1« *• dP^ \ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY -3 _, ^*,r-™ ^rf^SHINGTON, D.C .20460 530R89107 WASTE a so EUE^GE'jC •" RESPONSE MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Final Monthly Report— RCRA/Superfund Industry Assistance Hotline and Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Information Hotline Report for May 1989 \ Q M/ -- FROM: Thea McManus, Project Officei^TV ^ \^ Office of Solid Waste \r* TO: See List of Addressees This report is prepared and submitted in support of Contract #68-01-7371. I. SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS AND RESOLVED ISSUES— MAY 1989 A. RCRA 1. Medical Waste-Household Medical Waste According to Section 259.30(b)(l)(ii) of the Medical Waste Tracking regulations (54 FR 12374), household waste is not regulated as medical waste. Would this exemption apply to household waste generated by health care providers in private homes? Household waste, as defined in Subtitle C regulations (40 CFR Section 261. 4(b)), is excluded from the definition of medical waste in RCRA Section 1004(40), and is not subject to the requirements of the demonstration program. The November 13, 1984 Federal Register (49 FR 44978) stated that the exclusion is limited to waste generated by individuals on the premises of a residence, for individuals and composed primarily of materials found in waste generated by consumers in their homes. Thus, if domestic waste is generated by individuals at a residence, it is "household waste" and thus excluded from this program. Medical waste generated in homes by home health care providers thus is "household waste." Because the household wastestream is excluded, the waste generated by a health care provider in private homes would not be subject to the tracking or management requirements even when the waste is removed from the home and transported to the physician's place of business. Source: Becky Cuthbertson (202) 475-6713 Research: Kim Jennings (202)382-3112 ------- 2. Interim Status vs. Permit Modification for Newly Regulated Units An owner or operator of a fully permitted facility manages RCRA non- hazardous waste in several surface impoundments. This waste will become subject to Subtitle C regulation if the Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for waste identification becomes final and effective. a) Will the surface impoundments qualify for interim status? If a permit modification is required, what modification class would be applicable? Newly regulated units at fully permitted facilities do not qualify for interim status. Interim status is granted to facilities and not to individual units per Section 3005(e) of RCRA. Instead, the permittee would follow the permit modification procedures in Section 270.42(g). First, as of the time the TCLP rule becomes effective, the Class 1 permit modification process must be followed for the permittee to continue managing the newly identified waste. Under these procedures, the permittee notifies EPA and the public. Six months after the TCLP rule's effective date, the permittee must then apply for a Class 2 or 3 permit modification, depending on the modifications necessary, and follow the appropriate procedures. Permittees that have not previously managed the newly identified waste may not use the process in Section 270.42(g) and must complete the applicable permit modification procedure prior to treating, storing, or disposing of the waste. (See 53 FR 37912, 37922.) b) Section 3005(j)(6)(A) of RCRA states that surface impoundments that become subject to Subtitle C due to the promulgation of a new listing or characteristic for identifying a waste as hazardous will have four years from the date of such promulgation to meet the retrofitting requirements under Section 3004(o) of RCRA. Does this provision apply to existing surface impoundments which become newly regulated but are not authorized to operate under interim status? Yes. EPA currently interprets Section 3005(j)(6)(A) as being applicable to units at facilities requiring permit modification due to a new listing or characteristic for identifying a waste as hazardous. Therefore, newly regulated units at fully permitted facilities will have four years from the date of promulgation of a new listing or characteristic to comply with the retrofitting requirements. Source: Wayne Roepe (202) 382^740 Resource: Debbie Doherty (202) 382-3112 ------- B. SARA Title III 3. Section 313: Article Exemption The operator of a facility processes metal sheets containing nickel at a facility by the following stepwise process: a) The sheets are cut into various shapes with a laser saw (the cutting process releases fumes containing nickel). b) The resulting pieces are further ground down to their final shape (grindings are produced in the process). In both steps of the process, the shape or form of the sheet is not changed substantially. For an article to retain its exemption during processing or use, the processing or use must result in a total release of less than 0.5 Ibs/yr of a toxic chemical. The 0.5 Ib/yr cut-off value applies to the aggregate releases from processing or use of the same type of item and not to each individual item. Does the 0.5 Ib/yr cut-off value apply to aggregate releases of the same type of item being processed or used in the same manner or, rather, to releases from all manners of processing or use of the same type of item at the facility? In general, the 0.5 Ib/yr release cut-off value applies to aggregate releases from the same type of item being processed or used in all manners at the facility. (If the same type of item is both processed and used at the facility, aggregate releases from processing and use are counted towards one 0.5 Ib/yr cut-off value.) In other words, total releases of a toxic chemical from the same type of item at a facility are counted towards a single 0.5 Ib/yr cut-off value, regardless of whether the item is processed, used, or both. With respect to the above scenario, the 0.5 Ib/yr cut-off value applies to the total aggregate releases of toxic chemical from both steps of the process. In other words, the various shapes resulting from the laser cutting are "the same type of item" as the initial sheet. Thus, any releases of toxic chemical from further processing of these cut shapes (e.g. grinding) must be added to the releases that resulted from laser cutting. Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-3821 Research: Kenneth Leigh Mitchell, Ph.D. (202)382-3112 ------- 4. Section 313: Releases to Water A facility owner or operator's NPDES permit lists not only the first stream into which they discharge their waste, but also the subsequent streams it will flow through. The first three streams are listed on the permit as "unnamed creek." The fourth listed stream is the first with a name, Grove Creek. Since the facility does not discharge directly into Grove Creek, what should they list in Section 3.10 for receiving stream or water body on the Section 313 Form R? Since Grove Creek is the first named receiving stream, it should be listed in Section 3.10 even though the waste is not directly discharged into it. Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-3821 Research: Anita Bartera (202) 382-3112 5. Toxic Chemical List Issue A facility operator uses welding rods and other metal alloys containing phosphorus above the de minimis concentration. Due to the volume of metal used, they will exceed the processing threshold for phosphorus. However, the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) does not indicate, and their supplier does not know, if the metals contain phosphorus (white or yellow) or a red or black form which would not be considered a listed toxic chemical. Must the facility assume the phosphorus is a listed or a non-listed material? How much research is required in order to find out? When using an alloy containing phosphorus, it is highly unlikely that it is elemental phosphorus in the alloy. Usually, iron, copper or tin phosphides will exist. Since the qualifier yellow or white refers to elemental phosphorus, and elemental phosphorus is not found in alloys, the phosphorus in the alloy is not a listed toxic chemical. Source: Larry Longanecker (202) 382-7971 Research: Anita Bartera (202)382-3112 6. Public Availability of Title III Documents Section 324 of SARA Title III addressing the public availability of documents, states that the emergency response plan, material safety data sheet or list submission, Tier I/II, Form R and Section 304 written follow-up notice are to be made available to the public by "the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC), or Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC), as appropriate," ------- 6. Public Availability of Title III Documents (Cont'd) (Section 324(a)). Can this be interpreted to mean that the documents can be made available by the SERC or LEPC as long as all the mentioned documents are made available by one or the other? What Section 324(a) is addressing by saying the SERC or LEPC can make documents available as appropriate is the instance where a form may be submitted to one and not the other. For example, the LEPC does not receive Section 313 Form R submissions. Therefore, it would not be appropriate for the LEPC to make Form Rs publicly available. Therefore, EPA has interpreted Section 324 to mean that both the SERC and LEPC must make publicly available all the above documents that are submitted to them. Source: Kathy Bishop (202) 382-7912 Research: Anita Bartera (202) 382-3112 7. Section 313: Multi-establishment Facility A facility consists of many establishments and the operators have chosen to file Section 313 reporting Form R by establishment rather than as a facility. Establishment #1 has a manufacturing process that otherwise uses over 10,000 Ibs. of a listed toxic chemical. Establishment #1 sends its wastewater to Establishment #2 where it is treated. Establishment #2 just treats the toxic chemical and does not use it anywhere else. Since a Form R has to be filed because of Establishment #l's activities, how is the operator of Establishment #2 to fill out the Form R, specifically Part III Section 3 for activities and uses at the facility, and reflect the releases resulting from the waste treatment? Rather than not answering that section of the Form R, it is better to check the block 3.3c for otherwise use as an ancillary use. The rest of the Form R can be filled out as if that second establishment had triggered reporting themselves, i.e., releases to the environment, waste treatment methods and efficiencies. If any further questions were to arise about activities at Establishment #2, their required recordkeeping should indicate that the Form R is for treatment only and reflecting releases from the facility contributed by their establishment. Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-3821 Research: Anita Bartera (202)382-3112 ------- 8. Emergency Planning Requirements A farmer contracts with an applicator to spray pesticides on his fields. The pesticides contain extremely hazardous substances (EHS). The applicator drives a tank truck onto the farmers' field and sprays the pesticide from the truck onto the fields. For purposes of Section 302 emergency planning requirements, are the EHSs in the truck considered present at the facility and reportable if above the threshold planning quantity? Or are they covered by the transportation exemption? The transportation exemption is intended to exempt substances being transported in commerce and when stored incident to that transportation. The interpretation of storage is limited to storage under active shipping papers. Once a transportation vehicle arrives at its intended destination, it is no longer considered in transportation. If the substance which was transported to the site is not stored under active shipping papers, it is also not considered exempt. Thus, the EHS in excess of a TPQ, even though still contained in a truck would be considered present at the facility and, as such be reportable. The owner or operator of the facility (in this case the farm fields) is required to report if there are EHSs present at the facility in amounts in excess of their threshold planning quantities. However, the required report is simply an identification of the facility and a facility coordinator who can be contacted for further information, to the local emergency planning committee (LEPC). Thus, it is anticipated (although not required) that in making a report to the LEPC, the owner or operator of the facility at which the EHS is applied, would indicate that the chemical is in intermittent use at a variety of sites and briefly explain the periods of time and locations where this application takes place. This will provide the LEPC with the necessary information to determine the nature of the risk posed by this facility or facilities, without placing an undue burden on the owner or operator of the facility. Source: Kathleen Bishop (202)382-7912 Kirsten Engel (202) 382-7706 Research: Anita Bartera (202) 382-3112 9. Establishment An owner or operator of a petroleum facility sends hazardous waste containing a Section 313 toxic chemical to a land treatment facility by underground pipeline. The land treatment facility is owned and operated by the same owner and operator of the petroleum facility. The land treatment facility is not adjacent or contiguous to the petroleum facility, but the petroleum facility maintains "right- of-way" of the pipeline. ------- 9. Establishment (Cont'd) For Part B permitting under RCRA, EPA considers the land treatment facility to be on-site. As per the RCRA Hotline, this does not necessarily mean that the petroleum facility and the land treatment facility are considered one. For purposes of reporting under Section 313, are the two facilities considered to be one? Since the land treatment facility is not adjacent or contiguous to the petroleum facility and they are connected only by a pipeline which the petroleum facility controls right-of-way, the facilities are considered two separate facilities with the same owner/operator. Source: Sam Sasnett (202) 382-3821 Research: Minda Sarmiento (202)382-3112 10. Toxic Chemical List Issues: De Minimis For purposes of Section 313 reporting, is Xylene (mixed isomers) CAS # 1330-20-7 a specified weight percent combination of m-Xylene, o-Xylene, and p-Xylene? Does the mixture need to contain all three individual isomers or can it contain any combination of two of the isomers? Also, for calculating the de minimis, for Xylene (mixed isomers) do you aggregate the isomers and determine if the weight percent is less than one? Xylene (mixed isomers) is an unspecified mixture that could contain just two of the individual isomers or all three. The facility should use their best judgment in determining if they should report under the mixed isomers or the individual isomers. If the facility knows more about the mixture, such as specific weight percents for each isomer, they could determine the thresholds separately and report on each isomer. However, if the facility manufactures, processes, or otherwise uses the isomers as a mixture, it may be more appropriate to determine the threshold as a mixture, therefore, report as a mixture. To determine the de minimis for Xylene mixed isomers, the one percent would be applied to the aggregated isomers weight percent in the mixture. For example: Mixture 1: m-Xylene 30 0.30 o-Xylene 30 0.30 p-Xylene 30 0.30 Total Xylene 90 0.90 Chemical Z 9910 99.1 Total Mixture 10,000 100 ------- 10. Toxic Chemical List Issues: De Minimis (Cont'd) The total weight is less than one percent, therefore less than the de minimis and exempt. Source: Robert Israel (202) 382-3716 Research: Minda Sarmiento (202) 382-3112 ------- II. ACTIVITIES — MAY 1989 1. The RCRA/Superfund Hotline and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to- Know Hotline responded to 20,530 questions and requests for documents in May. The breakdown is as follows: RCRA Superfund UST CEPP Information Calls 6,038 Call Document Requests 1,508 Written Document Requests 408 Referrals 1,038 923 174 1,545 1,254 5,761 = 14,267 1,147 = 4,083 274 = 682 460 = 1,498 Totals 8,992 1,097 2,799 7,642 = 20,530 A. RCRA/Superfund Hotline Activities 2. On May 5, Denise Sines, Hotline Project Director, and Chris Bryant, Hotline Section Chief, met with Diane Bartosh, OSW, concerning a Hotline project. 3. On May 1, 8,15 and 22, Joe Nixon and Ross Elliott, Hotline Section Chiefs, attended the OSWER Communications Meetings. 4. On May 12, Joe Nixon, Hotline Section Chief, met with Sandy Siegross, OUST, to discuss Hotline Operations as they pertain to the UST Program. 5. On May 12, Todd Glass, Hotline Information Specialist, met with representatives from Technical Resource, Inc., to discuss operations concerning the SITE Program at the Alternative Treatment Technology Information Center (ATTIC). 6. On May 24, James Lounsbury, WMD, briefed the Hotline on pollution prevention and waste minimization. B. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline 7. On May 1-3, Robert Rule, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Section 313 inspectors workshop held by OCM for its Regional personnel. 8. On May 2, Dan Irvin, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the meeting on the revision of the Emergency Response Guidebook held by the Department of Transportation. 9. On May 2, Robert Costa, of the Title III Hotline staff, participated in a panel to discuss outstanding Section 313 issues at the OCM inspectors workshop. ------- B. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline (Cont'd) 10. On May 4, Jim Buchert, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the conference call with the Regional Preparedness staff on Title III enforcement issues. 11. On May 8, Anita Bartera, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the conference call with the FEMA/EPA Regional Title III coordinators on status of Title III activities. 12. On May 9, Robert Rule, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Title III Workgroup meeting on the status of Title III activities. 13. On May 9, Jim Buchert, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Chemical Safety Audit subcommittee meeting on the status of this audit program. 14. On May 9, Jon Roland, of the Title in Hotline staff, attended the Information Transfer Subcommittee meeting on communicating information on the Agency's accident prevention activities. 15. On May 10, Robert Rule, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Congressional oversight hearing on the Right-to-Know Pollution data which focused on the Section 313 data and compliance levels. 16. On May 10, Anita Bartera, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Congressional Committee on Public Works and Transportation hearing on national oil spill contingency planning and response capabilities. 17. On May 10, Minda Sarmiento, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the conference call with Regional Counsel on the status of Title III enforcement and legal issues. 18. On May 10, 17, 24, and 31, the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Title III Outreach Subcommittee meetings on the status of Title III communications strategy. 19. On May 15, Jon Roland, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Prevention Workgroup meeting on the status of prevention activities. 20. On May 16, Ken Mitchell and Robert Costa, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Preparedness Staff meeting on status of program office activities. 21. On May 17 and 23, Robert Costa, of the Title III Hotline, met with Lee Ann duFief (OTS) and Laurie Solomon (CEPPO) on the status of the Title III Hotline. 10 ------- B. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline (Cont'd) 22. On May 17 and 24, Ken Mitchell and Jim Buchert, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Section 313 Interpretive Subgroup meetings on outstanding Section 313 issues. 23. On May 18, Robert Costa, of the Title HI Hotline staff, attended the TRIMS staff meeting on the status of Section 313 activities. 24. On May 22, Jon Roland, of the Title in Hotline staff, attended the Regional Preparedness coordinators conference call on the status of Regional Title III and preparedness activities. 25. On May 23, Ken Mitchell and Robert Costa, of the Title HI Hotline staff, attended the Title III Workgroup meeting on the status of Title III activities. 26. On May 24, Minda Sarmiento, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the TRI Taskforce meeting on the status of the impending release of the TRI data. 27. On May 25, Sam Sasnett and Eileen Fesco, of the Office of Toxic Substances (OTS), met with the Title III Hotline staff on the status of outstanding Section 313 interpretations and issues. 28. On May 31, Ken Mitchell, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the TRIMS staff meeting on the status of Section 313 activities. 29. On May 31, Sam Sasnett, Bob Israel and Eileen Fesco of OTS met with the Title III Hotline staff on the status of outstanding Section 313 interpretations and issues. 30 On May 31, Robert Costa and Jon Roland, of the Title III Hotline staff, attended the Information Transfer Subcommittee meeting regarding communicating information on the Agency's accident prevention activities. 11 ------- ANALYSES OF QUESTIONS—May 1989 Grand Total = 12,888 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% 17% 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 LIST 0/0 RCRA General Information §3010 Notification §260.10 Definitions §260.22 Petitions/Delisting §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 kg/mo §262 Manifest Information §262 Accumulation §262 Recordkeepinq & Reporting §262 International Shipments §263 Transporters 5% 13% 1% 5% 1% 2% 2% 6% 2% 2% 1 6% 444 74 136 28 177 267 406 433 1 19 100 78 66 98 70 167 230 36 36 48 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 Rec. §266 E Used Oil Burned for Energy Recovery §266F Precious Metal Reclamation §266G Spent Lead — Acid Battery Reclamation Subtitle D: Municipal Solid Waste Subtitle D: Other Asbestos/PCBs/Radon Corrective Action Dioxins Household Hazardous Waste Medical/Infectious Waste Liability/Enforcement Minimum Technology Mixed Radioactive Waste Used Oil Waste Minimization 20% 9% 3% 2% 0% 2% 1% 1% 4% 4% 30 1 0 9 80 1 5 0 290 126 82 23 56 66 50 1 1 49 130 24 12 ------- RCRA-TSDF/264 and 265 A Scope/Applicability B General Facility Standards C Preparedness/Prevention D Contingency Plans E Manifest/Recordkeeping/Reportinc 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 0 Incinerators P Thermal Treatment Q Chem., Phys., Biol 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 D Release Detection §280 E Release Rpt. & Investigation 215 22 14 1 5 30 74 93 66 45 78 44 5 1 0 26 20 41 8 0 362 142 6 64 1 12 48 18 27 35 30 22 1 17 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 4 1 1 191 1 14 120 290 8 53 30 62 20 38 43 1 6 33 92 93 1.508 7,546 1 8 7 136 375 26 34 1 4 26 5 1,254 2,799 13 ------- CERCLA Access & Information Gathering Administrative Record Allocations from Fund ARARs CERCLIS Citizen Suits Clean-Up Costs Clean-Up Standards Community Relations Contract Lab Program (CLP) Contractor Indemnification Contracts Definitions Emergency Response Enforcement Exposure Assess./Risk Assess. Federal Facilities Fund Balancing General Grants Hazardous Substances Health/Toxics MRS Liability Mandatory Schedules Natural Resource Damages NBARs NCR Notification NPL Written Request Responses Referred to EPA Program Offices Referred to other Federal Agencies Referred externally (state, organizations, etc.) Response Form Sent Response Form Sent/FOIA 1 2 1 7 1 1 52 7 9 32 1 4 1 4 1 6 3 18 5 14 2 68 9 105 5 48 36 0 2 0 65 40 1 12 105 10 52 2 Form Letter Sent/Need More Info. Requests Filled - RCRA -CERCLA -UST SUBTOTAL 226 1 1 2 408 Off-Site Policy On-Site Policy 03H4 PA/SI PRPs Public Participation Radon RCRA Interface RD/RA Remedial Removal Response RI/FS ROD PQ 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 20 4 2 2 23 3 0 3 7 1 8 28 0 56 21 37 4 20 23 5 2 4 1 7 174 1 ,097 108 129 109 280 412 0 1 ,038 TOTAL CALLS, DOCUMENT REQUESTS and REFERRALS 1 2,888 14 ------- Emergency Planning Community Right-to-Know Information Hotline Daily/Monthly Summary Report—May 1989 Total Calls: 5,761 Distribution of Calls by EPA Regions Region 1 Region 2 Reqion 3 Region 4 Region 5 International Manufacturers 20 Food 21 Tobacco 22 Textiles 23 Apparel 24 Lumber & Wood 25 Furniture 26 Paper 27 Printina & 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 Equipmer 37 Transportation Equipment 38 Instruments 39 Misc. Manufacturing Not Able to Determine iTotal Mfa. (%) [Title III General §301-3 Emergency Planning SERCs Notification TPQs Mixtures Extremely Hazardous Substances 9% 10% 15% 13% 24% 0% 2.70% 0.10% 1 .00% 0.30% 0.80% 1 .00% 1.90% 2.30% 12.10% 2.20% 3.80% 0.30% 2.10% 2.70% 8.60% 2.10% 5.00% 2.80% 0.70% 0.50% 1.00% 54.00%| 467 155 89 36 44 1 8 151 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 (%) 1,147 274 7% 5% 3% 9% 2% 1% 2.40% 4.90% 7.00% 12.60% 1.00% 1.00% 0.70% 1 .70% 0.30% 0.60% 2.20% 1.00% 2.10% 2.30% 1.00% 0.10% 0.70% 0.70% 0.10% 3.90% 0.10% 0.80% 7.20 %| 13 9 8.00 %| 15 ------- §31 1/§31 2 General MSDS Reporting Requirements Tier l/ll Regulations 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 C6HA Preparedness Staff OTS Staff RCRA/Superfund Hotline Regional EPA TSCA Hotline Other Total Referrals 406 96 205 270 45 33 56 91 1 9 %| 1 ,882 614 416 99 4 7 295 18 103 4 5 3 %| 1 13 1 3 163 22 45 113 460 (Total Document Requests: 1 . 1 4 7| Training: General §305 Training Grants §305 Emergency Systems Review §126 (SARA) Traininq Regulations Total (%) CEPP: Interim Guide Chemical Profile NRT-1 Hazard Analysis Risk Communication Title III Workshops Information Management Prevention ARIP Other Total (%) Trade Secrets Total (%) Enforcement Total (%) Liability Total (%) Release Notification General Notification Requirements Reportable Quantities RQsvs. TPQs CERCLA vs. §304 Transportation Exemptions Total (%) 9 1 3 23 1 %| 2 1 4 27. 40 13 13 3 1 2 243 6%| 29 1.30 %| 65 1.00 %| 19 0.30 %| 72 63 58 31 64 9 1 7 5 % 16 ------- IV. PUBLICATIONS—MAY 1989 RCRA The following documents are available from the Cincinnati Warehouse via the RCRA/CERCLA Hotline: "Environmental Fact Sheet: 1985 National Biennial Report of Hazardous Waste Generators and TSDFs." The order number is EPA/530- SW-89-033C. "Environmental Fact Sheet: Changes to Interim Status Facilities; Modifications to Hazardous Waste Permits: Procedures for Post-Closure Permitting." The order number is EPA/530-SW-89-028. "Environmental Fact Sheet: No Land Disposal Standards Amendment." The order number is EPA/530-SW-89-044. March 7,1989 Federal Register (54 FR 9596), "Changes to Interim Status Facilities for Hazardous Waste Management; Modifications of Hazardous Waste Management Permits: Procedures for Post-Closure Permitting; Final Rule." The order number is OSW-FR-89-008. May 2,1989 Federal Register (54 FR 18836), "Land Disposal Restrictions; Final Rule." The order number is OSW-FR-89-010. "Report to Congress: Management of Hazardous Waste From Educational Institutions; Executive Summary." The order number is EPA/530-89- 040A. The full report is forthcoming from NTIS. The following documents are available from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) at (703) 487-4650: "1985 National Biennial Report of Hazardous Waste Generators and TSDFs," Volume I, Order No. PB89-187645. Volume II's Order No. is PB89-187652. "BOAT Background Document for K061." The Order No. is PB89-142384. "Design, Construction, and Evaluation of Clay Liners for Waste Management Facilities (Final)." The Order No. is PB89-181937. "Status Report Chemical Activities," Volume I Order No. is PB84-213958. Volume II's Order No. is PB84-213966. 17 ------- RCRA (Cont'd) The following documents are available through the RCRA Docket at (202) 475-9327. Four Background Documents Supporting Test Method 1312 of the Mining Waste Proposed Rule of April 17, 1989: 1) "Appendix (X + 3), Method 1312;" 2) "Performance Testing of Method 1312 - QA Support for RCRA Testing;" 3) "Quality Assurance Project Plan for Inter-Laboratory Comparison of TCLP, E.P. Toxicity (1310) and Method 1312 for Lead in Soil;" and 4) "Inter-Laboratory Comparison of 1310,1311 and 1312 for Lead in Soil." "Introduction and Criteria for Special Waste." The order number is A- DISS00627. "List of Solid and Hazardous Waste Agencies" SW-393. "1986, 1987 Survey of Selected Firms in the Commercial Hazardous Waste Management Industry," is available from the Waste Policy Integration Division at (202) 382-2769. A guidance package on the disposal of expired pesticide 2,4,5- T/Silvex and the related appendixes are available from the 2,4,5- T/Silvex Hotline at (703) 539-1970. "How to Set Up a Local Recycling Used Oil Program," and three related brochures are available through requests to Sarah Carney (OS-301). The Order Nos. are EPA/530-SW-89-039/A-D. "Lust Trust Cooperative Agreement Guidelines," (OSWER # 9650.10) is available through the Office of Underground Storage Tanks Docket. "Operational Guidance on Control Technology for New and Modified Municipal Waste Combustors," is available from Jim Dembocker at (202) 475-8980 or from the Regions. "Underground Tank Leak Insurance...Maximizing Your Coverage," is available from the Petroleum Marketers Association for $49.95, at 1120 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005. "User's Guide to the Contract Laboratory Program," is available from Cheryl Shriver at (703) 684-5678. 18 ------- CERCLA The following OSWER Policy Directives are available from the CERCLA Docket at (202) 382-6940: "Political Subdivision—Lead For Remedial Response" (OSWER # 9355-03) "Policy For Superfund Compliance with the RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions" (OSWER # 9347.1-02) "Procurement Under Preauthorization/Mixed Funding" (OSWER # 9225.1- 01) "Results of FY88 Record of Decision Analysis" (OSWER # 9242.2-02) The following documents are available from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) at (703) 487-4650: "A Compendium of Superfund Field Operation," Order No. PB88-181557. "CERCLIS: Site Location Extract," is available via yearly subscription only. The Order No. is PB 88-914800. "Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual," Order No. PB87-183125. The following documents are available from Martin Topper, Office of External Affairs, at (202) 382-7063: "Agency Indian Communications Plan," March 31, 1989 "Report of EPA Activities on Indian Lands for FY 1988" "CERCLA Getting Into the Act: Contracting and Subcontracting Opportunities in the Superfund Program," available from Barbara Jones (PM-214(F)). "Methods for Evaluating the Attainment of Cleanup Standards; Volume I: Soils and Solid Media," available from Pepi Lacayo at (202) 382-2714. Order No. EPA 230/02-89-042. 19 ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000 V. FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES—MAY 1989 Former Notices With Open Comment Period February 6,1989 (54 FR 5746) (proposed rule) March 24,1989 (54 FR 12247) (proposed rule) March 24,1989 (54 FR 12326) (interim final rule) March 28,1989 (54 FR 12659) (notice of intent to delete site) April 4,1989 (54 FR 13559) (notice of settlement for response costs) EPA proposes regulations to set standards for the Disposal of Sewage Sludge. These standards apply to POTWs and privately owned treatment works that generate or treat domestic sewage sludge. Comments will be accepted through August 7,1989. EPA proposed to delete the Voortman Farm Site from the National Priorities List (NPL). Comments accepted until May 1,1989. This interim final rule identifies medical wastes as well as sets forth the regulations for implementing the demonstration tracking program under the Medical Waste Tracking Act. This rule becomes effective June 22, 1989 through June 22, 1991. Comments on the rule were accepted through May 23,1989. This notice announced EPA's intent to delete the Cecil Lindsey site, located in Jackson County, Arkansas, from the NPL and requested comment on this action until May 3,1989. This notice announced EPA's settlement for response costs at the Zenith Chemical Company Site in Dalton, Georgia, with John Biddle and the Spartan Trading Company. Comments were accepted until May 4,1989. 20 ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000 April 7,1989 (54 FR 14101) (notice of proposal to deny a petition) April 11,1989 (54 FR 14395) (extension of comment period) April 12,1989 (54 FR 14678) (notice of proposed settlement) April 14,1989 (54 FR 14971) (notice of proposal to grant a petition) April 17,1989 (54 FR 15316) (notice of proposal) April 21, 1989 (54 FR 16171) (proposed consent decree) EPA proposed to deny a petition submitted by Bethlehem Steel Corp., (BSC), Lackawana, New York, for an exclusion of certain solid wastes from the lists of hazardous waste in 40 CFR Sections 261.31 and 261.32. Comments were accepted until May 22,1989. This notice announced the extension to the close of the comment period for each of the 25 draft toxicological profiles prepared by ATSDR published on December 20,1988. (53 FR 51192) This notice extended the date of April 14, 1989, published on the front of each profile to May 15,1989. This notice announced the proposed administrative settlement at the Burns Hill Road Superfund site in Hudson, New Hampshire, and requested comments until May 12,1989. This notice announced EPA's proposal to grant a petition submitted by the EPA Combustion Research Facility (CRF) in Jefferson, Arkansas, to exclude the scrubber water generated at its facility. Comments were accepted through May 30,1989. EPA proposed to further define the scope of the Bevill exclusion with respect to mineral processing wastes. Comments were accepted through May 31,1989. This notice announced a proposed consent decree for a "De Minimis" settlement in United States v. Royal N. Hardage. Comments were accepted until May 20, 1989. 21 ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000 May Federal Registers May 1,1989 (54 FR 18503) (final rule) May 1,1989 (54 FR 18505) (final rule) May 2,1989 (54 FR 18836) (final rule) May 4,1989 (54 FR 19184) (immediate final rule) May 5,1989 (54 FR 19435) (notice of proposed settlement) May 5,1989 (54 FR 19526) (proposed rule) EPA denies final exclusion from the lists of hazardous wastes contained in 40 CFR Sections 261.31 and 261.32 for specific wastes generated by Brush Wellman Corporation, Bedford, Ohio. EPA denies final exclusion from the lists of hazardous wastes contained in 40 CFR Sections 261.31 and 261.32 for specific wastes generated by Weirton Steel Corporation, Weirton, West Virginia. EPA is amending the "no land" disposal treatment standards for first third wastes found in 40 CFR Section 268.43. The "no land" disposal standard will not apply to non-wastewater forms of these wastes disposed of before August 17,1988, or generated in the course of treating wastewater forms of the waste. EPA intends to approve New York's hazardous waste program revisions. Comments will be accepted until June 5, 1989. This notice proposes a settlement to a claim by EPA against Technical Ordnance, Inc., pursuant to Section 122(i) of CERCLA. Comments will be accepted until June 5, 1989. EPA is proposing the eighth update to the NPL. The update proposes to add 10 new sites to the NPL. Comments will be accepted until July 5, 1989. 22 ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000 May 9,1989 (54 FR 19888) (final rule) May 10,1989 (54 FR 20213) (proposed consent decree) May 12,1989 (54 FR 20580) (final rule) May 15,1989 (54 FR 20847) (immediate final rule) May 15,1989 (54 FR 20849) (notice) May 15,1989 (54 FR 20851) (notice of codification) May 16,1989 (54 FR 21174) (notice of interim final rule) EPA is granting a final exclusion from the lists of hazardous wastes contained in 40 CFR Sections 261.31 and 261.32 for specified wastes to be generated by CF and I Steel Corporation in Pueblo, Colorado. This notice announces the lodging of a proposed consent decree pursuant to CERCLA in U.S. v. Richmond. Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company. Comments will be accepted until June 11,1989. EPA is granting a one-time exclusion for a specific waste generated by Merck and Company, Inc., in Elkton, Virginia. EPA intends to approve the Colorado hazardous waste program revisions. Comments will be accepted until June 14, 1989 This notice responds to comments received on the final rule published March 16, 1989, and affirms the Agency's decision to authorize Kentucky's revised program. EPA intends to codify the Minnesota authorized State program in 40 CFR Part 272. The codification will be effective July 14, 1989. Comments will be accepted until June 14,1989. EPA is promulgating an interim final rule establishing procedures for the administrative assessment of civil penalties under Section 109 of CERCLA and Section 325 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act. 23 ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000 May 22,1989 (54 FR 21941) (notice) May 22,1989 (54 FR 21953) (notice) May 23,1989 (54 FR 22278) (notice) May 24,1989 (54 FR 22439) (notice of correction) May 24,1989 (54 FR 22524) (notice) May 24,1989 (54 FR 22455) (notice of deletion from the NPL) May 24,1989 (54 FR 22488) (notice) EPA is granting final exclusions from the lists of hazardous waste in 40 CFR Sections 261.31 and 261.32 for specified wastes to be generated by Bethlehem Steel Corp., Steelton, Pennsylvania, and Johnstown, Pennsylvania. EPA intends to approve Guam's hazardous waste program revisions and thus grant Guam final authorization. Comments will be accepted until June 21,1989. EPA is granting final authorization to Wisconsin to operate its expanded hazardous waste program under RCRA. This notice corrects the date and location previously announced in the April 20, 1989 Federal Register (54 FR 15940) for the proceedings to determine whether to withdraw North Carolina's Hazardous Waste Program approval. EPA adjusts the RQ for radionuclides established under Section 102(b) and administratively exempts from reporting certain radionuclide releases. This notice announces EPA's intent to delete the Jibboom Junkyard site from the NPL and requests public comment until June 23, 1989. ATSDR announces that cooperative agree- ment and/or grant applications are to be accepted to conduct pilot and epidemiologic studies to determine the relationship between human exposure to hazardous substances in the environment and adverse health outcomes. 24 ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000 May 25,1989 (54 FR 22637) (notice of proposed consent decree) May 25,1989 (54 FR 22638) (notice of proposed consent decree) May 26,1989 (54 FR 22809) (notice) May 26,1989 (54 FR 22811) (notice announcing proposed administrative settlement) May 30,1989 (54 FR 23174) (final rule) May 30,1989 (54 FR 23018) (notice announcing correction) This notice announces the lodging of a proposed Department of Justice (DOJ) consent decree pursuant to CERCLA in U.S. v. BASF Wyandotte Corp., et aU concerning the Liquid Disposal Inc., site in Michigan. Comments accepted until June 24,1989. This notice announces the lodging of a a proposed DOJ consent decree pursuant to CERCLA in U.S. v. Nicolet. Inc.. concerning the Ambler Asbestos Site in Pennsylvania. Comments accepted until June 24, 1989. This notice announces EPA information collection activities under OMB review. This notice announces the proposed administrative settlement for costs incurred by EPA at Burns Hill Road Superfund Site in Hudson, New Hampshire. Comments accepted until June 26, 1989. EPA promulgates a rule pursuant to Sections 107(a) and 122(h)(2) of CERCLA, which establishes and governs the procedures for EPA's arbitration of small cost recovery claims under Section 107(a) of CERCLA. This notice announces a correction to the proposed exclusion from the lists of hazardous wastes in Sections 261.31 and 261.32 that appeared in the April 14,1989 Federal Register. (54 FR 14971) 25 ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline National Toll Free #800/424-9346, Washington DC Metro #202/382-3000 May 30,1989 (54 FR 22951) (notice announcing availa- bility of funds for cooperative agreements) May 30,1989 (54 FR 22970) (notice of proposed consent decree) May 30,1989 (54 FR 22971) (notice of proposed consent decree) May 30,1989 (54 FR 22971) (notice of proposed consent decree) May 31,1989 (54 FR 23212) (notice of deletion from NFL) ATSDR announces the availability of FY 1989 funds for cooperative agreements with State health agencies to perform health assessments at sites listed on the NPL excluding all Federal facilities. This program is authorized under Section 104(i)(15) of CERCLA. This notice announces the lodging of a proposed partial DOJ consent decree pursuant to CERCLA in U.S. v. A and F Materials Company at a facility in Greenup, Illinois. Comments accepted until June 29, 1989. This notice announces the lodging of a proposed consent decree pursuant to RCRA in U.S. v. Allegan Metal Finishing Company in Michigan. Comments accepted until June 29,1989. This notice announces the lodging of a consent order pursuant to CERCLA in U.S. v. Velsicol Chemical Corporation located in Illinois. Comments accepted until June 29,1989. EPA deletes the Voortman Farm Site in Pennsylvania from the NPL. 26 ------- 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, OS-332 Kathy Collier, RTF, NC Elizabeth Cotsworth, OS-343 Rhonda Craig, OS-333 Hans Crump, OS-210 Gordon Davidson, OS-500 Elaine Da vies, OS-100 Truett DeGeare, OS-301 Bob Dellinger, OS-332 Jeffery Denit, OS-300 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 Horner, 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, OS-210 Laurie Solomon, OS-210 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 Howard Wilson, PM-273 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 27 ------- ------- |