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
------- |