MISCELLANEOUS                                                 DOC:   9560.04(84)

Key Words:    HWDMS Definition


Subject:      Policy on OSW Definitional Issues


Originator:   Lee M. Thomas, Assistant Administrator

Source Doc:   See Miscellaneous [9560.18(84)]

Date:         12-28-84


     The following policies were decided by OSW in conjunction with Regional
Project Officers:

     1)  A commercial facility is defined as "any regulated facility (public or
         private) that accepts hazardous waste from a third party for a fee or
         other remuneration, for the specific purpose of treating, storing, or
         disposing of that waste, except 'captive1 facilities."

     2)  A uniform procedure was adopted to track all non-notifiers in HWDMS,
         including regulated and non-regulated handlers.

     3)  OSW will allow only one SPMS "bean" for permitting per facility.
         OSW also developed a coding and tracking system to allow Regions to
         uniformly code multiple permit actions at a single facility.

     4)  A procedure was developed for tracking both "real world" and "legal
         record" process codes.  The procedure is an expansion of the existing
         C-1800 "legal" record and should be implemented in Fall 1985.  OSW
         will continue to use the "legal record" data as the basis for its
         retrievals on all information concerning facility processes.  Therefore,
         while the use of the C1800 "Real World" record is optional, the Regional
         offices must continue to load data on process codes from the Part A
         Permit Applications into the C1800 "Legal Record" and must continue to
         demand revised Part A Permit Applications from those facilities where
         discrepancies exist.

                                                                                     «  (84.
Ap-i1 198^ Repor-
Pagt 2



  1.  Does the date of the generator's certification on a manifest designate the
      date of shipment?

           The date of the generator's certification on a manifest does not necessarily
           have to be the date of shipment.  The date of shipment is determined by  the
           date of the initial transporter's signature.  The time period for consideration
           of exception reporting is based on the date of the transporter's signature,
           not the generator's certification (262-.42(a)).

  2.  a) Is a generator required to keep copies of biennial  reports and manifests  at  the
      site?  The RCRA definition of generator is site specific.

      b) Is a TSOF required to keep copies of manifests and  biennial reports on site?

           a) 262.40 does not specify that a generator must  keep copies of manif=
           and biennial reports on site.  Copies of both can be kept at corporate
           headquarters.  It must be noted, however, that 3007(a) of 3C2A states that
           a generator must be able to provide to EPA or duly designated personnel
           information on or access to records regarding waste management.

           b) 265.71(a)(5) requires TSDF's to retain copies  of manifests on site for
           at least three years from the date of delivery.  265.74(a) states that  all
           required records must be furnished upon request and made available for
           inspection by EPA personnel.  Biennial reports are required records.

  3.  Do characteristic hazardous wastes need to be manifested for export if they
      are going to be legitimately recycled abroad?

           No; the generator provisions of 262.-50 which govern exporting hazardous
           waste are superseded by 251.6(a) which states that wastes which are deemed
           hazardous by characteristic only are not subject  to RCRA requirements if
           legitimately recycled.

  4.  Must a company's Part 8 permit application submission  include a closure date if
      the company has no plans for closure in the near future?

           Yes; 270.14(b)(13) requires a closure plan to be  submitted with the Part 3
           application, and the estimated closure date is part of that closure plan
           (264.112(a)(4)).  Later, if the estimated closure date changes, the closure
           plan must be amended as a minor modification to the permit (270.42(g)).

  RCRA/Superfu      line
  April 1984 Rep,
  Page 3                                            ;

  5.  264 and 265 Subpart H state that a financial  test  letter(s)  sent  to  tne Regional
      Administrator demonstrating financial  assurance  ana  liability  coverage must be
      signed by the Chief Financial Officer (CFO).   Can  someone other than the CFO be
      delegated to si'gn these letters?

           No; only the CFO can sign financial  assurance and liability  coverage
           demonstration letters..

  6.  264.93(c) cites 144.8 of the Underground  Injection Control  (UIC)  regulations for
      identifying underground sources of drinking water  and  exempted aquifers.  According
      to the preamble to the April  1, 1983,  Federal  Register,  however,  which deconsolidatls
      EPA's Consolidated Permit Regulations,  the correct citation  should be 144.7  (as
      changed from 122.35).  If a State is applying for  final  authorization, should the
     ' State use 144.7 or 144.3?

           The proper citation is 144.7; therefore,  a  State  should use  144.7 when
           applying for RCRA final  authorization.


  1.  A recent delegation of authority from EPA Headquarters to the  Regions concerning
      funding immediate removals took place on  April'16, 1984.   What does  the delegation
      of authority entail?

           Prior to April 16, 1984, Regional  Administrators  (RA)  could  authorize the
           funding of immediate removals up to  $250,000.  The  April  16  delegation  of
           authority increases RA's authority for  funding immediate  removals up to
           $1,000,000.  In addition, the delegation of .authority  allows RA's to authorize
           'exemptions to the statutory six-month  immediate removal time limit.

  2.  What guidelines does EPA follow for Superfund response actions?

           Section 105 of CERCLA required that  a  revised version  of  the-National Contingency
           Plan (NCP) be published to provide a national hazardous substance response
           plan.  Generally, the revised NCP, published  in the July  16, 1982, Federal
           Register, establishes procedures and standards  for  all  aspects  of responding
         •  to releases of hazardous substances, oil,  pollutants,  and contaminants.

  3.  What is the National Strike Force?

           The National Strike Force (NSF) consists of three United  States Coast Guard
           (USCG) Strike Teams:  Atlantic, Pacific, and  Gulf Coast.   Strike Teams  provide
           EPA and USCG On-Scene Coordinators with  assistance at oil and  hazardous substance
           removals  (see 300.34 NCP).  Stride Team  personnel are specialists in communi-
           cations, site safety, contractor monitoring,  and are equipped  with  specialized
           containment and response equipment.

  r*jjt I I  l JUT
  Page  4



   1. An owner of  a TSDF  has  RCRA  surface  Inpoundments 1n which no hazardous waste has
     been  placet  since January 26.  1983.  A closure plan has been submitted but not
     approved.  The  TSOF land 1s  divided  Into two parts to he sold.  One half has all
     the surface  Impoundments, the  other  half has none.

     a) Does  either  half have 1nter1n  status 1f the present owner/operator was planning
     to close downfall hazardous  waste management?

     b) If a  change  of ownership  does  occur, does the Part A chanye?

           a)  If the  property sold has  no  units, that portion has no Interim status.
           The half that  has  the surface  Irrpoundnents has Interim status even though the
           old owner  Is planning on  closing. Interim status Is In effect until
           terminated by  124  procedures.

           b)  Yes: changes 1n the  ownership of a facility may be made 1f the new owner
         -or  operator submits a revised  Part A pemit application no later than ^0 o- -
           prior to the scheduled  chanye  ( 270.72(d)).

           Source:     Debbie  Wolpe
           Research:   Irsne Homer

   2. The dry  cleaning Industry use  carbon filters to filter the solvent,
     perchloroethylene.   Are the  resulting carbon filters which contain spent
     perchloroethylene viewed as  hazardous waste?

           The filters are viewed  as  F0u2, ana the weight of the filter 1s counted toward
           the sfnall  quantity generator (SQG) Unit of 10QU Kvj.  These filters are
           typically  generated by  tne dry  cleaning Industry and may contain up to one
           gallon  of  perchloroethylene.
           Source:     Alan Corson
           Research:   Oenlse  Wright

   3. Wastewater fror an  API  separator  discharges into niltiple sequential surface
     1cpound«ients where  the  solids  fall  out.

     a) Is the waste-water from the  API  separator a hazardous waste 1f it coesn't
     exhibit  a Subpart C characteristic?

     b) Is the sludge that precipitates  out 1n the Impoundments a KU51 waste?

     c) If the wastewater 1s filtered,  are the solids from filtration KU61?

           a)  No.

           b)  Yes; the API separator and  subsequent iinpoundt^ents used for settling of
           sol Ids  are viewed  as all  part  of the API separation system.

           c)  Yes.

           Source:    Myles Horse  and Jin Poppiti
           Research:   Oenlse  Wright

rtCRA/Superfund -   ine
April  1984 Repor.
Page 5

 4. If equipment fron drillir,_    .- crude oil  or  natural  gas  is  steam-cleaned  off-
    site from the drilling site,  is  the  waste excluded  from  regulation  by  261.4(o)(5)
    even if the waste exhibits  a  Subpart C  characteristic?

         Wastes uniquely associated  with tne  exploration, development or production
         of crude oil, natural  gas or geothermal  energy  are  excluded  from  regulation
         by 261.4(b)(5) regardless of whether the waste  exhibits  a  Subpart C
         characteristic.  Since only water  is used  for  steam-cleaning,  the drilling  •  .
         waste is still excluded  from regulation.   If another cleaning  agent  no:
         uniquely associated with the exploration,  development, or  production of
         crude oil, natural  gas,  or  geothermal energy was used, then the waste could
         be subject to regulation.  For  example,  if methylene chloride  was used to
         clean the equipment,  the waste  would be  subject to  regulation  as  FOU2.

         Source:    Meg Si 1ver
         Research:  Denise Wright

 5. In filing a Part 3 permit  application for a  Department Of Energy  (DOE)
    facility, what State regulations are applicable according to  the Memorandum of
    Understanding  (MOU) between EPA  and  DOE on hazardous waste  and  radioactive
    mixed waste management?

         On April 13, 1984,  the United States District  Court for  the Eastern
         District of Tennessee, Northern Division,  concluded ". .  .that application
         of the RCRA regulation at Y-12  (one  of  the DOE  facilities  at Oak  Ridge,
         Tennessee) will not be inconsistent with the Atomic Energy Act (AEA)."
         DOE has indicated'to EPA's  Office  of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
         (OSWER) that it will not appeal  the  court's decision and will  in  fact
         comply with RCRA on a  nationwide basis.  The status of 'the MOU is currently
         unclear.  In terms  of  filing a  permit application,  the DOE applicant nust
         comply with the State's  standards  even  if  they  are  more  stringent than
         EPA's under RCRA.  The issue of how  to  handle  radioactive mixed waste was
         not addressed by the  court  and  is  still  being  contemplated by  EPA.

         Source:    Tony Saney  •
         Research:  Tom Gainer

 6. A facility with an API separator sends  its effluent  to  surface  impoundments prior
    to discharge at an NPDES permitted outfall.   The sludge  is  taken to a  land
    treatment site nearby.  Precipitation run-off from  the  active  tilling  portion of
    the land treatment operation  is  collected in  tne impoundments.  Is  the waste in
    the impoundments deemed K051  because the  effluent comes  in  contact  with the
    sludge in the separator tank?

         No; the effluent must  prove to  be  hazardous by  characteristic. K051 is the
         sludge generated in an API  separator.   The supernatent cannot  be  K051 by
       .  definition and separation does  not. constitute  mixing.  On  April 10,  1983, OSW
         issued a memo describing the policy  on  run-off  from active portions  of hazardous
         waste management units.   For land  treatment units,  this  memo suggests that the
         run-off from active portions be presumed to be  a hazardous waste  because it is
         likely to have mixed  with listed waste  leachate.   This policy, however, is
         currently being reevaluated due to concerns raised  by  industry.   Comments from
         industry, E?A Regional offices, and  States are being examined  now.   For
         additional information on this  issue, contact  Mike  Flynn,  382-4439.

         Source:    Art Day
       •  Research:  Ken Jennings