EPA530-R-94-005K
                                                  PB94-922410
     MONTHLY  HOTLINE REPORT
                      October1994


           RCRA/UST, Superfund, and EPCRA
   Hotline Questions and Answers

   Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)	   1
   Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
      Liability Act (CERCLA)	   3
   Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)...   4
   All Program Areas	   5
   New Publications

   Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)	   9
   Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
      Liability Act (CERCLA)	  10
   Underground Storage Tanks (UST)	  11
   Other	  12

   Federal Registers

   Final Rules	  13
   Proposed Rules	  14
   Notices	;	~	  16
   Call Analyses

   Calls Answered
   Caller Profiles
   Hotline Topics..
                            I $\\ W \
                            IB v .. 1  , ,   l,|
                                    Es ?!
                                u
   ... 23
   ... 26
 '.	 28
                  RCRA/UST, Superfund. and EPCRA
           National Tot-free Not.: 800-424-9346 or 800-535-0202
                       Local: 703-412-9810
              TOO National Tol-Free No.: 800-553-7672
This report is prepared and submitted in support of Contract No. 68-WO-0039.

EPA Project Officar    Can* VanHook JaspcrM
                 U.S. Environmantal Protection Agency
                 Washington. DC 20460
  Printed on
Recycled P

-------

-------
                      HOTLINE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
                 RCRA
1. Regulatory Status of Metals
   Recovery Under RCRA

   If an industrial furnace is burning or
processing hazardous waste to recover metal
values, how is the furnace regulated?

   Industrial furnaces burning hazardous
waste are generally subject to the boiler and
industrial furnace (BIF) regulations in Pan
266, Subpart H. Owners and operators of
smelting, melting, and refining furnaces that
process hazardous waste solely for metals
recovery are conditionally exempt from the
BIF regulations except for the requirements
regarding management of wastes prior to
burning (§266.101), management of residues
(§266.112) and the alternative requirements
outlined in §266.100(c). Specifically, the
facility must: submit a one-time  written
notification; sample and analyze the waste;
maintain appropriate records; and be engaged
legitimate metals recovery. For  purposes of
this exemption, EPA established three criteria
to determine if hazardous waste  is processed
solely for metal recovery: (1) the healing value
of the waste cannot exceed 5,000 Btu/Ib (if so,
the waste is considered to be burned for
energy); (2) the concentration of Pan 261,
Appendix VHI organic constituents cannot
exceed 500 ppm (if so, the waste is considered
to be burned partially for destruction); and (3)
the waste must have recoverable levels of
metals 56 ER 42504,42507; August 27,1991).
   Certain industries process wastes for
metals recovery, yet normally do not meet the
criteria for legitimate metals recovery outlined
above. For example, secondary lead smelters
process spent lead acid battery parts that
contain pieces of rubber or plastic, which
generally have heating values over 5,000 Btu/
Ib. In response, EPA promulgated special
regulations for lead, nickel-chromium
furnaces, or metal recovery furnaces that bum
certain baghouse bags. EPA expanded the
conditional exclusion to include specific
mercury-bearing wastes processed in exempt
mercury recovery furnaces (59 ER 47980;
September 19,1994). Provided the units
comply with the alternative requirements of
§266.100(cX3),  the metal recovery furnaces
would only be subject to §§266.101 and
266.112.  Specific requirements found in
§266.103(c)(3) include: one-time written
notification; restrictions on the type of
material burned; sampling and analysis; and
maintenance of records. In addition, EPA
regnladbli, if the emissi
a hazard to human health and the
environment

   Metal recovery units engaged in precious
metals recovery are also conditionally exempt
from Pan 266, Subpart H.. Precious metal
recovery is defined as the reclamation of
economically significant amounts of gold,
silver, platinum, palladium, indium, osmium,
rhodium, ruthenium, or any combination of
these metals (§266.70(a)). Provided the
owner or operator of the unit complies with
the alternative requirements of §266.100(f),
the unit would be exempt from all BIF

-------
Hotline Questions and Answers
                              October 1994
requirements except for the regulations
regarding residue management (§266.112).
Specific requirements include: one-time
written notice, sampling and analysis, and
maintenance of records (§266.100(f)).
Management of precious metal wastes prior to
recovery would be covered by Part 266,
SubpartR

2.  Status of Municipal Waste
    Combustion (MWC) Ash

    In 1990, the United States generated
approximately 196 million tons of municipal
solid waste. Sixteen percent of this waste,
over 31 million tons, was managed in about
150 municipal waste combustion (MWC)
facilities which burned the waste for
destruction or energy recovery. These
facilities generate ash, which weighs
approximately 25% of the weight of the
original solid waste (59ER29372,29373;
June 7,1994). This ash is primarily
landfilled, with less than 10% used in building
materials. How does EPA regulate the
management of this MWC ash?

    The regulatory history of MWC ash is
complex. EPA first promulgated hazardous
waste regulations under RCRA in May 1980.
These regulations included an exemption from
all RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste
regulations for household waste (40 CFR
 §261.4(b)(l)). In the preamble to this rule,
EPA interpreted this provision to exempt all
residues resulting from the treatment of
 household hazardous waste, such as MWC
 ash, from hazardous waste regulations (45 FR,
 33084,33099; May 19,1980). The preamble,
 however, did not address ash from the
combined combustion of household hazardous
 waste and non-hazardous commercial or
 industrial waste.

    In 1984, Congress amended RCRA by
 adding §3001(1), which states that a resource
recovery facility recovering energy from the
mass burning of municipal solid waste and
non-hazardous commercial or industrial waste
shall not be deemed to be treating, storing,
disposing, or otherwise managing hazardous
waste under certain circumstances. In 1985,
EPA interpreted this provision to exempt
certain municipal resource recovery facilities
from RCRA permitting requirements but not to
exempt MWC ash from RCRA regulation (50
EE 28702,28725; July 15,1985). In
November 1990, Congress enacted an
amendment to the Clean Air Act prohibiting
EPA from regulating ash as a hazardous waste
under §3001 of RCRA for a period of two
years. On September 18,1992, EPA
Administrator William K. Reilly announced in
a memorandum that EPA had reinterpreted
§3001(1) to include an exemption for MWC
ash.

   The Environmental Defense Fund filed
citizen suits to enforce the EPA's 1985
interpretation of the statute in two U.S. District
Courts.  On May 2,1994, after a series of
appeals, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of
City of Chicago, et al. v. Environmental
Defense Fund, et al.. No. 92-1639 (_ U.S. _),
that MWC ash is not exempt from RCRA
regulation. The Court stated that §300 l(i) only
exempts resource recovery facilities from
RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal facility
(TSDF) regulations; it does not exempt the ash,
nor does it exempt the facility from regulation
as a generator of hazardous waste. The
Supreme Court opinion makes ash generated at
resource recovery facilities, whether generated
from only household waste or a mixture of
household and non-hazardous industrial or
commercial solid waste, subject to RCRA
regulation if the ash is found to be a hazardous
waste. Therefore, facilities generating
tWflflfr'lS MWC ash are fully subject to the
RCRA Subtitle C generator regulations, and
facilities managing hayar*0"8 ash are subject
to the RCRA TSDF regulations of Parts 264
and 265.

-------
October 1994
                 Hotline Questions and Answers
   Although no hazardous waste listing
applies to MWC ash, the ash would be a
hazardous waste if it were to exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste as defined in
§§261.20-261.24." MWC facilities generally
produce two kinds of ash: bottom ash and fly
ash.  Bottom ash is collected at the base of the
combustion unit and generally accounts for 75
to 80% of ash generated at a facility. Fly ash is
collected in air pollution  control devices and
accounts for the remaining 20 to 25% of ash at
a facility. Studies have shown that fly  ash,
more than bottom ash, can exhibit the toxicity
characteristic of a hazardous waste, typically
for lead and cadmium.

   The Agency recognizes that immediate
compliance with the Supreme Court's decision
may be difficult because  many facilities have
been operating consistent with the Agency's
previous interpretation that MWC ash was
excluded from regulation under Subtitle C and
because of the financial investment required
for full compliance with RCRA Subtitle C.
Therefore, on May 27,1994, the Agency
issued an implementation strategy
memorandum (Herman and Laws to Regional
Administrators) outlining EPA's strategy for
implementing the court's decision. In addition
to the implementation strategy, the Agency has
made available two other documents relevant
to implementation of the court's decision.

   On May 24,1994, EPA began distributing
copies of its draft guidance Sampling and
Analysis of Municipal Refuse Incineration Ash
(EPA530-R-94-020). This guidance includes
recommended procedures for MWC facility
owners and operators to follow for ash
sampling and, analysis. The Agency also
published a Federal Register notice on  June 23,
1994 (59 EE 32427), requesting comment on
the draft guidance. The comment period ended
on September 21,1994.  On June 7,1994, the
Agency published a Federal Register notice
 (59 ER 29372) that: (1) extends the deadline
 within which owners and operators of facilities
 that treat, store, or dispose of ash determined to
 be a hazardous waste can file their hazardous
 waste Part A permit applications; and (2)
 interprets ash from waste-to-energy facilities
 as a "newly identified" waste for the purposes
 of the RCRA land disposal restrictions (LDR),
 thereby delaying the application of these
 requirements for facilities that generate a
 hazardous ash.  -
                CERCLA
3.  National Priorities Ust Format

    In accordance with §300.425(d)(4) of the
National Contingency Plan  (NCP) and
CERCLA §105(a)(8)(B), at least once each
year EPA must update the Federal Register
notice containing the revised Superfund
National Priorities List (NPL). Beginning in
1984, EPA proposed federal facility sites for
the NPL, and in 1987 (56 ER 27620) EPA
divided the NPL into federal and non-federal
sections—each organized by rank according
to Hazard Ranking System (MRS) scores. Sites
in the General Superfund Section were listed
sequentially by MRS score in groups of 50,
with Group 1 containing the sites with the 50
highest HRS scores,  while sites in the Federal
Facilities Section were assigned numbers
corresponding to the HRS-based groups
delineated in the General Superfund Section
(e.g., EPA assigned a "2" to any Federal sitt
with an HRS score falling between the highest
and lowest scores from Group 2 of the General
Superfund Section).  As of October 14,1992
(57 £& 47180), EPA began to arrange both
sections of the NPL alphabetically by state ami
ceased to list the sites by rank in Appendix B of
the Federal Re fitter. Why did EPA change tkt
format of the NPL?

-------
 Hotline Questions and Answers
                               October 1994
    EPA altered the HRS-based format of the
 NPL primarily to make the list easier to use.
 Citizens typically want to know whether a
. given site in a certain state is on the list  As
 the NPL grew from the original 406 to over
 1,200 sites, it became increasingly difficult to
 find sites based on name and location alone.
 EPA therefore opted to change the NPL format
 and publish the list alphabetically by state
 rather than sequentially by HRS score (57 FR
 47180,47184; October 14,1992).  The Agency
 has not, however, eliminated the HRS score
 information from NPL rulemakings. The
 preamble to each NPL proposal and final rule
 now identifies the HRS-based group into
 which each new site falls.  For instance, a "2"
 would indicate that a site's HRS rank falls
 between 51 and 100.

    In addition to making the NPL easier to
 use, the new format also more accurately
 reflects the roles of the HRS and the NPL in
 the Superfund program. EPA's Hazard
 Ranking System is one of the three methods
 used to determine a site's eligibility for
 inclusion on the Superfund National Priorities
 List. EPA uses the HRS to determine, based
 on the relative threat associated with actual or
 potential releases of hazardous substances
 from a site, whether or not the site should be
 placed on the NPL and thus qualify for a fund-
 financed remedial response (§300.425(b)).
 HRS scores alone do not determine the order in
 which sites will be addressed. The results of
 remedial investigation/feasibility studies (RI/
 FSs), the outcome of negotiations between
 EPA and potentially responsible parties, the
 relative urgency of response actions, and other
 factors also play a role in the establishment of
 funding and response priorities (57 FR 47183;
 October 14,1992). EPA's decision to change
 the NPL format and list sites alphabetically by
 state instead of by HRS rank reflects the fact
 that the HRS simply serves as a preliminary
 screening device, and that the fundamental
purpose of the NPL is to let the public know
which sites may warrant a remedial action,
rather than to indicate EPA's cleanup priorities
or indicate absolute risk. Although die NPL
updates printed in the Federal Register are now
listed by state, the list of NPL sites by HRS
rank is still available upon request to EPA.
                 EPCRA
4. EPCRA §313 Reporting of Ammonia
   Processed in Cheese Products

   According to EPCRA.§313, facilities which
manufacture, process, or otherwise use toxic
chemicals listed at 40 CFR §372.65 above
threshold amounts are required to report
releases, transfers, and source reduction
activities associated with such chemical
activity. Ammonia (CAS No. 7664-41-7), an
EPCRA §313 toxic chemical, is used at a
manufacturing facility to adjust pH levels in
cheese products. During this process, the
ammonia is converted into a salt which
remains with the final cheese product.  The
cheese is then distributed in commerce. Is this
considered a covered activity under EPCRA
§313 and, if so, how should it be reported on
the Form R?

   Ammonia used in this manner is
considered processed under EPCRA §313 and
must be applied toward that threshold.  The
definition of process found at 40 CFR §3723
affirms that a toxic chemical prepared for
distribution in commerce is a reportable
activity even if it is distributed in a different
form or physical state from that in which it was
originally received. All of the ammonia
incorporated into the cheese is processed as a
reactant and should be reported as such on the
FonnR.

-------
October 1994
                Hotline Questions and Answers
      ALL PROGRAM AREAS
5. OSWER's Environmental Justice
   Initiative

   From the time Carol Browner assumed her
position as Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Administrator in 1993, she has made
the pursuit of environmental justice one of the
Agency's top priorities. Although EPA has
made considerable progress in protecting and
cleaning up the environment, many poor and
minority communities are burdened by
pollution from threats such as landfills,
municipal waste incinerators, and hazardous
waste sites. In response to this problem,
President Clinton signed Executive Order,
12898 on February 11,1994. This order
requires each federal agency to develop an
agency-wide environmental justice strategy to
identify and address adverse human health and
environmental effects that may result from its
programs. How will EPA incorporate
environmental justice issues into the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response's
Superfund, RCRA, UST, and EPCRA
programs?

   Executive Order 12898 requires each
federal agency to include environmental justice
as an integral part of its work. An interagency
federal Working Group on Environmental
Justice has been created to advise, coordinate,
and provide guidance to each federal agency as
it develops its environmental justice strategy.
The Working Group is composed of
representatives from various federal agencies
and designated government officials. Each
federal agency is required to provide a copy of
their final environmental justice strategy to the
Working Group for review to ensure that the
administration, interpretation, and enforcement
of programs, activities, and policies are
undertaken in a consistent manner.
   To implement EPA's environmental justice
goals, OSWER established an Environmental
Justice Task Force to broaden the discussion of
environmental justice issues and make
recommendations specific to waste programs.
The Task Force met with representatives from
citizen groups, industry, Congress, and state,
local, and tribal governments, to identify
environmental justice issues and influence
OSWER's environmental justice strategy. On
April 28,1994, OSWER announced the
availability of the OSWER Environmental
Justice Task Force Draft Final Report which
identified key environmental justice issues and
recommendations.  The recommendations
outlined in the report are divided into those
which cut across all waste programs (OSWER-
wide) and others primarily directed toward
specific regulatory areas. To implement the
environmental justice goals, Elliott Laws,
Assistant Administrator of OSWER, issued a
memorandum on September 21,1994,
directing Regional offices to integrate
environmental justice into all stages of
OSWER policy, guidance, and regulatory
development (OSWER Directive 9200.3-17).

   The major OSWER-wide environmental
justice recommendations focused on the
following categories: Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act; communication, outreach, and
training; economic redevelopment; cumulative
risk; contract, grant, and labor issues; federal
interagency issues; and Native American tribal
issues. One of the most significant OSWER-
wide recommendations made is to prevent and
respond effectively to Title VI complaints
affecting waste programs. The Task Force also
focused substantially on ways to improve
communications, develop trust and involve
low-income and minority communities. Other
recommendations applicable to all programs
include assisting in economic redevelopment
by expanding the current "brownfield"
redevelopment pilot program aimed at

-------
 Hotline Questions and Answers
                               October 1994
identifying, decontaminating and redeveloping
contaminated properties, identifying multiple
sources of contamination through cumulative
risk assessments, expanding employment of
local labor in affected communities through the
use of contractors, and identifying a
mechanism to increase technical assistance to
tribal governments and initiating
environmental pilot programs on tribal lands.

   The Task Force also made
recommendations specific to each OSWER
program area to assess communities affected
by OSWER programs and ensure appropriate
emphasis on public participation. The
following sections address the
recommendations developed for the
Superfund, RCRA, UST, and EPCRA
programs.

   The Superfund program includes formal
community relations provisions to encourage
public participation throughout the decision-
making process. Community relations
activities under Superfund include developing
a site-specific community relations plan,
establishing an information repository and
administrative record, providing technical
assistance, holding public meetings, and
providing public comment periods.  Although
Superfund community relations provisions are
in place, the Task Force identified
recommendations  to incorporate awareness of
environmental justice issues into current
procedures.

    Under the Superfund program, one of the
major environmental justice recommendations
includes developing Community Advisory
Groups.  These groups would act as site
information clearinghouses for the a/reeled
community, assist in establishing land use
expectations, and provide community support
for remedial decisions. The Task Force
recommends that the Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response (OERR) work with the
Regions to develop proactive site assessment
efforts and incorporate issues such as multiple.
exposures and unique risk scenarios into risk
assessment protocol.

   The most significant issue that the Task
Force identified for the RCRA program
concerned the siting of new hazardous waste
facilities. Environmental justice groups have
expressed concern that hazardous waste
facilities may be sited disproportionately in
low-income and minority communities. The
Task Force found that under the current RCRA
statute and regulations, EPA has limited
authority to determine where a facility will be
sited. Thus, OSWER established a Siting
Workgroup in April 1994. The Workgroup is
developing recommendations regarding issues
that impact technical location standards for
sensitive geologic areas, cumulative risk, and
expanded public involvement

   The flexibility of the Underground Storage
Tank (UST) program allows states to run
programs based on the needs and demands of
their own regulated communities. In the draft
report, the Task Force recommends that states
consider environmental justice as they set
priorities for UST compliance programs and
cleanup activities. States can apply for grants
to develop outreach materials and compliance
programs that address environmental justice
issues specific to their state program.

   The states also play a significant role in the
implementation of EPCRA. EPCRA created
stale emergency response commissions
(SERCs) and local emergency planning
committees (LEPCs) to inform the public
about the storage and use of chemicals in their
community and to develop emergency
response plans for dealing with accidental
releases of chemicals. Specifically, EPCRA
$301 requires that, at a minimum, each LEPC

-------
October 1994                                               Hotline Questions and Answers
include representatives from community
groups or organizations, elected state or local
officials, law enforcement offices, health
officials, hospitals, and transporters. To ensure
that SERCs as well as LEPCs are
representative of the designated areas,
recommendations in the Task Force report
encourage the Chemical Emergency
Preparedness and Prevention Office (CEPPO)
to issue letters to SERCs, LEPCs, and Tribal
Emergency Response Commissions (TERCs)
explaining ways to address areas with
environmental justice concerns. It is also
recommended that EPA expand the availability
of LandView, a PC program that contains
information on sources of pollution from six
EPA databases and demographic and economic
data from the Bureau of the Census.
LandView can be used to identify geographic
areas and populations that may be subject to a
disproportionate burden of pollution.

   The OSWER Environmental Justice Task
Force establishes an ambitious timetable for
the development of draft implementation plans
in each of these program areas. The Task
Force recommended that each OSWER
program office and Region submit a draft
implementation plan in June 1994, outlining an
environmental justice strategy specific to its
OSWER program. OSWER will coordinate
the implementation of these plans with
Agency-wide efforts to address environmental
justice concerns in communities where
OSWER-regulated facilities are located.

   Executive Order 12898 requires EPA to
submit its finalized environmental justice
strategy to the interagency Working Group by
February 1995.

-------

-------
                       NEW  PUBLICATIONS
      HOW TO ORDER
   NT1S Publications are available by calling (703) 487-4650, or writing NTIS. 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
   VA 22161. Use the NTIS Order Number listed under the document
   EPA Publications are available through the Hotline. Use the EPA Order Number listed under the document
                           RCRA/UST, Superfund, and EPCRA
                   National Toll-Free Nos.: 800-424-9346 or 800-535-0202
                                 Local: 703-412-9810
                        TDD National Toll-Free No.: 800-553-7672     	
                 RCRA
TITLE: "Access Express"
AVAILABILITY:  Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA220-B-94-003

This document is a summarized version of
Access EPA and is designed as a quick
reference guide to major EPA information
contacts such as EPA clearinghouses, dockets,
and libraries. Information in the document-is
organized both by environmental topic areas
and by EPA regions.

TITLE: "El Manual del Consumidor para
Reducir los Desechos Sdlidos"
AVAILABILITY:  EPA
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-K-92-003S

This booklet is the Spanish version of the
Consuer's   nk for Reducing Solid
Waste. It provides information about the
environmental benefits of source reduction and
recycling.  The document outlines steps that
citizens can take to reduce the amount of solid
waste they generate. It also provides statistics
on the amount of solid waste generated
throughout the US, and includes appendices
with useful references for those who want
additional information on solid waste
management
TITLE:  "Technical Resource Document:
Extraction and Beneficiation of Ores and
Minerals; Volume 4: Copper"
AVAILABILITY:  NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB94-200 979

This document presents the results of EPA's
research into the domestic iron mining industry
and is one of a series of profiles of major
mining sectors. The report describes copper
extraction and beneficiation operations and the
potential environmental effects that may result
from copper mining. It concludes with a
description of the current regulatory programs
implemented by EPA, federal land
management agencies, and selected states
regarding the iron mining industry.

TITLE:  Technical Resource Document-
Extraction and Beneficiation of Ores and
Minerals; Volume 6: Gold Placers"
AVAILABILITY:  NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB94-201 811

This document presents the results of EPA's
research into the domestic gold placer mining
industry and is one of a series of profiles of
major mining sectors. The report describes
gold placer extraction and beneficiation
operations with specific references to the
wastes associated with these operations. The

-------
 New Publications
                              October 1994
 report characterizes the geology of gold placers
 and discusses the potential environmental
 effects that may result from gold placer
 mining. It concludes with a description of
 current regulatory programs implemented by
 EPA, federal land management agencies, and
 selected states regarding the gold placer
 mining industry.

 TITLE:  "RCRA/UST, Superfund, and
 EPCRA Hotline"
 AVAILABILITY: Hotline
 EPA ORDER NO.:  EPA530-F-94-013

 This pamphlet provides an overview of the
 services provided by the Hotline.  It includes
 information on how to use the Hotline and
 briefly summarizes each regulatory program
 area covered.
                 CERCLA
  TITLE: "Control of Excavation Depths at the
  Sikes Disposal Pits Superfund Project"
  AVAILABILITY: NTIS
  NTIS ORDER NO.: PB94-963413

  This fact sheet documents an approach, taken
  by Region 6 and the Texas Natural Resource
  Conservation Commission (TNRCC), for
  determining and documenting the appropriate
  amount of contaminated material to be
  excavated at the Sikes Disposal Pits Superfund
  Site.  This project is unique due to the high
  level of on-site oversight support used by
  TNRCC.
TITLE: "The Superfund Emergency
Response Program: Over a Decade of
Protecting Human Health and the
Environment"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PR-941 (free document)

This pamphlet provides a brief overview of the
progress die Superfund Emergency Response
Program has made in the past decade. It
discusses how the Superfund Emergency
Response Program eliminates risk to the
public, their actions at long-term cleanup sites,
and who pays for the program. This pamphlet
also discusses the state and local community
involvement in emergency response actions.

TITLE: "A Report on State/Territory Non-
NPL Hazardous Waste Site Cleanup Efforts for
the Period 1980-1992"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB94-963402

The focus of this report is the non-NPL
hazardous waste sites being cleaned up by the
states/territories. Federal hazardous waste
cleanup efforts have been included to tell the
whole Superfund program story. All of the
data is historical, representing what has
happened over the first 12 years of the
Superfund program. The report discusses
Superfund removal and remedial actions, the
predominant remedies selected, and the costs
of the cleanups.

TITLE: "OPA Update: Implementation of the
Oil Pollution Act of 1990; Vol. 3, No. 1"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB94-963252

This bulletin provides up-to-date information
on issues concerning the Oil Pollution Act
(OPA) of 1990. It includes an article
describing the proposed revisions to the NCP
that implement important, response-related
10

-------
October 1994
                           New Publications
 OP A amendments to §311 of the Clean Water
 Act(CWA). The bulletin also details the
 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for
 Offshore Facilities between the Environmental
 Protection Agency (EPA), Department of
 Transportation (DOT), and the Department of
 the Interior (DOI), and includes an article
 describing the National Preparedness for
 Response Exercise Program (PREP)
 workshops. The OPA update also contains a
 brief history of the NCP, a publications update,
 a regulatory update, 1993 ERNS data and
 information on the 1995 International Oil Spill
 conference.

 TITLE: "Guidance on Residential Lead-
 Based Paint, Lead-Contaminated Dust, and
 Lead-Contaminated Soil"
 AVAILABILITY: NTIS
 NTIS ORDER NO.:  PB94-963284

 This guidance addresses residential lead-based
 paint hazards including lead-contaminated dust
 and soil in and around homes. The Agency is
 in the process of developing a rule to address
 these hazards under §403 of the Toxic
 Substances Control Act (TSCA) to respond to
 an increasing number of requests for advice
 about lead-based paint hazards.

 TITLE: "Removal Response Reports: OSC
 Reports"
 AVAILABILITY: NTIS
 NTIS ORDER NO.:  PB94-963 405

 This fact sheet summarizes a pan of the
 Superfund Removal Procedures (SRP) volume
 entitled Removal Response Repotting
 POLREPs and OSC Reports.  It focuses on the
 preparation and distribution of On Scene
 Coordinator (OSC) reports. OSC reports
 summarize activities at a site on completion of
 a removal action.
TITLE: "Removal Response Reports:
POLREPs"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB94-963 406

This fact sheet summarizes a part of the
Superfund Removal Procedures (SRP) volume
entitled Removal Response Reporting:
POLRBPs and OSC Reports. It focuses on the
preparation and distribution of pollution
reports (POLREPs). POLREPs provide factual
progressive data on removal activities.

TITLE: "Revised Interim Soil Lead Guidance
for CERCLA Sites and RCRA Corrective
Action Facilities"
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER MX;  PB94-963282

This interim directive establishes a streamlined
approach for determining protective levels for
lead in soil at CERCLA sites and RCRA
facilities that are subject to corrective action
under RCRA §§3004(u) or 3008(h), as part of
the Superfund Administrative Improvements
Initiative. This interim directive replaces all
previous directives on soil-lead cleanup for
CERCLA and RCRA  programs.
TITLE: "How to Evaluate Alternative
Cleanup Technologies for Underground
Storage Tank Sites: A Guide for Corrective
Action Plan Reviewers"
AVAILABILITY: GPO
GPO ORDER NO.: 055-000-00479-0

EPA developed this manual as guidance for
state regulators who evaluate corrective action
plans (CAPs) that incorporate alternative
technologies at underground storage tank
(UST) sites. The manual focuses on the
                                                                                 11

-------
 New Publications
                                                    October 1994
 technical aspects of the decision-making
 process of CAP review. Each chapter
 discusses one of eight technologies and
 describes its oil and groundwater applications
 in detail A glossary of technical terms is
 included.
                 OTHER
  TITLE: "Monthly Hotline Report"
  AVAILABILITY: NTIS
  NTIS ORDER NO.: See below

  Yearly Subscription  PB94-922400
                    530-R-94-005
                       October 1994
PB94-922410
530-R-94-005J
  January 1994


  February 1994


  March 1994


  April 1994


  May 1994


  June 1994


  July 1994


  August 1994


  September 1994
PB94-922 401
530-R-94-005a

PB94-922402
530-R-94-005b

PB94-922403
530-R-94-005c

PB94-922 404
530-R-94-005d

PB94-922405
530-R-94-005e

PB94-922406
530-R-94-005f

PB94-922 407
530-R-94-005g

PB94-922408
530-R-94-005h

PB94-922 409
530-R-94-005i
                       The reports contain questions that required
                       EPA resolution or were frequently asked,
                       publications availability, Federal Register
                       summaries, and Hotline call statistics.

                       The Monthly Hotflne Report Questions and
                       Answers are also available for downloading at
                       no charge from CLU-IN at (301) 589-8366.
12

-------
                            FEDERAL REGISTERS
           FINAL RULES
RCRA
"Arkansas; Final Authorizations of State
 Hazardous Waste Management
 Program Revisions"
 October 7,1994 (59 EB 51115)

 EPA intends to approve revisions to Arkansas'
hazardous waste program under RCRA. Final
authorization will be effective December 21,
1994, unless EPA publishes a prior action
withdrawing this immediate final rule.
Comments must be received on or before
November 21,1994.

"Oklahoma; Final Authorization of State
 Hazardous Waste Management
 Program Revisions"
 October 7,1994 (59 EB 51116)

 EPA intends to approve revisions to
Oklahoma's hazardous waste program under
RCRA. Final authorization will be effective
December 21,1994, unless EPA publishes a
prior action withdrawing this immediate final
rule. Comments must be received on or before
November 21,1994.

"New Mexico; Final Authorization of
 State Hazardous Waste Management
 Program Revisions"
 October 7,1994 (59 EB 51122)

 EPA intends to approve revisions to New
Mexico's hazardous waste program under
RCRA. Final authorization will be effective
December 21,1994, unless EPA publishes a
prior action withdrawing this immediate final
rule. Comments must be received on or before
November 21,1994.

"Utah; Final Authorization of State
 Hazardous Waste Management
 Program"
 October 14,1994 (59 EB 52084)

 EPA intends to approve revisions to Utah's
hazardous waste program under RCRA. Final
authorization will be effective December 13,
1994, unless EPA publishes a prior action
withdrawing this i"T"vcdiate final rule.
Comments must be received on or before
November 13,1994.

"Arizona; Incorporation by Reference of
 Approved State Hazardous Waste
 Program"
 October 20,1994 (59 EB 52918)

 EPA intends to approve Arizona's
incorporation by reference of 40 CFR Part 272
into its authorized state RCRA program. Final
authorization will be effective December 19,
1994, unless EPA publishes a prior action
withdrawing this immediate final rule.
Comments must be received no later than
November 21,1994.

"Florida; Final Authorization of State
 Hazardous Waste Management
 Program Revisions"
 October 26,1994 (59 EB 53753)

 EPA  intends to approve revisions to Florida's
hazardous waste program under RCRA. Final

-------

-------
  Federal Registers
                              October 1994
  authorization will be effective December 27,
  1994, unless EPA publishes a prior action
  withdrawing this immediate final rule.
  Comments must be received on or before
  November 25,1994.

  EPCRA

  "Extremely Hazardous Substances List
   and Threshold Planning Quantities;
   Correction"
   October 12,1994 (59 EB 51821)

   EPA published corrections to errors found in
  Appendices A and B to 40 CFR Part 355.
          PROPOSED RULES
  RCRA
  "Financial Assurance Mechanisms"
   October 12,1994 (59 EB 51523)

   EPA proposed to amend the financial
  assurance regulations under RCRA in two
  program areas. With regard to municipal solid
  waste landfills under Subtitle D, the Agency
  proposed to add a financial test for use by
  corporate owners and operators, and a guarantee
  for use by firms that wish to guarantee the costs
  for an owner or operator. Second, EPA
  proposed to modify the domestic asset
  component of the corporate financial test for
  hazardous waste TSD facilities under Subtitle C.

  "Financial Assurance; Municipal Solid
   Waste Landfills"
   October 18,1994 (59 EB 52498)

   EPA proposed to amend the federal criteria for
  municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs) under
  Subtitle D of RCRA by delaying the effective
  date of Subpart G, Financial Assurance, until
  April 9,1996. Comments must be received by
  December 19,1994.
"Michigan; Final Authorization of State
 Hazardous Waste Management
 Program Revisions"
 October 21,1994 (59 EB 53132)

 EPA intends, subject to public review and
comment, to approve revisions to Michigan's
hazardous waste program under RCRA.
Comments must be received on or before
November 21,1994.

OUST

"Utah; Approval of State Underground
 Storage Tank (UST) Program"
 October 27,1994 (59 EB 53955)

 EPA intends to approve Utah's UST program.
The State of Utah's application for final approval
is available for public review.  Comments must
be submitted on or before November 28,1994.
A public hearing is tentatively scheduled for
December 16,1994.

CERCLA

"National Priorities List; Radium
 Chemical Company"
 October 6,1994 (59 EB 50884)

 EPA announced its intent to delete the Radium
Chemical Company Site in Woodside, Queens
County, New York, from the National Priorities
List EPA and the State of New York
determined that no further cleanup under
CERCLA is appropriate and that remedial
actions at the site have been protective of public
health, welfare, and the environment.
Comments concerning the site may be submitted
on or before November 15,1994.
14

-------
October 1994
                           Federal Registers
                                PROPOSED RULES
"National Priorities List; Olmstead
  County Landfill"
  October 13,1994 (59 EB 51933)

  EPA announced its intent to delete the
Olmstead County Landfill in Oronoco,
Minnesota, from the National Priorities List
EPA and the State of Minnesota determined that
no further cleanup under CERCLA is appropriate
and that remedial actions at the site have been
protective of public health, welfare, and the
environment Comments concerning the site
may be submitted on or before November 14,
 1994.

"National Priorities List; Northwestern
  State Portland Cement Company"
  October 13,1994 (59 EB 51933)

  EPA announced its intent to delete die
 Northwestern States Portland Cement Company
 located in Mason Gty, Iowa, from the National
 Priorities List EPA and the State of Iowa
 determined that no further cleanup under
 CERCLA is appropriate and that remedial
 actions at the site have been protective of public
 health, welfare, and the environment Comments
 concerning the site may be submitted on or
 before November 18,1994.

 "National Priorities List; Suffolk City
  Landfill"
  October 20,1994 (59 EB 52949)

  EPA announced its intent to delete the Suffolk
 City Landfill Site in Suffolk, Virginia, from the
 National Priorities List EPA and the
 Commonwealth of Virginia determined that no
 further cleanup under CERCLA is appropriate
 and that remedial actions at the site hive been
 protective of public health, welfare, and the
 environment Comments concerning the site
 may be submitted on or before November 21,
 1994.
"National Priorities Ust; Boise Cascade/
 OnaiVMedtronlcsSlte"
 October 26,1994 (59 EB 53773)

 EPA announced its intent to delete the Boise
Oiscade/Onan/Medtronics Site in Fridley,
Minnesota, from the National Priorities List
EPA and the State of Minnesota determined that
no further cleanup under CERCLA is appropriate
and that remedial actions at the site have been
protective of public health, welfare, and the
environment Comments concerning the site
may be submitted on or before November 25,
1994.

CERCLA/DOI

"Natural Resource Damage
 Assessments"
 October 19,1994 (59 EB 52749)

 The Department of the Interior announced the
commencement of a review of regulations for
assessing natural resource damages under
CERCLA and the dean Water Act The
regulations provide procedures that natural
resource trustees may use to obtain compensation
from potentially responsible parties for injuries to
natural resources. Comments on how the process
should be revised must be received by
January 17,1995.

EPCRA

"Extremely Hazardous Substances List;
 Response to Petitions"
 October 12,1994 (59 £B 51816)

 EPA responded to several citizens petitions to
revise die list of extremely hazardous substances
at 40 CFR Part 355, Appendices A and B. The
Agency proposed a rule to delete from the list
phosphorous pentoxide, dithlycarbamazine
                                                                                   15

-------
  Federal Registers
                               October 1994
  citrate, fenitrothion, and tellurium, and to revise
  the threshold planning quantity for isophorone
  diisocyanate from 100 to 1,000 pounds.  EPA
  .denied petitions to delete paraquat and
  isophorone diisocyanate from the list as well as to
  revise the threshold planning quantities for
  azinphos-methyl and fenamiphos.
                 NOTICES
  RCRA
  "Hazardous Waste Disposal Injection
   Restrictions; Petition lor Exemption"
   October 4,1994 (59 EB 50594)

   EPA granted a petition submitted by EMPAK,
  Inc. to reissue an exemption to LDR for the Class
  I injection well located at Deer Park, Texas. EPA
  is satisfied that, to a reasonable degree of
  certainty, there will be no migration of hazardous
  constituents from the injection zone for as long as
  the waste remains hazardous. This action is
  effective September 22,1994.

  "Hazardous Waste Disposal Injection
   Restrictions; Petition for Exemption"
   October 4,1994 (59 EB 50594)

   EPA granted a petition subnattefitl&Oyonsanto
  Chemical Company to reissue an exemption to
  LDR for the Class I injection well located at
  Alvin, Texas. EPA is satisfied that, to a
  reasonable degree of certainty, there will be no
  migration of hazardous constituents from the
  injection zone for as long as the waste remains
  hazardous. This action is effective August 31,
  1994.

  "Information Collection; Extension of
   Hazardous Waste Manifest"
   October 5,1994 (59 EB 50755)

   EPA announced that the Office of Management
  and Budget on August 17,1994, authorized the
extension of the Hazardous Waste Manifest Form
OMB No. 20504039 through September 30,
1996.

"Information Collection; Exports/Imports
 under the OECD Decision"
 October 5,1994 (59 EB 50756)

 EPA announced that it forwarded an
Information Collection Request (ICR) to the
Office of Management and Budget The ICR is
intended to ensure implementation of the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development's Council Decision on the control
of international shipments of waste intended for
recovery operations. Comments must be
submitted on or before November 4,1994.

'Technical Corrections and Extension of
 Comment Period"
 October 11,1994 (59 EB 51439)

 EPA announced the availability of corrections
to certain portions of data pertinent to additional
assessments of potential risks from cement kiln
dust waste and extended the comment period on
the corrected materials. The Agency originally
announced the availability of this data in a notice
published on September 14,1994 (59 EE 47133X
Comments on the new data will be accepted for a
period of 30 days from die date of publication,
while comments on affected sections of the
previous data must be received by November 10,
1994.

"Hazardous Waste Disposal Injection
 Restrictions; Petitions for Exemption"
 October 12,1994 (59 Efi 51597)

 EPA granted a petition submitted by Albemark
Corporation to reissue and exemption to LDR for
the Class I injection well located at Magnolia,
Arkansas. EPA is satisfied that, to a reasonable
degree of certainty, there will be no migration of
16

-------
October 1994
                            Federal Registers
                                     NOTICES
hazardous constituents from the injection zone
fa- as long as the Waste remains hazardous. This
action is effective September 27, 1994.

"New Hampshire; Full Program
  Adequacy of State Municipal Solid
  Waste Permit Program"
  October 17, 1994 (59 EB 52299)

  Pursuant to RCRA §4005(c)(lXQ, EPA gave
notice of a tentative determination, public
hearing, and public comment period concerning
the adequacy of New Hampshire's municipal
solid waste landfill permit program. Comments
must be received no later than November  16,
1994. If there is sufficient public interest, a
public hearing is tentatively scheduled for
December!, 1994:

'Transfer of Data to Contractors"
  October 21, 1994 (59 EB 53162)

  EPA announced that it will transfer information
submitted to the Agency under RCRA §3007 to
its contractor Hydrogeologic, Inc., and its
subcontractors. The information will allow the
contractors to assist the Agency in enhancing and
implementing the fate and transport models used
to support the development of regulations for the
identification of hazardous wastes. Confidential
Business Information submitted to EPA under
RCRA §3007 is required to complete these
 analyses. Transfers of data will occur no sooner
than October 31, 1994.

 "Proposed Consent Decree; Kodak Park"
  October 24, 1 994 (59 EB 53486)
  A Consent Decree in United
incurred in connection with die Kodak Park
facility located in Rochester, New York. The
settler will also offset $3,000,000 in penalties
through the implementation of six supplemental
environmental projects with a new present value
of $12,000,000. Comments will be received for a
period of 30 days from the date of publication.

"New Jersey; Partial Program Adequacy
 of State Municipal Solid Waste Permit
 Program"
 October 28,1994 (59 EB 54190)

 Pursuant to RCRA §4005(c)(lXQ, EPA gave
notice of a tentative partial determination, public
hearing, and public comment period concerning
the adequacy of New Hampshire's municipal
solid waste landfill permit program. Comments
must be received no later than December 14,
1994. A public meeting will be held on the same
date.

CERCLA

"Proposed Settlement; American
 Chemical Services Site"
 October 3,1994 (59 EB 50232)

 EPA proposed to enter into a de minimis
settlement under CERCLA §122(g). The
proposed settlement requires settling parties to
reimburse EPA $23,649,894.84 for response
costs incurred in connection with the American
Chemical Services Site in Griffith, Indiana.
Comments must be provided on or before
November 2,1994.
       Company was lodged with the U.S.
 District Court for the Western District of New
 York on October 7, 1994. The decree requires
 the settler to reimburse EPA $5,000,000 for costs
                                                                                    17

-------
  Federal Registers
                                October 1994
                                      NOTICES
  "Proposed Administrative Agreement;
   MCI, Inc., Site"
   October 4, 1 994 (59 EB 50603)

   EPA proposed to enter into a settlement under
  CERCLA§107. The proposed settlement
  requires the settling party to reimburse EPA
  $55,000 for response costs incurred in connection
  with a removal action conducted at the MO, Inc.,
  Site Petrochemical Recycling CorpTEkotek, Inc.,
  Site in Detroit, Michigan. Comments must be
  received on or before November 3, 1994.

  "Proposed Consent Decree; Davis Liquid
   Waste Site"
   October 5, 1 994 (59 £B 50772)
   A Consent Decree in United States v.
  Davis, et al.. was lodged with the U.S. District
  Court for the District of Rhode Island on
  September 16, 1994. The decree requires the
  settling parties to reimburse EPA $3,475,000 for
  costs incurred in connection with the Davis
  Liquid Waste Site in Smithfield, Rhode Island.
  Comments will be received for a period of 30
  days from the date of publication.

  "Proposed Consent Decree; General
   Refining Superfund Site"
   October 5, 1994 (59 EB 50772)

   A Consent Decree in United States v. General
  Refining Company, et al.. was lodged with the
  U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
  Georgia on September 23, 1994. The decree
  requires the settling parties to reimburse EPA
  $2,150,000 for costs incurred in connection with
  the General Refining Superfund Site in Garden
  City, Georgia. Comments will be received for a
  period of 30 days from the date of publication.
"Proposed Settlement; MIG/Dewane
 Landfill"
 October 12,1994 (59 EB 51597)

 EPA proposed to enter into a deminimis
settlement under CERCLA§122(g). The
proposed settlement requires settling parties to
reimburse EPA approximately $2,800,000 for
response costs incurred in connection with the
MIG/Dewane Landfill in Belvidere, Illinois.
Comments must be provided on or before
November 14,1994.

"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
 Radium Chemical Company Site"
 October 13,1994 (59 EB 51975)

 EPA proposed to enter into an administrative
settlement under CERCLA §122(h). The
proposed settlement in connection with Radium
Chemical Company Site in Woodside, Queens,
New York. Comments must be received on or
before November 14,1994.

"Proposed Consent Order; Berlin & Farro
 Liquid Incineration Site"
 October 14,1994 (59 EB 52190)

 A proposed Consent Order in United States v.
Berlin and Farro Liquid Incineration. Inc. was
lodged with the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District Michigan on September 29,
1994. The proposed order requires the settling
parties to reimburse EPA $426,234.20 for costs
incurred in connection with the Berlin & Farro
Liquid Incineration Site in Swartz Creek,
Michigan. Comments will be received for a
period of 30 days from the date of publication.
18

-------
October 1994
                           Federal Registers
                                      NOTICES
"Proposed Consent Decrees"
  October 14,1994 (59 EB 52191)

  Two proposed Consent Decrees in United
States v. Terry Shaner. et aL. were lodged with
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania on September 28,1994. The first
proposed decree requires the settling parties to
reimburse EPA $547,304.44 for costs incurred in
connection with the site at issue. The second
proposed decree provides a cash out settlement
for $7,000 for the settling defendant Comments
will be received for a period of 30 days from the
date of publication.

"Proposed Consent Decree; McColl Site"
  October 14,1994 (59 EB 52192)

  A proposed Consent Decree in United States
and State of California v. Shell Oil Company..
Inc.. et aL. was lodged with the U.S. District
Court for the Central Division of California on
September 15,1994. The proposed decree
requires the settling parties to reimburse EPA
$13,248,000, and the State of California
$4,752,000 for costs incurred in connection with
the McColl Super-fund Site in Fullerton,
California. Comments will be received for a
period of 30 days from the date of publication.

"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
  ENRX and Buffalo Warehousing Sites"
  October 17,1994 (59 EB 52301)

  EPA proposed to enter into a settlement under
CERCLA §122(h). The proposed settlement
requires the settling parties to reimburse EPA
 approximately $1,006,000 plus interest for
response costs incurred in connection with the
 ENRX and Buffalo Warehousing Sites in
 Buffalo, Erie County, New York. Comments
 must l?e received on or before November 16,
 1994.
"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
 Frontier Chemical Site"
 October 17,1994 (59 EB 52302)

 EPA proposed to enter into a de minimis
settlement under CERCLA §122(g). The
proposed settlement requires the settling parties
to reimburse EPA approximately $984,000 for
response costs incurred in connection with the
Frontier Chemical Site in Niagara Falls, New
York. Comments must be received on or before
November 16,1994.

"Proposed Consent Decree; Solvents
 Recovery Service of New England Site"
 October 16,1994 (59 EB 52555)

 Pursuant to CERCLA § 122(g), a d£ minimis
Consent Decree in United States and State of
Connecticut v. A J. Murphy Die & Machine Co..
Inc.. et al.. was lodged with the U.S. District
Court for the District of Connecticut on
September 29,1994. The decree requires the
settling parties to reimburse EPA, the State of
Connecticut, and other entities $6,700,000 for
costs incurred in connection with the Solvents
Recovery Service of New England Site in
Southington, Connecticut Comments will be
received for a period of 30 days from the date of
publication.

"Proposed Consent Decree; Mover
 Landfill Site"
 October 19,1994 (59 EB 52809)

 Pursuant to CERCLA §122(g), a dfi minimis
Consent Decree in United States v. Aluminum
Company of America, et al.. was lodged with the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania on September 29,1994. The
decree requires the settling parties to reimburse
EPA $3,478,626 for costs incurred in connection
with the Mover Landfill Site in Collegeville,
                                                                                     19

-------
   Federal Registers
                                October 1994
                                       NOTICES
  Pennsylvania. Comments will be received for a
  period of 30 days from the date of publication.

  "Proposed Consent Decree; Envirochem
   Site"
   October 19,1994 (59 EB 52809)

   Pursuant to CERCLA §122(g), a de. minimis
  Consent Decree in United States v.
  Environmental Conservation and Chemical
  Corporation, et al.. was lodged with the U.S.
  District Court for the District of Indiana on
  September 29,1994. The decree requires the
  settling parties to reimburse EPA for costs
  incurred in connection with the Envirochem Site
  in Zionsville, Indiana. Comments will be
  received for a period of 30 days from the date of
  publication.

  "Proposed Consent Decree; Hi-Mill
   Manufacturing Company"
   October 19,1994 (59 EB 52810)

   Pursuant to CERCLA, a Consent Decree in
  United States v. Hj-Mjll Manufacturing
  Company was lodged with the U.S. District
  Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on
  September 29,1994. The decree requires the
  settling party to reimburse EPA $169,871.30 far
  costs incurred in connection with the Hi-Mill
  Manufacturing Company Site in Highland,
  Michigan. Comments will be received for a
  period of 30 days firom the date of publication.
  "Proposed Consent Decree;
    Manufacturing/North Farm
    October 19,1994 (59 EB 52810)

    Pursuant to CERCLA, a Consent Decree in
  United States v. Smith-Jones. Inc_ el aL
lodged with the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Iowa, Central Division, on
September 29, 1994. The decree requires die
settling parties to reimburse EPA $536,300 for
costs incurred in connection with the Midwest
Manufacturing/North Farm Site in and around
Kellogg, Iowa.  Comments will be received for a
period of 30 days from the date of publication.

"Proposed Consent Decree; Salem Acres
  Site"
  October 24, 1994 (59 £B 53485)

  Pursuant to CERCLA, a Consent Decree in
United States v. DiBiase Salem Realty Trusk et
aL was lodged with the U.S. District Court for
the District of Massachusetts on October 12,
1994. The decree requires the settling parties to
reimburse EPA $80,329 for costs incurred in
connection with the Salem Acres Superfund Site
located in Salem, Massachusetts. Comments will
be received for a period of 30 days from the date
of publication.

"Proposed Consent Decree; Kalama
  Specialty Chemicals Inc."
  October 24, 1994 (59 EB 53487)

  Pursuant to CERCLA, a Consent Decree in
IJni              *^ Spec
Inc-etaL was lodged with the U.S. District
Court for the District of South Carolina on
October 13, 1994. The decree requires the
sealing party to reimburse EPA for costs incurred
in connection with the Kalama Specialty
Chemicals, Incx, Site in Beaufort County, South
Carolina. The settling party also agreed to
perform the final remedy for the site. Comments
will be received for a period of 30 days from the
date of publication.
20

-------
Federal Registers
                              October 1994
                                    NOTICES
"Proposed Consent Decree; Savage
 Municipal Water Supply Well Site"
 October 24,1994 (59 EB 53487)

 Pursuant to CERCLA, a Consent Decree in
United States v. OK Tool Co.. Inc.. et al.. was
lodged with the U.S. District Court for the
District of New Hampshire on October 12,1994.
The decree requires the settling parties to
reimburse EPA and the State of New Hampshire
approximately $3,000,000 for costs incurred in
connection with the Savage Municipal Water
Supply Well Site located in Milfbrd, New
Hampshire. Comments will be received for a
period of 30 days from the date of publication.

"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
 Brewer Gold  Mine Site"
 October 27,1994 (59 EB 53977)

 EPA proposed to enter into a settlement under
CERCLA §122(h). The proposed settlement
requires the sealing parties to reimburse EPA for
response costs incurred in connection with the
Brewer Gold Mine Site in Jefferson, South
Carolina. Comments must be received within 30
days of the date of publication.

"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
 Norcross Mercury Spill Site"
 October 27,1994 (59 EB 53977)

 EPA proposed to enter into a settlement under
CERCLA §122(h). The proposed settlement
requires the settling parties to reimburse EPA for
response costs incurred in connection with the
Norcross Mercury Spill Site in Norcross,
Georgia. Comments must be received within a
period of 30 days from the date of publication.
"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
 Irwln Chemical Company Site"
 October 28,1994 (59 EB 54192)

 EPA proposed to enter into a settlement under
CERCLA §122(h) on September 29,1994. The
proposed settlement requires the settling parties
to seU the site, and a nearby city lot, and to turn
the proceeds over to the Agency for response
costs incurred in connection with the Irwin
Chemical Company Site in Des Moines, Iowa.
Comments must be received within 30 days of
the date of publication.

EPCRA

"Forum on State and Tribal Toxics Action
 Projects (FOSTTA); Public Meeting"
 October 4,1994 (59 EB 50599)

 EPA announced that open meetings of the four
Projects of the Forum on State and Tribal Toxics
Action Projects (FOSTTA) will be held in
Alexandria, Virginia, on October 24 and 25,
1994.  The meeting will be for the Toxics
Release Inventory Project, the State and Tribal
Enhancement Project, the Chemical Management
Project, and the Lead (Pb) Project

Environmental Justice

"Small Grants Program; Solicitation
 Notice"
 October 5,1994 (59 EB 50757)

 EPA's Office of Environmental Justice
requested applications for grants available to
affected members of minority and low-income
community groups under the Environmental
Justice Small Grants Program. Funds can be
used to support activities intended to foster
projects which address environmental justice
issues.  Pre-applications must be mailed to

-------
 October 1994
Federal Registers
                                     NOTICES
  regional EPA offices no later than February 4,
  1995.

  "National Environmental Justice
   Advisory Council; Public Meeting"
   October 11,1994 (59 EB 51440)

   EPA announced that open meetings of the
  National Environmental Justice Advisory
  Council and four subcommittees will be held in
  Herndon, Virginia, on October 25 through 27,
  1994.
22

-------
                          CALL ANALYSES
                       CALLS ANSWERED BY HOTLINE
                            October Dally Volume*
300 -r

                                                            EPCRAand
                                                             Superfund
H - 1
                           1
4	1	1	1	1	1	1	1-
1
                       11   12  13  14  17  18   19  20  21  24  25 26  27  28  31
                                       Day

                                 Year to Date*
RCRA/UST
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September.
October
Month
5,843
5,069
6,059
4,535
4,802
6324
4.565
5.257
4,729
4,796
Cumulative
5,843
10,912
16971
21,506
26308
32632
37.197
42454
47,183
51.797
EPCRA and SufMrfumf

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
Month
4,418
6,835
7203
6,114
7944
8,414
3946
3.906
3,863
4,245
Cumulative
4.418
11,253
18456
24,570
32514
40,928
44.874
48.780
52.643
56,888
Documents
(All Proaram Areas)

January
February
March
April
Mav
June
July
Auaust
September
October
Month
4.050
4,095
4081
3,203
3,800
4.915
4246
4.913
4.407
3,993
Cumulative
4.050
8,145
12226
15,429
19229
24.144
28390
33.303
37.710
41.703
   •All calls answered by the Call Management System, the Message Retrieval Line, and the Document Retrieval Line.

-------
   Call Analyses
October 1994
                             QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY TYPE
                                    October Daily Volume*
    700 T
                                                          Regulatory
                                  12  13  14  15  16   19 20  21  22  23  26  27 28
      29 30
                                         Year to Date*
Regulatory
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
Month
12,042
12.609
15947
13.686
15.514
19,335
11,280
11,393
11,241
11.075
Cumulative
12.042
24.651
40,598
54,284
69.798
89.133
100.413
111,806
123,047
134,122
Document

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
Month
4,353
4.528
4.789
3.931
4.346
5,404
4,561
5.093
4,561
4,275
Cumulative
4,353
8.881
13,670
17,601
21.947
27,351
31,912
37,005
41,566
45,841
Referral/Transfer
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
Month
768
1,288
1.954
1,482
1,763
1,669
1,231
1,508
1,442
1,310
Cumulative
768
2.056
4.010
5,492
7.255
8,924
10.155
11.663
13.105
14.415
   * All questions answered by the Call Management System, the Message Retrieval Line, and the Document Retrieval Line. A
     single call may include multiple questions combined with document requests and referrals.
24

-------
October 1994
Call Analyses
                    QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY PROGRAM AREA
                                      October 1994*
  'Based on 15,350 questions and excludes 1,310 referrals and transfers mad* from both Hotlines. Includes the
  Message Retrieval Line and the Document Retrieval Una.

                                       Year to Date*
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
RCRA
Month
57%
(9,394)
51%
(8,788)
54%
(11,149)
49%
(8,708)
47%
(9,334)
43%
(10,757)
53%
(8.365)
60%
(9,786)
59%
(9,350)
60%
(9,278)
Cumulative
57%
(9,394)
54%
(18,182)
54%
(29,331)
53%
(38,039)
52%
(47,373)
50%
(58,130)
50%
(66,495)
51%
(76,281)
52%
(85,631)
53%
(94,909)
UST
Month
4%
(668)
5%
(831)
5%
(993)
5%
(857)
4%
(791)
4%
(932)
6%
(917)
6%
(1.018)
7%
(1.083)
5%
(698)
Cumulative
4%
(668)
5%
(1,499)
5%
(2,492)
5%
(3,349)
4%
(4,140)
4%
(5,072)
5%
(5,989)
5%
(7.007)
5%
(8.090)
5%
(8.788)
EPCRA
Month
25%
(4,100)
29%
(4,923)
27%
(5,588)
31%
(5,509)
37%
(7,386)
45%
(11,042)
27%
(4,312)
21%
(3.532)
20%
(3,198)
22%
(3.430)
Cumulative
25%
(4,100)
27%
(9,023)
27%
(14,611)
28%
(20,120)
30%
(27,506)
33%
(38,548)
32%
(42,860)
31%
(46,392)
30%
(49,588)
29%
(53,018)
Super-fund
Month
14%
(2,223)
15%
(2,595)
14%
(3,006)
15%
(2,543)
12%
(2,349)
8%
(2,008)
14%
(2.247)
13%
(2.150)
14%
(2,173)
13%
(1.944)
Cumulative
14%
(2,223)
14%
(4.818)
14%
(7.824)
14%
(10,367)
14%
(12.716)
13%
(14,724)
13%
(16.971)
13%
(19,121)
13%
(21.294)
13%
(23.238)
                                                                                   25

-------
   Call Analyses
                                  October 1994
                                  CALLER PROFILE
                                  RCRA/UST Hotline

                     Regulated Community                    5,343
                     Citizens                                  191
                     State & Local Govt/Native American         270
                     Federal Agencies                           91
                     Educational Institutions                     121
                     EPA                                      77
                     Media                                     6
                     Interest Groups                              9
                     Congress                                   0
                     International                               12
                     Other                                    139
                     Referrals*                                273
                     Transfers to EPCRA/Superfund Hotline*       218
                     Document Retrieval Line*                   181
                     Message Retrieval Line*                    620
                     TOTAL

                           Citizens
                     7,551
            State & Local Govt./
             Native American
                      4%
             All Others
                6%
Federal Agencies
      1%
                                                 Regulated
                                                 Community
      * No caller profile data available.
26

-------
October 1994
                                    Call Analyses
              Emergency Planning and Community Rlght-to-Know Act/
                                  Superfund Hotline
   Manufacturers -

    Food/Tobacco                    53
    Textiles                         40
    Apparel                         14
    Lumber & Wood                 28
    Furniture                        24
    Paper                           35
    Fruiting & Publishing             54
    Chemicals                      241
    Petroleum & Coal                66
    Rubber and Plastics               71
    Leather                         28
    Stone, Clay & Glass              38
    Primary Metals                  60
    Fabricated Metals                89
    Machinery (Excluding Electrical)   34
    Electrical&Electronic Equipment   51
    Transportation Equipment         55
    Instruments                      35
    Misc. Manufacturing             168
     Subtotal                     1,184
     Consultants/Engineers              1,885
     Attorneys                          354
     Citizens                            281
     Public Interest Groups                29
     Educational Institutions              160
     EPA                                65
     Federal Agencies                    104
     GOCOs                              7
     Congress                             2
     State Officials/SERCs         .      68
     Local Officials/LEPCs                47
     Fire Departments                     15
     Hospitals/Laboratories                37
     Trade Associations                   25
     Union/Labor                          3
     Farmers                              2
     Distributors                         13
     Insurance Companies                 10
     Media/Press                         15
     Native Americans                     2
     International                          6
     Other                              222
     Referrals*                          399
     Transfers to RCRA/UST Hotline*      420
     Document Retrieval Line*             36
     Message Retrieval Line*              92

     TOTAL                          5,483
                Attorneys
                   8%
 All Others
   18%
  * No caller profile data available.
Manufacturers
    26%
                                                                                  27

-------
  Call Analyses
                                      October 1994
                                  HOTLINE TOPICS
   RCRA
   Special Wastes  *
    Ash
    Mining Wastes, Bevill
    Medical Wastes
    Oil and Gas
   Subtitle C (General)
   Hazardous Waste Id. (General)
   Toxicity Characteristic
   Wood Preserving
   Listing of Used Oil
   Huff
   Radioactive Mixed Waste
   Delisting Petitions
   Hazardous Waste Recycling
   Generators
   Small Quantity Generators
   Transportation/Transporters
   TSDFs General
   TSDFs Siting Facilities
   TSDFs Capacity
   TSDFs Treatment
   TSDFs Burning
   TSDFs Storage
   TSDFs Disposal
   Land Disposal Restrictions
   Permits and Permitting
   Corrective Action
   Financial Liability/Enforcement
   Test Methods
   Health Effects
   Waste MinJPolhition Prevention
   State Programs
   Hazardous Waste Data
   Subtitle D (General)
   Household Hazardous Waste
   Siting Facilities
   Combustion
   Industrial Waste
   Composting
   Source Reduction/Poll. Prev.
   Grants & Financing
   Procurement (General)
    Building Insulation
    Cement & Products with Fly Ash
    Paper & Paper Products
    Re-refined Lubricating Oil
    Retread Tires
    6
   17
   19
   14
  494
1,696'
   55
   10
   63
    3
   30
   11
 2251
 5401
  146
   37
  236
    9
    3
   83
  131
   63
   77
 9491
  168
  233
  143
   93
   15
 2101
   84
   44
 3381
  186
   24
   55
   15
   17
   98
    6
   27
    7
    4
    3
    4
    3
Solid Waste Recycling (General)       3731
 Aluminum                            12
 Batteries                             27
 Glass                                11
 Paper                                14
 Plastics                              27
 Tires                                 21
 Used Oil                            165
Markets (General)                      13
 Aluminum                             3
 Batteries                              4
 Compost                             12
 Glass                                 4
 Paper                                 3
 Plastics              .                 2
 Tires                                 15
 Used Oil                              9
RCRA General                       1,697

TOTAL                          9,278*
* Includes 2354 RCRA document requests.


UST

General/Misc.                       159*
Applicability/Definitions                 63
Regulated Substances                   14
Standards for New Tank Systems         31
Tank Standards and Upgrading           93
Operating Requirements                 23
Release Detection                      82
Release Reporting & Investigation        24
Corrective Action for USTs              90
Out-of-Service/Closurc                  36
Financial Responsibility                 30
State Programs                         20
Liability/Enforcement                   28
LUST Trust Fund                       5

TOTAL                            69«»
* Includes 426 UST document requests.
28
    1 Hot topics for this month
    1 Topics are calculated as the summation of all questions received by the Hottinc. A single cal nay result in
      multiple question*.

-------
October 1994
                                   Call Analyses
 EMERGENCY PLANNING AND
 COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW

 General:
 General Title ffl Questions           345
 Trade Secrets                         6
 Enforcement                        58
 Liability/Citizen Suits                  9
 Training                             5
 Chemical-Specific Information          42

 Emergency Planning (§§301-303):
 General                             55
 Notification Requirements             30
 SERC/LEPC Issues                   31
 EHSs/TPQs                         25
 Risk Communication/
   Hazards Analysis                    27
 Exemptions                          3
 Emergency Release Notification (§304):
 General                             82
 Notification Requirements             44
 Reportable  Quantities                 71
 CERCLA § 103 vs. SARA §304         28
 ARIP/AHEDB/ERNS                  5
 Exemptions                          4
 Hazardous Chemical Reporting
 (§§311-312):
 General                             35
 MSDS Reporting Requirements         46
 Tier I/II Requirements                136
 Thresholds                          36
 Hazard Categories                     7
 Mixtures Reporting                    7
 Exemptions                         24
 Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (§313):
  General
  Reporting Requirements
  Thresholds
  Form R Completion
  Supplier Notification
  NOTEs/NOSEs/NONs
  Voluntary Revisions
  Pollution Prevention 33/50
  Public Access to Data
  TRI Database
  Petitions
  TRI Expansion
  Exemptions
 122
 124
 122
 275
 107
6981
2851
  88
  59
  53
  36
  61
  48
        Special Topics:
         CAA§112
          General                           42
          RMPs                             64
          List of Regulated Substances          31
         Federal Facilities Executive Order       54

        TOTAL                          3,430
        "Includes 937 Emergency Planning and Community
        Right-to-Know document requests
SUPERFUND

General/Misc.
Access & Information Gathering
Administrative Record
ARARs
CERCLIS
Citizen Suits
Claims Against Fund
Clean-Up Costs
Clean-Up Standards
Community Relations
Contract Lab Program (CLP)
Contractor Indemnification
Contracts
Definitions
Enforcement
Federal Facilities
Hazardous Substances
HRS
Liability
Local Gov't Reimbursement
Natural Resource Damages
NCP
Notification
NPL
Off Site Rule
OSHA
PA/SI
PRPs
RD/RA
Reauthorization
Remedial
Removal
RI/FS
Risk Assess./Health Effects
ROD
152
 15
  3
 93
 60
  2
  5
 12
 64
 45
 18
  2
  7
 24
 35
 21
 96
 19
 94
 11
  4
 44
 76
1721
 14
 12
 10
 23
 13
 38
123
 45
 39
 56
 32
  1 Hot topics for this month
  • Topics are calculated as the summation of all questions received by the Hotline. A single call may result in
   multiple questions.
                                                                                 29

-------
  Call Analyses                                                           October 1994


   RQ                               2211
   SACM                              35
   Settlements                          45
   SITE Program   -                     35
   State Participation                      6
   State Program                         5
   TAGs                                4
   Taxes                               15


   Special Topics
    Oil Pollution Act                     28
    SPCC Regulations                    20
    Radiation Site Cleanup                51


   TOTAL                         1,944*
   *Includes 558 Superfund document requests.
   TOTAL HOTLINE QUESTIONS,
   DOCUMENT REQUESTS AND
   REFERRALS:                   16,660
   1 Hot topics for this month
   •Topics are calculated u the summatfaM«f ••qMtfawnctfod by the HottiM. A su(k cal may remit im
    multiple questions.

30

-------
      RCRA/UST, Superfund,  &  EPCRA  Hotline

El "Hotline," es un servicio pubiico para ingles- e hispanohablentes que provee informacion y
documentos sobre los siguientes programas de la Agencia de Protection Ambiental [EPA
siglas en ingles]:

RCRA/Tanques Subterraneos de Almacenamiento (TSA)

La ley de Conservation y Recuperation de Recursos [RCRA siglas en ingles] regula el
desecho de materias solidas, manejo de desechos toxicos, y Tanques Subterraneos para
el Almacenamiento (TSA) [UST siglas en ingles] de petroleo y substancias toxicas.
Preguntas acerca de las regulaciones de RCRA o TSA frecuentemente tratan sobre:

    • basureros municipales [MSWLF siglas en ingles]
    • la generation, transportation, tratamiento, almacenaje, y desecho de materias
      toxicas
    • reciclaje de desechos solidos y toxicos
    • responsabilidad financiera, detection de escapes o fugas, instalacion correcta, y
      cierre de los TSA.

Superfund

El programa de "Superfund" permite a EPA limpiar sitios abandonados y contaminados con
substancias toxicas y recobrar gastos de los individuos responsables por la contamination,
Preguntas acerca del programa de Superfund a menudo tratan sobre:

    • el Plan National de Contingenria [NCP siglas en ingles]
    • la Lista National de Prioridades [NPL siglas en ingles]
    • cantidades que deben ser reportadas en caso de derrames de substancias toxicas.

EPCRA

La ley de 'Planeamiento para Emergencies y el Derecho de La Comunidad a Saber' [EPCRA
siglas en ingles] ayuda a las comunidades a preparar a sus miembros en caso de accidentes
y derrames quimicos y ofrece a los ciudadanos, ofitiales de los gobiernos estatales, locales,
tribus y a EPA, informacion sobre peligros quimicos. El programa de EPCRA trata acerca
de:

    • planeamiento para emergentias y notification urgente en caso de derrames o fugas
    • reportaje del inventario de quimicos toxicos
    • reportaje de los derrames de quimicos toxicos (Formulario R) y el banco de datos
      que mantiene el inventario de derrames toxicos [TRI siglas en ingles].

El Hotline esta abierto Lunes por Viernes, 8:30 AM-7:30 PM EST, y esta c err ado en Dias
                          Festivos del gobierno Federal.

           RCRA/UST, Superfund & EPCRA Hotline: (800) 424-9346
       Llammadores afueras de los E.E.U.U. St. Puerto Rico: (703) 412-9810
     Personas con problemas auditivos, favor llamar al (TDD): (800) 553-7672

-------