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 ------- |