UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-• WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
530R88112
MAR IT
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Final Monthly Report— RCRA/Superfund Industrial Assistance
Hotline and Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-
Know Information and Title III Hotline Report for December 1988
FROM: Thea McManus, Project
Office of Solid Waste \
Hubert Waiters, Deputy Project Officer L^^-/
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
TO: See List of Addressees
This report is prepared and submitted in support of Contract #68-01-7371.
I. SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS AND RESOLVED ISSUES— DECEMBER 1988
A. RCRA
1. Closed Loop Recycling
In a production process a manufacturing facility generates a secondary material
that consists of 90% ignitable liquids and 10% ignitable gases. From the
production process the material is piped to a storage tank where the ignitable
gases are separated from the ignitable liquids. The gases are then piped back into
the production process to be used as raw material. The remaining ignitable
liquid is discarded as a hazardous waste. Is the liquid and gas mixture exempt
from being a solid waste under the closed loop recycling provision in Section
261.4(a)(8)?
RECEIVED
ENVIRONMENTAL PROrtCJlON
UBRAIty, REGION V
-------
1. Closed Loop Recycling (Cont'd)
Raw
Material
i r
Manufacturing
Facility
Gases
PRODUCT
2° Material
(90% liquids
10% gas)
f Storage Tank
Liquid
Hazardous
Waste
According to Section 261.4(a)(8) secondary materials are not solid wastes if
they are reclaimed and returned to the original process or processes in which
they were generated where they are reused in the production process
provided:
(i) Only tank storage is involved and the entire process through completion
of reclamation is closed by being entirely connected with pipes or other
comparable enclosed means of conveyance;
(ii) Reclamation does not involve controlled flame combustion (such as
occurs in boilers, industrial furnaces or incinerators);
(iii) The secondary materials are never accumulated in such tanks for over
twelve months without being reclaimed; and,
(iv) The reclaimed material is not used to produce a fuel or used to produce
products that are used in a manner constituting disposal.
-------
1. Closed Loop Recycling (Cont'd)
Provided the reclamation process meets all requirements of Section
261.4(a)(8), the portion of the secondary material that is returned to the
production process to be used as a raw material (the ignitable gas) is not a
solid waste. However, the remaining portion that is discarded (the ignitable
liquid) is a hazardous waste and being such is not exempted from the
definition of a solid waste per Section 261.4(a)(8). Since the generator is
handling a hazardous waste, he/she must comply with the applicable
provisions of Parts 262 through 270.
Source: Chester Oszman (202) 382-4499
Research: Joe Nixon
2. Land Disposal Restrictions: Soils and Debris from RCRA Corrective Action
Under the land disposal restrictions, some soil and debris have national capacity
variances. Must the response action under CERCLA be pursuant to Section 104
or Section 106 of CERCLA and must the corrective action under RCRA be
pursuant to a corrective action order?
Soil and debris contaminated with wastes from the "first third" list and for
which the promulgated treatment technology is incineration have a national
capacity variance until August 8, 1990. This variance, however, applies to all
soil and debris contaminated with these wastes not just to soil and debris
generated by CERCLA or RCRA clean-up actions (53 FR 311%). In contrast,
soil and debris contaminated with solvent, dioxin, or California list wastes are
subject to a variance only if they result from an action taken under Section
104 or Section 106 of CERCLA, or a corrective action under Subtitle C of
RCRA. This variance extends to November 8, 1990. EPA, however, can use
either orders or permits to require corrective action under RCRA. The
variance is not limited to soil and debris from corrective action orders.
Source: Steve Weil (202)382-4770
Steve Silverman (202)382-7706
Research: Renee Pannebaker
3. Financial Assurance
Company X is identified on a RCRA Subtitle C permit or permit application as
owning three treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs). These facilities
are operated by wholly-owned subsidiaries of Company X. The three
facilities need financial coverage for nonsudden accidental occurrences: $3
million per occurrence and $6 million annual aggregate. Must the parent
-------
3. Financial Assurance (Cont'd)
company provide the $3 million/$6 million for each facility (a cumulative of $9
million/$18 million) or can all of the facilities be covered by the $3 million/$6
million?
An owner or operator of a hazardous waste treatment, storage or disposal
facility, or a group of such facilities must demonstrate liability coverage in the
amounts of $3 million per occurrence and $6 million aggregate (40 CFR
Section 264.147(b)). As explained in the April 16, 1982, Federal Register (47 FR
16544), liability coverage is required on an owner or operator basis rather than
a facility basis. The annual aggregate coverage requirement takes into account
the risk of multiple occurrences among facilities owned by one company (47
FR 16546). So, the company that owns three TSDF's as subsidiaries is only
required to have $3 million/$6 million nonsudden accidental coverage, not
$9 million/$18 million.
Source: Mark Pollins (202) 382-6259
Research: Renee Pannebaker
4. Underground Storage Tanks
An owner/operator has a petroleum underground storage tank (UST) system
that was installed in 1966 and decides not to upgrade the UST until December 22,
1998. The owner/operator chooses to use monthly inventory control and annual
tank tightness testing for his release detection method. How does the
owner/operator comply with the phase-in schedule for release detection and
when is the owner/operator required to install a method of monthly
monitoring?
An UST system that was installed in 1966 must be provided with release
detection by December 22, 1990 (Section 280.40(c)). Per Section 280.41 (a)(2),
"UST systems that do not meet the performance standards in Section 280.20
or Section 280.21 may use monthly inventory controls (conducted in
accordance with Section 280.43(a) or (b)) and annual tank tightness testing
(conducted in accordance with Section 280.43(c)) until December 22, 1998
when the tank must be upgraded under Section 280.21 or permanently closed
under Section 280.71." From the effective date of the UST regulations
(December 22, 1988), the owner/operator has 10 years to utilize the monthly
inventory control and annual tank tightness method of release detection
until the owner/operator upgrades.
As stated in Section 280.41(a)(l), "UST systems that meet the performance
standards in Section 280.20 or Section 280.21, and the monthly inventory
requirements in Section 280.43(a) or (b), may use tank tightness testing
(conducted in accordance with Section 280.43(c)) at least every 5 years until
-------
4. Underground Storage Tanks (Cont'd)
December 22, 1998, or until 10 years after the tank is installed or upgraded
under Section 280.21(b), whichever is later." Since the owner/operator
upgraded the UST in December 1998, the owner/operator now has 10 more
years to utilize the monthly inventory control and tank tightness testing
method before he/she is required to utilize a monthly monitoring method.
Thus, the owner/opera tor does not have to utilize monthly monitoring until
December 2008.
Source: Tom Young (202) 475-7261
Research: Yolanda Ting
B. CEPP
5. Sections 302. 311 and 312: Transportation Exemption
An oil company owns many wells on an oil field. Each well is on its own plot of
land. These plots are not adjacent or contiguous and, therefore, each well is its
own facility. When operating these wells, it is sometimes necessary to inject air
or gas into the well to get the flow of oil started. The machines that inject the gas
are called boosters. The booster is a portable piece of equipment that can be
attached via a hose to more than one well at a time. Once the wells are flowing,
the booster can be moved to another location on the oil field to boost other wells.
The booster contains some extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) that are
released during normal operations. The amounts of some EHSs exceed their
threshold planning quantity. Since these boosters are mobile and never part of a
well (not part of an existing facility), can they be exempted under the
transportation exemption?
The transportation exemption applies to EHSs that are traveling in
commerce, such as in a truck, or are in transit, such as in a pipeline.
Therefore, when the boosters are being moved and are not attached to any
facility, they are in transit and exempt under the transportation exemption.
However, when the booster is stationary and/or attached to the wells, it is not
in transit or traveling in commerce and must be reported. Even though it is a
temporary site, the presence of those EHSs above their threshold planning
quantities (TPQs) is of concern to the local emergency planning committee
(LEPC). Therefore, the EHSs in the booster should be reported in the same
manner as a chemical that is only on-site for part of the year, which includes
the time at one location. Similarly, any EHS present in the hose that is
attached to the well from the booster is considered process equipment and
subject to reporting as part of the booster.
-------
5. Sections 302. 311 and 312: Transportation Exemption (Cont'd)
A generic report may be prepared (i.e., one Tier I/II for similar wells).
Therefore, one set of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) and one Tier I/II
may be prepared for similar boosters with the same EHSs in similar amounts
and submitted to each State emergency response commission (SERC), LEPC
and fire department under whose jurisdiction the oil field falls.
Source: Kirsten Engel (202) 382-7706
Kathy Brody (202) 475-8353
Research: Anita Bartera
6. Section 313: Supplier Notification—De Minimis Levels
A manufacturing facility distributes a mixture containing three different
manganese compounds. Each manganese compound, taken separately, would be
below the de minimus level for Section 313 reporting. However, if the three
manganese compounds are added together, the de minimus level is exceeded. Is
this facility required to fulfill the supplier notification requirement (40 CFR Part
372.45) for this mixture?
The specific manganese compounds in this mixture are not listed as Section
313 toxic chemicals, however, the compounds are included in the manganese
compound category. Therefore, the weight percent of all manganese
compounds in the mixture must be considered for purposes of de minimus
and threshold determinations. Since the percent of manganese compounds
exceeds the de minimus level, the facility would have to fulfill the supplier
notification requirements for this mixture.
Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-3821
Research: John Ferris
7. Section 313: Supplier Notification
A manufacturing facility is required to provide a Section 313 supplier
notification for a mixture. One of the facilities receiving the supplier notification
has requested that its notification go to that facility's corporate headquarters, and
the headquarters has guaranteed that they will deliver the notification to the
facility. By sending the notification to the corporate headquarters, is the
manufacturing facility fulfilling its supplier notification requirement even
though the manufacturing facility is not directly giving the notification to the
facility to which they supply the chemical?
-------
7. Section 313: Supplier Notification (Cont'd)
As long as the corporate headquarters can guarantee that the receiving facility
will obtain the notification by the first shipment in the calendar year, the
manufacturing facility is fulfilling its supplier notification requirement by
sending the notification to the corporate headquarters as requested.
Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-2821
Research: John Ferris
8. Section 313: Supplier Notification—SIC Codes
A facility is a multi-establishment facility whose primary SIC code is not within
20-39. One establishment manufactures epoxy/poly ester resins that contain
Section 313 toxic chemicals above the de minimus. The other establishment is a
distributor. Is the facility required to notify for supplier notification?
The facility is not defined as a covered facility as per Section 372.45(a)(l), since
its primary SIC code is not within 20-39. Therefore, the facility is not required
to provide supplier notification for the resins it manufactures.
Although the facility is not required to provide supplier notification, EPA
encourages voluntary compliance with the supplier notification provisions
in order to help customers comply with Section 313 reporting requirements.
Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-3821
Research: Minda Sarmiento
9. Section 313: Supplier Notification—Exemptions
The preamble to the Section 313 final rule (52 FR 4510) states that consumer
product exemptions similar to those found in the OSHA Hazard
Communication Standard (HCS) and the rule implementing Sections 311 and
312 of Title III are incorporated into the Section 313 supplier notification
provision (53 FR 4510). The consumer product exemptions under OSHA HCS
and Sections 311 and 312 are both broader than the exemption that is listed in the
Section 313 final rule.
The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) implementing Section 313 exempts from
supplier notification, "(a)ny consumer product as the term is defined in the
Consumer Product Safety Act packaged for distribution to the general public." (40
CFR Section 372.45(d)(iii))
OSHA HCS has a broader exemption which includes consumer products or
hazardous substances which will be used in the workplace in the same manner
-------
9. Section 313: Supplier Notification—Exemptions (Cont'd)
as normal consumer use, and which results in a duration and frequency of
exposure which is not greater than exposures experienced by consumers (52 FR
31878).
Section 311(e) expands the consumer product exemption to include substances to
the extent that they are present in the same form and concentrations as a product
packaged for distribution and use by the general public (40 CFR Section 370.2
"Hazardous Chemicals").
A facility manufactures 16-ounce boxes of a detergent which contains a Section
313 toxic chemical. The facility primarily distributes this detergent to consumers,
however, it is also used by industry. The Consumer Product Safety Act defines
the detergent as a consumer product.
The manufacturer distributes the 16-ounce boxes of detergent to three facilities
within SIC codes 20-39. Each facility uses the detergent in a different way. The
first facility exclusively uses the detergent to supply the company lunchroom for
the employees to wash their dishes. The second facility uses the detergent in
industrial size washers to clean metal articles. The third facility uses the
detergent to dean and degrease their distillation towers.
To which of these facilities would the manufacturer be required to provide
supplier notification?
The manufacturer would not be required to include supplier notification
with the shipment of the 16-ounce boxes of detergent sent to any of these
facilities.
For the product to be exempt from supplier notification under 40 CFR Section
372.45(d)(2)(iii), it must be packaged for distribution to the general public.
This detergent is being distributed to covered facilities in the same form that
it is packaged for distribution to the general public (i.e., the 16-ounce box).
Therefore, no supplier notification is required. If the same detergent was sold
to manufacturing facilities in drums or other "industrial quantity" packages,
then supplier notification would be required, regardless of the end use at the
facility.
Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-3821
Al Brauninger (202) 492-6980, Consumer Product Safety
Commission
Research: Jon Roland
-------
10. Section 313: Supplier Notification—Material Safety Data Sheets
The supplier notification requirement states that notification must be given with
the first shipment of each mixture or trade name product containing a toxic
chemical in each calendar year beginning January 1, 1989. Section 372.45(c)(5)
states that if a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) is required to accompany
shipment of the mixture, the notification should be attached or otherwise
incorporated into the MSDS. OSHA regulations stipulate that a new MSDS is
not required to be sent along with an off-site shipment unless the composition of
the hazardous chemical changes. If the composition of a mixture or trade name
product does not change and the supplier notification is incorporated into the
MSDS, is it necessary for a manufacturer to send a new supplier notification
annually?
A manufacturer who distributes a mixture containing a toxic chemical is
required to provide a new supplier notification with the first shipment of
each calendar year. However, if the initial shipment of a mixture required an
MSDS, this annual requirement can be satisfied in subsequent years by
sending a notice with the first shipment of each calendar year referencing the
MSDS from the initial shipment unless the percent by weight of the toxic
chemical in the mixture changes. Because OSHA regulations require a
receiving facility to maintain copies of all MSDSs and Section 372.45(c)(5)
requires notification to be incorporated into the MSDS, a notice referencing
the initial MSDS will provide the same information as a new supplier
notification.
Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-3821
Research: Jim Styers
11. Section 313: Supplier Notification—Provisions
There are three provisions that a facility must meet to be subject to the Section
313 supplier notification requirements (40 CFR Section 372.45(a)). The first
provision is that the facility must be in SIC codes 20-39. The second provision
states that the facility must manufacture or process a toxic chemical. The third
provision states that they sell or otherwise distribute a mixture or trade name
product containing the covered toxic chemical to a facility or a person which
distributes to a facility in SIC codes 20-39. When the third provision states "the
toxic chemical," is it referring to any toxic chemical used at the facility or only to
the toxic chemicals which are manufactured or processed at the facility?
For example, a facility processes chemical A, but otherwise uses chemical B, for
cleaning purposes, and sends chemical B to a recycling facility. The recycling
facility has a manufacturing SIC code. Is supplier notification required to be
given for chemical B which is otherwise used at the facility?
-------
11. Section 313: Supplier Notification—Provisions (Cont'd)
Because the facility sells a mixture (i.e., the "waste" containing a toxic
chemical) to a recycler, then they are considered to have processed that toxic
chemical. The operation of packaging and selling the waste would be
classified as a processing activity. Therefore, the facility is required to provide
a supplier notification for chemical B which was otherwise used, then
processed at the facility.
Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-3821
Research: Jim Buchert
10
-------
II. ACTIVITIES—DECEMBER 1988
1. The RCRA/Super fund Hotline and Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Hotline responded to 18,400 questions and requests for
documents in December. The breakdown is as follows:
Superfund UST CEPP
Information Calls
Call Document Requests
Written Document Requests
Referrals
6383
1,074
116
1^28
1,489
153
2387
2,111
2,098 = 12357
769 = 4,107
267 = 383
225 = 1,553
Totals 8,901 1,642 4,498 3359 = 18,400
A. RCRA/Superfund Hotline Activities
2. On December 1, Denise Sines, Hotline Project Director, and Chris Bryant,
Hotline Section Chief, met with Jim O'Leary, Director, Office of Program
Management and Support, OSW, regarding RCRA/Superfund Hotline
monthly "Hot Topics."
3. On December 5,12, and 19, Chris Bryant, Hotline Section Chief, attended the
OSWER Communications meeting.
4. On December 5, David Gravallese, Office of General Councel, briefed the
RCRA/Superfund Hotline on CERCLA Section 103(c) Notification
Requirements.
5. On December 6 and 8, Denise Sines, Hotline Project Director, met with Hubert
Watters, Deputy Project Officer, OERR, concerning Hotline staffing.
6. On December 8, Nancy Brown and Larry Starfield, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, briefed the RCRA/Superfund Hotline on the CERCLA
Off-Site Policy.
7. On December 14, Tom Schruben, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, briefed
the RCRA/Superfund Hotline on the UST Technical Requirements.
B. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline Activities
8. On December 1,15, and 22, Denise Sines, Hotline Project Director, and Robert
Costa, Hotline Section Chief, met with Leanne duFief and Bob Israel, Office of
Toxic Substances, and Anastasia Watson, Preparedness Staff Liaison, regarding
the status of the Title IH Hotline.
11
-------
B. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline Activities (Cont'd)
9. On December 5, John Ferris, Hotline Information Specialist, and Robert Costa,
Hotline Section Chief attended the Section 313 Interpretation Subgroup
meeting on review of the revised Form R and expanded instructions.
10. On December 5, Jon Roland, Hotline Information Specialist, attended the
Chemical Accident Prevention Committee's organizing meeting.
11. On December 6-8, the Title HI Hotline staff attended the meetings of the Title
III Preparedness, Section 313 and Outreach Regional Coordinators meetings
on the status of Title III implementation activities.
12. On December 9, Carl Koch, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, briefed
the Title III Hotline on the current status of the Accidental Release
Information Program (ARIP).
13. On December 13 and 20, the Title HI Hotline staff attended the Preparedness
Staff meeting concerning the status of program office activities.
14. On December 14, Jim Styers, Hotline Information Specialist attended the Title
HI Outreach Subcommittee meeting on status of Title III communications
strategy.
15. On December 15, Sam Sasnett, Jennette Petty and Ruby Boyd, Office of Toxic
Substances, briefed the Title in Hotline staff on the outstanding issues
regarding Section 313 notices of non-compliance.
16. On December 19, Jim Buchert, Hotline Information Specialist, attended the
conference call with the FEMA/EPA Regional Title IE coordinators on the
status of Title ffl activities.
17. On December 20, Minda Sarmiento, Hotline Information Specialist attended
the Title in Workgroup meeting concerning the status of Title IH activities.
18. On December 20, Jon Roland, Hotline Information Specialist attended the
Prevention Workgroup meeting regarding the status of ARIP and other
prevention activities.
19. On December 21, Phyllis Flaherty and Mary McDonnell, Office of Compliance
Monitoring (OPTS), and Jeff Heimerman, Office of Waste Programs
Enforcement (OSWER), briefed the Title ffl Hotline staff concerning the status
of current and planned Title HI enforcement actions and activities.
20. On December 21, Robert Costa, Hotline Section Chief, attended the planning
meeting concerning a future video teleconference on Title ffl.
12
-------
B. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline Activities (Cont'd)
21. On December 22, Anita Bartera, Hotline Information Specialist, attended the
National Response Team meeting concerning the status of Federal
preparedness and response activities.
13
-------
ANALYSES OF QUESTIONS—January 1989
Grand Total = 12,922
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
Summary of Calls by EPA Region
Region 1
Region 2
Region 3
Region 4
Region 5
Region 6
6%
1 1%
18%
12%
16%
9%
Region 7
Region 8
Region 9
Region 10
International Calls
5%
5%
12%
5%
0%
Calls
Manufacturers
Generators
Transporters
TSDFs
EPAHQ
EPA Regions
Federal Agencies
State Agencies
Local Agencies
Used Oil Handlers
USTO/O
RCRA
General Information
§3010 Notification
§260.10 Definitions
§260.22 Petitions/Delistina
§261.2 Solid Waste Definition
§261.3 Hazardous Waste Definition
§261 C Characteristic Haz. Waste
§261 D Listed Haz. Waste
§261.4 Exclusions
§261.5 Small Quantity Generators
§261.6 Recycling Standards
§261.7 Container Residues
§262 Generator-General
§262 100-1000 ko/mo
§262 Manifest Information
§262 Accumulation
§262 Recordkeeoina & Reporting
§262 International Shipments
§263 Transporters
5%
13%
1%
5%
1%
2%
2%
6%
2%
2%
16%
429
74
132
27
170
267
404
418
116
101
69
41
98
67
154
214
30
30
47
Consultants
Attorneys
Laboratories
Univ ./Researchers
Trade Associatons
Insurance Co.'s
Environmental Groups
Press
Citizens
Other
§266 C Use Constituting Disposal
§266 D HW Burned
for Energy Recovery
§266 E Used Oil Burned
for Energy Recovery
§266 F Precious Metal Reclamation
§266 G Spent Lead— Acid
Battery Reclamation
Subtitle D
Asbestos/PCBs/Radon
Corrective Action
Dioxins
Household Hazardous Waste
Infectious Waste
Liability/Enforcement
Minimum Technology
Mixed Radioactive Waste
Used OH
Waste Minimization
20%
9%
3%
2%
0%
2%
1%
1%
4%
4%
28
1 0
0
80
13
205
135
85
25
59
65
52
1 0
50
130
24
14
-------
RCRA-TSDF/264 and 265
A Scope/Applicability
B General Facility Standards
C Preparedness/Prevention
D Contingency Plans
E Manifest/Recordkeeping/Reportin<
F Ground-Water Monitoring
G Closure/Post Closure
H Financial Requirements
1 Containers
J Tanks
K Surface Impoundments
L Waste Piles
M Land Treatment
N Landfills
Liquids in Landfills
O Incinerators
P Thermal Treatment
Q Chem., Phys., Btol Treatment
Underground Storage Tanks
General
§280.10 Applicability
§280.11 Interm Prohibition
§280.12 Definitions - General
UST
Regulated Substance
§280 B New UST Systems - General
§280.20 Performance Stds.
§280.21 Upgrading
§280.22 Notification
§280 C General Operating. Req.
§280 0 Release Detection
§280 E Release Rpt. & Investigation
213
21
1 3
1 3
26
73
90
62
40
77
47
6
9
28
20
41
8
0
363
141
6
64
112
48
18
27
35
30
22
117
33
R Underground Injection
X Miscellaneous
§268 General
§268 Solvent & Dioxins
§268 California List Wastes
§268 Schedled Thirds
§269 Air Emissions Standards
§270 A General
§270 B Permit Application
§270 D Changes to Permits
§270 F Special Permits
§270 G Interim Status/LOIS
§271 State Programs
§124 Administrative Procedures
DOT Requirements
OSHA Requirements/HW Training
Test Methods/HW Technologies
RCRA Document Requests
SUBTOTAL
§280 F Corrective Action Petroleum
§280 G Corrective Action
Hazardous Substances
§280 H Out-of-Service/Closure
§280 I Financial Responsibility
§281 State UST Programs
Liability
Enforcement
LUST Trust Fund
Other Provisions
UST Document Requests
UST SUBTOTAL
3
1 0
1 91
1 12
1 1 9
21 7
8
53
30
61
22
38
43
1 7
13
32
93
1 ,506
7,21 3
1 8
7
136
375
26
34
1 4
26
5
1,254
2,91 1
15
-------
CERCLA
Access & Information Gathering
Administrative Record
Allocations from Fund
ARARs
CERCUS
Citizen Suits
Clean-Up Costs
Clean-Up Standards
Community Relations
Contract Lab Program (CLP)
Contractor Indemnification
Contracts
Definitions
Emergency Response
Enforcement
Exposure AssessVRisk Assess.
Federal Facilities
Fund Balancing
General
Grants
Hazardous Substances
Health/Toxics
MRS
Liability
Mandatory Schedules
Natural Resource Damages
NBARs
NCP
Notification
NPL
Written Request Responses
Referred to EPA Program Offices
Referred to other Federal Agencies
Referred externally (state.
oraanteations. etc.)
Response Form Sent
Response Form SenVFOIA
Form Letter Sent/Need More Info.
Requests Filled - RCRA
- CERCLA
-UST
SUBTOTAL
1 2
1
7
1 1
51
7
8
31
1
4
1
4
17
3
1 8
5
14
2
67
8
105
5
48
35
0
1
0
65
40
112
354
57
33
38
0
2
0
93
25
5
607
Off-Site Policy
On-Site Policy
OSHA
PA/SI
PRPs
Public Participation
Radon
RCRA Interface
RD/RA
Remedial
Removal
Response
RI/FS
ROD
RQ
SARA Interface
Settlements
SITE Program
State Participation
State Program
Taxes
Title lll/Right-to-Know
CERCLA Document Requests
CERCLA SUBTOTOAL
Referrals
Referrals - EPA HQ
Other Hotlines
Regions
State
GPO/NTIS/PIC/ORD/Dockets
Other
SUBTOTAL
1 9
3
1
2
23
3
0
2
6
1 8
27
0
59
21
37
4
1 9
23
5
2
4
1 7
174
1,152
109
129
109
280
363
49
1 ,039
TOTAL CALLS, DOCUMENT
REQUESTS and REFERRALS
1 2,922
16
-------
Emergency Planning Community Right-to-Know Information Hotline
Daily/Monthly Summary Report—January 1989
Total Calls: 4,858
Distribution of Calls by EPA Regions
Region 1
Region 2
Region 3
Region 4
Region 5
International
Manufacturers
20 Food
21 Tobacco
22 Textiles
23 Apparel
24 Lumber & Wood
25 Furniture
26 Paper
27 Printing & Publishing
28 Chemicals
29 Petroleum & Coal
30 Rubber and Plastics
31 Leather
32 Stone, Clay & Glass
33 Primary Metals
34 Fabricated Metals
35 Machinery (Excluding Electrical
36 Electrical & Electronic Eguipmer
37 Transportation Equipment
38 Instruments
39 Misc. Manufacturing
Not Able to Determine
iTotal Mfg. (%)
(Title III General
§301-3 Emergency Planning
SERCs
Notification
TPQs
Mixtures
Extremely Hazardous Substances
6%
1 1%
16%
14%
23%
0%
2.40%
0.06%
1.00%
0.28%
0.55%
0.41%
1.30%
1 .60%
17.50%
3.20%
3.40%
0.16%
2.20%
1.60%
5.70%
0.94%
4.10%
2.10%
0.43%
0.39%
1.60%
51.40%|
337
225
1 14
91
80
22
248
Total Document Requests:
Total Written Requests:
Region 6
Region 7
Region 8
Region 9
Region 10
Unknown
Distributors
Handlers
Attorneys
Consultants/Engineers
Laboratories
Trade Associations
Public Interest Groups
Universities/ Academia
Insurance Companies
Hospitals
State Agencies/SERC
Fire Departments
EPA
Local Officials
LEPC
Farmers
Federal Agencies
Media/Press
Union/Labor
Citizens
Indians
Other
Total (%)
Delisting EHS
Exemptions
ITotal (%)
1,203
560
7%
4%
2%
9%
3%
1%
2.70%
7.10%
6.10%
11.10%
1.10%
0.88%
0.51%
1.70%
0.32%
0.90%
2.10%
1.10%
1 .50%
1.50%
2.00%
0.33%
0.94%
4.30%
0.00%
2.20%
0.02%
0.60%
5.20%|
21
30
12.80%l
17
-------
§31 1/5312
General
MSDS Reporting Requirements
Tier l/ll Peculations
Thresholds
OSHA Expansion
Hazard Categories
Mixtures
Exemptions
iTotal (%)
§313
General
Form R
Thresholds
Phase II
Phase III
Workshop (Training)
Petitions
Health Effects
Database
Mass Balance Study
ITotal (%)
Referrals
OSHA
Preparedness Staff
OTS Staff
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
Regional EPA
TSCA Hotline
Other
Total Referrals
487
224
458
484
64
82
101
140
32%|
1,507
680
203
25
0
0
99
5
40
1
40%|
67
2
4
143
15
25
74
330
I Total Document Ftoauests:
1 .203!
Training: General
§305 Training Grants
§305 Emergency Systems Review
§126 (SARA) Training Regulations
ITotal (%)
CEPP: Interim Guide
Chemical Profile
NRT-1
Hazard Analysis
Risk Communication
Title III Workshops
Information Management
Prevention ARIP
Other
ITotal (%)
Trade Secrets
ITotal (%)
Enforcement
ITotal (%)
Liability
ITotal (%)
Release Notification
General
Notification Requirements
Reportable Quantities
RQsvs.TPQs
CERCLA vs. §304
Transportation
Exemptions
ITotal (%)
7
6
8
25
1 %
4
21
33
47
1 0
7
8
4
165
5%|
28
0.43%)
62
0.96%
1 2
0.18 %|
68
44
42
1 8
48
5
20
4 %
18
-------
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000
IV. PUBLICATIONS—DECEMBER 1988
RCRA
The Chemical, Physical and Biological Properties of Compounds, Present at
Hazardous Waste Sites—Final Report is available from the National Technical
Information Service (NTIS) at (703) 487-4650. The order number is PB89-132-203.
The cost is $49.95 for paper copy or $6.95 microfiche.
The following documents are available from the EPA Cincinnati warehouse:
—Choices for Conservation, July, 1979; the order number is SW-779.
—The Used Oil Recycling Brochure; the order number is EPA/530-SW-89-006.
—The Medical Waste Tracking Act; the order number is EPA/530-SW-89-008.
CERCLA
The following Federal Register notices are available from the Superfund Docket
at (202) 382-3046.
—The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP); Proposed Rule (53 FR 51394).
—The Hazard Ranking System (HRS) for Uncontrolled Hazardous Substance
Releases; Appendix A of the NCP; Proposed Rule (53 FR 51962).
19
-------
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000
V. FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES—DECEMBER 1988
Former Notices with Open Comment Period
October 26,1988; 53 FR 43400
(proposed rule)
November 3, 1988; 53 FR 44526
(proposed settlement)
November 3,1988; 53 FR 44527
(proposed settlement)
November 4, 1988; 53 FR 44658
(SAB meeting)
November 4, 1988; 53 FR 44678
(proposed consent decree)
The EPA is proposing rules implementing
the Congressionally mandated prohibitions
on the underground injection of selected
hazardous wastes. This notice sets forth
restrictions for certain first third wastes.
Comments must be received on or before
December 27,1988.
This notice announces a proposed settlement
under Section 122(h) of CERCLA between
EPA and John R. Boucom, Jr., for response
costs at Auburn Church Road Drum Site,
Raleigh, NC. The comment period expired
December 3,1988.
This notice announces a proposed settlement
under Section 122(h) of CERCLA between
EPA and Transcon Lines, Inc., for response
costs at the Peachtree Mercury Site, Norcross,
GA. The comment period expired
December 3,1988.
This notice announces the meeting of the
Science Advisory Board's (SAB) Sub-
committee on Products of Incomplete
Combustion (PICs) for hazardous waste
incineration. The meeting was open to
the public and was held December 15-16,
1988, in Washington, D.C.
This notice announces the lodging of a
proposed consent decree in U.S. v. Village of
Endicott and Town of Union in connection
with the Endicott Village Wellfield Site,
Broome County, NY. The comment period
expired December 4,1988.
20
-------
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000
November 4, 1988; 53 FR 44716
(proposed rule)
November 8, 1988; 53 FR 45106
(proposed rule)
November 8, 1988; 53 FR 45112
(proposed rule)
November 9, 1988; 53 FR 45402
(lodging of consent decree)
November 10,1988; 53 FR 45523
(extension of comment period)
This proposed rule will reference various
Federal agencies' implementation of OMB's
Circular A-110 with a common government-
wide rule for the administration of grants
and cooperative agreements to institutions of
higher education, hospitals, non-profit and
profit entities. Both EPA and FEMA are
affected by this proposed rule. The comment
period ends January 3,1989.
EPA is proposing to grant a petition
submitted by Marquette Electronics, Inc., of
Milwaukee, WI, to exclude certain solid
wastes from the lists of hazardous wastes
contained in 40 CFR Sections 261.31 and
261.32. Comments were accepted until
December 23,1988.
EPA is proposing to conditionally grant
Occidental Chemical Corp. of Sheffield, AL,
an exclusion for certain solid wastes from the
lists of hazardous wastes contained in 40 CFR
Sections 261.31 and 261.32. Comments were
accepted until December 23,1988.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) is lodging a
consent decree pursuant to CERCLA in the
case U.S. v. Zinc Corp. of America, a
division of Horsehead Industries, Inc. The
decree is for a release in the Blue Mountain
Unit of Palmerton Zinc in Palmerton, PA.
DOJ accepted comments until December 9,
1988.
EPA is extending the comment period on a
proposed delisting decision for Merck and
Company, Inc., of Elkton, VA, that
appeared in the Federal Register of
September 27, 1988. Comments were
accepted until December 14,1988.
21
-------
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000
November 17,1988; 53 FR 46474
(request for comment)
November 21,1988; 53 FR 46948
(consent decree)
November 22,1988; 53 FR 47232
(FEMA proposed rule)
November 25,1988; 53 FR 47731
(proposed rule)
November 25,1988; 53 FR 47737
(proposed rule)
This notice requests further comment on the
proposed rulemaking of August 14,1987 (52
FR 30570) concerning increased flexibility in
the modifications of permits (and for interim
status facilities, Part A applications) when
facilities are managing newly listed or
identified wastes. The comment period
expired on December 19,1988.
The DOJ is giving notice that a consent
decree has been issued pursuant to CERCLA ,
in the case of U.S. v. Alean Aluminum Corp.
The proposed consent decree involves clean-
up costs incurred at the Renora Superfund
site in Edison, NJ. The comment expired
on December 21,1988.
This proposed rule would establish policy
implementing FEMA's responsibility to
provide permanent relocation assistance to
persons as part of CERCLA response actions.
Comments will be received until January 23,
1989.
EPA is proposing to exclude certain solid
wastes contained in an on-site surface
impoundment from the lists of hazardous
waste in 40 CFR Sections 261.31 and 261.32 in
response to a petition submitted by Brush
Wellman, Inc., Elmore, OH. This notice also
proposes to deny two other petitions
submitted by the same company. Comments
will be accepted until January 9,1989.
EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the
State program of Utah and give Utah final
authorization. Comments were accepted
until December 27,1988.
22
-------
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000
November 29,1988; 53 FR 47980
(NPL site deletion)
November 29, 1988; 53 FR 48048
(consent decree)
November 29,1988; 53
(proposed rule)
48218
December Federal Register Notices
December 1,1988; 53 FR 48614
(notice of correction)
December 2,1988; 53 FE 48645
(notice of correction)
December 2,1988; 53 FR 48655
(proposed rule)
EPA is providing notice on its intent to
delete the Parramore Surplus Company site,
Mt. Pleasant, FL, from the National Priorities
List (NPL). Comments were accepted by
the Region IV Docket Office until
December 24,1988.
This notice announces the lodging of a
proposed consent decree pursuant to
CERCLA in U.S. v. Metropolitan Dade
County Florida, for the Northwest 58th Street
Municipal Landfill. The comment period
expired on December 29,1988.
This proposed rule would amend the
National Contingency Plan (NCP) by adding
a new Section 300.440. This proposed
amendment implements CERCLA Section
121(d)(3) regarding off-site management of
wastes from CERCLA response actions.
The comment period ends January 13, 1989.
This notice is a correction to the October 20,
1988 Federal Register (53 FR 41280)
concerning ATSDR's hazardous substance
priorities list.
This notice contains technical corrections to
the June 15, 1988 Final Rule (53 FR 22324)
concerning TSCA testing requirements of
Appendix VIII constituents.
This proposed rule is a delisting petition for
waste generated at Boeing Airplane Co.,
Auburn, WA. Comments will be accepted
until January 17, 1989.
23
-------
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000
December 2,1988; 53 FR 48661
(notice)
December 2,1988; 53 FR 48830
(notice)
December 6,1988; 53 FR 49227
(proposed settlement)
December 6,1988; 53 FR 49248
(proposed consent decree)
December 7,1988; 53 FR 50040
(proposed rule)
December 13,1988; 53 FR 50093
(notice of availability)
December 14,1988; 53 FR 50308
(proposed consent decree)
This notice announces a proposed deletion
from the National Priorities List (NPL) for
the Wade (ABM) Site, Chester, PA. The
comment period ends January 3, 1989.
This notice proposes guidelines for
exposure-related measurements; the
guidelines are from EPA's Risk Assessment
Forum.
This notice of a proposed settlement under
CERCLA Section 122(h) between EPA and
Trust Company Bank, the Trust of Norman
Reints, P.I.E. Nationwide, Inc. and response
costs at the Zenith Chemical Co. Site, Dalton,
GA. The comment period ends January 1,
1989.
This is a notice of a proposed consent decree
in U.S. v. Atlantic Richfield Co.. Inc.. under
CERCLA for oil refinery facility in
Wellsville, NY. Comments will be accepted
until January 5, 1989.
This is a proposed petition to delist a certain
waste generated by Mason Chainberlain, Inc.,
Bay St. Louis, MI. Comments will be
received until January 27, 1989.
This is a notice of availability of the Risk
Assessment Forum report entitled, Special
Report on Ingested Inorganic Arsenic: Skin
Cancer Nutritional Essentiality.
This notice announces the proposed consent
decree in U.S. v. Chevron Chemical Co.. et
al.. under CERCLA for their landfill in
Monterey Park, CA. Comments will be
accepted until January 23,1989.
24
-------
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000
December 14,1988; 53 FR 50309
(proposed consent decree)
December 15,1988; 53 FR 50457
(notice of public meeting)
December 16,1988; 53 FR 50529
(final rule)
December 16,1988; 53 FR 50550
(proposed rule)
December 16,1988; 53 FR 50568
(notice)
December 16,1988; 53 FR 50568
(notice of availability)
December 19,1988; 53 FR 51019
(notice)
December 19,1988; 53 FR 51019
(notice of consent decree)
This notice announces the proposed consent
decree in U.S. v. Polysar Inc.. under RCRA
for the polystyrene production facility in
Copley, OH. Comments will be received
until January 13, 1989.
This notice announces a public meeting of
the Contractor Indemnification Review
Panel on December 16,1988 at 9:00 a.m. in
Washington, D.C.
EPA grants final authorization for additional
program modifications to Florida's
Hazardous Waste Management Program.
This proposal would deny a petition to
exclude waste generated by Fisher Guide in
Flint, ML Comments will be accepted until
January 30,1989.
This notice announces the move of the
RCRA Docket from room LG-100 to M2427.
The docket was to be dosed from December
27-30,1988 to allow for the move.
This notice announces the availability of the
final EPA Federal Facilities Compliance
Strategy signed on November 8,1988.
This notice announces the proposed stipula-
tion and agreement to compromise and settle
environmental claims under CERCLA
between EPA and Diamond Reo Trucks in
Michigan.
This notice announces the lodging of a
complaint and consent decree under
CERCLA between EPA and Landfill, Inc. in
Colorado.
25
-------
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000
December 20, 1988; 53 FR 51192
(notice of expected availability)
December 21,1988; 52 FR 51273
(correction notice)
December 21,1988; 53 FR 51394
(proposed rule)
December 21,1988; 53 FR 51391
(notice of public meetings)
December 23,1988; 53 FR 51780
(final rule)
December 23,1988; 53 FR 51909
(notice)
December 23,1988; 53 FR 51962
(proposed rule)
ATSDR announces the expected availability
of the second 25 draft toxicological profiles
for those hazardous substances most
commonly found at NPL sites. The first
priority list appeared in 52 FR 12866.
This notice corrects errors in the Under-
ground Storage Tank Financial Require-
ments Federal Register of October 26,1988
(53 FR 43322).
This proposal revises the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Plan (NCP).
Comments will be accepted until February 21,
1989.
This notice announces the holding of four
public meetings on the proposed revisions to
the NCP. The meetings will be held as
follows:
—January 10,1989: Chicago, IL;
—January 12, 1989: Washington, D.C;
—January 17,1989: Dallas, TX, and
—January 19,1989: Los Angeles, CA.
•
This rulemaking announces the deletion of
the Toftdahl Drums Site in Brush Prairie,
WA from the NPL since no further clean-up
is required.
This notice postpones the announcement of
December 16,1988 and the relocation of the
RCRA Docket. The Docket remained open
December 27-30,1988.
EPA proposes revisions to the Hazard
Ranking System (HRS) to change EPA's
evaluation of potential threats to the public
health and the environment. Comments
will be received until February 21,1989.
26
-------
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000
December 30,1988; 53 FR 53282 This rule proposes to list three wood
(proposed rule) preserving operation wastes and one surface
protection process waste. Comments will be
accepted until February 28,1989.
December 30,1988; 53 FR 53330 This proposed rule is a tentative petition to
(proposed rule) deny a petition from the American Wood
Preservers Institute for EPA to reconsider
and clarify the K001 listing. Comments will
be received until February 28,1989.
27
-------
List of Addressees:
Devereaux Barnes, OS-330
Jim Berlow, OS-322
Frank Biros, OS-500
George Bonina, OS-310
John Bosky, EPA-Kansas City
Susan Bromm, OS-500
Karen Brown, PM-220
Diane Buxbaum, Region 2
Jon Cannon, OS-100
Jayne Carlin, Region 10
Fred Chanania, LE-132S
Richard Clarizio, Region 5
Steve Cochran, EH-562B
Kathy Collier, RTF, NC
Elizabeth Cotsworth, OS-343
Rhonda Craig, OS-333
Wayne Crane, PM-273F
Hans Crump, OS-210
Gordon Davidson, OS-500
Elaine Davies, OS-301
Truett DeGeare, OS-301
Bob Dellinger, OS-332
Jeffery Denit, OS-300
Bruce Diamond, OS-500
Melinda Downing, DOE
Lee DuFief, TS-779
Karen Ellenberger, OS-100
Terry Feldman, A-108
Tim Fields, OS-210
Lisa Friedman, LE-132S
John Gilbert, EPA-Cin., OH
Al Goodman, EPA-Portland, OR
Lloyd Guerci, OS-500
Matt Hale, OS-340
Lynn Hansen, OS-305
Penny Hansen, OS-230
Bill Hanson, OS-220
Cheryl Hawkins, OS-200
Steve Hooper, OS-500
Irene Homer, WH-595
Barbara Hostage, OS-210
Hotline Staff
Bob Israel, TS-779
Phil Jalbert, OS-240
Alvin K. Joe, Jr., GRC
Gary Jonesi, LE-134S
Jim Jowett, OS-210
Thad Juzczak, OS-100
Julie Klaas, OS-510
William Kline, OS-322
Bob Kievit, EPA-Olympia, WA
Robert Knox, OS-130
Mike Kosakowski, OS-510
Walter Kovalick, OS-200
Steve Kovash, PM-214F
Tapio Kuusinen, PM-223
Steve Leifer, LE-134S
Steve Levy, OS-301
Henry Longest, OS-200
Sylvia Lowrance, OS-300
James Makris, OS-120
Joseph Martone, A-104
Chet McLaughlin, Region 7
Scott McPhilamy, Region 3
Royal Nadeau, Region 2
Mike Petruska, OS-332
Lawrence Pratt, ANR-464
Steve Provant, EPA-Boise, ID
Barbara Ramsey, A-104
Carl Reeverts, WH-550E
John Riley, OS-210
Suzanne Rudzinski, OS-342
Dale Ruhter, OS-320
Debbie Rutherford, OS-400
William Sanjour, OS-332
Pam Sbar, LE-134S
Mike Shannon, OS-310
Mike Shapiro, TS-779
Elaine Stanley, OS-500
Jack Stanton, A-101
Steve Torok, EPA-Juneau, AK
Betty VanEpps, OS-240
Bruce Weddle, OS-301
Steve Willhelm, Region 7
Alex Wolfe, OS-342
Dan Yurman, OS-100
Tish Zimmerman, OS-220
Hazardous Waste Division Directors, Regions I-X
Hazardous Waste Management Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X
Regional Counsel, Regions I-X
Regional Libraries, Regions I-X
28
-------
------- |