EPA530-R-95-002I
SUB-9224-95-012
MONTHLY HOTLINE REPORT
December 1995
RCRA/UST, Superfund, and EPCRA
Hotline Questions and Answers
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 1
Underground Storage Tanks (UST) 1
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) 2
New Publications
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) 5
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know (EPCRA) 5 .
Federal Registers
Final Rules 7
Proposed Rules 7
Notices 8
Call Analyses
Calls Answered 15
Caller Profiles 18
Hotline Topics 20
RCRA/UST, Superfund, and EPCRA
National Toil-Free No.: 800-424-9346
Local: 703-412-9810
TDD National Toil-Free No.: 800-553-7672
This report is prepared and submitted in support of Contract No. 68-WO-0039.
EPA Project Officer:
Carie Van Hook Jasperse
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
Printed on
Recycled Paper
-------
MONTHLY HOTLINE REPORT
AVAILABILITY
National Technical Information Service
(NTIS)
The Monthly Hotline Report can be ordered
through NTIS at (703) 487-4650. The NTIS
order numbers are as follows:
Yearly Subscription SUB-9224
January 1995 PB95-922 401
February 1995 PB95-922 402
March 1995 PB95-922 403
April 1995
May 1995
June 1995
July 1995
August 1995
September 1995
October 1995
November 1995
December 1995
PB95-922 404
SUB-9224-95-005
SUB-9224-95-006
SUB-9224-95-007
SUB-9224-95-008
SUB-9224-95-009
SUB-9224-95-010
SUB-9224-95-011
SUB-9224-95-012
EPA and state personnel can order the Monthly
Hotline Report from the RCRA Docket at
(703) 603-9230. The order number for the
1995 yearly subscription is EPA530-R-95-002.
ELECTRONIC AVAILABILITY
The Monthly Hotline Report Questions and
Answers are also available for downloading at
no charge from the CLU-IN bulletin board at
(301) 589-8366.
The complete text of the 1993, 1994, and 1995
Monthly Hotline Reports may be accessed via
the Internet using a gopher. From the EPA
Core Server at gopher.epa.gov, follow this
pathway: EPA Offices & Regions --> Office of
Solid Waste & Emergency Response —> OSW
(RCRA) --> RCRA: General --> RCRA/UST,
Superfund & EPCRA Hotline Reports.
The Hotline maintains an electronic mailing
list named HOTLINE_OSWER. Subscribers
will have Hotline announcements and Monthly
Hotline Reports e-mailed to them as they are
released, at no charge.
• To subscribe to the Hotline electronic
mailing list send an e-mail to:
Listserver@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
Subject: SUBSCRIBE TO LISTSERVERS
Message: SUBSCRIBE
HOTLINEJDSWER your first name
your last name
For example, SUBSCRIBE
HOTLINEJDSWER JOHN SMITH
• To receive the Help file with useful
commands for users send an e-mail to:
Listserver@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.g6v
Subject: HELP
Message: HELP
-------
HOTLINE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1.
RCRA
Lead-Acid Batteries and Universal
Waste
How do the Pan 273, Standards for
Universal Waste Management, affect the
management of lead-acid batteries regulated
under the Part 266, Subpart G, regulations for
spent lead-acid batteries being reclaimed?
Lead-acid batteries that are managed under
Part 266, Subpart G, are not subject to the
universal waste management standards. The
universal management standards only apply to
those lead-acid batteries that are not managed
under Part 266, Subpart G. The existing
recycling program for automotive lead-acid
batteries has been extremely successful, with
recycling rates in excess of 90 percent
nationwide. By retaining the Part 266,
Subpart G, requirements. EPA can continue
to operate this program without modification
or adverse effect on the environment. EPA
expects that most non-automotive lead-acid
batteries will be managed under Part 273 (60
FR 25492, 25505; May 11, 1995).
2. Cathodic Protection Inspections on
Existing Underground Storage
Tanks
An owner/operator of an existing steel
underground storage tank (UST) installed a
cathodic protection system on the tank in
order to comply with the upgrading
requirements for existing USTs in 1995 (40
CFR §280.21). Must the owner/operator
begin inspecting the cathodic protection
system even though the system is installed
prior to the December 22,1998, upgrading
deadline?
The 1998 upgrading deadline has no
bearing on the inspection requirements for
cathodic protection systems on existing UST
systems. All cathodic protection systems must
be tested within six months of installation and
then once every three years to ensure proper
operation (§280.3l(b)(l)). This requirement
applies to cathodic protection systems
installed prior to and after the 1998 regulatory
deadline for upgrading existing tanks.
Through regular inspections, owners/operators
can ensure that corrosion protection systems
are operated and maintained to continuously
provide protection to the metal components of
an UST, thereby preventing releases to the
environment.
Owners/operators must maintain records
of the results for the last two triennial
inspections of the cathodic protection system
(§280.3 l(d)(2)). In addition, impressed
current cathodic protection systems must also
be inspected every 60 days to ensure the
equipment is running properly (§280.3l(c)).
Owners/operators must maintain records from
the last three inspections for the 60 day checks
of impressed current systems (§280.31(d)(l)X
-------
Questions and Answers
December 1995
3. Clean Air Act Hazardous Air
Pollutants and Hazardous
Substance USTs
Underground storage tanks (USTs) are
subject to the requirements of 40 CFR Part
280 if they contain hazardous substances, as
defined in CERCLA §101(14), or petroleum.
The list of hazardous substances identified
under CERCLA is not, however, a static list, as
it is comprised of chemicals identified under a
number of different environmental laws.
Chemicals, such as ethylene glycol, identified
as hazardous air pollutants under the 1990
amendments to the Clean Air Act were subject
to regulation as CERCLA hazardous
substances when the bill was signed into law
on November 15,1990. Moreover, USTs
containing these newly identified hazardous
substances became immediately subject to
regulation as hazardous substance USTs. If a
tank was installed after December 22,1988,
but prior to the date upon which the material
stored in the tank was identified as a
hazardous substance, would the tank be
considered a new or existing tank system?
The tank would qualify as an existing
system. While §280.12 separates "existing
tank system[s]" from "new tank system[s]" on
the basis of their status as of December 22,
1988, use of this date is inappropriate to
determine the regulatory status of tanks that
store newly identified hazardous substances;
the tank would be considered an existing
system if it was in use on the date that the
material became identified as a hazardous
substance. In contrast, any UST brought into
use for storage of a material after it has been
identified by statute or regulation as a
CERCLA hazardous substance would need to
meet the standards for new UST systems prior
to use.
By way of example, an ethylene glycol
underground storage tank installed in 1989
would qualify as an existing tank system. As a
result, the UST would not be subject to
upgrade requirements until December 22,
1998. Yet, if installed in 1991, the UST would
have been a new tank system, and, therefore,
would be required to meet the new tank
standards described in 40 CFR Part 280.
CERCLA
4. The Use of Soil Screening Levels
and Their Relationship to
Preliminary Remediation Goals
Both Soil Screening Levels (SSLs) and
Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) are
risk-based contaminant levels developed to
streamline the CERCLA response process.
SSLs are chemical concentrations in soil that
represent levels of contamination below which
there is generally no concern under CERCLA.
PRGs are draft, media-specific cleanup levels
based on preliminary site information. How
are SSLs and PRGs related, and how should
each be used during the remedial
investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS)? May
SSLs be used as cleanup standards?
While SSLs and PRGs are both risk-based
levels of contamination, they may be
developed using different assumptions, land
uses, or exposures, and have distinct uses.
SSLs are used to identify those areas of a site
where levels of contaminants in soil are
generally not of concern under CERCLA. By
excluding these areas from further.
investigation, the site manager may focus on
areas that have levels of soil contamination
that require further study. PRGs are developed
for the purpose of screening remedial
technologies, in order to focus study on those
alternatives that can achieve remediation goals.
-------
December 1995
Questions and Answers
The use of SSLs is not mandatory. The
decision to use SSLs is made early in the RI/
FS, and should be based on two
considerations: the potential benefits of
eliminating areas of the site, potential
chemicals of concern, or exposure pathways
from further study; and whether site conditions
are suitable for the application of the soil
screening framework. This framework is the
process used to develop SSLs, and is based on
several assumptions. The assumptions include
default values and prescribed parameters for
residential land use and for human exposure
through the soil ingestion pathway, the
inhalation pathway, and ingestion of
groundwater contaminated by the migration of
chemicals through the soil. SSLs cannot be
applied at all CERCLA sites, especially sites
with exposure and risk scenarios differing from
the assumptions used in developing the
framework (e.g., no ecological threats, no
agricultural land use). If a site is found to be
suitable, the site manager then collects a small
amount of site characteristic data to develop
site-develop SSLs. (Generic, conservative
SSLs may also be developed for crude
comparisons.) After the site manager
establishes SSLs for a particular site, actual
soil contaminant concentrations are then
measured and compared to the appropriate
SSLs. Those areas with average soil
concentrations below SSLs can generally be
eliminated from further evaluation under
CERCLA, while areas with concentrations
exceeding SSLs generally receive further
investigation to determine the degree of risk
posed by those areas.
PRGs are an integral part of each RI/FS.
When developing the RI/FS workplan,
remedial action objectives are established,
providing a general description of what the
remedial action will accomplish. PRGs are
specified in the remedial action objectives as
desired endpoint contaminant concentrations or
risk levels (i.e., "draft" cleanup levels). They
focus the feasibility study on technologies that
can achieve the remedial goals, thereby
limiting the number of alternatives considered
in the detailed analysis required at 40 CFR
§300.430(e)(9). Initially, PRGs are based
upon readily available environmental or
health-based applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements (ARARs) as
developed under other laws. Common
examples include chemical-specific maximum
contaminant levels and water quality criteria.
PRGs may be modified into final cleanup
levels after the completion of the baseline risk
assessment, and as additional information is
derived from the RI/FS (55 FR 8712; March 8,
1990).
SSLs are not universal remediation goals or
cleanup standards, although there may be some
circumstances where SSLs may be used as
PRGs. The general methodology for
developing SSLs is an update of methodology
presented in the Risk Assessment Guidance for
Superfund, Part B, for developing health-based
PRGs. The use of SSLs as PRGs, however, is
limited to sites where the site conditions are
consistent with the assumptions inherent in the
soil screening guidance. SSLs may be used as
PRGs where basis for response action exists,
and provided that site parameters approximate
the assumptions used in developing the soil
screening framework (e.g., residential use, no
ecological problems, consistent exposure
pathways). SSLs may be modified as the RI
proceeds. SSLs will only become final
cleanup levels when the nine criteria
considered in the remedy selection process (40
CFR §300.430(e)(9)(iii)) support a remedy that
achieves the SSLs.
-------
NEW PUBLICATIONS
HOW TO ORDER
NTIS 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 Toil-Free No.: 800-424-9346
Local: 703-412-9810
TDD National Toil-Free No.: 800-553-7672
CERCLA
EPCRA
TITLE: Innovative Treatment Technologies:
Annual Status Report (Seventh Edition),
Applications of New Technologies at
Hazardous Waste Sites
AVAILABILITY: NCEPI
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA542-R-95-008
This report documents and analyzes the
selection and use of innovative treatment
technologies in the Superfund program and at
some non-Superfund sites subject to corrective
action under RCRA. The report updates the
status of all the projects and includes projects
for which innovative technologies were
selected in Superfund RODs during FY 1994.
TITLE: Bioremediation in the Field
AVAILABILITY: ORD
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA540-N-95-500
The bioremediation field initiative provides
technical assistance to RPMs and OSCs. It
also provides contacts for involvement in the
bioremediation field initiatives as well as a list
of sites considering bioremediation.
TITLE: Hazardous Chemical Inventory Tier
II Form and Instructions, Windows Electronic
Version
AVAILABILITY: Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: N/A
EPCRA §312 requires an owner or operator of
a facility that meets the applicability criteria
found in 40 CFR Part 370 to submit a
Hazardous Chemical Inventory Form to the
State Emergency Response Commission, Local
Emergency Planning Commission, and fire
department with jurisdiction over the facility.
The purpose of this form is to provide state and
local officials and the public with specific
information on hazardous chemicals present at
a facility during the past year. The Tier II
form and instructions are available through the
Hotline. Hard copy or a disk formatted for
DOS or Windows may be ordered.
-------
FEDERAL REGISTERS
FINAL RULES
RCRA
"RCRA Expanded Public Participation"
December 11,1995 (60 FR 63417)
EPA issued regulations providing for earlier
public involvement and expanded public
access to information throughout the
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facility permitting process. EPA
required applicants to hold an informal public
meeting prior to application submission, the
permitting agency to notify the public when it
received the application, and combustion
facilities to notify the public before a trial
burn. In addition, the rule gives the
permitting agency the authority to require an
information repository at any point during the
permitting process or the permit life. This
rule is effective on June 11,1996.
PROPOSED RULES
RCRA
"Hazardous Waste Delisting Petition"
December 7,1995 (60 Efl 62794)
On December 7,1995 (60 EE 62794), EPA
proposed to grant the delisting petition
submitted by Bethlehem Steel Corporation
(BSC). BSC petitioned the Agency to
exclude, on a one-time basis, wastes
contained in an on-site landfill in
Lackawanna, New York. The wastes are
presently listed as EPA hazardous waste
number K060. In addition, EPA proposed to
use the EPACML fate and transport model to
predict the concentration of hazardous
constituents that may be released from the
petitioned waste into the groundwater.
"Hazardous Waste Identification Rule
(HWIR)"
December 21,1995 (60 FR 66344)
HWIR proposes to establish constituent-
specific exit levels for low-risk solid wastes
that are designated as hazardous because they
are listed, or have been mixed with, derived
from, or contain listed hazardous wastes.
Generators of listed hazardous wastes that
meet the self-implementing, risked-based exit
levels would no longer be subject to the
hazardous waste management system under
Subtitle C of RCRA as listed hazardous
wastes. The Agency is also proposing to
replace the technology-based LDR treatment
standards in 40 CFR §268.40 with the risk-
based exit levels. EPA will accept public
comments on the HWIR proposal until
February 20,1996.
CERCLA
"National Priorities List; Lewisburg
Dump Superfund Site"
December 20,1995 (60 EH 65616)
EPA Region IV announced its intent to
delete the Lewisburg Dump site, located near
Lewisburg, Tennessee, from the National
Priorities List. EPA and the State of
Tennessee have determined that the site no
-------
Federal Registers
December 1995
longer poses a significant threat to public
health or the environment and that no further
cleanup under CERCLA is appropriate.
Comments concerning the proposed deletion
will be accepted on or before January 11, 1996.
NOTICES
RCRA
"Office of Underground Storage Tanks
(OUST) Docket Relocation"
December 1,1995 (60 FR 62008)
The Office of Underground Storage Tanks
Docket, originally scheduled to be closed from
November 14, 1995 through November 24,
1995, will now be closed through December 1,
1995. Closing the OUST Docket during the
move will facilitate the moving of the Docket's
collection and ensure the integrity of the
regulatory dockets. Beginning December 4,
the phone number for the OUST Docket will
be (703) 603-9231.
"New Jersey; Final Partial Program
Determination of Adequacy of State/
Tribal Municipal Solid Waste Permit
Program"
December 6,1995 (60 FR 62439)
EPA granted final partial approval to the
following components of New Jersey's
municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF)
permitting program: location restrictions,
operating criteria, design criteria, closure and
post-closure care, and financial assurance
criteria. New Jersey's program had been
deemed adequate to ensure compliance with
the MSWLF criteria. The determination of
adequacy for New Jersey's program is effective
December 6, 1995.
"New York Department of
Environmental Conservation; Transfer
and Storage of Hazardous Waste
Incidental to Transportation
Requirements"
December 6,1995 (60 FR 62527)
It was determined that federal hazardous
material transportation law preempts New
York State's 6 NYCRR §372.3(a)(7), which
restricts hazardous waste transporters'
activities at transfer facilities.
RCRA/CERCLA
"Proposed Consent Decree; Halby
Chemical Superfund Site"
December 4,1995 (60 FR 62108)
A proposed Consent Decree in United
States v. Brandywine Chemical Company was
lodged on November 9, 1995, with the U.S.
District Court for the District of Delaware.
The proposed Consent Decree requires the
defendant to take certain actions and to make
payments for a portion of the response costs in
relation to the Halby Chemical site in New
Castle, Delaware. The proposed Consent
Decree includes a covenant not to sue by the
United States under §§106 and 107 of
CERCLA and under §7003 of RCRA. DOJ
will receive comments relating to the proposed
Consent Decree for a period of 30 days from
the date of publication.
CERCLA
"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
Slattery Gas Stove Site"
December 6,1995 (60 Ffi 62445)
A proposed administrative settlement,
pursuant to §122(h)(l) of CERCLA, has been
reached in relation to the Slattery Gas Stove
site in Brooklyn, New York. Under the
-------
December1995
Federal Registers
NOTICES
proposed agreement, the settling parties will
pay EPA the sum of $95,000 in partial
reimbursement for prior response costs
incurred at the site. EPA will accept written
comments relating to the proposed settlement
on or before January 5, 1996.
"Proposed Consent Decree; Hertel
Landfill Superfund Site"
December 6,1995 (60 FR 62479)
A proposed Consent Decree in United
States v. Western Publishing Company. Inc.. et
aL was lodged on November 28,1995, with
the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of New York. The proposed Consent
Decree resolves claims of the United States
under CERCLA §§106 and 107 against the
defendants in connection with the Hertel
Landfill site in Plattekill, New York. DOJ will
receive comments relating to the proposed
Consent Decree for a period of 30 days from
the date of publication.
"Revised Model D_e_ Minimis Contributor
Consent Decree and Administrative
Order on Consent"
December 7,1995 (60 FR 62849)
EPA published the revised "Model CERCLA
Section 122(g)(4) De Minimis Contributor
Consent Decree" and the revised "Model
CERCLA Section 122(g)(4) De. Minimis
Contributor Administrative Order on Consent."
These models, developed by the Agency and
DOJ, supersede the "Interim Model CERCLA
Section 122(g)(4) D_£ Minimis Waste
Contributor Consent Decree and
Administrative Order on Consent" issued on
October 19,1987 (November 12,1987; 52
43393). The revised models are designed as
guidance for EPA and DOJ staff when
negotiating CERCLA §122(g)(l)(A) d£
minimis contributor settlements. In addition to
the models, EPA published a September 29,
1995 joint memorandum from EPA and DOJ
announcing issuance of the models.
"CERCLA Enforcement Against
Lenders and Government Entities that
Acquire Property Involuntarily"
December 11,1995 (60 FR 63517)
EPA published a policy memorandum which
sets forth EPA's and DOJ's policy regarding
the government's pursuit of CERCLA cost
recovery from lenders and against government
entities that acquire property involuntarily.
Although the "Lender Liability Rule,"
promulgated in 1992 (April 29, 1992; 57 FR
18344), was vacated by the Circuit Court of
appeals for the District of Columbia in 1994,
this memorandum states that, as an
enforcement policy, EPA and DOJ intend to
apply as guidance the provisions of the 1992
Rule, thereby endorsing the interpretations and
rationales announced in that Rule.
"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
Chicago Industrial Waste Haulers
Site"
December 12,1995 (60 FR 63712)
A proposed administrative settlement,
pursuant to §122(h)(l) of CERCLA, has been
reached in relation to the Chicago Industrial
Waste Haulers site in Alsip, Illinois. The
proposed settlement requires the settling party
to reimburse EPA for prior response costs
incurred at the site. EPA will accept written
comments relating to the proposed settlement
on or before January 11,1996.
-------
Federal Registers
December 1995
NOTICES
"De Minimis Administrative
Settlements; Peerless Industrial Paint
Coatings Site"
December 13,1995 (60 Ffi 64062)
EPA announced that it has entered into four
separate de. minimis administrative settlements
under §122(g) of CERCLA, in relation to the
Peerless Industrial Paint Coatings site in St.
Louis, Missouri. The settlements resolve the
liability of four settling parties for response
costs incurred and to be incurred at the site.
Written comments on the settlements will be
accepted by EPA on or before January 12,
1996.
"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
Hooker Chemical/Rucco Polymer Site"
December 13,1995 (60 FR 64062)
A proposed administrative settlement,
pursuant to §122(h)(l) of CERCLA, has been
reached in relation to the Hooker Chemical/
Rucco Polymer site in Hicksville, New York.
The proposed settlement requires the settling
parties to pay EPA the sum of $124,665 in
reimbursement of past response costs incurred
at the site. EPA will accept written comments
relating to the proposed settlement on or before
January 12, 1996.
"Proposed De Minimis Administrative
Settlement; Hudson Coal Tar Site"
December 13,1995 (60 FR 64062)
A proposed dfi minimis administrative
settlement, pursuant to § 122(g)(4) of
CERCLA, has been reached in relation to the
Hudson Coal Tar site in Hudson, New York.
The proposed settlement resolves the settling
party's liability under §§106 and 107 of
CERCLA for response actions or costs in
relation to the site. EPA will accept written
comments relating to the proposed settlement
on or before January 12, 1996.
"Proposed Consent Decree; Drake
Chemical Superfund Site"
December 18,1995 (60 FR 65066)
A proposed Consent Decree in United
States v. American Color & Chemical
Corporation, et al.. was lodged on November
30, 1995, with the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Pennsylvania. The
proposed Consent Decree resolves claims of
the United States under CERCLA §§106 and
107 against the defendants in connection with
the Drake Chemical site in Lock Haven,
Pennsylvania. DOJ will receive comments
relating to the proposed Consent Decree for a
period of 30 days from the date of publication.
"Proposed Consent Decree; Catskill
Tire Fire Superfund Site"
December 18,1995 (60 FR 65067)
A proposed Consent Decree in United
States v. Casings, et al.. was lodged on
November 27, 1995, with the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of New York.
The proposed Consent Decree requires the
defendants to pay the United States $120,000
and to reimburse EPA for response costs
incurred at the Catskill Tire Fire site. DOJ will
receive comments relating to the proposed
Consent Decree for a period of 30 days from
the date of publication.
"Proposed Consent Decree; Moss-
American Superfund Site"
December 18,1995 (60 Ffi 65067)
A proposed Consent Decree in United
States v. County of Milwaukee. Wisconsin was
10
-------
December 1995
Federal Registers
NOTICES
lodged on November 28,1995, with the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of
Wisconsin. The proposed Consent Decree
represents a settlement of claims brought
against Milwaukee County under CERCLA
§§106 and 107 for the recovery of costs
incurred and to be incurred by the United
States in relation to the Moss-American site in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin. DOJ will receive
comments relating to the proposed Consent
Decree for a period of 30 days from the date of
publication.
"Proposed Consent Decree; Harbor
Island Superfund Site"
December 18,1995 (60 F_B 65067)
A proposed Consent Decree in United
States v. The Port of Seattle, et al.. was lodged
on September 29,1995, with the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Washington.
The proposed Consent Decree requires the
defendants to implement EPA's selected
remedial action at the Harbor Island site in
Seattle, Washington, and to reimburse the
United States for response and oversight costs
incurred at the site. DOJ will receive
comments relating to the proposed Consent
Decree for a period of 30 days from the date of
publication.
"Proposed Stipulation of Settlement;
Pine Street Canal Site"
December 18,1995 (60 EB 65068)
A proposed stipulation of settlement in In re
St. Johnsbury Trucking Company. Inc.. was
lodged on November 24,1995, with the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of
New York. The proposed stipulation of
settlement requires payment for natural
resource damages and reimbursement of costs
incurred and to be incurred by the United
States in relation to the Pine Street Canal site
in Burlington, Vermont. DOJ will receive
comments relating to the proposed Consent
Decree for a period of 30 days from the date of
publication.
"Proposed Administrative Settlement;
Eastern Surplus Superfund Site"
December 20,1995 (60 FR 65656)
A proposed administrative settlement,
pursuant to §122(h) of CERCLA, has been
reached in relation to the Eastern Surplus site
in Meddybemps, Maine. The proposed
settlement resolves the liability under
CERCLA of the United States Department of
Defense for costs incurred by EPA in
conducting response actions at the site. EPA
will accept written comments relating to the
proposed settlement on or before January 19,
1996.
"Proposed Consent Decree; McColl
Superfund Site"
December 21,1995 (60 FR 66324)
A proposed Consent Decree in United States
and State of California v. Shell Oil Company.
Inc.. et al.. was lodged on December 1,1995,
with the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California. The proposed Consent
Decree resolves the liability of the defendant
under CERCLA §107 for costs incurred in
connection with the McColl site in Fullerton,
California. DOJ will receive comments
relating to the proposed Consent Decree for a
period of 30 days from the date of publication.
11
-------
Federal Registers
December 1995
NOTICES
"Proposed Consent Decree; Vega Alta
Public Supply Wells Superfund Site"
December 21,1995 (60 Ffi 66325)
A proposed Consent Decree in United
States v. Caribe General Electric Products.
Inc.. was lodged on December 8,1995, with
the U.S. District Court for the District of
Puerto Rico. The proposed Consent Decree
requires the defendants to pay a sum of
$2,650,000 to the United States for
reimbursement of past costs incurred in
connection with the Vega Alta Public Supply
Wells site in Vega Alta, Puerto Rico. DOJ will
receive comments relating to the proposed
Consent Decree for a period of 30 days from
the date of publication.
EPCRA
"Toxic Chemical Release Reporting;
Reopening of Comment Period on
Petition to Delist DBNPA"
December 15,1995 (60 FR 64407)
EPA granted a request to extend the comment
period for a petition to delete 2,2-dibromo-3-
nitrilopropionamide (DBNPA) from the
EPCRA §313 list of toxic chemicals. The
administrative stay of reporting requirements
for DBNPA under §313 of EPCRA and §6607
of the Pollution Prevention Act remains in
place (60 ER 54949; October 27,1995). EPA
also corrected an error printed in the
October 27,1995 notice. Written comments
on the petition to delist DBNPA will be
accepted by EPA on or before January 29,
1996.
ALL PROGRAM AREAS
"Solicitation Notice; Environmental
Justice Small Grants to Community-
Based/Grassroots Organizations and
Tribal Governments"
December 6,1995 (60 FIR 62432)
EPA solicited pre-applications for the Fiscal
Year 1996 Environmental Justice Small Grants
Program. The purpose of this grants program
is to provide financial assistance to eligible
community groups and federally recognized
tribal governments that are working on or plan
to carry out projects to address environmental
justice issues. Pre-applications must be
postmarked no later than March 2, 1996.
"Request for Applications;
Environmental Justice Community/
University Partnership Grants
Program"
December 6,1995 (60 FR 62436)
EPA solicited applications for the Fiscal Year
1996 Environmental Justice Small Grants
Program. The purpose of this grants program
is to help community groups and tribal
governments effectively address local
environmental issues through active
partnerships with one or more institutions of
higher education. Applications must be
postmarked no later than March 2, 1996.
"Request for Proposals; XL Community
Pilot Program"
December 12,1995 (60 EB 63711)
EPA invited proposals from local
governments, communities, states, tribes, and
other parties interested in participating in the
XL Community Pilot Program. Through the
Pilot Program, EPA will offer assistance to an
12
-------
December 1995 Federal Registers
NOTICES
entity in exchange for a commitment on the
pan of the entity to go beyond the
environmental results of compliance and
achieve greater environmental quality that
would have been realized under traditional
approaches. EPA will provide flexibility in the
implementation of environmental regulations,
technical support, coordination of federal
programs, identification of government
resources, and other types of support identified
on a case by case basis.
"Incentives for Self Policing: Discovery,
Disclosure, Correction, and
Prevention of Violations"
December 22,1995 (60 EB 66706)
EPA issued a final policy to encourage
regulated entities to voluntarily discover,
disclose, and correct violations of
environmental requirements. Incentives
include eliminating or substantially reducing
the gravity component of civil penalties (the
portion of a penalty over and above the
economic benefit received from non-
compliance) and not recommending the cases
for criminal prosecution. The policy also
requires companies to act to prevent recurrence
of the violation and to remedy any
environmental harm which has occurred.
13
-------
f t
CALL ANALYSES
250
CALLS ANSWERED BY HOTLINE
December Daily Volume*
Documents
12.4981
200
(0
n 100
50 --
EPCRA and Vk
Superfund ^\
I 2,574
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
-i 1 1 —
>l
— i 1 i 1
8 11
12 13
Day
Year to Date*
14 15 18 19 20 21 22
RCRA/UST
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Month
6,017
5,984
6,953
5,954
6,746
6,834
5,252
6,265
5,368
5,583
4,784
3,358
Cumulative
-
12,001
18,954
24,908
31,654
38,488
43,740
50,005
55,373
60,956
65,740
69,098
EPCRA and Superfund
January
February
March
April
May
June
July.
August
September
October
November
December
Month
3,432
4,284
3,892
3,158
3,910
7,707
4,095
3,663
2,828
2,768
3,093
2,574
Cumulative
--
7,716
1 1 ,608
14,766
18,676
26,383
30,478
34,141
36,969
39,737
42,830
45,404
(All
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Documents
Proa ram Areas)
Month
4,389
4,191
5,402
4,631
4,959
5,283
3.678
3,952
3,440
3,907
3,150
2,498
Cumulative
--
8,580
13,982
18,613
23,572
28,855
32,533
36.485
39,925
43,832
46,982
49,480
*A11 calls answered by the Call Management System, the Message Retrieval Line, and the Document Retrieval Line.
15
-------
Call Analyses
December 1995
QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY TYPE
December Daily Volume*
600 -r
500 --
Regulatory
w
11 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22
Year to Date*
Regulatory
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Month
12,045
11,182
12,817
10,851
13,051
19,381
12,290
13,749
13,313
14,642
12,227
,9,080
Cumulative
-
23,227
36,044
46,895
59,946
79,327
91,617
105,366
118,679
133,321
145,548
154,628
Document
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Month
5,285
5,301
6,643
5,636
6,707
7,924
5,855
6,027
5,034
5,479
5,201
3,326
Cumulative
--
10,586
17,229
22,865
29,572
37,496
43,351
49,378
54,412
59,891
65,092
68,418
Referral/Transfer
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Month
1,518
1,689
1,747
1,328
•1,652
2,276
1,349
1,282
1,144
1,151
1,166
756
Cumulative
-
3,207
4,954
6,282
7,934
10,210
11,559
12,841
13,985
15,136
16,302
17,058
* All questions answered by the Call Management System.-the Message Retrieval Line, and die Document Retrieval Line. A
single call may include multiple questions combined with document requests and referrals.
16
-------
December 1995
Call Analvses
QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY PROGRAM AREA
December 1995*
'Based on 12,406 questions and
Message Retrieval Line and the
excludes 756 referrals and transfers made from both Hotlines. Includes the
Document Retrieval Line.
Year to Date*
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
RCRA
Month
56%
(9,725)
52%
(9,474)
55%
(11,738)
55%
(9.814)
51%
(10,939)
45%
(13,075)
49%
(9.455)
56%
(1 1 ,879)
55%
(10,708)
58%
(12,365)
55%
(10,287)
53%
(6,999)
Cumulative
—
54%
(19,199)
55%
(30,937)
55%
(40,751)
54%
(51 .690)
52%
(64,765)
51%
(74,220)
52%
(86,099)
52%
(96,807)
53%
(109.172)
53%
(119,459)
53%
(126,458)
UST
Month
6%
(1,012)
5%
(951)
6%
(1 .290)
5%
(897)
5%
(1 ,052)
3%
(980)
4%
(828)
9%
(1.928)
10%
(2.045)
9%
(1,923)
9%
(1,785)
12%
(1,547)
Cumulative
—
5%
(1 ,963)
6%
(3,253)
6%
(4,150)
5%
(5,202)
5%
(6,182)
5%
(7,010)
5%
(8,938)
6%
(10,983)
6%
(12,906)
7%
(14,691)
7%
(16,238)
EPCRA
Month
24%
(4,215)
29%
(5,261)
23%
(4,904)
25%
(4,536)
31%
(6,684)
41%
(12,127)
31%
(6,084)
20%
(4,157)
20%
(3,848)
17%
(3,646)
18%
(3,366)
19%
(2,541)
Cumulative
— .
27%
(9.476)
25%
(14,380)
25%
(18,916)
27%
(25,600)
30%
(37,727)
30%
(43,811)
29%
(47,968)
28%
(51,816)
27%
(55,462)
26%
(58,828)
26%
(61 ,369)
Superfund
Month
14%
(2,378)
14%
(2.486)
16%
(3,275)
15%
(2,568)
13%
(2,735)
11%
(3,399)
16%
(3,127)
15%
(3,094)
15%
(2,890)
16%
(3,338)
17%
(3,156)
16%
(2,075)
Cumulative
—
14%
(4,864)
14%
(8,139)
14%
(10,707)
14%
(13,442)
13%
(16,841)
14%
(19,968)
14%
(23,062)
14%
(25,952)
14%
(29,290)
14%
(32,446)
14%
(34,521)
17
-------
Call Analyses
December 1995
CALLER PROFILE
RCRA/UST Hotline
Regulated Community 2,922
Citizens 93
S tate & Local Govt./Native American 167
Federal Agencies 51
Educational Institutions 156
EPA 39
Media . 6
Interest Groups 4
Congress 0
International 3
Other . 75
Referrals* 181
Transfers to EPCRA/Superfund Hotline* 133
Document Retrieval Line* 108
Message Retrieval Line* 893
TOTAL
4,831
Citizens Federal A9encies
State & Local Govt./ 30/ 1%
Native American
AM Others
8%
Regulated
Community
' No caller profile data available.
18
-------
December 1995
Call Analyses
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act/
Superfund Hotline
Manufacturers
Food/Tobacco 25
Textiles 18
Apparel 3
Lumber & Wood 12
Furniture 9
Paper 27
Printing & Publishing 16
Chemicals 119
Petroleum & Coal 36
Rubber and Plastics 9
Leather 4
Stone, Clay & Glass 10
Primary Metals 22
Fabricated Metals 31
Machinery (Excluding Electrical) 28
Electrical&Electronic Equipment 19
Transportation Equipment 38
Instruments 9
Misc. Manufacturing 128
Subtotal 563
Consultants/Engineers 1,621
Attorneys 189
Citizens 241
Public Interest Groups 10
Educational Institutions 42
EPA 31
Federal Agencies 62
GOCOs 3
Congress 0
State Officials/SERC 59
Local Officials/LEPCs 35
Fire Departments 8
Hospitals/Laboratories 4
Trade Associations 12
Union/Labor 0
Farmers 2
Distributors 0
Insurance Companies 1
Media/Press 6
Native Americans 1
International ' 3
Other 141
Referrals* 209
Transfers to RCRA/UST Hotline* 233
Document Retrieval Line* 7
Message Retrieval Line* 116
TOTAL 3,599
Citizens
8%
Attorneys
6%
All Others
14%
Consultants/
Engineers
53%
Manufacturers
19%
* No caller profile data available.
19
-------
Calf Analyses
December 1995
HOTLINE TOPICS
RCRA
RCRA GENERAL
SUBTITLE C
Hazardous Waste Id. - General
Toxicity Characteristic (TC)
Wood Preserving Wastes
Listing of Used Oil
Fluff
Mercury-Containing Lamps
Radioactive Mixed Waste
Delisting Petitions
Hazardous Waste Recycling
Generators
Small Quantity Generators
Transporters
Exports/Imports
TSDF General
Treatment
Storage
Disposal
Siting Facilities
Capacity
Land Disposal Restrictions
Permits and Permitting
Corrective Action
Liability/Enforcement
Test Methods
Health Effects
Combustion - General
Permitting
Tech. Standards/Combustion Units
Waste Minimization
Risk Assessment
Waste Minimization/Pollution Prevention
State Programs
Hazardous Waste Data
Military Munitions
SUBTITLE D
Household Hazardous Wastes
Subtitle D - General
Siting Facilities
Combustion
Industrial Waste
Solid Waste Recycling - General
Aluminum
Batteries
Glass
Paper
Plastics
Tires
Used Oil
893
1/7121
191
15
133
1
1191
21
26
1111
3471
139
56
18
4101
90
116
26
15
14
5951
131
152
99
55
15
34
18
24
20
9
68
80
49
82
98
1821
9
6
17
1961
12
15
18
29
20
6
107
Composting 19
Markets - General 21
Aluminum 1
Batteries 2
Compost 11
Glass 2
Paper 2
Plastics 4
Tires 8
Used Oil 21
Procurement General 24
Building Insulation 2
Cement/Cement Products with Fly Ash 0
Paper and Paper Products 14
Re-Refined Lubricating Oil 6
Retread Tires 1
Source Reduction/Pollution Prevention 71
Grant and Financing 12
OTHER WASTES
Ash • 11
Bevill Amendment (Mining Waste) 26
Medical Waste 124
Oil and Gas 18
TOTAL 6,999*
* Includes 1,908 RCRA document requests.
UST
General/Misc. 2601
Applicability/Definitions 79
Regulated Substances 42
Standards for New Tank Systems 1331
Tank Standards and Upgrading 114
Operating Requirements 72
Release Detection 324
Release Reporting & Investigation 65
Corrective Action for USTs 106
Out-of-Service/Closure 62
Financial Responsibility 1701
State Programs 46
Liability/Enforcement 51
LUST Trust Fund 23
TOTAL 1,547*
* Includes 527 UST document requests.
20
1 Hot topks for this month
• Topics are calculated as the summation of all questions received by the Hotline. A single call may result In
multiple questions.
-------
December 1995
Call Analyses
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW
General:
General Title III Questions 3531
Trade Secrets 11
Enforcement 12
Liability/Citizen Suits 2
Training 2
Chemical-Specific Information 25
Emergency Planning (§§301-303):
General 61
Notification Requirements 19
SERC/LEPC Issues 57
EHSs/TPQs 22
Risk Communication/
Hazards Analysis 12
Exemptions 5
Emergency Release Notification (§304):
General 127
Notification Requirements 26
Reportable Quantities 114
CERCLA § 103 vs. SARA §304 28
ARIP/AHEDB/ERNS 4
Exemptions 8
Hazardous Chemical Reporting
(§§311-312):
General 70
MSDS Reporting Requirements 34
Tier I/II Requirements 84
Thresholds 23
Hazard Categories 6
Mixtures Reporting 10
Exemptions 20
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
1291
1721
52
1611
17
4011
751
7
83
72
19
1111
34
Special Topics:
CAA§112
General 27
RMPs 13
List of Regulated S ubstances 18
Federal Facilities Executive Order 15
TOTAL 2,541
"Includes 490 Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know document requests
SUPERFUND
General/Misc. 177
Access & Information Gathering 45
Administrative Improvements
General 129
Environmental Justice/Brownfields 2061
S ACM/Presumptive Remedies. 91
Soil Screening Levels 25
Administrative Record 4
ARARs 129
CERCLIS 83
Citizen Suits - 2
Claims Against Fund 13
Clean-Up Costs 16
Clean-Up Standards 52
Community Involvement 16
Contract Lab Program (CLP) 10
Contractor Indemnification 2
Contracts 6
Definitions 28
Enforcement 33
Federal Facilities 63'
Hazardous Substances 78
HRS 10
Liability 61
Local Gov't Reimbursement 5
Natural Resource Damages 2
NCP 19
Notification 46
NPL 971
Off Site Rule 1
OSHA 4
PA/SI 8
PRPs 71
RD/RA 9
Reauthorization 16
1 Hot topics for this month
1 Topics are calculated as the summation of all questions received by the Hotline. A single call may result in
multiple questions.
21
-------
Call Analyses
December 1995
Remedial
Removal
RI/FS
Risk Assess./Health Effects
ROD
RQ
Settlements
SITE Program
State Participation
State Program
TAGs
Taxes
78
42
18
35
28
2071
20
26
7
8
0
6
Special Topics
Oil Pollution Act
SPCC Regulations
Radiation Site Cleanup
4
7
32
TOTAL 2,075*
"Includes 401 Superfund document requests.
TOTAL HOTLINE QUESTIONS,
DOCUMENT REQUESTS AND
REFERRALS:
13,162
1 Hot topics for this month
1 Topks are calculated as the summation of all questions received by the Hotline. A single call may result in
multiple questions.
22
------- |