MISCELLANEOUS DOC: 9560.04(84)
Key Words: HWDMS Definition
Regulations:
Subject: Policy on OSW Definitional Issues
Addressee:
Originator: Lee M. Thomas, Assistant Administrator
Source Doc: See Miscellaneous [9560.18(84)]
Date: 12-28-84
•
Summary:
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.
ne
Ap-i1 198^ Repor-
Pagt 2
.TI. FREQUENTLY ASKED AND SIGNIF.^NT QUESTIONS
A. RCRA
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 ;
I
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.
8. CERCLA
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
v
TM. RESOLVED ISSUhS
A. RCRA
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.
f
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
------- |