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 ------- |