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 ------- |