EPA530-R-92-014C
PB92-922-403
MONTHLY HOTLINE REPORT
March 1992
RCRA/SF/OUST and
Emergency Planning and Community Rlght-to-Know
Hotline Questions and Answers
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 1
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) 2
Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) 4
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know 4
New Publications
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 6
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) 7
Other §
Federal Registers
Final Rules 10
Proposed Rules , 10
Notices 11
Call Analyses
Calls Answered 15
Caller Profiles 18
Hotline Topics 20
RCRA/SF/OUST Hotline
National Toll Free No.: 800-424-9346
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Hotline
National Toll Free No.: 800-535-0202
This report is prepared and submitted in support of Contract No. 68-WO-0039.
EPA Project Officer:
Barbara Roth, (202) 260-2858
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
Printed on
Recycled Paper
-------
HOTLINE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
fiCRA
1. Resource Conservation and
Recovery Information System
(RCRIS)
What is RCRIS?
The Resource Conservation and Recovery
Information System (RCRIS) is a major
national information system that helps EPA
Regions and States in the daily operations and
implementation of the RCRA Subtitle C
program. As of December 1991, it was fully
implemented by all Regions and States,
effectively superseding the Hazardous Waste
Data Management System (HWDMS).
RCRIS also tracks data previously contained
in the Corrective Action Reporting System
(CARS). Both HWDMS and CARS were
archived in January 1992.
RCRIS is both a program management and
inventory system of RCRA hazardous waste
handlers. RCRIS captures identification and
location data for all handlers of hazardous
waste and a wide range of information on
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities regarding permit and closure
status, compliance with Federal and State
regulations, and cleanup (corrective action)
activities.
Data are collected from notification forms
and permit applications submitted by
hazardous waste handlers, as well as from
information gathered at inspections. EPA
Regions and RCRA-authorized States enter
information directly into RCRIS. Core data
from the Regions and States are then uploaded
to the RCRIS National Oversight database
monthly for use by EPA Headquarters in its
oversight of the RCRA program and to
respond to public requests for information.
2. Commercial Chemical Product
Definition in §261.33
A manufacturer intends to discard an
unused formulation which contains two t
chemicals that serve as active ingredients. \
Only one of the chemicals is listed in 40 CF1$
§26133. A comment in §261J3(d) states that
"[t]he phrase 'commercial chemical product
or manufacturing chemical intermediate
having the generic name listed in...' refers to a
chemical substance which is manufactured or
formulated for commercial or manufacturing
use and which consists of the commercially
pure grade of the chemical, any technical
grades of the chemical that are produced or
marketed, and all formulations in which the
chemical is the sole active ingredient."
(Emphasis added.) Does the term "sole active
ingredient" refer only to chemicals which are
listed in §§261J3(e) and (f)? If a product
contains two active ingredients, only one of
which is listed, would the discarded product
be regulated as a P-or U-listed waste?
The discarded formulation would not be
regulated as P- or U-listed waste when
discarded. In order to be regulated as a P-or
U-listed waste, a waste must meet all of the
listing criteria. The listings in §261.33 do not
include chemical mixtures where the listed
-------
Hotline Questions and Answers
March 1992
chemical is not the sole active ingredient, and
do not apply to chemicals that have been used
for their intended purpose (54 ER 31335;
July 28,1989). In the scenario described
above, while the discarded formulation meets
the criterion of being unused, it contains more
than one active ingredient. It is not necessary
for a chemical to be listed in §§261.33(e) or
(!) in order to meet the definition of an active
ingredient An active ingredient is defined as
a compound or mixture that performs the
function of the product "Sole active
ingredient" means the active ingredient is the
only chemically active component for the
function of the product If a formulation has
more than one active ingredient the
formulation, when discarded, would not be
within the scope of the listing in §261.33,
regardless of whether only one or both active
ingredients are listed.
Generators, however, must be sure to
correctly determine whether a particular
constituent performs the function of the
product, or only serves an ancillary function,
such as mobilizing or preserving the active
ingredient For example, fillers, solvent
carriers, propellants, and other components
with no pesticidal role are functionally inert in
pesticide formulations and therefore are not
active ingredients. In cases where a hazardous
constituent from §§261.33(e) or (0 is a
functionally inert component of a commercial
chemical product, e.g., a solvent carrier, its
presence does not prevent the formulation
containing another P- or U-listed constituent
as the sole active ingredient from being a P- or
U-list waste (internal Agency memorandum
dated May 3,1989).
^CERCLA
3. National Priorities List Construction
Completion Category and Site
Deletion
What is the significance of the Construction
Completion category on the National Priorities
List (NPL), and how was it affected by recent
modifications to the NPL deletion process!
EPA realized that the number of sites
deleted from the NPL did not accurately reflect
the amount of Superfund work completed and
the extent of threats actually mitigated at
Superfund sites. Due to the frequent need to
conduct complex, long-term remedies and the
stringent regulatory deletion criteria, sites mast
remain on the NPL despite the fact that *
extensive remedial actions have taken place >
and the site may no longer present a threat to
human health and the environment In order to
more accurately communicate progress toward
cleaning up NPL sites, EPA established
(1) the Construction Completion category,
which allows EPA to specifically designate
sites that are in the final stage of the remedial
process, and (2) a policy change which
facilitates more rapid deletion of a site from the
NPL when cleanup is complete.
On March 8,1990 (55 ER 8699), EPA
promulgated the revised National Contingency
Plan (NCP), which stated that EPA had the
authority to place NPL sites into designated
categories (40 CFR §300.425(d)(6)). This new
regulatory language prompted the
establishment of the Construction Completion
category, which consists of sites that are close
to being deleted. The category included (1)
those sues for which a Notice of Intent to
Delete had been published; (2) sites awaiting
the five-year review required by CERCLA
§ 121 (c) after the completion of a remedial
-------
March 1992
Hotline Questions and Answers
action; and (3) sites undergoing long-term
remedial actions (primarily groundwater
cleanups) at which the construction phase of
the activity is complete.
The Construction Completion category no
longer includes sites that are awaiting the five-
year review; EPA removed that requirement
from the deletion process (56 FR 66601). For
several years, EPA's policy was to retain sites
on the NPL until it completed a review five
years after initiation of the remedial action.
The review was to confirm that the
remediation is protective of human health and
the environment Although CERCLA §121(c)
requires that a five-year review take place, the
statute does not specify that the review must
take place prior to NPL deletion. The decision
to delay deletion until after the five-year
review arose from the EPA Administrator's
June 1989 Management Review of the
Superfund Program (also known as the "90-
Day Study"). Subsequent experience and
analysis have shown that including the five-
year review as part of the NPL deletion
criteria was confusing to the public. Inclusion
meant that even though many sites no longer
presented a health threat and were otherwise
eligible for deletion, the sites had to remain on
the NPL. EPA determined that the Superfund
program would operate more efficiently if the
NPL deletion process and the five-year review
process were separated, or "de-linked." On
December 24,1991, EPA published the de-
linking policy, stating that deletion is no
longer deferred pending the completion of the
five-year reviews. This change allows sites to
be deleted from the NPL as soon as the
requirements specified in the Record of
Decision are met. Sites may be restored to the
NPL immediately, if deemed necessary, at the
time of the five-year review.
EPA first placed sites into the Construction
Completion category when the February 11,
1992, NPL final rule was published (56 ER
5598). At that time, 14 NPL sites were given
the special classification. On January 16,
1992, EPA issued a Federal Register notice
clarifying the Construction Completion
designation and placing an additional 11 sites
into the category (57 ER1873). This
designation does not exempt a site from the
deletion procedures found at 40 CFR
§300.425(e), but does signify that major
progress has been made at the site. In order for
a site to be shifted into the Construction
Completion category, the site must have an
approved interim or final close-out report
Thus, the Construction Completion category
consists of (1) sites with an operating remedy
in place that will take many years to complete
(such as groundwater pump-and-treatment), i
and (2) sites that are cleaned up and will most
likely be deleted when the required public
notice and State consultation process has been
completed.
Separating the five-year review
requirement from the deletion process and
placing sites into the Construction Completion
category are procedural changes that do not
affect implementation of the regulations. The
importance of these policies is that they
streamline the deletion process, and highlight
the NPL sites where health risks have been
significantly reduced. These changes should
provide a more effective method of
demonstrating to the public the progress and
achievements of the Superfund program.
-------
Hotline Questions and Answers
March 1992
OUST
4. States Authorized for the
Underground Storage Tank (UST)
Program
Section 9004 of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) enables EPA to
approve State underground storage tank (UST)
programs to operate in lieu of the Federal UST
program. To qualify for final approval, a State
program must be "no less stringent" than the
Federal program and provide for adequate
enforcement in accordance with §§9004(a)
and (b) of RCRA. To date, how many States
have received final approval??
Currently, six States have received final
approval to operate the UST program in lieu of
EPA. The States are Georgia, Mississippi, New
Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, and
Vermont. Authorized States have primary
enforcement responsibility, although EPA
retains the right to conduct inspections under
§9005 of RCRA and to take enforcement
actions under §9006 of RCRA. As of March
1992, EPA has issued tentative determinations
to grant approval to two other States, Maine
and Maryland, to operate the Federal UST
program. A tentative determination, like a
proposed rulemaking, is followed by a
comment period and requires a subsequent
action granting or denying approval. Maine
and Maryland are expected to receive approval
during 1992.
States without UST program approval may
have a Memorandum of Agreement with their
EPA Regional Office which allows them to
implement specific parts of the UST
regulations on behalf of the Region. Questions
regarding the contents of any agreement should
be addressed to the appropriate State agency.
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND
^COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW
5. TRI Facility Location
A facility regulated under §313 of the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Act uses a Post Office box number or a
mailing address different from its physical
address to receive its mail. When the physical
location is listed as the mailing address, the
mail is returned to the sender by the Post
Office. For reporting on the Form R, Section
3.1, what should the facility list as its mailing
address?
The reporting year 1991 Form R contains a
separate field for mailing addresses. The
facility should enter its mailing address in thi^
field if it is different from the facility's physical
address. The facility must always enter its
physical address in the appropriate section of
the Form R (40 CFR Part 372).
6. Catalyst as an Article
A facility uses a catalyst containing a listed
toxic chemical in a fixed bed reactor. The
catalyst is in the form of cylindrical or trilobed
extrudates (pellets) in specific sizes. It is used
to promote a chemical reaction and is not
physically altered during use. The spent
catalyst is sent off-site to be reclaimed. Can the
catalyst be exempted as an article under §313
of the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act?
No. The catalyst is manufactured to a
specific shape or design and has end use
functions dependent upon that shape; however.
EPA believes that releases occuring during use
and transfer operations would prevent it from
meeting the article definition. Such catalysts
usually contain dust-size material that is not the
same size and shape of the pellets. The likely
-------
March 1992 Hotline Questions and Answers
releases would be dust emissions and spills that
occur during charging and removing the
catalyst from the reactor. Such operations are
part of the normal conditions of processing and
use that must be considered under the article
definition. The spent catalyst sent off-site for
recycling does not itself constitute a release that
invalidates the article exemption, as long as all
of the toxic chemical is recycled. The facility
should also consider whether any on-site
regeneration of the catalyst results in the toxic
chemical being released in wastestreams.
7. TDI Thresholds and Releases
A facility has three separate process
streams: one containing 2,4-toluene
diisocyanate (TDI), with CAS number
584-84-9; the second containing 2,6-TDl, with t
CAS number 91 -08-7; and the third containing \
TDI (mixed isomers), with CAS number >
26471-62-5. In the past, the list of §313 toxic
chemicals included 2,4-TDl and 2,6-TDI, On
December 1,1989, TDI (mixed isomers) was
added to the list. How should a facility
calculate the thresholds and releases for each
isomer and for the mixture of TDI? If the
facility knows the composition of the mixture,
should it total the amount of the pure 2,4-TDl
and 2,6-TDl with the amount in the mixture to
determine if the thresholds for the individual
isomers have been met?
Because the S313 list of toxic chemicals r==r
includes listing* for pure 2,4-TDl, pure 2,6-
TDI, and TDI (mixed isomers), the facility
should calculate the thresholds separately for
each stream. The components of the mixture
should not be applied to the thresholds of pure
isomers. If the individual thresholds are not
met, no reporting is necessary. If the individual
thresholds are exceeded, the facility may file a
single report for TDI (mixed isomers) and
include the total releases and transfers of all
three process streams, or file three separate
reports (40 CFR Pan 372).
-------
NiW PUBtlCATrONS,
^HOW TO ORDER
NT1S Publication* are available by calling (703) 487-4650. or writing NTIS, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
VA 22161. Be sura to include the NTIS Order Number listed under the document.
Hotline Publications are available through the RCRA/Superfund/OUST Hotline by calling a Document
Specialist at 1-800-424-9346. Be sure to include the EPA Order Number (if any) listed under the document.
RCRA
TITLE: "Final Cover Requirements for
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills"
AVAILABILITY: Hotline
EPA NO.: EPA/530-SW-91-084
On October 9,1991, EPA published final
regulations for municipal solid waste landfills.
The regulations address location restrictions,
facility design and operations, groundwater
monitoring, corrective action measures,
conditions for closing and providing post-
closure care, and financial responsibility
requirements.
TITLE: "States' Effort to Promote Lead-Acid
Battery Recycling"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB92-119 965
EPA NO.: EPA/530-SW-91-029
OSW and other EPA offices are attempting to
determine how EPA and States can most
effectively promote lead-acid battery recycling.
For the purposes of this study, lead-acid battery
recycling is the transfer of used lead-acid car
batteries from consumers, via a chain of
intermediaries, to secondary lead smelters where
the batteries are processed to produce refined
"secondary" lead.
TITLE: "Compilation of Current Practices at
Land Disposal Facilities: Summary of Liner and
Leak Detection Designs, Action Leakage Rates,
Response Action Plans, and Management of
Liquids in Landfills"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB92-128 206 |
EPA NO.: EPA530-R-92-003 )
This report summarizes the results of a
nationwide evaluation of hazardous waste land
disposal facility permits and Pan B permit
applications regarding liners, leak detection
systems, and the treatment of liquids and use of
absorbents at landfills.
TITLE: "Action Leakage Rates for Leak
Detection Systems: Supplemental Background
Document for the Final Double Liners and Leak
Detection Systems Rule for Hazardous Waste
Landfills, Waste Piles, and Surface
Impoundments"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB92-128 214
EPA NO.: EPA530-R-92-004
This supplement explains how the formula in the
original background document is used to
calculate an action leakage rate. This document
also presents the results of action leakage rate
calculation for facilities needing the minimum
design specification in the final rule.
-------
March 1992
New Publications
CERCLA
TITLE: "EPA Fact Sheet: Risk Assessment
Guidance for Superfund: Volume 1- Human
Health Evaluation Manual (Part B)"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: PB92-963 339
This fact sheet is designed to introduce remedial
project managers and other personnel to the
information that is available iaJlAGS/HHEM,
Part B, on developing risk-b»Pl preliminary
remediation goals for chemicals of concern at
CERCLA sites. EPA's Human Health ' "f
Evaluation Manual, which describes the process
of gathering information and assessing the risk
to human health, and the Envirociment
Evaluation Manual comprise & two-volume set
called Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
(RAGS). The HHEM has three main parts:
Part A, which discusses the baseline risk
assessment. Pan B, Development of Risk-based
Preliminary Remediation Goals, and Part C,
Risk Evalution of Remedial Alternatives.
TITLE: "EPA Fact Sheet: Risk Assessement
Guidance for Superfund: Volume 1-- Human
Health Evaluation Manual (Part Q"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: PB92-963 340
This fact sheet is designed tp introduce remedial
project managers and othc^personnel to the
information that is available in RAGS/HHEM,
Part C, on using human health risk information
to evaluate remedial alternatives. EPA's Human
Health Evaluation Manual, which describes the
process of gathering information and assessing
the risk to human health, and the Environment
Evaluation Manual comprise a two-volume set
called Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
(RAGS). The HHEM has three main parts:
Part A, which discusses the baseline risk
assessment, Part B, Development of Risk-based
Preliminary Remediation Goals, and Part C,
Risk Evalution of Remedial Alternatives.
TITLE: "Reporting en Cleanup Activities
Through Environmental Indicators"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: PB92-963 255
This document examines the work done by EPA
over the past 10 years to show progress and
accomplishments on sites that have not yet been
deleted from the list of the most dangerous
areas.
TITLE: "National Priorities List (NPL) Sites:
Alabama"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: PB92-963 223 (to obtain
the Order No. for other States, call NTIS at
(800) 553-6847) = t
\
This publication is one in a series for the 50 j
States, providing general Superfund background
information and descriptions of activities at
each State NPL site. Included in this document
is what EPA and others participating in site
cleanups are doing, and how the nation can
move ahead in solving these serious problems.
TITLE: "CERCLIS Characterization Project:
National Results"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: Region 1, PB92-963 315;
Region 2, PB92-963 316; Region 3, PB92-
963 317; Region 4, PB92-963 318; Region 5,
PB92-963 319; Region 6, PB92-963 320;
Region 7, PB92-963 321; Region 8, PB92-
963 322; Region 9, PB92-963 323; Region 10
PB92-963 324
This report is one in a series, for all EPA
Regions, providing information on the nature of
the sues being evaluated by the Superfund site
assessment program, characterizing sites in
CERCLIS. Separate reports are available for
the 10 EPA Regions.
-------
New Publications
March 1992
^ERCLA
TITLE: "NPL Characterization Project:
National Results"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: Region 1, PB92-963 304;
Region 2, PB92-963 305; Region 3, PB92-
963 306; Region 4, PB92-963 307; Region 5,
PB92-963 308; Region 6, PB92-963 309;
Region 7, PB92-963 310; Region 8, PB92-
963 311; Region 9, PB92-963 312; Region 10
PB92-963 313
This report is one in a series for all EPA
Regions, providing information on the nature
of the sites being evaluated by the Superfund
site assessment program. Each report is
intended to provide a "snapshot" of NPL sites,
by Region, as of February 1991. Separate
reports are available for the 10 EPA Regions.
TITLE: "Superfund Emergency Response
Actions: A Summary of Federally-Funded
Removals; Fifth Annual Report-Fiscal Year
1990"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: PB92-963 403
Summarizes short-term actions (removals)
undertaken by EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard
in response to hazardous substance incidents.
The document presents a historical perspective
of the program and summarizes removals
completed during the year. This document will
be revised annually.
TITLE: "Guidance on Preparing and
Releasing Waste-In Lists and Volumetric
Rankings to PRPs Under CERCLA"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: PB92-963 606
This document provides guidance to the
Regions on the compilation and release of
waste-in lists and volumetric rankings.
-. *ft^.^s.-"—r^g_
Guidance includes help in complying with
CERCLA information release requirements and
exchange policies.
TITLE: "Congressional Limits for FY 1992
Alternative Remedial Contracting Strategy
(ARCS) Program Management Costs"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: PB92-963 260
This memorandum transmits Congressionally
mandated targets and reporting requirements for
ARCS contracts program management costs.
TITLE: "Progress Toward Implementing
Superfund Fiscal Year 1990 Report to
Congress"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: PB92-963 256
This document presents EPA's Annual Report to
Congress on the status of the Superfund
program. It includes an assessment of the
program and progress made at NPL sites.
TITLE: "A Guide to Principal Threat and
Low-Level Threat Wastes"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO: PB92-963 345
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan states that EPA
expects to use "treatment to address the
principal threats posed by a site, wherever
practicable" and "engineering controls, such as
containment, for waste that poses a relatively
low long-term threat" This guide explains
considerations that should be taken into account
in categorizing waste for which treatment or
containment generally will be suitable. It
provides definitions, examples, and Record of
Decision documentation requirements related to
waste that constitute a principal or low-level
threat.
-------
March 1992
New Publications
OTHER
TITLE: "Monthly Hotline Report"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: See below
Yearly Subscription PB92-922 400
530-R-92-014
January 1992
February 1992
March 1992
PB92-922401
530-R-92-014a
PB92-922 402
530-R-92-014b
PB92-922 403
530-R-92-014c
The reports contain questions that required
EPA resolution or were frequently asked,
publications availability, Federal Register
summaries, and call statistics.
-------
FEDERAL REGISTERS
'FINAL RULES
RCRA
"Guam: Final Authorization of Territorial
Hazardous Waste Management Program"
March 3,1992 (57 EB 7553)
EPA has reviewed the Territory of Guam's
application for final authorization of revisions to its
hazardous waste program. Subject to public review
and comment, EPA intends to approve Guam's
hazardous waste program revisions. The rule wifl
be effective May 4,1992, pending no adverse
comments.
"'Mixture' and 'Derived-From' Rules"
March 3,1992 (57 EB 7628)
EPA is today simultaneously removing and
reissuing 40 CFR §261.3, including the "mixture"
and "derived-fiom" rules, on an interim basis under
§553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA). The effective date of this rule is
February 18,1992, and the expiration dale for
paragraphs (a)(2Xiv) and (cX2XO of 40 CFR
§261.3 is April 28,1993.
PROPOSED RULES
RCRA
"Definition of Hazardous Waste; 'Mixture*
and 'Derived-From' Rules"
March 3,1992 (57 EB 7636)
In this notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is
soliciting comment on the "mixture" and "derived-
from" rules and on other approaches to regulating
waste mixtures and residues. EPA is accepting
public comment on the proposed rule until April ^
1992. j
"Proposed Exclusion for Certain Solid
Wastes"
March 27,1992 (57 EB 10629)
The EPA is proposing to grant a petition from
MAHLE, Inc., to exclude certain soBd wastes
generated at its facility from the list of hazardous
wastes in 40 CFR §§261.31 and 26131
Comments will be accepted until May 11,1992.
Copies of RCRA Federal Registers are available through the Hotline by calling a Document Specialist at
1-800-424-9346.
10
-------
March 1992
Federal Registers
NOTICES
RCRA
"Proposed Consent Decree; Gateway
Petroleum Co."
March 2,1992 (57 EB 7400)
The proposed Consent Decree in IMaL
fiiflc, wa.y Petroleum Co. Inc.. was lodged with die
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
on February 21,1991 Under the terms of the
Consent Decree, the settling defendant win pay
$20,000 in civil penalties, and imptement a sampling
program and a phased closure of the Gateway
Petroleum Co. facility. Comments were accepted for
a period of 30 days.
"Indiana: Schedule of Compliance for
Modification of Indiana's Hazardous Waste
Management Program"
March 2,1992 (57 EB 7321)
EPA published this compliance schedule for
Indiana to modify its authorized hazardous waste
management program in accordance with §27121(g)
and adopt Feo^piogramnwdifkations. The
effective date for this notice is Match 2,1992,
"Michigan: Schedule of Compliance for
Modification of Michigan's Hazardous
Waste Program1*
March 3,1992 (57 EB 7552)
EPA published this compliance schedule for
Michigan to modify its program in accordance with
§27Ol(g) and adopt Federal program modifications.
The effective dale fcr this notice is March 3,1991
'Technical Corrections to Land Disposal
Restrictions for Third Third Scheduled
Wastes'*
March 6,1992 (57 EB 8086)
This notice conects errors and clarifies the
language in the preamble and regulations of the
June 1,1990, final rule. This notice is effective
March 6,1991
"Rhode bland: Final Authorization of State
Hazardous Waste Management Program
Revisions'*
March 6,1992 (57 EB 8089)
EPA has reviewed Rhode Island's application
for final authorization of revisions to its hazardous
wasteprogram. Subject to public review and {
comment, EPA intends to approve Rhode Island's]
hazardous waste program revision. The final
authorization for Rhode Island wfll be effective
May 5,1992, pending no adverse comments.
"Intent to Grant BP Chemicals, Inc., an
Exemption From the Land Disposal
Restrictions Regarding Injection of
Hazardous Waste1*
March 12,1992 (57 EB 8753)
EPA is proposing to grant an exemption from
the ban on disposal of hazardous wastes through
injection wells to BP Chemicals, Inc., of Lima,
Ohio. After the comprehensive review of all
material submitted, EPA has determined that there
is a reasonable degree of certainty that BPCTs
in jected wastes will not migrate out of the injection
zone within the next 10,000 years. Comments will
be accepted until April 8,1991
Copies of RCRA Federal Registers are available through the Hotline by calling a Document Specialist at
1-800-424-9346.
11
-------
Federal Registers
March 1992
NOTICES
"New York: Final Authorization of State
Hazardous Waste Program Revisions"
March 23,1992 (57 EB 9978)
EPA reviewed New Yak's application for final
authorization of revisions to its hazardous waste
program. Subject to public review and comments,
EPA intends to approve New York's hazardous
program revision. The final authorization for New
Yoik wiU be effective May 22,1992, pending no
advene comments.
"Proposal to Grant a Variance from Land
Disposal Restrictions to Exxon Company,
USA., Billings, Montana"
March 26,1992 (57 EB 10478)
EPA is proposing to grant a no-migration
variance to Exxon Company U.S A, that would
allow Exxon to place untreated hazardous wastes,
subject ID die lard disposal restrictions, in the
Exxon Billings Refinery's New South Land
Treatment Unit in Billings, Montana. Comments
will be accepted until May 11,1992.
"Proposed Guidance on the Testing of
Mixed Radioactive and Hazardous Waste"
March 26,1992 (57 EB10508)
EPA and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
are jointly issuing a proposed guidance document
on the testing of mixed waste. Comments will be
accepted until May 26,1992.
"Petition for Exemption to Land Disposal
Restrictions for Class I Hazardous Waste
Injection"
March 30, 1992 (57 EB 10761)
EPA is providing notice that a reissuance of an
exemption to die land disposal restrictions has been
granted to Sterling Chemicals for its Texas City,
Texas, facility. This decision constitutes final
Agency action and is effective March 23, 1992,
"Petition for Exemption to Land Disposal
Restrictions for Class I Hazardous Waste
Injection"
March 31, 1992 (57 EB 10897)
EPA is providing notice that a reissuance
exemption to the land disposal restrictions has beep
granted to ARCO Chemicals tor its Channel View,
Texas, facility. This decision constitutes final
Agency action and is effective March 24, 1992,
"Petition for Exemption to Land Disposal
Restrictions for Class I Hazardous Waste
Injection"
March 31, 1992 (57 EB 10897)
EPA is priding notice that a reissuance of an
exemption to the land disposal restrictions has been
granted to the Ethyl Corporation facility in
Magnolis, Arkansas. This decision constitutes final
Agency action and is effective March 24, 1992,
Copies ofRCRA Federal Registers are available through the HoittAt by calling a Document Specialist at
1-800-424-9346.
12
-------
March 1992
Federal Registers
NOTICES
CERCLA
"Proposed Consent Decree for Rasmussen
Dump Site"
March 2, 1992 (57 EB 7400)
The proposed Consent Decree was lodged on
.February 14, 1992, in the US. District Court for the
Eastern District of Michigan. The proposed Consent
Decree concerns Ac hazardous waste site known as
the Rasmussen Dump Site, located on Spicer Road,
Green Oak Township, Livingston County, Michigan.
Comments were accepted for a period of 30 days.
"Proposed Consent Decree for Hercules 009
Landfill Site"
March 2, 1992 (57 EB 7401)
The proposed Partial Consent Decree in United
States v. Hercules Inc.. was lodged OP February 6.
1992, with the US. District Court for the Southern
District of Georgia, Brunswick Division. Pursuant to
the proposed decree, the settling defendants will
finance and perform an interim remedial design and
remedial action at the Hercules 009 Landfill Site, and
reimburse the United Stales for future oversight costs
and future response activities. Comments were
accepted for a period of 30 days.
"Proposed Consent Decree for the
Rcketvilte Road Landfill Site"
March 2, 1992 (57 EB 7402)
'Proposed Consent Decree for Wheeling
Disposal Service Company Landfill
Superfund Site"
March 2, 1992 (57 EB 7402)
The pioposed (Consent Deoee in ll
v.
Wheeling Disposal $ervice Co.. Inc.. et aL, was
with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Missouri. The proposed Consent Decree resolves the
liability of the settling defendants under §§106 and 107
of CERCLA at the Wheeling Disposal Service
Company Landfill Superfund Site near Amazonia,
Missouri. Comments were accepted for a period of 30
days.
"Proposed Consent Decree for the Woodbury
Chemical Superfund sna" t
March3,1992(57EB7603) !
The proposed Consent Decree in ynjjcjiSlaiCS v.
Coloraflp anfl tSJUfflffrn Pl?ilrPMl Company was VxJgfd
with the US. District Court for the District of
Colorado on February 12, 1991 The Consent Decree
requires the defendant to pay $100,000 in past costs
incurred by the United Stats in remediating the
Woodbury Chemical Superfund Site in Commerce
, Colorado, Comments were accepted for a period
of 30 days.
"Proposed Consent Decree for the Western
Sand Site"
March 9, 1992 (57 EB 8359)
The
Consent Ppcree in Unify}
«* al . tuna
the US. District Court fir die Middle District of
Florida on February 6, 1992. The proposed Consent
Decree will require the settling defendants to
implement the remedial action and reimburse the
United Stales for costs incurred by EPA at the
Picketvflie Road Landfill Superfund Siie. Comments
were accepted for a period of 30 days.
The proposed Consent Decree in UnitedjStaiHi v.
Qlin Hunt Sw^jajw Products, Inc., e^ ai-T u*8* k^g*!
with the US. District Court fat the District of Rhode
Island on February 27, 1991 The proposed Consent
Decree concerns the response to the existence of
hazardous substances at the Western Sand Ste in
Smithneld and Burrillville, Rhode Island Comments
were accepted for a period of 30 days.
13
-------
Federal Registers March 1992
NOTICES
OUST
"Approval of Maryland's State Underground
Storage Tank Program"
March 10,1992 (57 EB 8420)
EPA issued notice of a tentative determination
to approve the State of Maryland's underground
storage tank program. Comments will be accepted
until May 1,1991
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW
"Enhance Existing State and Local
Emergency Planning and Community {
Right-to-Know Programs" [
March 2,1992 (57 EB 7474) -
In support of the intent and ongoing
implementation of EPCRA, die Research and
Special Programs Administration (RSPA) is
proposing to accept applications from and award
grants to Slate or Tribal Emergency Response
Commissions.
"Ethytene Bisdithiocarbamates (EBCDs);
Notice of Intent to Cancel and Conclusion
of Special Review"
March 2,1992 (57 EB 7484)
EPA concluded its special review and risk/
benefit analysis of the EBDCs and announced its
intent to cancel registrations unless registrations and
applications comply with the tenns and conditions of
registration specified in this notice.
14
-------
TOO -r
600
00 • •
too ••
300 • .
200
100 • •
CALL ANALYSES
VCALLS ANSWERED BY HOTLINE
March Daily Volume*
F/OUST
Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know
H 1 1 1 1 r-
Grand Total
I 15.492
2 34 S 6 » 10 11 12 13 16 17 18 19 20 23 24 26 26 27 30 31
Year to Date*
RCRA/SF/OUST
January
February
March
Month
11.534
11,478
12.333
Cumulative
23.010
35.343
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW
January
February
March
Month
3,583
4.943
3,159
Cumulative
8,528
11,685
• M calls answered by the Call Management System. A smgk call may result in multiple question combined wilh document
requests and referrals.
••Peak in questions due to promulgatioo of interim Baal rale continuing the "mixture" and "dervked from" rules.
-------
Can Analyses
March 1992
CALLS ANSWERED BY TYPE
600 -r
500 • •
400 • •
300 • •
200 . .
100 • •
March Dally Volume*
Questions
Fteterrab
-\ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 h
I11.7551
1,390
H 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 3 4 S 6 » 10 11 12 13 18 17 18 19 20 23 24 25 26 27 30 31
Stand Total
17.297
Year to Date*
««w
C
January
February
March
Question*
Month
11,980
12.338
11,755
Cumulative
24,268
36,023
January
February
March
Documents
Month
4,276
3,822
4,152
Cumulative
8,098
12,250
Referrals
January
I February
March
Month
1,505
1,831
1,390
Cumulative
3,336
4,726
* AD calls antwered by the C«D Management System.
••Peak on RCRA/SF/OUST Hotline due to promulgation of interim final rule continuing the "mixture" and "dervjced from" rules
16
-------
March 1992
Call Analyses
CALLS ANSWERED BY PROGRAM AREA
March 1992*
• t
>
Bas«d on 15,907 questions pos«d and excludes 1,390 referrals made from both Hotlines
Year to Date"
" Based on 48,273 questions posed and excludes 4.726 referrals made trom both Hotlines
17
-------
CaN Analyses
March 1992
CALLER PROFILE
RCRA/SF/OUST Hotline
Regulated Community 8,034
Citizens 770
State & Local Gov'L/Native American 402
Federal Agencies 196
Educational Institutions 239
EPA 153
Other 181
Media 24
Interest Groups 120
Congress 0
Referrals 1,140
International 25
Message Retrievals* 1,049
TOTAL 12,333
Citizens
7%
State/Local Govt/
Native American
4%
All Others
8%
Message
9%
Regulated
Community
72%
* Message concerned EPA's response to court remand of the "mixture" and "derived from" rules.
18
-------
March 1992
Call Analyses
Enwgency Planning and
Community Rlght-to-Know Hotline
Manufacturer
Food/Tobacco 93
Textiles 5
Apparel 2
Lumber & Wood 6
Furniture 15
Paper 21
Printing & Publishing 30
Chemicals 356
Petroleum & Coal 58
Rubber and Plastics 47
Leather 2
Stone, Gay & Glass 28
Primary Metals 96
Fabricated Metals 132
Machinery (Excluding Electrical) 32
Electrical&Electronic Equipment 72
Transportation Equipment 54
Instruments 5
Misc. Manufacturing 63
Not Able to Determine 89
Subtotal 1,206
Consultants/Engineers
Attorneys
Citizens
All Others
Trade Associations
Public Interest Groups
Universities/Academia
Insurance Companies
Hospitals
State Agencies/SERC
Fire Departments
EPA
Local Officials
LEPC
Farmers
Federal Agencies
Media/Press
Union/Labor
Distributors
Indians
Laboratories
Misc.
Referrals
International
TOTAL
558
126
137
17
20
102
0
59
100
21
45
39
29
0
55
23
1
73
1
38
258
250
1
3,159
Citizen*
5%
Attorneys
4%
Consultant*
Engineers
19%
AJIOtlwrs
31%
19
-------
CaM Analyses
March 1992
HOTLINE TOPICS
RCRA
General/Misc. 592*
Special Wastes
Ash 0
Bevffl . 29
Medical 136
Oil and Gas 3
Subtitle C Wastes
Hazardous Waste
Identification General 2,582**
Toxicity Characteristic 184
Wood Preserving 46
Used Oil 128
Fluff 0
Mixed Waste 30
Delisting & Petitions 33
Hazardous Waste Recycling 172
Generators 444*
Small Quantity Generators 136
Transporters SO
Treatment, Storage & Disposal
Facilities
General Facility Standards 286
Siting 1
Capacity 0
Treatment 149
Burning 104
Storage 110
Disposal 97
Land Disposal Restrictions 434*
Permits & Interim Status 166
Corrective Action 153
Financial Assurance 0
Liability/Enforcement 62
Test Methods 122
Health Effects 0
Pollution Prevention/Waste Min. 54
State Program* 48
Hazardous WMte Data 13
Subtitle D WMtot
Household Hazardous Waste 120
Subtitle D Facilities
General Facility Standards 265
Siting 2
Combustion 0
Industrial Wastes 0
Composting 0
Source Reduction 10
Grants & Financing 10
Procurement
General 0
20
Hot topic* for tktaBoettk.
• Tapta art e*Jrabtad m the i
Building Insulation 0
Cement & Products with Fly Ash 0
Paper & Paper Products 1
Re-refined Lubricating Oil 0
Retread Tires 0
Solid Waste Recycling
General 194
Aluminum 5
Batteries 6
Glass 3
Paper 6
Plastics 14
Tires 24
Used Oil 192
Markets
General 136*
Aluminum 0
Batteries 3
Compost 1
Glass 2
Paper 1
Plastics 3
Tires 19
Used Oil 13
Document Requests 3,018
TOTAL 10,410
SUPERFUND
General/Misc. 84
Access & Information Gathering 48
Administrative Record 12
Allocations from Fund 7
ARARs 47
CERCLIS 134*
Citizen Suits 13
Clean-Up Costs 17
Clean-Up Standards 28
Community Relations 27
Contract Lab Program (CLP) 14
Contractor Indemnification 3
Contracts 5
Definitions 13
Emergency Response 4
Enforcement 28
Exposure Assess./Risk Assess. 18
Federal Facilities 13
Fund Balancing 3
Grants 9
liquations oa the "miiturc" and "derived trim" raid.
tto* of aB qe**tk>M received by the Hotline. A «tof> cal nay reaoft Im multiple
-------
March 1992
Call Analyses
Hazardous Substances
Health/Toxics
HRS
Liability
Mandatory Schedules
Natural Resource Damages
NBARs .
NCP
Notification
NPL
Off Site Policy
On Site Policy
OSHA
PA/SI
93
12
39
52
0
6
0
39
51
169*
26
6
7
8
RCRA Interface
RD/RA
Remedial
Removal
Response
RI/FS
ROD
RQ
SARA Interface
Settlements
SITE Program
State Participation
State Program
Taxes
Title m/Right-to-Know
Document Requests
TOTAL
OUST
General/Misc.
Applicability/Definitions
Regulated Substances
Standards for New Tank Systems
Tank Standard* and Upgrading
Operating Requirements
Release Detection
Release Reporting & Investigation
Corrective Action for USTs
Out-of-Service/aosure
Financial Responsibility
State Programs
Liability/Enforcement
LUST Trust Fund
Document Requests
TOTAL
—- 5-
24
10
36
12
11
43
36
185*
9
20
22
3
0
6
34
199
1,638
72
53
21
15
16
4
31
7
32
40
74
15
32
5
71
488
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW
Tide m General 142
§301-3 Emergency Planning
General 43
SERCs/LEPC 27
Notification 22
Mixtures 8
Extremely Hazardous Substances 64
Delisting EHS 9
Exemptions 5
§304:
General 71
Notification Requirements 42
Reportable Quantities 51
RQs vs. TPQs 12
Transportation 1 1
Exemptions 16
§311/312:
General
MSDS
uirements
Tier I/O Regulations
Thresholds
OSHA Expansion
Hazard Categories
Mixtures
Exemptions
§313:
General
FormR
Thresholds
Phase I
Phase 0
Phase m
Pollution Prevention
NONs/NOTEs
Petitions
Health Effects
Database
Exemptions
166*
90
269*
159*
14
39
44
63
437*
209*
112
60
35
2
52
32
34
14
33
29
Hot topics fcrtfcto
Training:
General 3
§ 305 Training Grants 0
§305 Emergency Systems Review 0
§126 (SARA) Training Regulations 0
A staffc caH m»j rwott IB i
-------
Cal Analyses
March 1992
General:
CEPP Interim Guide
Chemical Profile
NRT-1
Hazard Analysis
Risk Communication
Title m Workshops
Information Management
Prevention ARIP
Other
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
68
Trade Secrets
Enforcement
Liability
Document Requests
TOTAL
7
5
4
864
3371
TOTAL HOTLINE QUESTIONS,
DOCUMENT REQUESTS AND
REFERRALS: 17,297
j
22
Topics in calmtatadMtkifamnatlM of aO questions received by the Hodioc. A riaglt cal m»j rtsatt IB multiple
-------
LIST OF ADDRESSEES:
Ed Abrams, OS-332
Jennifer Anderson, EPA-Reg. 7
Kate Anderson, OS-520
Irene Atney-Yurdin, DOE-NY
BethBehrens,EPA-NEIC
Kathy Bishop, OS-210
John Bosky, EPA-Kansas City
Brett Bowhan, DOE-Idaho
Susan Bromm, OS-SOO
RickBrandes,OS-330
Karen Brown, A-149C
Nancy Browne, OS-520
Kathy Bruneske, OS-305
Karen Burgan, OS-110
Heather Burns, Hotline
Diane Buxbaum, EPA-Reg. 2
SabrinaCaffihan,DOE
Carol Carbone, EPA-Reg. 1
Sonia Chambers, EPA-Reg. 5
Richard Clarizio, EPA-Reg. 5
Don R. Clay, OS-100
Jerry Clifford, EPA-Reg. 9
Bill Cosgrove, EPA-Reg. 4
Clinton Cox, EPA-Alabama
Becky Cuthbertson, OS-332
Elaine Davies, OS-100
Jeffery Denit, OS-300
Lynn DePont, OS-305
Director, RED, LE-134S
DaveEberiy,OS-343
Chris Elias, CA Dept of Health
Terry Escarda, C A Dept of Health
Lisa Friedman, LE-132S
John Gilbert, EPA-Cinn.
Diane Glass, Kelly AFB, TX
Alan Goodman, EPA-Portland, OR
Kristin Goschen, EPA-Reg. 8
John Gorman, EPA-Reg. 2
Cheryl Graham, LE-132S
Betty HoUowell, DOE-TX
Hinton Howard, EPA-Reg. 5
Henry Hudson, EPA-Reg. 4
Susan Hutcherson, EPA-Reg. 10
Harriet L. Jones, EPA-Reg. 7
Kathy Jones, OS-210
GaryJonesi,LE-134S
Ron Josephson, OS-333
TooyJover.OS-120
Robert Kayser, OS-333
Mitch Kidwell, OS-332
Bob Kievit, EPA- Olympia, WA
JenyKffliane.GAO
William Kline, OS-322W
Robert Knox.OS-130
Dan Kovacks, Hotline
Walter Kovalick, OS-110
Henry Longest, OS-100
Jim Loomis, FL ERC
Sylvia Lowrance, OS-300
Tom Lueders, EPA-Reg. 5
James Makris, OS-120
Andrea McLaughlin, OS-220W
Chet McLaughlin, EPA-Reg. 7
Dorothy McManus, OS-120
Tami McNamara, TS-779
Scott McPhilamy, EPA-Reg. 3
Kim Mercer, EPA-Reg. 9
Margaret Mereas, EPA-Reg. 4
Charlotte Mooney. OS-332
Robert Morby, EPA-Reg. 7
Beverly Negri, EPA-Reg. 6
Susan OXeefe,LE-134S
ChaePak, EPA-Reg. 10
Myra Perez, EPA-Houston
Mark Phillips, EPA-Reg. 3
Dan Powell, OS-HOW
Steve Provant, EPA-Boise, ID
Jim Radle, Jr., EPA-Reg. 9
CarlReeverts,WH-550B
John Riley, OS-210
Barbara Roth, OS-305
DaleRuhter.OS-341
Debbie Rutherford. OS-420WF
William Sanjour, OS-330
Sam Sasnett, TS-779
Tim Schoepke, TS-793
Jay Silbennan, US Coast Guard
Stergios Spanos, NH DES
Elaine Stanley, OS-SOO
Kathie Stein, LE-134S
Beverly Thomas, OS-420WF
Christine Thomas, Hotline
Jim Thompson, OS-520
Linda Thompson, LE-134S
Robert Thompson, A-104
Steve Torok, EPA-Juneau, AK
Harriett Tregoning, PM-220
Bern VanEpps, OS-240
David Van Slyke, LE-134S .
Barbara Wagner, EPA-Reg. 8 >
David Watson, PM-214F
Howard Wilson, PM-273
Denise Wright. OS-332
Tish Zimmerman, OS-220
OSW Division Directors
OSW Deputy Division Directors
OSW Branch Chiefs
Hazardous Waste Management Division Directors,
Regions I-X
Hazardous Waste Management Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X
Regional Counsel, Regions I-X
Regional Libraries, Regions I-X
------- |