xvEPA
United Stales
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Solid Waste
Washington DC 20460
SW-173C
April 1979
Solid Waste
Hazardous Waste
Management Seminar
Proceedings of the
Pennsylvania Environmental
Council
-------
Prepublication ieeue for EPA libraries
and State Solid Waste Management Agencies
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SEMINAR
Proceedings of the Pennsylvania Environmental Council, Inc.
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, January 25, 1978
These proceedings (SW-173c) are of a seminar
funded in 'part by a grant from the EPA18 Office of Solid Waste.
The speeches are reproduced entirely as presented.
Copies will be available from the
National Technical Information Service
U.S. Department of Commerce
Springfield, VA 22161
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1979
-------
Publication does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor
does mention of commercial products constitute endorsement by the
U.S. Government.
An environmental protection publication (SVM73c) 1n the solid
waste management series.
-------
Contents
Speakers
Curtin Winsor page 1
Irving Hand page 1-2
William Middendorf page 2-5
William Philipbar page 6-7
A.Blakeman Early page 8-15
Daniel Derkics page 20-25
Jack Schramm page 26-27
Lynn B. Johnson page 28
William Bucciarelli page 28
Thomas Scott page 29
Robert Allen page 29
Edward Schuster page 30
Summary of Morning and Afternoon Questions and Answers
Tom Dale page 15
Representative Ronald P. Goebel page 15,16
William Middendorf page 16.18,19
William Goebel page 16
A. Blakeman Early page 17
Irving Hand page 17
Oliver Smith page 17
representative Samuel W. Morris page 17
Joseph Berne page 18,19,31
William Bucciarelli page 18,30,31
Dan.1 el Snyder page 18
John Schmidt page 19
Edward Schuster page 19
William Philipbar page 19
Jack Schramm page 30
Robert Allen page 30,31
111
-------
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SEMINAR
The Pennsylvania Environmental Council, Inc.
MORNING SESSION
Speeches
Curtin Winsor, Esq., President. Pennsylvania Environmental Council, Inc.
This is the third time in the past two years that the Pennsylvania
Environmental Council, Inc. (PEC) has sponsored a discussion of hazardous
waste management problems. The first two conferences on hazardous waste,
held in 1976, dealt with the nature, extent, and possible solutions to
hazardous waste management problems. This seminar focuses on the impact
of the new Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), P.L.
94-580 on hazardous waste management in Pennsylvania.
Irving Hand, PEC Director and Chairman of the Seminar. Our discussion
here today should focus on what those in power will do to deal with problems
of hazardous waste management. We have with us this morning three
panelists, who will each speak briefly about RCRA. When the speakers have
finished their remarks, they will answer questions from the floor.
-------
The speakers are: William Middendorf, Deputy Secretary, Bureau of
Environmental Protection, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources (DER); William Philipbar, President, Rollins Environmental
Services; and A. Blakeman Early, Legislative Director, Environmental
Action, Inc.
Remarks of William Middendorf. My talk will focus on three areas.
First, what is the nature of the hazardous waste problem in Pennsylvania?
That is, what is the volume of hazardous wastes generated here? Second,
what has been done so far in Pennsylvania to deal with the problem?
Third, what can Pennsylvania do in the future with the hazardous waste
problem?
Pennsylvania is a highly industrialized state with approximately
20,000 manufacturing plants generating every type of waste. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated recently that three million
tons of hazardous wastes are generated annually in this state, and this
places Pennsylvania in the top three generators of hazardous wastes in
the country. Only Texas and California generate more.
Hazardous wastes are generated by industrial processes, including:
textile dying, agricultural chemicals manufacturing, petroleum refining,
steel manufacturing, paint production, energy production, and glass and
leather manufacturing. The worst hazardous waste problems result from
three of these manufacturing processess: agricultural chemical production*
petroleum refining, and steel manufacturing.
-------
-3-
To date, the hazardous wastes generated in Pennsylvania have been
handled through long-term storage, landfill (some illegal landfills have
been used), contract haulers, out-of-state disposal, and ocean disposal.
Each of these methods of disposal 'has caused some environmental problems
at one time, either fish kills, water pollution, or acute health problems.
These methods have also resulted in longer-term environmental problems
including ground water pollution, leaching of chemicals into residential
wells, restriction of fisheries, pesticide disposal problems, PCB
problems, metals in sewage sludge, and accumulated health problems from
lead and cadmium.
The public has been outraged by these problems. People wonder how
government could have allowed the problem to reach such crisis proportions.
Citizens want the problem to be solved, but generally do not want hazardous
•
waste disposal sites to be located in their neighborhoods. There have
been especially vehement objections to proposals for dumping Philadelphia
sludge in other areas of the state. The public feels that agricultural
use of sewage sludge is not safe, which makes that disposal option
difficult. Objections to the use of sludge to reclaim stripped mines have
also been voiced. Sludge is a major form of waste, perhaps the single
biggest waste disposal problem.
-------
-4-
Pennsylvania has made efforts to solve the problems of waste disposal
since 1966. In 1967, a staff of twenty-five was assigned to this area.
The Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act (Act of July 31, 1968, Act No.
241, Pa. Laws 788) provided for planning at the local level. A solid waste
survey, done in 1968, indicated that 100 million tons of solid wastes were
generated in Pennsylvania each year, and that 11 million tons of this waste
were generated from industrial and agricultural activities. One million
tons of this was classified as hazardous wastes. This figure is several
years old, and I believe EPA's figures reflect the present situation more
accurately.
From 1967 to 1971, the emphasis was on solid waste management planning.
In 1970 through 1975, emphasis was placed on municipal and community solid
waste facilities. In 1976, Pennsylvania received a grant from EPA that
enabled the state to explore the need for a hazardous waste management
program. Other areas that have received attention are personnel training,
alleviating serious problems caused by inadequate handling of hazardous
wastes, planning for location of disposal sites, penalty assignments, and
monitoring and coordination with other agencies, such as the Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation.
DER believes that a larger staff and a bigger budget are needed to
ensure that the hazardous waste program is effective. The state also needs
adequate rules and regulations, an inventory of hazardous waste sources and
practices, adequate emergency procedures, further training of industry
personnel, emergency disposal sites, public acceptance of disposal methods,
and source reduction and resource recovery.
-------
I feel that DER needs at least 60 new staff positions, and an
additional $1.5 to $2.0 million a year to administer the hazardous waste
management program. The Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act needs to
be amended to increase criminal and civil penalties for violations. A
manifest system, that tracks hazardous wastes from manufacture through
final disposal, is needed. Legislation authorizing this system is essential.
There are some advantages to state, rather than Federal involvement
in this area. First, it was the intent of Congress that the states be
involved. Second, DER is already required to regulate solid waste through
the Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act. Most solid waste sites also
take in hazardous wastes. Coordination between the hazardous waste and
solid waste programs will be possible if DER handles them both. In
addition, DER has a knowledgeable staff, and there is already a good
enforcement program in place in Pennsylvania. An informal survey of
Pennsylvania industries shows that industry would vastly prefer a
state-administered program of hazardous waste management to one managed
by the Federal Government. Industry does not want to deal with two
different levels of government in this issue.
DER, along with other states that are members of the National Governor's
Association, has been monitoring EPA's proposed hazardous waste regulations.
DER has moved toward interim primacy in the hazardous waste program. The
final decision on accepting full primacy, however, will depend upon the
content of the proposed EPA regulations, the adequacy and continuity of
Federal financial assistance, and legislative and public support.
-------
-6-
Remarks of William Philipbar. The Federal Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) requires closer cooperation between the public
and private sectors than any other environmental legislation to date.
The hazardous waste management industry has a long way to go before
it will be able to dispose of wastes in an environmentally safe way. There
are presently too few disposal sites trying to deal with too much waste.
There are only 20 sites outside of California that can adequately treat
hazardous wastes. These are mainly chemical landfills with no pre- or
post-treatment capabilities, or recovery abilities. There are fewer than
10 adequate analytical laboratories associated with hazardous waste
treatment facilities.
Why is the industry in this shape? Clearly, because prior to the
passage of RCRA, there was no demand, because there were no regulations
forcing industries to dispose of their wastes properly. The economics of
waste disposal are unfavorable. This Act will force proper disposal of
hazardous wastes. The result will be a major increase in the cost of
disposing wastes, as proper methods of disposal are naturally more costly
than improper disposal has been.
*
Another problem is that waste disposal is a tough business. There
are few trained people. The industry has a bad image as a result of a
few "night riders" who dump -waste material into sewers. It is a
capital-intense and a high-risk business.
RCRA will affect the hazardous waste management industry. I believe
that the industry will come to be dominated by medium to large size firms.
The Act will force favorable economics by fostering more personnel training
and better technology. This will result in fewer adverse environmental effects.
-------
-7-
RCRA will also have an effect on the industries that generate the
wastes. These industries will try to reduce the amount of wastes they
produce, and will move toward more off-site disposal and treatment of
wastes in order to reduce their potential liability.
EPA is working on regulations to implement this Act. These
regulations will be out in final form in the spring of 1979. They will
set out requirements for disposal sites, and identify materials that cannot
be land-filled. The regulations will describe the manifest system, which
is intended to track wastes from production through disposal. This system
worked well in other states.
The regulations will also establish responsibility for financing
post-closure care of disposal sites. Under the proposed regulations, an
estimate of the cost of such care will be made and the owner and operator
of the landfill will be required to accumulate a pool of money that will
be used to administer the landfill after closure. An indemnity fund would
also be established in case the landfill causes environmental problems.
The fund for post-closure care must be large enough so that the interest
on the fund will cover the costs of administering the site after closure.
Insurance for post-closure will be necessary. Land used for disposal
could be transferred to the state and Federal Government to administer
10 or 15 years after closure, with the costs of administration being met
by the fund described above. Wisconsin has adopted this approach.
-------
-8-
Remarks by A. Blakeman Early. This conference is addressing the
second and very crucial stage of the implementation of the hazardous waste
management provisions of RCRA—the state assumption of regulatory authority.
This legislation interjects the Federal regulatory hand into one of the
last bastions of the environment which has heretofore been regulated, if
at all, through state and local statute and ordinance land disposal. There
is little doubt that the Federal regulatory hand is thrust into the arena
of land disposing hazardous wastes with a capital R.
While the provision of guidance and technical assistance is certainly
going to play a major role in ensuring proper implementation of the
hazardous waste provisions, this statute is derived from the new breed of
environmental legislation that demands that a big stick not only be carried,
but used when necessary. Citizen involvement is crucial to ensuring that
hazardous waste requirements are enforced when necessary.
I urge citizens to become involved in the implementation of these
hazardous waste management requirements at the earliest stages of state
assumption of responsibility. I also urge citizens to get involved with
the implementation at the Federal level, too. This involvement must focus
on various aspects of the process as well as substantative environmental
issues. Here are some of areas where I feel that involvement is most
important.
A major area which is crucial to the implementation process and which
all too often is an afterthought to most citizens involved in the
environmental movement, is the question of the budget for implementation
programs. Based on my experience with EPA in Washington, the effects of an
inadequate budget on the effectiveness of a regulatory program can be
devastating.
-------
-9-
The budget has an impact on all phases of implementation, substantive,
procedural, and administrative. This issue cannot be underestimated
because states have been notoriously stingy in funding adequate solid
waste programs in the past and the prospect of Federal support for this
legislation can be described in no other terms but bleak. Indeed, the lack
of budget for the Federal solid waste program will have a profound impact
on the state programs as well.
First, let's review the present status of EPA's solid waste budget.
Although the hazardous waste program is faring better than others, the
Office of Solid Waste received an increase of only five persons of the
153 additional persons requested for Fiscal Year 1978. It received an
increase of $8.7 million of a total of $143 million requested. Rather
obviously, EPA must take steps to deal with the dramatic disparity between
what is required under the Act, and the resources it has been given to meet
these requirements.
There are two basic responses EPA can take in order to ameliorate this
disparity: it can seek to define the hazardous waste problem, and thus its
responsibilities, as narrowly as possible, °r it can seek to minimize
Federal involvement by encouraging state and local assumption of
responsibilities.
I prepare to reserve judgment as to whether EPA has succumbed to the
temptation to narrowly interpret its mandate. Quite clearly, the Agency
is promoting the state assumption of program responsibilities. This effort
is a basic part of the strategy document recently circulated by EPA for
comment.
-------
-10-
I raise the budget issue in relation to state delegation, not because
I feel that state assumption of the regulatory functions in hazardous waste
management is undesirable. Certainly, the policy of RCRA encourages this
approach and those closest to the hazardous waste management problems
should be best suited to solve them. However, I do fear that due to the
Federal budget problem, EPA may become too enthusiastic to rid itself of
its responsibilities. Thus, the question of whether a state has a program
"equivalent" to the Federal one for purposes of delegation may become one
of whether it can do a better job than the meager resources that EPA can
provide would do, rather than whether the state program is equivalent to
the one described in the statute and truly adequate to protect public
health and the environment.
Ensuring the adequacy of state programs is made additionally more
difficult because of the significant changes made in RCRA from the
"standard" language for delegating authority such as is found in the Clean
Air Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. First, the
Administrator of the U.S. EPA must grant interim authorization to a state
that applies and demonstrates its program to be "substantially equivalent"
to the Federal program. No public hearing is required prior to submission
or approval.
-------
-11-
Second, permanent authorization of a state program becomes essentially
automatic after state application unless EPA takes two steps. Within 90
days of the state application EPA must find that the state is not expected
to receive EPA approval and within 180 days after that, EPA must find that
the state program is either not equivalent to the Federal program, or with
programs in other states or that the state program does not provide adequate
enforcement. If EPA fails to make either of these findings, the second of
which it cannot be compelled to make, the state automatically receives
authorization. EPA has a major incentive not to make these findings
because of its own inadequate manpower and inadequate funds. Therefore,
it will be up to the interested citizens of Pennsylvania to ensure that the
hazardous waste program submitted and approved is truly equivalent to the
one described in RCRA and EPA's implementing regulations. Citizen
involvement must begin at the earliest stages of state involvement and
those citizens here today are to be commended for their foresight. That
involvement can start by ensuring that notice and opportunity for a public
hearing is required prior to state application for interim authorization.
Citizen involvement also means involvement in the critical budget area
that I have so far discussed only in the context of the Federal program.
However, if state officials do not have adequate budgets, they will not have
adequate resources to plan an effective program at the outset, and corners
will surely be cut when it comes to implementation. As I mentioned a
moment ago, state solid waste budgets take on added significance when one
considers that the Federal solid waste budget contains precious little
money for grants in support of state programs.
-------
-12-
A moment ago I mentioned the need for funds to ensure proper planning.
Planning is a key area in the regulatory process for citizen involvement.
First, it is easy to be most effective during the formulative period of a
program, rather than trying to achieve change once it is in full swing.
Second, citizen involvement in planning of hazardous waste facilities
can help alleviate one of the problems of greatest concern to both Federal
and state solid waste officials and which is the first substantive issue
I wanted to highlight. That is the issue of land disposal facilities
siting. All too often, the most ardent citizen involvement in the solid
waste field has been a negative one—that of fighting the proposed location
of a new solid or hazardous waste land disposal facility. Citizens have
an important role to play in helping to ascertain what future disposal
needs will be and helping to select where disposal facilities will be
located. The proposed EPA requirements for hazardous waste facilities are
the most comprehensive ever developed covering every aspect of facility
construction, operation and maintenance. Yet, siting a facility remains
the most important single factor in ensuring that a facility will not pose
a threat to public health or the environment.
The location of a disposal facility in impermeable soils, in a well
drained area that is far above underground water aquifers can do more to
ensure the safety of a site than nearly any other condition. When a site
is found with this rare combination of characteristics, citizens who fight
such a siting on the basis of the "anywhere but near me" approach do their
community a great injustice. If a land disposal facility is ultimately
located at the site where no one opposes it, all too often this is the
least environmentally desirable site, as well.
-------
-13-
Such ill-considered decisions have a way of returning to haunt us in
the form of polluted ground and surface waters and other environmental and
health threats. Solid waste officials have frequently been burned on
adverse public reaction to disposal facility siting decisions. I know at
EPA in Washington, concern about this adverse public reaction is reaching
the paranoid stage, resulting in the downplay of information concerning
the problems that poor facility siting, construction, and operation can
bring. Citizen pressure in support of sound siting decisions during the
planning stage can go a long way toward ensuring that the decision is
not reversed.
Another key substantive environmental issue that is intimately related
to siting issues is groundwater protection. Again, citizen participation
at the planning stage is crucial. This involvement must extend beyond
Solid Waste Disposal Act planning. EPA is attempting to integrate the
approach taken in the Safe Drinking Water Act in its regulations for
hazardous waste facilities. Basically, the Safe Drinking Water Act requires
each state to classify groundwater aquifers according to present or future
use. Those aquifers that are classified as being suitable for drinking
water supply or as a potential drinking water supply will receive greater
protection than those that are classified suitable for industrial use. As
V
currently formulated, EPA's hazardous waste facilities regulations will plug
into this classification system. Disposal facilities that are located over
or near an aquifer that is classified as suitable for drinking water use
will have to meet more stringent requirements designed to reduce the
potential that leachate might pollute that aquifer than facilities that are
located over or near aquifers classified as suitable for industrial use.
-------
-14-
Clearly, citizens have a great interest in the decision by state
officials to essentially write off certain underground aquifers. The
decision regarding aquifers that have already been spoiled is not difficult.
Nor is the decision regarding aquifers that are presently being used as
drinking water supply. The difficult decisions will surround the
classifications of aquifers which are largely unused. As in the case of
competing uses for a land disposal site, conflicts between competing uses
for ground water aquifers are most easily resolved at the planning stage.
Citizens are likely to have the greatest impact on state officials during
the planning stages.
While as an environmentalist, my view is that all unused aquifers
should be protected as a potential drinking water source, I think we must
recognize that such an approach is not politically realistic. Therefore,
this classification process must be an open one which ensures that citizens
appreciate the consequences of classifying a given aquifer for a given use.
As most of you know, a lot less is known about underground waters, the
manner and direction of movement, and the ability to purify them once they
have been polluted than is known about surface waters. The decisions
classifying aquifers in the near future will have an impact for many years
to come.
The last issue I would emphasize really resembles the budget and
planning issues in that it concerns an aspect of the regulatory process in
general, rather than a specific environmental concern in hazardous waste
management. This is the citizen's suit provisions of RCRA.
-------
-15-
As in most environmental legislation passed since 1970, RCRA provides
that citizens may sue the Administrator to compel him to perform any
non-discretionary act or duty. Furthermore, a citizen is given standing
to sue anyone who violates any "permit, standard, regulation, condition,
requirement, or order" under this Act. Citizens suits, and the threat of
citizens suits, have been a crucial factor in ensuring that environmental
protection laws have been properly administered and observed. I am
certain that the existence of the citizen's suit provisions has been a
major motivating factor behind public officials administering these laws
responding to citizen in-put. In my view, state hazardous waste management
authority cannot provide an "equivalent" program as required under Section
3006(b) of RCRA without a provision authorizing citizen's suits which is
parallel to Section 7002.
Citizens rarely have the resources to use such a provision very
frequently. Without the potential, a citizen's ability to ensure that
RCRA is administered as it should be is vastly reduced.
Summation of the Morning Question and Answer Period
Tom Dale (Citizens Against Philadelphia Sludge). I would like to point
out that all sludges are not the same as Mr. Middendorf implied in his
speech. Some sludges, such as those from Philadelphia, contain more lead,
and thus, pose more of a'health problem.
Representative Ronald P. Goebel (R-Allegheny). How is mine waste
being dealt with under this Act? Does this come under the heading of
hazardous wastes, or is it a separate problem?
-------
-16-
William Middendorf (Pennsylvania PER. Deputy for Environmental
Protection). Mine wastes are being regulated by Pennsylvania now, and
also by the Federal law on strip mining. These wastes are also covered
by the Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act.
Representative Goebel. What will happen if DER does not get funding
to administer the Act? Will the Department set priorities?
William Middendorf. Very little has been done in Pennsylvania to
deal with the hazardous waste problem. Our present funding does not even
enable us to keep up with the domestic waste problems. DER cannot drop
other waste problems to deal just with hazardous wastes.
Representative Goebel. (Addressing Mr. Philipbar) Could you please
clarify your statement about landfills being taken over by the Federal or
state government?
William Philipbar (President, Rollins Environmental Services, Inc.).
The regulations now being drafted by the U.S. EPA suggest that after a
site has been closed (10 years or so after the closure) it could be taken
over by the state. A pool of funds would be created by the owner or the
operator, which would be used to care for that facility from then on.
Representative Goebel. I feel that the citizens views that they do
not want a hazardous waste disposal site located in their area should
receive high consideration.
-------
-17-
A. Blakeman Early (Legislative Director, Environmental Action). The
problem is not that easy to solve. The state must try to plan ahead to
get citizens involved and to select sites prior to the time that people
make substantial real estate investments in an area. The major problem
at this time is that disposal sites are not being administered in an
environmentally safe manner. Sites are being located where people have
already settled. Finding safe sites is so difficult that citizens should
be more willing to accept them when they are found.
Irving Hand (PEC Director and Chairman of the Seminar). Site
selection is difficult, as is most land use regulation in Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania has 5,000 units of local government. Traditionally, land use
responsibility has been given to local governments. A role for county
government in land use is only slowly and grudgingly being given. There
are still many problems of cooperation and coordination. Choices
concerning location of disposal sites should be made on a regional basis.
Oliver Smith (Western Electric Company and a PEC Director). In my
area of Pennsylvania, the county did plan landfill sites in undeveloped
areas. The public reaction was very negative. Nothing has been done as
yet, because there is a question about who has jurisdiction in this area.
Representative Samuel W. Morris (D-Chester County). May I ask what
the prior speaker meant by "undeveloped land?" Was it agricultural land?
Oliver Smith. Yes, farmland.
Representative Morris. Farmland jU developed.
-------
-18-
Joseph Berne (University of Pittsburgh). As a former member of the
DER staff, I know that DER has attempted to solve hazardous waste management
problems in the past. Will the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
actually assist the state in this effort? Isn't there a problem of
technological capability that the Act does not deal with?
William Middendorf. DER feels that the Act will help. It reflects
a mandate of Congress—good hazardous waste management is not discretionary
anymore. The technical capability of the state does need to be increased
in order to deal with this problem.
William Bucciarelli (Chief, Division of Solid Waste Management,
Bureau of Land Protection, Pennsylvania DER.) RCRA provides a basis for
action; it attacks the management side of the problem.
Joseph Berne. This group should be aware that DER has, since 1968,
been addressing the problem on a case-by-case basis but has not found any
solutions.
Daniel Snyder, Esq. (Dechart, Price & Rhoads and a PEC Director).
Permits from DER and possibly from EPA and some transportation agencies
will be required. This will create a difficult regulatory maze. Will
the private sector be willing to go through this process in order to
provide services?
A. Blakeman Early. You are talking about the difficulty of obtaining
a single site permit. The trend in the industry probably will not be
toward the single site. The trend will be toward on-site disposal. The
generator, as an employer, has political clout and if he can not get
permits, he will move elsewhere.
-------
-19-
John Schmidt (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources).
We are studying disposal sites in Pennsylvania for radiological material.
Social barriers are also high in this area. What is the life-time of
hazardous wastes? Are the wastes degradeable? Will disposal sites be
limited to receiving wastes generated in Pennsylvania or will other
states be able to use them as well?
William Middendorf. This last question is a legal question that may
be resolved by the Supreme Court in a few weeks. (The case to which he
is referring is a City of Philadelphia challenge to a New Jersey statute
prohibiting importation to New Jersey of hazardous wastes from other
states. The Supreme Court declared this statute unconstitutional in
July, 1978. Ed. Note).
Edward Schuster (Vice President, Newco Chemical Waste System, Inc.).
Will there be any facilities in Pennsylvania or will the barriers be too
high? Is it possible that no sites will be approved at all? Is there any
joint effort under way to handle small amounts of similar wastes produced
at different sites?
William Philipbar. There was such an effort in Houston, but I don't
know of one here.
Joseph Berne. There has been such an effort, near Ellswood. High
cost metals would be recovered, so the economics were favorable.
-------
-20-
Remarks of Daniel Derkics for John P. Lehman, Director, Hazardous
Waste Management Division, Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. My job involves working with the states to obtain
authorization for their hazardous waste programs. I intend to discuss
here what the Federal Government expects from the states in this program,
and why.
Hazardous wastes are a problem of great magnitude. The consequences
of illegal disposal are serious. There have been documented cases of
groundwater contamination by leachates, surface water contamination by
runoff, direct contact poisoning, air pollution, damage from fires and
explosions, all resulting from unacceptable disposal of hazardous wastes.
Most of these incidents resulted from the open dumping of hazardous wastes
on isolated tracts of land, or indiscriminate acceptance of wastes by
municipal landfills regardless of the hazards involved.
In New Jersey, for example, illegal disposal of the contents of an
8,000 gallon tanker down a Newark sewer was brought to light when police
caught the driver of the tanker in the act. The case was clinched when
the arresting officer's shoes began to rot.
Similar incidents have happened in Pennsylvania and have been reported
to the press. For example, Pennsylvania has spent $400,000 in 1971 to
neutralize and dispose of the wastes of a chemical company. In this
incident, several lagoons in which the chemicals were stored began to
leak, and destroyed plant grounds in Bucks County. Pennsylvania spent
$140,000 cleaning up'chemical wastes from a tannery site in Tioga County.
In 1973, 20,000 gallons of chemical wastes spilled and drained into
Cowanesque River, killing all life in the river.
-------
-21-
In another incident, an inspector from DER was splashed and burned by
lye from an illegally disposed drum at a landfill in York County. In
this case, the landfill had accepted a material that it was not authorized
to handle.
EPA has information about more than 400 such incidents which some of
the state agencies have gathered. Clearly, these same problems exist in
those states which do not have environmental programs, and where the
damages are not documented. Therefore, cases reported understate the
magnitude of the problem. Of the 400 cases EPA has studied, 64 happened
in Pennsylvania. In 54 of these 64 incidents, a specific industry could
be identified as the cause: the chemical industry in 10 cases; the
industrial waste processing industry in six cases; the mining industry
in four incidents; the food processing industry in three cases; the
petroleum industry in three cases; one case each in the agricultural,
plating, tannery and public utilities industries.
The magnitude of the problem is enormous. The results of 14 EPA
industry studies show that 34 million metric tons of potentially hazardous
wastes were generated in 1977. By 1983, this figure will increase to 38
million metric tons. Eighty percent of this is treated on-aite; 20 percent
is hauled off-site for disposal contractors.
-------
-22-
Lagooning in unlined surface impoundments represents a common method
for disposing of hazardous industrial wastes. Nearly 50 percent of
industrial wastes are disposed of in this way. Dumping in non-secure
landfills accounts for disposal of another 30 percent. Ten percent of the
wastes are disposed of by uncontrolled incineration. Thus, 90 percent of
the hazardous wastes generated by 14 key industries are managed by practices
inadequate for the protection of human health and the environment. By
the way, Pennsylvania is the third largest generator of hazardous wastes
in the United States, according to the 14 industry study.
The objectives of RCRA are simple: to protect health and the
environment, to conserve material resources, and to conserve energy resources,
The Act established the Office of Solid Waste within EPA to guide the
implementation of the law. It also established a Federal, state, and
local government partnership to implement the Act.
The Act emphasizes: land control through regulation and control of
hazardous waste disposal operations; regulation and control of hazardous
wastes from "cradle to grave;" improvement in all aspects of waste
management; reduction of solid wastes through resource recovery and
waste reduction efforts; manpower training and public education; and
research and special studies on solid waste management techniques.
Subtitle C of RCRA sets forth the "cradle to grave" approach to
regulating hazardous wastes. This approach makes use of a manifest system
that follows the hazardous waste from the point of its generation to its
disposal. This section also sets standards for generators, transporters,
and waste management facilities to ensure proper handling of the waste at
each stage. The "cradle to grave" approach includes the use of a permit
system for treatment, storage, and disposal facilties.
-------
-23-
It is expected that the regulations will reduce illegal dumping,
eliminate unsatisfactory facilities for waste treatment and disposal, and
encourage resource recovery as waste treatment costs rise. It is also
expected that the regulations will encourage generators to handle more
wastes on-site. The impact on prices, jobs, and the industries involved
should be minimal, except in marginal industries.
It is the intent of Congress and of EPA to make the hazardous waste
management program under RCRA as much of a state-run operation as possible.
The Administrator of EPA can authorize the state to operate its own program
in lieu of the Federal program if certain conditions are met. States can
receive one of three types of authorization: interim, full, or partial.
Interim authorization gives the states a two-year period for their
existing state programs during which the states can modify existing programs
to qualify for full authorization. Existing programs must be "substantially
equivalent." To be "substantially equivalent," a state program must have
legislative authority to control either on-site or off-site disposal of
hazardous wastes, there must be a permit mechanism for
disposal facilities, there must be an active surveillance and enforcement
program, and there must be an "authorization plan" which is a type of
compliance plan or schedule for reaching full authorization.
-------
-24-
To achieve full authorization, a program must be equivalent to and
consistent with other programs under Subtitle C. To be equivalent, a state
program must: have legislative authority to control all forms of hazardous
waste management; have published regulations under this authority; have
a permit mechanism for storage, treatment, and disposal facilities; have
a manifest system to track wastes from origin to ultimate disposal; have
adequate resources to carry out the program; identify the agency
responsible for the program; and provide for public participation in
accordance with EPA guidelines under Section 7004 of the Act.
Partial authorization involves a combined implementation effort of
EPA and the state that meets all the requirements of full authorization.
This type of authorization can only last five years (with some exceptions).
It will be issued if state legislative authority is lacking for certain
program components.
Federal oversight of state programs consists of quarterly state
reports to EPA, EPA facilities inspections (limited to 10 percent of total
facilities), and an annual program review by EPA.
An application for a state program should include a narrative
description of the proposed program, a memorandum of understanding,
describing oversight, and an authorization plan if it is an application for
an interim program. The application should be signed by the designated
state official, and submitted to the appropriate EPA regional administrator.
A public hearing on the state application must be held.
-------
-25-
Pennsylvania should consider taking over the hazardous waste management
program for a number of reasons. The state is the third largest generator
of hazardous wastes in the United States and borders on another large
generator, Ohio. As the third largest generator, the state should receive
a proportionately higher level of funds. Second, state assumption of the
program is consistent with the intent of Congress. Third, the state is
more familiar with its own problems, and the program will be better run in
Harrisburg. Local industries and citizens would prefer to deal with
Harrisburg, and control from Harrisburg will inevitably make for better
public participation.
It appears that Pennsylvania's Solid Waste legislation may be eligible
to receive interim authorization, which would allow two years to expand
to a fully authorized program. Perfecting legislation would be needed
in Pennsylvania's case for full authorization.
Summation of Question and Answer Period
(Answers were provided by Mr. Derkics)
Q: Who will pay for this waste management program?
A: Matching funds are available to the states under RCRA.
Q: Shouldn't those who generate the waste be made to help pay for the
costs of regulation?
A: Under RCRA's permit system, the state could charge for the use
of disposal sites. So the generator, by paying these charges, would in
effect be asked to pay.
Q: Will the costs of this program be met by the fees?
A: We are not sure of this at present. It will be some time before we
can know the answer to this question from experience with the program.
-------
-26-
A general discussion on the need for source reduction as well as
adequate management practices ensued. Mr. Early of Environmental Action,
Inc. urged that Congress be asked to take strong action to encourage
companies to reduce the amount of wastes they generate. A member of the
audience questioned the availability of funds for research into good
hazardous waste disposal methods. Federal and state research funds in
this area are being cut back, and most of the money is being directed
toward research in the area of treatment rather than source reduction as
the former is the most pressing problem. Mr. Schramm, EPA's Region III
Administrator, indicated that EPA is interested in source reduction and has
a task force studying this issue at the present time.
AFTERNOON SESSION
., Speech and Panel
Remarks by Jack Schramm, Administrator, Region III Office of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Will the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) do the job? This is the issue we are here to discuss
today. We hope that by providing input to legislators and their staff we
will help them strengthen this legislation.
-------
-27-
At 11:00 a.m. today, the Administrator of the U.S. EPA announced at
a news conference that regulations will be adopted to implement the Safe
Drinking Water Act. The regulations will specify certain cities that
have special problems with their drinking water supplies. EPA will study
water supplies in these cities to determine the extent of contamination.
At present, it appears that in most cases contamination is minimal. Water
supply quality problems represent the kind of environmental "time bombs"
that are now being discovered frequently. Many water supply quality problems
are caused by concentrations of synthetic chemicals.
EPA feels it is significant that PEC has chosen to address the topic
of hazardous waste management at this time. EPA would like Pennsylvania to
assume authority for administering RCRA. EPA is anxious to form a
partnership with the states to implement RCRA.
Panel Participants: Lynn B. Johnson, Manager, Environmental Control,
Rohm & Haas Company, Bristol; William Bucciarelli, Chief, Division of Solid
Waste Management, DER; Thomas Scott, Esq., Killian & Gephart, PEC's
Legislative Representative; Robert Allen, Chief, Hazardous Materials Branch,
U.S. EPA, Region III; and Edward Shuster, Newco Chemical Company, Niagra
Falls, New York.
-------
-28-
Lynn Johnson, Manager, Environmental Control, Rohm & Haas, Co.
Rohm & Haas produces three kinds of wastes: degradable; non-degradables,
such as inert plexiglass, a substance which is not harmful; and hazardous
wastes that need to be stored for many years. These include heavy metals
and arsenic. Rohm & Haas investigates sites that it may use for disposal
to make sure that the wastes are properly disposed of. Rohm & Haas uses
no disposal sites in Pennsylvania, because there are no adequate sites
in Pennsylvania. There are only eight or ten sites in the entire country
that can deal with the wastes that we produce.
William Bucciarelli, Chief, Division of Solid Waste Management, PER.
RCRA is an attempt to turn from correction of a problem to prevention. DER
feels that the Act provides a firm foundation for a hazardous waste
management program in Pennsylvania. Future legislation in this area in
Pennsylvania should amend legislation that is already on the books; it is
not necessary to start from scratch. The responsibility for the hazardous
waste program should not be fragmented among many agencies, but should be
concentrated in DER, and the already existing solid waste management program.
DER is already trying to promote recovery of resources and waste exchange
programs, and to deal with emergencies dealing with hazardous wastes.
DER would like to see Pennsylvania get the authority to administer
this Act. If Pennsylvania accepts this authority, it would be under an
interim authorization, so that the state could view the final guidelines
of the Federal Government before deciding whether to go permanently into
the program.
-------
-29-
Thomas Scott, Esq., Klllian & Gephart, PEC's Legislative Representative.
I noted that the first section of the model legislation says that we do
have the technology to contain waste and that it is within the economic
ability of generators of waste to properly dispose of wastes. I was struck
by the fact that the industry can do it, but that the government apparently
does not have the money needed to force the industry to properly dispose of
hazardous wastes. As environmentally concerned citizens, we must see.that
government does force industry to adequately treat these wastes. Citizens
must be aware of budgetary problems, in addition to being aware of
substantative issues that affect the environment. How can we get the most
mileage out of the environmental protection dollars we spend? We need to
look at the model legislation and compare it to what we have today. Many
of the provisions in this Act are presently on the books in Pennsylvania.
As we look at the model legislation, we must ask: Where do we need to
change the present law?
There are two major problems that must be dealt with. One is the
problem of responsible industries generating hazardous wastes with no
proper place to dispose of them. The second is the problem of irresponsible
industries, those that are not concerned about proper disposal. These
industries must be policed to make sure they correct their disposal
practices. Proper disposal is more expensive, but society benefits greatly.
The benefits outweigh the costs.
Robert Allen, Chief, Hazardous Materials Branch, EPA, Region III. DER
has done a good job in the area of solid waste management and is qualified to
take on the hazardous waste management program. Pennsylvania does have some
existing laws that may be useful in dealing with hazardous waste management
problems. EPA's model legislation should be used as a starting point.
-------
-30-
Edward Shuster, Newco Chemical Company, Niagra Falls, New York. There
are enormous quantities of hazardous wastes being generated. I feel that
the estimates made by DER and EPA are probably low. These figures do not
take into account illegal dumping, spills, and accidents. In the Midwest,
PCBs have been discovered in oil tanks. The presence of the PCBs makes the
whole tank a hazardous waste, not just some small part of it.
The outlook is not all bad. Waste disposal will create jobs, and will
allow industries to stay in this jurisdiction and develop, instead of
departing for areas where more waste treatment sites are available.
Summation of Afternoon Question and Answer Period
Schramm.' What grant moneys might be available to the states from the
Federal Government?
Allen. Fourteen million dollars were appropriated for FY 1978. Based
on its population, Pennsylvania should get $779,000. For FY 1979, the
allocation will be based on several factors, including population, wastes
generated, and the transportation distance to adequate treatment facilities.
Pennsylvania will probably get twice as much money in FY 1979 as in FY 1978.
Schramm. What resources and personnel are necessary to administer this
program in Pennsylvania?
Bucciarelli. Sixty new staff positions will be needed if Pennsylvania
is to accept authority for this program. The manifest system requires
many staff people to implement it properly. We will also need funds to
provide training programs for employees of hazardous waste management
facilities.
Schramm. Are matching funds available?
-------
-31-
Allen. A 75-25 matching grant procedure will be used. In the
discretion of the EPA Administrator, some deviations from this will be
possible.
Joseph Berne (former staff person with PER). Is this program to have
two phases—planning and implementation—as the solid waste program did?
Bucciarelli. Activity in this program will be in two phases. The bulk
of the money for this program will go to hazardous waste programs. Whatever
money is left over will go to planning.
END OF SEMINAR
-------
PARTICIPANTS IH PEC'S HAZARDOUS WASTE !(ANAGEMENT FORUM,
1970
Adams, Bill
Representative for Senator Hall
Main Capitol, Harrisburg, 17120
Altoff, Don
U.S. Utilities Service Corp.
470 Mall Circle Drive
Monroeville, 15146
Balamoun, Samuel
Pennwalt Corporation
700 First Ave. King of Prussia 19406
Berger, Stewart
PP & L
2 North 9th Street
Allentown, 18101
Bisco, Harry
City of Allentown
435 Hamilton St. Allentown
18101
Bloomquist, Betsy
Legislative Assistant
600 N. 2nd St., Harrisburg 17101
Boni, Frank
Yarway Corp.
Bluebell, 19422
Burns, Bob
Standard Coated Products
Kazleton, 10201
Cali, Greg
Leeds & Northrup
Sumneytown Pike
North Wales 19454
Callazzo, William
Gilbert Assoc., Inc.
P.O. Box 1498 Reading 19603
Cardinal, Ann
PEC Director
564 Forbes Ave.
Pittsburgh, 15219
Carothers, J.C.
Western Electric
555 Union Blvd., Allentown 18103
Carter, Karin
Penn DER
P.O. Box 1467 Harrisburg 17120
Chenzoff, Irene
Gallery Chemical Co., Gallery 16042
Cline, Ray
Roy F. Waston, Inc.
Weston Way, Uest Chester 19380
Daugherty, Sue
Appalachian Audubon
131 Old Ford Dr. Camp Hill 17011
DeBenedectis, Hick
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th & Walnut Sts. Philadelphia 19106
DcrkicS,, Dan
U.S. EPA
401 "ll" St., S.tf. Washington, D.C
20460
Dolan, Ton
Wissahlckon Valley Watershed Assoc.
25 Skippack Pike, Ambler 19102
Duny, Michael
Chemical and Hazardous Waste Consulta-r'
P.O. Box 146, Effort 18330
Duvel, WQ., Jr.
Michael Baker, Jr., Inc.
Box 280 Beaver 15009
Earlanson, Wb.
Neville Chemical Co.
Pittsburgh, 15225
Eberly, Scott
City of Reading
8th & Washington Sts., Reading 19610
Eldredge, Robert
Eldredge Sanitation
Box 6, Sweetwater Rd.
Glen Mill 19342
Embich, Thomas
Pa. Chamber of Connerce
222 N. 3rd St.
Harrisburg 17101
-------
Farquhar ,.~Gor don
C.A.P.S.
McFarlen Rd. Rd. 3
Box 7, Kennett Square 19348
Representative Fee
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Fitzgerald, Tfionas
Wewco Chemical Waste Systems,
4626 Royal Ave.
Niagra Falls, N.Y. 14303
Frame, Lewis
Lanchester Corp.
Honey Brook, 19344
Fraust, C.L.
Western Electric
555 Union Building
Allentoxm 18103
Gittleman, D.H.
Western Electric
P.O. Box 241 Dept. H-20
Reading 19603
Click, George
USA Reactors, Ltd.
525 Pleasure Rd.
Lancaster 17601
Inc.
Gockley, Gene
PP 6 L
2 North 9th St.
Allentovn 18101
Representative Goebbels
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Gray, Richard
GAI Consultants, Inc.
570 Beatty Rd.
Monroeville 15146
narsch, John U.
U.S. EPA, Rfigion III
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Henninger,-Jeffrey
Carpenter Tehcnology
P.O. Box 662 Reading 19603
Hitchin, Edward
Legislative Assistant
Rm. B-51 liain Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Horst, Wn.
City of Lancaster
120 II. Duke St.
Lancaster; • 17603
Hull, Paul
Gilbert Assoc.
P.O. Box 1498
Reading 19603
Irian, Dereck
Waste Ilanagenent Inc.
Chicago, 111.
Jacobs, H. Joseph
Gannett, Fleming, Cordrry & Carpenter
P.O. Box 1963
Harrisburg 17105
Janoso, Richard
PP & L
2 North 9th Street
Allentown 18101
Johnson, Robert
Hatthey-Biohop
Malvern 19355
Kerr, Norman
Cherokee Plant
Merck Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 196 Danville 17821
Kirkpatrick, David
Legislative Analyst
Rm. 48 Main Capitol
Harrisburs 17120
Laird, Thomas
Lancaster Co. Planning Commission
50 IT. Duke St., P.O. Box 3480
Lancaster 17604
-------
Lama, Warren
Assistant to Rep. Yahner
RB. 145 Capitol Building
Harrisburg 17120
Lane, Edward
Valley Forge Audubon Society
P.O. Box 343 Wayne 19087
Lee, Dr.
Franklin Institute
20th and Benjamin Pkwy.
Philadelphia 19103
Lockhead, Thomas
Snith Kline Corp.
1500 Spring Garden Street
P.O. Box 7929
Philadelphia 19130
Loughead, Mr.
Wyeth Laboratories
P.O. Box 861
Paoli 19301
ilalaspina, John
Pfizer, Inc.
6AO N. 13th St.
Easton 18042
llanko, Joseph
Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen
Packard Building - 12th Floor
Philadelphia 19102
Masisak, Donald
N. Central Regional Planning
and Development Commission
P'.O. Box 377
Ridgeway 15853
McHugh, Gerard
General Refractories
600 Grant Street, Rm.
Pittsburgh 15219
McGibbon, Mr.
Luken Steel
Coatesville 19320
3000
Hertz, Ron
Cherokee Plant
Merck Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 196 Danville 17821
Michael, Dennis
City of Lancaster
120 N. Duke St.
Lancaster 17603
Mills, Vto.
R.W. Eaken, Inc.
P.O. Box 171
Leesport 19533
Minich, Robert
City of Allentown
435 Hamilton Street
Allentown 18101
Mistichelli, Pete
Organic Recycling, Inc.
967 S. Matlack St.
West Chester 19330
Representative Samuel Morris
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Mullen, Hugh
IU Conversion Systems, Inc.
3624'Market Street
Philadelphia 19104
Murphey, Charles J.
Valley Forge Audubon Society
P.O. Box 343 Wayne 19087
Nale, Thomas
C.A.P.S.
McFarlen Rd. Rd. 3 Box 7
Kennett Square 19343
Representative O'Brien
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Pappajohn, Ernie
U.S. EPA
401 "M" Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
Paretto, Michael
U.S. Utilities Service, Corp.
470 Mall Circle Drive
Monroeville 15146
'Pastor, Richard
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Patton, Richard
IU Conversion Systems, Inc.
3624 Market St.
Philadelphia 19104
Perry, Ronald
Institute of State and
Regional Affairs
Pennsylvania State Univ.
Capitol Campus
Middletown 15146
Petalouski, Dr.
Franklin Institute
20th and Benjamin Pkwy.
Philadelphia 19103
Paul, Linda
GAI Consultants
570 Beatty Rd.
Monroeville 15146
Rapier, Gordon
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Representative Reed
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Reiff, George
Pell of Penn.
#1 Parkway - 16th Floor
Philadelphia
Revss, Rita
League of Women Voters
Box 284 Malvern 19355
Rowe, Gloria
Sun Oil Company
P.O. Box 426
Marcus Hook 19061
Ruggiano, Louis
IU Conversion Systems, Inc.
3624 Market Street
Philadelphia 19104
Savage, Harry
Fischer and Porter
County Line Rd.
Warminster 18974
Schatz, R.J.
Gilbert Assoc.
P.O. Box 1498
Reading 19603
Schmidt, John
Penn DER
Box 1467
Harrisburg 17120
Schuster, Edward
Newco Chemical Waste Syst
4626 Royal Ave.
Niagra Falls, H.Y. 14303
Sexton, George
Betz Laboratories
4636 Somertpn.Rd.
Trevose 19047
Shanley, Gerard
Energy Impact Assoc.
P.O. Box 1399
Pittsburgh 15230
Sitoner, Louis
Neville Chemical Co.
Pittsburgh 15225
Skinner, Richard
Certain-Teed Corp.
P.O. Box 860 #8 Bldg.
Valley Forge 19482
Inc.
Sloan, Samuel
York County Planning Cotraission
220 S. Puke Street
York 17403
-------
Smith, Nelson
Matthey-Bishop
Malvern 19355
Smith, Oliver
Western Electric
P.O. Box 241
Reading 19603
Snyder, Daniel, III* Esq.
Dechart, Price & Rhoads
3400 Centre Square West
1500 Market Street
Philadelphia 19102
Representative Taylor
Main Capitol
Harrsiburg 17120
Terpaktz, George
Scientific, Inc.
1703 East 2nd St.
Scotch Plains, New Jersey
Trainer, Nicholas
Sartomer Co.
Bolmar & Wields Sts.
West Chester 19380
Turetsky, Wm. S.
Allied Chemical Co.
Margaret and Bermuda Sts.
Philadelphia 19137
Waschic, Thomas
Aide to Sen. Gekas
1056 Union Depot Center
Harrisburg 17111
Wilcox, Nelson
Brooks Instrument
407 Vine Street
Hatfield 19440
Uydra, Joseph
AJ.'Je to Sen. Hanbech
Main Capitol
Hurrisburg 17120
Representative Yahner
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
07076
Zurhide, George
Certain-Teed Corp.
P.O. Box 860 #8 Bldg.
Valley Forge 19482
Zerbe, Lewis
Empire Steel Castings
P.O. Box 139
Reading 19603
SPEAKERS AND PANELISTS
Allen, Robert
Chief - Hazardous Material* Branch
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Bucciarelli, Hia.
Chief - Div. of Solid Waste Hgnt.
Bureau of Land Protection
Penn. DER
P.O. Box 2063
Harrisburg 17120
Early, A. Blakeman
Director - Environmental Action, Inc.
1346 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C» 20036
Hand, Irving
Associate Professor - State and Regional
Planning
Pennsylvania State University
Capitol Campus
Middletown 17057
Johnson, Lynn B.
Manager - Environmental Control
Rohm & Haas Co.
Bristol Pike, Bristol 19007
Lehman, John P.
Director - Hazardous Uaste llgmt. Div.
U.S. EPA
401 "M" Street, S.TJ.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Middendorf, TJm.
Deputy Secretary for Environmental Protect!
Penn. DER
Fulton Building — 16th Floor
Harrisburg 17120
-------
Philipbar, Win., Jr.
President
Rollins Environmental Services, Inc.
One Rollins Plaza
Wilmington, Delaware 19899
Schranm, Jack
Regional Administrator
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Scott, Thomas W., Esq.
Killian & Gephart
216-218 Pine Street
Box 886
Harrisburg 17108
Winsor, Curtin
President
Pennsylvania Environmental Council
225 South 15th Street
Philadelphia 19102
PEC STAFF
Bell, Sharon
Research Associate
Bennett, Jamie
Research Assistant
Farber, Jo Anna
Administrative Assistant
Winsor, Eleanor
Executive Director
Prepared by the Pennsylvania Environnental Council, Inc. (PEC)
225 South 15th Street
Philadelphia, Pa. 19102
-------
PARTICIPANTS IN PEC'S HAZARDOUS WASTE !IAKAGEMENT FORUM, Jan . 1978
Adams, Bill
Representative for Senator Hall
Main Capitol, Harrisburg, 17120
Altoff, Don
U.S. Utilities Service Corp.
470 Mall Circle Drive
Monroeville, 15146
Balamoun, Samuel
Pennwalt Corporation
700 First Ave. King of Prussia 19406
Berger, Stewart
PP & L
2 North 9th Street
Allentown, 18101
Bisco, Harry
City of Allentown
435 Hamilton St. Allentown 18101
Bloomquist, Betsy
Legislative Assistant
600 N. 2nd St., Harrisburg 17101
Boni, Frank
Yarway Corp.
Bluebell, 19422
Burns, Bob
Standard Coated Products
Hazleton, 18201
Cali, Greg
Leeds & Northrup
Sumneytown Pike
Horth Wales 19454
Callazzo, William
Gilbert Assoc., Inc.
P.O. Box 1498 Reading 19603
Cardinal, Ann
PEC Director
564 Forbes Ave.
Pittsburgh, 15219
Carothers, J.C.
Western Electric
555 Union Blvd., Allentown 18103
Carter, Karin
Penn DER
P.O. Box 1467 Harrisburg 17120
Chenzoff, Irene
Gallery Chemical Co., Gallery 16042
Cline, Ray
Roy F. Weeton, Inc.
Weston Way, West Chester 19380
Daugherty, Sue
Appalachian Audubon
131 Old Ford Dr. Camp Hill 17011
DeBenedectis, Hick
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th & Walnut Sts. Philadelphia 19106
Dorkics, Dan
U.S. EPA
401 "II" St., S.W. Washington, D.C
20460
Dolan, Tom
Wissahickon Valley Watershed Assoc.
25 Sklppack Pike, Ambler 19102
Duny, Michael
Chemical and Hazardous Waste Consultar
P.O. Box 146, Effort 18330
Duvel, Wm., Jr.
Michael Baker, Jr., Inc.
Box 280 Beaver 15009
Earlanson, Wta.
Neville Chemical Co.
Pittsburgh, 15225
Eberly, Scott
City of Reading
8th & Washington Sts., Reading 19610
Eldredge, Robert
Eldredge Sanitation
Box 6, Sweetwater Rd.
Glen Hill 19342
Embich, Thomas
Pa. Chamber of Commerce
222 N. 3rd St.
Harrisburg 17101
-------
Farquhar,'Gordon
C.A.P.S.
McFarlen Rd. Rd. 3
Box 7, Kennett Square 19348
Representative Fee
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Fitzgerald, TKooa's
dewco Chemical Waste Systems, Inc.
4626 Royal Ave.
Niagra Falls, N.Y. 14303
Frame, Lewis
Lanchester Corp.
Honey Brook, 19344
Fraust, C.L.
Western Electric
555 Union Building
Allentown 18103
Gittleraan, D.H.
Western Electric
P.O. Box 241 Dept. H-20
Reading 19603
Click, George
USA Reactors, Ltd.
525 Pleasure Rd.
Lancaster 17601
Gockley, Gene
PP & L
2 North 9th St.
Allentown 18101
Representative Goebbels
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Gray, Richard
GAI Consultants, Inc.
570 Beatty Rd.
Monroeville 15146
Harsch, John W.
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th & Wnlnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Henninger, Jeffrey
Carpenter Tehcnology
P.O. Box 662 Reading 19603
Hitchin, Edward
Legislative Assistant
Rm. B-51 I lain Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Horst, Win.
City of Lancaster
120 N. Duke St.
Lancaster; • 17603
Hull, Paul
Gilbert Assoc.
P.O. Box 1498
Reading 19603
Irlam, Dereck
Waste Management Inc.
Chicago, 111.
Jacobs, W. Joseph
Gannett, Fleming, Cordrry & Carpenter
P.O. Box 1963
Harrisburg 17105
Janoso, Richard
PP & L
2 North 9th Street
Allentown 18101
Johnson, Robert
Matthey-Bishop
Malvern 19355
Kerr, Norman
Cherokee Plant
Merck Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 196 Danville 17821
Kirkpatrick, David
Legislative Analyst
Rm. 48 Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Laird, Thomas
Lancaster Co. Planning Commission
50 N. Duke St., P.O. Box 3480
Lancaster 17604
-------
Lamm, Warren
Assistant to Rep. Yahner
Rm. 145 Capitol Building
Harrisburg 17120
Lane, Edward
Valley Forge Audubon Society
P.O. Box 343 Wayne 19087
Lee, Dr.
Franklin Institute
20th and Benjamin Pkwy.
Philadelphia 19103
Lockhead, Thomas
Snith Kline Corp.
1500 Spring Garden Street
P.O. Box 7929
Philadelphia 19130
Loughead, Mr.
Wyeth Laboratories
P.O. Box 861
Paoli 19301
Malaspina, John
Pfizer, Inc.
640 N. 13th St.
Easton 18042
llanko, Joseph
Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen
Packard Building - 12th Floor
Philadelphia 19102
Masisak, Donald
N. Central Regional Planning
and Development Commission
P.O. Box 377
Ridgeway 15853
HcHugh, Gerard
General Refractories
600 Grant Street, Rm. 3000
Pittsburgh 15219
McGibbon, lit.
Luken Steel
Coatesville 19320
Mertz, Ron
Cherokee Plant
Merck Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 196 Danville 17821
Michael, Dennis
City of Lancaster
120 N. Duke St.
Lancaster 17603
Mills, Wm.
R.U. Eaken, Inc.
P.O. Box 171
Leesport 19533
Minich, Robert
City of Allentown
435 Hamilton Street
Allentown 18101
Mistichelli, Pete
Organic Recycling, Inc.
967 S. Matlack St.
West Chester 19330
Representative Samuel Morris
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Mullen, Hugh
III Conversion Systems,
3624 Market Street
Philadelphia 19104
Inc.
Murphey, Charles J.
Valley Forge Audubon Society
P.O. Box 343 Uayne 19087
Nale, Thomas
C.A.P.S.
McFarlen Rd. Rd. 3 Box 7
Kennett Square 19348
Representative O'Brien
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Pappajohn, Ernie
U.S. EPA
401 "M" Street, S.U.
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
Paretto, Michael
U.S. Utilities Service, Corp,
470 Mall Circle Drive
Monroeville 15146
Pastor, Richard
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Patton, Richard
IU Conversion Systems, Inc.
3624 Market St.
Philadelphia 19104
Perry, Ronald
Institute of State and
Regional Affairs
Pennsylvania State Univ.
Capitol Campus
Middletown 15146
Petalouski, Dr.
Franklin Institute
20th and Benjamin Pkwy.
Philadelphia 19103
Paul, Linda
GAI Consultants
570 Beatty Rd.
Monroeville 15146
Rapier, Gordon
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Representative Reed
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
Reiff, George
Bell of Penn.
#1 Parkway - 16th Floor
Philadelphia
Reves, Rita
League of VJomen Voters
Box 284 Malvern 19355
Rowe, Gloria
Sun Oil Company
P.O. Box 426
Marcus Hook 19061
Ruggiano, Louis
IU Conversion Systems, Inc.
3624 Market Street
Philadelphia 19104
Savage, Harry
Fischer and Porter
County Line Rd.
Warminster 18974
Schatz, R.J.
Gilbert Assoc.
P.O. Box 1498
Reading 19603
Schmidt, John
Penn DER
Box 1467
Harrisburg 17120
Schuster, Edward
Newco Chemical Waste Systems, Inc.
4626 Royal Ave.
Niagra Falls, II. Y. 14303
Sexton, George
Betz Laboratories
4636 Somerton Rd.
Trevose 19047
Shanley, Gerard
Energy Impact Assoc.
P.O. Box 1899
Pittsburgh 15230
Sitomer, Louis
Neville Chemical Co.
Pittsburgh 15225
Skinner, Richard
Certain-Teed Corp.
P.O. Box 860 #8 Bldg.
Valley Forge 19482
Sloan, Samuel
York County Planning Commission
220 S. Pvke Street
York 17403
-------
Smith, Nelson
Matthey-Bishop
Malvern 19355
Smith, Oliver
Western Electric
P.O. Box 241
Reading 19603
Snyder, Daniel, III, Esq.
Dechart, Price & Rhoads
3400 Centre Square West
1500 Market Street
Philadelphia 19102
Representative Taylor
Main Capitol
Harrsiburg 17120
Terpaktz, George
Scientific, Inc.
1703 East 2nd St.
Scotch Plains, New Jersey
Trainer, Nicholas
Sartomer Co.
Bolmar & Wields Sts.
West Chester 19380
Turetsky, Wm. S.
Allied Chemical Co.
Margaret and Bermuda Sts.
Philadelphia 19137
Waschic, Thomas
Aide to Sen. Gekas
1056 Union Depot Center
Harrisburg 17111
Wilcox, Nelson
Brooks Instrument
407 Vine Street
HatfieId 19440
Wydra, Joseph
Aide to Sen. Manbech
M«iin Capitol
Hurrisburg 17120
Representative Yahner
Main Capitol
Harrisburg 17120
07076
Zurhide, George
Certain-Teed Corp.
P.O. Box 860 #8 Bldg.
Valley Forge 19482
Zerbe, Lewis
Empire Steel Castings
P.O. Box 139
Reading 19603
SPEAKERS AND PANELISTS
Allen, Robert
Chief - Hazardous Materials Branch
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Bucciarelli, Wm.
Chief - Div. of Solid Waste Mgnt.
Bureau of Land Protection
Penn. DER
P.O. Box 2063
Harrisburg 17120
Early, A. Blakeman
Director - Environmental Action, Inc.
1346 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
Hand, Irving
Associate Professor - State and Regional
Planning
Pennsylvania State University
Capitol Campus
Middletown 17057
Johnson, Lynn B.
Manager - Environmental Control
Rohm & Haas Co.
Bristol Pike, Bristol 19007
Lehman, John P.
Director - Hazardous Waste llgmt. Div.
U.S. EPA
401 "M" Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Middendorf, Wm.
Deputy Secretary for Environmental Prot«eti
Penn. DER
Fulton Building - 16th Floor
Harrisburg 17120
-------
Philipbar, Wm., Jr.
President
Rollins Environmental Services, Inc.
One Rollins Plaza
Wilmington, Delaware 19899
Schramm, Jack
Regional Administrator
U.S. EPA, Region III
6th and Walnut Streets
Philadelphia 19106
Scott, Thomas N., Esq.
Killian & Gephart
216-218 Pine Street
Box 886
Harrisburg 17108
Winsor, Curtin
President
Pennsylvania Environmental Council
225 South 15th Street
Philadelphia 19102
PEC S. .FF
Bell, Sharon
Research Associate
Bennett, Jamie
Research Assistant
Farber, Jo Anna
Administrative Assistant
Winsor, Eleanor
Executive Director
Prepared by the Pennsylvania Environmental Council, Inc. (PEC)
225 South 15th Street
Philadelphia, Pa. 19102
Qy (70 *«*•••• IMWIMIU.HH -itl-147/35
oW~I/oC
------- |