application
for limited interim authorization If an
application does not meet all require-
ments of |25081Ha) (1) and (3). the
Regional Administrator shall not
grant limited interim authorization If
the Regional Administrator is not sat-
isfied that the State-proposed plans in
§250811(a) (2) and (4) are adequate
for implementation of section 3010,
he/she shall withhold limited interim
authorization
(c) If the Regional Administrator de-
termines that a State application is
unsatisfactory, he/.she shall inform
that State in writing of the reasons
within 15 working davs of receipt of
the application The Regional Admin-
istrator may then allow that State to
submit another application within 15
working days fr»r EPA consideration.
(d) If the Regional Administrator
finds a State application acceptable,
he/she shall execute an agreement
with that State, signed by the Region-
al Administrate r and an official of the
responsible Sta;e agency, granting lim-
ited interim aathoi ization to imple-
ment section ISO 10 requirements All
such agreemen.s shall be effective no
later than 120 calendar days after pro-
mulgation of these pieliminary notifi-
cation regulaticns and shall terminate
on the effective date of the section
3001 regulations (6 months after pro-
mulgation)
§250.820 Who must file notification
(a) Every person conducting a haz-
ardous waste activity at the time of
promulgation or revision of section
3001 regulations must file notification
in accordance with these regulations
This notification constitute& one of
the conditions for interim status for
all persons who treat, store, and dis-
pose of hazardous waste Owners of in-
active hazardous waste treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities are not
required to notify Those persons who
must both not fy and either seek a
generator or a transporter identifica-
tion code or apply for a new or a re-
vised facility permit pursuant to revi-
sion of section 3001 regulations may
accomplish not if ication with either
the submission of the information re-
quired for the respective identification
code, or with th*; submission of the ap-
plication for a now or a levised facility
permit, provided such information is
submitted within the first 90 days
after promulgation of the revised sec-
tion 3001 regulations Further defini-
tion of what is a hazardous waste, who
is a generator; who is a transporter,
and who is an cwnfr or operator of a
tieatment, storage or disposal facility
is given in reg ulations promulgated
under sections ilOOl, 3002, 3003, 3004,
and 3005 of the act.
(b) Special cases—(1) Corporations.
A responsible individual of the corpo-
ration shall file notification.
(u A group of establishments, plants,
transportation terminals, etc , located
at a single site under the ownership or
operation of one person may file a
single notification.
(u) A person owning and operating
more than one p>lace of operation may
file a single notification for all facili-
ties provided.
(A) All required information is clear-
ly stated separately for each place of
operation, and
(B> Copies of the pertinent informa-
tion in this single notification are sent
to each EPA Regional Office (or au-
thorized State) having jurisdiction
over the area in which the places of
operation are located
(2) Highway transporters A respon-
sible individual shall file notification
for each terminal the transporter
owns and utilizer for vehicles trans-
porting hazardous wastes,
(3) Railroad or pipeline companies
A responsible individual may file a
single notification for the entire rail
line or pipeline, provided that copies
of this notification are sent to each
EPA Regional Office (or authorized
State) having jurisdiction over the
area in which the railroad or pipeline
is located.
(4) Federal agencies conducting haz-
ardous waste activities must comply
with all notification requirements In
the same manner as other persons
(5) Federal on-scene coordinators,
when acting in their official capacity
under the provisions of section 311 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, and the national oil and hazard-
ous substance pollution contingency
plan, are not included under the re-
quirements of these regulations
(6) These regulations do not apply to
persons who transport hazardous ma-
terials which have been spilled.
§ 250 821 When to file notification.
(a) Persons conducting hazardous
waste activities at the time of promul-
gation or revision of Section 3001 regu-
lations ("hazardous waste identifica-
tion and listing") must file notifica-
tions not later than ninety (90) days
after promulgation or revision of sec-
tion 3001 regulations.
(b) Any person conducting hazard-
ous waste activities at the time of pro-
mulgation or revision of section 3001
regulations who does not file notifica-
tion of such activity within 90 days of
the,date of this promulgation or revi-
sion is in violation of these notifica-
tion regulations and may be subject to
the penalties described under section
3008 of the act No hazardous waste
may be legally transported, treated,
stored, or disposed unless notification
has been made It should be noted
that late notification is a violation of
section 3010 and subjects such person
to possible enforcement action
§ 250 822 Where to file notification,
(a) Persons must file notifications
with the appropriate EPA Regional
Administrator or State which has been
granted limited interim authorization.
Copies of the pertinent notification in-
formation shall be sent to each EPA
Regional Administrator or designated
State agency in which the person's
places of operation are located
(b) Persons owning or operating sev-
eral places of operation should refer to
§250820(b)
(c) A list of names and addresses of
all State agencies granted the limited
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 43, NO. 133—TUESDAY, JULY 11, 197B
-------
PROPOSED RULES
29913
interim authorization to recme notifi-
cations will be published in the FFDER-
AL REGISTER before or at th^ tir^ of
promulgation of section 3001 regula-
tions.
§ 250 S2-1 Information required in notifica-
tion
fa) if a pet son fuHy and accurately
completes and returns the form pre-
sentrd in these regulations (see table
I) for ea^h place of operation, the
person ui'l h-uc cornpJiod with the re-
quirements cf §250823 of thoso regu-
lations Persons util'zmq this form
mav submit additional information or
documents a.s a part of the notifica-
tion submission
(b) If a person chooses not to u^e the
form, that per on must fi!" a written
rtotifirnticn .sfa'jnR rlcarjy and lesibJy
the fol'ou ii.tf uilormation (for each
place of oprrn'ion)
fI) The mn~>e cf the oigan:zation
and place of oprraMnn
(2) The ma.I'rg address and location
of the place of cneration
(3) The pnnc'pal artiuty of the
p'aie of operation, nthrr 1 > four-d,p]t
standard mdur,*.n?J cIa-- )
(4) An identif,"ation number for the
place of operation
(i) If a person has an Internal Reve-
nue Service employer id^nt1 fixation
numb"i (EIN), this number shall be
provided
(n) A person uho or* ra'es mo;e
than ore p'a-^ of opera1 -^n w:lh Ihe
same FTI for a'l <;^aH df.)p"intc a sep-
arate F-ifftx to tf-c r:W to d'imej.sh
each plarc of operation (e g, (EIN
No ) -2, (EIN No )-3)
(ui> Federal fa^iliti^s shall provide
the General Services Administration
ageno and facility number
dv) Transporters shall provide their
Interstate Commerce Commission
number however, if a tiansporter does
not have such a number, he/she shall
proude his/her Public Utilities Com-
mission nui.ibor, or other permit
number (as assigned by State Health
Department, etc )
(v) AIJ notifiers shall state the spe-
cific sources (IRS, ICC, etc.) of the
identification number
(vi) If a person does not have an al-
ready assigned identification number.
this fact shall be stated. An identifica-
tion number will then be assigned by
EPA (or the designated State agoncv.)
(5) The name, telephone number,
and address of a responsible individual
at the place of operation who could be
contacted for clarification of informa-
tion submrtfed in the notification
(6) The following statement, with
.signature, name, title, and date "I
hereby certify that the information
provided herein is comple'e and cor-
rect tq the best of mv knowledge I un-
dei~tand that all information in this
notification may be made available to
the public, unless otherwise noted, ac-
coidmg to §250823 (b) (10), I am au-
thon/ed to sign official documents for
my organization "
(7) The tvpe (.s) of hazardous wa^te
activity conducted by th° person, le,
generation, transportation, treatment,
storage, or disposal of hazardous
waste. Treatment, storage, or disposal
activities conducted at the site of
waste generation shall be indicated as
"onsite treatment," etc Persons who
transport hazardous waste shall indi-
cate th^ mode (air. rail, highway,
\\afer. etc ) of transportation
(8) The tjpes of fuc'ardou.s waste
handled by the person, as identified by
c,V,,er,a ur.dei section 3001 icg'ilations
Ail war,'^ which are ignitable. teae-
tr.e, infectjoin. ratf;'?ariojve, or corro-
sive must be described as such Howev-
er, person.'; who carr.ot in the 90-day
period allowed definitively determine
whether their wastrs are toxic may so
indicate. If. after the 90-day period, it
is determined that a waste is non-
toxic, a statement to this effect must
be filed no later than 180 days after
promulgation of section 3001 regula-
tions Otherwise, the person will be
considered for notification purposes,
to be conducting hazardous waste ac-
tivities If. at some future date, &
person determines that his waste is
not hazardous according to section
3001 regulations or if he ceases to
handle hazardous «.a,ste, he may file a
statement to this effect, and he will no
longer be considered to be conducting
hazardous waste activities under this
section.
(9) A description of the hazardous
waste handled as identified by listing
under the section 3001 regulations or
by the general type specified in said
regulation and specific contents
(where known) using the best availa-
ble information (e g. "wastewater
treatment sludge containing lead com-
pounds")
(10) A statement indicating what in-
formation, if any, in § 250 823(b), num-
bers (8), (9), and (11) (types, descrip-
tion, and quantities of hazardous
waste), is to be considered confidential
business infoimation If the informa-
tion is claimed as confidential, it will
be treated in accordance with the con-
fident jality of business information
regulations in 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart
B. When reported on the sample form,
information that is not claimed by the
person filing notification as confiden-
tial may be released to the public
without further notice to the person
who submitted it The EPA or the des-
ignated State agency will make the
final determination as to whether in-
formation submitted is m fact confi-
dential.
(13) Optional1^ An estimate of the
annual amount of hazardous waste
handled based on the period from Jan-
uary 1, 1977, to December 31, 1977
For persons not conducting hazardous
waste activities during any or all of
that period, the annual volume should
be estimated m the best practical
manner.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 43, NO. US-TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1978
-------
29914
PROPOSED RULES
TABLE I
NOTIFICATION FORM WITH INSTRUCTIONS
NOTE
READ ALL INSTRUCTIONS
BEFORE COMPLETING
NOTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE ACTIVITY
(Section )QIO(,T), Resource Constcva(ion
and Recovery Act of J975, -12 USC 6930)
\. (o) Nome of t
(b)
(c) Pn
/ hereby Certify that the information provided herein is complete Jmd c
I understand that all information on this form m&y be made available to
item number 8. I am authorized to sign official documenty/Qr my
3- («)_
(b).
the best of my jtnow/ej^e.
• lie unless otherwise noted under
(b) Q Tronjp5*J-mod>
QTr
rail, (rucfr, Ot/ierJ
5. Type* of haiordau* woiles handled, as icUndtied by enter,o under Section 3001 r? gy to 11 or, i. Does the place of operation
(d To
Conimu* in the "^
s id«niified by U
Section 3001 >e^u'olior,s, ot b-y gcneiol type ond »p«
(COMT1MUED ON PACE 2)
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 43, NO. 131* -TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1978
-------
PROPOSED RULES
29915
CONF IDfc NT IAL1TY CLAIM
putting on ",\" in the oppropftote bo«(es} Anx mlo'
Irtaltd in occordonce with ike eonf. cUnholi ty reguloti
reported to EPA lh0i ,s eloimed t
i 46 CFR Port 2, Subport B.
nd.co-e rhor below b,
r,(,deol.oI will be
NOTE If you fa
DITEM 1
No /i<-!7ardous »as'e, as defined ur^kr Section 3001 rc 6e frtirr-,pOr(te/, stored, treated,
or disposed of ur. 'ess notification of hazardous wasfe activity h:ts been suomittt'd to the EPA or authorized St^lc
au'hortties acco-r'ing (o regulations promulgated under Section 3010, P L. 9 1-580. Failure to comply with thit
regul&tion can result in c/v il and 'or criminal penalties of as much f>^ $25,000 a day for ejcft ciny of violation.
Any person v. ho knowingly makes a IB'SC statement or representation in filing notification of hazardous taste
activity shall, LPOH conviction, be sjbj^rJ [o a /me o/ not more than $25,000, or to imprisonment not to t'tceec/
one year, or bo'h.
pla«s* indicate the n\jm\tet of the i'«m be\ng referred lo.
=^4.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 43, NO. 133—TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1978
-------
29916
PROPOSED RULES
(90) d.iys Uom the d^te of piumulga -, .v
waste by ail persons conducting nP7.udous
The F,Pj\ is ptoM-lm^ i* form sug-c^mi d. i U--P in tnr^King \utli the notification tequu*-mcnts of Section 3010-
Uie of this form is ophondl Completion by a per-on of (hi* form for each plate of operation, with the exception
noted under item 5(0, and tr'ms-iitta! t° tr e «*ppr°pridte outlionty (or author it it. *) wilt satisfy all requirements
" i Section 3010, P L. 94-580,
on of hazardous waste activity
tion Number (ElN)
(G5A) agency and facility
•he same ElN lor each)
No.)-2, (ElN No)-3).
(d) Id^niifirjjioji^Nurpberj If you ha\e an In
enter it here Federal facilities s'lall en
should designate a separate suffix (o the
In addition, transporters shall entfr. one
Commerce Commission number, (2) Public Utilities Commission i
(State Health Department, erc.J.
The specific source (IRS, ICC, ere.} of each number entered shal'
2. Pnncipa.1 technical contact(sj. Enter 'he name, address and telephone mi
at the place of operation whom the EP \ or designated State agency may contai
submitted on this form.
3- Certifies ho r\. An individual authorize:! by a company or organization officer to sign of my a I documents on
their behalf should enter his signature, name and title, and date.
4. Persons filing notification should consult Subpart G regulations for relr-x ant definitions of haz
activities. The type(s) of transport mechanism (e.g., truck, railroad, etc ) nust be provided
$• Types of ^.a^J)jd"us,1*J^l?__a_5_li'^rilL(lejLAVL-c-iLl'l(.1^- Kac 1
protocols are being published under Sertion 3001 regula'i
whether or not a waste is hazardous.
appropriate category should be inJicafed, Test
ns These tests ate the findl determinants of
It should be noted that if a person marl s the space for ' Und^tcrnunf J," u,hich may be done only under cate-
gory "(f) TOXK.," he should submit no later than ISO d.T>s after promulgation or revision nt Section 3001
rrgiilat.cn-;, a statement that his v-jstes have been determined not to be h.irntdous, if this determm.ition has
been inne Otht" *ISP, any person wh" indicates that tr1 doe<; not know u, heth^r an) of his *3stes are hazard-
ous due lo toxicity, \vill be considered o be conducting ha/aidous v-Jsle activities (or notihcjtion purposes.
ftnMc_hand>_d.nrin..Mly_ Tbn
hcmlrl cnler the Cstm-
er 11. 19/7 For tlio
P1
y
calendar year.
8. Self-explanatory.
[FR Doc 78-18989 Filed 7-10-78, 8 45 arn]
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 43, NO. 133—TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1978
-------
if any changes have been made in
certain titles of the CODE OF
FEDERAL REGULATIONS without
reading tha Federal Register every
day? If so, you may wish to subscribe
to the "Cumulative List of CFR
Sections Affected," the "Federal
Register Index," or both.
Cumulative List of CFR Sections Affecled
$10.00
per year
The "Cumulative List of CFR Sections
Affected" is designed to lead users of
the Code of Federal Regulations to
amendatory actions published in the
Federal Register, and is issued
monthly in cumulative form. Entries
' indicate the nature of the changes.
Federal Register Index
$8.00
per year
Indexes covering the
contents of the daily Federal Register are
issued monthly, quarterly, and annually.
Entries are carried primarily under the
names of the issuing agencies. Significant
subjects are carried as cross-references.
A finding «ld !• included In itch publication which IUU
Federal Register p»g« numbers with the date of publication
In the Federal Refliter.
Note to m Subscribers: FR Indexes and the
"Cumulative Ust ol CFR Sections Affected" will continue
to be mailed free of charge to regular FR subscribers.
j Mfcll order form to:
j« Superintendent or Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.c. 20402
There Is enclosed j
_ subscription^) to the publications checked below:
5 CUMULATIVE LIST OF CFR SECTIONS AFFECTED ($10.00 • year domestic; $12.50 forel(K>
m FEDERAL REOISTER INDEX (W.OO • year domestic; $10.00 foreign)
fi Street Addrass _
3 City.
j Make check payable to tha Superintendent of Documents
M
^liiiiiiiinuiiuiiiiiiuiiiiiiiiiioiiuiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiC
-------
ATTENDEE LIST: EPA PUBLIC HEARING SAN FRANCISCO, CA
Affleck, Glen
Environmental control Coordinator
Hewlett-Packard, Inc.
1501 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
Balzhiser, Gary
Operations Coordinator
Union 76 Oil Company
PO Box 7600
Los Angeles, CA 90051
Bayr, Robert
Manager Environmental Affairs
Velsicol Chemical Company
341 E. Ohio St.
Chicago, IL 60611
Bean, Charles
United States Air Force
Air Training Command
323 FTW/DEEV
Mather AFB, CA 95655
Beemer, Rebecca
Environmental Control
Dow Chemical Company
PO Box 1398
Pittsburg, CA 94565
Benson, Barrett
U.S. EPA
PO Box 25227 Bldg. 53
Denver, CO 80225
Beresford, Charles
Corporate Attorney
Oxirane Corporation
4550 Post Oak Place Drive
Houston, TX 77027
Bourns, Charles
Supervisory Environmental Scientist
U.S. EPA
215 Fremont St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
Bowman, Val
Manager Environmental Control
Mobil Chemical Company
1 Greenway Plaza #1100
Houston, TX 77046
Brosler, Harvey
Attorney
U.S. Department of Energy
1333 Broadway
Oakland, CA 94612
Cardall, John
Environmental Staff Engineer
Mobil Oil Corporation
3700 W. 190th St.
Torrance, CA 90509
Cavallero, Jack
Division Chief
San Francisco Fire Department
260 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA
Clark, ARdie
CAL-OSHA Reporter
PO Box 207
San Pablo, CA 94806
Daview, Jim
Karding-Lawson Associates
55 Mitchell Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94902
Delia Zoppa, Joseph
Richmond Sanitary Service
205 41st Street
Richmond, CA 94805
Doss, Robert
Civil Engineer
Pacific Gas & Electric Company
77 Beale St.
San Francisco, CA 94108
Dreier, Robert
Senior Facilities Engineer
Intel Corporation
3065 Bowers Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95051
Fieberling, Wilson
Director of Public Works
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
-------
Pickett, Kent
Regulatory Report Coordinator
Pacific Gas & Electric Company
77 Beale St.
San Francisco, CA 94106
Fifileuskas, Peter
Waste Management Specialist
2151 Berkeley Way
Berkeley, CA
Fleischer, Burton
Environmental Specialist
Allied Chemical Corporation
Nichols Road
Pittsburg, CA 94565
Foard, James
Environmental & Energy Matters
Phelps Dodge Corporation
PO Box 2265
Tucson, AZ 85702
Greco, James
Director-Government Affairs
Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc.
Fannin Bank Building
Houston, TX 77030
Grey, Alan
Engineer
EG5.G Idaho, Inc.
PO Box 1625
Idaho Falls, ID 83401
Kreider, R.E.
Senior Chemist
Chevron Corporation
PO Box 1272
Richmond, CA 94802
Harding-Barlow, I.
Consultant
3717 Laguna Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94306
Harrington, R.W.
Pacific Refining Company
PO Box 68
Hercules, CA 94547
Hart, R.E.
Hazardous Materials Control
Southern Pacific Transportation Co.
1 Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Hasmann, Charlene
Water Quality Control Board
San Francisco Bay Area
1111 Jackson St. #6040
Oakland, CA 94607
Hatayama, Howard
Asst. Waste Management Engineer
Department of Health Services
2151 Berkeley Way
Berkeley, CA 94704
Hayden, Eveleth
Executive Vice President
League of Industrial Associations
3640 Grand Avenue
Oakland, CA 94610
Heeren, Duane
Environmental Engineer
Getty Oil Company
PO Box 5237
Bakersfield, CA 93308
Henry, Ray
Wilbur-Ellis Company
191 West Shaw Ave. #107
Fresno, CA 93704
Herold, Ken
1935 McAllister St.
San Francisco, CA 94957
Jopling, William
Acting Assistant Chief
Department of Health Services
714 P Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Kazemi, Hossain
Sanitary Engineer
Regional Water Quality Control Bd.
1111 Jackson St.
Oakland, CA 94607
-------
Kilpatrick, R.S.
Engineer
Southern Pacific Transportation Co.
1 Market Plaza #1100
San Francisco, CA 94105
Krohn, L.L.
Manager Environmental Control
Union Oil Company
Union Oil Center
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Lechner, George
Systems Safety Engineer
UTC Chemical Systems Division
PO Box 358
Sunnyvale, CA 94088
Levi, Carl
Mechanical Engineer
Champlin Petroleum Company
PO Box 125
Wilmington, CA 90748
Liscombe, E.A.R.
Vice President
Phostoxin, Inc.
PO Box 469
Alhambre, CA 91802
Luchetti, Frank
Waste Management Specialist
Division of Environmental Protection
201 S. Fall Street
Carson City, NV 89710
Mateus, Hugo
Chemist
Romic Chemical Corporation
2081 Bay Road
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Matsumoto, Stan
Associate Civil Engineer
Contra Costs Dept. of Public Works
County Administrative Building
Martinez, CA 94553
Morriss, James
Attorney
Thompson, Knight, Simmons & Bullion
2300 Republic National Bank Bldg.
Dallas, TX 75201
Nicholson, William
Manager-Research & Engineering
Potlach Corporation
PO Box 3591
San Francisco, CA 94119
Nuti, Caesar
Richmond Sanitary Service
205 41st St.
Richmond, CA 94805
Olmstead, Roger
Senior Environmental Engineer
U.S. Borax, Inc.
3075 Wilshire Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Osegueda, Arthur
Engineering Consultant
Chevron USA, Inc.
575 Market St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
Ouellette, Raymond
Senior Engineer
Shell Oil Company
PO Box 2463
Houston, TX 77001
Faille, Edward
Legal Compliance Technician
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.
300 Lakeside Drive
Oakland, CA 94643
Parker, A.B.
Senior Conservation Engineer
Atlantic Richfield Company
1601 Bryan St.
Dallas, TX 75221
Petulla, Joseph
Director-Environmental Planning
University of San Francisco
Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94118
Phelan, Daniel
Corporate Manager
Fibreboard Corporation
55 Francisco St.
San Francisco, CA 94133
Pianetto, San
Sludge Removal Service
5316 Diversity
Chicago, IL 60639
-------
Pieper, R.K.
Industrial Hygienist
Lockheed Corporation
111 Lockheed Way
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Pulkka, Greer
Environmental Analyst
Simpson Timber Company
900 Fourth Ave
Seattle, WA 98164
Ridinger, David
Director-Environmental Affairs
Newmont Services Limited
PO Box M
San Manuel, AZ 85631
Risley, Bruce
Vice President
American Waste Container Service
11505 Douglas Road
Rancho Cordova, CA
Rosse, H. Laverne
Program Director
Nevada Environmental Protection
201 S. Fall St.
Carson City, NV 89710
Rupp, Stuart
Environmental Consultant
California Environmental Technology
PO Box 7
Richmond, CA 94807
Sanchez, Catalina
Deputy Administrator
Food & Drug Administration
Metro Manilla, Philippines
Schneider, H.M.
President
Romic Chemical Corp.
2081 Bay Road
E. Palo Alto, CA 94303
Schwarzer, Carl
Waste Management Specialist
Dept of Health Services
2151 Berkeley Way
Berkeley, CA 94704
Seto, George
Safety & Health Specialist
Stanford University
61 Encina Hall
Stanford, CA 94305
Severns, Jim
U.S. EPA
215 Fremont St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
Shahed, Rafat
Occupational Health Program
Contra Costa County Health Dept.
1111 Ward St.
Martinez, CA 94598
Shandley, Joseph
Sanitary Engineer
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
Code 114G PO Box 727
San Bruno, CA 94066
Sievwright, Ralph
Attorney
Twitty, Sievwright & Mills
1905 Townehouse Tower
Phoenix, AZ 85013
Simonsen, Barney
Vice President
I.T. Corporation
336 W. Anaheim St.
Wilmington, CA 90744
Siri, Jean
President
West Contra Costa Conservation League
1015 Levene Place
Richmond, CA 94530
Sloan, Aubrey
Chief, STS Management Division
Vandenberg AFB, CA 93437
Speary, William
Attorney
Browning-Ferris Industries
Fannin Bank Building
Houston, TX 77030
Staha, Rodger
Exxon Corporation
3400 E. 2nd St.
Benicia, CA 94510
-------
Storm, David
Research Chemist
California Department of Health
2151 Berkeley Way
Berkeley, CA 94704
Suhrer, F.C.
Consultant
California Department of Health
2151 Berkeley Way
Berkeley, CA 94704
Sullivan, Pat
Major
United States Air Force
6595 ASTW SZM
Vandenberg AFB, CA 93437
Switzer, D.C.
Safety & Training Supervisor
Pacific Refining Company
PO Box 68
Hercules, CA 94547
Thomas, P.W.
Editor
California Environmental News
PO Box 307
San Carlos, CA 94070
Tortorete, Thomas
Manufacturers Representative
1637 Meadowlark Drive
Fairfield, CA 94533
Trve, L.J.
Senior Project Engineer
Chevron Chemical Company
575 Market St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
Valentino, Chris
Engineer
Bechtel National
PO Box 3965
San Francisco, CA 94119
Van Sant, Jim
Liquid Waste Removal
326 Phelan Ave
San Jose, CA 95112
Wahbeh, William
Technical Manager
IT Corporation
4575 Pancheco Blvd.
Martinez, CA 94553
Weinberg, David
Attorney
Wald, Harkrader & Ross
1320 19th St NW
Washington, DC 20036
Wiegman, S.A.
Senior Environmental Engineer
Southern California Edison Company
PO Box 800
Rosemead, CA 91770
Wilkins, Ken
Manager-Hazardous Materials Services
Safety Specialists, Inc.
3284 Edward Ave
Santa Clara, CA 95050
yo1737c
SW-44p
Order No. 717
•ftU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1978 O— 620-007/3722 REGION 3-1
-------
-------
------- |