w • EPA530-R-97-005g »-' SUB-9224-97-007 MONTHLY HOTLINE REPORT July 1997 RCRA, Superfund, and EPCRA Hotline Questions & Answers Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 1 Clean Air Act §112(r)(CAA) 2 New Publications Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 7 Underground Storage Tanks (UST) 10 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) 10 Federal Registers Final Rules 13 Proposed Rules 14 Notices 15 Call Analyses Caller Profiles 21 Hotline Topics 23 RCRA, Superfund, and EPCRA National Toll-Free No.: 800-424-9346 Local: 703-412-9810 TDD National Toll-Free No.: 800-553-7672 This report is prepared and submitted in support of Contract No. 68-W6-0016. Judi Kane, Project Officer Sheretta Dixon, Alternate Project Officer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC 20460 Printed on Recycled Paper ------- MONTHLY HOTLINE REPORT AVAILABILITY Electronic Availability The Monthly Hotline Report Questions and Answers are also available for downloading at no charge from the CLU-IN bulletin board via modem at (301) 589-8366 or telnet at clu- in.epa.gov. After registering, select Directory 8 from the file submenu. CLU-IN also has the Monthly Hotline Reports available via the World Wide Web (WWW) at ftp://clu-in.com/download/hotline/ The complete text of the 1991 (November and December only), 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996 Monthly Hotline Reports may be accessed via the WWW. Go to the Hotline Home Page at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hotline/ and select "Monthly 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 HOTLINE_OSWER your first name your last name For example, SUBSCRIBE HOTLINE OSWER JOHN SMITH • To receive the Help file with useful commands for users send an e-mail to: Listserver@unixmail.rtpnc.epa. gov Subject: HELP Message: HELP 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-9224-97-000 January 1997 SUB-9224-97-001 February 1997 SUB-9224-97-002 March 1997 SUB-9224-97-003 April 1997 May 1997 June 1997 July 1997 RCRA Docket SUB-9224-97-004 SUB-9224-97-005 SUB-9224-97-006 SUB-9224-97-007 EPA and state personnel can order the Monthly Hotline Report from the RCRA Docket at (703) 603-9230. The order number for the 1997 yearly subscription is EPA53Q-R-97-005. ------- HOTLINE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS RCRA 1. Self-Transportation of Used Oil by Service Contractors Used oil generators must ensure that all shipments of used oil in quantities greater than 55 gallons are transported off site only by transporters with EPA identification numbers. Generators may transport up to 55 gallons of used oil in their own vehicles (self- transport) without an EPA identification number, provided the used oil is either produced at the generator's site or collected from do-it-yourselfers, and provided the used oil is sent to an approved collection center or an aggregation point owned or operated by the generator (40 CFR §279.24). If a facility hires a contractor to come on site and service equipment containing used oil, provided the contractor complies with the requirements of §279.24, can the contractor self-transport the used oil generated from servicing the equipment without an EPA identification number? The contractor can self-transport up to 55 gallons of used oil to a collection center or an aggregation point without an EPA identification number because he also qualifies as the generator of that used oil. The definition of used oil generator includes "any person, by site, whose act or process produces used oil or whose act first causes used oil to become subject to regulation" (§279.1). A contractor, therefore, that comes on site and services equipment containing used oil is a used oil generator, because the contractor's act of servicing and removing used oil from equipment first causes the used oil to be subject to regulation. As a generator, such a contractor may self-transport up to 55-gallons of used oil without an EPA identification number pursuant to §274.24. This situation is analogous to the one described in the September 10, 1992, preamble discussion of used oil generated on ships in which the owner or operator of the ship or vessel and the person or persons removing or accepting the oil from the vessel are considered to be "co-generators" of the used oil (57 FR 41566; 41585). Similarly, both the owner or operator of the equipment and the person removing used oil from the equipment may be considered "co-generators" of the used oil, and both parties are responsible for managing the used oil in accordance with used oil generator standards of Part 279, Subpart C. The co-generators may decide which of the parties will fulfill the generator requirements. Either co-generator can self-transport the used oil under the provisions of §279.24 without an EPA identification number, provided no more than 55 gallons of used oil are transported at any one time, provided the used oil is transported in vehicles owned by the co-generator or owned by an employee of the co-generator, and provided the used oil is sent to an approved collection center or to an aggregation point owned or operated by the co-generator who is self-transporting the used oil. ------- Hotline Questic 'Nnswers July 1997 CAA§112(r) 2. Frequently Asked Questions on the CAA §112(r) Program Levels The risk management program regulations in 40 CFR Part 68 are applicable to owners or operators of stationary sources at which more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance is present in a process (40 CFR §68.10(a)). Are all covered processes subject to identical risk management program requirements? No. To ensure that individual processes are subject to requirements commensurate with their size and process type, EPA has classified them into three categories, or "programs." Program 3 processes are subject to the most comprehensive requirements and comprise relatively complex chemical processing operations in specified Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes and processes already subject to the OSHA process safety management (PSM) standard. Program 2 processes are subject to a streamlined version of the requirements, and include generally less complex operations that do not involve chemical processing. Program 1 processes, subject to minimal requirements, are those from which a worst-case release would not affect the public. Further, since the RMP rule requirements are performance based, owners or operators of stationary sources with processes in Programs 2 or 3 have flexibility under the rule to tailor their programs to best meet their own risk management needs. If a stationary source has several processes that are covered under 40 CFR Part 68, and some of those processes have had an accidental release within the past five years (making those processes ineligible for Program 1 status), are the individual processes from which no accidental releases have occurred also ineligible for Program 1 status? No. Eligibility determinations for Program 1 status are made separately for each process. If any individual process meets all of the criteria listed at 40 CFR §68.10(b), that process is eligible for Program 1 status. If a stationary source comprises some covered processes that meet the eligibility requirements for one of the three programs (i.e., Program 1,2, or 3) and some processes that are subject to a different program, must the owner or operator of the source submit multiple risk management plans (RMPs)? No. Although a stationary source may have processes in one or more of the three programs, the owner or operator must submit a single RMP that includes the information required by 40 CFR §§68.155 through 68.185 for all covered processes at that source (40 CFR §68.150(a)). That RMP will contain relevant information on each covered process. A covered process that is ineligible for Program 1 will be subject to Program 3 requirements if the process is in one of nine specified SIC codes, or is subject to the OSHA PSM standard (40 CFR §68.10(d)). When determining Program 3 applicability for a particular process, should the owner or operator use the primary SIC code that describes the stationary source's main business ? No. The owner or operator must determine the individual SIC code for each covered process to determine whether Program 3 applies (61 FR 31670; June 20, 1996). The assigned SIC code should reflect the activity of ------- July 1997 Hotline Questions & Answers the process, and will not necessarily be the same as the source's overall primary SIC code. The preamble of the risk management program final rule states that Program 3 applies to processes in certain SlO&odes (61 FR 31670; June 20, 1996). It also states that Program 3 applies to any process subject to the OSHA PSM, unless the process is eligible for Program 1. If a process meets the requirements of Program 1, but is also in SIC code 2611 (one of those identified for Program 3 applicability), is that process subject to the Program 1 or Program 3 requirements? The Program 1 eligibility criteria are found at 40 CFR §68.10(b). If a process meets the criteria for Program 1, that process is subject only to the Program 1 requirements, regardless of the applicable SIC code or whether the process is subject to OSHA's PSM. Program 3 requirements do not apply to processes that meet the Program 1 eligibility criteria (40 CFR §68.10(d)). The preamble to the risk management program final rule states that EPA "recognizes that the full PSM standard is not appropriate for propane retailers," and "has assigned propane retailers and users to Program 2 " (61 FR 31702; June 20, 1996). Will processes containing propane always be subject to Program 2 requirements? No. A process containing propane may be subject to the Program 1 requirements if that process meets the Program 1 eligibility criteria, listed at 40 CFR §68.10(b). The preamble states that "all retailers are in Program 2, unless they can meet Program 1 criteria" (61 FR 31676). Propane retailers generally will not have any Program.3 processes because Program 3 requirements are only applicable to processes in SIC codes 2611, 2812, 2819, 2821, 2865, 2869, 2873, 2879, or 2911 or processes covered by OSHA's PSM standard (40 CFR §68.10(d)). Retailers are specifically exempted from OSHA's PSM (61 FR 31676). 3. Frequently Asked Questions on Risk Management Program Requirements: Worst-case Release Scenario Analyses The owner or operator of a stationary source covered by the risk management program regulations must conduct a worst- case release scenario analysis as part of the required hazard assessment (40 CFR §68.25). The worst-case release is defined as the release of the largest quantity of a regulated substance from a vessel or process line failure that results in the greatest distance to an endpoint (40 CFR §68.3). If a release from the process containing the largest quantity of a regulated substance would result in a shorter distance to an endpoint than a release from a smaller process, which scenario should be considered the worst-case release ? The worst-case release is the scenario that results in the greatest distance to an endpoint beyond the stationary source boundary (40 CFR §68.25(h)). EPA recognizes that there could be release scenarios in which a smaller process could generate a greater distance to an endpoint than a release from the largest vessel or pipeline (61 FR 31682; June 20, 1996). The regulatory language at 40 CFR §68.25(h) clarifies that a scenario involving a smaller quantity of regulated substance handled at a higher process temperature or pressure, as well as a scenario involving a smaller quantity located closer to the stationary source boundary may, in fact, result in the worst-case release. ------- Hotline Questions & Answe; July 1997 A stationary source subject to the risk management program regulations at 40 CFR Part 68 comprises multiple Program 2 and Program 3 covered processes. The owner or operator must conduct a single worst-case release analysis to represent toxic regulated substances and a single worst-case release analysis to represent flammable regulated substances (40 CFR §68.25(a)(2)). Could the worst-case scenario for a toxic substance involve a Program 2 process while the worst- case scenario for a flammable substance involves a Program 3process, and vice versa? Yes. For the purpose of the hazard assessment requirements of 40 CFR Part 68, Subpart B, no distinction is made between Program 2 and Program 3 processes. The worst-case release scenario for toxic substances can be represented by either a Program 2 or a Program 3 process, and the worst-case release scenario for flammable substances can also be represented by either a Program 2 or a Program 3 process. The owner or operator of a stationary source subject to the risk management program regulations must analyze the worst- case release scenario involving a Program 2 or 3 process containing a regulated flammable substance and the worst-case release scenario involving a Program 2 or 3 process containing a regulated toxic substance (40 CFR §68.25). If the worst-case release scenarios for a regulated toxic substance and for a regulated flammable substance involve the same process, must both scenarios be analyzed? Yes. If the worst-case release scenarios for a regulated toxic substance and for a regulated flammable substance in Program 2 and 3 processes are associated with the same process, the two worst-case release scenarios must be analyzed separately. Under the risk management program regulations at 40 CFR Part <5#, if a Program 1 process contains a threshold amount of both a regulated toxic substance and a regulated flammable substance, should a worst case release scenario be analyzed for each of the substances in the process? Yes. A worst case release scenario must be analyzed for each regulated toxic and flammable substance above the threshold. This analysis will serve two purposes: 1) to demonstrate that no release from that process would reach a public receptor as required in 40 CFR §68.10(b)(2); and 2) to determine the one "worst" worst case release scenario that results in the greatest distance to an endpoint, which must be reported in the RMP. When selecting the worst-case release scenario for Program 2 and 3 processes as required by 40 CFR §68.25, a stationary source owner or operator must analyze the release scenario that results in the greatest distance to an endpoint. Does the "greatest distance to an endpoint" refer to the greatest total distance from the process (e.g., vessel or pipeline), or to the distance beyond the stationary source boundary? The greatest distance to an endpoint will ultimately refer to the distance beyond the stationary source boundary. When selecting a worst-case release scenario, the stationary source owner or operator must first evaluate potential releases from all Program 2 and 3 covered processes. Each release is modeled as a circle, with its center at the process and with a radius equaling the distance to the endpoint concentration (Response to Comments document, Chapter 5, pg. 5-109). The owner or operator must then choose the scenario that results in the greatest distance to an endpoint (40 CFR §68.25(a)(2)). If a scenario with a ------- July 1997 Hotline Questions & Answers smaller overall distance to an endpoint, however, could result in a greater distance to an endpoint beyond the stationary source boundary (e.g., the process is very close to the facility boundary), it must be chosen as the worst-case release scenario (40 CFR §68.25(h)). ------- 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, Superfund, and EPCRA National Toil-Free No.: (800) 424-9346 Local: (703)412-9810 TDD National Toll-Free No.: (800) 553-7672 EPA's fax-on-demand service distributes selected publications noted by a "fax-on-demand" number. To order these documents, from your fax machine dial (202) 651-2060 (for OSW documents), (202) 651-2061 (for CEPPO documents), and (202) 651-2062 (for OERR documents), and follow the instructions provided by the voice prompt, using the fax-on-demand number noted. Please call the Hotline for detailed instructions on using the fax-on-demand service. - EPA Publications Available on the Internet You may access certain documents electronically by using this server: World Wide Web (WWW): http://www.epa.gov Documents on the WWW server may be located by using the on-line search functions. Note: As of March 31, 1997, materials previously available from the Gopher server (gopher.epa.gov) will be archived and henceforth available via the Internet solely on the World Wide Web server. RCRA TITLE: Pay-As-You-Throw Tool Kit Order Form AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-F-97-012a This brochure outlines and provides ordering information for the Pay-As-You-Throw Tool Kit. TITLE: Extended Product Responsibility: A New Principle for Product-Oriented Pollution Prevention AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-R-97-009 This report showcases successful applications of Extended Product Responsibility (EPR) by companies responding to a variety of business incentives, including cost savings, increased customer loyalty, product innovation, and green image building. TITLE: Prioritized Chemical List; Draft AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-D-97-004 The draft list provides a relative ranking of more than 800 chemicals based on the chemicals' tendency to persist in the environment. TITLE: Chemical-Waste Code Crosswalk; Draft AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-D-97-005 This document assists in establishing the link between chemicals and RCRA waste codes by identifying waste streams likely to contain particular chemicals and the chemicals likely to be present in a particular waste. ------- New Publications July 1997 TITLE: Background Paper: Exclusion to the Definition of Solid Waste; Excluded Scrap Metal and Shredded Circuit Boards Being Recycled AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-176 945 This document describes the modification of the definition of solid waste to exclude scrap metal and containerized shredded circuit boards that are being recycled. A definition for processed scrap metal and discussion of comments received on the proposed land disposal restrictions Phase IV supplemental rulemaking are given. TITLE: Background Document for Land Disposal Restrictions - Wood Preserving Wastes (Final Rule-): Capacity Analysis and Response to Capacity-Related Comments AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-176 937 This document presents the capacity analysis EPA conducted to support the Phase IV land disposal restrictions (LDR) rulemaking on newly listed wastes from wood preserving. TITLE: Economic Impact Assessment of the Phase IV Land Disposal Restrictions Final Rule on Newly Identified Wood Preserving Hazardous Wastes, Contaminated Media, and Abandoned Wood Preserving Sites AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-176 960 This assessment estimates the incremental cost of the Phase IV LDR final rule for newly identified wood preserving wastes on hazardous waste cleanups of contaminated media at inactive and abandoned wood preserving sites. TITLE: Best Demonstrated Available Technology (BDAT) Background Document for Toxicity Characteristic Metal Wastes, D004-D011; Proposed AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-176 986 This background document provides the Agency's rationale and technical support for developing BDAT treatment standards for both nonwastewater and wastewater forms of the eight TC metal wastes: arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, selenium, and silver. TITLE: Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Phase IV Land Disposal Restrictions Final Rule for Newly Identified Wood Preserving Wastes AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-176 952 This document provides estimates on the costs, economic impacts, and benefits of the wood preserving wastes provisions of the Phase IV LDR rule. TITLE: Regulatory Impact Analysis: Phase IV Land Disposal Restrictions - Toxicity Characteristic (TC) Metals AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-176 994 This analysis estimates the costs, economic impacts, and benefits of the supplemental proposed rule applying Phase IV LDR to metal-bearing hazardous wastes. It also provides discussion of non-ferrous metal foundries, waste generation and management, current treatment standards, and revised universal treatment standards (UTS) for toxicity characteristic nonwastewaters. ------- July 1997 Plications TITLE: Regulatory Impact Analysis: Application of the Phase IV Land Disposal Restrictions to Newly Identified Mineral Processing Wastes AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-177 000 This analysis estimates the cost, economic impact, and benefits of the supplemental proposed rule applying Phase IV LDR to newly identified hazardous mineral processing wastes. The document also discusses the proposed regulatory options for mineral processing wastes no longer exempt from subtitle C requirements under the Bevill exemption. TITLE: Groundwater Pathway Analysis for Aluminum Potliner-s (K088); Draft AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-176 853 This document discusses the application of the EPA composite model for leachate migration with transformation products to model the groundwater impact from the disposal of aluminum potliners. TITLE: Indexing of Long-Term Effectiveness of Waste Containment Systems for a Regulatory Impact Analysis; Draft AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-176 861 This document describes an effectiveness indexing scheme developed to provide input data to a multi-media contaminant fate and transport model used to assess pollution potential in groundwater, surface water, and soil. TITLE: Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Phase III Land Disposal Restrictions Final Rule and Addendum: Revised Risk Assessment for Spent Aluminum Potliners AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-176 846 This analysis estimates the costs, economic impacts, and benefits of the LDR Phase III rule, including discussion of the methodology for estimating the affected quantities of characteristic and newly listed wastes. TITLE: Response to Comments Received on the Newly Listed Wastes and Hazardous Soils Proposed Rule to Support 40 CFR 268 Land Disposal Restrictions; Capacity-Related Comments AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-177 539 This document summarizes and responds to comments on the national capacity to accommodate the newly listed wastes and hazardous soils under the land disposal restrictions program. TITLE: Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste; Final Update III AVAILABILITY: NTIS/GPO NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-156 137 GPO ORDER NO.: 955-001-00000-1 This document provides test procedures which may be used to evaluate properties of solid waste which determine whether waste is hazardous within the definition of RCRA §3001. It includes methods for collecting samples of solid wastes, determining the reactivity, corrosivity, ignitability, and assessing the composition of wastes and the mobility of toxic species present. ------- New Publications July 1997 TITLE: RCRA Permit Policy Compendium Update Package; Revision 7 AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-162 606 This update package includes reference memoranda, letters, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) Policy Directives, and Hotline summaries from January 1, 1996 through December 31, 1996, as well as an entirely new Volume 1 Users's Guide and Keyword Index. TITLE: Response to Capacity-Related Comments Received on the Phase III Land Disposal Restrictions Proposed Rulemaking AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-177 547 This document summarizes and responds to comments on the national capacity to accommodate wastes covered in Phase III of the LDR program. Comments discussed include: required and available treatment capacity for decharacterized wastewaters, carbamate and organobromide wastes, and spent potliners; proposed treatment standards for wastes managed in CWA, SDWA, or CWA-equivalent systems; and carbamate production wastes, organobromide production wastes, spent aluminum potliners, and radioactive wastes mixed with newly listed and identified wastes. UST TITLE: PIRI Issue Papers AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NUMBER: EPA510-R-97-001 The papers discuss risk-based corrective action (RBCA) issues associated with natural attenuation; the definition of "contaminant"; "No Further Action" letters; selection of carcinogenic target risk levels for soil and groundwater remediation; off-site movement of chemicals of concern; institutional controls; groundwater nondegredation policies; and use of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH). CERCLA TITLE: Superfund Today: Focus on Construction Completion AVAILABILITY: NTIS EPA NO.: 540-K-96-009 NTIS ORDER NO.: PB96-963 253 OSWER DIRECTIVE NO.: 9200 2-291 This issue focuses on the Lord-Shope Landfill site in Girard Township, Pennsylvania. This site became the 400th Superfund site to be placed on the Construction Completion List (CCL). A construction completion site is a former toxic waste site where physical construction of all cleanup actions are complete, all immediate threats have been addressed, and all long-term threats are under control. This issue highlights EPA's progress and commitment to making the Superfund program work faster, fairer, and more efficiently. TITLE: Superfund Removal Procedures: State Participation in Federal-Lead Removal Actions AVAILABILITY: NTIS EPA ORDER NO.: 540-R-96-041 NTIS ORDER NO.: PB96-963 409 OSWER DIRECTIVE NO.: 9360 3-07 This document was designed to provide information to On-Scene Coordinators and site managers on state participation in Federal-lead Superfund removal actions. This document is one of ten volumes in the Superfund Removal Procedures manual series. Together, these volumes update and replace the Superfund Removal Procedures manual (OSWER number 9360.0-3B). 10 ------- July 1997 New Publication? TITLE: Federal Interagency Working Group on Brownfields AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: 500-F 97 102 URL: http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/ The Interagency Working Group on Brownfields was established in July 1996 as a forum for Federal agencies to exchange information on brownfields-related activities and to develop a coordinated national agenda for addressing brownfields. EPA's Brownfields Economic Redevelopment Initiative is designed to empower states, communities, and other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together in a timely manner to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and sustainably reuse brownfields. EPA's brownfields initiatives strategies include funding pilot programs and other research efforts, clarifying liability issues, entering into partnerships, conducting outreach activities, developing job training programs, and addressing environmental justice concerns. TITLE: Revision to OSWER NPL Policy "The Revised Hazard Ranking System: Evaluating Sites After Waste Removals," Publication No. 9345.1-03FS, October 1991. AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB97-963 215 OSWER DIRECTIVE NO.: 9345.1-25 This document was designed to provide greater flexibility to the current National Priorities List (NPL) policy for evaluating the impact of completed removals on a Hazard Ranking System (HRS) score. The Agency recognizes that some post-site inspection removals can substantially diminish the threat to human health and the environment and should be considered in the HRS process up to the time of NPL listing. This consideration only applies where the Region has documentation that clearly demonstrates there is no remaining release or potential for a release that could cause adverse environmental or human health impacts. The Agency believes that this reform would reduce EPA and private sector legal/ transaction costs associated with the listing and subsequent deletion process. 11 ------- FEDERAL REGISTERS You may order copies of all major RCRA, Superfund, and EPCRA Federal Registers by calling the Hotline. RCRA, Superfund, and EPCRA National Toll-Free No.: (800) 424-9346 Local: (703)412-9810 TDD National Toll-Free No.: (800) 553-7672 Electronic Availability Federal Registers from October 1994 to the present related to the Hotline's program areas are accessible via EPA's Public Access Servers. The servers are accessible at: World Wide Web: http://www.epa.gov FTP: ftp.epa.gov EPA Federal Registers are organized by date on the World Wide Web (starting from October 1994). Go to: http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr For RCRA/UST and selected CERCLA Federal Registers, choose: Federal Register (FR) - Waste. For selected EPCRA Federal Registers, choose: Federal Register (FR) - Toxic Release Inventory. FINAL RULES RCRA "District of Columbia; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program" July 9,1997 (62 FR 36698) EPA granted the District of Columbia approval to operate its underground storage tank (UST) program. The program meets statutory and regulatory requirements of Subtitle I of RCRA and 40 CFR Part 281. Additionally, District of Columbia's program regulates USTs containing home heating oil for consumptive use on the premises where stored. Approval will become effective August 8, 1997. "Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III; Emergency Extension of the K088 National Capacity Variance" July 14,1997 (62 FR 37694) EPA extended the current national capacity variance for spent potliners from primary aluminum production, Hazardous Waste K088, for three months. Generators of K088 wastes can dispose of them without meeting land disposal restrictions standards until October 8, 1997. EPA concluded that there is adequate treatment capacity for spent potliners at the Reynolds treatment facility in Gum Springs, Arkansas, and has provided the extension to allow generators time to make official arrangements for disposal with Reynolds. During the national capacity variance, landfills and surface impoundments in which K088 wastes are placed must meet minimum technological requirements required by RCRA §3004(h)(4), outlined in §3004(o). This rule is effective July 7, 1997. 13 ------- Federal Registers 1997 "Wyoming; Final Determination of Adequacy of the State's Municipal Solid Waste Permit Program" July 15, 1997 (62 FR 37907) EPA issued a final determination of adequacy to the state of Wyoming for their Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (MSWLF) permit program. Wyoming's program meets federal MSWLF criteria, 40 CFR 258. This determination is effective July 15, 1997. "Final Rule; Revisions to Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills" July 29, 1997 (62 FR 40708) EPA amended the Revised Criteria for MSWLFs to allow states the ability to grant flexibility to MSWLFs which receive 20 tons or less of municipal solid waste per day. States can institute alternative frequencies of daily cover and methane monitoring, provided new requirements are protective of human health and the environment. This rule also allows the state to permit alternative infiltration barriers for the final cover, as long as the infiltration barrier achieves an equivalent reduction in infiltration. EPA makes no additional changes to financial assurance requirements, deeming them flexible within the provisions of the Land Disposal Flexibility Act of 1996. This action becomes effective October 27, 1997, unless EPA receives adverse comment on or before August 28, 1997. If such adverse comment is received, EPA will withdraw this final rule by publishing a timely notice in the Federal Register. PROPOSED RULES RCRA/CERCLA "Announcement of and Request for Comment on Municipal Solid Waste Settlement Proposal" July 11,1997 (62 FR 37231) EPA published its Municipal Solid Waste Settlement Proposal. The proposed policy describes a method for calculating settlements with certain entities, providing liability relief to municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill owner/operators (O/Os), and municipal and private MSW generator/transporters (G/Ts). The proposed policy applies to co-disposal landfills on the National Priority List (NPL). Co-disposal sites, which make up 23 percent of the sites on the NPL, contain municipal solid waste and sewage sludge and non- municipal solid waste. The proposal has two main components: First, EPA will not actively pursue MSW G/ Ts unless hazardous waste, derived from a commercial, institutional, or industrial process, is present at the site. In cases where MSW G/Ts seek settlement, EPA proposes to determine the amount of the settlement by multiplying the G/Ts known or estimated contribution of MSW by a determined unit cost of remediating a representative RCRA Subtitle D landfill. Secondly, EPA proposes a presumptive settlement amount of 20 percent of total response costs for MSW landfill O/Os who wish to settle; this figure is based on historical data and other considerations, and may be adjusted for site-specific factors. Comments on this proposed policy must be submitted on or before August 25, 1997. 14 ------- July 1997 Federal Registers RCRA "Proposed Rule; Revisions to Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills" July 29, 1997 (62 FR 40714) EPA amended the Revised Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (MSWLFs) allowing states to grant flexibility to MSWLFs which receive 20 tons or less of municipal solid waste per day. States can institute alternative frequencies of daily cover and methane monitoring, as long as new requirements are protective of human health and the environment. This proposed rule also allows states to permit alternative infiltration barriers for final cover, as long as the infiltration barrier achieves an equivalent reduction in infiltration. EPA makes no additional changes to financial assurance requirements, deeming them flexible within the provisions of the Land Disposal Flexibility Act of 1996. This action becomes effective October 27, 1997, unless EPA receives adverse comment on or before August 28, 1997. "Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Proposed Removal of Final Rule" July 31,1997 (62 FR 41005) EPA proposed to revoke the delisting of certain wastes generated in the treatment of spent aluminum potliners by Reynolds Metal Company, Gum Springs, Arkansas. EPA bases its proposal on data which demonstrate that high levels of hazardous constituents, which exhibit the characteristic of corrosivity, exist in leachate from the monofill where Reynolds disposes of such waste. Any person may request a hearing on this proposed decision by filing a request containing the information outlined in 40 CFR §260.20 on or before August 15, 1997. Comments to this proposed rule must be received on or before September 2, 1997. NOTICES All Programs "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual" July 14, 1997 (62 FR 37585) EPA changed where they post schedule, location, and registration information for the Multi Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) development working group meeting. This information will no longer be announced on the RCRA, Superfund & EPCRA Hotline. EPA outlines current MARSSIM development working group posting sites. RCRA/CERCLA "Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Department of Defense Range Rule" July 14, 1997 (62 FR 37567) The Department of Defense (DoD) announced its intent to prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) to assess the environmental impact of promulgating the DoD Rule on Closed, Transferred, and Transferring Ranges Containing Military Munitions (DoD range rule). According to DoD, EPA has not made a determination on whether the presence of unexploded ordinance on a closed, transferred, or transferring range constitutes a solid waste subject to RCRA corrective action. DoD identifies initial concerns with applying CERCLA to these sites. Comments must be postmarked no later than August 13, 1997. 15 ------- Federal Registers July 1997 NOTICES RCRA "Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain" July 9,1997 (62 FR 36789) The Department of Energy (DOE) announced the availability of the Summary of Public Scoping Comments Related to the Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada. For further information, contact Wendy Dixon , Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Project Manager, Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy, 1180 Town Center Drive, MS/010, Las Vegas, Nevada 89134, (800) 967-3477. "Exemption Hazardous Waste Injection Restrictions; Texas Ecologist, Incorporated (TECO), Robstown, Texas" July 9,1997 (62 FR 36804) EPA granted a no-migration petition for TECO's Robstown, Texas, underground injection facility. "Hazardous Waste Management System: Modification of the Hazardous Waste Program; Mercury-Containing Lamps" July 11,1997 (62 FR 37183) EPA made available a study which addresses the management of mercury-containing lamps under the hazardous waste management system. The study includes an electronic model and a report that assesses mercury emissions under different management approaches outlined in the July 24, 1994, proposed rule (59 FR 39288). These approaches include conditional exclusion from the hazardous waste regulations and adding lamps to the universal waste regulations (60 FR 25542; May 11, 1995). Comments on the study must be received on or before August 25, 1997. "Agency Information Collection Activities Under OMB Review" July 21,1997 (62 FR. 38991) OMB approved EPA ICR NO. 1698.03 Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements under EPA WasteWi$e Program, OMB 2050- 0139; it expires July 31, 2000. "Regulatory Reinvention (XL) Pilot Projects" July 28,1997 (62 FR 40349) EPA extended for thirty days the comment period for the proposed "OSi Project XL Draft Final Project Agreement and Related Documents" for OSi Specialties, Inc. (subsidiary of Witco Corporation, Sisterville, West Virginia). Comments must be received on or before August 27, 1997. "Department of Energy Office of Industrial Technologies (OIT); Notice of Solicitation for the Chemical Industry Initiative" July 31,1997 (62 FR 41032) DOE solicits applications to perform waste minimization and energy efficiency research in support of their "Technical Vision 2020: The Chemical Industry." DOE identifies how to obtain a complete solicitation document. Full 16 ------- July 1997 Federal Registers NOTICES applications are due on or before January 5, 1998. CERCLA "National Priorities List; Sealand Limited Site" J uly 1,1997 (62 FR 35446) Notice of Intent to Delete "Notice of Open Meeting of the Environmental Financial Advisory Board" July 1,1997 (62 FR 35494) The Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB) will hold an open meeting of the full Board on August 7-8, 1997. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss work products under EFAB's current action agenda. Topics expected to be discussed include cost effective environmental management and brownfields redevelopment. "National Priorities List; Frit Industries Superfund Site" July 25,1997 (62 FR 40029) Notice of Intent to Delete "National Priorities List; Union Pacific Railroad Sludge Pit Site" July 25,1997 (62 FR 40033) Notice of Intent to Delete "National Priorities List; Silver Mountain Mine Site" July 30,1997 (62 FR 40784) Notice of Intent to Delete "National Priorities List; Cheshire Ground Water Contamination Site" July 2,1997 (62 FR 35689) Notice of Intent to Delete "Information Collection Activities; Cooperative Agreements and Superfund State Contracts for Superfund Response Actions" July 2,1997 (62 FR 35803) EPA is soliciting comments on an Information Collection Request (ICR) concerning collection of information under EPA's Superfund rule. The Superfund rule establishes the administrative requirements for the CERCLA-funded cooperative agreements for state, local, and tribal government response actions. "National Priorities List; Southside Sanitary Landfill Site" July 3,1997 (62 FR. 35974) Notice of Intent to Delete "Notice of Policy; CERCLA Provisions Addressing Lenders and Involuntary Acquisitions by Government Entities" July 7,1997 (62 FR 36424) EPA announced the publication of a policy on the interpretation of CERCLA provisions that address lenders and government entities that acquire property involuntarily. Prepared in consultation with the Department of Justice, the policy clarifies the circumstances in which EPA intends to apply the lender liability rule and its preamble in interpreting CERCLA's amended secured creditor exemption. 17 ------- Federal Registers July 1997 NOTICES "National Priorities List; Middletown Airfield Site" July 10, 1997 (62 FR 36997) Notice of Intent to Delete "National Priorities List; Tri-State Plating Superfund Site" July 14, 1997 (62 FR 37522) Notice of Intent to Delete "National Priorities List; Bruin Lagoon Site" July 17, 1997 (62 FR 38239) Notice of Intent to Delete "Extension of Comment Period; Consent Decree" July 17,1997 (62 FR. 38322) EPA announced that the comment period for the consent decree in United States v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, et al., will be extended. Comments received on or before July 25, 1997 will be reviewed. EPCRA "Ethylene Glycol; Risk Assessment Peer Review; Extension of Public Comment Period" July 1,1997 (62 FR 35495) EPA extended the comment period for the ethylene glycol risk assessment peer review conducted for EPCRA §313. In response to request, the comment period is extended by 60 days, until September 5, 1997. "Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; Addition of Facilities in Certain Industry Sectors; Industry-Specific Guidance; Notice of Public Meeting" July 10,1997 (62 FR. 37053) EPA will hold public meetings to solicit and discuss comments on industry-specific guidance documents for the newly added industry groups subject to EPCRA §313 and Pollution Prevention Act §6607. Individuals wishing to participate in the development of these industry-specific guidance documents should contact the persons listed in the notice. Comments on the distributed documents must be submitted by August 20, 1997. "Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; Additional Time to Report" July 24,1997 (62 FR. 39797) EPA announced that it will allow facilities required to submit Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reports for calendar year 1996 until September 8, 1997, to file those reports. "Request for Nominations to the Toxic Data Reporting Committee; National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology" July 25,1997 (62 FR 40073) EPA requests the nomination of candidates for appointment to the Toxic Data Reporting (TRD) Committee of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT). Nominations will be accepted until 5 p.m. EST, August 18, 1997. 18 ------- ly 1997 Federal Registers NOTICES CAA "Accident Prevention Subcommittee's Electronic Submission Workgroup Final Recommendations Report; Notice of Availability" July 1,1997 (62 FR 35494) The "Electronic Submission Workgroup Final Recommendation Report" contains recommendations on the technical and practical issues associated with creating a national repository of electric Risk Management Plans. The report includes suggestions for both reporting procedure and access to information on Risk Management Plans. Settlements and Consent Decrees "Proposed Administrative Settlement; Cemetery Lane Superfund Site" July 1, 1997 (62 FE 35495) "Consent Decree; United States v. Erie Coatings & Chemicals Inc." July 2, 1997 (62 FR 35935) "Consent Decree; United States v. Rohm and Haas Co." July 2, 1997 (62 F_B 35936) "Consent Decree; United States v. Larry Jones, et al." JulyS, 1997 (62 FE 36079) "Consent Decree; United States v. Ralph Riehl, et al." JulyS, 1997 (62 FE 36079) "Consent Decree; United States and State of Vermont v. Town of Bennington, et al." JulyS, 1997 (62 EE 36079) "Consent Decree; United States v. Anderson, Greenwood & Co., et al." JulyS, 1997 (62 FR 36571) "Consent Decree; United States v. DWC Trust Holding Co., et al" JulyS, 1997 (62 EB 36572) "Consent Decree; United States v. Browning-Ferris Industries of South Jersey, Inc." July 16, 1997 (62 EB 38117) "Consent Decree; United States V. Ralph Riehl, et al" July 16, 1997 (62 EE 38118) "Consent Decree With Third Party Defendants; United States v. Raymark Industries, et al." July 16, 1997 (62 EB 38118) "Prospective Purchaser Agreement; Solar Usage Now, Inc., Property" July 16, 1997 (62 EB 38120) "Proposed Administrative Settlement; Harco Property Site" July 21, 1997 (62 EB 38991) "Consent Decree; United States v. Gordon Stafford, et al" July 21, 1997 (62 FR 39020) "Consent Decree; United States v. Hawaiian Western Steel, et al." July 21, 1997 (62 EB 39020) 19 ------- Federal Registers July 1997 NOTICES "Consent Decree; United States v. Copper "Consent Decree; United States v. Bill Range Company Currie Ford, Inc., et al." July 22, 1997 (62 F_B 39254) July 31, 1997 (62 FR 41078) "Consent Decree; United States v. "Consent Decree; United States v. Cosmo Pepper's Steel and Alloys, Inc." lacavazzi, et al." July 22, 1997 (62 F_B 39255) July 31, 1997 (62 F_R 41078) "Consent Decree; United States v. Stanley "Consent Decree; United States v. New and Shirley Modes" Hampshire Ball Bearings, Inc." July 22, 1997 (62 FR 39255) July 31, 1997 (62 FR 41079) "Consent Decree; United States v. Harold Shane" July 22, 1997 (62 F_E 39256) "Proposed Administrative Order on Consent; Clear Creek/Pinto Beans Site" July 23, 1997 (62 F_B 39519) "Proposed Agreement and Covenant Not to Sue; Millcreek Dump Superfund Site" July 23, 1997 (62 FB 39519) "Proposed Administrative Settlement; Dorney Road Landfill Superfund Site" July 25, 1997 (62 FR 40086) "Proposed De Minimis Settlement; Dorney Road Landfill Superfund Site" July 25, 1997 (62 F_R 40086) "Proposed Prospective Purchaser Agreement; Terre Superfund Site" July 30, 1997 (62 FR 40815) "Consent Decree; United States v. Akzo Nobel Coatings Inc., et al." July 31, 1997 (62 FR 41077) 20 ------- CALL ANALYSES This month, the Hotline responded to a total of 29,111 questions and requests for documents. CALLER PROFILE RCRA/UST Hotline Regulated Community Citizens State & Local Government Native Americans Federal Agencies Educational Institutions EPA Media Interest Groups Congress International Other Referrals* Transfers to EPCRA/Superfund Hotline* Document Retrieval Line* Message Retrieval Line* TOTAL NUMBER OF CALLERS 4,341 315 177 4 119 161 122 18 34 8 14 47 461 259 234 563 6,877 : No caller profile data available. 21 ------- Call Analyses July 1997 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act/ Superfund Hotline Manufacturers Food/Tobacco 188 Textiles 20 Apparel 6 Lumber & Wood 37 Furniture 23 Paper 45 Printing & Publishing 33 Chemicals 285 Petroleum & Coal 83 Rubber and Plastics 43 Leather 14 Stone, Clay & Glass 19 Primary Metals 122 Fabricated Metals 196 Machinery (Excluding Electrical) . 47 Electrical & Electronic Equipment 46 Transportation Equipment 54 Instruments 12 Misc. Manufacturing 246 Subtotal 1,519 Consultants/Engineers 5,246 Attorneys 135 Citizens 87 Public Interest Groups 21 Educational Institutions 51 EPA 86 Federal Agencies 115 GOCOs 2 Congress 13 State Officials/SERC 42 Local Officials/LEPCs 16 Fire Departments 24 Hospitals/Laboratories 18 Trade Associations 6 Union/Labor 2 Farmers 4 Distributors 4 Insurance Companies 2 Media/Press 5 Native Americans 0 International 1 Other 156 Referrals* 199 Transfers to RCRA/UST Hotline* 126 Document Retrieval Line* 0 Message Retrieval Line* 2,398 * No caller profile data available. TOTAL NUMBER OF CALLERS 10,278 22 ------- July 1997 Call Analyses HOTLINE TOPICS RCRA RCRA GENERAL SUBTITLE C Hazardous Waste Id. - General Characteristics Listings Mixture Rule Derived-From Contained-In Policy Sampling 1,101' 1,252' 7221 5941 101 91 2541 32 Solid and Hazardous Waste Exclusions487' Radioactive Mixed Waste Delisting Petitions Definition of Solid Waste/Hazardous Waste Recycling Large Quantity Generators Small Quantity Generators CESQGs Transporters Exports/Imports TSDFs General Facility Standards Unit Standards Air Emissions Combustion - General BIFs Incinerators Draft Strategy Waste Minimization LDR Applicability Notifications/Certification Treatment Standards Permits and Permitting State Programs Financial Assurance Closure/Post-Closure Corrective Action Enforcement Hazardous Waste Data Test Methods Indian Lands Used Oil Standards Military Munitions OTHER WASTES Ash Bevill Amendment (Mining Waste) Medical Wastes Oil and Gas 24 28 3941 5271 2981 119 85 21 3741 4171 173 50 31 28 3 313 8671 184 4411 2361 208 41 82 224 97 53 154 2 205 39 6 36 181 20 SUBTITLE D Household Hazardous Wastes Subtitle D - General Technical Standards Industrial Wastes Municipal Wastes Indian Lands Financial Assurance Solid Waste Recycling/Markets - General Aluminum Batteries Glass Paper Plastics Tires Used Oil Composting Procurement Source Reduction/Pollution Prevention Grants and Financing TOTAL QUESTIONS * Includes 1,974 RCRA document requests. 155 122 16 18 144 2 12 3141 7 12 4 15 17 26 54 12 31 59 20 11,635* UST General/Misc. Applicability/Definitions Regulated Substances Closure 1998 Deadline Standards for New Tank Systems Tank Standards and Upgrading Replacing/Closing Release Detection Reporting Requirements Operating Requirements Corrective Action for USTs Financial Responsibility Enforcement State Programs Private Sector Indian Lands LUST General/Miscellaneous RBCA Technologies Solvency/Cost Controls TOTAL QUESTIONS * Includes 273 UST document requests. 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. 72 3381 67 59 3011 66 2151 47 1021 29 1691 43 47 24 30 1 2 11 1 3 6 1,633* 23 ------- "'1 Analyses July 1997 EMERGENCY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW General: General Title III Questions Trade Secrets Enforcement Liability/Citizen Suits Training Chemical-Specific Information Emergency Planning (§§301-303): General Notification Requirements SERC/LEPC Issues EHSs/TPQs Risk Communication/ Hazards Analysis Exemptions Emergency Release Notification (§304) General Notification Requirements Reportable Quantities CERCLA §103 vs. SARA §304 ARIP/AHEDB/ERNS Exemptions Hazardous Chemical Reporting (§§311-312): General MSDS Reporting Requirements Tier I/II Requirements Thresholds Hazard Categories Mixtures Reporting Exemptions 1171 11 42 12 2 1711 921 41 10 2121 274 1 46 32 48 35 0 5 78 29 90 1241 41 65 43 Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (§313): General AFR 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 4441 9851 2,654' 1,633' 5,006' 52 22 85 17 92 78 17 72 Exemptions Special Topics: CAA §112 General RMPs List of Regulated Substances Federal Facilities Executive Order 2781 2191 156 55 13 TOTAL QUESTIONS 13,499 *Includes 1,508 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know document requests SUPERFUND General/Misc. 134 Access & Information Gathering 26 Administrative Improvements General 32 Environmental Justice/Brownfields 47 S ACM/Presumptive Remedies 6 Soil Screening Levels 25 Administrative Record 11 ARARs 11 CERCLIS 921 Citizen Suits 2 Claims Against Fund 4 Clean-Up Costs 29 Clean-Up Standards 29 Community Involvement 20 Contract Lab Program (CLP) 7 Contractor Indemnification 0 Contracts 4 Definitions 561 Enforcement 56 Federal Facilities 64 Hazardous Substances 1141 HRS 11 Liability 68 Local Gov't Reimbursement 2 Natural Resource Damages 3 NCP 57 Notification 52 NPL 1941 Off Site Rule 13 OSHA 4 PA/SI 20 PRPs 32 RD/RA 26 Reauthorization 3 24 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. ------- July 1997 Call Analyses Remedial 43 Removal 34 RI/FS 20 Risk Assess./Health Effects 50 ROD 41 RQ 1671 Settlements 15 SITE Program 6 State Participation 6 State Program 16 TAGs 2 Taxes 1 Special Topics Oil Pollution Act 3111 SPCC Regulations 4191 Lead Contamination 3 TOTAL QUESTIONS 2,344* ""Includes 237 Superfund document requests. TOTAL HOTLINE QUESTIONS AND DOCUMENT REQUESTS: 29,111 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. 25 ------- |